ST: Strange New Worlds Canceled

[Astyanax]

SNW sure looks good, but it's go so soul. No social commentary.

Uh, what? There's huge social commentary in every episode, starting with the first episode of Season 1 and the police state that had developed a weapon of mass destruction.

What was called social commentary back in the 60s seems to now be simply branded as "woke".

SNW wears its big heart and soul on its sleeve, even if it has to get a little (okay, or a lot) corny to do so. I love it for that. It's just that many of this generation's Trek fans don't like the messaging. But like it did in the 60s, Trek is intended to be gently disruptive in using the "straw man" model.

This is coming from someone who despises Discovery and Section 31, and will be skipping Starfleet Academy.

I really believe SNW is different. Sure, there are some continuity and lore breaks, but every IP does that too.

 

[3Dsf]

That's a shame. SNW has been lots of fun. Uneven, but then what flavour of Trek hasn't been?

 

[Captain Dunsel]

That's a shame. SNW has been lots of fun. Uneven, but then what flavour of Trek hasn't been?

While each Classic series had a few clunkers…SNW is quite the opposite, with far more clunkers than quality episodes.

 

[cboath]

People say they want social commentary, then complain when they get it because 'i watch these things to get away from that stuff'. Then will likely follow up with 'well, we want good not over the top social commentary' wbich some will still complain about. You simply cant win if you are making a show. These days, you do it and half the people will be offended it is against their viewpoint too, going right back to you just cant win.

I know that likely comes off as cynical, but you can see i all in various threads.

Im fine with a good story and or adventure.

 

[Lightning]

I'd like to note that we have more SNW yet to air (26) than has been broadcast (20). show isn't even to the halfway point yet.

 

[Doomsday]

Uh, what? There's huge social commentary in every episode, starting with the first episode of Season 1 and the police state that had developed a weapon of mass destruction.

What was called social commentary back in the 60s seems to now be simply branded as "woke".

SNW wears its big heart and soul on its sleeve, even if it has to get a little (okay, or a lot) corny to do so. I love it for that. It's just that many of this generation's Trek fans don't like the messaging. But like it did in the 60s, Trek is intended to be gently disruptive in using the "straw man" model.

This is coming from someone who despises Discovery and Section 31, and will be skipping Starfleet Academy.

I really believe SNW is different. Sure, there are some continuity and lore breaks, but every IP does that too.

Are you okay?

I've seen the whole show thus far and there most certainly is not social commentary in every episode. Is it okay that I just have an opinion?

You seem super pressed that I'm not a big enough fan of the show you like.

 

[Lightning]

Ive seen the whole show thus far and there most certainly is not social commentary in every episode

Of the two statements, every episode is closer to the truth than zero episodes. But I don't want to go parse every episode for a percentage.

 

[Doomsday]

Of the two statements, every episode is closer to the truth than zero episodes. But I don't want to go parse every episode for a percentage.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

People say they want social commentary, then complain when they get it…

Here is the difference…Classic Trek, TNG, DS9…etc. presented social commentary that was well-written and actually made one think, beyond the episode, about the scenarios that were presented.

Social commentary, as presented in the Kurtzman era, is poorly-written, with all the creative depth of a bath tub.

 

[Cephus]

SNW sure looks good, but it's go so soul. No social commentary. It's too bad given the budgets they received; I guess it's true the less money you have, the better your product tends to be. I'm speaking of mainstream hollywood productions, not bottom-of-the-barrel slop that gets dumped on Tubi.

I don't care about the looks. I care about the story and the characters and the consistently good writing. I have zero interest in eye candy. That's why I haven't cared about modern Trek for decades.

 

[Cephus]

Here is the difference…Classic Trek, TNG, DS9…etc. presented social commentary that was well-written and actually made one think, beyond the episode, about the scenarios that were presented.

Social commentary, as presented in the Kurtzman era, is poorly-written, with all the creative depth of a bath tub.

It is fine to have social commentary in the midst of telling a good story. It is not fine to have social commentary to the exclusion of a good story. That's what we've gotten for years on end. Preaching and crap writing. That's the problem.

 

[CB2001]

 

[JiminSTLouis]

So season 3 hasn’t even aired yet, season 4 is in production, season 5 is approved, and the big headline is SNW is CANCELLED?

 

[Captain Dunsel]

So season 3 hasn’t even aired yet, season 4 is in production, season 5 is approved, and the big headline is SNW is CANCELLED?

It would seem so:

 

[MARK M3]

The Difference is( It's impossible to compare the talent of the Original series to...Strange New Worlds), The QUALITY of the writers and WRITING of the original series VS WHO wrote/writes for Strange New Worlds.Take a look at who wrote for the original series...then Google their credentials. Do the same for Strange New Worlds.
Case closed.

And Strange New Worlds.

 

[ForbiddenOnion]

Star Trek became what is is by being a niche show that had a die hard audience. They want Trek to be the cool show that everyone loves rather than the nerdy show beloved by its core group. You can tell, they want Star Trek to be as big as Marvel or Star Wars and to that I defer to the great midwestern philosopher Wayne Campbell.

"I mean, Led Zeppelin didn't write tunes everybody liked. They left that to the Bee Gees."

 

[Bloop]

It's pretty sad that people seem to keep getting work today just because they previously got work doing anything in their field, regardless of the quality. I used to feel like people at "the top" of their professions got there because the were more talented and had tons of experience. Now I realize that talent and experience are a very small part of it. Who you know is the main thing (maybe the only thing).

The Difference is( It's impossible to compare the talent of the Original series to...Strange New Worlds), The QUALITY of the writers and WRITING of the original series VS WHO wrote/writes for Strange New Worlds.Take a look at who wrote for the original series...then Google their credentials. Do the same for Strange New Worlds.
Case closed.View attachment 1941798View attachment 1941799View attachment 1941800



And Strange New Worlds.


View attachment 1941801

 

[AnubisGuard]

Not surprised; they killed Lower Decks and Discovery after 5 seasons, so I was kinda expecting this.

What does suck is the last season being shorter. 10 episode seasons every 2 - 3 years is a joke as it is, so to cut it down to 6 eps. is really stingy.

 

[cboath]

Not surprised; they killed Lower Decks and Discovery after 5 seasons, so I was kinda expecting this.

What does suck is the last season being shorter. 10 episode seasons every 2 - 3 years is a joke as it is, so to cut it down to 6 eps. is really stingy.

We are talking paramount. They are also in mid takeover, so probably some bs in play there too.

 

[JiminSTLouis]

In my opinion, Season 3 didn’t get off to a good start with episode 1. Ridiculous solutions to the crisis (but it is Star Trek I suppose). There were some new clips in the opening sequence that I liked, like a Klingon D7.