‘Star Trek: Lower Decks’ Creator Says The TNG Era Is A “Playground,” Plus New Images And More

The countdown to Thursday’s series premiere of Star Trek: Lower Decks continues and we have a few more updates from Monday to keep you going.

New images

Last week CBS released 16 images from the first four episodes of Lower Decks. Today five more arrived from this Thursday’s episode “Second Contact.”

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Jack Quaid as Ensign Brad Boimler, Nol Wells as Ensign Tendi and Tawny Newsome as Ensign Beckett Mariner

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Jack Quaid as Ensign Brad Boimler, Nol Wells as Ensign Tendi and Tawny Newsome as Ensign Beckett Mariner

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Ben Rodgers as Lt. Commander Stevens and Jerry O’Connell as Commander Jack Ransom

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Ben Rodgers as Lt. Commander Stevens and Jerry O’Connell as Commander Jack Ransom

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Tawny Newsome as Ensign Beckett Mariner and Jack Quaid as Ensign Brad Boimler

“Second Contact” — Pictured (L-R) Nol Wells as Ensign Tendi, Tawny Newsome as Ensign Beckett Mariner and Jack Quaid as Ensign Brad Boimler

They also released another image from episode two, “Envoys.”

“Envoys” — Pictured Jack Quaid as Ensign Brad Boimler

McMahan on why the TNG era

Given that he’s the author of  Warped: An Engaging Guide to the Never-Aired 8th Season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, it wasn’t a big surprise that Lower Decks creator and showrunner Mike McMahan set the show just one year after the last TNG film Star Trek: Nemesis. But in a new interview with CNET, McMahan expands on his choice of era:

When he had the opportunity to pitch a Star Trek show, McMahan immediately opted for the Next Generation era familiar from his youth. “I remember watching Data and Geordi,” he remembers, “like, these are my guys.” As much as he loves the characters and campiness of The Original Series, the ’90s era of Trek shows felt like home  — and also proved it was possible to tell stories beyond the Enterprise. “With Voyager and Deep Space Nine, it became like a genre,” says McMahan. “The TNG era is kind of a genre of Star Trek, and [for creators] it’s just a playground.”

And yesterday after our last update, McMahan shared some of his enthusiasm on Twitter for the coming premiere, touting the years of work that has gone into the show.

 

Another character promo

Yesterday we shared two character promo animations. Today CBS All Access released a new one, for Ensign Brad Boimler.

 

Fans making their own Lower Decks art

Over the last few weeks, Trek Twitter has seen some creative fans creating Lower Decks versions of their favorite Trek characters. An example of this can be seen below with fan Jemina Malkki’s version of “Disco Decks.”

Artist J.J. Lendl decided to turn this idea around and created a poster for what Lower Decks might look like IRL—and Tawny Newsome (aka Ensign Mariner) loves it.

All Access free month promo

CBS All Access also announced a one-month free promotion. For a limited time, try 1 month FREE!


And keep up with all the news and reviews from the new Star Trek Universe on TV at TrekMovie.com.

Subscribe
Notify me of
58 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I forgot to mention this earlier but they are now dishing out a free MONTH! When they started it was a week. Disney offered a week. Now it’s a month. This is not a good sign. I honestly don’t know what anyone is going to find with those extra 25 days that they didn’t find in 7.

Also, I think it was obvious they would use the TNG era. It was McMahon’s favorite. And myself, I see the TNG era as rife with comedy opportunities more so than the TOS era. TOS has been parodied to death already, too.

I got two months free. I have Disney+ for one year. The TNG era can be utilized for comedic effect. TOS has grown tired.

LOL, TOS is remarkably untired for a show that was on when Lyndon Johnson was president. I still see gifs and memes from it on social media. Some things are timeless and that is what TOS is. We will check in on TNG in the year 2039 and see how its longevity is doing.

I grew up on TNG so it can get personal. TOS is not my favorite Star Trek of all time but I like Kirk and Spock as characters.

I wasn’t born in the 1960s so TOS doesn’t feel special to me. TNG has gifs and memes too you know. Star Trek as a whole is timeless. We can agree on that.

I say TNG is better. We can agree to disagree.

