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. SpecimenB
    Nov 13, 2017
    3
    What's getting rated here? When you peruse through the critic reviews and the user reviews, it seems very few of the positive reviews are actually reviewing the show on its merits. They seem to be reviewing how politically correct it is. "The captain is a middle-aged Asian woman, About time." "The lead is a strong, black woman. How progressive." "The ships doctor and chief science officerWhat's getting rated here? When you peruse through the critic reviews and the user reviews, it seems very few of the positive reviews are actually reviewing the show on its merits. They seem to be reviewing how politically correct it is. "The captain is a middle-aged Asian woman, About time." "The lead is a strong, black woman. How progressive." "The ships doctor and chief science officer are gay lovers. Bravo!" But when you look at the reviews for the show itself, the results are predominantly negative. The credit I will give this show is the acting is top notch. And the allowed budget clearly allows this show to go where no show has gone before. But the plot and story are abysmal. The science is ridiculous. The characters themselves, while expertly played, are very cliche and difficult to relate to. It seems the attempt to bring Star Trek to a wider audience has backfired and lost them their original fanbase.… Expand
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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.
  5. SkalderSan
    Oct 5, 2017
    3
    Awful TV series. I am disappointed. I expected a worthy continuation of the famous series, but got full suck. I do not like the main character. I do not like special effects, I do not like the plot and its presentation.
  6. dougal83
    Oct 20, 2017
    3
    The production values are good but it's ruined by screenwriters shoe horning in their politically correct agenda. Edgy writer give a female a man's name for reasons... Klingons are obsessed with their cultural purity rather than being testosterone filled; strong and honorable, nothing wrong with that. Last straw was the two odd overly groomed officers being homosexual... Not a programThe production values are good but it's ruined by screenwriters shoe horning in their politically correct agenda. Edgy writer give a female a man's name for reasons... Klingons are obsessed with their cultural purity rather than being testosterone filled; strong and honorable, nothing wrong with that. Last straw was the two odd overly groomed officers being homosexual... Not a program I'd let my children watch.

    Still waiting for a Star Trek reboot... Bring back Deep Space Nine.    … Expand
  7. ozymandias79
    Oct 4, 2017
    3
    It doesn't feel like Star Trek. This show focuses too much a single character who is boring and shallow. The two pilot episodes were bad and I made it about halfway through the third before giving up. What a waste of money.
  8. Artimecion
    Mar 15, 2018
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. (some spoilers if you haven't seen the first season.)

    Firstly, I should probably point out that I've seen all of the other Trek series and must admit that I'm not an Enterprise Fan, nor am I fan of the newer reboot films. This may help to explain some of my views with Discovery.

    Discovery is a tedious mess of a show that just doesn't feel like Star Trek. Unlikable, dumb characters and unnecessary changes to established design (Especially the Klingons) really stand out in the absence of an engaging story. The characters are emotionally very one-dimensional and make absolutely baffling, and often unrelateable, choices. I often found myself thinking "in what possible scenario was this choice a good idea?'. Compounding the issues with the story and characters is that there are very few consequences to actions. Major plot elements happen with no feeling of gravity (except perhaps the start of the klingon-federation war that the series mostly focuses on) and people get injured or 'die' with relatively little impact.

    The characters are a particular annoyance. The formula is usually a) the character 'dies' only to reappear later or b) the character is actually not who they claim to be. This is fine when these thing happens once, but it becomes groan worthy when yet another character is masquerading as something else. This is to the point that, by the end, most of the remaining cast are either not what they appeared to be in the opening episode and only one of the 'deaths' appear to be permanent. The cast is also pretty unmemorable to the point that I can only really remember the names of Burnham and Lorca - the others just become 'the klingon lady' 'the annoying scientist' or 'the awkward ginger one'. Compare this to Deep Space Nine, for example, where the characters are relatively complex and memorable from the get-go.

    The show also suffers heavily from being a prequel. Technology exists where it shouldn't in the Trek timeline, but this sits alongside an awkward attempt at continuity (backwards and forwards in time). These issues really impact on this being an engaging star trek show when you're constantly trying to figure out where things fit because it is a prequel. Then there are weird anachronisms, such as the 'disco' sweatshirts and the nightclub on board the ship which feel out of place and pop-culturey. I'm really hoping the series gets better, but the cast needs a complete overhaul and they really need script writers than can write an engaging sci-fi story that fits the star trek universe.

    To give some credit, it does look pretty and the story picks up briefly about 3/4 of the way through with an unexpected jump the alternative universe. However, this is short lived and the last few episodes become a tired return to 'oh look, another character isn't who they say they are' and 'oh... that character is back...'.

    The writing is very poor and is probably the element I take the most issue with. Dialogue is generally awkward and people don't really speak 'naturally'. Plot points are introduced for temporary convenience and forgotten in a drive to move the story along. Albeit minor, one problem that highlights this (and irrationally infuriates me) is how they deal with the difference between Terrans from the alternative universe and Humans in the federation-verse and the framing of this. They mention that there is a difference in people's vision, with Terrans being more sensitive to light, therefore explaining Lorca's optical affliction. However, nobody else seems to demonstrate this (particularly the empress when she is bought back to the federation-verse). In addition, this fact is dealt with in the alternative dimension, not within the federation-verse. Therefore, surely it should have been explained that the Federation Humans are less sensitive to light, with the Terran sensitivity being normal in their universe? It's probably ridiculous, but it does bug me that a Terran described themselves as having an 'affliction' that would have been entirely normal to them in their universe. Maybe i'm nitpicking, but the culmination of poor story and character elements mean that Discovery is a miss for me.

    I'll gladly watch season two, but if the characterisation and story remains dull, I do not see myself going out the way to watch any future seasons.    … Expand
  9. nilsy
    Oct 22, 2017
    3
    Think this will be remembered as the worst star trek ever.

    Se more and more look back at enterprise which was the whipping dog of star trek in the past as ... hmm maybe it wasnt that bad it could have been a discovery abomination. Those that dislike this really dislike it, why didnt you make a star trek everyone would have watched that sure they would have complained but they would    Think this will be remembered as the worst star trek ever.

    Se more and more look back at enterprise which was the whipping dog of star trek in the past as ... hmm maybe it wasnt that bad it could have been a discovery abomination.

    Those that dislike this really dislike it, why didnt you make a star trek everyone would have watched that sure they would have complained but they would have watched it.
    This isnt "star trek" its just another bad scifi show    … Expand
  10. 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
  11. gaargod
    Nov 3, 2017
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I gave this show a chance but after episode 7, I give up. On the bright side, the visuals are great.

    I can perhaps forgive inconsistencies with the previous shows (such as Vulcans being able to telephatically communicate instantaneously at distances of several light years). However, what kills the show is bad writing. And I'm being very polite when I call it 'bad'.

    Episode 7 is a great example of what's wrong with the show. The ship is in the middle of the war. Somehow, a dude called Mudd has access to technology which is way too advanced for the era (maybe it will be explained later), and is able to almost take the ship and sell it to the Klingons.

    Despite the severity of the situation, the writers decide to focus on a cheesy love story. Seriously? Towards the end of the episode, it turns out that the Klingons would be more interested in Michael Burnham than in getting the most advanced ship in the alpha quadrant.... The reason? Michael is special. Oh, so special. I almost threw up in my mouth at how bad the writing was at this point.

    Finally, at the end of the episode the crew decided that the punishment for Mudd is not a summary execution or prison, but getting married to a rich girl which he doesn't really like. The guy almost caused the Federation to lose in the war against the Klingon empire. He also has knowledge of all the ship's secrets, which would be very valuable to the Klingons, and which are not widely known even in the Starfleet. And they let him go. Just like that.

    Nope, I can't take this anymore. They are butchering Star Trek with this writing. It's better to rewatch an old series with solid writing, and forget that this garbage even exists. I hope that the show gets either cancelled, or that they get completely different writers for Season 2.    … Expand
  12. 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.
  13. deltagilbert
    Mar 17, 2019
    3
    There's so much to dislike about this show. It's Star Trek in name only. Everything in this show blue. It looks awful. The dialogue is terrible. Conversations between characters are forced and awkward as the writers try to make them sound witty with short sentences delivered at lightening pace. They just sound stupid. No one talks like that.

