Strange New Worlds review **POSSIBLE SPOILERS**

[Mudd]

There is one moment in the first episode where they have the tech do something that 23rd century tech shouldn't be able to do. And I was taken aback by it, and laughed. Later I realized that TOS had this particular tech do even more ludicrous things on occasion, without even batting an eye. Still, it was the single most Akiva Goldsman moment in this Goldsman script.

The second episode, "Children of The Comet," is very different from the pilot. It's written with a lot of nuance, and is an honest-to-gods science fiction story, to the extent that can apply to the TV variety. Afterward I was kind of "how did that happen on Star Trek?"

This isn't any "Discoverse;" to the extent that any such thing might exist, it's confined to their 32nd century now. I don't think they had definite plans for SNW when they did the second season conclusion of STD, but if they hadn't quarantined Discovery and her crew in a different place it would probably have been impossible to do SNW fully in the way that they have. The two shows could scarcely share so specific a milieu.

This is Trek's 23rd century, "Prime" if you must call it that, and in many small ways and a few large, Strange New Worlds owns the 23rd century now. It doesn't reimagine or reboot Trek. It just restarts it.

 

[Mudd]

Narrator: The fans hated it.

Three or four of them, at least. And they have Youtube channels.

 

[DEWLine]

I'm still watching DSC and I'm definitely not hate-watching.

Back to SNW...

 

[Mudd]

And dedicated Trek sites like trekmovie and trekcore, and actual Trek actors who are on that very same show... but of course some BBSers know things better.

The truth of this has nothing to do with Star Trek. You can be the all-time expert on all things Star Trek and claiming this is still mistaken. It's not something you get to vote on.

I interpret "But it's not, of course." and "You can get everyone who's ever worked on the show to swear out affidavits that they believe it is a character, and it still will not be a character." as more than just an opinion.

That'd be just one more thing that you'd be completely wrong about, then.

I disagree to me the ships are very much characters, but then again I have an emotional attachment to many inanimate objects. Which can be a failing if one considers how much money gets pored into project cars etc.

I have emotional attachments to many objects as well. That does not transform them into beings.

If you compare it to buildings, I would say the Enterprise is akin to Wright's Fallingwater. It is a landmark.

That's a reasonable comparison.

 

[Mudd]

Spoiler

the Robert April cameo, which I guess means TAS is no longer canon?

It's more than a cameo, and evidently recurring. And it's quite good. Nothing to complain about there, at all.

There is, BTW, another bit of a cast surprise that's rather delightful, and I haven't seen it chattered about online yet, as that one has.

Spoiler: Spoiler

Lieutenant Sam Kirk is a recurring character in at least the first two episodes.

 

[Gepard]

What if you like the "high profile, big budget whiffs"?

Then you keep getting them with Discovery and Picard.

Me, I'm hoping desperately that SNW isn't anything like those two.

 

[fireproof78]

The truth of this has nothing to do with Star Trek. You can be the all-time expert on all things Star Trek and claiming this is still mistaken. It's not something you get to vote on.

Indeed.

I have emotional attachments to many objects as well. That does not transform them into beings.

Also, indeed.

 

[gvn2fly]

Awww…I should not have read the IGN review…

the one that mentions

Spoiler

the Robert April cameo, which I guess means TAS is no longer canon?

There were a lot of errors in that show

 

[JoaquinSlowly]

Awww…I should not have read the IGN review…

the one that mentions

Spoiler

the Robert April cameo, which I guess means TAS is no longer canon?

‪‪I don’t think that’s necessarily the case.

Spoiler

We know that a lot of things in TAS don’t translate 1:1 to TOS, and ‪‪I think we can chalk that up to different representations in different mediums allowing for variation in visual depictions and representations, while still respecting the canon, and continuity of the content of the story.

‪‪Because of the way Akiva Goldsman, SNW’s co-show runner/EP, refers to TAS as canon, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that the events of The Counter-Clock Incident are canon, they just didn’t appear exactly as depicted in TAS.

For reference, Goldsman referred to TAS as canon on the Deadline Picard podcast in an interview back when he was developing SNW, and working on Picard S01 from a couple years back.

Seasons 1, 2, 3 of the Original Series, and the Animated Series, are considered the first four seasons of [TOS]. That is canon, proper, as are all televised or filmed Star Trek stories, those are all canon, and if you're making Star Trek, especially in the unified ViacomCBS universe, those are sort of 'fair-game,' creatively.

 

[fireproof78]

‪‪I don’t think that’s necessarily the case.

Spoiler

We know that a lot of things in TAS don’t translate 1:1 to TOS, and ‪‪I think we can chalk that up to different representations in different mediums allowing for variation in visual depictions and representations, while still respecting the canon, and continuity of the content of the story.

‪‪Because of the way Akiva Goldsman, SNW’s co-show runner/EP, refers to TAS as canon, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that the events of The Counter-Clock Incident are canon, they just didn’t appear exactly as depicted in TAS.

