Star Trek: Discovery (TV Series 2017– ) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
1,642 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
HOW MANY PREQUELS/TIMELINES DO WE NEED?
slhelling21 July 2018
I consider myself a simple minded person. We have now had 3 movies and 2 TV shows since the end of what I call the modern Star Trek era (after ST: Nemesis and after ST: Voyager).

Why do we have to keep going backwards? Why do we need yet another timeline, to help us go backwards?

Am I the only one who would like to see a USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-F)?

Stop looking to the past and go boldly forward to the future. No more revisiting and reinventing the past. The undiscovered country is out there and the Enterprise-F can take us there.

LLAP
72 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Half a century of cultural legacy flushed down the drain
ludzureklamas10 May 2018
If there's one single thing this show does well, it proves that just because you own the rights to something doesn't mean you have the capacity to make it - or even understand it for that matter.

Star Trek isn't just a name. Like every long running piece of fiction, it has its own set of defining characteristics. For some reason the creators of Discovery have chosen to disregard every single one of them. The question is - why?

Perhaps they wanted to move with the times and innovate. That in itself wouldn't be a problem. But this innovation feels entirely ego-driven. Why turn Klingons into Orks, especially in a prequel scenario? Only for innovation's sake. Narratively there's nothing new here at all. They've just made the next generic big budget space war fiction with a popular brand name on it. All right, perhaps they wanted to create an action packed space opera for the masses. But they could have done so in an original universe of their own, seeing how the defining characteristics of Star Trek don't really fit their purpose. Even a spin-off would have been better that this. So that leaves us with two logical explanations.

One - it's just naked profiteering. Star Trek is widely popular, therefore the big investment. Cynical, but likely true. And two - they just don't understand what Star Trek is about, nor do they care.

And that's not even the worst part. The worst part is that these people have nothing to say. There's no message here, only the same regurgitated social agenda that you can read anywhere on the internet at any given time. No matter where you stand on current issues, there's no interesting perspective here for anybody. Gone are the original ideas, outlandish plots, smart dialogue and philosophical conundrums that made Star Trek what it was. Now it's just self-righteous people shouting at each other and things exploding in space.

As if to compensate, the show is massively overproduced. There are copious amounts of lens flare, bloom, dutch angles, shaky-swirly cameras and unnecessary editing. It looks like the frame never stays in the same place for a even second. Watching an episode of Discovery feels like stepping into a tumble dryer. Things keep swirling all over the place even when there's no action on screen. I strongly suspect that if this wasn't called Star Trek, it would have no hope to succeed.

Normally I don't give 1 and 10 star ratings. Those should be reserved for the most unlikely sitations. I gave it a good thought, but couldn't find any single redeemable quality that this show has. Don't touch this with a ten foot pole.
241 out of 338 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blow 'em up, Scotty - Discovery doesn't feel like the future
alsigma12 November 2017
I waited for the first season's break to do justice to Discovery - though unfortunately on IMDb the early reviews always dominate. Alas, in this case it doesn't matter because it's one long episode and ended as it started, just less spectacular.

Other than many of the "one star" reviews, my beef with Discovery isn't that it's not true to Trek canon or Roddenbery ethics. It's not that it's sometimes annoying ("You're *the* Michael Burnham?"), features wooden acting, flat dialogues or stupid plot lines. That's because older Trek series weren't immune to these problems, and it didn't matter a lot.

The difference of this new era TV is the same as the reboot movies: I am unable to imagine this science fantasy as the actual future. For me, the "I could be there" feeling is missing, which always made the big difference. Thi doesn't require TNG techno babble or is hampered by TOS star ship models hanging on wires. Reality doesn't equal a dark and gritty setting, and a lot of expensive cgi doesn't necessarily help either.

