I understand the problems with licensing that affect how each ST series or film looks. I also understand that someone can make reasonable criticism of a character or show which have nothing to do with any particular racial or gender animus. However when you make the point that your objection to DSC or to Burnham's character is solely based on non racial, non gender objections and that you don't think most of the fan base did react negatively to an all female, minority led bridge....I think...thou dost protest too much... Why do you ascribe 'pure' motives to fans who haven't asserted them?

Read the reviews on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes by the viewers and you'll actually notice (apart from the show not getting all that high scores)that the most heard comment is that the show claims to be part of star trek but doesn't look or feel like that it is cannon most reviewers see it as a run of he mill SF show with the Star trek logo attached to it (of which I gave some examples.And sure there might be some mastodontic idiots complaining about the mostly female cast but if you read the first two pages of reviews on IMDB alone you'll see that viewers don't like the show because of females but because of what I wrote here above.So why you keep bringing up the notion that most fans have objections with an all female(or mostly female) bridge or that is the sole reason they don't watch it?

First: Many of these "fans" have plainly posted their objections to DSC based on race and gender of the stars. Remember, the backlash I refer to started before any single episode was seen. This backlash continued with the complaints more about canon, lore and other things. It became obvious to everyone that some changes had to be made for DSC to survive. What we see now is a direct response to a fan reaction you appear to be denying!

No sorry but that is not what happened,the backlash prior to show was based on 4 things;

1) The CBS lawsuit against the producers of Axenar and the consequences that came after that,Axenar was a project that was met with a lot of enthusiasm of the fans when CBS blocked that and started issuing all these restraints for fan fiction videos CBS pissed off a lot of fans.

2)Around the same time pre-production started on DISC and information about DISC started coming from the production and all the troubles they had led to the suspicion of fans that CBS deliberately blocked Axenar because CBS feared that Axenar might be something the fans would like better than the show they were producing and that Axenar would be more popular.Also the continuing troubles on the set ,information of the premise of the show and the firing of Bryan Fuller further diminished expectations of the fans(I remember having various discussions on the TOS boards with various posters over the latest stories around the production and the issues some of the first photos raised among the posters because that is how long I have following this show ).

3) It was only after the teaser trailer that we got a first view and after the blocking of Axenar one probably can understand the gulf of dissatisfaction among the fans when faced with a show they didn't like the look of and was starting to look like they were given a Trek show most of them did not want in favor of a show they had actually wanted to see.

4)CBS panicked after all the negative reviews and when some reviewers(NOTE : SOME NOT THE MAJORITY) had vented criticism about the SJW agenda or the race or gender of the main characters CBS used the same tactic as TLJ and GB2016 by generalizing all fans that didn't like the trailer as male white racist cellar dwelling misogynists which pissed off fans even more that by the time when the first episode aired CBS had lost most if not all credits with the fans.

Second: Your words above confirm my thesis. Please consider carefully what the MAIN differences are between season 1 and season 2 are. I think they mainly boil down to a heroic looking white male (Kirk, Piccard) on the bridge. When Lorca moved from 'unconventional, militarily brilliant strategist' to evil-to-the core alternate universe villain', that was the last straw!!! If you think this has NOTHING to do with NOTHING then.....I don't know!

No it has nothing to do with Pike being male but how he is written and what counts for Pike also counts for the majority of characters season 2 finally gives us some background also the characters are now actually starting to acts like Trek characters Even Burnham now seems to get more interesting when we get to see her background history.In season 2 we see interesting characters being fleshed out(Pike,Burnham,Saru,Stamnets they are now actually doing something with him and his relationship and partner,Ash/Voq), also we get more info about the whole relationship between Spock and Burnham,also the whole character interactions and stories have a more Star Trek feeling where we see species interacting in a cooperative,constructive manner where they as a group try to solve problems and emergencies by working together in contrast to the passive aggressive manner the characters were written in season 1 where people always shout at each other,are in conflict and the constant swearing(I thought the show was aimed at a family audience ?Because I don't remember seeing Starfleet personnel swearing so much).The effect is that now by season 2 we finally get to know these characters and most of them are actually likable and relatable.

