Need an entire series where Porthos accidentally sets off an all-out Beagle-Ferengi blood war.

TCTTS said:

---

I agree. This is what Star Trek should be. They can still make Star Trek movies in the form of spinoffs, prequels, etc, but the main story (or stories) should be in the form of an ongoing TV/streaming series with 20+ episodes per season. Also, fire anyone and everyone involved with the *current* Star Trek streaming series, which look abysmal. Start over completely fresh.

---

You and I agree! I never thought I would see the day! What's interesting is listening to former writers from Star Trek, they all agree. So since you would know, why don't they do this? Is it the cost? Is it the writers? Why do you think they don't just go back, continue the storyline beyond the dominion wars, and re-ignite the same moral lessons taught from the previous shows with a new crew? And yes, fire Kurtzman and his band of zealots. Please. My first call would be to Ira Steven Behr. Have him assemble a team and be the new showrunner.

The Abrams-verse movies were so successful (the first one more so than the next two) that they became the face of the franchise. So they then designed all the shows to try and look and feel like the movies, and let Kurtzman run rampant in the process (he was part of the writing team who wrote the first two Abrams-verse movies). The problem was, the shows feel like cheap imitations of the movies, and the vibe/tone of the movies isn't the right vibe/tone for TV. And yes, Star Trek is inherently woke, but these shows were conceived during the height of Hollywood's wokest period, and it's all just been too much, and too goofy, and the whole franchise just feels "off"at this point. The good thing is Paramount is now under new ownership, and all signs point to a complete refresh/reboot at some point in the next year or two, as the ownership has said the franchise is a priority for them.

TCTTS said:

---

The Abrams-verse movies were so successful (the first one more so than the next two) that they became the face of the franchise. So they then designed all the shows to try and look and feel like the movies, and let Kurtzman run rampant in the process (he was part of the writing team that wrote the three Abrams-verse movies). The problem was, the shows feel like cheap imitations of the movies, and the vibe/tone of the movies isn't the right vibe/tone for TV. And yes, Star Trek is inherently woke, but these shows were conceived during the height of Hollywood's wokest period, and it's all just been too much, and too goofy, and the whole franchise just feels "off" now. The good thing is Paramount is now under new ownership, and all signs point to a complete refresh/reboot at some point in the next year or two, as the ownership has said that the franchise is a priority for them.

---

Excellent news. I mean, you can see the fan reactions every year at the Star Trek cons. Star Trek fans are not fans of the Kurtzman treks. They just aren't. They are quite vocal about what they would like to see. It's excellent that the property is going to be a priority for them. It's ripe for the taking. The only new series that sees lots of fan interaction and hype is Lower Decks. That's the closest a new series has come. But yeah, Discovery, Picard, even Strange New Worlds, and probably Starfleet Academy is just something the star trek faithful do not get behind. I'm glad they are waking up. Bring back Ira Steven Behr!

TCTTS said:

---

I agree. This is what Star Trek should be. They can still make Star Trek movies in the form of spinoffs, prequels, etc, but the main story (or stories) should be in the form of an ongoing TV/streaming series with 20+ episodes per season. Also, fire anyone and everyone involved with the *current* Star Trek streaming series, which look abysmal. Start over completely fresh.

---

Which series are you referring to?

I thought Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks were great. SNW had a lot in it that was reminiscent of original Trek.

Dekker_Lentz said:

---

Man, I really like Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks. Both seem to care about the franchise. Strange New Worlds is an 8.2 IMDB and 70% Fan on RT. I don't think either of these shows are this issue. Lower Decks is 7.8 on IMDb and 72% Fan on RT.

I don't think these shows are the problem and Lower Decks should get more episodes.

Discovery is a different story.

---

Yeah, I'm just talking about fan interactions at cons. Lower Decks has lines for folks to meet the cast. You see that somewhat with Strange New Worlds, but less so, the cast from Discovery, Picard, etc. has no lines. No one cares.

All of them.

Maybe Strange New Worlds is the best of the bunch (I've only seen bits and pieces), but even it looks goofy as hell at times (wasn't there like a puppet episode or something?).