On the upside, Discovery tries to have some character relations and development which made DS9 so appealing back in the days. But after nine episodes, it still just delivers entertainment based on Star Trek. I'd rather have something like the brilliant "The Orville" which disguises as entertainment, but has the actual Star Trek heart and vision to make it believable.
149 out of 208 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Everything Trek never was... and should never be
sykespj7 February 2018
Just when I thought this show couldn't possibly get any worse, it got worse. The acronym STD fits like a glove. Most of them are pretty painful too, and unfortunately, you can catch them from someone you love.

Previous Trek series have all been founded on optimism... an unshakeable belief that a common set of shared core beliefs can bring people of all races together in the pursuit of freedom, justice, harmony, unity and the betterment of all. Discovery is just plain dark and depressing, with Starfleet officers so fatally flawed it is a total mystery how the show could possibly be a link between the brimming optimism of Enterprise and TOS.

The concept of self-contained episodes (with the occasional two-parter) has been unmercifully abandoned. Instead we get a soap operatic mess whereby unlikely mega-dilemmas are solved by even more unlikely miraculous, out-of-place, totally dumb solutions.

As for personal relationships, Discovery doesn't need a ship's counselor, it needs a psychiatric wing. How could people this screwed up possibly save not only the Federation, but reality as we know it (...or do we? [...or do we really care?]). The kids in Degrassi Junior High showed more maturity than this mob.

Star Trek is supposed to be about small stories that say big things. This is why an ensemble cast full of real people has been so critical to the franchise's success. STD truly is a disease that threatens to destroy the very fabric of what makes Trek so great. This is one malaise that needs to be eradicated from the face of the planet as soon as possible.
215 out of 307 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not Star Trek, not well-written, not interesting, not worth it.
Randomizer260023 March 2018
I've read a bunch of reviews for STD, and noticed that most of the reviewers who love STD, insult and denigrate people who don't. As you read the reviews, some people layout out their criticisms very clearly. I'm just going to give general impressions.

I love Sci-Fi. I started with the original Star Trek in 1968, and have watched all the Star Treks, Stargates, Babylon 5 and most of the rest. Usually there is some overall theme or plot direction for the season. STD seems to wander all over the place. Every episode, it looks like they are taking the series some other direction. Not like a plot twist, but like the show runner keeps changing.

I like a series, Sci-Fi or not, with some likeable characters. STD doesn't seem to have any. The characters run from sadistic to simple-minded, but none of them seem like people you know. They have no depth or sides to their personality. And the dominant demeanor is unbridled emotionalism, but never joy or wonder, always dark. And forget wit or humor.

If you like Star Trek, try Orville. That is a little campy, but Star Trek plots with people acting like humans.
216 out of 309 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Terrible and insulting at the same time.
Captain_Blue2 May 2018
Damage control has now set in. They are of the misimpression that changing uniform colors and bastardizing the TOS Enterprise is what the fan base want. Are they stupid?

How can they not realize or understand that the entire concept of a retconn reboot stabs at the very heart of every Trek fan? We tried to tell them so early on and they dismissed it entirely. They think they know better than their target audience.

Every Trek show which has dealt with prequels and time travel has been fully focused on ensuring painstakingly level of accuracy. STD dumps all over that by declaring that their way is the right way.

STD is without a doubt the darkest page in the history of the franchise. I find it offensive to my intelligence. I don't like the characters, I don't like the writing, and I sure as hell hope that humanity doesn't end up like those morons.

There is literally nothing to inspire me here. It doesn't want to make me a better person, it doesn't give me any incentive to hang on for the future just around the corner, and the cheesy telegraphed speeches.

Star Trek is all about tackling hard issues without needing to point out the issues in the first place. STD has nothing of that. It's just an action series made for sci-fi fans, there is nothing whatsoever cerebral or otherwise intellectual here for Star Trek fans.
188 out of 270 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No inspiration, NOT Star Trek
pjgowtham13 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Star trek is about inter species politics, technological gap, boundaries, exploration and ethics. Star trek is more like a projected future which portrays the best version of humanity possible. There is no place for dark future here as the core of this series.

