Spoilers The return of the "reset button"

[JoeZhang]

How can a series fundamentally changing its premise be a reset button?

New storyline does not equal reset.

 

[MrPointy]

They didn't really reset everything, so much as they swept it under the rug. I'm betting The Picard Show mentions Discovery and/or the spore drive at some point.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Way back in the day, one of the biggest criticisms of Voyager was the use of the so-called "reset button." Basically due to pressure from the studio, the show studiously avoided any sense of serialization greater than a two-part episode. Unless the writers eventually decided that a given show would have a "sequel" it was unlikely the events would ever be mentioned again. Thus the ship could go from trashed in one episode to brand-spanking new in the next. Or Neelix could have an existential crisis around death, Torres could be "born again" or Janeway could have salamander babies with Tom Paris and no one ever remarked upon it again. The stakes for the series as a whole were thus lowered, because we knew that no matter what happened onscreen, it didn't really matter in the longer run - it was just there to entertain us for 40-some odd minutes.

I would propose that with the season finale, the reset button has been effectively dusted off for Discovery. I am sure that there will be some callbacks to the first two seasons here and there, but not all that many more than Voyager had from episode to episode.

The last act of the season finale pretty definitively closed out every single arc in seasons one and two, provided Discovery does not eventually return to the 23rd century.

1. Control is dead as a doornail. Not completely clear based upon what happened onscreen, but Kurtzman has confirmed.
2. Everything related to Discovery, the Spore Drive, and Michael Burnham has been classified. Of course they still had a within-universe impact, but in terms of the "internal lore" of Trek history, they are supposed to have been totally forgotten.
3. We are likely never seeing Ash Tyler, Pike, Spock, Amanda, Sarek, L'Rell, Siranna, or Mudd on the show again (even if we see them elsewhere). Oh, and Cornwell and Leland are dead. It's pretty unlikely that PU Lorca will ever raise his head either come to think of it. Basically half of the established character relationships are totally

What that leaves us with is character continuity. However, even here we have thin gruel.

• Michael has the most obvious existing hook, as her birth mother should be in the time frame in question, and they should be reunited. However, basically every other element of her backstory has been rendered largely irrelevant by the time jump. It can still inform who she is as a character now, but unless they really want to go down the excessive flashback route, her relationships with Spock, Amanda, Sarek, etc just won't have any relevance in the next season.
• Saru's character growth in terms of his "evolution" (in a pokemon sense) remains in force. However, the personal link to his sister is gone. Unless we rediscover his people in the far future, there doesn't seem like any existing personal hook that can be investigated here.
• It was nice (though a bit forced) to see Stamets and Culber reunited at the end of the last episode. However, in a lot of ways their relationship has just been re-established at the point it should have been to begin with - a healthy, functional one which happens to be the first same-sex couple in Trek history. I don't think belaboring the drama they had in the second season too heavily into the third would work well from a story perspective, meaning a "reboot" of their relationship to some extent seems likely. Beyond that, I guess they could do more with Stamets being the "spore guy" - though honestly figuring out how to be something else besides that might be the more compelling story.
• A number of characters have only been fleshed out in a cursory manner, to the degree that what happened in the first two seasons barely seems to matter. This includes Tilly as a main character, recurring characters like Reno, and the bridge furniture (even though they got a bit more of a place in the sun this season).
• Oh, and of course there is MU Georgiou. Her unique backstory is what helps to define her...erm...perspective on things. However, even in the second season, there were relatively few callbacks to her actions in the first. She doesn't appear to have any notable dangling plot threads (other than her continued feelings for Burnham) and we know that she is off the show after the third season, even if the show continues on past her, meaning she has an expiration date.

Regardless, the conclusion I have come to is that while the amount of time the "story" of Discovery had over the last two seasons was significant - a bit longer overall than any single season of an earlier Trek show - fundamentally it appears that that single story was just as self-contained as any earlier Trek story, just longer - and that the reset button was still, for all intents and purposes, pressed.

