Is it just me or did Lower Decks end up being what Discovery should have been? As I think back to my excitement of a new ST series in the mid twenty-teens, particularly with the rumors of the series focusing on a non-captain main character and a new ship, I can't help but think that I might have enjoyed Discovery if it had been written more like Lower Decks except with a more serious/real world vibe.
Is STLD what STD should have been?
- Thread starter nooobeee
- Start date
There are a few things I would've changed, but I'm happy with DSC overall. It, more than any series, showed what some people's true colors are.
The only problem is that in 2017, it still looked like the Kelvin Films wouldn't stall out, so SNW would've been perceived as too similar.
Even though I don't agree with that, I can see it.
The only problem is that in 2017, it still looked like the Kelvin Films wouldn't stall out, so SNW would've been perceived as too similar.
Yes, you do have a point. In 2017 CBS was trying to make absolutely sure that their audience was not confused into thinking that the show took place in the same universe as the movies. Of course, showing Vulcan as still being around would have helped that, along with making the ship look far more like the TOS version than the Abramsprise or the later Discoprise.
But I think I’m segueing too far off the OP’s topic. I think what they’re trying to equate was the idea of the main character not being the captain, which both DSC and LDS have in common. But I still don’t think DSC would have worked with LDS’s format, especially as CBSAA’s flagship show.
I hadn't really thought much about it, but Lower Decks really does cover a lot of the same ground as Discovery, doesn't it? Mariner's a lot like Burnham, traumatised and demoted to the lower decks, and the other three ensigns are her Tilly. She works through her issues, reconciles with her mother, gains the respect of the crew, and ends the show in a command position... while saving the multiverse along the way.
Honestly, I think Lower Decks did a much better job, with smarter writing and stronger ties to the world it takes place in, though I'm not sure making Discovery more like it would've helped. I'm trying to imagine Disco as a low-stakes episodic workplace drama and my brain is throwing up error messages..
Honestly, I think Lower Decks did a much better job, with smarter writing and stronger ties to the world it takes place in, though I'm not sure making Discovery more like it would've helped. I'm trying to imagine Disco as a low-stakes episodic workplace drama and my brain is throwing up error messages..
Last edited:
Discovery season one's first half is what Discovery should have been.
It's "DSC", not "STD".
I like that DSC initially had a main character who wasn't Captain, and that Burnham and Saru were mostly-friendly rivals/competitors. I also prefer that they were senior officers rather than lower-deckers.
During the first season you had them under a Captain who was one extreme, like Lorca. Then in the second season, they were under Pike, who was the exact opposite. So we got to see how Burnham and Saru dealt with both types of Captains.
Then in the third season, Saru was Captain. He made some choices I really didn't agree with (i.e. making Tilly the First Officer). And in the fourth season we had Burnham as Captain, and we got see her apply what she learned in previous seasons and what it was like to be on the opposite side of power-dynamic.
Finally, in the fifth season, Burnham is a more experienced Captain, and she gets to give Rayner a second chance, just like she was given a second chance, and Saru was able to advance in a field that suited him better. He makes for a better Ambassador than Captain, IMO.
So, Discovery's top two characters progressed in a way that befit them and in a way that Lower Decks wouldn't have allowed. Mariner and Boimler essentially end their series, kind-of/sort-of, the way Burnham and Saru started theirs.
Glad I got that out while I still had time. Crammed day today. Happy Holidays!
During the first season you had them under a Captain who was one extreme, like Lorca. Then in the second season, they were under Pike, who was the exact opposite. So we got to see how Burnham and Saru dealt with both types of Captains.
Then in the third season, Saru was Captain. He made some choices I really didn't agree with (i.e. making Tilly the First Officer). And in the fourth season we had Burnham as Captain, and we got see her apply what she learned in previous seasons and what it was like to be on the opposite side of power-dynamic.
Finally, in the fifth season, Burnham is a more experienced Captain, and she gets to give Rayner a second chance, just like she was given a second chance, and Saru was able to advance in a field that suited him better. He makes for a better Ambassador than Captain, IMO.
