I said a while back that I was gonna change my name due to my obscene displeasure with the final season but… nah. I’m Stamets. I love my lil gay boy and I love his lil gay family and I love the ship with the weirdly long nacelles.
I said a while back that I was gonna change my name due to my obscene displeasure with the final season but… nah. I’m Stamets. I love my lil gay boy and I love his lil gay family and I love the ship with the weirdly long nacelles.
Stamets is great. I love him.
I love a LOT of the characters on discovery, but I just found the story arcs it ended up telling very… Overblown.
Did the disco really have to save the literal galaxy every season? And skip across time so it could be placed into a pivotal role in every era?
Not a single time, not once, did the disco feel like just another ship in the fleet. It was always THE ship.
Season one is still the best IMO, with the disco being a secret research program hijacked by Lorca for his own purposes. The story felt right. But then the ship and crew just kept being extraordinary not just every season, but in every tiny moment.
I really love all the worldbuilding in Trek, but in disco that always played second fiddle to whatever crisis was going on, which the disco would then inevitably resolve. It was yawn-inducing to me.
Even as I adored lots of the small stuff the series did with the style, characters, and world.
Like Stamets!
Your comments put into words how I felt about the show. It was one major calamity after another. I might go back and finish because of Stamets, Culber (love Wilson Cruz), and everyone else.
I do like Strange New Worlds a lot. It is less frenetic
SNW has landed much more solidly for me, as well. I really hope it continues.
The most stinging part is Prodigy, the literal kid’s show, takes a similar story arc and doesn’t make it all about their special magic research ship.
It really didn’t.
In Season 1 the only ‘save the galaxy’ thing is basically a one-off episode plot. Not unlike many other Treks.
Season 2, yeah. That flagrantly is save the galaxy.
Season 3, they are not saving the galaxy, they’re trying to help rebuild the Federation and its influence and uncover a scientific mystery. The Federation was crippled but existed and was at war with another group. Discovery shows up and is able to help with the use of a different perspective (a literal plot point) and new technology. The same thing happens in literally every Trek, it just switches sides on who has what tech. Enterprise was with basically everyone, SNW is the Gorn, TOS is the Klingons, TNG is the Romulans/Borg/Cardassians, DS9 is Cardassian/Dominion, PIC is Romulan Sect/Changelings/Borg, LD has the Pakleds and I’m sure that Prodigy has something as well. Haven’t started it yet. Either way, in all of them the primary ship that we follow becomes a primary plot point in the wars. The only one that doesn’t fit the mould is Voyager and that’s because they’re on their own but even then the show opens with Starfleet vs the Maquis.
Season 4, they’re trying to uncover another scientific mystery that is wreaking havoc in the galaxy. Personally i’d say it’s halfway there but not entirely. It’s more of a political season with seeing the internal struggles of the Federation. The ‘galaxy saving’ is a backdrop that’s set up for the inner aspects of the Federation being at odds with one another. It’s a representation of the struggle thats also within Burnham and all the crew members for being in a new place far from home. I honestly think that Season 4 is a work of art.
Season 5, saving the galaxy also isn’t a thing in this. Closest you can say is that they’re trying to save the Federation from being destroyed. Galaxy seems to be fine otherwise. But even then the season is more of a treasure hunt. A shitty one but still a treasure hunt.
As opposed to any other show? As mentioned, every show features a primary ship that ends up solving the conflicts or being a MAJOR player in it. This feels like a really bizarre complaint. The four Enterprises we follow all feel like THE ship. Do they meet up with other ships? Sure, but they’re always the ones at the heart of the conflict and solving it. That’s… how shows work? It’s not like the new tech for Discovery is a big deal or not used as a constant plot point either. DS9 had the Defiant with a cloaking device that was heavily relied on. Why? Because that’s what they had. Discovery has a spore drive which is why it’s being used so much and why we follow it. Just like the Enterprise had its name or new path, Voyager had it’s stranded space and DS9 had a new quirky ship based around a space station.
… what?
I feel like you have completely missed the majority of what was happening on screen over the course of the show. The crisis is the second fiddle to the characters. It’s used as a vehicle to drive character development as opposed to having characters drive a crisis like in TNG or Voyager. Not that both didn’t have character development as well, but they were often static characters that were reacting to a new crisis each time. Discovery flipped the switch hard and went all in on serialization and character development. Every season the characters change and grow, so much so that they did a really shit flashback to what their characters were like about halfway through Season 5. The characters were fleshed out by the worldbuilding and they themselves fleshed it out.
In Season 1 and 2 they were relatively constrained about what they could world build but they still did their best. They expanded on the engagements with the Klingons (which annoyed some people but I enjoyed), expanded on Prime Pike for the first time since TOS, they finally gave Number One a name, they expanded on the childhood with Sarek that Spock had and his relationship with his human mother that he’s hinted at, expanded more on Section 31 and expanded further on the Terran Empire. They developed an entirely new race in Saru and developed a whole culture around him that stretches across multiple seasons. Then they went to the future where they have more free reign and went nuts with developing incredible looking ships and insane tech and new worlds and new empires and elaborating on cultures not seen since TNG.
How is any of that second fiddle when every bit of that expansion was the driving force of each season?
I see these complaints all the time and I don’t understand what y’all are talking about, especially when every other Trek show is guilty of the same ‘crimes’.
Maybe I can help you understand a bit where viewers like me are me coming from. I do see where people who really enjoy the show get it from, as they usually like it for the same reasons I do, but the stuff that for me kick me out of my immersion, just doesn’t for them.
I mean, that stuff is the reason I like a lot of Discovery.
