Star Trek: Alpha to Delta Quadrants & Everything In Between

[wonderings]

I think Trek does that. But Trek is not intended to be primarily about conflict between characters in the more traditional sense. This is something that caused friction between Roddenberry and his writers.

Most other sci-fi shows are more like BG in that sense, so (again, just a personal opinion), I don’t think Trek should go that route. If it does it will lose the qualities that made it unique (whether you like them or not).

On the other hand, I think the traditions / conventions / fashions of writing and TV will always be tugging in that direction. If Trek becomes totally character driven, or dystopian, or focused on ‘save the universe’ or ‘survival’ stories, it’s not Trek anymore.

We can agree to disagree on that, it’s just my take.

Of course, and I know I am in a minority here as there is still a large community of Trekkers.... or is it Trekkies?

I am not looking for a soap opera where it is just the drama between crew members, but there is always that part, living away from home in relatively confined spaces. There is going to be a natural level of interpersonal drama. I think it was episode 2 or 3 of Battlestar Galactica where they had to jump into hyper space (or whatever they called it, been a while). You could literally feel the tiredness of the crew in dealing with the situation at hand. How many times are things going on and only the main characters and a few others are reacting, running through the ship just passing people walking along like nothing is happening, they seem so disjointed from the reality of the situation on a space ship.

There are so many avenues for Star Trek to explore in real interesting ways that would also mirror issues right here on good old planet Earth. Religion, politics, war are the big ones and something they would obviously come across and do come across in what I would say is really lazy and unrealistic ways. Again I think Star Trek has so much potential but no one with the courage to put the money into a show that does not follow the latest failed attempts at shows. When working on a long math equation the sooner you turn back from a mistake the better, go on to far and the more lost you get.

What is it that you would say makes Star Trek so unique?

 

[Lord Blackadder]

What is it that you would say makes Star Trek so unique?

I've posted on that already at great length, so I encourage you to click back and read it (for the sake of the group who've already been subjected to it) but to sum up: a utopian vision for humanity's future, exploration, discovery, cultural interchange and fusion, sci-fi technology, episodic storytelling, humor...

And baked into that we do still see seasonings in the form of: detailed character development, serial stories, conflict, war, death, greed, loss, romance, sexuality, the tension between science and spirituality, cultural relativism, failure...all the stuff writers like to use to make a show gripping.

 

[wordsworth]

I enjoyed the original Star Trek, and even more so, TNG. I subsequently found Voyager and Deep Space Nine excellent also. The characters were sympathetic and believable, well drawn and well portrayed in stories that were for the most part absorbing and stimulating. Some episodes were scintillating, gripping or moving, sometimes all three.

Star Trek Discovery was/is a long, long way from approaching such well-knit, rounded creativity. Admittedly, I could only get as far as series (season) two of Discovery and not far into that either. (I haven’t seen SNW yet.) I didn’t care about the Discovery characters because I hadn’t been persuaded to do so. It was all so unconvincing and very… superficial. Little depth at all. Noise, plot, effects, and some characters whose names I never learned to remember because I wasn’t invested enough to do so.

The rebooted Battlestar Galactica mentioned in this thread started off superbly, I thought, though by the time of the full first season and season two I had lost interest. Again, I didn’t care enough about the characters to stick with it, and that was compounded by the excess plot twists and mirroring of real-world political conflict. The balance, to me, was all wrong. I remember the TV critics raving about the series at the time of its broadcast and later my being very surprised when I didn’t enjoy it, instead finding it a frustrating watch.

Meanwhile, we still have Star Trek and particularly the TNG, Voyager and Deep Space Nine work as examples for any adventurous, non-template TV creatives with the smarts to learn from it.

An honourable mention goes to Enterprise, too; to my mind not a bad effort at all.

 

[cwerdna]

Probably US only:
‘Star Trek: Starfleet Academy’ Series Premiere To Stream For Free On YouTube
https://trekmovie.com/2026/01/13/st...eries-premiere-to-stream-for-free-on-youtube/

 

[CWallace]

So as "Academy" is getting ready to premiere, we should all remember that no Star Trek series ever launched strongly. A number of media sites were given screeners of the first six episodes and the general consensus is it starts off weak, but gets better as the episodes progress and the characters and writers get more comfortable. Which is pretty much we have seen with most modern Trek shows' first season.

