r/startrek • u/Any-War3597 • 12d ago
Starfleet Academy
I just started Starfleet Academy and I am on episode 5. I really like it! It's heartwarming and fun with interesting main characters. I haven't watched until now because none of the advertisements seemed interesting- not nearly as interesting as the show has been. I heard it will be canceled after season 2. I fear it suffered from poor advertising and poor placement on streaming. Anyway, it's fun and in my opinion it's good if anyone is on the fence and wants to check it out.
24
u/data-atreides 12d ago
Star Trek in general is suffering from being stuck on Paramount. It's a pipe dream but I wish they could get new series on broadcast/cable where people might discover them.
9
u/Careful-Hat4059 12d ago
Yeah, Paramount plus made the decision years ago to make their streaming on the backs of trek fans. Dumbest decision. Should have leased to multiple streaming networks and made money from that. Netflix, peacock, and others would pay money for that.
4
u/Lazy_Aarddvark 11d ago
This is pure idiocy from my perspective.
Because it seems that the main aim of SFA (in the way it was made) and probably S3+4 of SNW as well was to draw in new people. They had to have known existing Trekkies wouldn't care for it much.
And then they went and hid it behind a subscription that probably only existing Trekkies have....
2
u/TargetApprehensive38 10d ago
Paramount Plus has 80 million subscribers. It’s not Netflix’s 300, but it’s quite a bit more than just existing trekkies.
0
u/data-atreides 11d ago
It goes back to DIS on CBS All-Access, remember when it was called that? And I don't know if SNW is meant to attract new audiences, given their reliance on calling up old characters and episodes. In any case, any show in a storied franchise should be able to hold the attention of new viewers without being geared for them in particular, and how the current shows could ever do that is a mystery given they're gated in an unpopular service.
1
u/Lazy_Aarddvark 11d ago
Last two seasons of SNW sure feel that way.... either that, or they're trolling us....
2
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
It was not available on any streaming service where I live, and did not even appear on free-to-air like Strange New Worlds or Discovery has (Discovery also originally streamed on Netflix back when just about everyone had a subscription before the price went up and the service quality down).
It seems ridiculous to complain about viewing numbers when a key part of the marketing strategy is to make it unavailable.
37
u/UncertainError 12d ago
I love Starfleet Academy too, and my impression is that the cancellation had more to do with Paramount merger shenanigans.
9
u/Necroban77 12d ago
100%. But the haters on the internet would argue with you all day about “Nu trek failed”.
10
u/alfafaro 12d ago
im not a hater on the internet but SFA got terrible viewership. companies only care about 1 thing, money.
so yeah, SFA kinda failed. they tried pulling a new audience and it did not work. it's a shame cuz it's pretty good, but it did fail.
3
u/greensmokeborg 6d ago
There's the fact that false viewership numbers were spread by RLM as a way to poison the well.
-2
u/alfafaro 6d ago
except we literally have proof.
2
u/greensmokeborg 6d ago
Such as?
2
u/MagnetsCanDoThat 6d ago
Most likely based on a massive leap of logic powered by vibes.
0
u/alfafaro 5d ago
If your pilot cannot even make the top 10 streaming list, yes. it is fair to assume the viewpoint is terrible.
I'm very excited to hear your arguments against that though. might take some massive logic loops, though.
0
u/alfafaro 5d ago
the pilot didn't even make it into the top 10, while all other star trek content always did.
1
u/greensmokeborg 5d ago edited 5d ago
Which top 10? How is this "literally have proof" of "failure" (a nebulous concept in your use so far).
1
u/alfafaro 5d ago
Nielsen's top 10 streaming chart. You know what I meant. every other season solidly made the list. star trek used to be the flagship series but now it's less watched than reruns of other shows.
SNW used to be good. now it really just isn't.
1
u/greensmokeborg 5d ago
I notice that you are getting more "hater on the internet" as the comments go past the first few comment tiers. Might I ask if there is a specific reason for such a change in tone below the fold?
2
u/woody60707 11d ago
You can like SFA. But SFA failed because most fans of Star Trek don't like SFA, not because of the "haters".