Discovery is based on the original timeline. This series is supposed to happen after star trek enterprise. The technologies were a bit advanced for the timeline.

The show failed to focus on earth's people, about the federation, dialogues that explain the psychology of the characters. Clearly, the directors of the series don't know star trek.

The vulcan logic, The klingon strength ,are all ignored comfortably in this show. The humans are shown as depressed warmongers

Klingons live by their honour. They aren't bald shiny orcs. These were unlike any klingons in the previous series. They are so different ( In a bad way).

This show is pure graphical entertainment, no story, not prequel - like at all. There was no life to the story. Fan made star trek is way better than discovery. The major problem must have been the too much budget. They threw it all in the CGI and gave nothing for the story.

This show is a disgrace for the whole star trek franchise. The directors should back off if they don't understand Star Trek. I hope season 2 is not this grim.
171 out of 249 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Where no one has gone before ... and should never have
MadManMUC7 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
You know, there are lots of stories of people becoming — or wanting to become — scientists of every description, astronauts, engineers and so on because of Star Trek, especially TOS and TNG. People who saw this future, loved it, got inspired, and wanted to do their bit to make it a reality.

Will Discovery have that same positive impact on people a few years from now? Will people look on Star Trek Discovery and think, 'Wow. This really is a future I want to help realise', and aspire to become something that helps humanity get there? Judging on what we've seen so far, the answer is a loud outright, 'NO.' And this is the biggest shame of all with this series. It has taken something that actually had a real-life inspiring legacy, and warped it into this dark, bleak, violent, gruesome (do we *really* need all of that gore in Star Trek,like in this last episode (8)?), immoral, insipid, un-inspiring, and — ultimately — revolting thing that is nothing like what it should actually be.

If they dare to call this awful thing 'Star Trek', they'd better be prepared to live up to its legacy.
238 out of 352 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The worst Star Trek franchise by a country light year.
neil-procter25 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Idiot TV comes in many guises. Ant & Dec's and James Cordon's shows are very different, but both are still juicy slices of idiot television. Star Trek Discovery is another in the long line of new wave shows that think they are clever but are so idiotic they can only be designed for people who just like to watch the fabulous images and the explosions. I watched season one to the end in hope of some redemption, but alas, there was none. First of all, it falls into the same trap that eventually killed off (the superior) Star Trek Enterprise, namely having one continuous theme. In Discovery it's the Klingon war. There are several episodes in a parallel universe where everyone's doppelgangers are evil (such a cliched idea it could be right out of the original Star Trek series). The characters are unlikable and dull and the things they do are illogical to say the least, and not just in the eyes of Mr. Spock. To put evil Georgiou in charge of the mission to end the war was just one of the many nonsense actions, sort of akin to capturing Hitler and putting him in charge of an allied invasion. Furthermore, despite not being set in a future beyond all previous Star Treks, they seem to have come up with some convoluted method of high speed space travel that had never arisen in previous franchises. Star Trek used to pride itself in using science that was plausible - this stuff is just garbage. I won't be around for season 2. I'll go back and watch Voyager again.
128 out of 185 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
This show can be summed up by the words "hamfisted" and "forced". I expected better
bjstarosta23 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
The professional critics keep saying this is a "Star Trek for our time". If our time is about hopelessness, extreme belligerence, logic defying turns of events, hamfisted social agendas, and over- engineered glamour shots, then yes this show completely reflects our time. What follows is a rant about quality of the writing on this show, but if you want a quicker summary without spoilers, just scroll down to the last paragraph.

