I recently saw Star Trek Picard, the first season was okey, season 2 was awful, the season 3 was nice.
Acording some critics last Discovery season is bad, so now I’m afraid of looking a series who has a bad ending, it worth to watch or is as painful as Picard Season 2? Or I should watch Strange New Worlds and Enterprise instead?
I watched all of Discovery. It’s different, a bit too touchy-feely at times for me. But, the stories are interesting and wild.
OTH, I liked all of Picard, so maybe you shouldn’t take my view into account.
I enjoyed Picard more than I thought I would
Stop at Season 2 and it’s an ok time.
@cuchi it is bad…

I absolutely loved that look for the Klingons. I was so sad to see it meekly watered down in later episodes. It’s what they should have done in The Motion Picture!
Most any criticism of the show is true. I will say that it is a good series to watch with people who haven’t watched Star Trek before because it is a little un-Trek-ish and there is less to stop and explain. Also, since the mission is top secret it has little overlap with anything except SNW.
As a Star Trek fan, I was happy to get more Trek, the same as I was happy to get more Picard (that S2 was a pain though!), Lower Decks, Prodigy, and even the Short Treks.
My wife was pulled into the world of Star Trek by Discovery (a full 36 years after I’d started watching the franchise) and now she loves it and wants to watch all of the other series. So, Discovery gets a point for that.
(I haven’t seen Section 31 yet. It is supposed to be very bad.)
Discovery is fine and at the time it was the only modern Trek we had so there’s that, it’s enough for me to like it.
The only problem I had with it is that every season is “OMG we have to save the all fucking universe!”, other than that it’s cool.
Then we had Strange New Worlds so my thirst for “let’s just explore that funny planet and have a drink at the mess” Trek was satisfied.
I still watch discovery because ‘spaceships goes piou piou piou eat my phaser’ and that’s what I want it to be.
I really liked parts of it…from themes to characters…but found it really hard to sit through, most of the time. They had a really annoying way of rehashing everything that happened, after-the-fact…as if we needed to be constantly reminded about details that were literally from ten minutes ago.
It reminded me of the dialogue formats used in cheesy Mexican telenovelas. You can’t mention someone’s name, without also including a brief description of who they are related to, and what they’ve previously done. No one talks like that in real life. Especially when the person you’re talking to, was right there with you when that event took place.
If you remove all the superfluous dialogue, then the actual length of each episode, was less than 20 minutes.
I love Discovery. Some of the criticisms are valid; every season has a few dumb moments that make me shake my head. But I love the characters, the actors are all great, Doug Jones in particular is a treasure, and the first contact in season 4 feels more like a proper science fiction scenario than any other in Trek.
One thing to keep in mind is that the tone shifts considerably season to season. It starts off quite grim and gritty, but don’t expect it to stay that way.
Discovery is my least preferred star trek I’ve watched so far, I mean, it’s not “bad” per se, it’s just different from the rest of star trek and has a different formula.
The thing with discovery is that everything happens really fast, there’s always a sense of urgency and hurry, but actual plot development happens really slowly.
Conflict takes a whole season to resolve, instead of standard one episode which you expect from a star trek show.
Also, I hate how the actors mumble instead of talking.
It’s not bad, it’s just not my favourite format.
Discovery was never bad. It’s just different. Some people say it’s not what Trek is about.
-
Star Trek has always been about captains exploring. Deep Space Nine challenged that with a commander; Sisko later made captain, but the station itself only moved in the pilot (closer to the wormhole; it’s always been in Bajor’s orbit) and maybe one other time? But they did plenty of exploring in the Runabouts, and Defiant, the ship they got later. But essentially the action came to them, and that was fine. Discovery is not about a captain. Michael Burnham is a… commander? I forget. On the original ship. Then she’s nobody. She gets promoted up but she almost never leads, but the show focuses on her. It’s… weird. (And she’s a woman… named Michael… pronounced the same as the male name… and this is never explained.)
-
Star Trek has always been about diversity, but Discovery had a gay couple in an openly sexual relationship. It never showed sex between them, but plenty of kissing and intimacy. Discovery also had a non-binary character with they/them pronouns. And as mentioned, a woman named Michael, but she’s cisgendered and straight, so that’s not why she has a guy’s name. Anyway, some people thought it was a few bridges too far.