So when the show premieres and social media fills with "this is the worst thing ever!" and "Paramount has killed Star Trek once and for all!", let us all remember how bad TNG was in it's first year.

 

[wonderings]

So as "Academy" is getting ready to premiere, we should all remember that no Star Trek series ever launched strongly. A number of media sites were given screeners of the first six episodes and the general consensus is it starts off weak, but gets better as the episodes progress and the characters and writers get more comfortable. Which is pretty much we have seen with most modern Trek shows' first season.

So when the show premieres and social media fills with "this is the worst thing ever!" and "Paramount has killed Star Trek once and for all!", let us all remember how bad TNG was in it's first year.

so expect the worst and then tell yourself it is good? Lots of shows come on strong now, are you saying Star Trek is not able to actually start with a compelling story with compelling characters that get peoples attention?

I have not followed the hype for the show, or any real reviewers as I just have no hope in a quality Star Trek show (would so love to be proven wrong). If it is coming out of the main stream reviewers then I would not put any hope in them as they are basically paid advertisement. Rings of Power is a prime example of this, they built lots of hype with their interviews and promotions and the show is a complete disaster. My hunch is you will have mediocre reviews and it will be properly trashed by the screen critics who are not paid by studios. Again I would love to be proven wrong as I love the concept of Star Trek, just wish they actually came out with compelling interesting sci-fi stories.

 

[CWallace]

so expect the worst and then tell yourself it is good?

It's Star Trek, so I expect to watch the whole series as I have done all the other ones.

Lots of shows come on strong now, are you saying Star Trek is not able to actually start with a compelling story with compelling characters that get peoples attention?

To be blunt, yes.

With the television series, most of them struggled for the first half-dozen to a dozen episodes, especially with the pilots. The streaming series had much less to work with, so they tended to find their feet sooner, but outside of Lower Decks, even they were not winners at launch, IMO.

 

[sjsharksfan12]

For the last few years I've felt that Star Trek can be so much more, and it feels like Fans just settle for mediocrity. I look at shows like Silo and Severance and Fallout and think I would like a Star Trek series to be this way, with multi-layered characters, great writing and some great twists and turns. Instead the writing (At least for SNW Season 3) was just average and that made the show just average.

I'm planning to give Starfleet Academy a shot and try to keep an open mind, but I still mad at them for cancelling Lower Decks and Prodigy and after watching Section 31, my excitement for Trek these days is not entirely high. I guess I just wish Star Trek was higher quality and fans should want that higher quality in a show. Of course that attitude is purely subjective, but I just wonder what a Star Trek show with better writers would be like, because there's a lot of sci fi shows now that is just passing it by.

 

[wonderings]

For the last few years I've felt that Star Trek can be so much more, and it feels like Fans just settle for mediocrity. I look at shows like Silo and Severance and Fallout and think I would like a Star Trek series to be this way, with multi-layered characters, great writing and some great twists and turns. Instead the writing (At least for SNW Season 3) was just average and that made the show just average.

I'm planning to give Starfleet Academy a shot and try to keep an open mind, but I still mad at them for cancelling Lower Decks and Prodigy and after watching Section 31, my excitement for Trek these days is not entirely high. I guess I just wish Star Trek was higher quality and fans should want that higher quality in a show. Of course that attitude is purely subjective, but I just wonder what a Star Trek show with better writers would be like, because there's a lot of sci fi shows now that is just passing it by.

Think we are on the same page here. And I do agree, fans just seem to accept the slop and like it because they will like anything that is Star Trek. This is not unique to Star Trek, Star Wars is like this, Marvel and DC.

I am going to wait to see what some reviewers say about the show before thinking about attempting this latest series. Personally I trust The Drinkers reviews and his mindset when critiquing movies and shows, he is probably one of the few actually honest reviewers out there.

