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. 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.
  2. Wexford_C
    Oct 28, 2017
    9
    I have watched the fist 6 episodes so far and have really liked it and the new characters. The characters have all a vulnerability that makes them interesting and the action has been good. It is as good a Star Trek since the best of TNG. Can't wait to seen the rest.
  3. Tony2017
    Oct 27, 2017
    0
    Oh my God... what a horrible TV show. This should be taken down. The true Star Trek Gene Roddenberry is so far from ST Discovery. Horrible and all values for example ST TNG are flushed down the drain. The lack of respect for the true spirit of ST is just to much!!!! I decided not to watch the rest when the captain mentioned the name Elon Musk. What the ****, all respect for the man andOh my God... what a horrible TV show. This should be taken down. The true Star Trek Gene Roddenberry is so far from ST Discovery. Horrible and all values for example ST TNG are flushed down the drain. The lack of respect for the true spirit of ST is just to much!!!! I decided not to watch the rest when the captain mentioned the name Elon Musk. What the ****, all respect for the man and what he did, but to pay your way into a Star Trek series that belongs to the fans and not to particular individuals. I will not watch the rest! I will just go on my DVD-s for TNG, DS9, Voyager, where I can actually learn some interesting stuff every time I watch the shows.… Expand
  4. Testman33
    Oct 27, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have watched all the shows in this new series so far. On the positive side the show has some great special effects and some capable actors. Since there have been several versions of Star Trek I don't have a problem viewing a darker storyline as it has something to add to the Star Trek world. One problem is actually similar to the same problem that plagued the original series. The main character can't act. Like Captain Kirk she is propped up by the other cast members who can. Eventually William Shatner got better so maybe she will. The character names are hard to remember and after this many shows we should have some idea of their mental and moral qualities. Character development has been so slow it seems to stand still. I am not a big fan of the continuing serial but this is not a bad idea for a ship that goes from place to place sort of like viewing the captains log. But this series has rambled all over the place introducing elements such as the beast that could control the ship that seemed no more than a slightly interesting by-line rather than a major plot. As soon as this got interesting the beast was sent floating off into space. The Klingons are another example of poor character development and the writing has not brought out any qualities one can grab hold of. Having everything they say be in closed caption is a terrible idea. If the writers and directors of this show don't do a better job this one is taking a crash dive that no one will survive. P.S. sorry my review has been so rambling. It is sort of like the show.… Expand
  5. electronicoffee
    Oct 27, 2017
    9
    I absolutely love it when a show can take classic style and mesh it with futuristic graphics. This is why as fun as the star wars universe is- I've preferred the star trek universe visually. I love that throwback style, even when touches of deep future scifi aesthetic are added (ds9, voyager), moreso I've preferred the star trek universe because at it's heart star wars is another genreI absolutely love it when a show can take classic style and mesh it with futuristic graphics. This is why as fun as the star wars universe is- I've preferred the star trek universe visually. I love that throwback style, even when touches of deep future scifi aesthetic are added (ds9, voyager), moreso I've preferred the star trek universe because at it's heart star wars is another genre (some say space opera, drama/romance, etc.) with scifi as it's setting rather than it's focus while star trek, due to it's inherent nature (being 'mission' or 'protocol' based) assigns the plot / events in most episodes or story arcs from a certain mindset and this does that very well although the crew in this is tossed together due more to events and outcomes. The enemies are redesigned with a gothic feel, showing the series is learning from it's adversary (the SW universe) learning to slide a little extra into the 'feel' of an enemy and of the show, sometimes a little flash does a LOT for a show like this leaving it feeling more like a science / adventuring show with elements of war and the flash and payoff of game of thrones. Few could do a better job doing a prequel and balancing the level of depth (such as the Mycelium Drive and it's issues/story) with the sizzle and level of visual delight we've come to expect from AA and AAA shows. Give it a few episodes, as many characters and the cast change about swiftly.… Expand
  6. james-cordoban
    Oct 25, 2017
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The ratings are a good example when the dual ranking of "metacritic" pays of. Nearly all "professional reviews" were done after the pilot, whereas the user score increases per time an reveals, imho, the more accurate ranking (e. g. with "The Orville" its the same).

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

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

    Watch "The Orville", that's definately the better show!    … Expand
  7. Ededed
    Oct 25, 2017
    0
    Confusing and disappointing. CBS All Access will not get any money from me to view this mess. An unVulcan Vulcan and a captain that plays things so safe that she’s dangerous? Bad! Not worthy of the Star Trek franchise or brand. Janeway at least could make a decision and act like a captain. This is Star Trek in name only.
  8. apannilsson
    Oct 25, 2017
    5
    I have never been much for Star Trek, but I do love Sci-Fi.
    The first episode felt stale and uncertain. But after episode 3 I am totally hooked.
    I like the characters, the setting and the premise and am very curious about where the show will go from here. Very good! ---- Edit--- Am now on episode 6 and unfortunately the series has become a bit boring, whimsical and predictable at    I have never been much for Star Trek, but I do love Sci-Fi.
    The first episode felt stale and uncertain. But after episode 3 I am totally hooked.
    I like the characters, the setting and the premise and am very curious about where the show will go from here.
    Very good!
    ---- Edit---
    Am now on episode 6 and unfortunately the series has become a bit boring, whimsical and predictable at moment. I am afraid I wont even make it through episode 6 because its just not very interpreting anymore. It peaked at episode 3 and then just went straight downhill. So Im gonna leave it at a 5 now.    … Expand
  9. 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
  10. melchel
    Oct 24, 2017
    0
    How utterly disappointing. The writers of this show have completely missed the point of Star Trek. There’s no solidarity among the crew, there is conflict EVERYWHERE, they’re using **** saying **** A LOT, being sarcastic with each other, questioning superior officers all over the place, and torturing an innocent creature for their own benefit. And the storyline with the Klingons isHow utterly disappointing. The writers of this show have completely missed the point of Star Trek. There’s no solidarity among the crew, there is conflict EVERYWHERE, they’re using **** saying **** A LOT, being sarcastic with each other, questioning superior officers all over the place, and torturing an innocent creature for their own benefit. And the storyline with the Klingons is overbearing. It’s just terrible and it’s simply not Star Trek. It’s just stolen the name.… Expand
  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. 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
  13. Wizzer
    Oct 23, 2017
    0
    This is not Star Trek. It is a sci-fi that tries to imitate Star Trek made by people that are clueless about Star Trek. The cgi is great but everrything else is a major letdown. It doesn't even work as a mediocre non-Trek bland sci-fi show as the wooden and uninspired acting is unbearable to watch.
  14. MarsCorialanus
    Oct 23, 2017
    0
    I'm a huge star trek fan. Leading up to the premiere I thought the cast looked great, I knew that cinematic technology could allow for some cool new story telling, and I thought the diversity was a definite plus- Star Trek's first gay character. While the actors all do a pretty good job, the writing is god awful, the plots are uninteresting, and, worst of all, its violent and pessimistic.I'm a huge star trek fan. Leading up to the premiere I thought the cast looked great, I knew that cinematic technology could allow for some cool new story telling, and I thought the diversity was a definite plus- Star Trek's first gay character. While the actors all do a pretty good job, the writing is god awful, the plots are uninteresting, and, worst of all, its violent and pessimistic. It is the worst kind of Sci-fi; dark thoughtless explosion porn. I'm six episodes in.... I thought I would give it at least that long. Sometimes Star Trek takes some time to get its momentum. For now, I'm bowing out. Maybe in a season or two it will start to understand that Star Trek challenges its audience, makes them think, and most of all- it provides inspiration and hope in an otherwise in-just and flawed present. At one point, it also name dropped Elon Musk.... Alas poor Star Trek, I knew it Horatio.… Expand
  15. the_nephilim71
    Oct 22, 2017
    10
    I love this show. I've been a fan of Trek for around 40 years and was thrilled when I heard they were making a new show because I've been waiting for a new show for a long time. The actors and characters are great and the stories are interesting. Star Trek: Discovery is like a mixture of Next Generation, Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek (2009) I highly recommend it! 10/10
  16. 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
  17. zanban
    Oct 22, 2017
    0
    i watched the first two parts so far, and reading these reviews and i'm wondering were we watching the same show? the main character obviously didn't know its place in the ship command and acted recklessly,from what i understood she was taught by the vulcan race and those would never do what she did, instead of reading those wishful reviews of 80+ read the bottom ones those will telli watched the first two parts so far, and reading these reviews and i'm wondering were we watching the same show? the main character obviously didn't know its place in the ship command and acted recklessly,from what i understood she was taught by the vulcan race and those would never do what she did, instead of reading those wishful reviews of 80+ read the bottom ones those will tell you all that is wrong with the show… Expand
  18. Nobilis1984
    Oct 21, 2017
    6
    Criticism to star Trek: Discovery episode 1