---SPOILERS---

One of the reasons why I loved the earliest Star Trek shows was that it wanted to inspire you to be a better person, and it did this through exploration of the characters' struggle to make choices that would ultimately be objectively good. In this show the first episode treats us to a drone operator's dilemma: short term morals and short term thinking as opposed to considering the wider implications of your actions, which is something that was a total staple of the show. We get a Vulcan character advocating conflict seemingly to avoid conflict, but nobody seems to question at all the logic or implications of pre-emptive strikes, instead it's an almost entirely emotional endeavour. Why? Why did the writers miss this opportunity? So we could get more lens flared CGI shots of the exterior? Or that pointless space suit drift that lasted 20 minutes just so it could be made into a pretext for the Klingon war? This review would be an essay if I was to pick apart the plot holes in the 1st and 2nd episode, so lets just sum it up by saying those episodes made the main character look stupidly impulsive, which already seems inconsistent with her backstory.

And don't get me started about the other characters: the redhead crewman is an obvious comic relief/nervous newbie trope with no nuance whatsoever, every single one of her lines is annoying so far. Even Ensign Crusher was miles better than this despite the flaws of that character. The main character is supposed to be Spock-lite under the idea that there will be a conflict between Vulcan logic and human morality. And yet the conflict is so forced and the writing of the character conversations so linear, that it breaks suspension of disbelief. The new captain looks set to be killed off by the end of the season judging from what happened so far, can't say I'll shed tears about that. Interaction with different races on the starship Discovery is limited to the "I just want to survive, please" first officer, as it seems like every other Federation member race has been replaced with human cyborgs and actual robots (I wish I was kidding). If Star Trek races correspond to certain sides of the human personality, then this guy corresponds to the fight or flight reflex. Except that's not a personality trait, and any kind of nuance that was had in having a coward as one of the main characters ended after the first two episodes really. All in all, the character writing on this show so far is terrible and getting worse with every episode.

And then you have the Klingons. Never mind the change in their appearance, the Trump supporter monologue was ridiculous. I'm sure there was a better way to include the nuances of our time than to change the Klingons from an honour based society into fundamentalist conservatives. Also, as a more minor quip: the other Star Trek shows went with a Universal Translator plot setup for a reason: it's annoying to have to read subtitles.

Or take this little gem: The main character has to introduce herself on the Discovery by getting into a fight with three inmates. A fight that was completely unnecessary and forced, did nothing for the plot other than showcase some people getting hurt. What? The closest we get to an actual exploration of morality is the tardigrade arc, which truly is the Trolley Problem re-hashed: do I want to kill one creature to save hundreds or not? Would've been on the right track, had there been an actual exploration of it instead of outright rejection of the main character's complaints followed by a clichéd exchange about chains of command. Not that we were able to empathise with any of the characters involved anyway, even if the writing wasn't so trope ridden. The end of Ep.5 where the mirror universe literally looks back at you through a mirror just sums it all up.

---END SPOILERS---

The writers had a chance to make something truly outstanding here: a show that would break out of the doom and gloom and indiscriminate killing of modern TV shows and bring the viewers something that would inspire them and make them think for a change. This show is available via streaming to unshackle it from its commitments to mainstream TV, but it instead becomes exactly that: mainstream TV - a combination of the winning traits of a bunch of modern TV shows, so that a sweet spot can be hit with the ratings I guess? What happened to boldness in creativity? What we get is a cynical Game of Thrones treatment of the Star Trek universe, the exact opposite of what Gene Roddenberry wanted it to be, and paradoxically completely unimaginative and uncreative since it's just a rehash of what has been done much better in other sci-fi/fantasy TV shows already out there. There are plenty of reviews that say this show would be fine if it wasn't a Star Trek show. I don't think it would be. I think there's a serious problem with the character writing, the constant clichés, the generic trope overload, and the forced direction the plot is taking. The fact that it is a Trek show only makes it worse, because I expected so much better. I hope this gets canceled in disgrace, so that the next Star Trek show learns from its mistakes, then maybe we can have some actually bold and interesting writing.
124 out of 180 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Congrats on killing a 50 year franchise
prairiental28 January 2018
After watching the 1st episode of Discovery which was broadcast over the air, I'm not surprised to see all the negative reviews. As is often typical in "reboots", in an effort to make everything bigger and better, it's just change for change sake. From the Klingon redesign, to the various (sometimes laughable) uniforms, the aliens as well as the cast dialog and interactions, I had no desire to watch another episode - let alone pay for it. I've watched every Star Trek series from the original on and although some series were better than others, this one is a joke. Seems to be yet another instance of the bean counters overseeing the creative process. Congrats on killing a 50 year franchise.
215 out of 322 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
It's dead, Jim
chimera-215 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
The Klingons do not look like Klingons, and when given a chance to throw us a bone of a real Klingon they failed. The Klingon ships don't look Klingon...or anything else. Absolutely shapeless. Discovery herself is a rejected McQuarrie redesign of the Enterprise from over 40 years ago. None of the sets make a bit of sense in continuity and the lighting is an abject fail.

