It’s been over a year since the season 2 finale of Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, but apparently season 3 is “coming soon” in early 2025. Series stars Anson Mount (Pike) and Ethan Peck (Spock) were on a panel talking about the show at Creation’s ST-NJ Star Trek convention, and they offered some insights into what to expect as well as reflected on the show’s past.
Murder, Muppets and Spock in a skant?
The actors were careful not to get into spoilers for the upcoming season which wrapped up filming earlier this year. But as Anson Mount talked about season 2’s musical episode “Subspace Rhapsody,” he hinted at an upcoming episode that will be just as genre-bending:
Anson Mount: We’re really blessed to have leaders like [co-showrunners] Akiva [Goldsman] and Henry [Alonso Myers] who have a really big ‘F-it’ attitude and this idea that Trek can be a lot of things. They’re mischievous and like getting in trouble. For whatever reason, genre has become a really interesting way of us having conversations with the writers about what would make us excited. And that’s a smart TV writer considering what is going to make your cast excited to go to work. It makes a huge difference. It really does. It’s hard to explain. We’ve got an episode coming up I can’t tell you about, although Jonathan has already spelled the beans about it. He directed that and just from the outset it was such enormous fun. I mean, it just adds so much to the scene, don’t you think?
The episode Anson mentioned is the one directed by Jonathan Frakes, who described it as a “Hollywood murder mystery.” There was one genre that Mount had no answer for. When a fan asked if we should be expecting a “Muppet episode,” he seemed perplexed:
Anson Mount: I’ve gotten this question twice now, where is this?… Um, I… First of all, you’re operating on the idea that we’re told anything. I’d be interested to to be a fly on the wall in that pitch meeting to see how to get that past the network. But sure, maybe. Anything’s possible in science fiction.
The reason fans ask about it is because Akiva Goldsman brought it up earlier this year, telling The Hollywood Reporter “At this point, is there a genre that Strange New Worlds can’t do?… Could it do Muppets? Sure. Could it do black and white, silent, slapstick? Maybe!’”
Also during the Q&A, a fan asked if we would ever see Spock in a unisex “skant” uniform, and it appears Ethan is into the idea:
Ethan Peck: I threaten to wear it all the time, to request it. So maybe. We’ll see.
Anson Mount and Ethan Peck at STNJ 2024 (Photo: TrekMovie)
What Strange New Worlds is all about
The pair of actors also fielded a question on what the “message” is of Strange New Worlds.
Anson Mount: It depends on the episode. I think, in general, this is a little bit navel-gazing, but I think within the Star Trek community, I hope people are starting to understand that that Star Trek can be a lot of things. There is not this one thing called “Trek.” And I’ve been learning that as well. I have stopped going up to Akiva and Henry, our showrunners, and saying, “Are you sure that this is a good idea?” Because it always works out. People’s suspension of disbelief, especially in this community, is phenomenal.
Ethan Peck: I suppose there’s an ethos or philosophy that’s being illustrated that inspires to approach the unknown with curiosity. I think with—weirdly love?— in order to reach beyond what you’re comfortable with and what you know to understand something other and something different. And I feel like that’s pretty present in most episodes, I mean of all Star Trek. And I think we’re pretty Trekky as far as Star Trek shows go.
Anson Mount: I think Trek gives it that thing in us that originally wanted to walk out of the cave and go see what was out there, now wants to go to the stars and see what’s out there. When you take the concept of something like NASA and look at it on paper, it’s ridiculous. We want to spend billions of dollars to strap a rocket to the ass of these people and shoot them up into space and look around. Everybody in the world is pretty much like, ‘Yeah, that’s what we should do.’ There’s something in us. Our destiny is somewhere in that direction. And Star Trek gets right at the meat of that curiosity bone.
Regarding what was a favorite moment from the series highlighting the message of diversity, Peck pointed to “The Serene Squall” and the character of Dr. Aspen/Captain Angel:
Ethan Peck: So there’s an episode in season 1 when pirates board the Enterprise, and there’s a character, Dr. Aspen, played by Jesse James Keitel, who’s wonderful. And Dr. Aspen poses to Spock—because he’s betwixt humanness and Vulcanness, right? He kind of doesn’t feel like he belongs in either place. And Dr Aspen is nonbinary, and they offer this idea: Maybe you’re something else. And so that comes to mind. And I think that is hammered home in a scene when Spock sits down with T’Pring and he says, “I’m neither human nor Vulcan. I’m Spock.”
