Picking up from S2?

[Bry_Sinclair]

So I rarely venture into this corner of the forum, but asking a genuine question so please, be gentle--my delicate mental well-being can only take so much.

So initially I only watched the pilot episodes and wasn't impressed, so decided to not to bother with the rest of the season. But with S2 introducing Pike and Number One, which has been so well received they're getting their own spin-off, I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile picking it up from the S2 premier--given from what I've read each season seems to make changes.

For those that have been with the show from the beginning but weren't overly enthused with S1, would this make much of an odds to my perception of the show?

 

[Orphalesion]

It's what I did. I really disliked Season 1 when I first watched it and didn't make it past episode 2 or 3. Then a while ago I watched Season 2 and I really liked it, it's a huge improvement, imo.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Try it and see what you think. Worst case scenario, you've wasted an hour of your life.

 

[Lord Garth]

Season 2 is tonally very different from Season 1.

Except for the third episode, "Point of Light". That's more of a throwback to Season 1. But, if you can bear that one episode out, you should be good. Or you can just skip that episode because they'll recap what you need to know at the beginning of the next one anyway.

 

[DarKush]

So I rarely venture into this corner of the forum, but asking a genuine question so please, be gentle--my delicate mental well-being can only take so much.

So initially I only watched the pilot episodes and wasn't impressed, so decided to not to bother with the rest of the season. But with S2 introducing Pike and Number One, which has been so well received they're getting their own spin-off, I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile picking it up from the S2 premier--given from what I've read each season seems to make changes.

For those that have been with the show from the beginning but weren't overly enthused with S1, would this make much of an odds to my perception of the show?

I actually liked Season 1 more overall than Season 2, but you really don't need to see Season 1 before watching and appreciating Season 2. If you've seen the pilot episodes you already know about the relationship between Burnham and Sarek. Other than that, I would just read the character profiles or episode breakdowns at Memory Alpha or on wikipedia to get caught up when it comes to several characters:

Spoiler

Emperor Georgiou, Stamets, Tyler, L'Rell, and especially Culber

.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

So I rarely venture into this corner of the forum, but asking a genuine question so please, be gentle--my delicate mental well-being can only take so much.

So initially I only watched the pilot episodes and wasn't impressed, so decided to not to bother with the rest of the season. But with S2 introducing Pike and Number One, which has been so well received they're getting their own spin-off, I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile picking it up from the S2 premier--given from what I've read each season seems to make changes.

For those that have been with the show from the beginning but weren't overly enthused with S1, would this make much of an odds to my perception of the show?

I liked Season 1 but liked Season 2 even more. They are very different beasts. The episodes feel a bit more standalone and there's great classic trek style episodes like "New Eden", "An obol for charon", "The sound of thunder". Pike is an amazing Captain, who really encapsulates the best of Starfleet. There is one scene in particular which really shows you why Pike is such a revered figure by Kirk and Spock and by Starfleet in general. The crew feel a lot more like a family and I really liked the exploration of Spock and Burnham's relationship.

The second half of of the season is weaker, but there was a change of showrunner (the previous ones were fired for bullying the writing staff) and the decision was made to send Discovery into the future in season 3. The whole second half of the season is basically the set up for this to happen.

I think you will like season 2, but my advice would be to have 0 expectations, accept that it's not 90's trek stylistically or tonally and just enjoy the ride.

 

[DarKush]

^
I agree a lot with you on Pike but I felt the second half of Season 2 was stronger. I thought the first half arc wasn't that tightly wound together and was based on an ultimately underwhelming denouement. I felt the second half amped things up more. There were some nice character beats in the first half though and the "New Eden" episode was the most old-style Trek episode Discovery has done thus far.

I also agree with your advice to Bry to just go in with zero expectations and to get in his mental space that Discovery is not 90s style Trek. I put it in between the Berman era and the Abrams era, which isn't always an easy mix. I personally prefer Berman era Trek, but Discovery does have some merits.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Believe me, after I first taster I have subzero expectations

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Believe me, after I first taster I have subzero expectations

Well every series took a couple of seasons to find their feet. Discovery is no different and should receive the same level of expectation that you would have given to a previous series to get its sea legs.

 

[May 20]

I finally subscribed to CBSAA for Picard, so I decided to give DIS a shot. I hadn't even seen the first episode when it aired on CBS. No real idea what it was actually about, so no expectations. And we watched both seasons over about three weeks and enjoyed it all very much. Yes, there's a major tone shift between seasons 1 and 2, but that was okay. Looking forward to season 3!

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Well every series took a couple of seasons to find their feet. Discovery is no different and should receive the same level of expectation that you would have given to a previous series to get its sea legs.

