Star Trek: Discovery

:

Season 1
Season #: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
User Score
4.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1324 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 527 out of 1324
  2. Mixed: 158 out of 1324
  3. Negative: 639 out of 1324
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. AyHy
    Oct 24, 2017
    3
    Frankly, Star Trek: Discovery is everything I *don't* want in a Star Trek show.

    It's: * Basically humorless * Basically joyless * Pessimistic * An "interquel" so we know how everything ends * Despite its name, not focused on discovery at all - just a war story Why did they think this was the Star Trek we wanted? The Orville, despite its ridiculousness, is closer to being the    Frankly, Star Trek: Discovery is everything I *don't* want in a Star Trek show.

    It's:
    * Basically humorless
    * Basically joyless
    * Pessimistic
    * An "interquel" so we know how everything ends
    * Despite its name, not focused on discovery at all - just a war story

    Why did they think this was the Star Trek we wanted? The Orville, despite its ridiculousness, is closer to being the Star Trek we wanted.

    The production values are amazing, the editing and sound is amazing, but the story they're telling just... kinda bums me out.    … Expand
  2. james-cordoban
    Oct 25, 2017
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The ratings are a good example when the dual ranking of "metacritic" pays of. Nearly all "professional reviews" were done after the pilot, whereas the user score increases per time an reveals, imho, the more accurate ranking (e. g. with "The Orville" its the same).

    I'm not a Trekkie and I like it more dystopian. The one point I give for the visual effects. I don't give any more points because of giant plot holes (in E4 & 5 all it was all about how to power the spore-drive, in E6 they just jumped, no explanation how they did it, if they used the "eugenics" (sic!) way again), cheesy and unconvincing dialoges (the characters put their "heavy with meaning" voice on all the time and are always throwing worldly wisdom around), incredible sterotype characters (making the cast more diverse is great, but it doesn't help much if you just let them perform very uninspired role models).

    What really set me off was in E06, when the female Admiral (forgot her name, sry) is really , really upset with Cpt. Lorca (male) and he just offers some drinks, says "we can spend the time better", puts her hand on her leg and she gets up and undresses -- what the **** Let's get the Golden Raspberry Awards for the Writers!

    Watch "The Orville", that's definately the better show!    … Expand
  3. melchel
    Oct 24, 2017
    0
    How utterly disappointing. The writers of this show have completely missed the point of Star Trek. There’s no solidarity among the crew, there is conflict EVERYWHERE, they’re using **** saying **** A LOT, being sarcastic with each other, questioning superior officers all over the place, and torturing an innocent creature for their own benefit. And the storyline with the Klingons isHow utterly disappointing. The writers of this show have completely missed the point of Star Trek. There’s no solidarity among the crew, there is conflict EVERYWHERE, they’re using **** saying **** A LOT, being sarcastic with each other, questioning superior officers all over the place, and torturing an innocent creature for their own benefit. And the storyline with the Klingons is overbearing. It’s just terrible and it’s simply not Star Trek. It’s just stolen the name.… Expand
  4. Karoneska
    Oct 13, 2017
    3
    "It's new, all different, all better Star Trek", say defenders. "You just stayed in '90 man, be progressive! Future is now!". But new Star Trek is not just different. Even treated as collateral vision with no connection with old Star Trek...still it is silly, visually weak, politically charged show with no respect for viewer intelligence.
  5. 998817268
    Oct 31, 2017
    0
    It's your bog standard sci-fi that unironically follows any sci-fi trope you could imagine. It's also melodramatic to the point of being unintentionally comedic at times. Good is not a word I would use to describe this show, because it's boring and hammy.
  6. Elstgav
    Oct 16, 2017
    0
    This show is tragically bad. There isn’t a single likeable character, the dialogue is painfully wooden, the Klingons can’t act behind their rubbery makeup, none of the crew members seem to like or even respect each other. It’s appalling to see how they got the tone of Star Trek fundamentally wrong on EVERY level. Star Trek was an optimistic show about humanity working together and doingThis show is tragically bad. There isn’t a single likeable character, the dialogue is painfully wooden, the Klingons can’t act behind their rubbery makeup, none of the crew members seem to like or even respect each other. It’s appalling to see how they got the tone of Star Trek fundamentally wrong on EVERY level. Star Trek was an optimistic show about humanity working together and doing their best when confronted with moral dilemmas. In STD we have starfleet officers who mutiny, bald-face lie, are warmongers, carelessly insubordinate, commit warcrimes, are unwelcoming, untrusting, willing to torture animals to get their way (literally!), the list goes on… STD is just offensively bad and disrespectful to the Star Trek franchise.… Expand
  7. McMcDr
    Oct 11, 2017
    0
    It's not Star Trek, it's just SJW - propaganda.

    Tbh. i really hope the authors and the responsible persons, including their families and child will die on cancer. They totaly destroyed the Star Trek - Label
  8. sabrose1020
    Feb 12, 2018
    0
    Its pretty clear CBS caught wind of the negative reviews on this site and hired some botters to equalize things.
    The network has tried to shelter this show from itself by putting it on all access.It wouldnt have lasted a season on over the air television. Its playing with Netflix money for season 2 and has yet to release how many people actually watch the show on all access.
    It    Its pretty clear CBS caught wind of the negative reviews on this site and hired some botters to equalize things.
    The network has tried to shelter this show from itself by putting it on all access.It wouldnt have lasted a season on over the air television. Its playing with Netflix money for season 2 and has yet to release how many people actually watch the show on all access.
    It needs to listen to the negative reviews fire some people and hire someone with some competence to run it or its deader than a doornail.
    The contrived finale was one only Neville Chamberlain would love. But it fit the entire season -garbage.    … Expand
  9. Locust69
    Nov 18, 2017
    0
    utter garbage with nice cgi... go watch orville this is just a bad joke. Like everything bad about JJ-trek and nothing good. Story is bad, characters are TERRIBLE, cast is mostly boring + they used star trek to promote left wing agenda and SJW, PC propaganda (also the reason why so called pro-reviewers like it so much). Characters are probably biggest problem: bunch of arrogant clownsutter garbage with nice cgi... go watch orville this is just a bad joke. Like everything bad about JJ-trek and nothing good. Story is bad, characters are TERRIBLE, cast is mostly boring + they used star trek to promote left wing agenda and SJW, PC propaganda (also the reason why so called pro-reviewers like it so much). Characters are probably biggest problem: bunch of arrogant clowns written by some leftie millenial with no taste and doing terrible decisions every ten minutes... also good to know that devs compare klingons to trumps voters and only competent persons in star fleet are women while men are all racists or/and idi*ts... #NotMyStarTrek… Expand
  10. NotchFilter
    Oct 2, 2017
    1
    The bar had been set way too high for this premiere episode. It had to be good enough to convince the potential audience that the $6 per month for CBS streaming was "worth it."

    It's not. ST:NG got off to an uneasy start, but it quickly got its space-legs over the course of the first season and turned into one of the better SciFi TV shows. Sadly, I'll never know if ST:Discovery    The bar had been set way too high for this premiere episode. It had to be good enough to convince the potential audience that the $6 per month for CBS streaming was "worth it."

    It's not.

    ST:NG got off to an uneasy start, but it quickly got its space-legs over the course of the first season and turned into one of the better SciFi TV shows.

    Sadly, I'll never know if ST:Discovery gets better. The pilot was so bad that I don't even care, nor am I interested in, what happens to the characters as the series unfolds.

    $6 per month in order to watch this show? Who is CBS kidding?    … Expand
  11. BurningHatred
    Oct 9, 2017
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was cautiously optimistic after watching the pilot episodes, which showcased stunning visual effects and sets more than anything else. I understand that this is 2017 and Star Trek is competing with shows like Game of Thrones which has set the bar incredibly high for what general audiences expect from TV series nowadays. Visually I have no complaints, it looks as good or even better than most sci fi movies I've seen recently, and I'm perfectly OK with visual changes made to the alien races. The other change/compromise that I have come to accept is that modern audiences want serialised programming, as opposed to a literal episodic format. This is part of the reason that I wasn't initially as turned off by the character of Michael Burnham as most people were. I understand that in a 15 episode serial, our main character needs to undergo a slow, gradual change over the course of the entire story. In the case of Michael they are clearly going for a redemption arc, which is nothing new or interesting, but it's perfectly passable. Long story short, I was hopeful that once the trappings of pilot dirty work were out of the way, we were in for some quality trek adventures, exploration, and maybe, just maybe, some discoveries along the way.

    Well, two episodes later I'm genuinely sad to say that the quality of this show has taken a nosedive in the hands of infamous Hollywood hack Alex Kurtzman, known for helming such classics as The Amazing Spiderman 2, Star Trek Into Darkness, Transformers, and many more. Only someone like Kurtzman could write a Star Trek ensemble, where literally every single character is a vapid, arrogant, smug prick who you hope fails in their mission to unleash war and destruction on the universe. Remember Gene Roddenberry's bright, hopeful vision of the future? Well forget it, because Star Trek is about people fighting with each other over how best to create weapons of mass destruction, YAY! In the pilot episode, the character Saru tells us that his race were biologically determined for the sole purpose of sensing the coming of death. I think the rest of the cast were biologically determined for the sole purpose of bickering at each other relentlessly while making highly idiotic decisions.

    But above all else, my main disappointment lies within the main character, Michael. And that's really the problem isn't it, this is a Star Trek show with a main character that the story almost exclusively focuses on. As I said, I was initially lenient on her despite the bizarre course of action she takes in the pilot episodes. I wanted to see her redeem herself by doing acts of kindness and selflessness, that would start out small and gradually become more and more significant. But less than two episodes after her mutiny, Michael is right back to her old ways. It's bad enough that she's cuddling up with the comically evil captain of the USS Discovery, Lorca, but what's worse is that she shows almost no signs of resentment for Lorca's boner for war and turning the Discovery into a war ship (???). You would think she of all people would be pleading for diplomacy and doing things differently, but no she has been relegated from her road to redemption and now serves as a passive protagonist, who spends her time caring for Lorca's murder machines. In some scenes on the contrary, she actually does seem to be filled with regret; but given her relationship with Lorca it just feels so tonally off. What the hell is this character supposed to be? It's like she's being written by two different people who speak different languages and can't communicate with each other or something. Oh, and speaking of relegated characters, Saru is now a walking vessel for Michael's backstory/sob stories to be filled in. At some point the writers must have realised that their main character is a miserable villain with no sympathetic qualities, so every now and then they drag Saru, one of her old colleagues into the scene so we can have a scene of her briefly smiling, as opposed to her usual expression of despair.

    I realise that I only have a few hundred characters left, which won't be enough to fully articulate my hatred for the character of 'Paul Stamets', but it goes without saying he encapsulates everything wrong with this new series. It's a Trek series that portrays the future as a dismal battlefield in space, one that I wouldn't WANT to discover. It feels like a Star Trek rollercoaster ride at six flags, not a serial. Before I end it I want to mention that I don't blame the character of Michael on the actress Martin Green, I actually think she's doing a pretty good job with what she's been given. Same with Saru, Lorca and Phillipa who I haven't mentioned, but I enjoyed Michelle Yeoh's performance in the pilot and was really disappointed that she was killed off so early.

    PS: I said earlier in the review that EVERY character was smug and dislikeable; exclude Tilly from that. Ripper and Tilly, please save us all.    … Expand
  12. MK500
    Oct 3, 2017
    1
    If you want to watch Star Trek; watch The Orville instead. Even after 3 episodes, this dark abomination has nothing to do with Gene Rodenberry‘s Star Trek. I feel terrible for the very decent actors that have to try to make something out of this horrible writing. You want to like the characters; but the situations they find themselves in are so absurd that it just doesn’t work. It feelsIf you want to watch Star Trek; watch The Orville instead. Even after 3 episodes, this dark abomination has nothing to do with Gene Rodenberry‘s Star Trek. I feel terrible for the very decent actors that have to try to make something out of this horrible writing. You want to like the characters; but the situations they find themselves in are so absurd that it just doesn’t work. It feels like they are trying to squeeze 3 episodes of plot into every episode. This series is obviously very high budget, but they should have hired some decent writers instead of dumping it all into CGI. I’m a huge fan of every prior Star Trek series until this; but this one is going to need to take a seriously major turn to have any hope of winning my fandom. If it wasn’t for The Orville I would be very depressed right now.