Ethan Peck as Spock and Jesse James Keitel as Dr. Aspen (Paramount+)
Spock’s uncle Chris… and his Vulcan hair
The pair of actors also talked about the unique chemistry they have with Christopher Pike and Spock and how it contrasts with Kirk and Spock:
Ethan Peck: I think that my version of Spock is learning to be more human and exploring his humanness. And I see Pike to Spock as a sort of Uncle figure / older brother figure; someone who teaches him about humanness and human ideals, what it is to be noble, and have integrity.
Anson Mount: I think Pike is all about having the diversity of minds on his ship and Spock is certainly a completely different angle on things.
Of course Pike’s signature hair came up when a fan asked about its increasing height as well as the fact that Vulcans all seem to have the same haircut. Anson brought up the teaser released at Comic-Con over the summer revealing Pike and others being transformed into Vulcans.
Anson Mount: I think you can see that not all Vulcans have the same haircut, with Pike. I wanted that straight up, straight back thing… I become a Vulcan for a day, and the hair is awesome.
Anson Mount as Vulcan Pike from season 3 preview (Paramount+)
More from STNJ
Check out our earlier coverage of Tawny Newsome and Jonathan Frakes talking about Starfleet Academy at the STNJ convention and look for more updates to come.
Anson Mount and Ethan Peck at STNJ 2024 (Photo: TrekMovie)
Keep up with all the news and reviews from the new Star Trek Universe on TV at TrekMovie.com.
Great interview!
AND this proves why it is not a Star Trek show. Trek is not many genres, it is an intelligent philosophical show which makes us think / ask questions / want to better ourselves etc it is more than just making shows the cast like to make based on a “F-it” attitude.
we are now 15 years into “Nu-Trek” and they just do not understand the legacy of what they are working with
But why should I care, I wont be watching any of this because I have all the real stuff made between 1964-2005.
“AND this proves why it is not a Star Trek show. Trek is not many genres, it is an intelligent philosophical show which makes us think / ask questions / want to better ourselves etc it is more than just making shows the cast like to make based on a “F-it” attitude.”
The older shows didn’t disappear into some sort of mist. You can still watch them and see how wrong-headed this is.
This place needs to go outside.
All five old shows seem to be re-run every day in my local market on a channel called H&I, to say nothing of Amazon. It seems mostly right-headed to me.
*sigh* gatekeeping, it just won’t go away. NOBODY gets to decide what Trek is or isn’t. We can decide whether to watch it or not. I’m not too fond of seafood. I’m not criticizing people at Red Lobster. I won’t waste time like you’re doing here. Spock’s Brain is on somewhere, followed by The Children Shall Lead. Watch those gems of Trek magic…
Oh, my sweet summer child. Of course you’re not a fan of seafood if you’re basing it off Red Lobster. :)
Nobody said the show was “just” made from an ‘F-it’ attitude, he was simply referring to an extremely-specific aspect of their attitude regarding the place of genre within specifically this series. This is made clear by the context of the statement. If you have twist/re-mold it so much to make a complaint fit… maybe your problem is something else.
LOL it will be “big-swings” again. I am asking a very simple question, when are we going to get some intelligent science fiction??
It’s been there the whole time. Your having been distracted by the “big swings” is your problem if you’re letting yourself be distracted away from the layers.
This kind of toxic crap is why Star Trek fans get such a bad rap. You DON’T get to decree what is and what is not “real” Star Trek. I really don’t understand this obsession you have with complaining and meaning about something you don’t like. It’s bizarre. It must be exhausting being this negative all the time.
It IS, in fact, many genres. Star Trek, depending on the series and the specific episode, has been a sci-fi series, a space opera, a comedy, a love story, a war story, a Western, a noir story, a parody of 1950s culture, and so many other genres. It is all-encompassing and is limited only in one’s imagination. That has always been a large part of its appeal, going back to TOS’s first season.
It has become a parody of itself though. Star Trek could parody itself and has done many times, and it worked. But now parody is the new normal and that is not cool
I question if you’ve actually seen any “Old-Trek” because I’ve been watching since 9/8/1966 and there are plenty of genre episodes mixed into most of the TV series.
