Q&A

DVD, Short Treks (Q&A)

Watching some of these 'Short Treks' is like having a peek into some alternate universe which is both fascinating and irritating. Many people expressed a desire for a Captain Pike series after his impact in Season 2 of 'DSC,' and perhaps in part due to that response that's exactly what they'll be getting with 'Star Trek: Strange New Worlds' supposedly designed to fill the gap of traditional episodic Trek that has been missing from the slate of current productions which has bloomed from the origins of 'DSC.' In one sense it's exciting to know how many Trek series' are at some level of production or transmission (six at latest count: 'DSC' S3, 'Picard' S2, 'Lower Decks' S1, 'Section 31' S1, 'Prodigy' S1 and 'Strange New Worlds' S1!), with the potential for even more in the distance that we don't know about. I don't include 'Short Treks' in that list because it's more of a side-series, or sub-series as I recently dubbed it - a kind of potential 'sidequel' ground for experimentation. What we wouldn't have given for something like this back in the 90s and 2000s - imagine an episode about Chief O'Brien's first day as Professor at Starfleet Academy, post-'DS9.' Or one of Worf's encounters as Martok's Ambassador. Or how about Seven of Nine meeting her family back on Earth after 'Voyager' return home. The possibilities are truly endless.

Except that now they are endlessly frustrating, just as 'DSC' has been, a reminder of all that has been altered in Trek's DNA to squeeze it into a form that modern demographics would find palatable. Cue the way it feels like we're watching a close, but no cigar alternate universe like something out of 'Parallels.' Because I can imagine what it would have been like to see Spock on his first day aboard the USS Enterprise and how he and Number One might have interacted had they been trapped in a Turbolift shortly after he came aboard. And it's not quite this. The trouble with the modern iteration of Trek is that it's written by people that don't quite speak the patois that is the unique Trek language. It was like that from the beginning of 'DSC' when they first announced the characters and one of them was called Ash Tyler. Tyler? And this is set scant years after 'The Cage,' Trek's only touchstone into the 2250s, the decade previous to 'TOS.' So as a Trekker you automatically assume that that name has meaning because these people must know Trek, right? That's how Trek had always been written, especially in the 2000s when you had people like Mike Sussman and Garfield and Judith Reeves-Stevens on the writing staff. This new guy must be a relation of José Tyler from 'The Cage,' because it makes sense that they'd want to tie in an existing character since that's one of the things that makes Trek so great: it's interwoven tapestry of details and history.

Nope. There's no connection whatsoever, it's a common name, it doesn't matter, it's fine. Except as a Trekker you're left wondering why they specifically went for that name when it has Connotations. And there have been other oversights or lack of understanding in other parts of the unfolding Nu-Universe. Control, the terrible villain (in more ways than one!), of Season 2 'DSC' appeared to be deliberately set up with some connection to the Borg: it 'assimilates' organic beings with the use of nanoprobes, or what look suspiciously like them, even mottling the skin as they take over. The catchphrase was something like, 'Struggle is useless,' too close to 'Resistance is futile' to go unnoticed, and with all the time travel shenanigans (Time Suits, Time Crystals, Time Lollypops, Time Bananas, Time Unicorns… or whatever, like some bad 1950s sci-fi B-picture), many feared this could be the origins of the most fearsome race in Trek history. Fortunately in that case they were either just playing with us or once again completely misreading how Trek works and its visual vernacular. That was a relief, but it showed again that they don't know what they're playing with. And just as this episode reminds that most is inspired by the divisive, non-Prime Universe films that set the tone for Trek's dumbing down and desperate attempts at mainstreaming, with its music style, its visuals, its icky modern speak (and bad language that you don't expect from a classic character), a complete messing up of the era in which they so wanted to be set just so they could play with such characters, yet another little misunderstanding occurs with the title.

It's only a little thing and this shouldn't be taken as any serious breach in Trek etiquette, of course, but if you have a single letter 'Q' in a title it means it's a Q episode, as in the powerful being that caused so much trouble on 'TNG,' 'DS9' and 'Voyager.' Sure, it's a small thing, unimportant to general viewers not versed in the ways of the Trek, but it's also yet another reminder that modern Trek exists in a weird space between being comfortable in what it is and expecting its audience to turn up (people like me would lap it up), and trying to appeal to the Marvel comics film generation that apparently want 'snappy' dialogue and contemporary mannerisms (but then those films are set in our current times, while Trek is a futuristic period piece). So anyway, in alphabetical order we had: 'Q2,' 'The Q and The Grey,' 'Q-Less,' 'QPid,' and 'Q Who?' Why should they stick to the rules of a previous regime? Why indeed, why not simply go into the future and do whatever (as it sounds like Season 3 of 'DSC' will do), 'unbound' from canon as they're so fond of being, as if canon is a burden to escape rather than an opportunity to exploit (funny when they're doing episodes like this!). The why is because that's how you keep Trek consistent, but if you don't care about consistency then you don't need to bother. But if you don't have consistency the fans that love what they see and want to dive deeper into this world, will be disappointed by the obvious cracks - I'm not talking about the episode title now, and I don't just mean the old Trekkers like me, but every new recruit that is impressed by the flashy modern stuff that is much about appearances and so much less about the mechanics on the inside.

