Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x04 - "A Space Adventure Hour"

[Nerys Myk]

Sci-fi/adventure plots are key too, though. The Doomsday Machine is the story of Matt Decker (whose story is tied entirely to the episode rather than part of a wider arc) but it's also just an exciting thriller story in which Kirk kamikazes a big space turd. Stories like A Taste of Armageddon are overwhelmingly just about imagining a fictional society rather than giving the recurring characters any discernable arc or growth.

TOS didn't really do character arcs like SNW. Character growth was often confined to the episode. (and sometimes forgotten Guest stars in TOS were often as important to the plot as the regulars, especially in Season One more anthological approach. Not sure ATOA was as much about creating a fictional society as it was a commentary on contemporary issues

think part of peoples' complaints arise from the way in which SNW engages with science fiction - it's often either a thinly-drawn device to enable some relatively mundane character beat (eg the aliens who force Chapel to say she loves Spock in S2), or is treated entirely as a joke to enable a gimmick episode. Both approaches are fine in isolation and common throughout Star Trek, but you can see why they start to wear on people when they come to define the entire show, especially with 10-episode seasons.

Thinly-drawn device describes how most of Trek engages with science and science fiction. It's rarely about the science. The science is the vessel to serve the idea or the conflict on. As Gene says in my sig
"Tell your story about people, not about science and gadgetry."
One of his other rules is "Don't try to tell a story about whole civilizations .We've never yet been able to get a usable story from a writer who began... "I see the strange civilization which"

 

[cooleddie74]

Hell, Carolyn Palomas in "Who Mourns for Adonais?" was more developed and integral to the plot of that episode than Chekov was, and while we learned he was 22 years old in 2267 we basically got no other character development out of him over that 50 minutes despite his presence in most scenes. Palomas, on the other hand, got more to do than anyone but Kirk and Apollo.

And was never seen again.

 

[indranee]

Brannon Braga and Asimov's love child.

Yeah. We really didnt need a holodeck episode. I also find it strange that starfleet held holodeck technology back for a century after it was invented. That's like the personal computer being invented in 1874 and being held back until 1974 or the gasoline powered car being invented in 1785 and held back until 1885. They should have left it as it was. In tng it was touted as a new technology. It should have stayed that way.

And this is how I define "gimmicky" as done in SNW. I thought I was done with this line of discussion.... ugh.... but I've got to say that it feels a bit like desperation -- "how can we tie this...inane... whatever... situation/person/thing... to TOS/the Cage/and now even TNG (Holodeck!/Computer, ARCH!) so we can fanservice Old Trekkies and show the new ones we're legit fans making the show. Well, if you're a legit fan, make good Star Trek. I loved Those Old Scientists and Subspace Rhapsody as well. I consider them good Star Trek. Not this last one. There was no real reason for an explanation for why we needed to learn why the Holodeck (with the TNG look, for goodness' sake) needed to have an explanation as to why it wasn't used Pre-TOS. Just show something that resembled a kind of a digitized environment that's being used for recreation or research. There was no reason to put on a poorly written episode taking up bandwidth in the midst of a ten-episode string. If this is the way they're going to write Season 4 and 5, I have no issues with the cancelation.

 

[T'Bonz]

It wasn't a bad episode although of course it reminded me of TNG a bit too much. I laughed out loud at the antics of the "Space show" (the name of which eludes me at the moment).

 

[TRON JA307020]

Hell, Carolyn Palomas in "Who Mourns for Adonais?" was more developed and integral to the plot of that episode than Chekov was, and while we learned he was 22 years old in 2267 we basically got no other character development out of him over that 50 minutes despite his presence in most scenes. Palomas, on the other hand, got more to do than anyone but Kirk and Apollo.

And was never seen again.

That was episodic television in the 60s. The stories while revolving around the main stars often revolved around the guest stars as well. I prefer it. Im tired of 10 to15 episode arc plot lines that have one story stretched out into numerous episodes with a ton of filler material and too many guest stsrs to remember. Imagine if the Doomsday Machine was a 13 episode season mission. I would have lost interst after the first episode.

It wasn't a bad episode although of course it reminded me of TNG a bit too much. I laughed out loud at the antics of the "Space show" (the name of which eludes me at the moment).

The Last Frontier. The best part was the chair gag.

 

[Starflight]

TOS didn't really do character arcs like SNW. Character growth was often confined to the episode. (and sometimes forgotten Guest stars in TOS were often as important to the plot as the regulars, especially in Season One more anthological approach. Not sure ATOA was as much about creating a fictional society as it was a commentary on contemporary issues

Fair point! I suppose maybe the friction for some people is in the way SNW feels like it's inverted the Star Trek playbook a little - Star Trek used to have relatively static characters encountering strange people, places, and ideas, while SNW (and Discovery/Picard) feels much more like the characters themselves are in flux and the drama involves their own self-perception, histories, and relationships with each other.