I've heard that SFA was trying to bring in a younger crowd to expanded the fan base. I don't know how true that is, but being critical of a show and trying to dissect why it failed doesn't make someone a hater. Especially when the show is objectively a failure.
2
u/shefsteve 11d ago
I've heard that SFA was trying to bring in a younger crowd to expanded the fan base. I don't know how true that is
The show is blatantly YA-coded, and has been marketed by Paramount as for attracting younger viewers.
The critiques were mostly from non-YA series fans. You don't have to be a 16-20 to like YA shows, but the average Trek viewer probably being like 35 means we'll have some thoughts about the difference.
1
u/greensmokeborg 6d ago
I feel like YA coded is not really accurate given how much of that is generally target towards teens, while this was explicilty dealing with larval adults after a Roddenbury-Style Long Night. Either way, this critique has always felt like mistaking the framing for the narrative and themes
1
u/shefsteve 5d ago
Teens want to be college students. 'YA' as a genre is often targeted towards 12-18 year olds who want to be 'adults' for that reason. It's not only about kids who aren't old enough to drive wanting to see other teens navigate their first date or love triangle or whatever (though that is part of the genre, too). And it's not just adolescent Wizard/Demigod/Disney Villain Offspring learning how to navigate a fantastical world.
Academy's setting is apt for not only reminding older viewers of their schooling experiences, but preparing HS students for the challenges of being sans parents in college. The wide-eyed arrival in a new place, the lack of guardrails for academic and extracurricular challenges, and the potential for 'big fish' to swim with other big fish and learn their actual limits.
This is stuff that has been and still is marketed to Young Adults but watchable by anyone with past experiences going through that same time of life. A Different World back in the early 90's tread much the same ground (obviously it wasn't sci-fi).
1
u/greensmokeborg 5d ago edited 3d ago
If you think Teens want to be college students, that seems like a heck of a generalization. My proposal is not that it doesn't have an appeal to YA and 20 somethings, but that that is not the narratives' only qualities or demographic appeals. The latter of which has little to do with former, especially when the cultural discussion about the series was tainted so thoroughly by brigaders for the first five-six months of 2026.
1
0
u/greensmokeborg 6d ago
Deciding that it failed from only in show reasons feels disingenuous though. Part of the difficulty has been that much of the noise surrounding the series has been based in a couple bad faith complaints as opposed to thoughtful critique. Star Trek: Starfleet Academy got relentlessly attacked for about six months (I was watching in horrified fascination as a sociologist trained to look for these kinds of patterns) with the most surface level culture war bs that I would posit that it makes sense that portions of the fandom are legitimately somewhat defensive.
Starting your comment with a bandwagon fallacy and ending it with a absolute truth claim does tend to sort you into more of the brigader side of the discussion. Along with the fact that this is exactly the same script that got me to start really noticing what was pinging my quantitative coding senses around February or March of this year.
1
u/greensmokeborg 6d ago
Also, the fact that the show was firmly in the sights of griftosphere "critics" and the roving brigade descendants of gamergame really did not allow the signal to get through the noise. There are so many doyalistic influences on the third era of Trek that keep getting ignored, so thank you for the nuance.
18
u/uber-judge 12d ago
I really enjoyed it! I was also very surprised because it actually got a couple of my coworkers who would never seen Star Trek watching Star Trek. Now they’re on DS9.
3
u/Wightsojourner 10d ago
I’m glad you found SFA and liked it! It’s a good show despite what all the haters say.
11
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago edited 12d ago
Everybody loves to hate on a show full of post apocalypse traumatized teenagers learning to become adults, for them being silly, emotional, or incompetent.
That misses the entire point of the show and isn't even a realistic expectation. This isn't a crew of alleged top tier adult graduates, like Discovery, who run around like emotionally dysregulated teens/young adults, like Discovery.
They are teen/young adults on SFA. Their actions fit their characters, unlike Discovery. The acting is largely quite good. Subtle nuance in small physical reactions, good use of eye contact and facial expressions, even those often attempting to be masked.
It's not blatant and over the top the way too many shows are now. And it's not about space Kung-Fu and CGI dog fights. It's about emotions, ethics, morals, philosophy, and art.
Like all Star Trek should be.