Your main character is a bully, impatient, fails to plan ahead and happy to commit mutiny. The other characters we have no idea about because they did almost no character development of them. And, let me see...we have the First officer going to investigate an unknown object in a high radiation area in a space suit because...they ran out of probes? Ran out of shuttles? The ship was low on fuel? We don't know.

We ALSO have Obi Wan Sarek, who is now using the Vulcan mind meld to do instantaneous visits with Burnham across hundreds of light years. Yeah, THAT Sarek. The one who refused to speak to his son for 18 years because of his human half and his entry in Star Fleet...who adopted a human and has shared his Katra, and new Jedi powers, with her to be close when she needs him...because she joined Star Fleet...

*sigh* I'm out of energy. Everything about this show is wrong including the cast/advertising presuming to claim she is the first black and/or female in a leadership position. Have we forgotten Uhura, Chapel, Janeway, T'pol or Sulu and Sisco, etc, etc...

It's an SJW disaster and right now, an outright embarrassment.
229 out of 351 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Star Trek on the surface, but nothing below
jelinek-7182621 April 2018
In the beginning of the first episode Burnham predicted (with Spock like attitude) to the second when a storm will arrive. Just minutes later she admitted, that the prediction was wrong. Well and this is the whole description of Discovery. Insert some well known Star Trek references and features, but then do nothing about it. Great visual effects, dialogues with the pace and quality of a middle school play, so far flat characters, chaotic stories with obvious Star Trek references or with reaction to some present social event. I am really sorry to see this show under Star Trek franchise. I dream about Jean Luc Picard appearing from parallel universe on the Orville and staple it as an official Star Trek sequel :)
119 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Not Star Trek, it's terrible
dsjbouma7 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
For a Star Trek series there's way too much improbability and inconsistency in the Star Trek lore. This series is set after Enterprise, but before TOS. The USS Discovery (and other federation vessels) are far too advanced for the time this series is set to take place in. A Spore drive, really? Why has there never been any reference to Spore drives in previous series? Okay, I get that visuals, etc. required an upgrade in this age of special effects and modern technologies, but then the series should've be set much further in the future. That at least would've been possible.

Then there are those "redesigned" Klingons... just plain horrifying. They look bad, really bad and they talk a weird type of Klingon. I tried to get used to the changes, for the past 8 episodes, but I just can't get used to it. It's not Star Trek, it's a spin off and a bad one.

This series is not what I had hoped for... especially since TNG and Voyager are my favorite Star Trek series and I'm automatically comparing Star Trek: Discovery to those series. It doesn't even come close to those two epic series.

I think The Orville is better than this series, which basically says everything.
183 out of 281 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Childish, badly written and poorly executed.
piotrlipert26 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, don't read journalist reviews for this. My guess is they are paid, either way really disconnected from reality (check the disparity between critic/fans reviews on rotten tomatoes).

Simply put the show is awful. The dialogues are sometimes disconnected from one another and feel very forced. You'll feel like watching the Room in some scenes, that's how bad it is.