I've read your post a few times and I'm failing to understand how the reset button is in play. The show is changing it's primary setting, possibly permanently, how exactly is that pushing the reset button? Discovery's journey to 32nd century is completely based on previous arcs and storylines the very nature of it is as opposite to reset button as can be.

 

[Michael]

You know, I can kind of see where you‘re coming from with this, @eschaton. I don‘t know if I‘d call it a reset button per se, but it sure seems like they have completely given up on the show‘s original setting and premise. Many of the things that happened in the first two seasons will never be of any importance again.

But I guess it’s only par for the course that writers who don‘t seem to be able to craft a coherent arc even for a single season, won‘t be able to maintain any kind of arc for the series as a whole. Imagine hit shows like Game of Thrones or The Expanse completely abandoning their setting and premise halfway through their run.

I‘m not even sure what Discovery‘s mission will be from here on out. Finding a way home? Surely that can‘t be a priority, because the writers don‘t want them to get home. Exploring the universe and discovering new things? They are so far removed from anything they know; who will they report their findings to? Tilly wants to become a captain? On what ship and in what fleet? At this point it seems like the show has lost its focus.

It‘s a shame that they didn‘t have more confidence in the original vision for this show and completely gave in to some loudmouths on the internet. Having a character call out fan terms like Prime and Mirror Universe in dialog (!) and having practically the whole universe sworn to secrecy about the existence of Discovery out of a weird sense to ”align the show with canon“ surely represents one of the low points of Star Trek‘s history. At least it does for me.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The people running Discovery now aren't the same people who started it. When it began, it was conceived as a standalone anthology series (with only one season to this crew AND a timejump finale), now it's ongoing as part of an all-out Marvel-style telespam strategy.

Change was inevitable.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

As others pointed out, just because a story arc was concluded doesn’t make it a reset button. This is an approach I think is best for serialized television where a story plays out within a season as opposed to the whole show. LOST was one big long story for six seasons, for better or worse. Then there’s a show like BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER that had season storylines that never carry over the next, but the consequences of those seasons are still felt in the aftermath. ENTERPRISE tried this with the Xindi arc in the third season. While that storyline resolved by the fourth season, it still had a definite effect on the characters that they no longer felt like the same people from the first two seasons (except perhaps Mayweather and Hoshi, the most underutilized characters).

DISCO will be changing it’s premise pretty hard, but I doubt the characters will act like it’s just another episode. Their lives have changed DRAMATICALLY. For example Tilly’s all about wanting to become a Starfleet Captain, bit is that still feasible in the 32nd century?

 

[KennyB]

You know, I can kind of see where you‘re coming from with this, @eschaton.
But I guess it’s only par for the course that writers who don‘t seem to be able to craft a coherent arc even for a single season, won‘t be able to maintain any kind of arc for the series as a whole.

Haters gonna hate. I enjoyed the season and found it coherent. I guess I'm just not as advanced as you are. Yeah I must be simple.

 

[TPezz]

In my opinion, the Season 3 story arc is a continuation on of Season 2, not really a reset. Everything that’s happened thus far hasn’t been erased, it’s still part of their story. The first episode of the next season will likely pick up where we left off, with Discovery arriving in the future and having to cope with being in a strange new world away from everyone they knew. I’m sure there will be focus on Michael missing her family and Tyler, as well as feeling guilt for the casualty that occurred. There’s also the matter of whether her mother is alive as well, and whether they have actually saved the universe from Control.

We also know that Georgiou somehow returns to her time to lead the S31 show, so there’s her journey on how she’ll get back. The Red Angel Suit is also still in existence.