Third: DSC planners went to great lengths to explain what they were TRYING to do differently in this new ST series and why. Do you honestly think people gave them the time and space to do those things? I am referring now to things like: a) the characterization (more ensemble style cast with a deep dive into each individual as time goes on); b) the seasonal story arc (as opposed to the one hour episodic structure); c) a more rounded, realistic portrayal of the antagonists (Klingons speaking Klingon). These are things the producers announced, ahead of time, as departures from the established ST norms in order to create a better, more realistic storytelling experience. Sadly, they became the unintended casualties of season 1 as the white male fan base freaked out because they did not see THEMSELVES in the chair on the bridge of DSC.

I don't have issues when they try to do something differently I actually applauded ENT for not going on the technobabble heavy and less conflict among characters route of the TNG era shows that they more or less went back to the original show while integrating new things and tried to do things differently by introducing multiple episodes story arcs and the season three story arc(that was actually one of the aspects of DISC I liked and still like).But the issues arise when the producers claim it is part of cannon and takes place in the original timeline when things in the show appear that don't make sense ,are far too advanced of the time period in which the show supposedly takes place,when characters interact /act contrary what has been established in cannon (Vulcans,Klingons) Sure you can try to explain why you changed things and the changes you wrote about and the producers intentions could have easily been achieved within the structure of established cannon ENT managed to give us a fresh new look upon Vulcans and that even they were not that enlightened as we used to think,which actually made the Vulcan interesting again but most of this was done within the bounds of established cannon.Also the fact that around episode 6 CBS specifically installed a group of writers to check continuity and cannon related issues which kind of confirms that there were issues with cannon.So no my/their objections do not stem from not seeing myself/themselves in the chair on the bridge but rather with the fact that when you claim something is cannon within the established franchise you have to abide to the rules of the established canon like I said before a franchise inadvertently has a certain amount of familiarity sure one can change certain things but not so far as changing the core of that franchise otherwise it ceases to be part of that franchise.The fact we have seen these changes in season 2 seems to indicate that the new producers and show runner have taken these issues seriously.

What you are doing now Nexus71 is simply trying to deny the obvious, imho. Maybe you don't realize it yet yourself. Perhaps you convinced yourself you had OTHER real objections to the show, perhaps you did! Even if this were so, you have to admit that you (plural) really did not give the show much of a chance now...did you?

No my issues have nothing to do with the issue you keep coming back at ,I have followed the show from it's announcement to currently and all the things we heard about the show,who were involved,the troubles and previously mentioned four things about the production having reacted and read posts by those that brought up these things one can't claim I am just a sheep following the group my history with the shows goes back too long for that to just raise one issue for me not liking the show.And not giving the show a chance? I watched the entire first season and am stil watching the show so I can honestly say I give the show quite a fair chance ,just because the critics are dismissive of a movie or a series doesn't hold me back for making up my own mind or let my views be biased by criticism I didn't do that with ENT and gave it a fair chance or season 1 & 2 of TNG which for most fans of TOS was also quite a radical change,and since I actually feel that the show is getting closer to a Trek show because of the new producers and show runners dealing with the criticism so many of the fans had.

After a season and a half of DSC I can say this much. There were things I did/do not like about DSC. I still dislike the flashy, glossy look of the film but am gradually getting used to it. I never really got to see the dynamic of two females on the bridge and I feel some of the characterization is rushed, not appearing organically. I was particularly excited to hear about a more "lower deck" approach to the characterization , where a fuller picture of the non principals were presented. I haven't see that either. Rather what I am seeing is ST revert back to what I use to see in TOS and NXT GEN and what is blatantly copied in The Orville.

The Issues you raised are basically the same issues I have or at least are a part of the reasons why I felt season 1 failed for me as a Trek show and failed at this whole new premise they promised us or at least would address in a manner befitting the established cannon. And despite The Orville of having the advantage of sets and characters that remind fans of "old"trek the show and it being a spoof /homage/cliché of Star Trek judging from what Invidia about the story line of a species that forces a specific gender role on it's newborn indicates that the issues used by CBS as defense of DISC(when it was criticized) are being addressed by The Orville in manner similar to a Trek show while the DISC track record on that matter so far had been poor.

