The Legacy of Star Trek: Discovery

"The first season was off to a rocky start." So they WERE following along faithfully with a longly held Star Trek tradition.

"I'm not going to even go over every season" Proceeds to go over every season. Never change, Steve

I have a feeling that we would have known more about the rest of the ensemble if the writers had paid less attention to crafting the ubiquitous 500-word pontifications, and devoted those 10 minutes per episode letting Owo and Dettmer share some cool tidbits of their lives. Instead, all we get are knowing looks from them while Saru, Pike, or Burnham drone on and on with "I know you're scared, but you're the best damn crew in Starfleet, blah, blah..."

Saru helped me with my anxiety, as I related to him that his fears were a form of lies that even his own mind was telling him. That will always be the legacy of Discovery for me.

It was amazing watching Doug Jones walk in season 1, because he broke his back carrying it.

I think that you hit the nail on the head when you talk about the serialization of the story. I have some minor complaints about some of the things that the series did (I've never found mirror universe plots terribly interesting, I thought the mushroom drive was kind of dumb, I didn't think it was necessary to tie the main character to Spock, etc), but I'm willing to look past a lot of those things because Star Trek has always embraced a certain silliness. But the serialized storytelling killed me. Both in this series and Picard. In a monster-of-the-week style of storytelling, a bad episode is one-and-done---you watch it, roll your eyes, and hope that next week is gonna be better. When you decide to completely serialize a show like this, if the plot doesn't catch you, you have a season to get through. It is very frustrating.

growing up in the 1960s with the original series, I paid no attention, grew up and married a man that was a Star Trek fan, still no interest to learn, but I have to give it to you Steve, you have an amazing way to draw listeners in and make it interesting, I know more about Star Trek now listening to you then I ever intended to know , my husband also thanks you

I really wish that quality of writing for Disco would have been more consistent and that had it more of an "ensemble" show.

I think my biggest issue with Discovery is that it didn’t lean into what made it great often enough. People complain that it’s too emotional, but I think that was its greatest strength. Instead of giving us moments of building relationships, it felt obligated to having action sequences as much as possible. For example, instead of getting a full Season 4 finale dedicated to the dynamics of making contact with the 10-C, we have to have a high stakes chase with a villain that was honestly never that interesting. In the season 3 finale, Tilly tells a story about how she was depressed on her birthday and Michael just comforted her without mentioning her birthday, but this story is sandwiched into a high stakes action moment instead of being shown to us previously. And of course, the Season 5 timey wimey episode where Michael has a fist fight with herself from the past, in what feels like bold character assassination of Season 1 Michael as wildly irrational. Discovery was at its best when it was feeling, not fighting.

One complaint I’ve seen about Discovery that completely baffles me is the claim that the show’s presentation of society’s prejudices — especially in terms of LGBTQ (and particularly trans rights) — is too “in your face” compared to older Trek shows. Um, the original series depicted the ignorance of racism by having the last 2 members an entire species — whose faces were painted literally half black and half white — fight to the death. This aired at the height of the Civil Rights movement when peaceful protesters were being beaten in the streets… And DISCOVERY is the “in your face” Trek show?! Holding a mirror up to society and commenting on its uglier and shameful areas has ALWAYS been the core of Star Trek. If anything, Discovery depicted its LGBTQ characters as completely ordinary people, which is the WHOLE POINT of setting aside the trivial differences between people and living together harmoniously. Great video, Steve! Thank you for your work… your videos are often the highlight of my day 😁

Dang. I never watched Discovery just because the streaming format doesn't really work for me, but you just made me want to try it.

My biggest gripe with Discovery was that they cast Tig Notaro and then barely gave her any fucking screen time.

Michael Burnham is a rare example of a character that was overdeveloped. She had huge personal arcs in basically all the seasons. No Star Trek character has ever had so much *backstory*. Even in S3, they introduced a whole timeskip seemingly just to give Michael more backstory to explore. And that was a shame, because it meant that she never settled as a character. It's not that I don't know who Michael is, it's that I have five different Michaels who all seem inconsistent with each other, none of whom get to fully just exist for more than an episode or two at a time. Try describing S5 Michael and S1 Michael to a friend who hasn't seen the show, and see if they can guess whether you're describing one character or two.

