Groups > rec.arts.startrek.current > #5850 > unrolled thread

Jonathan Frakes BLASTS Star Trek Fans In CYNICAL Starfleet Academy Interview!

Started by	Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>
First post	2026-03-09 04:30 -0400
Last post	2026-03-14 05:59 -0400
Articles	11 on this page of 31 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.startrek.current

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#5869

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2026-03-12 12:44 +1300
Message-ID	<10osupd$1hntc$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#5868

On 2026-03-11 21:15:52 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> Verily, in article <10osjr0$1e2om$1@dont-email.me>, did
> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>> 
>> "Deep Space 9" was okay, except for the silly religious Prophets mumbo-jumbo,
>> but it wasn't the best of the Trek shows of the pre-downfall shows (the
>> downfall started with the ridiculous "Enterprise").
> 
> What's your pick for the best?

I liked both "The Next Generation" and "Voyager", although both had 
their share of silly episodes (including pointless "big red reset 
button" episodes).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5870

From	The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-12 07:25 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.441c6cce397acd35989b5d@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#5869

Verily, in article <10osupd$1hntc$1@dont-email.me>, did 
YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> 
> On 2026-03-11 21:15:52 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> > Verily, in article <10osjr0$1e2om$1@dont-email.me>, did
> > YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> >> 
> >> "Deep Space 9" was okay, except for the silly religious Prophets mumbo-jumbo,
> >> but it wasn't the best of the Trek shows of the pre-downfall shows (the
> >> downfall started with the ridiculous "Enterprise").
> > 
> > What's your pick for the best?
> 
> I liked both "The Next Generation" and "Voyager", although both had 
> their share of silly episodes (including pointless "big red reset 
> button" episodes).

ST:TNG might be my favorite overall. The first year was rough and the 
last couple were a little silly, but the midrange was good IMO. 

Did you watch Star Trek: Lower Decks? It's a comedy, but it does respect 
the canon, and it's set shortly after Voyager's return. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5871

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2026-03-13 10:30 +1300
Message-ID	<10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#5870

On 2026-03-12 11:25:52 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> Verily, in article <10osupd$1hntc$1@dont-email.me>, did
> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>> 
>> On 2026-03-11 21:15:52 +0000, The True Melissa said:
>>> Verily, in article <10osjr0$1e2om$1@dont-email.me>, did
>>> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>>>> 
>>>> "Deep Space 9" was okay, except for the silly religious Prophets 
>>>> mumbo-jumbo, but it wasn't the best of the Trek shows of the 
>>>> pre-downfall shows (the downfall started with the ridiculous 
>>>> "Enterprise").
>>> 
>>> What's your pick for the best?
>> 
>> I liked both "The Next Generation" and "Voyager", although both had 
>> their share of silly episodes (including pointless "big red reset 
>> button" episodes).
> 
> ST:TNG might be my favorite overall. The first year was rough and the 
> last couple were a little silly, but the midrange was good IMO.
> 
> Did you watch Star Trek: Lower Decks? It's a comedy, but it does 
> respect the canon, and it's set shortly after Voyager's return.

I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5873

From	The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-13 08:06 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.441dc7ebf21fb659989b6c@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#5871

Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did 
YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(

Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
decontamination massage. 

Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5875

From	Daniel <me@sc1f1dan.com>
Date	2026-03-13 09:43 -0700
Message-ID	<87ms0bfzn5.fsf@rpi3>
In reply to	#5873

The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> writes:

> Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did 
> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
>> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
>> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(
>
> Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
> decontamination massage. 
>
> Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO. 

I was told the show is good and a final episode seemingly de-cannonized
STD. Not sure if that was said to tempt me. I'm not opposed to watching
it, just hasn't garnered enough interest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5876

From	The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-13 13:06 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.441e0e2c492540ac989b73@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#5875

Verily, in article <87ms0bfzn5.fsf@rpi3>, did me@sc1f1dan.com deliver 
unto us this message:
> 
> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did 
> > YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> >> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
> >> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
> >> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(
> >
> > Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
> > decontamination massage. 
> >
> > Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO. 
> 
> I was told the show is good and a final episode seemingly de-cannonized
> STD. Not sure if that was said to tempt me. I'm not opposed to watching
> it, just hasn't garnered enough interest.

I didn't watch STD, so I don't know. 

Maybe that was another factor in its cancellation. The rumor is that 
Alex Kurtzman cancelled ST:LD because he was frustrated that it had more 
viewers than STD, which he regarded as the serious show. 

It was a reasonable time to cancel it, though. Five good years is long 
enough, and every show gets stale eventually. I just hope they keep 
their promise to make another lighthearted show. 

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5879

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2026-03-14 11:07 +1300
Message-ID	<10p21qh$3l80m$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#5876

On 2026-03-13 17:06:40 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> Verily, in article <87ms0bfzn5.fsf@rpi3>, did me@sc1f1dan.com deliver
> unto us this message:
>> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did
>>> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>>>> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
>>>> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
>>>> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(
>>> 
>>> Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
>>> decontamination massage.
>>> 
>>> Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO.
>> 
>> I was told the show is good and a final episode seemingly de-cannonized 
>> STD. Not sure if that was said to tempt me. I'm not opposed to watching 
>> it, just hasn't garnered enough interest.
> 
> I didn't watch STD, so I don't know.
> 
> Maybe that was another factor in its cancellation. The rumor is that 
> Alex Kurtzman cancelled ST:LD because he was frustrated that it had 
> more viewers than STD, which he regarded as the serious show.
> 
> It was a reasonable time to cancel it, though. Five good years is long 
> enough, and every show gets stale eventually. I just hope they keep 
> their promise to make another lighthearted show.