Speaking of which, I get that The Orville is an homage to ST in some sense. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". Also there is nothing completely new of completely original in art. Even the best artists borrow. Those who understand dance can see flashes of James Brown, Fred Astaire even native African dance in the moves of the late Michael Jackson. What made us all stare at Michael was the fact that he ADDED SOMETHING NEW to JB, FA or AD. He made something new , something different. THAT is NOT what The Orville is doing. How do I know? If it were, the fans of the show would be saying " The Orville is NOTHING like ST it is different.!"

Doing something new was not the premise or concept behind the show being a Spoof of something it has to look like and feel like the thing it is trying to spoof and the basic premise of The Orville was a comedy SF show with a very heavy wink to Star Trek so we see stories with some things/stories we recognize from previous Trek shows and making of fun of that or dealing with topical issues dressed in a Star Trek veneer but in stead of playing it straight deal with these issues in a comical fashion.

They, you are saying the EXACT opposite! They are most commonly saying that The Orville represent ** what they consider to be ST** And what exactly is The Orville? Well, it is an exaggeration of TOS ( with some more humor generously sprinkled in)...a spoof mostly. What that spoof shows is useful however. Let me tell you what I see in The Orville. White male hegemony firmly in command with characters who have some minor enduring flaws and EVERYBODY else around them being the ones with the SERIOUS character flaws. No wonder it is preferred by the fanboys.

Well considering the fact that not that much Trek fans are fans of Seth MacFarlane's previous outings or humor I would consider it a disadvantage having him as captain for Trek fans.Unless it is Macfarlane's point to mock these traditional views TOS had about gender (although for it's time TOS's way of portraying gender/race were quite radical or at least extremely liberal remember the show aired only two or three years after civil rights activists in Mississippi were murdered and blacks in the south were still victims of segregation & racism and were at risk of being beaten,tortured or lynched).And if gender/race is such a crucial thing for fans it still raises the question why would fans have issues with that now while not having these issues with DS9 or VOY?

I appreciate the spirit of our discussions. Please consider my point of view as a useful counterbalance you MAY not have by yourself. "We don't see things as they are, we see them as WE are." Anais Nin.

And I appreciate the spirit of discussion as well and like I said my view is only my point of view but I do appreciate reading other posters views whose are the opposite of mine but with my response I only tried to illustrate with examples and heaving dealt with DISC for past 3,5 years that my issues have nothing to do with the gender of who is in the seat but with producers not living up to expectations or not delivering that what was promised.And sure everyone's opinion is "colored" with what one has read or heard in prior to viewing ans an opinion is by definition is subjective but one also tried to illustrate that these points of criticism are not out of the blue or are based on those that don't like it alone but are rather based on the fact that all the problems one has been hearing and reading about that went on behind the scenes during the conception,pre production and production was reflected by what was on the screen.The fact with Pike being in the seat of command has nothing to do with why I like the character or why I like season 2 better,the reason why I like him has to do with the fact that he acts,reacts,interacts with others in a fashion one would expect of a well written Star Trek character but also other characters benefit from that treatment that including Burnham making her far more engaging and likeable. And the fact that I have followed the entire series so far shows that I am not dismissive of the show and that I can look beyond small minded preconceptions like which gender our main character has or whether there is an over representation of females on the bridge.

As matter of fact I can come up a whole narrative and character arc spanning several season if Empress Georgiou had been made captain of Discovery where for example we could show Georgiou change from the evil,paranoid,cruel bitchy Empress into the Georgiou we knew from the normal universe by interacting withe various species on board of Discovery and on their Journeys and that these interactions challenge her whole perceptions she previously held or challenge her whole philosophy and upbringing.We can have a background for Georgiou being the daughter of Empress Hoshi and that she became Empress after killing her mother because of the cruel and abusive manner in which she was raised by her (and we could have a direct connection as a sequel to the ENT Mirror universe episodes and Georgiou changing into the more normal universe Georgiou is a pre-cursor of the effect normal Kirk's visit to the Mirror universe had as was described in the Mirror Universe episodes of DS9) .And voila in under five minutes I have come up with a premise that has a)a female in command,b)is an interesting character with an interesting back history which also explains why she turned out that way c)create numerous possibilities for her character to interact with various species and genders in interesting thought provoking manners not only challenging Georgiou's preconceptions but also that of the viewers,d)have interesting interactions between Burnham and her because of Burnham's own past e) is in cannon and ticks off most of the boxes of what is a Star Trek character based on the core philosophies of Star Trek.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDl3bdE3YQA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEHqPCA_lzQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag2KgtwATfI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x__kcVB1DxU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ncVyxQRw70

