4 ms·

While I'm definitely going to give this a chance, I'm not going to get my hopes up. Firefly was a perfect storm--it was the combination of Wheadon, Tim Minear,

While I'm definitely going to give this a chance, I'm not going to get my hopes up. Firefly was a perfect storm--it was the combination of Wheadon, Tim Minear, and the entire cast. Personally, I think the writing is what made Firefly work, and without Wheadon or Minear, I don't know if it will rise to the same level. Moreover, I felt Serenity was a good conclusion to the original mythology (River, Alliance, etc.). If they introduce a new mythology arc, it might not quite have the same resonance. And if they just do a bunch of monster-of-the-week episodes, it won't be enough. But I don't want to criticize what I haven't seen. They know way better than I do, and even if the only result of this is that the original actors have a lot of fun, then I'm all for it. They deserve to take a shot.

throwatdem12311 7mo ago
The benefit of it being animated is that if it sucks we can just ignore it, if it’s good we can embrace it. If they went the full live-action route there’s a higher chance it tarnishes the legacy of the original. I didn’t like Star Trek: Lower Decks but it didn’t make me feel like Trek has been ruined like Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy did.
- ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
  If you didn't like Lower Decks you probably really never liked Star Trek. Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy also happen to be better than... a significant portion of the classics (DS9 will never be surpassed and that's okay). Lower Decks in traditional Trek fashion had a rough season 1 but was stronger later. SNW an Academy had probably the best two season 1 performances of any Star Trek shows ever produced. There's one gripe about Academy that you can grant: The theme song sucks. Other than that, perfect. There's some legitimately challenging writing decisions in Discovery and Picard, but if the three shows you mentioned ruin Trek for you, you never got it in the first place.
  - BoxOfSnoo 7mo ago
    I love Lower Decks but it’s not like TOS at all. It’s more like a love letter to TOS. Strange New Worlds is VERY much like TOS.
    - hedora 7mo ago
      If I had to stack rank: (1) TOS (1) TNG (2) lower decks (3) the animated series? But, I watch it for the science fiction. The other series were hardly the same genre. DS9 was trying to be babylon 5 / sanctuary moon half the time. The lack of science research on voyager still works my spouse into a rage.
      - worthless-trash 7mo ago
        Hey! Dont try and mandela effect sanctuary moon into existence, you almost had me.
        Terretta 7mo ago
        The 2nd worst thing about the series is seeing those clips. The first worst thing is, of course, disambiguating the machine's gender. Until the live action show this was the only popular book series I'm aware of where a reader could project and never glitch. For both the gender and the show, enabling our projection is a key conceit and device.
  - GMoromisato 7mo ago
    I couldn't get into Lower Decks. And I love Star Trek, so maybe you don't understand the full range of Star Trek fans. I personally love NG but couldn't get into DS9 or Voyager. I disliked Discovery but I love SNW. There are all kinds of Star Trek fans.
    - remarkEon 7mo ago
      DS9 is a good litmus test for determining what kind of Star Trek fan you are. It broke a lot of the optimism and continuum of how Star Trek had worked previously, where hyper-competent people just always seem to come out okay. It smashed reality into the faces of sci-fi fans by building an actual war-narrative into the character arc (an episode of DS9 deals with GWOT PTSD better than almost any other network TV show did) and so it's not really surprising that DS9 was a little controversial when it aired. I stopped watching Discovery after "the burn" event because it didn't make any sense, and it was obvious the writers wanted to start from scratch. Space fungus powers the ship? A character has a panic attack and any ship with a warp drive is blown up? Not a serious sci-fi show and one of the worst entries into the Star Trek catalog. I hope Paramount takes a pause and we don't get any new Star Trek for 5 years, so the writers can grow up.
      - MisterTea 7mo ago
        DS9 raised the bar so high that it's past the Oort cloud. I've watched everything up to Enterprise and I will say that I enjoyed all of them despite their flaws. I tried watching the newer trek series: lower decks, discovery and picard. Lower decks was an instant turn-off and I fell asleep on the first episodes of the other two, twice. The free month of paramount ran out before I bothered trying to watch them again. I should give them a go one day.
      - monkeydreams 7mo ago
        Glad someone else felt the same. Discovery started well but the whole "burn" thing was... stupid. There are a million narrative devices you could use to break the ability for ships to travel via warp and they chose the least sciency of them all.
  - cwillu 7mo ago
    Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy are different than a significant portion of the classics. If you think they're better, than it might be you who never really liked classic star trek. Which is okay, once you phrase it as a preference rather than an objective standard that everyone has to agree with.
    - ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
