Space.com poses the debate-provoking question whether SNW S2 overdid the gimmicks
Space.com poses the debate-provoking question whether SNW S2 overdid the gimmicks
With a "Lower Decks" crossover, a musical episode and lots of James T. Kirk, Captain Pike and his crew couldn't move for novelty episodes.
An interesting, deliberately thought provoking 🤔 question for a lazy long weekend Sunday morning…
Setting aside whether specific fans like specific ‘gimmicks’ (crossovers, musicals, bringing back Kirk or Khan) or tropes (transporter malfunctions), Space.com is posing the hypothesis that the proportion was too high in Strange New Worlds second season.
There’s no arguing that the season was successful in drawing in large audiences week after week. Taking a look back though, was there too much trippy-Trek(TM) dessert and not enough of a meaty main course? YMMV surely.
For my part, I can both agree that trippy Trek is something I’ve been wanting more of, and that I would have welcomed 2 or 3 more episodes were more grounded or gave the opportunity to see more of Una as a leader and dug into Ortegas backstory.
The 90s shows seemed to be bit embarrassed by trippyness, although Voyager found its pretext allowed even stern Janeway to pronounce ‘Weird is our business.’ One can argue that the high proportion in SNW is a feature, not a bug.
I’d still prefer a 12-15 episode season though.
I really don't think the inclusion of Kirk should be considered a "gimmick". There was no stunt-casting, nor were the episodes in which he appeared particularly gimmicky (well, okay, "Subspace Rhapsody" was a gimmick episode, but in a way that wasn't structured around Kirk specifically).
Like it or hate it, it's clear to me that the producers are including Kirk because they think it's worth exploring the character at this point in his career. I wouldn't call that a gimmick.
26I found that the opinion-piece from Space.com didn’t distinguish classic tropes and use of legacy characters from ‘gimmicks.’
While my personal preference prior to the show’s premiere had been to hold on the introduction of so many TOS legacy characters, to allow the others and original ones to breathe, as long as having Kirk there is bringing new insights to his character (and others’), it’s all to the good. At this point, I’m eager to see more of young Scotty.
7
I miss the 24 episode seasons
22Me too. Even the more flawed episodes of a 24 episode season contribute valuable worldbuilding etc. Those shows became more than the sum of their individual episodes.
You felt like you lived on Voyager with them. You'll never feel that with SNW.
15I’m up to the third season of TOS right now and it dawned on me the other day that I’ve already seen more TOS than I probably will ever see of SNW. I know they’re putting more time/effort into SNW episodes, but it’d be great to see some longer seasons.
3Permanently Deleted
1
Permanently Deleted
19Some of the episodes of SNW S2 are amongst the darkest things ever portrayed in Trek at all. The swinging from the Lower Decks episode to the M’Benga/Chapel episode was intense
Ad Astra and Among the Lotus Eaters were also pretty serious episodes.
7
I love SNW but this show is held back by the low number of episodes per season. With 10 episodes it's just not possible to develop all your characters and still try out weird storytelling ideas. Although some of that is self-inflicted. Nobody forced them to bring on Kirk and Scotty, when they haven't even managed to give Ortegas something to do in 20 episodes. By season 4 we'll probably have a junior Doctor McCoy, Ensign Sulu and Cadet Chekov on board, and then it'll get really crowded.
But back to the topic: I loved the humorous episodes this season but 3/10 is really the maximum amount of funny episodes. On the other hand, I'd love more thought-provoking stuff like "Ad Astra Per Aspera" and "Under the Cloak of War". 2 out of 10 episodes was not enough for my taste.
15In my opinion it is the best Trek in a very long time and blows the recent movies out of the water. SNW deserves the right to add in some fun to keep things interesting.
14What turns me off about SNW is that The Orville is a better return to form to "classic Trek" than actual Star Trek. The episodes revolving around Topa's gender and identity is some of the best scifi commentary on modern society out there right now.
I think it's good that CBS never gave MacFarlane his own ST show, lest he be beholden to all the history of the franchise (the same thing that is, in part, weighing down SNW). Who knew that khan was Kirk's father’s brother’s nephew’s cousin’s former roommate?!
12Be careful about praising The Orville the way you are to people who remember TNG very fondly. It apes TNG very closely but also has more than its fair share of Mcfarlane’s Family Guy humor which isn’t for everyone and definitely doesn’t jibe with Trek.
The episode where we first meet the Krill has Lt. Malloy laughing maniacally and constantly at the fact that the Krill’s god is named Avis. This just isn’t that funny and breaks immersion.
McFarlane himself admits this episode was very juvenile and the show gets quite a bit better once he decides to stop going after Family Guy style jokes. Many people won’t watch enough episodes to see the show is worth a chance.
6Wait, what does that make Khan and Kirk?
