S1 was awesome, S2 is a yawn fest

[Cyrus]

BTW, what I find interesting is how much serializing is going on with The Orville despite all the accusations that it's slavishly copying TNG. At one point in the last episode Gordon referred back to all other failed romance episodes. And during the 2-parter there was a callback to Isaac cutting off Gordon's leg. So serialization doesn't have to be all or nothing. It can be more of a continuum.

Making references to events in prior episodes is not serialization. I don't see any serialization in the Orville so far, though they may end up doing it in the future, just like TNG did some in its latter seasons.

One more thing I was thinking of, I don't get all this "Discovery is like Game of Thrones!" nonsense. Granted, I've never seen Game of Thrones (I know, I know... ),

I think GoT is the best TV series ever, so you are missing out. But I don't see much similarity between GoT and Discovery. The only influence of GoT that I see, and that is not something unique to that show, is the willingness to Kill regular or recurring characters in an attempt to make it unpredictable. I figured out Lorca was toast long before it happened.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think GoT is the best TV series ever, so you are missing out. But I don't see much similarity between GoT and Discovery. The only influence of GoT that I see, and that is not something unique to that show, is the willingness to Kill regular or recurring characters in an attempt to make it unpredictable. I figured out Lorca was toast long before it happened.

Thanks! Finally a confirmation of what I thought all along: whenever it's said, it's only being used as just another item in the kitchen sink to throw up against the wall when insulting Discovery to see what sticks.

When people can't talk about the actual show itself, they talk about whatever they can around it, and then hope if they can say it blustery enough, they can pin it all to Discovery. "STD is like this!" "STD is like that!" "STD lovers are this!" "STD lovers are that!" All fine and dandy, but what about what's in the episodes? Talking about the characters, the writing, whether or not something was properly set up, wondering how it leads into TOS and the rest, etc. That's criticism. "Lady Gaga! Hipsters! Game of Thrones! SJWs!" is just throwing out pop-culture references and buzz-words, and trying to pass that off as criticism. It makes people who are genuinely critical of the show look bad.

 

[Alan Roi]

Thanks! Finally a confirmation of what I thought all along: whenever it's said, it's only being used as just another item in the kitchen sink to throw up against the wall when insulting Discovery to see what sticks.

When people can't talk about the actual show itself, they talk about whatever they can around it, and then hope if they can say it blustery enough, they can pin it all to Discovery. "STD is like this!" "STD is like that!" "STD lovers are this!" "STD lovers are that!" All fine and dandy, but what about what's in the episodes? Talking about the characters, the writing, whether or not something was properly set up, wondering how it leads into TOS and the rest, etc. That's criticism. "Lady Gaga! Hipsters! Game of Thrones! SJWs!" is just throwing out pop-culture references and buzz-words, and trying to pass that off as criticism. It makes people who are genuinely critical of the show look bad.

Of course these buzzwords creep in even to more well thought out critiques, which it seems even the thinking people fall victim to, as they are often playing to audiences who are looking for those to do the thinking for them.

But no, I watch a lot, and the show hasn't been GoT in space, not even season 1, Nor is it close to Black Sails either, which I consider better realized than GoT. There is an occasional bit of Farscape in the pacing that the show gets, and maybe a tiny bit of BG but the closest show I can compare it to in the last 10 years would have to be The Last Ship, which was very Treky (and spent a season on an ode to The Enemy Within), but in a mil-fi way that Disco doesn't really get close to, and not filmed and scripted and acted like it was made in the 80s .

It also doesn't distinguish itself from old Trek, IMHO, as the grief-striken would have one believe and therefore doesn't take the chances it could that would carry it to a completely another level other than the fact the production values and cinematography make it fill like a movie every week. The writers don't capable of or interested in juggling multiple protagonists/antagonists to the level Black Sails was able to (or the Expanse for that matter), the MU wasn't close to the deep study I saw Counterpart which elevated that genre. The time travel stuff this year isn't what 12 Monkeys did to elevate the time travel genre.

IMHO its generally very good, but rarely touched brilliance because its not as daring as it could be. Yes, its produced the best first 25 eps of a series since TOS, But that's an extremely low bar, and its shown that you can produce a scifi show that looks and feels like a 45 min movie every week for just 8mil, for which I hope bodes well for scifi TV in general and Trek in particular.
.

 

[BillJ]

This is the first time I've ever heard an ongoing complaint that one was 'unearned'.

If they had spent that much time on a funeral for Robert Tomlinson, it would have been unearned. It was filler designed to pad out an episode.

 

[Alan Roi]

If they had spent that much time on a funeral for Robert Tomlinson, it would have been unearned. It was filler designed to pad out an episode.

It was not filler, and IMHO, claiming so is very odd. One thing we've learned from Disco over the past 1.5 seasons is that it does not do filler, even when doing so would be an improvement. It was there for a point and to make a statement, like it or not.

 

[Noname Given]

What you're actually describing here is how the target demo of Discovery is so different from what came before that Disco fans feel the need to belittle the earlier shows and its fans, to the detriment of Trek fandom as a whole.

Um, I've been watching Star Trek first run (on NBC) since I was 6 in 1969. No one's been 'belittling' any previous shows any worse than has been done in the Franchise's 50+ year history since NBC aired the first show that was 'not Trek' to many in 1973 with TAS; and has continued with EVERY new incarnation of Star trek be it a feature film, or new series.

 

[BillJ]

Um, I've been watching Star Trek first run (on NBC) since I was 6 in 1969. No one's been 'belittling' any previous shows any worse than has been done in the Franchise's 50+ year history since NBC aired the first show that was 'not Trek' to many in 1973 with TAS; and has continued with EVERY new incarnation of Star trek be it a feature film, or new series.

I may not agree with some of the choices that they have made, but I don’t see where they have belittled what came before.

 

[ED-209]

I'm with @BillJ on this one, it was definately filler, and all for a character we barely even knew unitl the episode she died.