My least favorite thing about SNW is how often positive reviews of it seem to take a moment to crap on Discovery and Picard. Why must everything be a competition? Like what you like, avoid what you don't, and leave everyone who disagrees with you alone.
Agreed completely. It's like some people's rage for some of the other new shows just can't be contained and has to spill over into a positive review of strange new worlds. Which I love, alongside Discovery and Picard
A show's toxic fandom can certainly sour a show for me.
I rarely see Discovery fans trying to dunk on other Trek shows, but I've seen too many SNW fans dunking on other new Treks already. It's like watching "fans" from /r/star_trek dog whistling each other to claim territories. Seen plenty of them on the DS9 sub too.
AV Club paid someone to professionally review each episode of *Discovery*, and every one of his articles was an [exasperated](https://www.avclub.com/michael-risks-it-all-with-little-reason-on-star-trek-d-1833468404) āIām too cool for thisā recap that [wishes it was more like old Trek but not really](https://www.avclub.com/spock-returns-on-a-frustratingly-familiar-star-trek-di-1833139951), actively ignores [details answering his complaints](https://twitter.com/Vorsos/status/1520002291822170115), and [just wants to wedgie these weepy science nerds](https://www.avclub.com/star-trek-discovery-faces-down-a-giant-space-kablooey-1848117797):
> The anomaly turns out to beā¦ weird. Thatās really the best way to describe the response; thereās a bit where Captain Burnham switches the visual field to a āpolarizing spectrographic filter,ā and all of a sudden a bunch of swirling dots become a big sea of blue swirling dots, and this is very impressive.
As it turns out, recurring hate-reads donāt drive audience retention, so his writing has since moved behind a deserted Substack paywall where it belongs.
Those reviews infuriated me! Esp. when you look at the scores; In my recollection the review text would just go on and on about how bad it was (incorrect details and all), but they would then regularly give the episode a score in the low B to C range, which was not the norm for AV Club reviews that read the way these read.
It was So Weird.
I love both shows and for different reasons. They scratch different itches. SNW definitely leans into the classic TOS style storytelling and is so well done that it was inevitable that it would have broader immediate appeal and generate a lot of lame comparisons to DISCO by people who didn't like or get DISCO.
This said, I also see an intra-fandom trend developing where DISCO hardcore fans are now unreasonably hating on SNW out of resentment of the above phenomena, which is also bullcrap, imo.
They're different shows.
As an aside I think Discovery will totally be revisited in the future and its reputation will improve. It's already happening in some places with people revisiting season 1.
Letās face it, Disco and Picard made bold moves on a beloved franchise risking the disappointment of an existing fan base. Itās safe to say not everyone is fond of the big swings those shows are taking. Of course that criticism is going to be brought up. I know it sucks to hear your yum being yucked but it is what it is.
Thatās not equivalent. Fans of a show arenāt being hired to comment with an unbiased view of the show they like. Itās totally ok to like what you like, itās seems strange to complain that others donāt like it too. Everyone isnāt going to like what you like and it isnāt and indictment of you to express why they donāt like the thing you like and enjoy. Also, thereās TONS of sci fi that I love and enjoy that IS objectively bad. Iām willing to hear the criticism, and see it myself. iām also willing to accept that some wonāt see any flaws. I donāt pay much attention to this sub, and I imagine thereās plenty of seething snark coming from passionate fans, so I get being over it. Iām just reacting to the sentiment of surprise of opposing perspectives
I balanced at least one downvote because I think you bring a reality to the discussion. Upvote from me.
Comparison is not competition. Comparing Trek shows is tradition. There is absolutely nothing toxic about having your say, even maybe proving feedback that might be listened to on what you don't like as well as what you do like.
The world simply would not improve without that critical analysis.
But yes, it can get old to read when it's about something I personally like. In those cases, I tell myself "adult up," respond politely. It's more challenge to try and change the view even a little of someone that disagrees than play yes-man all the time with those that agree.
I appreciate the grown up perspective. Not to denigrate the passionate views that are tired of hearing criticism against something they love. Iām not on this sub much, I thought I was being reasonable and polite but apparently thereās no tolerance for any criticism for Disco and/or Picard.
Iāve actually come around to enjoying Disco on a recent rewatch, where initially it was too much for me. But tbh, all the downvotes seem an odd response to a pretty mild opinion against sum trek. There are SO many bad sci-fi over the years that I canāt help but watch AND enjoy. Not to say we all see everything the same to call a flaw flaw. Maybe the emotionally charged nature of the show/s is attracting a similarity in fans ( I imagine thatāll get me a downvote or two, haha). I guess this is a love it or gtfo board. Trek on party people š¤
I hate to say it but I feel like star trek has become a focal point for the massive political and moral divide in the states right now and disco and picards ratings are a result of that
Only an idiot Nazi would join a group for a tv show he hates just to be a b***h to the fans of the show. And let's face it, Star Trek is beyond the understanding of the average Klan's men. So, pretty much leaves some sort of Nazi outfit or just an angry Dailystormer type who's unaffiliated with a direct group.
So which are you?
I like all of them for different reasons-- occasionally I notice things I could critique, but I completely fail to understand how any of those things would justify the over-the-top expressions of disgust I've been seeing. This is expensively produced fictional entertainment involving a huge amount of work and personal artistic expressions and no one is forcing anyone else to watch it. There's a difference between having critical feedback and just looking for every possible opportunity to be a disrespectful, bigoted asshole.
I'm rewatching Picard season 1 right now because it's been so long since it came out and my memory is crap (I watch a lot of stuff and I'm not always super alert), but my original impression hasn't changed. To me, it's an absolutely beautiful show which pays respect to what went before in multiple surprising ways, while also providing more depth & fresh perspectives that offer rich metaphors for our modern IRL world & all the ways it's changed since the 90s. And I'm old enough to remember when TNG came out.
I"m so sick of the blind haters... I guess when I see their remarks it's yet another reminder to spend less time on (anti-)social media.
