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. pissedtrekky
    Feb 21, 2019
    5
    I'm a long time trek fan and Discovery had my attention up to the last three episodes. the last episode i shut off after that science geek guy said how he was going to miss his bf's sexy scar! I'm not sure who there target audience is supposed to be but I've seen daytime soaps that were less gay. The first season was pretty good and the start of this season then they started to over actI'm a long time trek fan and Discovery had my attention up to the last three episodes. the last episode i shut off after that science geek guy said how he was going to miss his bf's sexy scar! I'm not sure who there target audience is supposed to be but I've seen daytime soaps that were less gay. The first season was pretty good and the start of this season then they started to over act everything and turned up the homosexual volume and tried to push the humor where it feels labored at best. did they change the director or something? what's with all the looking at each other all the time the dramatic pause like in soaps. and why all the man love bull/ is this the brokeback mountain star trek? and who else is sick of looking at the first officer's face? it looks like a vjj! I guess i'm going to go finish watching it but i'm hoping vjj face gets killed on this episode and if the science geek and the doc that came back from the dead kiss again i'm done! I can't believe they're ruining this.… Expand
  2. allquixotic
    Oct 17, 2017
    4
    This show is a mixed bag in my opinion. The first three episodes are pretty bad; they're mostly devoid of character interaction, and trying to recreate the constant buzz of explosions from the new Star Trek films. Episodes four and five are much more intriguing as they provide some tentative ties to the other Trek media, and provides a potential in-universe justification for all the darkThis show is a mixed bag in my opinion. The first three episodes are pretty bad; they're mostly devoid of character interaction, and trying to recreate the constant buzz of explosions from the new Star Trek films. Episodes four and five are much more intriguing as they provide some tentative ties to the other Trek media, and provides a potential in-universe justification for all the dark themes and moral ambiguity that the show is all about. That said, this sort of "edgelord" thematic is getting really tiresome of late, and I grow tired of it growing like a cancer and taking over every single show I watch. Not every show has to be about cataclysms and wars and explosions and gunfights and characters that hate each other. It's sort of like the present-day toxic culture in general is starting to consume our media, and I don't think it's helpful to society; it sort of fans the flames. Where'd the optimism and innocence in Star Trek go? They're essential to what makes Star Trek, well, Star Trek. So overall I'm really annoyed by this show, and even though it's starting to get interesting, it's really disappointing to see it characterized this way as another doom and gloom edgy show. I want the original themes of Star Trek to return at some point; otherwise this review stands.… Expand
  3. KentuckyWindage
    Oct 28, 2017
    4
    I watched four episodes before throwing in the towel. Poorly written and not a single likeable character. Bravo you bunch of cretins. Watch The Orville instead.
  4. Jesp1
    Sep 25, 2017
    4
    Meh... Just a bland show, yet a HORRIBLE STAR TREK! Definitely not worth a subscription to CBS as of yet. Though there is some hope they could do better.... Maybe?
  5. tr1cky1
    Nov 8, 2017
    4
    Strong production and performances by the cast are handcuffed by the mediocre stories and plots. The cast seems to know how to have fun, but the fundamental tools to move the story along are flawed, prompting the audience to think, well, why didn't they just do these 4 things instead to keep the crew of the Discovery out of trouble?
  6. timeknight
    Nov 3, 2017
    4
    I really wanted to give this show a chance, and a higher rating. I just can't though. It does not hold true to the Star Trek feel of previous shows. This definitely feels like Alex Kurtzman just tried to make Star Trek like Transformers. It tries too hard to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

    The first episode actually starts out great. I loved the dynamic between characters on    I really wanted to give this show a chance, and a higher rating. I just can't though. It does not hold true to the Star Trek feel of previous shows. This definitely feels like Alex Kurtzman just tried to make Star Trek like Transformers. It tries too hard to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

    The first episode actually starts out great. I loved the dynamic between characters on the Shenzhou. Captain Georgiu had a very refined vibe. I was looking forward to seeing how the crew developed. That vibe was rudely interrupted by Klingons who look and sound more like orcs from Lord of the Rings. So much for human relatability of the Klingons. They've somehow devolved into savage tribesmen.