    To All only I must say that this is no more star Trek like I know it. Everything feels strange. There are first sometimes the Klingonen. Supposedly it plays 10 years before Spock, Kirk und Co. Why look then so lousy? Why not as well as in the series of 1966-69?? In addition there come the dull characters. Earlier one had Spock, a Data or a    Criticism to star Trek: Discovery episode 1

    To All only I must say that this is no more star Trek like I know it.
    Everything feels strange. There are first sometimes the Klingonen. Supposedly it plays 10 years before Spock, Kirk und Co. Why look then so lousy? Why not as well as in the series of 1966-69??
    In addition there come the dull characters. Earlier one had Spock, a Data or a Seven of Nine they have protruded. Now I see only one pale heap of types.
    It is not also any more about discoveries of foreign species and cultures in all. No one gets the old Klingonen of the attic again.
    But for the end still what of positive. Visually simply first-class made.
    If no star Trek stood, however, before it, it could be any Scifi series.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Episode 2: See episode 1
    Episode 3-5: Clear increase and improvement with stories and Cast.
    The stories it is entertaining and persuade me.
    The action is clearly driven back.    … Expand
  19. scorpion999
    Oct 21, 2017
    6
    Nice try but no cigar.
    Too many historical errors.
    Too dark. Plastic robot Klingons. Poor script in places. Poor acting in parts. Poor casting with several characters. Over the top politically correctness. Over stretched storyline. Swearing not relevant. Star Trek doesn't swear because it doesn't need to. Too arty farty with camera work and editing. Apart from that I loved it.    Nice try but no cigar.
    Too many historical errors.
    Too dark.
    Plastic robot Klingons.
    Poor script in places.
    Poor acting in parts.
    Poor casting with several characters.
    Over the top politically correctness.
    Over stretched storyline.
    Swearing not relevant.
    Star Trek doesn't swear because it doesn't need to.
    Too arty farty with camera work and editing.
    Apart from that I loved it.
    I will be watching and enjoying it for what it is.
    A mildly entertaining new sci fi series loosley based around the Star Trek theme that I have come to love and cherish.    … Expand
  20. GiantWomanOpal
    Oct 21, 2017
    10
    This show is AMAZING! It breathes new life into a franchise that was long growing stale. The recent movies were boring, and few new fans were being created. This is a Star Trek that shows that values are hard to stand by, and it takes struggle to do so. Don't listen to the haters who are just mad that the universe doesn't revolve around White dudes. This is Trek worth watching.
  21. fancypants01
    Oct 21, 2017
    0
    Complete disappointment. I'd rather watched Star Trek Enterprise than watch this new show. I hope they turn in around soon but all the new special effects might not save the bad acting and awful storyline.
  22. Acriminal
    Oct 20, 2017
    0
    I was really, REALLY...looking forward to STD. Having been a life-long fan of TOS and TNG, as well as DS9 and Voyager, but not as much a fan of Enterprise - it was "OK" I guess. I've loved all the movies, even the "bad" ones - didn't mind the JJ Abrams revamps although they do stray quite a bit from Roddenberry's vision.

    Not as much as Star Trek Discovery. STD is just not Star Trek.    I was really, REALLY...looking forward to STD. Having been a life-long fan of TOS and TNG, as well as DS9 and Voyager, but not as much a fan of Enterprise - it was "OK" I guess. I've loved all the movies, even the "bad" ones - didn't mind the JJ Abrams revamps although they do stray quite a bit from Roddenberry's vision.

    Not as much as Star Trek Discovery. STD is just not Star Trek. I gave the first four episodes a try and I've given it a good chance, but there's just too much that bothers me about it.

    The Klingon revamp was excessive and unnecessary. The last thing I want to do is sit there for half of a show reading subtitles and listening to authentic Klingonese spoken by mouths filled with cotton balls, by aliens that look more like Orcs than Klingons. Excuse me? They ATE the captain!? Why is it that I find that hard to accept about a space faring civilization?!

    Did I actually hear the F word!? And someone said Sh*t? Did the writers of this series even watch the original shows? To quote Spock, there are some "colorful metaphors" here for sure. The show isn't for kids anymore, which is sad and really unfortunate.

    Gene Roddenberry's inspiring vision of the future of humanity has been completely misplaced and ignored. So far there are no social or political parallels in these stories to spark the imagination. Nothing about this show is inspiring or enjoyable. I see nothing about the future of humanity to look forward to here. No exciting worlds to explore, just starships that look more like gyroscopes.

    They got the technology all wrong. Apart from the occasional beep on the bridge from TOS, including the first two notes of the intro sequence, this is all a cheap attempt at making you think you're watching Star Trek but that's about where it ends in its similarity.

    Complete disregard of the prime directive, or ethics towards alien species, the enslavement of alien beings by starship captains!?! Seriously? To win a war. Unreal. Unheard of. Inexcusable.

    Hologram communication even though we've never even seen this in TNG depictions of the future. Long distance mind-meld communication that coincidentally is exactly like the hologram communication except in a hazy dreamlike place with camera play. Very convenient! Cool idea yes, but it would have been a cooler idea if it was in a different timeline.