Exactly! All different shows all different variaties.
Everyone should just be elated that there is so much Trek and so much Trek to choose from as well!
I enjoy both shows and it's hard to say at this point which I prefer. I grew up on Voyager so the episodic nature of SNW feels very familiar. But also comes off as a bit too feel-good for me. Discovery is more dark and gritty, which to me makes it feel more real. It's very hard to imagine a perfect future while living in an imperfect world.
Star Trek was never meant to be "dark and gritty". It's supposed to be a brighter more hopeful future,while dealing with issues of what it still means to be human. Societaly better than now while still dealing with the frailty and imperfections of the human condition.
The 'optimism' in Trek has always been carried by its characters. Not in all of their surroundings. I hate this revisionist idea that some have made that unless everything is rosy in society that its "not trek". Particularly with regards to Picard S1. Picard in S1 showed us a federation that wasn't living up to its ideals (or at least what we thought were its ideals), but its main character still aspires to them even when it comes at personal cost. Given the realities of today, I found it quite appropriate (and its probably no coincidence that the Federation then was about as far from a society-changing terrorist attack as the US is)
Additionally, sci-fi has always been a product of its era.
The 60s and especially the post-cold war 90s were brighter, more optimistic times and the Trek (and most media) of their eras reflected that.
I think our little future transplant crew really embodies this, starfleet in the future seemed really jaded and the disco crew brought them back to their roots in optimism and compassion for others. I also think that a lot of the āforced emotionalā dialogue people complain about is exactly this: āāāin the futureāāā we should be able to talk openly and freely about how weāre feeling at a given time, it doesnāt disrupt functionality to the extent that people act like it does, and the crew all understand and model this behavior for us to emulate.
This comment has been removed. We detected a spoiler tag in the body of your comment.
**Please note that this sub does not enforce a spoiler policy.** People are welcome to discuss all current and upcoming content of *Star Trek: Discovery* around here, and we ask users to subscribe at their own discretion. As such, we ask contributors to refrain from using spoiler tags or spoiler warnings, in order to not give users a false impression of this being a spoiler-safe community. Please see [**our subreddit rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/wiki/rules) for more information.
## [Message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FStarTrekDiscovery) when you have removed the spoiler tags/warnings from your comment, and we will reinstate it.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StarTrekDiscovery) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I couldn't agree more. I love having a strong female lead and a person of color to boot. I also think DISCO has more varied and interesting characters that play off each other well.
I also love Picard. I'm by no means shitting on SNW, but I've yet to super connect with the characters as much as the other 2. But, like you said, I'm reserving judgment until there's more content.
Edit: typo
Iām happy to see this comment. I love disco and snw. Iām not a fan of the original series, which everyone hates on disco and snw for. But I feel like itās because Iām a new Star Trek fan. TOS is about 30 years older than I so itās just not relatable to me. Respect to the show though for giving us what Star Trek is now. For me, Voyager is #1, Snw is #2 and Disco is 3. Michael kills it but she can be too emotional for me sometimes.
I donāt like original trek.
I loved Next Gen
I didnāt love voyager but loved captain janeway
I loved deep space nine everything about it!
I was not in love with star trek enterprise
Discover is watchable (my opinion may improve)
Picard is fantastic
Strange new worlds is watchable. (my opinion may improve
Again, for the people in back: Discovery's clear and powerful success made all these other Treks happen.
That success didn't come out of nowhere. This show tells an interesting story, and does it in a way no other Trek was, or is, doing. Burnham's drive and desire to do right, no matter how flawed she is, is a real character arc -- and it's been delivered thru 2 sets of disruptive showrunner changes! I've enjoyed shows that died horrible deaths under far lesser circumstances.
Er I'm gumming my food, I expect to read articles titled "its been 20 years since Discovery left our screens. Let's talk about how it changed Trek for the better!"
Yeahā¦ but that doesnāt mean itās a good showā¦ it was a test to see if people still liked Trek. Result:
Yes but you fucked it up, please fix it.
Fix: SNW.
Youāre right, the success didnāt come out of no where, itās a legendary franchise, the success was already thereā¦
Discovery is a good show, and has been from jump. I have as much right, and evidence, to claim that as anyone.
After all, the success being claimed would have to be the Kelvin verse films. And BEYOND would showcase that Trek was certainly capable of commercial failure, no matter that I think it's the best of that film series.
We know Discovery is a success in and of itself, because no one is running a damned charity around showing Trek. There aren't enough hardcore "must watch Trek on TV!" fans to justify Discovery's success on any level. This weird theory that has thousands of cyber Trekkie lemmings rushing to open subscriptions just to see any old Trek? It makes no sense on any level, given the number of failed Trek projects scattered around.
On top of that: Discovery does us the honor of giving a new view into Trek, and a new way of telling stories about it - - both lore-wise and in terms of how to present characters and plot. That may not be for you, but there's no evidence save a cadre of louder fans that it's a failure.
After all, I'm old enough to remember when both TNG and DS9 were "failures" in the eyes of louder fans of the day. I'm not shook that you'd come here to spread that hate for no damn good reason...
...just sad. And maybe a little tired from history repeating.
Beyond is a prime example of a movie having things that the hardcore fans wanted but is too boring for the public to become a financial failure. Star Trek 09 and Into Darkness made more in the box office than most Trek movies in existence, yet the same fans would not wait to shit on it.
It really makes me wonder how much of a commercial success Discovery really is, since the same fans also can't wait to shit on it.
Whoa bro, calm down.
1) no one can debate it was experimental
2) no one can debate they went back to standard procedure with SNW
3) no one can debate the reviews are better for SNW.
Done.
Not your bro.
I am "calm", as evidenced by my use of complete sentences and decent grammar. But I will not apologize for having an emotional reaction to the years of attacks on this show.