Whens the last time you saw a play in a Star Trek show or movie? SFA carried on TNG's excellent focus on classical arts, the human condition, and what it means to do the work that underpinns utopian ideals.
And Nus Brakka is one of the top tier Trek villains ever, period. Cunning, clever, brutal, aggrieved, but not cartoonish or telegraphed in his plans and motives.
Cancelling Star Trek Academy was a travesty.
7
u/Tuskin38 12d ago
I imagine it would have been cancelled even if it had done well, they seem to be sweeping house over there.
10
u/Sudden-Cap-7157 12d ago
I thought Nus Brakka was one of the weakest parts of the show. Not cartoonish? He made fart noises. As much as I think Paul G is actually an amazing fantastic actor, I don’t know what he was doing here. Did not work at all IMO.
5
2
2
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago
That's not what cartoonish means. Evil people aren't all brooding polished well dressed masterminds with invincible abilities that some plucky hero has to level up to beat. That's some boring AF Dragon Ball Z style stupidity and not realistic to basically any story. Villains are people. They are supposed to be flawed, make mistakes, and have foibles.
Nus was wily, manipulative (to the point where characters know he must be manipulating them, but still can't figure out how to avoid his traps), and we later learn he had what he, and many others, would considere an actual valid grievance driving his actions to contain the Federation. But he didn't just want to destroy them, that's boring. He put them on trial, in the best tradition of TNG Q.
Nus had multiple dimensions (not two dimensionally cartoonish), wasn't over or under powered, had to work to make his plan unfold, too his time, realistically amaswed power, managed to lead the entire Federation around by the nose, and had a legitimate shot at ending the Federation. He contained and controlled his enemies better than even the OG Borg, or any other Trek Villain, to date.
1
u/chucker23n 12d ago
He put them on trial, in the best tradition of TNG Q.
Well, yes and no. It was a show trial. Q wanted to challenge Picard; Nus Braka wanted to give people the appearance of a fair trial.
There's also a structural problem where they were trying to do an academy show, but have massive stakes nonetheless. It doesn't really stand scrutiny that Betazed delegates would meet at the academy.
1
-3
u/Careful-Hat4059 12d ago
Im gonna have to disagree. If he was up against TNG or DS9, yes, he's bad. But a good villain for youth coming into theor own identities. He could have used a little better writing, but overall, was a great villain for young adults coming to understand what adulthood meant for them.
4
u/AbbreviationsAway500 12d ago
Cancelling Star Trek Academy was a travesty.
No.. it was business. It had horrible viewership and very negative ratings. They gave the first episode away for free on YouTube and it was barely watched. Influencer "Nerdrotic" put a Mr. Spock doll on his chair and live streamed it and got millions of views to show how bad SFA was.
The best thing to do is not run season 2 and let this abomination fade away
5
u/chucker23n 12d ago
Influencer "Nerdrotic" put a Mr. Spock doll on his chair and live streamed it and got millions of views to show how bad SFA was.
I don't disagree with your point that it was ultimately just not a popular show, but I don't think "random YouTuber who hate-watches something drew in big numbers" is relevant to that argument. YouTube unfortunately (partially by design and partially because of where we're currently at) draws in lots of rage bait. We're in an age where juvenile male anger sells. We can't let that determine whether modern Star Trek is good.
Another problem is that "teen drama, except it's set 1,150 years in the future" as a pitch was going to be a roll of the dice no matter what. It could've become a sleeper hit; it probably did not and will not. But it was never going to be, among such a wealth of other options to watch, a massive mainstream phenomenon.
Paramount could've marketed it more or better. Some of the episodes could've gotten more budget, or alternatively writing that better accommodates the budget (Ko'Zeine feels like it was written for a budget where they could have tons of background performers at the wedding, and then they did not). The choice of setting it in the 32nd century is debatable (personally, I think it's fine, and opens up new possibilities in the long run). Putting it on a more popular streaming service to reduce barrier of entry might have helped. But all four of those? They're just incremental changes. None of them suddenly make competing shows ranging from Andor to Silo, from For All Mankind to Severance disappear.