The most important flaw however is that heroes are annoying. They make stupid decisions. It's hard to believe that Starfleet officers from the future with high IQ fail so hard. An average Joe would have the common sense not to make such mistakes.

There is another side to the annoyance. The characters annoy each other. They argue and insult one another (even if a superior officer is on the receiving end - inconceivable in the military, even in TNG, or TOS). I get the idea that writers wanted their relationships to grow, but it's way overdone. People in the real world who act this way are called ass holes.

I'm not even going to talk about the betrayal of the Star Trek spirit. Spend the time re watching TNG instead of this Star Trek: Avengers flop.
141 out of 214 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This Ain't Trek
charles-494464 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This show is simply not Trek, but a terrible derivative. The writing is awful with huge plot holes, the characters are bad and hateful, they ruined the Klingons, their culture and ships.

They use bad science to invent a spore drive from mushrooms (a magic pixie dust drive), they decide its time for the show to drop f-bombs and the crew as Star Fleet members are an embarrassment and unworthy to wear the uniform.

This isn't Star Trek.
129 out of 196 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How can this garbage get 7.5 rating?
logika-6484910 February 2018
I went through at least 150 reviews (sorted by "helpfulness" according to IMDB) and not one was above 6, and at the very minimum, 80% was below 4.

Thankfully, there are quite a few new SciFi shows that can provide me with a much needed fix: The Orville (surprisingly good), Altered Carbon, Black Mirror, heck, even the Expanse.

I hope STD (poor choice of acronym) does have some redeeming qualities, but I can't spare the patience to go look for them...
125 out of 190 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I don't even know where to start...
dantonjames3 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I remember when people though Enterprise was a little on the slow side or that Captain Archer wasn't as compelling a character as he could have been. Man I wish we could get him back.

I don't like anyone in this show. They're all a bunch of reprehensible jerks with terrible morality and inconsistencies in character from moment to moment and Burnham is the worst. She's supposed to have been brought up with a Vulcan upbringing but in the first episode she accidentally kills a member of another race (musta had the silly thing in reverse!), assaults her captain, lies to her crewmates and starts an interstellar war.

All that after being told by her adopted Vulcan father that she should shoot at people, unprovoked, in order to show superiority. Then after that she's canned by a panel that is shrouded in darkness...for some reason.

Moving forwards we see her roomied with a girl who would have been ok back in the low res sixties but has no place on HDTV as she has a face like a cooking pancake with moles and craters spack filled to the brims. I go 'uhhhr' everytime she's given a closeup. And then she speaks.

Then they mention how the Wright brothers and Zephram Cochrane should be held in just as high regard as Elon Musk, a barely competent, noncompetitive auto maker running on government grants and hype. Please.

I'm four episodes in, waiting for it to get going, get better, show me something uplifting in some way, something to make me feel good about having watched it.

This is not Star Trek. The visuals are stunning, the set design is gorgeous, just amazing but that's where my praise ends. This is pew pew action show set in space with angry people doing angry things set in a time and place we know everything about and none of this is that place and time.
115 out of 175 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Roddenberry must be turning in his grave...
AntonEgoCritics19 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not particularly old and not even a hardened Trekkie, but I WAS a fan... And I felt it was my obligation to open an account just to participate in mitigating this show's senseless and overly enthusiastic public reception...

The values Star Trek promoted and illustrated even facing the worse adversity was exemplary and inspiring... To think we might actually be capable of such evolution was goose-bumpy! Now it's just a bunch of egotistical undisciplined brats led by warmongers focused on personal achievement, love affairs, drinking, clubbing and answer back wittingly even to the hierarchy...