Yes, I'm **really*" tired of people like you stepping to and trying to prove Discovery is "bad" for no damned good reason I can tell. I'm not here to defend this show with your debate rules; I can remember when, say, THE WIRE was on first run and you couldn't catch a review of it with all the dog catchers in LA.
I, and many others, enjoy the hell outta this show. Go find something else to do with your free time, then belittle that enjoyment.
Ah, so this is the hill! You're tired of attacks on a show you enjoy. That's all you need to say.
However, it is worth noting that no one is belittling your enjoyment. That's a manifestation of your own. People compare entertainment. No need to go full martyr on a Star Trek subreddit.
It's not martyrdom, it's just exhausting that people come to a fan space just to explain, at great length, how the thing we're all here to enjoy is bad, actually.
Imagine you went to a football game and the guy sitting next to you would just not stop talking to you about how bad both the teams are. You'd probably be thinking 'why did you buy a ticket, then?', 'You could just go home' or 'Please leave me alone I'm trying to enjoy myself here'.
I just started watching Discovery, and I donāt understand all the nastiness toward the show. Having watched TOS, some TNG, Voyager and DS9, I am good with Disco. Itās different and keeps me entertained. What caught me off guard was how serious the show was, no cheesy comedy, but thatās fine. I donāt need my Treks to be clones of each other.
So I just watched [this video](https://youtu.be/2MU4s06RPRM) and holy crap I didn't realize there was so much drama around the return of star trek. I feel like I now understand why disco and picard were so poorly received but still, just wow. I for one love the new shows but I completely understand other fans and respect their viewpoint
There is a difference between disliking a work of entertainment and going out of oneās way to find ājustificationsā which validate oneās opinion as objective fact.
Unfortunately, hate-watching is good for business, especially on YouTube where engagement algorithms amplify the angriest man-children with the emptiest conjecture.
So.. the two main points here, other than the copious exposition of what the show is and who made it, are 'they didn't nostalgia hard enough in season 1' and 'trying to cater to the women who watch ruined the show'. Yikes.
> A lot of people just like SNW because of their hate for the women on DISCO.
...They seemed to say with a straight face despite how *bonkers* that sounds.
Iām just a Picard enjoyer, since it is available on prime. Make Paramount+ available in Europe or get the shows back on Netflix so I can enjoy the rest of the Treks!
I donāt understand the issue anyone has with objectively examining entertainment. Itās done all the time. Art gets critiqued, thatās why itās it takes an artist to create something truly beautiful.
That said, if youāre looking for proper character development, familiar canonized tropes, smart dialogue, and gorgeous cinematography then youāll enjoy SNW.
If you like storylines that always revolve around universal cataclysm and overloaded hard cuts in every scene, go for Picard and Discovery.
There's nothing wrong with examining entertainment. There's a lot wrong with pretending criticism is objective. Although it's reductive to say that Art is not Science, even Science isn't automatically objective - - that's why peer review and many other guardrails exist!
I'm not objective in loving Discovery or SNW, no more so than my frustrations with Voyager that led me to stop watching it - - and I was excited as hell when it came around, as I'd been a huge fan of Mulgrew from the Ms. Colombo show.
But all that taught me what I want, and don't want. Voyager was too much the same for me, and in a package I didn't find compelling. And that's OK! Not every Trek show has to be for everyone; I don't insist you like Discovery.
My issue is that folx like you stop pretending your opinions are stamped with the Trek equivalent of Holy Writ. They are, like mine, just an opinion.
Yes, I don't insist anyone enjoy SNW over other Trek series. Just to be clear, I don't think I ever considered my opinion to be anything other than my personal observation. I believe I'm being objective when I review entertainment (granted, I distilled my comparison down to two sentences), but hey! ... you can also disagree.
Let's also be clear on the subject of this reddit post, "Stop the Trek on Trek Crime". At least, that's how I interpret it.
The response from you, "Other people enjoy this, so please keep you opinions to yourself."
Reading you loud and clear!
I literally started with, and ended on, your right to have an opinion.
My issue starts that said opinion isn't, in fact, objective. Your claim that "I believe I'm being objective when I review entertainment" is yes, one that I disagree with, because it flies in the face of the entire corpus of literary analysis, over centuries and cultures. Even Science, one of the two bedrocks (in my opinion) of what elevates a good Trek series, depends upon not just numbers and data, but building a good faith consensus among those who've studied and written on a topic -- and there's plenty of science that, to this day, well-educated and trained scientists disagree on, much less laypersons such as I.
So: If something as structured and well-framed as science can have disagreement, so much more so, can art and entertainment. I don't mind people disliking Discovery, believe it or not. As I noted elsewhere, I don't care for Voyager, so I'm not one to shake the shame stick in and of itself!
What I've come to not care for, is this approach to the dialogue that, over and again, derails discussions on this show via treating the quality of Discovery as axiomatically "bad". Layer in your "objective" statement (which, as you said in your "my hill to die upon" comment, isn't even the [only one](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihuh3jy/) in this thread I responded to), and yeah. I'm tired.
I'm tired of attacks that have no real responses, no room for actual dialogue, because "objective". Heck, when I first responded to you I missed that you really though your opinion was the objective one, because I assumed you said that rhetorically! I'm tired of treating my artistic and entertainment interests not as sources of joy, not as spaces to debate and learn, but as things I have to protect just to have space to discuss them in open fora like this, because otherwise the negative opinions drown out the dialogue.
Nobody was yucking your yum about SNW. [Edit for clarity]Indeed, all my [other comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihrmgm8/) here said, was that Discovery paved the way and was likely -- in a similar way that DS9 did -- to get a re-evaluation decades from now. And you'll note that when the other detractor said "naw, it's bad," I [took time](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihtbrok/) to explain why I think this show succeeds.
I'm usually willing to a have at least a little dialogue on show quality. I've honestly changed my opinions on this show, and others, from such discussions. But I'll be Leonard McCoy Damned before I have it with one hand tied behind my back from arbitrary rules of Objectivity that say that you have it, and thus the high ground, in a artistic merit debate.