I do understand your frustration and exasperation with supposed fans who do nothing but very publicly and monetizably bitch about canon, I really do. But the things you love about Star Trek (how it relates to the present day, the emotional truths of its characters and stories, its commitment to presenting an aspirational message) directly result in a huge population of people who are in love with the elements of the show you go out of your way to call out as insignificant window dressing. Emotional investment in the characters and their struggles is going to lead to emotional investment in the secondary world. That's just something we have to manage and express in constructive ways that don't involve death threats to people who are just showing up to do their job where they pretend to live in space, because that's what being a fucking human being is, Jesus Christ. Finally, material criticism of Discovery to keep this screed tethered to the topic at hand, the real reason I'm bothered by Michael Burnham's relationship with Spock is because a large chunk of Spock's (rather limited) characterization and depth in his original appearances was tied to his relationship with his family, and how those relationships interact with his struggles over his Vulcanness and humanity. In Discovery, since the show really isn't about Spock, it never felt to me like Michael fit into that paradigm in an interesting and compelling way, and Strange New Worlds, which is considerably more about Spock, has made it clear that it's not going to bother trying either.

I give a shit about Saru’s rank, because I think he was (is) one of the best Captains in the history of Star Trek. I also liked that Michael was the main protagonist without being Captain, and insisting she replace Saru in later series, I think slightly devalues her character.

Great video overall, but I do have to disagree slightly with your view on canon and continuity. To be clear, I'm not as strict on this as I used to be. Production design changes and timeline alterations are inevitable with a long running franchise, and canon can be flexible if it benefits the story. However, Discovery is a new entry in an established franchise, specifically building off familiar events and factions. Maintaining consistent continuity within a story is a basic aspect of fiction because a writer is temporarily maintaining the illusion of a real world. So when Discovery has a lot of really obvious contradictions all at once, it's hard to blame fans who care about canon for being upset. You are right that the story at hand is most important, but to say that canon isn't a valid criticism, or to imply that anyone who has a problem with it is just an irrational whiner, is unfair. (I know that's not what you intended but that's kinda how it came across at times). Then again I'm sure you have dealt with a lot of annoying and irrational fans over the years, so I might be fed up after a while too if that were the case.

I dislike Discovery for several reasons and gave up on the show after season 3 BUT there are several aspects and characters I love. - Saru: One of the best characters in all of Trek - Our first on screen gay couple, Stamets and Culber were great. - Tilly is a delight and her bubbly excitement is relatable af. - Without Discovery we wouldn't have SNW which is in my top 3 Star Trek shows.

"People aren't robots." Data: "I take exception to that." 😉

"The main character cries too much" is now also a complaint for The Doctor in Doctor Who...

There was a cumulative effect of the "changes" to the franchise in Star Trek Discovery. As you iterated through them, each on their own wouldn't have caused the fracas we saw from many legacy Star Trek fans, but when combined, we were offered a show that bore little to no resemblance to the beloved franchise many of us had invested a significant amount of time in. Personally, it's hard to express how excited I was that a new live action Star Trek series was lauching. I can remember watching the first few episodes of Discovery and feeling that excitement slowly turn to resentment. Magic mushroom spore drive, navigating giant space tardigrades (LOL), purple marble mouthed Klingons with undecipherable speaking abilities, mutiny by the lead character, unnecessary and preventable death of the first captain, space whales, double hosed pissing, deranged Spock, magical telepathic capabilites of Sarek, breath door locks, smug computer voice, sunlight bathed rooms and corridors, shiny metallic everything sets, lens flares, blue light everywhere, whispering dialog, etc., etc., all added up and created something incredibly unfamiliar. Not to mention the storytelling had completely changed in tone. Gone were big philisophical ideas, moral dilemmas and subtle world building plots. Gone were stories that provoked further thought. Discovery's stories were firnly rooted in surface level absolutes. Each a linear journey where a nemesis must be defeated or a mystery box solved. Each a mini Marvel superhero movie where good and bad are clearly laid out and we root for the heroes because we're told they're the heroes. After watching all 5 seasons, I can count on one hand the times when I was intrigued enough to spend time thinking about the show after it aired. In short, Discovery was NOT Star Trek, at least it wasn't for me. It was something else entirely. All the Gorn skeleton, Tribble, Guardian of Forever fan service and Easter eggs didn't make it Star Trek either. The showrunners used all that to lure in the sizeable audience the franchise had grown over decades, including me. Small wonder there was deep resentment. I think your intepretation of why legacy fans rebelled, cheapens the very real experience many of us had with the show.