New Star Trek TV Series' - Picard & Lower Decks

New Star Trek TV Series' - Picard & Lower Decks

With the latest announcement of another new Trek series being produced it's an exciting time. They aren't yet at the output of Trek's heyday in the Nineties when there were fifty-two episodes a year and a feature film every other year, and there's still a long way to go to reach that if the current trend for fifteen or less episodes a season continues as it looks likely to. But still, 'DSC' is gearing up for its second season, the Jean-Luc Picard series, complete with Sir Patrick Stewart reprising his iconic role has been confirmed as a planned multiple-season run, and now an animated comedy cartoon, 'Star Trek: Lower Decks' joins the production line.

My first thought is that we don't need an animated series, due to my aversion to non-canon material. My last thought is the same. While it seems in some quarters that 'Star Trek: The Animated Series,' the Seventies Filmation cartoon, is thought to be canon, I still hold to the consensus opinion that, as Gene Roddenberry was unhappy with it and considered it not to be canon, and as the producers since that time have taken the same view, the only true canon of Trek is what is shown in live action film and TV shows. People can argue about the rightness and wrongness of that position, find comments from people back in the day that support 'TAS,' and cite examples of references to it in such things as 'Enterprise,' even expound on how much they love certain episodes, but for me it doesn't change its non-canon status - if we based canon on our preferences then we'd all have different canon and that's not how it works. Canon is the 'true' history, the continuity commonly established for the overarching universe of Trek, and its sense of internal consistency is one of the biggest draws of the franchise and something that appears to be under threat of erosion from the Kelvin Timeline to the 'updated aesthetics' of 'Discovery.'

First, there is canon within 'TAS' by the very fact that those things were referenced elsewhere in live-action Trek, and I'm fine with them making ever more become canon, but it doesn't mean that everything is canon within 'TAS' because of that. Not until it's specifically addressed in live-action. It's all to do with the reality and integrity of the universe, otherwise anything goes… which brings me to 'Lower Decks.' The idea of a series focusing on the lesser crew rather than the Bridge officers has been speculated upon ever since the great Season 7 'TNG' episode of the same name. Whether it could actually work in that structure is debatable, but many would like to see them try, and was something at first suspected for 'DSC' when it was announced the main star wouldn't be the Captain. I still haven't seen 'DSC' yet (waiting on the DVDs), but I get the impression it didn't follow that path. So the idea is sound, but I'm not keen on a Trek comedy series. I wasn't keen on another animation, either, as early as its first announcement, but I would have at least been somewhat interested in a serious animation, perhaps with the voice cast of 'DS9' (rather like the beautifully detailed style that has been shown in the images released for the new documentary on that series, 'What We Left Behind'), or 'Voyager,' though as far back as the Nineties Armin Shimerman wanted to do an animated Ferengi series which never happened.

I'm relieved that the Picard show isn't going to be the animated project as I was fearing that slightly, but an ugly style in the character designs I've seen, and the description of the previous form of the main man behind it puts me right off. If it's also an 'adult' comedy I'll not have the least bit of interest. If it's a family cartoon, which seems to be suggested by the comments about it broadening the Trek to "fans of all ages" as Alex Kurtzman (the current Rick Berman), said, then I can at least get on board with the idea of trying to catch the young early so they grow up into other Treks, much like 'Star Wars' has done with its animated content, but I doubt it would appeal. The difficulty with Trek has always been that at heart it's a thoughtful, mentally stimulating and narratively satisfying exploration. This approach may have been softened vastly from 'Enterprise' on, but it's why those old series' are still popular and still bringing in large audiences on streaming sites, as Netflix revealed a while back. I'm not saying a modern animation can't do what those live action series' did, but everything points to it being the opposite of what people like me want in their Trek.

The argument for bringing in younger generations is of course valid, but I would argue that Trek itself was generally a family affair: I first got into Trek watching 'The Original Series' with my Father in the early Nineties when it was shown on BBC2, and from there slowly discovered the other shows, growing up as Trek seemed to grow with me, and revisiting it as my brain became sharper and better able to discern deeper things than fistfights and weird aliens. 'DS9' was always the best thing for that as I watched and re-watched it over the years on video and latterly, DVD, discovering new things all the time. Since then, beginning with 'Enterprise' there seemed to be a process of dumbing down as the creative forces behind it became largely spent, with a brief flare of creativity towards the end of that series that heralded the last burst of life before burnout of the franchise ready for a new shoot to grow in its place, but one that continued the tradition of simplification in an attempt to bypass the vast canon, rules and established facts and style so as to appeal to a wider audience.