So as far as I’m concerned, it’s not a reset at all. It’s just a continuation on of the previous two seasons. Kurtzman also said that S3 would continue to link up with cannon, so that doesn’t mean that Pike and Co have seen the last of Discovery and it’s crew. A reset would be if they had have erased Michael Burnhams whole past, right back to when she was a child. I was afraid that may have been the case, which would have upset me since it would’ve meant the whole two seasons were a complete waste. Thankfully that didn’t happen.

Besides, have they even made it 950 years into the future though? Remember the crystal only has infinite power, and when first determining where they would jump to, they didn’t take into account the jumps back in time that Burnham ended up making to create the red signals. Perhaps they haven’t ended up as far into the future as we thought.

 

[Delta Vega]

Season 3 will be a continuation, not a reset

 

[Mudd]

No, that was not what Voyager was criticized for in particular. As I said upthread, in many cases the "reset" in no way claimed that what was showed onscreen wasn't within the main continuity of the series. Instead, it was about either immediately discounting the effects of the plot developments of the episode by returning them to the status quo by the final act, or just completely ignoring anything which would have had a longer-lasting impact on the characters or ships.

Marooning them for the foreseeable future in the, uh, future is the opposite of returning to the status quo, and definitely has a long-lasting impact on the characters.

Calling this outcome a reset button is a dog that don't hunt, and a silly way to stretch for a criticism to launch a topic with.

"We're just not gonna talk about it no more." LOL

I expect that the folks aboard ship will talk and deal with it a great deal, and the show is about them.

 

[rahullak]

If "reset" here means: whatever happened in previous season/episodes will no longer carry over to the next season, then this is most certainly NOT a reset. The characters and the ship carry over from the previous seasons. I'm certain DISCO writers will not abandon the characterization and start with a complete and total blank slate.

If "reset" means that there is a change in setting, mission etc., then this is could be seen as a reset. But IMO, this is not the same "reset" as you've described for Voyager, since setting and mission did not change for VOY: only that there was no impact of what could be seen as significant events.

 

[Starflight]

I know this isn't directly what the thread is about, but I have to defend Voyager:

The reset button criticism confuses me, because Voyager easily has more continuity than TOS and TNG. The only real continuity I remember in TNG is the Klingon politics arc, and obvious minor stuff like Tasha dying, the Borg mini-arc, Worf and Troi being together for 30 seconds.

Voyager has the ship actually moving through space. This is done in the absolute worst way imaginable, where Kazon space seems to stretch on for endless light years even though they're basically tribal people theoretically stuck on one planet, but we do eventually move through Vidiian space and into Hirogen space (both of which are, again, really bizarrely defined and seem to stretch on through half the quadrant).

Voyager also easily has more permanent plot changes than TNG or TOS - B'Elanna and Tom get together, the Delta Flyer is constructed, Kes leaves (after slowly developing her telekinesis over many episodes), the Doctor and Seven of Nine both have rough but definite character arcs, Barclay has an ongoing side-plot in which he works to rescue Voyager, etc. All this, and it has many episodes which essentially require you to have viewed previous episodes to understand what's going on at all - Course Oblivion, Fury, The Voyager Conspiracy, that shit one where the Irish holodeck guy goes looking for Janeway, every Barclay episode, every episode including Icheb, and so on. Easily matches and probably surpasses TNG for continuity and episodes having later repercussions.

I really never got why TNG is allowed to "get away" with resetting (put in quotes because I don't think having a broad status quo to go back to at the end of most episodes is necessarily a bad thing) but Voyager gets roasted for it. It's pretty much the main criticism of the show along with "Janeway is insane", which is another that I don't really get.

 

[Amasov]

I do remember taking a sort of delight whenever a character on Voyager made reference to the events of past episodes. And because I remember that reaction I had, it's all coming back to me; how I remember what my attitude watching the show was like. I knew they were just all self-contained episodes. The idea of serialization was just so foreign to me (I wasn't watching Deep Space Nine back then).

 

[TrickyDickie]

Spock isn't dead, and it's not going to be a two-year wait to see if they really do bring him back, so it's all good.

