It looks like the upcoming Lower Decks season will be the last one 😭😭 I didn’t have any expectations for this show but it has quickly grown to be one of my favorites. I’ll miss it

  • StametsM
    link
    fedilink
    18 months ago

    You may not be trying to be gatekeepy but every single comment of yours in this thread directly fits that definition. Discovery was the only show for a time and then others came about. Just because it is going to be the only show active at the moment means nothing. Especially when Legacy has been pushed hard. Could be they’re gearing up for the release of that. Could be a thousand other things. But it doesn’t help anyone to be negative, focus on the downsides and then suggest that its not even worth it because its not for the typical Trek demographic.

    • Flying SquidM
      link
      fedilink
      28 months ago

      See my other comment. This really isn’t about the show itself, this is about Paramount executives dictating what a show should be rather than let the creative team do so.

      Legacy has been pushed hard by the creative team. I don’t see any sign of Paramount executives going for it… probably because it would be a lot more expensive.

      All Paramount cares about right now is getting people to join and stay on Paramount Plus. Everything Star Trek (apart from maybe movies) has to be viewed through that lens at the moment.

      I wish the entertainment business wasn’t all about money, I really do. But it is. And that doesn’t make for good television most of the time.

      • StametsM
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Kurtzman has actively said he’s trying to get Legacy done but that he cannot snap his fingers and make it happen because Paramount exists. I’d say that’s a pretty big sign along with two other Trek shows winding down and opening budget for a new show. Legacy won’t be cheap to make and Discovery and Lower Decks are the two more expensive shows to make. Discovery also uses CBS stages in Toronto at their newly built studio, stages which will now be available after Discovery ends.

        Viewing everything through the lens of money is fine and should be done that way all the time because it is a profit driven company. But you’ve been phrasing this like even the concept of appealing to a different demographic is bad. That is my primary issue with what you’ve been saying here. That appealing to someone who isn’t a straight white dude is not a good thing. You suggested as much with your first comment saying “what, you don’t wanna watch teenage drama?” I know a lot of people that would but you’re not reflecting their opinion here. You’re just insinuating that because it’s for a different demographic that makes it immediately bad and suspicious without ever considering the perspective of someone in that demographic. You’re reducing them to a profit point and suggesting that they only matter in the sense that money can be gotten from them. No consideration has been given to whether or not they’d want that type of show or what that demographic thinks. It’s just “they’re only using them for money” which is accurate about your demographic too and extremely reductive to discussions.

        • Flying SquidM
          link
          fedilink
          38 months ago

          Kurtzman has actively said he’s trying to get Legacy done but that he cannot snap his fingers and make it happen because Paramount exists.

          But that’s my point. Kurtzman is not the one greenlighting these shows. That’s not in his power. He can want to make Legacy more than anything in the world, but Paramount is the one that gets to say which show gets made. And maybe even Kurtzman suggested, “let’s do a Starfleet Academy show.” But him suggesting it is not the reason it was greenlit.

          But you’ve been phrasing this like even the concept of appealing to a different demographic is bad.

          As I said, my issue is that this, right now, looks like it will be the only Star Trek show left after SNW is over (and I doubt it will last more than five seasons either), which I maintain is a terrible idea, specifically because it is intended to appeal to a specific demographic. Animated shows aside, Star Trek has never been created with the intention to appeal to a specific demographic. It has always been a show for everyone. Paramount is explicitly calling this a YA show.

          A YA Star Trek show is just fine. I think it’s great if it is a good show and introduces a new audience to it.

          A YA Star Trek show being the only thing left is a terrible idea. And that is what is the case right now. Maybe Legacy will be greenlit and I will change my tune, but as it is right now, I will maintain that a YA Star Trek being the only Star Trek show left is a bad thing and is not what most current fans want.

          Is it really a good idea to introduce a new audience a new audience to Star Trek at the expense of the current audience? Because I don’t think it is.

          And before you say it, I would definitely not say that Discovery would be the same sort of thing. Discovery was not sold as a show made to a specific audience.

        • Flying SquidM
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Let me add one thing I am hopeful about for the show, since I have only said negative things so far. I am hopeful that the show does more to flesh out the Star Trek of the 32nd century. I think that would be a fine thing. Discovery started down an interesting path and continuing down that path is not a bad idea.

