• Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    This sucks. I mean its not my favorite Trek but it definitely was Trek. It just needed a season or two to get footing. The ‘wokeness’ is just bullshit. They have 1 gay character and a very side character boyfriend. Literally the rest is jocks and pretty girls besides my girl Sam the autism stand in (fucking love her). Cant help but feel this is orchestrated. I mean Riker fucked a nonbinary alien and all those chuds love Riker('s image).

      • Juice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 hours ago

        A season today is only 8-10 episodes. TNG was legit pretty wonky for the first 20-30 episodes.

        Like it wasnt bad, I really like Holly Hunter, and several of the characters were felling really strong in the last few EPs of season 1. But I do worry that the shorter seasons just aren’t really conducive to telling Star Trek stories.

        A movie might be cool, but it will never happen. And we will have to see what they do with season 2. The show doesn’t have too much margin to get worse, like bad writing or directing. Some things about the show, like visual effects and sound effects, like there were just a lot of really bad decisions around it. Nothing that couldn’t be fixed tho

        • ThunderComplex@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          What does the amount of episodes per season have to do with anything? The creator knows how many episodes they’ll have to deliver and that they need to make it compelling enough to get the S2 renewal. It doesn’t matter if you have 8 or 28 episodes to do that.
          Additionally, the UK has been able to make very memorable TV shows for decades and they get 6 episodes total.

          And what type of excuse is “TNG was legit pretty wonky for the first 20-30 episodes”?? So because that show took a while to get its footing 89 years ago, shows today are also allowed to take a couple years before getting good? Are we just not supposed to expect improvements?

          I wholeheartedly agree with the statement “if it takes two whole seasons for a show to “just get good” it was a shit show.”. We should have higher expectations.

          • Juice@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            50 minutes ago

            You seem more invested in criticizing it than trying to enjoy yourself.

            I also didn’t say the first season was bad, i liked it. Theres stuff to criticize but SAM quickly became a fav character, as the actress is quite good. The episode where they hyperbolic time-chambered her in order to make her emotionally resilient was quite good, sort of an inverse to the Lal episode in TNG.

            There was stuff to criticize and maybe you just really didn’t like it. Thats fair, opinions about a new star trek show are purely subjective and that is OK. But TV just isnt as good as it used to be, in part because of the shorter seasons, and changes to the industry from streaming. And it wasnt actually that long ago, not for me at least. So idk what to tell ya champ. Starfleet academy was a little rough but that doesn’t mean I think a show is allowed to be straight ass for 100 episodes before it gets good. I think star trek shows, the ones we love, weren’t perfect either in their first seasons. Ben Sisko was just straight up weird at first, Picard was a total dick. Lieutenant Yar was not a great actress (she was much better when she came back briefly in s3), Whorf’s make up looked stupid and bad.

            Certain things about the production cycles of shows do change over time. A show can get better writers, the actors can get better in their roles, more viewers mean better budgets and pay. Some shows start out good and then quickly decline. I’d rather have 6 seasons of a show that started out rough but got better after 1-2 seasons, than something that starts good but starts to suck after season 1 and gets canceled in 2-3 seasons.

  • MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    William Shatner just said it best again:

    And when the Next Gen came out; there was tons of hate because it ‘wasn’t Star Trek’ and the cast probably was in fear from the fans. Again when the series with Bakula came out, it too was panned by the fans because it ‘wasn’t Star Trek.’ Star Trek is different for everyone.”

    So, to all the outspoken trolls and haters out there, a huge Fuck You for sabotaging the entire franchise.

    • Alchalide@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I don’t dislike it because it’s woke. I dislike it because it’s a really bad show.

      • Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Which means your opinion on whether or not it should continue is irrelevant.

        It literally isn’t a show for you.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      18 hours ago

      So, to all the outspoken trolls and haters out there, a huge Fuck You for sabotaging the entire franchise.

      Surely it was the writers who sabotaged the show by producing this instead of literally anything else.

    • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Funny how we can influence a TV show into being canceled because it deals with “icky wokeness” but can’t do anything about the actual icky child fucker.

      • Sl00k@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        2 days ago

        What’s crazy is I can’t even pinpoint what they even mean by the wokeness? It’s really not overbearing, nor anymore than SNW or other TV shows. Maybe I’m just in a West Coast echo chamber

        • RamenJunkie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Academy is honestly less “woke” than Discovery, or even SNW.

          Basically though, these jokers HATE the gay Klingon.

        • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The ones who aren’t being dishonest pieces of shit feeding into divisivism are usually complaining about the lack of quality of the writing and/or the overt nature of ‘leftist’ messaging. Meaning anything remotely progressive like gay people existing or touchy-feely things coming from guys in a manner where those things are not directly relevant to the plot or don’t actually change anything end up feeling forced, and thusly feel like they’re sprinkled in just to “be progressive”.

          Often times there is some credibility to the complaints of the quality of writing, it’s just the ‘woke’ thing that triggered them to think about why the thing on screen is happening. Instead of noticing that it’s a general ham-fisted nature to the writing (which Trek basically always has in quite a few episodes of all series), they stupidly blame ‘woke’.

          That is the power of the brainwashing coming from the dishonest propagandists like Ben Shapiro and their ilk: Legitimate shortcomings become things caused by “the other”, instead of basic variability of quality.

          IMO, the bigger problem with Trek is Hollywood dumbasses like Kurtzman like pushing messaging more than writing good stories to challenge the alternate POV, which plays right into the shitty propagandists’ hands.

          There are plenty of old episodes that would embarass modern Trek with being progressive since they didn’t make it an overt declaration (tell the audience), but showed why the bigoted view was bad. Whereas new Trek loves to just… declare the progressive view as good, and then go on to Main Character the problem away: Poor writing even when you agree with the message.

          Sure, there are also quite a few hamfisted episodes of old Trek, but I’d much rather take 24 episode seasons smattered with ham than 10 episodes with an overarching story that loves to simply declare itself superior. It’s so much easier to ignore the poorly written episodes in old Trek when there is so much to take in, especially when there are some gems to find.

          IMO, the overproduction is also hurting a lot of newer IPs even beyond being a huge cost. It sets the expectations higher. It’s so much easier to gloss over a 6/10 in writing which is inevitable in a long running series no matter the message, when the visuals and the rest aren’t a 10/10 in every scene. If the episodes weren’t insanely expensive, long productions, they’d be able to put out a lot more episodes to drown out the bad ones. Instead, they give us 10, in a season that’s almost always a bit rocky to begin with in every series.

          I think setting expectation is one reason why Lower Decks gets so much love. It’s “just a cartoon”, so when the writing nails a mature topic, it feels like a proper treat.

          • gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Whereas new Trek loves to just… declare the progressive view as good

            can you cite example, not saying you’re wrong, but I always feel modern trek does representation without any clear messaging/opinion at all. Its a case of we “have these things” but fear actually using the things in a morality play. I’d be happier with modern trek if it actually took a proper side

          • pEg@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            There are plenty of old episodes that would embarass modern Trek with being progressive since they didn’t make it an overt declaration (tell the audience), but showed why the bigoted view was bad. Whereas new Trek loves to just… declare the progressive view as good

            Are you for real?

            • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Yes. I also said there was plenty of silly things.

              Two things can be true at once. Especially when there are far more episodes of previous Trek, and not only TOS.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            The reason people like lower deck so much is because it was obviously written by an actual Star Trek fan rather than someone trying to write generic science fiction and then slap a Star Trek aesthetic on top. Which was what discovery was like in the early days.

          • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            I disagree that cartoons set lower expectations. I expected a lot from Lower Decks and that expectation was well satisfied. One thing LDS does benefit from is the 22 minute runtime. 45 minute episodes are too long.

            • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              21 hours ago

              Cartoons don’t set lower expectations. They naturally come with a different set of expectations that happens to have more leeway with writing. Especially in comedies vs overproduced “serious” shows.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          I mean, it ain’t exactly The Honeymooners or Dukes of Hazzard, is it? That’s the standard that we’re measuring “woke” against these days!

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The franchise died because of poor ratings, not poor reviews.

      Do you think The Bachelor stayed on air for years because of critical acclaim?

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Maybe if anyone involved during the Kurtzman era, actually watched the shows and movies first, and had good writing skills things would have gone different. This show is insulting to Start Trek.

      You want to say fuck you to somebody, say to the people who greenlit this crap. Kurtzman should have been removed a long time ago. Stop throwing a tantrum.

    • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The fact that this is happening now and not at the end of season 2 implies studio shenaniganary and not listening to some dumb chuds.

      Why would they sabotage viewership for season 2 instead of canceling it outright? Or at a minimum just dump the rest of it now?

      My gut says it’s virtue signaling by management to the Ellison who’s gonna run the place in the not too distant future. Canceling the “woke” trek sounds like something sufficiently sycophantic for a Hollywood exec.

      The worst part is now the chuds are taking a victory lap.

      • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Season 2 completed production a couple of weeks ago. SNW has completed production on its final 2 seasons. This is the first time there has been a clear deck with no Trek in development or production since 2005.

        It isn’t necessarily virtue signalling. A new ownership team tends to like having a fresh start on key properties. It comes at the right time, with Kurtzman’s contract up at the end of the year. Financially there’ll be a bit of brinkmanship. If the studio greenlights another Kurtzman Trek show now, they’ll be handcuffed to him for the next few years and his deal will go up in value. Hold off, and they can keep the price down or go for someone else.

        • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          So if it had been popular would it have continued? Serious question, because it sounds like they weren’t going to continue SFA after season 2 in the first place.

          • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            If it were a phenomenon then maybe it would have been continued, but Trek is expensive, and they don’t have Netflix paying for it these days.

            I never got the impression it was a show that would stick around. Obviously it would be limited to 4 seasons anyway without replacing most of the cast, but I think it pretty much wrapped everything up in season 1.

      • ryper@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why would they sabotage viewership for season 2 instead of canceling it outright? Or at a minimum just dump the rest of it now?

        They can’t dump season 2 right now because it only finished filming a month ago and there’s a lot to be done after that.

    • Soupbreaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Since the news broke that Academy was cancelled, I’ve seen a number of comments implying that people who posted negatively about it on Lemmy are in some way responsible for its cancellation. That’s a ridiculous notion. Nobody with the power to make that decision gives a single shit about what goes on here, nor are they even aware of our existence. I get that you’re frustrated, but your ire is misdirected.

      • teslekova@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ha! Blaming people on Reddit is barely believable. Maybe an exec is a big Reddit fan, or it gets back to the board because the social media pr team keeps tabs on Reddit to make sure AMAs aren’t being given in problematic fora.

        But Lemmy? Delusion.

      • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I was taking your comment seriously until the performative bigotry at the end. At that point I thought “Here is a person who is perfectly capable of thoughtful conversation, but is trying to look like an ass.”

    • LurkingLuddite@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      He would be far more correct in the general sense if it were only bigots and idiots complaining that were never going to be fans of a more intellectual show anyways.

      New Trek has had lots of criticism from actual, existing Trek fans that want to see the IP flourish into another 100+ episode series. Of course the usual bigots and propagandists also hated on it, but they were always going to! To thusly pretend there are zero honest fans who didn’t like Discovery or Picard, etc, is to completely ignore valid critique.

      Star Trek might be different for everyone, but there are many core throughlines and principles that were heavily changed for New Trek. That doesn’t inherently make New Trek bad by itself, but it also means the old fans aren’t just whining to whine.