 

[CWallace]

Anyone listened to the Star Trek: Khan audio drama? I just listened to a series review on a Star Trek podcast I follow and while I had planned to get around to it at some date, I am moving it up the list as it sounds solid.

It was originally pitched as three-episode mini-series by Nicholas Meyer, but when Paramount entered their cost-cutting regimen in preparation of putting themselves up for sale, it was scrapped due to the costs of building new sets for only three episodes. Instead, Meyer converted it into a nine-episode audio drama that covers the period on Ceti Alpha V between "Space Seed" and "The Wrath of Khan".

The show has a pretty solid main cast, including George Takei and Tim Russ (both reprising their roles aboard the USS Excelsior), along with Naveen Andrews (LOST) as Khan and Wrenn Schmidt (For All Mankind) as Marla McGivers.

 

[Mainsail]

Well, I just watched the first two episodes of Star Trek: Star Fleet Academy. There have been a lot of negative reviews. I think it will take a few episodes before we know for sure, but I am not nearly as pessimistic as some of the reviews. Yes, it is kind of a Melrose Place in space, but I am willing to give the writers and characters a chance.

 

[sjsharksfan12]

Well, I just watched the first two episodes of Star Trek: Star Fleet Academy. There have been a lot of negative reviews. I think it will take a few episodes before we know for sure, but I am not nearly as pessimistic as some of the reviews. Yes, it is kind of a Melrose Place in space, but I am willing to give the writers and characters a chance.

I feel the same way. My expectations were low but there were things I did like it about, such as the Negotiations with Betazed in the second episode and just kind of the cast chemistry of the first episode. I don't like some of the dialouge and even consider it a little cringeworthy, but it could have been a lot worse. I'm interested to see where the next few episodes go.

I also appreciated the references to Prodigy and Lower Decks, as I consider the animated shows to be the best shows of the streaming era.

 

[CWallace]

I just finished the first episode and overall, it was decent enough. I find Holly Hunter to be a naturally quirky character (and I mean that as a compliment) so the racial makeup of her character fits this. And while I absolutely love Paul Giamatti as an actor, I absolutely hate his character in this show.

Spoiler: character spoiler

The Joker works for Batman - it does not work for Star Trek.

The cadets overall are fine. Genesis Lythe is my favorite, but then I like confident female characters. Not a huge fan of Caleb Mir at the start, but by the end I was much better with him.

 

[Mainsail]

I just finished the first episode and overall, it was decent enough. I find Holly Hunter to be a naturally quirky character (and I mean that as a compliment) so the racial makeup of her character fits this. And while I absolutely love Paul Giamatti as an actor, I absolutely hate his character in this show.

Spoiler: character spoiler

The Joker works for Batman - it does not work for Star Trek.

The cadets overall are fine. Genesis Lythe is my favorite, but then I like confident female characters. Not a huge fan of Caleb Mir at the start, but by the end I was much better with him.

Initially, I felt the same way about Hunter's character, but it is starting to grate on me after watching episode 3. As chancellor of the school, she is kind of the "captain" of the academy. In fact, she served that role on a starship in the first episode, and she is just not exhibiting the type of disciplined leadership qualities one would expect. Too flighty. Too eager to be everyone's friend. Too casual with the chain of command. Star Fleet is not a summer camp for young adults. It is a military academy where you train and develop the discipline to react in split seconds to life and death situations. Officers need to know what is expected of them and how to respond to a crisis. They don't lounge around in the captain's chair barefoot reading a romance novel (or whatever) while on duty. The crew and other officers need to be at their duty stations in uniform prepared to react in an instant as they travel at faster than light through unexplored space......and she is curled up with a good book in the captain's chair. This does not resonate professionalism or leadership, see: Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer, and Pike. I am not saying there weren't light hearted moments and humor on the bridge, but they were professional and great leaders.

 

[Bug-Creator]

This does not resonate professionalism or leadership, see:

O.k.

Kirk

The guy that thought "1st contact" was something about ####ing the local princess?

