The fact Dak'Rah was a coward and let his men die so he can escape that moon assures his place in Grethor.
Isn't most of Klingon lore based on the ancient Samurai code? at least that is what manifested in TNG with talk of honor and duty and self sacrifice, dying in battle etc...
Samurai Viking Bikers.
Sounds like an Asylum movie.
Just bumping this one point in my OP. I have issues with this show but SAM is not one of them
Kinda cool that …
the episode I referenced - "Real Life" got a call back. This episode came to my mind immediately once I saw The Doctor was on the show and that woud feature a photonic lifeform that saw him as a mentor.
"Real life" is an underrated episode of Voyager where we saw a ton of Character development for the Doctor.
"Real life" is an underrated episode of Voyager where we saw a ton of Character development for the Doctor.
I have zero interest in watching this series, but it's quite funny how one of these right wing pop culture commentary channels spent over an entire hour reviewing an episode of a series they apparently hate. If SFA does nothing else it has allowed these people to farm lots of outrage. https://imgur.com/8r5oz54
Right-wingers always need to rush off to their safe spaces to complain whenever their narrow worldview is challenged.Heck, Fox News apparently did a segment about the show featuring a gay Klingon today (yesterday?) as per Karim Diané’s Instagram. Starfleet Academy appears to be extremely triggering to right-wing snowflakes.
Self-identification is your prerogative of course, but I would not classify someone who doesn't much talk about their right-wing positions as a right-winger. I obviously don't read all your posts, but other than your saying you have rightward leanings I would not have guessed. Especially since you seem to embrace things like empathy, which is not a trait I associate with them, anyway.
I won't go too afar in the weeds but empathy was something I never felt was lacking in the circles I learned from so this definitely is new idea to me
I'd say this is a mutual phenomenon, more to do with current norms more so that simple ideology.
I think that "How can you have a female Jem'Hadar!" is a bogus complaint by people JUST to have something to complain about and just demonstrates a failure of the imagination. (Uh, if you can CLONE a bunch of males you can CLONE a female!)
Also, anything using the word "woke" is a garbage argument.
But heck, I am so old remember people complaining about "that old bald guy - and haven't they CURED baldness by the 24th century!? UNBELIEVABLE!" and how "You can't have Star Trek without Kirk and Spock and McCoy!" and how "It's on a *Space-Station*!? There's no starship! So what, they are gonna Boldy Sit Where No One Has Sat Before! BORING!" and even "A black Vulcan!? HOW can there be a BLACK VULCAN!?" (I dunno, how can there be a *White Vulcan* for THAT MATTER!? How does THAT make any MORE sense!?)
I think there ARE legit complaints you can make. Though over-all I LIKE the show a lot more than I EXPECTED I would.
And I am a guy who STOPPED watching "Voyager" AND quite "Enterprise" ONLY to come back for the 4th season.
The Betazoids not having black eyes IS a legit complaint, but the fact that Zoe's character BLEW OUT her dad's auditory cortex actually explains WHY they can't mind talk, because I would IMAGINE that the auditory cortex ALSO translates psychic waves...transmissions...signals...into a "voice" you "hear" on your head (really, ALL voices are just voices we hear in our heads!)
Leaving Sisko and Cassidy Yates child OFF the family tree was a big mistake. (I would have been HAPPIER if SAM had discovered the Sisko DID return and that the new Kai and the Bajoran government HID him on Bajor so that he could have a life AWAY from being the Emissary...and just before he died of old age, the Prophets TOOK HIM BACK *AGAIN*...and that secret was BURIED for 800 years.
My only complaint about the Discoverse shows is...if the TOS Enterprise "really" looked like the "Strange New Worlds" Enterprise - then WHAT did "The Motion Picture" - "The Undiscovered Country" Enterprise "REALLY" look like!?
Or for that matter. What did the Excelsior REALLY look like, on the Bridge!? Or the Voyager because it has a *tiny* bridge compared to the Discoprise...with a tiny bridge viewscreen, and no window.. but it's SOMEHOW 100 years MORE ADVANCED than Discovery!?
But as for SNW as a show...teen drama isn't my big thing, and they
Also, anything using the word "woke" is a garbage argument.
But heck, I am so old remember people complaining about "that old bald guy - and haven't they CURED baldness by the 24th century!? UNBELIEVABLE!" and how "You can't have Star Trek without Kirk and Spock and McCoy!" and how "It's on a *Space-Station*!? There's no starship! So what, they are gonna Boldy Sit Where No One Has Sat Before! BORING!" and even "A black Vulcan!? HOW can there be a BLACK VULCAN!?" (I dunno, how can there be a *White Vulcan* for THAT MATTER!? How does THAT make any MORE sense!?)
I think there ARE legit complaints you can make. Though over-all I LIKE the show a lot more than I EXPECTED I would.
And I am a guy who STOPPED watching "Voyager" AND quite "Enterprise" ONLY to come back for the 4th season.
The Betazoids not having black eyes IS a legit complaint, but the fact that Zoe's character BLEW OUT her dad's auditory cortex actually explains WHY they can't mind talk, because I would IMAGINE that the auditory cortex ALSO translates psychic waves...transmissions...signals...into a "voice" you "hear" on your head (really, ALL voices are just voices we hear in our heads!)