In this day and age with so much content available to watch then I think the pilot of any show should be the creators putting all of their best into that episode, to hook people into watching more. I just didn't get that with STD (I'm sorry that was how I originally identified the show and it's just what's stuck in my head, so it's what I use), finding the writing very week, the plot seem really odd and the characters unlikable.

Whilst it will take a season or two for shows to find their feet and get the right tone, quality and character dynamics, there should always be something in the pilot that draws me in, whether it's the story, a character, hell even the sets, something that peaks my interest. For the last two Trek shows I managed to catch their premiers on satellite over here when they were first released, with Caretaker I immediately liked Torres (a half-Klingon who hated everything Klingon, so we wouldn't be getting episodes about her honour, yes please) and I loved the premise of the show (it was only later, when they never really capitalised on it that I began to lose my real love for the show), whilst in Broken Bow it was the relationship between Tucker and T'Pol that drew me in (bantering back and forth with such great chemistry between them, you didn't know if they were going to punch one another or snog) then the rest of the first two seasons landed and, whilst they were still a highlight, it became a chore at times.

The last non-Trek show that I tried to give the benefit of the doubt and watch more of was Breaking Bad. I made it halfway through the second season before I called quits, finding the prospect of slogging through any more to be unrewarding and just painful--and this is a show that 99.9% of people hail as being one of the best things ever made, but for me it was just awful, but I took the word of others and tried to stick it out but wasted several hours of my life and felt the worst for it. So what works for some/most people won't always be the same for others.

From what some folks here have said I think I will give the S2 premier a shot, treat it like like Where No Man Has Gone Before or The Train Job and it's a second pilot, though likewise if there isn't something that hooks me then I'll move on to something else...maybe a rewatch of Firefly (now I've put the thought in my own head).

 

[Lord Garth]

I just didn't get that with STD (I'm sorry that was how I originally identified the show and it's just what's stuck in my head, so it's what I use), finding the writing very week, the plot seem really odd and the characters unlikable.

If you find you like the second season and you want extend the olive branch, at least meet us half-way and not call it that. As a gesture of good will, if nothing else.

I'm not trying to convince you to like the first season and even pointed out an episode in S2 that you should skip. So I'm trying on my end.

 

[DarKush]

In this day and age with so much content available to watch then I think the pilot of any show should be the creators putting all of their best into that episode, to hook people into watching more. I just didn't get that with STD (I'm sorry that was how I originally identified the show and it's just what's stuck in my head, so it's what I use), finding the writing very week, the plot seem really odd and the characters unlikable.

Whilst it will take a season or two for shows to find their feet and get the right tone, quality and character dynamics, there should always be something in the pilot that draws me in, whether it's the story, a character, hell even the sets, something that peaks my interest. For the last two Trek shows I managed to catch their premiers on satellite over here when they were first released, with Caretaker I immediately liked Torres (a half-Klingon who hated everything Klingon, so we wouldn't be getting episodes about her honour, yes please) and I loved the premise of the show (it was only later, when they never really capitalised on it that I began to lose my real love for the show), whilst in Broken Bow it was the relationship between Tucker and T'Pol that drew me in (bantering back and forth with such great chemistry between them, you didn't know if they were going to punch one another or snog) then the rest of the first two seasons landed and, whilst they were still a highlight, it became a chore at times.

The last non-Trek show that I tried to give the benefit of the doubt and watch more of was Breaking Bad. I made it halfway through the second season before I called quits, finding the prospect of slogging through any more to be unrewarding and just painful--and this is a show that 99.9% of people hail as being one of the best things ever made, but for me it was just awful, but I took the word of others and tried to stick it out but wasted several hours of my life and felt the worst for it. So what works for some/most people won't always be the same for others.

From what some folks here have said I think I will give the S2 premier a shot, treat it like like Where No Man Has Gone Before or The Train Job and it's a second pilot, though likewise if there isn't something that hooks me then I'll move on to something else...maybe a rewatch of Firefly (now I've put the thought in my own head).

In the era of high concept and peak television I do think it's reversed from the past, where now the pilot or first seasons are often gripping or compelling but then the seasons after start running out of gas. It's the opposite of the old way where series slowly built up over a few seasons, and with Berman Trek it seemed to me that most got good around the third season. That's how I felt about TNG, to some extent DS9 (I thought DS9 started off stronger than TNG but perhaps got consistently good in Season 3), and ENT. With ENT I mostly skipped the first two seasons and I am now slowly going through Season 1. Can't judge Voyager because I watched it off and on during its run and mostly after Season 4.

I was a big fan of Breaking Bad, though I have no interest really in Better Call Saul. I liked how Breaking Bad threw you right into the action, and that reminded me of how J.J. Abrams used to do that effectively. Shame you couldn't get into it. I'm not raving over Breaking Bad but I did think it was a very well-written and acted series.