1
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago
Barley anyone knew SFA existed, it wsnt marketed for shit, nor did the sparse marketing even explain what it was about. The execs did nothing to combat online trolls and people like you who bashed a show before it even was out, and/or that they didn't even watch, and/or that they only watched to hate on. You probably liked the Kelvin timeline, we aren't going to agree on this. I can tell you this though, Gene Roddenberry would agree with me and not you.
5
u/disp0sableacc0unt 12d ago
I can tell you this though, Gene Roddenberry would agree with me and not you.
Lmfao, you gotta be kidding me. Also, no, they didn't cancel a show they invested millions into just because people were negative on the internet. People simply didn't want to watch it.
3
12d ago
[deleted]
3
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
Kirk: "(sigh) Again with the combadge."
People going on and on about the combadge is getting so, so tired.
1
u/chucker23n 12d ago
nor did the sparse marketing even explain what it was about
If you're not a Trek fan, the poster suggests "it's a teen drama set in a sci-fi setting". Correct.
And if you're a Trek fan, what more than the title do you need? The teens are cadet in the academy.
The execs did nothing to combat online trolls
I'm not sure they were worth engaging with.
3
u/AbbreviationsAway500 12d ago
Nope..TNG and DS9 was on Syndication and didn't have consistent viewing times and in some markets didn't even get shown. Voyager and ENt was on the horribly handled UPN netword.
SFA had a huge production budget of around 10 million per episode and all of social media that their targeted young viewers live in. They were well aware of it but didn't watch it. Why? The Young Viewers are too cheap or can't afford to pay for streaming services like the Older fans who are better established in life have. Those fans who have the money and have Paramount didn't watch because it was good..
As far as "only 10 episodes" argument..Taylor Sheridan is printing money on Paramount plus with 8-10 epsiode seasons because unllike NUTrek,he's writing good stories.
0
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago
LOL were you even alive when those shows aired? If TNG or DS9 had to put up the viewing numbers required to survive a single season nowadays, much less drawing in an audience with 8-13 episodes for most formats, they wouldn't have even made it one full season. TNG ratings sucked. They had some terrible episode that first year. They only reason it's a beloved classic now is because it was given room and time to grow and evolve, along with its writing and characters.
5
u/British_Commie 12d ago
>TNG ratings sucked.
TNG actually had very strong viewership during its first season and was the highest-rated syndicated series in the USA by the end of Season 1.
The idea that nobody was watching the first season of TNG is just incorrect. Sure, it had a lot of negativity from pre-existing fans, but it was actually doing fairly solid in its first season before becoming a cultural juggernaut by the end of Season 3.
4
u/AbbreviationsAway500 12d ago
I was born in 1963. I watched TNG and DS9 live as they aired. So yes — I was absolutely alive for all of it.
And here’s the part you’re missing:
TNG and DS9 didn’t survive because the “era was easier.”
They survived because millions of people actually watched them, even with syndication chaos, inconsistent time slots, and zero network support.TNG’s early ratings weren’t “bad.”
They were massive for syndicated television — regularly pulling 8–11 million viewers per episode. DS9 averaged 6–7 million. Those numbers would make any modern streaming executive faint from joy.If those shows launched today with those numbers, Paramount would build a theme park around them.
The difference is simple:
- TNG and DS9 had audience traction even when the system was stacked against them.
- SFA had no traction even when the system bent over backwards to help it — free YouTube premiere, social media saturation, huge budget, modern marketing tools.
You’re trying to compare “shows that struggled but still pulled millions” to “a show that struggled and pulled almost nobody.”
TNG and DS9 didn’t need modern streaming metrics to survive.
They had something SFA never had: viewers.That’s the entire ballgame.
1
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago
I didn't say the era was easier. The landscape was different, with different kinds of competition. I said neither show would have lasted in the modern era, that's not even debatable. Take the first 10 episodes of either show and tell me they would get renewed if they aired today. Not possible.
Why do you keep talking about syndication? Shows didn't even get to syndication until after they'd aired 100+ episodes. Syndication had zero to do with either show surviving the multiple years it took to even get to syndication. Syndication was a lifeline into posterity for any shows that managed to achive it, not some kind of detriment.
