Discovery 1x01 & 1x02 – 2-part premiere [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

bigar

I am mildly positive about the two first episodes. Klingons have never been my favourite race and that will not change now. The annoyingly slow delivery of their made up language is just too tiresome to listen to. The should do the Star Trek VI thing and change to English after the first few sentences in Klingon.

I do like most of the characters and the FX are not too intrusive. Favourite part is Burnham's discussion with the computer to let her out of the brig.

I will continue watching but hope the Klingons do not feature too much.

Inviere

Goodshape wrote: »

What's been written about the Klingons in the pre-TOS / TOS era? Or about Starfleet for that matter? (discounting the 1960s look of the thing).

We have 3 years on the Enterprise, plus one additional episode set ~10 years earlier (The Cage). A little bit of exposition maybe from subsequent series. Isn't that kind of it? Or am I missing something?

What I meant was, being a prequel, there's not very many freedoms that can be taken with, well, anything really...because we know the general outline of the timeline. We know there was a war, we know the war was eventually ended, we know there will be a peace treaty, and we know we'll ultimately end up being allied to the Klingons. While a writer can fill in the blanks to an extent, there's only so much creative freedom given those constraints.

Post-Voyager, everyone seems to have different ideas as to what should or could happen with the myriad of races, the politics, the technology. It's all pretty rigidly defined.

That sounds like an oxymoron. If everyone has different ideas about how things could be done, how is that rigidly defined? I'm truly baffled as to how anyone can feel that a prequel setting gives more creative freedom than a sequel setting. The 25th century in Star Trek has never been mentioned in the 60 years of canon that I recall, a complete and total blank canvas...yet there's people who argue writing within the confines of a prequel setting offers more possibilities? I honestly don't get it

Goodshape

Inviere wrote: »

What I meant was, being a prequel, there's not very many freedoms that can be taken with, well, anything really...because we know the general outline of the timeline. We know there was a war, we know the war was eventually ended, we know there will be a peace treaty, and we know we'll ultimately end up being allied to the Klingons. While a writer can fill in the blanks to an extent, there's only so much creative freedom given those constraints.

Those are fair points. I suppose I am still interested in knowing the details of that war, despite – as you say – having the foreknowledge of an eventual peace treaty.

Knowing how WW2 ended didn't hinder my enjoyment of Dunkirk and there was plenty of scope for creating original characters and plot details there, as there is here.

That sounds like an oxymoron. If everyone has different ideas about how things could be done, how is that rigidly defined?

I think I phrased that badly. Everyone has their own way of excusing or writing away the difficulties of a post-Voyager Federation ("the temporal guys will undo the super-tech", "take it 100+ years in the future so it'll be different", "introduce a new superpower", "etc. etc.") – and I think it'd be the same people complaining were any one such 'solution' chosen. Mt point is "set it in the future" is not a silver bullet, at all.

I'm truly baffled as to how anyone can feel that a prequel setting gives more creative freedom than a sequel setting.

I don't really believe it's a zero-sum game. It's not "prequel is good, sequel is bad" for me – but it's not "prequel bad! FULL-STOP!" either. And the prequel is what we have, so... let's enjoy it?


And this prequel hatred thing... I mean, it's not the bloody Star Wars' Skywalker saga here. It's not a prequel in the sense that they were; digging up old favourite characters and literally tampering with stories, people, and places you've loved before. This is a massive universe in which we've previously spent 3 years aboard a single ship.

This is something set before / during the same era, it's not a "prequel" to Captain Kirk's 5 year mission. It's not Star Trek '09 where we get to see young whipper-snapper James T. steal his uncle's product-placing 200-year-old car. It's just another story set during one of Starfleet's most interesting and mostly unexplored times.



Potentially, anyway. It could still be ****. Kinda feels like it hasn't started yet, despite the pilot. But damn I'm looking forward to finding out.

Inviere

Goodshape wrote: »

Knowing how WW2 ended didn't hinder my enjoyment of Dunkirk and there was plenty of scope for creating original characters and plot details there, as there is here.

Indeed. However, and specifically related to Star Trek, the previous tv show was a prequel, the previous three film releases have been in a prequel setting...I have to admit that I'm quite jaded with the prequel concept in the Star Trek universe. It's been 16 years....sixteen years, since Star Trek has tried to push forward. Since then, we've been looking backwards.