For reference, Goldsman referred to TAS as canon on the Deadline Picard podcast in an interview back when he was developing SNW, and working on Picard S01 from a couple years back.

I thought he hated Trek and had never watched it?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Spoiler

the Robert April cameo, which I guess means TAS is no longer canon?

As much as I love TAS, I'm not bothered in the slightest by this news.

 

[Mudd]

I didn't time the shows, but they really move. They pack a lot of story into an hour or so.

 

[starfleettanner]

Spoiler

the Robert April cameo, which I guess means TAS is no longer canon?

It's more than a cameo, and evidently recurring. And it's quite good. Nothing to complain about there, at all.

There is, BTW, another bit of a cast surprise that's rather delightful, and I haven't seen it chattered about online yet, as that one has.

Spoiler: Spoiler

Lieutenant Sam Kirk is a recurring character in at least the first two episodes.

Is that who the mustache guy was seen in the trailer on the bridge? The blueshirt?

 

[Mudd]

Is that who the mustache guy was seen in the trailer on the bridge? The blueshirt?

Yes.

 

[Tuskin38]

Spoiler: Spoiler

Lieutenant Sam Kirk is a recurring character in at least the first two episodes.

Spoiler

That seems so obvious now. The moustache should have been the giveaway.

I kid, but that's great. Characters like this I'm fine with, one we know almost zero about. Makes his death in TOS more tragic.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I just read a non-spoiler review on Tumblr that basically said it's the same political stuff as the rest of modern Trek but anti-"woke" fans might not notice because a rugged white man is in charge

They said episodes 1 and 2 were okay nothing special, which is pretty much what I'm expecting.

 

[NCC-73515]

The truth of this has nothing to do with Star Trek. You can be the all-time expert on all things Star Trek and claiming this is still mistaken. It's not something you get to vote on.

the two sides (or options) are:
A: the actors and people at trek websites are lying or have no clue, but you do.
B: the actors and people at trek websites know what they're talking about, and you're wrong.

pretty easy to figure out what's more likely.

since that won't be understood, here's an example:
the hemmer actor says his quarters are on deck 4. the review authors confirm that. then you come in and say that's not true. who wins?

 

[Jinn]

IMO, if the Enterprise is a character, then one that is very underutilized, looks very cool and mostly does important background stuff that isn't relevant to the plot, only to be eventually dramatically killed off. The Airiam of TOS. Really, fans should be furious. Even Voyager got more "character" moments.

 

[gvn2fly]

I didn't see a dedicated review thread so here are a few more. Apologies if some of these have been posted somewhere on here.

San Francisco Chronicle - 3/4
"Star Trek: Strange New Worlds” leverages audience familiarity in a manner that’s welcoming rather than suffocating."

Paste Magazine - 9/10
"Smart, addictive and flat out fun, Strange New Worlds is the best Star Trek series since The Next Generation and acts as a faithful love letter to the original.

Solzy at the Movies - 4/5
"While Star Trek: Strange New Worlds must stick to canon and Pike's fate, the show offers a contemporary vibe as fans get to visit new worlds and cultures."

Here are a few more.

Variety
"Strange New Worlds is content to fall back on the basics: a likable cast traveling the galaxy, having wacky sci-fi adventures, and generally having a hell of a good time. By and large, this approach works. While it lacks “Discovery’s” ambition, “Strange New Worlds” also avoids that show’s struggles with serialization and scope, as each episode limits its focus to the story at hand. The result is as straightforward and direct as the show’s leading man, and nearly as likable. There’s no strain here, and while the more episodic style may be old-fashioned, it’s refreshing to watch something that isn’t pretending to be a 10-hour movie."

IGN Movies 9/10-
"Funny, inspiring, and kind of amazing, Strange New Worlds is, so far, the best new Trek in years."

Slashfilm
"In returning to a familiar ship, familiar characters (Pike, Spock, Number One, Khan, Uhura, Dr. M'Benga, Nurse Chapel), and Trek's classical and well-worn hour-long episodic format, the franchise has finally reached a point where it is ... however unbelievable it might be ... legitimately good once again. No qualifications are needed any longer. "Strange New Worlds" is, quite simply, the best "Star Trek" show in decades."

 

[gvn2fly]

Slashfilm
"In returning to a familiar ship, familiar characters (Pike, Spock, Number One, Khan, Uhura, Dr. M'Benga, Nurse Chapel), and Trek's classical and well-worn hour-long episodic format, the franchise has finally reached a point where it is ... however unbelievable it might be ... legitimately good once again. No qualifications are needed any longer. "Strange New Worlds" is, quite simply, the best "Star Trek" show in decades."

FYI: The Slashfilm review has episode descriptions and spoilers for the first 5 episodes in case anyone is interested. Each episode's plot is specifically discussed. There are some major plot and character spoilers so proceed with caution..or if you're like me..Enjoy!