      Maybe they actually have some good points when they’re comparing things that are getting dropped one after the other, not even approaching episode counts that the original hit with three seasons, to the rest of the older series which all have significantly more than that.

      Yes, they all had silly episodes, so why did these older things with plenty of sillyness garner so many fans? It’s foolish to pretend it’s all bigots and idiots simply saying, “it’s different!”.

    • minorkeys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yeah this is a stupid ass take. The show isn’t enough of what people liked about startrek. That’s not the audiences fault, it’s the showrunner’s fault, who famously didn’t watch startrek, didn’t care about the IP, didn’t care what people liked about it and just wanted to use the IP to promote ideology and worldview. Aka propaganda. Atleast the OS to Enterprise era gave us enough of what we liked that we could sit through what we didn’t. Just because trek was progressive doesn’t mean all the fanbase was on board with all of it. The progressiveness wasn’t the only thing of value that it was. This latest installment failed to strike that balanced at all because it intentionally and arrogantly and sadistically refused to even attempt to.

  • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    Im sad, there was such heart and potential in this generation of Star Trek.

    Fuck the haters.

    • Rioting Pacifist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Its weird Everytime i go back to reddit it pushes more and more hateful subs on me I think they just keep adding underscores or something.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Oh come on it’s not that people hate new Star Trek shows it’s that they hate badly written Star Trek shows. There’s plenty of examples of Star Trek shows that people love.

      • StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Good thing people stuck with TNG season one despite rehashes like ‘The Naked Now’, offensive episodes like ‘Code of Honor’ and most of a season of sub par offerings.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          18 hours ago

          At least he weren’t trying to show teenage drama down my throat.

          What I want to know is what market research they did to come to the conclusion that this would be positively received, who was the show aimed at, because it certainly isn’t Star Trek fans.

          • StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            18 hours ago

            No one was “shoving anything down your throat.”

            You don’t need to watch.

            You may have been the key 15-34 year old demographic that advertisers and marketers target back in the 1990s. If so, you are not the key demographic now. Why do you think others should be paying for your preferences?

              • StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                15 hours ago

                The franchise wouldn’t exist if my 90 something year old mother-in-law and women like her didn’t watch it all and buy the books and magazines since 1966.

                Or, if I and my partner and others hadn’t been watching since TOS was in first run.

                Having defended TNG against TOS fans who wanted it killed, and having seen TAS killed by fan campaigns in the mid 1970s, I have no time for people in their 40s and 50s who would rather kill a show than have new Trek that might be meaningful to my GenZ kids.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Not just because they’re new though. But because they’re badly written.

      • @echodot @supersquirrel

        Much better ideas for series have been suggested by those that enjoy Star Trek, and they have been ignored.

        Star Date Beverly Hills 90210 wasn’t what we asked for.

        Even when a series has good characters and interesting ideas, it still needs compelling plots and competent script writing.

        Personally I’ve watched every episode of every other Star Trek Series, even the weaker ones. I’ve given up on Academy. I’m just really not interested 😕🖖

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          There’s so much stuff that they could have gone with and then instead they decided to go with disaster movie on a galactic scale. Ugh.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve been watching them, and most are pretty bad… I don’t hate them, but like, I get it. Great production value, but the stories are weak and rather trite.

  • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I know an STA hater. She only watched the first half of episode 1, and assumed the rest of the show would be equally grimdark and “federation bad”.

    I was also an STA hater after the first half of episode 1, but then I watched the second half. Then I watched the other episodes. But some people don’t have that kind of patience.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I think people don’t like the direction that they’re taking Star Trek in general. It was one of the few science fiction shows which was actually hopeful about the future, but the writers have decided that they can’t think of creative ways to go in that direction so they’re going to blow everything up.

      It wouldn’t be so bad if it made some kind of logical sense, but they just had everything destroyed for hand wavy reasons without any basis in canon.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I actually really liked the first few episodes. Not amazing, but solid.

      It’s the ones that come after that were a bit disappointing.