I think I phrased that badly. Everyone has their own way of excusing or writing away the difficulties of a post-Voyager Federation ("the temporal guys will undo the super-tech", "take it 100+ years in the future so it'll be different", "introduce a new superpower", "etc. etc.") – and I think it'd be the same people complaining were any one such 'solution' chosen. Mt point is "set it in the future" is not a silver bullet, at all.

Definitely not a silver bullet, but speaking in terms of writing freedom, breathing in new life to the franchise, and breaking free of the notion that Star Trek is defined by the Kirk era, a future setting offers the most creative freedom.

It's just another story set during one of Starfleet's most interesting and mostly unexplored times.

Perhaps, time will certainly tell. Don't take my cynicism for negativity, I really enjoyed the opening gambits. My only criticism is not of the show, but of the studio going out of their way to tell us it's being set in the Prime Universe. It's a reboot, they're fooling nobody.

PhiloCypher

fixxxer wrote: »

They didn't have the rights to do that (afaik) so it wasn't an option. With the visual style being so similar I guess they hoped that the majority of casual viewers would just assume they were set in the same timeline.

Someone other then CBS owns the rights to the Post Voyager/Nemesis 24th century and onwards ? I find that hard to believe. Even if there's been a 100 books written about that period since the last 24th century movie/show its not like the Authors own the IP. CBS can do what they want. They just happen to want a prequel.

Deleted User wrote: »

What have they changed really in Discovery, the look of Klingons/Ships and a bit of modernisation of tech views.

The problem with the end of Voyager (and entire prime line)
-Delta Quadrant is massively Borg and Voyager heard not a hint of another power there.
-Gamma is Dominion and canon maps have them controlling most of it.
-Alpha and Beta are massively mapped, where are the next big race coming from? It was already ridiculous that the Federation did not even hear of the Ferengi prior to TNG, where are the others going to hide?

After the TNG/DS9/Voy timeline Star Trek was falling into the SG1 problem of needing to invent a heretofore unknown big bad to keep growing.
SG1 did it so much in their 10 years that they had to leave the Galaxy for Atlantis and SG1

Why would there necessarily need to be a next big race discovered. The post Dominion war fallout would provide plenty of fertile ground to cover as the old powers lick their wounds and struggle for a new equilibrium. Besides the same argument can be made against making a prequel, as you can't really introduce any new race of galactic consequence that we haven't already heard of.

Sparko wrote: »

Those dinosaur aliens in Voyager seemed to be fairly advanced - not sure how much storyline potential there could be but I'll leave that to the writers!

I think with decent writing the post Voyager/Nemesis universe still has untapped potential. The future tech could be confiscated by the temporal department or whatever it was called. In terms of an enemy - what about the other aliens often mentioned but not hugely explored? Tholians, Tzenkethi, Sheliak, Breen (in ds9 but still fairly undeveloped). Again it just comes down to the writing, I'm sure decent writers could mine plenty of story out of that timeline.

Haha had completely forgotten about that bonkers Voyager Dino episode which posited that Dinosaurs had managed to evolve into a spacefaring race without leaving any visible trace of, what must have been, an extremely advanced civilisation.

hal9550 wrote: »

Overall i really enjoyed both episodes - obviously a SERIOUS amount of issues with various things

Holographic communication: Canon wise its not on OBVIOUSLY! but to be honest id let it slide because i imagine humanity will have something similar soon enough. the way i see it, being PRE TOS is all well and good but its difficult to have something less advanced than the old 60s 1701 without it seeming far too retro for todays audience

Klingon Cloaking Device: Obviously more issues, as with the general design of their ships but again. Happy to Ignore - who knows where these guys acquired this cloak... romululan incolvement perhaps? as to the ship design its the same argument as above

Story line involving Burnham - WORST part in my opinion - very unrealistic for me - also life imprisonment for nerve pinching a superior? Because thats basically all she did! a wee bit harsh!!!

Generally im glad its back and its like this:

JJtrek One - VERY annoyed over design, plus canon issues, destruction of vulcan - silly story - terrible

JJTrek two - HORRIFIC - only seen it once, never again

JJTREK 3 - OMG shockingly bad

Discovery - Not bad! I WANT MORE!

Am I the only person who thinks Beyond is the best(or at least most fun and least canon destroying) of the JJ trek films ?

silverharp wrote: »

the whole scene didn't add adding to the episode it was a dead end, it looks like they had it so they could have a cool scene for the trailers.

I know, most of the most pertinent information like the fact Burnham has served under the Captain for 7 years is repeated later in a more naturalistic way anyway. So its kinda redundant.

