They need to make one episode in which they retcon Trip’s death in that stupid Holodeck finale, air it so it’s canon, and then immediately cancel the show because this sounds mid AF, and Archer was an ass, and Bakula has all the presidential gravitas of a single neutron.
IcedRaktajino@startrek.website
on 01 Oct 22:38
nextcollapse
If Paramount doesn’t pick it up, they should at least offer the idea to David Mack or one of the Trek novel authors. Would make a great series.
StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 01:59
collapse
On the other hand, they could pick up Vanguard for a more serious show.
I’m actually disappointed that United would focus more on Archer’s kids than his government
data1701d@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 02:46
collapse
I mean, if they struck a balance, it could be enjoyable enough.
It’s not a dynamic we’ve fully explored in Trek. We kind of got it with adult Jake and Captain Sisko in the later seasons of DS9, but we haven’t really fully seen the experience of a Starfleet empty nester.
Still, drama after drama is rather annoying.
After being disgusted by the horribly-done pre-school show, I’d much rather see a Star Trek done in the spirit of Craig of the Creek and Bluey that’s about a friend group of kids running around a star base and getting into fun and trouble and low-stakes ethical dilemmas, preferably while their parents (the crew and civilian residents) deal with DS9 levels of heavy stuff. After saying this to my younger sibling, they have a more developed pitch, having sketched up some concept art for fun.
StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 03:04
collapse
I think we share a view on Scouts.
I think you missed the point on this though - it’s not a show for or with children.
It’s another go at selling an younger ensemble based on they’re being the offspring of a legacy character.
The article says Archer’s four adult children would be in their twenties and thirties. They would be in different roles and services.
I didn’t like the nepobaby, ‘children of’, angle in Picard and I didn’t really like Archer, so I can’t imagine why they would think this would be the way to draw in an audience.
data1701d@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 03:33
collapse
When you put it that way, I agree.
TNG made a point to avoid doing this as much as possible, and it ultimately worked and arguably usurped the original.
I guess that’s also part of the strength of Lower Decks and somewhat Prodigy; both shows are the only ones of this wave to be mostly focused on original characters. Lower Decks does bring in legacy characters frequently, and Prodigy does have Hologram Janeway and later starts to heavily feature legacy characters as part of the storyline, but both have an original cast as the core of the show that isn’t anyone we know’s brother or cousin. I superficially thought about this, but didn’t think about it in comparison to the other newer Treks before.
StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 13:45
collapse
While many older fans are disappointed that Starfleet Academy is set in the far future 32nd century, I am hopeful that it’s focus on original characters, will be a strength.
Having a few recurring Discovery characters around, and Robert Picardo as The Doctor, doesn’t negate that it’s fundamentally about new characters and not legacy ones or their immediate family.
Like the apparent ‘no technobabble’ edict from on high, with so many ‘kids of’ and ‘sibling of’ characters in the new era, I have to wonder if the IP holder had laid down some kind of structure forcing the creators to tie new main characters to legacy ones.
I am wondering if Pelia was created as much to give Holly Hunter’s character a legacy tie and check the required box for linkage to another character as much as she was to provide a vehicle for Carol Kane.
I like Lower Decks, but it’s not old Trek. Strange New Worlds is great, but I’m so tired of prequels and reboots and blah blah blah
data1701d@startrek.website
on 02 Oct 23:13
collapse
I mean, that’s fair.
I feel that somewhat by accident, Lower Decks does better capture some aspects of classic Trek than other series, namely being mostly episodic and bringing a sense of humor back to Trek, and it sometimes even attains a level of dramatic skill comparable to the best of classic Trek (namely above all else the exchange between Mariner and Ma’ah in the S4 finale). Also, I’m honestly really impressed that Lower Decks managed to get me attached to its characters and make it feel like they’ve evolved so much in a total runtime less than that of the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation.
That said, Lower Decks does lack the mellow charm and the long(er)-form storytelling of classic Trek. However, considering the Trekiness they otherwise pulled off, I kind of wonder how the Lower Decks writers would do if they were given the opportunity to do a 50 minute “standard” Trek series; I think they might be able to do pretty well.
Similarly, with SNW, while it has some of the strongest writing of social interaction, the sci-fi aspect is often weaker than it should be. For instance, “Four-and-a-Half Vulcans” is almost a brain-dead premise in terms of science fiction, but executed so well in terms of the social dynamics and character writing.
In other words, I can see your desire for a no-compromises, no catches Trek.
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social
on 02 Oct 02:55
nextcollapse
A sitcom about the kids of Janeway and Paris it is then! With singing!
cloudy1999@sh.itjust.works
on 02 Oct 23:51
collapse
I’d watch this, but only if there’s a laugh track.
threaded - newest
Never mind. Kurzman and his ilk would just turn it into another soap opera in which everyone is somehow related to Spock.
