Star Trek: Discovery - New series on Netflix

[Flip Martian]

C5_Steve said:

Anyway

I thought Ep6 was a bit filler-ish which is a shame given it's the last episode. It was kind of a bottle episode in that it didn't actually affect the bigger plot but if gave us more Rayner which is a plus as I really like his character. I assume they're used it to deal with the friction between the two in one single episode so they can now get on with working together but it did feel a bit forced.

Agreed. At the end of the episode, the story had gone no further. I think you can do that in the older 20+ eps a season format but not so much in 10. Unless you're struggling to stretch the story to 10.

Something like DS9 could tell a load of stories while being in the Dominion War arc quite successfully, over several seasons. This "hunt" plot realistically is a rather thin idea for a whole season.

Rayner is a good character - but given how much Michael is inclusive and supportive, she was very quick to tell Book how she hated him. And all because he disagreed with her (with good evidence) on how to deal with the 2 crooks, and then chose to argue with most of what she said. Which is all she ever did in the first few seasons when being told to do something... Poor writing. But indicative of the stance so many take on social media now when someone says anything they disagree with. Maybe that's just the way society is going.

[C5_Steve]

Flip Martian said:

So there we have it. We can say many times about the poor writing and characterisations etc and how the "message" dominated at the expense of all those things. Every fan of Disco seems to accuse every critic of not being pro inclusivity, whatever we actually say. You can disagree with what I say, fine - but don't put words in mouths. ST has always been for anyone, of course - it's a tv show, they want ratings! I've watched it on and off since the early 70s. I've seen messages about racism, sexism, sexuality, right wing politics, gender inclusivity - pretty much everything in that time. It's all been a positive.

Only with Disco has it been so clumsily handled. The writing, fleshing out of non-lead characters, pacing and plotting has often (until season 5) played second fiddle to characters representing minorities pushed to the front, regardless of their merit or importance to the plot. Most people still struggle with the names of the bridge crew, even by season 5. 1 of the originals only got fleshed out a bit because she was being killed off by the end of the same episode. People run around in an emergency trying to get something done before something explodes/someone gets killed - but they will still find the time to stop and talk about a trauma or worry that's bugging them, get a pep talk from Michael (usually, as she's the focus of the series) and then resume. What do they do? Stop time while that happens?

The writing on this show has been NOTHING like as well done as pretty much any other ST I've ever seen. Which is understandable, given they have been writing a message, not just a series of stories. There is no way anyone will ever convince me the writers weren't told by show runners to get that message in there, front and centre, and make sure people know what ST represents.

We already did know - it didn't need the focus being pulled away from the stories. Older Trek delivered messages while telling stories. People could use their brains.

And finally, I don't recall that "they pronoun" scene being 10 seconds. But I do remember it was totally unnecessary. It's the 23rd century, totally irrelevant - everyone would be more than aware by then. In fact, "him" and "her" may well have disappeared by then altogether. It wouldn't even be thought about it. It was jarring, and took you of the story. A 21st century conversation in a future world. And a very clumsily placed message for people watching.

In hindsight and reading the post you made whilst I was typing my other one, you have made some valid criticisms of the show and so I apologise if I've generalised.

However, I do feel you are missing the point so allow me to be more obvious but first say number one, I'm not a Disco "fan". Across all 5 seasons there have been some very good bits and some not so good bits. Its personal preference of course but it's been no worse IMO than Enterprise which had some awful writing and episodes.

But I do stand by my point about people having an issue with diversity being more "front and centre" and a reason for the poor script/storylines etc. I think we'll agree to disagree here but blaming the faults of the show on the false claim that it's somehow more diverse doesn't wash. The show might have more minority groups represented in it's main cast but it's a tiny fraction and really doesn't affect the show. We have two non-hetrosexual couples (that we know of and only one now). That's it. They don't draw more attention to these issues than anything else in the show. The bridge crew is as diverse as any of the others. The pronouns scene for example (it was as short as I said it was btw) was needed otherwise how would the other characters have known how to address them? Adira is different to those around them and it needs clarifying. Over the top would be every character introducing themselves with their pronouns throughout the show.

I think the fact you feel the show has had a "message" just highlights the issue and again I think it's a point we'll just disagree on. I don't agree that Disco has had any more D&I plots or threads or "messages" than any other Trek show. But I do agree the cast is the most diverse it has been, however, that's still a tiny fraction of the overall show content and storyline. I just don't notice it as much as you do, which was my original point. I don't think the show has done anything that has stood out as inclusion for inclusion's sake.

I also agree that the "Michael" speeches are pretty annoying now but that's purely character-driven. She just doesn't have the gravitas of other Captains and never will.

