News Season 2 will be the last (show cancelled)

[Michael]

They shouldn't have had him wanting to be a doctor period.

Because you don't go to Starfleet Academy and come out a doctor, you go to the Starfleet Medical Academy. Which means for four years the character basically has no real "niche" of his own. Which is pretty much exactly what we saw in the show.

Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe the logistics are a little wonky, but I personally wouldn’t have changed that aspect about Jay-Den because a Klingon wanting to be a healer is an interesting thing to have on the show. IIRC they don’t even make it very clear whether he’s studying to become a doctor or something closer to a nurse. They mention him declaring molecular biology and regenerative therapies as his specialties, which probably makes it more likely that he’s going to be a doctor, but they don’t really spell it out either. But I guess the nurse idea would make it a little more believable for him to complete these studies as part of his SFA training.

One of the things that crippled the show there was having to treat Ake as a main character and giving her multiple A and B stories that should have gone to fleshing out the main five.

But I suppose if you're paying 750k an episode for Holly Hunter you gotta do something with her.

I have to disagree again, getting Hunter for Ake was absolutely the best thing they could do, because she’s a delight in the role and helps to elevate the show.

Do you watch all your media through the lens of an accountant for the production company or just Star Trek?

They can run it and still write it off to some extent.

But that would obviously be no fun for the kind of people who hate the show and whose wet dream it would be to deny the second season to those that do enjoy it.

We’ll see what happens, but at this point I seriously doubt we’ll actually see any of these wild scenarios play out that get bandied about by the people who didn’t enjoy the show. Curiously I don’t see anyone suggesting Strange New Worlds getting shelved as a tax write-off, even though the show was basically cancelled at the same time by the same incoming management. The bitterness towards that production seems to be in a different league, even though from all we know both shows weren’t the ratings successes they needed to be in order for them to be continued.

 

[Tosk]

Curiously I don’t see anyone suggesting Strange New Worlds getting shelved as a tax write-off, even though the show was basically cancelled at the same time by the same incoming management.

But SNW got the go-ahead to film a truncated final season to finish up, whereas SFA got rug-pulled on a cliffhanger ending. So it does feel like SFA is already at a disadvantage.

 

[BillJ]

Curiously I don’t see anyone suggesting Strange New Worlds getting shelved as a tax write-off, even though the show was basically cancelled at the same time by the same incoming management.

As much as I hate to say this as a straight white male, don't underestimate that SNW is led by a white, male character as a difference in how the two shows are treated by certain corners of fandom and by the new corporate leaders.

 

[Michael]

But SNW got the go-ahead to film a truncated final season to finish up, whereas SFA got rug-pulled on a cliffhanger ending. So it does feel like SFA is already at a disadvantage.

That’s true, I forgot about that. I admit it would be interesting to at some point have some concrete viewership numbers for these streaming shows. Obviously both shows don’t seem to have brought in as much as the people in charge needed them to, but it would for sure be interesting to know just how far they are apart or how they compare to other modern Trek outings. The vacuum of information that’s created by them not publishing any numbers makes it possible for bad faith actors to fill it up with their own guesswork and slanted data points.

As much as I hate to say this as a straight white male, don't underestimate that SNW is led by a white, male character as a difference in how the two shows are treated by certain corners of fandom and by the new corporate leaders.

Oh, I don’t doubt that this is the case at all. Overwhelmingly the visible criticism of Starfleet Academy seems to have focussed on how the show’s supposed “wokeness” and “DEI casting” was what’s wrong about it. So no surprise there that the superficially more “conservative” Trek show gets a pass by those same critics.

 

[BillJ]

Oh, I don’t doubt that this is the case at all. Overwhelmingly the visible criticism of Starfleet Academy seems to have focussed on how the show’s supposed “wokeness” and “DEI casting” was what’s wrong about it. So no surprise there that the superficially more “conservative” Trek show gets a pass by those same critics.

I think Starfleet Academy probably focused a little too much on "equality", sometimes detrimental to the story. Because it sometimes felt like the story was lost in it. On the other hand, Trek has always been "woke". So, for me, much like SNW, SFA didn't work for me because it was largely dull.

I've seen seven episodes. The two I consider good (pilot, sixth episode) had a lot going on in it and were absolutely good 'Star Trek'.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

I would argue that if the people who "didn't watch" and thought SFA was a bad idea stopped commenting and saying things, that would be an even worse sign for Star Trek.

I tend to think this is similar to a relationship. When people expend the effort to complain, most of the time underlying their criticism is the fact they still care about the relationship enough to complain. When people stop complaining and go cold, that's even worse. It's an indication they've given up and things are nearing an end.