    Here is an easy way to judge a new Star Trek series: Does it make you feel inspired and excited about the future of mankind? This one is a hard No.

    Remember that Star Trek is often cited by astronauts and NASA engineers as one the things that inspired them to choose their path in life. I can’t imagine this series inspiring anyone.    … Expand
  13. Wihglah
    Oct 5, 2017
    2
    if you like Incompetent, criminal and cowardly bridge officers, unintelligible Klingons, war crimes committed by STARFLEET personnel - oh and weaponised lens flare, then this is the show for you.
  14. akovia
    Oct 9, 2017
    3
    Not a single negative review by critics? I just completely lost faith in the so called professionals that this site pools from. If great production is all it takes to dazzle, it doesn't say much for the future.

    I seriously wanted to love this. I am a Trek fan for sure, but would fail on all but the easiest trivia. I don't care about if it stays true to timelines or technology and never    Not a single negative review by critics? I just completely lost faith in the so called professionals that this site pools from. If great production is all it takes to dazzle, it doesn't say much for the future.

    I seriously wanted to love this. I am a Trek fan for sure, but would fail on all but the easiest trivia. I don't care about if it stays true to timelines or technology and never have. It's always been about the storytelling and thoughts it provokes. This feels like a high school script with a Hollywood production budget. I take that back. A high schooler with passion could do better.    … Expand
  15. sanchess
    Oct 1, 2017
    2
    Show is good quality. But thats about it. I believe all star trek (show) principles has been lost. Im gonna ignore messages of the show as this is open for interpretation. Decisions crew make are not calculated and most of times not reasonable. There is also no-one I connected with, however the show is just starting, maybe that will change. I feel the directors went on that flashy loudShow is good quality. But thats about it. I believe all star trek (show) principles has been lost. Im gonna ignore messages of the show as this is open for interpretation. Decisions crew make are not calculated and most of times not reasonable. There is also no-one I connected with, however the show is just starting, maybe that will change. I feel the directors went on that flashy loud route ignoring what got Star Trek very popular, which is diplomacy, reason, and thought provoking stories. I hope this was just to promote the series to new audience, but, to be fair, if you are hoping for something to get better then it isnt really good.… Expand
  16. AngelZash
    Oct 15, 2017
    0
    I really really wanted to like this show, but the fact is: it's just not Star Trek!

    The characters aren't bad, and the writing is good if you ignore the fact the entire first two episodes would have been better being alluded to and referenced in the third and later episodes rather than being a full two (or single two-parter) episodes. However, the writers seem to have forgotten their    I really really wanted to like this show, but the fact is: it's just not Star Trek!

    The characters aren't bad, and the writing is good if you ignore the fact the entire first two episodes would have been better being alluded to and referenced in the third and later episodes rather than being a full two (or single two-parter) episodes. However, the writers seem to have forgotten their timeline and they seem to have neglected to find out about actual Star Trek canon when it comes to ethics and technology. I can get over Burnham being Sarek's foster daughter and being raised as Spock's brother. I find it harder to get over a Starfleet whose members would not immediately question the pain of a creature in front of them (even for science!). Not even Kirk or Sisko, arguably the more ruthless captains, would have gone for that. Additionally, the whole mutiny seems overblown and contrived from every angle, Burnham's being blamed for starting the entire war is definitely contrived, and even in war, maybe especially in war, no military organization is going to allow a mutineer to serve on a ship again. If the writers want to make things more interesting by bending or breaking the rules and canon, they should first LEARN those rules and that canon inside and out. As it is, it's obvious they are taking a few bits and pieces and merrily throwing out what doesn't suit them.

    The writers need to learn what made Star Trek a cultural phenomenon. It wasn't the science or the action or even the special effects; it was the heart and spirit of the show. It was the idea that humanity could learn and grow, we could become something bigger and better than what we are, and then we could reach the stars and keep our ideals and values even as we face impossible odds. Star Trek has always given us hope of a better way, a better tomorrow. This series would have us believe nothing changes and we are doomed to be a race of jerks forever.

    I really wanted to like this show, and I do see so so much potential in it. It just isn't Star Trek as it is. But hey, if all you want is a sci-if flick with lots of action and special effects, then this is the show for you!    … Expand
  17. joejoe1
    Nov 4, 2017
    2
    I couldn't continue watching episode 7 because it was just too awful. Lame, boring, unfocused, and extremely bad writing. I remember when TNG came out, there was so much excitement every week. People made it a point to clear their schedules to watch the show, and talked about it afterwards. Are they trying to wreck the franchise? Because STD will do exactly that.
  18. moviestalker
    Oct 7, 2017
    1
    So what happend here is that they put a 'Star Trek' sticker on a below average scifi show and hope to make a few bucks by fooling the fanbase with pretty costumes and explosions. Roddenberry would be rolling in his grave if he saw this.

    Ever since J.J.Abrams dealt severe damage to the Star Trek franchise by turning it into a over the top action circus and rewrote the shows law as he saw    So what happend here is that they put a 'Star Trek' sticker on a below average scifi show and hope to make a few bucks by fooling the fanbase with pretty costumes and explosions. Roddenberry would be rolling in his grave if he saw this.

    Ever since J.J.Abrams dealt severe damage to the Star Trek franchise by turning it into a over the top action circus and rewrote the shows law as he saw fit, I didn't have much hope that this show would follow a different path. And (sadly) I was correct. What we have here, feels like a bad crossover between 'Mass Effect' & 'J.J Abrams-Trek' and the longer you watch it, the more unbearable it becomes...

    Dear Hollywood writers: If this abomination is the best you can do when you think of Star Trek, then let the franchise die. Seriously: Let.it.die.
    Nobody needs weird looking klingons that talk, as if they had cotton balls in their mouth. Nobody needs these poorly written plots that make zero sense and Nobody needs your "vision" of Star Trek.    … Expand
  19. Angus
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    Stafleet is now the bad, anti-liberal, intolerant team.

    "Reimagined" Klingons are not righteous or bad, but want to be left to their own culture. The new Star Trek+ crowd never saw Deep Space Nine, aka the best Star Trek series in my opinion, or at least the one I enjoyed the most due to Sisko and his son. Not because his skin color, because Avery Brooks and Cirroc Loften (sp?) are    Stafleet is now the bad, anti-liberal, intolerant team.

    "Reimagined" Klingons are not righteous or bad, but want to be left to their own culture.

    The new Star Trek+ crowd never saw Deep Space Nine, aka the best Star Trek series in my opinion, or at least the one I enjoyed the most due to Sisko and his son. Not because his skin color, because Avery Brooks and Cirroc Loften (sp?) are great actors. This series faced everyone checkmark on the modern anti-liberal left's progressive stack but did not preach like the creationists of old. You had a strong female first officer conflicted in her faith and the new anti-faith Federation perhaps taking the place of the fascist Cardassians who left the occupations. You had a science officer who lived life as a man and a women via her symbiote. Dr. Bashir was a character that had many facets but his character's biggest reveal was a discussion on eugenics and "designer kids." Shapeshift, male chauvanist Ferengi bar-tender with a heart of gold. Mysogist is the modern word to determine if you are a moron. If you use it in reference to anything today in the west from an institutionailzed aspect unironically then you are truly a moron.

    The new Star Trek throws away all good discussion on social issues and states with no subtlety...

    "If you are right of Lenin then you are evil, racist, sexist and any other new douche-words the anti-liberal left progressives make up."

    Would have been nice to not be preached to, but division is all that LA, San Francisco and New York has left. No one wants their **** politics, especially in entertainment or elected office nowadays but they are going to push it until they incite and actual backlash that will cause loss of life on a massive level.

    Too bad though, the main actress was good on walking dead and a deep character. We know she can act better if the writing was better and not one-dimensional hatred justification against those you don't politically agree with.    … Expand
  20. FRK
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    The new series is a huge disappointment. Endless crying, overemotional, badly written long and senseless dialogues, no charisma from any of the characters, no engaging plot. So long waiting and what we get is a badly written and juvenile pair of episodes. It seems the producers have never seen a single start trek movie or series chapter before. So many resorces to do en epic series, such aThe new series is a huge disappointment. Endless crying, overemotional, badly written long and senseless dialogues, no charisma from any of the characters, no engaging plot. So long waiting and what we get is a badly written and juvenile pair of episodes. It seems the producers have never seen a single start trek movie or series chapter before. So many resorces to do en epic series, such a waste of time. Awful..… Expand
  21. hitzestau
    Nov 15, 2017
    0
    This is not what I expect from a show carrying the words Star Trek in its name. Everything that has been established in over 50 years is disregarded and ignored by producers and writers. The plots of the individual episodes are full of holes, races like Klingons and Vulcans have been rewritten or undergone a complete reboot.

    All the core Star Trek values are not present in this show –    This is not what I expect from a show carrying the words Star Trek in its name. Everything that has been established in over 50 years is disregarded and ignored by producers and writers. The plots of the individual episodes are full of holes, races like Klingons and Vulcans have been rewritten or undergone a complete reboot.

    All the core Star Trek values are not present in this show – and how shall all this turn into the Starfleet and the Federation we know from the adventures of Captain Kirk only nine years later? This is by no way a prequel (which is already bad enough), this is a lame sci-fi show that is abusing the words Star Trek in its title. If it wasn’t for those two words, the show would never have gotten this kind of attention and would have probably already been cancelled.

    This doesn’t bring Star Trek into the 21century, where TV shows are darker and it is less easy to tell heroes and villains apart. This also not about confronting the Star Trek values like respect for other lifeforms and peaceful coexistence with an ugly reality – no, with this new show, Star Trek itself has become that ugly reality.    … Expand
  22. ashtrayb
    Oct 1, 2017
    1
    Set phasers to "Kill" , This is a quote from episode 3 of the Star Trek Discovery . it is a symbol to the loss of innocence and summarizes what this new series is about : dumb action filled story that is lacking the charm and exploration mission that the previous Star Trek TV series were about.

    Unfortunately the TV series has take the worst direction that I feared - they turned the    Set phasers to "Kill" , This is a quote from episode 3 of the Star Trek Discovery . it is a symbol to the loss of innocence and summarizes what this new series is about : dumb action filled story that is lacking the charm and exploration mission that the previous Star Trek TV series were about.

    Unfortunately the TV series has take the worst direction that I feared - they turned the TV series into a JJ Abrams Hollywood trash . Michael Burnham recites lines from Alice from Wonderland with a straight face? Are you kidding me ?! The actor who plays Michael Burnham is over-acting each of her lines which gives it a soap opera feel.

    And they put these series with a war storyline and some alien monsters in it ? This is disappointing. I am going back to watch Star Trek TNG or Voyager or Enterprise.    … Expand
  23. ameenk67
    Oct 10, 2017
    2
    Simply does not live up to the Star Trek name. Being only 18 and watching almost every star trek episode in existence this show leaves much to be desired. Acting is shallow, weird camera angles and a flashy show all equate to something that rewrites the start trek genre and for me, that is not the star trek I have grown to love from a young age.
  24. Wizzer
    Oct 23, 2017
    0
    This is not Star Trek. It is a sci-fi that tries to imitate Star Trek made by people that are clueless about Star Trek. The cgi is great but everrything else is a major letdown. It doesn't even work as a mediocre non-Trek bland sci-fi show as the wooden and uninspired acting is unbearable to watch.
  25. afngary
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Been a Star Trek fan since the 70s and must say this is NOT Star Trek. This is total trash and not worth watching. The background, characters, and poor acting is really bad. Most of all this basically another JJ reboot. Stay away from this STD!
  26. OldTrekkie
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I watched the 1st 2 episodes of Star Trek Discovery and these episodes will be my last. I was a kid when the original Star Trek (TOS) aired in 1966. Through reruns and syndication as I was getting older, I came to know the TOS episodes and the storylines very well.

    This version is the most implausible Star Trek to date. These 2 episodes are as bad as the finale of Star Trek Enterprise. The ship doesn't resemble the TOS Ship at all. In fact, we don't see the Starship Discovery in the 1st 2 episodes. That's a serious mistake for a premier of a series IMO.

    For the Trekkies who know TOS, on 2254 (or 2253) Spock with Captain Pike experience the adventure in the original unaired pilot "The Cage", which was used in TOS Season 1, episodes 11 and 12 titled the Menagerie. The Cage was not broadcast in its original form until in 1988 on TV. The Enterprise in that episode doesn't look like the ship Shenzhou in these episodes, even though its the same time frame. The uniforms don't match TOS, and the technology is way too advanced than the same time frame in TOS. Now I know this series is 51 years later, but geez, have a modicum of continuity.