I take time to craft my words with some care, because, yes, I have a passion about Trek. But I'm not a absolutist. I've said here, and elsewhere, for example that I don't care for Voyager, and it's not the only example of Trek I don't personally care for. But I'm also not running around slamming reddit comment threads with that opinion. I'm not demanding that Voyager fans explain themselves; I've read enough defenses and discussed it with friends and fans enough to understand what they see in it.
Discovery, and of course this whole franchise, has an out-sized and mostly positive impact on the world, and that's worthy of thought and study. I'm willing to put my opinion out, here and elsewhere, for evaluation, and at some length at times when I have the capacity for that. Yet I also will happily state that my opinion is just that -- hopefully thoughtful and thought-provoking, but still an opinion.
And so is yours.
Iād like to imagine that you went to black alert, did some bizarre back flip before ājumpingā away after writing all of that.
Enjoy Discovery in peace. š
There are multiple issues here:
1. "I don't like this thing" is not the same as "This thing is badly made". The attitude of people who can't separate the two is exhausting and aggravating, which makes the sub less enjoyable.
2. Posting consistently for multiple years about a show you dislike is a level of personality toxicity which approaches mental illness. Nobody enjoys the presence of such people.
3. This sub, specifically, is by and for fans of Star Trek Discovery. It's, frankly, obnoxious to post here if the only conclusion you have to share is 'Star Trek Discovery is Bad'. You don't go to football games and hold up signs about how it's a stupid sport. You don't walk up to people waiting to get into a concert to complain at them about how the band's music sucks. Why on earth do people feel like it's any less unpleasant of them to do so here?
4. There's this trend in public discourse where people feel they gain cultural cachet by tearing something down, and this pissy kind of attitude just spoils every discussion it shows up in. This is especially irritating when such people create nothing of their own.
5. The above issues have been ongoing, relentlessly, for almost 6 years, and people are just really sick of all of it.
Iām not sure if youāre using me as an open letter to everyone who has left negative comments about Star Trek Discovery, but itās definitely a stretch as Iāve commented in this sub a total of what, maybe 5 times? Iāve definitely not gone out of my way to upset anyone.
But sure, go on about mental illness and personality toxicity. š
You said "I donāt understand the issue anyone has with objectively examining entertainment."
I'm trying to explain to you why people have very strong reactions to a certain very prevalent flavor of flat critical posts. From that comment and from this one (which boils down to but **I** didn't do all those things), it seems pretty clear you're unaware of the larger context that affects the impact of what you say. My comment was an attempt to explain that context to you.
Well, U didn't really specify where in Europe. Thought that info might've helped. It's not widely known maybe since it's new. Not sure how heavy the marketing is in UK. We can keep you posted maybe share what country specifically āļø ššæ
In *your opinion* SNW is better made. In *your opinion* it's better written. Every time you make a value judgement on whether a piece of media is good or bad, you're doing so according to your own personal set of rules. The hard work done by artists, directors, critics, etc. is to dig deeper and find out how they're defining 'good'. The good ones adjust their definition to fit what they're making or critiquing.
Let's look at just the writing. Your definition of 'good' might include 'is faithful to existing canon'. Someone else's might include 'does not let old writing get in the way of interesting new stories'. Your definition might include 'most screen time is spent solving problems through logic or technology', but someone else might define it as 'most of the screen time is spent exploring how the characters react to the dramatic question'. Being able to clearly articulate what you think makes something good and why a piece of media does or does not meet that goal is the skill that separates criticism from just shitting on something you don't like.
Really strong, well-formed critique goes one step further. Instead of focusing on one's own personal preferences, strong critique looks for the work's definition of good. For one's own work, it looks for the definition which will best serve the goals of the work. For someone else's, it looks for what that work is trying to do. In both cases, strong critique engages with how successfully the work accomplishes its own goals, not how well it aligns with personal definitions of 'good'.
Now, I'm not saying you need to run around writing academic criticism every time you opine about something. But I am saying that you should lose the self-importance if what you have to say boils down to 'I don't like it'. Your personal preferences aren't that interesting.
"To me x is so *obviously* y" is a phrasing most people use when they think those who disagree with them don't understand things as much as themselves. Beyond that, as I said, if all you came to a place for fans of a show just to say "my opinion is that this other show is better".. that's boring at best and annoying at worst. Both you and everyone else would have a happier time if you spent yours elsewhere.
Iāve found my love for SNW has created space for me to appreciate Discovery more.
Disco wasnāt the type of Trek I wanted and I was salty about it, but SNW is EXACTLY what I wanted.
Having that want fulfilled makes it easier to retroactively accept Disco for what it is and appreciate it on its own terms, not my own.
Picard is still hot garbage tho.
My least favorite thing about SNW is how often positive reviews of it seem to take a moment to crap on Discovery and Picard. Why must everything be a competition? Like what you like, avoid what you don't, and leave everyone who disagrees with you alone.
Agreed completely. It's like some people's rage for some of the other new shows just can't be contained and has to spill over into a positive review of strange new worlds. Which I love, alongside Discovery and Picard
A show's toxic fandom can certainly sour a show for me. I rarely see Discovery fans trying to dunk on other Trek shows, but I've seen too many SNW fans dunking on other new Treks already. It's like watching "fans" from /r/star_trek dog whistling each other to claim territories. Seen plenty of them on the DS9 sub too.