    Every single character on the bridge is either an alien or some kind of augmented human. It's overdone in my opinion, and we never learn anything about them. We just get a quick flash of "oh cool she's got cybernetic implants, maybe she's like the Borg?!", or "oh cool an artificial lifeform, maybe he's like Data?!", or "oh wow what an ugly alien, what's his story!?". There's no character development at all. Saru is probably the only interesting character on the entire show but we don't get enough of him either. instead we get to learn more about the boring Starfleet cadet with curly red hair sharing a bunk with a convicted-for-life traitor that should be in the brig. Okay that's plausible. Bad writing.

    Stories with worthwhile character development would be preferable over this terrible story about a war with the Klingons and fungus drive. Seriously? Spores. OK. That fits with modern physics theory about the nature of the cosmos. OK there are spores everywhere. I'll buy it. This whole idea may have been a cool plot-line for one or two episodes, but not the basis for the entire season or series.

    Star Trek Discovery is an insult to the intelligence of all Star Trek fans everywhere. It all comes down to very, VERY bad writing, and the writing bar has been set very high by Star Trek fans over the years. Star Trek Discovery has lowered this bar really, REALLY low, and has disrespected the entire franchise.    … Expand
  23. teebow
    Oct 20, 2017
    0
    It’s no coincidence that the initials for discovery are STD, one should stay away…
    But seriously, this is how I see the difference between STD and the Orville:
    The Orville is a fan’s faithful homage to their favourite show with the added humour the creator is know for. Discovery is what happens when fans of Michael bay decide to cash in on the love for an American institution. And what    It’s no coincidence that the initials for discovery are STD, one should stay away…
    But seriously, this is how I see the difference between STD and the Orville:
    The Orville is a fan’s faithful homage to their favourite show with the added humour the creator is know for.
    Discovery is what happens when fans of Michael bay decide to cash in on the love for an American institution. And what does MB do when he gets his hands on someone else’s IP? Completely change what makes the originals compelling, make the characters people u can’t begin to like, let alone root for, throw in a ton of over the top and unnecessary CGI, god awful writing (and even worse dialogue), a little subtle racism, and throw out any thoughts of “canon” or “respect for source material”.
    In other words: pure crap    … Expand
  24. 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
  25. AlanJ
    Oct 19, 2017
    1
    I have been watching and reading every incarnation of Star Trek for over 40 years; all the TV series, all the movies, dozens of novels (and there are some pretty bad novels, out there).

    All I can tell you is this: I don't know what Star Trek Discovery is, what it's supposed to be or what it hoped to be, but it sure ain't Star Trek.
  26. Rissois
    Oct 18, 2017
    7
    I take back my earlier positive review. This show is full of unlikable characters, nonsensical plot devices, and plot holes so vast you could fly a starship through. Great acting and special effects though.
  27. agagil
    Oct 18, 2017
    0
    I'd like to review this series as if it had no connection to any Star Trek show in the past. So disregarding it's name and the lore behind it, this is hideously bad.

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

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

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

    This series does not live up to the spirit of Star Trek, not as a high-concept science fiction story nor as any kind of metaphor for reasonable human reaction.    … Expand
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. Elstgav
    Oct 16, 2017
    0
    This show is tragically bad. There isn’t a single likeable character, the dialogue is painfully wooden, the Klingons can’t act behind their rubbery makeup, none of the crew members seem to like or even respect each other. It’s appalling to see how they got the tone of Star Trek fundamentally wrong on EVERY level. Star Trek was an optimistic show about humanity working together and doingThis show is tragically bad. There isn’t a single likeable character, the dialogue is painfully wooden, the Klingons can’t act behind their rubbery makeup, none of the crew members seem to like or even respect each other. It’s appalling to see how they got the tone of Star Trek fundamentally wrong on EVERY level. Star Trek was an optimistic show about humanity working together and doing their best when confronted with moral dilemmas. In STD we have starfleet officers who mutiny, bald-face lie, are warmongers, carelessly insubordinate, commit warcrimes, are unwelcoming, untrusting, willing to torture animals to get their way (literally!), the list goes on… STD is just offensively bad and disrespectful to the Star Trek franchise.… Expand
  31. EasternCanuck
    Oct 16, 2017
    6
    I like this show for what it is - a Star Trek 'themed' show. Characters are not very interesting, though the captain is growing on me as we learn more about him. The Klingons are a small disaster. I don't know why they were re-invented but they haven't got that correct. I appreciate that there is Klingon language but there are so many Klingon scenes that I get tired of reading subtitles.I like this show for what it is - a Star Trek 'themed' show. Characters are not very interesting, though the captain is growing on me as we learn more about him. The Klingons are a small disaster. I don't know why they were re-invented but they haven't got that correct. I appreciate that there is Klingon language but there are so many Klingon scenes that I get tired of reading subtitles. It's like I'm watching a foreign film at times.… Expand
  32. 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
  33. 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
  34. JessTurner
    Oct 16, 2017
    0
    The depths of the badness of this show are extraordinary, let me count the ways:

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

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

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

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

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

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

    And why are the crew of the Discovery so abrasive?

    How can a person get into such a show.    … Expand
  35. 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
  36. AngelZash
    Oct 15, 2017
    0
    I really really wanted to like this show, but the fact is: it's just not Star Trek!

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

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

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

    I really wanted to like this show, and I do see so so much potential in it. It just isn't Star Trek as it is. But hey, if all you want is a sci-if flick with lots of action and special effects, then this is the show for you!    … Expand
  37. danghe
    Oct 14, 2017
    5
    This is not star-trek from my perspective. They go in the past and they change the looks/voices for an entire species (the Klingon). I am sorry, but if I was the director and I would have seen the proposal of the new Klingon species, I would have fired that guy instantly. They could have improved the known look, not change it entirely.
    If you are a fan of old start trek series, probably    This is not star-trek from my perspective. They go in the past and they change the looks/voices for an entire species (the Klingon). I am sorry, but if I was the director and I would have seen the proposal of the new Klingon species, I would have fired that guy instantly. They could have improved the known look, not change it entirely.
    If you are a fan of old start trek series, probably you would be disappointed as I am. This decision shows lack of respect to the previous star trek fans, especially to the ones that have got attached to Worf. Even their voice is off. You would expect an imposing voice, considering they have 3 lungs and a big chest/resonance chamber. Well, no...it's like they speak through their nose...

