Copium

LD being canon takes away some of the sting of Disco being canon. Since it's so far in the future the last 3 seasons can also easily be ignored.
As it should be.
Cartoons can't be, simple fact.
- This is false.
  LD directly crossed over with SNW, so if LD isn't canon then neither is SNW.
  Prodigy is brilliant so if it's not canon what's the point?
- All Star Trek live-action television series and films are and always have been generally considered part of the canon,[2] while Star Trek: Lower Decks and Star Trek: Prodigy are both fully accepted as canonical as well.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon
- So a factors just your opinion right. And therefore not a fact

Stamets is great. I love him.

I love a LOT of the characters on discovery, but I just found the story arcs it ended up telling very... Overblown.

Did the disco really have to save the literal galaxy every season? And skip across time so it could be placed into a pivotal role in every era?

Not a single time, not once, did the disco feel like just another ship in the fleet. It was always THE ship.

Season one is still the best IMO, with the disco being a secret research program hijacked by Lorca for his own purposes. The story felt right. But then the ship and crew just kept being extraordinary not just every season, but in every tiny moment.

I really love all the worldbuilding in Trek, but in disco that always played second fiddle to whatever crisis was going on, which the disco would then inevitably resolve. It was yawn-inducing to me.

Even as I adored lots of the small stuff the series did with the style, characters, and world.

Like Stamets!