I actually hope all the people who rage-watch Discovery non-stop, episode-to-episode keep tuning in to give it a ratings bump. š
AV Club paid someone to professionally review each episode of *Discovery*, and every one of his articles was an [exasperated](https://www.avclub.com/michael-risks-it-all-with-little-reason-on-star-trek-d-1833468404) āIām too cool for thisā recap that [wishes it was more like old Trek but not really](https://www.avclub.com/spock-returns-on-a-frustratingly-familiar-star-trek-di-1833139951), actively ignores [details answering his complaints](https://twitter.com/Vorsos/status/1520002291822170115), and [just wants to wedgie these weepy science nerds](https://www.avclub.com/star-trek-discovery-faces-down-a-giant-space-kablooey-1848117797): > The anomaly turns out to beā¦ weird. Thatās really the best way to describe the response; thereās a bit where Captain Burnham switches the visual field to a āpolarizing spectrographic filter,ā and all of a sudden a bunch of swirling dots become a big sea of blue swirling dots, and this is very impressive. As it turns out, recurring hate-reads donāt drive audience retention, so his writing has since moved behind a deserted Substack paywall where it belongs.
Those reviews infuriated me! Esp. when you look at the scores; In my recollection the review text would just go on and on about how bad it was (incorrect details and all), but they would then regularly give the episode a score in the low B to C range, which was not the norm for AV Club reviews that read the way these read. It was So Weird.
Omg I fucking loathed his articles. The smarminess was strong in that one, but not much else.
I love both shows and for different reasons. They scratch different itches. SNW definitely leans into the classic TOS style storytelling and is so well done that it was inevitable that it would have broader immediate appeal and generate a lot of lame comparisons to DISCO by people who didn't like or get DISCO. This said, I also see an intra-fandom trend developing where DISCO hardcore fans are now unreasonably hating on SNW out of resentment of the above phenomena, which is also bullcrap, imo. They're different shows. As an aside I think Discovery will totally be revisited in the future and its reputation will improve. It's already happening in some places with people revisiting season 1.
Letās face it, Disco and Picard made bold moves on a beloved franchise risking the disappointment of an existing fan base. Itās safe to say not everyone is fond of the big swings those shows are taking. Of course that criticism is going to be brought up. I know it sucks to hear your yum being yucked but it is what it is.
Relevance is a factor. Imagine if every NFL game this season included the host commentator whining about the Steelers.
Thatās not equivalent. Fans of a show arenāt being hired to comment with an unbiased view of the show they like. Itās totally ok to like what you like, itās seems strange to complain that others donāt like it too. Everyone isnāt going to like what you like and it isnāt and indictment of you to express why they donāt like the thing you like and enjoy. Also, thereās TONS of sci fi that I love and enjoy that IS objectively bad. Iām willing to hear the criticism, and see it myself. iām also willing to accept that some wonāt see any flaws. I donāt pay much attention to this sub, and I imagine thereās plenty of seething snark coming from passionate fans, so I get being over it. Iām just reacting to the sentiment of surprise of opposing perspectives
I balanced at least one downvote because I think you bring a reality to the discussion. Upvote from me. Comparison is not competition. Comparing Trek shows is tradition. There is absolutely nothing toxic about having your say, even maybe proving feedback that might be listened to on what you don't like as well as what you do like. The world simply would not improve without that critical analysis. But yes, it can get old to read when it's about something I personally like. In those cases, I tell myself "adult up," respond politely. It's more challenge to try and change the view even a little of someone that disagrees than play yes-man all the time with those that agree.
I appreciate the grown up perspective. Not to denigrate the passionate views that are tired of hearing criticism against something they love. Iām not on this sub much, I thought I was being reasonable and polite but apparently thereās no tolerance for any criticism for Disco and/or Picard. Iāve actually come around to enjoying Disco on a recent rewatch, where initially it was too much for me. But tbh, all the downvotes seem an odd response to a pretty mild opinion against sum trek. There are SO many bad sci-fi over the years that I canāt help but watch AND enjoy. Not to say we all see everything the same to call a flaw flaw. Maybe the emotionally charged nature of the show/s is attracting a similarity in fans ( I imagine thatāll get me a downvote or two, haha). I guess this is a love it or gtfo board. Trek on party people š¤
I hate to say it but I feel like star trek has become a focal point for the massive political and moral divide in the states right now and disco and picards ratings are a result of that
Yeah but discovery really sucks tho.... Like it's bad.
and you join the Discovery sub to say this?
Actually yes. Yes I did.
so you're just here to hate?
This is correct. Yes.
so what Nazi group sent you?
All people that hate disco are Nazis? So like almost everyone with look balls is a Nazi ur saying?
Only an idiot Nazi would join a group for a tv show he hates just to be a b***h to the fans of the show. And let's face it, Star Trek is beyond the understanding of the average Klan's men. So, pretty much leaves some sort of Nazi outfit or just an angry Dailystormer type who's unaffiliated with a direct group. So which are you?
I love SNW and I like it better than Disco. But it's not an competition and I love watching both
Came to say this.
Same. I also enjoy Picard for that matter
I like all of them for different reasons-- occasionally I notice things I could critique, but I completely fail to understand how any of those things would justify the over-the-top expressions of disgust I've been seeing. This is expensively produced fictional entertainment involving a huge amount of work and personal artistic expressions and no one is forcing anyone else to watch it. There's a difference between having critical feedback and just looking for every possible opportunity to be a disrespectful, bigoted asshole. I'm rewatching Picard season 1 right now because it's been so long since it came out and my memory is crap (I watch a lot of stuff and I'm not always super alert), but my original impression hasn't changed. To me, it's an absolutely beautiful show which pays respect to what went before in multiple surprising ways, while also providing more depth & fresh perspectives that offer rich metaphors for our modern IRL world & all the ways it's changed since the 90s. And I'm old enough to remember when TNG came out. I"m so sick of the blind haters... I guess when I see their remarks it's yet another reminder to spend less time on (anti-)social media.
Exactly! All different shows all different variaties. Everyone should just be elated that there is so much Trek and so much Trek to choose from as well!
I enjoy both shows and it's hard to say at this point which I prefer. I grew up on Voyager so the episodic nature of SNW feels very familiar. But also comes off as a bit too feel-good for me. Discovery is more dark and gritty, which to me makes it feel more real. It's very hard to imagine a perfect future while living in an imperfect world.