-
Star Trek has almost always been wholesome. Deep Space Nine pushed the envelope, and while it showed Sisko doing some very bad things, profanity was never part of it, and the violence was mostly PG. Discovery was on streaming, so they had profanity and R-rated violence. There may have even been some mild nudity, I don’t recall. This put off a lot of traditional fans.
-
Before Deep Space Nine (i.e. The Original Series and The Next Generation), Star Trek has always been episodic. DS9 introduced arcs, but each episode still had its own identity, and this was true through Enterprise. But each season was its own thing on Discovery, and no one episode really stood alone.
Points 3 and 4, and to some, point 2, put off some older, “traditional” Trekkers who felt that Discovery was made for the younger generation and was not “for” them. And I can dig it. I mean, it does follow the recent-ish films where the ships are flashy, not tacky with their tech. (Keep in mind, the ships were always flashy for their time! It’s just, we cling to the old designs and the newer, flashier one just seems excessive, but now, the newer, flashier one is dull in comparison to the ones that have followed it.)
As for Picard, that was purely a sequel to The Next Generation (and to a lesser extent, Voyager, because of Seven of Nine). It was a love letter to the fans of that show, those shows. As purely its own thing, it’s a weaker Trek entry, but for those of us who grew up with 80s/90s Trek, it was good closure since the movies were neglecting those characters. Another such show might be Prodigy, which is a more direct continuation of Voyager, but Prodigy stood on its own better with its original cast. Picard’s original cast was not very good, but very forgettable.
Back to Discovery, it’s very much its own thing, set both before TOS and after anything else (minor spoilers — plot device allows them to swerve around any continuity problems). It did launch Strange New Worlds, which Trekkers seem to like more than Discovery, as that is a straight TOS prequel, showing the (movies/newer) original Enterprise under Captain Pike, who was captain before Kirk. Spock’s in it, too. (I have yet to watch SNW, but I plan to. I just finished Prodigy and I like to space them a bit.) Discovery also launched Section 31, the streaming-only movie, which is about as bad as you’ve heard. The less said about that one, the better — if you want to watch it, you should, and you should do so without worrying what Internet People think about it. It’s still Star Trek, albeit some of the weakest Trek out there.
Personally, I rate Discovery above ENT but below Voyager. I have a hard time deciding whether Discovery or Prodigy is better. Prodigy was a computer-generated anime that aired on Nickelodeon and that all sounds bad, but it was actually very good. It might seem at first that Kate Mulgrew (Janeway/Hologram Janeway) is there to prop the cast up, but they all shine so brightly, they don’t really need her as much as they think. I liked TNG, DS9, and VOY all better than STD and… whatever we’re abbreviating Prodigy to (PRO? STP?). As a child of the 80s, TOS is a bit dated for me, but the stories were so good… that’s another one that is hard to place for me.
I recommend you watch it, but if you do, you have to finish the season. You can’t drop it mid-season, and if you do, you can’t judge it, because the individual episodes aren’t meant to be watched on their own. It’s meant to be binged. That said, you can safely stop at the end of any season. I won’t say it gets worse, but each season made me wonder if it was really necessary, including the first one. Because no, it isn’t. Discovery is not necessary for… anything… in the Star Trek universe. It’s not really connected. Even Strange New Worlds… they ran into the Enterprise in the beginning of the second season, but then they went away. So yeah, you can safely watch SNW without Discovery and you’d be fine. I do think the first season was good, as far as action Trek goes. And you can stop there, but with the way it ends… you won’t. Season 2 was okay, a good mystery, and you can stop there, but you still may want to see what comes next. After that, I think the quality does take a bit of a dive, but then they’re in the far future, and you just wanna see more and more of what’s left of Starfleet in the future. And it’s good enough to stick with. But never necessary. And that’s probably the “worst” thing I can say about it.
I am one of those older traditional Trekkers you mentioned (btw our generation prefers “trekkies”) and I actually enjoyed Discovery a lot. It’s definitely not one of my favorite Trek series though because of 2 things:
- It’s Trek in name only. You said it’s totally disconnect from the other shows and you’re right. But it’s more than that. It’s not just disconnected from the other Trek series, it’s disconnected from Trek. It feels like they had a generic space/action show and decided to increase the viewership by naming one of the characters Spock and giving a few nods to the Trek franchise. Again: I liked it. I thought it was a really good generic space/action romp. But all other Trek shows have a particularly different view of humanity and history, a core innocence that’s put to extreme tests again and again, while the characters in Discovery couldn’t care less about that stuff.
