There were endless moments in season 3 that would have been solved by reaching out to the progressive Borg collective from the season 2 finale. Not to mention that a few character arcs and character development moments that just seem suspiciously absent in season 3. So, is the entirety of season 2 not cannon or am I missing something?
There’s nothing contradictory about the seasons, and they were written and filmed back-to-back. There’s no need for a retcon.
On the whole, i enjoyed S2, but if I was to give it a numerical rating, I’d say 4/10, below average for Trek.
One of my bigger complaints would be with how watered down the Borg Queen was in terms of threat. We’ve previously seen Borg assimilation happen in mere seconds, and the assimilation of the Dr. took multiple episodes to resolve.
As for my biggest complaint, it’d be the setting. A jump to the past is a nice trip for a 2 or 3 parter in Trek, but a whole season just didn’t jive that much for me.
On the other hand, S3, that was some of the best NuTrek I’ve seen so far.
All posts and comments in Daystrom Institute must be substantive and explain their reasoning. Simply declaring that a season of the show is so bad that it shouldn’t exist is not sufficient.
If you want to point out specific discrepancies and argue that they are a reason to view S2 and S3 and contradictory, that would be appropriate here.