    I've recently found The Orville. That is a lot more star trek than this one. Seriously!    … Expand
  38. blainiebobainie
    Oct 14, 2017
    10
    I have sincerely enjoyed the building tension on the show. I am enjoying the serialized story-line. I look forward to many more seasons with new and interesting story-lines and deepened character development. The production values is fantastic. I feel like I am watching a movie in my living room every week! I like the characters and the actors playing them. I am honestly excited and beyondI have sincerely enjoyed the building tension on the show. I am enjoying the serialized story-line. I look forward to many more seasons with new and interesting story-lines and deepened character development. The production values is fantastic. I feel like I am watching a movie in my living room every week! I like the characters and the actors playing them. I am honestly excited and beyond thrilled to have Star Trek back on television!!!… Expand
  39. 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.
  40. fchemenway
    Oct 13, 2017
    1
    The Orville is much better. The only GOOD thing about Discovery is the money they pumped into it for special effects. I generally didn't like any of the characters, nor the plot. They friggin totally changed the Klingon's appearance ! Those are NOT Klingons! I got through the first episode and half the second, but now I'm done. The Orville is much better, without even trying to be.
  41. ulukay
    Oct 13, 2017
    0
    as a lifelong startrek junkie i just had to register to this website to leave a review.
    tldr: it sucks
    music sucks cgi is pretty good (the only thing that was good in the first two episodes) klingons are now ratfaced, hairless ultra-supremacist. logic is non existent. who would you send to board a klingon battleships bridge to capture a klingon leader? 10 big man with armor and    as a lifelong startrek junkie i just had to register to this website to leave a review.
    tldr: it sucks

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

    my estimate:
    - all SJW like and hype the show (not that they would actually watch it)
    - Series will be cancelled after Season 2    … Expand
  42. 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.
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. Baird788
    Oct 12, 2017
    0
    SOMEONE! Kill it with fire! this is an Abomination to the star trek series the writing is horrible and the only good character was the captain from the first episode as the main character comes off as Cringy, rude and WILDLY emotional which is weird considering she was supposed to be raised by a Vulcan. Its nothing like past star treks at all where they focus on the captain and tell youSOMEONE! Kill it with fire! this is an Abomination to the star trek series the writing is horrible and the only good character was the captain from the first episode as the main character comes off as Cringy, rude and WILDLY emotional which is weird considering she was supposed to be raised by a Vulcan. Its nothing like past star treks at all where they focus on the captain and tell you all about the crew members aboard the ship. The Kiingons not only Look god awful but sound as if they are talking underwater. The tech they have is like 100 years more advanced then even star trek voyager yet this is based before Kirk but the worst part about the show is CBS access.… Expand
  46. FansAreTrolls
    Oct 11, 2017
    9
    I'm tired of fans who are trashing this show for absolutely no reason other than the fact that this is a little different from the Treks we've seen in the past. I'm tired of people who think they own the legacy of Trek just because they did a cosplay at a convention or watched all 7 seasons of every Star Trek series. I'm tired of the whiny **** in the Trek community who stifle creativityI'm tired of fans who are trashing this show for absolutely no reason other than the fact that this is a little different from the Treks we've seen in the past. I'm tired of people who think they own the legacy of Trek just because they did a cosplay at a convention or watched all 7 seasons of every Star Trek series. I'm tired of the whiny **** in the Trek community who stifle creativity and innovation just because this show doesn't conform to their rigid and frankly inane standards of what Trek can or cannot be. It literally makes me laugh when I read comments like "Trek is supposed to be more humanist and optimistic because there is no conflict in the future since there is no money or hunger and the universe is one big happy jolly utopia". That is just BS. Have these people even seen Star Trek? Trek is not about a bunch of pencil pushers in a space ship marveling at the amount of cubic feet of iron ore in a comet. Trek is about the vastness of space challenging the limits of human psychology, human constructs about what does or does not constitute 'order' in the universe, human thought, and even human morality. From ToS to DS9, the best episodes/movies have always been about the internal conflicts of the characters, juxtaposed against the external conflicts of the vast unknown they are placed in, and how the characters navigate through this in order to arrive at a greater understanding of themselves as well as the universe at large. Worf vs Picard in First Contact. Kirk vs Spock in Amok Time. Picard vs Sisko in the DS9 pilot. The Militaristic Cardassians vs the Spiritual (and somewhat obscurantist) Bajorans. The Ba'ku vs the Son'a. Picard's diplomacy vs the blood feuds of the Klingon Empire. The collective of the Borg vs the individuality of humanity. That is the Star Trek I know. And this show takes that to the next level. Yes this Trek is darker than the rest. But that is awesome. It's like Trek finally graduated from its PG rating into more mature themes so that it can ask the tougher, more troubling questions. This tone also makes sense given that it's exploring the formative years of the federation. And this tone makes much more sense in the serialized format where you want to deeply explore the evolution of characters as we progress through the seasons.

    A couple things that could improve though - better exposition with less direct storytelling, but I expect that will improve as the characters settle into their roles moving forward.

    P.S. I'm a long time fan myself and have seen all the previous series. For the record I'm not a particular fan of the new JJ-verse. But the only common thread between the recent movies and Discovery is the visual style and special effects - which are frankly the best I've ever seen in a Trek TV series.    … Expand
  47. McMcDr
    Oct 11, 2017
    0
    It's not Star Trek, it's just SJW - propaganda.

    Tbh. i really hope the authors and the responsible persons, including their families and child will die on cancer. They totaly destroyed the Star Trek - Label
  48. Phix105
    Oct 11, 2017
    0
    Another example of how critics have no clue what is good. One critic commented on today's pessimistic political landscape. We don't want the real world to invade our programs. Leave 2017's politics out. One critic stated that there are things for die hard Trekkies. Where? The stupid tribble that keeps making noise to remind us that it's Star Trek from the past. No way. I had such highAnother example of how critics have no clue what is good. One critic commented on today's pessimistic political landscape. We don't want the real world to invade our programs. Leave 2017's politics out. One critic stated that there are things for die hard Trekkies. Where? The stupid tribble that keeps making noise to remind us that it's Star Trek from the past. No way. I had such high hopes for this and I have been let down just like I was in the last movie.… Expand
  49. 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.
  50. pchernik
    Oct 10, 2017
    0
    Uninteresting, uninspired, forced characters. Atrocious special effects that feel more aged than the much older series.... The main protagonist was supposedly raised by Vulcans, yet she curses in every episode "s**t, that worked!". She is supposed to be a measured, calm, individual, in control of her emotions! Nothing Vulcan apparently rubbed off on her, including her over-elaborateUninteresting, uninspired, forced characters. Atrocious special effects that feel more aged than the much older series.... The main protagonist was supposedly raised by Vulcans, yet she curses in every episode "s**t, that worked!". She is supposed to be a measured, calm, individual, in control of her emotions! Nothing Vulcan apparently rubbed off on her, including her over-elaborate hairdo. And... Don't get me started on what they've done to the poor Klingons.... I hate what CBS has done to Star Trek. This is truly pathetic and sad. I'm really upset by this feeble creation wearing the name of my favorite sci-fi universe.… Expand
  51. VanGheist
    Oct 10, 2017
    0
    Are you joking? These so called "Professional" critics don't understand the vision Roddenberry had in mind. This show SUCKS, not because of it's cast, or anything. The reason this show is bad is because it's NOT STAR TREK. How dare you sully Gene's reputation with this overly dramatic and violent smut. This isn't even close to any of the principle shows. The Orville is closer to StarAre you joking? These so called "Professional" critics don't understand the vision Roddenberry had in mind. This show SUCKS, not because of it's cast, or anything. The reason this show is bad is because it's NOT STAR TREK. How dare you sully Gene's reputation with this overly dramatic and violent smut. This isn't even close to any of the principle shows. The Orville is closer to Star Trek, than this show. I suggest you skip this nonsense and let it burn, to show these executives that we're pissed off. Completely missed the mark. (Sorry Sonequa Martin, go join the Orville crew, sorry you got sucked up into this show.)… Expand
  52. Naessarne
    Oct 10, 2017
    8
    The first two 'pilot' episodes were woeful. I think it was because there was too much similarity in the characters being that the main character Michael, the Captain and the science officer chap were all quite dry...now, four episodes in with the introduction of a ship full of seriously emo humans, particularly the new Captain, there is much better scope for dialogue etc to improve. LikingThe first two 'pilot' episodes were woeful. I think it was because there was too much similarity in the characters being that the main character Michael, the Captain and the science officer chap were all quite dry...now, four episodes in with the introduction of a ship full of seriously emo humans, particularly the new Captain, there is much better scope for dialogue etc to improve. Liking the whole 'war is hell' theme and the plot is starting to develop. Also...its basically Brexit in space with the UK as the Klingons.… Expand
  53. DMW206
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    This show is not Star Trek. They have ignored or explained away important elements central to the 'soul' of the show, a vision Gene Roddenberry brought to the screen. There are no longer humanist qualities within humanity. They no longer work to better themselves with an optimistic view of the future - instead, they are petty, greedy, impulsive, rash, and adversarial. These are qualitiesThis show is not Star Trek. They have ignored or explained away important elements central to the 'soul' of the show, a vision Gene Roddenberry brought to the screen. There are no longer humanist qualities within humanity. They no longer work to better themselves with an optimistic view of the future - instead, they are petty, greedy, impulsive, rash, and adversarial. These are qualities that are suppressed by an evolved sensibility by the time Starfleet comes into being - but this is no longer true. The way Michael acts is disgraceful for a Vulcan and for a Human. The Captain, Lorca, would never, ever be entrusted with a ship. He would be cashiered out of Starfleet so fast his head would spin. Even the Maquis act with more dignity. The creator of Star Trek would be ashamed of what his creation has become. No critic, no actor, no producer could claim otherwise and at the same time understand the vision of the future that was Star Trek.

