Star Trek: Lower Decks (animated series)

Justin Credible Darts

Goodshape wrote: »

or... maybe it doesn't.

really , then if it was so good then surely the rating would be higher ?



I can never get over how trek fans get so protective over a show.


Just because you like it, does not mean everyone does.

Justin Credible Darts

pixelburp wrote: »

The curse of aggregators on a TV show is that if a user rates something low off the back of watching 1, 2 episodes - that's hardly a fair reflection of the overall season. Should a user's score count if they've only watched < 20% of the entire run? Hardly. That's an inherently flawed system 'cos eveyone knows of a show that starts poor but gets better. It's practically a rite of passage TBH and rare enough a show starts off amazing.

Does Lower Decks deserve the rating? No, not remotely. It's not a perfect show - it's actually not that funny in places and the jokes are half-hearted - but it's solid and "very Trek" for those who speak of those things. Starts off rough but its main characters are personable and I've fond myself rooting for them.

What you must factor in is that any show, be it star trek or not, if the first couple of episodes are rubbish, the viewer will not tune in again if they did not like it., so the only people rating the latter shows are those that are biased in to giving it a good report since they are still watching.



Those that quit after the first couple are not watching.

pixelburp

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

really , then if it was so good then surely the rating would be higher ?

I can never get over how trek fans get so protective over a show.

Just because you like it, does not mean everyone does.

In fairness, I pointed out the flaw in the ratings, given many were clearly made around the broadcast of episode 2 - which accounts for < 20% of the entire season. That can't be said to be reflective of the overall season if people are just dropping off.

The consensus across thread has been broadly positive; starting from a ropey premiere with Mariner being the main point of contention. And again, after episode 2 she settles down and shows distinct depth.

Justin Credible Darts

pixelburp wrote: »

In fairness, I pointed out the flaw in the ratings, given many were clearly made around the broadcast of episode 2 - which accounts for < 20% of the entire season. That can't be said to be reflective of the overall season if people are just dropping off.

The consensus across thread has been broadly positive; starting from a ropey premiere with Mariner being the main point of contention. And again, after episode 2 she settles down and shows distinct depth.

again the point you are missing, is the people who like the show are obviously still watching., and good for them they are enjoying it.



I quit after 2 episodes, not watched any more of it, I thought it was atrocious, and I wanted to enjoy it.


So the majority of those that did not like the show tend to avoid the thread on Lower Decks so its hardly a shock the feedback would be positive

pixelburp

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

again the point you are missing, is the people who like the show are obviously still watching., and good for them they are enjoying it.

I quit after 2 episodes, not watched any more of it, I thought it was atrocious, and I wanted to enjoy it.

So the majority of those that did not like the show tend to avoid the thread on Lower Decks so its hardly a shock the feedback would be positive

Wish I lived where you live. If what you said was true, then the internet would be a much quieter place from all the disgruntled Trek, Star Wars or Dr. Who fans NOT sledging their passions online. Or, to use an example specific to aggregators, the slew of MCU "fans" review-bombing Captain Marvel before it had even been released, dropping the score (to the extent of it requiring the sites changing their rules).

Hell, the Television forum on this site is full of people shítting on RTÉ on a consistent basis and I doubt half of them even watch the content; so no, I don't agree with your logic based on the simple evidence of the internet. :pac:

Media consumption isn't a zero-sum game, those remaining merely being the fanboys. Hell, you're here, disproving your own theory. While my own opinion is on record here as being "mixed". The actual comedy is perfunctory at best, often hitting very obvious punchlines. But the character moments and very TNG era plotting is solid and keeps me going. But yes, you need to watch past episode 2 to get to the good stuff.

Justin Credible Darts

its not rocket science to grasp.

the people STILL watching the show are obviously going to praise the show.
Why else would they be watching it.
They must like it surely, why watch it otherwise....


The people who did not like it, have stopped watching it, are hardly turning up to praise it.....I thought you might have comprehended that.

As for RTE, I spent years seeing the absolute muck they made.
It stands to reason if they make muck for years, the same people making said muck are not going to overnight make quality programs.

The point about LD was the rating was supposedly undeserving low.
The fact its low is because people think the show deserves it, and it seems to upset people.

why do people have to make excuses for the rating ?
Surely once you enjoy it that should be all that matters to you ?

pixelburp

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

its not rocket science to grasp.

the people STILL watching the show are obviously going to praise the show.
Why else would they be watching it.
They must like it surely, why watch it otherwise....

Your point is not rocket science, it just doesn't track with the observable reality of life on the internet. Just to be clear, what I'm describing is literally in the dictionary as a thing:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hate-watch

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hate-watch

edited to add... and wikipedia FWIW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate-watching

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

The point about LD was the rating was supposedly undeserving low.
The fact its low is because people think the show deserves it, and it seems to upset people.

why do people have to make excuses for the rating ?
Surely once you enjoy it that should be all that matters to you ?