    It's just generally not very good. Just    There's so much to dislike about this show. It's Star Trek in name only. Everything in this show blue. It looks awful. The dialogue is terrible. Conversations between characters are forced and awkward as the writers try to make them sound witty with short sentences delivered at lightening pace. They just sound stupid. No one talks like that.

    It's just generally not very good. Just cancel it and start again.    … Expand
  14. Hawk321
    Nov 1, 2017
    3
    Not Star Trek to me. Acting, story, dresses, logic....all far beyond TNG, VOY or DSN 9.
    And why the heck do those klingons have no hair anymore ??? While I find it interesting to hear real klingon voices and to see some klingon skin heads....it makes no sense to me why each klingon is now hairless.
    There are a couple more of stupidity stuff that is not kanon proofed like modern beaming,    Not Star Trek to me. Acting, story, dresses, logic....all far beyond TNG, VOY or DSN 9.
    And why the heck do those klingons have no hair anymore ??? While I find it interesting to hear real klingon voices and to see some klingon skin heads....it makes no sense to me why each klingon is now hairless.
    There are a couple more of stupidity stuff that is not kanon proofed like modern beaming, spore jump, spocks step sister, klingons organic looking star ships and peacock alike space fighter "jets".    … Expand
  15. sonny2dap
    Feb 13, 2018
    3
    This was mixed to begin with, and went downhill.

    The performances in general were solid by the cast but the writing and direction were lacking exemplified best by the finale. So we have set up a backs against the wall scenario, a war like implacable foe is at the city gates and everything you know says the enemy will not back down unless confronted with overwhelming force, they    This was mixed to begin with, and went downhill.

    The performances in general were solid by the cast but the writing and direction were lacking exemplified best by the finale.

    So we have set up a backs against the wall scenario, a war like implacable foe is at the city gates and everything you know says the enemy will not back down unless confronted with overwhelming force, they respect warriors and strength and if you don't defeat the enemy everything you know will be destroyed, you're playing for all the marbles.

    You have a way to strike back at the enemy and save your people but to do so will mean compromising your ideals and millions of the enemy will be killed, whereas if you don't act millions of your people will die and the ideals you stand for will be gone too as they're not shared by your enemy. Had the writers followed the internal logic of their story and had it play out that Starfleet the idealistic organisation has to compromise its' ideals to survive and make some point about that's why they're ideals and people are imperfect and sometimes horrible acts are necessary to prevent even worse outcomes, that would have been a poignant arc and thought provoking, instead we had our lead character come up with an implausible solution that essentially has the war end because someone with no army or navy or broad base support, from a minority religious/political group turns up making terrorist demands.

    The message is hardly appealing to most audiences and the reaction of the honorable warrior Klingons who respect strength of arms in battle is also unbelievable in that they meekly acquiesce to such an extremist demand, in complete contradiction of the way Klingons have been portrayed all season.

    i could go on and on, the injection of certain contemporary politics which will date this show horribly is another topic that you could easily spend another few thousand words on.

    Season 2 is coming as we know already but unless serious changes happen on the writing team, 2 seasons will be it.    … Expand
  16. 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
  17. 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.
  18. 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
  19. DoctorMan
    Oct 6, 2017
    3
    This is NOT Star Trek. No logic, no character development. Characters are unlikable and then just die. Too dark, damn lens flare. I really wanted to like this but I guess I'm going to give The Orville a chance instead.
  20. CybershamanX
    Oct 13, 2017
    3
    Gorgeous visuals don't make up for the fact that the true spirit of Star Trek is missing from this the latest installment to the franchise. Yes, it's all show with the "go" consisting of heavy plot shoveling and character motivations that make no sense whatsoever. Unfortunately, you will not be discussing the finer details of each of Discovery's episodes in the far future which is aGorgeous visuals don't make up for the fact that the true spirit of Star Trek is missing from this the latest installment to the franchise. Yes, it's all show with the "go" consisting of heavy plot shoveling and character motivations that make no sense whatsoever. Unfortunately, you will not be discussing the finer details of each of Discovery's episodes in the far future which is a hallmark of each of the previous series. Yes, they've chosen to go a more serialized route but that's not a problem. They've got amazing visuals to show us and they are heavily anchored to an overarching plot that, damn the torpedoes, will be told at the heart's expense. Why they chose to wedge this show between Enterprise and TOS, I will never know. It limits them by having them attempt to conform to existing canon, which I have yet to see how any of it fits despite the creators claims to the contrary. It might have been better for them to have just set the show after Voyager. At least then it would have been somewhat of a clean slate and they pretty much could have done whatever they want without too much trouble. I can understand why they wanted to update the look of the show. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that it had more to do with keeping it in line with the look of the JJ Trek "Kelvin timeline" than anything else. Short of vaguely looking like what has gone before, Discovery has little in common with previous Treks. At the time of this writing, I have yet to see anything worth discussing as far as how it relates to the "real world". Gone are the heady discussions of man vs. machine, race, government or any of the other topics that Trek has so boldly tackled in the past. What we have on display is space combat and very snooty characters attempting to outdo each other's putdowns. Indeed this is NOT your father's or mother's Trek. So, if generic space shoot 'em ups are your thing, then buckle up and take Discovery for a spin. Literally a "spin", as you will find out in episode 4. But, if you're looking for something a little deeper that will have you talking about other things than the look of a show, look no further than The Orville. THAT show looks like it will be shaping up to be the Trek we were all waiting for. And it will make you laugh, at that. ;)… Expand
  21. 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.
  22. Knight3079
    Nov 2, 2017
    3
    A show that has lost what it is and is turning it to something very generic and forgettable... It's a beautiful show with amazing visuals but a weak story. Numerous plot holes make this show seem confused and sometimes boring.
  23. antina
    Nov 7, 2017
    3
    To put it simple: this is not Star Trek.
    Someone must have tought that a good sci-fi show must be dark, gritty and grim. Maybe they are right, but please, please, don't call it star trek!
    This show has nothing of what made legions of fans fall in love with Roddenberry's vision. Nothing.
    Ad, apart from that, is really bad.
  24. P4inskiller
    Feb 2, 2019
    3
    Beverly Hills 90210-Star Trek. This is real "2019" Star Trek....a lot of "Me too", woman power, feelings and emotions - even the Klingons..?! People in 400 years will not be like this! To strange, unrealistic, stupid and therefore nothing for me. I hope the Picard show will be less stupid...
  25. Adules
    Dec 19, 2017
    3
    This show feels like CBS meddled with the production, transforming Bryan Fuller's ambition into a generic sci-fi action show. If you were expecting quality writing and characters akin to Deep Space Nine, The Next Generation, and Enterprise, you will be disappointed. The main word I can use to describe this show is "thoughtless". It feels like they were more interested in making a generic,This show feels like CBS meddled with the production, transforming Bryan Fuller's ambition into a generic sci-fi action show. If you were expecting quality writing and characters akin to Deep Space Nine, The Next Generation, and Enterprise, you will be disappointed. The main word I can use to describe this show is "thoughtless". It feels like they were more interested in making a generic, manipulative, action movie than they were about verisimilitude, realistic characters, and subtext.

    The idea for the show is intriguing, but that's where the positive aspects end. It is distinctly not star trek. The klingons don't look, act, or think like klingons. The themes of the show is more focused on grim-dark story telling than the optimistic thought provoking soul of star trek.    … Expand
  26. AdamKingry
    Jan 11, 2018
    3
    I feel terrible for giving the show a bad review because I really like some of the characters. Rainne Wison was funny and interesting in his role - perfect casting. Also perfect casting is Jason Isaacs as Lorca - completely believable as an experienced, embattled maverick with exceptional leadership skills, dispassionate resolve and cunning, and a moral compass that is a little in the greyI feel terrible for giving the show a bad review because I really like some of the characters. Rainne Wison was funny and interesting in his role - perfect casting. Also perfect casting is Jason Isaacs as Lorca - completely believable as an experienced, embattled maverick with exceptional leadership skills, dispassionate resolve and cunning, and a moral compass that is a little in the grey area.

