# Why Star Trek: Discovery sucks and contemporary mainstream ruins everything



## BenjiMac (Aug 7, 2017)

I really tried to be open minded about Discovery and, to my discredit, assumed those voicing concerns loudly were the same people upset about the diversity of the cast.. hold that thought.

Then I watched it and, and I don't use this word lightly, garbage. It was passable sci-fi but truly terrible Star Trek. The characters were awful, the set was uninspired, the acting felt robotic at times, the opening was a ludicrous pile of incongruous nonsense and two people vomiting exposition on each other.

I held out though, deciding that few shows open well and the first two episodes were like a context building prequel, but I found episode three no better. (I will disclaim my opinions by saying, genuinely, that I am delighted so many people are enjoying discovery - the fact I do not does not mean it shouldn't be on TV, but I do note it attracts a very different audience at the expense of alienating many fans of the franchise)

WTF is a black alert?

Why does a super secret ship pick up random criminals and then tell those criminals the name of the ship, give them free reign of the galley and expose them to all the very obvious signs of the ship's nature?

Why does a woman, very justifiably, sentenced to life imprisonment not 6 months previously get offered a job the moment she comes onboard?

Casting Saru in the role of first officer only exposes the fact he will die because you've told us at length that Burnham is ifrst officer in the story.

The Klingon rage is, imo, perfectly justifiable because the Klingons had established and mch loved canon built over decades into a form that appealed to a wide audience and was held in high regard - the new Klingons would be excellent.. were they not replacing the Klingons.

Then we get on to the diversity part - something I was looking forward to very much as it's been a staple of Trek throughout history. My problem with discovery is that it takes politics (a sort I generally agree with btw) and diversity (including unbelieveably assigning a woman with learning difficulties to the most advanced ship in the fleet) and pushes them out under a big spotlight - while Trek has always done this it was done without a song and dance.. thats the POINT.

It's only diversity if you don't make a big point of it. Burnham is a woman of colour with a man's name raised in cross-cultural conditions - that is her character. Her roommate literally introduces herself by informing Burnham she has special needs.

Janeway was a great captain who just so happened to be a woman, Chakotay was an excellent first officer who just happened to be native American. Tuvok was, I believe, the first black actor to play a Vulcan and it's not even mentioned. Sisko was another excellent captain and overall character who just happened to be African-American. Race/Sex doesn't matter in Trek - it's an optimisitic vision of what we could achieve. Its not supposed to be gritty and dark, it's not supposed to have flawed characters.. it's the very best (regardless of race/sex/sexuality) striving to make the universe a better place.

Discovery goes the other way, it ticks all the boxes but forgets to write good, believeable characters instead - Nothing about Burnham is relateable.

The new Klingons came off more sympathetic than the federation who defiled a corpse of all things to win a stupid victory they then ruined with an act of mindless violence. Given the diverse Federation were supposed to represent the progressive ideals I hold dear and the Klingons were supposed to represent Trump supporters.. I came away from this with new found respect for Trump voters frankly. At least their behaviour could be understandably explained.

Burnham feels like three terrible characters rolled into one and she seems to switch between personas between scenes. Logical Vulcan, Sarcastic human, surprise racist... it makes no sense.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

I am now 4 episodes in and... I am actually enjoying it. I dislike all the characters, but it is actually their flaws and mistakes that make the plot more interesting. Episode 3 and 4 were more old fashioned Star Trek, episode 1 2 are more JJ, and by the look of the trailer episode 5 will go further into exploring the captain's motives and Klingon culture... 

As far as the political concerns go, they are not subtle about it... But it's Star Trek, it was never subtle, it just so happens to be that the zeitgeist that once made it the first show to feature interracial kissing has now moved to placing a special needs person as an officer in a military/science vessel, I guess?


