Late to Discovery but finally saw it
- Thread starter EnriqueH
- Start date
A lot of people, even fans of DSC felt it got out of the gate weak. I actually really liked the pilot, though.
The interesting thing, though, is that it is really more of a prologue than anything else. The rest of the series focuses on a different set of characters and different setting. Have fun watching!
I was not looking forward to Discovery at the time, did not think the previews looked good, and was not going to sign up for CBS AA...the first part of the pilot airing on regular CBS intrigued me enough to sign up for CBS (for the free trial to see how it would be resolved) and I ended up staying subscribed.
I think the season would've worked better for me if "Context is for Kings" had been the first episode, and "The Vulcan Hello"/"The Battle at the Binary Stars" had been chopped up and used as flashbacks throughout the season.
I think we all have different views on the beginning. I quite liked it, but DSC has definitely gotten stronger as it's progressed.
Many viewers demonstrated they had profound difficulty following even the only, for the most part, mildly challenging plotting of season 1 episodes and arcs. Even the main reviewer on Io9, started practically every single review with the line, "I'm so confused."
Do you really think what you are suggesting would have helped? And if so how?
For me? Yes. Which is why I put "for me" in my comment.
But again, how? How does that make the season better for you?
It gets rid of two tedious episodes, and allows us to learn about Michael Burnham as we go along instead of puking up her backstory onto the screen ten minutes after meeting her.
I just saw the first one. And I have to say I don't really like the way they are doing the Klingons. They look more like Lizards to me. Don't know if I will watch anymore.
Imagine how I felt in 1979 watching TMP and seeing what they'd done with the Klingons. Oh wait, I wasn't just a Klingon fan. I was a fan of Star Trek.
It does allow us to learn about Burnham as we go along. It just doesn't throw things at us out of left field like most of the characters we've met before have been developed on what seems like the whim of this week's writer. Oh, Jadzia can suddenly go toe to toe with Klingons in battle. Oh, Dr. Crusher is suddenly a murder mystery detective, etc.
Second this.
The more things change, the more they stay the same...
https://amp.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDi...k_superfan_leslie_thompson_writing_about_the/
Exactly.
Season 1 has a strong start and strong finish, incredibly weak middle.
Season 2 has a strong start and middle, horrible end. The last time I cringed at a star trek episode as hard as I did the season 2 finale was the amazon princess episode from season 1 of TNG.
The thing with STD is, you *really* have to be able to suspend disbelief to enjoy it.. I mean, in ways you never thought you were capable of...
Season 2 has a strong start and middle, horrible end. The last time I cringed at a star trek episode as hard as I did the season 2 finale was the amazon princess episode from season 1 of TNG.
The thing with STD is, you *really* have to be able to suspend disbelief to enjoy it.. I mean, in ways you never thought you were capable of...
This reminds me of some of the rather simple criticisms the Red Letter Media guys came up with. "They say thing X / do thing Y and then never mention it again!!!" and of course "Nothing makes sense!!!", which were widely parroted among HateTubers and other assorted "fans" all over the web. While careful watching and paying attention to the dialogue takes care of most of the alleged problems, as demonstrated by the work of more even headed Fans who took the time to clarify most misconceptions, through either videos or in forums. But nothing works, because hate sells. I fear the "25%ers", as I like to call them, will stay a part of the Fandom.
Don't get me wrong, both seasons had some issues and were quite a bit uneven at times (and I personaly dislike some of the too predictable and mainstream dialogue and really wish Star Trek would have taken the opportunity of this rebirth to establish a more hard Sci-Fi identity), but Disco was far better received and IS a better product than some claim it to be.
They're confused on purpose. If you explain anything to them, they'll reject it so they can continue to be "confused".
And if you use examples of any Star Trek from 1966 to 2005 to back you up, they'll reinterpret it so they can continue to bash whatever Discovery (or Picard) is doing. Doesn't matter if that reinterpretation means they're misrepresenting Old Trek. That's collateral damage if they accomplish their objective which is to "Bash any new Star Trek at all costs."
Similar threads
- Locked