Now it could be pointed out that this mini episode is exactly the kind of thing that refutes that argument: that they obviously do care about the past if they're willing to fill it in, and there is a certain amount of fascination in that, as I said at the top, that they are willing to go in this direction, and I think this would have come out before they announced a Pike series. It's funny: I've brought up Walter Koenig's early 2000s comments in Star Trek Magazine before, because he predicted that eventually they'd just remake 'TOS,' and yet they still haven't quite got to that point. I can see it happening with 'Strange New Worlds' where they slowly bring in each of the future main cast with a young Scotty, Uhura, Chekov, etc., and maybe that is indeed the end goal. If so, it's quite a different prospect from the complete reboot that the Kelvin films were, and yet at the same time it's more diabolical in a way, because it's a subtle alteration over many years to get to that same point. To me, the 23rd Century, at least the decade of 'TOS,' should have been left well alone unless they wanted to do the occasional visit and recreate it as it was in the 1960s, which is how Trek dealt with it before. Then, the onus was on creating content and making it great through the issue- and character-driven format that 'TNG' had amped up and 'DS9' and 'Voyager' had run with, while nostalgia for the past was a sweet treat worked in here and there, but they would never have walked over something as sacrosanct as 'TOS' for a permanent series just for the sake of winning ratings.

That's what it's all about, gaining traction in the streaming wars where existing brands are the currency with which to fight. On the face of it so much Trek being made is exciting and gives us much to look forward to, but when it's all just that little (or large), bit 'off,' and actually overwrites the past then, much like 'Star Wars,' it's actually taking away. That's the sad part - as Trekkers we want to see Trek do well, no doubt, we want more of it - absolutely - but if it's at the expense of altering the very base DNA of itself and losing its appeal to us then it would be better if there was no more and it had ended in 2005 and never resurfaced because at least then we'd still have dreams of what it might have been like if Trek came back to TV, those dreams that carried us through so many fallow years. Others are simply happy that any new Trek exists at all because there's always the chance it will better 'synch up' (Kurtzman's favourite expression), with old Trek as time goes on. But it's as simple as seeing the beloved Enterprise sets exploded into some bloated version with a ridiculous widescreen window covering one wall, a complete loss of the sense of what Trek was: a battleship or submarine travelling through the stars protecting its Federation assets, dealing with problems, exploring…

It's the details that matter, the details that make it what it is, no matter how small. No one expects every detail to match up and be correct, but the effort needs to be seen that they are trying as hard as they can instead of being smugly satisfied with beefing everything up for no good reason. Take the Turbolift in which most of this episode takes place - do they use the handles to set it in motion, the way they did on 'TOS,' which is supposed to be the SAME SHIP, don't forget? No, Number One presses a button like a modern day lift, yet the handles are there, they could have used them! So why have the detail if it's not even used? Then there's the ridiculous amount of space within the hull which houses the Turbolifts, a roller-coaster of rails and emptiness that makes a mockery of previous generations' designs. I know we never actually saw within the mechanisms in 'TOS,' but it was irrelevant and left up to our imaginations. And the few times we did see what a Turbolift shaft looked like in other Trek ('TNG's 'Disaster' or 'DS9's 'Crossfire,' for examples), they were solid shafts! These things are upsetting because rather than give us the original Enterprise, which we'd love to see with modern production values (not modern alterations - there's a huge difference!), and we'd love to see more of the ship that we never saw before and have things explained to us that never were before, instead, they lazily throw illogical design and needless busyness that runs against the simple, clean style that has characterised the universe in opposition to so much other sci-fi.