A toxic relationship is better ended. Sometimes you just have to cut off an element.

I understand there's grifters and awful people online who've co-opted Star Trek to get views and clicks to complain about DEI and social justice. But I also believe there's a contingent of fans who honestly didn't like this concept and it's execution, and don't like the overall direction of this franchise.

There absolutely are and we saw many pop in over the various episode threads. And like normal genuine people they expressed their incompatability with the show and walked out. The genuine ones are not still regularly hanging around now.

 

[Michael]

I think Starfleet Academy probably focused a little too much on "equality", sometimes detrimental to the story. Because it sometimes felt like the story was lost in it.

I find that an interesting statement, but I admit that I’m not sure I understand what exactly you’re referring to. Can you give a specific example of when there was too much focus on “equality”? And how it was to the detriment of the story?

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

What the fuck are you even on about?

Someone who hypocritically dismisses individual statements about SFA being a disaster, yet sells "plenty" as some sort of evidence of its value. Yeah, whoops, Mikey.

This is where fanaticism in trying to defend what is seen as an awful series and hypocritical positions run your entire argument into a wall.

Next...

but in your earlier post you linked that assessment to the viewership numbers, which simply doesn’t make much sense

Then cut the run-around bullshit and lay it all out right here: why did SFA--and SFA alone--fail and end up cancelled?

You must live in a very black and white world where there is no nuance at all. Why would me saying the conservative backlash against Starfleet Academy was unprecedented mean that I think the hate that Discovery received didn’t exist?

Your words:

"I don’t recall there ever being such extreme reactions to any earlier Trek series, such as an online “news site” explicitly seeking out writers who “hate the show”, a conservative cable news network running segments on how the show is “woke trash” for featuring gay characters, “diversity casting” and “ugly obese characters”, or even US administration officials coming out to trash it."

Apparently you do not even consider what you're posting before clicking on Post Reply. Above, in saying you "...cannot recall such extreme reactions to any earlier Trek series..." or have no awareness or memory of any conservative cable news channel criticizing a ST series for being "woke trash" means you were just born last year or are posting BS just because. DISCO was constantly attacked for being "woke trash", its casting choices, gay characters, etc. not only by the growlers from the Right Wing YouTube Geek channels, but in mainstream conservative media outlets. They wasted no time picking DISCO apart and claiming it was anything other than "real" Star Trek. Anyone even remotely aware of NuTrek's media coverage journey could not escape the constant Right Wing attacks against DISCO, yet you claim no ST series was ever subjected to such "extreme" reactions as that seen with SFA?

A poor defense usually begins with a lack of awareness of the subject being defended.

 

[BillJ]

I find that an interesting statement, but I admit that I’m not sure I understand what exactly you’re referring to. Can you give a specific example of when there was too much focus on “equality”? And how it was to the detriment of the story?

I won't deep dive, but off the top of my head two revolve around Genesis (the blond cadet).

One, when they are on the battlefield she is easily distracted because someone said something about her family. Being easily distracted by that doesn't make one captain material. So, then she becomes captain.

Two, in the episode during the training mission, she is working as a team with another cadet. When they find something, everyone starts showering her with the praise.

Three, in the same episode as two, we have two teams, one the "good guys" (Starfleet Academy), the other the "bad guys" (the War College). On one side we had a group of minorities, on the other we had a group of pretty generic white guys (one with pointed ears glued on). The perceived good guys were the all minority group.

I tend to think the TPTB didn't really think through how some of this stuff would play out over the course of the series. None of the above sunk the series for me (boredom did that), but they did kinda stick out like a sore thumb. All of this in the opinion of a straight, 54 year old white guy whose been around the franchise since 1975.

 

[BillJ]

Then cut the run-around bullshit and lay it all out right here: why did SFA--and SFA alone--fail and end up cancelled?

It didn't. SNW also got cancelled and then got a last minute reprieve. Prodigy also got cancelled.

 

[Elaise]

But that would obviously be no fun for the kind of people who hate the show and whose wet dream it would be to deny the second season to those that do enjoy it.

We’ll see what happens, but at this point I seriously doubt we’ll actually see any of these wild scenarios play out that get bandied about by the people who didn’t enjoy the show. Curiously I don’t see anyone suggesting Strange New Worlds getting shelved as a tax write-off, even though the show was basically cancelled at the same time by the same incoming management. The bitterness towards that production seems to be in a different league, even though from all we know both shows weren’t the ratings successes they needed to be in order for them to be continued.

You bring up a very good point.

When that batwoman show got shelved, every show that is perceived or is not popular gets that question put upon it for a follow season.