Seriously, though, I found the end of the Season 2 finale to be 'deliciously frustrating'....they basically left the possibilities wide open. I really don't care whether they have a clear vision for Season 3, or none. My curiosity is piqued and I am looking forward to seeing what they do.

First wormhole I see tonight, and straight on 'til morning!

 

[Vger23]

This is exactly the opposite of a "reset button" as the definition has come to be known. There's a major change in the show that will have PERMANENT IMPACT on the characters, setting, and direction of the story from this moment forward.

A reset would have been Michael going back in time and stopping the Control plot before it could begin, and nobody knows or notices, and everything is back to normal.

And I'm sorry, I love all Trek to varying degrees, but comparing VOY to DSC is like comparing downtown Detroit to the Bahamas as a vacation destination , with VOY sitting happily in the great State of Michigan.

 

[Michael]

Haters gonna hate. I enjoyed the season and found it coherent. I guess I'm just not as advanced as you are. Yeah I must be simple.

What the fuck? I don‘t see how anything I wrote warrants calling me a hater. In fact, I like and love many aspects of the show. (The Airiam avatar might be a clue, for one.) That is exactly why I care about it being better. Ditto for the ”advanced“ tangent: What in my post gave you the impression that that‘s how I see myself, or that I see others as ”simple“? That‘s some wicked reading between the lines skills you got there.

 

[Vger23]

I know this isn't directly what the thread is about, but I have to defend Voyager:

The reset button criticism confuses me, because Voyager easily has more continuity than TOS and TNG. The only real continuity I remember in TNG is the Klingon politics arc, and obvious minor stuff like Tasha dying, the Borg mini-arc, Worf and Troi being together for 30 seconds.

Voyager has the ship actually moving through space. This is done in the absolute worst way imaginable, where Kazon space seems to stretch on for endless light years even though they're basically tribal people theoretically stuck on one planet, but we do eventually move through Vidiian space and into Hirogen space (both of which are, again, really bizarrely defined and seem to stretch on through half the quadrant).

Voyager also easily has more permanent plot changes than TNG or TOS - B'Elanna and Tom get together, the Delta Flyer is constructed, Kes leaves (after slowly developing her telekinesis over many episodes), the Doctor and Seven of Nine both have rough but definite character arcs, Barclay has an ongoing side-plot in which he works to rescue Voyager, etc. All this, and it has many episodes which essentially require you to have viewed previous episodes to understand what's going on at all - Course Oblivion, Fury, The Voyager Conspiracy, that shit one where the Irish holodeck guy goes looking for Janeway, every Barclay episode, every episode including Icheb, and so on. Easily matches and probably surpasses TNG for continuity and episodes having later repercussions.

I really never got why TNG is allowed to "get away" with resetting (put in quotes because I don't think having a broad status quo to go back to at the end of most episodes is necessarily a bad thing) but Voyager gets roasted for it. It's pretty much the main criticism of the show along with "Janeway is insane", which is another that I don't really get.

Voyager's premise, combined with the show' inability to allow any major happening to have a lasting impact on the characters, ship, etc is what gets it roasted. It gets criticized more than TNG because TNG was episodic and didn't declare it's premise to a specific goal (in this case, getting home after being flung 70,000 ly away with a mixed crew and no resources.). With a premise like that, having events wiped away makes watching the show a near-useless exercise. And that premise magnifies the negative feelings of the reset button episodes significantly.

And VOY, pound-for-pound, had more reset button episodes (goes nowhere, does nothing tales) that, by the end of the episode, the characters had no recollection or consequence for what just happened. Essentially, a series of "what if" episodes that are meaningless to the premise.

Voyager failed in almost every way to live up to its premise. TNG did not. So, yeah, VOY is going to take heat for that. Deservedly so.

 

[Starflight]

And VOY, pound-for-pound, had more reset button episodes (goes nowhere, does nothing tales) that, by the end of the episode, the characters had no recollection or consequence for what just happened. Essentially, a series of "what if" episodes that are meaningless to the premise.

