First Cadets Cast For ‘Star Trek: Starfleet Academy’

We are finally learning who will be playing some of the Starfleet Academy cadets for the Starfleet Academy show with the official announcement of three actors today.

Meet the cadets

This morning, Paramount+ officially announced Kerrice Brooks (My Old Ass), Bella Shepard (Wolf Pack), and George Hawkins (Tell Me Everything) have joined the cast of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. Brooks, Shepard, and Hawkins will play cadets, joining previously announced cast members Holly Hunter as the captain and chancellor of Starfleet Academy and Paul Giamatti as the season’s villain.

Paramount+ didn’t provide any additional details about the three characters, but presumably they will be playing lead characters. Paramount did provide these breakdowns of the actors:

Kerrice Brooks

Brooks, an actress and professional dancer, will make her feature film debut this year in My Old Ass produced by Margot Robbie and directed by Megan Park. She will also star in the 70s coming-of-age comedy, Feeling Randy. Brooks’ credits include The Prom, The Cypher, How We Roll and On My Block. Brooks got her start in the entertainment industry as a professional dancer performing with artists like Billie Eilish, Lil’ Nas, Kelly Rowland and more.

Kerrice Brooks

Bella Shepard

Shepard was recently the lead of the Paramount+ series Wolf Pack and is best known for her previous Brat series On the Ropes and A Girl Named Jo, and as the lead in the series Two Sides. Shepard was also seen in The Wilds, Witch Hunt, and the iCARLY reboot . She  had a lead guest role on the final season of Orange Is the New Black and recurring roles on Life in Pieces and Grace and Frankie.

Bella Shepard

George Hawkins

Hawkins is best known for playing Dylan in Tell Me Everything. His previous credits include Sean in the BAFTA-nominated film Boiling Point and Adam in the feature film Gassed Up. In 2023, Hawkins graduated from London’s Mountview Academy of Theatre Arts.

George Hawkins

The new YA-focused Starfleet Academy series is set in the 32nd century, as established by the recent seasons of Star Trek: Discovery. Here again is the official synopsis for the new series.

The upcoming series will follow the adventures of a new class of Starfleet cadets as they come of age in one of the most legendary places in the galaxy. Produced by CBS Studios, the new series will begin production later this summer.

Star Trek: Starfleet Academy introduces viewers to a young group of cadets who come together to pursue a common dream of hope and optimism. Under the watchful and demanding eyes of their instructors, they discover what it takes to become Starfleet officers as they navigate blossoming friendships, explosive rivalries, first loves and a new enemy that threatens both the Academy and the Federation itself.

The show is expected to start filming at the end of the summer at Pinewood Studios in Toronto where Star Trek: Discovery was produced. The series will be using several stages, including Pinewood’s “Mega Stage,” the largest in North America, which will be used to create the San Francisco campus of Starfleet Academy.

Pinewood’s Mega Stage will be home to Starfleet Academy

Keep up with news about the Star Trek Universe at

Notify me of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments



Good to have another Brooks in ST.

Those are some big boots to fill.


I suspect the actor will lose the nosering in the actual series.

If they absolutely have to do this series, I hope they take some cues from the Naval Academy scenes in PATRIOT GAMES.

I don’t know, Tawny Newsome left her nose stud in for Mariner’s live action appearance.

I’ve been a fan of trek since it’s beginnings in a first generation Trekkie, I’m strickly a TOS,TNG,DS9,VOYAGER, an the kelvin time line films, I didn’t care much for Discovery after they left the 23 century, apparently chickened out due to official Trek cannon.. won’t be watching this one nope I was disappointed with disco, an this is just going to be nothing more than the same

Sure, Jan.

How can you make that determination based solely off its connection to Discovery? How do you know it will be “more of the same” when there are completely different creatives at the helm of this show. Don’t get wrong, I’m not all that interested in this show- but writing off a show entirely saying you won’t watch it (when we all know you will) is just dumb, to be honest.

Because many of the same people are involved. And the production company has an awful record with how they handle the property. It’s not at all a bad theory that this show will be “more of the same.”

A first generation Trekker knows how to spell canon. And we’re sexagenarians now — nobody cares about your dramatic exit. Let the young generation have their chance, man. They’re the folks who will propagate Trek into the 22nd century.


I’m with you. Not gonna watch. Not YA. Don’t care. Didn’t like Disco, didn’t like Picard, don’t like SNW, don’t like Lower Decks, not interested in Prodigy, not excited for S31. Star Trek under these producers just isn’t for me. Honestly my list of Trek media is even shorter than yours: TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. I don’t rewatch Kelvin films.

Whoa. Sad. I mean being so negative. Be careful. Life could pass you by without you really enjoying anything and missing out on so much. I say this without judge, and with total love.

We are on similar pages. The only thing we differ on is Prodigy. Which I felt started out decent but got progressively worse as it went on. And this 2nd season really isn’t that good at all. Other than that I completely agree that the current producers “aren’t for me” either. I don’t think they have a good understanding of Star Trek. I don’t know what the Skydance deal will mean for Trek but I’m hoping it will mean the end of Secret Hideout producing it.

I hope they know how to cry on screen. DSC shows love to have characters cry and since these are younger cadets all the hormones and emotions will cause them to cry even more

An end to the usual ST stocism

There is a dramatic advantage to stoic characters. If you have characters constantly going on about their feelings and hugging, crying, holding hands and having outbursts, it dilutes the impact of any emotional breakthroughs. “Less is more” is a real truism. It’s often fine or even necessary to have a freer character or two to bounce off of, but restraint makes for better drama.

Sounds pretty boring and simplistic. No one would watch that.

And yet every bit of Star Trek until DISCO (season 2, at that) managed to avoid the hugging and crying.

I call that show Star Trek: Discovering Your Feelings for a reason.

That ship caught the weepy virus in a major way and apparently they never found a vaccine for it.

I mean when Zora, the ship’s computer was always getting emotional, you know something was wrong on that ship.

I can’t tell if you are being serious. That’s most characters in 90s Trek. That’s Spock. That’s Sarek.

There is nothing simplistic about not venting your feelings all the time. It’s human. It’s a character having a crush and silently pining until they finally let it all out to their beloved or never at all. It’s someone gritting their teeth to endure hardship and not letting others see their pain or frustration. It’s putting on a brave face to be professional but venting in private.

It doesn’t have to go as far as TNG which veered into being positively stolid. But it needs to feel real and have pathos. A show where every other character seems to have turned into a counselor or a patient and holds hands or stops everything to talk about their problems is not a better way to dramatize the dynamics of people on a starship. It has the virtue of being different, but there’s zero catharsis for me when I watch these people solve their problems and interact with each other. That’s not me having a fetish for repressed people, it’s a dramatic truism that’s been hardworn for decades because it works.

It’s not the 90’s anymore. Go buy a new calendar. 🙄

If it was the 90s more people would probably be watching these shows. Four of five got canceled in 5 seasons or less.

I don’t think SNW will last more than 5 seasons because it probably costs too much.

Four out of five? DSC was cancelled, PRO was cancelled, and LDS was cancelled. PIC was conceived as a three-season deal. Did I totally space out a show?

No Picard wasn’t canceled but it did end. And the fact it wasn’t replaced with something else, Legacy or otherwise tells you the state of Star Trek or Paramount+ isn’t very strong these days. Legacy should’ve been fast tracked if they wanted more Star Trek on the site to replace Picard.

Hopefully that will change with more new shows period once the new management takes over.

If you can’t engage with an opinion someone has put real time and thought into to explain, then don’t bother. You’re just being rude now.

Discovery turned into a season long Lifetime movie. It was embarrassing.

Even the finale episode had them crying and hugging each other like someone died or something. Just bizarre.

Prodigy managed to go 40 episodes staring kid characters and yet came off less emotional than a bunch of so-called mature professionals. I can’t remember any of them crying. I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wring but it still proves far less than the melodrama on board Discovery.

I am so so happy Michelle Paradise is not running this show and anotherreasonI support it. She was the worst show runner in Star Trek.

You got no soul Tiger.

Are you lost little puppy?

Hey Tiger, I’m not into that creepy fetish. Keep it to youself.

Don’t make me take away your milk.

No one wants your “milk” Tiger.

You won’t leave me alone so you tell me.

You seem to have a sad life.

I’ve been watching season 5 but didn’t even watch the finale. I’m anticipating too much crying and hugging and “you’ve got this” encouragement like they’re propping up children in need of validation. Sometimes a kick in the pants is a better teacher than undeserved praise.

Let me preference this first by saying overall I enjoyed the finale and I gave it a 7.5/10. It’s the only Discovery finale that got at least a 7 so that’s pretty good lol.

But man there is a scene in it that felt so cringe to me. It’s not going to spoil anything because it’s literally (and I mean LITERALLY) nothing but the characters standing on the bridge giving hugs and crying with each other. It’s obviously there as a ‘goodbye’ to the show and characters but OMG, really?

The two best goodbye scenes in Star Trek for me will always be the final ‘second star to the right’ scene in TUC and the final poker game in AGT. Both of those scenes felt so emotional at the time. When Picard is about to deal and says, “I should’ve done this a long time ago.” And Deanna replies “You were always welcomed.” I remember choking up so much in that moment. It was so understated but beautifully written and fits that show to a T.

Then we get Discovery with the characters hugging and holding each other for several minutes like they just attended a funeral, but there is no context to any of it. You don’t get the sense it has anything to do with the final mission because time felt it has passed. Maybe it was Burnham last time on the ship I have no idea. Maybe I need to watch it again. And I don’t want to take away from the people who liked it. And I know others did.

But to me it summed Discovery in all the worst ways, forced emotions that felt too artificial and fake.

I think Discovery would be a stronger show today if they went the ‘less is more’ approach instead of going full throttle every time with that stuff.

But my opinion only.

Well Tiger if you gave the DSC finale 7.5/10 that will encourage me to watch it… I agree with the two goodbye scenes you mentioned. To me it was the TUC scene over the AGT one but that one was great as well. That’s when writers could write…

Tiger2 You really missed the boat on this issue. The vast amount of emotional scenes in Discovery are earned, and vastly more realistic than how emotions were portrayed in most of the previous generations of Trek. I really strongly recommend you reading war time memoirs of people who served in Naval ships, Bomber crews, or ground combat units during times of war. Because their own stories are vastly more emotional than what Discovery has shown. Be it from them telling about their own emotional releases or referencing the emotional releases of the people they served with. You complain about one scene in the finale, comparing it to a funeral. We don’t know the circumstances of the memory, but it didn’t appear to be one of grief or sadness, but of remembrance and celebration. But have you ever heard or witnessed units coming home from war? Have you witnessed or read stories of people when it was announced that war had ended? Have you been to or heard stories about sailors when a ship is decommissioned? How you ever witnessed or read about units having reunions? Those are all full of tears and hugging. Both from what is lost and from good memories and deep bonds as well. If that scene is even remotely close to something of that nature then crying and hugging isn’t out of place. It’s exceedingly realistic. Trek has done an exceedingly poor job of showing how people behave in and after a crisis (there are a few examples). We often talk about how the shows should have behavior closer to the military. Lets be very frank here, Discovery in most cases (though not all) is far more realistic then most Trek on how people behave in times of great stress and Trauma. Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Masters of the Air all based on real people and real events (mistakes and all) all during pivotal periods of World War II And over half of the episodes have people crying or breaking down (for mostly bad but in some cases good). The memoirs and statements of the people who lived these lives say it barely scratches the surface of their own behavior and the behavior of those they served with. My own experience when I worked with Veterans of Foreign war in the late 80’s and early 90’s (most were Korean and Vietnam, but a couple were still from World War II) and the range of emotions far outpace what we see in Trek. And yes that does include seeing people in command cry. And this is from periods much earlier in US culture when it was frowned upon by the general public for men to express any real emotion in public, outside of jeering for a sports team. It wasn’t common, but it did happen. And this is for times that are 40 to 80 years removed from today, where attitudes are a lot more relaxed. The real issue for Discovery (and others) is execution. Which is an entirely different issue. That really needs some work. Things like arc pacing, story structure were huge weakness in most of the seasons of arc based Trek storytelling (this includes Enterprise and DS9 as well). But those two other shows didn’t exclusively use arc based serial storytelling so the weakness isn’t so glaring. While I agree with you (I am really sure you’ve had this opinion, if not I apologize) that I wish the writers didn’t have each season arc focus on such a massive scale threat. Doing that type of stories means you reasonable should have more emotions shown by the crew. And it does become a bit repetitive. Its like people complaining about Trek films never being about a crew on a first contact mission, versus responding to a direct threat (surprisingly the only time we see this in a film is the very beginning of Star Trek Into Darkness of all films). And in universe, I don’t think any crew has had as much high stakes, high risk, and separation from loved ones, and the loss (or greatly diminished) state of their government and institutions. Thus they rationally should be the crew that does express the most emotion. And since Discovery is never shown to be a ship of the line (versus being a mission specific, in its case fast response), you would expect a structure that is less formal then a ship of the line (or a sub for that matter). But for myself it’s again not the emotions for the series but the execution of both the larger canvas and of course some individual scenes. That were major issues for the show. And that doesn’t even touch on some of the over top aspects of the physical production. Seriously flame throwers on the bridge.… Read more »

I agree with you Tiger. She was not a great showrunner. I think if Bryan Fuller had stayed we would have gotten a better show going forward.

No, no she wasn’t and I generally liker season 5. But it still had all the ‘are you kidding me’ scenes like all the others. She at least tried to pare a lot of it down but the season as a whole could’ve been told in 6-7 episodes. Per usual, not enough story and way too.much emotional fluff to carry all the bits that lacked plot and substance.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment. For me it has to be Akiva Goldsman. The man just doesn’t have a creative bone in his body. SNW is as beige and vanilla as it comes- there’s nothing really unique or memorable about the show (aside from Pike’s hair) and its best episode relies on guest actors fron Lower Decks. Of course, entirely my opinion.

Fair enough and trust me I’m certainly no Akiva Gildsman fanboy either. He has given us some of the worst Star Trek to date. No matter my feelings over Discovery nothing will ever beat out season 2 of Picard as some of the worst television ever produced.

I certainly like SNW more than you do but I don’t really disagree with you that it feels a little bland and generic at times either. But I think because they got so much slack over Discovery and Picard they are going as safe as possible although they definitely did some left field things like the Lower Decks crossover (still my favorite episode) and the musical (not my favorite episode ;)).

But I’m just being honest, SNW isn’t perfect either but there is nothing overly cringe about it like I felt we got in Picard season 2.

But I’ve always said SNW is basically comfort food for a lot of fans and why it’s so popular. It’s not overly exotic or interesting but you definitely enjoy it after every meal because it’s just what you’re used to eating all your life. Some look at that phrase as negative but I see it as a positive since for me Star Trek as a property is comfort food these days.

Just to be the ultimate contrarian, I loved Season 2 of Picard. It was an absolute mess and made zero sense, but I found it a refreshingly fun ride after the grim dark mess of Season 1!

Hey I’ve never had a huge problem with season 1 or 2 of TNG so we all have our guilty pleasures lol.

It’s called showing emotions and not acting like a TNG cardboard cutout. I lost count on how many TNG episodes ended with TNG characters dealing with psychological damage only to be fine as rain in the next episode.

You ol’ softie.

EXACTLY. I love TNG… It’s my OG show… But Discovery was the first time I felt like Star Trek characters were real people. The “anti-crying” brigade is just the culture of toxic masculinity reacting to its values of the denial of vulnerability and the myth of macho power no longer being seen as supreme. It’s a reaction to the decay and dismantling of the power of male supremacy. And when you’ve spent your life constructing an identity that gives you access to this fading social power structure, you are reactionarily mad and upset that what you’ve spent so much time cultivating to “stay on top” is now seen as absurd and not valued. So, ironically, they get all emotional and attack any display of vulnerability. It’s all painfully obvious if you have an intellect that is capable of seeing these patterns and structures… which they do not. It also doesn’t hurt to have had Discovery headed by a black woman, which brings in some unspoken racism into the critique as well. My take: if you are a Star Trek fan, you should try to evolve yourself beyond the silly cultural constraints of what the characters of the 23rd and 24th centuries would consider “a primitive land paranoid culture” towards the better future that Trek represents. Because, its not technology that makes the United Federation of Planets a near utopia, it’s the people and their values and how they conduct themselves.

Excessive emotional display in a professional military style organisation is not evolution. It is devolution. How many of you would watch a modern military series where soldiers would run around crying?

Starfleet isn’t a military organization. How do you not know this?

Of course it isn’t! Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians, Breen, Gorn, … Come on over and take what you want! Us Feds have nothing to defend ourselves with. Our thousands of starships are just to protect against those pesky demon-lichens we’re trying to study.

Thank you. Discovery started as a war with the Klingons for Khaless sake. If Starfleet decided to stop fighting, exactly who would replace them to protect the Federation and from wiping out Earth?

And by the way, why does every angry freak in the galaxy wants to take out Earth so badly in the first place? Because it is seen as the defensive arm of the Federation.

You take that out first the rest of it will probably fall like dimenoes.

Exactly. I honestly don’t understand how people insist on ignoring this fact. Starfleet can be explorers too, but if that’s all they do, why bother with quantum torpedoes and ablative shields?

Because apparently if you simply avoid calling it a military then you can overlook the obvious…even when you have Starfleet officers from Kirk to O’Brien literally calling themselves soldiers. DS9 in fact use that term the most out of all the shows. Not surprising since they fought a multi year war but I digress.

Maybe there is a different meaning to that word somewhere but the only time I heard someone call themselves a soldier is in the military.

The military historically had an important role in exploration. Indeed, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency continues that tradition today in the US.

The idea that “Starfleet isn’t the military” never had much currency, but it clearly sailed by the time of “BOBW” and all of DS9, and frankly it clearly sailed as far back as “Balance of Terror” and “Errand of Mercy.” I suspect this idea was being pushed by people who enjoyed Star Trek but had an axe to grind against the US military in the aftermath of Vietnam.

Even in the 22nd century Starfleet established itself as a military when it got into a war with the Romulans as it’s first major conflict.

Two hundred years after that it’s still getting into wars and conflicts. How is that not a military?

Or a chain of command, uniforms, etc….Starfleet can go in peace but it can also defend itself and its ideals if necessary. After all not everyone they meet will view them as friends/allies so it makes sense to leave all your options open. I am not sure how some might miss this aspect of the franchise. I know not everyone likes their countries military or how it operates but this isn’t something that’s really up for debate…or so I would have thought.

And you would be correct. As much as the Federation is benign and wants peace, that doesn’t mean all the alien civilizations around them think the same way. For some, war is the better way and the Federation needs a military branch to defend itself and protect its citizens.

“As much as the Federation is benign and wants peace, that doesn’t mean all the alien civilizations around them think the same way.”

You don’t even have to get that far.

After game theory was applied to international relations (at least as an academic discipline), it became well-accepted that conflict can arise even when neither party desires it. This is due to factors such as the “security dilemma” (what makes one state more secure makes others less secure), misperception/difficult at reading adversaries, preference falsification, etc.

A good deal of the current debate over Ukraine comes down to the extent to which that theory explains, or does not explain, that conflict.

Four years of the Dominion War says otherwise. Starfleet is like the Coast Guard, part of the military in wartime. But in peacetime, the Coast Guard is still a pretty strict about regulations, fitness, and chain of command. And there certainly isn’t a lot of crying… :-)

When the only people who fight the wars are Starfleet people yeah it’s basically the military.

I don’t care how much Roddenberry and his hippie hippie values tried to say otherwise but he was the guy who decided Starfleet should be the one to answer all the conflicts and patrol Romulan and Klingon neutral zones.

We don’t have NASA patrolling the North Korean DMZ, that’s actually guarded by, wait for it, the military.

Roddenberry served in the military, in the Army Air Corps, what we now know as the Air Force. His bio says that he survived two plane crashes while serving, one as pilot in command. He also flew commercially as a pilot for PanAm, where he survived a third crash in Syria.

He may have had some idealistic beliefs, but the “hippy dippy” values didn’t extend to the military, and his military experience shows in TOS. (Unfortunately, I’d argue that whatever prevailed in the Vietnam era, today, the prime directive and the idea of restraint/non-intervention appear to be championed more by the right than the hippish left.)

I’m obviously talking about his views on the show. And we all know Roddenberry didn’t fully practice his beliefs either. For a guy who hated capitalism in Star Trek to the point he excised money out of it, he exploited it as much as possible for his own gain in the real world.

As far as his military background that is literally what is so odd about Star Trek since so much of the show was based around his experience in War World 2 and what came out if it. And yet he was so against the show being viewed militarily; even to the point he hated TWOK when all Nic Meyer did was say the quiet part out loud apparently and emphasized Starfleet was designed around military culture and protocol.

Roddenberry was a creative guy but inconsistent and weird at times.

I’m sure NASA helps with the spy satellites

They don’t design the weapons that Starfleet apparently does for its ship and personnel and that has killed millions of people in the process.

This is a good analogy, but I would note that the Coast Guard is one of the uniformed services; it is “the military” outside of wartime as well.

The US military also sponsors plenty of basic research, as the Air Force Research Laboratory and sister institutions from other branches will illustrate.

Coast Guard isn’t part of the Department of Defense (Pentagon) though. It was under Department of Transportation until 9/11, after which it was folded into the new Department of Homeland Security. It falls under the DoD (Navy) only during wartime.

Star Trek is not set in our “modern” era. That’s the point. Would a “modern” military series have a ship’s counselor seated next to the captain? No. But that’s where Roddenberry put one. So take your complaints to Roddenberry himself. Also, Starfleet is exploratory… not military. An article about on forgottentrek .com said this “We live in a society that views compassion as a weakness, particularly feminine compassion. The message that to care is to give up your strength is instilled through media, culture, even in the mechanics of our very language. Allowing yourself to feel the world with one or two degrees less of a protective layer around your heart takes courage, and courage takes power. Like many highly sensitive people, Deanna Troi is regularly underestimated and her importance reduced. Through her patience and understanding, Troi insists that forcing yourself to view the world with empathy makes you a stronger person, not a weaker one.”

Even Roddenberry didn’t have his characters crying every two episodes. How many times did Kirk or Picard cry in all their stories?

Now how many times did Burnham cry? It’s so bad someone made a YT video of all the times she cried on the show and it’s a pretty long video.

Kirk cried… right, Kirok? And over Edith, and Sam, and when split….
Spock cried tears in TMP.
Bones cried when Spock died, and Edith.
Scotty cried for Peter, and in Generations, and in TNG.
Sulu cried in pain.
Janice Rand cried.
Uhura cried.
Chekov screamed…
You should watch all 78 episodes, 22 animateds, and 7 movies again.

OK, another challenge, I love it. Let’s go.

First off David I said two pertinent statements to get my point across:

1. “Even Roddenberry didn’t have his characters crying every two episodes. How many times did Kirk or Picard cry in all their stories?”

2. “Of course it’s a TV show so it’s OK to show [crying] from time to time and some of Treks most emotional moments come from people breaking down. But Discovery turned it into a parody.”

Explain it to me as slowly as possible? How what I said was contradictory to your post in ANY way David?

Yeah characters cried once or twice which I have said is not only fine but great emotional beats when done from, wait for it. TIME TO TIME.

I explicitly stated that, correct? Are those examples you thoroughly laid out proof of what I actually said?

OK lets begin starting with your response to me:

“Kirk cried… right, Kirok? And over Edith, and Sam, and when split….
Spock cried tears in TMP.
Bones cried when Spock died, and Edith.
Scotty cried for Peter, and in Generations, and in TNG.
Sulu cried in pain.
Janice Rand cried.
Uhura cried.
Chekov screamed…”

Soooo out of 8 characters, 78 episodes. 22 animated episodes and 7 movies we have 13 instances of crying? Do I have that number right David? Anyone correct me if I’m missing a shed tear somewhere for a fallen comrade.

Out of 5 seasons and 65 episodes of Discovery, Michael Burnham (and onlyMichael Burnham) managed to cry a total of 53 seperate times in the series.

Let me repeat it again, 53 TIMES OUT OF 65 EPISODES!

How many times do you have cry baby Kirk putting on the water works out of 78 episodes. 22 animated episodes and 7 movies again? Three? I added that correctly right? Wow someone needs to seriously send that guy to a counselor.

Who is the next big weeper on your well detailed list? Bones, a total of two times in 25 years???? Someone give that guy a hug already.

You included 8 characters and 13 instances of them crying over a span of 78 episodes. 22 animated episodes and 7 movies. I got that clear right David?


You don’t see that as a bit…obsessive?

And yes I have left out the other obvious point, there is an additional seven main characters on that show, many who has cried quite a bit themselves from Tilly to Tyler and Colbert, Staments and Book.

I didn’t include any of those because A. I’ve already made my argument excessively clear now lol and B. There isn’t a compilation video of those weepers like there is on Burnham so it would probably take hours to add up the rest of the baby nursery.

So are we done here? Have I sold my argument to you now? Great, take it easy David.

Maybe it would be better for you to watch all 65 episodes of Discovery again?

(And if anyone wants to look at that Burnham video and to check my work it’s called the Michael Burnham Crying Compilation by Major Grin and it’s 13 minutes long…yeah lol)

It’s really 53? Goodness.

Doctor Who got flak this season because the new Doctor cries in I think 7/8 episodes. I am always impressed by the actors who do this so well, but it feels like a dilution of something special which needs to be saved for really key moments.

And I say this as someone who will cry on the spot for the endings of: The Visitor, The Inner Light, Duet, TWOK, The Offspring, Sleepless in Seattle, City Lights, Babe, Coco, E.T…. I’m not a hard ass.

I really need to watch the new Doctor Who. I hate that’s its on Disney now.

That is annoying. The show’s been on so long the streaming rights in the US are split amongst 4 services.

It’s an interesting and glossy update they’ve done IMO. Not always convinced it works and the Doctor is very different now – not alien at all, just a regular fun dude who feels deeply.

Yep! It’s AT LEAST 53 TIMES!

I tried to be as fair as possible and really only counted scenes where she is physically crying and not just where she was attempting to cry but in reality it’s probably over 60 times if you include any moments she’s about to turn on the water works.

I would’ve just link the video itself (because man it’s a lot lol) but it all goes to purgatory now. But I hope everyone watches it because it REALLY gets the point across how excessive it had become. Again even all the other modern shows don’t remotely get close to how many times crying happens when compared to Discovery. That’s really the only outlier in the entire franchise and why it gets picked on so much.

But this is what we’re talking about. If Burnham just cried 3-5 times a season (and that’s still way more than overwhelming majority of characters on these shows as David elegantly proved ;)) we wouldn’t be talking about this every season as we do.

She cries the most in season 2 which is around 30 times. In one season alone she still cries twice as many times as the entire TOS cast in 25 years lol.

And as said she’s obviously not the only one so it could be a hundred scenes when you add everyone else up….in just 65 episodes of content.

And it’s not a gender issue at all either. Let me follow David’s lead and point out another legacy character whose been around and has had her hardships too and another female lead: Captain Janeway.

To date she’s been in 172 Voyager episodes, 40 animated episodes now thanks to Prodigy and 1 movie. Can anyone take a guess how many times she cried in all that time? Once! It’s the episode Pathfinder where she chokes up for a few seconds when Voyager makes contact with Starfleet for the first time after six seasons being stuck in the Delta Quadrant. And she faced way more hardships than Burnham lol.

And I swear everytime Janeway chokes up in that scene I choke up right along with her because how impactful it feels. This is a side we never seen of her before who is trying her best to keep it together for her crew but you can see the wave of emotions in her face. Just like those few times when Kirk cried. Or Picard
Or Sisko. It feels meaningful when it happens BECAUSE its so rare.

And then we have Discovery where it has been turned into a night time soap opera when a character is basically crying in every episode; sometimes several times in an episode. People like me calls it a Lifetime movie because that’s what it exactly feels like (and I don’t even know there is even that much cryingin most of those stories lol). And now that people like David who probably thought he was making a very solid point is now getting the full picture and who I suspect I will never hear from again lol.

And BTW I literally LOL when I saw his response to me. It was very funny because it was obvious he had no clue how often these characters truly sobbed on that show. Citing Uhura cried once in 25 years is hysterical in highsight now.

But it gave me a chance to rant and make clear why people like me was frustrated with this show for 5 seasons now. But same time if you have no issue the lead character cried 50 times and you truly find it endearing and made you love the character more, that’s obviously fine too and more power to you. No one is right or wrong, just expressing our personal opinions on it.

Bro I think you enjoy these response arguments too much! 🤣

Always a fun read though lol. I didn’t know Scotty cried at all. Was one of them an episode where he misplaced his whiskey?

And Cry Baby Burnham cried over 50 times on Discovery?? Seriously?People gave me crap for nicknaming her that but my god is it appropriate learning this lol.

She is truly a hot mess of a character at times. You’re a Starfleet officer and a bleeping Captain, get it together girl!

But I’m going to be honest, I think I also cried 50 times after watching every episode of Discovery, just for a different reason from Burnham’s. 😄😢

Lol I do at times.

I’ve had people accuse me of things I never said or did and those have made me angry but it’s always just been misremembering things or a lack of communication and we eventually move on.

This one was just funny. I was just having a little fun with David because I generally think most people don’t realize how much hugging and crying is done on this show, especially if you don’t watch it regularly enough which I don’t: partly because it’s just too much of it for my taste.

And BTW is a scream REALLY a cry David as you noted for Chekhov? I feel you’re stretching it a bit here. But I’m going to let it go because it’s Wednesday in my part of the world and it would be a shame to split hairs on hump day.

TOS characters wore their hearts on their sleeves more, so that’s partly why I don’t come down as hard on the new shows for being more familiar and loose than the Berman era shows which came out of Roddenberry deciding things needed to be much more buttoned up. Still, it’s not a fair comparison to Discovery which indulges far more than the more isolated examples you are cherry picking above. It’s an exaggeration to say everyone on Disco cried all the time, but SMG was saddled with a ton of it and overall it was so much more than TOS and SNW.

But again, it is still valid to say that less is more when it comes to emotional outbursts. You don’t get the same satisfaction from a conflict or an emotional release if the characters have been amped up to a 9 all season. The most affecting storyline for me in Discovery was Saru and T’Rina. It’s understated, measured, builds believably, and features characters who aren’t blurting out their feelings every 5 minutes. It’s just a better payoff when they express affection for each other.

Similarly, Sarek praising Spock in TVH, Worf telling Alexander he is his father, Picard warming up to Wesley, Odo asking Garak to breakfast, or Seven of Nine gradually acclimating to human life et al are more rewarding and powerful than all the declarations of love and friendship Disco characters are always preaching to each other. Kudos to them for trying something different and speaking to a generation that is less reserved. It’s still does not make for compelling television, and there are a ton of shows on right now that allow for characters to hold things back and still express themselves all the time, not just for cathartic climaxes.

You could argue that Burnham’s crying is due to the fact that she was raised culturally Vulcan and is now overcompensating as she reintegrates into human society.

Problem is, all the normies cry in DISCO, too.

It’s not just the crying, either. In the last two season, it’s been irksome that whenever the ship encounters a serious problem that it needs to science it’s way out of, the bridge rings up our sainted trio of Stamets, Adira, and one of Reno, Tilly, or Culber. They solve the problem without breaking a sweat. (Regrettably, I think this phenomenon is due to the writers refusing to portray trans characters as anything other than a Mary Sue archetype.)

Now, it is true that Trek engineers have always pulled rabbits out of their hat. But when Scotty installed the cloaking device in “The Enterprise Incident” and said, “it’s the biggest gamble I ever took,” or when B’Elanna told an impatient Janeway, “when I say it will take ten minutes, I meant ten minutes,” well, you had a palpable sense of fear — that these characters thought their hat might not produce a rabbit this time. On Disco, the rabbit is (excuse the pun) old hat.

Stamets was an interesting character in season one, when he was a bit of a Elon Musk taskmaster and a misanthrope. He was neutered by season three.

There is a difference between being concerned for people’s mental well-being (having a counsellor as a bridge officer) and having melodramatic cryfests that display an enormous amount of unprofessionalism and immaturity. Half the crying scenes in DIS remind me of when my 33-year-old sister cried for 7 hours when her favourite shoes broke.

 Would a “modern” military series have a ship’s counselor seated next to the captain?

It would if said ship’s counselor could read minds and tell her CO what an adversary was thinking.

Maybe not seated right next to a Captain but they would be onboard the ship. I also think it matters because a mentally fit member of starfleet is important. It’s just another part of the total package. Even current military structures are now starting to get this. Naval ships deploy with counselors, life coaches, etc because they now understand that people need lots of support while away from home. Particularly if you are engaging in combat. While the Enterprise didn’t fight as much as DS9 did they had their share of skirmishes with the Borg and other adversaries. So it makes sense to have someone nearby to give support when and where it’s needed.

I agree with all this, but I was addressing the question of why she was on the bridge.

Exactly. It wasn’t real people, it was melodramatic mush because professional officers don’t cry that much.

Of course it’s a TV show so it’s OK to show it from time to time and some of Treks most emotional moments come from people breaking down. But Discovery turned it into a parody.

SNW has, surprisingly, not have people tearing up every other episode and those characters seem to be well adjusted.

Precisely. DIS lacks professionalism; SNW does to a certain degree, but nowhere near as bad. That is what ultimately irks me about modern Star Trek. There is no respect for professionalism and decorum. Everything is so emotional and personalised. I guess it’s a sign of the narcissistic times we live in.

Someone has made this point in the past but the people making Star Trek today are just very far removed from military and chain of command settings unlike people who made the older shows.

That’s exactly why Fratboy Kirk was made a Captain in JJ verse when the guy haven’t even graduated from the Academy yet or been in space longer than a week. Utterly absurd.

It’s also why every character in NuTrek use slang and talk like they are on social media instead of a professional setting in the biggest scientific, diplomatic and defense force in the Alpha Quadrant.

And I like SNW and LDS a lot personally but everyone sounds too contemporary and casual all the time. But at least it’s 80% less crying like on Discovery. 🙄




Good post, totally agree.

If you guy were in control of Trek, it would have been ran into the ground years ago. Good thing all you guys can do is watch and cry. 🤣

Too late. Michelle Paradise already did it years ago with Discovery. 🙄

That is what ultimately irks me about modern Star Trek. There is no respect for professionalism and decorum

Say that again — what was so appealing about TOS and Berman-era Star Trek was that we saw a functional team of well-trained, smart professionals doing their job well.

This is exactly why I have virtually no interest in DISCO, Kiddie Trek, workplace comedy Trek, Young Adult Trek (TM), and so on.

Ok Dad

You’re way too old to make that kind of stupid comment. Weren’t you 16 30 years ago?

Ok Mom

To be honest (and getting back to the topic lol) my biggest fear about the Academy show is it won’t feel like West Point in the 32nd century but more like West Beverly High in the 32nd century. And many people seem to share that view.

This is part of the problem of modern Trek across the board, they seem to think the ONLY way to get teenagers or college students to care about their shows if you make it sound as contemporary as possible.

And now they are creating a show aimed directly for them. Hopefully this will be a show showing serious cadets about to embark in the dangerous unknown of the galaxy.

But if it’s anything like we gotten so far with shows like LDS, DIS and SNW (and I too like most of these shows) where all the young officers feel like they been hanging out in a sorority for four years will probably fall flat to a lot of fans out there.

Again it doesn’t have to be a serious drama but it should be a place for serious students at least.

But for the naysayers this is a concern. And ironically another reason why others want the Legacy show over it because season 3 really did feel like TNG again on how it handled how people talked and sounded like the professionals and serious minded officers we all remembered.

It’s not just because people want more Worf, it honestly felt the most adult out of all the shows so far and many fans want that tone again.

Discovery never seemed all that concerned about the chain of command or job descriptions either. I chalk that up to writers that didn’t always care for the underlying structure of starfleet. Or rather they saw how it functions very different than others do.

Discovery is a really bad show that’s why. The fact Burnham is Captain now when she tried to pull a mutiny makes it clear how inept the writing was.

And they also made Tilly an XO lol. Just comically stupid.

And we shouldn’t stop at Discovery. Picard made Seven a Captain as a ‘field promotion’ when she wasn’t even in Starfleet lol. How does that work??

And even in Prodigy they pulled something similar (but not as extreme as the others).

We know most of this is just a means to an end to put the characters in a new place in the story but when it’s constantly done in a casual and hand wavy way, it just takes out all meaning in terms of rank and personal achievement.

And in TNG, Captain Picard put a civilian teenager on the bridge of the Enterprise-D as its *pilot* and then made him an Ensign before he became a cadet. And Starfleet just went along with it.

In Enterprise, T’Pol was first Officer for the first three despite not being a member of Starfleet. She might have had a Vulcan commission, but that was pretty much irrelevant.

The chain of command and proper processes in Star Trek are exceptionally malleable, or completely forgotten about to suit the story or the character.

I will defend T’Pol because she was the only one on the ship who had real diplomatic and space experience with decades of it. She had lived on other worlds and was even an intelligence officer at one time. She was never meant to be on the Enterprise longer than their original mission. But Archer saw how valuable she was since she was the only one that even had first contact experience and knew some of the areas they were going.

It worked because Starfleet was still very young and they were leaning on the Vulcans to guide them. She could’ve just stayed on the ship as a consultant kind of like Neelix became but her experience does make her more valuable as someone part of the missions themselves.

Now I can’t make any excuses for Wesley lol other than to say he was a Prodigy but yeah it’s the flagship, they should have trained officers piloting that ship. Stick him in a science department which is where he truly belonged anyway.

T’Pol was also foisted on Archer by the paternalistic Vulcans as a kind of chaperone. He didn’t want her there in the beginning.

Well, here is the thing. SNW does a lot of what DIS did but gets away with it. There are whole scenes of characters talking about their feelings and their relationships (Chapel for example, who is solely there to be a love interest for Spock) in the middle of the drama and nobody bats an eyelid. Whenever that happened on DIS, the eye rolling and complaints would be deafening.

I have often wondered if this complaint would be as prevalent for DIS- and for the lead character- if Burnham was a white man, so I do subscribe to some of Luke’s original analysis. Not saying it happens here, but I do wonder if misogyny plays a role in the DIS gets from the wider fandom. Seeing how Pike can monologue and get distracted by his feelings throughout Season 1 kind of confirmed that for me.

During peace time probably not since the stress factors would be much lower, But active duty during times of war or similar threat levels. It’s actually kind of common.

Band of Brothers, The Pacific, and Masters of the Air all considered at least good to absolutely great in quality have over half of the episodes showing military men crying. All are based on real people, real events (mistakes and all) and real stories told by the people who lived them.

Memoirs of those real life people tell stories that have far larger amounts of emotions being released. In down time, during actual combat, and when on duty. Be it on ship, in air or the ground.

Generally if your breaks didn’t have real impact on your ability to do your job, you usually had no pushback besides humor or teasing.

Every emotional state is heightened. Anger, hatred, love, despair, fear all are increased vastly versus peace time. And it comes out. Can be tears, can be fights, can be harassment of others. But it comes out.

And would I watch those? Absolutely Hell yes. In fact when it comes to the military and war time, I prefer watching material that give us the viewer the more realistic grounded look, versus seeing the military through a simply heroic lens.

And lets be very clear here, Discovery more then any other Trek (Its a mistake in my opinion) has had more high stress, massive scale issues to deal with. Been cut off from friends and family more then any Trek even Voyager, and lived through seeing their government and institutions be mere shadows of their former self.

So yes Discover should be the most emotional to date of any Trek series. Its only logical.

Now I have issues with Discovery. Pacing, and story structure are the two biggest ones. Those are things that for me hurt the series.

I agree 100%.

You can’t take what makes for good drama out of the equation though. Ignore the rhetoric about crying, that’s overblown and yes ‘m sure there’s some prejudices there but that’s just sidelining what I think is the main issue: There is a fine line between characters being more open about feelings and speaking truths… and trodding over what makes for compelling drama. Characters can’t be open books, they can’t speak their minds about everything and have Kumbaya moments and therapy all the time, it makes the show dramatically inert. Hell, the Lower Decks characters have more pathos and reserve than the Discovery crew was allowed to have in its last 3 seasons, and they are literally 2 dimensional.

There are times when exchanges in Discovery felt like:

“Hey. Crazy crisis we’re having, right?”
“Yep! Gotta go lock down this power coupling!”
“Ok. Wait. WAIT! You look like something is wrong. Is it… feelings? Do you want to talk about them?”
“No no I musn’t.”
“It looks like feelings.”
“You’re right. It’s feelings.”
“I have one word for you: ‘Connection.'”
“Omg I feel so seen.”
“Hold my hand and tell me everything.”
“The warp core is about to explode…”
“The warp core doesn’t have a broken heart.”
“That’s not true, what about Zora?”
“Oh f*ck that’s right! Zora, get in on this therapy sesh, girl!”
“So anyways, when I was 7 there was this Naussican…”

Hey waitaminute… you were a writer on Disco right?


OK, this was magnificent. We’ll done sir.. .well done.

Why is the term “Toxic masculinity” even allowed to exist? How can you even write this without losing all pretense of objectivity? How is it toxic to be masculine? How is this not misandry in the same way as disrespecting women is misogyny? Therefore why can you even use that expression and further describe it as “now seen as absurd” and not come off as a bigot?

Luke I have always found your posts very articulate and level-headed, but although I understand where you’re coming from, maybe you’re going a little too far here.

Dude go drink a Bud Light. You’ll feel better.

I don’t drink. Care to comment intelligently on what I said, or is this beyond you?

Whatever. None of this banter matters to me. Don’t get so worked up.

I know. You’re way too cool for anything to bother you. And if it doesn’t matter to you stay out of it. Bigotry matters, and it can come from all sides.

You poor child. I’ll light a candle for you tonight. 🤣

Candle? Instead why don’t you return that hug I gave you a while back? Huh, a bro hug, you know, the toxic masculinity kind…

I’m going to use Crusher’s candle.

You always say that every time you start losing an argument lol.

The fact that you think this an argument tells me all I need to know about you.

Oh hell no.

The fact that you can’t win any arguments should tell you more about yourself bud.

I can’t win an argument when I’m not involved, The argument in your head is your own problem.

Please Proceed.

Lol all you do is argue with people and troll. And every time you lose the argument you play it down like now.

You seem to hate it here but you won’t leave.

All true. Just a waste of space. I suspect because he has no friends

“Toxic masculinity” doesn’t refer to any and all expressions of masculinity. It specifically refers to certain patterns of toxic behavior. It’s not at all saying that just being male / masculine is inherently toxic, any more than speaking of three-wheeled vehicles is saying that all vehicles have three wheels.

That may be, but why single-out men for those patterns of toxic behavior? Why is there no “toxic femininity”? I’ll answer my own question; it’s because that would be offensive and misogynistic. Just call it toxic, no need to add on masculinity.

Quirky thing about language. Words have meanings. “Toxic chemicals” means something different than “chemicals.” No one is saying chemistry is bad. They are saying that some forms of chemistry can be toxic… not all. If you have trouble understanding how language structure works to communicate concepts, I can see why the next level of comprehension of the conveyed meaning might elude you. Do not mistake your lack of understanding of the words I am saying for actually what I am saying. It’s a false attribution error on your part. Maybe just google the definition of “toxic masculinity,” instead of stating that my position is something that it is not? To quote Ambassador Sarek, “It is difficult to answer when one does not understand the question.”

Regardless of how you want to twist its meaning because you don’t have the grit to face the consequence of your words, the concept is offensive. Being toxic is not inherent to men or women yet thankfully there is no such thing as “toxic femininity” is there? So are we to correct all the wrongs that have been made to women by doing it to men now? Disney is looking for people like you.

Nah, they’re just a bit too melodramatic.

The dreaded ‘re set button’, even worse during ‘Voyager’ “s run

So true. Voyager pissed me off some much that I just stopped watching Trek all together until JJ rebooted it. I still haven’t seen most of the last two seasons of Voyager.

Oh please. Stop trolling.

Welcome to the Star Trek family!

Young minds, fresh ideas, be tolerant….

Well quoted!!! Love it! :)

A reminder many of us could use. Thanks Captain Kirk, Tony!

Really good use of a really good quote!
Above all, season 2 of ST: Prodigy has showed me that a show with a fresh, young cast and crew can really deliver some of the best Star Trek the franchise has seen. That being said I worry about this show being too terrestrial. Let us never take the stars out of Star Trek. Space is the final frontier not earth. I’d love to have a character synopsis along with this announcement but it’s an attractive and interesting looking cast so far.

Do we have anything official about Tilly being a regular cast member?

Hopefully no. But I think she’ll show up in an episode or two just to annoy people that don’t like Discovery. Like me. ;P Anyhoo, welcome to the club, cadets!

I would certainly hope so after her character turn toward teaching on Disco! Only thing I see getting in the way is if Mary Wiseman’s schedule is already filled.

Just because she hasn’t been announced yet doesn’t necessarily mean she hasn’t been cast. If the studio wants Wiseman for a regular role chances are they started negotiations long ago and she has known for some time when to keep her schedule clear.
After her set up on Discovery it would indeed be a bit strange if she didn’t show up at least in a small role.

Yeah, what you described is what I figured is happening, I was just iterating my hope and casting it to the four winds for good measure haha.

I truly hope, more than any other new legacy character, that Tilly is a regular on this new show.

If they want to hit the target demo and reach a wider audience, they should consider moving this series off of Paramount+ or at least consider sharing the premiere window (debut on Paramount+, encores on CBS and Paramount Network). Paramount+ needs Star Trek to keep the lights on but its limiting the potential of the franchise.

Keep your day job.

You need to get a job and stop trolling bro.

I don’t work. There’s always money in the banana stand.

That explains…a lot.

U Jelly?

oh, ‘enterprise’ is worth a watch, especially when it gets to season 3, 4

This is my day job, but I work for one of the other guys.

I agree with all of this and I don’t remotely care about this show. No one is going to watch it but old fans if it just stays on Paramount +. They should put it on a site young people actually have as well and something they use often.

I like P+ but it’s actually hurting Star Trek because it doesn’t have the subs or younger people like Netflix does. Prodigy is probably getting much more younger people watching that show over there than P+ did.

Would be a perfect Netflix show. Right in between Bridgerton and Stranger Things. With hints of former hit Elite and some Gossip Girl for good measure. Oh well.

Also agree Denny C. I think we can all agree if we want Star Trek to grow beyond the same people whose been watching it for 30÷ years it simply needs to have more exposure. And the irony is it had a lot of it before it became exclusive to All Acess/Paramount +.

I mean who can argue against this when something like Netflix has 3-4 times the viewers and is in 200 countries. I don’t know how many countries P÷ is in now but if it’s in a third of that that would be shocking.

That said with this new takeover and the promise to beef up P+ somehow may look very different by the time the show premieres. But I think it’s time they start licensing these shows to bigger streamers. There are still tons of potential viewers out there whose never even heard of these shows.

The fact only SNW is the sole holdout tells you it’s not even enough fans on Paramount + to sustain these shows anymore.

“…and a new enemy that threatens both the Academy and the Federation itself.”

Lord Voldemort?


Mr. Stay Puft would be more threatening.


What? Could happen. Paramount owns both franchises.

Terminator? Skydance owns the rights….

Skynet, then. Kind of relevant these days…

I wanna play… The Night King?



I don’t think I’ve seen any of them in anything but the same has been true for a lot of actors on previous Trek shows.
If anything, these casting announcements are a positive sign that production is moving along despite the troubles that Paramount is in.

With how much money Paul and Holly cost they have to cut corners somewhere. That doesn’t mean they’re not great but rather that they are likely to be hidden gems! This isn’t the Star Trek show I want to see, as I am way past YA, but I will still watch it like all the rest.

I just hope they find a way to do what Star Trek is the best at…..both internal and external exploration. Most newer shows have given us the internal but the external not as much. I would love to see them build upon alien species in a way Discovery never did.

Never heard of them but exciting news! It sounds like they are getting very close to filming.

They actually hired real actors, building the sets, completed scripts and a starting date.

Take notes for everyone making the next Star Trek movie. 😉

These kids will probably be fleet admirals before we get another movie.

Annnyway, sounds good.

The academy might be derelict as Earth banished Starfleet after the burn.

We actually did see Starfleet headquarters in season 3 of Discovery and surprisingly it looked pretty good.

Glad to see them announcing some of the younger cast from this. Not really familiar with them, but looking forward to seeing them in action.

I still think it’s a massive mistake to put this on over the Legacy show. I don’t remotely buy this show is going to suddenly draw in teenagers just because they have a Cardassian teenager on the show or something.

But I’m going to give it a chance of course. If I can love LDS and Prodigy as much as I do maybe I will love this too.

But seriously make Legacy the next show. You know the thing fans actually want?

If they want to draw a teenage audience, I’m not sure that Paramount+ is the right place. Perhaps the CW network or Netflix would be a better platform to grab that demographic. Teenagers aren’t going to pay for a streaming service if there parents don’t already have it. I love Star Trek Prodigy, and hope that show will continue. Nevertheless, Prodigy was originally meant to be a kids show, hence why they put it on Nickelodeon in the hopes kids would watch out. I personally don’t know of any kids that are big Prodigy fans, outside of the kids of Trekkie parents who may have introduced it to their kids via Paramount+. It was smart to put Prodigy on Nickelodeon, unfortunately it may not have succeeded there as they hoped. At the end of the day, it’s mostly us adults who watch and enjoy Prodigy, which I would argue is perhaps the most loved and preferred series across the fan base for any of the new CBS All Access/Paramount+ Kurtzman-era Star Trek. A lot of people who don’t like Discovery, Picard, Strange New Worlds, or Lower Decks still like Prodigy. So Prodigy is successful IMO, despite being removed from Paramount+. As great as Prodigy is, it still has not yet resonated with children and pre-teen audiences to the extent Paramount and CBS may have wanted. It’s not as mainstream as say SpongeBob Squarepants is or some of the animated Star Wars Clone Wars cartoons. I have a feeling that teenagers will pass on this history and that it will, again, us adults who watch it. And personally, I have no interest in the concept of this show. I don’t really care for the TNG episode “The First Duty” and I like TNG a lot. I predict that Starfleet Academy will be an expensive huge flop that will be cancelled either during or after the first season by the new IP owners at Skydance, who likely will have different plans for Star Trek. If Skydance is smart they should hire Band of Brothers show writer Erik Jendresen to produce his planned Star Trek Romulan Wars trilogy that he pitched before to Paramount just before new management came in and scrapped it. Hopefully the new management will take Star Trek in a better direction, something akin to Star Trek: Enterprise, which is truly the most underrated and arguably one of the absolute best Star Trek series ever made.

My only problem with comparing it to “The First Duty” is that it focused solely on command cadets. This show will need to expand beyond that in order to make it more interesting. I also think it’s too soon to claim it will be cancelled. We just don’t know how well Star Trek fans as a whole will accept it and no matter what they say I still think that’s their true target audience.

Although in principle I agree I don’t think it’s the ideal streaming service for it. If it’s truly meant for a YA audience it probably would be best on the CW. However, with new leadership coming in we could see them sell it to other platforms after the seasons air. Or even just put it for free on YouTube. That would definitely be a better way to attract a younger audience.

I am excited. Of course I want Legacy, and I really hope that is the next show (or project, be it a film or mini-series), but I am excited for Academy. Prodigy has proven that a kids’ oriented series can appeal to adults; there’s no reason a YA-oriented can’t appeal to long-time Trek fans. We shouldn’t just assume it’s going to be a carbon copy of CW shows. I had no interest in Lower Decks or Prodigy, now I enjoy them just as much as the live action series.

I have my doubts. I don’t get why the show is set in the time period of a previous show that got at best a lukewarm reception from the fandom. I don’t get it. I think that they should have pursued the Legacy show. I hope that the Skydance folks see that. Picard Season 3 was fantastic. The first 2 seasons were garbage. Picard Season 3 did something that JJ was not able to do with Star Wars. They tapped into a nostalgic feeling and showed the fandom love. Why would you squander an opporunity like Legacy and give us something we did not ask for? Nobody asked for the Acolyte. Ask the folks at Disney Plus how that is going.

This guy gets it ! 👍

And The Acoylite was so bad I gave up after episode 4.

I gave up after episode 5 lol.

I’m just going to say it, no matter how we feel about modern Trek in general or any specific show I feel a hundred times over it’s in a much better place than Star Wars is these days and I’m even including Picard season 2.

Saved by the Bell in space?

I won’t be watching this.
It’ll be on the level of one of the many Disney Star Wars shows that’ll crash and burn in its first season.

I have a sinking feeling you might be right.

nice, tolerance the hallmark of a ST fan…

I’ll give this my usual ‘watch 3 episodes and decide’ treatment. If it turns out to be Riverdale In Space, I’m out. I felt the same about PRO, and was pleasantly surprised. Hopefully the same will happen here.

you know ‘trek’, sometimes it takes 2, 3 seasons before a show gets really good.