Star Trek: Discovery - Season 4 - (*** Spoilers***)

ilovesmybrick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612648#Comment_118612648

While I would agree, the fawning on the reddit trek sites and some other review videos is frankly ridiculous. I think one of the few negative (and I mean very mildly negative) reviewers, I think on the AV club, essentially stopped all reviews due to low readership, whereas the mostly very positive I09 reviewer (same company) is still going. Same with a lot of the podcasts. I'm a big fan of the Greatest Generation guys, but their recaps of Disco just don't align with their overviews of TNG, DS9 and VOY, or for that matter Lower Decks. There were classic episodes of Trek that were dragged over the coals, albeit in a fun manner, whereas Discovery in particular gets a pass, even on their most egregious BS. I don't want to go down the road of "No, it's the children that are wrong", but I find it hard to see it as anything other than needing to keep Paramount onside to get access to screeners and cast.

To be honest the only serious criticism I'm seeing is either on this site, or on the massively downvoted comments on either reddit or other reviews. The rest are "I didn't think they could top the last episode, but they did. GREATEST SHOW EVER!" nonsense. To be honest I disagreed a lot with Red Letter Medias reviews of Picard, but those guys are big into their Trek. Their criticism got links to their videos banned from r/startrek. Utter nonsense, and the reason the show has only improved very marginally in four seasons.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612736#Comment_118612736

Well that's what I mean. "Didn't hate it" is a deceptive, underwhelming metric; while given fans are more prone to reactive extremes you often get these lopsided "scores" between critics and audiences, the only real difference being critics less likely to hype or hate a thing - yet that boilerplate shrug of indifference gets an inaccurate 👍 from the site.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612747#Comment_118612747

Problem is every amateur and a lot of the professional reviewers seem to be either in the best show ever, they ruined Trek or it's too woke blaa blaa camps.

It's so hard to find a review that is honest about the good and bad of the show rather than just plowing on with their season 1 preconceptions.

ilovesmybrick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612840#Comment_118612840

Yeah, that's spot on. Adira and Grey aren't bad because they're woke, they're just badly written, but the concept (not space boyfriend, no to that) is interesting but not realised. It's the same problem with Aria, the idea of someone being so artificially recreated, having to pick and chose what to remember from your personal life, the idea is prime classic TNG stuff. But they introduce the idea, do nothing with it, and kill the character.

Though, all that aside, I don't see how much better writing can help Burnham as either the character or actress. Sisko is my favourite captain, but man there was some serious overacting there, but nothing on SMG. And Brooks was able to act with nuance even in that. I don't think it would be much of a problem if the other characters were better developed, Saru for instance is great and can easily hold episodes on his own, but what other character there really can do that? Culber, a small bit. Stammets, not really. So it's entirely on her shoulders, and she can't pull it off.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612747#Comment_118612747

Io9 is a site that has gone to the dogs. It used to be a great resource for hidden gems and interesting stories tangential to sci-fi. Now it's a home of Bad Faith Hot Takes for clickbait, and focuses on the obvious, big ticket franchises that have the stink of management emphasis. Like, they barely covered The Expanse half the time, alongside other shows that deserved more promotion like Lost in Space or For All Mankind - the latter almost never covered by the site, despite being exactly the kind of show io9 would have covered in its pomp.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118612925#Comment_118612925

Adira I love but Grey died and needed to stay dead. Culber is great and so is Stamets and both of them together too so why kill Culber knowing you were gonna bring him back. Also is he or isn't he chief med. and why is he ships councillor now.

Saru is probably the best character so why make him captain knowing you are taking it off him.

To me it's the "Lost" school of writing were you start an arc without knowing the finish and think it's all grand as long as you have a big "OMG" finale.

It's so easy to take Disco apart but the problem is that the over the top "killed Trek" and "too woke" crowd leads to an over sensitive opposition and vice versa. So we end up with best show ever or 0/10. It really is a perfect allegory to current US politics.

As for overacting it's all over Trek but Brooks and Stewart were real A list actors in terms of skill.

Evade

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118613368#Comment_118613368

To be fair Star Trek has been starting stories with no idea how to end them since TNG. Almost every part one episode that ended a season was written without any idea of how to resolve it.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118613558#Comment_118613558

Different kind of show though. Despite the odd cliffhanger no one watched older Trek for the season long arc.

Disco wants to be a deeper show with a season long arc and keeps failing.