Bummer No just some music clips an average selection of what one is listening on a Saturday while enjoying a couple of beers and preparing for Saturday dinner. currently Donald Fagen is playing with the cool New Frontier from the album The Nightfly followed by And Your Bird Can Sing by The Beatles from the awesome Revolver.

We want the funk we gotta have the funk yes George Clinton and Parliament - Give Up The Funk (Tear The Roof Off The Sucker) followed by the somewhat obscure Firefall -Strange way to Tell me You Love Me

I think you better call Tyrone the amazing Erykah Badu but you can't use my phone .... followed by Badly Drawn Boy - Once Around The Block not so serious Invidia it is Saturday cheer up

"The fact with Pike being in the seat of command has nothing to do with why I like the character or why I like season 2 better,the reason why I like him has to do with the fact that he acts,reacts,interacts with others in a fashion one would expect of a well written Star Trek character but also other characters benefit from that treatment that including Burnham making her far more engaging and likeable. And the fact that I have followed the entire series so far shows that I am not dismissive of the show and that I can look beyond small minded preconceptions like which gender our main character has or whether there is an over representation of females on the bridge."

Nexus71,

I don't think you should take my points about what I consider (for want of a better expression) the hostile White Male Reaction...PERSONALLY. I did NOT mean them PERSONALLY even though I honestly believe you and many others share this view and it has affected the development of the DSC series greatly. I do however find it very interesting that you have suggested a "five minute" alternate story line that would leave a) female in command; b) interesting characters; c) interesting possibilities for future character development of said female character; d) interesting development of Burnham; e) is in canon and ticks of the boxes you require.

Let me explain why this discussion should NOT be personal. In order for our discussion to be MEANINGFUL we need to speak about MOST or GENERAL fan reaction. Our personal ideas have really no relevance because the producers react to LARGE fan reaction, not individual anecdotal evidence. Besides, you can say you find one thing "interesting" I can say I don't and we are quickly at a stalemate.

As to your reaction to my specific thesis, your response seems to be mostly annoyance at my repeatedly making a singular point...without much real attempt at refutation. Perhaps this is because there is not much evidence to the contrary. You point to some RT comments about DSC not "feeling" like ST. I have already conceded that point and also explained why The Orville feels more like ST to that fan base. Re-read my previous comments about how The Orville fits into my thesis.

I am also VERY intrigued by your 'five minute save' of DSC. First notice how apart from point a), the other four rely HEAVILY on the word interesting. In other words interesting ...to me, that is , you! Second, you (plural) never gave the original DSC story line/plot line a chance to develop even to the length of your 5 min example. DSC was panned right off the bat...panned more when the premise of two minority females was simply suggested by the early trailers. Long, long before ANY character development could be considered. Long, long before any typical ST behavior (whatever that means) could be established or NOT established. You (plural) were not having ANY of it and you let it be known not just in RT and TMDb etc but also on You tube, Twitter etc.. The reaction was so hostile that a full court press had to be mounted to save the show. This my dear man was BEFORE yes BEFORE the Lorcas character was introduced to ST fans. Indeed, the introduction of the British actor to the DSC bridge was the first attempt made to counter the hostile WMR.