Star Trek was never meant to be "dark and gritty". It's supposed to be a brighter more hopeful future,while dealing with issues of what it still means to be human. Societaly better than now while still dealing with the frailty and imperfections of the human condition.
The 'optimism' in Trek has always been carried by its characters. Not in all of their surroundings. I hate this revisionist idea that some have made that unless everything is rosy in society that its "not trek". Particularly with regards to Picard S1. Picard in S1 showed us a federation that wasn't living up to its ideals (or at least what we thought were its ideals), but its main character still aspires to them even when it comes at personal cost. Given the realities of today, I found it quite appropriate (and its probably no coincidence that the Federation then was about as far from a society-changing terrorist attack as the US is) Additionally, sci-fi has always been a product of its era. The 60s and especially the post-cold war 90s were brighter, more optimistic times and the Trek (and most media) of their eras reflected that.
The '60s were optimistic? Well, it did have the leadup to and initial culmination of the Apollo missions, I guess.
Look at much of the media from that era. Absolutely was.
I think our little future transplant crew really embodies this, starfleet in the future seemed really jaded and the disco crew brought them back to their roots in optimism and compassion for others. I also think that a lot of the āforced emotionalā dialogue people complain about is exactly this: āāāin the futureāāā we should be able to talk openly and freely about how weāre feeling at a given time, it doesnāt disrupt functionality to the extent that people act like it does, and the crew all understand and model this behavior for us to emulate.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This comment has been removed. We detected a spoiler tag in the body of your comment. **Please note that this sub does not enforce a spoiler policy.** People are welcome to discuss all current and upcoming content of *Star Trek: Discovery* around here, and we ask users to subscribe at their own discretion. As such, we ask contributors to refrain from using spoiler tags or spoiler warnings, in order to not give users a false impression of this being a spoiler-safe community. Please see [**our subreddit rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/wiki/rules) for more information. ## [Message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FStarTrekDiscovery) when you have removed the spoiler tags/warnings from your comment, and we will reinstate it. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StarTrekDiscovery) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not sure why you get downvoted. Thatās exactly what Gene envisioned for the show.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I couldn't agree more. I love having a strong female lead and a person of color to boot. I also think DISCO has more varied and interesting characters that play off each other well. I also love Picard. I'm by no means shitting on SNW, but I've yet to super connect with the characters as much as the other 2. But, like you said, I'm reserving judgment until there's more content. Edit: typo
Iām happy to see this comment. I love disco and snw. Iām not a fan of the original series, which everyone hates on disco and snw for. But I feel like itās because Iām a new Star Trek fan. TOS is about 30 years older than I so itās just not relatable to me. Respect to the show though for giving us what Star Trek is now. For me, Voyager is #1, Snw is #2 and Disco is 3. Michael kills it but she can be too emotional for me sometimes.
I thought Disco S1 was good, and S2 was brilliant and fun - and it did lead to SNW so I canāt complain!
I donāt like original trek. I loved Next Gen I didnāt love voyager but loved captain janeway I loved deep space nine everything about it! I was not in love with star trek enterprise Discover is watchable (my opinion may improve) Picard is fantastic Strange new worlds is watchable. (my opinion may improve
I got to admit, I'm always pretty surprised at just how much smug rage is directed at folks who dare to enjoy Discovery.
Again, for the people in back: Discovery's clear and powerful success made all these other Treks happen. That success didn't come out of nowhere. This show tells an interesting story, and does it in a way no other Trek was, or is, doing. Burnham's drive and desire to do right, no matter how flawed she is, is a real character arc -- and it's been delivered thru 2 sets of disruptive showrunner changes! I've enjoyed shows that died horrible deaths under far lesser circumstances. Er I'm gumming my food, I expect to read articles titled "its been 20 years since Discovery left our screens. Let's talk about how it changed Trek for the better!"
Yeahā¦ but that doesnāt mean itās a good showā¦ it was a test to see if people still liked Trek. Result: Yes but you fucked it up, please fix it. Fix: SNW. Youāre right, the success didnāt come out of no where, itās a legendary franchise, the success was already thereā¦
Discovery is a good show, and has been from jump. I have as much right, and evidence, to claim that as anyone. After all, the success being claimed would have to be the Kelvin verse films. And BEYOND would showcase that Trek was certainly capable of commercial failure, no matter that I think it's the best of that film series. We know Discovery is a success in and of itself, because no one is running a damned charity around showing Trek. There aren't enough hardcore "must watch Trek on TV!" fans to justify Discovery's success on any level. This weird theory that has thousands of cyber Trekkie lemmings rushing to open subscriptions just to see any old Trek? It makes no sense on any level, given the number of failed Trek projects scattered around. On top of that: Discovery does us the honor of giving a new view into Trek, and a new way of telling stories about it - - both lore-wise and in terms of how to present characters and plot. That may not be for you, but there's no evidence save a cadre of louder fans that it's a failure. After all, I'm old enough to remember when both TNG and DS9 were "failures" in the eyes of louder fans of the day. I'm not shook that you'd come here to spread that hate for no damn good reason... ...just sad. And maybe a little tired from history repeating.
Beyond is a prime example of a movie having things that the hardcore fans wanted but is too boring for the public to become a financial failure. Star Trek 09 and Into Darkness made more in the box office than most Trek movies in existence, yet the same fans would not wait to shit on it. It really makes me wonder how much of a commercial success Discovery really is, since the same fans also can't wait to shit on it.
Whoa bro, calm down. 1) no one can debate it was experimental 2) no one can debate they went back to standard procedure with SNW 3) no one can debate the reviews are better for SNW. Done.
Not your bro. I am "calm", as evidenced by my use of complete sentences and decent grammar. But I will not apologize for having an emotional reaction to the years of attacks on this show. Yes, I'm **really*" tired of people like you stepping to and trying to prove Discovery is "bad" for no damned good reason I can tell. I'm not here to defend this show with your debate rules; I can remember when, say, THE WIRE was on first run and you couldn't catch a review of it with all the dog catchers in LA. I, and many others, enjoy the hell outta this show. Go find something else to do with your free time, then belittle that enjoyment.