I went back and looked at the engagement for SNW and you are right. It has steadily gone down over each season. It surprising similarity to SNA, though i'm not sure i'd count that given length of time is not equal.

Personally I think the animosity to SFA outside of here is its close connection to Disco. Or it could be that Alex Kurtzman was one of the showrunners for this season.

Though I doubt the latter part, mostly because his name is still attached to all the shows in some manner.

Edit: Something I forgot to add for a reason why they would still play the second season. They contract paramount signed might include a heavy financial penalty if they do not air it. I would almost bet money on that being in the contract. I bet that batwoman shelving made that a concern for a lot of people in charge of these contracts.

 

[Elaise]

But SNW got the go-ahead to film a truncated final season to finish up, whereas SFA got rug-pulled on a cliffhanger ending. So it does feel like SFA is already at a disadvantage.

Well, they did get contracted that second season for a reason. You would think they should have anticipated this.

 

[BillJ]

They contract paramount signed might include a heavy financial penalty if they do not air it.

It would still come down to the economics of the situation. Even with penalty, if it ends up making them more money to bury it, they'd bury it.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

SNW also had the commodity of time. There was still a year left of Kurzman's contract, time before Skydance fully takes over so there was the opportunity for some kind of wrap up project (originally a 90 minute streaming film). Discovery and Lower Decks both had time to rewrite their finales to serve as actual endings.

If Academy were to have still been cancelled after 2 seasons in a different climate it may have gotten the chance to rework its finale or get a little something to serve as a wrap up. Lots of factors worked against it.

 

[BillJ]

I think another thing that worked against SFA was simply economics and TPTB not reading the room on the diminishing returns that Trek was bringing in. Hunter and Giamatti weren't cheap to bring in, then they built the most expensive sets that Trek had ever had.

The show failed in multiple ways (for me) and they are all at the feet of Alex Kurtzman. Much like the failures of late-90's/early-2000's Trek are solely at the feet of Rick Berman. Kurtzman had a good run, but everyone runs out of gas eventually.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe the logistics are a little wonky, but I personally wouldn’t have changed that aspect about Jay-Den because a Klingon wanting to be a healer is an interesting thing to have on the show. IIRC they don’t even make it very clear whether he’s studying to become a doctor or something closer to a nurse. They mention him declaring molecular biology and regenerative therapies as his specialties, which probably makes it more likely that he’s going to be a doctor, but they don’t really spell it out either. But I guess the nurse idea would make it a little more believable for him to complete these studies as part of his SFA training.


I have to disagree again, getting Hunter for Ake was absolutely the best thing they could do, because she’s a delight in the role and helps to elevate the show.

Do you watch all your media through the lens of an accountant for the production company or just Star Trek?


But that would obviously be no fun for the kind of people who hate the show and whose wet dream it would be to deny the second season to those that do enjoy it.

We’ll see what happens, but at this point I seriously doubt we’ll actually see any of these wild scenarios play out that get bandied about by the people who didn’t enjoy the show. Curiously I don’t see anyone suggesting Strange New Worlds getting shelved as a tax write-off, even though the show was basically cancelled at the same time by the same incoming management. The bitterness towards that production seems to be in a different league, even though from all we know both shows weren’t the ratings successes they needed to be in order for them to be continued.

SNWs 3rd season was a huge ratings drop. The season was the worst of the 3. I would not minded them canceling the show much earlier. It really has dropped in quality and it just does not fit with TOS at all.

 

[Firebird]

I think another thing that worked against SFA was simply economics and TPTB not reading the room on the diminishing returns that Trek was bringing in. Hunter and Giamatti weren't cheap to bring in, then they built the most expensive sets that Trek had ever had.

We're in the midst of the streaming bubble bursting, the contraction of the film industry, and the continuing hangover from the pandemic and the dual strikes. It's really a miracle things have been able to make it this far to begin with.

 

[Michael]

Someone who hypocritically dismisses individual statements about SFA being a disaster, yet sells "plenty" as some sort of evidence of its value. Yeah, whoops, Mikey.

Seriously, I don’t know how many ways there are for me to tell you that saying “plenty of people would disagree with the show being a disaster” was not some attempt to create “evidence of its value” or “defend” it. Again, I was not dismissing your personal assessment of the show. You can think about it what you want. This was merely to counter the point you were making about the cancellation or the viewership numbers somehow being “evidence” for the show being a “disaster”. I was pointing out that whether it was a “disaster” or not lies in the eyes of each viewer. And to repeat: Something can be utter shite and get phenomenal viewership numbers, or conversely be a creative success even though nobody watched it. There just isn’t the kind of factual correlation between the two, as you want to claim.

