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. Palanthemion
    Oct 3, 2017
    4
    Interesting story so far, but if you remove the insignias and rename the Klingons to whatever just another sci-fi show. The Star Trek you know is absolutely insignificant to follow the events. No real depth so far. I hope this will change. Otherwise nice to see - but definately nothing to really get involved with.
  2. DukeJon
    Oct 3, 2017
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I thought the first two episodes were pretty poor. Firstly there was far too much talking. Oh there's a probe with weapon damage and a mysterious object on our scanner. Let's all stand around talking about it. An large enemy ship has just appeared right in front of us. Time for a long chat with my boss. Loads of enemy ships have just arrived. Let's line up all our ships right in front of theirs then have a big meeting about it.

    The scenes with the klingons were long and dull. They didn't look or behave anything like the klingons I am familiar with; their language was slow and tiresome to listen to. They should have switched to english rather than have us read all those subtitles. The reference to skin color/race was unsubtle to say the least. Lots of scenes were ripped from other shows; the spacesuit trip to discover an object (from star trek the motion picture), crossing space from the brig to an escape hatch (from 2001 a space oddysey, though in that movie it was at least plausible), "we haven't heard from the enemy in a hundred years" from battlestar galactica. Starfleet fleet tactics seem to be "line up all your ships at point blank range in front of the enemy and wait for them to take the first shot". The main character was ice cold like a vulcan one minute then a rash hotheaded human the rest. She ran about shouting like a hormonal teenager, not a disciplined starfleet officer. I found her quite unlikeable, a critical flaw for a show like this. Michelle Yeoh phoned it in. The only interesting character was Sari. Everyone else was dumb; like the crews in the recent alien movies they have only their own stupidity to blame for their deaths. My main gripe; why does the main female character have a male first name? Episode three didn't really improve things. I like the whole "derelict ship" vibe to this episode but why would they allow a convicted mutineer to wander around a top secret research ship without any handcuffs? The main character pretty much comes and goes as she pleases, she's either being thrown in the brig or being lectures on how wonderful she is. Hand me the sick bag! Another thing; calling an episode "battle of the binary stars" is a bit of a spoiler, don't you think?

    On the plus side production values were high and the ships look cool. It usually annoys me how they always have to shoehorn Sarek into a show but they used him well this time.    … Expand
  3. brentwshelton1
    Oct 2, 2017
    9
    I'm rating this show as a "9" as any TV show generally has some flaws - and Discovery hasn't been immune to that. However, I have to commend it for bringing us a different type of Trek. I'm in my fifties and have been a fan of the original show, TNG, and Voyager. For me the fact that this show portrays Star Fleet officers as flawed is important. If one truly thinks of the "Trek time"I'm rating this show as a "9" as any TV show generally has some flaws - and Discovery hasn't been immune to that. However, I have to commend it for bringing us a different type of Trek. I'm in my fifties and have been a fan of the original show, TNG, and Voyager. For me the fact that this show portrays Star Fleet officers as flawed is important. If one truly thinks of the "Trek time" line - Picard and Janeway were centuries after Lorca. It is totally realistic for Star fleet officers to be darker in nature and fuzzier on ethical grounds than what is achieved in the future. Quite honestly, most of the negative reviews seem to harp on (1) Having to pay (by the way - only if you want to see it right away - I'm sure it will be available on other streaming services or broadcast - after the season ends) and (B) that it isn't exactly the same ( as TNG, etc. Like I said - I'm glad it is a different type of Trek and really excited for the rest of the season! Thnik the cast and writers are doing awesome!… Expand
  4. KILLyrIDOLS1
    Oct 2, 2017
    9
    So many other reviews have completely missed the point or applied a standard that every other Star Trek series would also fail to meet. The first several episodes were great and a real return to form for the franchise after several movies that really seemed to, like so many users on this site, miss the whole point of what star trek is supposed to be about.
  5. shaheinm
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    I want to like this show so badly, but it's terrible so far. It definitely isn't Star Trek (there are dozens of reviews from other users that detail why; I'll join that chorus in a minute), but more than that, it's just bad TV. The writing is lazy - it's incredibly obvious when they're just creating false tension to move the story along. You can't see anything because the set is soI want to like this show so badly, but it's terrible so far. It definitely isn't Star Trek (there are dozens of reviews from other users that detail why; I'll join that chorus in a minute), but more than that, it's just bad TV. The writing is lazy - it's incredibly obvious when they're just creating false tension to move the story along. You can't see anything because the set is so poorly lit all the time, and every character aside from Doug Jones is one-dimensional, boring, and unlikeable. The science makes zero sense (WTF is that "interconnected web of spores" BS, midichlorians?).

    Ignore all of the talk of "SJWs have taken over" and all that nonsense from people who clearly don't understand or haven't seen Gene Roddenberry's vision. Trek is at it's best when it portrays a hopeful, progressive future for mankind. The problem here is that you can't do that with terrible writing and lazy plotting.

    And as far as Trek is concerned, Seth MacFarlane has created something that captures the spirit of Trek quite magnificently (episode three may as well have just been a lost episode of TNG), and that makes STD all that much harder to watch. I'm a devoted Trekkie, and I want nothing more than a Star Trek series to live on television, so I probably will continue watching the full first season of STD, but it is abundantly clear to me that The Orville is superior in every way (and a better Star Trek show than the one that bears the franchise's name).

    For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone felt the need to "update" Trek (in a prequel, no less) on television, especially in a paid format like CBS All Access. I hate the JJ-verse movies, but I can kinda sorta understand the desire to bring mass market appeal to Trek on the big screen - movies are supposed to appeal to as large an audience as possible. But the only people who are going to pay CBS for a monthly subscription to watch a show week-to-week that still includes commercials are Trekkies. And all we want is a Star Trek show. I can live with updates and changes, but the Klingon redesign was awful and disengaging (they can't emote in those prosthetics - Klingons have always been boisterous and emotional - and the "no one has seen a Klingon in 100 years" line drove me nuts), the cloaking technology reveal screws up all kinds of timeline problems, the tech is too advanced for TOS to be a successor series (Enterprise went to great lengths to keep the tech in the show 100 years behind a show that was created 40+ years before it)... why are you even making a prequel show? Why not just put a show set after DS9?

    Now I'm sad. I'm gonna go watch The Orville to give me hope again.    … Expand
  6. Zybane
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    Words cannot describe how cringe-worthy this show is. I just got halfway through episode 3 and I had to turn it off.

    Lets just say a Star Trek in which Star Fleet officers use ridiculous disparaging nicknames, prisoners simply have their handcuffs removed so that they can try and find a seat at the dining table among the crew and no one wants to sit with the prisoner like a high-school    Words cannot describe how cringe-worthy this show is. I just got halfway through episode 3 and I had to turn it off.

    Lets just say a Star Trek in which Star Fleet officers use ridiculous disparaging nicknames, prisoners simply have their handcuffs removed so that they can try and find a seat at the dining table among the crew and no one wants to sit with the prisoner like a high-school TV show, and the writing and dialogue is beyond cringe-worthy.

    I thought the new Michael Bay'esque Star Treks were awful, this show takes awful to where awful has never gone before!    … Expand
  7. cbeckman
    Oct 2, 2017
    10
    I've love Trek since the TOS and love all incarnations, except the JJ Abrams version (which is terrible). But, I do not get the hate for this version. It's great. The characters are great. The story is fun and exciting. It features both believable science and politics.

    This is certainly different than all other incarnations, but true to the heart of trek. This is the only show I'm    I've love Trek since the TOS and love all incarnations, except the JJ Abrams version (which is terrible). But, I do not get the hate for this version. It's great. The characters are great. The story is fun and exciting. It features both believable science and politics.