Look, I wasn't really bothered that they'd used 'Q' in the title and yet Q himself never showed up. I didn't expect him to, really (apart from with 'Picard' they haven't been quick to even bring back many guest actors, let alone major, recurring ones, perhaps partly because they don't even make Trek in the same country any more, it's mostly in Canada, so Canadian actors are more likely to be used for simple logistical reasons). It's simply that they don't seem to even realise what they're doing, once again taking so much from the most recent film series (which I hope rests in peace and isn't brought back to life), at the expense of 'true' Trek. You know, the stuff that constitutes 95% of Trek's running time, 700+ episodes and 10 films… I know it became unsuccessful and they want to make it BIG, but it's never going to be what they're competing against. It doesn't have the simplicity of 'Star Wars' and 'Dr. Who,' or the cartoonish comic book-ness of Marvel or DC, and WE DON'T WANT IT TO! If I sound dissatisfied then it's because I am. For much of the short running time I felt this was probably the best 'Short' I'd seen. There are some nice touches, mainly from Ethan Peck who I know actually studied Leonard Nimoy to ape his mannerisms and manner of speech. It made me smile when he first comes aboard and shouts out that he's reporting for doo-TEE in the same unbalanced way that Spock spoke in 'The Cage.' I'd much rather something like that gets through than the vast visual changes, but even then they're playing off 'strictly canon' ideas that are at odds with their loose approach to Trek!

If there was one thing we probably could have accepted it was for an unemotional Spock to appear pre-'Cage' because we know that Nimoy, the Writers, and Directors were all getting to know this alien and hadn't worked him out completely. Nimoy got tighter in his performance as the first season progressed, but the standard Spock of that time is unemotional if less rigid than in 'The Motion Picture.' But they chose to play up the 'mistake' because it is canon, but it's also more in tune with the modern obsession with feelings. But for what it is, I will give Peck applause for his generally very good version of Spock that is so much closer to Nimoy than Zachary Quinto's poor approximation whom the latter seemed to see as a blank slate for him to do whatever he wanted - the difference is, it was, because it's another universe, while this is supposed to be Prime. And yet, and now we come to it, Number One is so snarky and uncontrolled in both body language and voice. She was designed much more Vulcan-like than Spock was originally, so why do they take 'Cage' Spock, but reinvent Number One as so modern and 'sassy.' Wouldn't it have been so much more original for today's audiences to see a restrained and emotionless (not completely, but entirely in control of herself), woman? That annoys me because Number One, for the little we saw of her, was a really interesting character, just as Pike was, and yet both of them have had an attitude makeover that makes it hard to see the original intent shine through (plus, why does this Pike, who is supposed to be pre-'Cage' sport white hair?).

This all adds to the impression that we're seeing through a crack into an alternate universe where things are not as they were. I'd love to have seen Spock beam aboard the Enterprise and meet Number One for the first time (where did he beam from - as usual we don't get exterior views as if they hate space and showing starships!), I'd love to have seen them wandering the 'TOS' sets or getting stuck in the Turbolift having twisted the hand control to start it in motion. I'd love to see a viewscreen instead of a giant window, and the real, accepted, known proportions of the Bridge, in all its glory, because that would be real nostalgia. Or don't do it at all and stick to the far future where you can make up stuff to your heart's content. So many of modern Trek's failures would be lessened if they'd set everything in the 25th Century onwards. I still wouldn't have liked the contemporary, unrestrained speech and attitudes, I still would have baulked at the illogical plot developments and lack of alien cultural exploration, lack of fundamental detail, lack of beauty shots of ships and technology, but at least they wouldn't have been jack-booting all over the original, stomping its face in, in a way that even the Kelvin films didn't achieve. And don't get me wrong, the TV re-imaginings have been far closer to Trek than those films, but it's still a long way off from the comfort food of the 90s, the deep, textured universe I know so well.

I don't know, maybe, as happened with 'Enterprise,' they'll get closer to the spirit of Trek as time goes on, they'll slowly change things to fit, be that uniforms, ships, sets… but it's such a big, expensive job that it seems highly unlikely, if not impossible at this stage. And yet I still feel better about a series that stomps on 'TOS' so brazenly as this than I do about a Section 31 series starring a mass murderer who has no business fronting Trek at all and whom they completely failed to even come close to redeeming in 'DSC,' the only reason her addition had any hope of making sense. I would certainly watch 'Strange New Worlds,' but I wouldn't be too happy. This first episode of 'Short Treks' Season 2 that came out in 2019 is a sort of pilot, except that 'DSC' Season 2 was the real pilot, the experiment to see how viewers would respond, and they did so enthusiastically, generally more than for the existing characters of 'DSC' itself, which highlights a fundamental problem: we want to see traditional 'good' characters, not the teen angst variety, or superheroes that were forced on us with 'DSC.' We don't expect Number One to be donning a super-suit and flying through space blasting asteroids, we expect her to be running the ship efficiently, dealing with the crew, being a support to the Captain, all the things a good First Officer should be doing. I can't tell from this brief visit if that's how the series will be, and she did succeed in irritating even in that short a time when she suddenly starts singing and twirling round Spock. That just isn't the sort of thing you'd expect from a First Officer who wants the respect of a young Ensign just come aboard, it makes her look ditzy and silly.

