What were your first thoughts on 'Discovery'?

[seigezunt]

My first impression: "Yes! This is what I wanted to ENTERPRISE to be: a Star Trek show that actually looks and feels like something made in the 21st century, instead of a Xerox of a Xerox of TNG."

This. I was excited, and really, really nervous that, in some bid to appeal to the fans who didn't like the new movies, the producers were going to give us something from out of the 90s.

I was pleasantly surprised. And this was the first post-TOS series where I never had to grit my teeth and think, "this is Star Trek, I need to support it, at least." It was the first premiere season in the franchise that kept me hanging from episode to episode. Hell, it was the first premiere season that I made it all the way through.

Some episodes have been better than others, and while it has gone in directions I probably would not have charted, it has never failed to entertain. They did good.

 

[davejames]

so glad to find this thread. i stopped watching Disco because it didn't seem like Roddenberry world much at all.. more like a war driven type series that i feel like i see everywhere and don't watch

But I Want to like it! So I was hoping someone who loves star trek DS9/NG/TOS..meaning, someone not new to star trek...could tell me what I'm missing and how I could come round and enjoy Disco?

:-/

For me it's the rich characters and unpredictable storytelling that I appreciate most, and which we hadn't really seen since DS9. The fact it's not another formulaic alien-of-the-week show is a huge plus for me.

I admit some of the characters did come across pretty cold and unlikable early on, but they've softened quite a bit over time. And that Roddenberry spirit comes through really strong in the show now I think.

 

[haddie moonfall]

One of the early reviews called Discovery "DS9 reborn" and I agreed when I watched it. A difference between DS9 and Discovery is that DS9 begins with optimism and then forces everyone into war, and Discovery is the other way around, beginning with war and showing optimism build back up through it. I wonder how you would feel about DS9 if you had seen some of the darkest episodes first and then stopped watching.

I see what you're saying, and feel ready to try watching Disco with this in mind. DS9 is my favorite so that is exactly what i needed.. hope. One reason I was wanting encouragement to have an open mind about Disco is because I didn't really enjoy Enterprise until the last season (4) and it ended when it was just getting good, imo. . . so i want to support Disco if it has potential... so we get more seasons!!.. not sure if i'm making sense but Thank you.. I'll give it a go :-)

 

[haddie moonfall]

For me it's the rich characters and unpredictable storytelling that I appreciate most, and which we hadn't really seen since DS9. The fact it's not another formulaic alien-of-the-week show is a huge plus for me.

I admit some of the characters did come across pretty cold and unlikable early on, but they've softened quite a bit over time. And that Roddenberry spirit comes through really strong in the show now I think.

Wow thanks so much, I'm starting to get excited now.. and will indeed give it a go... I loved DS9,
i did think disco Was another formulaic alien of week show, so glad to hear you like it.. thanks again! very helpful

 

[Vger23]

so glad to find this thread. i stopped watching Disco because it didn't seem like Roddenberry world much at all.. more like a war driven type series that i feel like i see everywhere and don't watch

But I Want to like it! So I was hoping someone who loves star trek DS9/NG/TOS..meaning, someone not new to star trek...could tell me what I'm missing and how I could come round and enjoy Disco?

:-/

It's about the journey, not the destination. Shows like TNG handed us the perfect word. DSC is about the stumbling and hardships getting to that world. It doesn't execute that perfectly, but at least it isn't static, boring and safe like a lot of Star Trek has been.

It's an attempt at something fresh, which will always have some pain associated with it. But, after 750 episodes, it's a welcome experiment for sure.

 

[haddie moonfall]

It's about the journey, not the destination. Shows like TNG handed us the perfect word. DSC is about the stumbling and hardships getting to that world. It doesn't execute that perfectly, but at least it isn't static, boring and safe like a lot of Star Trek has been.

i want to see the better world, but i see what you're saying..it's the journey

 

[Vger23]

i want to see the better world, but i see what you're saying..it's the journey

Right...I think the idea here is seeing that perfect world in the development stages. It's more dramatic to see that than just have it handed and it's unearned.

DS9 had that too, but from a different angle. DS9 showed the perfect world eroding under the pressures of war. DSC on the other hand shows more flawed characters fighting to be better.

In that way, it's right there with TOS and DS9.

That's why I love it.

 

[Ovation]

i want to see the better world, but i see what you're saying..it's the journey

You've seen the better world. There's about 700 hours of it available already.

 

[Succubint]

When I watched the first two eps I was impressed by the production values and I liked Michael, Georgiou and Saru well enough. However, it didn't feel particularly different or exciting to me. It wasn't until episode 3 when we met Lorca, Tilly and Stamets and started the true journey of Discovery that I truly got hooked in and wanted to see more.