    The Ash Tyler character is well-acted and well written, but for some reason I'm not buying the chemistry between Ash and Michael yet.

    Sonequa Martin Green does an excellent job as Michael, oscillating between heartfelt emotions and Vulcan reserve. Remember that she hasn't rejected her humanity, and isn't half Vulcan like Spock. She's fully human with all that entails, but can be remarkably focused and calm in a crisis. She has a snappy mathematics ability and has above average combat prowess - evidenced by the fact that she can take down a Klingon who is twice her weight. But she's not a Vulcan and doesn't need to eschew emotion.

    I actually really love her character. She seems like a genuine person and her emotions feel very real to me. Excellent acting. Ash just isn't swashbuckling enough, or stable enough, for me to believe she'd take an interest in him. And I think it's unlikely she'd kiss him with that greasy, scraggly beard.

    Tilly's character is okay. She's quirky and irritatingly upbeat, but she is growing on me. I think her character has potential. She's sort of a Neelix-like character - upbeat, optimistic, overly talkative, and more savvy than she appears.

    I don't like Lt. Saru partially because he's sniveling and irritating, but mostly due to the fact that he's hard to look at. Those tendrals on the back of his skull that pop up and writhe  like little worms when he senses danger actually make me cringe with revulsion.

    I don't like the homosexual couple at all. One is a mean albino and the other is a flat-acting Prince clone with a distracting overbite; but that isn't why I don't like them. I don't like them because their relationship is a propaganda move that was presented to and approved by GLAAD ("a media monitoring organization founded by LGBT people") .

    There has been a systematic and aggressive campaign to pressure production companies to represent the tiny contemporary subculture in numerous, positive, substantive, prolonged, central roles in the media - particularly aimed at markets for families and children, with the central aim of mainstream normalization. I'm not a supporter of propaganda in any form, but I really don't like the idea of special interest groups pressuring production companies, especially when massive overrepresentation is taking place already.

    The matching red pajamas, brushing teeth scene caused me to stop watching for weeks. When I gave the show another shot due to the memorable acting of Sonequa Martin Green, I stopped watching entirely​ at the homosexual kissing scene. I found it to be contrived to the degree that I utterly lost my suspension of disbelief. All I saw was aggressive special interest activism intruding upon a beloved television franchise.

    In typical militant fashion, Wilson Cruz, the overbite doctor, said "We aren't here for [the fan's and viewer's] comfort" and essentially said, if you don't like it, don't watch the show. That's not very business-like, but it may prove to be prophetic if the 200 Metacritic negative  user reviews to 100 positive reviews is any indication of the show's longevity - or the nation's polarization over the issue.

    My suspicion is that the primary fan base just wants to watch the show with their family without any f-bombs or ham-fisted propaganda. I suppose they may need to decide if they want to make a show fans enjoy (and buy) or bow subserviently to the watchful diligence of the GLAAD Gestapo.

    I probably won't watch Season 2 despite the many great performances, interesting storylines and good special effects. Great disappointment from an avid Star Trek fan who has seen every movie and every episode in each incarnation of the franchise.    … Expand
  27. thapeloa
    Feb 1, 2018
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This show is so political its boring...nothing feels natural in the show. The gay couple reveal did not feel like a natural relationship but mainstream TV checking the box that they had the first gay couple. Burnham is acted out by a brilliant actress pity her character went from emotionally devoid to ultra loving and caring in the space of 3 episodes! Took the mystery completely out of her. Then the show blatalntly once again tries to check the boxes from episode 12 by turning a very interesting character (Lorca) into a male villain who is taken down by two female heroins, the other female heroin being a previously ruthless emperor who tortured and murdered people but for the sake of checkboxes she turned into a loving co-star for Burhams (Marvel-esque) action sequence in episode 13. Instead of the evil empress dying in the end Burnham saves her so they can go live happily aboard the discovery. The script writing in this show is horrendous nevermind all the politics of the show. Oh and the show touches on slavery too in a total of probably 2 minutes on screen, the slaves were being sold by Burnhams new best friend the emperor...but Burnham forgot all that in favor of ticking check boxes.… Expand
  28. Zygzagoon
    Apr 6, 2018
    3
    I finished watching S01 a week ago with Dad. I have always wanted to watch a StarTrek show with him because he loves them. Finally! And ... huh, not what I expected. I mean, I wanted new flashy CGI. I wanted space battles like Deep Space Nine (which were awesome). But what I really wanted was some lovable characters, especially comedy characters who don't understand the way humanI finished watching S01 a week ago with Dad. I have always wanted to watch a StarTrek show with him because he loves them. Finally! And ... huh, not what I expected. I mean, I wanted new flashy CGI. I wanted space battles like Deep Space Nine (which were awesome). But what I really wanted was some lovable characters, especially comedy characters who don't understand the way human interaction work like Data, the Doctor or Seven of Nine. Tilly is the closest to a lovable, positive Star Trek character and she disappeared into the background very quickly. At the end of the series, Dad and I turned to each other and asked the same question: Why do they keep giving Burnham monologues? She is SO boring. SO boring! And, dare I say it, I miss the space jargon! It made the show sound smart and I felt privileged for watching it! I learned the word "isotope" listening to them talk. All I learned from this one is "boohoo, our relationship is failing". Its sci-fi, not drama! Ugh! I MIGHT watch the second season.… Expand
  29. Antares8001
    Nov 16, 2018
    3
    It's basically a mediocre sci-fi action thriller that someone slapped a Star Trek sticker on.
    When I heard that this show was gonna take place in the original timeline and not the one of the god awful movie reboots I was excited. But then I started watching it and oh boy...
    Everything that made Star Trek great is missing. The likable characters, the diverse and thought provoking    It's basically a mediocre sci-fi action thriller that someone slapped a Star Trek sticker on.
    When I heard that this show was gonna take place in the original timeline and not the one of the god awful movie reboots I was excited. But then I started watching it and oh boy...
    Everything that made Star Trek great is missing.
    The likable characters, the diverse and thought provoking story-lines, the social criticism, the positive outlook, the focus on diplomacy and exploration has all been traded for terrible dialog, run of the mill sci-fi art style, a CGI action spectacle, second rate story-lines that have been not only been done to death but also seem to belong in an angsty teenage drama show, all topped off by characters that you couldn't pretend to like or relate to with a gun to your head. And let's not say anything about that utterly ridiculous and unnecessary Klingon redesign other than:"What were those P'takhs thinking?".
    Don't get me wrong, the older Star Trek series have more than a few rather campy and outlandish episodes, but as a whole they mostly managed to be thought provoking and created one of the most thought out and coherent Sci-Fi universes populated by believable characters and species.

    If they didn't call it Star Trek I would consider it a kinda ok 6/10 sci-fi show you wouldn't mind watching on a slow evening or as a distraction while doing chores. But as it is simply another laughable and sad entry into the Star Trek canon. If only they had kept it within the movie timeline, at least then it wouldn't have left such a sour mark on Gene Roddenberry's legacy.

    It's a truly weird day when a Seth MacFarlane parody is widely considered to be the true spiritual successor to the likes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager and the actual canonical franchise entry feels like the parody.