My point is that I found Trek appealing, and that's why I wanted to keep watching it and have never grown tired of it, despite there being over seven hundred episodes and now thirteen films. I didn't need animation to break me in gently, but with 'DSC' they've made the decision to be 'mature,' which is really just another word for being lazy, loosening up on the baser instincts of human nature towards a harder-edged, more visceral experience rather than mental stimulation and satisfaction. If they had kept that series family friendly (and again, I admit to not having seen it, but I know about a lot of the content), they wouldn't need something else to appeal to younger generations, and, as Trek became to me, it could be a progression of itself that the viewer follows. When I was young I preferred the action and ship battles, but as I grew older I took onboard the character and depth of the universe until the action became secondary to that. That's why 'talky' episodes such as 'Duet' from 'DS9,' or 'Tapestry' from 'TNG' remain as compelling as ever - they don't rely on special effects or violence (not to say there isn't any, but it's not integral), such things are in their proper place: to serve the story. Trek at best is a series of good stage plays, sometimes strung out in arcs over many episodes (Dukat's fascinating fall and rise and fall in the viewer's estimation, is spectacular).

With all this talk of deep canon, character and story, I'm not saying a comedic, half-hour cartoon can't do those things, I'm just saying if I want to see more Trek I want to see the Trek I want to see. It's not for everyone, don't try and make it so, but if you do, at least try to advance Trek in some way. If this had been a heavily CGI series that was setting a new trend and new standards for animation then it would be worthwhile, but the trouble with Trek in this century has been that rather than do its own thing it tries to ape other things (such as the Kelvin films following the trend of 'Casino Royale' for Bond and 'Batman Begins' for Batman, of re-envisioning long-lived series'). 'TNG' and its spinoffs were so special because they were unique, they dared to be different and in essence created a whole new sub-genre that led to numerous sci-fi series', from the 'Stargates' to 'Farscape' and many others besides. The films haven't touched people like me, not because we don't like action, but because they aren't true to Trek and seem bland in comparison to the powerful drama and characterisations of what came before. Lightning was caught in a bottle on several occasions in Trek's history, but that doesn't mean that labelling the bottle 'Star Trek' will guarantee a lightning strike every time thereafter.

All this is a long-winded way of getting around to saying that I wonder at the people behind Trek. I'm excited by the possibilities of so much potentially being made in the next few years, but this is tempered by the track record so far. The more that is thrown at the wall, the more chance that at least something will stick (I'm banking on the glorious return to the 24th Century with the Picard series), but 'Star Wars' has been a warning to the faithful: more doesn't necessarily mean good. I haven't loved any of the 'Star Wars' I've seen this century, so much that it's tainted my view of the older films. And 'The Hobbit' so poisoned my view of Middle-Earth that I haven't watched 'The Lord of The Rings' films for many a year, despite them being among my favourites. What Trek really needs is someone like Manny Coto, who both had a strong creative vision for Trek, and one that suited its legacy. Somewhere between the strict, rigorous and disciplined Rick Berman style, and the loose, casual one displayed by those of current Trek, the films and so on. I can't yet really judge Alex Kurtzman (except for his part in the first two Kelvin films), especially as the first season of 'DSC' was designed from the blueprints left behind by Bryan Fuller, a man that on paper would have seemed to be the perfect hand to guide Trek to a new era of success, but in actual fact much of what was changed and created discontent among long-time viewers was down to his mandates. It sounds as if 'DSC' will gradually hew closer to Trek as we know it (such as Klingons having hair again when so much was made about them being bald). I only hope the pendulum effect swings much closer to what I want to see.

Trek is in a good position at the moment, the Prime Universe, if not thriving, ready to burst out when so many said we'd never be going back to that 'tired' old universe. My advice is make what you want to make that you think will bring people in, but don't make Trek what it isn't, in order for people to like it, because eventually it'll turn around, as it has done for some, and become what the people that liked it don't like. And then it needs to change to something to get more people in, and so the cycle continues! Concentrate on its strengths and be careful what you make canon.

Anticipation Rating:

Lower Decks: *
Picard series: ****


The other series' that have yet to be officially confirmed are a Starfleet Academy young adult series (I imagine a 'Smallville' kind of thing), and a miniseries about Khan's reign in exile on Ceti Alpha V, ostensibly with Nicholas Meyer behind it, the man who directed Khan's comeback, 'Star Trek II.' If Meyer is truly involved then there's a chance it could be something worthwhile, though he was paraded as a name behind 'DSC' in its early days and I hear he seemed to vanish from all contribution when the series was released, his involvement still largely undisclosed. I can't imagine it being a good story, just playing off the Khan name, which didn't help 'Star Trek Into Darkness,' it could be argued, but who knows? I'm too old to appreciate Young Adult fare, although if the first two seasons of 'Smallville' were the template it could be good. But I doubt it.

Anticipation Rating:

Khan: **
Starfleet Academy: *


Unrelated to any of this, except very loosely, is seeing pictures of Armin Shimerman back in the Quark makeup after almost twenty years in coverage of a recent convention. It made me warm and happy to see - makeup doesn't age, so (apart from the teeth which didn't look quite right), he was identical to the Quark we knew. And now I really want to see Quark come back in either the Picard series or something else! Genuinely, the character was my favourite of all in Trek, Shimerman's performance an incredible achievement that doesn't get much recognition. Forget Kirk, Spock, Picard, Data, Janeway or Seven of Nine. Quark was always the best!