Would Star Trek Discovery have benefited from an episodic format?

[MakeshiftPython]

No, actually. I just want stories were things matter. If that can be done in episodic shows great and more power to them. But, I generally see it in arc shows. So, give me that in whatever format it does.

By that argument, episodic shows are great from a studio POV because it allows for syndication.

My only complaint regarding episodic shows, especially Star Trek, is when things don't matter.

Things can matter in episodic shows. VOYAGER could have been able to do episodic stories where it features a situation of the week, but what transpires in that episode isn't necessarily forgotten. For a brief time, it actually worked that way before it ultimately was treated as standalone episodes with little carryover. For example, "Parallax" is very much a formulaic standalone episode with the crew facing the situation of the week, but certain events have a lasting impact like Torres being assigned as the chief engineer, the introduction of recurring characters Seska and Carey, ect. This is what the show needed more of. It didn't need to be something earth-shattering every week, but there at least needed to be some kind of progression and acknowledgement that things have changed, and I think it's a shame VOY shied away from that too much.

 

[fireproof78]

Things can matter in episodic shows. VOYAGER could have been able to do episodic stories where it features a situation of the week, but what transpires in that episode isn't necessarily forgotten. For a brief time, it actually worked that way before it ultimately was treated as standalone episodes with little carryover. For example, "Parallax" is very much a formulaic standalone episode with the crew facing the situation of the week, but certain events have a lasting impact like Torres being assigned as the chief engineer, the introduction of recurring characters Seska and Carey, ect. This is what the show needed more of. It didn't need to be something earth-shattering every week, but there at least needed to be some kind of progression and acknowledgement that things have changed, and I think it's a shame VOY shied away from that too much.

I agree, and, to me, episodic tends to lead to that weakness, because it is a lot easier to write stand alone, and not worry about it. But, I agree that episodic can have things that matter but it seems to be rare.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I've been rewatching SMALLVILLE for the first time in quite awhile and am amazed at how while it's largely episodic (Clark faces mutant freak of the week), there's still a progression as far as characters are concerned, especially as they don't forget about events that happened prior that still effects them in the present. It's also interesting because this show debuted at the same time as ENTERPRISE, and it's doing a much better job at building up its story and characters in its first season, whereas ENTERPRISE felt so aimless from the start that any kind of acknowledgement of continuity would seem out of the norm.

 

[fireproof78]

I've been rewatching SMALLVILLE for the first time in quite awhile and am amazed at how while it's largely episodic (Clark faces mutant freak of the week), there's still a progression as far as characters are concerned, especially as they don't forget about events that happened prior that still effects them in the present. It's also interesting because this show debuted at the same time as ENTERPRISE, and it's doing a much better job at building up its story and characters in its first season, whereas ENTERPRISE felt so aimless from the start that any kind of acknowledgement of continuity would seem out of the norm.

Interesting. I might have to rewatch it.

 

[Vger23]

I am currently re-watching DSC in a semi-binge format (about 3 episodes per night, now that I have the BR disks) and I can answer the initial posted question with a resounding "no."

The story holds up great and is extremely binge-friendly. I'm liking it even more this time through.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Interesting. I might have to rewatch it.

Funny bit of symmetry about the two shows is how they flip sides: By the time SMALLVILLE hits its fourth season it starts committing the same sins that ENTERPRISE did in its earlier seasons with character inconsistencies and tired plots, while ENTERPRISE then started taking continuity and character growth more to heart. And while ENTERPRISE got cut short just as it got good, SMALLVILLE went on way longer than it should have and from my memory got worse as it went.

 

[Lord Garth]

Funny bit of symmetry about the two shows is how they flip sides: By the time SMALLVILLE hits its fourth season it starts committing the same sins that ENTERPRISE did in its earlier seasons with character inconsistencies and tired plots, while ENTERPRISE then started taking continuity and character growth more to heart. And while ENTERPRISE got cut short just as it got good, SMALLVILLE went on way longer than it should have and from my memory got worse as it went.

I've never seen Smallville but I'm guessing they can only do the "He's Superman but not Superman yet!" thing for so long before it starts to get old. So it would make sense that they'd want to focus on something else. But I'm also of the mind that it probably never should've run that long and wouldn't have if WB/CW didn't have to hold on to every single hit it had. WB turned out better on that front because all UPN really had was Voyager and Moesha. Maybe Smackdown if you count that (but that was more just a case of Smackdown borrowing two hours of UPN every week). Either way, neither network could afford to get rid of anything that took off.

 

[NeoStar9]

As someone that watched Smallville from start to finish I will say the show is structured in the following way and I think it's largely seen like this.