Nobody's upset, nobody's making excuses. I started the aggregator point so the curiosity is merely that aggregators can't tell the whole story because rating "1" based off of 20% of a season is like rating a movie after watching 30 minutes. It's valid insofar as anyone's opinion is valid - but its context is not off the back of a "fair" amount of the show watched.

TV pilots & second episodes, hell entire first seasons, are usually poor and take a while to find its feet. Don't think that needs explaining on a Trek forum of all places.

Justin Credible Darts

the point you are missing, its not just casual viewers that voiced their dislike for lower decks but plenty of hardcore trek fans also.

When trek fans are saying...no thanks and no longer watching, is it really a surprise the rating is low ?
As I said earlier, its low because its not that good. The only people praising it still are those still watching obviously

this nonsense the rating is wrong is always spun by people try to deflect. I did not like it...therefore I stopped watching.

I did not like discovery and it gradually got better.
Discovery was bad....but gave it a chance

Lowers Decks was just atrocious, and I was will to over look it was a cartoon. I wanted to enjoy it.
I saw enough in what I saw to realize why it got low ratings...the people still watching obviously like it, so hardly a shock they think the rating is wrong, dont mean they are right.

pixelburp

Whoosh. I give up

Goodshape

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

I saw enough in what I saw to realize why it got low ratings...the people still watching obviously like it, so hardly a shock they think the rating is wrong, dont mean they are right.

I at least 50% hated it until around episode three or four.

Now that I've seen all of it, I've seen enough to realize why someone might give it such a low rating if they'd only seen the first few episodes.

I don't know that anyone elses opinion would change, but mine did.

Justin Credible Darts

Goodshape wrote: »

I at least 50% hated it until around episode three or four.

Now that I've seen all of it, I've seen enough to realize why someone might give it such a low rating if they'd only seen the first few episodes.

I don't know that anyone elses opinion would change, but mine did.

As I said I glad you enjoyed it, and was hoping I too would have enjoyed it, but it was not for me.

pixelburp

Goodshape wrote: »

I at least 50% hated it until around episode three or four.

Now that I've seen all of it, I've seen enough to realize why someone might give it such a low rating if they'd only seen the first few episodes.

I don't know that anyone elses opinion would change, but mine did.

It's debatable if I'd have continued beyond the first clutch of episodes had I not seen the recommendations that it got better and calmed down. Which as said, is a common refrain with TV. The energy levels definitely pulled back from the hyperactivity of episode 1. Which wouldn't be hard.

santana75

Just finished season 1. Didnt know there were only 10 episodes, I was all geared up for 20 odd so now cant wait for season 2. The season finale was quite the surprise given the light tone up til that point.

AMKC

@ Justin Credible Darts I recommend watching Lower Decks from episode 10 backwards and then stop when Marineer gets really annoying. Honestly you are missing some great Trek by not watching it. Yes some of the characters specifically Marineer can be very annoying but all the rest of it the ships the Galaxy they are in the planet names the small details they havf got right makes it worth it. Its the best Trrk Show in years. I will watch Discovery season 3 and hope it's good but when it's done I will rewatch Lower Decks again because Discovery will no doubt disappoint again.

FutureGuy

Mariner was completely OTT in earlier episodes but she has had great character growth since then and we understand now why she acted the way she did at the start.

Just want to sum our my feelings for this show.

- I care more about these characters than anyone on Discovery and Picard.
- I care more about the ship than any ship since probably the Defiant.

Watching the pylon getting tore off hurt

- For the first time in 20 years, I cannot wait for the next episode.
- I have never seen a Trek show with the finger more on the pulse with what has come before it. It's been created and writteh with such love and care.

pah

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

Why would he ?
because you said it ?
You do know most people do not continue to watch things they dont like.
For me I never watched the animated series, saw one episode of lower decks and it was more than enough.


you declaring things as if they were fact does not make it fact.
Just because some people dont like something you like, should not mean you should get so defensive.

We've had this debate before. Honestly I'm not sure why you continue to post on this thread. In the same manner that you won't watch a show you dislike surely you would unfollow a thread about said show?

Justin Credible Darts

pah wrote: »

We've had this debate before. Honestly I'm not sure why you continue to post on this thread. In the same manner that you won't watch a show you dislike surely you would unfollow a thread about said show?

It is a discussion board, and as a star trek fan i am going to read trek threads.


Unlike others I do not tell others where they can or cannot post.

I dont tell people who dislike discovery not to post or question why they dislike the show, because they are entitled to the opinion, as I am.


When I see people say the low rating LD got is wrong, I feel I have the right to say I believe its right and warrants the low rating.