Rawr

I find myself needing the echo many here in my own frustration that there appear to be few public voices out there who can treat this show objectively. It either a shilltastic non-critical slant of the show ala Will Wheaton or Trek Culture, or an overly critical nitpick of the entire thing like Doomcock etc... The middle ground, where I feel most fans probably live...is rarely represented.

I've been reflecting a bit about Trek before and Trek now, and I'm trying to sort out what it is about the newer live action stuff that doesn't sit with me and I think I've got a grip of what that issue is with me.

I grew up in the 80's, and my entire life up until the early 2000's was filled with a live and continuing Trek universe. From 1979 until when Voyager ended, we had a continuous universe that had grown from TOS we all could consume, debate and get to know. They screwed up continuity and made terrible mistakes along the way (Fair Haven) but it was a universe that a fan like myself always wanted to pay a visit to each week, and in most cases I would be glad for it.

But then it ended, and we fell into the mire of Prequels. Although I undervalued Enterprise at the time and some of the seasons were Classic Trek...it brought about the notion of going backward and abandoning the universe we had all enjoyed for the guts of 2 decades.

Star Trek 2009 offered a new version of the Universe, which might have been good if they had kept it up...but alas it spluttered out in the second movie and although Beyond was alright...it didn't beg for a follow up.

And then we had Discovery, which offered an actual return to the Universe we remembered...but it made things a more difficult by stylistically sitting on the fence between the Trek we remembered and the 2009 Movie. It really felt like they didn't know which way they actually wanted to land and when they started to claim that the show belonged in the "Prime" universe it became more obvious that they didn't actually know what that meant. Discovery doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the franchise because of this and so any failing or problem the show has is just amplified.

Pivoting the entire show around a generally unlikable character just adds the to sense that this show is not where you go to have an enjoyable hour of Trek.

Discovery is not the worst TV show ever made…far from it. But it is a show that cosplays in Trek uniform while pretending to belong to what came before, when really it doesn’t.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118614627#Comment_118614627

Kurtzmann was involved in 09 so they could have saved a lot of trouble by just continuing in that timeline but I'm sure the execs knew that "prime" timeline would sell better.

End of the day it's just being made by the wrong people. LD has McMahan who clearly loves the world the show is set rather than this kinda punk year 0 vibe JJ and Kurtzmann have where they felt the need to change everything. Let's not forget JJ boasted about not even liking Trek. Ya they throw in an inspiring speech about peace and love cause they think it ticks the Trek box but it never convinces.

It's a bit of a weird example but you should listen to Jason Segel talk about his motivation for bringing back the Muppets in 2011 and the absolute love he had for that show. Here was a man who absolutely got the essence and tone of what the Muppets was. Then look at the poorly received "Most Wanted" made without him and only cause the studio wanted a sequel.

Evade

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118613815#Comment_118613815

I'm pretty sure we did for later DS9 and Enterprise. They weren't quite as serialised as Discovery but still. And I'm pretty sure they got by on some seat of the pants writing too, like a lot of the Dukat/Wynn stuff in the final ten episodes of DS9, they were just better at it.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118614869#Comment_118614869

Well DS9 got away with it at least.

Rawr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118614807#Comment_118614807

Lower Decks is very much an exception to much of what I wrote there about Discovery. It's certainly part of why I love the show and the amount of love for Trek it shows is clear. There is a certain feeling that Lower Deck's universe is the same one as TNG.

It would have certainly been a lot better if they just stuck to their guns and made Discovery part of the 2009 universe. They'd have gotten away with a lot of their design choices and would of had the freedom to take Trek history in a different way. But even then I wonder if the show would have been any good. The focus on Michael as the cause/key/solution to everything is now bordering on the level of parody. Martin-Green's performance as Michael is nowhere near good enough to carry an entire show. I think regardless of cannon, Discovery would still be lack-luster stuff.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118615385#Comment_118615385

Still wouldn't be great as a Kelvin universe show but at least it would take away a whole ton of the criticism around how ships and aliens and all that look also the continuity issues. At least 09 were smart enough to see that.

TheValeyard

I strongly disagree

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118625171#Comment_118625171

Ya right Disco just happens to be exactly the kind of Trek you never knew you wanted. If you don't want logic but want crying why are you even watching Star Trek. Go watch Grey Anatomy or something.

Rawr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118625171#Comment_118625171

Ha….I wonder what angle / shill agreement they’re coming from there.

I’m of course being unfair, it’s entirely possible for people who are not being paid off by CBS to also like the show, but my gut tends to make me wonder if positive press for such an underwhelming piece of television isn’t somehow by agreement.