My main point, though, is that, seeing as they're finally abandoning the Abrams-verse movies, since all the shows spawned from those movies, the franchise now needs a fresh (re)start, top to bottom, regardless if one of the shows stands out above the rest.

TCTTS said:

---

All of them.

Maybe Strange New Worlds is the best of the bunch (I've only seen bits and pieces), but even it looks goofy as hell at times (wasn't there like a puppet episode or something?).

My main point, though, is that, seeing as they're finally abandoning the Abrams-verse movies, since all the shows spawned from those movies, the franchise now needs a fresh (re)start, top to bottom, regardless if one of the shows stands out above the rest.

---

Will you tell them to tap Ira Steven Behr? We need to get back to the Michael Piller era of Star Trek writing and stories. It's devastating that he died so young, but Behr is alive and can re-ignite a writer's room to produce the same quality. DS9 was some of the best writing Star Trek had ever seen.

I disagree. Strange New Worlds is the TOS Abrams-verse. They even had an episode mocking it. It's about the look of the show, the ship, the battles, the cgi, all the eye candy with little focus on the substance. That being said, perhaps if they stuck to more then 10 episodes and scrapped all the eye candy, there would be something there. But yeah, Kurtzman needs to be fired and a new direction charted. His vision isn't working and I'm glad Paramount is waking up to that fact and will put an emphasis on Star Trek going forward.

Lower Decks works because it's all about the writing, the character interaction and the continuation of Star Trek told with a new lens.

When an episode like that becomes 10% of the new season, then yeah, it's not good. 20-30% of every SNW season are episodes like that. But that goes beyond the aesthetics of the show. It's strictly in the Abrams-verse.

Richleau12 said:

---

I disagree. Strange New Worlds is the TOS Abrams-verse. They even had an episode mocking it. It's about the look of the show, the ship, the battles, the cgi, all the eye candy with little focus on the substance. That being said, perhaps if they stuck to more then 10 episodes and scrapped all the eye candy, there would be something there. But yeah, Kurtzman needs to be fired and a new direction charted. His vision isn't working and I'm glad Paramount is waking up to that fact and will put an emphasis on Star Trek going forward.

Lower Decks works because it's all about the writing, the character interaction and the continuation of Star Trek told with a new lens.

---

I have seen this criticism of the SNW episode "Space Adventure Hour" and I agree it could have been better done, but it was directed by Jonathan Frakes who loves Star Trek and it contains this quote:

JOANIE GLOSS: "You don't think some kid out there is going to see this show and spend the rest of their life searching the stars? You don't think a person can love a piece of art or music or a story so much that it heals them? Shows them parts of themselves they'd never even seen before? And give them hope? … A show like this could've gone on forever. Given generations of fans a place to feel seen, to belong, something to believe in again, no matter who they were or where they came from."

The show was trying to show the juxtaposition of very real messages and emotions of TOS with the clearly dated/campy/low budget reality of the show. I saw the episode as basically saying, even if you take only the worse elements of TOS, it still moved a generations of people. Which is a pretty powerful compliment.

I think it could have been executed better, but it was trying to pay TOS the highest compliment.

I can agree that SNW is a marriage between Abramsverse aesthetics, but also taps into TOS's core messages.

Can SNW be more serious? Probably. But I think it is a good building block. I really hope it leads into a new show, with Kirk's Enterprise.

Plus the SNW + Lower Decks crossover episode is huge fun!

Edit: Just to be clear, I am not arguing that SNW is better than TOS and DS9, just that it belongs in the conversation of "good" Trek.

Yes! I love these guys…

EXCLUSIVE: After breathing new life into high-profile IP like the ‘Spider-Man’ franchise and ‘Dungeons & Dragons,’ Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley are coming on to write, produce and are attached to direct a new original ‘Star Trek’ film for Paramount.

Plot details… pic.twitter.com/blEH0b12Gn

— Deadline (@DEADLINE) November 14, 2025

Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley are set to write and direct a ‘STAR TREK’ movie.

They previously directed ‘Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves’ and ‘Game Night’

(Source: Deadline) pic.twitter.com/YEj4CxG4VZ

— DiscussingFilm (@DiscussingFilm) November 14, 2025

Misleading photo, though, seeing as it's not an Abram's-verse movie.