Sorry, but I just couldn't sit by thins. Because this is complete BS. I started to watch the franchise from TNG. And DS9 and Enterprise were logical and organic continuation of the show. I bet noone would denounce Voyager for Doctor and Seven, because they are the only good part of it.

Discovery is on the other hand is total crap. Not only it doesn't fit the canon with idiotic Klingons and shroom drive, it's alos poorly written compared to Dark Matter (another edgy space opera), not just Trek.

No, this is the truth. Literally EVERY first season was considered bad by the fans,

And I'm from TOS. And it is wide known fact that: From [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series]wiki[/url]

So, this series had bad ratings that there was need for a fan's campaign to continue the show to the third season.

And had so bad reception comparing to TNG that CBS decided not to release them on Blu-Ray in FullHD like TOS or TNG. They was afraid, that this is simply won't be profitable at all. Oh, and: Source: https://www.trektoday.com/news/010602_02.shtml

Reminds me today critics of Discovery. :) By the way, this "morale gray" characters comparing to TNG was one of the fans hatred towards DS9 back then

And about Enterprise "logic". In one episode (don't remember which one exactly) there was a moment when starship was heavily damaged and from the celling started to fall not metallic parts but rocks, sand, earth and concrete. I never thought that in starfleet they build their ships like modern buildings! XD

No wonder it failed and was cancelled after 4th season: http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/enterprise-failed-star-trek.html

The same things was said about EVRY first season. And even laters seasons in some cases. Even for first season of TNG.

That's exactly my point. If fans were against TNG or DS9 they wouldn't start campaign to renew the show.

With Discovery it's the opposite.

You seem to utterly fail to grasp the fact that ultimately the problem with Discovery is the most important thing about the show- the writing. Yes, every previous show had it's detractors and was met with some measure of controversy. But you can't equate the moral ambiguity of DS9 with the extremely poor writing on Discovery. DS9 took time and great care in getting it's well developed characters to where moral ambiguity can be explored in depth. Discovery is just throwing shit against the wall with no regard for logic, internal consistency or characters, instead relying on piss poor attempts at shock value.

And no one is pretending that the old show were flawless, never had a weak episode or made a bad call. The fans are merely saying that they were great despite of that. Discovery is not doing anything to warrant that kind of leniency.

It was an ok-ish episode, although, I suspect Frakes had something to do with it. It had a good twist, but come on, this is Star Trek we are talking about, so we know that Dr. Hugh Culber is not really dead. It was also weird seeing the crew from Discovery be on Defiant as well. Guess they could not use those extras from the pilot for more episodes.
I did like that Stamets prediction about Tilly being the captain was true. Nothing else to say.

I think you mean on the Shenzhou? Yeah, I noticed that too. Odd, but among all the other stuff I shrugged at it.

Discovery is, actually, have good ratings and already renewed for the second season.

It is actually, the same in case of fans comparing new series to its predecessor. Predecessor always seems much more nice series and with a good writing. Always.

Exactly:

TNG - Hey, TOS were better! Where is my Kirk and girls in mini? And wrtining in season 1 ns extremely bad comparing to TOS! (Btw, first season of TNG is considered by many trekkies the worst of all seven of this series)

DS9 and VOY: They are nowhere near like TNG! This grey characters in nowhere near good defined characters of TOS or TNG! And writing is much less interesting than TNG!

ENT: This is worse than ever! Cancel that now!!!

And now we have DIS... Every time when new Star Trek arrives happens exactly the same thing: fans start to cry that new one is bad and old ones (which they considered extremely bad a few months before) is, suddenly, is now became a excellent series!

Exactly the same: DIS is new series and old fans in enraged that they not like old movies. The thing that whole world is gone forward from that time - is not important to the fans. They demand separate episodes, but now is continuous stories is popular in TV series: Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Expanse, True Detective and many others. DIS is just trying to be modern, to get a new fans. Because old ones is just not enough to support it.