[Flip Martian]

C5_Steve said:

In hindsight and reading the post you made whilst I was typing my other one, you have made some valid criticisms of the show and so I apologise if I've generalised.

However, I do feel you are missing the point so allow me to be more obvious but first say number one, I'm not a Disco "fan". Across all 5 seasons there have been some very good bits and some not so good bits. Its personal preference of course but it's been no worse IMO than Enterprise which had some awful writing and episodes.

But I do stand by my point about people having an issue with diversity being more "front and centre" and a reason for the poor script/storylines etc. I think we'll agree to disagree here but blaming the faults of the show on the false claim that it's somehow more diverse doesn't wash. The show might have more minority groups represented in it's main cast but it's a tiny fraction and really doesn't affect the show. We have two non-hetrosexual couples (that we know of and only one now). That's it. They don't draw more attention to these issues than anything else in the show. The bridge crew is as diverse as any of the others. The pronouns scene for example (it was as short as I said it was btw) was needed otherwise how would the other characters have known how to address them? Adira is different to those around them and it needs clarifying. Over the top would be every character introducing themselves with their pronouns throughout the show.

I think the fact you feel the show has had a "message" just highlights the issue and again I think it's a point we'll just disagree on. I don't agree that Disco has had any more D&I plots or threads or "messages" than any other Trek show. But I do agree the cast is the most diverse it has been, however, that's still a tiny fraction of the overall show content and storyline. I just don't notice it as much as you do, which was my original point. I don't think the show has done anything that has stood out as inclusion for inclusion's sake.

I also agree that the "Michael" speeches are pretty annoying now but that's purely character-driven. She just doesn't have the gravitas of other Captains and never will.

First off - apology accepted. My response may well have come across as combative but after being accused of being a fascist, or a homophobe, just because I dared to criticise Disco in the past (with the same reasons I put here), I was in "God not again, why do I bother" mode. Sorry.

Must admit I have struggled to find good bits in Disco - the Pike arc in season 2 perhaps; they fleshed out a fairly flimsy historical character and did a good job (although Anson Mount can take much credit too, surely). Saru's "coming of age" too, perhaps. Season 5 (as I said above a couple of times) does seem rather more fast paced and "ST-like".

I didn't say "Disco is crap BECAUSE it's more diverse" merely that they focus on diversity and feelings/emotional babble, to a point where they spend more time drawing attention to that and away from plotting. In my opinion, of course - others (incl you) are free to disagree. And again, I don't think in the 23rd century Adira (thanks, I have a real issue remembering their names) would be regarded as different, when they regularly interact with aliens of all kinds. I'm sure Adira wouldn't be unique. So no pronoun speech required. It would have been rather more adult to have just written it in the script - address Adira as "they" from the off. People would have caught on and understood it. Don't make an issue out of it, just do it - Kirk didn't have to make a speech about having an African woman as his comms officer; she was just there and everyone accepted that's how it was (at a time when that really would have been very very unusual).

There are other reasons to dislike it. To be honest, Burnham wound me up early on because she disagreed with anyone in authority and questioned orders constantly - and not just questioned but argued and told people they were wrong! That in itself is so unlike ST. Imagine every time Picard gave Riker an order and he pouted and petulantly said "no"! It just felt off; a mardy, argumentative and petulant overgrown child who still hates anyone who doesn't agree with her immediately. There is no way she would have made a captain. Let alone the most important one they have, so everyone else should listen to her. It's daft. And Tilly, who was a complete wall flower in Season 1, rather large, not shown as particularly bright - how would someone like that get into starfleet academy, never mind through it, when they're all shown as physically fit, intelligent and confident. The elite, physically and mentally. And she's still the only overweight person in the future, seemingly. They could perhaps have done with a few more. Those 2 characters annoy; which is a shame when they're 2 of the main characters. Saru on the other hand is quite different. More interesting, and when they HAVE fleshed out his character and given him more to do, it's generally worked well. Although his admiration for Michael is unfathomable. Book could be interesting but again, most of his story is linked with Michael. She's everywhere. The series could have done with the other characters being fleshed out and given responsibilities, rather than everything being Michael-centric.

[AlexC1981]

I don't mind the show, I just don't think it's as good as other Star Trek series. I think the inclusivity aspect isnt too OTT either. However you're 100% right about Michael.

Tilly is just another Reg Barclay and there was an episode of Voyager that concentrated on poor performing members of the crew, though at least one of them was Marquis, not Starfleet.

Discovery got everyone's back up in the first 5 minutes when it changed absolutely everything about the Klingons for no reason.

[C5_Steve]

Flip Martian said:

First off - apology accepted. My response may well have come across as combative but after being accused of being a fascist, or a homophobe, just because I dared to criticise Disco in the past (with the same reasons I put here), I was in "God not again, why do I bother" mode. Sorry.