    This is certainly different than all other incarnations, but true to the heart of trek. This is the only show I'm at all interested in and actually the best thing I've seen in years!    … Expand
  8. Atriox
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    Don't waste your time ! Seriously ! It is generic. The FX are just standard and not appealing. The lead character is unlikable. The production design is god awfully bad. The new Klingons are the worst.
  9. Talbis
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    I'm like 25 minutes into the third episode I paused to write these first impressions here. I was beyond skeptical when this series was announced and at least now I know why it was sent to CBS Access - to die. Yeah, they knew it will suck, so they've sent it to die.
    I can forgive a lot of things, like inconsistent technology levels (holograms weren't a viable method of communication until    I'm like 25 minutes into the third episode I paused to write these first impressions here. I was beyond skeptical when this series was announced and at least now I know why it was sent to CBS Access - to die. Yeah, they knew it will suck, so they've sent it to die.
    I can forgive a lot of things, like inconsistent technology levels (holograms weren't a viable method of communication until about a 100 years after this series takes place in lore), I can forgive the visual changes to Klingons (to writers: just explain TOS Klingons, like DS9 and Enterprise did, eh?)... but I can't forgive wooden acting from main, unlikable hero. Michael Burnham doesn't deserve to wear that uniform. And hey, she's court-martialed, so at least writers know how stupid, unresponsible and out of place she is. Thing is, she does whatever she wants. Third episode and she's let loose to run around secret projects. Hey, writers, we keep prisoners in the brig, not in the same quarters as Starfleet Academy students... If I learned anything it's that Sonequa Martin-Green cannot act at all. But the biggest kick to the balls I received from Discovery was when Captain Philippa Georgiou, a most interesting and well-portrayed character in Discovery, was killed off in the second episode. All that noise about getting Michelle Yeoh, all those easter eggs hidden in captain's ready room... gone. Poof! The most interesting part of the series was nothing but a cock tease! Now we're stuck with an unlikable character that's not being balanced by a mentor figure, but instead is a menace released into the wild to **** things up as she wants. Michelle Yeoh sold me on the idea of another sodding prequel, guess I can't have that now, can I?
    Overall story also isn't all that great. Klingons are back and afraid that the Federation will take away their individuality. Federation would like nothing more than to take away the individuality of Klingons. They (writers) wanted to comment on current sociopolitical climate in the US... instead they've turned the Federation into less advanced Borg. Their message gets lost in the amount of ridiculously stupid decisions everyone makes in this show.
    Klingons aren't Klingons. I get that they got redesigned, I don't care, they can look whatever they want, thing is, they don't act or feel like Klingons at all. Gone is the "pirate ship" vibe of a Klingon ship, now they're all just stand in the room and whine about how cruel the galaxy is to them.
    Star Trek was always about the human condition, how good people can be, how open they can be, how hopeful the future might be if we just put work into it. Even much darker Deep Space 9 had a lot of hope in it. Star Trek was about who you are amongst many. Discovery doesn't care about any of that, in fact, it seems to be about destroying everything the Trek build for over 50 years. This has no soul of Star Trek. Even J.J. Abrams did a better job getting at the core of what Star Trek was about... I'm done with the show.    … Expand
  10. wolffandy3
    Oct 2, 2017
    10
    Loved it! Pitch perfect! Thrilling, mysterious, funny, and bold! Top notch acting, Sonequa Martin-Green is captivating and charming -- a perfect Trek lead. Writing is clever and deep, weaving a tapestry of intrigue, making the most of it's serialized structure. Fantastic direction, SFX, music -- the sets are incredible. I dig the big budget, love seeing Trek this way. Very epic. Star TrekLoved it! Pitch perfect! Thrilling, mysterious, funny, and bold! Top notch acting, Sonequa Martin-Green is captivating and charming -- a perfect Trek lead. Writing is clever and deep, weaving a tapestry of intrigue, making the most of it's serialized structure. Fantastic direction, SFX, music -- the sets are incredible. I dig the big budget, love seeing Trek this way. Very epic. Star Trek meets Game of Thrones, in the best way.
    This is Star Trek at it's finest!    … Expand
  11. gozu
    Oct 2, 2017
    10
    I was hooked right away and I'm loving all the plot twists. I am enjoying this much more than TNG, which is the only other Star Trek series I've watched in its entirety.

    I have we get 6 or 7 more seasons!

    Making the show streaming-only and 10 dollars a month the only way to watch it is terrible news for the show and its cast and crew.
  12. NotchFilter
    Oct 2, 2017
    1
    The bar had been set way too high for this premiere episode. It had to be good enough to convince the potential audience that the $6 per month for CBS streaming was "worth it."

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

    It's not.

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

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

    $6 per month in order to watch this show? Who is CBS kidding?    … Expand
  13. Goreminister
    Oct 2, 2017
    0
    SJW Hollywood claimed the next classic franchise and turned it into disgusting propaganda. I´m sad to see that one of my beloved TV Series lost everything of the original message. On top the 90s called: They want their SFX back. Terribly executed! :(
  14. madmacdoo
    Oct 2, 2017
    1
    Unlikeable characters, poor storylines, and an all round mess of a show if the first 3 episodes are anything to go by. It can improve of course, but it doesn't look likely at this time. The worst star trek since enterprise(which was also rubbish).
  15. Groen
    Oct 2, 2017
    10
    I watch the first two episodes and loved it! i do remember the first episodes of TNG and was horrible. The first season of Voyager was ok, later it became the best next to STO. Discovery began very strong. SFX was fantastic, good characters and lots of actions. Hope they can keep up this level of tension and urgency. For all you haters (0 points really?) get a life :)
  16. DoctorZack
    Oct 1, 2017
    4
    Congratulations. Even if you don't delve into this with a political mind, this is by far the most disappointing inclusion into the Star Trek franchise. While visually stunning (because money), the series lacks any of the heart or resemblance to the franchise's previous entries. My advice, go watch The Orville if you want to see a true Star Trek heir.
  17. LaurentV
    Oct 1, 2017
    7
    Finally got around to watching the first two episodes and...we seem to have a winner! Lots of good potential in characters and SFX. I give it a "7" because I do wish the series would stay in line with the young concussed officer's lament "We're Star Fleet. We're explorers, not soldiers". I also find the new design for the Klingons to be baroque (literally) and most...unfortunate. It'sFinally got around to watching the first two episodes and...we seem to have a winner! Lots of good potential in characters and SFX. I give it a "7" because I do wish the series would stay in line with the young concussed officer's lament "We're Star Fleet. We're explorers, not soldiers". I also find the new design for the Klingons to be baroque (literally) and most...unfortunate. It's solid enough otherwise to just pretend it's an eight-hour "action episode" of Star Trek, like "Doomsday Machine" or "Best of Both Worlds"… Expand
  18. ashtrayb
    Oct 1, 2017
    1
    Set phasers to "Kill" , This is a quote from episode 3 of the Star Trek Discovery . it is a symbol to the loss of innocence and summarizes what this new series is about : dumb action filled story that is lacking the charm and exploration mission that the previous Star Trek TV series were about.

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

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

    And they put these series with a war storyline and some alien monsters in it ? This is disappointing. I am going back to watch Star Trek TNG or Voyager or Enterprise.    … Expand
  19. Alaska_Wolf
    Oct 1, 2017
    2
    I only got to watch the first show, then I found out CBS wants us to stream the rest after I couldn't find the 2nd show. Personally, I just didn't find the "New and Improved" Star Trek to be compelling enough for me to spend even more money on streaming it. As a long time, and original Trekkie from 1966, I was really looking forward to the latest installation, and I was honestly quitI only got to watch the first show, then I found out CBS wants us to stream the rest after I couldn't find the 2nd show. Personally, I just didn't find the "New and Improved" Star Trek to be compelling enough for me to spend even more money on streaming it. As a long time, and original Trekkie from 1966, I was really looking forward to the latest installation, and I was honestly quit disappointed with the show, and not just CBS's underhanded, money grubbing tactics.

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

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

    Perhaps the show has gotten better, but CBS has turned me right off watching it with their "You have to subscribe to watch it" after the first show. Thanks CBS, but no thanks.    … Expand
  20. ernie76
    Oct 1, 2017
    10
    This is Trek at its best. Greates Problem for most haters seems to be that the "Massage" isent delivert on a silver plater like in TNG where Picard hold a long Monolog at the end of many episodes.
    The look of the Klingons and thair Ships is a bit strange but it isent the 90s anymore and so i can live with that.
    As the Trek Creed say i am open for "New and Strange" things and so i git    This is Trek at its best. Greates Problem for most haters seems to be that the "Massage" isent delivert on a silver plater like in TNG where Picard hold a long Monolog at the end of many episodes.
    The look of the Klingons and thair Ships is a bit strange but it isent the 90s anymore and so i can live with that.
    As the Trek Creed say i am open for "New and Strange" things and so i git this a chance!    … Expand
  21. Shaka_Igloo
    Oct 1, 2017
    10
    Loved it. A show where the action and plot comes first instead of jumping straight into being yet another sci-fi soap opera. So sick of these crews full of self doubting whining babies and their personal problems that end up taking center stage instead of adventures in space.
  22. Perrypelican
    Oct 1, 2017
    0
    The acting is not inspiring. The dialog is terrible. The glingons dont look even close to the original ones. The captain calls michael number one like she is forced to use that expression, not at all like it is her pet name. Nothing flows. Everything is all over the place. There are no relationships that seem to be more than 2 days old, never mind 7 years. The subtitles for the klingonsThe acting is not inspiring. The dialog is terrible. The glingons dont look even close to the original ones. The captain calls michael number one like she is forced to use that expression, not at all like it is her pet name. Nothing flows. Everything is all over the place. There are no relationships that seem to be more than 2 days old, never mind 7 years. The subtitles for the klingons disappear way too fast for nothing. I was not at all impressed with the graphics. The way the ships appear suddenly and always move slightly is so unrealistic. I found nothing good about the new star trek.… Expand
  23. sanchess
    Oct 1, 2017
    2
    Show is good quality. But thats about it. I believe all star trek (show) principles has been lost. Im gonna ignore messages of the show as this is open for interpretation. Decisions crew make are not calculated and most of times not reasonable. There is also no-one I connected with, however the show is just starting, maybe that will change. I feel the directors went on that flashy loudShow is good quality. But thats about it. I believe all star trek (show) principles has been lost. Im gonna ignore messages of the show as this is open for interpretation. Decisions crew make are not calculated and most of times not reasonable. There is also no-one I connected with, however the show is just starting, maybe that will change. I feel the directors went on that flashy loud route ignoring what got Star Trek very popular, which is diplomacy, reason, and thought provoking stories. I hope this was just to promote the series to new audience, but, to be fair, if you are hoping for something to get better then it isnt really good.… Expand
  24. katieelizabeth
    Sep 30, 2017
    5
    I can only review the first 2 episodes, because that's all that has aired so far. As someone who has enjoyed Star trek since TNG and has basically watched every episode since then at least twice, I am qualified to say that Star Trek: Discovery really isn't a Star Trek series. It has been "2017'd" - meaning it has lots of padded sequences, poor and pointless dialogue, juvenile conflictI can only review the first 2 episodes, because that's all that has aired so far. As someone who has enjoyed Star trek since TNG and has basically watched every episode since then at least twice, I am qualified to say that Star Trek: Discovery really isn't a Star Trek series. It has been "2017'd" - meaning it has lots of padded sequences, poor and pointless dialogue, juvenile conflict between characters that are supposed to be professional star trek officers, and the show's writers seem to value shock value at times - all evidence of the 2017 tv show formula. Star Trek is supposed to look forward - it has got to be better than this, and treat it's audiences with some respect.