Also, ‘Real Trek’ is whatever the owners of the IP decide to do with it. IMHO, I prefer they try different things with the franchise and so far they’ve delivered.
Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant. – as Kirk said to Scotty in Star Trek III.
Warning for gatekeeping
“At this point, is there a genre that Strange New Worlds can’t do?… Could it do Muppets? Sure. Could it do black and white, silent, slapstick? Maybe!’”
How about intelligent allegorical Science Fiction?
Anyone??
This is just tedious now. You really ought to be banned.
you want slapstick Trek? Muppet Trek?
I remember a time it was about boldly going where no one had gone before and making us more thoughtful as we went along.
What if you boldy went someplace else and took a nap?
Star Trek is an action adventure franchise that has always been much more cartoony than you’re willing to remember. It’s often smart, but it’s often silly and funny too.
really?
You are an exhausting person.
I dont like to see a 60 year old legacy being demeaned, it is not respecting the brilliant people who created TOS and TNG. Yes those WW2 veterans etc
Blessed indeed.
Not quite the word I would use, but after reading the room, sure, let’s go with “blessed”.
I get a lot of heat on here because I defend the legacy of Star Trek. I have just watched a video of William Shatner on youtube talking to the Rodenberry archive and he talks about the professional and disciplined people who made Star Trek what it was initially. These people had life experience, many were WW2 veterans but they were all professional. I mean, am I the only one on here who questions why the attitude of people who make Star Trek today is “F-it”???
Who would have the keys to a 60 year old franchise and have their work ethic as “F-it”??
F**k what? the legacy, the audience, the networks???
What is it they do not care about, the long term fans???
I am calling out people who are using Star Trek basiclly as their own experimental vehicle to get bullet points on their CV for their post-Trek Hollywood careers and I am the one receiving multiple phaser blasts (on set to kill!)
Gene Roddenberry once said that the Trek of the future may not be his vision and that it was OK. If the creator of the show knew this was coming and said OK, who are you to tell those who he entrusted the legacy to that they’re doing it wrong?
Clearly there’s enough fans out there who do like it or the show wouldn’t have funding to continue to be made. So, we can easily dismiss the notion that there aren’t fans of this current iteration.
Strange New Worlds is easily and measurably the best “Nu-Trek” to have popped out. But, it couldn’t have been so without the others that came before it.
Using logic here, the numbers support the show creation – meaning enough fans to like it. You’re saying you’re defending Trek’s legacy. You’re not. You’re defending your idealized version of the Trek legacy. That’s not the same thing.
If you are not open to change or infinite diversity in infinite combinations, you have thoroughly and utterly missed the point of Star Trek. Either go outside and touch grass or stop watching the show and reading articles on the topic. We don’t need you to pollute the legacy with your distorted view and clear hatred for exploration (whether it be of space or new ideas).
Judging by this board I think you’re getting a little too worked up over what Mount said. He sounds like just as much of a big Trek fan as the rest of us and he obviously wants to see this show seen as inspirational and thoughtful. I think the people who run it also sees it that way. SNW is a very optimistic and positive show, which I think some of the earlier shows weren’t enough of and put some fans off.
Now I will agree that there is probably too much of an emphasis on genre bending type stories and it leans more gimmicky than something bold. The musical episode seems to fit that bill directly and you will get a different response depending on how someone felt about it. But the show is very popular overall even if this board is a bit more divided over it, so they are doing something right.
But reading your posts and your feelings on everything post-Enterprise, it sounds like this new era just isn’t for you. And that’s obviously fine, but it’s nothing wrong to just say that and just focus on the things you do like.
“We’re really blessed to have leaders like [co-showrunners] Akiva [Goldsman] and Henry [Alonso Myers] who have a really big ‘F-it’ attitude and this idea that Trek can be a lot of things.”
“They’re mischievous and like getting in trouble.”
I agree that Star Trek can be a lot of things, but this doesn’t give them carte blanche to do anything they want because they have this “really big F-it attitude”. Star Trek is not theirs to not give a damn and do whatever they want with it…
They can do a lot of things sure, but it needs to fit in a proper context. This is why a cartoon comedy show like Lower Decks works well as well as the big swings episodes of SNW. But pushing the envelope too much can burst the bubble and bring you outside of what makes the show Star Trek. I’m willing to give the showrunners leeway, but reserve the right to dislike what they do if I feel they’re pushing the limits. This however is my personal taste so I’m fine with people liking shows that I don’t.