Must admit I have struggled to find good bits in Disco - the Pike arc in season 2 perhaps; they fleshed out a fairly flimsy historical character and did a good job (although Anson Mount can take much credit too, surely). Saru's "coming of age" too, perhaps. Season 5 (as I said above a couple of times) does seem rather more fast paced and "ST-like".

I didn't say "Disco is crap BECAUSE it's more diverse" merely that they focus on diversity and feelings/emotional babble, to a point where they spend more time drawing attention to that and away from plotting. In my opinion, of course - others (incl you) are free to disagree. And again, I don't think in the 23rd century Adira (thanks, I have a real issue remembering their names) would be regarded as different, when they regularly interact with aliens of all kinds. I'm sure Adira wouldn't be unique. So no pronoun speech required. It would have been rather more adult to have just written it in the script - address Adira as "they" from the off. People would have caught on and understood it. Don't make an issue out of it, just do it - Kirk didn't have to make a speech about having an African woman as his comms officer; she was just there and everyone accepted that's how it was (at a time when that really would have been very very unusual).

There are other reasons to dislike it. To be honest, Burnham wound me up early on because she disagreed with anyone in authority and questioned orders constantly - and not just questioned but argued and told people they were wrong! That in itself is so unlike ST. Imagine every time Picard gave Riker an order and he pouted and petulantly said "no"! It just felt off; a mardy, argumentative and petulant overgrown child who still hates anyone who doesn't agree with her immediately. There is no way she would have made a captain. Let alone the most important one they have, so everyone else should listen to her. It's daft. And Tilly, who was a complete wall flower in Season 1, rather large, not shown as particularly bright - how would someone like that get into starfleet academy, never mind through it, when they're all shown as physically fit, intelligent and confident. The elite, physically and mentally. And she's still the only overweight person in the future, seemingly. They could perhaps have done with a few more. Those 2 characters annoy; which is a shame when they're 2 of the main characters. Saru on the other hand is quite different. More interesting, and when they HAVE fleshed out his character and given him more to do, it's generally worked well. Although his admiration for Michael is unfathomable. Book could be interesting but again, most of his story is linked with Michael. She's everywhere. The series could have done with the other characters being fleshed out and given responsibilities, rather than everything being Michael-centric.

I don't disagree with much of that tbh, some very good points! (we agree on a lot it seems )

I actually thought Tilly was an ok character at the start. She had some of the funnier lines, her stuff in the Mirror universe was very good and she did indeed seem like the Barclay of this series in all the right ways. But I agree, they've really messed up her arc by trying to make her somehow more capable but at the same time dumbing her down. They've pushed her more into a leadership role (with the cadets plot line) but actually not made her any more confident in the writing. It does jar and if she does end up leading the spin off Academy show I'll be disappointed. They've just tried to do too much with her in too short a time frame.

Saru I think has had the best development over the show, his shift from distrusting Michael to standing behind her has been very organic and backed by some decent writing but a lot of that goes to how good Doug Jones is as an actor I feel. I did enjoy the Kelpian storyline and the switch around they had with the roles of predator and prey, it was one of the more original plots.

It does at times almost feel like a YA show more than ST but I do wonder how time will treat it. I re-watched Enterprise recently
and those decontamination scenes were an uncomfortable watch, totally unnecessary and gratuitous and really pulled you out of the show. The whole Trip/T'Pol storyline was just annoying at times, just as much as anything I've seen in Disco. However the last series and a half were really good and I do wonder what it would have gone on to be had it been given more time. It speaks volumes that Disco and Ent got 4/5 seasons despite some questionable early reception and yet Lower Decks has been cancelled despite being a brilliant show from day one.

I've rewatched the first 3 seasons and the first two especially I think are really good in parts, 4 I couldn't rewatch as it was just too slow, too far fetched and just had no stakes. I'm glad 5 is back to being more trek like just in a futuristic (for ST) setting.

[Flip Martian]

C5_Steve said:

I don't disagree with much of that tbh, some very good points! (we agree on a lot it seems )

I actually thought Tilly was an ok character at the start. She had some of the funnier lines, her stuff in the Mirror universe was very good and she did indeed seem like the Barclay of this series in all the right ways. But I agree, they've really messed up her arc by trying to make her somehow more capable but at the same time dumbing her down. They've pushed her more into a leadership role (with the cadets plot line) but actually not made her any more confident in the writing. It does jar and if she does end up leading the spin off Academy show I'll be disappointed. They've just tried to do too much with her in too short a time frame.

Saru I think has had the best development over the show, his shift from distrusting Michael to standing behind her has been very organic and backed by some decent writing but a lot of that goes to how good Doug Jones is as an actor I feel. I did enjoy the Kelpian storyline and the switch around they had with the roles of predator and prey, it was one of the more original plots.

