Edit: Sean Ferrick… if you see this just know that while I am a massive dick and a terrible person I will love you forever please marry me
I kinda feel bad for Disco fans. I ain’t out there to yuck anyone’s yums, but it was such a different kind of show to previous Star Treks, I’m not surprised it didn’t land well with many fans. And it’s become so commonplace to shit on it (for many valid reasons but also some nasty ones and folks with the latter should fuck right off).
I wore a Star Trek shirt to a wedding and got many compliments, one from a guy who explained his favorite was Discovery, even named his cat after Michael, he felt it was really important to him and asked what I thought about it. I got a battery of polite things to say in this situation, but a more drunken attendee practically lept over to exclaim “Discovery? MAN that one blew chunks!! What were they thinking?? Shoulda been another sci-fi show without the Trek name.” and, jeez, read the room!
I guess what I’m saying is, we don’t gotta all like it, but Disco fans are Trek fans and we gotta be nice to em, they’re here for largely the same reasons we are and, hey, maybe one day they’ll go back and learn that the best Trek is Deep Space Nine.
I guess what I’m saying is, we don’t gotta all like it, but Disco fans are Trek fans and we gotta be nice to em, they’re here for largely the same reasons we are and, hey, maybe one day they’ll go back and learn that the best Trek is Deep Space Nine.
I’ve said many times that the best Trek is the Trek you like the most.
I remember when TNG was “bad Star Trek.”
I remember when DS9 was “bad Star Trek.”
I remember when Voyager was “bad Star Trek.”
I remember when Enterprise was “bad Star Trek.”
And you will find people who name any one of those as their favorites.
All Star Trek is bad Star Trek until it has aged a few years. It’s like whiskey, you gotta let the angels have their share first.
I can’t remember where I saw it, some Star Trek documentary, but it was pointed out that the Star Trek people first watched and grew up with tended to be their favorite one.
The same is true for music, types of movies, and pretty much anything else entertainment related as well. For the most part people like familiar things.
Star wars prequels were “bad star wars movies” and now they’re looked on favorably.
A generation from now, the force awakens trilogy might not be “bad star wars”
Oh I promise I’m being flippant about DS9 being the objective best, but you’re right.
Disco tried something different and that worked for some and didn’t work for others. That’s alright. Hopefully they can learn from what worked and what didn’t and we can all have more future Trek to enjoy because of it.
Awesome take. I tried to push through, but I similarly just didn’t see any Trek in it other than a coated layer. I felt especially vindicated when Strange New Worlds came out so amazing.
No need for hate or anger toward it. We want studios to try new things. I was initially very afraid that it was ostracizing trek fans though. Telling them to f off in exchange for a wider scifi action audience
Honestly? Thanks. That’s what bugs me the most. People just shit on Discovery for no reason other than to be an asshole and it’s incredibly common place. Everytime the show gets mentioned someone has to come in and say how they didn’t like it because it sucked for whatever reason. That doesn’t happen with anything else. Can you imagine if I rocked up and said how much I hate Deep Space 9 everytime someone mentioned that they loved the show? Because I do. I cannot stand Deep Space 9. There are characters in it that I love but other characters I despise to the point I can’t watch it. Personally I think it messed up a lot and made a lot of mistakes and I don’t like watching it or spending my time even really thinking about it which is why I post so few DS9 memes.
However.
I’ve said I don’t like Deep Space 9 like three times in the entire time I’ve been on Lemmy and it’s been in instances like this. There’s no reason for me to wander around saying “Hey yeah but like this sucks and for this reason and this is also ass and other reasons”. Discovery just became ‘cool’ to hate and is bashed relentlessly. That’s why I posted this video. A lot of the complaints are either unfounded or based on a misunderstanding. Not that there are not criticisms, but things like the dark tone and less utopian society (as you mentioned) are misunderstood. People can like it or not like it. Totally their right. My only hope and wish is that people like it for their own personal reasons from experience that are shaped with the full picture and not just based off of misunderstandings or, worse still, things heard from some random cunt on youtube.
The folks that complain about “pandering” or whatever when Disco comes up are morons, plain and simple. Folks that complain about the writing or style of the show, I think that’s got more legs, but it’s all been said already and it doesn’t serve a great deal of purpose to rehash it.