 

[CWallace]

Initially, I felt the same way about Hunter's character, but it is starting to grate on me after watching episode 3. As chancellor of the school, she is kind of the "captain" of the academy. In fact, she served that role on a starship in the first episode, and she is just not exhibiting the type of disciplined leadership qualities one would expect. Too flighty. Too eager to be everyone's friend. Too casual with the chain of command.

Overall, I agree with you that she does seem far too "casual" for her position.

We only have two Lanthanite characters to go on, so I admit it is dangerous to make any generalities, but perhaps the species favors a more "go with the flow" mentality? Or perhaps Lanthanites in general are not so "flighty" and Nahla and Pelia left their homeworld because they did not fit in? Could they be the Lanthanite version of the Vulcan Doug?

Star Fleet is not a summer camp for young adults. It is a military academy where you train and develop the discipline to react in split seconds to life and death situations. Officers need to know what is expected of them and how to respond to a crisis. They don't lounge around in the captain's chair barefoot reading a romance novel (or whatever) while on duty. The crew and other officers need to be at their duty stations in uniform prepared to react in an instant as they travel at faster than light through unexplored space......and she is curled up with a good book in the captain's chair. This does not resonate professionalism or leadership, see: Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer, and Pike. I am not saying there weren't light hearted moments and humor on the bridge, but they were professional and great leaders.

We know that post-Burn, Star Fleet Academy was discontinued and the War College continued because the focus was on survival, not exploration. Based on character dialogue, Star Fleet Academy has been re-opened because the galaxy is now (generally) stable enough that Star Fleet can return to its original primary mission of exploration.

When stuff got real with Nus Braka, Nahla snapped back into the what we could consider the "traditional" role of a Star Fleet Captain so she can be "professional" when the situation calls for it.



Three episodes in, I can tell this show is not aimed at me, but then I am 56. That being said, I am finding things to enjoy in it, while also finding plenty of things that I do not. Genesis Lythe remains the standout for me and I am appreciating the maturation of Caleb Mir as a character and getting insight into why Darem Reymi acts the way he does helped me relate to him as a character more. I am more "miss" than "hit" on the War College cadets, but I can understand that the history of the school's importance to the Federation and Star Fleet in the post-Burn era would have inflated egos a fair bit. And I would like to see Lura Thok have more dimension than "Camp Counsellor / Drill Sergeant".

 

[Mainsail]

O.k.

The guy that thought "1st contact" was something about ####ing the local princess?

Kirk was definitely a bit of a swashbuckling character, but I think the womanizer thing is exaggerated:

Per the internet:
In the original Star Trek series, Captain Kirk actually had sexual encounters with very few aliens, with estimates typically ranging from 2 to 4 specifically alien, out of fewer than 10 total romantic liaisons. While the "interstellar womanizer" reputation is exaggerated, key examples include Deela in "Wink of an Eye" and potentially Elaan in "Elaan of Troyius".

BTW - I would have no problem if the Star Fleet Academy Chancellor had a lover or occasionally went to San Francisco or Risa for a hook-up. If Hoshi Sato (ENT) can do it, why not other officers. The issue is professionalism, discipline, and leadership while on duty or when interacting with subordinates. Also, what is the deal with these barefoot close-ups? Does someone in the writers' room have a kink or fetish?

 

[Mainsail]

Overall, I agree with you that she does seem far too "casual" for her position.

We only have two Lanthanite characters to go on, so I admit it is dangerous to make any generalities, but perhaps the species favors a more "go with the flow" mentality? Or perhaps Lanthanites in general are not so "flighty" and Nahla and Pelia left their homeworld because they did not fit in? Could they be the Lanthanite version of the Vulcan Doug?



We know that post-Burn, Star Fleet Academy was discontinued and the War College continued because the focus was on survival, not exploration. Based on character dialogue, Star Fleet Academy has been re-opened because the galaxy is now (generally) stable enough that Star Fleet can return to its original primary mission of exploration.

When stuff got real with Nus Braka, Nahla snapped back into the what we could consider the "traditional" role of a Star Fleet Captain so she can be "professional" when the situation calls for it.