The mischievous comment however is borderline ridiculous. The showrunners like getting in trouble? What does that mean, that they’ll purposefully do something controversial just to piss off the audience? That’s not being mischievous, that’s being a d*ck.
“Star Trek is not theirs to not give a damn and do whatever they want with it…”
Sadly, it is, and with Paramount’s blessing. For me, that explains how the Section 31 teaser happened.
I’m honestly curious how all this is going to go after Paramount merges. Because soon Trek will not be theirs alone to decide, for better or worse.
I’ll be curious as well to see how the sale changes the direction of Star Trek, if at all.
Although I have some issues with the show and no problem expressing them I do really enjoy it and liked both seasons. It’s a lot of fun and very comedic. Yes I do wish it could be a little bolder and give us a bit more deeper and thoughtful stories we got in TOS, TNG or DS9, but I’m coming to the conclusion this is not that show. It’s aimed to be more lighter with a touch of allegory here and there (although we did get the darker Klingon episode last season at least). I will just be happy if season 3 sticks to its main mandate and actually just explore more strange new worlds. LDS actually does more of that than this show does IMO.
But looking forward to it.
I agree completely! When they want to do serious stuff they can. They just clearly aren’t interested. I too would like a standard episode of them just visiting a planet. Or even just checking up on a colony.
On a less serious note I could see Spock wearing the Skant but not with the leggings underneath. Rather he could wear it with the standard pants like Crewman Zuniga did.
Yeah, I think it’s a conscious decision to keep the show lighter. And I also think it was done to distinguish it from Discovery and Picard which we know comes off more serious, maybe a little too serious at times lol. But I have said in the past SNW was probably made heeding all the complaints people gave DIS and PIC and the shows were considered too dark, cynical, overly serialized, too many saving the galaxy storylines, etc. That’s why this show feels so different and ‘fluffier’ from those. .
And this is obviously not a new thing. Voyager was given a similar mandate after DS9 arrived and the complaints were that the show was also too dark, war based, less adventure of the week type of story telling. And many hated it was on a space station. So Voyager became the fun adventure planet of the week show again. It certainly had some darker stories here and there for sure but it didn’t drive the show the way it did on DS9.
But yeah, VOY actually explored quite a bit (to be fair it didn’t have a choice ;)) unlike SNW that started off that way in season one but was a huge step down in season two and one of my biggest complaints. Just give us more stories about interacting with new aliens if nothing else and I think most people will be happy.
Somehow I completely missed Peck’s discussion over wearing a skant lol. Yeah, go for it, although Worf probably wouldn’t approve though. ;)
Yeah. Voyager’s crew explored, and that was exactly one of the many reasons I didn’t buy into the show. When you’re–what was it–70,000 light-years away? The last thing that made sense was to explore. The first priority would and should have been was to get home. Now, if they were 5… 10 light-years away, yeah, that makes sense. Given the premise, Voyager should have been about a generational ship trying to get home. That would have made sense.
I disagree with that. They were the first Federation starship on the other side of the galaxy and Janeway was both an explorer and a scientist. That’s why she signed up for the job. To seek out new life and civilizations and in her case every new Star system and alien species was a first would be something you can’t exactly pass up.
And plus it was always unrealistic to just hit warp 9 and just expect to make it home in one piece in 70 years or so. Voyager is a tiny ship. Generational ships are (in theory obviously) set up to literally go for decades, Voyager wasn’t. So they still needed other resources to keep it running or allies for supplies and to figure out what areas were safe to travel through and what wasn’t. And there were a lot of A-holes in the Delta Quadrant, probably more so anywhere else in the galaxy, including the biggest, the Borg. Meeting friendly aliens was just as much about survival as everything else.
And it’s not like they didn’t try to get home every time they saw a possible way to get home faster. Her focus was always getting home and took a lot of chances that were risky and dangerous to do it. But I know this has been argued a lot over the decades. But I always go to this very basic point, if the show just became about finding Voyager a way home in every episode, it would make for a pretty boring and redundant TV show pretty quickly.
Lighter = dumber. Star Trek is not meant to be dumbed down, it has been dumbed down since the 2009 movie. I will die on this hill (which reminds me, Generations was dumbed down Trek too which is why it is by far the worst Trek movie including the Kelvin timeline) So yes Star Trek 1964-2005 could be dumb too, but it was the exception – now it is the norm.