They could have simply had an adult conversation, but the writers seem to think such things are boring! Have they not watched non-sci-fi dramas? What makes Trek so real is the counterpoint of realistic people that come up against extraordinary circumstances. If you start with wacky, unrealistic Starfleet officers then you're already veering off into fantasy territory as if sci-fi is just another comic book cartoon. If that's what the people want, then that's what they'll get, but that isn't what drew people like me to Trek - I love the formality of so much of it, and you can have fun within that. To strip away that professional sense of a real world military organisation (even if it isn't military, more of a scientific group), loses it its power and uniqueness. At least we finally get confirmation of her real name, Una (pronounced Oona), which had been kicking around for a while as a name for her in the novels, and I think was given in honour of Trek author Una McCormack, which can be seen on her Yeoman's clipboard PADD (a nice touch), and is later spoken by Spock. I don't know why she was so coy about her name, maybe she doesn't like it? One other point of interest is that we hear the Enterprise's computer voice and what a missed opportunity to use Majel Barrett's archive! I believe there was even an 'app' that put together all her vocals from the various Treks so it's not like they couldn't have had easy access, and that would have been a beautiful touch. Either that or get Rebecca Romijn herself to voice it, maybe say she was there for an overhaul of the computer and they chose her voice to represent it. That would have been fun, but I'm not sure they think that deeply about the details. Always the details.

In spite of the discomfiting aesthetics that really put me out of this 23rd Century setting, and the modern speech, it wasn't a bad little exploration, mainly thanks to Peck, and even while I dislike him bursting into laughter or smirking too much, he still captures much of the character (in fairness, Nimoy's Spock often had a slight wryness on his face, but if only they'd follow such nuance slavishly in all things instead of picking and choosing like they do, which would give us a sense that the direction of things was heading unequivocally canon-ward, and we're still missing the quizzical raising of an eyebrow that was his hallmark). I just wish this anti-Vulcan sentiment was portrayed onscreen as it used to be, with human characters often teasing or disliking such an attitude, but the Vulcans stoically ignoring all external pressures, instead of the sentiment being in the writing itself where it's like Vulcans don't really behave that unemotionally most of the time, they're cool guys just like us, yeah? No, they're different and they need to be different and they need to be accepted as different - Number One makes some point about the importance of diversity, but then she puts down his Vulcan control to a need to fit in, and it's completely the wrong attitude: in Trek there are different alien cultures, and this is what sometimes causes conflict because they aren't attuned to the ways of their shipmates and vice versa: A-L-I-E-N (see 'The Galileo Seven' on 'TOS' or 'Learning Curve' on 'Voyager' for perfect examples of both difference and integration!). I didn't appreciate that attempt at simplifying or dismissing Spock's Vulcan heritage here.

I knew there was going to be a lot to write about this one because far from being some unimportant little knockabout as most of the previous 'Short Treks' have been, this was actually a 'moment' in Trek history, a part of a key character's life changing. For all that I didn't feel much portentousness in his appearance on Enterprise. There was much to discuss and now it's done. It was an episode I knew less about than the first season and so I have more interest in seeing these. I don't expect to like any of them as such, since I like roughly two episodes out of these first thirty-four episodes in the third generation of Trek's existence, but I'm at least intrigued. Like 'The Escape Artist' I would say this is the most watchable, and 'best' if that's a word that can be used for things you don't much respect. At least they're only fifteen minutes rather than fifty, so there's less heartache than there would be. Maybe I'm a sucker for buying into all this modern stuff, which even though they claim is 'canon,' is 'Prime,' and 'synchs up,' clearly doesn't quite fit, even in the closest attempts. How I long for the halcyon says of 'Enterprise' Season 4 where little 'mistakes' from 'TOS,' such as the authority sending out Kirk's ship said to be 'UESPA' when they hadn't come up with Starfleet, or forgot they had, were retconned into cleverly being another organisation. Any creases in canon were being ironed out rather than ignored or misapplied. As ever, it's something to write about, so there's that plus point at least. But I would like to see some new Trek that I actively like, if not love. Impossible? I still await 'Picard'… Oh, and please, you don't need to do zany little animations on the title, just show it and be done, what is so wrong with taking Trek seriously?

**