I hadn't considered DISCO Season 2 as a soft reboot, but in a way I guess you could. Like another poster said, there is a change in the tone. I imagine Kurtzman, etc. was listening to some fan complaints about Season 1 and wanted to address some of those. I do hope you enjoy Season 2. But if it doesn't do it for you, and you haven't seen The Expanse (this week I finished the first three seasons) you might want to try that on Amazon. Also I enjoyed Dark Matter, that's on Netflix. Both The Expanse and Dark Matter have a Firefly vibe.

I think the DISCO pilot was rushed. I imagine CBS was so anxious to grab viewers and leave us breathless that they neglected to root us in the characters so we would have someone to care about. That being said, I liked the bits of character moments in the pilot with Georgiou and Burnham and then Burnham and Saru. I also thought the Klingon leader was intriguing, and I wish we had gotten more with him. The Klingon scenes were hampered by them speaking Klingon and the makeup they had on made that laborious. I saw it as another attempt by CBS to give the fans something they thought the fans wanted at the expense of the story. If I had my druthers I would've started the series with the third episode and perhaps spliced the pilot together as a movie 'event' to be shown during the winter hiatus.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

But if it doesn't do it for you, and you haven't seen The Expanse (this week I finished the first three seasons) you might want to try that on Amazon. Also I enjoyed Dark Matter, that's on Netflix. Both The Expanse and Dark Matter have a Firefly vibe.

I love The Expanse, have the first three seasons on Blu-ray and got a special one week offer of Amazon Prime for just 99p so got caught up with S4--its more of a "hard science" show that I typically go for, but the characters are wonderfully portrayed and the writing in spot on. I enjoyed Dark Matter as well, though the whole slowly regaining memories after space-amnesia does get a little trying after a while.

Currently having a rewatch of SGU so I think I'll try my second attempt after that.

 

[fireproof78]

I think the DISCO pilot was rushed. I imagine CBS was so anxious to grab viewers and leave us breathless that they neglected to root us in the characters so we would have someone to care about. That being said, I liked the bits of character moments in the pilot with Georgiou and Burnham and then Burnham and Saru. I also thought the Klingon leader was intriguing, and I wish we had gotten more with him. The Klingon scenes were hampered by them speaking Klingon and the makeup they had on made that laborious. I saw it as another attempt by CBS to give the fans something they thought the fans wanted at the expense of the story. If I had my druthers I would've started the series with the third episode and perhaps spliced the pilot together as a movie 'event' to be shown during the winter hiatus.

I think I put that on Fuller and BTS craziness resulted in that pilot being so many ideas being explored. The Klingon scenes are far and away one of my favorite scenes in Star Trek because it felt so alien.

I agree that CBS was attempting to give fans what they thought they want-because fans had dropped a million plus on a fan series about a Klingon War. So, how else are CBS supposed to interpret that fan response?

 

[DarKush]

I think I put that on Fuller and BTS craziness resulted in that pilot being so many ideas being explored. The Klingon scenes are far and away one of my favorite scenes in Star Trek because it felt so alien.

I agree that CBS was attempting to give fans what they thought they want-because fans had dropped a million plus on a fan series about a Klingon War. So, how else are CBS supposed to interpret that fan response?

I wasn't thinking of a Klingon war only when I said CBS was attempting to give fans what they want but that is worth considering when you factor in the reaction to Axanar. I was thinking more so the idea of a big space war in general, something momentous and with consequences. Also, I was thinking about the focus on big emotions and big actions. And that this wasn't something that I imagine CBS thought that just Star Trek fans 'wanted' but that a more amorphous genre fandom liked when you consider massive hits, at the time, like Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead or buzzy lesser hits. Unpredictability and very big stakes and all that. I just now considered that the Klingon political machinations might even have been inspired by Game of Thrones, as an aside.

In particular to the Klingons I do think CBS thought Trek fans would love the Klingons mainly speaking in Klingon, Klingonese, or Klingoni? And the nice mention of "The Black Fleet", that kind of insider stuff that hardcore fans do like, and I liked the mention, even though I've never finished The Final Reflection.

For my personal feelings on DISCO Klingons, I liked the aesthetic and the focus on the politics, however I think CBS's redesign went too far, especially with the costuming and ships. I wish more care had been taken perhaps to explain this was an offshoot or another subgroup of Klingons, like we had the HemQuch and the QuchHa' (terms I wish were made canon). For me, it would've cleared up a lot of angst and it would've also added to T'Kuvma's motivation to unite all Klingons together. DISCO Klingons certainly felt more alien than we've seen in a long time, if ever, when it came to the Klingons, but it just didn't fit consistently with what we've seen in ENT and then TOS to sandwich DISCO between them. If this had been a completely new race, same aesthetic, I think a lot of the ire would've been gone.