    On a semi-relatied side note I find it very odd that quite a few people seem to criticize this "libtard, SJW crap" considering the social criticism and very progressive world view that has always been integral to Star Trek is pretty much non-existent here. Unlike previous entries it never even tries to seriously deal with social issues.    … Expand
  30. Vectis99
    Oct 24, 2018
    3
    A failed attempt to adapt the Star Trek franchise for a modern audience. Pointlessly edgy and crude, Star Trek Discovery tries to squeeze out as much dark shock value as possible accompanied by little else.
  31. WJF3
    Jan 25, 2019
    3
    In Star Trek there is no main character, and anyone can be a hero (Reginald Barclay). In Star Trek Discovery there is only Michael Burnham. The whole series is about her. She is the Main character; the smartest, the toughest and the hero every time. It begins to become predictable. And where is the delight and playfulness that we all love about Star Trek? Discovery takes itself tooIn Star Trek there is no main character, and anyone can be a hero (Reginald Barclay). In Star Trek Discovery there is only Michael Burnham. The whole series is about her. She is the Main character; the smartest, the toughest and the hero every time. It begins to become predictable. And where is the delight and playfulness that we all love about Star Trek? Discovery takes itself too serious. I tried to be positive about Discovery, and I keep trying to stick with it, but watching it has become too laborious. I hope that this is not Star Trek's last act, that would be embarrassing. J.J. Abrams please make another movie.… Expand
  32. grovian
    Feb 11, 2019
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is like a badly written fan fic. Everyone is an idiot (at least some of them gets killed for their stupidity), not one character is likable. This is not the Starfleet i know for decades, and it was never like this even at their lowest (ex: Dominion war). Star Trek was always about the bright future and (ironically) discovery. It was about curiosity, to wonder at the universe. ST had shown the best of humanity a future we can aspire for. But not this series. This is just a generic sci-fi with a Star Trek skin on it. None of these characters would have made trough Starfleet academy even just a few years later...

    The Expanse is way better at being a sci-fi with much better stories to tell.

    The Metacritic page says this: "Summary: 10 years before the Enterprise, the U.S.S. Discovery sets out to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before."
    Except nothing of this is true.

    SPOILERS
    The ship sets out to war and jumps all over the place with a new drive tech which is a bad joke (at least a little bit of sci-fi is in it).

    Some things the protagonist did at the outset of the series:
    - She (Michael) disregard for orders after Captain Geogiou stated to simply do a flyby of the alien ship/probe/whatever. There was no "exceed this mandate at your discretion" clause. She consciously disobeyed and landed
    - She then, instead of avoiding the Klingon warrior's defense by moving in any other way, she chose to surge forward into him and killed the warrior
    - She then proceeded to incapacitate her own superior or commandeered her ship
    - Then she murdered the Klingon boss (her weapon was on stun during the boarding of the Klingon vessel, but she had set it to kill and then shot this dude on purpose (while the whole purpose of the boarding was to capture the guy, which would have been possible even after the captains death, but she choose to kill the Klingon))

    Are we supposed to like this character? She should be in jail for her crimes (she even gets a life sentence but they just wave it, cause she got plot-shield).    … Expand
  33. Startrekmickie
    Apr 12, 2019
    3
    We were so happy to see this produced and presented but we can barely watch it for the overwhelming volume of the music during dialogue. Likely done for dramatic effect it has become so distracting we are considering stopping watching it. We have subtitles on but you cannot hear the dialogue at certain time because the volume of the music takes over the entire scene. Please correctWe were so happy to see this produced and presented but we can barely watch it for the overwhelming volume of the music during dialogue. Likely done for dramatic effect it has become so distracting we are considering stopping watching it. We have subtitles on but you cannot hear the dialogue at certain time because the volume of the music takes over the entire scene. Please correct it...we love the show and the new twists and turns but will have to stop watching and subscribing if this issue is not corrected.… Expand
  34. 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
  35. 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.
  36. 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
  37. Stormwolf
    Oct 9, 2017
    2
    This series is pretty awful in terms of characters and writing, the special effects and set design are pretty good though.

    A good Star Trek show has a well balanced crew who greatly make up for the occasional crappy episode. The crew on Discovery is just unlikeable, it doesn't exactly help that we get a poorly written Mary Sue character forced down our throats. I watched the first 4    This series is pretty awful in terms of characters and writing, the special effects and set design are pretty good though.

    A good Star Trek show has a well balanced crew who greatly make up for the occasional crappy episode. The crew on Discovery is just unlikeable, it doesn't exactly help that we get a poorly written Mary Sue character forced down our throats.

    I watched the first 4 episodes and I find this show to be inferior to most fanfics for its disregard to established lore. The Klingons are a embarrassment and Sarek's personality and backstory get twisted to the point where I think that it's a grave insult to Mark Lenard's work on the character.

    Don't watch this if you love Star Trek, watch Orville instead, that show has the heart and spirit of what made the original Star Trek great.    … Expand
  38. 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.
  39. v3nt
    Mar 31, 2019
    2
    More about the character' brothers, sisters or whatever's than any type of discovery. It is too character driven and most of them are quite annoying. Almost every story arc is about them. General story line seems a few steps back compared to the originals. Secret factions, alternate realities...
  40. 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
  41. tiaga
    Dec 9, 2017
    2
    First off I wanna say it's not bad, I do enjoy it. But as a Trekkie I know it messes up the timeline. And that's super sad. On top of that, you gotta pay like 10 bucks a month to see it on some stupid app, so its not even on tv to watch. Gene Roddenberry would be so disappointed to see his dream be turned inside-out like this. I honestly must say the Orville is more true to the star trekFirst off I wanna say it's not bad, I do enjoy it. But as a Trekkie I know it messes up the timeline. And that's super sad. On top of that, you gotta pay like 10 bucks a month to see it on some stupid app, so its not even on tv to watch. Gene Roddenberry would be so disappointed to see his dream be turned inside-out like this. I honestly must say the Orville is more true to the star trek series than star trek discovery. Seriously, if your looking for more star trek material, go watch the Orville.… Expand
  42. marc5477
    Apr 14, 2018
    2
    I am being very generous with the 2 rating. This show is cheap, predictable, illogical, and a total bore. Its a chore to sit and see a bunch of high schoolers in star trek officer uniforms pretend that they are smart and emotionally stable. You might as well call this Star Trek Kids instead of discovery. The only problem is that it might be a bit too dark for kids but then again they getI am being very generous with the 2 rating. This show is cheap, predictable, illogical, and a total bore. Its a chore to sit and see a bunch of high schoolers in star trek officer uniforms pretend that they are smart and emotionally stable. You might as well call this Star Trek Kids instead of discovery. The only problem is that it might be a bit too dark for kids but then again they get worse from watching the news so perhaps not.

    Anyway, as many point out already, Star Trek has taken a very dark yet awkward tone. Awkward because its clearly trying to send a political message. Half of the characters are either minorities or gay. I have had friends from all said groups (I am of a hated minority group myself) but I dont like it when people stick politics in my entertainment and doubly so when the writing and acting is iffy. This is Star Trek, not blacks vs whites. Not gay vs straight. No men vs women. All the major leaders in the show are women. Half of the main characters are black. Half are gay or bi (okay I can sort of buy that one). But the point is, its not realistic and this is supposed to be SCIENCE fiction, not activism fiction. I want to see worlds that I have not dreamed of before, listen to someone talk about zero point mechanics, or subspace communication theory, or math, or science, etc. The only attempt at science in this show seems to be the silly spores which sounds more like a Tolken fantasy. Just add a few elves... wait...

    The show is very poorly written with quasi-teen level dialog and too much interpersonal drama rather than actual "discovery." Also, the characters seem to contradict themselves at every turn. Micheal is hailed as some sort of genius and was raised by logic fanatic Vulcan, yet is in a permanent state of surprise at nearly everything that happens and cant make a good decision if her life depended on it, which it did and she mostly got out of it with silly luck (a la Kirk silliness).