    Seeing as Enterprise started it's season with a Klingon arc, and has already explored these early Klingon-era stories quite well before, doing it yet again feels like the series is going over well-explored territory already. The Next Generation had the best Kligon focused stories, and DS9 even went to war with them. Honestly, what is there left to do?

    The show's special effects are quite amazing, but that's honestly the only thing that's really going for it. I'll take the rich characters, deeper plots and intrigue from DS9 over this any day.

    Maybe I shouldn't be too critical - most Star Trek series have started fairly poor after all - but the acting and direction is very clear here... it's almost as if I can predict the tone for the rest of the series, just because I've seen it all before with other modern tv shows. Uninspiring to be sure, and very disappointing.    … Expand
  25. mujanovic
    Sep 30, 2017
    0
    Disturbingly bad. Unimaginative, soulless, bad writing, bad acting, no sense of space exploration and adventure, no science in sci-fi... Did CBS hire a bunch of middle schoolers to write this? Visually it's the same level of lazy and unimaginative: tilted camera angles, lens flares, blockbuster CGI, no soul, no sense, nothing more than a cynical ploy to make you give your money to CBS.
  26. notafan54
    Sep 30, 2017
    0
    Character Michael Burnham ruins this show. She is not believable nor even likeable. Lt. Saru is disgusting to look at. It's the future. Don't they have better plastic surgery? The Klingons are a joke. Why are we going with Klingons? How about something new? That's what the Original show was all about. The unknown. The only redeemable is Michelle Yeoh. The rest of the show really stinks.Character Michael Burnham ruins this show. She is not believable nor even likeable. Lt. Saru is disgusting to look at. It's the future. Don't they have better plastic surgery? The Klingons are a joke. Why are we going with Klingons? How about something new? That's what the Original show was all about. The unknown. The only redeemable is Michelle Yeoh. The rest of the show really stinks. it is not Trek Worthy and I have seen every episode in all of the earlier series. They are also pushing Homosexual activity onto the show. What's the point? Star Trek Sucks Literally!… Expand
  27. JLC
    Sep 30, 2017
    8
    The only problem was the visual (Lens Flares and the battle scenes).
    The characters were amazing, and the script was fine and well written
    If you consider the visual as canon, you wont like it.
    If you consider only the history, well...you'll be rewarded.

    3/4
  28. coustoe
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Uninspiring, unoriginal, boring and dull. Seems like CBS tried to save money on the writing and development team. Another lazy attempt by corporate heads and SJWs to milk a franchise without coming up with any original ideas on their own.
  29. MysticDingo
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. HONEST REVIEW:
    It's just not Star Trek. We have Michael Burnham as the main character, and the only one that matters. She's a complete Mary-Sue character who is perfect in everything she tries to do. The show gives the appearance of her failing, but she doesn't actually fail at anything. Seeing as how she is able to do any job required on the ship so far, it's a wonder why there are any other characters at all, specifically the science officer. Furthermore, once they encounter the Klingons, our Mary-Sue thinks that she knows better than the captain, assaults the captain with a vulcan nerve pinch(really? any trekkie knows that the only being other than a vulcan who can perform this is Data, an android), and then proceeds to mutiny on the ship. It "fails" but she gets her desired result anyways. Since when is mutiny, assaulting a superior, and disobeying direct orders something that makes for good star trek? My question is, where's the crew? Where's the meaningful character interaction? Where's the moral or philosophical question at heart in the episode(s)? No, what we get is a pew pew fest where needless things happen. If you have watched it, then Michael had no need to go out to the beacon, why not send a drone instead which we know they had because they planned to use one to carry a torpedo in the second episode. Why did the captain and first officer leave the ship in an attempt to capture the klingon leader, resulting in the captains death? Why did Michael MURDER the Klingon leader after killing the captain even though they were going there to capture the Klingon to disgrace him, instead of killing him and thereby turning him into a martyr? Michael literally disrespected the memory of her captain by intentionally failing in her mission. And for god sakes, why give a black female character a dudes name? Michael? Really? The only reason for this is for the writers to virtue signal and go "Oh look how progressive we are!" Why not show some ACTUAL respect for ACTUAL black females by ACTUALLY giving Michael a REAL black female name like, Tamika, or Monique, or Aaliyah, or Chanelle?

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

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

    All in all, this show looks to be the death knell of Star Trek as we know it. If this is the caliber of Star Trek show/shows we can expect to come in the future, then I'm going to start watching ST: Enterprise reruns because ST:E blows Discovery out of the water.    … Expand
  30. Semtex_Steve
    Sep 29, 2017
    3
    I'm not really sure what to make of all this. The effects were impressive, but the sets were dull and dark and the new Klingons looked ridiculous - even compared to the old Klingons who looked like Kiss fans with Cornish pasties on their heads. The main character came across as a psychotic maniac who really didn't belong on the bridge of a Starfleet vessel and the side characters wereI'm not really sure what to make of all this. The effects were impressive, but the sets were dull and dark and the new Klingons looked ridiculous - even compared to the old Klingons who looked like Kiss fans with Cornish pasties on their heads. The main character came across as a psychotic maniac who really didn't belong on the bridge of a Starfleet vessel and the side characters were entirely forgettable.

    The effects were pretty, but nothing we'd already seen in the JJ Abrams remake almost a decade ago, and the constant Dutch angles reminded me of Battlefield Earth.    … Expand
  31. KnightMarshal
    Sep 29, 2017
    1
    This is the first time I've felt the need to write a review. Huge Star Trek fan all of my short life (22). In terms of CGI 10/10. However, CGI does not make a series good. Character development is god awful. Star Trek was good because it developed multiple characters. This can't even develop 'the main' character properly. (Why is there even a main character?!) Most importantly, to theThis is the first time I've felt the need to write a review. Huge Star Trek fan all of my short life (22). In terms of CGI 10/10. However, CGI does not make a series good. Character development is god awful. Star Trek was good because it developed multiple characters. This can't even develop 'the main' character properly. (Why is there even a main character?!) Most importantly, to the developers, Thanks for **** on my favorite franchise you SJW cucks. Star Trek has always been progressive, but this is insanity. You all need to be fired, out of a torpedo bay preferably. End of rage rant.… Expand
  32. afngary
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Been a Star Trek fan since the 70s and must say this is NOT Star Trek. This is total trash and not worth watching. The background, characters, and poor acting is really bad. Most of all this basically another JJ reboot. Stay away from this STD!
  33. Dudleyk2
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    This show is terrible and not entertaining. To top it off the libtard actors decided to take a knee on instagram to split their audience base. Smooth move morons.
  34. dmcimo
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    Complete Junk. Not only are you forced to pay to see this show in the USA/CANADA , but its also badly done. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but this show has nothing to do with Trek stories, they just on uniforms and attempted to use the THEME, but that is all. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bitComplete Junk. Not only are you forced to pay to see this show in the USA/CANADA , but its also badly done. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but this show has nothing to do with Trek stories, they just on uniforms and attempted to use the THEME, but that is all. There are also problems with the pacing and energy. They go to such great lengths to build up some little bit of momentum then cut to the Klingon with SUBTITLES, wow...just utter wow.... I have been a Star Trek fan for years, I Have watched every series, every film multiple times. I will not watch another episode of this rubbish. Definitely not worth a subscription to CBS as of yet, and even if you have Netflix in USA/CANADA, CBS made it clear they they want to steal all the money from us and won't allow Netflix to have it here, but anyone else across the world.… Expand
  35. ppstudent
    Sep 29, 2017
    4
    As a Trek fan, I'm quite disappointed in the way the first episode went. Maybe that is me but there is so many things wrong with the characters. The cast was kind of weak and maybe that will improve as they gets through the first few episodes. One of the problems is that Star Trek wasn't made to be both stiff and dark. On the other hand, Star Trek Orville has a strong cast, a strong storyAs a Trek fan, I'm quite disappointed in the way the first episode went. Maybe that is me but there is so many things wrong with the characters. The cast was kind of weak and maybe that will improve as they gets through the first few episodes. One of the problems is that Star Trek wasn't made to be both stiff and dark. On the other hand, Star Trek Orville has a strong cast, a strong story line, and a lot of humor (both flat and funny).… Expand
  36. Devoras
    Sep 29, 2017
    0
    I made an account just to write on this board.

