Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Season 2

I liked it. But I have severe reservations. I know Star Trek fans were crazy about the first season, and this was similarly good, but the problems the first season had were exacerbated here. Is the show better than Discovery? By a mile. But the truth is I was far more generous to Discovery than other fans were until I simply threw up my hands in Season 4 and decided it was a lost cause. I had similar likes and reservations during that show's second season. I thought it was a solid episode. That perhaps showed some troubling signs.

Let's get to the good stuff first. Robert April being a Black Hat on par with Admiral Cartwright. I bet Gene Roddenberry would go into conniptions over the idea, which is you ask me, is the best reason to do it. I think his son Eugene is really cool because I'm betting he knows his father wouldn't have been down with it, but did it anyways because it's a good twist. It really is.

I love Spock planning to steal the Enterprise. The best thing about this show, and something it has in common with The Original Series and none of the others, is that it often feels like a caper. On The Next Generation when Picard met Spock he called what he and Kirk did back then "Cowboy diplomacy". In reality it's crap, and would cause major headaches and nothing good. But it's still kind of fun. And I don't find Spock the creep or the idiot I found Kirk, so I can even shut my brain off and enjoy it. This goes for Pike too by the way. Pike, Spock, and Number One never raise my dander the way Kirk and McCoy did.

Say what you will about the Kurtzman era of Star Trek, it has actual interesting characters. Pelia gets only half credit because she isn't human after all, but could you imagine Guinan or any other guest humanoid alien being this much fun? Carol Kane is clearly having a blast. The problem with the characters on most of the first five Star Trek series (minus Deep Space Nine) is that most of them were boring. That was a Roddenberry mandate in fact, which is another reason I don't believe the guy had any business deciding the future of humanity in a sci-fi franchise.

The dedication to Nichelle at the end was wonderful, but the moment I really loved was Uhura taking ownership of her communications station, and basically refusing to stop doing to her job because it was inconveniencing the engineers. True, part of that was because she was trying to help steal the Enterprise, but I bet Nichelle Nichols would have LOVED that scene and would have loved to have ever been given something similar. Martin Luther King was right that her presence on the bridge of the Enterprise was how people of color should be seen. The problem is I believe Roddenberry and the other producers believed their diversity job started and ended with different ethnicities being "seen". Being shown as strong, and capable, and able to stand up to the other white characters? Uhura was never given that. And I love that she was here.

So that is a LOT of good to admire. The episode is nothing the franchise needs to really be ashamed of. That being said, there are some really bad decisions being made.

Dr. M'Benga torturing a Klingon is one of them. And the thing is, I believe the Kurtzman era DID put in the legwork to explain why it would happen. Whenever I saw saw the original Enterprise crew's visceral hatred of the Klingons, I thought it was way overblown, and done in a ham-fisted way to make an allegory for different types of races not getting along. As much smack as I talk about Discovery, I admire the first season for suggesting that the Klingon War was far worse than The Original Series led us to believe. The Klingons weren't just the Federation's rivals. Because they didn't view humans as people, they butchered them (whole families, women and children included) and laughed and made merry while doing it. Genocide on the level of the Nazis. Scotty snubbing Worf on The Next Generation was sort of funny at the time. This suggests those old wounds are real and not manufactured the way Archer's ruthlessness with the captured Xindi was while "Enterprise" unwisely explored him torturing him..

Still, man, this STAR TREK, you know? I watch this show because it ISN'T that, or it isn't SUPPOSED to be that. You want to make M'Benga haunted and damaged by the war? I think that's great and I think Roddenberry sucked because he would never show stuff like that. You want to show him torturing a Klingon for information? That's too far.

Speaking of which, I had nothing but bad notes for Christine Chapel last season. If anything things have gotten MUCH worse. And the rest of my complaints will be a variation on the fact that the show is sloppy with its continuity and doesn't really care what was set up before. If it was a reboot or an alternate Universe like the Kelvin Timeline that would be fine. But it's supposed to be untold stories from the Pike era in the official timeline. The truth is Christine Chapel was NOT a badass. She was a wallflower. Did Roddenberry suck for portraying her as such (and casting his wife in the role of the damsel for good measure)? Yes. But it's established canon Chapel is both useless in a crisis, and always moon-eyed over Mr. Spock. Having Spock have feelings for her doesn't just violate the character. It violates the actual continuity of what actually HAPPENED. Star Trek: Picard got sloppy with its Guinan continuity in Season 2 as well, and Discovery has been a mess in general, but it sucks that this show can't be bothered to keep basic continuity straight. The worst thing is this isn't a simple error. The producers almost certainly know they are writing the character and her relationship to Spock entirely differently, and THEY SIMPLY DON'T CARE. I'm not as brutal as most critics about stuff like that (when the Kurtzman era decided to ignore Turnabout Intruder's notion of no female Captains in the Kirk era I was like "That is a piece of bad canon that shouldn't just be ignored, but retconned entirely." This is different though. Very.

