TV show Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Starts Production in 2024

[Ryujin]

Well, they kind of have too. A super smart STEM representation is a must for a "school show" in 2023.

Maybe a "new" Vulcan/Romulan "lost cause" guy with a sword.

Seems obvious they will have an Orion too, assuming they can do that green body pain cheep

Humm...set in 32 rd century, the Academy would be on a ship, right? So they could fly the USS Academy around the galaxy while in school.

And if they advance the timeline, we could have DISCO kids: Mike Burnham, Jr. , Sarutwo, Tina Tilly, Cincinnati Booker and so on.

The Academy is exactly what it sounds like; a school, on a planet. Typically that planet is Earth. There is no need to have a messianic uber-student, when you can just have a group of students with their own unique skills and talents. Or, perhaps, not a lot unique at all, given that they've all had to pass stringent entry standards just to be there at all. The prodigy trope is over utilized.

There was a fairly recent show, I think produced by SyFy, that used the trope, but the name currently escapes me. They had the main character who was supposedly human but actually somehow a hybrid of an ancient alien species, the student from an enemy race (Klingon stand-in), and a service clone from another planet (Orion slave girl stand-in). It wasn't particularly good.

EDIT - I remembered the name of the thoroughly forgettable show. It was "Pandora."

Pandora (TV Series 2019–2020) - IMDb

Pandora: Created by Mark A. Altman. With Priscilla Quintana, Oliver Dench, Ben Radcliffe, Noah Huntley. Set in the year 2199, a young woman who has lost everything finds a new life at Earth's Space Training Academy where she learns to defend the galaxy from intergalactic threats.

www.imdb.com

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'll give it a watch, in case it turns out to be better than I'm envisioning but, if Discovery taught me anything, it's that I don't have to slavishly watch everything that someone slapped a Star Trek label on.

Good point. There was never any bad Trek until Discovery.

(I kid, kind of, but I think people both overestimate how good certain past Trek was and underestimate the quality of Discovery, which not only has some excellent parts, but also has David Cronenberg in one of my favorite recurring cameos)

 

[Ryujin]

Good point. There was never any bad Trek until Discovery.

(I kid, kind of, but I think people both overestimate how good certain past Trek was and underestimate the quality of Discovery, which not only has some excellent parts, but also has David Cronenberg in one of my favorite recurring cameos)

Oh, there has most certainly been bad Trek before Discovery. It, however, was unremittingly bad from the start, from my point of view, and finally broke me. I will admit that Enterprise is a show that I won't rewatch, however, putting it in pretty much the same sinking boat.

 

[Umbran]

The original post I responded to, by Morrus, very much referenced the situation.

I mean, if you want to just ignore how I just said that the situation is a result of something larger, that's fine.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I was hoping this would be set in the Picard (post TNG) time, not the Discovery time.

One thing which bugs me about Discovery is that it's not an optimistic future, and the Federation's days are numbered. It kinda
turns all the hopeful era I enjoy into a prequel to a dystopian era.

I'll still watch it of course.

Oof. That does sound pretty bad. Just let the good thing be good. Just let the future get better over time.

the metaphor Saru uses is the Renaissance, which came only after the Dark Ages,

Ugh I am so tired of that stupid misconception.

The Renaissance as understood in comments like this didn’t exist, because the “dark ages” weren’t a time of social, cultural, scientific, and artistic, darkness, they’re a time with few surviving records. That’s it.

That scene is even worse than when Elon Musk (go isn’t even actually an engineer, and frankly seems to be fairly stupid) was mentioned alongside actual great scientists.

The contribution of the “dark ages” to the renaissance is that there are clear through lines from the early Middle Ages to the renaissance. You can look at art history and development after development and see how artists got to the point they did by the time people started inventing dumb stories about how bad the previous age was. Same thing with science, philosophy, music, etc

Education rose during the Middle Ages! Europes first hospitals, universities, attempts to spread literacy, all happened over the centuries we call the Middle Ages.

Hell the unwashed peasants who have never left their village trope isn’t even true, as even tiny thorps in Europe had public bath houses, and the roads were full of travelers of all kinds, including tourists and adventurers, people escaping bad landlords to live in a city and find work (or turning to banditry), pilgrims, and of course tradesfolk.

No Renaissance without the terrible Dark Ages…good lord.

 

[MarkB]

Oof. That does sound pretty bad. Just let the good thing be good. Just let the future get better over time.

While it is a pretty bleak portrayal of the future, this was a 930 year time skip. The remarkable thing isn't that the Federation is almost gone, it's that an organisation which still bore its name and ideals still existed at all after so long.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I mean, if you want to just ignore how I just said that the situation is a result of something larger, that's fine.

Given it didn't seem relevant to what I was responding to, yes?

 

[ART!]

Annnnnd I'm out.

It's really sad, because Starfleet Academy as a series had been predicted since the late 1990s.

...and they were talking about an Academy movie in the mid-'80s!

A couple months ago I was down on P+ Trek because it looks amazing but I've found a lot of the writing to ham-fisted and/or too in-my-face, but this 3rd season of Picard is really good and gets better every episode, so maybe they're shifting to a different approach?
The 32nd century does suggest more snazzy-looking stuff, and focusing on "kids" makes me worry it will continue with that ham-fisted, "every single scene regardless of the danger involves someone stopping to talk about their feelings or what happened in the previous scene" approach.

Anyway, we'll see. I like some Trek-centric eye candy (I mean the visuals, not the actors) as much as the next guy.

 

[Umbran]

Oof. That does sound pretty bad. Just let the good thing be good. Just let the future get better over time.

Ugh I am so tired of that stupid misconception.

I can understand it a little from a dramatic point of view - a good story has a series of rising and falling tension. Having a situation for characters seem okay, then plummet, with a climb back to the top is a pretty common successful narrative.

I think tying the character's narrative to the societal narrative is a mistake, though, basically because society rise form a depth takes a whole lot of time. It takes decades to centuries to build back from a societal low point. The show doesn't have that kind of time.

I can also see what they were trying from a Roddenberry perspective. Trek wasn't Roddenberry's only story idea ever. Post TOS, he had a fascination for the post-apocalyptic as well, basically in the form of "hero of the past comes forward to help rebuild the future". He attempted a couple of iterations, but it only really got a shot after his passing, in "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda". Discovery is clearly making use of those same concepts.

The problem is to pull it of in Trek, you have to crush the Federation, which we're already invested in, and that leaves a bad taste in our mouths.

 

[Umbran]

Given it didn't seem relevant to what I was responding to, yes?

Why must all conversation stick to what you responded to? Why can't new thoughts get added to a discussion?

Edit: Actually, never mind. It isn't worth the effort.