TOS
.
.
.
STD
ENT
DS9
PIC
.
.
.
.
.
TNG
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
VOY
.
.
.
STD
ENT
DS9
PIC
.
.
.
.
.
TNG
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
VOY
Star Trek Discovery...best first season of the franchise?
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I completely agree. I think that kind of innovation and addition to the technology is something that will benefit productions for a long time to come. I can same the same thing about the prequel trilogy too. Technically, they were very forward looking and expansive in the ability of capability in terms of digital filming, effects, etc. I am hoping Trek takes advantage of it.
I would say DIS has the second-best premiere season of the franchise. I'm afraid there are structural problems in DIS S1 as a result of the season order being unexpectedly extended; the trip to the Mirror Universe really should have been Season 2 instead shoe-horning it into the middle of S1's Klingon War arc. But is is of consistently higher quality than any other Trek series's first season except PIC's.
My first season rankings:
1. PIC
2. DIS
3. TOS
4. DS9
5. ENT
6. VOY
7. TNG
My first season rankings:
1. PIC
2. DIS
3. TOS
4. DS9
5. ENT
6. VOY
7. TNG
When are people going to drop the conspiracy theory that getting two extra episodes somehow threw off DSC's first-person narrative, or the notion that the end of the season was rushed?
There's objectively nothing wrong whatsoever with the narrative structure or pace of DSC Season 1, which is indeed the best first season of the franchise to date when looked at completely objectively.
There's objectively nothing wrong whatsoever with the narrative structure or pace of DSC Season 1, which is indeed the best first season of the franchise to date when looked at completely objectively.
I much prefer that we had the first two episodes onboard the Shenzhou. It shows what Burnham was like before her fall from grace and gives us a chance to see Captain Georgiou so we can later compare her to Emperor Georgiou. And it's all concentrated in those episodes.
It's better than chopping it up and interspersing it through flashbacks that might've disrupted the narrative flow of later episodes or might not have fit in at all.
And with all the technical work that went into those two episodes, and the effort, they deserve to be seen in all their glory. If it had been decided not to show them, it would've been a waste.
Plus, I had a thread a while back where I called a hypothetical Star Trek: Shenzhou the phantom Star Trek series, and explained why in this thread.
It's better than chopping it up and interspersing it through flashbacks that might've disrupted the narrative flow of later episodes or might not have fit in at all.
And with all the technical work that went into those two episodes, and the effort, they deserve to be seen in all their glory. If it had been decided not to show them, it would've been a waste.
Plus, I had a thread a while back where I called a hypothetical Star Trek: Shenzhou the phantom Star Trek series, and explained why in this thread.
First seasons?
TOS
DS9
TAS
TNG
VOY
ENT
DSC
PIC
I reserve the right to change my mind at any time. I'm already waffling on TNG>Voy...
TOS
DS9
TAS
TNG
VOY
ENT
DSC
PIC
I reserve the right to change my mind at any time. I'm already waffling on TNG>Voy...
Complexity means nothing if the product isn't good or universally liked. It's the same with the convoluted storylines these series are telling, you don't need it to be so complicated for a show to be compelling. The design is generic sci-fi cliche, nothing ambitious about it.
Also, @RAMA you who are so fond of talking about award nominations, Mandalorian got FIFTEEN at the Emmys, and worthy of every one of them. How many do Picard/Discovery get? Whilst Mando is picking up nominations for outstanding Drama, CBSTrek is getting things like makeup, hair styling, prosthetics and sound editing. And unlike in the past, none for visual effects (it was never going to score one of those).
The pointless mirror universe episodes, almost completely unseen war with the Klingons, and lacklustre finale say hello.
1) The Mirror Universe episodes weren't pointless, and were part of Bryan Fuller's plan from the beginning
2) You having a problem with the finale doesn't mean there's an objective issue with the season
3) You wanting to see more of the war with the Klingons doesn't mean there's an objective issue with the season
You're trying to take things that you didn't like and pass them off as objective failings of the show.
For me Georgious death happened too quick for me to have any feeling for her or Burnham yet. And I would have preferred if we could have just skipped BDSM Georgiou all together
Last edited:
DSC not introducing its titular vessel and 3 of its primary cast members until Episode 3 was a great subversion of the typical Star Trek formula that is totally in keeping with what else the show wanted to do in subverting said formula.
1) TOS
2) PIC
.
.
3)DS9
4)DSC
.
.
.
.
5) TAS
6) VOY
7) ENT
.
.
.
.
.
8) TNG
2) PIC
.
.
3)DS9
4)DSC
.
.
.
.
5) TAS
6) VOY
7) ENT
.
.
.
.
.
8) TNG
And you are trying to objectively say that there is nothing wrong with season 1, when actually that is just your OPINION.
Should have skipped the whole mirror universe arc entirely, and maybe gotten off the ship for a change, or given us an episode where we get to know Airiam, so her intro/death in season 2 would actually mean something, or actually show this war with the Klingons instead of completely avoid it apart from one 2 minute space battle.
Show me a product that is universally liked.
See I'm the opposite. Georgiou's death hit hard and felt like a specter over the season.
Last edited:
Yep to the mirror and Klingons but I loved the Airiam episode not because I felt for her but I liked the structure of the episode, what it showed us of the other characters and in general I loved when shows give us the story from another angle like TNG:lower decks did and BSG could be very good at too
Show me a product that is universally liked.