Season 1 to 4 = Very good to great. Near the end though you can see where the issues are if they're not allowed to do certain things.
Season 5 to 7 = Bad to so so. This is where the real issues were. Characters kept around for no real reason story wise. Characters not allowed to take the next logical steps they should be taking. That leads to bad stories, bad dialogue, etc. This is where the no tights and no flights mantra became a huge problem. This is the show's dark times. Thankfully it wasn't ended here. There was always just enough in those seasons that made you think things could improve as there were some gems hidden.
Season 8 to 10 = good again to very good to great. Its basically another show in many ways. In all but name it's Superman Year Zero and then Year 1. The show was allowed to go in the direction it naturally should have. Many characters were removed from the show and others brought in. It leans heavily into the comic book nature with this stories, characters, etc.

So yeah Smallville got worse after a while until it turned itself around and just became great! If Enterprise was allowed to continue I think it would be even better. Should Smallville have run as long as it did? I don't know. I'm glad it did though so it was allowed to recover from it's failings. It also helps that while the ratings for the show got lower and lover each season as with any long running show they never dropped off a cliff suddenly. That is very likely why it was kept around for so long because people continued to watch even when maybe we shouldn't have.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I gradually watched less by Season 6, so I can’t comment on the following other than it no longer looked like the show I wanted. I liked the conceit that it was Clark Kent in his adolescent years trying to figure out his place in the world, and it just became less about that and more “how can we make a Superman show without Superman because Tom put it in his contract that he would never wear the suit? I know! Give him a red leather jacket and call him the Red-Blue Blur!!!!” which seems to be what the show GOTHAM looks like only on steroids.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Smallville was great. It came up with the formula of the younger, edgier version of a famous character battling their famous enemies while establishing their famous friendships/relationships, which Gotham and even Star Trek Into Darkness subsequently used.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Smallville was great. It came up with the formula of the younger, edgier version of a famous character battling their famous enemies while establishing their famous friendships/relationships, which Gotham and even Star Trek Into Darkness subsequently used.

I’m not sure I’d call it “edgy”. In many ways it feels like a spiritual prequel to Donner’s Superman, heck even used the same production design for the Fortress of Solitude.

The best thing about the show was easily Michael Rosenbaum as Lex Luthor. I like that they made him and Clark friends to give the series a much more tragic note to play on, though from what I’ve read of the finale they really shit the bed with Lex at the end. Too bad. He’s still the best live action depiction of Luthor ever, though I have a soft spot for Hackman.

 

[Vger23]

Amazingly enough, the close re-watch I've been giving DSC this week has basically got me believing that the show isn't incredibly serialized to begin with. There's definitely an overarching arc that governs the storytelling, but many of the episodes wrap up rather neatly. I think the MU stuff is very serialized, but the Klingon War stuff that brackets that is actually more of a backdrop for individual stories. I'd liken a lot of it to shows like "The Blacklist"...where there's an overarching theme, but episodes are also somewhat contained stories.

Heck, "Context is for Kings," "Lethe," "M2MTSMGM," are virtually stand-alone. The two-part prologue is pretty much stand-alone. "Choose Your Pain" and "Si Vis Pacem" can be enjoyed as stand-alones, despite having some considerable arc content.

 

[Spectre Of The Fun]

No the format is fine and some of the episodes hold up well on their own. Discovery is the kick in the behind the franchise needed after things grew stale with Enterprise and Voyager. The serialized format is just one part of it but a big one. Shorter seasons with character arcs are where TV is right now.

The positive is more focus on the main characters like Burnham, Lorca, Stamets, Tyler, Tilly, Saru, both Georgious and Sarek. The loss is that this style departs from classic TV of selling a show's viewers both its star or stars and guest stars. For example I just watched 43 episodes of the Invaders from 1967-68. A highlight is all the great guest stars (Michael Rennie, Alfred Ryder, Gene Hackman etc.) brought in each episode but arguably there isn't enough focus on star Roy Thinnes or those guest stars characters' sacrifices, triumphs or suffering. There is some holdover from episode to episode but very little.

Anyway I am not telling most of you anything you don't already know and like most things in life there are pros and cons. I hope Discovery gets to a season 3 with the war and a Red Angel threat to the universe behind it. I hope it gives us a few throwback episodes or sends Tilly home on leave or Burnham visits relatives she didn't know she had or Stamets visits Culber's family. Mix it up, let them play against some good guest stars. Trek should be able to do more than one thing in the same show since at some point in 50 years it has done a bit of everything already.

It is easy for me to see both sides of issues so I can sympathize with fans that don't like Discovery at all or at least aren't crazy about the format.

 

[Vger23]

No the format is fine and some of the episodes hold up well on their own. Discovery is the kick in the behind the franchise needed after things grew stale with Enterprise and Voyager. The serialized format is just one part of it but a big one. Shorter seasons with character arcs are where TV is right now.