    Here are the main pros of Discovery:
    - Great sets and costumes
    - Great cinematography
    - Great use of special effects
    - Acting talent isn't that bad

    Main cons:
    - Waaaaaay too grim dark. There's no space opera here. It's grittier than beach sand.
    - Too melodramatic. Where's the positivity that was characteristic of previous Star Trek shows?
    - Klingons who are LotR orcs.
    - There's a lot of scenes where they show federation officers doing things like beer pong, or dropping f-bombs. This makes no sense, given the fact that Star Fleet officers are held to a higher standard, and shouldn't be drunk when they're expected to be fighting a war.

    If CBS was trying to alienate Trekkies, they succeeded. They made a standalone sci-fi drama though.    … Expand
  7. Thylbanus
    Sep 27, 2017
    4
    Everyone is SO one dimensional. The writing is so horrible that even the cast appears to be aware that they just need to rush through their lines. There is no humor, or relatability. And in the end, you start to realize that the Federation is the Borg in this show. The only reason I even gave it a 4 was because the CG was so good. Hell, they should have just let Alec Peters do AxanarEveryone is SO one dimensional. The writing is so horrible that even the cast appears to be aware that they just need to rush through their lines. There is no humor, or relatability. And in the end, you start to realize that the Federation is the Borg in this show. The only reason I even gave it a 4 was because the CG was so good. Hell, they should have just let Alec Peters do Axanar and it would have been better.… Expand
  8. eagleeyeviking
    Dec 22, 2019
    4
    Something about this adaptation feels flat. Yes, the set designs are impressive, there are moments that work, and the visuals are mostly breathtaking. However, the dialogue is expositionary, the script is poorly written, the characters are emotionless, and the pacing is inconsistent.
  9. jcanfis
    Nov 7, 2017
    4
    i ..... really ........ do ........ not ........... like ........... klingon.............. scnes.......... with ........subtitles....... it ......... is .........slow.........and.........boring!
    I lately skip the klingon scenes as they bore me to hell.
  10. mcq767
    Sep 27, 2017
    4
    I've only seen the first episode, but it was not encouraging, and the ending was totally awful. Like other reviewers have stated, this is much more JJ's Trek than Roddenberry's. The Klingons are purple, the lens flares are everywhere, and its much more focused on action than diplomacy. The main character is insufferable and I **** you not, (very inconsequential spoiler) Vulcan nerveI've only seen the first episode, but it was not encouraging, and the ending was totally awful. Like other reviewers have stated, this is much more JJ's Trek than Roddenberry's. The Klingons are purple, the lens flares are everywhere, and its much more focused on action than diplomacy. The main character is insufferable and I **** you not, (very inconsequential spoiler) Vulcan nerve pinches the captain in the first episode because she wasn't getting her way. I'll give it a shot and watch the next few, but based on the first episode, this feels like bad fan-fiction with $50 million thrown at it, and once its distribution service, cbs all access ultimately fails and its budget is slashed, I'm not confident its script and acting will be able to carry it.… Expand
  11. Metric_Thread
    Oct 24, 2017
    4
    I think it is not bad show. But it is no good either. I just watched 6 first episodes yesterday lying sick in my bed, and after that I don't know if I want to watch the next ones. The story is quite interesting, but there are some points that just push me away from that show.

    STD is over politically correct. To the point that if there will be new character introduced in future episodes,    I think it is not bad show. But it is no good either. I just watched 6 first episodes yesterday lying sick in my bed, and after that I don't know if I want to watch the next ones. The story is quite interesting, but there are some points that just push me away from that show.

    STD is over politically correct. To the point that if there will be new character introduced in future episodes, you can be sure it will be some gay or trans muslim black woman, and she will probably be in relationship with the main character.

    The captain of Discovery is a bad guy. Captain of the Federation starship from the title of the show cannot be evil. That is just not star trek.

    The complete disconnection from star trek universe. Everything is more technologically advanced than in any other star trek. That just makes no sense.

