A question about this series: Can I look without having seen the original? I would like to see the original, but it is very long. Maybe if this series generates a fascination with the franchise, I would see little by little the original :)

It's works perfectly as stand-alone. There are several references to the other shows, but nothing requires previous knowledge. The only thing you'd need to know is that the Earth is part of a Federation of Planets, and Starfleet runs their space exploration/military program. And even that is probably explained at some point.

Yeah, it's a prequel, bringing in new people was no doubt one of their priorities.

Thanks for the answers. Then I will see it :)

You can... but why would you? It sucks in every possible way. To someone who doesn't know Trek it will only misrepresent it in the worst ways imaginable. And the original isn't "very long", it only has three seasons. Unless you mean all the previous shows, but that shouldn't concern you for the start. Just watch The Original Series. It's just three season and it's still a great, great show.

The Original Series is not only infinitely better, it's also a far more easy and natural place to start. Discovery exists in this weird space where it doesn't fit with the previous shows at all, and yet constantly refrences them and brings in characters from the classic show.

With 25 episodes each. It's pretty long.

Plus it's from a time when there were a lot less commercials cutting into the run time of a one hour episode.

Indeed.
Newbies should be warned not to watch any remastered episodes* though, the CGI in the 60s series looks very out of place and will ruin the experience. Same can be said of TNG Blu-ray versions, although it's not as bad there, as they didn't recreate every external shot.

If one sticks to DVD versions, those are probably the best things to get and 99,99% close to the original versions.


* = Star Trek: The Motion Picture Director's Cut is the only exception where it's actually a good idea to get that, as it has some scenes which were originally meant to be in the movie, but were left out as they ran out of time to produce them.

Yeah, it's just too much of a time investment.

I for one, if I was going to watch older Trek past the handful of episodes I watched over the years, would maybe try Next Generation or Deep Space Nine. Were it not for Star Trek fans themselves saying the first couple seasons of those shows are terrible.

I don't care how good they say a show gets after a while. I'm not going to watch 50 hours of what they themselves consider to be bad television in order to get there. Maybe if I was watching it week to week like a lot of those fans did it wouldn't bother me as much.

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. I will try to see then "Star Trek: The original series" first

I honestly wouldn't listen to this advice. They're well watchable, it just takes a while for things to get up to speed because at least the first season tends to be about building up characters and introducing concepts. If you're just looking for an interesting sci-fi episode now and then it's absolutely worth it and, assuming you enjoy them anyway which is well possible, you know it'll only get better.

The main problem with seasons like that is that they feel out of place after you've seen the rest of the series because characters and concepts are still getting molded into place. That's makes it difficult for people looking to revisit the episodes but it really shouldn't affect a newcomer to the series.

I'd hardly call a three season series long, but anyway I don't see how it matters. Every episode is a separate story. It's not like he has to watch the whole thing or needs to watch them all in a short period of time.

You know, I'm really not sure if it is. If they wanted the show to be as accesible to new audience as possible they wouldn't bring in Sarek as a key supporting character, or Harry Mudd, or make the main character Spock's "sister" and make the old USS Defiant a plot point. I honestly don't know what the intention here was.

I hate TOS remaster. Like you say, it's out of place and it just reeks of fakeness. It's like watching Cassablanca with a mew soundtrack with modern pop songs. Leave the show as it was. And it's Star Trek. It's about the plot and characters, not the effects.

That is one of the most radical improvements in terms of Director's Cuts I know. It makes a pretty average movie into one of the best in the entire franchise.

That doesn't make it inaccessible. Such things are just throwbacks for the fans of the series. In any standalone episode the same kind of things are explained with single sentences explaining it's a renowned historical person/ship etc and the story just moves on with people watching it simply accepting that fact.

I know it's not "innaccessible" but it's so full of those things it doesn't really feel aimed at a new audience. A throwback for the fans was McCoy's cameo in the TNG pilot. He didn't stick around as a supporting character for multiple episodes. I know a person can watch it and get it without prior knowledge of Trek, but it doesn't feel, to me at least, like that was the target audience. Or rather, the show seems very confused about it's target audience, at times seemingly rejecting everything Trek was, both in style and continuity, and at others relying on established characters and even relatively obscure plot points from previous shows.