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

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

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

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

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

    Now if the show is to be saved along with Star Trek itself, fire the current writers, fire ANYONE who even worked with JJ Abrams and his utter disgrace he called Star Trek and get creative people onboard who is willing to work with the MAIN timeline.    … Expand
  37. FRK
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    The new series is a huge disappointment. Endless crying, overemotional, badly written long and senseless dialogues, no charisma from any of the characters, no engaging plot. So long waiting and what we get is a badly written and juvenile pair of episodes. It seems the producers have never seen a single start trek movie or series chapter before. So many resorces to do en epic series, such aThe new series is a huge disappointment. Endless crying, overemotional, badly written long and senseless dialogues, no charisma from any of the characters, no engaging plot. So long waiting and what we get is a badly written and juvenile pair of episodes. It seems the producers have never seen a single start trek movie or series chapter before. So many resorces to do en epic series, such a waste of time. Awful..… Expand
  38. AreYouSerious
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    What is this crap? The most aggravating characters I've ever had the misfortunate of watching on a TV show before. Do they even understand their audience? Have they ever watched an episode of Star Trek? Any Star Trek (even the movie reboots)?

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

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

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

    I've never served in the armed forces, but if this is what the "idyllic" future of the armed forces looks like, we're in for a hell of a lot of trouble...    … Expand
  39. OldTrekkie
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I watched the 1st 2 episodes of Star Trek Discovery and these episodes will be my last. I was a kid when the original Star Trek (TOS) aired in 1966. Through reruns and syndication as I was getting older, I came to know the TOS episodes and the storylines very well.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Thanks for reading.,

    OldTrekkie    … Expand
  40. inopinatus
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    Shameful writing that has neither wit nor pathos. Painful camerawork and horrendous editing. The actors try their best with the stilted and implausible script, and the VFX designers have incorporated the best starfields that you'll see outside a 2017 video game, but it is lipstick on a pig. The show has all the dismal hallmarks of design-by-tv-executive. Hardly surprising that Bryan Fuller quit.
  41. Vasot
    Sep 28, 2017
    7
    From the 2 episodes that i have watched so far it's not the greatest Star Trek ever but it's not as bad either as some negative people claim around here. The action and the battles are great and for a series the cinematography is better from most movies i have watched. There are only 2 episodes released so far so it's very early to make final assumptions about this show. The only problemFrom the 2 episodes that i have watched so far it's not the greatest Star Trek ever but it's not as bad either as some negative people claim around here. The action and the battles are great and for a series the cinematography is better from most movies i have watched. There are only 2 episodes released so far so it's very early to make final assumptions about this show. The only problem for me is the leftist and SWJ trash ideologies that they have put into the show… Expand
  42. valrond
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    Terrible. Just a horrible TV Series, if you can call that thing a TV Series.
    First, let's start by the pilot. It is bad, really bad. Awfully bad. The plot is nearly non-existant and definitely not appealing at all. Scratch that. Just 5 seconds into this thing, you know it is wrong. You see a bunch of creatures. They are supposed to be Klingon's, but they are not. They don't look like    Terrible. Just a horrible TV Series, if you can call that thing a TV Series.
    First, let's start by the pilot. It is bad, really bad. Awfully bad. The plot is nearly non-existant and definitely not appealing at all. Scratch that. Just 5 seconds into this thing, you know it is wrong. You see a bunch of creatures. They are supposed to be Klingon's, but they are not. They don't look like Klingons at all, not even close to what we had in TNG/DS9/Voyager (well, he just had a half klingon there in Belanna Torres, but you get it). Then they speak in Klingon ALL THE TIME. Klingon is not meant to be talked, except for some few moments like they have in the previous series, then they speak in English. And it sound so dull and monotonous, which the lack of facial expressions make even worse.
    Then we have the captain and 1st officer doing a nice scene, but just looks nice, it adds NOTHING to the story. I will keep it mostly spoilers free, but a freaking 1st officer of the UFP DOESN'T KNOCK OUT HER CAPTAIN. I could go on and on and on, but you get the point. This is NOT Star Trek.
    Then there is the politicial/SJW leftist agenda they are trying to shove down our throats.
    The Klingons are isolationists that want to remain klingon. The very creators of the series have said they are an allegory to Trump and Trump supporters. The Federation is what the globalists are now, they want to assimilate all those that don't think like them, in this case the Klingon.
    So, what we really have here, is a leftist anti-Trump propaganda, not even my words, but their creators.
    Then there is the white genocide/lack of white male characters. There are two, one that barely features, and the other one, a racist admiral, when we hadn't had a racist in Starfleet in 28 seasons of TV and 10 movies (plus those new Star Wars movies pretending to be Star Trek movies), but here it is again.
    Simply awful, don't watch if you want an entertaining series.    … Expand
  43. Awaken
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Unnecessary urgency - timers, countdowns, flashing warnings. Unrealistically frilly, convoluted, overcomplicated klingon customs, design and architecture. Heroes and zeroes - a single character that matters, everyone else is fluff. Everyone on the fed side being a 2017 human in values and outlook. No evolution of humanity. Plot plagiarism. Even more plot plagiarism. Dialogue plagiarism. Lack of plot. Obvious tropes. Convenient lack of autopilot for dramatic effect. More obvious tropes. Being unable to transport without lifesigns 2 minutes after transporting a bomb just fine. Too much CGI eye candying. Unnecessary conflict between colleagues. Too much unjustified tension. One dimensional characters. Not enough moral ambiguity. Shared assumptions of right and wrong. Everyone on "our side" being okay with mining corpses. Only decent moral examination taking place with a computer. Too much stating of the obvious. Uncomfortable subtle likening of Klingons to idealogically driven terrorists facing off against the USA / Federation. Zealous enemies saving laser bullets to allow cinematic convenience. Serious light bulb shortage in 23rd century court. The physics of a space ship, no matter how pointy it is, cutting slowly through another space ship instead of pushing it away.… Expand
  44. Discovery
    Sep 28, 2017
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. excellent series, quite good addition in the Universe of Star Trek, As the fan of Star Trek I isn't happy only with design of klingon ( they are awful )… Expand
  45. Angus
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    Stafleet is now the bad, anti-liberal, intolerant team.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Too bad though, the main actress was good on walking dead and a deep character. We know she can act better if the writing was better and not one-dimensional hatred justification against those you don't politically agree with.    … Expand
  46. KlaiggeB
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    I go back to the very beginning with Star Trek, so I'm a long time fan.

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

    But this show lost me in the first 10 minutes.

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

    It was, in a word, terrible!

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

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

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

    Then we have the first officer attacking the captain!

    And gets away with it!

    Are you serious?

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

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

    I don't think so.    … Expand
  47. Strykenine
    Sep 28, 2017
    8
    I picked up CBS all access just for Star Trek, and while I am not sure weather this was the right purchase, it feels like a promising beginning. I have been a Star Trek fan since the release of TNG back in '87 (I was 6) and I remember the first time I watched The Best of Both Worlds. That was a little taste of what Star Trek could be, and I have watched just about anything 'Star Trek'I picked up CBS all access just for Star Trek, and while I am not sure weather this was the right purchase, it feels like a promising beginning. I have been a Star Trek fan since the release of TNG back in '87 (I was 6) and I remember the first time I watched The Best of Both Worlds. That was a little taste of what Star Trek could be, and I have watched just about anything 'Star Trek' related since then. I even like the Abramsverse-Trek, but I feel like those movies will eventually be a side-note in Trek history. Television is where this franchise belongs, due to the ability to tell long-form stories and explore themes and topics both political and scientific that don't necessarily need to have 100-million dollar budgets to be interesting.

    'The Vulcan Hello' isn't quite 'The Best of Both Worlds' and due to the chaotic nature of the first few episodes, it's hard to tell if there will be strong, memorable characters like Picard, Q or Data. That being said, I like the main character thus far and I think that depending on where they take her, this could be a really good series. I thought that shoehorning in Sarek was a bit of a stretch, and it added almost nothing plot-wise, but I will reserve judgement for how that choice plays out. If they wanted to have her be a human-raised-by-Vulcans, they didn't have to include him. That feels forced.

    Luckily, almost nothing else does. The Klingons are far more distinct than they were in TNG, and I like them. They are certainly different, but one of my favorite TOS films was 'The Undiscovered Country' where General Chang was essentially Christopher Plummer with no makeup. I guess my point is that the looks don't spoil anything, but I hope they decide to develop the Klingons into something distinct. It looks like this season will focus on the Klingons, and I'm okay with that.

    One other thing - Star Trek has always needed conflict. It's going to be interesting to see how an organization like the Federation responds to provocation by an enemy that is afraid of them, and with good reason. The Federation usually looks good, but we sometimes forget to think that what looks good from our side of the fence isn't necessarily what looks good to everyone. The Klingon war can be that kind of conflict, I think, where not only is there combat (glorious combat!) but there can be a philosophical presentation of multi-cultural representative nations vs monocultural systems. Sound relevant?