    I think 4 points is exactly what this star trek deserves.    … Expand
  12. DoctorZack
    Oct 1, 2017
    4
    Congratulations. Even if you don't delve into this with a political mind, this is by far the most disappointing inclusion into the Star Trek franchise. While visually stunning (because money), the series lacks any of the heart or resemblance to the franchise's previous entries. My advice, go watch The Orville if you want to see a true Star Trek heir.
  13. brianlear
    Oct 16, 2017
    4
    Episode 5--Choose your pain--This was the best episode of the series so far, but the bar is pretty low after the last few. Finally the writers realized you need some kind of sub-plot to allow characterization to occur, instead of some grand umbrella called "serialization." So we got a prison-break episode set on a Klingon ship and it didn't turn out half bad. Lorca is the tough guy. MuddEpisode 5--Choose your pain--This was the best episode of the series so far, but the bar is pretty low after the last few. Finally the writers realized you need some kind of sub-plot to allow characterization to occur, instead of some grand umbrella called "serialization." So we got a prison-break episode set on a Klingon ship and it didn't turn out half bad. Lorca is the tough guy. Mudd is onboard (why?). I still don't like how the Klingons are portrayed, but it's becoming apparent that the writers feel that is how they must be portrayed if we are to buy into them being the enemy. It just feels wrong though--we have many years worth of Klingon episodes etched into our hearts--those honorable, tough, warriors, yet somehow remarkably human at the same time. Those Klingons are gone and I think they made a mistake doing it that way. It could have been done so much better.

    The spore plot advanced a bit and possibly ended--we'll see. There was some attempt at characterization of the crew members, which is a promising sign.

    Still, the writers continue to show their immaturity and lack of writing prowess. We still get several long expositional speeches to cameras. In one scene, it is particularly cringy--this time, a 30 second recap of the spore drive plot delivered speech-to-audience style by Burnham. This one had me hitting the pause button to have a laugh with my wife about the quality of the writing.

    Sometimes, it appears as if the cast are being forced to deliver their lines at 2x speed.

    The editing is loose and in several parts, just poor. The captain appears in a shuttle by himself with no warning, and we are left wondering why he is there and then is suddenly attacked. The captain somehow steals a shuttle from the Klingons without us knowing about it. We don't need to see every single thing that happens behind the scenes, but glaring errors like these pull you out of the action and it's just poor editing. I bet the scenes were shot, even. But where are they?

    The cinematography--passable. We still have copious amounts of exaggerated lens flare, washed out colors, and monotone sets. Camera angles are all over the place although not as blatant as the pilot.

    F-bombs--unbelievable, seemed forced, like the writers were trying to say "Hey look at us, we do unexpected things like put swearing in Star Trek. Watch the next episode please."

    During this episode, it has become become apparent that Burnham is dragging the show down. I'm not sure how many more extended shots of her expressionless face I can take. I sincerely hope that the writers have done this purposefully, in preparation for her character to shed her tough exterior and evolve into this wonderfully colorful person. If so, great. Let's get evolving. She's dragging every scene she's in, and it's possible it might just be her. She needs some fun episodes to let her character come out.

    It's a slow start. For DS9 this early on, we had already met Garak, who would go on to be one of the shows most memorable characters. And the 5th episode was "Babel"--an interesting story about a virus that induces speech oddities that allowed the actors to say funny things. Voyagers 5th episode was "The Cloud"--about harvesting resources out of a living nebula. It was not an incredible episode but I do remember it fondly--it was, similar to Discovery, about the ethics of harming sentient life forms. TNG's fifth was "The Last Outpost"--a misguided introduction to the Ferengi that never went anywhere.

    2 stars for me. There was some promising characterization. The prison-break sub-plot was a welcome departure from the ponderous serial arc. But the writing, pacing, and editing continue to be poor, and Burnham is dragging the show down. Overall it still feels like fan-fiction with good CGI.    … Expand
  14. parallax_84
    Jan 19, 2018
    4
    My problem with this show are the main characters... acting is wooden , they have no charisma, they are boring to death. I watched 6 episodes and i couldn't watch anymore.
  15. TheTRaiN
    Sep 25, 2017
    4
    Poor (and wooden) writing. A horrible bridge layout. Badly delivered lines (i.e., bad acting). Weak story, at least, as introduced in the first episode. Doesn't feel like Star Trek at all. If it wasn't called "Star Trek," I'd have turned it off fifteen minutes in. Sad.
  16. Cheers
    Sep 25, 2017
    4
    Bridge scenes and crew interaction is like watching Federations next top model. SJW's have stolen the franchise. Klingons have been further de-humanized, wich offcourse makes sense, because they do not fit in the inclusivity of the Rainbow unicorn federation.

