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

  • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    187 months ago

    This makes me sad, but it also may be for the best. Lower Decks is great, but it has one of those premises that relies on the characters remaining stagnant. I don’t really want to watch 10 seasons of these characters being junior staff while still being at the center of the most significant events on the ship, or have Mariner’s character regress every few seasons so she can relearn the difference between questioning authority and self-sabotage. I’m not saying that’s happened yet, but they had to promote the characters once already. There’s only so long they can go before either their lack of development becomes a problem or the characters have to stop being Lower Deckers. I’d rather they end too soon than too late.

    • @accideath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      67 months ago

      Yes but, who says the show couldn’t evolve around its cast and follow them on their path to become officers? I’d certainly watch that. Would even be interesting to see some slightly higher ranked non bridge officers do their thing in their daily lives.

      • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Yeah, I’d definitely watch that, my point is just that it doesn’t really feel like that would be Lower Decks anymore, that feels like a new show (“Star Trek: Middle Management”?). Who knows, if there’s enough enthusiasm for Lower Decks, maybe we’ll get a follow up that’s like what you’re describing, or maybe Mariner and friends having misadventures on their first command.

        And don’t get me wrong, they definitely could keep going with this show as-is for a while longer. But it feels like eventually this is going to stop being, “the untold stories from Starfleets low-ranking support crew,” and just be, “TNG but irreverent.” Which is also fun, but also a different show (in fact I think that’s called The Orville).

        • @accideath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          37 months ago

          Fair. I hope, that they replace LD with something as good. The best Trek we had in a long time, besides maybe SNW. And with the other already announced future star trek shows n films not sounding as exciting to me, I really hope we get something new worthwhile

      • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        That’s true, but there’s a line from season 7 of the Simpsons that feels relevant. Burns asks who Homer is for the 100th times and Smithers says something to the effect of, “Simpson, sir. All the recent events of your life have revolved around him in some way.” Lower Decks is starting to feel a bit like this. Watching the Lower Deckers be at the center of events that affect the entire Cerritos or even the whole Federation while still being nobodies is starting to get a little silly.

        That being said, I don’t think the show needs to end after this next season either. I think they could get at least 2, maybe even 3 good seasons out this premise and these characters. But having the showrunners know they’re working on their last season and bringing it to a good conclusion isn’t the worst thing in the world. It’s definitely better than running until it jumps the shark and getting unceremoniously cancelled between seasons. And maybe we’ll get a good follow-up show, like something based around a Commander Mariner, or even a Lower Decks set in a different era (I would love a TOS style Lower Decks).

    • @Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      There’s only so long they can go before either their lack of development becomes a problem or the characters have to stop being Lower Deckers.

      I don’t know man. I see your point and don’t entirely disagree, but… Lower Decks is an animation show. My point being that for example, Lisa Simpson is obviously very gifted academically, and has done a lot of things in her life, but she’s still a 2nd grader. As another example, Cartman, Kenny, Kyle and Stan have only advanced from the 3th grade to the 4th grade, and they’re pretty often involved in global problems.

      So I really don’t think that would be the issue. Not for me, at least.

      • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        Yeah, but the Simpsons is a story of the week sitcom. Lower Decks has season long story lines with status quo changing results, like Mariner and Freeman’s relationship being reveled, or Rutherford getting his memory back. They even had to acknowledge in Season 3 that the Lower Deckers were kinda famous for all of the big events they’d been involved in. They definitely recognize the passage of time and consequences of actions, unlike things like Simpsons, Futurama, Family Guy, Bob’s Burgers, etc. (South Park is kinda a whole different beast, but I’d argue it’s changed so much over the years it could be considered 3 or 4 different shows at this point.)

        • @Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -27 months ago

          Animation shows can engage in it, or choose not to. Simple as.

          Real life shows are more constrained by actors aging.

          A season could be days or years, or nothing at all, depending on the decisions of the writers.

          There’s no problem with it. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill.

          • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            37 months ago

            I don’t know what to tell you man, there’s a difference in storytelling between Futurama and Disenchanted. I think most people would find it jarring if they went from season-long story threads and character progression to a weekly status quo reset.

              • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                27 months ago

                Well, I’m trying to be polite as I explain that going from serialized storytelling to a, “Status Quo Is God,” sitcom would be an extremely weird choice that would probably ruin the show.

                • @Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I’m trying to politely explain that I understand what you’re saying, but that I think that it is a false dilemma.

                  I don’t know if you watch Doctor Who, but it is notorious for not being consistent with it’s own established canon. One could say the established canon is that there is no established canon. This isn’t too unrelated, because Trek does a bit of it too. Some implications in certain episodes are left just ignored even though they’d actually have massive implications. Transporter incidents, holodeck mishaps, instant across the universe speeds, all that jazz. They need them for an episode, but weirdly the whole Trek world isn’t changed by the implications of something. Also unimaginably weird and universe upsetting things are pretty normal in Trek.

                  So why would it be that weird for the Lower Deckers to just be themselves for X seasons? Progress as needed, or don’t. You seem to think your opinions mean that somehow it would be so weird none would watch it. Not true. In the slightest.

                  • @pjwestin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    0
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    So, cannon and serialization aren’t the same thing. Cannon is the general mythos of the show, while serialization is the method of storytelling. Specifically, it’s having a story unfold over many episodes, a season, or even several seasons. Dr. Who treats its cannon very lightly, but the show is fairly serialized, with small hints being dropped throughout the season on larger plot lines, even in stand-alone episodes (the Pandorica, the Silence, Bad Wolf, etc.). It also has large changes that last from season to season, regeneration being the most obvious.

                    Compare that to TOS, where everything is a stand-alone story and all the characters return to their status quo positions at the start of the next episode. Pretty much nothing carries over from week to week (except Harry Mudd, I guess). You could watch every single episode of TOS out of order and it would make perfect sense (aside from the two-parters, obviously). If you watched every episode of Doctor Who out of order, you’d wonder why the companions keep swapping, why David Tennant keeps getting replaced with Peter Capaldi, and God help you if you’re trying to follow any of Moffat’s later episodes.

                    Lower Decks is pretty serialized, with things like the Texas class ships and the Pakleds developing over the course of or in between seasons (the Locarno storyline is probably most involved of these). But, aside from story, there is a lot of character development that goes on over the series. Mariner has a completely different relationship with her mother, Ransom, and the Federation now than in season 1. Boimler is more self-assured and less obsessed with rules and rank. D’Vana is more open about her Orion upbringing and even changed career tracks. There’s a lot of growth and change compared to the characters in TOS.

                    So, I’m saying that if they keep going for too long, they’ll either have to promote these characters out of the lower decks or it will be weird that they’re still stuck at menial ranks. You seem to be saying they should just place the characters in a state of arrested development and only have them, “go be themselves,” in wacky adventure-of-the-week stories. I think that would be a very weird direction for the show to take after giving them 4 years of character growth, and I’m willing to bet most fans would feel the same. If you don’t, fine, then we just have to agree to disagree.