    Since when does Star Trek borrow from Star Wars with the Hologram communications? The writing and acting in these episodes are deplorable to say the least. Burnham tells Captain Georgiou, if you kill T'Kuvma, he will be a martyr for the Klingons and it'll rally the Klingons to fight in his name. So after T'Kuvma kills the Captain, she kills him anyway. The tribunal is a compete joke where she sentenced to life imprisonment for Mutiny, striking an officer, and insubordination. She pleaded guilty before sentencing and states she'll violate Starfleet principles if she has to or something like that. Now in future episodes Gabriel Lorca, (Jason Issacs who I like as an actor) gets her sentence dismissed and takes her to his ship "The Discovery" for the war with the Klingons. How do you know if she disagrees with your decision she won't mutiny again or at least disobey orders? This is such poppycock. The weapons like the phasers are more advanced than TOS. Especially the rifle/gun used in the beginning to bring water to the surface of the desert planet and the Prime Directive is completely ignored. Why even have a prime directive at all? Is Burnham going to continue to disregard the prime directive every time she disagrees with it?

    So far, she's one of the worst Star Trek Characters ever to be in one of the Star Trek TV Shows. I 'd find it amazing if true Trekkies, especially from my age group, like this show. Its pathetic, unrealistic, and most of all insulting to older Trekkies like myself. I'll probably be wrong about my prediction, but this series shouldn't last 1 season.

    It seems people today are content with any movie or series created for one of the 6 top franchises of all time. Star Trek, Star Wars, Harry Potter, James Bond, the Marvel Universe, and the DC Universe ( I know there are others like Rocky. Alien, Predator, Terminator, Dr. Who, etc...). Don't get me wrong, I grew up with 5 of the 6 and enjoyed the Harry Potter Series immensely. However, prequels, sequels, changing characters for diversity purposes, incorrect time lines, alternate universes or alternate versions of characters, reboots, and relaunches are saturation at its worst.

    For the comic book fans who read this post, since when was Barry Allen brought up by a step father who has a daughter named Iris West and a brother namesd Wally West. That concept goes against the original storyline of the Flash. The original Defenders were the Hulk, Doctor Strange, and Namor The Sub Mariner.

    It seems some heroes have become passe like Namor, The Green Hornet, and The Lone Ranger (Johnny Deep's movie, with him playing Tonto didn't do anything for that franchise nor did Seth Rogen's movie about the Green Hornet). I think the Green Hornet could be made today with a great script and two good actors playing Kato and the Green Hornet. The 1966 one season series of the Green Hornet is still a Cult Classic TV Series.

    Can we create anything else these days than redoing the same characters over and over again with different storylines just to attract new generations? Why doesn't the franchises create additional characters for the story to attract new audiences? Superman will become the Man of Tomorrow again as he was in 1938 as opposed to being the Man of Steel. How many times are we going to relaunch a character when the previous reboot didn't work out? Most changes I don't agree with, but once in a while there's a change I do agree with regarding these franchises. Wonder Woman was always set during World War II (WWII), not WWI. Is Steve Trevor dead? I doubt it, but I disagreed with this change in the storyline just like "Discovery". Yet, Superman and Wonder Woman should be together in this day and age.

    Thanks for reading.,

    OldTrekkie    … Expand
  27. madmacdoo
    Oct 2, 2017
    1
    Unlikeable characters, poor storylines, and an all round mess of a show if the first 3 episodes are anything to go by. It can improve of course, but it doesn't look likely at this time. The worst star trek since enterprise(which was also rubbish).
  28. Tony2017
    Oct 27, 2017
    0
    Oh my God... what a horrible TV show. This should be taken down. The true Star Trek Gene Roddenberry is so far from ST Discovery. Horrible and all values for example ST TNG are flushed down the drain. The lack of respect for the true spirit of ST is just to much!!!! I decided not to watch the rest when the captain mentioned the name Elon Musk. What the ****, all respect for the man andOh my God... what a horrible TV show. This should be taken down. The true Star Trek Gene Roddenberry is so far from ST Discovery. Horrible and all values for example ST TNG are flushed down the drain. The lack of respect for the true spirit of ST is just to much!!!! I decided not to watch the rest when the captain mentioned the name Elon Musk. What the ****, all respect for the man and what he did, but to pay your way into a Star Trek series that belongs to the fans and not to particular individuals. I will not watch the rest! I will just go on my DVD-s for TNG, DS9, Voyager, where I can actually learn some interesting stuff every time I watch the shows.… Expand
  29. kaindestroi
    Sep 27, 2017
    2
    There is no logic in this show and to much emphasis on the fiction with no science behind it,
    This show could just as well be about elf's and goblins, not at all how sci-fi should be like.
    and they botched the Klingons!
  30. PhotonEmotion
    Oct 3, 2017
    0
    Where is Captain Conway, where is she? Where is Piccard! Where is Benjamin Sisko (I loved him!). No this Star Trek gutted the original vision of Roddenberry into something CNN would be proud of! Gone with the optimism, bye bye to the Klingons who had been degraded tribal barbarians who could never be imagined to have successfully built an Empire!
  31. BengalsfanAZ
    Oct 7, 2017
    0
    I don't think I have ever given a show a 0 rating. I am a life-long Star Trek fan and after watching this abomination, I can not support this franchise if this is the route it is going.

    I accepted the JJ Abrams "action" movies because I figured it would bring some $$ to the franchise and kick-start some good new series. Then we get this garbage. I mean, the red flags were everywhere    I don't think I have ever given a show a 0 rating. I am a life-long Star Trek fan and after watching this abomination, I can not support this franchise if this is the route it is going.

    I accepted the JJ Abrams "action" movies because I figured it would bring some $$ to the franchise and kick-start some good new series. Then we get this garbage. I mean, the red flags were everywhere but I did not want to accept it.

    Only being offered on the CBS app was a huge red flag. Then there were the delays and rewrites. The end product is total crap. The story doesn't flow, it's nothing like the Star Trek series of past and the acting of the main character is horrid.

    Past Star Trek series, especially TNG, were based on great acting and thought provoking story-lines. This trash doesn't follow any of that logic. The main characters, save Michelle Yeoh as the Captain, are not likable or well acted. In fact, the main character, a woman named "Michael", is not likable at all. I found her course, arrogant and rude. The rest of the characters just seem to be acting through the lines, not caring about the scenes at all. This series is a total Hollywood BS liberal remake that stains the Star Trek franchise.

    Gene Roddenberry would be ashamed of this giant piece of garbage. My only hope is that it goes off the air soon so that no one else gets subjected to it's distorted Star Trek universe.    … Expand
  32. Blackness123
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Terrible characters, bad acting, boring story, obvious political implications and enforced diversity. But hey, shiny CGI can fix all that, can't it?
    Truly an affront to Star Trek.
  33. StrongHarm
    Nov 21, 2017
    3
    First, why am I paying cash to ABC for 15 commercials an episode? Because I'm an idiot? Hey! Thanks a lot.. I thought we were in the age of ignoring truth.. and here you go hitting me in the face with it.

    The season finished and I LOVED the technology and exploration aspects. This show made me reflect on one thing repeatedly however; it's mostly intelligent people who like science    First, why am I paying cash to ABC for 15 commercials an episode? Because I'm an idiot? Hey! Thanks a lot.. I thought we were in the age of ignoring truth.. and here you go hitting me in the face with it.

    The season finished and I LOVED the technology and exploration aspects. This show made me reflect on one thing repeatedly however; it's mostly intelligent people who like science fiction and Star Trek.. so why would they assume that intelligent people require social engineering to implant "correct thinking" where diversity and acceptance are concerned? Is this actually already clear to the producers and the constant bombardment of correctness is actually some sort of self flagellation for the Socialist Religion? Don't get me wrong, I don't care that there are transgender people, and the science officer is gay (and they French kiss with close ups), and a man was raped (justice!), and nature is more powerful than tech since the spores allow us to jump, and the harmony of a planet as a thinking sentient ecology saves all of our lives... I'm actually good with all this... but GOOD GOD, did you have to put it all in a few episodes and parade it around like a trophy? The other Star Trek series did a good job of featuring social issues with a subtlety and grace. This was like a mixture of good scifi and an orgy of self congratulation for moral and social superiority at the DNC. It was rather distracting.

    Can't wait for next season.    … Expand
  34. Devoras
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    I made an account just to write on this board.

    First to CBS and the writers: How DARE you try to replace the main line with the Kelvin timeline. How dare you unravel 70 years of canon to fit your commercial needs? Gene Roddenberry has already turned in his grave. Shame on you! I am a long time avid Star Trek fan and junkie who could not sit silent after the horror i witnessed. I    I made an account just to write on this board.

    First to CBS and the writers: How DARE you try to replace the main line with the Kelvin timeline. How dare you unravel 70 years of canon to fit your commercial needs? Gene Roddenberry has already turned in his grave. Shame on you!

    I am a long time avid Star Trek fan and junkie who could not sit silent after the horror i witnessed. I simply dont know where to start cause all the effects and concepts are drawn from the Kelvin timeline.

    First, phaser canons? What? That went obsolete long ago, and phaser banks were the norm. Even the visual fire we can already see draws from Kelvin Trek. Disgrace.
    The Klingons do not look like Klingons and yet again it was borrowed from Kelvin Trek. If there was continuity from Archer to Kirk they would not look so jumbled at all. Heck, they look more Reman than Klingon. Next up is starship design. WHY on earth are there so many shapes and different design and absolutly no classification? It makes no sense from a practical view and it is not appealing at all. Having so many different designs complicates repairs, complicates getting spare parts and other assorted issues. Even in the real world we know this, and why you dont see mutiple designs, but rather a few of many for ease sake.

    Now where was I, oh yes! Klingon cloaking! Really? Did the guys writing this crap even pay attention as to when the Klingons got their cloaking tech from the Romulans? No I guess not. And speaking of not paying attention, you call THAT a Bat`leth? It looked like an oversized wiener knife. I am speechless. Second last take on my list is the warp in and out effects and sound, No suprise guys, picked from the Kelvin time line yet again.
    Last take, WHY did you guys kill off Michelle`s character?! Star Trek is about diversity, and it was about time we got an asian captain, female no less in the forefront! But no, had to settle for a white captain in the end. I can sense the white supremacist at CBS allready.

    Now if the show is to be saved along with Star Trek itself, fire the current writers, fire ANYONE who even worked with JJ Abrams and his utter disgrace he called Star Trek and get creative people onboard who is willing to work with the MAIN timeline.    … Expand
  35. WernerHeisenber
    Oct 5, 2017
    0
    The show is all style no substance done by people who have no idea what classic Star Trek (TOS / TNG) was about.

    I have watched episodes 1 to 3 and had it with the show. I did not find any likeable character. Instead I found tons of logical, plot and science errors. The Klingons look like straight out of Warhammer 40k. The plot did not make any sense and the decisions of the main    The show is all style no substance done by people who have no idea what classic Star Trek (TOS / TNG) was about.

    I have watched episodes 1 to 3 and had it with the show.
    I did not find any likeable character. Instead I found tons of logical, plot and science errors.

    The Klingons look like straight out of Warhammer 40k.
    The plot did not make any sense and the decisions of the main character are in no way understandable, although they are supposed to be very logical - which they are not.

    In general the writing is very poor and more than 2 hours were not enough to build any tension.    … Expand
  36. inopinatus
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    Shameful writing that has neither wit nor pathos. Painful camerawork and horrendous editing. The actors try their best with the stilted and implausible script, and the VFX designers have incorporated the best starfields that you'll see outside a 2017 video game, but it is lipstick on a pig. The show has all the dismal hallmarks of design-by-tv-executive. Hardly surprising that Bryan Fuller quit.
  37. agagil
    Oct 18, 2017
    0
    I'd like to review this series as if it had no connection to any Star Trek show in the past. So disregarding it's name and the lore behind it, this is hideously bad.

    I'm not sure if its the scientific rubbish uttered throughout the episodes which causes me to stop watching, the cartoonish characters, the dialogues which no reasonable human (or klignon) would say out loud or the bad    I'd like to review this series as if it had no connection to any Star Trek show in the past. So disregarding it's name and the lore behind it, this is hideously bad.