So, Discovery's top two characters progressed in a way that befit them and in a way that Lower Decks wouldn't have allowed. Mariner and Boimler essentially end their series, kind-of/sort-of, the way Burnham and Saru started theirs.
Glad I got that out while I still had time. Crammed day today. Happy Holidays!
Last edited:
An argument can be made that Lower Decks managed the concept of the senior staff are not the main characters better than Disco did, but that's because Lower Decks had the advantage of being a comedy where you can get away with having lower ranking personnel as the focus. A show like Disco needs the decision makers to be front and center.
Who was relatively quickly promoted to captain. And even when she wasn't captain, Burnham was still the one in charge or had the solutions.
In this respect, I think Lower Decks did a much better job of having a main character(s) who were not the captain or senior staff.
I wouldn't call becoming Captain at the end of the third season "relatively quickly", but...
I agree with the main point that Discovery wasn't suited to be a lower decks sort of show, nor was it meant to be. Burnham was First Officer of the Shenzhou, lost her rank, and regained her rank by the end of the first season if not her position. Saru was Second Officer of the Shenzhou, then First Officer of the Discovery.
Tilly seemed to skip right over being lower decks. She was a Cadet the first season and then was a full-fledged Bridge Officer by the second.
Discovery for me had the worst start out of any of the star trek shows what with the pre production chest pounding, bernham being overshadowed by 'we must make her special and tie her in to the TOS cast somehow' and on and on?
Show really picked up when it jumped to the 32nd century.
Honestly setting the whole thing in the 'future' era would've fixed a lot of complaints I had beyond the initial poor script writing and unearned emotion moments (however this is an opinion. That should not detract from anyone's enjoyment.)
SNW is what Discovery should have been.
Honestly I want a 32nd century lower decks. The galaxy is a mess... so of course it's gonna be the guy with the mop feeling it worst.
Well, yeah, she's the lead character. Amazing how so many around here find it so difficult to grasp the concept that a show's lead character is naturally the show's most important character.
Or, lots of people around here could be right and there could be something about the show that's less than ideal.
I think if you count together the amount of in-show time between the first and second season that the main characters experienced after Burnham joins the Discovery (not-inclusive of them jumping forward in time by six months coming back from the Mirror Universe), it's probably not that long.
I agree that it feels that Burnham advanced too quickly and that at times the show was a little too Burnham-focused, main character or not. I sometimes feel that her advancement came at the expense of Saru, and I would have liked to see more of him as the captain without Burnham playing such a dominant role regardless of her position.
This is not to say that Burnham was a bad character or anything; I was fine with her as a character; it was the writers' decisions to place so much emphasis upon her that troubles me.
As far as comparisons to LD go, though...I did kind of like the idea of a serious show from a lower-deckers' perspective, but that's really not what we ultimately got. I'm not sure how well it would have worked in practice, but clearly the writers weren't, in the end, interested in pursuing that.
I'll always be curious as to what DISCO might have been if there hadn't been so much writer turnover.
This is not to say that Burnham was a bad character or anything; I was fine with her as a character; it was the writers' decisions to place so much emphasis upon her that troubles me.
As far as comparisons to LD go, though...I did kind of like the idea of a serious show from a lower-deckers' perspective, but that's really not what we ultimately got. I'm not sure how well it would have worked in practice, but clearly the writers weren't, in the end, interested in pursuing that.
I'll always be curious as to what DISCO might have been if there hadn't been so much writer turnover.
Last edited:
There are many things wrong with the show, but Burnham's rank in the first few seasons is not one of them. Nor is focusing on characters who are not "bridge officers." They should have made the bridge officers a little more interesting. Which is what LDS did. Even a character like T'Ana, who probably got the least screentime, was more developed and interesting than any of the DISCO bridge crew.
The trouble Discovery often had is that they had to contrive reasons for why Burnham was the most important character in the story, while Lower Decks just told a story about what Mariner was up to that week in her job (and Boimler etc.) Disco put Burnham's mothers at the centre of galaxy-shaking events to give her a personal connection to whatever was going on, Lower Decks just put Mariner's mother in the captain's chair. And so on.
I thought Detmer and Owo were good.
Similar threads
- Locked