      There's taste and there's product quality. I don't like Game of Thrones, but it's well-produced. I actually like Discovery, but I can also point out a bunch of problems with it. Disappointing mystery boxes, questionable commitment to canon continuity, so much focus on a single character that many of the most interesting characters get no screen time. The fans often had better ideas about where the story is going than the writers did. I also really like DS9, TNG, and Voyager, but you can easily also admit seasons 1 and 2 of each are... on the weaker side. They take time to warm up to the quality SNW and SFA nailed in their very first seasons. And bear in mind, we're working with ten episode seasons now, so even Strange New Worlds is barely past it's "season one" in classic show terms. Go find a single episode of Strange New Worlds or Starfleet Academy that's "Code of Honor"-worthy bad. You won't find one because there isn't one. Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds, and Starfleet Academy are vastly better shows than Discovery or Picard. But more than that, LD, SNW, and SFA are some of the most classic-style Star Trek content you can get. We're talking largely episodic shows which heavily draw from TNG and TOS storylines and plot design, and often focused on discussing the very core of what Starfleet, and Star Trek in general, is about. If people are still griping about the Star Trek produced today, it's because they aren't watching it. The weird part is these criticisms if pointed at Discovery or Picard might have held weight! But it's directed at shows which are a complete non sequitur for the claims made.
      - cwillu 7mo ago
        I'm not sure what you're responding to, but it's certainly not anything that I said.
  - remarkEon 7mo ago
    Academy deliberately set out to "be different" and fans of Star Trek are reacting accordingly. The show sucks, its set design and writing are trash, and all Paramount is doing here is counting on actual Star Trek fans watching the back-catalog on Paramount+ to juice the value of the other actual Star Trek IP (ugh Academy is bad, I'm going to re-watch DS9 for the 15th time, or maybe Voyager). Academy is so bad that I have to wonder if there are people involved who deliberately want to destroy Star Trek so they can "re-boot" it from scratch later.
    - ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
      All of this is fundamentally wrong enough you can just say your blogs said it was too woke so you didn't watch it. The recent Star Trek shows have their problems, most often whiffing the delivery of a satisfying conclusion to the season arc. (Discovery and Picard both had terrible mystery box seasons where the mystery ended up being dumb and disappointing.) Academy nailed it. The characters, the conclusion, the resolution to different subplot threads, all extremely solid. Like, you can generally like or dislike a given show, but there are valid criticisms and then there are very invalid ones. And it's very clear you did not actually watch the series.
      - remarkEon 7mo ago
        Academy is a show about incompetent people being drug along by the plot. It is diametrically apposed to TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY. In just the first episode of Academy, one of the characters eats her communicator, and then the show moves on as if this is something normal that goes on. Does this sound like the usual competence porn that the prior iterations of Star Trek were known for? It certainly does not to me. This is supposed to be, ya know, the academy that the best of the best enter into in order to commission into Starfleet. The rest of Academy is one incomprehensible plot hole after another, followed by awful (and at times disrespectful) callbacks to prior shows. Can you link some blog posts? I'd like to read them. Not on social media these days as I gave it up for Lent a decade ago and never went back, so I'm probably missing some more comprehensive criticisms of Academy.
        7mo ago
  - wink 7mo ago
    Keep up with the grade a gatekeeping, lest someone not really liking it watches some of it.
- MisterTea 7mo ago
  Came for the Firefly. Stayed for the Trek flame wars. Anyone else feeling all warm and cozy like its the 90s again?
- wan23 7mo ago
  Without getting involved in the flame war, SNW and SFA are good shows. Strange New Worlds is the closest to one of the classic shows out of the new ones, though it has some quality issues in the more recent season which Trek show didn't? And Academy is just something different, but that doesn't make it bad. It should be okay for a property to have a show or two that is a different genre than the others. And for what it's worth, the themes are classic Trek at their core.
ActorNightly 7mo ago
Lets be real - Firefly was very good. But the reason it holds "magic" status as far as series goes is mostly because of its rarity, and the final movie where a major likable character was killed off, with everyone wishing for a sequel. Its same with anything really - car enthusiasts obsess over limited runs of older cars because they are rare, not because they are good, and people were lining up at McDonalds when they re-released Szechuan sauce (which is literally soy sauce and ketchup). If they would have done Season 2,3, and so on, it wouldn't be held in such a high regard as it is now.
- D13Fd 7mo ago
  > Lets be real - Firefly was very good. But the reason it holds "magic" status as far as series goes is mostly because of its rarity, and the final movie where a major likable character was killed off, with everyone wishing for a sequel. Strongly disagree. The Firefly series was always exceptional. I watched it on DVD around the time it came out (maybe just after it was cancelled) and waited for the movie. The movie was actually a net negative, in my opinion, for killing off Wash (Tudyk), who was essential to the chemistry they had going. I actually think the movie killing him off (and to a lesser extent, killing Book) hurt the momentum for further movies or other follow-ups. > If they would have done Season 2,3, and so on, it wouldn't be held in such a high regard as it is now. It's always possible that it could have gone off the rails. But the original Star Trek only ran for three seasons and spawned countless other shows and movies. I think if it had gone for two more seasons with the same cast, crew it, and general quality level it could potentially have been another Star Trek.
  - Dusseldorf 7mo ago
    I never got the impression there was much momentum for any more sequels anyway, Serenity felt like the bone they were willing to throw. This was a time before show revivals (rather than remakes/reboots e.g. BSG) were common, it was very surprising when they did it for Family Guy.
    - laughing_man 7mo ago
emmelaich 7mo ago
Agree, Whedon's script is essential to the popularity. I'd love it happen tho if they can do a good enough job. As well as River etc, I'd like to Shepherd Books back story.

