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

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 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.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 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 Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 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?

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 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.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 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.