I am surprised you can ascribe, the EARLY and INTENSE hostile fan reaction from some quarters to character development; none ST like interactions; or even the futuristic look when these things had NOT yet even been really established. However, I'll let that be. I am interested in examining your 5 min alternative development and why you even suggested it. Was it to defend against the accusation of anti-feminism? Are you trying to say that had they developed the Georgio character to your liking....there would NOT have been the OUTRAGE there was? Surely you CANNOT not believe that? can you?. Look, I am not asking if your changes would have made Georgio more interesting to YOU, clearly they would. I am asking if you think those changes would have avoided the large scale criticism! Anyway your suggestions about Georgio's character seems to be exactly where the show is headed now, she is essentially a BADDIE who will become a GOODIE thru her interactions with characters in the good universe. Point is, however, she was NEVER given the chance as Captain!!! When the idea of her and Burnham heading the DSC bridge was reveal.....THAT is when the hostile WMR began.

In contrast Pike's descending into the DSC Captain's chair was greeted with INSTANT exaltation....even though it presented clear problems. Where did the obscure RULE 25 come from? ( no questions of canon there...right); What exactly is Saru's position?; How come The Federation can let one Captain simply take command of another vessel? (again, what about canon?) Do you hear any such complaints Nexus71? Have YOU raised any such concerns?

The TRUTH is no! None of this is a concern BECAUSE it leads to a desired end. Looking film, drama, fiction in general involves a "willing suspension of dis-belief". I don't think EVERY little thing must be quibbled about when considering FICTION! However, this is my point: The WMR goes nuclear in regards to canon and this illusory "star Trek Feeling" when ANY change leads to something they DO NOT LIKE!!! This is what all the complaints and criticism of DSC is about. Admit it!

This ALSO explains the love of The Orville, the ST-like show where the 'White Males hierarchy' is firmly in place. Yes the WM characters have some small flaws in The Orville but everyone else has the real issues. There are TWO reasons why Voyager and DS9 were successful ST series , to the extent they were. The first was that THEY WERE GIVEN A chance. There was no instant attempt to derail Voyager, the viewers gave it a chance. Perhaps after Kirk, Bones, Piccard and Riker it was time to share some of the limelight. The second reason these series succeeded was their uniquely interesting premise (Voyager) and their excellent Ensemble cast(DS9) DS9 also had the best written, thought provoking stories so far in ST. They presented a wide range of characters who were neither entirely good or entirely bad and therefore completely realistic.

DSC was NEVER given a chance to establish ANY of these qualities. Suddenly and immediately, DSC had to establish the nostalgia some people were most comfortable with. Denying these facts will not make them less true. Take the long view and ask yourself this: what changes have occurred to DSC since it's inception? Now consider where these changes bend towards. If you are honest, you will agree with my thesis.

To the critics of DSC, particularly those who love to contrast DSC with The Orville, I invite you to consider each show's recent treatment of the 'man vs machine' dynamic. This concept has been a key one of since 2001 A Space Odyssey.

In a recent TO episode, their answer was the way such a battle could be won was essentially to appeal to the 'humanity' of the machine! That is like saying you can persuade a car to not run over you! That is LAZY writing. TO producers NEVER take the time to set up, review and resolve difficult issues. They raise them ONLY to mimic traditional Sci-Fi quandaries; sprinkle some high school humor and hope people come for more.

In season 2 episode 9 of DSC however, this same issue was illustrated with a much more satisfactory conclusion. DSC's writer were careful to set up the premise that in order to access the human's information, the machines had to interface with a human. Then, THAT human would end things by accessing her own humanity. The episode also dealt with many other human foibles like betrayal and suspicions, problems which machines do not have to reckon with, but showed eventually that man could overcome them all. So machines may have advantages but humanity, in spite of its flaws, is better is the message.

By not thoughtfully considering their story line, the TO writers presented human characters that did not intelligently confront their adversary. They ALL apparently treated Isaac as if he were human not a machine, which he repeatedly told them he was! Perhaps the fact that they had somehow convinced themselves that they could create a feasible machine/human emotional relationship led them down that line. When the ship's doctor fell "in-love" with the machine, it felt silly but I thought perhaps they were trying to explore some form of human self delusion. When no one aboard the ship or in the Union seemed concerned about the clear dangers of signing a treaty with an entire planet of super humans, I realized these writers have no clue what Sci-Fi is. Somewhere along the line they conflated a ' human vs machines' conflict with a situation were 'man made machines exceed their original capabilities' and took over their creators. They were not careful; they were either too LAZY or too ANXIOUS to get to the glorious space battles or both.