Inviere

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Why would there necessarily need to be a next big race discovered. The post Dominion war fallout would provide plenty of fertile ground to cover as the old powers lick their wounds and struggle for a new equilibrium. Besides the same argument can be made against making a prequel, as you can't really introduce any new race of galactic consequence that we haven't already heard of

Precisely. Plus, what's wrong with the notion of actually going exploring again? The very early days of transwarp speeds could yield some fantastic stuff. Not that I'd like TNG 2.0 or anything, but there's a lot more to the universe than just the Milky Way. Neighboring galaxies, rogue clusters in the intergalatic void, systems on the very edges of our galaxy, HUGE parts of the Gamma and Delta Quadrants left unexplored (Voyager took a straight line through the Delta Quadrant, it's not like it was actively explored!). There'd be so much more to see, explore, and visit.

And that's all just exploration, as above, there could be huge socio-political changes in the wake of the Dominion War. Ad some time to that (100 years!), and the Alpha Quadrant could be an almost new place. The essence of Star Trek being humanity putting its differences aside in order to better itself could be the core message once again.

Am I the only person who thinks Beyond is the best(or at least most fun and least canon destroying) of the JJ trek films ?

Nope, agreed on that too. I actively dislike the first one (2009), enjoyed the second one in a switch off your brain way, but felt the third was the most polished and enjoyable one thus far. I have to say, I really love the score to those films.

Evade

Zillah wrote: »

The only lore continuity thing that I care about was that they declared hull breaches on Deck 1, but the bridge was fine at that point.

Deck 1 is always the bridge! That's why it's so exciting when the security officer is all "Sensors have detected intruders on decks, 12, 5, and....1"
startled looks from everyone present

The bridge is normally on the top hence it being deck 1.

Asus X540L

It's ****

FutureGuy

Asus X540L wrote: »

It's ****

Fantastically thorough first post.

Ludo

FutureGuy wrote: »

Fantastically thorough first post.

In fairness...he does have a point unfortunately. Hope to god it gets a lot better.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

TomSweeney

Goodshape wrote: »

Having said that, if you think "Identity Politics in Star Trek is a bad idea", you might have been watching the wrong show this past 50 years.



^^ sounds like every other episode of TOS and TNG.

True equality doesn't need Identity politics !! people are judged on their character and actions - not on their sex / race / orientation etc.
TNG at least had this, it didn't need to remind us in the episodes. (then again I didn't pay attention to media back when I was a kid ... )

pixelburp

TomSweeney wrote: »

True equality doesn't need Identity politics !! people are judged on their character and actions - not on their sex / race / orientation etc.
TNG at least had this, it didn't need to remind us in the episodes. (then again I didn't pay attention to media back when I was a kid ... )

Oh yes it did:
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/The_Outcast_(episode)


Star Trek frequently played with issues of sex, race and gender, often doing so allegorically, but it was there & with all the subtly or sensitivity of a hammer. To suggest otherwise would be displaying a pretty selective view of Trek history.

Goodshape

TomSweeney wrote: »

True equality doesn't need Identity politics !!

Tell that to the marginalised.

PhiloCypher

Red letter media's Re:View of Star Trek : Discovery

It's a long video. Cliff notes version . Mike likes it and is cautiously optimistic about the rest of the season. Richie didn't like it , thought it was too dark and action packed and if that was what we could be expecting it would be exhausting.

TomSweeney

Goodshape wrote: »

Tell that to the marginalised.

What marginalised ?
It's all equal oppurtunity now adays, I got hassle as a kid in England being from Ireland - and we didn't have much money, was I marginalised?

Or maybe I got on with it and built my own life ?

Goodshape

TomSweeney wrote: »

What marginalised ?
It's all equal oppurtunity now adays, I got hassle as a kid in England being from Ireland - and we didn't have much money, was I marginalised?

Or maybe I got on with it and built my own life ?

pixelburp

TomSweeney wrote: »

What marginalised ?
It's all equal oppurtunity now adays, I got hassle as a kid in England being from Ireland - and we didn't have much money, was I marginalised?

Or maybe I got on with it and built my own life ?

So anyone who has ever been on the receiving end of prejudice, injustice or marginalisation should just "get on with it?" Nor are they allowed talk about, or try to address these problems? Harsh, and pretty uncaring too TBH; it also sounds a lot like the sort of dismissive attitude directed towards those with mental issues, as if any problems are only ever ones own fault.