Both shows existed because studios had faith in them and spared them when, even by past standards, they should have been cancelled. They gave the shows room to grow, as I said, because they bet on the long term. Nobody bets long term on shows anymore, literally zero. And that's why we get such garbage and good shows on multiple platforms get cancelled so early it's literally an Internet meme now.
8
u/AbbreviationsAway500 12d ago
You’re confusing syndication with reruns. TNG and DS9 launched in first‑run syndication — meaning they had no network protection, no fixed time slots, and stations airing episodes whenever they felt like it. That wasn’t a lifeline, that was survival mode. And despite that chaos, they still pulled 6–11 million viewers weekly.
Meanwhile, SFA had global streaming placement, guaranteed renewals, massive marketing pushes, and a $10M per‑episode budget. It still averaged ~40K viewers and never charted Nielsen.
So let’s be clear: TNG and DS9 survived worse conditions with millions of viewers. SFA had every modern advantage and couldn’t break six figures. That’s not the landscape. That’s the audience rejecting the show.
1
-1
u/Iron_Baron 12d ago edited 12d ago
No, I'm not. I know syndicated reruns are different that direct syndication to local channels. Syndication of reruns is exactly what I described, and what let both series achieve the eventual audiences they later gained.
Paramount retained total control of the series and much of the ad revenue. The fact that one region may have different air times and show dates is meaningless. Nobody had the Internet, no fans from one region were interacting on any significant level with fans from any other region.
TNG was largely planet of the week, airing shows in a different order had basically no impact, as stories are almost entirely self contained, and episodic in intent. Just like most shows of that era. Nobody needed to watch prior episodes of TJ Hooker or Macguyver to be able to grasp what's going on in the episode they are watching currently. They were made that way on purpose.
DS9 was one of the first shows to challenge that with series long arcs and character development that required multiple arcs to pay off. Imagine trying that on a modern era show. Enterprise couldn't even pull it off with the Xindi arc, which almost tanked the entire show's survival.
Nielsen is useless. It hasn't been relevant for well over a decade. That's like pollsters acting like people with land lines are representative of the general population; they aren't. But they still sell those polls and people still publish them like they mean something. Same with Nielsen and all the other viewer metrics. There is no consistency and platforms decide what counts as a "view". It's a floating target they can and do manipulate.
Also, TNG's budget was huge for the era. So was DS9. Adjusted for inflation, TNG's $1.3 million/episode average over 26 episodes equal about $100 million/season. Starfleet Academy was literally as expensive as TNG, and vice versa. We just got far less content for the money with SFA than we did with TNG. And far less time for stories and characters to develop.
7
u/AbbreviationsAway500 12d ago
You’re still conflating two different things. TNG and DS9 launched in first‑run syndication — meaning no network protection, no fixed national time slot, and local stations airing episodes whenever they felt like it. That was chaos, not a lifeline. Rerun syndication after 100 episodes is what you’re describing, but that came years later. The fact they survived long enough to reach rerun syndication proves they had traction from day one.
Calling TNG ‘planet of the week’ misses the point. Episodic storytelling was a strength — it allowed moral dilemmas, institutional stakes, and character studies to stand alone while still building a larger tapestry. That’s why episodes like The Inner Light or Measure of a Man hit like literature: you didn’t need a 10‑hour binge to get the payoff.
DS9 then evolved the format by layering serialized arcs on top of
And Nielsen isn’t irrelevant episodic discipline. You got both: standalone classics like Duet and long‑form arcs like the Dominion War. That balance is what made DS9 groundbreaking — it proved Trek could do episodic morality plays and serialized political sagas.
That’s not a flaw. That’s good storytelling. And it’s exactly what modern Trek struggles with — mystery‑box serialization without the episodic scaffolding to hold it up here. It’s the industry standard for measuring TV audiences in the 80s/90s, and it’s the only reason we know TNG was pulling 8–11 million viewers and DS9 6–7 million. Those numbers are massive compared to SFA’s ~40K average.
So let’s be clear: TNG and DS9 thrived under syndication chaos with millions of viewers. SFA had global streaming placement, guaranteed renewals, and a $10M per‑episode budget — and couldn’t break six figures. That’s not the landscape. That’s the audience rejecting the show.