throwatdem12311 7mo ago

The benefit of it being animated is that if it sucks we can just ignore it, if it’s good we can embrace it. If they went the full live-action route there’s a higher chance it tarnishes the legacy of the original. I didn’t like Star Trek: Lower Decks but it didn’t make me feel like Trek has been ruined like Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy did.

ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
If you didn't like Lower Decks you probably really never liked Star Trek. Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy also happen to be better than... a significant portion of the classics (DS9 will never be surpassed and that's okay). Lower Decks in traditional Trek fashion had a rough season 1 but was stronger later. SNW an Academy had probably the best two season 1 performances of any Star Trek shows ever produced. There's one gripe about Academy that you can grant: The theme song sucks. Other than that, perfect. There's some legitimately challenging writing decisions in Discovery and Picard, but if the three shows you mentioned ruin Trek for you, you never got it in the first place.
- BoxOfSnoo 7mo ago
  I love Lower Decks but it’s not like TOS at all. It’s more like a love letter to TOS. Strange New Worlds is VERY much like TOS.
  - hedora 7mo ago
    If I had to stack rank: (1) TOS (1) TNG (2) lower decks (3) the animated series? But, I watch it for the science fiction. The other series were hardly the same genre. DS9 was trying to be babylon 5 / sanctuary moon half the time. The lack of science research on voyager still works my spouse into a rage.
    - worthless-trash 7mo ago
      Hey! Dont try and mandela effect sanctuary moon into existence, you almost had me.
      - Terretta 7mo ago
        The 2nd worst thing about the series is seeing those clips. The first worst thing is, of course, disambiguating the machine's gender. Until the live action show this was the only popular book series I'm aware of where a reader could project and never glitch. For both the gender and the show, enabling our projection is a key conceit and device.
- GMoromisato 7mo ago
  I couldn't get into Lower Decks. And I love Star Trek, so maybe you don't understand the full range of Star Trek fans. I personally love NG but couldn't get into DS9 or Voyager. I disliked Discovery but I love SNW. There are all kinds of Star Trek fans.
  - remarkEon 7mo ago
    DS9 is a good litmus test for determining what kind of Star Trek fan you are. It broke a lot of the optimism and continuum of how Star Trek had worked previously, where hyper-competent people just always seem to come out okay. It smashed reality into the faces of sci-fi fans by building an actual war-narrative into the character arc (an episode of DS9 deals with GWOT PTSD better than almost any other network TV show did) and so it's not really surprising that DS9 was a little controversial when it aired. I stopped watching Discovery after "the burn" event because it didn't make any sense, and it was obvious the writers wanted to start from scratch. Space fungus powers the ship? A character has a panic attack and any ship with a warp drive is blown up? Not a serious sci-fi show and one of the worst entries into the Star Trek catalog. I hope Paramount takes a pause and we don't get any new Star Trek for 5 years, so the writers can grow up.
    - MisterTea 7mo ago
      DS9 raised the bar so high that it's past the Oort cloud. I've watched everything up to Enterprise and I will say that I enjoyed all of them despite their flaws. I tried watching the newer trek series: lower decks, discovery and picard. Lower decks was an instant turn-off and I fell asleep on the first episodes of the other two, twice. The free month of paramount ran out before I bothered trying to watch them again. I should give them a go one day.
    - monkeydreams 7mo ago
      Glad someone else felt the same. Discovery started well but the whole "burn" thing was... stupid. There are a million narrative devices you could use to break the ability for ships to travel via warp and they chose the least sciency of them all.
- cwillu 7mo ago
  Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy are different than a significant portion of the classics. If you think they're better, than it might be you who never really liked classic star trek. Which is okay, once you phrase it as a preference rather than an objective standard that everyone has to agree with.
  - ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