    Long story short, I liked these episodes. I don't watch much television, despite having Netflix and Amazon Prime as well as this CBS all-access. None of the other shows on CBS look that appealing, and quite a few of them actually look bad outright (Seal Team? Really?) but here is hoping that Star Trek makes it worthwhile. If it isn't, I won't be renewing for Season 2.    … Expand
  48. Canisrah
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    Watch the Orville instead. Discovery is not Star Trek in any way shape or form. Its yet another horrendous apparition dreamed up by TV Execs as a vehicle to push globalist propaganda and progressive political dogma with a big helpful of feminist poison. Flashy visuals to little to hide the fact that this production has no soul.
  49. mech
    Sep 28, 2017
    7
    As a long time Star Trek fan I came with an open mind. Unfortunately this show is really stupid so far.

    An uncontrollable starfleet first officer that acts like an emo teenager (she is supposed to have been brought up by Vulcans, lol) looks completely out of place. Kilngons are super annoying with their long-winded caveman speeches. Star Trek was always more on the philosophical    As a long time Star Trek fan I came with an open mind. Unfortunately this show is really stupid so far.

    An uncontrollable starfleet first officer that acts like an emo teenager (she is supposed to have been brought up by Vulcans, lol) looks completely out of place.

    Kilngons are super annoying with their long-winded caveman speeches.

    Star Trek was always more on the philosophical side and less pew pew bang bang. This one is the opposite.    … Expand
  50. Voodoo123
    Sep 28, 2017
    1
    +Visual flair puts this shows aesthetic in line with 2009 JJ abrams film
    +Great cast
    +Interesting period for star trek lore -No longer a show about an advanced yet peaceful culture of unified civilizations -OTT lens flare/camera tilts/camera pans way too much movement for my taste -Starfleet crew noticeably relish in the death of their perceived 'enemy' -OTT klingon prosthetic makeup    +Visual flair puts this shows aesthetic in line with 2009 JJ abrams film
    +Great cast
    +Interesting period for star trek lore
    -No longer a show about an advanced yet peaceful culture of unified civilizations
    -OTT lens flare/camera tilts/camera pans way too much movement for my taste
    -Starfleet crew noticeably relish in the death of their perceived 'enemy'
    -OTT klingon prosthetic makeup impairs the actors ability to emote or even speak clearly
    -Story flavors mindless action over philosophical / ethical debate

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

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

    I will keep watching in the hope something gets better but so far these 2 episodes are star trek sacrilege. (if this was anything other than star trek would've given 4/10 hence the 1/10)    … Expand
  51. Ulflander
    Sep 28, 2017
    0
    This is not only one of the worst things (not) on TV at the moment (seriously CBS, $15/mo to see this?), but its by far the worst attempt at a Star Trek.

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

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

    At least Enterprise tried.    … Expand
  52. Thylbanus
    Sep 27, 2017
    4
    Everyone is SO one dimensional. The writing is so horrible that even the cast appears to be aware that they just need to rush through their lines. There is no humor, or relatability. And in the end, you start to realize that the Federation is the Borg in this show. The only reason I even gave it a 4 was because the CG was so good. Hell, they should have just let Alec Peters do AxanarEveryone is SO one dimensional. The writing is so horrible that even the cast appears to be aware that they just need to rush through their lines. There is no humor, or relatability. And in the end, you start to realize that the Federation is the Borg in this show. The only reason I even gave it a 4 was because the CG was so good. Hell, they should have just let Alec Peters do Axanar and it would have been better.… Expand
  53. D00mM4r1n3
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I gave up when the cast took a knee. There is no excuse for a show set in the future to be dealing with current-day hysteria. Remember when Star Trek was about discussion and discovery? Now it's about pew-pew and SJW.
  54. scifinerd215
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I was so disappointed. This should have been a spin-off set in the Star Trek universe instead of Star Trek series. Putting all of the canon issues aside, this on it's own was mediocre at best. The main character, i hate to say, was a terrible actress. One scene they say no one has seen the Klingon's in over 100 years, and in the next scene the main character was angry that Klingons killedI was so disappointed. This should have been a spin-off set in the Star Trek universe instead of Star Trek series. Putting all of the canon issues aside, this on it's own was mediocre at best. The main character, i hate to say, was a terrible actress. One scene they say no one has seen the Klingon's in over 100 years, and in the next scene the main character was angry that Klingons killed here parents. Also they need to tone down the lens flare. Why did they get rid of the intro? "Space the final frontier". Also the episode that aired on CBS was only like 25 minutes long and everything else was commercials, and to watch the rest of the episode you had to go online... This is a big pass for me...… Expand
  55. drmagnumwolf
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    This is not Star Trek, if you want Star Trek, watch The Orville. There are numerous continuity errors, prime directive violations, technological misplacement, and it focus on one character instead of the entire crew.
  56. elyh
    Sep 27, 2017
    8
    I loved the first two episodes! I really don't get why the series is getting so much hate the production values are off the charts. People need to relax and enjoy stuff.
  57. Blackness123
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Terrible characters, bad acting, boring story, obvious political implications and enforced diversity. But hey, shiny CGI can fix all that, can't it?
    Truly an affront to Star Trek.
  58. edejong
    Sep 27, 2017
    7
    I'm rather surprised by all the negative reviews. It's easy to see TOS and TNG through a lens of humanist perfection and compared with the few top episodes of these series, Discovery falls bleak. However, these two episodes are promising. Interesting characters and good actors, an antagonist that needs to develop. Diplomatic feuds. Possibilities of storylines. Please, give this series aI'm rather surprised by all the negative reviews. It's easy to see TOS and TNG through a lens of humanist perfection and compared with the few top episodes of these series, Discovery falls bleak. However, these two episodes are promising. Interesting characters and good actors, an antagonist that needs to develop. Diplomatic feuds. Possibilities of storylines. Please, give this series a chance. It's definitely better than the last couple of movies. 7/10… Expand
  59. Akilax
    Sep 27, 2017
    5
    "Hopeful" is what I would call my attitude towards this new series after having seen the first two episodes.

    Granted it has quite a few flaws, but I hope that many of them may just be caused by todays need to hook viewers immediately. If that is the case and they manage to get to the roots of what made the old Star Trek series great, I think we may be in for a treat. Visually the    "Hopeful" is what I would call my attitude towards this new series after having seen the first two episodes.

    Granted it has quite a few flaws, but I hope that many of them may just be caused by todays need to hook viewers immediately. If that is the case and they manage to get to the roots of what made the old Star Trek series great, I think we may be in for a treat.

    Visually the show is amazing so far. It is absolutely AAA quality and does not have to hide from any cinema releases. Unfortunately, that does not help to ignore its flaws, like the flat dialogs when a character has to explain some background information.

    In general I would say that the show often seems to try and introduce complete newcomers to Star Trek, with as much lore as possible. That's not a bad thing in itself. It does become bad though when you have characters talk about themselves or their species in a way that seems detached, void of personal relation and more like a narrative explanation. And there are many times where the behaviour of characters seems to be decided more by the need to push forward with the story than by the need for consistency of a personas actions.

    - People with apparently deeply rooted convictions are convinced by someone to do something that would normally not even cross their minds, after just a short talk.
    - Reasonable people and people who normally excel at thinking logically fail to see how a situation proves a hypothesis in an obvious way and continue to act as though the hypothesis was wrong.
    - Flashbacks try to show us why someone acts the way they act, but in such a brief and abstract manner, that it does not help understand as much as it just stipulates it.

    The huge advantage of TV shows as opposed to movies in my opinion is, that they have much more time to narrate. They can let the viewer experience the development of a character and therefore allow them to better understand them. So far, "Star Trek: Discovery" seems to rush through this potential. The creators appear desperate to serve everyone their cup of tea and seem to end up giving nobody what they really want.

    As I assume, that all these shortcomings are just owed to the financial pressure of the producers and their need to appeal to a huge audience as fast as possible, I am hopeful. Hopeful, that once the audience is hooked after a few shows the creators will take their time and let us live through the experiences together with the characters in this show.