The actors are great, Sonequa Martin-Green in particular has a lot of really challenging scenes that she nails expertly. Doug Jones is so good at being a gangly alien that it’s taken for granted but that’s because he’s so truly incredible he makes it seem easy. Jason Isaacs plays his role so deplorably he’s easy to hate which is amazing for a villain, probably one of the best in the franchise only behind Marc Alaimo or Louis Fletcher. Anthony Rapp and Wilson Cruz have such chemistry on screen, especially in the more mundane scenes they share.
Maybe there will be this kind of retrospective revival for Disco, I dunno. But I do think the actors deserve better than to be associated with the problems the show had, manufactured or actual.
Oh the ‘pandering’ folks are completely fucking stupid because in the same breath they’ll say how the show ruined Klingons and everything else. Bro, either they’re pandering or they’re doing their own thing. Which is it? Yeah, if you wanna complain about writing or acting or something that’s fine but pandering? Pretty sure if they were pandering they wouldn’t have pissed off so many people in the fandom saying they did shit wrong.
Also I have nothing to add to the acting other than Mary Wiseman deserves an amazing amount of props for making a character that so many people on the autistic spectrum identified with. And a character who has had so much visible growth over the series that its astounding. I love that woman, both Tilly and the actress.
Also Oded Fehr. But that’s just because he’s Admiral Daddy.
I always hated the “pandering” argument because it usually was followed by some kind of complaint about social justice. When I was on discord those people would usually end up getting banned.
You’d better edit that damned comment and extol the virtues for our Tig.
Lmao no I love her work off Star Trek but every scene with her felt forced and pointless
People are just more likely to comment on what is current, because there is a combination of immediate relevance and the assumption that the current thing is an indicator of how something will be moving forward. The complaints about Discovery were a lot more frequent and angry prior to SNW taking off as having an alternate that someone likes makes it easier to ignore the stuff they don’t. Stuff that came out 10 years ago can be easily ignored, and to be honest most people got their frustration out already.
I watched the first couple seasons of Discovery and blame the writing for stopping. The actors did a fine job with what they had, the special effects were great, but boy howdy I did not care about anything plot wise after a while because everything was universe ending stakes and apparently insubordinate leads don’t need to succeed to justify being insubordinate. Or learning anything from failure, that is off the table!
The best characters were all the side characters, who acted like normal people that learn things and have rational reasons when they don’t listen to authority when authority is wrong. Again, I blame this entirely on the writing.
Off the top … this is my personal opinion and take … it’s a hot topic and from the start, I’ll apologize if I get anything terribly wrong or if I offend anyone.
After several of you encouraged me, I went and binge watched the entire series over about two months. The start was exciting and I was happy to see so many new ideas and story lines created for the show. As a person of colour (I’m Indigenous Canadian) I was also happy to see characters of varied colour, backgrounds, species, orientations and sexualities in the show … it made sense because a future open world won’t just be a cast of uniformly identical individuals everywhere. A uniform group of individuals that all look, act and present in the same way are always painted as villains like the Borg, so why would civilization aspire for universal conformity?
I loved the characters and potential for growth of their individual stories like Tilly, Saru, Owosekun, Detmer, Reno, Nahn … or the couple of Stamets/Culber, and Adira/Gray
I enjoyed Burnham at first and I loved the idea of a female woman of colour taking a lead of the show … but to me, they went overboard with her storyline and her personality. In the TOS series, Captain Kirk played a part in events in the galaxy … he didn’t become central in the fate of the universe. I think the problem they had was that Burnham almost became like a God-like character that was central to the future of the entire universe. I like making characters important … it just gets difficult when you surround the entire universe around one person because then the stories all become the same … the universe is in danger because of one person, so it can only be saved by one person. And no matter what is going to happen in the future, you know that it will always revolve around that one person.
All the other Star Trek leads were passive participants in a greater story (I’ve only ever watched TOS, TNG, VOY and some of DS9) … Kirk, Picard, Janeway, Sisko mostly played roles where they were part of events in the galaxy that involved them but their survival didn’t hinge on the fate of entire galaxy or universe … their stories are usually stories of survival that would have been resolved whether or not they lived or not. Burnham is different … all her stories revolve around her and the fate of the entire universe hinges on just her, which was exciting the first time … but lost it’s suspense every other time it happened.
But about the most disappointing thing for me in the series was a lack of seeing the character JET RENO. I would have loved to see Reno square off with Stamets more often in engineering and the science lab.
I would love a spinoff show that centred around Engineering with Reno … and maybe an episode where they could bring together all the Star Trek engineers … Scotty, Laforge, O’Brien and all the other engineer characters and even throw Data in their too in some time warp multiverse event that unexpectedly brings them all together for a brief moment.