What is the actual solution? DON'T HAVE THAT CHARACTER BE CHAPEL. Have Jess Bush play an entirely different character. Nobody would fault them for that. Instead that are making an already frustratingly hard to follow continuity even messier.

I suspect the show expected us to find the Turtled-Headed Klingons a treat. "Hey! We finally got the Paramount likeness-rights back and no longer have to portray them as two-penised, blue-skinned monsters!" I still don't like it. Because it STILL breaks continuity. In this era, the human-looking Klingons (seen on The Original Series) were the Klingons the Federation dealt with. "Enterprise" cleverly said their human looks were down to an "Augment Virus", which was an audacious and genius storytelling move on writers Judith and Garfield Reeve-Stevens' part. Basically if Star Trek ever had a continuity snarl, back then they hired the Reeve-Stevens to clean it up. Enterprise was a crap show, but its fourth season had value because they were put on the writing staff, and were often instructed to clean up these messes outside of the damn non-canon tie-in novels, and make that crap official. I don't even think the Reeve-Stevens could sort the monster Klingons to Turtle heads here, much less Star Trek: Picard's assertion that Khan probably happened 50 years after The Original Series said it did. Or the continuity of when Picard met a younger Guinan. They were amazing at explaining the unexplainable, but even they would probably be at a loss for a way to untangle all this nonsense.

What was Spock's "Thing"? "Make the ship go forward now!" I don't like the notion of The Thing. Star Trek: Picard mentioned it in its last episode too, but it feels like something like that should be effortless and not something obsessed about, or a common experience for Starfleet officers planning to be captains. "Make is so," is the epitome of level-headed cool. The shows suggesting perhaps Picard workshopped that ahead of time? No. Don't ruin my Star Trek like that, producers. You think the self-referential nature of that makes the characters more relatable? I don't want to relate to the Captains in that specific way. Part of the deal of Star Trek (and this IS something I've complained about) is that the characters being evolved makes them equally admirable and weirdly alien to us. The idea of the expectations of command catchphrases robs the franchise of a great deal of magic. And Star Trek is mostly science fiction rather than fantasy. It's nowhere NEAR as hard sci-fi as Roddenberry always bragged it was, but there was little magic in the stories (Q and the Wormhole Aliens excepted). Don't take the magic of the EXPERIENCE from me, okay, Kurtzman? You don't HAVE to make the characters as neurotic and obsessive as I am. In fact, I'd prefer it if they weren't. That's not the relatable aspect of myself I believe Roddenberry's flawed future was missing. I actually liked the fact that Jean-Luc Picard made taking charge seem effortless.

I'm not saying I dislike the show now, but while fans loved the first season, I actually liked it about as much as the first and second seasons of Discovery (which other fans hated). I wound up hating Discovery. I suppose it could turn things around in the final season, but for now I think that show is crap. The fact that this show seems to be offering that show's worst faults at about the same quality level as season 2 (at least to me, other fans seem to like it more) worries the HELL out of me.

I sense trouble ahead. ***1/2.

Unlike the Trek series of the Roddenberry / Berman era, this feels like a future I could live in. It feels like one that is possible. Where humans are still sometimes prejudiced and make mistakes. But they can learn and grow from them. They aren't intractable with their sense of perfection and self-righteousness. They aren't just talking the talk about striving to do better. We can actually witness them doing that, because for the first time ever, the failures are being acknowledged and shown as current problems instead of a past issue that is no longer relevant. I want that future. I will still crossly say I don't much dig a future popular culture where the edgiest guilty pleasure is Gilbert and Sullivan. But we're getting there.

M'Benga's insistence that Spock absolutely hated the Vulcan lawyer was awesome, especially when Spock comes over and says "I'm sorry you had to see that." That was great.

This isn't just Star Trek at its best. It's Star Trek as it always should have been but wasn't. And damn, it's great. My favorite episode of this show so far. The performances were all uniformly outstanding too. I'd suggest the show put this one on the Emmy reel if I didn't believe Emmys were worthless. Amazing television. *****.

That might go down in history as one of the single best Star Trek episodes of all time. You can't REALLY beat "The Visitor", but this show was like, "Let me try anyways."

The Sam / George Kirk thing is this show fixing a continuity snarl, as it the idea that the Temporal Cold War from Enterprise caused the Eugenics Wars, which were supposed to occur in 1992, to keep getting postponed. The episode did another smart thing there and did not say the year in which it was set.

