Seasons 1-2 or 3-4?

[KennyB]

Definitely 1-2. 3 was okay, but 4 has been very dull dispite a strong start (I loved the butterfly men!)

Ditto

 

[KennyB]

It's just IMHO, but I think part of the issue is one aspect of Berman Trek they have largely avoided a lack of storytelling versatility. That's one way that Season 1 is actually very similar to Season 4 - Michael is still the lead in ways Picard never was, and the show is really only interested in telling one kind of story - with one frame of reference - per season.

I'm coming around to the idea that while every Trek series should have its own voice - and distinct characters - we simply shouldn't have the actual tone of each show/season hyper focused. We need a breather where we have stories told from the POV of others besides the lead, or a comedic episode in the middle of heavy drama. That sort of thing.

I think it would serve Discovery well if they had a season of 2-3 episode mini arcs instead of the 1 BIG BAD/Mystery per season.........it's just not working for them. The cast, crew, look, VFX everything is great except hey don't seem to maintain the focus and intensity over 13 episodes IMHO.

 

[fireproof78]

I think it's hard to do, to be honest...and perhaps unfairly so. The more Trek marches on, the higher the expectaions seem to go, and the more divergent the opinions of what it "should be" seem to be. That's pretty tough space to navigate in for any production.

I agree. I think Star Trek is burdened with terrible purpose of being all things to all human kind in a way that makes that needle very small and difficult to thread.

My problem with season 4 isn't that there's too much crew interaction, it's that I'm not getting anything out of it, for all the reasons that have been discussed a hundred times already. I'm craving some proper discussions! I want to see them hanging out and behaving like normal people! The pacing wouldn't feel so slow if their conversations weren't so dry and repetitive.

Interesting. I suppose in that way DSC has failed in the cardinal way for Trek in that it is entertaining. I will not speak long on the fact that I don't think the DSC crew is ever going to be normal; I think there is too much trauma for that. But, if you are not entertained then yes, I see the problem.

You misunderstood me. I was not making any sort of comment on the tone or style in relation to season 3/4 being similar to TNG/DS9/VOY. I was only comparing the average quality of those seasons which all left me with a "meh" sort of impression.

Fair enough. I guess I had a similar impression to TNG and TMP with the current season. It's a lot of talk and not a lot of action. Which strikes me as being exactly what was desired of Trek. But, more interestingly, is the idea that even if one were engaged with the characters (which many have given the impression that they are not) it is possible to still walk away with a meh feeling.

It's all incredibly fascinating.

It's just IMHO, but I think part of the issue is one aspect of Berman Trek they have largely avoided a lack of storytelling versatility. That's one way that Season 1 is actually very similar to Season 4 - Michael is still the lead in ways Picard never was, and the show is really only interested in telling one kind of story - with one frame of reference - per season.

I'm coming around to the idea that while every Trek series should have its own voice - and distinct characters - we simply shouldn't have the actual tone of each show/season hyper focused. We need a breather where we have stories told from the POV of others besides the lead, or a comedic episode in the middle of heavy drama. That sort of thing.

This strikes me more of a byproduct of current production design, not just with Trek but with multiple other dramas too. In the era of streaming these are no always treated as episodes but one episode divided up.

In this case it appears to not be working all that well, though the theme and tone is very much TNG to me.

 

[eschaton]

I think it would serve Discovery well if they had a season of 2-3 episode mini arcs instead of the 1 BIG BAD/Mystery per season.........it's just not working for them. The cast, crew, look, VFX everything is great except hey don't seem to maintain the focus and intensity over 13 episodes IMHO.

Welll, next season they are going down to 10. Arguably this is too long even for modern serialized TV. If you look at Netflix and Disney+, the standard "season" length for live-action drama now seems to be down to 6-8 episodes.

 

[fireproof78]

Welll, next season they are going down to 10. Arguably this is too long even for modern serialized TV. If you look at Netflix and Disney+, the standard "season" length for live-action drama now seems to be down to 6-8 episodes.

Next season will be all action.

 

[eschaton]

Next season will be all action.

I could be wrong, but I think the writer's room finished up already? I don't think fan reaction has been bad enough for them to do a sudden pivot away from whatever they initially planned for.

Then again, Discovery has a long history of doing sudden pivots in the middle of production.

 

[fireproof78]

I could be wrong, but I think the writer's room finished up already? I don't think fan reaction has been bad enough for them to do a sudden pivot away from whatever they initially planned for.

Then again, Discovery has a long history of doing sudden pivots in the middle of production.

I do. And they always take the wrong lesson from fan feedback.

Exhibit A: This Season, and the season ender of season 3.

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

Fair enough. I guess I had a similar impression to TNG and TMP with the current season. It's a lot of talk and not a lot of action. Which strikes me as being exactly what was desired of Trek. But, more interestingly, is the idea that even if one were engaged with the characters (which many have given the impression that they are not) it is possible to still walk away with a meh feeling.