    If you put the above aside, the storytelling is sub-par. There are logical holes within the plots presented. An example: the first episode, the Captain allows the First Officer to get into a space suit and fly on out to a special anomaly they know nothing about, all the while on a time limit due to radiation. This is a plot hole so big you could drive a truck through it. No Captain would allow this. No Starfleet Officer would volunteer for this. And, for someone who lived on Vulcan and grew up in their culture, it is obviously illogical. This is blatant disregard for the intelligence of the fan base. Those in charge think you're stupid and that all you want to be entertained with is fancy, flashy effects and visuals accompanied by action, with no thought needed. Do not support this show. It will either become the standard for Star Trek, and we will have lost something great, or it will be the final nail in the coffin for the franchise. Either way, the outcome is sad.

    And a last remark: this is a show I would never allow my kids to watch. That says everything you need to know.    … Expand
  54. 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.
  55. BlobTheCat
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Star Trek is known for ensemble-screenplay of likeable characters who work well together and portraing a bright positive future of humanity.
    Star Trek Discovery is exactly the opposite. It's centered around one unlikeable character in cinematic screenplay in a dark grim future.
    The whole tone of the show is just depressing. The sets are all dark. It's like the crew is working on a spaceship without turning the lighting on once.
    The maincharacter is less stable than a 12 year old child. Even todays astronauts have more discipline and ratio than her.
    CBS killed the brand Star Trek off.
    Time to search for other space opera, and actually there is one. You'll know what i am talking about. Jar of pickles    … Expand
  56. TJJ
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    Indescribably bad..... but I'll try.

    The Klingons...... more like Uruk-hai in space. Subtitles only was a monumentally stupid decision, as was the change in appearance. The space battles..... the choice of camera shots, and lack of context leave them bereft of any meaning. The writing.....incoherent garbage you'd expect to find in a b-movie. The characters..... oh my,.....    Indescribably bad..... but I'll try.

    The Klingons...... more like Uruk-hai in space.
    Subtitles only was a monumentally stupid decision, as was the change in appearance.

    The space battles..... the choice of camera shots, and lack of context leave them bereft of any meaning.

    The writing.....incoherent garbage you'd expect to find in a b-movie.

    The characters..... oh my,.....

    On second thoughts, screw this review; Discovery is so worthless it's not even worth expressing what it did wrong. Everything!    … Expand
  57. 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
  58. Furball
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    Having watched Star Trek since I was knee high, STD is just nasty and incurably bad on every level. It's all been said by other people. It's pro gay, anti white, anti heterosexual white male, badly written, badly acted, and just unbelievably boring. It's not Star Trek. It's not even mediocre sci-fi. It's unwatchable.
  59. 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
  60. Santakrooz
    Oct 9, 2017
    9
    Huge ST and TNG fan. I like it - a lot. I also like the theatrical reboots fwiw. I just disagree with the negative reviews on here. We loved it from the pilot and are up to episode 4. I think the acting is good, the characters are interesting, and it's an interesting and action oriented Star Trek story that follows the Star Trek philosophy and general storyline, but not necessarilyHuge ST and TNG fan. I like it - a lot. I also like the theatrical reboots fwiw. I just disagree with the negative reviews on here. We loved it from the pilot and are up to episode 4. I think the acting is good, the characters are interesting, and it's an interesting and action oriented Star Trek story that follows the Star Trek philosophy and general storyline, but not necessarily the canon perfectly, which is fine with me. TNG didn't follow perfectly either, and neither did the original movies. The characters are different, which I think rubs some people the wrong way, they're looking for another Picard or Janeway or Kirk, and these are different characters - and they're interesting, flawed, mysterious. We're digging it. We also like the whole Klingon reboot - and backstory. The FX are amazing, but we're addicted to the storyline and the action. Great series.… Expand
  61. KingDonald
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    SJW RUBBISH. They just killed a franchise for no reason. The continuity of the show has been ignored with the appearance of the klingons. You would be better off watching Star Trek Continues on YouTube, that show is faithful to the Star Trek ethos. Star Trek Discovery is rubbish.
  62. Sauah
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    Is it so hard to show the time when the mankind is no longer is passionate about weapons and power, but about knowledge and new frontiers? Is it hard to show the time when we all would become better than we are now? The star trek have always been about that. This show as it is now is nothing but a soulless evil. Cgi are good. But have we all become so soulless that cgi is enough for us?Is it so hard to show the time when the mankind is no longer is passionate about weapons and power, but about knowledge and new frontiers? Is it hard to show the time when we all would become better than we are now? The star trek have always been about that. This show as it is now is nothing but a soulless evil. Cgi are good. But have we all become so soulless that cgi is enough for us? This is not Star fleet, but a bunch of selfish, arrogant, undisciplined teens, possessed by a thirst for violence and of victory "at all cost". They all deserve to be spanked by Jean Luc Picard.… Expand
  63. Fallguy
    Oct 9, 2017
    10
    This is not your daddy’s Star Trek., but it is Star Trek. Just a different version for a different time. It’s compelling, exciting and, yes, dark. Darker than Trek has ever been.But it oozes the hope for those times we know and we all have seen to come after this prequel. Don’t believe the trolls: It’s absolutely epic! LLAP
  64. kenpeach2007
    Oct 9, 2017
    1
    I've watched the first 4 episodes and this just does not feel like Star Trek. It might bear the name and alien races but it is something entirely non-Roddenberry.
  65. 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
  66. damocles1974
    Oct 9, 2017
    10
    The negative reviews just seem to have spoken their verdicts even before the show even really started. The first 2 "real" episodes showed that Discovery is very well written and a really good addition to the universe because it dares to be new.
  67. HarryNuggets
    Oct 9, 2017
    8
    Well done lads, looks good, and so far, that being the first three episodes, so good. It looks a bit grittier than the previous series and a bit darker in terms of storyline.
  68. trash-46645
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    A rape of what Star Trek used to be. Star Trek used to be about inspiring future, doing the right thing and bettering oneself, finding common ground even with enemies, about scientific discovery, exploration and generally about a future you want to live in. Thematically Star Trek always dealt with a lot of questions of ethics and going what's right. It was not dumbed down violentA rape of what Star Trek used to be. Star Trek used to be about inspiring future, doing the right thing and bettering oneself, finding common ground even with enemies, about scientific discovery, exploration and generally about a future you want to live in. Thematically Star Trek always dealt with a lot of questions of ethics and going what's right. It was not dumbed down violent overdramatic war scifi. This is complete opposite of what Start Trek used to be, there is so much wrong with this series that I agree with others - this is not Star Trek. This is cliched garbage constructed to appeal to dumb masses. Such a shame what they did to Star Trek, another great series raped.… Expand
  69. shachar2like
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    Sorry this isn't what made star trek or any other classic tv show that ran for decades a success.
    What made every classic TV show as I described & defined above is that they're not about violence.
    I'm trying to stick to the new show but it's just not it. And whoever made the Klingons speech did a poor job, it just sounds is if they don't know the words and just going over the    Sorry this isn't what made star trek or any other classic tv show that ran for decades a success.
    What made every classic TV show as I described & defined above is that they're not about violence.