Disney wasn’t advertising two months when they started. They themselves were offering one week. I just did a quick search and cannot find any offer from them lasting more than the one week. If you got two months my guess is it was through some sort of special bundle with some other company who partnered up or something.

They’ve been doing free month offers numerous times, usually around the time of a big series/season premiere.

Just checked. It’s not going on now. I haven’t been on the lookout for it but I haven’t seen the one month thing. Not saying it hasn’t shown from time to time.

Well, since there already exists a character of Lower Decks in a previous Star Trek series, it was only logical to use that era. Of course I am talking about Mr.Broccoli.

Last edited 1 month ago by DaveCGN

Netflix has a free moth for as long i can remamber.

Yep. But Netflix is not Disney. Which is the example I used. Netflix was the only one who offered more than one week.

This show is a love letter to the TNG era and I love that.

TNG is my first Star Trek show so that era is personal to me. Looking forward to it.

Last edited 1 month ago by Faze Ninja

“Playgound” = kids show.

And there is nothing wrong with that. I just wish they would be more honest with themselves that that’s what this is.

Who doesn’t like a goods kids cartoon with some genre elements like Johnny Quest, for example.

I wish you were more honest with yourself and didn’t pretend they said anything to the contrary.

Not necessarily purely a kids show. Generation Y and Z like to act more childlike. They says things like “TL;DR, that is enough adulting for today. Now I will play video games and watch cartoons and eat Fruity Pebbles because I am 37.”

I’m an 18 year old millennial adult man and I don’t say that. My friends don’t say that.

I don’t understand why anyone would say “TL;DR, that is enough adulting for today. Now I will play video games and watch cartoons and eat Fruity Pebbles because I am 37″ out in public is beyond me.

The younger generation is more childlike. Generation Y and Z should’ve gotten better parenting figures while growing up.

Last edited 1 month ago by Faze Ninja

Every generation always think the generation after it are lazy, childish and got it far too easy. I’m from Generation X, we were treated like self absorbed people who shunned society, had no manners and was consumed with technology (the internet basically came into public consumption when Generation X were mostly in high school and college).

All these silly stereotypes people put on others are eye rolling. Sure some of that can be true for some people but not all. There are just as many hardworking, serious and adult minded people in EVERY generation. And we can even enjoy the same things too regardless of age.

Look at this board, it probably ranges from 18-60s and yet we all love Star Trek. It doesn’t belong to any one generation and every generation seems to appreciate it, for the people who actually watch it I mean.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

Thanks Tiger2 for saying it.

Dumping on younger generations is always ungracious and at best a short-sighted generalization.

GenX is finally recognized as the sandwich generation, even by Boomer politicians who don’t really understand how their generation left the GenXers with very little room to grow.

What the retrospective view on the millennials or the Zs will be once they hit their 40s is hard to predict.

18 isn’t millennial. Its Gen Z.

Good point!

Probably because their helicopter parents have spoiled them rotten.

By ‘playground’ he obviously was saying that there is a lot of room for stories and lots of world-building to expound upon and characters to utilize.

You’re twisting a pretty simple quote to support your own judgement of a show you haven’t even seen yet.

Last edited 1 month ago by Andy

Loosen up my friend. What’s wrong with a great kids cartoon that adults can relax and have fun with?

Fat Albert, Johnny Quest, Teen Titans Go! What’s not to like?

Last edited 1 month ago by Methusalah

There’s nothing wrong with that, and that is likely what Prodigy will be. It doesn’t look like that is what Lower Decks will be. It will be an adult cartoon, like The Simpsons or Futurama. The playground phrase is pretty common, and just means that it is the world that they are playing in. It has nothing to do with the genre or the target audience.

We’ll see.

“When he had the opportunity to pitch a Star Trek show, McMahan immediately opted for the Next Generation era familiar from his youth. “I remember watching Data and Geordi,” he remembers, “like, these are my guys.” As much as he loves the characters and campiness of The Original Series, the ’90s era of Trek shows felt like home — and also proved it was possible to tell stories beyond the Enterprise. “With Voyager and Deep Space Nine, it became like a genre,” says McMahan. “The TNG era is kind of a genre of Star Trek, and [for creators] it’s just a playground.”