    I'm not sure if its the scientific rubbish uttered throughout the episodes which causes me to stop watching, the cartoonish characters, the dialogues which no reasonable human (or klignon) would say out loud or the bad acting. Yes, it's all that, but it's also one more important thing - reasonable human behavior.

    The whole reason for Star Trek (and good scifi in general) was to use a "futuristic" setting in order to explore human behavior and interaction in new and sometimes impossible situations. And rayguns, those are also pretty cool. So when a woman who mutinied, struck her captain unconscious and took control of a ship without any lawful reasone is welcomed back to the fold by another captain, that is unreasonable behavior. That could never, ever happen in a military setting. A person like that would never be trustworthy enough to be given any responsibility, by anyone, no matter how helpful they could be.

    This series does not live up to the spirit of Star Trek, not as a high-concept science fiction story nor as any kind of metaphor for reasonable human reaction.    … Expand
  38. MysticDingo
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. HONEST REVIEW:
    It's just not Star Trek. We have Michael Burnham as the main character, and the only one that matters. She's a complete Mary-Sue character who is perfect in everything she tries to do. The show gives the appearance of her failing, but she doesn't actually fail at anything. Seeing as how she is able to do any job required on the ship so far, it's a wonder why there are any other characters at all, specifically the science officer. Furthermore, once they encounter the Klingons, our Mary-Sue thinks that she knows better than the captain, assaults the captain with a vulcan nerve pinch(really? any trekkie knows that the only being other than a vulcan who can perform this is Data, an android), and then proceeds to mutiny on the ship. It "fails" but she gets her desired result anyways. Since when is mutiny, assaulting a superior, and disobeying direct orders something that makes for good star trek? My question is, where's the crew? Where's the meaningful character interaction? Where's the moral or philosophical question at heart in the episode(s)? No, what we get is a pew pew fest where needless things happen. If you have watched it, then Michael had no need to go out to the beacon, why not send a drone instead which we know they had because they planned to use one to carry a torpedo in the second episode. Why did the captain and first officer leave the ship in an attempt to capture the klingon leader, resulting in the captains death? Why did Michael MURDER the Klingon leader after killing the captain even though they were going there to capture the Klingon to disgrace him, instead of killing him and thereby turning him into a martyr? Michael literally disrespected the memory of her captain by intentionally failing in her mission. And for god sakes, why give a black female character a dudes name? Michael? Really? The only reason for this is for the writers to virtue signal and go "Oh look how progressive we are!" Why not show some ACTUAL respect for ACTUAL black females by ACTUALLY giving Michael a REAL black female name like, Tamika, or Monique, or Aaliyah, or Chanelle?

    At the end of episode 2, we see Michael getting courtmartialed and sentenced to life imprisonment, only to have the preview for the rest of the seasons episodes completely shatter than. According to the previews, it looks like Michael will get some sort of work release on a Federation ship, where she loses all her previous rank and prestige and will likely have to work her way up from the bottom and "overcome a ton of adversity and oppression," that she quite frankly deserves after assaulting her captain and attempting a mutiny!!!! Seriously, watch as they try to cast Michael as the good guy(girl?) in trying to overcome her adversity and oppression while ignoring the fact that she's the one who brought it on herself!!!!

    Worst aspects of the show:
    1. Klingons have been downgraded from a noble warrior race and turned into mindless beasts which look ugly, and can't speak Klingon for crap.
    2. Michael is the only human to have studied at the Vulcan Science Academy, and who can perform a Vulcan nerve pinch. Completely cannon breaking on both counts.
    3. The entire series revolves around a black female named Michael, who is important because she's black, a female, smarter than men and can kick their asses. Total Mary-Sue. If you liked the Mary-Sue-Perfect-In-Every-Way character known as Rey from "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," then you may just love this show.
    4. Because the show center's around Michael, there's no need for crew. There's no crew interactions, no asking of the opinions of the science, tactical, medical, or engineering officers, because Michael is so perfect she just knows everything and what the right course of action in any situation is of course.
    5. It's not sci-fi. It's set in space in the future sure, but it's not real sci-fi. There's no real deep science fiction questions or problems to solve. There are no moral and philosophical questions to deal with that have been the basis of Star Trek for decades. All this new show has is "Wow sweet graphics bro!" and "OMG PEW PEW PEW!!!!! YEAH LET'S KICK SOME KLINGON ASS!!!"

    All in all, this show looks to be the death knell of Star Trek as we know it. If this is the caliber of Star Trek show/shows we can expect to come in the future, then I'm going to start watching ST: Enterprise reruns because ST:E blows Discovery out of the water.    … Expand
  39. SupR_G
    Oct 9, 2017
    3
    I don't know what I just watched, but this was not Star Trek. Do not pay CBS for this garbage. And no, this has nothing to do with "SJWs" or "PC culture" or whatever other buzzwords said by people who never watched an episode of Star Trek in their life.

    It's just bad writing, period.
  40. dmcimo
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Complete Junk. Not only are you forced to pay to see this show in the USA/CANADA , but its also badly done. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but this show has nothing to do with Trek stories, they just on uniforms and attempted to use the THEME, but that is all. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bitComplete Junk. Not only are you forced to pay to see this show in the USA/CANADA , but its also badly done. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but this show has nothing to do with Trek stories, they just on uniforms and attempted to use the THEME, but that is all. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bit of momentum then cut to the Klingon with SUBTITLES, wow...just utter wow.... I have been a Star Trek fan for years, I Have watched every series, every film multiple times. I will not watch another episode of this rubbish. Definitely not worth a subscription to CBS as of yet, and even if you have Netflix in USA/CANADA, CBS made it clear they they want to steal all the money from us and won't allow Netflix to have it here, but anyone else across the world.… Expand
  41. BlueSun86
    Oct 3, 2017
    3
    The setting and the effects were great - what you would expect. I don't like the nod to the original series. For example the sounds and look of the tricorder and the old design of the chair make no sense in this day and age. Those are small things though. What i didn't like is that the character acting and dialog, and the big gaps in science, especially in the third episode. Seems likeThe setting and the effects were great - what you would expect. I don't like the nod to the original series. For example the sounds and look of the tricorder and the old design of the chair make no sense in this day and age. Those are small things though. What i didn't like is that the character acting and dialog, and the big gaps in science, especially in the third episode. Seems like this series is going in the footsteps of a fantasy show instead of a sci-fi...… Expand
  42. Alaska_Wolf
    Oct 1, 2017
    2
    I only got to watch the first show, then I found out CBS wants us to stream the rest after I couldn't find the 2nd show. Personally, I just didn't find the "New and Improved" Star Trek to be compelling enough for me to spend even more money on streaming it. As a long time, and original Trekkie from 1966, I was really looking forward to the latest installation, and I was honestly quitI only got to watch the first show, then I found out CBS wants us to stream the rest after I couldn't find the 2nd show. Personally, I just didn't find the "New and Improved" Star Trek to be compelling enough for me to spend even more money on streaming it. As a long time, and original Trekkie from 1966, I was really looking forward to the latest installation, and I was honestly quit disappointed with the show, and not just CBS's underhanded, money grubbing tactics.

    Oddly enough, in some ways this show was eerily reminiscent of Mass Effect:Andromeda to me. Neither the acting, nor script writing, were up to par with what I've come to expect from the Star Trek franchise. I honestly think the first season of TOS was better, and there is absolutely no comparison to TNG, or DS9. I'm honestly not even sure how to frame it in my Star Trek universe, it did not appear to be written for those of us that have loyally followed all of the Star Trek Series for generations. For lack of a better word, this first episode was just plain bad. After seeing it, then finding out I have to get a streaming service to watch the next episodes, all I can say is I really don't think so.

    I'm afraid that if the rest of the episodes are so poorly scripted, acted and just downright un-Star Trek like, this could be the shortest Star Trek iteration in history. I'm fairly certain that Gene Roddenberry would not be amused. From technology more advanced than TOS, to form changing Klingons that convienently get explained away, even Enterprise did a MUCH better job with that...well except for the Klingons that looked like TNG and DS9 Klingons! But seriously, 3 totally different iterations of the same species? That's a bit hard to swallow.

    Perhaps the show has gotten better, but CBS has turned me right off watching it with their "You have to subscribe to watch it" after the first show. Thanks CBS, but no thanks.    … Expand
  43. trash-46645
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    A rape of what Star Trek used to be. Star Trek used to be about inspiring future, doing the right thing and bettering oneself, finding common ground even with enemies, about scientific discovery, exploration and generally about a future you want to live in. Thematically Star Trek always dealt with a lot of questions of ethics and going what's right. It was not dumbed down violentA rape of what Star Trek used to be. Star Trek used to be about inspiring future, doing the right thing and bettering oneself, finding common ground even with enemies, about scientific discovery, exploration and generally about a future you want to live in. Thematically Star Trek always dealt with a lot of questions of ethics and going what's right. It was not dumbed down violent overdramatic war scifi. This is complete opposite of what Start Trek used to be, there is so much wrong with this series that I agree with others - this is not Star Trek. This is cliched garbage constructed to appeal to dumb masses. Such a shame what they did to Star Trek, another great series raped.… Expand
  44. yBe
    Oct 3, 2017
    0
    Just made an account to give my two cents. I read quite a few reviews now, but I can't shake the feeling that this series is sexist against men. Theres not one very likeable character, or "hero" that makes you root for. I don't know what critics see in the protagonist, but for me, she felt like the most detestable of the whole cast.
  45. Rastrelly
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    Weak and uninspired attempt at nostalgia hijacking made by people who are unaware of how it's done. With mostly unsympathetic characters, poor acting of everyone except that new alien species guy and Yeo, extremely cheap-looking decorations and storyline that would make Gene Roddenberry roll in his grave, this burp of the industry is unrecommended and should be forgotten.
  46. Semtex_Steve
    Sep 29, 2017
    3
    I'm not really sure what to make of all this. The effects were impressive, but the sets were dull and dark and the new Klingons looked ridiculous - even compared to the old Klingons who looked like Kiss fans with Cornish pasties on their heads. The main character came across as a psychotic maniac who really didn't belong on the bridge of a Starfleet vessel and the side characters wereI'm not really sure what to make of all this. The effects were impressive, but the sets were dull and dark and the new Klingons looked ridiculous - even compared to the old Klingons who looked like Kiss fans with Cornish pasties on their heads. The main character came across as a psychotic maniac who really didn't belong on the bridge of a Starfleet vessel and the side characters were entirely forgettable.

    The effects were pretty, but nothing we'd already seen in the JJ Abrams remake almost a decade ago, and the constant Dutch angles reminded me of Battlefield Earth.    … Expand
  47. Sauah
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    Is it so hard to show the time when the mankind is no longer is passionate about weapons and power, but about knowledge and new frontiers? Is it hard to show the time when we all would become better than we are now? The star trek have always been about that. This show as it is now is nothing but a soulless evil. Cgi are good. But have we all become so soulless that cgi is enough for us?Is it so hard to show the time when the mankind is no longer is passionate about weapons and power, but about knowledge and new frontiers? Is it hard to show the time when we all would become better than we are now? The star trek have always been about that. This show as it is now is nothing but a soulless evil. Cgi are good. But have we all become so soulless that cgi is enough for us? This is not Star fleet, but a bunch of selfish, arrogant, undisciplined teens, possessed by a thirst for violence and of victory "at all cost". They all deserve to be spanked by Jean Luc Picard.… Expand
  48. CoreGamer1408
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I tell myself this a messed up mirrored universe time line so I can just get through this, oh deary me. This is not Star Trek this is a bastardization of Star Trek. Which will probably alienate more old fans than create new ones.
  49. coustoe
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Uninspiring, unoriginal, boring and dull. Seems like CBS tried to save money on the writing and development team. Another lazy attempt by corporate heads and SJWs to milk a franchise without coming up with any original ideas on their own.
  50. AreYouSerious
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    What is this crap? The most aggravating characters I've ever had the misfortunate of watching on a TV show before. Do they even understand their audience? Have they ever watched an episode of Star Trek? Any Star Trek (even the movie reboots)?

    This looks "expensive," production-wise, but everything else about it is absolutely terrible - particularly the scripting and acting. I could    What is this crap? The most aggravating characters I've ever had the misfortunate of watching on a TV show before. Do they even understand their audience? Have they ever watched an episode of Star Trek? Any Star Trek (even the movie reboots)?