    There's taste and there's product quality. I don't like Game of Thrones, but it's well-produced. I actually like Discovery, but I can also point out a bunch of problems with it. Disappointing mystery boxes, questionable commitment to canon continuity, so much focus on a single character that many of the most interesting characters get no screen time. The fans often had better ideas about where the story is going than the writers did. I also really like DS9, TNG, and Voyager, but you can easily also admit seasons 1 and 2 of each are... on the weaker side. They take time to warm up to the quality SNW and SFA nailed in their very first seasons. And bear in mind, we're working with ten episode seasons now, so even Strange New Worlds is barely past it's "season one" in classic show terms. Go find a single episode of Strange New Worlds or Starfleet Academy that's "Code of Honor"-worthy bad. You won't find one because there isn't one. Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds, and Starfleet Academy are vastly better shows than Discovery or Picard. But more than that, LD, SNW, and SFA are some of the most classic-style Star Trek content you can get. We're talking largely episodic shows which heavily draw from TNG and TOS storylines and plot design, and often focused on discussing the very core of what Starfleet, and Star Trek in general, is about. If people are still griping about the Star Trek produced today, it's because they aren't watching it. The weird part is these criticisms if pointed at Discovery or Picard might have held weight! But it's directed at shows which are a complete non sequitur for the claims made.
    - cwillu 7mo ago
      I'm not sure what you're responding to, but it's certainly not anything that I said.
- remarkEon 7mo ago
  Academy deliberately set out to "be different" and fans of Star Trek are reacting accordingly. The show sucks, its set design and writing are trash, and all Paramount is doing here is counting on actual Star Trek fans watching the back-catalog on Paramount+ to juice the value of the other actual Star Trek IP (ugh Academy is bad, I'm going to re-watch DS9 for the 15th time, or maybe Voyager). Academy is so bad that I have to wonder if there are people involved who deliberately want to destroy Star Trek so they can "re-boot" it from scratch later.
  - ocdtrekkie 7mo ago
    All of this is fundamentally wrong enough you can just say your blogs said it was too woke so you didn't watch it. The recent Star Trek shows have their problems, most often whiffing the delivery of a satisfying conclusion to the season arc. (Discovery and Picard both had terrible mystery box seasons where the mystery ended up being dumb and disappointing.) Academy nailed it. The characters, the conclusion, the resolution to different subplot threads, all extremely solid. Like, you can generally like or dislike a given show, but there are valid criticisms and then there are very invalid ones. And it's very clear you did not actually watch the series.
    - remarkEon 7mo ago
      Academy is a show about incompetent people being drug along by the plot. It is diametrically apposed to TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY. In just the first episode of Academy, one of the characters eats her communicator, and then the show moves on as if this is something normal that goes on. Does this sound like the usual competence porn that the prior iterations of Star Trek were known for? It certainly does not to me. This is supposed to be, ya know, the academy that the best of the best enter into in order to commission into Starfleet. The rest of Academy is one incomprehensible plot hole after another, followed by awful (and at times disrespectful) callbacks to prior shows. Can you link some blog posts? I'd like to read them. Not on social media these days as I gave it up for Lent a decade ago and never went back, so I'm probably missing some more comprehensive criticisms of Academy.
      - 7mo ago
- wink 7mo ago
  Keep up with the grade a gatekeeping, lest someone not really liking it watches some of it.
MisterTea 7mo ago
Came for the Firefly. Stayed for the Trek flame wars. Anyone else feeling all warm and cozy like its the 90s again?
wan23 7mo ago
Without getting involved in the flame war, SNW and SFA are good shows. Strange New Worlds is the closest to one of the classic shows out of the new ones, though it has some quality issues in the more recent season which Trek show didn't? And Academy is just something different, but that doesn't make it bad. It should be okay for a property to have a show or two that is a different genre than the others. And for what it's worth, the themes are classic Trek at their core.