    The basis for an awesome show has been set by the team behind it. The style of telling their stories still needs some refinement. I will follow the show and hope to see the necessary changes for it to become what I think it could and should be. If it stays the way it is now though, I can't recommend it.    … Expand
  60. Brigitte63
    Sep 27, 2017
    10
    LOVED the new series and I've been a fan since TOS! Expected the usual whining from fans who are stuck in the past and can't open their minds! I'm lucky to be able to watch in Canada on SPACE channel. My only criticism is that it is offered only on the CBS ALL Access service which makes it inaccessible to many potential fans and also I found having to read the Klingon subtitles veryLOVED the new series and I've been a fan since TOS! Expected the usual whining from fans who are stuck in the past and can't open their minds! I'm lucky to be able to watch in Canada on SPACE channel. My only criticism is that it is offered only on the CBS ALL Access service which makes it inaccessible to many potential fans and also I found having to read the Klingon subtitles very tedious and I hope they have them speaking in English soon. It always takes a new show a while for character development and I expect this will get better as time goes on. I do love the dark cinematic feel of it. Not everything has to be the light fluffy TNG!… Expand
  61. silbernitrat
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Big Fan of TNG here. What happened to being rational, humanist and cooperative?
    This show feels like some guys wrote the screenplays, who were only loving the action parts of star trek.
    All the philosphy of exploring and becoming better in the process has totally failed in that series. JJ Abrams is overrated and should just quit destroying good Sci-Fi Universes. Im not nostalgic, but    Big Fan of TNG here. What happened to being rational, humanist and cooperative?
    This show feels like some guys wrote the screenplays, who were only loving the action parts of star trek.
    All the philosphy of exploring and becoming better in the process has totally failed in that series.
    JJ Abrams is overrated and should just quit destroying good Sci-Fi Universes. Im not nostalgic, but this adds nothing interesting or new to the series, its just the boring american way of modern movie making.... (im no native speaker, sorry for my english)    … Expand
  62. CoreGamer1408
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I tell myself this a messed up mirrored universe time line so I can just get through this, oh deary me. This is not Star Trek this is a bastardization of Star Trek. Which will probably alienate more old fans than create new ones.
  63. wobbles
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    I was prepared to accept the more advanced looking set, It is 2017 and not the 60s. I was even prepared for the annoying lens flare that seems to be popular now but was it too much to ask for even high school play level acting? There's no Star Trek here, Just a ship ran by a committee of incompetent people. I felt this ship couldn't go from Earth to Vulcan without blowing itself up.
    A    I was prepared to accept the more advanced looking set, It is 2017 and not the 60s. I was even prepared for the annoying lens flare that seems to be popular now but was it too much to ask for even high school play level acting? There's no Star Trek here, Just a ship ran by a committee of incompetent people. I felt this ship couldn't go from Earth to Vulcan without blowing itself up.
    A coherent plot would have been nice to slip in also.    … Expand
  64. kpociecha
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    It was painful to watch, terrible dialog, illogical actions, over-saturated colors it looked like B class movie and Klingons are more like Romulans. I am done with this series after 2 episodes.
  65. Valkyan
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Retarded Lord of the rings plot
    Action from Star Wars directed by Michael Bay
    Only similarity with Star Trek are exploding bridge consoles ...

    Do not waste your time with this as I did with 2 episodes
  66. mcq767
    Sep 27, 2017
    4
    I've only seen the first episode, but it was not encouraging, and the ending was totally awful. Like other reviewers have stated, this is much more JJ's Trek than Roddenberry's. The Klingons are purple, the lens flares are everywhere, and its much more focused on action than diplomacy. The main character is insufferable and I **** you not, (very inconsequential spoiler) Vulcan nerveI've only seen the first episode, but it was not encouraging, and the ending was totally awful. Like other reviewers have stated, this is much more JJ's Trek than Roddenberry's. The Klingons are purple, the lens flares are everywhere, and its much more focused on action than diplomacy. The main character is insufferable and I **** you not, (very inconsequential spoiler) Vulcan nerve pinches the captain in the first episode because she wasn't getting her way. I'll give it a shot and watch the next few, but based on the first episode, this feels like bad fan-fiction with $50 million thrown at it, and once its distribution service, cbs all access ultimately fails and its budget is slashed, I'm not confident its script and acting will be able to carry it.… Expand
  67. anandb
    Sep 27, 2017
    5
    This is based solely on the first 2 episodes.

    Design was interesting, I'm not bothered by the fact that the tech looks more advanced than TOS. I think the klingons were a misstep though. That design was so silly and derivative of every ancient mystical race sci-fi design trope. The acting was a bit stiff but initial episode awkwardness is a time honored trek tradition. Action packed    This is based solely on the first 2 episodes.

    Design was interesting, I'm not bothered by the fact that the tech looks more advanced than TOS. I think the klingons were a misstep though. That design was so silly and derivative of every ancient mystical race sci-fi design trope.

    The acting was a bit stiff but initial episode awkwardness is a time honored trek tradition. Action packed episode so we don't really get to know any of the characters. But the action was a bit incoherent.

    Overall I don't get the need to brand it as Trek. In this age of The Expanse and Westworld does Sci Fi really need the franchise assist? I would say this is mediocre to slightly better than mediocre as a piece of space sci fi. As Trek, it is poor. I realize that hating on new Trek is also a time honored tradition going back to TNG but somehow I suspect this show will not win me over down the line.    … Expand
  68. YuryVidal
    Sep 27, 2017
    9
    Gostei muito da serie possui a protagonista possui o espirito dos verdadeiros capitães anteriores, muito bem feita com episódios dignos de um filme.
  69. RosstheBoss0
    Sep 27, 2017
    8
    (Episode 1 & 2)

    Star Trek Discovery sets a much more dramatic viewing than any series before, while not having much in common with earlier series' of which I'm fond, I still found things to like. So far, this season appears to be a more gritty and conflict filled series than previous series' which I can get behind, though I admit I do miss the old style. One thing I've noticed to be    (Episode 1 & 2)

    Star Trek Discovery sets a much more dramatic viewing than any series before, while not having much in common with earlier series' of which I'm fond, I still found things to like.
    So far, this season appears to be a more gritty and conflict filled series than previous series' which I can get behind, though I admit I do miss the old style.

    One thing I've noticed to be cautious about within the critic reviews and in contrast, the
    user reviews are the reasons for their respective high and low scores. Critics are giving the series high praise for its depiction of women in authority positions and women of colour, while this is not a bad thing by any means I feel the praising of such things to be counter-active. The point of Star Trek and in general, is things like Race/Orientation should not matter, highlighting things like race only provides reason to question why they are praising it, rather than just taking it as is. In contrast many reviews from users are more like protest scores, this series is unusual for Star Trek, far higher budget and is more story driven, be careful when considering the score of this series as so far, it is promising.

    Overall however the first two episodes have been very interesting and look forward to know what comes next with cautious-optimism.    … Expand
  70. Sugarhorse
    Sep 27, 2017
    10
    Really surprised at how good this show is, having followed the news of its troubled development and seeing the new "Klingons" made me expect very little of this show, but iv'e never been so happy to be wrong. Awesome effects and great characters, as well as an interesting story so far, can't wait to see how it shapes up. All the 1/0 star reviews seems to be trek fans of old complainingReally surprised at how good this show is, having followed the news of its troubled development and seeing the new "Klingons" made me expect very little of this show, but iv'e never been so happy to be wrong. Awesome effects and great characters, as well as an interesting story so far, can't wait to see how it shapes up. All the 1/0 star reviews seems to be trek fans of old complaining about how its all action and doesn't "feel like star trek" and other vague complaints without any specific criticism, the show is great and you should defiantly have a watch if your a trek fan or not.… Expand
  71. MarcStone2061
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Oh, good. BLM and ANTIFA are making Star Trek episodes now. Like all 3rd generation feminists they do not understand the concept of "a bridge too far". I will be shocked!, shocked! I tell you if this gets a green light for season 2.
  72. 1344
    Sep 27, 2017
    0
    Yet more PC garbage. Noble black characters and stupid white! It's becoming a cliché and boring; what happened to storytelling without agenda? Don't bother!
  73. kaindestroi
    Sep 27, 2017
    2
    There is no logic in this show and to much emphasis on the fiction with no science behind it,
    This show could just as well be about elf's and goblins, not at all how sci-fi should be like.
    and they botched the Klingons!
  74. TwiTu
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    I love TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise and the movies until 2009. I was so hopeful for this series, because I thought for a long time that we need a real Star Trek series again, to give us hope for the future, like TOS and TNG did, show us unity of mankind.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Addendum: I just read an article where the creators of this show literally said that it aims to be propaganda against "white supremacists" and Trump voters (Klingons). Its literally a propaganda show which aim it is to divide the society even further or at least support the division it already has.
    Gene and Majel would rotate in their graves so fast that they would fly to the gamma quadrant.
    I can only repeat myself: I am disgusted beyond belief... I really cant believe this is happening.    … Expand
  75. fabittar
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    It's late; I should be asleep, but what I just watched is SO BAD I could not go to bed without issuing a warning: this show is so terrible that I am seriously concerned it might've given me cancer. I only watched 2 episodes tho, so maybe I'll be alright.

    This is not Star Trek at all. This is made for the masses of mediocre, stupid people. Maybe I'll come back tomorrow to elaborate, but    It's late; I should be asleep, but what I just watched is SO BAD I could not go to bed without issuing a warning: this show is so terrible that I am seriously concerned it might've given me cancer. I only watched 2 episodes tho, so maybe I'll be alright.

    This is not Star Trek at all. This is made for the masses of mediocre, stupid people. Maybe I'll come back tomorrow to elaborate, but for now - and just in case I'm too lazy and/or forget about this - heed my warning: STAY AWAY FROM THIS.

    Whoever is responsible for this should be ashamed. Better yet, they should remove this show from TV / streaming, ask people who recorded this horrible travesty to delete it, have all physical copies destroyed, and then apologize.    … Expand
  76. Trunkis
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    The star trek for the PC millenial crowd.
    Loud, flashy, no soul on it.

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

    Avoid at all costs.
  77. Darkrayne
    Sep 26, 2017
    10
    This show is clearly getting review bombed on two fronts. First, by the people upset about the viewing method in the US. Second, by hardcore Star Trek fans who refuse to accept change. I wouldn't be surprised if Star Trek fan groups have posted to their forums requesting that all members help with review bombing. They are even hanging around here to up vote all the negative reviews andThis show is clearly getting review bombed on two fronts. First, by the people upset about the viewing method in the US. Second, by hardcore Star Trek fans who refuse to accept change. I wouldn't be surprised if Star Trek fan groups have posted to their forums requesting that all members help with review bombing. They are even hanging around here to up vote all the negative reviews and down vote the positive ones.