    This looks "expensive," production-wise, but everything else about it is absolutely terrible - particularly the scripting and acting.

    I could have turned it off after the first 15 minutes, but I persevered through two abhorrent episodes. I sincerely hope this dies a quick death.

    I've never served in the armed forces, but if this is what the "idyllic" future of the armed forces looks like, we're in for a hell of a lot of trouble...    … Expand
  51. robbybabyrob
    Dec 6, 2017
    0
    If this helps you, 2 Starfleet Officers break the prime directive in the very first scene of the show, letting us know right from the start, the writers know nothing of Star Trek. Bad acting, bad writing, dark and depressing. Tilted camera angles, lens flares, Klingons that have so much costume on it sounds as if they have just gotten back from the dentist with the cotton balls still inIf this helps you, 2 Starfleet Officers break the prime directive in the very first scene of the show, letting us know right from the start, the writers know nothing of Star Trek. Bad acting, bad writing, dark and depressing. Tilted camera angles, lens flares, Klingons that have so much costume on it sounds as if they have just gotten back from the dentist with the cotton balls still in their mouths, so many things that are just wrong, and very few that are right. The only thing I though was decent is the opening title sequence.… Expand
  52. mujanovic
    Sep 30, 2017
    0
    Disturbingly bad. Unimaginative, soulless, bad writing, bad acting, no sense of space exploration and adventure, no science in sci-fi... Did CBS hire a bunch of middle schoolers to write this? Visually it's the same level of lazy and unimaginative: tilted camera angles, lens flares, blockbuster CGI, no soul, no sense, nothing more than a cynical ploy to make you give your money to CBS.
  53. D00mM4r1n3
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I gave up when the cast took a knee. There is no excuse for a show set in the future to be dealing with current-day hysteria. Remember when Star Trek was about discussion and discovery? Now it's about pew-pew and SJW.
  54. Valkyan
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Retarded Lord of the rings plot
    Action from Star Wars directed by Michael Bay
    Only similarity with Star Trek are exploding bridge consoles ...

    Do not waste your time with this as I did with 2 episodes
  55. Canisrah
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    Watch the Orville instead. Discovery is not Star Trek in any way shape or form. Its yet another horrendous apparition dreamed up by TV Execs as a vehicle to push globalist propaganda and progressive political dogma with a big helpful of feminist poison. Flashy visuals to little to hide the fact that this production has no soul.
  56. Talbis
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    I'm like 25 minutes into the third episode I paused to write these first impressions here. I was beyond skeptical when this series was announced and at least now I know why it was sent to CBS Access - to die. Yeah, they knew it will suck, so they've sent it to die.
    I can forgive a lot of things, like inconsistent technology levels (holograms weren't a viable method of communication until    I'm like 25 minutes into the third episode I paused to write these first impressions here. I was beyond skeptical when this series was announced and at least now I know why it was sent to CBS Access - to die. Yeah, they knew it will suck, so they've sent it to die.
    I can forgive a lot of things, like inconsistent technology levels (holograms weren't a viable method of communication until about a 100 years after this series takes place in lore), I can forgive the visual changes to Klingons (to writers: just explain TOS Klingons, like DS9 and Enterprise did, eh?)... but I can't forgive wooden acting from main, unlikable hero. Michael Burnham doesn't deserve to wear that uniform. And hey, she's court-martialed, so at least writers know how stupid, unresponsible and out of place she is. Thing is, she does whatever she wants. Third episode and she's let loose to run around secret projects. Hey, writers, we keep prisoners in the brig, not in the same quarters as Starfleet Academy students... If I learned anything it's that Sonequa Martin-Green cannot act at all. But the biggest kick to the balls I received from Discovery was when Captain Philippa Georgiou, a most interesting and well-portrayed character in Discovery, was killed off in the second episode. All that noise about getting Michelle Yeoh, all those easter eggs hidden in captain's ready room... gone. Poof! The most interesting part of the series was nothing but a cock tease! Now we're stuck with an unlikable character that's not being balanced by a mentor figure, but instead is a menace released into the wild to **** things up as she wants. Michelle Yeoh sold me on the idea of another sodding prequel, guess I can't have that now, can I?
    Overall story also isn't all that great. Klingons are back and afraid that the Federation will take away their individuality. Federation would like nothing more than to take away the individuality of Klingons. They (writers) wanted to comment on current sociopolitical climate in the US... instead they've turned the Federation into less advanced Borg. Their message gets lost in the amount of ridiculously stupid decisions everyone makes in this show.
    Klingons aren't Klingons. I get that they got redesigned, I don't care, they can look whatever they want, thing is, they don't act or feel like Klingons at all. Gone is the "pirate ship" vibe of a Klingon ship, now they're all just stand in the room and whine about how cruel the galaxy is to them.
    Star Trek was always about the human condition, how good people can be, how open they can be, how hopeful the future might be if we just put work into it. Even much darker Deep Space 9 had a lot of hope in it. Star Trek was about who you are amongst many. Discovery doesn't care about any of that, in fact, it seems to be about destroying everything the Trek build for over 50 years. This has no soul of Star Trek. Even J.J. Abrams did a better job getting at the core of what Star Trek was about... I'm done with the show.    … Expand
  57. jprepo1
    Oct 16, 2017
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Star Trek Discovery: Spoilers
    TL;DR - Not terrible, but fairly weak overall, and whereas the network series had a chance to grow from shaky beginnings, its exclusivity to CBS All Access probably dooms it. Going to annoy most Trek fans.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >SPOILERS
    The Good:
    -The over all interactions between Cmdr Burnham and Capt. Georgiou started well, although Sonequa Martin-Green's character's acting actually got worse as the pilot went on, though its possible the early scenes were in fact shot later in production. They had a believable chemistry right up until she commits blatant mutiny and starts a war.
    -The special effects weren't bad
    -Lots of little nods, sound effects from the other series help establish the setting, and things like the Klingon burial scream are nice homages to the previous series.
    The Bad:
    -Way, way too dark, and I mean visually. Think battlestar galactica but even more shadowy at all times, and even, at one point, during a courtroom hearing, which was silly
    -Verisimilitude: Doesn't make much sense, overall, in the timeline established by trek. Some people decry trekkers' adherence to canon, but it makes the world believable and helps hold it together, and this screws with that early. Stop doing prequels, nobody likes them.
    -Lack of characters: granted, most of the characters seen were temporary, but only 2 really got any attention, and a third who was one of the most irritating characters I've ever seen, and managed to be so with very little screen time. how a race 'bred to sense death' and permanently scared of everything would make it into the military is beyond me.
    -This is no way needed to be a two parter. Especially given the temporary nature of most of the characters introduced, this could have been effectively shrunk to one episode.
    -Long range interstellar mind meld communication is **** stupid
    -Ship and tech design, as is always a danger with prequels, if you make ships that look way more advanced than things seen in the future, or with designs that have never been seen before (despite this show taking place 10 years before ToS and the Klingons being relatively well known at that time), it breaks immersion when things look out of place respective to the franchise
    The Ugly:
    -Themes, didn't really present much that was coherent, other than to screw with both the cultural history of the Klingons, and to randomly introduce a basic adopted sister to Spock that was somehow never discussed at any point despite Spock's character appearing in multiple series and movies and his father Sarek mind melding with Picard.
    -The Klingons look terrible. And I mean terrible, as did most of the Alien races, including the Star Wars cantina looking folks in the opening, and the (apparently) Daft Punk like robotic race serving on the bridge.
    -Only introducing one, maybe two, of the future main characters over the course of two hours was a terrible decisions
    -CBS all access, trying to charge for this show on a separate services is not the way to go. Even a show as popular as GoT has more people watching pirated than legit, and this is nowhere in the same universe as the early seasons of that. CBS will herald their initial signs ups now, but I wouldn't be surprised if we quietly hear about massive cancellations quickly.
    Overall is it was an inauspicious start, and highly flawed, but not irrecoverable if on network tv or cable. Sadly, given the platform, and the absurd amount of behind the scenes problems, this seems destined for failure. Rumors have already been swirling that CBS is already eyeing another trek series for if this becomes a 1 and done.

    EDIT: The people downvoting negative reviews en masse are an interesting group of fanbois, to be sure.

    UPDATE: The show has gotten consistently worse episode by episode. Every character they introduce is an ass, and dark. Trying way too hard to be a battlestar knockoff.    … Expand
  58. wobbles
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I was prepared to accept the more advanced looking set, It is 2017 and not the 60s. I was even prepared for the annoying lens flare that seems to be popular now but was it too much to ask for even high school play level acting? There's no Star Trek here, Just a ship ran by a committee of incompetent people. I felt this ship couldn't go from Earth to Vulcan without blowing itself up.
    A    I was prepared to accept the more advanced looking set, It is 2017 and not the 60s. I was even prepared for the annoying lens flare that seems to be popular now but was it too much to ask for even high school play level acting? There's no Star Trek here, Just a ship ran by a committee of incompetent people. I felt this ship couldn't go from Earth to Vulcan without blowing itself up.
    A coherent plot would have been nice to slip in also.    … Expand
  59. JessTurner
    Oct 16, 2017
    0
    The depths of the badness of this show are extraordinary, let me count the ways:

    Star Trek used to be very deliberately 'international', at the height of the Cold War we had Chekov... but this Star Trek is curiously American, the cast seems to be entirely American or at least Canadians passing as American (except Michelle Yeoh who was only there to die), and the Federation seems to    The depths of the badness of this show are extraordinary, let me count the ways:

    Star Trek used to be very deliberately 'international', at the height of the Cold War we had Chekov... but this Star Trek is curiously American, the cast seems to be entirely American or at least Canadians passing as American (except Michelle Yeoh who was only there to die), and the Federation seems to basically be the US military in space (which it always kind of was, "U.S.S.", but at least it used to seem like something else).

    I'm fine with the new Klingons and the random 'non-trek-ness' of it, but just as I start to take it for what it is and get some entertainment out of it, they do this:

    Apparently the the U.S.S. Discovery runs Windows from 1996 and they code in C from 1972... no wonder it sucks. That was the code she showed the guy, and it was system code too, not science code. Epic fail CBS! I wonder if Microsoft paid for that 'product placement'. What profoundly stupid and unnecessary damage to take CBS! I bet the Klingons are hacking it with buffer overflows!

    And then in episode 4 they name drop Elon Musk! Elon Musk hasn't done anything yet!!

    And the stupidity of the woman that got killed (i.e. that the writers killed off in ignoble fashion)... that was seriously bizarre.

    And why are the crew of the Discovery so abrasive?

    How can a person get into such a show.    … Expand
  60. M_Alex
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    Many Star Trek fans will be disappointed, because, this series has none of the feel that Star Trek had. It even doesn't have those elements that made it into the recent movies. The Prime Directive obviously no longer exists, or nobody pays attention to it, as the first episode shows. Whereas other Star Trek crews though before they acted, here we have the opposite. The feeling of good-willMany Star Trek fans will be disappointed, because, this series has none of the feel that Star Trek had. It even doesn't have those elements that made it into the recent movies. The Prime Directive obviously no longer exists, or nobody pays attention to it, as the first episode shows. Whereas other Star Trek crews though before they acted, here we have the opposite. The feeling of good-will and careful discovery seems to be replaced by a reckless gung-ho attitude, as the scene with the unknown object establishes: "we found something! It's hidden! But it has to want us to come closer!" It just does not feel like Star Trek.

    The crew, with the exception of Saru, are just unlikeable. The captain of the Shenzhou is overtly sarcastic, cynical, and seems not to have the respect that characterized previous captains (yes, Kirk included). Michaels, the show's protagonist is a bag of bad decisions: her landing on the object, provoking the Klingons, than being surprised that here superiors won't listen to anymore of her bright ideas. Urgh.

