Is SNW too much of an ensemble show?
- Thread starter webb3201
- Start date
Me too. If asked, I would have said it's the stuff in a Snickers bar.
Keep your distance, Cheugy. Fly casual.
You can thank the New York Times for trying to make the term a thing.I confess I had to google "cheugy."
But can you use it in Scrabble? That's the big question.
What is "too much" of an ensemble show? It's either an ensemble show or it's not. Star Trek hasn't done a lead-driven series since the original (or TAS anyway). Regardless of what the supporting cast said, it was never meant to be an ensemble show. Star Trek has been about The Group in the Main Titles. From TNG on, that group was much larger than the two and three back in the 60's. There have always been a lot of episodes focusing on one of the characters other than the first person in the credits.
So nope, SNW is fine doing what it does. It's a great cast, let 'em shine.
It would only be awful if all the characters sucked. Luckily, they don't.
So nope, SNW is fine doing what it does. It's a great cast, let 'em shine.
It would only be awful if all the characters sucked. Luckily, they don't.
exactly. Fleshing out the ensemble cast is great but with only 10 episodes it does feel like there just isn’t enough time. We don’t even need 26 (or 29 like TOS S1) just give us 16-18. And the format they use should be way better to handle more compared to the heavy serialization of Disco and Picard.
I mean, taste is subjective but this is…wrong. TNG S3, DS9 S5 for example both have more than 15 good episodes at least.
No. Everyone in the main cast should be able to get 1-2 eps each focused on them per season. And the reoccurring characters should have no problem get fleshed out along with the main characters. It doesn't matter than they only have 10 episodes. it's all about the writing.
If the only thing you changed about Michael Burnham was skin color and gender, nothing would actually change.
Tell me, so I don’t have to google it.I confess I had to google "cheugy."
I love ensemble shows.
Most of the Berman/Braga era Trek was supposed to be a "Ensemble Show".
Most of the Berman/Braga era Trek was supposed to be a "Ensemble Show".
How'd that work out?
It became the Picard/Data show.How'd that work out?
On topic, this will probably be an unpopular opinion, but in my opinion SNW has struck the right balance between episodic and character building. Each character feels like a real, breathing person who lives inside this world that continues after the cameras stop. But, more than that it generally leaves me wanting more.
Which is why 10 episodes is sufficient.
THIS! I was interested in this show because it was going to be about Pike and his crew. After 79 episodes and seven feature films, I have no interest in seeing Kirk again. Especially when it's being played by someone who couldn't be more wrong for the part. And as you said, Kirk's role in this season could have been played by any of the main cast. With only ten episodes in a season, screen time is very limited and should be given to Pike and his crew.
You do realize "Berman/Braga era" means only Voyager seasons 5 and 6 plus Enterprise, right? You can stretch the definition a little to include Generations and First Contact as well.
Regardless, there's no ensemble going on in those seasons/movies.
The only way they would be a killer is if there were all bad. If the majority of the season is great, I can never get enough.
I couldn't disagree more. From TOS thru Enterprise, even the worst seasons had more than 10 "good ones." Most of them had close to twenty good ones and some were so solid that there were very few I'd call stinkers.
The reason we're only getting ten episodes is the cost of making them is so high that they can only afford to do ten.
Last edited:
I vote for 17 episodes per Annual Season.
That is the perfect amount IMO.
Ok, my bad, the entirety of the Berman era only
When was the last time Michael Piller was mentioned in trek fandom. I hate that he seems to be already forgotten.
Similar threads