    Here's the deal: Star Trek, all the older series, are OLD. We love them, but they are old. Not just chronologically old, but also old fashioned. New things need to be NEW.

    Star Trek Discovery is an excellent example of how to modernise an old franchise. It gets rid of the occasional cheesyness and frequent geekyness the series is known for and replaces it with narrative, extremely high production values and more action. So far, every episode will make you believe you're watching a high budget movie. It follows a single character closely, instead of focusing on the entire officer crew.

    If Battlestar and Star Trek had a baby and that baby was raised by Mass Effect, this is what you would get. I'm personally enjoying it a lot more than the rebooted movies, which are still pretty good in thier own way.

    The Klingons look different, fans don't like that because they aren't used to the look and find it distracting, I understand that. However, the new design is far superior, aesthetically. They look more warrior-like and more imposing. If this had been the only version of what a Klingon looked like from the start of Star Trek, the fans would love it. The complaints have nothing to do with the way they look, it's purely because they look different.

    Fans also don't like that the technology looks way more advanced than the Original Series, even though Discovery is set before it. It's not the 60's anymore, we don't make things look old and rubbish just to follow suit. If they could have made ST:TOS look better, they would have. This problem stems from the archaic limitations of the time period the original was made, not in the design of the new series.

    Normal viewers: Dive in and enjoy some high quality Star Trek. There's a lot to like here, especially for newcomers.

    Hardcore Star Trek Fans: Keep going the way you're going and you're going to completely destroy this franchise. I get it, you don't want change.. but lets admit that this is better than nothing, even for you. If this series isn't a success it's not likely anyone will ever make a Star Trek series again.    … Expand
  78. RealPeople
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Im not a full blown trekkie. I like TNG best. I wanted to love this Discovery. I was excited about the cast. I have enjoyed all the Trek entertainment of the past in some way. The new movies are my least favorite, until now. This new show is just not good. Heartless, soulless, incompetent. That said, I do hope the show improves, that they right the ship. When I re-watch the first season ofIm not a full blown trekkie. I like TNG best. I wanted to love this Discovery. I was excited about the cast. I have enjoyed all the Trek entertainment of the past in some way. The new movies are my least favorite, until now. This new show is just not good. Heartless, soulless, incompetent. That said, I do hope the show improves, that they right the ship. When I re-watch the first season of TNG I find some cringe worthy interactions with the crew, they really grow together as the seasons roll on. I hope Discovery gets 5+ years to attempt to leave us something worthy of belonging in the Trek Universe. Guest directors, new writers, and brave paths taken in Discovery, to make all the bad reviewers, including myself, eat our words. Until I hear good things i will not be signing up for CBS streaming.… Expand
  79. Vorter
    Sep 26, 2017
    1
    This suffers from the same problems as a the Kurtzman/JJAbram "Star Trek" movies. The motivation of the actions for the characters is so out of whack that you can't relate to them or understand why they do what they do. The dialog is awful, the acting subpar and the Klingons have been retconned into looking like and acting like Romulans (which is not surprising since whoever controls TrekThis suffers from the same problems as a the Kurtzman/JJAbram "Star Trek" movies. The motivation of the actions for the characters is so out of whack that you can't relate to them or understand why they do what they do. The dialog is awful, the acting subpar and the Klingons have been retconned into looking like and acting like Romulans (which is not surprising since whoever controls Trek IP for the last two decades has a stiffy for Romulans). This whole production is a mess. I don't expect Season 2. 30 minutes of episode 1 was all I needed to know of this train wreck. There's good Sci-FI out there, it's just not on CBS or their paywalled streaming service.… Expand
  80. sanitariusz
    Sep 26, 2017
    9
    Really good start. As a ST fan from more then 30 years I can say that new show is unexpectedly good. Anyway I'm not able understand all these bad comments because new trek is different then treks before. New Klingons are excellent!
  81. Galgotit
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Absolute trash, money grabbing trash. I saw some where that the abbreviation for this is STD and it all made sense. This show is a money grabbing prostitute infected with a range of STD's. Hopefully this terrible show will come to an end soon and discourage similar cash grabs.
  82. Larkfeast
    Sep 26, 2017
    1
    WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****

    Just watch without sound, and skip all the duologue scenes

    Baboons were harmed during the script-writing phase of the production: Repetitive Strain Injury from bashing on typewriters
  83. laeknir45
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Terrible writing, and many errors in lore/history, but amazing CGI. It's not even remotely worth paying $5.99/mo where you still get commercials. Breaking prime directive in 1st scene, then insubordination on that level from the 1st officer, and not to mention leaving the bridge during an emergency to make an intergalactic phone call... bloody terrible. No explanation for why thisTerrible writing, and many errors in lore/history, but amazing CGI. It's not even remotely worth paying $5.99/mo where you still get commercials. Breaking prime directive in 1st scene, then insubordination on that level from the 1st officer, and not to mention leaving the bridge during an emergency to make an intergalactic phone call... bloody terrible. No explanation for why this Starfleet allows female captains, but won't in 10 years (see TOS Turnabout Intruder), or for retaining the look of ENT which was ~90 years previous to this incarnation. And then intergalactic telepathy from Sarek? Geez. I also really, really dislike the heavy focus on the Mary Sue 1st officer. And WHY would you beam over to a hostile ship full of Klingons with only two petite female officers when you have security personnel on your ship? God-awful writing. "STD" is apt.… Expand
  84. rixmadpor
    Sep 26, 2017
    10
    I've been a trekkie for almost 30 years. My first contact, with the Star Trek universe, was the Motion Picture, Wrath of Khan and then the series ST: The Next Generation. Back then I was impressed how one universe could encompass such a wide variety of subjects. From doing a 2001 Space Odyssey type of movie to an action movie like Wrath Of Khan. And then there was a TV series like TNG,I've been a trekkie for almost 30 years. My first contact, with the Star Trek universe, was the Motion Picture, Wrath of Khan and then the series ST: The Next Generation. Back then I was impressed how one universe could encompass such a wide variety of subjects. From doing a 2001 Space Odyssey type of movie to an action movie like Wrath Of Khan. And then there was a TV series like TNG, which I didn't expect that could be that good. Even the special effects were, for me, even better than the movies back then. And now... They've done it again. They re-invented Star Trek. They took a big risk but it was worth it. It's a whole new level. Not even the rebooted movies were this good. Cast, effects, story. Everything. They've done a great job hiding the story until the premiere. I never saw this coming. It's the best Star Trek TV pilot ever. This could be a movie. Congrats to everyone involved on the show. Thank you so very much. Live long and prosper!… Expand
  85. Cometer
    Sep 26, 2017
    10
    I'm an old time fan of Star Trek. When people think of Star Trek they think about exploration. Going into space and finding new life forms, new challenges. And you know what? Star Trek Discovery is no different from past Star Trek series. Those giving this show a low score only after the first two episodes have short memories and are grabbing to a 10 year old nostalgic view of the oldI'm an old time fan of Star Trek. When people think of Star Trek they think about exploration. Going into space and finding new life forms, new challenges. And you know what? Star Trek Discovery is no different from past Star Trek series. Those giving this show a low score only after the first two episodes have short memories and are grabbing to a 10 year old nostalgic view of the old series. But all those old series had a common trait. They all add antagonists.
    Go ahead and watch some of the first episodes of the older series. Khan, the Q, the Borg queen, Klingons and so on. The very first episode of the TNG introduced the Q.
    I'm giving Discovery a 10 because it is the best start of a Star Trek series. The main characters are strong. Discovery gives the best introduction to Klingons. Their tribal nature. The new look reflects it. And the use of Klingon language makes it more credible when compared to previous series where Klingons for some reason always spoke perfect English.
    If you want to stick to the past keep this in mind. The original series was created in the 60's. The computer consoles had buttons instead of touch displays because that's the best they could do
    at the time. We now have iPads and **** and what we expect from the future is not a star ship with buttons. If Star Trek does not evolve visually it will die along side a generation. I dont't want that. I want Star Trek to continue to inspire future generations.
    No Star Trek Discovery is not like TOS. But it is Star Trek. Fans praised the fan created Axanar. That focused on the battle of Axanar. Star Trek Discovery is truly leaps ahead what was possible in older shows. I'm looking forward to see what will happen.    … Expand
  86. flowbeus
    Sep 26, 2017
    5
    I have to give this a low score. It's just not the Star Trek I want it to be. I don't want to watch space explosions and amazing CGI and nothing else interesting for a whole season.

    It's not all bad, but I'm not sure why I'm watching it, what's this show going to be about? There's nothing to care about and no one to identify with. I want Star Trek to make me think and show us an    I have to give this a low score. It's just not the Star Trek I want it to be. I don't want to watch space explosions and amazing CGI and nothing else interesting for a whole season.

    It's not all bad, but I'm not sure why I'm watching it, what's this show going to be about? There's nothing to care about and no one to identify with. I want Star Trek to make me think and show us an optimisitc vision of humanity. I don't want generic space conflict. I just didn't see anything interesting or thought provoking here.