- It is completely detached, plotwise, from all other Trek (which you already mentioned). In a way that’s actually great because of my point #1. Because of that detachment I can look back on it with greater fondness, like the way you might have a particular circle of friends that you like even more because they never met your mom.
There is one HUGE exception to #1 and #2 above, and that’s the appearance of our good friend Mr. Kirk’s predecessor. There are a couple episodes that gave me the biggest chills from the old days, and if you saw the show (and you’re of a certain age) then you know exactly which episodes I’m talking about.
I’ve never heard of Trekkies as a generational term. I’ve always understood that Trekkers were people who enjoyed the show as a show (they’re on the Trek) whereas Trekkies enjoy the show as part of the show (they’re in the Trek). Like they believe Trek is real, or it’s our actual future, and that Klingons and Vulcans are out there somewhere. Gene Roddenberry preferred this term because the show is about hope, that things will get better to where the show is, and that when things are bad on the show, hope that they will be better or that it will all work out in the end. But me? I just like it as a show. It’s not “real” to me.
Though, I suppose everyone’s relationship with Star Trek (or, any other franchise) is unique and personal to them and you can’t just divide the fans into two categories. Still, that is what I always understood the difference between the two types was, as we are a franchise that has two names for its fans.
Regarding what you said about them having a generic space show and naming it Star Trek. That has happened before. Deep Space Nine exists because the guy made Babylon 5 pitched it to Paramount and they ran him off and stole his idea. Yes, Deep Space Nine is awesome and we love it, but it would not exist if not for Babylon 5, which we should all be thankful we also got. To this day no one who wasn’t involved knows exactly how much DS9 took from B5, but DS9 was not originally Star Trek, and it was widely criticised for not being Star Trek being that they were not exploring and that they were on a space station. I imagine a lot of episodes of TV started out as something else, some unconnected idea that was shoehorned into that show in the writers room. So while I don’t doubt that Discovery may have not been an original Trek idea, I do not care because neither was DS9 and I love DS9.
I’m not disagreeing with you, though, and I agree with some of your clarifications, particularly in point 1.
but then they’re in the far future, and you just wanna see more and more of what’s left of Starfleet in the future.
I never softened on that particular development. The Star Trek Universe I know and love is based in optimism, and I want to believe in a Federation that keeps adapting, improving, and ultimately continuing as a positive force moving forward through the dedicated collaboration of an infinitely-diverse collaboration of peoples.
Disco took that basic core of all the flavors of Trek we’ve ever had and said “LOL never mind, all the principled and optimistic stuff you loved leads to a dystopian crapsack future and everyone’s sadder assholes than before, u mad?”
I’m so confused by this comment. Season three is literally (literally) about “a Federation that keeps adapting, improving, and ultimately continuing as a positive force moving forward through the dedicated collaboration of an infinitely-diverse collaboration of peoples” even in the face of overwhelming odds to the contrary.
I agree Discovery over Enterprise.
It’s hard to hold up the show that showed our first hero captain in the franchise not only condoning but choosing torture as an alternative as being ‘more optimistic’ or ‘more in line with Star Trek’s aspirational vision.’
Then there’s its sharp retrograde to bro culture.
BTW I’m almost as longtime a fan as possible.
My first episode was TOS ‘Devil in the Dark’ on the day it first broadcast in Canada in early 1967.
Since then, I have seen every episode in first run the week it aired EXCEPT when Enterprise went off the rails after 9/11, trying to be an apologia for the appalling reaction of the US which suddenly condoned torture and violations of the international rules based order.
Well said, Enterprise is my least favorite… until Season 4 which I consider to be some of my favorite Star Trek.
But same goes for Discovery! I appreciated what they were trying to do but it didn’t click with me. And then seasons 4 and 5 I consider to be some of Trek’s best.
Yes, there were a few great season one Enterprise episodes such as ‘The Andorian Incident’ directed by Roxann Dawson of Voyager and guest starring Jeffrey Coombs as Shran but it was the fourth season that truly redeemed the show.
ENT 4x23 Archer vs Shran fight 👌
-
The central character of the show is the least interesting person on it somehow despite having what could have been a good back story.