Emotion in Trek is fine. In fact some of the very best moments in Trek where highly emotional. You show me Burnham cry-acting a scene and I’ll raise you a dying Jake Sisco at the end of The Visitor, or Picard’s PTSD meltdown in Family. In those cases the story earned it’s moments of high emotion, while Discovery will just throw those tears at you for no good reason (or a poorly established reason)

Good emotion in Trek? Yes. Whatever the hell is happening on Discovery? No, dial that nonsense down by 100

TheValeyard

You're entirely right,

Emotion can work well in Trek

Wrath of Khan - Death of Spock

When Kirk Can't Save Edith Keeler

Sisko over the body of dead Dax

Picard in The Inner Light

Sisko as Benny

Death of Trips sister

I'm sure they're plenty more.

Evade

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118625576#Comment_118625576

I don't think they're being paid it's much simpler. The *ists don't like Discovery therefore any negatives about it lumps you in with the *ists so only positives are allowed.

Two of my favourite scenes of emotion in Star Trek are the result of pure logic. Both involve Data, one in Redemtion II and the other in Gambit II.

Slydice

Can't remember what I was looking for but I ended up on the imdb of the actor who plays Tarka, Shawn Doyle.

That dude has put in some work! 94 credits! https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0236495/

pah

Relationships.

Lots

Of

Relationships

Rawr

So this weekend I'll hopefully get a dollop of Trek I actually enjoy (assuming they did an ok job with Picard...I'm avoiding other threads until I've watched).

But I see that there is a slight overlap with Discovery with 2 episodes to go until season's end. I have been following the episode threads here as a replacement to actually watching the show, and the impression that I continue to get is that it still is not worth the effort to set sail and watch anything from Season 4. Based on what I'm reading I can also also see a trend where the writers are padding out epidoes with filler at the expense of the main season arc.

This could mean that:

• A) They have gotten worse at planning seasons and will now cram everything into the last 30-40 minutes
• B) They had very little material to begin with and had little choice than to pad everything out. Or...
• C) This was their attempt to respond to fan critique about the crew etc...by trying to give the audience more time with the crew while attempting to ape what had been done in earlier Trek shows

(C) is an interesting one to ponder, because if that is the case it would fit in with the very knee-jerk way the producers have been trying to react to Trekkie sentiments. Micheal's development into a cry-acting train-wreck was very much a result of a complaint of the wooden "Vulkan-light" character she was depicting. Moving everything into a piss-poor 31st Century was a reaction to their poor handling of canon. Likely the complaints that we never get time with the crew has resulted in loads of time with crew to the point of tedium (by the sound of things). They react to feedback, all the time, but never seem to land on a better solution in the process. Very much a headless-chicken approach to show-running.

I'm not one of those people who think the current producers have made Discovery the way it is based on some kind of "woke" ideology, but rather that making good Trek is beyond their abilities or the abilities of people they know how to work with. Kurtzman is not a Trek fan, his people are not Trek fans, and a lot of what they are doing looks like it is based on a very superficial look at some old TOS or TNG-era episodes. They don't really get why those Trek shows were enjoyable to begin with.

And so, that brings me to the whole thing about enjoyment. I stopped watching Discovery at the end of Season 3, because it was clearly no longer enjoyable. It appeared that Season 4 would be more of the same. What I wonder, if anyone is wishing to indulge my curiosity, is there anything enjoyable in the current season that would make it worth watching at all? My gut tells me that there isn't.

ilovesmybrick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118731067#Comment_118731067

Personally I thought Picard was excellent. Leaving out Lower Decks for the moment, it is the best new episode of Trek in the modern formats. There are a few issues, but nothing to write home about.

Discovery and Picard are overlapping for three weeks. If you do decide to watch Discovery (I'm watching, but I wouldn't recommend), leave a bit of distance with Picard. Watched tne first episode of Picard yesterday and was delighted with myself, then put on Discovery and got depressed again!

In terms of your points, I would go with B-They have the kernel of an idea, that could potentially be interesting, but they lack the talent to flesh it out. So they delve into a bit of C, where they go look, here's a person. This person likes surfing, or holidays on the beach, or whatever triviality. Now this person is a developed character so we can get back to Burnhams personal life. We don't get loads of time with the crew at all, just random vignettes here and there for whoever happens to be handy on set that day.

I wouldn't quite say that the problem with Discoverys producers is woke ideas. I think that the problem with the producers is that they feel that jamming in as many woke ideas as possible can make up for writing or character development. So rather than approaching it from the aspect of "Here is an interesting character idea, and sure we'll make the character also trans or gay or whatever", they approach it from the perspective that "If we make the character trans/gay/whatever, that will make them an interesting character". So you end up with characters like Grey, who are completely superfluous and have absolutely no development beyond one characteristic (though I suppose maybe being a ghost/android is development?). It's lazy stuff.