I love the Temporal Cold War explanation because if the show is as awesome as this episode is, it'll someday use it to explain the differences in the monster, turtlehead, and Augment Klingons designs. The original canon of Roddenberry and Berman was somewhat messy. Both Kirk and O'Brien's personal histories were a wreck. But MOST of it held together. Until Discovery messed almost all of it up. Even Picard did dirty by the continuity of when younger Guinan first met Jean-Luc Picard. This episode cleaned it up a LOT, and for once I won't cry foul at Denobulons being present in a later era. This episode helped the ENTIRE canon. Even inexplicable stuff from the Roddenberry / Berman era like the Sam / George thing.. I know Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens didn't write it, but this is the exact kind of thing that would have been in their wheelhouse. For longtime Star Trek fans, it was the loving Valentine Berman and Braga believed the execrable "These Are The Voyages..." to be, but that was actually a huge middle finger to us instead.

Not only did the history of the Singhs get called out (and it would have been awesome for a Brent Spiner cameo, but maybe TOO awesome), AND the Temporal Cold War, but the real Star Trek Deep Cut is the Temporal Bureau Of Investigations, as seen on the fan-favorite Deep Space Nine episode "Trials And Tribble-lations." I would have preferred it if Agent Emily had an awful joke anagram name like Dulmer and Lucsly, but maybe I just missed it.

Khan being a little kid that Singh herself must comfort is an amazingly uncomfortable scene. Imagine if you had to ever do the same thing for boy Hitler and you get how messed up that is. It pushes a LOT of buttons for me and in a good way.

I did NOT expect Conspiracy Theory Girl to be a Romulan and the Big Bad. She's so cute! VERY effective casting against type there. I love her being excited she got to kill Kirk. I think many students of history would believe the same thing. The fact that Tolian Soran was not given a similar line in Star Trek Generations is a very clear demonstration of what inferior storytellers Brannon Braga and Ronald D Moore were for that terrible, terrible movie.

I'm gonna talk about my favorite things in a bit, but I do sort of need to give my opinion on Kirk. I have made absolutely no secret in previous Star Trek reviews that he is one of my absolute least favorite characters, and I think he's by far the worst series regular Star Trek Captain if you don't count Lorca from the first season of Discovery (and nobody ever really does). I like this interpretation because despite being softer edged and less obnoxious, he also contained a few things I hated about Kirk, but they were portrayed as exasperating instead of admirable or understandable.

Like him confusing 21st Century Toronto for New York. Regardless of whether or not he's read Hawthorne or The Bible, Kirk's astounding 23th Century ignorance was one of the things that amazed me every episode. "Gosh, Mr. Spock, who the heck is Surak?" Him not knowing that is like if Spock had never heard of Jesus. It showed the fact that Kirk's knowledge is iffy in a LOT of departments, despite him being great at 2-D chess. And I love that that mistake was unflattering, if slightly endearing. It was both, which is great.

Him being great at chess is not a surprise, despite how stupid he was on the old show. It fits into the fact that 23rd Century humans are supposed to be evolved. If Kirk and Spock play 3-D chess, he can whoop ass at 2-D chess. That doesn't stop him from being an idiot compared to other characters on the show. But to his credit, Kirk himself downplays it and suggests the 2-D game is simple and easy for everyone of their era. And believe it or not, that makes sense.

The other unflattering Kirk bit I loved is Kirk grabbing the device and them getting transported into the past with no weapons, equipment, or even money because of his rashness. One of the absolute worst things about Shatner's Kirk is he would be completely careless and reckless with technology he didn't understand. He'd often break it in dumb frustration, and bingo! That's the answer! It was obnoxious. What was so annoying and frustrating to me was every time he broke or misused a piece of high tech equipment because he didn't understand it, the results of its destruction always miraculously worked out in his favor. That is a very glaring example of bad writing the old show routinely engaged in. I very much like that for the first time ever it screwed them over instead.

The two things I loved most about the episode will probably get crap from fans who hate the Kurtzman stuff. But I love the fact that Kirk is placed in the role of the doomed lover for the first time ever. That had to have been deliberate, and a nod to the fact that every time Kirk "fell in love for real" on the original series, the chick died at the end of the ep to simplify the situation. And having Singh in tears at the end over losing the guy, even though our timeline's version is alive and well, is the perfect subversion of a overdone Kirk scenario that got pretty long in the tooth by the third season. "Tell Sam I said 'Hi...'" Oof! Dramatic gut-punch right there, WHILE hitting The Total Reset Button. Pretty sneaky, sis.