    I think the creators of this show were going to a TOS feel. TOS (the original series) was largely a failure which barely finished 4 seasons and was only replayed due to lack of color TV content at the time. It was clearly given away cheap as it played in the worst time slots on the worst channels back in the day. Why would you want to emulate that? The biggest hit in Star Trek, the one that attracted nerds and geeks is the Next Generation (TNG). Yet, the creators here took a dump on TNG and all that followed, lost their viewership and rolled back Star Trek to its failure days. Great work!    … Expand
  43. AxeT
    Oct 5, 2017
    2
    Like Disney's "Star Wars" now, this is more interested in diversity casting than in good storytelling craft, and what lame casting and boring storytelling it is! Snazzy visual effects are a given these days. Utter JUNK!
  44. 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!
  45. Yzaak
    Dec 28, 2017
    2
    I just tried watching it. Barely made it through the first episode.
    This is not a show I will continue watching, what a horrible disrespect toward anything to do with Star Trek.
  46. 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.
  47. 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.
  48. 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
  49. shag00
    Jul 8, 2018
    2
    As I see it, Star Trek has always been a sci-fi exploration show, both of the cosmological and human spirit while occasionally addressing some of the edgier issues of American culture.

    What Discovery is, is a show, not much more than a liberal leftist take on homosexuality and doing "good" for various minorities such as dark-skinned people and people with intellectual disabilities set    As I see it, Star Trek has always been a sci-fi exploration show, both of the cosmological and human spirit while occasionally addressing some of the edgier issues of American culture.

    What Discovery is, is a show, not much more than a liberal leftist take on homosexuality and doing "good" for various minorities such as dark-skinned people and people with intellectual disabilities set in a well established commercial franchise. Seemingly gone forever are conundrums, lesser of 2 evils and truth, justice and the American way.

    A number of comments suggest, "it's a good sci-fi show just not a good Star Trek show", well quite frankly that's a crock of **** it's a terrible show, if it wasn't called Star Trek no one would watch it. Mid way during season 1, one of the most unrealistic scenes I have seen lately where one of the ship's crew opens the cage containing a ship-destroying-dinosaur-thing so she can cut it's toe nails.

    I found most of the other negative comments by other posters to be fairly accurate, no wonder the first guy in charge got fired because he obviously knew the show sucked. I feel disappointed also that the majority of so-called professional reviewers are more concerned with being perceived as politically correct than they are with critically appraising a long running, well established series which is both a prequel and a sequel, thereby leaving very little room to change many aspects of the over arching story, within which it fits.    … Expand
  50. 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
  51. udhos
    Feb 14, 2018
    2
    This series is a real pain to watch.
    I've watched every episode really hoping it would deliver a bit more of adventurous plots than politically correct stances on... EVERYTHING.
    Very unfortunately, STD could not do it. It is a thing so obsessed about political instances it can't deliver anything other than progressive agenda. It hits Trump. It hits manhood. It hits patriarchy. It hits    This series is a real pain to watch.
    I've watched every episode really hoping it would deliver a bit more of adventurous plots than politically correct stances on... EVERYTHING.
    Very unfortunately, STD could not do it. It is a thing so obsessed about political instances it can't deliver anything other than progressive agenda.
    It hits Trump. It hits manhood. It hits patriarchy. It hits Vulcan intelligence. It hits money. It's a relentless political show. If you enjoy PC, watch it. Skip it otherwise.    … Expand
  52. 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
  53. 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
  54. 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
  55. SirIsaacBrock
    Oct 18, 2017
    2
    I have tried to like this show but with each passing episode it seems more like miniseries then a journey of discovery, or at least I hope it is a miniseries so it will end before ruining Star Trek forever.

    The graphics are amazing and Michael is a likeable character, but the rest feels forced. I guess I will have to watch Next Generation or Original to get the taste of this show out of    I have tried to like this show but with each passing episode it seems more like miniseries then a journey of discovery, or at least I hope it is a miniseries so it will end before ruining Star Trek forever.

    The graphics are amazing and Michael is a likeable character, but the rest feels forced. I guess I will have to watch Next Generation or Original to get the taste of this show out of my mouth.

    Sorry for the bad review but it doesn't feel like Star Trek.    … Expand
  56. 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.
  57. Whuling
    Oct 13, 2017
    2
    As a generic sci-fi show, this would be forgettable and bland. As a Star Trek show it is shockingly bad. There are very few named characters, most of whom are aggressively unlikeable. The main character is devoid of emotional expression and constantly makes idiotic decisions based on leaps of logic. The scripts are unfocused, and the dialogue is very poorly written and delivered.As a generic sci-fi show, this would be forgettable and bland. As a Star Trek show it is shockingly bad. There are very few named characters, most of whom are aggressively unlikeable. The main character is devoid of emotional expression and constantly makes idiotic decisions based on leaps of logic. The scripts are unfocused, and the dialogue is very poorly written and delivered. Science has been abandoned in the technology of the show and replaced with magic. This show has already, in 3 episodes, had telepathy, light, and fungi that violate relativity. The sets are poorly lit and shot. The CGI is very expensive looking, but has yet to be used to make anything original or memorable.

    This show is basically an extremely high budget version of the dozens of forgettable sci-fi shows that have appeared over the years. The only reason that it has garnered any attention is that it has had the Star Trek brand slapped on it. As an actual product, Discovery has no interest in using the Star Trek brand for anything other than marketing. This program abandons the philosophy, technology, history, and visual language of Star Trek. So, as a viewer I am left with a simple question. Why does this thing exist?    … Expand
  58. 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.
  59. jamestheweesel
    Oct 31, 2017
    2
    The shows impressive effects and single interesting character can not save it from directors and producers that don't understand that this isn't star trek. If you want one-shot interesting stories exploring topics like the knowledge, society and the human spirit, watch the Orvile. Despite its marketing, the second episode onward nearly drops the comedy in favor of a above par star trekThe shows impressive effects and single interesting character can not save it from directors and producers that don't understand that this isn't star trek. If you want one-shot interesting stories exploring topics like the knowledge, society and the human spirit, watch the Orvile. Despite its marketing, the second episode onward nearly drops the comedy in favor of a above par star trek show. This is not worth your time.… Expand
  60. Dick_Kickass
    Nov 2, 2017
    2
    I really wanted to like it. I gave it a chance and actually thought the first two episodes were promising, if a little odd. But it quickly went off the rails. Between the constant bickering and undermining between crew members, the utterly bizarre and unnecessary way they've altered the Klingons (arguably the best villains in sci-fi history), or the introduction of radical new technologyI really wanted to like it. I gave it a chance and actually thought the first two episodes were promising, if a little odd. But it quickly went off the rails. Between the constant bickering and undermining between crew members, the utterly bizarre and unnecessary way they've altered the Klingons (arguably the best villains in sci-fi history), or the introduction of radical new technology into a PREQUEL that's supposedly canon... it all adds up to a disaster. Fact is there's not ONE likeable character on the whole show. Everyone is either annoying, obnoxious, or just plain dumb. And this has nothing to do with 'diversity' or any of the controversial elements that people have been talking about... it's just a poorly written and executed show.

    I'm just really disappointed here. This show really is not Star Trek. Not tonally, not stylistically not in any recognizable sense. It's a shame too... with the budget they were given, they had a great opportunity here. Instead we got... well, not a whole lot other than some nice special effects.    … Expand
  61. JRjr
    Feb 5, 2018
    2
    The first half of the season was perfectly watchable, with the revamped Klingons a lot more interesting than previous incarnations and great special effects. The story itself was average but held my interest to some degree.
    However the start of the second half of the season has been utter nonsense and in particular the fight scenes are just laughable. Just comes across as lazy direction    The first half of the season was perfectly watchable, with the revamped Klingons a lot more interesting than previous incarnations and great special effects. The story itself was average but held my interest to some degree.
    However the start of the second half of the season has been utter nonsense and in particular the fight scenes are just laughable. Just comes across as lazy direction and feels its being made up as it goes along not to mention not being able to connect with any characters,
    There are a number of strong female characters and not one strong male, at times it feels that its been written by misandrists. Get some balance    … Expand
  62. timpfel
    Jan 5, 2019
    2
    I don't know what this is, but it's not Star Trek.
    I like the uniforms though.
  63. thatabramswoman
    Mar 1, 2018
    2
    Paid for it, watched it, wasn't impressed. I find it hard to imagine that before STOS they had a spore drive, SO much more advanced that NC-1701 or even NC-1701-D. The way the Klingons are being portrayed, being only shortly before STOS, is mind blowingly different. I know, I know, they didn't have the make-up abilities for STOS but this is just too far from anything I've ever seen orPaid for it, watched it, wasn't impressed. I find it hard to imagine that before STOS they had a spore drive, SO much more advanced that NC-1701 or even NC-1701-D. The way the Klingons are being portrayed, being only shortly before STOS, is mind blowingly different. I know, I know, they didn't have the make-up abilities for STOS but this is just too far from anything I've ever seen or imagined. The story line was bearable in the first season I guess. They completely lost me in season 2. It is just not worth $5.99 a month to watch one show that is not at all good. This is very dark and not a vision of the future that Roddenberry had. While I think Discovery is probably closer to reality (dark, sad, lacking in hope) Roddenberry wasn't trying to show reality, he was trying to show possibilities. In doing so he created a fan base of people who wanted a positive view of the future. Discovery does NOT live up Gene Roddenberry's future.… Expand
  64. GarethB
    Sep 30, 2018
    2
    Over the top action and CGI do not make good characters and stories, craps all over the real star trek as its another prequel where they have to get everyones nostalgia hyped but fail miserably. Bring back Gene Roddenberry's vision.
  65. wodan1234
    Feb 2, 2019
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. To give it 2 points is way to gentle. it deserved MINUS-12 !