    It looks good. Although i have to get used to all this fancy CGI **** for this series title.
  17. Cinemaphile
    Jan 9, 2018
    4
    Lots of unnecessary exposition. Too much emphasis on spectacle and not enough intimacy. Clunky dialogue. Overwrought score. Surprisingly mediocre. Not the 10 plus plus orgasmic star show you were hoping for, not the sub-zero apocalyptic devolution that fan-boys are reacting to. It's in the middle. A five. Take it from a 66'er. It's Trek, just not very goodLots of unnecessary exposition. Too much emphasis on spectacle and not enough intimacy. Clunky dialogue. Overwrought score. Surprisingly mediocre. Not the 10 plus plus orgasmic star show you were hoping for, not the sub-zero apocalyptic devolution that fan-boys are reacting to. It's in the middle. A five. Take it from a 66'er. It's Trek, just not very good Trek. At least it's not Red-Matter-Dumb like the reboot movies, right? Right?

    After viewing Episode 3, Context of Kings I'm revising my score ... down. Trek isn't Alien or Resident Evil or Marvel Comics or CSI Space.

    After viewing Episode 4, I'm tempted to revise my score up ... except for the fact that though it felt like Star Trek Classic, it had a bit of a Walking Dead aftertaste. On to next week...

    Episode 5 .... feels like Star Trek, but the dialogue sounds like it was written by a 12 year old. No change to the rating.

    Episode 6 ... the wheels have fallen off the show. Insipid expository dialogue abounds. The show feels like The Good Wife in space.

    And here is where my reviews end. I've given up hope on this series. At this point I'll be watching out of just sheer curiosity. That's probably not what the writers and producers intended.

    I've permanently lowered my score to 3.

    Episode 10 ... seems to be turning the corner, raising to 4    … Expand
  18. Satanski
    Feb 19, 2019
    4
    I rather liked the movie at first, minus idiotic plot with Ash Tyler and obligatory gay characters, but general stupidity of protagonists, eventually made me quit watching it. Gerenrally i hate stupidity and poltical correctness.

    I watched whole season in the end, and it came to me, this series would be so much better without Ash Tyler and Michael Burnham. They are stupid, weak and thus    I rather liked the movie at first, minus idiotic plot with Ash Tyler and obligatory gay characters, but general stupidity of protagonists, eventually made me quit watching it. Gerenrally i hate stupidity and poltical correctness.

    I watched whole season in the end, and it came to me, this series would be so much better without Ash Tyler and Michael Burnham. They are stupid, weak and thus annoying. I started fast forwarding Ash scenes, and series only gained from it.    … Expand
  19. Joshua_Rami
    Sep 24, 2017
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This show should have been called "Star trek Michael" because unlike every other star trek tv show which balances the time spent on the main cast, discovery pretty much only focuses on Michael which would be ok is this was just some scifi show but star trek was never just about one person. The visuals are great except for the Klingons which look like some failed mutant experiment gone wrong. The plot has to be the biggest issue I have with this show and just to give a few examples below:

    Michael and the captain use a visual marking made on the ground in sand in-order for their starship locate them (very unrealistic given any visual identification on the ground would be near impossible to make out especially drawn in sand)

    Michael decides to use an EV suit to travel to an unknown object in a asteroid field (Again unlikely given they have shuttlecraft which would provide much better protection & maneuverability)

    Michael uses a Vulcan neck pinch on her captain in-order to circumvent her authority but the captain wakes up a min later and at the last second and stops Michael (It appears it was done correctly otherwise she wouldn't have lost consciousness but the captain would have not woken up a min later )    … Expand
  20. Ehkzu
    Sep 25, 2017
    4
    Watched the Discover episode 1 with two other couples, followed by The Orville pilot episode. We're all scifi fans; two of us (myself and my spouse) have seen every Star Trek TV series and moive. All of us have feet in both the tech world and the art world (we all live in Silicon Valley).

    And all six of us strongly preferred The Orville pilot to Discover., and those of us who are    Watched the Discover episode 1 with two other couples, followed by The Orville pilot episode. We're all scifi fans; two of us (myself and my spouse) have seen every Star Trek TV series and moive. All of us have feet in both the tech world and the art world (we all live in Silicon Valley).

    And all six of us strongly preferred The Orville pilot to Discover., and those of us who are Trekkies strongly felt that The Orville, surprisingly, was far closer to Gene Roddenberry's vision than the authorized version (Discover) was.