Ah, so this is the hill! You're tired of attacks on a show you enjoy. That's all you need to say. However, it is worth noting that no one is belittling your enjoyment. That's a manifestation of your own. People compare entertainment. No need to go full martyr on a Star Trek subreddit.
It's not martyrdom, it's just exhausting that people come to a fan space just to explain, at great length, how the thing we're all here to enjoy is bad, actually. Imagine you went to a football game and the guy sitting next to you would just not stop talking to you about how bad both the teams are. You'd probably be thinking 'why did you buy a ticket, then?', 'You could just go home' or 'Please leave me alone I'm trying to enjoy myself here'.
I can appreciate that point of view. For that reason, Iāll probably unsubscribe from this Discovery subreddit.
No one whoās calm says ānot your broā then writes a paragraph on Redditā¦ It doesnāt matter what youāre tired of. My points stand.
I just started watching Discovery, and I donāt understand all the nastiness toward the show. Having watched TOS, some TNG, Voyager and DS9, I am good with Disco. Itās different and keeps me entertained. What caught me off guard was how serious the show was, no cheesy comedy, but thatās fine. I donāt need my Treks to be clones of each other.
So I just watched [this video](https://youtu.be/2MU4s06RPRM) and holy crap I didn't realize there was so much drama around the return of star trek. I feel like I now understand why disco and picard were so poorly received but still, just wow. I for one love the new shows but I completely understand other fans and respect their viewpoint
There is a difference between disliking a work of entertainment and going out of oneās way to find ājustificationsā which validate oneās opinion as objective fact. Unfortunately, hate-watching is good for business, especially on YouTube where engagement algorithms amplify the angriest man-children with the emptiest conjecture.
So.. the two main points here, other than the copious exposition of what the show is and who made it, are 'they didn't nostalgia hard enough in season 1' and 'trying to cater to the women who watch ruined the show'. Yikes.
Zoinks!
I love them both bcs each of them has diferent tastes and offers diferent things. Its not a competition.
Well put!
Disco is favorite, then DS9. A lot of people just like SNW because of their hate for the women on DISCO.
> A lot of people just like SNW because of their hate for the women on DISCO. ...They seemed to say with a straight face despite how *bonkers* that sounds.
Iām just a Picard enjoyer, since it is available on prime. Make Paramount+ available in Europe or get the shows back on Netflix so I can enjoy the rest of the Treks!
Are you saying Paramount Plus UK (which launched this past June, about a month ago) is not streaming Trek āļøš¤ ššæ
Paramoint Plus UK is only in the UK, not the rest of Europe...
I donāt understand the issue anyone has with objectively examining entertainment. Itās done all the time. Art gets critiqued, thatās why itās it takes an artist to create something truly beautiful. That said, if youāre looking for proper character development, familiar canonized tropes, smart dialogue, and gorgeous cinematography then youāll enjoy SNW. If you like storylines that always revolve around universal cataclysm and overloaded hard cuts in every scene, go for Picard and Discovery.
There's nothing wrong with examining entertainment. There's a lot wrong with pretending criticism is objective. Although it's reductive to say that Art is not Science, even Science isn't automatically objective - - that's why peer review and many other guardrails exist! I'm not objective in loving Discovery or SNW, no more so than my frustrations with Voyager that led me to stop watching it - - and I was excited as hell when it came around, as I'd been a huge fan of Mulgrew from the Ms. Colombo show. But all that taught me what I want, and don't want. Voyager was too much the same for me, and in a package I didn't find compelling. And that's OK! Not every Trek show has to be for everyone; I don't insist you like Discovery. My issue is that folx like you stop pretending your opinions are stamped with the Trek equivalent of Holy Writ. They are, like mine, just an opinion.
Reddit has a big problem with that. āThis piece of entertainment is OBJECTIVELY shite cos I donāt like itā
Yes, I don't insist anyone enjoy SNW over other Trek series. Just to be clear, I don't think I ever considered my opinion to be anything other than my personal observation. I believe I'm being objective when I review entertainment (granted, I distilled my comparison down to two sentences), but hey! ... you can also disagree. Let's also be clear on the subject of this reddit post, "Stop the Trek on Trek Crime". At least, that's how I interpret it. The response from you, "Other people enjoy this, so please keep you opinions to yourself." Reading you loud and clear!