Your comments put into words how I felt about the show. It was one major calamity after another. I might go back and finish because of Stamets, Culber (love Wilson Cruz), and everyone else.
I do like Strange New Worlds a lot. It is less frenetic
- SNW has landed much more solidly for me, as well. I really hope it continues.
The most stinging part is Prodigy, the literal kid's show, takes a similar story arc and doesn't make it all about their special magic research ship.
Did the disco really have to save literal galaxy every season?
It really didn't.
In Season 1 the only 'save the galaxy' thing is basically a one-off episode plot. Not unlike many other Treks.
Season 2, yeah. That flagrantly is save the galaxy.
Season 3, they are not saving the galaxy, they're trying to help rebuild the Federation and its influence and uncover a scientific mystery. The Federation was crippled but existed and was at war with another group. Discovery shows up and is able to help with the use of a different perspective (a literal plot point) and new technology. The same thing happens in literally every Trek, it just switches sides on who has what tech. Enterprise was with basically everyone, SNW is the Gorn, TOS is the Klingons, TNG is the Romulans/Borg/Cardassians, DS9 is Cardassian/Dominion, PIC is Romulan Sect/Changelings/Borg, LD has the Pakleds and I'm sure that Prodigy has something as well. Haven't started it yet. Either way, in all of them the primary ship that we follow becomes a primary plot point in the wars. The only one that doesn't fit the mould is Voyager and that's because they're on their own but even then the show opens with Starfleet vs the Maquis.
Season 4, they're trying to uncover another scientific mystery that is wreaking havoc in the galaxy. Personally i'd say it's halfway there but not entirely. It's more of a political season with seeing the internal struggles of the Federation. The 'galaxy saving' is a backdrop that's set up for the inner aspects of the Federation being at odds with one another. It's a representation of the struggle thats also within Burnham and all the crew members for being in a new place far from home. I honestly think that Season 4 is a work of art.
Season 5, saving the galaxy also isn't a thing in this. Closest you can say is that they're trying to save the Federation from being destroyed. Galaxy seems to be fine otherwise. But even then the season is more of a treasure hunt. A shitty one but still a treasure hunt.
Not a single time, not once, did the disco feel like just another ship in the fleet. It was always THE ship.
As opposed to any other show? As mentioned, every show features a primary ship that ends up solving the conflicts or being a MAJOR player in it. This feels like a really bizarre complaint. The four Enterprises we follow all feel like THE ship. Do they meet up with other ships? Sure, but they're always the ones at the heart of the conflict and solving it. That's... how shows work? It's not like the new tech for Discovery is a big deal or not used as a constant plot point either. DS9 had the Defiant with a cloaking device that was heavily relied on. Why? Because that's what they had. Discovery has a spore drive which is why it's being used so much and why we follow it. Just like the Enterprise had its name or new path, Voyager had it's stranded space and DS9 had a new quirky ship based around a space station.
I really love all the worldbuilding in Trek, but in disco that always played second fiddle to whatever crisis was going on, which the disco would then inevitably resolve.
.... what?
I feel like you have completely missed the majority of what was happening on screen over the course of the show. The crisis is the second fiddle to the characters. It's used as a vehicle to drive character development as opposed to having characters drive a crisis like in TNG or Voyager. Not that both didn't have character development as well, but they were often static characters that were reacting to a new crisis each time. Discovery flipped the switch hard and went all in on serialization and character development. Every season the characters change and grow, so much so that they did a really shit flashback to what their characters were like about halfway through Season 5. The characters were fleshed out by the worldbuilding and they themselves fleshed it out.
In Season 1 and 2 they were relatively constrained about what they could world build but they still did their best. They expanded on the engagements with the Klingons (which annoyed some people but I enjoyed), expanded on Prime Pike for the first time since TOS, they finally gave Number One a name, they expanded on the childhood with Sarek that Spock had and his relationship with his human mother that he's hinted at, expanded more on Section 31 and expanded further on the Terran Empire. They developed an entirely new race in Saru and developed a whole culture around him that stretches across multiple seasons. Then they went to the future where they have more free reign and went nuts with developing incredible looking ships and insane tech and new worlds and new empires and elaborating on cultures not seen since TNG.
How is any of that second fiddle when every bit of that expansion was the driving force of each season?
I see these complaints all the time and I don't understand what y'all are talking about, especially when every other Trek show is guilty of the same 'crimes'.
- Maybe I can help you understand a bit where viewers like me are me coming from. I do see where people who really enjoy the show get it from, as they usually like it for the same reasons I do, but the stuff that for me kick me out of my immersion, just doesn't for them.
  How is any of that second fiddle when every bit of that expansion was the driving force of each season?
  I mean, that stuff is the reason I like a lot of Discovery.
  But world-building and character development isn't just "going nuts" with expansion and imagination. All of that stuff, which there is a lot of, didn't feel properly thought out and planned to me. It was a barrage of ideas, very few of which landed for me. I can't even pull examples out of my head because it just didn't stay with me.
  You point out some of the good ones, and that's the stuff I'm still begging for more of.
  In my viewing, the only thing each season left me with really, was whatever big central plot element it had. So yes, the good ended up second fiddle to that. I would have preferred the show not work that way.
  As mentioned, every show features a primary ship that ends up solving the conflicts or being a MAJOR player in it.
  Another way to put it might be that other treks don't make their main ships feel like an inanimate Mary Sue? Or not as much. I don't mind the spore drive, I think it's cool af (even as to this day I'm iffy on the in-universe science it canonizes). Obviously the main ship and cast of a trek will somehow be part of major events, but disco never pulled that off without feeling contrived as hell to me.
  I think that's why you see people comment this a lot. Discos writing has a "forced" tone to it that not everyone seems to notice. Perhaps best exemplified by the way characters will burst into tears way more than in most media. Makes me think of the Robot Devils criticism in futurama.
  Even as the performances are competent, it's such a blatant attempt to pull at the viewers heartstrings it made me frustrated and thereby unable to stay immersed in what the character was feeling. Like the Robot Devil, rather then remaining engrossed, "that makes me angry". I can still see and appreciate the arc of the character, but the execution sabotages my ability to remain invested.
  The same kind of thing would happen with where the ship was going, what would happen there, etc.
  Again, overall, I enjoy the show. And while I know a lot of people suffer a similar experience to mine, I think the issues I run into when watching the show just don't register for others. Like how you're able to completely explain away my problems through the way you experience it.
  I can totally see how the show would shine if you just rearrange the parts I experience as second fiddle into it's primary appeal. I just can't do that when watching the show.
It is kinda weird that it always seemed like THE ship while the shows with the enterprise didn't really have that even though canonically the enterprise is THE (flag)ship. Or at least not as much.
Did the disco really have to save the literal galaxy every season?
Personally, I'm fine with this.
But if they are going to save the galaxy, make some real galaxy-sized problem.
To be fair, if I gave you a fleet of starships and one of them could just appear anywhere at any time, it would be THE ship.
Geordi is great. I love him.
I love a LOT of the characters on TNG, but I just found the story arcs it ended up telling very... Overblown.
Did the Enterprise-D really have to save the literal galaxy every season? And skip across time so it could be placed into a pivotal role in every era?
Not a single time, not once, did the Enterprise-D feel like just another ship in the fleet. It was always THE ship.
Seasons 3-4 are still the best IMO, with Picard being assimilated and liberated and wrestling with his new dual-identity as Locutus. Worf leaving Starfleet and being instrumental in Gowron’s ascension. The story felt right. But then the ship and crew just kept being extraordinary not just every season, but in every tiny moment.
I really love all the worldbuilding in Trek, but in TNG that always played second fiddle to whatever crisis was going on, which the ENT-D would then inevitably resolve. It was yawn-inducing to me.
Even as I adored lots of the small stuff the series did with the style, characters, and world.
Like Geordi!
- I don't really think that's the same thing. The enterprise D was the flagship of the federation. It was THE ship and was given important mission, but it didn't save the entire literal galaxy in it's own. It had whacky adventure, did a lot of first contacts, fought important battles. But discovery single handedly solved galaxy level menaces and fought against entire alien fleets, all without very little help. That just doesn't make any sense
- Did the Enterprise-D really have to save the literal galaxy every season?
  It didn't. And most of the episodes weren't even aimed at the major historical events of the time.
  It did participate on most historical events when they happened. And Q preferred to interact with it (what created some of those events). But it's completely different from Discovery.
- I'm really sorry you didn't enjoy everything about the series, but your subjective experience is what it is.
  I won't belittle it by superficially rehashing your words to apply them to something else.

