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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
I’m sorry but I have a hard time respecting anyone trying to correct me about what canon is when they can’t spell the word.
Yes, I know what you’re saying, and I’m telling you why I disagree with it. I’m also amazed that you don’t understand that saying “I’m willing to bet most fans would” is also completely subjective. It’s literally the same thing racists use to base their incredibly narrow views; the idea that because they think something, other people do as well. Now let me be clear, I am most certainly not implying you’ve said or done anything racist, ever. I’m just talking about a general cognitive lack of empathy.
You’re just spewing your personal opinions, without any reasoning for them. I don’t see a point in continuing the conversation.
Yeah, my phone autocorrected from canon to cannon. That doesn’t change the fact that it is not the same as serialization.
If you want evidence that fundamentally changing Lower Decks from a serialized to adventure-of-the-week show would piss people off, I obviously can’t prove that, but funny enough, a show you brought up did try something like this: South Park. They tried serialization for a few seasons, which ended with the disastrously bad, “member berries,” storyline. The final episode of that season is actually called The End of Serialization as We Know it.
Anyway, maybe you’re right; maybe people want to watch Boimler whine about the captain not noticing him for 10 seasons. I doubt it though. We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. Either way, your comments are becoming increasingly weird and pedantic and I’m losing my patience for it, so I’m just gonna stop here before I say something I regret. Have a good one.
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).
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.
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).
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
I'm seeing I'm in the vast minority of one who didn't enjoy Lower Decks. I found it loud, frenetic, and shrill. I caught most of the first season before tapping out. I haven't liked Discovery. Picard season two went to the zoo and I didn't go along on the ride with it, or returned to check out season 3.
But I am very much enjoying Strange New Worlds (the musical episode aside). Looking foward to more SNW, and Starfleet Academy, and since the "movie" coming out is an offshoot of Discovery I'm not all that jazzed for it even with Michelle Yeoh, but I'll probably check it out.
I’m in the middle where I felt like I could see the end coming over the last season. The premise seemed exhausted and the plots a bit of a stretch. I think I even posted somewhere that it wouldn’t last much longer.
So while I’m sad to see it go, as someone that was a fan of the show, this feels somewhat natural to me.
You should definitely watch season 3 of Picard. While the fanservice is fun, it was actually written by a competent team that retconned much of the bullshit from the other seasons and gave TNG the swan song it deserved.
Ha ha funny quote, but really, the latest revival is just… Tragic. Disenchantment was supposed to be a second Futurama too, but in the end it came with unfunny jokes and an uninteresting premise. It kinda feels like Groening stopped being funny.
Disenchantment was just jam packed with bad meta-jokes for writers and characters that literally just state their inner motivations. It felt like he was either 1) tired of trying or 2) trying to write show for comedy writers, and failing.
Sureee, but jt js not comedy writers that will be watching it. And if you see the latest season of Futurama, it’s all meta jokes and digs at stuff that is 5 years late from when it aired.
I started with Voyager way back in the day because that’s what was on TV at the time. I picked it up just fine. There isn’t really a wrong way to start watching. If you just jump in wherever, at most you might miss out on some Easter eggs or on the impact of some callbacks, but for the most part the idea of Star Trek is so infused in pop culture you’ll pick up most of it.
I love TOS, but it seems like a major chunk of Trek fandom has either skipped it or only watched an episode or two. If you want to get to know the TOS characters but can’t get into the show, start with the second Star Trek movie and watch through the 6th movie before starting on TNG.
TNG starts out pretty rough. It has some issues finding it’s voice, with many initial episodes being recycled or heavily inspired by TOS episodes. It has good early episodes, but often feels “off”. Good episodes throughout the first two seasons, but it becomes consistently solid in the third. TNG set the baseline for modern Trek.
DS9 comes after TNG. It’s very good right from the start, although it really, really gets good when the more overarching storylines pick up.
Voyager starts part way through DS9, but it really does it’s own thing.
ENT is a prequel. People are ultra harsh on the first two seasons, which I think is somewhat overkill. The first two seasons have some bad episodes, some good episodes and a good number of “meh”. Season 3 is an attempt at grimdark Star Trek, which is a divisive taste. Season 4 is genuinely really great. The writers finally figured out their niche.
Lower decks is such a fantastic exploration of the universe of star trek.
It adds more than its own isolated contribution to the federation universe!
Literally the embodiment of star fleet.
I had written so much more, vut it van be simplified…
Voyager eventually had to come home, every star trek series has had it’s final goal.
Every ship has a lower deck crew of unsung hero’s - that’s at least 6 ships to explore (maybe more, maybe less… I don’t mean to faux pas). Never mind significant engagements (is movies)
I recommend starting with Next Generation, or the original series.
After that, it’s a jumping point to any of the other series you want to try, and any of the movies. NextGen season one is a bit clunky, but it gets much better from season two onward.
Be forewarned that:
Even numbered Star Trek movies are much better than odds.
Not everyone likes Star Trek Discovery as its tone is completely different than most of the other shows.
Season two of Picard is a stinker. Skip it.
Original series has some cheesy episodes, but you can learn to love them in the same way that people love old Doctor who episodes.
I have long held that Season 5, Episode 2 of is the best episode to “test” if you’ll like Star Trek or not. It is a generally well-liked and well-reviewed episode, but more than that, from both a story and a character standpoint it is representative of what your average Star Trek episode is generally about.
So, my recommendation is to watch that one episode and report back.
Ooooh! I really like that idea! Several people that I know started to watch TNG and just couldn’t get into it. And I feel like part of it is the wacky crustiness of the first few episodes of the first season. So, I second this idea of diving right into the core of the show!
Okay. It’s not “Q” weird, but that is absolutely a weird episode. The whole “speaking in metaphors” thing is sort of a ridiculous concept as you’d have to have a language in place to even develop the metaphors. I loved how “out there” that episode is, and it is genuinely thought provoking, but if that was the first episode that I ever saw, I’m not sure I ever would have watched another one.
But I do like the concept of checking it out given a single episode. I’d rather recommend Season 5, Episode 18 (Cause and Effect), Season 2’s The Measure of Man.
This and SNW are their only good shows. You can easily tell from watching Lower Decks that the show runners love and get Star Trek. Hopefully they have been given enough time to wrap up the series the way they want.
As far as I can tell, Dan Harmon got mad that he accidentally started writing a decent continuing plot into his show that was supposed to be about nihilism or something. Either that or he sabotaged the show after breaking up with his girlfriend and writer on the show. Point being, I don’t think there was any reason for Rick and Morty to go tits up beyond Dan making terrible decisions for bad reasons. He literally made that “storyline” episode, apparently mad that fans gave a shit.
Which numbers do you mean, the numbers of people who enjoy it or the numbers of people who are willing to pay Paramount a monthly fee to watch it? Because the latter is the problem, and they think this will save them money, but they are fucked. Paramount Plus does not have enough programming for a lot of people, myself included, to justify their monthly fee. Their selection is paltry. I love Star Trek, but not enough for that.
This was always a problem and something that I fear is going to curse streaming until it dies. Everyone saw how well Netflix did for itself, and wants a cut of the pie, failing to realize that Netflix’s success was entirely because the pie was all in one place for people to enjoy.
All these smaller streaming apps that fizzle out after 2-5 years would have made more money for themselves if they had just negotiated out licensing deals with Netflix or any other major shareholder. Exclusivity is anti-consumer and sooner or later anti-consumer tactics will kill a product or service as soon as something better comes a long or the consumers decide they really don’t need it.
startrek
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.