    Oh, and the amount of lens flare is comical, the dialogue is cringe worthy and the Klingons really didn't need such a solid redesign. I don't feel like watching more than the first episode.    … Expand
  61. RealPeople
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Im not a full blown trekkie. I like TNG best. I wanted to love this Discovery. I was excited about the cast. I have enjoyed all the Trek entertainment of the past in some way. The new movies are my least favorite, until now. This new show is just not good. Heartless, soulless, incompetent. That said, I do hope the show improves, that they right the ship. When I re-watch the first season ofIm not a full blown trekkie. I like TNG best. I wanted to love this Discovery. I was excited about the cast. I have enjoyed all the Trek entertainment of the past in some way. The new movies are my least favorite, until now. This new show is just not good. Heartless, soulless, incompetent. That said, I do hope the show improves, that they right the ship. When I re-watch the first season of TNG I find some cringe worthy interactions with the crew, they really grow together as the seasons roll on. I hope Discovery gets 5+ years to attempt to leave us something worthy of belonging in the Trek Universe. Guest directors, new writers, and brave paths taken in Discovery, to make all the bad reviewers, including myself, eat our words. Until I hear good things i will not be signing up for CBS streaming.… Expand
  62. silbernitrat
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Big Fan of TNG here. What happened to being rational, humanist and cooperative?
    This show feels like some guys wrote the screenplays, who were only loving the action parts of star trek.
    All the philosphy of exploring and becoming better in the process has totally failed in that series. JJ Abrams is overrated and should just quit destroying good Sci-Fi Universes. Im not nostalgic, but    Big Fan of TNG here. What happened to being rational, humanist and cooperative?
    This show feels like some guys wrote the screenplays, who were only loving the action parts of star trek.
    All the philosphy of exploring and becoming better in the process has totally failed in that series.
    JJ Abrams is overrated and should just quit destroying good Sci-Fi Universes. Im not nostalgic, but this adds nothing interesting or new to the series, its just the boring american way of modern movie making.... (im no native speaker, sorry for my english)    … Expand
  63. sharkimedes
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    Sad. This show has nothing to do with Trek. Awful writing, Soulless acting, Stiff and dark. Now it will be years till we see something for real fans. They even turned the Klingons into cartoon-ish Monsters. No charisma at all. So glad I did not get "All Access."
  64. valrond
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    Terrible. Just a horrible TV Series, if you can call that thing a TV Series.
    First, let's start by the pilot. It is bad, really bad. Awfully bad. The plot is nearly non-existant and definitely not appealing at all. Scratch that. Just 5 seconds into this thing, you know it is wrong. You see a bunch of creatures. They are supposed to be Klingon's, but they are not. They don't look like    Terrible. Just a horrible TV Series, if you can call that thing a TV Series.
    First, let's start by the pilot. It is bad, really bad. Awfully bad. The plot is nearly non-existant and definitely not appealing at all. Scratch that. Just 5 seconds into this thing, you know it is wrong. You see a bunch of creatures. They are supposed to be Klingon's, but they are not. They don't look like Klingons at all, not even close to what we had in TNG/DS9/Voyager (well, he just had a half klingon there in Belanna Torres, but you get it). Then they speak in Klingon ALL THE TIME. Klingon is not meant to be talked, except for some few moments like they have in the previous series, then they speak in English. And it sound so dull and monotonous, which the lack of facial expressions make even worse.
    Then we have the captain and 1st officer doing a nice scene, but just looks nice, it adds NOTHING to the story. I will keep it mostly spoilers free, but a freaking 1st officer of the UFP DOESN'T KNOCK OUT HER CAPTAIN. I could go on and on and on, but you get the point. This is NOT Star Trek.
    Then there is the politicial/SJW leftist agenda they are trying to shove down our throats.
    The Klingons are isolationists that want to remain klingon. The very creators of the series have said they are an allegory to Trump and Trump supporters. The Federation is what the globalists are now, they want to assimilate all those that don't think like them, in this case the Klingon.
    So, what we really have here, is a leftist anti-Trump propaganda, not even my words, but their creators.
    Then there is the white genocide/lack of white male characters. There are two, one that barely features, and the other one, a racist admiral, when we hadn't had a racist in Starfleet in 28 seasons of TV and 10 movies (plus those new Star Wars movies pretending to be Star Trek movies), but here it is again.
    Simply awful, don't watch if you want an entertaining series.    … Expand
  65. Lsherman3
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    Just saw the first episode. I was looking forward to a new take on Star Trek, but I knew something was wrong from the opening title sequence. It played like a like a car commercial, showing off technology, trying to impress, without saying anything relevant. It was a teadius self indulgent opening, and from the get go I feared that if they couldn't do something as simple as set up theJust saw the first episode. I was looking forward to a new take on Star Trek, but I knew something was wrong from the opening title sequence. It played like a like a car commercial, showing off technology, trying to impress, without saying anything relevant. It was a teadius self indulgent opening, and from the get go I feared that if they couldn't do something as simple as set up the titles how were they going to do with an actual story? I had expected competent people at the helm of this show, but that was too much to ask. Its bad storytelling on multiple levels.

    Normally I try to give a show a full season before passing judgement. The writers always need time to find their footing. But fundamentally I don't like being given a pretentious teaser and then been told to pay up. Im not a junkie needing a fix, and I don't think the audience should be treated that way.

    As the show goes, its got some nice visual effects and art direction but these elements alone doesn't a worthy TV show make. The acting and story remind me of a fan film. The first thing they teach you in screenwriting is that it's the writer's job to convince the audience that the story worth watching. So far there's no chemistry between the cast, unrealistic behavior, Klingon's speaking in unbearablly annoying slow motion. The production team never even bothered to think about how people would relate to each other after serving for 7 years together or how officers behave in general.

    CBS paid big bucks for those effects and production values, yet the show is so bad they should pay the audience, not vice versa to have us sit through this. It's more along the lines of "Star Trek 1" the motionless picture. But at least Bob Wise knew that he was directing a dog. This production team doesn't have a clue.    … Expand
  66. amaljaa
    Sep 24, 2017
    3
    Trek fans who are looking for something that actually follows canon will be immensely annoyed by how much this show ignores all of it. Not as bad as I thought but everything is way too over designed. The graphics, CG, ships, props, everything has way too much going on that it's extremely distracting.
  67. ulukay
    Oct 13, 2017
    0
    as a lifelong startrek junkie i just had to register to this website to leave a review.
    tldr: it sucks
    music sucks cgi is pretty good (the only thing that was good in the first two episodes) klingons are now ratfaced, hairless ultra-supremacist. logic is non existent. who would you send to board a klingon battleships bridge to capture a klingon leader? 10 big man with armor and    as a lifelong startrek junkie i just had to register to this website to leave a review.
    tldr: it sucks

    music sucks
    cgi is pretty good (the only thing that was good in the first two episodes)
    klingons are now ratfaced, hairless ultra-supremacist.
    logic is non existent. who would you send to board a klingon battleships bridge to capture a klingon leader? 10 big man with armor and guns? noooo just send over the 2 small women!
    jesus f..... christ ....

    my estimate:
    - all SJW like and hype the show (not that they would actually watch it)
    - Series will be cancelled after Season 2    … Expand
  68. Itira
    Oct 16, 2017
    2
    The series is trying to evoke the spirit of the Star Trek franchise but copies too much errors done by the J.J.Abrams movies: CGI effects are more in the centre of the series than the actual a bit thin story which hat to fall flat when no emotional connection is possibe as the opponent (some unnecessary re-boot of the Klingons) can't move it's face under a thick rubber mask and strugglesThe series is trying to evoke the spirit of the Star Trek franchise but copies too much errors done by the J.J.Abrams movies: CGI effects are more in the centre of the series than the actual a bit thin story which hat to fall flat when no emotional connection is possibe as the opponent (some unnecessary re-boot of the Klingons) can't move it's face under a thick rubber mask and struggles to speak with his false teeth... from there on it's less "to boldly go" and communicate with foreign species but more trying not to laugh about this new instance of what one was "Star Trek". And yes the change of the showrunner before a premiere is never a premise to the quality of a series...… Expand
  69. dapperebas
    Sep 24, 2017
    2
    FX are not great but that is not the problem. The writing is awful. Over explaining everything. "I put my right foot in front of my left foot to get moving over this lovely sandy planet that is visited by me for the first time". Stop it, i'm watching tv not reading a Star Trek Manual.
  70. Kahlessthedude
    Sep 26, 2017
    1
    This is not Star Trek. I would be interested in seeing where the show goes if it was not a subscription money grab and it was not Star Trek prequel. In addition, I loved the science officer because it is a unique take on an alien species and the Captain was great. The first officer, Michael, is annoying overbearing and arrogant. Yes, she has a sense of wonder, but that is where her role asThis is not Star Trek. I would be interested in seeing where the show goes if it was not a subscription money grab and it was not Star Trek prequel. In addition, I loved the science officer because it is a unique take on an alien species and the Captain was great. The first officer, Michael, is annoying overbearing and arrogant. Yes, she has a sense of wonder, but that is where her role as a Starfleet officer ends. She is the main character and therefore destroys any desire to see more.

    In the first episode alone it already destroys the idea that it is set in the prime universe 10 years before Kirk (100 years after Archer). First, humans had regular contact with Klingons 100 years prior to the show, and then just stopped? This seems utterly unbelievable. The Klingons decloak, which the Klingons don't have that technology until 12 years after this show (they trade for it with the Romulans). Federation technology is more advanced then stuff seen in Deep Space 9, such as holographic log range communications, view screens that are windows that take up half the bridge. The colors of the specialties (red, gold, and blue) are abandoned even though used prior and after the show's settings. JJ Abrams movies did a better job convincing me it was Star Trek.

    Watch Orville, it is better and closer to Star Trek than this garbage.    … Expand
  71. RCDVOK
    Sep 24, 2017
    1
    To be fair It could have been worse but not by much. It's not Star Trek they way it should be. To dark and doesn't follow the original path of Star Trek. They tried something different and failed so hopefully it lasts only a season and they try again with their fan base in mind. Who cares about who is captain and that crap because that doesn't matter but screwing with the feel and messingTo be fair It could have been worse but not by much. It's not Star Trek they way it should be. To dark and doesn't follow the original path of Star Trek. They tried something different and failed so hopefully it lasts only a season and they try again with their fan base in mind. Who cares about who is captain and that crap because that doesn't matter but screwing with the feel and messing with cannon that you can't do. Admit you screwed up and start again, that's all I can say.… Expand
  72. ginberryblue
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Welcome to Grimdark Trek. Here you'll find unrelenting strife and callous war criminal behavior -- and those are the good guys. Ponderous, leaden, shadowy and ugly are the words that spring to my mind. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but it is the antithesis of everything that made Trek epic. Oh, and it's the first Trek ever that kids can't watch. So sad they took aWelcome to Grimdark Trek. Here you'll find unrelenting strife and callous war criminal behavior -- and those are the good guys. Ponderous, leaden, shadowy and ugly are the words that spring to my mind. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but it is the antithesis of everything that made Trek epic. Oh, and it's the first Trek ever that kids can't watch. So sad they took a promising lead actress and handed her this dreck.… Expand
  73. TwiTu
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    I love TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise and the movies until 2009. I was so hopeful for this series, because I thought for a long time that we need a real Star Trek series again, to give us hope for the future, like TOS and TNG did, show us unity of mankind.

    But what I saw in the first 2 episodes and the preview in the 2nd episode for the season, made my blood boil. It had nothing to do    I love TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise and the movies until 2009. I was so hopeful for this series, because I thought for a long time that we need a real Star Trek series again, to give us hope for the future, like TOS and TNG did, show us unity of mankind.

    But what I saw in the first 2 episodes and the preview in the 2nd episode for the season, made my blood boil. It had nothing to do with Star Trek, actually went completely against it in some aspects. It didnt show a better future for us all, no, it showed conflict between humans and a new old enemy for all humans. The sets are dark and feel depressing. Even a Captain and her 1st officer, who she knew for 7 years, are in conflict with each other and act like they have just met each other yesterday. They dont trust each other, they try to seed division instead.

    Klingons look like any generic alien from different other shows or even orcs in certain fantasy IPs. But not like Klingons. They are too weak to defend themselves against small female humans that are (in their own words) not soldiers, even though they are twice the size, and their Bat'leths would be virtually useless in battle because of their idiotic design. They talk like imbeciles and seem like a religious extremist race, which they were never portrayed as before.

    You watch this show and you get not a single familiar feeling from the past Star Trek experiences (unless you like JJ Abrams' abominations: The lens flares and the sterile set design). It feels sterile generally. The characters are sterile and bland, weak, unlovable. The dialogue is unintelligent (even though its often supposed to be highly influenced by Vulcans) childish and not even closely worthy of Star Trek. The crew disapproves of each other and questions every order, it seems to be a normal day for them. The famous Star Trek humor is nonexistent - where should it come from with bleak characters like those? The technology in many parts is even superior to the technology in Voyager. Its supposed to play 10 years before TOS, but it feels like its playing in a totally different and far more advanced universe.