----------



## BenjiMac (Aug 7, 2017)

Tropes said:


> I am now 4 episodes in and... I am actually enjoying it. I dislike all the characters, but it is actually their flaws and mistakes that make the plot more interesting. Episode 3 and 4 were more old fashioned Star Trek, episode 1 2 are more JJ, and by the look of the trailer episode 5 will go further into exploring the captain's motives and Klingon culture...
> 
> As far as the political concerns go, they are not subtle about it... But it's Star Trek, it was never subtle, it just so happens to be that the zeitgeist that once made it the first show to feature interracial kissing has now moved to placing a special needs person as an officer in a military/science vessel, I guess?


I agree totally, it's always been a political show but it's never been so shallow and overt with it. i'm on the left myself but even i find it offputting - because it's jarring.

I'm all in favour of treating people with respect and as equals, absolutely - but I like my characters to be more than one-dimensional box tickers and I like my suspension of disbelief to not be stretched to it's limits. I've never much been in to far fetched fantasy - I prefer optimistic realism. Faster than light travel? Sure, but give me a well thought out fictional explanation for it - Trek was always great at that.

That said, as I said earlier - I am genuinely happy so many people are enjoying it. My distaste for it does not mean it is objectively terrible and I hope your enjoyment continues - it just isn't for me sadly.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

BenjiMac said:


> I'm all in favour of treating people with respect and as equals, absolutely - but I like my characters to be more than one-dimensional box tickers and I like my suspension of disbelief to not be stretched to it's limits. I've never much been in to far fetched fantasy - I prefer optimistic realism.


The only sci fi show that does a decent job at those right now is The Expanse. I wouldn't hold Star Trek to those standards though, in Star Trek terms STD so far is like... Let's put it like this: STD is to DS9 what STV was to TNG.


----------



## Real Observer (Jun 16, 2015)

@BenjiMac Regarding the diversity and "strong" female characters and whatnot. I wanted to stay away from that particular topic so I don't make the post anymore bloated than it already is.

I have absolutely NO problem with these things. But the problem is that you can just tell when they are put there on intention as some sort of social justice gimmick with little to no thought how it works in the context of the story as a whole.

This way it just feels fake and forced. If you have a crew of well developed, interesting, relatable characters that *just happens to be* diverse in race, political and personal convictions, sex etc. well good, great! But if you put it there because you just have to with no regard whether it works as a whole, it makes for bad show and stands out like a sore thumb.

And yes. I know that Star Trek was always liberal left in political direction of the show (not to confuse with current pseudoliberal left exemplified by moral and intellectual rabble from gender studies at Berkeley). After all federation is basically socialist. But it always was that way in very thoughtful, intelligent and unassuming manner and it never shied away from controversial and difficult issues. 

From what I have seen so far I just can't imagine this new "Star Trek" being that way.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

A fan theory I am hoping is true and would be 100% onboard with:





TL;DW:


* *




Discovery is the origin of Section 31, the shadowy black ops of the federation. It would fit thematically with the characters, the very event and the desperation of the situation providing the future justification for it, and would allow Discovery to incorporate finding Aliens and discoveries that aren't officially on record because they were classified.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Tropes said:


> I am now 4 episodes in and... I am actually enjoying it. I dislike all the characters, but it is actually their flaws and mistakes that make the plot more interesting. Episode 3 and 4 were more old fashioned Star Trek, episode 1 2 are more JJ, and by the look of the trailer episode 5 will go further into exploring the captain's motives and Klingon culture...
> 
> As far as the political concerns go, they are not subtle about it... But it's Star Trek, it was never subtle, it just so happens to be that the zeitgeist that once made it the first show to feature interracial kissing has now moved to placing a special needs person as an officer in a military/science vessel, I guess?


I actually have enjoyed the first four episodes as well. I mean, I'm a Brian Fuller fan, and despite him leaving I can still see some of his touches here.

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star...trek-discovery-what-led-to-bryan-fullers-exit

I haven't really invested in Trek much since TNG, which I liked while it was airing but I've kind of been disappointed with long-term (I've always had plans to watch DSN, and I did watch a season of Voyager and quickly got tired of it), but... there's been enough so far in ST.D to hold my interest. I like their characters being flawed, and I'm kind of curious to see where they go with it. (I'm a big fan of Jason Isaacs too, so that helps.) 