The other thing I love that should offend plenty of people claiming the series is "too woke" is Pelia calling Roddenberry's future a "no-money, socialist utopia". Ted Cruz is ostensibly a Star Trek fan. I hope he saw that and was pissed off. Because that's what the future seen here essentially is. And Pelia's worry that it's a "fad" is valid, because in the time she's been on Earth, humans have been sinners a LOT longer than they've been saints, and human evolution might have nothing to do with it. The Romulan chick even explained Earth being worse off in the future might not be a demonstration of cause and effect. It might just be random. Which means the Federation might be too. And it might only be temporary. As much crap as I give Discovery (and it deserves it) I like the fact that the third season explored the idea that the Utopia Earth had created was fragile, and the Federation was in steep decline for that reason. And I love the fact that the Kurtzman era deals with these controversial ideas, that Gene himself would have hated. Because it makes the great future seem both possible and plausible to me, whereas Gene's unrealistic ideas were a variation on the Underpants Gnomes Master Plan. 21st Century war and conflict = ??? = Socialist Utopia! I don't buy that. I love that the Kurtzman stuff is very much invested in looking into cause and effect for our supposed better future. It makes the future that seemed unreachable to me as a kid seem possible now. Not likely. But possible. For Star Trek, it's what the franchise has always been missing, and it's better for it now.

Captain Ben Sisko's most famous line from the criminally underrated Deep Space Nine is "It's easy to be a saint in paradise." Back when DS9 aired, the line was both controversial, and for fans, debatable. The Kurtzman stuff has value because it shows it is actually true. Which is I believe the best legacy Star Trek could offer about a better future.

I've talked enough. Suffice it to say, last week is no longer my favorite episode of the show. THIS is. And it is one of the greatest Star Trek episodes of all time. Certainly the best of the Kurtzman era (and by far). Amazing television. *****.

I don't want to say I hated this episode. But I hated this episode. The high-concept scenario was nightmarish and no fun. Usually Star Trek can find a spiffy sci-fi angle for nightmare scenarios. But this reminded me a LOT of how Voyager would often torment the crew emotionally for no damn good reason whatsoever and bum the viewer out for no damn good reason either.

On the plus side it turns out Ortegas is actually adorable. How is it I'm just realizing this now? She deserved a better episode to finally shine during.

The worst episode so far. *.

What DOES this mean? Because that's not what happened. I HATED the last scene for that reason.

This breaking of continuity COULD work in the Narrative's favor however. Here is how I would do it. I would have this show (and this season) making Chapel and Spock the most epic love story in Star Trek history. Thumb their noses at purists like me stating this couldn't have actually happened. And then at some point do a high concept sci-fi story where to save Spock's life Chapel must agree to all memories of their love being erased for Spock and the rest of the crew. But she asks the entities if she can keep those memories if she promises never to reveal them to anyone else or who saved Spock's life and how. And suddenly her pathetic mooning over Spock on The Original Series (to his neglect) makes perfect sense and no longer feels as antifeminist as it was intended to be back in the day. That's how I would handle things. Piss off the Matt Zimmers in the audience more and more week by week, and suddenly not only make it fit the canon, but make a questionable part of the franchise less objectionable in hindsight.

Do you want to know the God's honest truth? I think this is the likeliest direction for the show. If it sucked as much as Discovery does, I wouldn't think so. But they've built up enough goodwill from me, that them taking the canon high road is a possibility in my eyes (if not a given).

The rest of the episode was great. Spock being human was funny (I like his annoyance as Sam Kirk's sloppiness) and I love his affirmation at the end of the struggles his mother went through on Vulcan. He said something to Chapel earlier that was true: "Vulcans can be jerks." It's the thing I liked least about the show Enterprise, but bringing back both the smell thing and how casually racist Vulcans are to humans is a good reminder that Vulcans aren't necessarily more evolved that we are. And the lack of emotions thing is a crock. I mean an emotionless person would not feel the need to say the deliberately cruel things T'Pring's mother does to Spock and Amanda. It's a sick joke.

But T'Pring pointing out that Spock should have trusted her with his condition is another thing which shows why the character was wary of him during "Amok Time" on The Original Series. The viewer sort of hated T'Pring in that episode, and what's great about this show is we understand where the frustration with Spock came from in hindsight.

The visual effects in the episode were amazing. Star Trek has not always had effects this beautiful, even though the shows have always been expensive. It's nice that they are now available on a television budget. Granted, this show and the other Kurtzman stuff MUST be miles more expensive than the Berman stuff, but still, it looks and feels feature-film quality to me.

Chapel telling off the Vulcan science dude at the end was nice too.

I love that the Vulcan dude (T'Pring's father?) loved Pike's cooking because he added flavor, but the mom kept insulting him that it was against tradition. But he still wanted more at the end of the rituals. And I love Pike suggesting charades. I like Pike far more than I ever did Kirk. The guy is like, "Ears?" and Pike shrugs in frustration.

It was a good episode, but the last scene aggravated me. ****.

This show is really onto something.

This was not an amazing episode of this show. It was average / pretty good. And yet, I still found it an amazing episode of television. It says something about the inherent strength of the entire series where the most basic quality episode is still better than almost every other current genre show. Yeah, the invisible aliens in agony thing has been done to death on Trek. But while the sci-fi high concept may have sucked, the drama surrounding it was solid.