    As a real and many decades long Star Trek fan, I feel massively insulted by this show.

    And to top it all off, the neoliberal propaganda in this show is so thick, you can almost cut it. Star Trek was always progressive and tried to show us the way, which it achieved brilliantly, yes, but this show is pure propaganda. You can even almost smell how they try to paint a racist tag on the Klingons or how the humans all look like a gang of SJWs and talk and act like them.

    I can only hope it dies a quick death and gets forgotten forever. It doesnt deserve anything else.
    We need people who understand Star Trek to make a series, not people who try to exploit it for their propaganda. I have never been that disgusted by a TV show. For me its brutal rape of Star Trek.

    Addendum: I just read an article where the creators of this show literally said that it aims to be propaganda against "white supremacists" and Trump voters (Klingons). Its literally a propaganda show which aim it is to divide the society even further or at least support the division it already has.
    Gene and Majel would rotate in their graves so fast that they would fly to the gamma quadrant.
    I can only repeat myself: I am disgusted beyond belief... I really cant believe this is happening.    … Expand
  74. Hessmix
    Sep 24, 2017
    3
    With the first two episodes out...if they don't go back to the original formula this will go down as worse then Star Trek Enterprise. I don't know what they're trying to achieve. Making the First Officer the main character was a mistake as far as I can tell.
  75. KlaiggeB
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    I go back to the very beginning with Star Trek, so I'm a long time fan.

    But this show lost me in the first 10 minutes. I've seen better acting/dialogue delivery by Middle School kids. It was, in a word, terrible! All of a sudden, the Klingons have changed. Why? Where did that come from? It's inconsistent with the Klingon characters that have long been established. As    I go back to the very beginning with Star Trek, so I'm a long time fan.

    But this show lost me in the first 10 minutes.

    I've seen better acting/dialogue delivery by Middle School kids.

    It was, in a word, terrible!

    All of a sudden, the Klingons have changed. Why? Where did that come from?

    It's inconsistent with the Klingon characters that have long been established.

    As former Air Force during the Viet Nam war, I'm flat out stating that NO CAPTAIN, none, would ever allow that kind of sarcasm to take place in a command center.

    Then we have the first officer attacking the captain!

    And gets away with it!

    Are you serious?

    That far from home discipline would be ALL that would keep the crew functioning smartly. Sarcasm would not be tolerated.

    And finally, they want me to PAY to see the rest?

    I don't think so.    … Expand
  76. HJRodrigo
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    Show is disinterested in exploring the original Star Trek universe created by Gene Roddenberry and wants to make a new one loosely based on it. Truth is that CBS is only using Star Trek as a brand name in order to sell this series. It uses the name Star Trek, but then copies things from other non Star Trek TV shows that are currently popular to make for an experience that is not true toShow is disinterested in exploring the original Star Trek universe created by Gene Roddenberry and wants to make a new one loosely based on it. Truth is that CBS is only using Star Trek as a brand name in order to sell this series. It uses the name Star Trek, but then copies things from other non Star Trek TV shows that are currently popular to make for an experience that is not true to the original creator's vision of the future. This show would have worked better as its own Sci show.… Expand
  77. Partygambler
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    What have they done to the Star Trek franchise?

    The characters have no depth, you can't relate with them and they are unlikeable.
    The Klingon redesign is a disgrace. Why didn't they used the old design.
    The Story is not interesting at all.

    Don't waste your time, watching this show.
  78. Ekras
    Sep 25, 2017
    1
    I'm giving it a 1/10 for trying. Even passing fans of ST will be disappointed - not only does it significantly break canon with previous shows (in a lot more ways than just the stuff with the Klingons) it doesn't FEEL like Trek. If they had released this as a "new" show I might have given this a 3/10 (it still is a really bad show) but the attempted connections to the Trek universe andI'm giving it a 1/10 for trying. Even passing fans of ST will be disappointed - not only does it significantly break canon with previous shows (in a lot more ways than just the stuff with the Klingons) it doesn't FEEL like Trek. If they had released this as a "new" show I might have given this a 3/10 (it still is a really bad show) but the attempted connections to the Trek universe and failure to do so in a cohesive way is a point-loss to me.

    Regarding the Klingons (and some of the other species) the CGI abuse is REALLY bad. Considering the cost of these episodes, couldn't they have afforded the much better looking makeup Klingons of years past? It's especially apparent in the eyes of the characters which don't seem to line up with skin correctly.

    As for the story - pretty generic fare here. The main story we've seen before in Trek (Twice in Voyager alone with the "renegade" ship in the delta quadrant and their redemption story in a later season, and of course with Tom Paris) in which the main character commits mutiny in the name of their crew mates and gets stripped of rank as a result. Hopefully it'll be resolved in a different way, but I suspect that the writers just don't care.

    They clearly didn't know much about Trek's history when going into this project, and I don't expect them to magically get an education in time for next season.

    My final gripe is with the pacing - one of the best things about Trek is that it's not a highly serialized show. You can miss an episode and keep watching and you won't be lost. This variant has abandoned this in favor of a more serialized approach and they use it to terrible effect. Future seasons will hopefully end this practice and return to a more traditional storytelling method.    … Expand
  79. Tkas
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    The level of stupidity of this show left me in awe! There is no clear logic, no rhyme or reason for the actions that everyone is doing. It's a despicable piece of tv and I really hope that it will soon crash and burn.
  80. 1344
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Yet more PC garbage. Noble black characters and stupid white! It's becoming a cliché and boring; what happened to storytelling without agenda? Don't bother!
  81. Whatevenisthis
    Jan 9, 2018
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Just watched the latest episode... didn't think they could shove anymore left wing political garbage in there even if they tried but somehow they managed it. They're now in an alternate reality where the enemy is "racist xenophobic version of the federation" LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooOooooo I can't do this anymore omg.

    The entire plot of every SINGLE episode is contrived and deus ex machina. The technology such as the spore drive and ease at which they integrated human DNA into the system was downright laughable and an insult to all viewers. Yes this is sci fi, but the leaps and bounds this show makes due to sheer writers laziness are ridiculous.

    The characters are horrendous save for Captain Lorca. He seems to be the only interesting (and dare I say rational) character on the show. When you are in the middle of a war with hundreds of lives being lost daily and countless numbers of your ships being being destroyed, you want him on your side to make the tough decisions. Despite what many have said previously, I rather enjoy his realistic approach and this dark element of the show.

    Every other character is horrendous. Michael Burnam is a glorified Social Justice Warrior who can apparently do no wrong. Aside from continuously making illogical decisions and causing the majority of the problems, somehow she always ends up creating the solution in the nick of time.
    Every statement she makes is loaded with a double connotation with the aim of commenting on todays present political climate. It's boring and irrelevant in the current universe she apparently exists in. I'm not interested in todays political issues, I'm interested in watching star trek. The script is disgustingly irrelevant to the current events in the show. I also don't appreciate being lectured at regarding social issues which at this point in time in the Star Trek Universe, were already supposed to have been past history.

    The character of Tilly would never have made it into Starfleet let alone onto Starfleet's most valuable ship. The blatant shoehorning of eccentric and weird characters into the show is again lazy by the writers and further adds fuel to the disastrous fire that is diversity quotas. Also, she's downright boring to watch. I skip 5 minutes each time her face appears knowing that they will give her far more screen time than she deserves and the plot won't have developed any further with her regardless.

    Michael Burnam and the forced love interest have no chemistry and I find it ridiculous that an entire episode that could make or break the entire war with the Klingons focussed more on their relationship development rather than the far more interesting Federation/ Klingon war. How laughable. Also, in the same episode, the antagonists far reaching plan includes placing his ship inside a space whale (lol, space whales exist now), somehow orienting said space whale into the path of Discovery, somehow knowing they would be obligated to pick up said space whale (I highly doubt that a ship as important as the Discovery would be obligated to pick up space whales close to enemy space), and so we start an episode revolving around groundhog day. Far fetched, boring, and anticlimactic.

    It's as if the show is trying to cater to every single possible market they can think of and can't cater to any single one successfully. It's also blatantly obvious who in these comments was either paid to write a good review or is part of the shows production. Sorry guys, nobody who's seen the show is buying it. Figuratively and literally.

    Episode 8 was especially stupid and unrealistic. The Klingon Kol seemed ridiculously unperturbed when he found out that the prisoner admiral had been killed. He basically shrugged it off and walked away after proclaiming in a previous episode that she was the most valuable captive. Every decision made in episode 8 made no sense whatsoever, from Lt. Saru's obsession with that alien planet, to the entire episodes premise which was to hijack some random planets "naturally occurring sound vibrations to be able to detect the cloaked klingon ships" HAHAHAHA who even thinks of this rubbish? I'm done. I got through 8 episodes but that's it. Not sure how I lasted this long.

    I'm a long time trekky and I don't mind the show going in a new dark direction, but all the writers should be fired and never hired again to create anything for TV as they're lazy, don't understand the history, have no idea how to develop interesting characters and have just hijacked the Star Trek brand to boost their boring, ill-informed political agenda. Diversity is fine as star trek has always been about diversity, but it never had to explicitly throw it in your face and shove it down your throat like this show has. On that note, I would like to see a straight white male character who ISN'T arrogant, rude, or who will obviously end up being the villain by series end.

    Goodbye Star Track. It was fun while it lasted.    … Expand
  82. tonyzampella
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    My initial thoughts/review. I am a Trek fan from TOS and have warmed up even to the reboots (sans Into Darkness) and really wanted to like this effort, having anticipated it for two years.

    At first blush, I sense that this series is doing too much, and trying too hard. FIrst off, Discovery is a prequel; it's supposed to be 10 years before the original series (TOS- w/Kirk and Spock);    My initial thoughts/review. I am a Trek fan from TOS and have warmed up even to the reboots (sans Into Darkness) and really wanted to like this effort, having anticipated it for two years.

    At first blush, I sense that this series is doing too much, and trying too hard. FIrst off, Discovery is a prequel; it's supposed to be 10 years before the original series (TOS- w/Kirk and Spock); yet, the technology is way beyond that point in the timeline. This starship has more capabilities than Kirk's Enterprise a decade later, or -- even Picard's, 90 years hence. It has hologram communications (no monitors or screens); a ready-room for the captain (not introduced until TNG); large crew quarters, even larger than TNG; the hi-techie medical bays; large screen window-monitors that take up half of the ship; and, that one-person spaceship/suit. I could go on. Too many new gadgets that simply would not have been in use at that time.

    Also, at this point in the timeline, there are too many species serving on a starship. Recall, that Spock was first Vulcan and TOS had no other species serving back then. Additionally, Vulcans would not have kept vital historical information about Klingons from the Federation; it's just not believable, especially after "Enterprise" plumbed the Vulcan-Human storyline that led to the creation of the Federation for four years. I'm also baffled by the modification -- again! -- to the Klingons. This one finds them expressionless, lumbering and plodding through syntax-challenged barks. In addition, the Klingons-with-cloaking technology is beyond this point on the timeline.

    Then there's the whole fight between a captain and first officer -- unless you're Marchis, this isn't how Starships operate. Specifically, these two officers served together for seven years, and now first officer Michael employs a Vulcan pinch and disobeys an order. This, from a first officer who is supposedly ready for her own command? To top it off, the captain manages this incident at phaser-point.

    This veers away from Star Trek canon. Might be great as a Sci-Fi show, but didn't feel like Star Trek. They have already dismantled many ideas at this point in the timeline to be believable -- at least for me. Between the five Star Trek series and the many movies, there's a rich Star Trek canon already imagined and some reimagined to draw from. Yet, they opted to undo staples, such as a United Federation of species (especially Vulcans and Humans), tightly bonded bridge crew, and a strong chain of command and Starfleet principles.