I think that was my favourite part of Discovery … the potential for more … the potential to see more of a story from each of the characters that made up the show.
Burnham almost became like a God-like character that was central to the future of the entire universe.
That’s why people liked to call it the Michael Burnham Show
I started hating Discovery. I ended loving it. The things I hated to start off were the retcon of the Klingons and the fact that it felt closer to the reboot films than the previous Treks. But there’s so much to love about it. The story is pretty incredible. It was definitely more intense than previous Treks, the character development was great. There was just enough humor to break things up. The twists were actual twists for the most part.
I honestly think people were hoping for something more utopian, forgetting about the timeframe of the show comes before even TOS, so things are more chaotic. It’s not my favorite Trek, but I think I’d put it around TNG if not above it.
Honestly? Agreed on literally every point. When it was first announced I fucking hated it and refused to watch it. I heard a bunch from other Trek friends and fans talking about how it was pandering with the gay characters and saw some stuff on YouTube backing it up.
I was an absolute moron.
I caved and decided to watch it because I was itching for something new in Trek. HATED the first few episodes. Loathed it. I think it was like the second last episode when Stamets terraforms a moon with mushrooms that I started to finally come around. I started to watch the second season, cautious, and within 15 minutes I was on the edge of my seat with a giddy smile on my face and laughing like a fool.
Discovery is amazing. It’s not without its flaws but the hate it gets is undeserved. Lately I’ve just been saying that Discovery has been getting the Prequel treatment and will continue to do so. Prequels were fucking hated when they first came out. Mocked relentlessly. Child actor of Anakin bullied to a really extreme and depressing point. Now? Beloved. Memed to high heaven. Remembered fondly. Loved. Discovery will get that too.
I also hated it…fuckin’ hated it! I watched the first three episodes when they aired and gave up. I binged it a couple of years later, and I’m glad I gave it another chance. What got me was the fallout from Hugh’s fate in season 1, omfg it was just heartbreaking watching Paul come to grips and try to move on. And Ash, even though he was responsible, got my empathy eventually because of his struggles with all that overwhelming crazy PTSD and repressed memories. Yeah, really glad I gave it another chance.
My main issue with the show is Burnham, so I don’t think there’s anything they can do to fix it for me unless they kill her off and get a new lead. The show has been going long enough, I’d watch one last season, but I think they need to end it and focus on strange new worlds and more shows like that.
I stand by Discovery, I enjoy that show. My main complaint is that I could’ve used more Jason Isaacs.
My dad has asked me every new season of Disco if Lorca is back, and disappointingly, every time, I have to tell him no.
I now know my son’s lemmy name
Seriously though, he was an amazing character.
I was so sure he’s coming back. Him falling into the shroom kingdom left the doors wide open, right? But he didn’t =/
He was my favorite part of the show! If only the rest of the cast/characters were as good/interesting
I get the criticism about production, plot, and dialogue decisions. I mean, I agree on quite a few of them. But a good chunk of the detractors are on the hate bandwagon because they just can’t stand women/minorities getting representation, and those dumbfucks need to GTFO. It’s Trek, for fuck’s sake. Yeah, Discovery is different, but I still dig the show.
You’re spot on. I have so many issues with the storytelling methodology, the decisions about how to treat the ST Universe and its canon, the use of the characters to tell the stories they chose, and more; but, it has been so hard to voice legitimate criticism of the show and the creators’ decisions because you always seem to end up lumped in with a bunch of chuds who are just upset about the diversity in the cast (which blows my mind, because it’s no more groundbreaking than a lot of other Trek, relative to the time of airing).
I’m with most people I’ve seen express a big meh for the show.
That show is only Star Trek by name. It’s got its own thing going (more science fantasy than science fiction), which isn’t my thing, especially not when you’re looking for a Star Trek fix which always had a nack for playing with real science but sticking with the plausibility of it.
I enjoy the other Star Trek show(s) and The Orville much more to get that.
So I watch them.
This constant “they are haters because minorities/women/other representation” is getting tired. It’s a couple loudmouth incels that have that sort of criticism and people like you seem to love getting baited in then saying everyone that doesn’t enjoy what you enjoy must be with them.
That show is only Star Trek by name
God, I’m so fucking tired of this line. This shit was said about the movies, and TNG, and DS9, and VOY, and ENT and the Kelvin movies. Everytime it’s wrong.
You could hide the words ‘Star Trek’ and ‘Enterprise’ from TOS and TNG and people would not know they were part of the same franchise.