Una disliking Pelia for both the C and reminding her of the loss of Hemer is interesting, but she raised a couple of interesting points. Pelia appears to have crumbs on her uniform with no food present. What is up with that? Moreover, how is it she's been in Starfleet since before Una was born, actually TAUGHT her at the academy, and Una currently outranks her? I am not convinced there is an interesting backstory to the first mystery, but I'm willing to bet it exists for the second.

I admire the show for what they are trying to do for Kirk. I'm wondering if the writers of the show share my perspective that Kirk on The Original Series sucked. It feels like they are taking enough digressions with the character that I'm wondering if they understand how badly he's aged in 2023 and are just rolling with it. First of all, he is jerk to Sam. Full stop. Sam had a legit concern and worry (and beef) and Jim's all like "It's your own fault you aren't as awesome as me." The reason I suspect the writers thought the old version of Kirk sucked is because the old show would never both give him that unflattering a moment (at least not deliberately, Kirk was constantly accidentally making me cringe) or suggest it's in-character too.

I love the bit with the cookie. She is crazy.

But I'll tell you something else. The bit of Kirk talking about not letting death win is the first moment of James T. Kirk I've ever liked. And I'm going to be brutally mean to The Original Series here. They would never have given Kirk such an empathetic moment. They would have believed it would have made him look weak. And if by some off-chance a strong guest script with something like that monologue had ever existed, Shatner would have refused to play it. It think the reason The Original Series was often bad, was because the producers (and the stars for that matter) did not understand what made good television. And that problem plagued The Next Generation too for a huge chunk of its run. Considering the entire premise of Star Trek was about the future and potential of humanity, I wish Gene Roddenberry, those writers, and those actors actually understood people. They did not and it's why I never believed or wanted that cold future. You take on the mantle of the Future of Humanity, you damn well better understand how people work. And none of the writers on the Original Series, and MANY (and possibly most) of the writers of The Next Generation didn't either. I share many other people's concerns about the Kurtzman stuff. I came to realize Discovery is atrocious and indefensible after four years of me giving it every benefit of every doubt. The thing is, when it comes to exploring people, their relationships, and how people act, they try. They put in the effort. They don't look at a Series Bible and say an 8-year-old boy is not allowed to grieve his dead mother, end of story. Death is actually scary here, and Kirk urges a combination of accepting its inevitability, and fighting its psychological hold on you. Damn it. We should have been allowed to explore these kind of things decades ago. It's insane we were not.

Wil Wheaton told Eugene Roddenberry that his father would be proud of what he's turned Star Trek into. I have my doubts about that. The best things his era have done have flung entirely in the face of everything his father unilaterally insisted the future should be. Gene Sr. was NOT a team player when it came to producing Star Trek, and sharing credit for it. The fact that current Trek is so outside of his weird, intractable beliefs are things I believe he'd complain about. That's what his latter years boiled down to regarding other people producing Star Trek. I am proud of what Eugene Roddenberry has done. But I really hope Wil Wheaton is right because that idea does not appear readily evident to me.

The most momentous moment in the episode is the meeting of Kirk and Spock. In a very nice subversion, the intro, simply put, doesn't matter. It's cursory. Sparks don't immediately fly, and their isn't a bunch of foreshadowing saying how close those two will get. But while the story doesn't do that, I love that the episode direction and production play up this entire mundane meeting because they know the audience knows how big a deal it is. They are having fun at the expense of how things started off so low-key.

Kirk meeting Pike for the first time was cool too.

I wish Nichelle Nichols had lived to see Uhura beat the crap out of James T. Kirk. She would have adored it. I mentioned awesome things this show does the original show would not have permitted? That! That!

It was sort of good to see Hemer, but it's hologram footage and a hallucination. It did not resonate with me as much a I believe the series was hoping it would.

I am always, ALWAYS tired of invisible aliens in peril. The episode itself? Was pretty good Star Trek, and pretty great television period. Weird, right? ****.

That lived up to the hype.

It's weird how it keeps continuity between the two shows by sort of making the transition from animation to live-action a given instead of something weird or out of the ordinary. The story is simply being told in different formats in different parts.

I was screaming at Boimler to shut up with Chapel. I sort of wish Chapel would have been allowed to enjoy that part of Spock more. Or for longer at least. But Boimler wrecked it, and is an idiot. Spock's reaction was great. He's not changing his current behavior because of this. So there.

For the record, Mariner has a LOT less frenetic energy going for her in live-action. Probably can't be helped, but while live-action restrains Tawny Newsome some, Jack Quaid still gets the bullet points down for what a dork Boimler is.

The animated ending was funny, and makes less sense than it's trying to convince us it is.

I can't imagine ANYONE ever fanboying the NX Enterprise. That was literally an entire crew of turds. I understand the need for Star Trek shows to build each other up, but really, I always assumed the NX was never mentioned on The Original Series OR Next Gen because the Federation was so damn embarrassed of the fact that Archer used to greet alien diplomats as if he was speaking to a slow toddler. Really there was NO part of Enterprise that didn't actually make me cringe on some level.