Justin Credible Darts

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

It is a discussion board, and as a star trek fan i am going to read trek threads.


Unlike others I do not tell others where they can or cannot post.

I dont tell people who dislike discovery not to post or question why they dislike the show, because they are entitled to the opinion, as I am.


When I see people say the low rating LD got is wrong, I feel I have the right to say I believe its right and warrants the low rating.

But you're not discussing the show, as you've not seen it.

pah

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But you're not discussing the show, as you've not seen it.

Agreed, if you look at metacritic the reviews are dated mostly in August where the reviewers could have watched 2 episodes at most.

If I had to review the show after 2 episodes I'm not sure I'd be recommending it to anyone as I was very unsure until about half way through the season when I started enjoying it. Now I am whole heartedly recommending it.

Imagine being interested in race tracks and posting on a board that you drove to the first corner but you didn't like that so you parked up and left. Now everytime you get asked about that track you tell everyone how much you hated it. Then they point out the absurdity of hating a track based on the first bend but you're not phased.

odyssey06

pah wrote: »

Agreed, if you look at metacritic the reviews are dated mostly in August where the reviewers could have watched 2 episodes at most.
If I had to review the show after 2 episodes I'm not sure I'd be recommending it to anyone as I was very unsure until about half way through the season when I started enjoying it. Now I am whole heartedly recommending it.

You'd have to sit through a lot of poor TV though if you didn't trust to your early impressions of a show. It is rare a show has a turnaround in reactions like this.
Even most professional critics only get the first bunch of episodes of a series to review in advance.

If it hadn't been a Trek show just a random scifi comedy I think I'd have dropped out after 2 episodes too.

pixelburp

odyssey06 wrote: »

You'd have to sit through a lot of poor TV though if you didn't trust to your early impressions of a show. It is rare a show has a turnaround in reactions like this.
Even most professional critics only get the first bunch of episodes of a series to review in advance.

If it hadn't been a Trek show just a random scifi comedy I think I'd have dropped out after 2 episodes too.

That's very true and undeniable but equally ... the reason I even brought up the scores in the first place, and something lost in the circular blather was about their absurdity: there's an inherent flaw in aggregators' "science" applied to something so critically subjective as TV or film. ESPECIALLY with something like a TV season where it's well-understood shows change and can get better - or worse! - over the course of its episodes.

The reduction of subjective TV or film analysis into a percentage point feels completely antithetical to the nature of Art. Going double when the score doesn't seem weighted or can know the context behind the user's value. As said before, the Captain Marvel film was a perfect example of how easily misleading the scores can be.

Hell in some industries, worker's bonuses have been known to be tied against the eventual metacritic value; it's a patently ludicrous valuation system.

Which is why I make a point of popping into threads across Boards to see if some shows are worth sticking with, or even picking up. Elaboration and expression are much better indicators. Especially from those watching who find things to love and hate.

Stark

In a lot of cases, I'll check back and see what the consensus is after other people have done the work for me of watching later episodes.

DS9 is a perfect example of a show I wouldn't have watched only for reading reviews from people who stuck with it.
The Expanse is another show I gave up on twice after a couple of episodes only to give it another shot after reading great reviews from people who watched past the first four episodes.
Someday I'll get past that first episode of "The Wire" :pac:

Plenty of other examples.

Goodshape

Stark wrote: »

The Expanse is another show I gave up on twice after a couple of episodes only to give it another shot after reading great reviews from people who watched past the first four episodes.
.

It took me three attempts and eventually a pandemic related lockdown to get through The Expanse season one. Everyone told me I should love it but I just didn't get it. That detective character was too annoying.

I'm now, finally, mid-way through season four and it might be the best sci-fi TV I've seen since Battlestar Galactica. Makes me dream about what Enterprise could have been, story-wise, and what Discovery and Picard could have been in terms of production quality and tone.

The Expanse is Great.

odyssey06

Stark wrote: »

Someday I'll get past that first episode of "The Wire" :pac:
Plenty of other examples.

It was episode 4 when it started to click for me, though I still had to use subtitles for season 1.
Aside from all the reviews, there was one scene in the first episode between McNulty and a Judge that I thought was brilliant.

santana75

Stark wrote: »

Someday I'll get past that first episode of "The Wire" :pac:

I had the same issue with the Wire. Took me several attempts to get over that first episode but once I did.......its like a gripping novel you wont be able to put down. Definitely pays off in the end.

pixelburp

The Expanse is defiintely the pinacle ATM in terms of that recommendation along the lines of "trust me, stick at it". "Agents of SHIELD" is another noted example for me: Season 1 is all kinds of terrible, only coming together in its last few episodes (because of the tie-in with the MCU finally paying off). When the series finally ended this year, it do so as one of my favourite shows on TV. An opinion I would have scoffed at back during those early episodes.

