No Wins For Star Trek At Critics Choice Awards; ‘Strange New Worlds’ Nominated By Cinematographers Guild


We are deep in award season and coming off last week’s wins at the Astra TV Awards Star Trek went into Sunday night’s Critics Choice Awards with three nominations. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks celebrities were on hand at the event in Santa Monica, but they didn’t take home any trophies. However, Strange New Worlds picked up another nomination, this time from the American Society of Cinematographers.

Star Trek at Critics Choice 2024

For only the second time in Critics Choice history, Star Trek shows were nominated for awards. Strange New Worlds was nominated for Best Drama Series. This was the first Critics Choice nomination for Star Trek in this category and there was some very strong competition. In the end, the award went to HBO’s Succession. Stars Anson Mount (Captain Pike) and Rebecca Romijn (Number One) took time off from filming season 3 in Toronto to attend the event on behalf of the show.

Embed from Getty Images

Celia Rose Gooding was nominated for her Strange New Worlds role as Uhura for Best Supporting Actress. She too was at the event but lost out to Elizabeth Debicki of Netflix’s The Crown.

Embed from Getty Images

For the second year in a row, Star Trek: Lower Decks was nominated for Best Animated Series. Creator and showrunner Mike McMahan was at the event but the show lost out to the Netflix series Scott Pilgrim Takes Off.

Embed from Getty Images

Strange New Worlds may not have picked up the award, but the second season still garnered much praise from critics. It has a 97% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and appeared on several top show lists for 2023, including mainstream outlets like TVLine, IndieWire, Esquire, and Vanity Fair. In a tweet shared by Anson Mount last night, Strange New Worlds supervising producer summed up how “incredibly cool” it was to see Strange New Worlds listed among all those other shows for the Critics Choice Awards.

Anson also had some fun on social media, sharing this picture of him with the caption “best seat in the house.”


View this post on Instagram


A post shared by Anson Mount (@ansonmount)

Cinematography nomination for Strange New Worlds

Late last week the American Society of Cinematographers announced its Outstanding Achievement Award nominees for the 38th Annual ASC Awards. For the One-Hour Episode of a Regular Series category, cinematographer Glen Keenan (CSC) was nominated for his work on the Strange New Worlds episode “Hegemony.” He is going up against cinematographers for Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty, Gotham Knights, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, and Foundation.

From “Hegemony”

This is only the third time in franchise history that Star Trek has been nominated by the ASC. The last nomination was in 1994 for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Winners will be announced during a ceremony on March 3, 2024, at The Beverly Hilton. The event will be live streamed at

Glen Keenan on the set of Strange New Worlds (Definition Magazine)

More awards season…

There are still a few more awards that could see Star Trek nominations coming up including more guild awards. The franchise is set to dominate the Saturn Awards coming on February 4, with a total of 15 nominations for PicardLower Decks, and Strange New Worlds.


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I sincerely hope no one here is disappointed that “Strange New Worlds” lost to “Succession.”

Wait… Strange New Worlds and Succession were both nominated in the same category? Star Trek is doing well.

Haven’t seen Succession, but I very much agree with your point. That SNW’s is considered among the best, Trek is doing well.

I’ve obv heard of it but never seen it. looks like this is the latest add to my binge to do list

I really wanted Strange New Worlds to take this one, but if you have to lose then Succession is THE show to lose to.

Succession is one of those shows that I want to watch, but I haven’t wanted to watch it quite enough and it never makes the cut. Too many things to do.

Neither surprised nor disappointed. A show like Succession is in another league.

A bloated soap opera with great acting. Not my cup of tea, but the critics love that sort of trashy spectacle. It’s the 21st century analogy of the Sopranos – characters and storylines I could care less about, but with great acting and a groupthink media that tells me that it certainly must be great art. No thanks!

⚠️🤓 “characters and storylines I could care less about”

I don’t think that means what you think it means…

It means exactly what I think it means.

Here is a term I know you understand though: “clown show.”