    Yes, Orville does occasionally descend into farce, with moments of **** 13 year old boy-level humor. But it has a beating heart, an ensemble cast you like and care about, screenwriting that isn't trying too hard, more plausible actions by the characters, and actually shows more affection and respect for Roddenbarry's vision than Disover did.

    I was really struck by how unanimous out little group was about the two shows, despite the fact that three of us grew up in India, one in russia, and two are native-born Californians.

    I've seen two more episodes of The Orville and have gotten progressively more impressed--it raises serious, difficult moral issues without getting sentimental or mawkish. And despite the elements of parody, you can tell that the show's creators have genuine affection for Star Trek's original vision.

    It's clever where Discover is, metaphorically speaking, ponderous and pretentious.

    Discover wasn't bad by broadcast scifi TV standards. But it wasn't excellent either. And if CBS wants me to pay for it, it has to be up there with Game of Thrones.

    It isn't.

    Of its creators, I'd be tempted to say "They have no honor." (real Trekkies will get this).    … Expand
  21. ppstudent
    Sep 29, 2017
    4
    As a Trek fan, I'm quite disappointed in the way the first episode went. Maybe that is me but there is so many things wrong with the characters. The cast was kind of weak and maybe that will improve as they gets through the first few episodes. One of the problems is that Star Trek wasn't made to be both stiff and dark. On the other hand, Star Trek Orville has a strong cast, a strong storyAs a Trek fan, I'm quite disappointed in the way the first episode went. Maybe that is me but there is so many things wrong with the characters. The cast was kind of weak and maybe that will improve as they gets through the first few episodes. One of the problems is that Star Trek wasn't made to be both stiff and dark. On the other hand, Star Trek Orville has a strong cast, a strong story line, and a lot of humor (both flat and funny).… Expand
  22. Palanthemion
    Oct 3, 2017
    4
    Interesting story so far, but if you remove the insignias and rename the Klingons to whatever just another sci-fi show. The Star Trek you know is absolutely insignificant to follow the events. No real depth so far. I hope this will change. Otherwise nice to see - but definately nothing to really get involved with.
  23. Senatic
    Oct 7, 2017
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Not Star Trek. If you want Star Trek watch The Orville.

    First 2 episodes have major plot holes, highly illogical character choices, is filled with action, lens flares, horizontal shots and some seriously questionable directing. Here are the offenses I spotted during the first viewing.

    - Captain and First officer casually breaking the prime directive.
    - Nobody tracking the Captain and First officer while they are on an alien planet.
    - Nobody tracking the sand storm, which they knew was coming.
    - Not being able to transport them out from a sandstorm (seriously is transporter technology regressing all of a sudden?)
    - Tracing a federation star symbol in the sand, that by the way wasn't immediately covered by said sand storm, this symbol can somehow be seen from space even though it's barely visible from the ground.
    - Can't scan foreign object because of interference (Dampening field), how to solve problem? Shoot first officer at problem.
    - Crew is surprised when they lose contact with the first officer they just shoot into the place they a minute ago couldn't scan.
    - Accidentally kill Klingon, hamstringing the main characters ability to have any meaningful development from what should be a pretty major plot point for a character whose parents were murdered by Klingon.
    - Survive radiation longer than stated by the crew should be possible.
    - Magically get back to the ship without telling the audience how.
    - Heal serious radiation burns and "unspooling of DNA" (lol wtf that's not how it works) in minutes seriously undermining whatever danger this part of the plot just put the character in by minimizing the impact it has.
    - Mutiny against the captain for emotional reasons(keep in mind this is supposed to be a human raised by Vulcan's)
    - The protagonist is objectively wrong to try to attack the Klingon ship since the moment after she is stopped a whole fleet of Klingon ships shows up, meaning had she succeeded they would have blasted the Discovery into a trillion little pieces killing everyone on board (exactly the thing the protagonist was trying to prevent.)
    -Comes up with plan to capture Klingon leader, then when the chance arises kills him instead switching her weapon from stun to kill because... Otherwise there wouldn't be a show?