 

[Mechanoid1]

I wont go into specifics, because you owe it to yourself to watch it first hand and make your own conclusions.
As for me, S1 was horrible, S2 started off great then plunged (its better than S1 though).
I was assured by many on this forum that in time this show would sync up and make sense..... yeah whatever.
I'm happy for CBS. Star Trek is their flagship for all access. May they continue to reap what they sow. They must be doing something right since they have so many other Trek series lined up to go where no one has gone before.

 

[Alessandro Piazza]

Super mega excitement. That excitement stuck through the entire first season, and has only gotten more enormous through the second season.

Amazing how cynical and jaded so many Trek fans can be that they were predisposed to hate Disco from the get go, and they still cling to wanting to hate it even though it is obviously growing in quality.

 

[skip bittman]

"Where did all the charm go?"

 

[Agony_Boothb]

"Where did all the charm go?"

When encounter at farpoint first aired? TNG is a lot of good things, but charming isn't one of them. Same with Voyager and ENT.

DS9 though, that show had charm coming out of it's well toned wormhole.

 

[Unimatrix Q]

When encounter at farpoint first aired? TNG is a lot of good things, but charming isn't one of them. Same with Voyager and ENT.

DS9 though, that show had charm coming out of it's well toned wormhole.

TNG had charm in the first four and half seasons imo. Mostly because of the great scores coming from Ron Jones. I really really like the whole show , but after Jones got fired it started to get more and more sterile and bland.

 

[Refuge]

TNG is a lot of good things, but charming isn't one of them. Same with Voyager and ENT.

DS9 though, that show had charm coming out of it's well toned wormhole.

You reckon?? Like for me... 'charm' has something to do with lightness, as in delightfulness. I equate TNG and Voyager as being lighter Trek. DS9 and Discovery as being more heavy and dark.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

You reckon?? Like for me... 'charm' has something to do with lightness, as in delightfulness. I equate TNG and Voyager as being lighter Trek. DS9 and Discovery as being more heavy and dark.

TNG was too sterile and dull to have any charm. I'll retract that Voyager had no charm, because I enjoy it a hell of a lot more than TNG.

 

[Refuge]

TNG was too sterile and dull to have any charm. I'll retract that Voyager had no charm, because I enjoy it a hell of a lot more than TNG.

Oh... I shouldn't show my weakness... but thanks for being a bit kind about Voyager

 

[DarKush]

Thinking back about some of my first thoughts...
-I liked the casting of Sonequa-Martin Green; I also liked that Michelle Yeoh and Jason Isaacs were involved.
-I thought the costuming and ships were too futuristic for the time period. They looked good, but didn't fit the time period.
-I wasn't a fan of the Klingon redesign, makeup, clothing or ships. They all looked good, but rarely said "Klingon" to me.
-The aesthetics of the show resembled the Abrams-Lin movies and I was wondering at first-and perhaps hoping later-that Discovery was set in the Kelvinverse.
-After watching "The Vulcan Hello", I was impressed with the production values, but felt the story moved too quickly, and promoted action over story and character. I also wasn't impressed with James Frain as Sarek.
-When I finally got around to watching the whole first season though, once it hit home video, I appreciated what they were doing with the stories and characters more than I did when I saw "The Vulcan Hello." I still think Frain was miscast. He would've made an awesome Romulan or maybe even a Klingon.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

I was pleasantly surprised. And this was the first post-TOS series where I never had to grit my teeth and think, "this is Star Trek, I need to support it, at least." It was the first premiere season in the franchise that kept me hanging from episode to episode. Hell, it was the first premiere season that I made it all the way through.

We reach, brother. My litmus test for Star Trek spinoff series has generally been are they bringing something new and dynamic to the table that justifies their existence. Star Trek: Discovery did that almost immediately. I also like the fact it has a POV that is willing to unsettle people (unlike some previous incarnations where they cynically tried to pander to everyone). For every few things I liked there would be something I was unsure of or didn't care for initially. It was rough around the edges and that was a good thing. I started off, for example, disliking Burnham - her mutinous action in the first episode or two offended me (in a good way). The we saw her broken down, disgraced and humbled a bit. Then the rebuilding and redemption. Her character, strikes me as having actually "learned." Where she was brash and stubborn she is now more deliberating and commanding.

Some episodes have been better than others, and while it has gone in directions I probably would not have charted, it has never failed to entertain. They did good.

Again, I agree. As long as the series vision is there and the effort noticeable not every one has to be a homerun (especially when every viewer may have a very personal and nuanced criteria for what a "homerun" would look like). I would say Star Trek Discovery has an above batting average though.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

FUCK YEAH STAR TREK, basically

I did agree with some early complaints that the Klingon characters' speech was severely impeded by the makeup (and I was waiting for that Hunt For Red October translation gimmick that we finally got in season 2; the amount of Klingon in S1E1 was a bit much!), and that the first two episodes should have been a feature-length premiere.

Other than that, I have been and remain excited to see NEW STAR TREK week after week. Just wish the seasons were longer; I don't care if that means filler episodes!