Wow this guy literally took the words out of my mouth. This is exactly how I feel too every time I think about the 24th century era and why it became my favorite easily. I grew up with TOS, I doubt I would be a fan without it, but the TNG era just became my ‘home’ as well.

For one thing there is just a lot more of it lol. But also because it really created a mythology for Star Trek TOS never really did. Obviously because of the era the show was made in and it was a lot more episodic, we never got invested in other aliens and story lines the way the 24th century shows did. I mean had the history of the Klingons, Vulcans and Romulans but once you went pass those groups there was really nothing else. We did learn a lot about the Federation but in reality the Federation was mostly in the background. In other words we are told a lot about it but we rarely saw it function outside of episodes like Journey to Babel and of course all the colonies they visited.

But the 24th century, everything was expanded on in so many ways. We got deep dives into a lot of Federation history and just how it worked more clearly. We got tons more aliens and groups who stuck around more than an episode and became very important in Star Trek like Q, Bajorans, Trills, Cardassians, Borg, Ferengi, Dominion and on and on. We also got to just see more organizations function in this era like the Tal Shiar, Section 31, Maquis, etc.

There is just much more going on. And its why I think so many were bothered who grew up in this period would just see it all wiped away. And yes there was fear it would be or at least never really revisited. Thankfully we are getting it again! I miss this era so much because it added to Star Trek on a grand level of mythology.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

The NextGen era was my home back in the 90s/early aughties but I definitely feel a lot more for TOS, the original movies and even KT movies. I wasn’t around in the 60s, I grew up on TNG and the spin-offs but TOS and anything related to it, even DSC with its Spock family connections, is much more pivotal to me.

TNG was a bold step and yes, it developed its own dynamics with the spin-offs, but in retrospect, it didn’t age as well as TOS and the movies. First of all, TNG was quite obviously heavily based on Phase II/TMP elements: Decker/Riker, Ilia/Troy, Data/Xon, Picard/seasoned Kirk, Yar/Chekov as security chief… much of TNG was developed out of the innovations originally destined for Phase II. In many ways, TNG was an adaptation of Phase II with only one basic change: the setting…

And here, the inherent problems start. They decided to move the series about 100 years into the future while at the same time planning to reuse ship models from the 23rd century movies and bringing in TOS characters. It was called “The Next Generation” while it actually was “The Next Century”, but then, it really wasn’t because 90% of the ship and starbase designs felt actually only a few decades away from the TOS movie era…at best!

That led to multiple issues that still don’t make much sense:
The monster maroon uniforms were used by Starfleet for decades and so were Excelsior-, Miranda- and Oberth-class ships with almost no new ship designs until the TNG movie era.
The Klingon peace process was told twice. First on NextGen during Seasons 3-5 and later again (but set 80 years earlier) on TUC.
The new technology may have been impressive in the late 80s but even by our standards none of that stuff is actually far beyond what we have today: touch screens, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, nothing introduced on TNG is beyond our reach… The only stuff that remains out of reach was stuff already introduced on TOS: warp drive and transporters!

Had they decided to set NextGen in the early 24th century, only 30 years after Kirk and Spock, the use of old starship models, the flashback use of the monster maroon uniforms, the appearance of TOS characters, the Klingon politics and much more would have been far easier to handle.

Taking the title “The Next Generation” literally would have been the answer! Star Trek would be better off if TNG had been set right after TOS and ENT should be set no more than 50 years before TOS… The technological, design-wise and fashion-related difference are simply not big enough to cover 250 years of history… The huge blanks between ENT and TOS as well as TOS and TNG cannot be filled logically.

NX-01 and La Sirena are two and a half centuries apart but do they feel like that?

Last edited 1 month ago by Garth Lorca

Well I basically disagree everything you just said Garth.

For one thing I don’t feel TOS has ‘aged’ better. Not for me anyway because sadly there are multiple episodes I can’t even watch now and I been watching it since the 70s. It feels outdated in so many ways, especially its treatment of women. Now to be clear I’m ONLY talking about myself and not saying it’s a general issue in fandom. I’m guessing most people have no issues with it and can just accept it was made in the 60s. This is my hang up but that hang up makes TOS feels much more dated compared to the other shows (although they are all dated in some way today).