    I'm trying to stick to the new show but it's just not it.
    And whoever made the Klingons speech did a poor job, it just sounds is if they don't know the words and just going over the pronunciation, they don't speak it fluently.
    That's without speaking of their appearance change which I ignore (like I have a choice)
    A captain that runs his crew to the max risking his ship and his entire crew and no one says a thing.

    I was just looking on the web to make sure I'm not alone.
    Sadly this show isn't the classic show we've all been waiting for.
    We'll continue waiting.

    RIP Star Trek Discovery, your cloak is ticking.    … Expand
  70. v3ctor
    Oct 9, 2017
    0
    What did I just watch? This is not the Star Trek that has inspired so many people. Any sci-fi show can be set in space, but Star Trek was about having a reason to be there - to seek out new life and new civilizations. But no, this show is about killing new life, treating others with utter disrespect and generally seeing who can be the stupidest. I had hopes this show would improve, but theWhat did I just watch? This is not the Star Trek that has inspired so many people. Any sci-fi show can be set in space, but Star Trek was about having a reason to be there - to seek out new life and new civilizations. But no, this show is about killing new life, treating others with utter disrespect and generally seeing who can be the stupidest. I had hopes this show would improve, but the last episode was so terrible I just give up.… Expand
  71. Hutbug
    Oct 8, 2017
    0
    Dreary, tedious, boring. And why make it a serial? Ugg. And a Vulcan makes a good sidekick but not a lead. Even though the character is human, her demeanor is stiff and uninteresting. And we have to pay extra for this AND watch commercials?? I wish I could find even one thing to like about this show.
  72. Bulk88
    Oct 8, 2017
    0
    By episode 3, this show has really doubled downed on nonsensical plot lines and dark grittiness(literally no one wants to flip the light switch). Discovery's writers do not seem to have an interest in making characters at all likable, Michael Burnham' is arrogant and aggressive and Captain Lorca is Lex Luthor in space, but instead wants to show off how updated and edgy Trek is now.By episode 3, this show has really doubled downed on nonsensical plot lines and dark grittiness(literally no one wants to flip the light switch). Discovery's writers do not seem to have an interest in making characters at all likable, Michael Burnham' is arrogant and aggressive and Captain Lorca is Lex Luthor in space, but instead wants to show off how updated and edgy Trek is now.
    Continuity has been totally ignored in too many way to list. Suffice it to say that I'm starting to suspect that this show is more a part of JJ's Trek than the original universe. (also the Klingon makeup makes it impossible to recognize emotion in their faces)
    Episode 3 pretty plays like Ridley Scott's Alien more so than Star Trek, the Orville is the better Trek show. The episode also introduces some bizarre and unexplained super spore that allows for an inexplicable scene of stargating around the galaxy.
    Really this show is not Trek. it's got a lot of action very little moralizing or philosophy. Really this show would be better if Seth McFarlane's pitch to CBS had been accepted and they had just made the Orville.    … Expand
  73. moviestalker
    Oct 7, 2017
    1
    So what happend here is that they put a 'Star Trek' sticker on a below average scifi show and hope to make a few bucks by fooling the fanbase with pretty costumes and explosions. Roddenberry would be rolling in his grave if he saw this.

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

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

    Dear Hollywood writers: If this abomination is the best you can do when you think of Star Trek, then let the franchise die. Seriously: Let.it.die.
    Nobody needs weird looking klingons that talk, as if they had cotton balls in their mouth. Nobody needs these poorly written plots that make zero sense and Nobody needs your "vision" of Star Trek.    … Expand
  74. 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
  75. BengalsfanAZ
    Oct 7, 2017
    0
    I don't think I have ever given a show a 0 rating. I am a life-long Star Trek fan and after watching this abomination, I can not support this franchise if this is the route it is going.

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

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

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

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

    Gene Roddenberry would be ashamed of this giant piece of garbage. My only hope is that it goes off the air soon so that no one else gets subjected to it's distorted Star Trek universe.    … Expand
  76. Honan
    Oct 6, 2017
    8
    A new story with an interesting theme. I really did not go into this show expecting to like it, I just started re-watching DS9. But wow. It looks like it will have a constant story like instead of "bad guy / funny event of the week" and it looks like it will do more to explore the reason starfleets "Science vessels" out gun just about everything in space. I'm looking forward to more ofA new story with an interesting theme. I really did not go into this show expecting to like it, I just started re-watching DS9. But wow. It looks like it will have a constant story like instead of "bad guy / funny event of the week" and it looks like it will do more to explore the reason starfleets "Science vessels" out gun just about everything in space. I'm looking forward to more of this story. HOWEVER I must admit I did not like what they did with the Klingons at all. Did not like the look, or the speech style. These are not the Klingons I love at all.… Expand
  77. Nebadon_Adams
    Oct 6, 2017
    0
    I tried. But within the first five minutes, you have useless exposition between two "friends" who have know each other for 7 years and it sounds like a robot informing a fax machine of the weather forecast. Beautifully shot, but boring as all get out. The Klingons talking in Klingon the whole time actually put me to sleep in the second part of the pilot...and because that dude MichaelI tried. But within the first five minutes, you have useless exposition between two "friends" who have know each other for 7 years and it sounds like a robot informing a fax machine of the weather forecast. Beautifully shot, but boring as all get out. The Klingons talking in Klingon the whole time actually put me to sleep in the second part of the pilot...and because that dude Michael Burnham is unredeemable, I didn't even care to find out what happened.