For real. None of the ships look familiar. The fuckin badge/delta doesn’t even look the same. Tech is all kinds of different. Whole new warp scales. New command hierarchy with the previous divisions being changed.
They fucking changed the klingons!
I saw the post this comment was made on, not realizing the context at first, and openly sighed and said “Like they did for the TOS movies and TNG?” Refreshing to see someone else saying that <3
ENT at least wanted to be a Star Trek show. Disco banked on the IP for nostalgia and then did nothing nostalgic with it.
I’m fine with people liking Disco or whatever but it’s like, the show only got good after they went a billion years into the future and were allowed to thrive in their own sandbox, rather than being tied down in the TOS era.
I would have immediately enjoyed it more if they had made it a post-Nemesis starting point. It would have been more interesting to check in on the Terran Rebellion than it was to check in on the Empire. All that stuff was gross.
Strange New Worlds takes all the new aesthetics established by Disco and actually applies a Star Trek formula to it, and I’m much happier with that show. It wants to be where it is, and it wants to be what it’s doing. Intent and planning are everything with media. Disco lacked in both early on, but I’m glad it pivoted.
I’m amazed with how factually written this comment is when literally everything in it is based off of opinion and personal takes.
Everything is based on personal takes. You enjoying Disco is a personal take. It’s my personal take that it seems obvious that when Kurtzman says he doesn’t care about violating canon because it’s too complicated, that he never really wanted to be tied down to the TOS era.
The first few seasons of the show are bizarre and jerky. They introduced tech and concepts that were too advanced for the timeline that didn’t make a ton of sense. Section 31 is my big example of that, because they have TNG-levels of equipment with combadges and a hyper advanced fleet. They operate more or less out in the open which is the total opposite purpose of a secret police in anything other than a Romulan or Cardassian-style military dictatorship. It’s just so out of place. The final battle in that season literally gives me a headache with the five hundred billion ships and shuttles.
My problem with Season 1 was that all of the solutions presented are so un-Starfleet. I understand they are consulting with Mirror universe assholes but planting a bomb in the planet core and then handing the detonator to a rebel faction is like, one of the most insane solutions I’ve ever seen come up with as a Star Trek plot, and that’s including Sisko straight up destroying atmospheres of planets in his vendetta against Eddington and the Maquis.
So yeah, opinions and personal takes.
I’m interested as to why you enjoy the series, because I’m here to converse even if we disagree on the first two seasons.
Removed by mod
It’s my personal take that it seems obvious that when Kurtzman says he doesn’t care about violating canon because it’s too complicated, that he never really wanted to be tied down to the TOS era.
Kurtzman has never said that. I would really appreciate it if you could stick to actual quotes from people instead of your own personal opinion on what he meant and then paraphrasing to the point that it isn’t even what he originally said.
The first few seasons of the show are bizarre and jerky. They introduced tech and concepts that were too advanced for the timeline that didn’t make a ton of sense.
First off, no. They didn’t introduce any tech or concepts in Discovery that were more advanced. This is a common complaint that is based off of misunderstandings on canon. Holograms were talked about existing in this time period by Tuvok and in Enterprise we see holographic technology being found. To think that it would be developed on an early scale and be glitchy as hell (As seen) is totally within the bounds of reality and sensibility. The only group to have tech more advanced is Section 31, as you said.
Section 31 is my big example of that, because they have TNG-levels of equipment with combadges and a hyper advanced fleet.
Well, yeah. That’s how it works in reality too. Secretive organizations get access to way more advanced technology and utilizes it first and foremost for themselves. Then eventually as it is surpassed, it is released to lower levels and even civilians. This has been happening in America for the past like 80 years. It’s not remotely surprising that the super secretive organization that doesn’t have any real oversight and has more or less an unlimited budget is more advanced in certain respects. Also you call the fleet ‘hyper advanced’ but there really isn’t anything to show that they are. They are black, have automatic fighters recessed into the hull instead of in a bay and look different, that’s about it. One of the ships has holographic cloaking technology that we saw. Other than that? They don’t even have full tractor beams. They have a combo of the grapplers from Enterprise and tractor beams.
hey operate more or less out in the open which is the total opposite purpose of a secret police in anything other than a Romulan or Cardassian-style military dictatorship
That’s just a complete lie. They don’t operate out in the open at all. The only people that they make themselves known to (outside of people they hire like Ash Tyler) is Captain Pike, some of the Discovery crew (how far that goes is unknown) and Chancellor L’Rell. Pike has mandates that supercede even General Order One, Discovery had black badges on board in the first few episodes so they of course are read into what Section 31 is, and L’Rell made an agreement with the Federation behind the backs of the Klingons. Her knowing about Section 31 is the least of anyones issues here. The only other people you could argue are the Kelpians from the Second Season finale and there’s no evidence that they were told what Section 31 was. They could have just been told “attack these targets” with no information.