And I also disagree TNG should’ve been set just 30 years after TOS. For me, what makes it more interesting is that it’s set so far from TOS, it can do what it wants. And it didn’t become a revolving door with TOS characters just in old age make up. Things like ships and uniforms from the TOS movies being used would probably better not to be used in an ideal world but I never had an issue with it. I always assumed these ships were built to last and older model ships were probably used for lighter stuff like diplomacy missions, etc and not long term space travel. So I had no issues with it. But I understand why others may have.

As far as technology, I don’t really get your point? Yeah, life caught up to a science fiction show, that’s how its ALWAYS is. And things like communicators and computers that we saw on TOS have also been in use for decades now, right? Many people actually think TOS is what heralded in the cell phone. And TNG also has things like holodecks and sentient androids so some things still remain very much out of reach. But either way it doesn’t matter, science fiction shows can only postulate so much. No matter what ‘century’ these shows are set in makes little difference in terms of how its translated in the real world. I mean ANY show post TOS would have the same problem, so this argument makes no sense to me.

One thing I will agree on is that yes in Trek the difference in technology and eras has always been an issue, which is exactly why people scratch their heads with Discovery. It doesn’t even TRY to align its tech with what we seen in TOS. There should be no spore drive at all. There should also be no holographic communication or touch screens either and yet its all there.

But yeah, probably because this is just how most people today would look at the future in the 23rd century from a 2020 perspective. And yes you have different writers from different eras trying meld things people did on other shows. But only so much can be done. So that’s why the NX-01 and La Sierrna doesn’t feel far apart. I mean there are some things in Discovery which feels more advance than Picard lol.

It would be nice to align these things better but it’s bound to happen given all the shows and films and how tech has been presented.

Maybe they could’ve moved up Enterprise BUT the issue is the show was suppose to be a pre-Federation show, that was the point. If it wasn’t for that I don’t think they would’ve done a pre-TOS prequel at all at the time.

But I love the 24th century to death. I know that because the overwhelming shows I rewatch are still the 24th shows. That’s what draws me in because the mythology is just so much more richer, especially the most with DS9 (and my favorite Trek show).

Thats why while still generally love the TOS show and films it still feels a lot less involved. And thats fine of course, I just like that the TNG era not only expanded on what we knew in TOS but created entire new mythologies as well.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

I understand why you disagree and I’m not even saying that TOS is better than TNG. The treatment of women certainly is an issue but it has been retconned on ENT, DSC and the KT. I’d rather think of my preference for TOS as a structural thing.

Let’s bring in Batman. Batman, Robin, Alfred, the Joker and the other classic rogue gallery villains… those are the originals.
Now, of course you can make a show set decades into the future with new people fighting crime in a Gotham of the future… Batman Beyond! It’s a nice spin-off / sequel, it may even be better, fresher, more nuanced etc. but it isn’t the original.

TNG and the spin-offs worked in their day and age but Core Trek is timeless for me. Not the set pieces, not the treatment of women, not even the scores that I love so much, but the basic position it has as the central core and origin. It’s hard to describe.
But anything directly related to TOS – for example Spock’s stepsister Michael – matters a lot more to me than the best episodes of DS9 or VOY (unless they directly refer to TOS, showing TOS footage, Tribbles, TOS Klingons, Mirror stuff etc.)
Besides its very own dynamics TNG has developed, my main focal point will always be its TOS relations… the few cameos, the fact that most characters are based on Phase II blueprints.

And I wasn’t even around in the 60s or 70s… I started watching Trek during TNG’s final season in 1993/94…

And TNG is timeless for millions of others including myself. In every major poll out there from the most favorite to most binged show TNG usually come out on top even now so clearly it hasn’t aged that badly for most if they still watch in droves.

But everyone will like what they like. I mean this entire thread is here because the guy who is making Lower Decks is enamored with the TNG era. There is no consensus on any of it. You like TOS more, great. I like TNG more. Most importantly we all love Star Trek in general regardless of one particular show or era. Let’s just leave it at that.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

I just want to add that the reason for the same ships on TNG as in the TOS movies is budgetary. It was just cheaper to reuse models. When watching it was a bit jarring to me, seeing that SFS space station still showing up. But I understand why. I guess if someone really needed an in-universe explanation then the idea that “they built the ships to last” works. But I am capable of getting past that. I can forgive them for having budget limits.