DISCO, both seasons, seemed to have an issue of too many cooks, and it's surprising how well each season actually did turn out overall. It could've been a lot worse considering all the BTS turmoil.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

The irony with Axanar is that it's filled with a lot of the stuff that people are criticising Disco for. Garth is the literal definition of a mary sue. He's played by the series creator (the insertion of the author into his own story), everyone loves him, including his enemies, He's a tactical genius who can turn the tied of a battle single-handed and Captain of the most powerful ship starfleet has. All of the supporting characters are cliched ciphers that exist just to blow smoke up Garth's butt hole and tell the audience how amazing he is. There is a war going on with the klingons who are portrayed as being more brutal than we ever saw, destroying entire cities with orbital bombardments and killing or enslaving entire populations of colonists. The Ares is basically a cut and paste design of other other starships like the constitution, miranda, akira. Heck, I think it was designed by the guy who did the USS Titan for pocket books, the ships are near identical.

Also Peters made Axanar to make money and he took a lot of money from his supporters and spent on things he shouldn't have. But CBS is evil because it makes people pay to watch star trek.

But it's tru trek everyone, so who cares.

 

[Lord Garth]

For obvious reasons, I so wish that fan-film was based off another Star Trek character. Any other Star Trek character. If I hadn't had the same username and been posting on this board since Clinton was President, and I was just registering now, I would've gone with a different username.

 

[Nerys Myk]

For obvious reasons, I so wish that fan-film was based off another Star Trek character. Any other Star Trek character. If I hadn't had the same username and been posting on this board since Clinton was President, and I was just registering now, I would've gone with a different username.

"Captain Tracy".

 

[DarKush]

The irony with Axanar is that it's filled with a lot of the stuff that people are criticising Disco for. Garth is the literal definition of a mary sue. He's played by the series creator (the insertion of the author into his own story), everyone loves him, including his enemies, He's a tactical genius who can turn the tied of a battle single-handed and Captain of the most powerful ship starfleet has. All of the supporting characters are cliched ciphers that exist just to blow smoke up Garth's butt hole and tell the audience how amazing he is. There is a war going on with the klingons who are portrayed as being more brutal than we ever saw, destroying entire cities with orbital bombardments and killing or enslaving entire populations of colonists. The Ares is basically a cut and paste design of other other starships like the constitution, miranda, akira. Heck, I think it was designed by the guy who did the USS Titan for pocket books, the ships are near identical.

Also Peters made Axanar to make money and he took a lot of money from his supporters and spent on things he shouldn't have. But CBS is evil because it makes people pay to watch star trek.

But it's tru trek everyone, so who cares.

I hadn't considered comparisons between DISCO and Axanar like that. Of course both dealt with a Klingon War, but the other stuff, like the Garth character, that is interesting. Though I think that with Axanar being a fan film it got a lot of leeway and less judgment.

Further, "Prelude to Axanar" was so well done that it made lots of fans hearts flutter, mine included. I did read about Peters saying at one time he would get another actor to play Garth, so there had to be enough displeasure with his role in "Prelude" for him to say that (though I am very skeptical that we will actually get "Axanar" now, though we might get Jonathan Lane's "Axanar: Interlude"). I still check in often to see how things are progressing with Axanar.

How "Prelude" was set up, documentary style, and short, there wasn't enough time to go into a lot of character development. I thought all the actors in it, Peters as well, did well. And the brutality in "Prelude" I mean there are hints of that kind of behavior from the Klingons throughout Trek, before DISCO even, and starting with "Errand of Mercy". Perhaps Axanar and then DISCO just took it to another level, or Axanar chose to depict things that TOS, TNG, and DS9, perhaps for budgetary or philosophical reasons at the time, did not. Each of those series featured a Klingon conflict which could've provided opportunities to do so, and a lot of was left unsaid or unexplored about what the Klingons did in those conflicts. Further, ENT depicted the Klingons about to wipe out one of their own colonies to stop the Augment virus from spreading and also gave a glimpse of how Klingons treat their subjects when Archer fought off Duras to protect some of them.

I liked a lot of the designs from "Axanar" a lot more than DISCO. They felt more in keeping with what came before. I think DISCO veered too far off and it feels discordant to put their starships between those from TOS and ENT. I don't even know if they fit really beside the Kelvinverse starships either.

It seems to me that Peters has a lot of detractors and has been pilloried for his behavior-alleged or otherwise. That's different than putting official Star Trek behind a pay wall, where for decades it was 'free', as long as one had a television that is. To this day I refuse to subscribe-unless for free-to CBS All Access. I did the one month they offered so I could see Picard and some of the Short Treks. I've just bought DISCO on home video and actually prefer looking at it that way.