My problem with Season 1 was that all of the solutions presented are so un-Starfleet. I understand they are consulting with Mirror universe assholes but planting a bomb in the planet core and then handing the detonator to a rebel faction is like, one of the most insane solutions I’ve ever seen come up with as a Star Trek plot
You seem to be very casually forgetting a metric fuckload of things that Starfleet has done across TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. Starfleet isn’t some goody two shoes organization that you are trying to pretend that it is. They’re a blend of strong ideals and morals with often awful execution. Something that goes perfectly in line with Discovery. What sort of things do you say?
Well. Admiral Nechayev ordered Picard to genocide the Borg without any hesitation, yet we know they can be unplugged and returned to an individual state. That’s pretty fucked up. The creation of Section 31, or at least the allowance of it, is pretty fucked up. They violated treaties with the Romulans to try and develop cloaking. Stone in TOS offers to sweep Kirks accusation of murder under the rug. Or what about that time that they conspired to murder the fucking Klingon Chancellor and Federation President? Maybe that time with Red Squad that had blind loyalty to Starfleet to the point of getting themselves killed, showing every problem with Starfleet? You didn’t listen to any of the Maquis talking about the horrible shit Starfleet does and how it throws lives away for political gain? Forget about that time that they poisoned the changelings and were so dedicated to making sure that they were eliminated that a dude killed himself to prevent the cure from being handed over? Or are you forgetting about General Order 24 that allows a Captain to sterilize a planet? Or the Omega Protocol where every other rule is suspended to eliminate a threat, no matter what the hell anyone says? Putting their own ideals above anyone elses?
It’s perfectly Starfleet.
I’m interested as to why you enjoy the series, because I’m here to converse even if we disagree.
I’ve talked plenty about why I like it in the past and I have in other comments. I’m more interested in why you keep picking and choosing parts of Star Trek to fit your own personal narrative.
Edit: I added a bit of tech to the Section 31 part.
Stamets I love ya you big shroomhead but this comment felt unnecessarily hostile, and I didn’t want to be upset when I responded.
You’re right that Starfleet does tons of shitty things all the time all across the franchise. Maybe I am being overly picky about what is in line with their doctrine as they violate it constantly, as you’ve rightly pointed out. Ultimately it doesn’t matter. Star Trek can be inconsistent within itself and that’s fine.
I just want to thank you for the contributions you make to Lemmy every day between memes and posts. I appreciate you.
I stand by my comment. I’m only matching your tone and energy that you came in with at the start. You attacked the show in ways that were completely unfounded and cherry picking and I merely picked the argument apart. I didn’t appreciate opinion being painted as fact. People can not like the show all they want, that’s fine. But using opinion to try and color what the show truly is and isn’t? I find that unacceptable.
Appreciate you too.
I don’t hate it, I simply don’t care about it.
deleted by creator
The cursing
It is a single curse word.
the attitudes
Way too vague and I’m not sure what you mean
“Hollywood dark mode”
Which is a visual and stylistic choice to represent something specific in the story that changes as the story changes. Season 2 onwards is incredibly bright.
the crass timing
Again, incredibly vague and I have no idea what you mean
oh god the Klingons… they look like emo versions of Nosferatu
Which are overridden for the second season where they look way closer to normal.
See this is stuff that the video is explicitly talking about. A lot of complaints made about Discovery that don’t seem to be based on anything. The Klingon look I get and the visual dark look of the show I disagree with but get. Everything else though? I’m just not sure where it’s coming from.
It is a single curse word.
And we’ve had ‘fuck’ used in Picard more than once. I don’t remember swearing in SNW, but I wouldn’t be shocked to hear it.
I mean we didn’t have swearing in TOS or 80s/90s/00s Trek because it was on broadcast TV. This should just be a duh thing.
There is an ep of Voyager where you can clearly see B’Elanna Torres mouthing “fuck!” when she gets caught doing something she ain’t supposed ta. Always loved that for her.
and oh god the Klingons…YOU CAN’T RETCON THAT HARD!!!
People seriously get so caught up in their pedantry, they forget where they came from. Please dismount that high-horse that you have no business being on.