And TBH it's far harder for me to name shows that grabbed from the get-go, 'cos by and large I find it to be the minority. Most shows I watch - coincidence or not - take a while to bed down, and especially if they're Genre Fiction; those require more narrative heavy-lifting to establish the internal logic of the world so by and large, they don't "get good" til much further on. Trek is by no means an exception.

Rawr

pah wrote: »

Agreed, if you look at metacritic the reviews are dated mostly in August where the reviewers could have watched 2 episodes at most.

If I had to review the show after 2 episodes I'm not sure I'd be recommending it to anyone as I was very unsure until about half way through the season when I started enjoying it. Now I am whole heartedly recommending it.

Imagine being interested in race tracks and posting on a board that you drove to the first corner but you didn't like that so you parked up and left. Now everytime you get asked about that track you tell everyone how much you hated it. Then they point out the absurdity of hating a track based on the first bend but you're not phased.

I get the impression that a lot of venom towards Lower Decks is coming from people who have become so anti-Kurtzman Trek, that any and all Trek shows coming from the current producers *must* be hated and must be review-bombed into oblivion.

I can somewhat relate to that mindset since I too have been very critical of Discovery, Micheal Burnham, Picard and all of the rest. I have bemoned the exisitense of this New Trek, that feels polished and sterile and appears to lack the soul of the Trek I remember from 20 years ago. I have watched Midnight's Edge, Doomcock and rest of them...taken their "rumors" compiled from 4-chan boards with a grain of salt as always recommend and took any news of New Trek being taken down with optimism that Trek may get better.

So I feel like I understand the mindset somewhat. But thoughout it all, I was never concerned with how "woke" things were, or that characters were female or not...all I ever wanted was good Trek and good Trek characters. I watched Discovery in the hope that we'd get that...and watched Picard for the same reason, but I was let down in both cases.

And then there was Lower Decks. I hadn't expected them to get it right. They hadn't even gotten International distribution..so this must have been terrible.
But they actually did it, they made a good Trek show, with good Trek characters and presented it as a half-decent animated comedy. For the first time since ST:Nemsis, the TNG world was back! And it felt great.

Justin Credible Darts; I'm making a guess in thinking that I understand your mindset when it comes to Kurtzman Trek, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I dispise Kurtzman Trek myself, I don't enjoy it and it routinely has let me down. Lower Decks, for whatever bizarre reason behind the scenes at CBS/ Secret Hideout, does not feel like Kurtzman Trek once you get into it. This is a show clearly made by actual TNG fans (No BS "Canon Gurus" required). You should give it a shot, I think you might like it.

Justin Credible Darts

Deleted User wrote: »

But you're not discussing the show, as you've not seen it.

Maybe you too chose to ignore what I wrote , as i clearly stated on this thread i saw the first couple of episodes, and gave up watching.


You should read my posts before wrongly making false allegations.


Show me where I said I never saw the show...oh wait you can't, cos I never said that.

Justin Credible Darts

Rawr wrote: »

Justin Credible Darts; I'm making a guess in thinking that I understand your mindset when it comes to Kurtzman Trek, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I dispise Kurtzman Trek myself, I don't enjoy it and it routinely has let me down. Lower Decks, for whatever bizarre reason behind the scenes at CBS/ Secret Hideout, does not feel like Kurtzman Trek once you get into it. This is a show clearly made by actual TNG fans (No BS "Canon Gurus" required). You should give it a shot, I think you might like it.

its not a kurtzman thing, in fact I had to google to see if he was responsible for LD.


I thought Picard started brilliantly , and then fell off a cliff, but saw it out to the end.
Discovery started poor, and never got much better during season 1, even if lorca was a great addition.


Season 2 improved, with the addition of anson mount, but the show is still too focused on michael burnham, the rest of the cast deserve better.


as for lower decks, it was not just bad where i could watch and hope it would improve , it was not only abysmal, but it was like watching some kids on pcp screaming and shouting, the whole thing seemed more than rushed, and all over the place, after a couple of episodes torturing myself I said no more, regardless who made it or produced it.


When trek fans are saying no thanks, its bad, as trek fans will generally keep watching in the hope it will get better, but LD was just too bad.

Goodshape

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

as for lower decks, it was not just bad where i could watch and hope it would improve , it was not only abysmal, but it was like watching some kids on pcp screaming and shouting, the whole thing seemed more than rushed, and all over the place, after a couple of episodes torturing myself I said no more, regardless who made it or produced it.


When trek fans are saying no thanks, its bad, as trek fans will generally keep watching in the hope it will get better, but LD was just too bad.

Not sure if it's been mentioned here yet

:pac:

but it gets better after the first few episodes.




in my opinion.


(you're perfectly entitled to not watch it)