You're missing my point. This complexity thing that Rama keeps going on about is meaningless if the stories themselves aren't good and popular with fans.
"Static" was a misnomer. I was in a hurry and phrased things poorly. I was speaking to the visuals - or strictly what's in the frame - not to the literal camera itself. Though, given the context of the entire sentence, I would think that was implied.
None the less, strip all the whizbang and camera movement away, and you'd see my initial point holds true. That scene you posted, is pretty much structurally identical to any similar scene of Voyager running into the Thomas the Tank Hierarchical Imperium. in the end, it's just people spewing gobbledygook at one another with nothing of substance going on. Spinning the bridge right round like a record baby doesn't make the gobbledygook any more interesting.
And might I add, the very point that you notice all the camera movement is proof they're doing it wrong. Style and 'flair' should be invisible. I personally love a lot of camera movement - they're called motion pictures, after all. But it needs to have reason and purpose. Disco just does it for the sake of it. The problem is, the show tries too hard to mimic the nu films. But it only uses the what and ignores the how, why, and when.
For all his faults (and he has many), Abrams is still a great director - in the sense of the person walking the set with a viewfinder. The guy has an innate instinct to shot framing and camera movement. And Lin is pretty good too. Compare a fast-moving scene from ST09 to one from Disco and ask yourself why did he choose to move the camera in such a matter - what was the purpose? Then do the same for a Disco scene.
Or better yet, look at the scene of Spock waling into the Vulcan Academy chambers. Abrams really take the camera off-center there. It starts off awkward and distorted. But as it fallows Spock down the hall into the chambers, it pans up and the board members are all huge in-frame, dwarfing Quinto. Disco just doesn't have any of the kind of substance.
As for Mando, well let's elevator pitch the show: the story of a nameless, faceless blue-collar worker - living in a world [galaxy] defined by its larger than life heroes expelling the grand binary wisdoms of good v. evil, left v. right, right v. wrong all encapsulated in red v. blue - trying to navigate "the way," or the sole gray path between all that, in order to provide and protect his family.
And in turn, you get this:
Or what might be my single favorite shot from any skiffy show ever:
I could write paragraphs on this single frame. The obvious reference to ET, channeling the innocent boy under all that armor or how the light and the dark create a cage-like image on the floor. He's literally imprisoned in between them.
And I could probably find a good dozen more like them. That's what provocative, thoughtful, and imaginative visuals look like. Art.
Fuck, Disco isn't even in the same league.
Apology accepted.
I'm not really a Star Wars fan. I saw the movies, but I'm more of a casual movie-goer in that regard, not a hardcore fan like I am with Star Trek. I don't have the Disney Channel or any of that either, so I'm not likely to see The Mandalorian, unless I'm over at someone else's house and they're showing it to me. And given Covid-19...I was speaking to the visuals - or strictly what's in the frame - not to the literal camera itself. Though, given the context of the entire sentence, I would think that was implied.
None the less, strip all the whizbang and camera movement away, and you'd see my initial point holds true. That scene you posted, is pretty much structurally identical to any similar scene of Voyager running into the Thomas the Tank Hierarchical Imperium. in the end, it's just people spewing gobbledygook at one another with nothing of substance going on. Spinning the bridge right round like a record baby doesn't make the gobbledygook any more interesting.
And might I add, the very point that you notice all the camera movement is proof they're doing it wrong. Style and 'flair' should be invisible. I personally love a lot of camera movement - they're called motion pictures, after all. But it needs to have reason and purpose. Disco just does it for the sake of it. The problem is, the show tries too hard to mimic the nu films. But it only uses the what and ignores the how, why, and when.
For all his faults (and he has many), Abrams is still a great director - in the sense of the person walking the set with a viewfinder. The guy has an innate instinct to shot framing and camera movement. And Lin is pretty good too. Compare a fast-moving scene from ST09 to one from Disco and ask yourself why did he choose to move the camera in such a matter - what was the purpose? Then do the same for a Disco scene.
Or better yet, look at the scene of Spock waling into the Vulcan Academy chambers. Abrams really take the camera off-center there. It starts off awkward and distorted. But as it fallows Spock down the hall into the chambers, it pans up and the board members are all huge in-frame, dwarfing Quinto. Disco just doesn't have any of the kind of substance.
As for Mando, well let's elevator pitch the show: the story of a nameless, faceless blue-collar worker - living in a world [galaxy] defined by its larger than life heroes expelling the grand binary wisdoms of good v. evil, left v. right, right v. wrong all encapsulated in red v. blue - trying to navigate "the way," or the sole gray path between all that, in order to provide and protect his family.
And in turn, you get this:
Or what might be my single favorite shot from any skiffy show ever:
I could write paragraphs on this single frame. The obvious reference to ET, channeling the innocent boy under all that armor or how the light and the dark create a cage-like image on the floor. He's literally imprisoned in between them.
And I could probably find a good dozen more like them. That's what provocative, thoughtful, and imaginative visuals look like. Art.
Fuck, Disco isn't even in the same league.
... so I'll comment further when I get a chance to watch a full episode of The Mandalorian and can discuss it after having actually seen it.
Similar threads