    The Shenzhou could have exploded and everyone died, and I would just shrug my shoulders. Give me Janeway ANY DAY OF THE WEEK (and she was a notorious breaker of the Prime Directive).

    Maybe I didn't like STD (it burns!!!) because I watched ORVILLE first, and man-oh-man, the second episode was directed by Tom (Robert Duncan McNeill) Paris, and it was a BREATH OF FRESH AIR! Rejoice, Trekkies, we do have a NEW STAR TREK SHOW and it is called: THE ORVILLE.    … Expand
  78. 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.
  79. mikeym
    Oct 6, 2017
    0
    What a dreary mess. The fact that the show is going out of its way to eshew the things that make Trek Trek mean that this is not for me. The turgid script and deeply contrived characters, mean that this for no one of taste.

    By the third episode we have had no more than the most superficial introduction to a handful of characters.

    I have no idea what the official reviewers are watching.
  80. MonkeyKing1969
    Oct 6, 2017
    7
    I am simply not seeing on the screen what some critic see. We are three shows in and very little of this show feels like Star Trek and ist is actually rather frighting that in teh current political and social climate CBS when with such a dour, dire, and un-optimistic show. This is light millennia away from being a good TV show, but it is all we will get. I hope they can turn thisI am simply not seeing on the screen what some critic see. We are three shows in and very little of this show feels like Star Trek and ist is actually rather frighting that in teh current political and social climate CBS when with such a dour, dire, and un-optimistic show. This is light millennia away from being a good TV show, but it is all we will get. I hope they can turn this around; yet, I know they won't.… Expand
  81. GodOne
    Oct 6, 2017
    10
    I've never been so happy since TNG, this is the first series with a different atmosphere, more realistic, with a lot of blood, good acting and cinematographic post production levels.
    I have never given 10 to something, this is the first time in my life, there are only 3 episodes for now but they are great.
    People unhappy about this series must have serious mental problems or maybe just    I've never been so happy since TNG, this is the first series with a different atmosphere, more realistic, with a lot of blood, good acting and cinematographic post production levels.
    I have never given 10 to something, this is the first time in my life, there are only 3 episodes for now but they are great.
    People unhappy about this series must have serious mental problems or maybe just trolls trying to sabotate this show.    … Expand
  82. Tallrothen
    Oct 6, 2017
    10
    The next step in the natural evolution of Star Trek.
    A few shady performances from a couple of characters but nothing that takes away from the overall experience. Don't miss it!
  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. 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!
  85. 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.
  86. yiannis23
    Oct 5, 2017
    9
    To be honest, I don't understand all the negative user reviews. Probably they come from Star Wars fans who are just jealous :-) I've been a Star Trek fan all my life, I've also been to a couple of conventions In Vegas so I think I am entitled to have an opinion on to whether Discovery is Star trek material or not. The answer is simple, YES IT IS. It focuses on the character, it adheresTo be honest, I don't understand all the negative user reviews. Probably they come from Star Wars fans who are just jealous :-) I've been a Star Trek fan all my life, I've also been to a couple of conventions In Vegas so I think I am entitled to have an opinion on to whether Discovery is Star trek material or not. The answer is simple, YES IT IS. It focuses on the character, it adheres with the Federation Directives, it brings out the Star Trek culture as we the fans know it. If I could compare it with one of the oder series, I would say that it is a mix between TOS and ENT. Actually I find it much more Star Trek than the recent Chris Pine movies. We need to give DIS a chance to reveal its true potential. Don't forget how awful the first season of DS9 was; at least in DIS we see a lot of action and story. Let's hope it will bring CBS the numbers otherwise I don't think we will be around for the next Star Trek TV series :-)… Expand
  87. WernerHeisenber
    Oct 5, 2017
    0
    The show is all style no substance done by people who have no idea what classic Star Trek (TOS / TNG) was about.

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

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

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

    In general the writing is very poor and more than 2 hours were not enough to build any tension.    … Expand
  88. golibethesda
    Oct 5, 2017
    1
    Worst Star Trek by far and the stupidest one. On RPG Codex I've written a list of idiocies and inconsistencies that are abundant in every episode so for details you can go there and here I'll only say this: watch The Orville instead.
  89. jcastlouis
    Oct 4, 2017
    10
    After three episodes I have to say this show is amazing. I felt compelled to write this review because so many others here are merely 0s with the same things copied and pasted. Would you honestly believe a rating of 0? Just like you wouldn't believe a 10. -- Overall the show is a modern telling of the classic Star Trek tales. Everything has been updated so the Star Trek franchise canAfter three episodes I have to say this show is amazing. I felt compelled to write this review because so many others here are merely 0s with the same things copied and pasted. Would you honestly believe a rating of 0? Just like you wouldn't believe a 10. -- Overall the show is a modern telling of the classic Star Trek tales. Everything has been updated so the Star Trek franchise can attract a whole new generation of fan. And the classic Trek substance is there too, if viewers will look. The first episode was somewhat stuff. Think of all of the beautiful television we'd miss if the first hour didn't do it for us and we dipped out. Episode 2 was masterful. It laid the foundation for the serialized story to move forward in a brilliant manner. Dialogue was crisp and believable. Effects were amazing. And the overall scope of the production was vast - similar in style and cinematography to a film. ST is a show steeped in canon. And the producers have said this show will adhere to canon if you are patient enough. Which means by the end of the 15 episodes of this season any "canonical conflicts" will have been explained. Many don't seem capable of giving it more than 42 minutes before making up their mind. If you're concerned about canon, I advise you to chillax going in. I have an it has led to an utter enjoyment of the show. And my son, who has never been a fan of any other incarnation, is hooked. Discovery is worth a look and I know you'll find the same jewel of science fiction that has endured for 51 years.… Expand
  90. 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.
  91. JoeSaid
    Oct 4, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. For a long time I thought that nothing could be more of a train-wreck than Star Trek Enterprise..until I watched Discovery. To say it simply this show is not Star Trek. It may be called Star Trek and it may use names like Klingons but it is not Star Trek. First let me address the Klingons. They aren't Klingons, they're Orcs that were dressed by Lady Gaga. This brings me to the uniforms that don't look anything like TOS uniforms and are nonsensical since all of them appear to be blue. The acting is horrible, and the lines are horrible so there is no saving the dialog. The plot is nonsensical as well "Space fungal spores"...what is that? The idea seems so stupid that I must have misunderstood the concept. Why don't we hear of anything...ANYTHING like these "spores" ever again in any other series? NONE of the characters are interesting. I watched 3 episodes and I couldn't say "I like this character or that character". All of the characters were flat and 2 dimensional with very little interesting backstory. I remember watching TNG for the first time and thinking "Cool there's a Klingon and an Android and a telepath, and the Captain is cool...." no....what you get in Star Trek Discovery is Sasha from Walking Dead reading her lines like shes bored...Also why is her name Michael? I mean I know this is the future where there are "no male or female names" but this is hitting me about as well as the men's skirt unifrorms on season 1 of TNG. There is the.effeminate Sheldon alien that apparently CBS thought would be a good fit for the show....everyone likes Sheldon...slap some make-up on this thin guy and make him act like Sheldon that will help carry the show.....CBS...it doesn't carry the show. Whiney Engineer that felt like that annoying co-worker everyone has that you hate being in a conversation with...I don't remember his name but with this show lets call HIM Alice or Susane...I can't think of a single crew member that I like. Oh yea and "Michael"'s roommate the girl that seems like she should be in the movie Mean Girls not a Star Trek show. I waited 10+ years for a new Star Trek show and this is what I get for my wait......I hate this show.… Expand
  92. abm0
    Oct 4, 2017
    5
    It has its moments, mostly due to the visuals they invested in (except the intro, which is completely out of place), but overall it's an incoherent, self-important, cliche-ridden and overly violent mess so far. I'm definitely enjoying The Orville more right now, but I'll still follow this along for another while, just because of the title.
  93. FunInTheSun1
    Oct 4, 2017
    10
    Okay, so there seems to be some review bombing going on with this show, thus the 10/10. Honestly though, as someone whose earliest childhood memory is watching the TNG episode "Shades of Grey" (season 2, episode 22) --not a great one--this series is pretty good, likely the most interesting thing to happen to Star Trek in over a decade.