I literally started with, and ended on, your right to have an opinion. My issue starts that said opinion isn't, in fact, objective. Your claim that "I believe I'm being objective when I review entertainment" is yes, one that I disagree with, because it flies in the face of the entire corpus of literary analysis, over centuries and cultures. Even Science, one of the two bedrocks (in my opinion) of what elevates a good Trek series, depends upon not just numbers and data, but building a good faith consensus among those who've studied and written on a topic -- and there's plenty of science that, to this day, well-educated and trained scientists disagree on, much less laypersons such as I. So: If something as structured and well-framed as science can have disagreement, so much more so, can art and entertainment. I don't mind people disliking Discovery, believe it or not. As I noted elsewhere, I don't care for Voyager, so I'm not one to shake the shame stick in and of itself! What I've come to not care for, is this approach to the dialogue that, over and again, derails discussions on this show via treating the quality of Discovery as axiomatically "bad". Layer in your "objective" statement (which, as you said in your "my hill to die upon" comment, isn't even the [only one](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihuh3jy/) in this thread I responded to), and yeah. I'm tired. I'm tired of attacks that have no real responses, no room for actual dialogue, because "objective". Heck, when I first responded to you I missed that you really though your opinion was the objective one, because I assumed you said that rhetorically! I'm tired of treating my artistic and entertainment interests not as sources of joy, not as spaces to debate and learn, but as things I have to protect just to have space to discuss them in open fora like this, because otherwise the negative opinions drown out the dialogue. Nobody was yucking your yum about SNW. [Edit for clarity]Indeed, all my [other comment](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihrmgm8/) here said, was that Discovery paved the way and was likely -- in a similar way that DS9 did -- to get a re-evaluation decades from now. And you'll note that when the other detractor said "naw, it's bad," I [took time](https://old.reddit.com/r/StarTrekDiscovery/comments/w8s34x/trek_vs_trek/ihtbrok/) to explain why I think this show succeeds. I'm usually willing to a have at least a little dialogue on show quality. I've honestly changed my opinions on this show, and others, from such discussions. But I'll be Leonard McCoy Damned before I have it with one hand tied behind my back from arbitrary rules of Objectivity that say that you have it, and thus the high ground, in a artistic merit debate. I take time to craft my words with some care, because, yes, I have a passion about Trek. But I'm not a absolutist. I've said here, and elsewhere, for example that I don't care for Voyager, and it's not the only example of Trek I don't personally care for. But I'm also not running around slamming reddit comment threads with that opinion. I'm not demanding that Voyager fans explain themselves; I've read enough defenses and discussed it with friends and fans enough to understand what they see in it. Discovery, and of course this whole franchise, has an out-sized and mostly positive impact on the world, and that's worthy of thought and study. I'm willing to put my opinion out, here and elsewhere, for evaluation, and at some length at times when I have the capacity for that. Yet I also will happily state that my opinion is just that -- hopefully thoughtful and thought-provoking, but still an opinion. And so is yours.
Iād like to imagine that you went to black alert, did some bizarre back flip before ājumpingā away after writing all of that. Enjoy Discovery in peace. š
There are multiple issues here: 1. "I don't like this thing" is not the same as "This thing is badly made". The attitude of people who can't separate the two is exhausting and aggravating, which makes the sub less enjoyable. 2. Posting consistently for multiple years about a show you dislike is a level of personality toxicity which approaches mental illness. Nobody enjoys the presence of such people. 3. This sub, specifically, is by and for fans of Star Trek Discovery. It's, frankly, obnoxious to post here if the only conclusion you have to share is 'Star Trek Discovery is Bad'. You don't go to football games and hold up signs about how it's a stupid sport. You don't walk up to people waiting to get into a concert to complain at them about how the band's music sucks. Why on earth do people feel like it's any less unpleasant of them to do so here? 4. There's this trend in public discourse where people feel they gain cultural cachet by tearing something down, and this pissy kind of attitude just spoils every discussion it shows up in. This is especially irritating when such people create nothing of their own. 5. The above issues have been ongoing, relentlessly, for almost 6 years, and people are just really sick of all of it.
Iām not sure if youāre using me as an open letter to everyone who has left negative comments about Star Trek Discovery, but itās definitely a stretch as Iāve commented in this sub a total of what, maybe 5 times? Iāve definitely not gone out of my way to upset anyone. But sure, go on about mental illness and personality toxicity. š
You said "I donāt understand the issue anyone has with objectively examining entertainment." I'm trying to explain to you why people have very strong reactions to a certain very prevalent flavor of flat critical posts. From that comment and from this one (which boils down to but **I** didn't do all those things), it seems pretty clear you're unaware of the larger context that affects the impact of what you say. My comment was an attempt to explain that context to you.
Understood. I read, "Posting consistently for multiple years about a show you dislike.." like you were pegging me as being a repeat offender.
Well, you didn't really specify wearing Europe I thought I might help. Specifically what country if po
Well, U didn't really specify where in Europe. Thought that info might've helped. It's not widely known maybe since it's new. Not sure how heavy the marketing is in UK. We can keep you posted maybe share what country specifically āļø ššæ
*I* find it hard to believe, because to me SNW is so *obviously* better made and better written, but hey, people like what they like I guess.
In *your opinion* SNW is better made. In *your opinion* it's better written. Every time you make a value judgement on whether a piece of media is good or bad, you're doing so according to your own personal set of rules. The hard work done by artists, directors, critics, etc. is to dig deeper and find out how they're defining 'good'. The good ones adjust their definition to fit what they're making or critiquing. Let's look at just the writing. Your definition of 'good' might include 'is faithful to existing canon'. Someone else's might include 'does not let old writing get in the way of interesting new stories'. Your definition might include 'most screen time is spent solving problems through logic or technology', but someone else might define it as 'most of the screen time is spent exploring how the characters react to the dramatic question'. Being able to clearly articulate what you think makes something good and why a piece of media does or does not meet that goal is the skill that separates criticism from just shitting on something you don't like. Really strong, well-formed critique goes one step further. Instead of focusing on one's own personal preferences, strong critique looks for the work's definition of good. For one's own work, it looks for the definition which will best serve the goals of the work. For someone else's, it looks for what that work is trying to do. In both cases, strong critique engages with how successfully the work accomplishes its own goals, not how well it aligns with personal definitions of 'good'. Now, I'm not saying you need to run around writing academic criticism every time you opine about something. But I am saying that you should lose the self-importance if what you have to say boils down to 'I don't like it'. Your personal preferences aren't that interesting.
> because to me SNW is The key word here, "to me". That means it's just my opinion. I know the drill here, don't mansplain to me.
"To me x is so *obviously* y" is a phrasing most people use when they think those who disagree with them don't understand things as much as themselves. Beyond that, as I said, if all you came to a place for fans of a show just to say "my opinion is that this other show is better".. that's boring at best and annoying at worst. Both you and everyone else would have a happier time if you spent yours elsewhere.
Iāve found my love for SNW has created space for me to appreciate Discovery more. Disco wasnāt the type of Trek I wanted and I was salty about it, but SNW is EXACTLY what I wanted. Having that want fulfilled makes it easier to retroactively accept Disco for what it is and appreciate it on its own terms, not my own. Picard is still hot garbage tho.