The first season of
Star Trek: Discovery elicited mixed responses from both fans
and critics. The controversial re-design of the Klingons had a lot of
fans up in arms before they even saw an episode. Their ire only
seemed to grow as the season progressed. Fans have had a few months
to get used to this new Trek iteration. But will they give season two
a warmer reception, or did Discovery commit a fatal flaw by
veering too far from canon?
The trailers for
Discovery’s second season show a lot of promise, with
visuals that make you glad you have a big screen & projector at
home to watch it on. (You might want to check this “Projectors
under 500” Guide) The introduction of more characters from
the original series has some fans on edge, but if they live up to the
promised excitement of the plot, this season could definitely win
over the fans still on the fence.
Why were people so hard on Discovery?
Discovery
invited its initial scrutiny by setting the show only ten years
before the original Star Trek. Even Enterprise faced
this kind of opposition and it had a hundred-year cushion in which to
explain away any inconsistencies. In-world logic is one of the Star
Trek universe’s strengths, so it’s understandable why fans
would tense at the thought of potential continuity breaks.
Then again, after 5
series and 14 movies, you have to wonder what other choice the series
had. Boldly going where none have gone before is right there in the
show’s tagline. No franchise wants to get stale, but it’s
particularly important for a show to constantly reinvent itself when
forward thinking is a key part of its identity.
But was the first season really that bad?
For what it’s
worth, as someone who has seen all 741 episodes of Stark Trek
at least once, I thought the first season of Discovery stood
toe-to-toe with the rest of the franchise. The flawed captain works
for the plot, and it’s refreshing that he’s not the primary focus
of the show. It’s a Star Trek of its times in terms of
storytelling: serial more than it’s episodic with its focus
primarily on flawed anti-heroic characters. It’s different, and
unique, but it’s still Star Trek. One look at the space
tardigrade will tell you that—it’s the perfect “monster that’s
not a monster” Star Trek is so good at.
With any universe as
well-built as Star Trek’s there’s the temptation to put
the canon on a pedestal. Sure the first season of The Next
Generation introduced us to Q. It also attempted to make the
Ferengi its key antagonists and featured some
of the worst CGI ever seen on cable television. Every show is
going to make some mis-steps when it’s finding its footing, and
even a storied franchise like Star Trek is no exception.
So how can the show win fans over?
Historically, there
are two ways a Star Trek series will play out. Either it will
gain a following and enjoy a long, 7-season run (The Next
Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager), or it’s plagued by low
viewership numbers and critical disdain and fizzles out after 3
seasons (The Original Series, Enterprise).
This makes the
second season arguably the most important for any Star Trek
franchise. How the show moves forward in the face of its lukewarm
reception will be interesting to see as the season progresses.
Discovery has so far been substantially different from past
Star Trek series in a lot of key ways. The best way for the
show to survive is for it to embrace this identity and push it even
further.
The cross-series
cameos in the first season were fun, and they did their job of
cementing the series firmly in the Trek universe. In season two,
they’ve added Spock and Captain Pike—characters that can work in
this world, as long as the writers make them Discovery’s
characters and don’t rely on familiarity to drive the storyline.
If Discovery
solidifies its identity in season two, public opinion will shift,
and the fans will start taking a more interested—and less
critical—view of this new series. If it keeps relying on the
franchise past to hold it up, though, we’ll be in for another
short-lived Star Trek series.