Ah, canon, or the word we use to describe which made-up story is more real than the other made-up stories!

Anything I personally don't enjoy isn't Canon.
- Everybody got their own canon.
  There isn't just one canon.
- Ha! I love it.
Yeah, who cares what's canon anymore? Next week they'll make another prequel that'll retcon the previous retcon to something else.
It's nothing but prequels anyway.
- They didn't retcon anything though. They've only expanded. No lore was changed, only visuals.
- This has been my beef with new Star Trek. Too many damn prequels and nostalgia trips.
  I just want a live action show with a new ship, a new crew, set post-DS9.
I mean, yeah. It's important to know which works are sanctioned by the creator/owner of a fictional work.
Without that My Immortal is as much of a part of Harry Potter as the Prisoner of Azkaban.
- it is though. You can't own stories. You can own the right to sell books or whatever about them in a particular market at a particular time but that's a legal contrivance.
  Who's myths are official and who's non cannon? Are there fairy tales more cannonical than others? Which bits of Arthuriana are more real than the others?
  Chant a dead language around whatever scrolls you like while wearing costumes but your ability to enforce some legal structure has no bearing on what is true.
- My Immortal
  I had to search this one. Bad fanfic?
  Regardless, they're both just stories. It seems like that point gets lost anytime "canon" comes up.

Modern Star Trek has its ups and downs. I’m just glad there’s so much of it. Discovery can have a weird National Treasure season, and Picard can have a bumpy Covid year, but there’s probably something interesting going on in Lower Decks or Strange New Worlds. (Or vice versa.)

I’m just happy characters like Stamets weren’t a one off experiment. It’s delightful to see queer folk continue to pop up in the main cast of other shows.

This analogy doesn't work because Lower Decks never misses, making it the only star trek with no bad seasons
- Lower Decks never misses unless you’re one of those folks with the Trek equivalent of the cilantro soap gene who just can’t get on board with an animated comedy show.

I have two opinions that have not changed since 2016:

First, Discovery, as Star Trek and as science fiction in general, is terrible. Great ideas destroyed by some of the worst writing and direction in the industry.

I will not be taking any questions.

And second, in spite of that, Paul Stamets as a character is one of my favorite in Star Trek. (After the shrooms mellowed him out, of course.)

I'm glad you're sticking with your nick, it suits you and it's a good one to have.

Probably unpopular opinion: I liked asshole Stamets. Nice Stamets is annoying.

Hell yeah dude!

All the characters in disco are amazing, it’s the main plot that gets ridiculous sometimes.

Don’t let bad writing ruin a great cast!