And yes, I can't watch Orville because it just TNG with "jokes" which I don't think is funny: click here

I've seen all that already! In TNG! And I don't want to watch this again (this time with "jokes"), I want something new! This is why I liked Discovery and didn't liked Orville.

Sorry, I should not have bothered with you at all. It's clearly utterly useless, as you simply refuse to address any of what we're actually talking about at all.

The format of the show isn't the problem (although it doesn't help Discovery stand out in a world of bleak longform shows), it's the writing. Discovery has five measly characters and fails to grasp the most basic fundamentals of storytelling. It tells a time loop story from the perspective of someone inside the loop while the real hero is saving the day off-screen. In the pilot the initial thought of a mutiny and the implementation of it occur within seconds of each other, making the protagonist look like she has a major disorder. The Klingon scenes have been known to cure insomnia. These writers, man. It's like watching a McDonalds fry cook being employed by a Michelin star restaurant.

And what exactly I should address? Totally subjective statements "this is bad writing", " this is bad at all" or "this is not the Star Trek I was thinking it should be"? I, for example, stated some objective statements like "continuous story is now standard and all modern TV series with good ratings (list of TV shows) have this type of story instead of different episodes like it was in 80s". Or "here is a video showing that Orville is just almost the same as TNG and DIS is better because it is something new in Star Trek universe". Or "here is ratings showing that previous seasons had bad ratings when they arrived". But you don't want to address this objective statements (objective because there is comparable moments, digits and so on) but prefer to discuss "writing" and "Star Trek likeness" which is different for each person and totally subjective. For example, writing can be bad for one person, but good for another.

If you want a good discussion, post exact problems which can be addressed: ratings, recycled ideas, and we may even discuss the "plot holes" but until season isn't ended - they still can be explained.

Yeah, because that's what we mind about STD, continuous story...

Yeah, because this thread is not full of pages and pages detailing every moronic nonsense in every episode since the show started. There are oly those nebulous, subjective statements.

Continous story is not the issue. The story sucking ass is.

No, I don't, because I don't care about the popularity of the show. I'm talking about it's quality. One has nothing to do with the other.

I started to read first pages and there is a lot about Trump/modern politics and other things but not DIS.

On your opinion. On mine - it is ok. Not great, but not worse than first episodes of other seasons. If you write (or give me a link to your post because I'm not really want to read whole pages of Trump followers/haters war) why it is bad - then we can discuss it.

But creators of this series is. If people doesn't watch it - why cares if this show is good? "Quality" won't pay salaries to the makers and won't feed their families. You may be very surprised, but making of TV series is just another business. It is for making money. And ratings was almost always a main reason to drop show or make a new season.

Bullshit. We're discussing episodes from page 1. I'm not going to go through the whole thread linking posts for your lazy ass for the privilage of having a discussion you're obviously unwilling and/or uncapable of having.


Great, go talk to them.

I tell you something I really like about this story they've chosen. First off, obviously they've set up the chance for these bigoted warlike Klingons to come into contact with these bigoted warlike Humans. The other Klingon dude, seemingly now struggling with his identity, and whom, from where the plot is right now, could fairly easily get to having developed an enmity for the mirror universe humans he may well spend time fighting, might get in a situation where he chooses the kinder, more reasonable humans over these other humans that he recognizes to be more evocative of his own kind. There could probably be some will they won't they/plot twist and character moment stuff to come out of that.

But that's the obvious thing.

What really interests me in what they've set up here is what happens with Lorka. You see, Lorka is now in a position where he is dealing with people who are purposed even more one-dimensionally and toxic of character than he is. You would think this will lead him to a point where he has to look in the mirror after some character development resultant from coming into contact with war-mongering and emotionally unsound actions the likes of which he himself carries out in the name of his war on the Klingons, at the hands of the mirror universe humans.

Instead though, I think the writers could choose a path where they slowly let it become clear that Lorka is actually quite unfazed by this turn of events, as he now has an enemy even more insidious than the one he had previously. His war, his whale, just got even bigger than it was.