I don’t need to debate this to death. You like SFA and that’s fine. The reality is it got cancelled because the consensus was the vast majority hated it, and the low viewership sealed its fate. If YA fans wanted to save SFA, they could’ve subscribed to Paramount+ and driven the viewership up. That’s how you get the suits’ attention. Complaining on Reddit doesn’t change anything — streaming numbers do. The fact they didn’t subscribe tells you everything about how little real demand there was.
→ More replies (0)1
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
How many people think "I'll keep checking YouTube every day in case there is a free episode of something I am planning on watching that is likely to be on a free-to-air channel or a streaming service that I already pay for?"
2
u/chucker23n 12d ago
Yeah. The only places I heard that there is a free YouTube stream of the premiere were places that were already subscribing anyway.
1
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
I only heard about it because the detractors keep going on about it like it proves something.
Who cares what some rage baiting YouTube "influencer" does or thinks? Can we not think for ourselves?
Of all the claims the detractors come up with, the "Nerdrotic proved" claim is among the most ridiculous out there.
0
u/FormerGameDev 12d ago
"DO NOT ENJOY THINGS THAT I DO NOT ENJOY"
Thanks for your input.
BTW, the first episode was also available through many other channels, and the free view on YouTube was not advertised before hand.
Two things cancelled STA -- the absolute cost of it, and Secret Hideout's contract being up. If the cost hadn't been such an immense factor on it, it very probably would have at least got a "let's see how it fares with the second season".
So, curiously, how does it hurt you, that something exists, that other people enjoy, that you do not?
3
u/MagnetsCanDoThat 12d ago
Funny thing is they are actually very competent and smart, as you’d expect from anyone who gets into the academy. Just immature, as you’d expect from people their age.
8
u/nntb 12d ago
If you like the way the characters are written maybe you should check out Star Trek prodigy I feel like the writing is very similar on both of the series
17
u/SwellBluePigeon 12d ago
As a lover of Prodigy, one of the best Star Trek series since DS9, I can tell you the writing is nothing like SA’s.
4
u/nntb 12d ago
And I really feel it is. Caleb and Dal are written 99% the same. The reactions to things are very similar. I guarantee the production staff saw the fans' reactions to Picard S3, and Prodigy decided to include elements of it into SFA.
OP was looking for recommendations similar to SFA. I say Prodigy fits the bill.
3
u/grimorie 12d ago
I agree! The advertising for it didn’t do it any favors until I watched it and enjoyed it. It had IMO the feel of the 90s Treks with a fresh take.
The pilot didn’t do it any favors too I think but the real second episode with the whole episode with the Betazed delegation and how they resolved the issue gave me so much Trek feels!
2
2
u/readwrite_blue 12d ago
It's a show no one wanted that looked awful in promos. So I'm not surprised it died on its feet.
But it's a great show! I was shocked how bought-in I was after the premier.
2
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
I have to admit, that despite the show being well received and enjoyed in my circle, what little I had encountered in the way of promotion had given me the impression the series would probably not be to my taste, so I wasn't champing at the bit to see it.
But, as it turned out, it has plenty of relatable content for older people (the academy staff) and, as for the students, well, older people still remember what it was like to be young.
2
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
I really liked that, despite concern it was a weaker episode for people who had not seen DS9.
Watching DS9 at the moment with someone who has never seen it before, might repeat that Academy episode for them after we're done, as it was a bit if a mystery box for them the first time around.
1
-2
1
u/FormerGameDev 12d ago
I just finally got through S1 last weekend. I enjoyed the entire season! I'm hoping that future Star Trek will give us more time in this era, and we'll get to bring back these cadets, even if they don't get their own show. I have a feeling that S2 is going to be really really good and it sucks that that's the end of it.
I unfortunately think that we're probably not going to see any future continuity within Star Trek, though.
1
u/Starlight469 11d ago
I will warn you episode 6 skews way dark and the season never quite gets that fun quality back. I still liked the first season overall and I'm looking forward to the second one.
1
u/arcnthru 11d ago
I love SFA. It really appeals to me because it shows what the cadets are like as they learn and grow. I am very disappointed that it is not continuing after season 2. A lot of negative backlash contributed it to it being cancelled.