I mean i'm not a fan of the series as a whole but i'm absolutely here for psycho dwight harry mud

Doesn’t hurt as much as LD confirming that Threshold wasn’t just Tom Paris’ fever dream.

LD takes sadistic pleasure in making sure to confirm all the worst episodes are canon.

Hurts fans and disrespects canon. There's a reason why it abbreviates so nicely to STD.

Yeah, DSC had some likeable moments and characters in a sea of mediocrity and poor producing. Mudd, Cpt Lorca, introducing SNW cast, etc and building off Roddenberry's vision of representation. But yeah so much of it just felt like an assault on Trek. Like the producers hate it or something.
- I loved Lorca. And actual fresh and yet completely believable military captain figure. And Jason Isaacs can act.
  And then they ruined his character with a silly rug-pull and. making him turn out to be some generic, evil for the sake of being evil, space Hitler character.

I like a lot of the characters. I just dislike the plot and writing. Stamets fucks.

i feel like the answer to what is and isn't canon can be summed up with;

Why do the klingons look different?

They always looked like that, you just didn't notice before.

Canon has always been squishy. The Eugenics Wars takes place in the nineteen-nineties... oh but didn't Voyager's crew visit the nineties? And it was just presented as it was when they were filming? Plus, DISCO had that Elon Musk name drop.

...so the timeline floats up as the present day does. Canon is just a vague sense of the things everyone agrees on.

I liked the SNW temporal cold war explanation.
iirc klingons were uncomfortably bald in early disco

Well I haven't even looked at it yet. The feedback of it from you guys is so bad I started deep space nine a second time before I went to discovery.

If you haven't seen Babylon 5, give that a shot. It's great. It's gritty like the good episodes of ds9 with none of the fluff.
- Thanks

I really enjoyed most of Discovery. Especially all the genuine queer representation, that shit was overdue. And Michael is a hell of a character, great but flawed and so on.

I just wish the spore drive didn't require the ship to spin around and make silly noises. That alone is responsible for a good 50% of the cringing I did while watching the series.

Doesn't hold a candle to DS9 in most respects tho, which I started rewatching after getting two episodes into the final season of Discovery

AAaaargghh! Medical emergency!

Give me 20 units of TOS immediately

I'll prescribe you 2 hours of Benjamin Sisko's e nun ci ation. S.

Stamets. Both you and the character rock.
The first time I tried to watch D I wasn’t sure; but the second time through he has really grown on me.
You and the stuff you’ve said on here as well. You seem like a hoopy frood

<3
Discovery isn't for everyone but that's fine. Not every Trek is going to hit you right. Not everyone is going to enjoy every piece of media. Some things are made for other groups of people. Discovery happens to fall in that category but it's just as much a part of Trek as DS9 and TNG.
The Trek universe exists with so much diversity, from the people to the planets. Why can't the shows?
- is 'deserve' really the word you were going for here? I dont 'deserve' to enjoy DIS and that's why I didn't?

Discovery may be canon, but I don't believe that the writers care all that much. They've certainly not made any effort to make it integrate with the rest of Trek.

Lower Decks on the other hand positively revels and the fact that it's canon.

I certainly know which is the more enjoyable of the shows as a result.

They’ve certainly not made any effort to make it integrate with the rest of Trek.
wut
It takes place between ENT and TOS and then in the far future. In every case they've done everything they can to have it fit with the timeline. They brought back Pike and Number One, actually giving her a name after 50 odd years. Then in the future they elaborate on the Romulan/Vulcan relationship and Spocks impact on the Unification he was seeking for in previous Treks. They honor every single actor and character they can by naming ships after passed actors or after characters. They build on to that lore. So yes. They do make an enormous effort to integrate it with the rest of Trek.
You can not like it, that's fine, but saying that they've not made any effort is an outright lie.

Disco certainly had it's up and maybe a bit more downs, but it has some of the best characters. Stamets is great (so please keep the name), and so is Suru. And the relationship between Suru and Michael is one of Treks best imo. And once we got over the speed bumps, Stamets and Culver warmed my icy gay heart when they were on screen together. Tilly and Reno were also great characters.