Definitely nothing wrong with that approach, but it can leave people wondering where the big sci-fi adventures have gone when the focus is so heavily on characters' internality rather than the "strange new worlds" they're discovering on their mission.

Hell, Carolyn Palomas in "Who Mourns for Adonais?" was more developed and integral to the plot of that episode than Chekov was, and while we learned he was 22 years old in 2267 we basically got no other character development out of him over that 50 minutes despite his presence in most scenes. Palomas, on the other hand, got more to do than anyone but Kirk and Apollo.

And was never seen again.

That's quite a good example of what I think I'm getting at - people like Decker, Palamas, Cochrane, and countless other characters get their arcs within an episode, and the series regulars are there to participate in it before moving onto their next adventure; as with Roddenberry's "wagon train" concept, the emotional focus changes from week to week as the heroes find new people who need help, new aliens to understand, new challenges to face, etc. The recurring characters can of course learn lessons and change too, but it has that anthology feel of "let's see what challenge we'll have to resolve this week".

With SNW, the writers' intent seems to be the inverse, as is common in a lot of more modern fiction - the sci-fi concepts and guest stars are mostly there for the recurring characters to discover something about themselves, rather than the world around them, and their arcs are designed to go on indefinitely. It works often, of course, and was frequently used in classic Trek too, but maybe SNW just goes for it too heavily and frequently on it for some people, and leaves the sci-fi side of things a bit too thinly-drawn.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Perhaps if it was the very first holodeck malfunction episode it would've been more interesting. But being the umpteenth one, it just looks like they're running out of ideas. That's my main beef with it. That and the overuse of nostalgia.

And yet, for many new fans, this may have been their first ever holodeck story. Their experiences may be very different than ours. (Similarly, my experience of ST:TMP, a a then-newbie, was very different to many others, because I had never seen "The Changeling". I had friends who watched ST II with no idea that there was a TOS episode involving Khan.)

Every few months, I meet some new fan with massive gaps in their Trek knowledge, but they are not always tempted to go back and watch all of the old stuff with characters they don't know yet. With so many older diehard fans claiming that they are done with "nuTrek", why not let the writers write the Trek they have always wanted to write?

I found this ep to be a lot of fun. I am glad it was made.

 

[fireproof78]

So what? The silly, gimmicky episodes are usually impactful from the character arc perspective. And Trek is about people more that the "crisis" on Allegorica Prime or Metaphorican Nebula.

This is where more modern Trek shines for me; it's about the main characters and their growth, rather than a sudden reveal for drama (Garrovick, Sarek and Amanda, Romulans tied fo Vulcans) and rather about the journey.

I've noticed in my Trek discussions, here, elsewhere and even on podcasts (no, not that one), that there is an aversion to long form change at times and a desire for the main characters to be more static. Kind of like Batman: no matter the villain or crisis he was still Batman.

For me, my sci-fi was a lot of coming of age, first missions, growth and change depending. Star Trek was perhaps the exception, and it wasn't my first sci-fi romp or love, so my desire in characters and changes is clearly much different than most.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Definitely nothing wrong with that approach, but it can leave people wondering where the big sci-fi adventures have gone when the focus is so heavily on characters' internality rather than the "strange new worlds" they're discovering on their mission.

Not sure TOS did “big SF adventure “ very often. The stories were often smaller scale. A threat to a crewmember or the ship. Occasionally a galactic threat like the doomsday machine, the space amoeba or the pancake parasites would occur. TNG really started the trend toward the focus on the characters internality.
People shouldn’t take the “strange new worlds” line literally. It’s just a title and a nice piece of poetry, not a mission statement or premise.

 

[fireproof78]

Not sure TOS did “big SF adventure “ very often. The stories were often smaller scale. A threat to a crewmember or the ship. Occasionally a galactic threat like the doomsday machine, the space amoeba or the pancake parasites would occur. TNG really started the trend toward the focus on the characters internality.
People shouldn’t take the “strange new worlds” line literally. It’s just a title and a nice piece of poetry, not a mission statement or premise.

*blinks in The Next Generation*

 

[TRON JA307020]

Not sure TOS did “big SF adventure “ very often. The stories were often smaller scale. A threat to a crewmember or the ship. Occasionally a galactic threat like the doomsday machine, the space amoeba or the pancake parasites would occur. TNG really started the trend toward the focus on the characters internality.
People shouldn’t take the “strange new worlds” line literally. It’s just a title and a nice piece of poetry, not a mission statement or premise.