So please cut the crap with saying I’m somehow “defending” the show or trying to “sell its value” by pointing to other people liking it. This is a fiction and not what I’m doing at all. And at it this point there’s no way for me to be any clearer than that. Unless you want to misunderstand on purpose to prolong the argument.

This is where fanaticism in trying to defend what is seen as an awful series and hypocritical positions run your entire argument into a wall.

My argument is that the cancellation and the viewership numbers don’t prove shit about the show’s quality or merit one way or the other. I don’t see you even trying to refute this actual point I’m making. I only see you deflecting by calling me a fanatic and a hypocrite and misrepresenting what I’m saying. I wonder why that is. Maybe you’re just not able to actually address what I’m actually saying? Are there shows that are considered “good” even though they flopped in terms of viewership numbers? And conversely, are there shows that suck ass, even though they are ratings successes?

Then cut the run-around bullshit and lay it all out right here: why did SFA--and SFA alone--fail and end up cancelled?

Well, obviously because it didn’t get the viewership numbers the decision makers needed it to get. We don't really know those numbers, but it’s easy enough to deduce that they weren’t what they needed to be.

As for why those numbers were disappointing, there’s several theories, some of which I listed earlier: the streaming platform it ran on doesn’t have big enough reach, the negative reactions to preceding Trek outings like Discovery and Picard made viewers skeptical to even check this newest outing out, the unrealistic expectations from the studio (“every show needs to be the next Stranger Things“), the changing studio leadership, the conservative backlash. And probably also because the show just didn’t end up being what the majority of people who did tune in wanted it to be. All of these were likely factors. I don’t claim to know which one played the biggest role. You (and others) on the other hand seem to be pretty certain it can only be because of the show’s supposed poor quality. I personally don’t see this as evident.

Your words:

"I don’t recall there ever being such extreme reactions to any earlier Trek series, such as an online “news site” explicitly seeking out writers who “hate the show”, a conservative cable news network running segments on how the show is “woke trash” for featuring gay characters, “diversity casting” and “ugly obese characters”, or even US administration officials coming out to trash it."

Apparently you do not even consider what you're posting before clicking on Post Reply. Above, in saying you "...cannot recall such extreme reactions to any earlier Trek series..." or have no awareness or memory of any conservative cable news channel criticizing a ST series for being "woke trash" means you were just born last year or are posting BS just because. DISCO was constantly attacked for being "woke trash", its casting choices, gay characters, etc. not only by the growlers from the Right Wing YouTube Geek channels, but in mainstream conservative media outlets. They wasted no time picking DISCO apart and claiming it was anything other than "real" Star Trek. Anyone even remotely aware of NuTrek's media coverage journey could not escape the constant Right Wing attacks against DISCO, yet you claim no ST series was ever subjected to such "extreme" reactions as that seen with SFA?

A poor defense usually begins with a lack of awareness of the subject being defended.

I’m sorry, but no, I genuinely don’t recall Discovery being faced with segments running on cable news networks attacking that show’s “wokeness”. It those existed I missed reports about them. Can you point me to such a report?

As for the other points I was listing: Where was there a “news site” actively and openly looking for writers who “must hate Discovery”? And were there any US admin officials trashing Discovery? I named those specific things, because I don’t recall there being something as extreme as these when Discovery was on. But that does of course not mean that I think that show wasn’t treated pretty poorly and unfairly by conservative reviewers.

But also, you yourself said the way Discovery was disparaged was only “second to SFA”. So aren’t we in agreement that SFA was treated even worse? I’m not sure what “second to SFA” would even mean otherwise? That’s all that I was trying to say with “unprecedented”.

 

[tenmei]

Three, in the same episode as two, we have two teams, one the "good guys" (Starfleet Academy), the other the "bad guys" (the War College). On one side we had a group of minorities, on the other we had a group of pretty generic white guys (one with pointed ears glued on). The perceived good guys were the all minority group.

Did we watch the same version of Vitus Reflux? The War College team in the overnight game included Dzolo and several other non "pretty generic white guys". It looks like the teams are fairly evenly weighted by your criteria.

 

[Dukhat]

We're in the midst of the streaming bubble bursting, the contraction of the film industry, and the continuing hangover from the pandemic and the dual strikes. It's really a miracle things have been able to make it this far to begin with.

This. If after all these cancellations, anyone still truly believes that Paramount/CBS will all of a sudden out of nowhere say ‘We’ve green-lit United!,’ they are pretty delusional. I don’t even see P+ existing beyond 2027.