But I have to admit it does suit the writing though: In-eloquent and brash, poor vocabulary... Nothing like the perfectly articulated yet concise and efficient arguments of the past. (It really helped in perfecting my English at the time)

Before, each adventures took its time to unravel, taking root in the mind first, then pace-fully building up to smoothly unfold into a positive and meaningful ending... It was so well done, many episodes got me thinking many days after watching them... Where as all Discovery's 45 minutes episodes (except the last 2, maybe...) left an empty/unsatisfied feeling behind, like nothing really happened... I often found asking myself afterwards: "What have I watched?"

On a somewhat more positive detail, I salute the continuities showcasing the qualities of an advanced society with women being Captains and the wide acceptance of same sex relationships... Although, contrary to quite few opinions it seems, nowhere as "groundbreaking" or even as "daring" as it were when TOS or Voyager successfully implemented these same twists... Discovery just likes to over abundantly remind us of its stands on the matters by, for example choosing a confusing first name for the main character, or profusely exposing the viewer to inelegant and unrestrained public displays of affection... Which I doubt to be as tolerated in any actual military organization, let alone The Federation supposed to represent the best in humanity...

So to bring an end to my rant of disappointment, I'll finish by qualifying this show as a disrespectful, poorly written, overly demagogic, unsatisfying human showcase piece of garbage... With nice CGI.

I miss Star Trek...
196 out of 307 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
how to kill a true franchises
leakhead29 April 2018
This atrocity is not Star trek. Star Trek was not just sc-fi but a tribute to the genius of human kind, the anti war, anti fake religion, anti racism. Star Trek showed values, true believable characters, great special effects, the goals of humans to explore space and go boldly where no one had.

This new show simply does not cut it, it shows unbelievable violence, bigotry, racism and the worse of humans. The special effects are bad. The stories of each show seem like they were written by angry selfish children. The acting is about the worse I've ever seen. How can this call this Star trek is beyond me

What a way to kill a 52 year old good franchise.

I surely hope they remove this awful show and tell it's writers to go elsewhere.
94 out of 142 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This is not Star Trek
noemovaarcha16 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is what you get when you rape Star Trek and everything it stands for ... into the butt...with a chainsaw...on fire.

The series is a continuation of mentally boring J.J. Abram's Star Trek

You get a lot of action, visual effects, drama, blood, fighting.

You will miss the real spirit of Star Trek, which was always about exploration, diplomacy, scientific vision, new worlds.

The writing is really poor, where today's social politics is more important than a good story and so it is forcefully stuffed down your throat. This is what makes the characters totally artificial.

Gene Roddenberry must be turning in his grave.

We just have to hope that one day a worthy successor of the great Star Trek series will be produced, this is not it.
50 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A complete betrayal of goodwill and trust by CBS and Netflix
Shutupwesley25 March 2018
All you need do to continue the legacy was add to it, within the clearly defined universe, to respect it and expand on it.

Every new Trek show adds to the clearly defined future, in it's timeline, you had from the 24th century to infinity. But you chose to rewrite it and rape it's past for kicks. What did you expect to happen?

Total destruction of goodwill and trust.

The creators of this garbage are now operating under the misimpression that the fanbase they have insulted are now keen to see their next abuse of OUR trek by rewriting even more of it. CBS are now on every Trek fan's blacklist. That's quite an accomplishment.

Are they stupid?

We don't want you to rewrite yet more of the franchise, we want you to leave it the hell alone. You've done enough damage, enough insult, enough abuse. We don't want STD, we don't accept you rewriting it, and we sure as hell don't want you doing it again for another season. You screwed up, we all tried to tell you but you did it anyway. You're not wanted, you're not accepted, and you're so far from the line of winning over the fanbase that your actors careers are now going to suffer as a result.

Congratulations on making hundreds of millions of consumers dislike by default everyone involved in this "Justice League" stupidity. Walk away from it, now. You thought the fan backlash in season 1 was harsh? Oh boy, you ain't seen nothin yet.

WE HATE YOU, EVERY ONE OF YOU, FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. GO AWAY.
102 out of 155 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not Star Trek
gianlucalentini8 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I'd like to add my voice to countless others: this is no Star Trek, by any stretch of imagination.