But world-building and character development isn’t just “going nuts” with expansion and imagination. All of that stuff, which there is a lot of, didn’t feel properly thought out and planned to me. It was a barrage of ideas, very few of which landed for me. I can’t even pull examples out of my head because it just didn’t stay with me.
You point out some of the good ones, and that’s the stuff I’m still begging for more of.
In my viewing, the only thing each season left me with really, was whatever big central plot element it had. So yes, the good ended up second fiddle to that. I would have preferred the show not work that way.
Another way to put it might be that other treks don’t make their main ships feel like an inanimate Mary Sue? Or not as much. I don’t mind the spore drive, I think it’s cool af (even as to this day I’m iffy on the in-universe science it canonizes). Obviously the main ship and cast of a trek will somehow be part of major events, but disco never pulled that off without feeling contrived as hell to me.
I think that’s why you see people comment this a lot. Discos writing has a “forced” tone to it that not everyone seems to notice. Perhaps best exemplified by the way characters will burst into tears way more than in most media. Makes me think of the Robot Devils criticism in futurama.
Even as the performances are competent, it’s such a blatant attempt to pull at the viewers heartstrings it made me frustrated and thereby unable to stay immersed in what the character was feeling. Like the Robot Devil, rather then remaining engrossed, “that makes me angry”. I can still see and appreciate the arc of the character, but the execution sabotages my ability to remain invested.
The same kind of thing would happen with where the ship was going, what would happen there, etc.
Again, overall, I enjoy the show. And while I know a lot of people suffer a similar experience to mine, I think the issues I run into when watching the show just don’t register for others. Like how you’re able to completely explain away my problems through the way you experience it.
I can totally see how the show would shine if you just rearrange the parts I experience as second fiddle into it’s primary appeal. I just can’t do that when watching the show.
It is kinda weird that it always seemed like THE ship while the shows with the enterprise didn’t really have that even though canonically the enterprise is THE (flag)ship. Or at least not as much.
Personally, I’m fine with this.
But if they are going to save the galaxy, make some real galaxy-sized problem.
To be fair, if I gave you a fleet of starships and one of them could just appear anywhere at any time, it would be THE ship.
Geordi is great. I love him.
I love a LOT of the characters on TNG, but I just found the story arcs it ended up telling very… Overblown.
Did the Enterprise-D really have to save the literal galaxy every season? And skip across time so it could be placed into a pivotal role in every era?
Not a single time, not once, did the Enterprise-D feel like just another ship in the fleet. It was always THE ship.
Seasons 3-4 are still the best IMO, with Picard being assimilated and liberated and wrestling with his new dual-identity as Locutus. Worf leaving Starfleet and being instrumental in Gowron’s ascension. The story felt right. But then the ship and crew just kept being extraordinary not just every season, but in every tiny moment.
I really love all the worldbuilding in Trek, but in TNG that always played second fiddle to whatever crisis was going on, which the ENT-D would then inevitably resolve. It was yawn-inducing to me.
Even as I adored lots of the small stuff the series did with the style, characters, and world.
Like Geordi!
I don’t really think that’s the same thing. The enterprise D was the flagship of the federation. It was THE ship and was given important mission, but it didn’t save the entire literal galaxy in it’s own. It had whacky adventure, did a lot of first contacts, fought important battles. But discovery single handedly solved galaxy level menaces and fought against entire alien fleets, all without very little help. That just doesn’t make any sense
It didn’t. And most of the episodes weren’t even aimed at the major historical events of the time.
It did participate on most historical events when they happened. And Q preferred to interact with it (what created some of those events). But it’s completely different from Discovery.
I’m really sorry you didn’t enjoy everything about the series, but your subjective experience is what it is.
I won’t belittle it by superficially rehashing your words to apply them to something else.
Actually I really did enjoy both TNG and Disco. Very different approaches in storytelling (episodic vs serialized). But you seem like you wanted Disco to be more like Lower Decks—not the hero of the fleet/timeline, not the supership of the timeline.
Wanting something to be something else is truly the supreme recipe for disappointment and distracts from appreciation of what something is and actually is, for all its flaws and charms.
Ok.
So you’re saying I’m wrong to have watched it at all, should shut up, accept it wasn’t made for me, walk away and stop sharing opinions online?
If we really boil it down, I wanted discos writing to be less contrived, less forced in its emotional high points, and more consistent and restrained in its fantastical worldbuilding.
Well I would not have said it like that.
You’re shouting at the sky here; angry because it’s raining on what was supposed to be a sunny day. The writers aren’t listening to you or me or anyone else, and it’s already been filmed and published, so what’s the point? To inspire a reboot where everything is done differently? Or just for some catharsis?
The only way to win a game of “immovable object vs unstoppable force” is to not play at all.
The point is to offer your opinion of a show in a public forum. Star Trek fans in particular have been doing this for over 30 years. Why is this such a problem for you?
It’s an Internet forum/meme post about Star Trek… shouting at the sky/into the void how you feel about the show is kind of the whole point. People get satisfaction and fulfillment from expressing themselves. That’s it, there doesn’t have to be a purpose or real world goal here. Where do you think you are? Standing outside the paramount lot watching someone bang on the windows pleading for someone to listen to them?
Yes. When it comes to communication on things that don’t actually significantly impact reality, such as governmental policy, was there ever any greater point than that? (Except for when fiction comments on things like governmental policy.)
The logical endpoint of that logic is both of us deleting our accounts and never interacting with others online again.
I don’t subscribe to it.
You’re right, and I apologize. I was kind of being a dick. Tough day, and it was unfair to take that out on the world. I respect your right to have and voice an opinion, and although my intent was not to squelch or suppress I acknowledge that that is the effect of my message.
I will leave my messages there, downvotes and mistake and all. Steel sharpens steel.