    I could accept a more action focused version of Star Trek, but Discovery is just plain bad and insults your intelligence. Yeah it looks very nice and obviously has a **** ton of money behind it. Shame that's all it has, totally wasted opportunity. Ep 3 was better, but I guess most people will have dropped it before that already.    … Expand
  24. Xelda
    Oct 13, 2017
    4
    After watching 3 episodes, it's MEH! for me. I'm not impressed with the JJ Abrams style visuals because the rest of the show is forgettable. Forgettable characters, forgettable story. Just boring. If you want Star Trek, watch The Orville. If you loved the JJ Abrams movies, then you will probably love this.
  25. vipman
    Oct 24, 2017
    4
    I'm a long life long sci fi fan but the story lines in this series seem to be written by 12 year old child who has gay male parents. The concepts are so far fetched, yet everything is so obvious its hardly worth watching an episode to the end. The the overuse of gay couples? This is Sci fi, not modern family. And the constant use of the overly emotional captain and 1st officer for everyI'm a long life long sci fi fan but the story lines in this series seem to be written by 12 year old child who has gay male parents. The concepts are so far fetched, yet everything is so obvious its hardly worth watching an episode to the end. The the overuse of gay couples? This is Sci fi, not modern family. And the constant use of the overly emotional captain and 1st officer for every dangerous mission, which always goes wrong...... Weak, and disappointing. Acting, sets, and CGI are ok. Its just the story lines that fail… Expand
  26. ganglio33
    Feb 8, 2019
    4
    One big hole in my nerddom has been star trek: I've never consumed book, tv show or movie of this universe. Waiting for the continuation of several excellent sci-fi series (The Expanse, Westworld...), I came across the Orville. It started out with a very scatological/childish humor but became better and better such that it is one of my favourite shows in today's tv. Therefore I went toOne big hole in my nerddom has been star trek: I've never consumed book, tv show or movie of this universe. Waiting for the continuation of several excellent sci-fi series (The Expanse, Westworld...), I came across the Orville. It started out with a very scatological/childish humor but became better and better such that it is one of my favourite shows in today's tv. Therefore I went to look at the original and watched star trek: discovery. Aside from good production value it has been a very disappointing show with almost no good story and a complete ignorance of the motto "go boldly where no one has gone before". It is one long thrillery story arc with a one-dimensional enemy. I normally love all Brian Fuller things as they meet exactly my humor. But here, there is no humor. Its just metally, bluish darkness. If you want to watch a dark sci-fi series, watch "the expanse", which is just 100x better. If you want to watch something a bit more uplifting, watch the orville. Or even (as I did) go and discover the 30 year old star trek the next generation. Through the superb storytelling in the old ones, they are still very easy to watch and even today better (speaking as a millenial).… Expand
  27. verdon
    Dec 2, 2017
    4
    The Asian captain should stay and be the star. The black captain and science officer are
    Terrible actors. Very poor and unbelievable to me. It’s like a poor mans version of Star Trek.
  28. TomSummers
    Feb 20, 2018
    4
    What a mess. Consider this a standalone series outside the regular Star Trek universe.

    The writers and producers have turned this Star Trek on it's head. You name it, they've pretty much re-written it. The uniforms (terrible), the way the Klingons look (more terrible), even the Klingon speech. The actions sequences are sparse and short. All talk, no action. It's not a drama in    What a mess. Consider this a standalone series outside the regular Star Trek universe.

    The writers and producers have turned this Star Trek on it's head. You name it, they've pretty much re-written it. The uniforms (terrible), the way the Klingons look (more terrible), even the Klingon speech. The actions sequences are sparse and short. All talk, no action. It's not a drama in space; it's a soap opera in space. They drop the occasional reference to the proper Star Trek universe in a vain attempt to make it part of the Star Trek canon but it won't work (Pike and Archer have come up, Sarek shows up sometimes).    … Expand
  29. Kowal_155
    Feb 17, 2018
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Spoilers ahead!

