MovieChat Forums > Star Trek: Discovery (2017) Discussion > The Problems with "Discovery"

The Problems with "Discovery"


Time to start the list! Yes, there are LOTS of things wrong with this mess. Let's start...

1.) Why send Burnham out into a highly radioactive zone to do an investigation? Don't you people have drones in the 23rd Century?

2.) The turgid Opening Titles. The standard morose non-music score. The parade of names like Nicholas Meyer and Eugene Roddenberry that you know had next to nothing to do with this thing.

3.) The lack of ability in keeping a camera level, and to not point it at lights. It's almost scary that such an accomplished cinematographer like Guillermo Navarro shot the first episode. He must really have wanted to do Trek very badly. Otherwise, why would he want to do all that J.J. Abrams garbage? Put. The camera. Level. Now! :-) Plus, the vertigo-inducing camera whirling around was too much to take.

4.) The super-heavy Klingon make-up makes it so the actors inside can't emote much at all. Plus, they're talking in Klingon makes it tough for the audience to connect with their emotions.

5.) I guess that the people running this show want to refute, as much as possible, Roddenberry's vision on having little crew conflict. That's why the crew on this series are at each other's throats on numerous occasions.

6.) So, Burnham assaults a superior officer and commits treason in the first episode? Are we supposed to "respect" her now? And, if so, how does that work, exactly?

7.) I'm guessing that this is just going to be another TV-MA "Game of Thrones"/"Walking Dead" thing with lots of violence, people yelling at each other, and generally depressing goings-on. I guess if that's where you want to go with this, they will get those viewers wanting that.

Add your own to the list. You know you want to! :-)

reply

Sarek mind melds with Michael across 1k light years. Michael feels bad Sarek risked his physical well being to do this. He goes on to say how he knew what he was risking, wouldn't do it unless it was necessary, and proceeds to give Michel what amounts to a confidence boost.

reply

Having watched two episodes now, your comments about the opening theme music are very good. It really has no theme, doesn't it? It's kind of a mix of low, building and high stabs and nothing really stands out as its own theme. At least we get a little bit of the original theme at the end.

reply

Agree with all negative points listed in the various posts here except the ones about subtitles on the klingons which I didn't mind at all. In comparison to the horrible acting, costumes and way of speaking the klingons had in those scenes, the subtitles was like an annoying little fly compared to a bear taking a dump on my couch while eating my brain.

reply

Yeah, I guess I was thinking, if they were just speaking in English, we wouldn't be getting that syrupy-slow, muddled "acting." Maybe the actors would speak at a normal pace if they were speaking English. I will watch a movie, etc. with subtitles. But, I think you have to hold the audience's interest if you're going to do that. I felt that I could go do my dishes, come back, and that Klingon scene would still be going!

reply

I agree with everything the OP and the others wrote.

Here's my thoughts on the subject:

There is too much war and action, at least in the first two episodes, maybe it will change. On other Star Trek shows I mostly prefered the exploration part and the mysteries solving.

The set design and special effects are great and I really like it, but I just can't get the feeling that it is set 10 years before TOS, it looks too sleek and futuristic that to me it looks like it is set at least 30 years after TNG. Which I think they should have done, it would be much more realistic.

I mean here it seems that they had much more advnced technology than in TOS and TNG, what is going on with those 3D holograms when they are communicating with other ships,
how come they had them and then 10 and 80 years later they were just using the screen?! It is stupid. Ok they might explain it as a technology which was discontinued, like minidisc or betamax. Also those holograms made me think of Star Wars. Only thing that was missing was Jar Jar Binks.

At least in Star Trek Enterprise they made it believable that it was set like 100 yrs before TOS. And I could buy it as a prequel, unlike this.

And the Klingons...think I would like them if they were some new race or if it was set like 500 years in the future and it was explained that they evolved or mutated or something. I really like the set design and think it is even better than in the TNG, and even the new Klingons do look better in a way but still I don't like it that they changed them so drastically. They could have at least leave them with the hair, to have a more Klingon look. I just can't get used to it that those are the Klingons, or at least the Klingons in the same universe. It feels again like some alternate universe.

Also, someone mentioned already, but was my thoughts exactly upon watching - how did the Klingons kill her parents but the Federation haven't seen or heard from Klingons in 100 years?!

reply

The bridge is impossibly huge for the size of the ship exterior, not to mention all the wasted space in a cramped ship. Of course it makes it very easy to move cameras around.

The battle scene of episode 2 was intensely disappointing. Finally there was the chance to see a major fleet battle and just as it's getting started they cut to characters having long conversations during the battle. WTF?!

reply

Wow I got to see this to believe it now.

reply

Yea the crew seems to be constqantly being dicks to each other. Its hard to root for them.

reply

The Problems with "Discovery"
1) "fans"
end of list.

reply

[deleted]