It does at times almost feel like a YA show more than ST but I do wonder how time will treat it. I re-watched Enterprise recently
and those decontamination scenes were an uncomfortable watch, totally unnecessary and gratuitous and really pulled you out of the show. The whole Trip/T'Pol storyline was just annoying at times, just as much as anything I've seen in Disco. However the last series and a half were really good and I do wonder what it would have gone on to be had it been given more time. It speaks volumes that Disco and Ent got 4/5 seasons despite some questionable early reception and yet Lower Decks has been cancelled despite being a brilliant show from day one.

I've rewatched the first 3 seasons and the first two especially I think are really good in parts, 4 I couldn't rewatch as it was just too slow, too far fetched and just had no stakes. I'm glad 5 is back to being more trek like just in a futuristic (for ST) setting.

Nice to actually have an adult exchange of views without the usual "you're a dumbass! No, you eff off" social media drivel! Agree on Doug Jones - he brought a lot to that character - even down to the way Saru walks ("why would he walk like a human anyway?"). Partly agree with you about Tilly - certainly how she is now - but from the first episode I just thought "how is she even there?" and that wouldn't go away. I get the Barclay analogy but he was seen as an engineering genius of sorts, just trapped in a very shy and awkward personality, so I could accept him being there more easily. Tilly...yeah, not really shown what ability she has that qualifies her for it.

Enterprise...well I think generally the first season isn't seen as up to much - much like TNG season 1. That decontamination scene - agree 100%. But it was the pilot episode. They didn't really go there again to that extent but some of the Trip/T'Pol "stress relieving Vulcan massage" stuff later got a little cringey, even for then. I am a big fan of Enterprise on the whole though. Like every ST they had some awful eps but when each season is over 20+ eps, that's allowable. Not so much when you only have to write 10, I would wager. Which was why I was a bit disappointed with Strange New Worlds season 2.

I agree though - I suspect Disco is written for an audience that actually I'm probably too old for. It's written for today - it has to be - not for people who've been watching ST since the 70s.

[C5_Steve]

Flip Martian said:

Nice to actually have an adult exchange of views without the usual "you're a dumbass! No, you eff off" social media drivel! Agree on Doug Jones - he brought a lot to that character - even down to the way Saru walks ("why would he walk like a human anyway?"). Partly agree with you about Tilly - certainly how she is now - but from the first episode I just thought "how is she even there?" and that wouldn't go away. I get the Barclay analogy but he was seen as an engineering genius of sorts, just trapped in a very shy and awkward personality, so I could accept him being there more easily. Tilly...yeah, not really shown what ability she has that qualifies her for it.

Enterprise...well I think generally the first season isn't seen as up to much - much like TNG season 1. That decontamination scene - agree 100%. But it was the pilot episode. They didn't really go there again to that extent but some of the Trip/T'Pol "stress relieving Vulcan massage" stuff later got a little cringey, even for then. I am a big fan of Enterprise on the whole though. Like every ST they had some awful eps but when each season is over 20+ eps, that's allowable. Not so much when you only have to write 10, I would wager. Which was why I was a bit disappointed with Strange New Worlds season 2.

I agree though - I suspect Disco is written for an audience that actually I'm probably too old for. It's written for today - it has to be - not for people who've been watching ST since the 70s.

Yeah SNW S2 had a lot more stand-alone stuff which I think was due to Anson Mount not being available for a large part. The Gorn set up took the whole season to pan out which was a disappointment as I felt they really could have done a lot with them and it's something we've never seen before. Plus they seem to have forgotten about Sybok which seems a waste.,

I think the fact they've not green-lit the ST:Legacy show says a lot about the state of ST at Paramount in general tbh. Along with the shuttering and removal of Prodigy. The potential sale and breaking up of the company hasn't helped with giving them the ability to plan ahead and whilst I know cost cutting is important right now for them you could have had 4 shows all using the same sets (SNW/Disco/Legacy/Academy) or versions of them. There's a lot of wasted talent and potential right now that could be put to good use.

[Flip Martian]

Fair point about Anson Mount's absence. Although that doesn't explain their desire to put a musical episode in there. I'd have felt more ok with that if they were doing 20 ep seasons still. With 10, I just wanted good Trek stories. Felt more like the writing team (or show runner) being self indulgent and doing wtf they like.

Sale of Paramount affecting ST - not for the first time. That company seems to get broken up, sold off and recompiled every few years. But yep, totally agree. I know Alex Kurtzman said recently that if it was down to him, Legacy would be a goer - but he doesn't make the decisions. Understandably, given the company is in a state of flux again.