I don't think that's true. Almost nothing in TOS and very little of TNG has a lasting effect (but IMO it doesn't need to).

Voyager's premise, combined with the show' inability to allow any major happening to have a lasting impact on the characters, ship, etc is what gets it roasted. It gets criticized more than TNG because TNG was episodic and didn't declare it's premise to a specific goal (in this case, getting home after being flung 70,000 ly away with a mixed crew and no resources.). With a premise like that, having events wiped away makes watching the show a near-useless exercise.

...

Voyager failed in almost every way to live up to its premise. TNG did not. So, yeah, VOY is going to take heat for that. Deservedly so.

Yeah that's fair. If people are ripping on the show for mishandling its premise and totally failing to utilise it, then it's a criticism I agree with. But a lot of people (nobody in this thread, but in many discussions online over the years) just throw out "no continuity" as a complaint in and of itself, which again, is confusing to me since VOY demonstrably has more continuity than TOS and I'd argue more than TNG.

 

[Mudd]

I absolutely agree that the producers have given up on the original setting and premise - they just couldn't make it work.

That does not make what they've done a "reset button," nor does the fact that The Burnham is teh Awesome make her a Mary Sue.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

I know this isn't directly what the thread is about, but I have to defend Voyager:

The reset button criticism confuses me, because Voyager easily has more continuity than TOS and TNG. The only real continuity I remember in TNG is the Klingon politics arc, and obvious minor stuff like Tasha dying, the Borg mini-arc, Worf and Troi being together for 30 seconds.

Voyager has the ship actually moving through space. This is done in the absolute worst way imaginable, where Kazon space seems to stretch on for endless light years even though they're basically tribal people theoretically stuck on one planet, but we do eventually move through Vidiian space and into Hirogen space (both of which are, again, really bizarrely defined and seem to stretch on through half the quadrant).

Voyager also easily has more permanent plot changes than TNG or TOS - B'Elanna and Tom get together, the Delta Flyer is constructed, Kes leaves (after slowly developing her telekinesis over many episodes), the Doctor and Seven of Nine both have rough but definite character arcs, Barclay has an ongoing side-plot in which he works to rescue Voyager, etc. All this, and it has many episodes which essentially require you to have viewed previous episodes to understand what's going on at all - Course Oblivion, Fury, The Voyager Conspiracy, that shit one where the Irish holodeck guy goes looking for Janeway, every Barclay episode, every episode including Icheb, and so on. Easily matches and probably surpasses TNG for continuity and episodes having later repercussions.

I really never got why TNG is allowed to "get away" with resetting (put in quotes because I don't think having a broad status quo to go back to at the end of most episodes is necessarily a bad thing) but Voyager gets roasted for it. It's pretty much the main criticism of the show along with "Janeway is insane", which is another that I don't really get.

Voyager was frustratingly inconsistent in this regard. I agree it had some GREAT continuity. An example being Torres's series long issue with being half Klingon and her issues with her father which culminate in what is probably my favourite episode of Season 'Lineage'. Then you have stuff like the never-ending supply of shuttles, torpedoes and the ship looking like it's come out of a ship yard after years of battles and catastrophes. Stuff like that kinda throws you out of thinking that the delta quadrant is a dangerous place.

There also things like Torres's depression which is both a sign of great continuity and shitty continuity because the episode follows up on the impact of the destruction of the Maquis but ultimately has no impact on her character, because it is never mentioned again. A similar thing happens in the the DS9 episode 'Hard Time'. O'brien goes through this horribly traumatic event where he thinks he's spent 20 years in prison, almost kills himself and at the end Bashir is like 'Here have a hypospray' and we never hear about it again. Both these examples are bugbears for me, as someone who suffers from Depression I would have liked an ongoing exploration of the impact it has on both Torres and O'brien.