Star Trek is under new ownership — it’ll be interesting to see if they hire a new show runner/producer going forward.
They need to make one episode in which they retcon Trip’s death in that stupid Holodeck finale, air it so it’s canon, and then immediately cancel the show because this sounds mid AF, and Archer was an ass, and Bakula has all the presidential gravitas of a single neutron.
If Paramount doesn’t pick it up, they should at least offer the idea to David Mack or one of the Trek novel authors. Would make a great series.
On the other hand, they could pick up Vanguard for a more serious show.
I’m actually disappointed that United would focus more on Archer’s kids than his government
I mean, if they struck a balance, it could be enjoyable enough.
It’s not a dynamic we’ve fully explored in Trek. We kind of got it with adult Jake and Captain Sisko in the later seasons of DS9, but we haven’t really fully seen the experience of a Starfleet empty nester.
Still, drama after drama is rather annoying.
After being disgusted by the horribly-done pre-school show, I’d much rather see a Star Trek done in the spirit of Craig of the Creek and Bluey that’s about a friend group of kids running around a star base and getting into fun and trouble and low-stakes ethical dilemmas, preferably while their parents (the crew and civilian residents) deal with DS9 levels of heavy stuff. After saying this to my younger sibling, they have a more developed pitch, having sketched up some concept art for fun.
I think we share a view on Scouts.
I think you missed the point on this though - it’s not a show for or with children.
It’s another go at selling an younger ensemble based on they’re being the offspring of a legacy character.
The article says Archer’s four adult children would be in their twenties and thirties. They would be in different roles and services.
I didn’t like the nepobaby, ‘children of’, angle in Picard and I didn’t really like Archer, so I can’t imagine why they would think this would be the way to draw in an audience.
When you put it that way, I agree.
TNG made a point to avoid doing this as much as possible, and it ultimately worked and arguably usurped the original.
I guess that’s also part of the strength of Lower Decks and somewhat Prodigy; both shows are the only ones of this wave to be mostly focused on original characters. Lower Decks does bring in legacy characters frequently, and Prodigy does have Hologram Janeway and later starts to heavily feature legacy characters as part of the storyline, but both have an original cast as the core of the show that isn’t anyone we know’s brother or cousin. I superficially thought about this, but didn’t think about it in comparison to the other newer Treks before.
While many older fans are disappointed that Starfleet Academy is set in the far future 32nd century, I am hopeful that it’s focus on original characters, will be a strength.
Having a few recurring Discovery characters around, and Robert Picardo as The Doctor, doesn’t negate that it’s fundamentally about new characters and not legacy ones or their immediate family.
Like the apparent ‘no technobabble’ edict from on high, with so many ‘kids of’ and ‘sibling of’ characters in the new era, I have to wonder if the IP holder had laid down some kind of structure forcing the creators to tie new main characters to legacy ones.
I am wondering if Pelia was created as much to give Holly Hunter’s character a legacy tie and check the required box for linkage to another character as much as she was to provide a vehicle for Carol Kane.
New crew. New ship. Post-DS9. Not an animated comedy. That’s all I want.
Prodigy?
I would certainly not reject a well-written Lower Decks season 6, so I don’t agree on the animated comedy front.
I like Lower Decks, but it’s not old Trek. Strange New Worlds is great, but I’m so tired of prequels and reboots and blah blah blah
I mean, that’s fair.
I feel that somewhat by accident, Lower Decks does better capture some aspects of classic Trek than other series, namely being mostly episodic and bringing a sense of humor back to Trek, and it sometimes even attains a level of dramatic skill comparable to the best of classic Trek (namely above all else the exchange between Mariner and Ma’ah in the S4 finale). Also, I’m honestly really impressed that Lower Decks managed to get me attached to its characters and make it feel like they’ve evolved so much in a total runtime less than that of the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation.
That said, Lower Decks does lack the mellow charm and the long(er)-form storytelling of classic Trek. However, considering the Trekiness they otherwise pulled off, I kind of wonder how the Lower Decks writers would do if they were given the opportunity to do a 50 minute “standard” Trek series; I think they might be able to do pretty well.
Similarly, with SNW, while it has some of the strongest writing of social interaction, the sci-fi aspect is often weaker than it should be. For instance, “Four-and-a-Half Vulcans” is almost a brain-dead premise in terms of science fiction, but executed so well in terms of the social dynamics and character writing.
In other words, I can see your desire for a no-compromises, no catches Trek.
A sitcom about the kids of Janeway and Paris it is then! With singing!
I’d watch this, but only if there’s a laugh track.
Legacy with Captain Seven.
Prodigy meets your criteria.
Ok, then I separate animated and comedy :p
Starfleet Academy technically has all of this criteria met, depending on how far you’re willing to stretch the definition of “crew”.
Fuck this.