    At the beginning it was promising. I was really enjoying the show. I was thinking that, well actually it shouldn't stick that much to canon and all old things that were working in the past. And I was right, it was best when it was inventing it's own things even if the were total scientific rubbish that good sci-fi should never accept. The worst part of it started when they started producing "blinking" to the canon fans like with Mudd episode when he was resetting time on and on. It was stupid, not funny, although it looked like it was the intention (it was just pathetic) and the ending of that episode was idiotic. Anyway, I was hoping that such cheesy moments will be from time to time... How wrong I was... Then the creators pulled the mirror nazi-humanity multi episode moment... I despise this mirror universe since the beginning of Star Trek, but it was something that was working in political environment in 60's with TOS. It was **** with ENT. It is fermented **** now. So: selling principles of Star Trek (like positive view of future, humans not getting in conflicts, being tolerant and so on, and so on, blah blah blah) for going into the worst parts of this universe? Total loss. Connecting the finale with the Pike's NCC 1701 was a cheap maneuver. Around the middle of the season one something was starting to smell terribly. Was it Fuller exit and not writing the proper continuation of the initial setup? Or was it that badly planned from the beginning? There were supposed to be 16 episodes. We got 15. Somewhere in time they needed to record new material when DIS started to get popular in the internet discussion. So I guess with the much disturbed production decision was made to be it just one season series. Later they decided to open it for second season. That's why last episode is so ridiculous to the whole war subject, not finishing it properly, doing unbelievable malakias... New Star Trek to be modern needs to disconnect somehow from the old, much loved series. This way it's just modern mediocre sci-fi like series, very bad Star Trek. No one is pleased. My girlfriend that disliked previous classic Star Treks liked this series at the beginning. But with declining quality she had no problem stopping watching at some point when I was getting frustrated but still continuing (because it's new Star Trek!). They killed much liked doc... they shouldn't do that. Lorca was killed just like that... and actually he was interesting. Most of core fans didn't like him ("he's not a starfleet captain with starfleet principles!") but that was interesting change.
    The one that was losing Star Trek identity but still - if the rest was done correctly it wouldn't matter. And gosh! It just lacked vision on how to show Qo'noS! Mos Eisley in Star Trek brand... I feel like after showing big T'Kuvma ship with whole story and meaning of it, they used all creative fuel... So it wasn't all bad, but as the whole it is. Hope they will improve in second season, and if there's reason for it get the hell back the Fuller! I have a feeling that his quit was partially a reason for declining this season to **** level.    … Expand
  30. PurpleCrayon4U
    Apr 18, 2019
    4
    While Season 1 tried to get its footing, Season 2 of ST:D felt bold enough to make statements that are reflective of 21st century 2019. As we venture into the future, CBS:All Access will be fragmenting the Star Trek Universe into at least 3 separate directions and time spans. I am not looking forward to being preached to about current status quo, or to try and shoehorn humor into scenariosWhile Season 1 tried to get its footing, Season 2 of ST:D felt bold enough to make statements that are reflective of 21st century 2019. As we venture into the future, CBS:All Access will be fragmenting the Star Trek Universe into at least 3 separate directions and time spans. I am not looking forward to being preached to about current status quo, or to try and shoehorn humor into scenarios that don't require it, or to receive speech after speech after speech of how dubious and thou art.

    What I want for the existing and new paths that the Star Trek Universe shall traverse are tales of science fiction and mystery and suspense and action and drama that have to do with ventures unfathomed with subjects and decisions that have to do with the future and not based upon 21st century 2019. Give me some Ray Bradbury, some Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke-and stay away from the tabloid stories that Star Trek:Discovery was so fond of in Season 2.    … Expand
  31. pjnt
    Apr 19, 2019
    4
    I am unable to continue watching this series. I made it 2 episodes into season 2, but this is a weak money grab on the Star Trek name.

    It follows the exploits of a single character. Unlike Starfleet which prides itself on rules that create and maintain peace, the protagonist breaks rules, the bigger the better, the more often the more shock effect to continually come out on top. Where    I am unable to continue watching this series. I made it 2 episodes into season 2, but this is a weak money grab on the Star Trek name.

    It follows the exploits of a single character. Unlike Starfleet which prides itself on rules that create and maintain peace, the protagonist breaks rules, the bigger the better, the more often the more shock effect to continually come out on top. Where TNG stove to show humanity a way forward, Discovery idolizes rouge impulsive behavior as a successful career path.