I've had my own bumps and bruises through life - who hasn't - but I'm not so naive as to think my problems through life, or indeed how I coped with those issues, automatically translate onto any other experience, like - I dunno, say - young gay kids growing up in rural Ireland; only pick that specific examples 'cos I had the chance to chat to some folks about their own experiences - it really highlighted what an oppressive, sad & lonely life it is for a lot of people growing up who fear for being themselves. Should these kids just "get on with it"?. Or are you going by the notion that cos of the marriage referendum Ireland overnight became instantaneously welcoming to all?

TomSweeney

pixelburp wrote: »

So anyone who has ever been on the receiving end of prejudice, injustice or marginalisation should just "get on with it?" Nor are they allowed talk about, or try to address these problems? Harsh, and pretty uncaring too TBH; it also sounds a lot like the sort of dismissive attitude directed towards those with mental issues, as if any problems are only ever ones own fault.

I've had my own bumps and bruises through life - who hasn't - but I'm not so naive as to think my problems through life, or indeed how I coped with those issues, automatically translate onto any other experience, like - I dunno, say - young gay kids growing up in rural Ireland; only pick that specific examples 'cos I had the chance to chat to some folks about their own experiences - it really highlighted what an oppressive, sad & lonely life it is for a lot of people growing up who fear for being themselves. Should these kids just "get on with it"?. Or are you going by the notion that cos of the marriage referendum Ireland overnight became instantaneously welcoming to all?

I hear ya, my point is in the true ST universe, none of these issues would even exist !!
Anyway, im not able to articulate my point well here!

I enjoyed the show, and only got this feeling after reading reviews so ill steer clear of media on this in the next episodes.

Btw you also have the other idiots on the far side saying it's white genocide ??? like really ?? wtf ...

Goodshape

TomSweeney wrote: »

I hear ya, my point is in the true ST universe, none of these issues would even exist !!
Anyway, im not able to articulate my point well here!

I enjoyed the show, and only got this feeling after reading reviews so ill steer clear of media on this in the next episodes.

That's just it though; nobody on the show is making any issue of it whatsoever. Sure some clickbait headlines are being written but that's sod all to do with the show (as you did say yourself).

There's also nothing wrong with celebrating increased, visible, diversity. Particularly in a show like Star Trek.

I'm gay myself and can't help but be delighted that there's finally going to be a prominent gay character on Discovery. It doesn't feel great to read or hear about how I shouldn't "harp on" about it because it doesn't affect you personally.

James Brown

Goodshape wrote: »

The new movies are a separate thing, set in an adjacent / alternative timeline.

Discovery – we've been told, although it hasn't mattered or been really confirmed on-screen yet – is set in the "normal" Star Trek timeline which includes TOS, TNG, DS9, Voy, and Ent.

They've updated some things again (as they did in the original first film, second film, third film, and TNG) which has annoyed some people again, but it is the same timeline.

Same timeline until Kirk's first mission?

Sonics2k

Zillah wrote: »

Nonsensical suicides are not a Star Trek staple; they always made an effort to make it make sense. I really wish people would stop saying that.

It really is though, look at the episode Chain of Command where Picard is taken hostage and tortured.

In all of Starfleet they chose the Captain of the Enterprise, a man who's background is largely in things like diplomacy, tactics and history, hardly in stealthy infiltration.

Riker himself frequently goes on away missions. Hell, now that I think about it seems that only senior staff go on dangerous away missions, the only time you'll see a low ranking person go is if they need a red shirt to kill off.

Sonics2k

TomSweeney wrote: »

True equality doesn't need Identity politics !! people are judged on their character and actions - not on their sex / race / orientation etc.
TNG at least had this, it didn't need to remind us in the episodes. (then again I didn't pay attention to media back when I was a kid ... )

BS, Star Trek frequently played with identity politics.

Code of Honor whilst being just a smidgen racist, deals with having a female head of security, which even the Klingons found odd later on.

Oh, how about Uhura herself. A black woman in a position of command way back in the 1960's. She was quite literally the first black woman shown in a position of power on American TV.

People really need to jump off this nonsensical claim that Discovery is 'too PC' because Star Trek has literally -always- been a forward thinking and PC show.

PhiloCypher

When I first saw the Uniforms in this it kinda threw me , Why were they still wearing NX Enterprise style jumpsuits a mere 10 years before TOS, but then I caught an episode of TNG on SyFy where Wesley is asked to confront his feelings of anger towards Picard over the loss of his father and it all came flooding back.



According to the memory Alpha wiki on Wesley, he was 15 in that first season of TNG(thought he was younger tbh) and had lost his dad 10 years before, which means the Wrath of Khan style navy uniform were still in service up till at least 10 years before the Romper suits came into Vogue in TNG.

LeinsterDub

Decent enough opening but I found all the subtitles and the a captain's accent annoying

PhiloCypher

New promo for season ahead

The_Valeyard

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Decent enough opening but I found all the subtitles and the a captain's accent annoying

I really enjoyed the use of Klingon

aligator_am

Watched first 2 episodes last night and have to say they were really bad IMO.

The characters just seemed off and uninteresting, didn't click for me at all.

The effects looked great in fairness but it wasn't enough for me to enjoy the episodes.

Something I noticed that was really odd was the weird camera angles that were constantly used, it reminded me of a review I saw once of Battlefield Earth!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8z7-DIa1As

I'm hopeful that the show will improve, it's early days yet so I'll give it a chance.

The_Valeyard

aligator_am wrote: »

Watched first 2 episodes last night and have to say they were really bad IMO.

The characters just seemed off and uninteresting, didn't click for me at all.

The effects looked great in fairness but it wasn't enough for me to enjoy the episodes.

Something I noticed that was really odd was the weird camera angles that were constantly used, it reminded me of a review I saw once of Battlefield Earth!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8z7-DIa1As

I'm hopeful that the show will improve, it's early days yet so I'll give it a chance.

How dare you compare StarTrek to the likes of Battlefield Earth.

Its the Bajorian slave ore processing for you!!!

cython

expectationlost wrote: »

did they rescue the prison transport pilot?

you mean the

prison transport

from episode 3?

PhiloCypher

I've decided to give the first 6 episodes a rewatch , I'll be retrospectively reviewing and rate them given what we know now in their respective threads (As I wasn't sure where else to post them)

Episode 1 : The Vulcan Hello

The opening Klingon scenes are as stilted as I remember and the dialogue in the desert prologue between Burnham and Georgiu as clunky, tho the visuals are top notch. We move onto the Shenzou , JJ flare in full effect, again the banter between the bridge crew seems somewhat forced and in complete contrast to the atmosphere on the Discovery, but then they are commanded by two very different captains. I for one am happy to see the Discovery crew earn that sort of comradery rather then have them be besties from the off. Burnham is also a lot more emotional here in contrast to how she is on the Discovery, I guess she blamed her "human heart" (to quote Sarek) for setting in motion a chain of events that led to her Mentors death and closed herself off emotionally. She'll likely spend the season trying to get back in touch with them.

"It would be logical for you to take into account my success rate during our 7 years together and execute my plan without further delay before we're dragged into war"

Dear god the hubris , whatever the merits of her plan that's not how you go about it and while her solution was the logical course of action it was also an emotional one for her given Klingons killed her parents. Given that her Vulcan upbringing surpressed rather then dealt with her emotions surrounding that, its not surprising that it came bubbling out in this outburst. So while I was inwardly cringing at what she was doing , it tracks emotionally for me.

" Starfleet doesn't fire first "

People have moaned about how Star Fleet has been depicted (despite the fact the Discovery is avowedly atypical) but this quote would suggest Starfleet at large, at least when not at war, are not a bad sort, they'll always let you throw the first punch .

All in all a mixed bag, amazing production values, Prosthetics and interesting characters dynamics in Burnham and Saru, hamstrung by dull Klingon scenes clunky dialogue and the sort of forced comradery that will have you yearning for the frosty silences of the Discovery bridge.

Not a great start but a start .

6/10

PhiloCypher

Episode 2 : The Battle of the Binary Stars

Warning: contains spoilers for episodes 3-6.

The episode opens with a Flashback to Sarek and Burnham beaming onto the Shenzou 7 years ago. Its interesting to note Burnham seems to be wearing the exact same outfit as she did in the flashbacks outside the Vulcan Science academy in episode 6 when Sarek was told he would have to choose which of his "experiments" would be allowed enter. He obviously wasted no time in carting her off to Starfleet as soon as he made his decision . Foreknowledge of this decision adds a nice layer to the scene.

"Behave"

Sarek utters this under his breath as he steps back onto the transporter pad, it comes across as an amused chastisement as Michael rebuffs Cpt Georgiu's niceties and could be seen as out of character for a Vulcan to say, but Sarek isn't a typical Vulcan, as the head of the Vulcan Science academy points out in episode 6.

"The House of D'Ghor will hear more" , " as will house Mokai"

I'm fairly sure these two houses are the ones that bribe there way into Kols good graces by handing over the admiral in episode 6 after they piss him off by listening to T'kuvma here.

Its all kicking off, and yes it does look somewhat Star Warsy with the phasers looking more like turbolasers then anything else but most of the ships do look NX01 era so maybe they don't have the superstructure required for normal phasers IDK . The action is more like DS9's sacrifice of angels then the more stately affairs of the films or TNG , extremely visceral. Watching it I've noticed the helmswoman Lt Detmar isn't sporting her 7 of 9 like skull implant. I'd missed that first time around and thought she'd always had them. Its yet another reminder as if Burnham needed any with Saru there, of what she did and what she lost.

"Communicating with you in this manner comes at a physical cost"

While its not stated explicitly if the explosion in episode 6 could be responsible for Sareks damaged heart as some have postulated(first heard about in TOS'S "Journey to Babel") could not his long distance meld be responsible for the Bendii syndrome we discover he suffers from in TNG's episode "Sarek". Even if its never made spoken canon, assuming the writing for Burnham and the show in general continue to improve it will add an extra layer of pathos to scenes that didn't lack for pathos in the first place when rewatching that episode.

We get another scene of T'Kuvma consulting with the remaining members of the council . Future hostage takers House's D'Ghor and Morkai are front and centre. We also get another scene of T'Kuvma speaking english in a far less stilted manner then he does his native tongue . Strange that.

"You will know our great houses standing as one under Kahless reborn in me. T'kuvma"

Kahless reborn huh, every bit as hubristic as Burnham this lad, and just like Michael pride cometh before the fall . Its especially ironic given he had only just lectured Kol on what an egotist he was in the last episode .

Looking at the basic shape of Tkuvma's ship in schematics its not dissimilar to the D7 of the TOS era its just overly florid in its external design. Maybe Post Battle of the Binaries it basic design becomes iconic and they start pumping them out in the more utilitarian design we see in TOS(Thats my head canon atm anyways).

The shows theme is reprised to great effect (imo) when the Captain, seeing the Klingons retrieving their dead, comes up with a cunning plan . Whatever one may feel about that theme(its growing on me like a fungas or ya know a spore) the incidental music in Discovery is definitely a step up from the sonic wallpaper that we got in most of 90's trek.

BOOM!!! her plan works and the head is damn near seperated from the neck of the ship. Curiously it is back reattatched when we drop back in with Voq and L'rell 6 months after the battle. Not bad for an on the spot repair.

"I can't transport her without a lifesign"

What is this Terminator . Only living tissue can go through , how do they transport inanimate cargo, how did you transport that photon torpedo Saru ? unfortunately this is one of those daft decisions they made to lay and even thicker layer of guilt on Burnham by having her have to abandon her Mentors dead body, sadly it comes at the expense of common sense .

Daft court martial is daft.

A better episode then the first, there's less clunky exposition, more action and we get a greater look at the Sarek Burnham family dynamic. It effectively sets the table for the show proper which starts with episode 3 .

7/10

DivingDuck

Finally getting around to watching this after putting it off for a while in case I'd hate it.

I didn't hate it, but like with everything post-Voyager, there's a distinct feel of "It's not Trek, though?" for me.

There was no sense of "coming home" the way there is with TNG, DS9, etc. I know the thing these days is to have unlikable protagonists, but that just doesn't feel very Trek-like to me. Burnham will probably grow on me as the series progresses, but so far I find her mostly irritating. The whole "I'm a Vulcan who's not Vulcan but I'm still very Vulcan" thing would have been more believable if she hadn't seemed on the verge of tears at multiple points throughout both episodes. I also didn't care for the fact that there was no sense of getting to know any of the crew aside Saru and Georgiou, though I enjoyed him quite and lot and thought she was the only character who actually felt like a real Starfleet officer. Will we see any of the others again? Are we supposed to care? I can't tell.

The biggest disappointment for me, though, was the Klingons. Are they going to explain how and why they look entirely different later on, or are we just meant to pretend they're the same as Worf et al? Even the language sounds different, like they're reading off cue cards with huge pauses instead of actually speaking it naturally. The scenes with them dragged really badly— I actually was bored during those scenes. As with the recent movies, it all just seemed very much "Trek in name only" and didn't have the same feel or tone as the other TV shows. Even Enterprise, which I drifted away from after a season or two, felt more in keeping with TNG/DS9/V than this did.

I'm not sure whether my apathy about the show thus far is because I was expecting the "Trek formula" or because it was genuinely lacking, but overall I wasn't impressed. I'll watch the rest of the episodes which are out already, but I'm lowering my expectations a lot going forward.