So, to some extent you DO care about those characters and storylines, even though you call it “not [your] cup of tea” and a “trashy spectacle”… your logical fallacies make it hard to take your “clown show” seriously.

You misunderstand — your irrelevant, process over substance remarks — that is the clown show.

No, you misunderstand. As long as your “substance” isn’t substantiated by process, your posts remain irrelevant.

But what else is new with you… Make mistakes, double down, rinse and repeat.

Process over substance = you are a clown show!


That an overwhelming majority happens not to share your particular tastes doesn’t necessarily make it groupthink. (It also doesn’t necessarily make you wrong.)

I think we’re going to finally give SUCCESSION a go in the next week or two. We blew through all of the MI-5 / SPOOKS episodes starring Matthew McFadyen (2.2 seasons worth) during this recent weather freeze-in (probably at least the fifth time through for those shows, though we’ve only watched the full 10 season run once) and figure this might be the right time to start in. Oddly, we’ve never watched more than the first few eps of MM’s SIX FEET UNDER, though we tried twice.

I remember posting on tbbs and I think here as well that SPOOKS writers should have been doing the Bond movies this century, and this time through, I saw several bits from the first two seasons that I think the Craig films bit from, though the appropriations, like some ham-fisted appiications of Ian Fleming’s work, were badly handled, ranging from the consolidation of the spy services in the UK to color treatments.

I wonder if John LeCarre was ever asked his opinion of SPOOKS?

I’ll be interested to read your reaction. I think McFayden was absolutely phenomenal in “Succession,” getting past his very pronounced British accent to give what was ultimately (you’ll have be patient) a multilayered performance in a series chockablock with standout performances.

Very sorry that you didn’t end up caring for “Six Feet Under.” I’d like to advise you (as I would with “Succession”) to give it more of a chance, but in truth the first episodes are pretty representative of its best qualities. If you didn’t fall in love with the show in the pilot when the sweet old man looked down at his dear departed wife’s corpse and said, “I hope she’s shoveling shit in Hell,” you probably never will.

I watched the first 2 SUCCESSION shows and it was hard even getting to that point, because I hated just about everybody. However my wife is going to keep watching it, so it wasn’t a total loss (and I appreciate that they seem to shoot on film, the look is definitely right for this show.)

Decided to continue on a full (but slow) rewatch of the whole run of MI-5 while watching other stuff, as this is the only way my wife will let me watch the last shot of the last episode, which is what I really want to do. Plus I do love the show and am having fun this time through noting not just the steals the Bond people took from it, but all the steals they SHOULD have taken from it (and then hired the right people to execute.)

I also found a tiny tidbit in mi-5 s2 that may have been a forgotten inspiration in a slight way for a bit in my just-for-the-hell-of-it Bond reboot script, which I’ve been messing around with for over a year and a half now. I’m writing this thing in a piecemeal fashion, with nearly every aspect connecting back to the pre title sequence, which is one part I have down cold, along with two endings and the first 10 pages after the titles. In addition to finally coming up with a way to use Fleming’s unused DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER train climax, I’ve also managed to work in an indirect reference to the still-unused Disneyland of Death that Blofeld cultivates in the YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE novel and think I’ve really come up with a way to complexify Bond without turning him into the humorless zombie we’ve seen this century. Don’t know why I’m doing this, since there’s no way forward, but I keep getting ideas ….

I completely understand as I had exactly the same reaction at first — these people are all awful, so why would I want to continue spending time with them? But I stuck with it anyway, admittedly mostly because of the critical adulation, and ultimately found it rewarding on a number of levels. And I think I can say that if “The Sopranos” demonstrated you can have a compelling drama featuring small-minded thugs who are nevertheless identifiably human, it can also be done with spoiled narcissists whose outsized influence is driving the world to ruin (which turns out to be a major subtext of the show as it goes along). As always, YMMV, of course.

I remember resisting NIP/TUCK for quite awhile even though I was watching THE SOPRANOS, figuring there was nothing and noe one there I would find palatable. But I actually liked the first season, though it seemed to get worse and more ridiculous as it went along. It was one of those shows where I stayed till the end of the run, but can’t explain why, and I’m trying to avoid those kinds of runs right now. I mean, I actually watched all of the Charlie Sheen 2-1/2 MEN eps in syndication, but I can only remember about 4 storylines, so that would be another where I feel I wasted my time. At least with BIG BANG, I can probably remember a couple dozen from the 5 or 6 seasons I stayed with it, though again, I don’t imagine I’ll ever revisit any of these.

I loved SPOOKS back in the day — still have my massive DVD set. It never got the attention it deserved.

Good luck on Succession. It did not do much for me, but it’s well done and superbly acted for the soap opera that it essentially is.

If “Succession” is a soap opera then any drama featuring complex interpersonal familial and business skullduggery is a soap opera.

I don’t agree with that. It’s more like what Supreme Court Justice Potter once said in a case involving hardcore po-rnography, basically, “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.”

Succession is a trashy soap all made up pretty and with pretend seriousness, and admittedly superior acting. My opinion.

I’m guessing you don’t understand that the Potter quote is cited as often as it is as a prime example of declarative nonsense. By all means, die on that particular hill if you care to.

I admire you — you’ve somehow integrated elitism and love of soaps into a point of view. That’s not easy to do! ;-)

Maybe I should invoke Potter whenever describing what I consider to be good STAR TREK.

Having mentioned the name Potter … does anybody here know if some wag like Weird Al ever did a Harry Potter parody song? I’ve been humming ‘smack my snitch up’ since the first book I read, even before the movie came out, and can’t believe nobody else hasn’t done something with that.

Lol, you know, that could work…”I know good Star Trek when I see it.”

Hey, it’s not that great, but there is a Harry Potter/Taylor Swift parody song you can find on YouTube called, “I Knew You Were Muggle”


Succession’s Waystar Royco has a daytime analogue in The Young and the Restless’s Jabot Cosmetics, a beauty brand begun by the family patriarch, John Abbott, and fought over by his children after his death. The tension between the Abbott siblings sometimes comes to a thrilling head: One scene from 2018 involves Jack (Peter Bergman) admonishing his sister, Ashley (Eileen Davidson), for besmirching the family’s legacy, and throwing their late father’s favorite chair through a glass wall before Ashley’s horrified eyes….Take the scene where, after Logan collapses on a plane, Tom holds a phone up to his ear and asks Shiv to say what may be her last words to him. The uncertainty over whether her father can actually hear her causes Shiv to cycle through a galaxy of feelings—disbelief, regret, heartbreak—within the span of minutes. Her choked reaction recalls a scene from the glory days of General Hospital in 1998…Succession seems to be aware of what it owes to daytime soap operas. There’s a scene in the show’s final season where the gruff Logan tells his kids he’s sad they didn’t come to his birthday party. “It’s like a f-ing telenovela,” Kendall sneers in response, likening his father’s rare display of vulnerability to the kind of outsized expression common on a Latin American daytime soap….

So what? Plot points in common aside, the writing and direction in “Succession” are light years-superior to anything seen on daytime television; otherwise those shows would have been eliciting the same level of critical praise for decades. They haven’t, and for good reason. Many years ago while staying with my father during the summer I even watched a few soaps for lack of anything better to do, and they weren’t even in the same universe as “Succession.” It’s a stupid article.

Dude, we have different opinions on this…and that’s OK. My only point here was that it’s not like I am alone in making this observation. Relax

People come, people go, and people forget. It’s a soap opera. The flatness was grinding on me. – MEDIUM (on Succession)

The soap opera about deeply unserious and unlikable rich people…”Succession” fits neatly into the prime-time soap tradition of series like ’80s standards “Dallas” and “Falcon Crest,” as it chronicles the power struggle within a family of miserable billionaires…
– Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

At its heart is an old-fashioned family soap opera, in the style of Dallas or Dynasty. Like those shows, Succession is about the unchecked mega-rich, the offshoots of capitalism run amok. Like those shows, it is a lot of fun to watch, frequently as funny and audacious as anything TV has cooked up.

Sure, and “King Lear” was this soap about a rich dude with three daughters who turned on each other when the old man’s will wasn’t clear about who was supposed to get what. I think the Japanese even did their own version, only it had samurai swords and stuff.

Yeah, Kurosawa directed, with Mifune as star. Wasn’t my favorite.K-film, but it’s well reviewed.

You do realize Shakespeare wrote and put on his plays for the masses, don’t you?

By the way, there’s nothing wrong with being an outstanding soap opera. It’s just not my thing. And regarding Shakespeare, I’m more of a Henry V kind of guy than I am a King Lear kind of guy..

Mifune does not appear in Kurasowa’s RAN, though he did team up with the director in other films. Tatsuya Nakadai starred as Hidetora, the King Lear analogue.

Yeah, thanks for the correction. I was thinking of Throne of Blood, which was his Samurai take on Hamlet, and Mifune stars.

Ran, OMG, don’t get me started. That annoying, constantly whining jester character always takes me out of the movie — bad casting (and there is an unusual story behind that).

His late career movies are not my favorites, but Kagemusha was OK.

PS: If you have never watched Yojimbo and A Fistfull of Dollars back to back in a single night’s viewing, it’s an awesome experience.

Priceless! but don’t forget the western version done with Patrick Stewart!

It’s funny, somebody asked Nicola Walker about doing a SPOOKS movie (odd person to ask, since like most of the cast her character didn’t live) and she said we’re better off with people begging for one than giving them a bad one. I guess she didn’t know they already made a SPOOKS feature several years back, but with the short guy from GoT in the lead (tho it did have Firth in it plus the bald gov’t guy who started turning up in s2.)

Dude, I didn’t know until you posted it here that there was a SPOOKS movie. Is is worth me trying to locate it?

If you’re a completist, yes. But we don’t even own it, and after it came out I could have bought the dvd at redbox for three bucks, or a blu-ray from hamiltonbooks for like seven, and didn’t. I remember there is some surprising stuff with that tall bald guy, but there’s just way too much Kit Harrington for me to buy into it.

It is subtitled THE GREATER GOOD, but I don’t think that is an in-joke reference to HOT FUZZ.

I just checked and Hamiltonbooks doesn’t stock it anymore, sorry. I’m guessing you can probably stream it through britbox or maybe amazon.

Never heard of ‘Succession’ but I’ll look into it now. Thanks.

That the shows and performers were nominated shows these are quality productions in and of themselves. There’s no shame in that.

Says everyone’s mom whose kid lost a contest

Does Anson use cement on his hair?

Self-sealing stembolts. They have the same effect, but leave less follicle damage.


What did he have to trade for them?

A Shatner Turbo 2000 toup, maybe?

Agreed, Kev.. It doesn’t look real.

Keep thinking he is auditioning for Gumby or to take Christopher Walken’s part of the SNL host rotation. He also reminds me of how Lucy Guttridge’s hair gets teased out behind her near the end of TOP SECRET! (she is riding on a motorcycle, her hair streaming back in the wind, but when the bike stops, her hair stays that way, sort of like somebody colored some cotton candy.)

Being nominated is already a big win. Really like SNW.

So I wonder if Celia will have a haircut closer to how we remember the classic Uhura this season? 🤔

She certainly looks a lot more like Nichelle Nichols with the hairstyle in the photo.

I hope she keeps the hair. She looks good.

She looks so pretty and professional in those shots.

So Mount still has that ridiculous hair.

I take it over my hair challenged head. :-)

Agreed. I have like a level 2 haircut. If my hair gets that big I turn into carrot top lol.

So apparently the hair is not just “Pike” hair, its “Mount” Hair LOL!

Mount Hair sounds like a remote extinct volcano where rabbits hang out.

Pike’s Peak is an ever-changing, ever-expanding realm …