ActorNightly 7mo ago

Lets be real - Firefly was very good. But the reason it holds "magic" status as far as series goes is mostly because of its rarity, and the final movie where a major likable character was killed off, with everyone wishing for a sequel. Its same with anything really - car enthusiasts obsess over limited runs of older cars because they are rare, not because they are good, and people were lining up at McDonalds when they re-released Szechuan sauce (which is literally soy sauce and ketchup). If they would have done Season 2,3, and so on, it wouldn't be held in such a high regard as it is now.

D13Fd 7mo ago
> Lets be real - Firefly was very good. But the reason it holds "magic" status as far as series goes is mostly because of its rarity, and the final movie where a major likable character was killed off, with everyone wishing for a sequel. Strongly disagree. The Firefly series was always exceptional. I watched it on DVD around the time it came out (maybe just after it was cancelled) and waited for the movie. The movie was actually a net negative, in my opinion, for killing off Wash (Tudyk), who was essential to the chemistry they had going. I actually think the movie killing him off (and to a lesser extent, killing Book) hurt the momentum for further movies or other follow-ups. > If they would have done Season 2,3, and so on, it wouldn't be held in such a high regard as it is now. It's always possible that it could have gone off the rails. But the original Star Trek only ran for three seasons and spawned countless other shows and movies. I think if it had gone for two more seasons with the same cast, crew it, and general quality level it could potentially have been another Star Trek.
- Dusseldorf 7mo ago
  I never got the impression there was much momentum for any more sequels anyway, Serenity felt like the bone they were willing to throw. This was a time before show revivals (rather than remakes/reboots e.g. BSG) were common, it was very surprising when they did it for Family Guy.
  - laughing_man 7mo ago

emmelaich 7mo ago

Agree, Whedon's script is essential to the popularity. I'd love it happen tho if they can do a good enough job. As well as River etc, I'd like to Shepherd Books back story.