Well we have to agree to disagree. I don’t think lighter= dumber.And DIS and PIC weren’t lighter and you still think those were just as bad, right?
Obviously no one will convince you otherwise and I am also a much bigger fan of classic Trek as well. I just don’t paint everything with one brush. Yeah, as you pointed out, there were a lot of dumb things done in every show and film series in the classic era just like there are dumb things in the modern one. I just feel the new shows have greatly improved over the years, with SNW as a good example. Not amazing, but decent. I have criticized it quite a bit (that some people don’t particularly like) but still like it just the same.
But I’m just being honest, if you can’t find one thing to like after 5 TV shows and 3 movies fifteen years later, I don’t know if you will ever find anything to like in the future no matter who is running it unless its Rick Berman again.
I think saying lighter=dumber is a very single and narrow minded point of view. Lighter stuff can be enjoyable (I enjoy stuff like Spock’s Brain or the Captain Proton episodes of Voyager). I think the problem with SNW is not that its lighter, its that the lightness and gimmickiness takes over the entire show. They can’t seem to find the ideal balance between light and serious and this is unfortunately down to the fact that they only have 10 episodes to work with every season. SNW is a show that needed to have 13 or more episodes each season to make its premise work much better and to include much more “proper, intellectual” science-fiction stories.
Yes, this. Perfectly said.
I also agree and said so in another recent thread. I don’t think the issue is doing lighter episodes, it’s just not enough of doing more serious ones, especially with just 10 episodes. The balance just feels a little off as you said.
I think people who are disappointed with the show point this out the most, it just feels more silly than serious and you don’t feel the gravitas the way you do with TOS, TNG, DS9, etc. Those obviously tell lots of lighter and gimmicky stories as well but with so many episodes they have the space to do it whenever they wanted.
But I also think that’s the show Anson Mount signed up for too. His portrayed of Pike has always been cool dad vibes and it feels reflected in the entire show.
His portrayal of Pike in DISCO was as of a serious captain worthy of the other Star Trek captains that preceded him.
In SNW, it’s become He of the Dopey Grin.
Lol ouch. But I will agree he did come off a lot more like a serious captain on Discovery. On SNW he comes off too relaxed and wants to be everyone’s friend. And he spends way too much time in the kitchen cooking. I remember I got flack for that once for saying that but I have zero problems with him cooking, but he shouldn’t be addressing officers in a kitchen either like he did Mariner and Boimler.
I think this just how Mount sees the character and since Pike ironically was probably the most popular thing to come out of Discovery they decided to lean into it more on this show. But his Pike and the original Pike from The Cage feels like two completely characters at this point.
Life is short: have an affair. Or at least watch “Spock’s Brain.”
It is very much Roger Moore Star Trek.
Oh snap, shots fired! 🤣
And Roger Moore had a few good Bond movies.
Honestly I liked Season 1 a lot more but S2 had it’s moments and I really am curious what they come up with for S3. I don’t see myself liking the Vulcan ep purely based on what I have seen thus far but I am looking forward to the premier and seeing how they get out of the jam from last season
Season 1 was a lot more stronger for sure. Out of that season I gave 8/10 shows a rating of 8 or higher. With season 2, it was only about 4/10. I don’t mean I hated all the others obviously, just not as high as an 8. Most just felt more average.
I can tell the Vulcan episode will be very divided. I’m really looking forward to it, but I think I’m in the vast minority on this board. ;)
BTW, good to see you back! I think I seen you here in a few weeks but I haven’t click on every link.
Season 1 was the best in my opinion. I didn’t enjoy the show breaking big swings in season 2. I also have similar feelings about the S3 Vulcan episode they showed a clip of. It seemed like a parody or a skit from SNL, but I can’t really judge it until I have seen the whole episode. Honestly, I don’t know why they just don’t go ahead and break the fourth wall. They are almost there anyway. Maybe I shouldn’t give them ideas like that.
The cliffhanger conclusion looks like it will be very exciting. Lots of lens flares seem to have been added for dramatic effect.
Haircut talk and big swings. Yay, I guess.
