Star Trek: Discovery's Biggest Problem Is That It's a Prequel

Star Trek: Discovery's Biggest Problem Is That It's a Prequel

Why is this a prequel? "And then you have to wonder why has Discovery made this choice at all. Why give Spock a foster sister he’s never mentioned? Why add all this weird baggage to Sarek and Amanda? Why didn’t Sarek try to rationalize what he did with logic, which is pretty much his default character? This is a dude who, when asked why he married a human said, “At the time, it seemed the logical thing to do.” Where is his defense of what he did to Burnham? Why the cop out where he denies remembering what happened? Why not just pick a different Vulcan? One whose beliefs and characterization we don’t know that well? Why not set this show a hundred years after Voyager, and let differences in continuity can be explained as changes that took place in between those shows? Why not have this be in the future of Trek, where Spock’s work with the Romulans has triggered a crisis on Vulcan over their relationship to other species? You can have extremists and you can have a protege of Sarek’s foster a human child and no one will ask why we’ve never heard about these things in the other shows. (Also, Burnham wears an IDIC pin throughout the flashbacks and yet at no point does anyone point out that the Vulcan extremists are definitely in contradiction with the fundamental Vulcan tenet of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. AWESOME.) Set it in the future, and have the war be with a species we don’t know. One where we’re not constantly wondering about forehead ridges. Or one where it doesn’t feel like backsliding—and backsliding to ‘60s racist caricatures—to present them like torturers, betrayers, and cannibals. Why not do something new? Set it in the future, where we don’t spend all our time wondering what the hell happened to all this amazing technology. What is the benefit of this particular show being a prequel? The craven, marketing answer is that Spock and the original series are icons, and the name recognition would draw people in. Of course, as we’ve said, we don’t see Spock. And nothing in the design of this show mimics the original series at all—despite Bryan Fuller’s apparent original plan to include the primary colors of the original, famous uniforms. So, again, why? I don’t hate this show. It’s not bad, it’s just that the good parts have nothing to do with it being a prequel while all the frustrating parts do. The only thing I’ve found that justifies it is that Enterprise had about as much contempt for Vulcans as this show apparently does. But the tug of war between science and war? That could be done in any era. The question of whether a captain is acting out of trauma or because he’s always just been a bit of a sociopath? Also could happen at any time. Science that is basically magic, snarky scientists, a cadet trying to forge her way to the command track, a first officer figuring out how to be a good captain within his particular strengths, a mutineer on a redemption path—all of these are good Trek bits and none of them require a prequel."