I didn't really think I needed another Klingon revamp, but... it's kind of an interesting take, and we're getting a lot of time on their side of things. Plus every so often there's just some bit of craziness popping out (like in episode 4, when they refer back to Captain Georgiou... wow)....


----------



## starscream430 (Jan 14, 2014)

I guess it seems like I'm one of the few Trekkies that actually like Discovery. To be fair though, I am a big fan of DS9 - a Star Trek show that is noticeably gritty and full of moral quandaries that don't paint the Federation in a positive light.






Concerning CBS All Access, I might buy it once the show goes on break. I do want to support the franchise because it can lead to more Trek in the future. If Discovery fails, they might put Star Trek on ice again since Beyond performed below expectations...despite Trekkies saying that it was the best of the JJ films.


----------



## nablur (Mar 9, 2017)

episodes 1 and 2 were overblown garbage. it was a terrible idea to begin the series with someone breaking all the standard rules of star trek and then still getting air time. 

that being said , episodes 3-7 have been MUCH better. 

I like the war dynamic which star trek typically has avoided. I enjoyed the DS9 war arc, and the couple episodes of TNG where you had alternate timelines with ongoing war. 

They'll still be able to do individual episodes with various star trek sub plots, like episode 4's tartigrade... but with the linear storyline and ongoing war plot, i think it will make the series more palatable for the masses and possibly more interesting with heavier stakes. 

prediction - lorca will continue down his warrior path to a point where he becomes the enemy, saru may become captain in his place, michael may gain rank again... either way, its interesting... 

anybody have personality types for the characters yet? Here is a list i started, which is probably mostly wrong but i just wanted to get the ball rolling: 

burnham - ISTJ/4
saru - INTP/6 
tyler - ISTP/5
georgiou - INFJ/2
stamets - ENFP/3
tilly - ESFJ/2
lorca - ESTP/8


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

nablur said:


> prediction - lorca will continue down his warrior path to a point where he becomes the enemy, saru may become captain in his place, michael may gain rank again... either way, its interesting...


Ok, the obvious antagonist is obvious, and that is

* *




Tilly




I still think that Discovery is the origin story for section 31, so Lorca is less of a villain and more as affable evil inverted, more closely tied to magnificent Bastard. I think what they might do instead is stick to our crew's point of view while doing increasingly dubious actions, at times positioning discovery in a way that places the Federation as the antagonistic authority from our perspective, but still having a point while doing so.

Oh, and Michael will obviously gain rank just as she hits it off with Ash so she'll outrank him in a TV appropriate timely manner.


----------



## nablur (Mar 9, 2017)

i just finished episode 9 ... yeah, i still like it! episodes 3+ were really good, with the last couple being even better. episode 9 was great, and the cliffhanger has me wanting to watch the second half.


----------



## Not that guy (Feb 26, 2015)

starscream430 said:


> I guess it seems like I'm one of the few Trekkies that actually like Discovery. To be fair though, I am a big fan of DS9 - a Star Trek show that is noticeably gritty and full of moral quandaries that don't paint the Federation in a positive light.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"Its easy to be a saint in paradise." Capt. Sisco

Values are reflected in what one does when they are afraid. May we never know who we truly are. We may not quite be human.

Reminds me of:
Deckard: We call it Voight-Kampff for short. - Blade Runner, 1982
Roy Batty: "I thought you were supposed to be good. Aren't you the "good" man? C'mon, Deckard. Show me what you're made of." - Blade Runner, 1982
Roy Batty: "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a slave." - Blade Runner, 1982

Would I pass Deckard's Voight-Kampff test? Yes. Would I pass Roy's Voight-Kampff test? I pray I will never find out.


DS9 broke the Roddenberry boundaries. But damn it was the best of the Trek, even though I love TOS. Star Trek was born in the cultural and technological context of the 60s. It is only appropriate that Discovery strive to be relevant in its current cultural context and not try to exist as a static museum piece.


----------