Three episodes in, I can tell this show is not aimed at me, but then I am 56. That being said, I am finding things to enjoy in it, while also finding plenty of things that I do not. Genesis Lythe remains the standout for me and I am appreciating the maturation of Caleb Mir as a character and getting insight into why Darem Reymi acts the way he does helped me relate to him as a character more. I am more "miss" than "hit" on the War College cadets, but I can understand that the history of the school's importance to the Federation and Star Fleet in the post-Burn era would have inflated egos a fair bit. And I would like to see Lura Thok have more dimension than "Camp Counsellor / Drill Sergeant".

All good points. I did not serve in the military, but I have managed a fair number of people in my career, and a certain amount of consistence is important. In leadership roles (especially military), it is very difficult to be lackadaisical about discipling and chain of command on a daily basis and then suddenly change command style and expect the crew to shift gears during an emergency. Not a very realistic portrayal of leadership.

 

[CWallace]

My guess is the goal of the showrunners is to show that Nahla is not your average/normal leader. We do already have War College Chancellor Kelrec filling the role of the "spit and polish" leader.

 

[Bug-Creator]

In the original Star Trek series, Captain Kirk actually had sexual encounters with very few aliens, with estimates typically ranging from 2 to 4 specifically alien, out of fewer than 10 total romantic liaisons.

So? How many incidents would you consider to be acceptable for the captain of the flagship on what is a to a large extend a diplomatic mission?

Now it was what TV shows did at that time, but once you take a step back you just can't unsee that TOS was just as cringe as Discovery and now Academy are accused of being.

 

[Mainsail]

So? How many incidents would you consider to be acceptable for the captain of the flagship on what is a to a large extend a diplomatic mission?

Now it was what TV shows did at that time, but once you take a step back you just can't unsee that TOS was just as cringe as Discovery and now Academy are accused of being.

I think this "likely" happened with Kirk once on a diplomatic mission in 79 episodes. Here are the diplomatic "likely/possible" encounters:

• Elaan ("Elaan of Troyius"): Likely, as Kirk spent an extended period in her quarters while under the influence of her "tears," which induce biochemical attraction.
• Odona ("The Mark of Gideon"): Often considered a "possible" instance, though some fans argue it was a matter of diplomatic duty rather than a romantic tryst.

This doesn't seem to be a centerpiece of his leadership style or an indictment of his professionalism. I think you have a better argument about the number of times he played fast and loose with the Prime Directive.....which is more of an examination of how much latitude captains in deep space need to adapt to strange new world situations while still adhering to Star Fleet doctrine. Essentially, every ST captain faced this dilemma.

 

[Bug-Creator]

This doesn't seem to be a centerpiece of his leadership style or an indictment of his professionalism.

He flirts with crew members, he flirts with guests on board and he flirts with every "suitable" female he encounters off ship.

Again, just the way they did TV in the 60s .....

 

[BigMcGuire]

He flirts with crew members, he flirts with guests on board and he flirts with every "suitable" female he encounters off ship.

Again, just the way they did TV in the 60s .....

I see your point - but maybe it's cuz I'm so biased (I can't stand the new stuff) - he still seemed far more professional than the captains I see today lol. Yeah, he's no Jean-Luc Picard ... but far more of a believable Starship captain to me than what I saw in Academy.

 

[Bug-Creator]

Well Picard (and to some extend Janeway) goes to the other extreme, where the rulebook is all that counts even at the expense of the mission or plain survival.

Sisko and Archer are IMO the only really plausible captains that could not only exist at real humans but would also have a realistic chance of of holding a command post for long.

Rebooted Pike is a bit odd with all the "I know my destiny" stuff guiding his decisions (or lack thereof).

 

[farmboy]

I'm a lifelong Trekkie, but I am way out of what appears to be the demographic for the "Academy". Given that, I found two characters that are cartoonishly drawn: Paul Giammatti (about 5'8" in real life) as a scenery chewing big bad guy, and the also cartoonish Drill Instructor. They are both gifted actors, but here either not given enough (or too much) to work with.

And why would a hologram character need academy training--it's a digital construct that can be programmed to be anything before coming into existence?

The kinder, gentler Captain? Not growing on me yet.