    So far i watched all of season 1 and all of what we got so far for season 2.
    Thankfully i escaped the Short Treks, because Netflix Germany wasn't stupid enough to take them AS PRESENT!
    And not only did it got worse, for example the weird religious stuff that doesn't belong in Trek or to Captain Pike. (Who is neither very religious nor a "fun guy" on duty).
    Or the unstable psycho-killer named Spock.
    Yes, yes THAT HAPPENED! Hes a Psycho killer according to STD.

    Watching episode 3 however really killed all hope, that this show will get any better. The Kling-Orcs ( Who seem to live in 8th Century, Valhalla) look worse than ever with hair.
    Nope.

    "Space Hitler" now rules the "Space Gestapo" (Section 31) , without any reasoning as to how they gave her that posting.

    And that stupid Ghost-friend that Tilly met, just went full bor racist, when she was expecting Lorca or "at least Kirk"( How did she even know him? Even Tilly doesn't know him!)
    By describing James. T Kirk, as the "Much whiter and much much blonder" GUY.
    #TheUeberArian.

    Also that fake body positivity theme, really went sour when chubby Tilly outran an entire staff of much slimmer and fitter extras, in a half marathon.
    Which she should have lost, for falling back and talking with her Ghost-Friend.
    And you could actually see how those extras did "run" extra slow.
    But off course, afterwards she got the SJW typical, "TRIPPLE AFFIRMATION!" within 2 Minutes.
    Oh yeah, that "Friend" of hers, was actually a "Spore infection".
    What the hell?

    Also "off course" ;) Burnham, not only is a splendid astronomer, test-pilot, Power-Girl (For surviving 9 G for ELEVEN Minutes!) Nooo! Oh no... That wouldn't be sufficient for "the bestest person Evaaar".
    She's also a "Xeno-Antropologist"... Ja...
    **** you CBS...

    "Jim! Its Dead!"    … Expand
  66. spretasky
    Jan 1, 2019
    2
    I came into this Star Trek not knowing about the drama for it and the hatred. until later when I personally finished watching season 1 and start looking up what people were saying on this "Star Trek" This is not Star Trek . People are telling I should watch Orville vs this. I haven't seen any Orville episodes yet to judge it . This Star Trek was awful. People giving this a 10 are lying toI came into this Star Trek not knowing about the drama for it and the hatred. until later when I personally finished watching season 1 and start looking up what people were saying on this "Star Trek" This is not Star Trek . People are telling I should watch Orville vs this. I haven't seen any Orville episodes yet to judge it . This Star Trek was awful. People giving this a 10 are lying to the fan base. It is a real shame that these people are tribal and robots and can't see how bad this Star Trek is.. Shame!!… Expand
  67. TheTokenSquare
    Jan 7, 2019
    2
    Gene Roddenberry is dead. I'm watching The Orville. I gave STD a 2 for having at least great special effects and production value. Would have given another point or two if the characters were more than one dimentional and the writing was decent. Another point docked for putting the show behind a paywall.
  68. sgtfalcon
    Jan 12, 2019
    2
    This is not Star Trek. Star Trek is supposed to be an optimistic view of the future. Every character in this show is pretty despicable. The writers don't seem to understand Star Trek at all. This show needs someone to turn it around. Bring back the normal Klingons, develop strong "Horatio Hornblower" type characters. Have the ship "Discovery" explore wonderful new worlds and bring back theThis is not Star Trek. Star Trek is supposed to be an optimistic view of the future. Every character in this show is pretty despicable. The writers don't seem to understand Star Trek at all. This show needs someone to turn it around. Bring back the normal Klingons, develop strong "Horatio Hornblower" type characters. Have the ship "Discovery" explore wonderful new worlds and bring back the morality play that was Star Trek. Occasionally, bring in the Klingons for some battle scenes and make them more like the Soviets as in the original series. This show completely conflicts with the morality plays that were Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, Star Trek: Enterprise.… Expand
  69. dk150968
    Mar 11, 2019
    2
    I seriously gave this show a chance, but after few episodes I've given up. no more thank you.
    No likeable characters, written by people that don't know anything about Star Trek. I have watched all Star Trek spin offs and this one is the worst. If you want to see what it should be like watch "The Orville"
    A Star Trek we should have got and not this PC garbage,,,,,,,,
  70. JerryW
    Mar 14, 2019
    2
    Although this show acts like it is Star Trek, it changed many of the main premises of the show. It is dark, full of drama, focused on personal issues more than science fiction. If it was named anything else, I would have given it an average score. As a Star Trek show, I cannot give it more than 2. Most of the science in the show does not stand in the face of Star Trek's usual science.Although this show acts like it is Star Trek, it changed many of the main premises of the show. It is dark, full of drama, focused on personal issues more than science fiction. If it was named anything else, I would have given it an average score. As a Star Trek show, I cannot give it more than 2. Most of the science in the show does not stand in the face of Star Trek's usual science. Also, how about that Klingon speech? It sounds like a robit trying to speak Klingon...… Expand
  71. 40whitemale
    Mar 11, 2019
    2
    This show is just terrible. No, I am not saying this out of my anger or white male frustration. I am saying this after watching great televosion like GoT, The Orville, The Xpanse, Umbrella Academy or even small shows like Mum (Yes, all female cast, no feminist agenda, just pure fun!). Discovery lacks of everything - accept budget. No story, just ploholes. No good writing, just bad acting.This show is just terrible. No, I am not saying this out of my anger or white male frustration. I am saying this after watching great televosion like GoT, The Orville, The Xpanse, Umbrella Academy or even small shows like Mum (Yes, all female cast, no feminist agenda, just pure fun!). Discovery lacks of everything - accept budget. No story, just ploholes. No good writing, just bad acting. No tansion, just headaches. I can only remember the name of the (eh!) female "Michael" (I guess it is because this is my name, too. Damn!

    While I really dislike the real "real" ST (Kirk & Spok) I loved TNG, liked DS9, accepted The Voyager and loved again: The Enterprise. And while Discovery tries to tell the story (again) what happened before Picard & Co, this has been done in great and much "on point" way by Ct. Archer. So please spend that huge budget on more seasons, less effects and mooooore story. Spare the politics agenda and give us real politics (like in TNG) and social relevance. Diversity can only be installed or "lived" while we tell diverse stories with diverse indiciduals in diverse communities. Discovery is nothing of that.

    After The Orville with this seasone has elevated us into something I would not expect - a real joy of exciting TV-watching - I rewatched episode 4 of Discovery to decide, is it me ... or WTF is going on? And then: I quit the show. I don't want to be lectured, yelled et, preached, bombarded by lense flares or rush from a plothole to another. It is not me, it is you, baby. - Live shor, and definitely not prosper.    … Expand
  72. ajewo
    May 25, 2021
    2
    Star Trek: Discovery is primarily about fast-paced action and one big mystery plot for each season rather than episodical mystery, exploration, ethical or social issues. The episodes are not very memorable, unlike other Star Trek series. Discovery is a gritty, non-optimistic version of Star Trek with prequel continuity issues, e.g., the Klingon makeover is just unnecessary, holograms, orStar Trek: Discovery is primarily about fast-paced action and one big mystery plot for each season rather than episodical mystery, exploration, ethical or social issues. The episodes are not very memorable, unlike other Star Trek series. Discovery is a gritty, non-optimistic version of Star Trek with prequel continuity issues, e.g., the Klingon makeover is just unnecessary, holograms, or the "instant everywhere" spore drive. However, some issues will be reverted in the second season.
    If you start to think about the plots for a minute, you will often find many issues that do not add up. Some episodes are so packed with "stuff" and contradictions that I didn't even care to follow the plot in a logical sense anymore. The voice-over pathos inspired by the JJ Abraham movies is just another empty element. And most of the characters are shady (especially in the first season) and unlikable. Some characters become charicatures. Michael Burnham, for example, is supposed to be the hero of the series, but since she's not the captain of the Discovery, she's not in a position to make the big decisions, yet she has all the answers and rebels without consequence (because she's always right in the end).
    As for the production, the series is well done. There are annoyingly overused light glares in the first two seasons, but the costumes, masks, and visuals are very good at movie level. All in all, I wish they had invested the budget in better scripts, stories, and dialogues written by actual science fiction authors.
    I recommend watching the earlier Star Trek series, The Expanse, or The Orville instead.    … Expand
  73. slicelook
    Feb 17, 2022
    2
    This season went full hollywood sjw with lqbtqt "i identify as whatever, pay attention to me and my irrelevant useless story that has nothing to do with star trek"
  74. TheSHO
    Jan 19, 2019
    1
    I am done after watching the 5th episode of the 1st season. Are you kidding me?! I let most of the things that I didn't like go. But when you have a very unlikable chief engineer (who is gay) and a very forgettable lead doctor (who is also gay) being shoved down our throats (pun intended) by the liberal Hollywood as a couple, that is when I am done. I am so sick and tired of HollywoodI am done after watching the 5th episode of the 1st season. Are you kidding me?! I let most of the things that I didn't like go. But when you have a very unlikable chief engineer (who is gay) and a very forgettable lead doctor (who is also gay) being shoved down our throats (pun intended) by the liberal Hollywood as a couple, that is when I am done. I am so sick and tired of Hollywood making everything about PC. Every single character is unlikable. The only one that is decent is the main character and they made her name Michael. Sigh, really? Just had to show us that gender and names don't mean anything, They are all interchangeable, right hollyweird? Other then forgettable and unlikable characters, you have horrible special effects for the space scenes. The older Star Treks looked soooo much better when there was no Computer technology. And don't get me started on the Klingons. The only good thing I would say this series has is the nice indoor set pieces. That is about it. Oh and one more thing. Isn't this show suppose to be before Enterprise? If so, why do they have so much more technology then Enterprise? Just doesn't make sense.

    I hope to God that the new one with Picard is better.    … Expand
  75. haberman13
    Oct 31, 2017
    1
    The only good thing about this show is that someone somewhere agreed to spend money on a new Trek show.

    So there is hope, that after this destroys the franchise for 20 years, we will perhaps get a real Trek show again.
  76. mortendynamo
    Dec 1, 2018
    1
    This is an abomination of what Star Trek is. I Have watched all the previous Star Trek series, and have loved them all, but this were just utter garbage.
  77. Humboldt1337
    Jan 17, 2019
    1
    This show is 100% SJW garbage now. It is like a diversity hire who hates Star Trek made all of the decisions regarding this series. These out of touch Hollywood elite execs know white males are the biggest Star Trek fan base, right?! Apparently not, as they do everything in their power to demean and insult white men throughout the entire show. Just total garbage, I hope this seriesThis show is 100% SJW garbage now. It is like a diversity hire who hates Star Trek made all of the decisions regarding this series. These out of touch Hollywood elite execs know white males are the biggest Star Trek fan base, right?! Apparently not, as they do everything in their power to demean and insult white men throughout the entire show. Just total garbage, I hope this series fails and is forgotten. I will just go watch DS9 re-runs instead.… Expand
  78. MichaelDorosh
    Feb 1, 2019
    1
    I didn't make it through the pilot. The set design, costumes, casting and writing all seem like a mess and seem completely unconnected to the existing ST universe. I could have watched Star Trek Continues for years. I won't be watching Discovery.
  79. 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
  80. AthanasiosT
    Nov 8, 2017
    1
    Kirk would have ejected this show in space...It is Not for trekkies and if by any chance you have a trek nostalgia, you can always watch The Orville. Even though the SFX are top, it just relies too much on action, shooting, firing torpedoes, simplified logic and silly thinking and too much straying from Strafleet directives. No exploration and no surprises await the crew this time. Simply boring..
  81. 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
  82. 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
  83. expreed
    Nov 26, 2017
    1
    Gene Roddenberry's vision went out the window entirely and was replaced with a no brains action show with only superficial diversity. The CGI is top notch, but that doesn't carry the show and Trekkies will prefer the 1960's show over this one in the end. Ignoring all the canon, which also went out the window, the show is just dumb and not well written. If the show were well written a lotGene Roddenberry's vision went out the window entirely and was replaced with a no brains action show with only superficial diversity. The CGI is top notch, but that doesn't carry the show and Trekkies will prefer the 1960's show over this one in the end. Ignoring all the canon, which also went out the window, the show is just dumb and not well written. If the show were well written a lot of the canon mistakes could be forgiven.

    Trek fans love Gene Roddenberry's vision and will probably never follow a Trek that borrows heavily from Star Wars... Sarek now has force powers everyone.    … Expand
  84. golibethesda
    Oct 5, 2017
    1
    Worst Star Trek by far and the stupidest one. On RPG Codex I've written a list of idiocies and inconsistencies that are abundant in every episode so for details you can go there and here I'll only say this: watch The Orville instead.
  85. Awaken
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Unnecessary urgency - timers, countdowns, flashing warnings. Unrealistically frilly, convoluted, overcomplicated klingon customs, design and architecture. Heroes and zeroes - a single character that matters, everyone else is fluff. Everyone on the fed side being a 2017 human in values and outlook. No evolution of humanity. Plot plagiarism. Even more plot plagiarism. Dialogue plagiarism. Lack of plot. Obvious tropes. Convenient lack of autopilot for dramatic effect. More obvious tropes. Being unable to transport without lifesigns 2 minutes after transporting a bomb just fine. Too much CGI eye candying. Unnecessary conflict between colleagues. Too much unjustified tension. One dimensional characters. Not enough moral ambiguity. Shared assumptions of right and wrong. Everyone on "our side" being okay with mining corpses. Only decent moral examination taking place with a computer. Too much stating of the obvious. Uncomfortable subtle likening of Klingons to idealogically driven terrorists facing off against the USA / Federation. Zealous enemies saving laser bullets to allow cinematic convenience. Serious light bulb shortage in 23rd century court. The physics of a space ship, no matter how pointy it is, cutting slowly through another space ship instead of pushing it away.… Expand
  86. russellpeach
    Mar 7, 2019
    1
    This is the worst star trek series EVER. This isn't even real star trek. This is prime, we want cannon. The directing is bad, the writing is inconsistent, incoherent and amaturish. Most of the actors are useless. The lead is such a mary sue that that she's SO unlikable she needs killing off as soon as possible. This series has NOTHING to do with the hopeful greatness of Gene Roddenberry'sThis is the worst star trek series EVER. This isn't even real star trek. This is prime, we want cannon. The directing is bad, the writing is inconsistent, incoherent and amaturish. Most of the actors are useless. The lead is such a mary sue that that she's SO unlikable she needs killing off as soon as possible. This series has NOTHING to do with the hopeful greatness of Gene Roddenberry's real Star Trek. I will stay with all the original series and The Orville which is the real successor to Star Trek.… Expand
  87. 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
  88. Voodoo123
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    +Visual flair puts this shows aesthetic in line with 2009 JJ abrams film
    +Great cast
    +Interesting period for star trek lore -No longer a show about an advanced yet peaceful culture of unified civilizations -OTT lens flare/camera tilts/camera pans way too much movement for my taste -Starfleet crew noticeably relish in the death of their perceived 'enemy' -OTT klingon prosthetic makeup    +Visual flair puts this shows aesthetic in line with 2009 JJ abrams film
    +Great cast
    +Interesting period for star trek lore
    -No longer a show about an advanced yet peaceful culture of unified civilizations
    -OTT lens flare/camera tilts/camera pans way too much movement for my taste
    -Starfleet crew noticeably relish in the death of their perceived 'enemy'
    -OTT klingon prosthetic makeup impairs the actors ability to emote or even speak clearly
    -Story flavors mindless action over philosophical / ethical debate