    Also if you are going to criticize any sort of    Okay, so there seems to be some review bombing going on with this show, thus the 10/10. Honestly though, as someone whose earliest childhood memory is watching the TNG episode "Shades of Grey" (season 2, episode 22) --not a great one--this series is pretty good, likely the most interesting thing to happen to Star Trek in over a decade.

    Also if you are going to criticize any sort of media for "bad writing" you really need to clarify what you mean. Such epithets are vague to the point of meaninglessness unless qualified.    … Expand
  94. MK500
    Oct 3, 2017
    1
    If you want to watch Star Trek; watch The Orville instead. Even after 3 episodes, this dark abomination has nothing to do with Gene Rodenberry‘s Star Trek. I feel terrible for the very decent actors that have to try to make something out of this horrible writing. You want to like the characters; but the situations they find themselves in are so absurd that it just doesn’t work. It feelsIf you want to watch Star Trek; watch The Orville instead. Even after 3 episodes, this dark abomination has nothing to do with Gene Rodenberry‘s Star Trek. I feel terrible for the very decent actors that have to try to make something out of this horrible writing. You want to like the characters; but the situations they find themselves in are so absurd that it just doesn’t work. It feels like they are trying to squeeze 3 episodes of plot into every episode. This series is obviously very high budget, but they should have hired some decent writers instead of dumping it all into CGI. I’m a huge fan of every prior Star Trek series until this; but this one is going to need to take a seriously major turn to have any hope of winning my fandom. If it wasn’t for The Orville I would be very depressed right now.

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

    Remember that Star Trek is often cited by astronauts and NASA engineers as one the things that inspired them to choose their path in life. I can’t imagine this series inspiring anyone.    … Expand
  95. Brittany123
    Oct 3, 2017
    9
    Very Impressed.
    I am really glad that Metacritic takes into consideration the user and critic reviews because I really enjoyed this show. If you just read the user reviews you would probably never watch this series because of how terribly it is scored. I cannot speak to how different it is from the previous Star Treks and that seems to be a sore point with some users. However, a lot of    Very Impressed.
    I am really glad that Metacritic takes into consideration the user and critic reviews because I really enjoyed this show. If you just read the user reviews you would probably never watch this series because of how terribly it is scored. I cannot speak to how different it is from the previous Star Treks and that seems to be a sore point with some users. However, a lot of the negative reviews seem to be focusing on the fact that the two highest ranking officers on the show are both female minorities.
    Don't let the internet trollers prevent you from watching it.
    Great story
    Insightful characters
    Excited to see whats to come!    … Expand
  96. cwayne
    Oct 3, 2017
    8
    While there are things that i don't like about the show (in particular, the mushroom FTL and the futuristic styling of the ship's interior) overall I think it is the most fun ST since TOS. Sonequa Martin-Green is great as the main character. The show is a little darker and grittier that previous ST shows, even more so than DS9. But we have to wait to see if they have any wonderousWhile there are things that i don't like about the show (in particular, the mushroom FTL and the futuristic styling of the ship's interior) overall I think it is the most fun ST since TOS. Sonequa Martin-Green is great as the main character. The show is a little darker and grittier that previous ST shows, even more so than DS9. But we have to wait to see if they have any wonderous explorations. At least i don't expect too many god-like aliens to be taking over the ship each episode.… Expand
  97. 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
  98. yBe
    Oct 3, 2017
    0
    Just made an account to give my two cents. I read quite a few reviews now, but I can't shake the feeling that this series is sexist against men. Theres not one very likeable character, or "hero" that makes you root for. I don't know what critics see in the protagonist, but for me, she felt like the most detestable of the whole cast.
  99. PhotonEmotion
    Oct 3, 2017
    0
    Where is Captain Conway, where is she? Where is Piccard! Where is Benjamin Sisko (I loved him!). No this Star Trek gutted the original vision of Roddenberry into something CNN would be proud of! Gone with the optimism, bye bye to the Klingons who had been degraded tribal barbarians who could never be imagined to have successfully built an Empire!
  100. voxnulla
    Oct 3, 2017
    0
    A jumbled mess of poor acting, dismal writing and flashy CGI and nostalgia tugs to distract you from these facts. Yet another millennial style gritty real people drama that confuses convoluted plot lines for depth and unnecessary artificial character flaws for character development.

    Fly along for 15 episodes where an unremarkable cast will explore their own faults and failures to    A jumbled mess of poor acting, dismal writing and flashy CGI and nostalgia tugs to distract you from these facts. Yet another millennial style gritty real people drama that confuses convoluted plot lines for depth and unnecessary artificial character flaws for character development.

    Fly along for 15 episodes where an unremarkable cast will explore their own faults and failures to absolutely assure us that the future is every bit as pale and empty as today is. Join the spectacle where the Klingons are just a McGuffin and the real enemy is the enemy within because humans are flawed. See how nonsensical and trivial conflicts are resolved with spectacular poor writing and witness how the resolution at the end will be as mundane and unsatisfying as pushing a button.

    Bread and games for the easily impressed.    … Expand
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 »