    It does reveal society today, though. People need a bigger boom to get a reaction. However, from an older viewer, no boom, just dud.    … Expand
  32. Muckelchen
    Oct 29, 2019
    4
    It´s a good series, but not a very good Star Trek series. If you not a very big fan of Star Trek, it´s a nice series to watch. But as a Star Trek fan i am disappointed.
  33. PilotwaveSpace
    Dec 27, 2018
    4
    The show is very well crafted and the actors are doing a good job. I even like the look and the dark setting for some of the episodes. But most of the stories and dialogs just make me shake my head in disappointment. Sometimes the "logic" of the protagonists is just plain stupid and that is something I would not expect from a Star Trek series. I really hope the show-runners get someThe show is very well crafted and the actors are doing a good job. I even like the look and the dark setting for some of the episodes. But most of the stories and dialogs just make me shake my head in disappointment. Sometimes the "logic" of the protagonists is just plain stupid and that is something I would not expect from a Star Trek series. I really hope the show-runners get some intelligent writers on board for the next seasons.… Expand
  34. sitebender
    Apr 19, 2019
    4
    Season 1 of Discovery was better and even that was a struggle to watch. I hated the storyline of Season 2 and when they do these grand season long story arcs, you're stuck. So if it's a bad story that you're not into, that's 10+ episodes your stuck in.

    The first few episodes of the series, the characters felt easy to hate. I dislike the main character as she's just Wesley Crusher. She    Season 1 of Discovery was better and even that was a struggle to watch. I hated the storyline of Season 2 and when they do these grand season long story arcs, you're stuck. So if it's a bad story that you're not into, that's 10+ episodes your stuck in.

    The first few episodes of the series, the characters felt easy to hate. I dislike the main character as she's just Wesley Crusher. She managed to start a war, she's the unmentioned sister to Spock and just in general, everything truly revolves around her, so the crew is largely forgotten about. There's so many background characters lucky to get a line in and the whole thing just doesn't feel like Star Trek.

    Even with two seasons finished, I know little about each character beyond a back story. The $10 a month to pay to watch something that I didn't enjoy felt like it hurt the experience.

    With all that said, there are glimmers of good or enjoyable stories and episodes among several dull episodes that feel like they're building to a finale.    … Expand
  35. pizzapicante27
    Apr 20, 2019
    4
    Its generic sci-fi show #513, they just slapped the Star Trek name on it, Season 1 is, just that, kind of mediocre, I'd give it a pass and say all Star Trek shows have terrible 1st season, but as I write this I've dropped Season 2 half-way through, it isnt fair to judge a season based on its follow up, but unfortunately the series goes from bad to worse to intolerable, dont bother, this isIts generic sci-fi show #513, they just slapped the Star Trek name on it, Season 1 is, just that, kind of mediocre, I'd give it a pass and say all Star Trek shows have terrible 1st season, but as I write this I've dropped Season 2 half-way through, it isnt fair to judge a season based on its follow up, but unfortunately the series goes from bad to worse to intolerable, dont bother, this is a waste of time.… Expand
  36. RobMarr75
    Dec 31, 2022
    4
    Season 1 is the only one I watched, so it's the only one I can review. It's just not very good. It has the promise of a fresh new Star Trek, which is exciting, but if you read the reviews of later seasons, it's clear it only goes downhill. I don't think "woke" was a huge problem in season 1. However, the characters, the plotting and the dialogue aren't very good, and I decided I wouldSeason 1 is the only one I watched, so it's the only one I can review. It's just not very good. It has the promise of a fresh new Star Trek, which is exciting, but if you read the reviews of later seasons, it's clear it only goes downhill. I don't think "woke" was a huge problem in season 1. However, the characters, the plotting and the dialogue aren't very good, and I decided I would not be watching more.… Expand
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. 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.
  41. 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.
  42. 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
  43. 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.
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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.
  49. 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
  50. 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
  51. 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
  52. 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
  53. 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.
  54. 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
  55. 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.
  56. 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
  57. 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.
  58. 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.
  59. 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.
  60. 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...
  61. 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
  62. 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
  63. 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
  64. 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
  65. 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
  66. 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.
  67. 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
  68. 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
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. 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.
  72. 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
  73. 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
  74. 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.
  75. 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...
  76. 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
  77. 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
  78. 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
  79. 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!
  80. 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!
  81. 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.
  82. 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.
  83. 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.
  84. 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
  85. 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
  86. 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
  87. 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
  88. 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
  89. 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
  90. 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
  91. 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
  92. 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.
  93. 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
  94. 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.
  95. 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
  96. 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
  97. 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
  98. timpfel
    Jan 5, 2019
    2
    I don't know what this is, but it's not Star Trek.
    I like the uniforms though.
  99. 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
  100. 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.
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 »