I could forgive the inexplicable new look of the Klingons (even though STD has basically changed the soul of their culture!), I could also forgive some minor or not so minor anachronisms (cloaking technology ahead of times, holographic technology ahead of times, ...) but I can't for a second forgive the complete lack of the true Star Trek core message in this series: Star Trek has always been about a future in which humanity is better than today, a future we could all aspire to, a future of harmony and maturity, and also a future of intelligence and curiosity.

This show is so 21st century in its focus on the pettiness of the characters, all of them are close-minded and unlikable, all caged in their own quirks and victimism; they don't work as a team, they don't respect the Federation's ethics, they don't respect the chain of command, they're just a bunch of spoiled kids that would have never been admitted to the Starfleet Academy, not to mention selected to work on a spaceship.

Michael Burnham is the least credible Vulcan-educated character they could create: illogical, emoting all the time, an insufferable Mary Sue who manages to be uninteresting and infuriating at the same time. Stamets is a petty temperamental insubordinate, Tilly is an embarrassing excuse of a shallow illiterate teenager; the only partially complex and passably interesting characters are Lorca and Saru, if one wants to be generous.

The plot holes and illogical turns of STD are often an insult to the intelligence of viewers (the final of Lethe, anyone? The start of the Klingon war? The events on the Klingon ship in Ep.08?), whereas Star Trek used to engage the viewers' intelligence, to challenge it with fresh and new ideas, and also with some scientific complexities (and no, the ridiculous tardigrade/mushroom drive doesn't count: that's not suspension of disbelief, that's just idiocy).

Not Star Trek, and also a sub-par sci-fi series, which I wouldn't recommend to anybody.
152 out of 237 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Let's kill Star Trek
kdmitzvon13 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This is the most beautiful example of taking something (Star Trek) from someone (real,loyal Star Trek fans) and giving their show to EVERYONE ... Let's give Star Trek to everyone ... everyone deserves to watch this show ... its 2018 ... I'm sick of it. I can't believe people that are "protected" by this political correctness don't feel bad for being made look like they need so much help and attention? If they see what's happening then why not protest it? ... It's just wrong to use such a great, intelligent show, that actually mean something to a lot of people into a tool of this stupid overly PCness ... oh come on ... 4 people fight in a room, a black woman, a asian woman, a indian woman and a white male ... guess who wins ... 20 kg black woman ... also vs Vulcan, and Klingon (why, o why did you make them like that) ... why, so unneeded its sf not a magical fairy tail. Its not about everyone understanding it. There's a lot of other content to sharpen your teeth on ...
115 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
You should be ashamed of calling this Star Trek!
pepzar22 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
sOK . where do I even begin?

I have seen 5 episodes and here is what I struggle with in prioritized order:

1. Taking advantage of a sentient being to the brink of it's death, is so far from the Prime Directive, which is T_H_E E_S_S_E_N_C_E of ALL Star Trek shows EVER! This is so wrong in any possible ways and cannot be excused by any means!

2. Since when is Star Trek about 1 person only? They have always been dependent on the variety of crew members and their skills, in order to "survive" and crack the puzzles encountered. But this depends on a no ranked traitor? Really?? Is that the best you can come up with??

3. Since when has ANY captain been a dictator and a tyrant to the brink of the unbearable? Kirk, Picard, Janyway, Archer have all been decisive, but they have always listened to the crew's opinions and made decisions based on that.

4. In the light of no. 1 and 3, I am sorry to say, but I feel this like being Nazi in the space squashing all live no matter the cost.

5. Klingons have been designed to look and feel Egyptians and having hard to breathe when they talk. They do not feel as the warrior race they have been portrayed in any other show. They are just so out of place.

In all honesty, Andromeda feels more Star Trek than this will ever be.

I for one will not waste anymore of my time of this bs excuse of the Star Trek franchise.
185 out of 292 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed