Overall, I thought it was fine. I think it got hit a little harshly by critics. It’s not terrible (read: unwatchable), but it’s pretty firmly my least favorite Star Trek series.
Without actually looking through the full episode lists, and just going off what I remember of each season, here are my gut ratings:
S1: 3/10
S2: 5/10
S3: 4/10
S4: 8/10
Overall: 5/10
Going a bit more into my thoughts in each…
Season 1 - 3/10
Pros:
First new Trek in a while.
Neat graphics.
Great cast. (Especially Doug Jones as Saru).
Cons:
Prequel-itis…
New graphics don’t match the TOS era.
We already know, roughly, how things will pan out.
Interesting season-long mystery, with payoff for multiple story beats.
Introduces Anson Mount as Captain Pike, leading to the spinoff of Strange New Worlds.
Cons:
More prequel-itis…
Puts legacy characters in peril, when the audience knows they canonically must survive. Saps any tension.
Galaxy-level threat must obviously be defeated, since we know there’s life in the future canon.
Burnham time suit well beyond reasonable tech level for the era.
Control drone fleet tech unreasonable for the era.
Predestination/Bootstrap paradox.
Discount Borg.
Season 3 - 4/10
Pros:
Finally out of prequel territory.
Cool future tech.
Interesting mystery of The Burn.
Great character development.
Cons:
Unsatisfying conclusion to The Burn mystery.
Tired of seeing The Federation in shambles.
Seriously, the source of The Burn was stupid.
Discovery would be able to solve so, sooo many problems in this era.
Did I mention the sad kid causing The Burn?
Season 4 - 8/10
Pros:
More character development.
Federation starting to get back on its feet.
Interesting mystery around the “Dark Matter Anomaly” (DMA)
We get to see The Federation deal with a truly alien first contact. Species 10-C was amazing.
Cons:
Once again, an existential threat. Very exhausting.
Conclusion
I think Discovery suffered from one main issue, in multiple way: season-based plots. Since every season had a single main plot, any issues with the plot ruin the whole season. We don’t get standalone great episodes like in the old series, which you could watch at random. You kinda need to watch the whole season. Furthermore, since each season had to have a big plot, every season is dealing with a huge issue. It’s exhausting being in an existential crisis the entire time. That’s the feeling we have in our real world right now. That’s the reason I watch Star Trek; it’s a glimpse at how the future might be brighter. Discovery never felt like a promising future. It felt like we are going to be struggling for our lives for the next millennium and more.
So, I still enjoyed it as a piece of media, and a part of the Star Trek canon, but it’s not a show I see myself watching again and again like the rest of the franchise.
My major issues with Discovery are two, but they apply to most modern TV series:
Too much talk, when a single sentence or gesture would have been enough.
The assumption that people care more if the stakes are incredibly high.
Yet, as I said: these apply to a lot of recent TV shows and films (Picard is another prime example) and are basically caused by lazy writing and direction.
A retcon is still a retcon even if it fits or doesnt inherently contradict anything. They do it in comics all the time. Having spoc suddenly have a secret human sister he cant talk about because shes classified is a retcon regardless of whether it fits or was well done.
You’re right that I couldn’t think of any explicit retcons. The closest I could think of, other than technology, were Burnham being related to Spock (which you touched on), and how absolutely decimated the Federation was by the Klingons while Discovery was in the mirror universe (again, not necessarily a retcon, but it seems like it would have been mentioned more).
Regarding tech, I had legitimately forgotten that Burnham’s parents and the time suit were Section 31. That said, what other amazing tech do we ever see out of Section 31? Granted, we don’t even see much of Section 31 in other shows, outside of DS9 and ENT, but in those cases, I seem to recall them being more intelligence operatives. They accomplish their job by knowing more than others, and operating outside usual Federation conventions. It’s spy stuff, not super weapons (outside the Changeling virus). But maybe I’m forgetting things.
Overall, I thought it was fine. I think it got hit a little harshly by critics. It’s not terrible (read: unwatchable), but it’s pretty firmly my least favorite Star Trek series.
Without actually looking through the full episode lists, and just going off what I remember of each season, here are my gut ratings:
S1: 3/10
S2: 5/10
S3: 4/10
S4: 8/10
Overall: 5/10
Going a bit more into my thoughts in each…
Season 1 - 3/10
Pros:
Cons:
Season 2 - 5/10
Pros:
Cons:
Season 3 - 4/10
Pros:
Cons:
Season 4 - 8/10
Pros:
Cons:
Conclusion
I think Discovery suffered from one main issue, in multiple way: season-based plots. Since every season had a single main plot, any issues with the plot ruin the whole season. We don’t get standalone great episodes like in the old series, which you could watch at random. You kinda need to watch the whole season. Furthermore, since each season had to have a big plot, every season is dealing with a huge issue. It’s exhausting being in an existential crisis the entire time. That’s the feeling we have in our real world right now. That’s the reason I watch Star Trek; it’s a glimpse at how the future might be brighter. Discovery never felt like a promising future. It felt like we are going to be struggling for our lives for the next millennium and more.
So, I still enjoyed it as a piece of media, and a part of the Star Trek canon, but it’s not a show I see myself watching again and again like the rest of the franchise.
@ApostleO
My major issues with Discovery are two, but they apply to most modern TV series:
Too much talk, when a single sentence or gesture would have been enough.
The assumption that people care more if the stakes are incredibly high.
Yet, as I said: these apply to a lot of recent TV shows and films (Picard is another prime example) and are basically caused by lazy writing and direction.
@Confidant6198
deleted by creator
A retcon is still a retcon even if it fits or doesnt inherently contradict anything. They do it in comics all the time. Having spoc suddenly have a secret human sister he cant talk about because shes classified is a retcon regardless of whether it fits or was well done.
That’s for the critique.
You’re right that I couldn’t think of any explicit retcons. The closest I could think of, other than technology, were Burnham being related to Spock (which you touched on), and how absolutely decimated the Federation was by the Klingons while Discovery was in the mirror universe (again, not necessarily a retcon, but it seems like it would have been mentioned more).
Regarding tech, I had legitimately forgotten that Burnham’s parents and the time suit were Section 31. That said, what other amazing tech do we ever see out of Section 31? Granted, we don’t even see much of Section 31 in other shows, outside of DS9 and ENT, but in those cases, I seem to recall them being more intelligence operatives. They accomplish their job by knowing more than others, and operating outside usual Federation conventions. It’s spy stuff, not super weapons (outside the Changeling virus). But maybe I’m forgetting things.
deleted by creator