I don't know about light-hearted, but in terms of animated Star Trek, 
there is "Star Trek: Prodigy" and "Star Trek: Scouts" (webseries aimed 
at preschoolers), but I haven't seen those yet either.

The creator of "Star Trek: Lower Decks" is making a new adult animated 
sci-fi show called "Odd Jobs" for Amazon Prime.
<https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/lower-decks-mike-mcmahan-odd-jobs-sci-fi>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5887

From	The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-14 06:02 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.441efc3cda2bf6c8989b77@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#5879

Verily, in article <10p21qh$3l80m$1@dont-email.me>, did 
YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> 
> On 2026-03-13 17:06:40 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> > Verily, in article <87ms0bfzn5.fsf@rpi3>, did me@sc1f1dan.com deliver
> > unto us this message:
> >> The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did
> >>> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> >>>> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
> >>>> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
> >>>> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(
> >>> 
> >>> Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
> >>> decontamination massage.
> >>> 
> >>> Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO.
> >> 
> >> I was told the show is good and a final episode seemingly de-cannonized 
> >> STD. Not sure if that was said to tempt me. I'm not opposed to watching 
> >> it, just hasn't garnered enough interest.
> > 
> > I didn't watch STD, so I don't know.
> > 
> > Maybe that was another factor in its cancellation. The rumor is that 
> > Alex Kurtzman cancelled ST:LD because he was frustrated that it had 
> > more viewers than STD, which he regarded as the serious show.
> > 
> > It was a reasonable time to cancel it, though. Five good years is long 
> > enough, and every show gets stale eventually. I just hope they keep 
> > their promise to make another lighthearted show.
> 
> I don't know about light-hearted, but in terms of animated Star Trek, 
> there is "Star Trek: Prodigy" and "Star Trek: Scouts" (webseries aimed 
> at preschoolers), but I haven't seen those yet either.

I'm not sure it's happening. The end of ST:LD implies that there will be 
new adventures around Starbase 80, and I'm all set for it, but nothing 
seems to be happening. It was probably shelved. 

I guess we can't have fun while there are messages to be preached. 

 
> The creator of "Star Trek: Lower Decks" is making a new adult animated 
> sci-fi show called "Odd Jobs" for Amazon Prime.
> <https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/lower-decks-mike-mcmahan-odd-jobs-sci-fi> 

That sounds potentially interesting, but it's not worth subscribing to 
Amazon Prime.

-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5878

From	Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Date	2026-03-14 10:55 +1300
Message-ID	<10p2150$3ku8m$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#5873

On 2026-03-13 12:06:54 +0000, The True Melissa said:
 Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did
> YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
>> 
>> I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows 
>> since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first 
>> episode!). So many shows, so little time.  :-(
> 
> Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual 
> decontamination massage.

"5 mins" was just a guesstimate. It was at the idiotic "Oil me up, 
Scotty" scene that I realised the show was simply garbage.



> Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO.

Difficult for it to be worse. "Enterprise" was pure drivel. :-p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5880

From	WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>
Date	2026-03-13 18:12 -0400
Message-ID	<0001HW.2F64C35B006D843370000BD2438F@news.supernews.com>
In reply to	#5878

On Mar 13, 2026, Your Name wrote
(in article <10p2150$3ku8m$1@dont-email.me>):

> On 2026-03-13 12:06:54 +0000, The True Melissa said:
> Verily, in article <10ovb8q$2e0uh$1@dont-email.me>, did
> > YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> > >
> > > I haven't watched "Lower Decks" yet, nor any other Star Trek shows
> > > since "Enterprise" (which I binned after five minutes of the first
> > > episode!). So many shows, so little time. :-(
> >
> > Only five minutes? Then you didn't even get to the sensual
> > decontamination massage.
>
> "5 mins" was just a guesstimate. It was at the idiotic "Oil me up,
> Scotty" scene that I realised the show was simply garbage.

you mean the scene where it’s established that Vulcan females have points 
on their anatomy other than their ears? That was pretty much where I bailed.
>
>
> > Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO.
>
> Difficult for it to be worse.

Lower Decksa was actually pretty good.
> "Enterprise" was pure drivel. :-p

The Mirror Universe episodes were okay. They would be the only Ent epis that 
I watched all the way through. The Evil Empress was worth the wait.

Lower Decks, now, LD was _funny_. And didsn’t take itself seriously.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#5886

From	The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-14 05:59 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.441efb86ba484c8f989b76@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#5878

Verily, in article <10p2150$3ku8m$1@dont-email.me>, did 
YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
> "5 mins" was just a guesstimate. It was at the idiotic "Oil me up, 
> Scotty" scene that I realised the show was simply garbage.

Yeah, that's the one I meant. I think most viewers were taken aback. 

> > Lower Decks is a better watch than Enterprise, IMO.
> 
> Difficult for it to be worse. "Enterprise" was pure drivel. :-p

Enterprise did improve after the first episode. I never really got into 
it, but when I did watch it, it was usually watchable. Still, I just 
didn't get interested in it. 

It might have had more of a chance if it had been *less* tied to ST:TOS. 
Enterprise was always trying to show the origin of what we'd seen on the 
classic show, and it might have benefited from being less prequel and 
more show. 



-- 
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

csiph-web

Jonathan Frakes BLASTS Star Trek Fans In CYNICAL Starfleet Academy Interview!

Contents

#5869

#5870

#5871

#5873

#5875

#5876

#5879

#5887

#5878

#5880

#5886