          Just not, again, at the expense of the rest of Star Trek.

          Edit: One more thought, since you brought up LGBT+ representation in Star Trek, something you know I support and wish had happened much earlier… If Paramount announced a show, selling it as “LGBT+ Star Trek,” wouldn’t that make you at least a little suspicious about the motivations behind the show and what executives might demand of it?

          • StametsM
            link
            fedilink
            18 months ago

            Edit: One more thought, since you brought up LGBT+ representation in Star Trek, something you know I support and wish had happened much earlier… If Paramount announced a show, selling it as “LGBT+ Star Trek,” wouldn’t that make you at least a little suspicious about the motivations behind the show and what executives might demand of it?

            No. I would have been excited as fuck that they finally saw me and gave a fuck about me. After being ignored for years to cater to the straight white man I would have been fucking ecstatic that they were bothering to announce that they would be showing stuff aimed towards people like me. I would have been surprised that they did so because I would know it would piss off a bunch of fans who would be frustrated that it wouldn’t be made for them as well as the fans who were just homophobic/bigoted assholes. I would have thought that it was a calculated move but one they clearly were confident in which meant that the product they were going to be making would have been heavily geared towards my specific demographic (thus the announcement) which would loop into more excitement. If we’re using current DSC alum then I would be even more excited knowing that the creator of the show (Fuller) was gay, that a number of writers on the show were gay and that they were casting gay/trans/enby actors to play gay/trans/enby roles. I wouldn’t have cared about the motivations behind the show. I would only care that after 60 years of watching the same people being waited on hand and foot I finally got a tiny slice of that treatment and got to see a world with people like me in it dealing with problems like the ones I deal with and facing challenges that are reflective of challenges in my own life.

            • Flying SquidM
              link
              fedilink
              28 months ago

              Okay, fair enough. It would make me instantly suspicious. Hopeful since it would represent me, but very suspicious.

              Let me use a different example to explain why I would be suspicious. But I also used an example that you were too close to.

              Let’s use the example of “Black Star Trek.” A Star Trek that represents the black experience? Wonderful idea! Look at the explorations of it on DS9 already!

              But until these questions were answered, I would be very suspicious:

              How much black representation would there be behind the scenes? How much would it lean into stereotypes? Would this be a 1950s “romance stories written for women by men” scenario? Would “Star Trek” be put on the back burner over “black” to the point that it is only a Star Trek series in name and it isn’t really “Black Star Trek?”

              So yes- LGBT+ Star Trek with a lot of queer input behind the scenes and with actors like Anthony Rapp representing the community on camera, that would be great… but that is not guaranteed and I was in the entertainment industry too long to not be cynical about this sort of thing. And in the case of YA Star Trek, I am not convinced yet that it will not be a bunch of sappy romance bullshit written by people who aren’t Star Trek fans and don’t understand sci-fi rather than exploring strange new worlds and seeking out new life and new civilizations.

              I am never optimistic about these things when they’re announced this way until I find out exactly who will be involved in putting them together. I’ve seen this sort of thing go south way too many times now.

              • StametsM
                link
                fedilink
                38 months ago

                I am never optimistic about these things when they’re announced this way until I find out exactly who will be involved in putting them together. I’ve seen this sort of thing go south way too many times now.

                And therein lies the massive difference between us. I’m looking at this new show and I am for sure being cautious but I’m optimistic. I’m looking at this from the side of more representation for more people, more Star Trek stories told in a new light, more exploration of a new world, more world building, more characters, more time to spend with concepts and core tenants of Star Trek, more time to see parts of Trek that we’ve never seen before. I’m not blind to the fact that it could go wrong but I’m thinking about this by focusing on the good because my entire life has been dark, depressing and filled with suicidal ideation every day that I wake up. I’m also not seeing it from the perspective of “other people”. I’m seeing this as the same way I saw Discovery. That they’re showing parts of the Star Trek world to people who’ve never seen it for them before and who are finally getting attention and the spotlight put on them for a moment and get their chance to shine.

                • Flying SquidM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  28 months ago

                  That is fair enough, that’s something we will just have to disagree on. But for both of our sakes, I hope you turn out to be correct. I really do. The last thing I want is to be right. Honestly.