Everyone else seems to be some sort of real person to me. She is just so boring and flat and everything revolves around her for no real reason. Her purpose seems to be to be the fence post that stands there and eventually cries.
The best thing about the show was it gave us Anson Mount as Pike and he is outstanding. He was so good as Pike we got SNW as a spinoff.
i would watch all of the above. with discovery at the very least the first four seasons, because S2 is a backdoor season 0 of strange new worlds and S4 rocks but needs the context of the first 3. it can be very uneven but i don’t think it gets bad as often as Picard did and doesn’t stay bad for as long as Picard does. Enterprise is similar, a rough-at-times ride that does really pay off in S3
you’re only gonna watch one, though, i’d do strange new worlds. it’s essentially a return to the TOS/TNG format and has a stellar cast. and frankly you don’t need to watch disco S2 to fully know what’s going on, they explain everything- i only watched disco after snw S1 left me hungry for more. SNW is seemingly unique among trek shows in that every season has been less well recieved than the last, partly because the short seasons are increasingly dedicated to gag episodes, but i’d say with the exception of one particular stinker in S3, a weaker SNW episode is still gonna be better than most shows at their best
but also- you’re your own person and may walk away from all of these series feeling someghing different! no harm on trying and if you hate something hey, it only cost you 40 minutes of your life
It has its weaknesses, but I think you should watch it if just to form your own opinion.
I’ve only watched through the middle of season 4, where I got a bit tired of it, though I might pick it back up.
Season 1 is interesting, season 2 is weird, and season 3 has its flaws but keeps you on the edge of your seat.
Season 4 I feel like squanders the new setting introduced in season 3; the plot they introduce feels so artificial to me, which is very upsetting because it feels like the new setting has so many stories that would practically write themselves even if you do decide to lean on “Big Bad Villain/Problem” storytelling.
If you’re a fan of older Star Treks it’s bad, real bad. I watched until the end of season 2 with my partner and had to bail. Everyone above has given good reasons why, I’ll add one I haven’t seen: the lead actress (Soneqa Martin-Green?) overacts Michael Burnham. She overdramatizes almost every scene, to the detriment of the believabolity of the in-universe world, I tried to overlook it but found it grating. I told my partner that half-way into season two, and she responded that she doesn’t really see it. Then about five seconds later Burnham is raising her voice to a senior officer and on the verge of tears over nothing… a minor misunderstanding. Partner laughs and goes, “ok yeah I see it”.
I’d rewatch Enterprise 100 times over ever watching Discovery again, and Enterprise is probably my least favourite pre-2010 Trek, if that helps you.
Speak for yourself.
I’ve been watching since 1967 and happily watched all five seasons of Discovery as they came out.
I’ve also rewatched them all with other members of our household.
I’ve definitely watched Discovery more times than Enterprise.
Cool. Power to you - we clearly have differing tastes. OP was on the fence and asked for an opinion so I gave mine, not sure who else I’d be speaking for. Now you’ve given yours, so they’ve even wider opinions 👍
It was your assertion that ‘if you’re a fan of older Star Trek’, someone would share your view that irked me.
There’s a lot of older fans that don’t dislike the new shows. We just aren’t feeling the need to caution other older viewers about the new shows.
@pulsewidth @cuchi I felt the same way, until a friend pointed out that’s what Shatner did, too. Stylistically, tonally, etc. the shows are very different, but I wonder if #StarTrekDiscovery feels similar to TOS, to audiences with more modern tastes.
I mean, Star Trek dosen’t had overacting in general?
TOS does but the 80s/90s series not so much.
Go ahead. Watch it. 🤷🏻
Discovery gets a lot of selective criticisms in online spaces. I don’t want to say it has anything to do with being the first Star Trek show with a Black female as a central main character, but Burhnam does seem to be more frequently criticized for behaviors that are celebrated when done by someone like Kirk or Riker.
It’s constant flawed buildup to a promise of something just around the corner the might actually be good, that not only never ever delivers on that promise, but pulls the rug out from under you more if ten than not, rather than just providing the payoff that you probably want (I lately keep thinking back to the Klingon War)
Seen it recently myself, about a couple years ago, never watched before, and it’s ok. I enjoyed it.
Don’t read too much into the comments, just watch it, of you don’t like it stop watching it.
For me it’s worthy, i have warched at this moment all ST except TOS, I tried it and I can’t.














