It's relatable.
Early Criticism: What’s Unfounded and What Isn’t
- Thread starter trekfan_1
- Start date
Uniformity and responsibility train unit cohesion.
As someone half a decade away from 40, I think it would be fair to say there's a sizable portion of the fanbase in the 30-40 range, those of us who had childhoods during the Berman era. Nepo fans mostly.
Teens and twenties in this day and age seem harder to court. Outside I guess children of Berman era babies who are now growing up with the Kurzman era.
It's also killing the entire crew when I'm not sure if the other crew had killed anyone.
They didn't, the Doctor very specifically reported no causalities.
Yeah they probably didn't want to start the pilot episode with some dead kids. lol
If anything, if it was one of the War College ships that did that, at least it'd be understandable as a way to differentiate the new Starfleet philosophy to the current "kill first, ask questions" later philosophy that caused Ake to resign in the first place.
I mean in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter, but it's so easy to solve this problem so that some audience members don't feel tonal whiplash even if they can fill in the gaps themselves. I've watched Taken and John Wick and whatever and I have no problem with action heroes who murder dozens of guys without a second thought. But I don't think that's what the writers are going for with Ake.
I just have to laugh every time someone tries to erase Star Trek's historically significant and considerable female fan base this way.
That’s actually something I started wondering about when I watched episode 3. Aside from the very 21st-century language, these characters could absolutely be the cadet versions of TNG characters. Picard himself said he was a bit of a “rascal” back in the day (pun intended). And I can even imagine Riker having been something like Darem Reymi—a bit of a hotshot.
Maturity comes with age, and most cadets enter Starfleet Academy around 18. I definitely didn’t have my current level of maturity or emotional intelligence at that age. The foundation was there, sure, but it took me almost 30 years to become who I am now. From that perspective, the Starfleet Academy characters feel completely believable to me.
The only thing that really bothers me is how they talk and carry themselves—it feels very 2025. All the “bro,” “get laid,” and similar expressions. Sure, fashion cycles back every few decades, so maybe language does too—even after a thousand years. Still, the biggest contradiction for me is that the show is supposedly set in the 32nd century, yet the characters speak and behave like modern-day people. Other than that, though, I think the characters work just fine.
Tbh it's not just Star Trek. And yes, shooting badguys has always been done, John Wayne killed a ton of Indians. But post 9-11 there has been a massive shift, a LOT of American media has now become morally rotten to the core.
It starts out with legitimately good shows like '24', where the heroes have to commit drastic acts to stop absolute evil plots, like torturing terrorists to save thousands. Brutal, but appropriate.
But then less good shows copy the same acts, in way less appropriate contexts - and suddenly you have Hawaii-Five-0 members murdering low-level street thugs on the street execution style.
Back in the 80s it was a big thing that 'Dirty Harry' brought in gangsters cold. But if you watch these movies today - he's a straight up paragon of virtue compared to now - only shooting the moment the criminals themmself grab their guns. 'Make my day'.
The respect for life seems to have drastically decreased in general over the pond, and the gun become a solution to be applied in all situations. Do one mistake, don't comply immediately, grow up poor - deserve get shot.
On this one I actually don't blame either the producers, the audience, or marketing.
The core audience for Trek IS middle-aged nerdy men. The producers do want to expand that - and that's the right decision! They just weren't that successful with it - the show didn't register much outside the core fanbase.
But it's very hard to predict success - e.g. 'Wednesday' - the core fanbase of the 'Addams Family' are ALSO middle aged white men. But that show immediately attracted a lot of young, female audience as well. My guess is SFA was hoping for something similar, but just didn't reach exactly the right magic & then pivoted back to their core audience in their last marketing push.
The problem with that is that Star Trek attracts new fans by being that show people put reruns of on on the background.
And you dont really do that with streaming.
This may actually have been untrue because reruns of Star Trek are one of the things that get watched most on Paramount + and before that on Netflix.
But yes, the Kelvinverse movies and Prodigy were designed to renew the fanbase.
The Irish Navy training vessel is the sailing ship Asgard II. It doesn't mean better ships don't exist and it's the same for self dressing beds.
There is, given the existence of stun weapons, but it's beside the point anyway - even if it were the case that the scripts manufactured situations where lethality was totally unavoidable in-universe (which is, of course, always a choice made by the writers) people would be well within reason to examine what the purpose was narratively.
The destruction of the pirate ship is there to act entirely as action spectacle to give the pilot episode a visually exciting climax - that's fine, but it's inevitable that some people are then going to react by criticising that decision, especially as the kickoff point for a lighthearted comedy show that preaches about how Starfleet is an organisation of love and hope and such (doubly so given that the bridge crew whoop and cheer as the enemy ship is blown apart, versus the typical Trek fig leaf of "let's scan for survivors and beam them aboard" or some equivalent).
Last edited:
"Death to the opposition!"
Some war college graduate, probably.
Some war college graduate, probably.
Welcome to television writing 101.
Using modern day lingo was a conscience decision that was made for ALL Kurtzman era trek. It started in Star Trek 2009 and has been that way since. Im not surprised they stayed the course with SA. Why change now? And since this show is about youngsters , that modern lingo would only be amplified . I don't think the the modern showrunmers care which century the show is based in. Even SNW is full of modern day slang. It's a creative license they just decided on evoking.
Having said that, I wish they would tone it down a tad. And hopefully the person who is given the Franchise keys next, will make the characters speak in a manner that is less obvious of modern day talk . Some of modern day talk will ALLWAYS filter into the shows. TOS had some dialog that sounded like the 60s. TNG =80s. But it was never very overt.
Having said that, I wish they would tone it down a tad. And hopefully the person who is given the Franchise keys next, will make the characters speak in a manner that is less obvious of modern day talk . Some of modern day talk will ALLWAYS filter into the shows. TOS had some dialog that sounded like the 60s. TNG =80s. But it was never very overt.
Meh. I prefer modern lingo as opposed to the neutral, wooden pseudo-speak of BermaTrek. We're not going to speak like that in the future either, so what difference does it make?
Similar threads
- Poll