I thought it was just me being overly harsh, and then the missus picked up the second part of Discovery on her own last week (not a huge Trek fan, but I sat her down a few years back and put on DS9 and a few of the films, which she enjoyed) and she stopped watching after ten minutes. She just realised that it was bad, it wasn't just me bitching about it all the time. It's just crap TV.

Picard was fun. Might watch a third time tonight!

ilovesmybrick

GreeBo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118731067#Comment_118731067

Unfortunately nothing enjoyable for me, I'm only watching to satisfy my curiosity on where the storyline is going, I'd be as happy reading a short story that just had the plot and the resolution. This current season is an embarrassment and quite demeaning to women imo. They all seem to have to show us how emotional they are all the time, despite the fact that it would be suicide to run a startship in this manner.

is_that_so

Like others been very reluctant to look at Season 4. Is it worth a look at all or does it just have a lot of the bad from the previous seasons?

ilovesmybrick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118797664#Comment_118797664

As far as I'm concerned it was the weakest season to date. Maybe watch it in one go while doing work around the house. You won't miss anything important as each episode only has about 5 minutes of anything of note.

I will probably watch season 5 because I'm a glutton for punishment, but I'll probably wait until it's over and blast through it some day when I've nothing better to do.

Spear

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118797664#Comment_118797664

My own two cents.

I'll keep it spoiler free, if case you plan to watch it.

I thought it was boring and empty story wise. There was about three episode worth of actual content stretched out into 13 episodes. The basic premise is a good hard sci-fi concept. But after the setup, they just spin their wheels for about 6 episodes, leaving if feeling extremely slow moving, and openly boring at times.

There are significant attempts to include and flesh out the secondary cast and crew members. And Burnham is far less of the god-like entity from the past seasons.

It's just a shame there's little to no story accompanying these improvements.

I personally preferred it over season 3, but that's only because it's boring rather than actively annoying.

If you can tolerate slightly more ponderous sci-fi in the vein of Solaris, ST: TMP, 2001: A Space Oddyssey, you might have more tolerance for this.

Rawr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118801248#Comment_118801248

I'm my later years I had really grown to appreciate TMP for what it is and I always had a soft spot for 2001: A Space Oddyssy. If they were trying to go for the whole "Space is big and dangerous" fair play, I wish it was done more...but is it worth putting up with the rest of the show?

I have now started reading the thread on the final episode, thus completing my attempt to experience the show by proxy via the Trek Boardsies (thank you by the way :D ) It appears alas that my fears that this season is not worth watching as come to pass. I had waited until the finale in order to access whether there was at least a satisfying conclusion to the run of episodes to make it worth even a passive marathon of the season while I did other work. Alas, no.

I get the impression of them trying to make Discovery a normal Trek show, with 31st century missions for the Federation to solve space problems while also dealing with the lives of the crew of the Enterprise Voyager Discovery....but that they just couldn't land it. I can't imagine Michael being in any way comparible to Kirk, Sisco, Picard or Janeway nor there being much of a crew to give any damns about. My readings here on Boards give me the mental image of a show where Micheal will continue chew the scenery with tearful whispers. Whispers which are trying to do the heavy emotional lifting that the script itself should have been able to do....and of course it can't because many of these people don't know how to write.

Although some have written that they have toned Micheal down...it still feels like the experience of Discovery would still be tedious and not entertaining. Thus a waste of time. For the first time since maybe Enterprise I find myself giving a new Trek season a miss, but unlike that earlier show...I don't believe that I'll regret it.

No doubt, as their Trek flagship show, Paramount will keep trucking along with Discovery and unless they present some hope of improvement I will probably avoid future seasons too. However I must wonder what would happen if the quality of Picard continues throughout Season 2 & 3 and if Strange New Worlds turns out to good too? How would they handle Discovery with 3/4 potentially better Trek shows running along with it?

pixelburp

With a fifth season, how much longer could the show even last? In this day and age, five seasons feels like an outlier when shows wrap up after 3 or 4 runs; streaming services and the mayfly lifespan of social media relevance has shortened series' lengths IMO. You'd have to imagine (hope) there can't be much longer left with this show before Paramount+ wrap it all up. Especially if Picard, Lower Decks and Strange New Worlds prove to be more popular for both eyeballs and social media.