Edit: in case you’re wondering about the deleted comment under this, I was told to walk out of an airlock.
Removed by mod
First off, your convergence thing is just dumb. You’re trying to apply your own logical progression of what evolution is to something that doesn’t exist. Also you’re ignoring the fact that there was a virus that was given to the Klingons to change their looks.
Second, you are the one with toxic spewback here. They were being sarcastic but you went to an insane fucking level (see point 3). Not remotely allowed in this community which is why your comment is being removed.
Third, you just suggested someone kill themselves. Not remotely allowed in this community which is why you’ve been banned for 7 days. Take a timeout and don’t come into this community with that energy again, please.
Nice try, Star Trek Discovery producers. You got me to try season 1. Not fooling me again.
If I wanted to watch Star Wars, then I would have watched that instead.
You got me to try season 1
You probably watched Season 1 of TNG though which is just as bad and twice as long. It astounds me how many people are willing to cave after like 13 episodes and say “NAH. GIVING UP. NEVER AGAIN.” but were willing to sit through stuff like Code of Honor with TNG in Season 1. I mean no Trek show before SNW ever had a solid first season. Most shows in general don’t. Judging it based off of that is just silly.
Removed by mod
I found every season stylistically jarring on first watch, and it made it hard to just enjoy the first time through, especially since it was the world’s first look at what new Trek was going to be like. But on second/third watch, all of the seasons except 1 are honestly pretty good. I’d take Seasons 3 or 4 of Discovery over, say, Season 1 of TNG, all of Enterprise, or season 2 of Voyager, any day. I think for me it’s a little overwhelming on first watch because it’s A - pretty high concept B - visual smorgasboard C - fast-paced. They’ll drop some important ideas or concepts really quickly then it’s back to the action. There’s no time to let ideas settle in, so you’re just suffering whiplash the whole time going from high concept to explosion to high concept to emotional moment to explosion to high concept. It’s honestly not bad, I actually enjoy media that’s too complicated to really grok the first time around, and it seems clear the fast-paced, high-concept intensity of the story is entirely part of the point, but I think this contributes to its lack of appreciation. Most people are probably gonna need to watch it a few times for the stories to really sink in.
I can throw on reruns of older Treks and kind of relax to them. I need to like, get hyped to watch Discovery.
Tons of issues, won’t deny that, but if people can look back fondly on Enterprise, I suspect they’ll be look back fondly on Discovery.
There’s 2 ways I believe you can view and criticize art, you can criticize it for what it is, or for what it isn’t.
I see a lot of the discourse and criticism around Discovery being much more focused on what it isn’t. That isn’t a fault of the show itself, that is a fault of the watcher.
You can love the Mona Lisa, but if you go and look at Starry Night and say “I don’t like it because it doesn’t have a woman in it”, that’s ridiculous. Is it a valid opinion? Sure, in the sense that any opinion on something subjective is. But the fact you don’t like it because it doesn’t have a woman isn’t the fault of the art or the artist.
Art is viewed subjectively, it can only be interpreted that way. Your beliefs and feelings towards any art is informed by who you are as a person, your experiences, etc. It’s why I hate the need fans of every fandom feels to compare and argue about which iteration of any series is “better” than another. What TNG was to me isn’t going to 100% line up with what it was to you, art is interpreted, those interpretations are unique to every person.
It seems a lot of people went into Discovery expecting it to fit their view of what “Star Trek” is. That’s fine, but saying the show is “objectively” bad because it doesn’t fit their expectations of what “Star Trek” is, is absurd and reductive. It’s not the fault of the art.
I don’t have time right now to watch the video, but if you’re not on their, Stamets, he’ll need to update it to add an 11th reason
He’s not. But then again he doesn’t know I exist lol
I just finished season 4 tonight. It’s great. Not perfect, but no Trek ever was. It’s also delightfully full of queer people!
Can’t wait for season 5!
STD lost me early on, but I liked Stamets and Tilly, and Lorca was interesting. I wish they’d’ve introduced it as new IP rather than calling it a Trek show, but eh. Different strokes. I got my SNW and I’m happy.
It’s DSC, not STD. Please stick to the naming structure of the shows over the years and either go with DSC (as shown in the show) or DIS. It makes absolutely no sense to call it STD.
Sorry my good person. No offense intended.
It’s just frustrating considering how often that ‘acronym’ is thrown at Discovery as an outright insult. It also just does not make any sense when looked at from any other acronym naming scheme.