"Badass" is the first time Uhura has cursed in the entire franchise. I noticed this because it's never happened before.

Star Trek does FAR fewer legit crossovers than it should. Outside of the Enterprise D visiting Deep Space Nine in the Next Gen episode "Birthright", and the Enterprise dropping O'Brien off in the DS9 Pilot "Emissary", or Voyager docking at DS9 in "Caretaker", Trek does fewer crossovers than a show with so many spin-offs should. Ironically it was Lower Decks itself that did a great crossover with Deep Space Nine last season, so it makes sense Boimler and Mariner are getting around the franchse.

I love Boimler pointing out to Pike that as much regret as he feels towards his father since he's gone, imagine how the rest of his crew is going to feel in the near future. Suddenly the birthday party isn't actually for him anymore. It's for them.

Ortegas and Chapel really seem to dig Mariner. She brings out the defiant rebel in all of them. And I like that about her.

Frakes directed. Of course. It would be weird if it WEREN'T him for this one.

I love the history being made by the Orion Scientists as sort of a measure of grace and starting point for other aspects of that society besides piracy to take hold. Even the Enterprise Crew can learn lessons about understanding and tolerance for their enemies. I can't imagine how a potential Klingon episode would shake down, but this was a good start for the Orions.

I enjoyed the hell out of that. And I enjoyed it more than I would have if the crossover had occurred on Lower Decks itself. Because then it would be entirely animated. Here they could go back and forth under the conceit that maybe the medium doesn't matter in telling Star Trek. Also your eyes are huge at the end! *****.

I was mostly fascinated by it, but I think it ended wrong. Deep Space Nine's "In The Pale Moonlight..." had a similarly dark and ambiguous ending, but there was a part of me that believed that Sisko keeping the secret he did was in the best interest of both the Federation in the War with the Dominion, and the peace with the Romulans. M'Benga having Chapel cover up a murder because nobody knows HE is the butcher of D'Gar does not have that same level of controversy attached. I would take M'Benga's calls for justice more seriously if he had taken responsibility at the end himself. He's asking when the accountability starts while getting the kid glove treatment from Pike. Pike doesn't really believe him and still lets him walk away after all but admitting he killed the Ambassador on purpose.

I did like several things about the episode. This show is better than The Original Series. While it turns out the ambassador is a bit of a fraud and dishonest about his past, that does not change my feeling that he is actually genuine about regretting that past and being grateful to the Federation. And the reason the show is better than The Original Series is it allowed me to come to that conclusion. The original series would have made him a bad guy, a secret spy for the Klingons, a traitor, you name it, just to reaffirm what scumbags Klingons are, and what scumbags the 20th Century human societies they stood for back in the day were.

His death was actually logical. If his career were actually successful, we would have heard about him, and the tensions between the Federation and the Klingons would have eased by The Original Series. Just the fact that we never heard of this genuine curiosity of a Klingon, who actually rejects his entire society, something we have NEVER heard a Klingon do before, makes his mortality in the episode on a clock.

The Monster Klingons can be seen in clips from the war from Star Trek: Discovery in the recap. It was good to see that, because it's the show telling us it is aware of the differences and mistakes in the make-up, and either has an answer for it, or expects us to roll with it. I don't like the idea of pushing Discovery's first two seasons out of my head-canon, especially considering how tied to this show its second season actually was.

I had some concerns about the entire premise. The entire premise is done to court controversy among the crew, who do not have the context that the audience does that honorable Klingons exist. And they made him the genocidal butcher to play up how hard it is for M'Benga and Chapel to accept him. But man, I don't care how valuable his alliance with the Federation is, it is not believable to me they would make somebody who did that an ambassador, one of the most sensitive positions in the fleet. Accept his defection. Pardon him, if you must. But making him an official intermediary of the Federation is not believable. Worse, I think he sucks at the job. Not because he has a temper, or can't take criticism. It's that he can't read the room. He thinks the hatred M'Benga and Chapel feel towards him can be reasoned against. And I find that a fascinating facet to give a Klingon, but again, that is not actually how an Ambassador should approach things. If an Ambassador feels they are making a potential ally uneasy, they back off immediately. And that's not a question. The job involves reading people and assessing their comfort level and willingness to make peace. If they are having trouble with it, they don't get into a Klingon sparring session with them while discussing the matter.