Leaving Sisko and Cassidy Yates child OFF the family tree was a big mistake. (I would have been HAPPIER if SAM had discovered the Sisko DID return and that the new Kai and the Bajoran government HID him on Bajor so that he could have a life AWAY from being the Emissary...and just before he died of old age, the Prophets TOOK HIM BACK *AGAIN*...and that secret was BURIED for 800 years.
My only complaint about the Discoverse shows is...if the TOS Enterprise "really" looked like the "Strange New Worlds" Enterprise - then WHAT did "The Motion Picture" - "The Undiscovered Country" Enterprise "REALLY" look like!?
Or for that matter. What did the Excelsior REALLY look like, on the Bridge!? Or the Voyager because it has a *tiny* bridge compared to the Discoprise...with a tiny bridge viewscreen, and no window.. but it's SOMEHOW 100 years MORE ADVANCED than Discovery!?
But as for SNW as a show...teen drama isn't my big thing, and they
The Excelsior's bridge actually looks like this.
And Voyager's bridge actually looks like this.
Also, if you think they have small viewscreens, you should see the Defiant's!
The minute you see them ALL as adaptations of some near-magical high tech future, those things stop mattering. You can even switch between versions you reference, like Lower Decks and Short Treks did.
Why would you want things on screen to stop mattering?
I’d say I’m a centrist with a bit of a libertarian lean. It’s fair to say newer Trek has leaned more left than earlier versions, but honestly, good storytelling and strong writing matter way more to me than politics ever will - no matter what side it comes from.
When it comes to Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, my reaction has mostly been mixed to negative - and that’s not because of politics. It’s mainly about the characters , contemporary youth vibe, and the writing. The characters are the biggest issue for me. Most just don’t connect. The ones that do still aren’t at that “I absolutely love this character” level.
That said, the wave of heavy backlash lately - especially from more extreme corners - has been just as frustrating. Episodes like 6 and the most recent one were actually stronger. But certain “complaint” channels immediately jump to thumbnails and titles like “It Keeps Getting Worse!” or “What Did They Do Now?” with exaggerated AI thumbnails making the characters look dumb or ridiculous.
To me, that says more about the content creator’s approach than the show itself.
If you look at a lot of those channels, almost everything they post is negative. It’s not balanced criticism - it’s constant negativity. Personally, even if I hated a show, I wouldn’t turn it into nonstop attack content. I’d explain my issues, maybe make a couple videos about it, and then move on.
The reality though is that balanced or middle-ground channels usually don’t grow as fast unless they already have a big audience. Extremes - super positive or super negative - tend to get more engagement. The super left and super right spaces both thrive on strong emotional reactions. Algorithms reward outrage and strong opinions. People like echo chambers, whether it’s all praise or all hate - and content that leans heavily one way ( usually hate) usually performs better.
Back to Starfleet Academy: it’s not my favorite Trek show, and it has real flaws in my opinion. But it also doesn’t deserve the level of exaggerated hate it sometimes gets. It’s fair to criticize it. It’s not fair to act like every flaw equals some huge cultural collapse.
It’s kind of like going to a restaurant, getting a meal that’s just okay, and then spending an hour online complaining not about the food - but about the garnish being “offensive” or attacking the server for something unrelated. Criticism should match the actual problem.
When it comes to Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, my reaction has mostly been mixed to negative - and that’s not because of politics. It’s mainly about the characters , contemporary youth vibe, and the writing. The characters are the biggest issue for me. Most just don’t connect. The ones that do still aren’t at that “I absolutely love this character” level.
That said, the wave of heavy backlash lately - especially from more extreme corners - has been just as frustrating. Episodes like 6 and the most recent one were actually stronger. But certain “complaint” channels immediately jump to thumbnails and titles like “It Keeps Getting Worse!” or “What Did They Do Now?” with exaggerated AI thumbnails making the characters look dumb or ridiculous.
To me, that says more about the content creator’s approach than the show itself.
If you look at a lot of those channels, almost everything they post is negative. It’s not balanced criticism - it’s constant negativity. Personally, even if I hated a show, I wouldn’t turn it into nonstop attack content. I’d explain my issues, maybe make a couple videos about it, and then move on.
The reality though is that balanced or middle-ground channels usually don’t grow as fast unless they already have a big audience. Extremes - super positive or super negative - tend to get more engagement. The super left and super right spaces both thrive on strong emotional reactions. Algorithms reward outrage and strong opinions. People like echo chambers, whether it’s all praise or all hate - and content that leans heavily one way ( usually hate) usually performs better.
Back to Starfleet Academy: it’s not my favorite Trek show, and it has real flaws in my opinion. But it also doesn’t deserve the level of exaggerated hate it sometimes gets. It’s fair to criticize it. It’s not fair to act like every flaw equals some huge cultural collapse.
It’s kind of like going to a restaurant, getting a meal that’s just okay, and then spending an hour online complaining not about the food - but about the garnish being “offensive” or attacking the server for something unrelated. Criticism should match the actual problem.
Last edited:
This!
I'm sorry but the criticism over newer Trek has lost the effect because it insists on personal attacks towards production teams, actors and fans.
Go back and look at what happened with Doctor Who when Jodie became the Doctor. It only got worse since then. The show really leaned into its politics, and the ratings tanked. SFA seems to be following the same course as Doctor Who. You'll still get some good episodes, but you'll have far more bad ones. But it won't be enough keep the show on the air.
And folks will come out and bash it. Same thing happened with Doctor Who.