Why have a title to entice us? We expected deep space missions exploring some strange stuff. We've gotten a bit of that but we've also gotten many more on the Enterprise or rehashing of tos/tng tropes like balance of terror, the Squire of Gothos, the gorn, the holodeck, a take on Dixon hill, a trial episide etc. They are also in love with the buffy/angel verse with the musical and the upcoming puppet episode. These guys don't have to write 26 episodes a season only 10. They've run out of original ideas already? Its incredible that this is what we are getting. There's also talk if another lower decks crossover. Why? We only have 20 episodes left. Why are they wasting time on this stuff?

 

[Starflight]

I've noticed in my Trek discussions, here, elsewhere and even on podcasts (no, not that one), that there is an aversion to long form change at times and a desire for the main characters to be more static. Kind of like Batman: no matter the villain or crisis he was still Batman.

Yeah, I'll admit that the serialised character-arc-heavy style doesn't work for me much of the time, and is one of the main barriers I have to enjoying a lot of modern Trek. I really miss the anthology-esque episodic format! The setup of having consistent characters meeting new lifeforms and exotic worlds every week, and seeing how they match up against them, can result in some great stories.

There's something to be said for "static" characters whose personalities the viewer gets familiar with, and who can be inserted into any new situation to make for great TV - you can take Data or Seven (or Bugs Bunny, or Homer Simpson, etc) and plug them into any type of plot and it's going to be good fun, in large part because they're probably not going to dramatically change or develop on a long-term basis, and are going to bring their own consistent personalities and worldviews to the story. That might be truer to life in some ways than the perpetual emotional volatility and upheaval that characters in modern drama tend to go through.

 

[fireproof78]

That might be truer to life in some ways than the perpetual emotional volatility and upheaval that characters in modern drama tend to go through.

Not in my experience, but that's an occupational hazard.

There's something to be said for "static" characters whose personalities the viewer gets familiar with

Sure, and in Star Trek TOS I'd probably be ok with it. But, in SMW I love the growth.

 

[UssGlenn]

I also find it strange that starfleet held holodeck technology back for a century after it was invented. That's like the personal computer being invented in 1874 and being held back until 1974 or the gasoline powered car being invented in 1785 and held back until 1885.

the electric car fell out of fashion for a century, and is only now coming back.

the Air Conditioner was invented in 1842 but took a century to be perfected and installed residentially.

 

[fireproof78]

Why are they wasting time on this stuff?

Because those are their stories they want to tell.

It might be a waste of audience member's time but not their's.

the electric car fell out of fashion for a century, and is only now coming back.

the Air Conditioner was invented in 1842 but took a century to be perfected and installed residentially.

Indeed. Technological growth is rarely a straight line, and given the nest constant conflict that the Federation experiences I would expect occasional data loss or imperfect prototypes.

 

[DaveyNY]

Why have a title to entice us? We expected deep space missions exploring some strange stuff. We've gotten a bit of that but we've also gotten many more on the Enterprise or rehashing of tos/tng tropes like balance of terror, the Squire of Gothos, the gorn, the holodeck, a take on Dixon hill, a trial episide etc. They are also in love with the buffy/angel verse with the musical and the upcoming puppet episode. These guys don't have to write 26 episodes a season only 10. They've run out of original ideas already? Its incredible that this is what we are getting. There's also talk if another lower decks crossover. Why? We only have 20 episodes left. Why are they wasting time on this stuff?

Perhaps because that even though you apparently don't care for it, a whole lot of other folks do.

And please tell me, after 50+ years of Trek Tales, what "Original Ideas" are left that haven't been done before.

 

[fireproof78]

Perhaps because that even though you apparently don't care for it, a whole lot of other folks do.

And please tell me, after 50+ years of Trek Takes, what "Original Ideas" are left that haven't been done before.

TMP!


Oh, wait.

Character wants revenge? Oh, wait...several times.

Android run amok? Both good and bad.

 

[DaveyNY]

TMP!


Oh, wait.

Character wants revenge? Oh, wait...several times.

Android run amok? Both good and bad.

You forgot female guest star in trouble, needs rescuing.
(or not, if one wishes to pissoff the ant-iwoke crowd)

 

[fireproof78]

You forgot female guest star in trouble, needs rescuing.

Also romance of the week never to be seen or heard from again.

Plus new technology goes haywire.

 

[DaveyNY]

Planet of the week disaster, never to be mentioned again.

Though there was one exception, which pissed off Kahn to no end.