It's things like that that turned me off the episode a bit. I think it is brave the show explores war and hatred in a realistic fashion that Gene Roddenberry refused to. More, it was nice to gave some legit nuance to an Original Series-era Klingon. Whatever noble motives Kor, Koloth, and Kang possessed, were retconned into Deep Space Nine, not actually seen on The Original Series (although admittedly Kang was not all bad back then). Star Trek VI got a LOT of crap for the level of prejudice the humans showed the Klingons, but I don't really feel Roddenberry or those critics (including the cast) understood the value of doing that. Yeah, we know and trust Worf. That's not a big ask for the audience. The big moment is Chancellor Gorkon pleading with Kirk to keep pursuing the peace as he lays dying, murdered by members of both the Federation and Klingon governments. The big moment is Kirk embarrassingly later admitting, "It never occurred to me to simply take Gorkon at his word." And The Undiscovered Country got criticism by suggesting racism still exists in the 23rd Century. But I don't remotely believe either The Original Series OR The Next Generation when they claimed it didn't. That's not how human beings work. Human beings are different and messy. Even if you got together a society that decided hatred and prejudice was wrong, not every single human would agree with that. And in fact, many of the humans who DID agree with that would unknowingly have those biases anyways. Leonard Nimoy wasn't destroying the idea of a perfect future. He's suggesting a great future will never be perfect, and it's stupid and unrealistic to expect that. And he got pushback from that that I don't agree with. Star Trek VI was not the best Star Trek film. But the slams against it for going against Gene's vision are bogus. It does in fact make Gene's vision more believable and credible, which you'd figure people would find a good thing. But... no...

I wish the creator of the series about the potential positive future of humanity actually understood people or how they worked. Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory is a pretty great nerd. But I would not put him in charge of a franchise with this specific premise either, while he understands nothing about people and how they think and act. Roddenberry actually thought therapists should wear leotards with their boobs hanging out. During therapy sessions. Yeah, crap like that is WHY I feel brave enough to take shots at Roddenberry, despite him being a pop-culture sacred cow. It's because crap like that says he wasn't actually sacred.

Clint Howard is like Jeffrey Combs in always seeming to get cast in random Star Trek roles. His first role was Balok on The Original Series but he's popped up here and there on all eras of the show. Pretty sure he was on Discovery once, but it's neat that he's always around when you need him. He looks less weird as an old man than he did as a little kid, or even a middle-aged adult.

The episode pushed my buttons, but there was one thing I liked being pushed. I liked hearing a black man on Star Trek call a white man privileged. And he's not actually discussing racial matters. But that's the thing that will register with the audience, so as far as button-pushing goes, it's DAMN effective. I wish every controversy the episode explored was as clever and perfect as that.

This episode was swinging for the fences and trying to be this show's version of "In The Pale Moonlight". Without realizing the ethical scenario revealed by M'Benga's moral failings and duplicitous actions aren't a secret kept at the expense of his pride and for the greater good of the peace. Instead it's done to keep him for being sent to prison for murder, and being revealed as the actual Butcher of D'Gar. "In The Pale Moonlight" has value because Sisko's controversial actions are genuinely up for debate. There is no part of M'Benga that still holds the high ground while he was spending the episode demanding justice and accountability. And not to belabor ANOTHER earlier point, but Ambassador Gul Dukat isn't exactly credible either.

They swung for the fences on this one. Ultimately, I think they missed. 2 1/2 stars.

Ask me the subspace probabilities of me giving that a positive review. No Star Trek Universe is THAT lucky.

As a rule, I greatly dislike musical episodes of shows without musical elements. Buffy The Vampire Slayer was the Gold Standard there, the South Park movie also checked off the right boxes, and Batman: The Brave And The Bold ALMOST did it right. Other than that I think all musical episodes suck. I do recall liking Xena's musical episode too, but it's been literally decades, and my mind could be playing tricks there. But as a rule I frown on not just the musical episodes, but the trope in general.

I don't mind serious shows being silly. What I don't like is serious shows hurting their own credibility. You can do silly stuff without doing that. It's almost impossible to do a musical episode and keep your credibility. Everything came together for Buffy in a way it never did again, even though Buffy wasn't the first musical episode. No other genre show has ever navigated those challenges so effortlessly.

My biggest objection to musical episodes, and this is especially true in genre, is the show will create a plot explanation for why the characters are singing and dancing. And even Buffy's wasn't great. Buffy's musical episode was great for other reasons. But even when speaking about the best musical episode of all time, Buffy still somehow failed the one thing I hate the most about them. That's partly why I loved the South Park movie so much. It's not apologetic about it and doesn't feel the need to explain why it's now a musical. It just is. I feel like the explanations are the show in question not believing in the trope / premise, and sort of doing a mea culpa that it's stupid. Rule of thumb for good television: Never tell me it's stupid in the show itself. Because I will freaking believe you. Don't test me here.

The other objection is I feel like shows do them for the wrong reasons. They feel a need to because other genre shows have, without bothering to realize how few good episodes have come out of the premise. It's a form of peer pressure and jumping on the bandwagon. The good thing about Buffy's musical episode is it was early enough in the fad that I not only felt and enjoyed the novelty, but it felt like Joss Whedon actually had something to say about the subject. I don't feel that for much else that does.