    What's odd is how easy it would be to make a new Trek series work. And yet they went for such obvious overreach to "serialize" a drama. At best it's a strange way to premiere this prequel. I think I'll wait for reruns on this one. I am curious about the new ship U.S.S. Discovery. It took TNG a season to get its footing. I hope this show can evolve into a Star Trek series as well; but thus far, it's not close.    … Expand
  83. MarcStone2061
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Oh, good. BLM and ANTIFA are making Star Trek episodes now. Like all 3rd generation feminists they do not understand the concept of "a bridge too far". I will be shocked!, shocked! I tell you if this gets a green light for season 2.
  84. kpociecha
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    It was painful to watch, terrible dialog, illogical actions, over-saturated colors it looked like B class movie and Klingons are more like Romulans. I am done with this series after 2 episodes.
  85. Ededed
    Oct 25, 2017
    0
    Confusing and disappointing. CBS All Access will not get any money from me to view this mess. An unVulcan Vulcan and a captain that plays things so safe that she’s dangerous? Bad! Not worthy of the Star Trek franchise or brand. Janeway at least could make a decision and act like a captain. This is Star Trek in name only.
  86. Jimmistoffa3
    Sep 24, 2017
    0
    It honestly doesn't feel like Star Trek at all. It feels like a generic sci-fi. Nothing about it feels real, from the ship, to space, to even the CGI creatures. It has a very modern feel to everything but it's just soulless. . The characters are extremely boring, and the chemistry and interactions also feel boring, maybe because the characters feel like they have no personality. TheIt honestly doesn't feel like Star Trek at all. It feels like a generic sci-fi. Nothing about it feels real, from the ship, to space, to even the CGI creatures. It has a very modern feel to everything but it's just soulless. . The characters are extremely boring, and the chemistry and interactions also feel boring, maybe because the characters feel like they have no personality. The Klingons look ridiculous, I won't even go into detail about them you can see for yourselves.

    Seriously don't even waste your time watching this. If you do, and if you are a real Star Trek fan, you will just be very disappointed. It blows my mind how people can slap a popular name on something so generic and try to pass it off as a good show. I was hoping for a great new Star Trek show to sink my teeth into, but I guess I will have to wait much longer, and that's assuming this show doesn't kill Star Trek on TV completely.    … Expand
  87. NikolayG
    Jul 29, 2018
    0
    The worst version of Star Trek bar none. It pretends it's the first to be diverse yadda yadda, which shows the people involved are clueless about the history of Star Trek. But all you have to do is watch it and witness the endless string of contradictions with Star Trek canon to realize the people involved are ignorant of Trek. The stories make Sharknado look plausible; they are driven byThe worst version of Star Trek bar none. It pretends it's the first to be diverse yadda yadda, which shows the people involved are clueless about the history of Star Trek. But all you have to do is watch it and witness the endless string of contradictions with Star Trek canon to realize the people involved are ignorant of Trek. The stories make Sharknado look plausible; they are driven by the desire to deliver crazy twists, as another person said, that would make M. Night Shyamalan blush. The characters are inconsistent in their behavior and mostly unlikeable. Not only is the show inconsistent with Star Trek; it is at times internally inconsistent with itself. Someone has posted a revealing video of clips from past Star Trek series and Discovery, which show how Discovery violates canon again and again and again. Add to this disrespect for Trek history and unbelievable behavior (by a crew made up of almost entirely unlikeable characters who snipe at each other like junior high schoolers), the visuals, and you have a catastrophe. The visuals and tech look 100 years advanced beyond Voyager. I haven't even mentioned the Klingons yet, who look like giant crustacean globs. The final episode of the season actually started off well, as they'd made some corrections, but the way the war with the Klingons ended was unbelievably stupid and anti-climactic, and then came the introduction of the so-called USS Enterprise that looks all wrong. Ridiculous and Awful. The original NCC-1701 model was simple enough that plenty of details could have been added to it without at all contradicting the original design. But they chose instead to change the color, add disco flair to the nacelle supports, totally change the rear, change the entire profile. The notion that NCC-1701 would look like this between the two Star Trek pilots makes no sense. It is not even close to a transitional look between the first pilot look and the somewhat altered second pilot look. I have canceled CBS All Access.

    The way to save this show is by revealing that it took place in some alternative universe and then for season two somehow shoving the crew (or at least Burnham) into the true original TOS universe with the real TOS look and no holograms or other beyond-Voyager-level jazz. CBS insists people won't watch a new show with the original TOS look. Meanwhile people DO watch TOS and all the fan series with the TOS look and, of course, the USS Callister episode of Black Mirror was so popular the internet almost exploded after it aired. People do still buy into the bright colors, short dresses, hairdos, and strong jawed captains. But CBS was too daft to notice and instead plunged into the incoherent mess that is Discovery, a show that is not about character, not about thoughtful ideas provoked by new and unique discoveries, but instead is all about forced unbelievable twists.    … Expand
  88. Ulflander
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    This is not only one of the worst things (not) on TV at the moment (seriously CBS, $15/mo to see this?), but its by far the worst attempt at a Star Trek.

    The Plot is bad. The timelines don't sync. The massive edits to the lore, like the appearance of the Klingons, Sarek's relationship to the main character, etc are horrible and make no sense. if CBS had removed all Star Trek    This is not only one of the worst things (not) on TV at the moment (seriously CBS, $15/mo to see this?), but its by far the worst attempt at a Star Trek.

    The Plot is bad. The timelines don't sync. The massive edits to the lore, like the appearance of the Klingons, Sarek's relationship to the main character, etc are horrible and make no sense.
    if CBS had removed all Star Trek references, this would have been a mediocre SCIFI at best. But as a Star Trek it's absolutely horrible.

    At least Enterprise tried.    … Expand
  89. Larkfeast
    Sep 26, 2017
    1
    WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****

    Just watch without sound, and skip all the duologue scenes

    Baboons were harmed during the script-writing phase of the production: Repetitive Strain Injury from bashing on typewriters
  90. Nevermind
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    This would have made a better star wars series imo. The only thing about discovery here is how to increase the traditionally smaller sci-fi viewer base. I supposed they might have done just that...

    But there are a lot of good sci-fis out and I'll be damned if I continue to watch this rubbish just because it's supposed to be star trek.
  91. laeknir45
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Terrible writing, and many errors in lore/history, but amazing CGI. It's not even remotely worth paying $5.99/mo where you still get commercials. Breaking prime directive in 1st scene, then insubordination on that level from the 1st officer, and not to mention leaving the bridge during an emergency to make an intergalactic phone call... bloody terrible. No explanation for why thisTerrible writing, and many errors in lore/history, but amazing CGI. It's not even remotely worth paying $5.99/mo where you still get commercials. Breaking prime directive in 1st scene, then insubordination on that level from the 1st officer, and not to mention leaving the bridge during an emergency to make an intergalactic phone call... bloody terrible. No explanation for why this Starfleet allows female captains, but won't in 10 years (see TOS Turnabout Intruder), or for retaining the look of ENT which was ~90 years previous to this incarnation. And then intergalactic telepathy from Sarek? Geez. I also really, really dislike the heavy focus on the Mary Sue 1st officer. And WHY would you beam over to a hostile ship full of Klingons with only two petite female officers when you have security personnel on your ship? God-awful writing. "STD" is apt.… Expand
  92. PEJOMAN1234
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    I saw the first episode tonight and I was shocked at how bad it was. The woman playing the captain cannot act, good God was her dialogue cringe, they even made a "joke" about her sarcasm but I couldn't tell as her lines were delivered just as flat and emotionless as all her other lines.
    Another problem is the lead just isn't likable. Other than that the rest of the episode was meh and did    I saw the first episode tonight and I was shocked at how bad it was. The woman playing the captain cannot act, good God was her dialogue cringe, they even made a "joke" about her sarcasm but I couldn't tell as her lines were delivered just as flat and emotionless as all her other lines.
    Another problem is the lead just isn't likable. Other than that the rest of the episode was meh and did not brought nothing to the table. Nothing really happened, the pacing was all over the place Doesn't help the previews afterwards looked way better than whatever the hell I just saw as Star Trek this is not.    … Expand
  93. DTums
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    Terrible pacing, hackneyed expositional dialogue, bombastic cinematography, a disregard of established norms... Just a world class dud. Absolutely soulless, and devoid of anything that makes Star Trek special.

    After a half-century of prosperity, I fear that CBS has killed Star Trek.
  94. Erunthalon
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This Show has nothing in common with Star Trek.

    Die Serie heißt zwar so, aber es hat nichts mit Star Trek am Hut.
    Das einzig positive sind die Special Effects, aber das war es auch schon.    … Expand
  95. synth3tic
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This series is so bad, I don't even know where to start. As a longtime Trek Fan, I'm appalled. The writing, acting, and direction was all overwrought. Everything was trying far too hard to be over-the-top and extreme. The crew's rash, thoughtless reactions made no sense for a military-like crew. When Michael committed mutiny it was so silly, I thought it was a dream sequence. Really, writers? That was totally absurd.

    The Klingons' art direction is arrestingly bad. Just a visual nightmare.

    This series is atrocious, and now it's canon. Now I have to go to the conventions and watch shows like TNG have to share stage time with this garbage. Ugh. When are we going to get a decent Trek show again? Seriously, fire the writers of this trash and start over.    … Expand
  96. Augen76
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    When making a show or any work based on existing material the most critical aspect is getting the core essence of it right. Discovery fails in every fashion to understand what Star Trek is, instead making a generic and frustrating sci fi show. The Federation represents ideas the writers of STD have no understanding of, favoring melodrama and in fighting over aspirational view old seriesWhen making a show or any work based on existing material the most critical aspect is getting the core essence of it right. Discovery fails in every fashion to understand what Star Trek is, instead making a generic and frustrating sci fi show. The Federation represents ideas the writers of STD have no understanding of, favoring melodrama and in fighting over aspirational view old series held. It is disappointing and depressing to see the wait continue for another true Star Trek series as this pale imitation that betrays its legacy set the franchise back a good decade. Score - 0/10 nothing redeeming found here, just scrap it all and try again.… Expand
  97. Trunkis
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    The star trek for the PC millenial crowd.
    Loud, flashy, no soul on it.

    This is way worst that I tought. Janeway and seven of nine have more chemistry on 5 minutes of voyager than this.

    Avoid at all costs.
  98. Galgotit
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Absolute trash, money grabbing trash. I saw some where that the abbreviation for this is STD and it all made sense. This show is a money grabbing prostitute infected with a range of STD's. Hopefully this terrible show will come to an end soon and discourage similar cash grabs.
  99. EdmundF
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    A disappointing Mary Sue Star Wars reboot. It doesnt feel like Star Trek, more of a Phantom Menace Star Wars movie than a thoughtful and intelligent look into the possibility of a futuristic exploration of space.
  100. chrisvb
    Sep 24, 2017
    0
    Just the worst. I really wanted to like this show, but it's awful. I found myself actually rolling my eyes many times. They just tried so hard, but didn't do anything good. There is no chemistry whatsoever with the cast. The captain is dry and uninteresting, the forced conflict with the other officers isn't clever, and it's not fun to watch. They just tried to jam 90 different thingsJust the worst. I really wanted to like this show, but it's awful. I found myself actually rolling my eyes many times. They just tried so hard, but didn't do anything good. There is no chemistry whatsoever with the cast. The captain is dry and uninteresting, the forced conflict with the other officers isn't clever, and it's not fun to watch. They just tried to jam 90 different things in, and sadly none of them work. Sad.… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

80
#80 Best TV Season of 2017
1
#1 Most Discussed TV Season of 2017
9
#9 Most Shared TV Season of 2017

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
72

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 20
  2. Mixed: 5 out of 20
  3. Negative: 0 out of 20
  1. The New York Times
    Reviewed by: James Poniewozik
    Oct 19, 2017
    50
    Discovery feels like it’s adrift between the adventure-of-the-week format of its network-TV predecessors and the kind of complex serial favored by cable and streaming.
    Read full review
  2. The Oregonian
    Reviewed by: Kristi Turnquist
    Sep 26, 2017
    60
    Star Trek: Discovery feels like it's just finding its footing. On the promising side, Doug Jones is already a standout as Science Officer Lt. Saru, who's from an alien race called Kelpiens. And James Frain is perfectly cast as Sarek, the Vulcan who veteran "Trek" fans know as the father of Spock. The relationship between Burnham and Sarek is one of the more intriguing aspects of Star Trek: Discovery.
    Read full review
  3. Salon
    Reviewed by: Melanie McFarland
    Sep 26, 2017
    80
    Happily Star Trek: Discovery strikes a balance between what diehard Trekkies love about Roddenberry’s universe and what J.J. Abrams injected into its theatrical resurrection. Ethical dilemmas and a clash between cultures and traditions comprise the fore of the narrative, but the hours don’t skimp on phaser blasts and broadcast-appropriate carnage.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »