To be frank, I felt the first episode/pilot was rushed and rather pedestrian. Dialog quips were annoying more than charming. Burmann's flip at the end really bothered me to no end (especially given that Vulcans are far more technologically sophisticated than either humans or Klingons, so to use the same strategy is suicide).
Ignore the pilot. This episode brings some really interesting drama to the table. Sarek's relationship with Burmann is interesting (the psychic link via mind melds hasn't been established to this extent, but it is interesting nonetheless). Establishes the characters far more eloquently with little dialog. The cliché dialog from the first episode is gone for much tighter, moving pieces. The pacing is more traditional Trek while still being moving and fast-paced, and is a much better setup for what's to come than the pilot.
I do find it annoying that they've made Klingons to be so spiritual (to waste time on the dead and making yourself tactically vulnerable is the antithesis of what Klingons represent). This isn't simply Trek fans groaning on canon, but completely flipping a race of people that's been so centric to the whole series.
------
Now as for the reviewer above me (Greg Adrian), I disagree that this Trek is a revolution and Star Trek has 'never been so great' (or that Voyager received backlash from Janeway being a female character). While this episode is very good at establishing the direction the series is going and telling its story, there really isn't much exploration to the story. From a technical perspective, it's far ahead of Trek, but the storytelling is for now relying on combat, which doesn't take too much writing expertise to do well (thank CGI wizards and great set designs). We'll see if we'll ever get timeless episodes of great Trek that explored dimensions of the human condition that makes sci-fi so unique (see 'All Good Things...;, 'Tapestry', 'Living Witness', 'Year of Hell', 'Measure of a man', 'Far Beyond The Stars', 'City on the Edge of Forever', and much more). Hopefully we will, but it's early to assume that critics don't have a point after the premier (the focus on combat so early in the series might not of been the best direction).
As to Voyager, most backlash comes from disappointment from the setting being ripe with material for interesting stories, and 1/2 of all episodes revolve the holodeck, Borg, and set pieces we've seen dozens of times in Trek, and never delving into the issues of being stranded so far away with no chance of returning home in your lifetime. Janeway was written in a bipolar way, sometimes upholding Starfleet principles to the point of religion, while others abandoning them on a whim. People criticized the inconsistencies of her character, not her being female or the actress (Kate did a fantastic job).
----
Hopefully, this series becomes something special, but the hyperbole on both sides needs to stop. As of right now, Discovery is a well-made, big-budget sci-fi war series. Will it rise to the best Trek has to offer? Is the badly written dialog from Episode 1 simply padding that won't be revisiting, or is this the kind of banter we should be expecting from this series? We'll see...
Ignore the pilot. This episode brings some really interesting drama to the table. Sarek's relationship with Burmann is interesting (the psychic link via mind melds hasn't been established to this extent, but it is interesting nonetheless). Establishes the characters far more eloquently with little dialog. The cliché dialog from the first episode is gone for much tighter, moving pieces. The pacing is more traditional Trek while still being moving and fast-paced, and is a much better setup for what's to come than the pilot.
I do find it annoying that they've made Klingons to be so spiritual (to waste time on the dead and making yourself tactically vulnerable is the antithesis of what Klingons represent). This isn't simply Trek fans groaning on canon, but completely flipping a race of people that's been so centric to the whole series.
------
Now as for the reviewer above me (Greg Adrian), I disagree that this Trek is a revolution and Star Trek has 'never been so great' (or that Voyager received backlash from Janeway being a female character). While this episode is very good at establishing the direction the series is going and telling its story, there really isn't much exploration to the story. From a technical perspective, it's far ahead of Trek, but the storytelling is for now relying on combat, which doesn't take too much writing expertise to do well (thank CGI wizards and great set designs). We'll see if we'll ever get timeless episodes of great Trek that explored dimensions of the human condition that makes sci-fi so unique (see 'All Good Things...;, 'Tapestry', 'Living Witness', 'Year of Hell', 'Measure of a man', 'Far Beyond The Stars', 'City on the Edge of Forever', and much more). Hopefully we will, but it's early to assume that critics don't have a point after the premier (the focus on combat so early in the series might not of been the best direction).
As to Voyager, most backlash comes from disappointment from the setting being ripe with material for interesting stories, and 1/2 of all episodes revolve the holodeck, Borg, and set pieces we've seen dozens of times in Trek, and never delving into the issues of being stranded so far away with no chance of returning home in your lifetime. Janeway was written in a bipolar way, sometimes upholding Starfleet principles to the point of religion, while others abandoning them on a whim. People criticized the inconsistencies of her character, not her being female or the actress (Kate did a fantastic job).
----
Hopefully, this series becomes something special, but the hyperbole on both sides needs to stop. As of right now, Discovery is a well-made, big-budget sci-fi war series. Will it rise to the best Trek has to offer? Is the badly written dialog from Episode 1 simply padding that won't be revisiting, or is this the kind of banter we should be expecting from this series? We'll see...