I also notice that for the most part musical episodes do not put in the effort to make the great original songs they used to back in the day. I remember watching the recent Disney+ movie Disenchanted and I was like "Alan Menken is going through the motions. He's stopped caring." And I will concede there were two or three songs in this episode I might grow to like if I heard them a few more times. A greater number were awkward with no rhyme or reason to the melody. Most of the musical numbers were phoned in.

Also why did the episode decide to make me hate Chapel by the end of it? What storytelling purpose does that serve? Genuinely confused by that.

And here is where you get to say "Matt, you are crazy, and you only like complaining to hear the sound of your own voice." And if you think that after this next opinion, I'll understand. I am literally about to bash what most people will think was the best part of the episode. Everyone on the show is an amazing showstopping singer.

I freaking HATE that.

To me, the most valuable part of the Buffy musical is that most of the cast were not professional singers. Outside of Anthony Stewart Head and James Marsters, I think the best that could be said for the rest of the cast was "Passable". And for Alyson Hannigan's couple of lines, "awful". But it's the fact that Sarah Michelle Gellar has such an unprofessional sounding voice that give her a vulnerability in her singing that does not exist for a diva flawlessly belting songs out with gusto. As a matter of fact I think Gellar's voice sounded beautiful because of it. This very episode of Strange New Worlds is talking about people being vulnerable and sharing their feelings they don't want to. I don't believe that while every song is belted out with full-throated confidence and a little of what they call "Studio Magic". I don't remotely believe this a problem the crew is suffering through. It's an inconvenience to them at best, that I am currently suffering through.

I'll give the episode this: I believe everybody who sang used their own singing voices. Everybody raved about Batman: The Brave And The Bold's "Mayhem Of The Music Meister" but the fact that Diedrich Bader as Batman didn't sing his own songs is sort of a deal-breaker there. Hearing cast members with imperfect voices is actually part of the joy, and I didn't get the sense the show "cheated" here and replaced anybody with a better voice. I just wish everybody was less talented. Yes, I know. You can stop giving me that look now.

I'm not made of stone. Of course the rapping Klingons were hilarious. I also love how they added vocals to the main titles and played The Original Series Theme at the end. But I think the thing I like best was La'an talking to Kirk about her feelings, and doing so in an honest and calm manner so she wouldn't break into song. That's the kind of honest drama I love.

But yes, I'm Matt, and I'll be the turd in your punchbowl this evening. Meh. 1 1/2 stars.

It was a great episode. But a bad place for a season finale, especially one right before a huge actor and writers' strike. There is no guarantee the show will be back. I'm not joking about that. That's how dire things are in Hollywood right now with the current sociopaths in charge of the major studios. I don't feel The Big Cliffhanger is the right place to leave off Star Trek seasons anymore. Picard, Lower Decks, and yes DISCOVERY have it right in usually giving us satisfying wrap-ups instead with a tag teaser at the end.

It was great to see Scotty though, and I loved that he was Pelia's student. Gives the character a bit more weight and history than she previously had.

I also liked that we saw a peaceful montage of the colony at the beginning. It never happened on The Original Series because it couldn't afford it, and I believe the Berman era was simply too clueless to see the selling point of doing it. But me being impressed by the budget here only goes so far. For all I know they used stock footage or AI models. This is why there is currently a strike by the way.

You know what? It's inappropriate for a Star Trek show to have Starfleet characters looking forward to and enjoying finding ways to kill an alien life form. I have repeatedly said I don't believe in Gene Roddenberry's vision of what a supposedly perfected human race looks like in the future. But the idea that future humans are no longer genocidal monsters? That's actually a message I can get behind! That was not remotely anything that needed to be updated for modern audiences. If a character had said something like that on the first five Star Trek series, it would have been because they were bad guys. Having the heroes muse it as if they are discussing the weather is beyond disturbing and out of line.

They did one-up Roddenberry in one way. Zombie movies still exist in the 23rd Century. I was like, "Thank God, these people aren't actually hopeless, cold, unfeeling automatons after all.".

Ortegas has a fun personality too, which is both refreshing and needed. It can't JUST be Scotty who's fun. Other people should be allowed a sense of humor.

Do you know what bugs me? The season one horror movie episode with the Gorn was super memorable and effective. But it's already been done. They didn't need to do it again.

This was the wrong era of television to do that. If the show ever comes back, we probably won't get any resolution for THAT for another three years. And that's a generous estimate. And that assumes the show will come back. Not a sure thing.

Ten years from now, in hindsight, when I rewatch the entire series in a binge (if it continues past this point) I will undoubtedly give that an easy five stars. Because I will have had the proper context for it and the later pay-off. I am allowed to be currently annoyed instead without it. I will give my five stars to a future Blu-Ray rewatch. Not the first go. I'm actually a little pissed. 3 1/2 stars.