    I really wanted this to work out but my heart sank when apparently someone at CBS thought 'lets do it JJ stylee'. I'm not sure any of this is fixable but what we have here feels like a massively lost opportunity...

    A first officer who vulcan nerve pinches her commanding officer to ATTACK a vessel who is supposedly brought up in a vulcan culture??? Did the producers ever watch an episode of star trek before making this show???

    I will keep watching in the hope something gets better but so far these 2 episodes are star trek sacrilege. (if this was anything other than star trek would've given 4/10 hence the 1/10)    … Expand
  89. ThemBakerBoys
    Sep 25, 2017
    1
    This dialogue is horrible! I have taken creative writing classes where the teacher would have roasted us for writing this bad. What a shame. Good cast and fairly good visuals wasted on a show where I want to mute the volume. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bit of momentum and then lose it when they cut to theThis dialogue is horrible! I have taken creative writing classes where the teacher would have roasted us for writing this bad. What a shame. Good cast and fairly good visuals wasted on a show where I want to mute the volume. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bit of momentum and then lose it when they cut to the Klingon scenes. Who knew Klingons were such chatterboxes? Like watching paint dry.
    "Something something, honor. Something something, torch." Snore!
    I guess Twin Peaks had me expecting something new and fresh and this is just stale cookie cutter "TV show" with the ubiquitous music rising to dramatic crescendo before the cut to commercial.
    To top it all off, the opening title sequence looks like a Chrysler car commercial from 2005. We have seen that "drawing comes to life" animation trick a thousand times. Watch the title sequence from True Detective season 1 if you want to see an opening that pulls you into the story and characters. And watch Green on any episode of Walking Dead to see what she is capable of in the hands of a competent director with a script that doesn't make you want to kick your sofa.    … Expand
  90. allandor
    Feb 13, 2018
    1
    It could have been a good new entry into the star trek franchise. The pilot is the best of the whole season and it is not really good. At episode 3 it is over the discovery comes into play and with it ... well the worst Star Trek series yet.
    Why must be everything new, if it is named Star Trek?`Why don't they use the Characters and "history" of the Trek-universe if the series should be    It could have been a good new entry into the star trek franchise. The pilot is the best of the whole season and it is not really good. At episode 3 it is over the discovery comes into play and with it ... well the worst Star Trek series yet.
    Why must be everything new, if it is named Star Trek?`Why don't they use the Characters and "history" of the Trek-universe if the series should be playing right in that universe?

    Star Trek Discovery wouldn't be that bad if it had been its own IP. Just "Discovery" with a whole new "universe". If you don't want to use Star Trek lore, just don't name it so.    … Expand
  91. 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
  92. 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
  93. 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.
  94. 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).
  95. 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
  96. RedShiftXIII
    Dec 2, 2021
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm a bit of a trekkie and have watched most of the series throughout my life, but while I may be biased, it's in favor of the shows—I kinda liked Star Trek: Enterprise. With that said, I don't think it's unreasonable to conclude that Star Trek: Discovery is a bad show in general.

    Exposition is a massive problem. While they do try to cover it up by inserting it into dialogue, it's as if the core concept of the show is how to fit as much exposition into dialogue as humanly possible. The conversations between characters almost always can be summed up as two robots interacting with each other who both just learned they were programmed with the ability to cry. Furthermore, everything from exposition sloppily hidden in dialogue to stubbing of toes, has to be a massively big deal.

    In the very first episode of this season, it's basically a bunch of fancy special effects and hilariously meaningless conversations: Why are we suppose to care that a captain doesn't want a president on their ship? Why is it a problem enough for a captain to continually openly protest and cause conflict where none needs to be had? Why did a captain ask the f***ing president, if she lied to a dude who was panicking, as if it was important to ask while everything is supposedly on the edge of complete disaster? Why do a bunch of officers ignore their captain when she asked for a status update but they're apparently too busy being dramatically quiet as the hangar burns down? Absolute nuttery.

    It's like they're trying to make a soap opera in space with zero self-awareness. While this may seem like a knock on the actors, the fact that this is consistent with every character, tells me it's a writer/director problem. Maybe I'm wrong, but the end result is the same—it's bad.

    Lack of continuity isn't always a bad thing, but one deeply important concept of the federation is that it's heavily influenced by maritime tradition. There's multiple explicit and implicit reminders of this throughout the IP's history, but Discovery seems to have forgotten that, or doesn't give a crap. It's fine if they want to build on that or even tear it down, but it's fairly obvious the writers didn't make any attempt to learn of Federation or maritime traditions to the point it'd be like a bunch of white guys making a movie about China and never actually researching Chinese culture. This isn't a big deal for ornamental things, but clear insubordination that isn't addressed because nobody knows it's insubordination both misses an opportunity to utilize already built concepts to introduce actual drama and tells us these aren't organized people with rules and regulation—they're just dudes, dudettes and duets, who we are told are smart and happen to be on a ship with some logos on it. Nobody in the show knows the difference between an ensign and the president of the Federation, nobody in the show has even a remote interest in displaying the level of professionalism even the most unprofessional international organization has.

    This isn't Star Trek; it's an exercise in fitting as much exposition into dialogue as possible and drama from nothing . . . with Federation logos. I really wanted this show to be good—that's why I sat through three seasons of it—but I don't think they've learned anything based on the beginning of the fourth season. I hate this show and I hate that i've wasted so much time watching it. I hope I've saved at least one person the trouble.    … Expand
  97. Almostpilot
    Apr 17, 2018
    1
    They managed to ruin the star trek universe. Grotesque what they did with the Klingons, ignoring all previous history of star trek.
  98. 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
  99. 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
  100. bob12345
    Sep 25, 2017
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Star Trek Discovery: To boldly go where no fan wanted them to go. Dark, pointlessly dramatic with nonsensical plotting, this blatant cash grab fails to understand what Star Trek is supposed to be about in the first place. Not helping matters is the blatant JJTrek aesthetic - whereas normally Starfleet ships are bright and cheerfully lit, the Shenzhou prefers moody dramatic lighting and ugly lens flares. Characters, and I use that word loosely, spout exposition about themselves or their species in ways that have no bearing on the story itself.

    As to the story - well, there really isn't one. The boring reimagined Klingons, here a barely disguised substitute for ISIL extremists, show how bad the costuming itself has gotten. Mush mouthed, and at one point with obvious black makeup smeared over the teeth, they've effectively taken everything interesting and fun about the Klingons and turned it into a farce.

    As to the Federation - committing a war crime is not in character, at all. Blatantly violating Klingon funerary rights by putting a bomb in a sarcophagus is against the ideal of everything Star Fleet, and Star Trek was supposed to stand for to begin with. That's without touching on the whole "life sentence" absurdity. Someone forgot what a post scarcity utopia is supposed to be about.

    Bottom line, Star Trek: Gothic Trappings is an angsty teenagers wet dream of Scifi, masquerading as a beloved series.    … 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 »