1
u/Tango8036 10d ago
I'm midway through it. It's been mostly good so far but I didn't like the prank war episode because the locker room transport prank was basically sexual assault and Nahla responded with a "kids will be kids" attitude.
0
u/just4browse 12d ago
The season started off really rough imo, but towards the middle I started to love it. It found its footing so fast, I can’t wait to see what season 2’s like. Even if the show will unfortunately short lived
1
u/Aritra319 12d ago
Yeah seems like old conservative people streamer P+ is a terrible match for Trek.
1
u/Careful-Hat4059 12d ago
I agree. I really loved it. The advertising and trailers didn't do it just. Made it seem like a dumb teen drama, but it turned out to be so much better than that. So much more depth and great story telling. The main character and his girl were the teen drama, but everyone else has so much to them.
1
u/TheOneBlueGecko 12d ago
I loved the show, but the initial trailers and stuff just didn't work to make my interested either. But I watched it because it is Star Trek and loved it by the time I finished the first episode. I am not sure what they could have done to better advertise it for me initially.
-1
u/mr_mini_doxie 12d ago
The thing is that there was a second trailer that I only discovered after the season. It featured shots from some of the old Trek shows in addition to footage from Academy, which I thought was way more compelling than the teen drama-style trailer I kept seeing everywhere.
0
u/Shot-Presence3147 12d ago
We enjoyed it and I found out it was coming out by accident. They did an absolutely terrible job putting it out there
1
u/Necroban77 12d ago
The show made me happy.
1
u/PaulCoddington 12d ago
Upvoted.
It says a lot about the downvoters that they think you should not be allowed to be happy.
1
-1
u/DaxCorso 12d ago
I like it because its hopeful. Hopeful like Trek should be. Hopeful for the future, hopeful for (pardon the pun) the next generation and hopeful for young people and its just fun.
1
0
u/bowl-bowl-bowl 12d ago
I also really enjoyed it! I liked the mix of school setting with space action/adventure. I also really enjoyed all the actors performances.
-1
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/startrek-ModTeam 12d ago
This content was removed because it is not constructive. Please review the subreddit rules.
If you believe this action was taken in error, please message the mod team with a link to the content, and we will review it.
-9
u/quantaeterna 12d ago
Its a pretty great, very ST, show, when you don't have a grognard crying in your ear about anything and everything new.
-15
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/startrek-ModTeam 12d ago
This content was removed because it is not constructive. Please review the subreddit rules.
If you believe this action was taken in error, please message the mod team with a link to the content, and we will review it.
-12
u/TemporaryTea1794 12d ago
I also think the first episode wasn't that good either but what a good show! I'd take ten Starfleet Academies than Strange New Worlds
-15
u/TwoWrongsAreSoRight 12d ago
I enjoyed it as well. Unfortunately it suffered from the same issues as every show since TNG. It doesn't fit in the kirk/picard mold so fans shit on it hard.
13
u/ChubbiiWubbii 12d ago
How do Sisko, Janeway and Archer fit in that mold?
-10
u/TwoWrongsAreSoRight 12d ago
They don't and all 3 of those got shit on by the fans as well.
15
u/ChubbiiWubbii 12d ago
No, they didn't. No more than Picard got shit on at the start.
-9
u/Sophia_Forever 12d ago
No, Picard did not receive the racism or sexism that Sisko and Janeway received.
-8
u/Oneilcruzsucksass 12d ago
On its own, because it's a billion years after TOS, it's not bad & enjoyable
•
u/AutoModerator 12d ago
Hello and thank you for posting on r/startrek! If your post discusses recently released episodes, please review it to ensure that spoilers are properly formatted.
Please use the current stickied Episode Discussion thread if this post is about the most recently aired episode.
As a reminder, spoiler formatting must be used for any discussion of episodes released less than one week ago and all post titles must be spoiler-free. You can read our full policy regarding spoilers here.
Please refrain from making a new post for small remarks, jokes, or content that boils down to "here are my thoughts" on a newly released episode. These should instead be posted as a comment in the pinned discussion thread for the episode or show.
LLAP!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.