That's a very simple way of looking at things. "People wanted talking now they got it". You leave out the very very important "good" bit. People wanted good talking that is part of a good story. That's why I mentioned the seasons I did especially TNG 7 when the writing was awful (space candle ghost awful at times). Disco isnt that bad this season but it hasn't been great.
Now early season 2 which was also mostly talking is Discos peak for me. A well written story with good characters chatting about a good mystery (until of course the big reveal is a Burnham and then the terminator plot kicked in)

 

[fireproof78]

That's a very simple way of looking at things. "People wanted talking now they got it". You leave out the very very important "good" bit. People wanted good talking that is part of a good story. That's why I mentioned the seasons I did especially TNG 7 when the writing was awful (space candle ghost awful at times). Disco isnt that bad this season but it hasn't been great.
Now early season 2 which was also mostly talking is Discos peak for me. A well written story with good characters chatting about a good mystery (until of course the big reveal is a Burnham and then the terminator plot kicked in)

No, I am assessing general themes, not specific examples.

Good is subjective. How the hell am I suppose to include a subjective feeling?

 

[eschaton]

I think in general people are very good at identifying what they like/dislike (probably better at identifying what they dislike) but they're generally very, very bad at identifying why they don't like it.

Thus, I feel like if you have a TV show you're trying to tweak, you should take criticism into account, but not take it literally, just seriously. Do your own assessment of what works and what doesn't and go from there.

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

No, I am assessing general themes, not specific examples.

Good is subjective. How the hell am I suppose to include a subjective feeling?

You are trying to create a narrative that "people whinged for slower talking Trek and now they got what they want they still whinge"
But they did not get what they want.

 

[eschaton]

You are trying to create a narrative that "people whinged for slower talking Trek and now they got what they want they still whinge"
But they did not get what they want.

I think the main criticism that people had at the end of Season 3 was that Osyrra was an underbaked villain, and that the final episode was pretty much a generic "defeat the bad guy" episode which didn't really mesh well with the themes of rebuilding the Federation.

Plus, you know, finding out the inside of Discovery is a TARDIS.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

2 and 3.

 

[fireproof78]

You are trying to create a narrative that "people whinged for slower talking Trek and now they got what they want they still whinge"
But they did not get what they want.

No, I am not. I am looking at what people want from Discovery and where it falls short. It's an interesting swing back and forth. People are going to whinge. That will not change.

 

[eschaton]

No, I am not. I am looking at what people want from Discovery and where it falls short. It's an interesting swing back and forth. People are going to whinge. That will not change.

I honestly don't think people complained much about the action even when the series was most action heavy though (like Season 2). That was never a common criticism of the show. The main criticism of the first two seasons had to do with the plots not making much sense, and the characterization being inconstant.

 

[fireproof78]

I honestly don't think people complained much about the action even when the series was most action heavy though (like Season 2). That was never a common criticism of the show. The main criticism of the first two seasons had to do with the plots not making much sense, and the characterization being inconstant.

It depends on the location. Here not so much. Elsewhere, well, I use the term "pew-pew" for a reason.

 

[Uhura's Song]

Best:
1. First half of S2
2. First half of S1
3. Second half of S4

Worst.
1. Second half of S2

The rest is in the middle.

 

[donners22]

Haven't seen 4 yet, but I liked 1 & 2 a lot more than 3. It became quite schmaltzy and directionless, and lacked the tension which helped make the earlier seasons compelling.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

People are going to whinge. That will not change.

 

[Vger23]

That's a very simple way of looking at things. "People wanted talking now they got it". You leave out the very very important "good" bit. People wanted good talking that is part of a good story. That's why I mentioned the seasons I did especially TNG 7 when the writing was awful (space candle ghost awful at times). Disco isnt that bad this season but it hasn't been great.
Now early season 2 which was also mostly talking is Discos peak for me. A well written story with good characters chatting about a good mystery (until of course the big reveal is a Burnham and then the terminator plot kicked in)

I think the universal problem is that what is "good" is subjective. So everyone wants "good" talking. Less pew-pew...and when there has to be pew-pew...well it had better be "good." And if we could have some "good" character development, that would be great. And let's not forget "good" writing overall. And a "good" arc with a "good" finale. The pacing had better be "good," because we don't want it too fast, and we definitely don't want it too slow.

So that's the hitch. And I do believe the production team is aware of general fan response to things, and I do believe they have made large creative decisions trying to be responsive to that (I mean, a 900 year time jump, anyone?). The problem is that no single pivot or response is going to make everyone happy. I agree with @fireproof78 that fans think they know what they want...but since everyone has their own extremely unflappable sense of what "good" is, it's basically a losing proposition. My wish has always been that writers and producers block out the "fan feedback" and just tell the story they want to tell in the way they want to tell it. When this has been done in the past (examples: TWOK, DS9, 2009 etc) the results have typically been very good. Yes, there are examples where it didn't work out....but Star Trek for a long time has been a product of "fan feedback" and "studio interference" and I don't think it has served the franchise well, despite the fans wanting to be heard and wanting influence.

I think every time the fanbase exerts their influence, and the producers listen, the franchise gets weaker and weaker.