What you said about TNG being very much like Phase II…. I can see that. I always saw Picard and Riker as Kirk split in two characters. But seasoned Kirk/Decker is a valid comparison. As are the others.

I know it’s budgetary. But they KNEW from the very beginning they’d need to work on a shoestring budget. And if I know that – the USS Hood (Excelsior class) appeared in the pilot! – I can adapt the setting to 30 years into the future instead of 80 years. It would have felt more natural and in line with real-life development.

My gosh, what am I doing here? Those decisions were made 33 years ago when I was 7. Still, the Monster Maroon thing is illogical. Those uniforms must have been in service for 80 years while Starfleet uniforms are changed on a five-year basis whenever there’s a series around. Again, I know it’s for the reason of selling merchandise.

Yeah, I love the Phase II / TNG similarities. They prove that concepts that are discarded first can still come to live a short time later. Will Decker – Will Riker, Ilia – Troy (two names harking back to Homer), Xon – Data (the emotionless outsider striving for human emotions), a “Russian” security chief…

I also loved the idea to base the Discovery design on an old 70s Enterprise refit design. Or including the once shelved Young Kirk / Spock academy premise in the 2009 reboot.

But I’d even go further. TOS could be surrounded by more direct prequels and sequels. SNW serving as the direct prequel and another show dealing with Kirk’s second five-year mission at some point.

Last edited 1 month ago by Garth Lorca

As someone just recently sadly said, it is what it is. Again I never had an issue with it personally, I don’t think most did. The maroon uniforms were just used for flashbacks, they DID actually have their own uniforms. Why they couldn’t just use the TNG uniforms in flashbacks is beyond me since those could’ve been in use for a few decades but yeah.

Sadly I really hate the look of the Discovery but I’m getting more use to it. But there is a reason WHY those 70’s designs were discarded in the first place.

And TOS already has the Kelvin movies, DIS and yes SNW. It has never been forgotten nor should it. For me, I want to see Trek grow and expand though and as said why I prefer the 24th century. But with Discovery in the 32nd century now, its expanding at a rate I never expected. But its nice with ALL these shows and various time periods each one is in, not only are old eras like the 23rd and 24th century are again represented, we are getting brand new eras. So its exciting and something for everyone! I’m hoping whenever Picard is done, that get’s a spin off too. I can’t see how it wouldn’t.

It’s really exciting times.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

That is a decent point. If you know going in you are going to have to recycle film models then it does make more sense to bring the show a little closer to the TOS film era. On the other hand, I do understand the desire to separate the shows by time frame. It was the desire to stand a little more on its own. To not have the crutch of bringing in TOS guest stars. Even though three of them found their way on the show. I will say I was never a fan of the 80 year separation. But I understood why they did it. I also had a tough time getting attached to the characters. I just saw too many TOS characteristics in them. For me, only Worf stood out as a new character.

I never hated TNG. I was happy to see new Trek. I watched the show religiously. Often with a few of my friends who also liked Trek. I can also appreciate those for whom TNG was their first exposure to Trek. I can understand for those folks TOS can be a little hard to watch given that it was 60’s TV. From my perspective, however, TNG feels too much like it was trying to recapture what TOS had. Copying character traits didn’t help for me. This is not to poo-poo those who love TNG. I get it. But again, for me, TOS just captured something intangible that TNG never could.

Looking forward to this. I wonder if TNG cast members who didn’t appear in Picard’s 1st season will do voiceovers for this.

According to McMahan, we can expect characters from all the shows which is really exciting. Since Voyager is already back from the Delta quadrant, they can be included too and find out what they been up to (we already know what Seven is doing ;)). Same for the DS9 characters since the Dominion war is now over and we saw some of them leave the station to go on to do other things as well.

So its going to be a lot of fun to see whoever we get! And it doesn’t have to be a revolving door of fan service either (although this show sounds like it was literally made for that kind of thing). But if we just get at least ONE character from each of those shows first season I would be happy personally.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

This quote from McMahan is why I’m excited for Lower Decks:

“I’m a huge Star Trek fan, and nobody needs a Star Trek comedy that made fun of Star Trek or punched down on Star Trek, nor was I interested in doing that that. I was interested in writing a Star Trek that could be canon, that follows the rules of other Star Trek shows that I loved, and has everything that you love about Star Trek, including the way you tell stories. But I’m a comedy writer. I’m never gonna write a serious Star Trek, so the way that we handled it is it’s on a ship that isn’t the capital ship. It’s not about the bridge crew. It’s about the lowest officers on that ship. But when we’re breaking stories for the lower decks, every episode also has a proper Star Trek episode that’s happening to the bridge crew, and our lower deckers aren’t involved in it. However, you can’t have a big sci-fi thing happening on a starship and not have it effect them because that’s their whole world. So if you’re watching Lower Decks, you’re getting a full Star Trek episode from the perspective of people who are having their own social and emotional stories and their own sci-fi stories, but they just aren’t on the bridge. They don’t have the information the bridge is getting, and they don’t have the responsibility.”

I love the idea of TNG-era Trek being its own genre (Just ask Seth McFarlane). Looking forward to this!

I love the NextGen era but it cannot be called a genre. The overall genre is SciFi, the subgenre is space opera, the franchise is Star Trek, the era is the late 24th century, the series are called TNG, DS9, VOY, PIC and LD…

You cannot just redefine terms as you like it. This is unprofessional on the producers’ side and it’s exactly that kind of definitory sloppiness that gives me the chills when I think of LD as a spoof set in the very same world it is destined to spoof… These elements cancel each other out within a systematic approach… But they wouldn’t have a problem with breaking the fourth wall since it quite obviously worked for Deadpool…

are you serious dude?
of course he can describe his approach as he likes… and can call it a genre.
wow… your words are oddly stiff and unimaginative.

Sorry for being stiff and non-flexible when it comes to my precious mental drawers. I’m odd, I know. I’m different.

When they said we were getting a “bananas” promo of Boimler, I didn’t expect it to be so literal.

The TNG era “a genre of Star Trek”… I cannot believe I’ve actually read that.

At best, Star Trek is ONE franchise but even that is not generally accepted if you compare it to other trademarks. Often, individual franchises are started within the same trademark such as The X-Verse, The MCU or Spiderworlds within the Marvel brand.
At least, there’s a general notion that Trek is still one franchise as a whole and that is a good thing, at least up until LD… Disenfranchising this product would feel adequat but to each his own…

But what Star Trek or an era of Star Trek can never ever be is a “genre”… The greater genre is called Science Fiction, the sub-genre is called Space Opera and Trek, all of Trek, is only a part of it. While arguably being the biggest, most important franchise in this genre (only second to Star Wars on the money front), it is still just a part of an even bigger picture that includes stuff like BSG, Stargate, Farscape, B5, Killjoys, The Expanse or even Futurama…

Calling the NextGen era a “genre” within Star Trek just doesn’t make any sense. It’s GENRE > SUBGENRE > BRAND > FRANCHISE > ERA > SERIES/MOVIE SERIES > SEASON/PHASE > MOVIE/EPISODE with clear-cut relations such as sequels, prequels, reboots, retcons/soft-reboots, spin-offs etc…

Anyone defying such obvious definitions turns the franchise into a convoluted mess. I guess this lack of clarity on the definition issue is what keeps these people (and lots of readers here) from seeing the problems they are creating by setting up a pardody/spoof within the very same world they want to refer to an a meta-level.

This gives me a headache because I need clear structures, canonical coherence and cohesion as well as reliable definitions that help me order my mind. I’ve spent the better part of my life structuring the worlds of SciFi and Fantasy in a franchise-based systematic approach. And now these people want to tell me, the NextGen era is a “genre”…

You’re being pedantic. He just means that there is a specific type of storytelling environment, with its own tropes, settings, and story types that exists in the TNG era.

The TNG era, or better TNG itself (which for me definitely excludes DS9) has, most certainly, a distinct “taste”, “vibe”, “feel”, “essence” to it. You can call it what you want, but I think everyone gets the idea behind channeling the “feel”, “vibe”, “taste”, “essence” of an era. I myself do feel no need to pick apart McMahans words here.

I know that “genre” is not the obvious term to describe a distinctive “vibe” etc. – (genres rather describe a set of rules / conventions / expectations, story beats, structures).
But definitively, certain episodes of TNG / trek can be seen as a combination of science fiction and lots of other genres outside science fiction (medical drama, courtroom drama, comedy, political thriller, war movie etc), which you seem to willingly obfuscate. It much more diverse than just “Sci Fi” > “Space Opera”.

But besides that, i would very much argue, that the “vibe” of an essential TNG episode style does not come from nothing, BUT exactly from a distinct set of rules / conventions / expectations, story beats, structures… thus it may as well count as its own genre.

Your terms (vibe, taste, essence) are very fine with me when it comes to describing what he actually talks about. But he said “genre” and that I cannot subscribe to.

BTW: You also use terms like rules, conventions and expectations in connection to the term “genre”… That is very interesting. For me, a “genre” has always simply been about the content, the topic, about what it is all about… starships (Space Opera) or giant monsters (Kaiju), superheroes or vampires, westerns or martial arts, medical drama or serial killers. That’s how I organize my entire collection of BDs, my entire life… and if something doesn’t fit my mental drawers, my mind is tormented over it for ages.

Last edited 1 month ago by Garth Lorca

Well. If you learn a bit about story theory and how to develop stories (i am not an expert by any stretch though), there is something called “Theme“, which describes, what a story is about at the core. Its so to speak the heart of the story.
Material things are more like Skin and Bones, they can be an expression of the theme, but in good story telling, “Stuff” is never what a story is ABOUT.
Starships and Lasers and so on are Stuff. Objects and Structures may stand for something thematic though.
That does not mean, that Stuff may not be one of the main things that appeal to an audience. Aestetics are a powerful factor of course.

Take the Kajiu Genre for example (if i am allowed to call it that). Its at the core not necessarily about
big monsters, but rather rooted in the collective condciousness of the japanese people that their home, as an island, is very much vulnerable to the forces of nature (E.g. Tsunamis) and also Hiroshima and Nagasaki showed how devastating mankind can be. So, Kajius are more of a manifestation of devastating natural or man made forces capable of whiping out a country. At least that is what i read.

Garth, your text is the weirdest thing I have read in years.
You shoudlnt take this too serious, its not healthy.

You know… the guy who said that its a “genre” is a human being with a very personal point of view.
Nothing he says is reallity defining or threateting your personal point of view.

Relax! Breath! Calm Down!

Last edited 1 month ago by jako

If you’ve been on this site for some time you should know that Garth Lorca can be very rigid in his thinking.

“Rigid” and “pedantic” (Legate Damar)… I love the sound of that. Really, I appreciate your assessment because those are terms I can easily identify with. Probably an Asperger thing… My mind needs order and clear-cut structures. Context, coherence, cohesion… I definitely lack the mental flexibility of others. Sorry if I keep annoying anyone…

Most interesting reaction I’ve read in years. Actually I was quite calm and relaxed when I wrote my post, even if it may appear otherwise. This is not Quentin Taratino doing a Star Trek movie or any other serious issue. When I’m really upset about something, you will probably notice :-)

Can we just for a brief second appreciate that all four main voice actors of Lower Decks could very well cameo as their (maybe older / grown up) real life counterparts in other live action Star Trek series (maybe Short Treks?…).
Even if you are not into the idea of a Star Trek animated comedy and/or dislike the type of humor (wich is totally ok btw), you can already feel the fun people are going to have with all the possible fan art…

*hüstel* meinegütedashastdujetztnichtecht gesagt*hüstel*ogottogottogott *kreisch*

Yep, I love that idea too! :)

A live action Short Treks would be great!

Thanks for encapsulating my flash of joy in seeing that “live-action version” of the poster.

A live action Short Trek would be wild.

You’re very welcome :D

A few years ago, “Lower Decks” show runner Mike McMahan published the Trek parody, “Star Trek The Next Generation: Warped, An Engaging Guide to the Never-Aired 8th Season,” currently available in both hard copy and Kindle from Amazon. It’s about as preposterous and funny as you’d expect. Wouldn’t be surprised if some of the gags in “Warped” wind up being re-purposed in “Lower Decks.”

That’s awesome. JJ Lendl is a king. I love his work.

When you going to be able to broadcast CBS All Access to Puerto Rico.