TBH I didn't mind the last season, it was OK. It had the same plotting, pacing and character issues that always seemed to hold back from being anything more than just OK.

Not for long tough. they only have to "Kelvin" the 31st century timeline.

32nd. Also no clue what you're talking about. Either you're suggesting that something from the 'real' Prime Universe is gonna breakthrough into the 32nd century or that it's going to be retroactively made into a split timeline, a thing that never happened to the Kelvin movies as being an alternate timeline was the literal point of the movie.
- Honestly I just don't understand why they didn't make Discovery with the intention of it being part of, and expanding the Kelvin Timeline. Was ST Beyond that bad ?

I'm doing a DISCO rewatch right now. It is much better on a second run than I remember it being when it first came out.

I had the same reaction in all honesty. I fucking hated it on first release. The klingons looked weird and most of them spoke it HORRIBLY with the giant fake teeth. I thought the ship looked odd as hell and Lorca was grating. Abandoned it like 5 or 6 episodes in. Came back a year or something later when they started season 2. Said fuck it. The trailer for Season 2 looks interesting. I'll rewatch Season 1 and catch up. Wasn't nearly as bad as I remembered. I was just so upset by all the 'newness' of it that I couldn't look past it. It wasn't the Trek I knew. Everything about it was SO STRANGE and felt so off but the more I watched it the more I recognized the Trek that's actually there. Just realized that it's Trek with a new coat of paint that is not the greatest color. Season 2 came around and they repainted again with a brighter color. Was still new but the old was much more recognizable.
I've had the same reaction to a lot of stuff. Tennant switching to Smith fucked me up. I hated Daniel Craig on first watch, although now I find the hatred of him to be unjustified. The writing of his movies? More so. There's a few other examples I'm sure but in each one it was just something new that put me off so much I couldn't bring myself to accept it. I think a lot of us fans have that reaction with new stuff.
But as I'm getting older the more I realize that the new should be embraced. Being stagnant isn't any better for media than it is for us or water. Movement and progress and trying new things should always be what we strive for. Even if the attempts don't always work, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
- Couldn't agree more brother. The concept of Riker's Beard is well known in TV - although it is hard to implement in the age of streaming. But I want new and untried.
  LD really broke the mold and is fantastic. DISCO's issue is that it wasn't different enough.
  I want Horror in the ST universe. I want James Bond in ST (Section 31?). I want How I Met Your Mother in ST. I want Law and Order in ST. I want MASH in ST. I want Saved By The Bell in ST(Academy?) I want The Hurt Locker in ST. I want The Notebook in ST. That's how the franchise moves on, not retreading old ground.

It may be canon, doesn't make it good though. What an awful series.

Wahhhh.
Cope harder.
- Don't worry, got plenty of good Trek to (re)watch.

I found that I enjoy Discocery a lot more watching it a slow pace, about 2 episodes a month. Otherwise, it really dies start to feel like the Michael Burnam hour for me. At a slow pace, it at least feels like it evolves less around one character - possibly since I gave the story time to relax I think. I am enjoying it overall, but Ia mid way through season 4 and will likely just not finish it.

Thank God for head canon

So, Lemmy ask you this kind one,

I have made it to the final season of discovery, and like one or two episodes in, but have sorta lost steam on finishing it based on what was said here on lemmy about the final season.

Worth finishing? Or leave it on a high note.

It totally seemed like the end of the series at the end of the previous season, so I could be fine with letting it go.

Also I am BALLS deep in DS9 now

Stick with DS9. The last time I've been this overwhelmingly disappointed in a TV show Dexter but honestly it wasn't even close. If you're one or two episodes in you've already found out what the big thing they're hunting is. Which means you know what the ending is. Moreover, you saw Burnham commit an act worse than her mutiny in Season 1 that proves she didn't learn shit. Moreover, the season was not known to be the final season when filming so an 'epilogue' was tacked on at the end. The epilogue does not give a singular line to anyone from the main Discovery crew outside of Burnham.
The fourth season ends beautifully. The fifth season adds literally nothing but removes so so much. Just abandon it.
- You're not seriously saying that Discovery has a worse ending than either of the Dexter endings are you?
Are you me?? I stopped two episodes into the final season to rewatch DS9 too! Really really enjoying it.