Discuss Star Trek: Discovery

I started watching ST as a kid 50 years ago. I enjoy this new show very much! I agree with most of the development choices the producers have made . I think the show is visually stunning and the episodes and characterization so far exceed anything else on TV currently. The things I am NOT wild about, I am willing to give the creators time to explain away or adjust, mostly because I think they have done an amazing job of all the other stuff. Ok, so I have established I am very much pro-DSC.

I am however keenly aware that many people are not happy with this new show. These critics seldom do more than level very general complaints. I would like to invite these DSC critics to make more constructive specific (but limited) complaints they have with the show here so that I can attempt to address them. Two points of caution however.

i) I can not address anything to do with canon. ii) I would like to ask that we refer to the show as DSC not STD, after all we do not refer to any other series with the prefix "Star Trek." do we?

If you want, I can explain specific things I think this show does much better than any other Star Trek show and better than many other shows on TV today!

1 reply (on page 1 of 1)

Jump to last post

I will do my best, just give a brief dot point presentation of my problems with the series

  • Aesthetics, this also contributes to tone and atmosphere, I don't mind them trying something different and evolving (obviously they have to keep up with the times, after all TV as an art form is changing too) but subjectively it is too hectic for me. I've seen a whole season and if you ask me I still couldn't give you an accurate description of the bridge. I don't mind all the dutch angles and such but for me it is a bit too much. Also as a side not something about the CGI looks animated, like it is out of a video game, I mean seriously Enterprise had better CGI than DSC.

  • Dialogue is very exposition heavy...and slow. Show don't tell.

  • Character can be very inconsistent in some cases (for example I think some of Michael's actions are quite contradictory and she seems to devolve as the series progresses) and extremely underdeveloped in others. I think DSC also has trouble handling the ensemble cast, I feel like I only really know a handful of the characters. This is a problem I have not seen on any other series I watch, I generally know all the primary and secondary characters. Also, this is completely subjective however, I have no interest in Michael as a character, she is our lead, and in a character focused show that is important. She was introduced to us and immediately committed mutiny, and failed at it. She didn't have good reason to either she was just arrogant and didn't trust her crew or captain. Then throughout the series she didn't really show much growth. There were some decent characters on the show (Tully, Lorca, Saru, Georgiou) but she was not one of them. Not to say they were great characters either, to me they weren't, for the most part they seemed like caricatures.

  • I feel the spirit of the show doesn't fit in with the rest of Star Trek. It is far too pessimistic. Also focuses too much on action and not inner conflict. We also see far to much interpersonal conflict between Federation characters. Here I am talking about overall mood not necessarily a rule for all the time for all series. I think this is not just me too as I hear this as a common criticism of the series. Feels more like a Space Opera than a sci-fi series exploring things like the human condition. I mean come on, we have had crews at odds with admirals before but never in Star Trek to my knowledge has Starfleet actively tried to commit genocide. Then when it is over it seems all forgotten that they were about to try and wipe out an entire culture. Also everyone is always moving and taking action rather than thinking about the situation and making the best decision, does that sound very Star Trek to you?

  • Writing just isn't great, I mean think about it long and hard, for the most part the whole pilot episode isn't relevant and could be cut out completely or at least reduced dramatically in length. This can be seen throughout the show, while there are some segments and episodes of course that are decent but overall the show was a bit of a chore to watch, a lot of it seemed forced. Another good example of this is the Klingons, in this series they are a very complex culture. That isn't necessarily a good thing however, they seem to have confused complexity with depth and instead winded up with a very integral part of the series just being pointlessly convoluted. Also I am not sure if it just me but they had a whole war in one season and it all seemed a bit rushed, especially when they ended a war in two episodes? That's a bit extreme.

I mean overall I didn't mind the show and will likely watch season 2 in hopes of it improving, I definitely felt it had an overall positive trend as the season progressed. To me it just seemed like a very average contemporary sci fi that is just a Battlestar Galactica knock-off which is what most sci-fi shows these days have been since the reboot first came out. In the end I would say it wasn't bad, but it definitely wasn't good either. It has some potential, the three sets of show runners probably didn't help either though.


s focus the search bar
p open profile menu
esc close an open window
? open keyboard shortcut window

On media pages

b go back (or to parent when applicable)
e go to edit page

On TV season pages

(right arrow) go to next season
(left arrow) go to previous season

On TV episode pages

(right arrow) go to next episode
(left arrow) go to previous episode

On all image pages

a open add image window

On all edit pages

t open translation selector
ctrl+ s submit form

On discussion pages

n create new discussion
w toggle watching status
p toggle public/private
c toggle close/open
a open activity
r reply to discussion
l go to last reply
ctrl+ enter submit your message
(right arrow) next page
(left arrow) previous page