All I know is that I never, ever feel compelled to go back and rewatch any episode of SNW. Once for each was apparently enough. I would call the showrunners’ attitude towards the show ‘flippant.’ Kind of a ‘throw it at the wall and see if it sticks’ sort of thing. And I’d really appreciate it if they would stop recasting classic main characters, but that’s not going to happen. Sadly, I’ve come to see SNW as sort of goofy, not actual sci-fi, a knock-off of what once was, a parody. If you want compelling sci-fi, go to Apple +, imo. Oh, and I think Mr. Mount looks ridiculous in that photo.
The thing is, even with big swings, Star Trek was always grounded in its own reality. I saw it referred to as a documentary about the future. It’s losing a bit of that quality.
The most important quality is that Star Trek has always been aspirational. It presented humankind as flawed, but always working to be better.
If you want to watch the most Star Trek show out there, get Apple TV and watch Ron Moore’s For All Mankind. It’s the Star Trek prequel you didn’t know you needed.
That’s exactly how I am feeling about the show. SNW seems to be untethered from its own reality at times and it really affects how I view the show overall.
I did watch an episode of For All Mankind, but as far as being like a prequel for Star Trek, it is just a bit too prequel for my taste.
These guys are fun to hear from!
Following the season 2 episode “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow” I have treated the Kurtzman era as a a separate entity from TOS to ENT.
It allows me to watch it and not give me a headache. SNW is one of the better entries under Kurtzman but I think it comes across as a parody of Trek rather than be good Science Fiction.
The dialogue I think comes across a bit cringey and more akin to MCU style dialogue with cheesy remarks.
Previously if the ship was attacked, the tactical officer would say something like “Phaser hit, I have the ship at 320 mark 2” but in SNW it would be something like “who hit us?” And the response would be “err…those guys” then cut to the screen.
I also feel they take the piss out of Spock. Sometimes I feel the smartest character can seem like the dumbest. Though Ethan Peck is good.
The cast are great and are fun to watch.
Also I wish the show could be it’s own thing rather than shoving in TOS set ups
Spot on.
I think for a lot of fans it’s easier to look at this show in a separate timeline from the classic shows now thanks to Tomorrow as you said. Then you can ignore all the Gorn stuff.
And the dialogue is pretty cringe at times but I’m not that bothered by it. And I agree I do like the cast, certainly much more than I like Discovery’s.
Star Trek: Strange New Worlds (SNW) still has potential, but for the most part it has been a mediocre show. Half the people in this forum complain that it isn’t “Real Trek”, while the other half go on about “Young minds, fresh ideas” (even though most of the SNW writers are in their 50s). I won’t argue about what is and isn’t real Trek, but I know in my heart when something “feels” like Star Trek. Strange New Worlds feels like Star Trek about 50% of the time, and the other 50% feels like they are just cribbing from other shows. I have yet to see a genuine “fresh” idea on that show. It is OK to be different from the Star Trek shows of the past, but given that it takes place between ‘Enterprise’ and ‘TOS’, there should be a logical continuity to it.
It feels a lot more in canon with Enterprise than it does TOS. But that’s the advantage when the NX-01 crew is so much earlier in the timeline I guess.
BTW, someone gets Archer on this show already!! If they can find a way to get Bioms and Mariner on it, they can find a way to get freaking Archer! 😎
“f-it attitude”. That’s not a feature, it’s a bug. Not the adjectives I want in a Trek show runner.
Honestly I do like this show but I get what people are saying and it doesn’t really hit you the way good old classic Trek does.
Do I think it’s on the level of TNG, DS9 or VOY for me? No, but there are certainly moments it’s pretty strong. I rate it at the same level as Enterprise. Still nowhere close to how amazing fourth season is but on par with the other seasons so far.
Deadweight Kirk still sucks though. That guy feels almost as wooden as old Chapel. And having a Khan relative onboard is just plain weird. And the canon is all over the place but it’s basically an alternate timeline now. But on the plus side we still got Hot Chapel, so that balances out ALL negatives! 😀👍
I think the “F-it” remark is in being more creative with the show and stories, and not play it safe with a formula to produce forgettable, bland shows that just meet criteria. Star Trek is about exploring new frontiers and working together to achieve wonders and overcome adversity.
Also, established ST like DS9 had a lot of episodes per season to devote to story and character arcs. SNW has what, 8-10 eps a season so they hit the ground running doing whatever they can with what they have. Too bad they don’t get 16 eps so we can explore the characters more and slow the pace down some.
no mention of Anson’s pottery?