    Nevertheless, I want to see more, I'm willing to give a show some time to gain it's footing. But CBS please don't put this behind a pay wall. Just make the paywall early access. If it is really Star Trek, and has a real message for humanity, Gene Roddenberry would want it to be over the airwaves.    … Expand
  87. ginberryblue
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    Welcome to Grimdark Trek. Here you'll find unrelenting strife and callous war criminal behavior -- and those are the good guys. Ponderous, leaden, shadowy and ugly are the words that spring to my mind. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but it is the antithesis of everything that made Trek epic. Oh, and it's the first Trek ever that kids can't watch. So sad they took aWelcome to Grimdark Trek. Here you'll find unrelenting strife and callous war criminal behavior -- and those are the good guys. Ponderous, leaden, shadowy and ugly are the words that spring to my mind. This may have the official Star Trek label on it, but it is the antithesis of everything that made Trek epic. Oh, and it's the first Trek ever that kids can't watch. So sad they took a promising lead actress and handed her this dreck.… Expand
  88. Erunthalon
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This Show has nothing in common with Star Trek.

    Die Serie heißt zwar so, aber es hat nichts mit Star Trek am Hut.
    Das einzig positive sind die Special Effects, aber das war es auch schon.    … Expand
  89. EdmundF
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    A disappointing Mary Sue Star Wars reboot. It doesnt feel like Star Trek, more of a Phantom Menace Star Wars movie than a thoughtful and intelligent look into the possibility of a futuristic exploration of space.
  90. Nevermind
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    This would have made a better star wars series imo. The only thing about discovery here is how to increase the traditionally smaller sci-fi viewer base. I supposed they might have done just that...

    But there are a lot of good sci-fis out and I'll be damned if I continue to watch this rubbish just because it's supposed to be star trek.
  91. Kahlessthedude
    Sep 26, 2017
    1
    This is not Star Trek. I would be interested in seeing where the show goes if it was not a subscription money grab and it was not Star Trek prequel. In addition, I loved the science officer because it is a unique take on an alien species and the Captain was great. The first officer, Michael, is annoying overbearing and arrogant. Yes, she has a sense of wonder, but that is where her role asThis is not Star Trek. I would be interested in seeing where the show goes if it was not a subscription money grab and it was not Star Trek prequel. In addition, I loved the science officer because it is a unique take on an alien species and the Captain was great. The first officer, Michael, is annoying overbearing and arrogant. Yes, she has a sense of wonder, but that is where her role as a Starfleet officer ends. She is the main character and therefore destroys any desire to see more.

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

    Watch Orville, it is better and closer to Star Trek than this garbage.    … Expand
  92. Boreas
    Sep 26, 2017
    5
    The problems with the show will be written about at length by others, all I'll say is that the show doesn't fit in the same universe as the earlier Star Trek shows and is best viewed as a separate continuity.

    One thing I did think was interesting was the way T'Kuvma articulated the Klingon view of the Federation, it says it comes in peace but in reality it's an existential threat to the    The problems with the show will be written about at length by others, all I'll say is that the show doesn't fit in the same universe as the earlier Star Trek shows and is best viewed as a separate continuity.

    One thing I did think was interesting was the way T'Kuvma articulated the Klingon view of the Federation, it says it comes in peace but in reality it's an existential threat to the Klingon way of life. I'm not sure how much the writers intended it to be the case but this actually echos very clearly Islamist views of the West and Liberal Democracy.

    The other parallel is with the theme of reuniting the Klingon Empire, more than one Muslim (usually Arab) leader has talked about the need to reunite some form of caliphate as a way to combat Western values and political power.

    It'll be interesting to see how they manage to show both sides of the conflict and to what degree the audience may find itself in sympathy with the Klingons, I think there is some real potential there.    … Expand
  93. Fred12
    Sep 26, 2017
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. For my part, I'm a big fan since the TOS series, and I think this is the best franchise since ST Voyager. The visual effects are on cinema movie level, and they present the ST Universe with refreshing characters in their own (new) way.
    I simply cannot understand some critics from users that pointed out here that TOS played in a universe with CRT monitors and it was after this series... Would you prefer old fashioned CRT monitors, and staff behind the screen who are pulling the doors and technicals / visuals from 30 years ago? that would be ridiculous. Updated technology is the key here as well as the overall fitting of the Star Trek Philosophy into the action. The klingons play their cultural aggressive stereotype that you love and the action is cinema movie level. Series start was really furious and I hope they can maintain that level.    … Expand
  94. GarvielLoken
    Sep 26, 2017
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This isn't Star Trek.
    -canon got pooped on
    -Klingons are now Locust from Gears of War.
    -Klingons, sorry, Locust, shouldnt even have stealth tech yet, they bought it from the Romulans after TOS.
    -No more coloured uniforms (no more yellow, red, blue). Now everyone has the same uniform.
    -Main protagonist is a female black lesbian first officer that commits treason and war crime over emotional reasons, despite being half Vulkan, and attacks her own captain, a friend known for 7 years. Is that how Starfleet acts? muh emotions and treason?
    -every single person on the bridge is questioning everything. thats not how a ship works.
    -the captain teleports a bomb to a body of a Klingon officer that was being taken for burial, and blows it up. Is this ISIS, or Starfleet?
    -The asian captain couldnt speak english. It physicaly hurt to listen to her talk.
    -So much lens flare, it will make your eyes bleed.
    -the whole show is being recorded at 45 degree camera angle. Dont ask me why, i have no idea.
    -the captain made foorprints on the desert so the ship can find them. So i guess finding footprints in a huge-ass sandstorm is easier than looking for life signs.
    -why did the USS Europa blow up? why was is cut in half? laws of physics and logic dictates, it shouldnt happen. the ship should be pushed back, not cut, not to mention they could just.... reverse.

    All of it just doesnt make sense.    … Expand
  95. Korkenzieher
    Sep 26, 2017
    10
    WOW - like it. Special effects, music and casting are great! Old Star Trek had more depth but the new show is a good compromise between the old series and the style of the new time line. AND the visuals in this TV series are one of the best you will currently see! If you watch Discovery shortly after STNG you my think THIS IS NEXT GENERATION TELEVISION.
  96. Masterhummel
    Sep 26, 2017
    6
    I think there are a lot of people who will enjoy it and i'm happy for them. But the series hasn't grown on me yet. It has the same issues for me the new star trek movies have - everything feels overdesigned and everyone acts like being a freshman on a camping trip with characters all over the place instead of what i would associate with star fleet. Also i'm not very keen on the expositionI think there are a lot of people who will enjoy it and i'm happy for them. But the series hasn't grown on me yet. It has the same issues for me the new star trek movies have - everything feels overdesigned and everyone acts like being a freshman on a camping trip with characters all over the place instead of what i would associate with star fleet. Also i'm not very keen on the exposition dumps being so inorganic.
    But then, the new Star Trek movies where incredibly popular so it's probably just me. I've read a few times that people would've liked it as a new IP - i'm pretty much in that camp right now.    … Expand
  97. M_Alex
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    Many Star Trek fans will be disappointed, because, this series has none of the feel that Star Trek had. It even doesn't have those elements that made it into the recent movies. The Prime Directive obviously no longer exists, or nobody pays attention to it, as the first episode shows. Whereas other Star Trek crews though before they acted, here we have the opposite. The feeling of good-willMany Star Trek fans will be disappointed, because, this series has none of the feel that Star Trek had. It even doesn't have those elements that made it into the recent movies. The Prime Directive obviously no longer exists, or nobody pays attention to it, as the first episode shows. Whereas other Star Trek crews though before they acted, here we have the opposite. The feeling of good-will and careful discovery seems to be replaced by a reckless gung-ho attitude, as the scene with the unknown object establishes: "we found something! It's hidden! But it has to want us to come closer!" It just does not feel like Star Trek.

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

    Oh, and the amount of lens flare is comical, the dialogue is cringe worthy and the Klingons really didn't need such a solid redesign. I don't feel like watching more than the first episode.    … Expand
  98. tonyzampella
    Sep 25, 2017
    2
    My initial thoughts/review. I am a Trek fan from TOS and have warmed up even to the reboots (sans Into Darkness) and really wanted to like this effort, having anticipated it for two years.

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

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

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

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

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

    What's odd is how easy it would be to make a new Trek series work. And yet they went for such obvious overreach to "serialize" a drama. At best it's a strange way to premiere this prequel. I think I'll wait for reruns on this one. I am curious about the new ship U.S.S. Discovery. It took TNG a season to get its footing. I hope this show can evolve into a Star Trek series as well; but thus far, it's not close.    … Expand
  99. Jesp1
    Sep 25, 2017
    4
    Meh... Just a bland show, yet a HORRIBLE STAR TREK! Definitely not worth a subscription to CBS as of yet. Though there is some hope they could do better.... Maybe?
  100. lilkillpappy
    Sep 25, 2017
    0
    They want me to subscribe to yet another service to watch this. Not going to happen Worst marketing idea in history. This show is going to bomb because of these greedy practices, and just so you all know, even after the additional cost there ares still commercials on CBS all access. This is so disgusting I want to vomit.
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 »