4... Absolutely no relation
3
I'd argue that the Star Trek history weighs it down more than that. Even without the historical references, much of the shows seem to be held back by the trying to live up to it, or having to stick to the same formula. Enterprise and Voyager famously suffered from considerable network meddling to try and recapture TNG, for example.
It could work, but it also means that much of any social commentary that does show up is a bit hampered, since the network wants a safe, conservative star Trek show (and the fans might be partly to blame, because they also want more of the same too, so much of the time).
A modern TOS that pushed boundaries as the original could never be made under the same brand. It's far too controversial for the network to accept, with all of its progressive and social commentary elements intact.
Not that it's a fault of Star Trek's specifically, just an issue with how big it has become. If the Orville became a similarly established brand, instead of Star Trek, it would almost certainly have had the same issues.
2
The real problem is the episode count. Season 2 was great just like season 1.
8Betteridge's law of headlines in action here. Season 2 was the best season of Star Trek since Voyager season 6.
7Yea I think the season just needed more episodes to breath.
I’ve argued elsewhere that the whole Kirk thing and embracing being a TOS prequel rather than its own show is a bad thing. Whether true or not, it adds even more to what the show is trying to do, on top of musicals and cross overs, so yes it needs more episodes and hopefully they get them.
6Paul Wesley Is hands down the best Kirk. I will die on this hill.
3Oh I've got nothing against the portrayal or actor or even the inclusion of Kirk in the show ... I just think the amount of TOS stuff (including Scotty) got distracting in S2, and that treating the show as a TOS prequel, which seems to be the case given what the showrunners have said, isn't going to be healthy for the show in the long run.
In general, my take on season 2 is that I've mentally prepared myself for it to mark the point at which it went bad or stopped being actually good. We'll have to see, and I'm obviously hoping that I'm paranoid ... but I do not trust Kurtzman or paramount or the temptation some executives must be salivating over to just reboot the original series.
3Permanently Deleted
2He's a dead ringer for a younger original Pike though. I wonder if he auditioned for that role but they brought him back for Kirk instead.
He's doing a great job as Kirk! But he looks more like Pike than Pike does.
2
I did want more strange new worlds than we got this season, so I somewhat agree with the headline
4Yeah I agree they went too far. Season 2 was disappointing; they seemed to want to spend their time indulging themselves with musical shows and cross overs. It feels like they alternated each episode - one moment you get a serious episode and the next a silly one.
However the season also gave us Ad Astra per Aspera which was one of the best star trek episodes I've seen in a long time. Among the Lotus Eaters wasn't bad; they just didn't need to shoehorn Khan in - it undermined what was actually otherwise a nice character driven story for La'an. The "should I kill hitler/my grandad" bit at the end was something that could have been impactful but was just didn't feel right.
Among the Lotus eaters and Lost in Translation were decent serious stories. Under the Cloak of War was an another attempt at a serious episode; it just didn't come off in the end.
And for me, Those Old Scientists was actually one of my favourite episodes. It was not Ad Astra Per Aspera good, and it was undeniably silly, but there was just something very warm and wholesome about the episode, and it actually reflected much better on Lower Decks than SNW; Boimler and Mariner felt a bit more fleshed out by the episode and it made me more appreciative of the show and what it's doing.
I think all in all, it was a decent season. It didn't maintain the high level of quality of the first season, and there were some really poor episodes (the opener Broken Circle and Cherades were terrible, and the muscial episode was just too far EVEN in a season with a crossover with a cartoon) but the highs were high and most of the other episodes were decent even allowing for some silliness. Season 1 was masterful TV in my opinion. Season 2 was decent.
Did they overdo the gimmicks? Yes. I still enjoyed the show despite the flaws but I sincerely hope they reign it in in season 3.
3I'd love it if they did more episodes per season and had some less bombastic adventures, but I really enjoyed what they put out with season 2 and I'd be more than happy to go on that exact same ride for many more seasons. I think SNW has managed to let its characters breathe and live real lives a lot better than other modern Trek, despite the season lengths.
3@StillPaisleyCat I would agree, they did over gimmick things, but as I commented somewhere else, the original Star Trek was a low budget show, and here they have a much, much larger budget, so what can you do? What should you do? And what will the fans accept? I think this season is very much about finding that out, and makes me wonder what's coming season 3.
3No. All the episodes were good. There should be more of them though
2I've like em all very much, except the musical episode, it was too much for me, and distracting from wanting to follow the story, I didn't make it through the whole ep
2I loved the Lower Deck crossover but I get that might have jumped the shark for some.
2I really enjoyed it. Season 3 of discovery really put me off the show, and SNW felt a bit like a return to form. Season 2 managed to be lighthearted and fun while also tackling more serious subjects.
It was a good season, and the gimmicks added rather than removed, I feel.
1