The positive is more focus on the main characters like Burnham, Lorca, Stamets, Tyler, Tilly, Saru, both Georgious and Sarek. The loss is that this style departs from classic TV of selling a show's viewers both its star or stars and guest stars. For example I just watched 43 episodes of the Invaders from 1967-68. A highlight is all the great guest stars (Michael Rennie, Alfred Ryder, Gene Hackman etc.) brought in each episode but arguably there isn't enough focus on star Roy Thinnes or those guest stars characters' sacrifices, triumphs or suffering. There is some holdover from episode to episode but very little.

Anyway I am not telling most of you anything you don't already know and like most things in life there are pros and cons. I hope Discovery gets to a season 3 with the war and a Red Angel threat to the universe behind it. I hope it gives us a few throwback episodes or sends Tilly home on leave or Burnham visits relatives she didn't know she had or Stamets visits Culber's family. Mix it up, let them play against some good guest stars. Trek should be able to do more than one thing in the same show since at some point in 50 years it has done a bit of everything already.

It is easy for me to see both sides of issues so I can sympathize with fans that don't like Discovery at all or at least aren't crazy about the format.

I honestly think that S1 would have been better served if they had stretched episode run times closer to an hour to flesh out some character stuff like you are mentioning above. If that means an extra 15 min per episode on average, that comes to 3-4 more full episodes worth of content. You can do a lot with that kind of time.

 

[Lord Garth]

It is easy for me to see both sides of issues so I can sympathize with fans that don't like Discovery at all or at least aren't crazy about the format.

I see both sides but, with other options, there's no reason for people to obsess over Discovery not being what they want. The "grace period" should really be completely over by the middle of the second season for where maybe people are still trying to get a feel for the series overall. After the shakeup with the new storyline in S2 is introduced and once Gretchen Herberts and Aaron Berg are gone, we'll be getting into territory where the show pretty much is what it's going to be. From that point on, the show won't change so much as the main storyline of the season will and who the Captain is. *

* The only exception to this is if the end of S2 ends up somehow connecting to "Calypso", then all bets are off. That would be a massive shakeup. But it still wouldn't be episodic. The show would change but it would change even further away from Traditional Trek. I consider this a good thing, but I suspect people who want the TOS/TNG way of doing things probably won't.

 

[Henoch]

The first two seasons of DS9 were absolute cold, wet mud as a result. I can barely slog through anything from those first two years, and gave up about 6 episodes in during first-run. And DS9 is easily my favorite 90s Trek show overall. Buy those first years were beyond ponderous.

I was a big fan of "Spencer: For Hire" (1985–1988) and Avery Brooks as Hawk. Avery Brooks needed to shave his head and re-grow his goatee to resurrect his role as Hawk in the reunion made-for-TV "Spencer" movies (1993-1995). This over lapped Seasons 1-3 of DS9. When he returned in late Season 3 of DS9, Sisko not only did he start to look like Hawk but he even talked and acted like Hawk. I hated him in Seasons 1-2; he was kind of wimpy and whiny. I loved him in Season 3 and beyond; he was full-blown Hawk again at the start of Season 4. I think Worf joined around this time, and Sisko needed to compete with Worf as to who was the more badass on the show.

 

[Lord Garth]

I was a big fan of "Spencer: For Hire" (1985–1988) and Avery Brooks as Hawk. Avery Brooks needed to shave his head and re-grow his goatee to resurrect his role as Hawk in the reunion made-for-TV "Spencer" movies (1993-1995). This over lapped Seasons 1-3 of DS9. When he returned in late Season 3 of DS9, Sisko not only did he start to look like Hawk but he even talked and acted like Hawk. I hated him in Seasons 1-2; he was kind of wimpy and whiny. I loved him in Season 3 and beyond; he was full-blown Hawk again at the start of Season 4. I think Worf joined around this time, and Sisko needed to compete with Worf as to who was the more badass on the show.

Sisko is definitely more badass. He intimidates Worf. He'd intimidate T'Kuvma.

And then there's the Spencer for Hire intro, which speaks for itself. That's an intro.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Spectre Of The Fun]

I honestly think that S1 would have been better served if they had stretched episode run times closer to an hour to flesh out some character stuff like you are mentioning above. If that means an extra 15 min per episode on average, that comes to 3-4 more full episodes worth of content. You can do a lot with that kind of time.

I don't necessarily disagree. However I think one of the goals in the production of season one was to reach big and epic in the storytelling like TOS (the music helps the feel). They wanted to be lean and cut to the bone. After the Red Angel crisis is over I wouldn't mind if they relax the pace and give us more characterization. For the most part I am satisfied with how they approached most things.

 

[Vger23]

I see both sides but, with other options, there's no reason for people to obsess over Discovery not being what they want. The "grace period" should really be completely over by the middle of the second season for where maybe people are still trying to get a feel for the series overall.

 

[Mudd]

I don't necessarily disagree. However I think one of the goals in the production of season one was to reach big and epic in the storytelling like TOS.

If that's what they were aiming for, their FAIL was even more epic.