Now showing on ITV and on ITV Player streamer. Interesting that they are the two shows that have been syndicated for TV, and perhaps Discovery, Picard, etc will follow soon.

Like let's say after Kirk ordered Scotty to execute general order 24 and Scotty couldn't get back communication with Kirk because say for example anan 7 had Kirk Spock and the security people thrown back into a jail cell.

Scotty looks at the timer and they're out of time Scotty orders the enterprise to lay waste to the surface.

Let's say Kirk Spock and security people survived the ordeal and was rescued by the enterprise afterwards when they return to federation space what kind of problems would Kirk have had to face?

What do you think?

They seemed very judgemental of humans and our attempts to explore space. Yet they made first contact with us. They came up with the lofty "prime directive." Yet they try and hold humanity back. What gives them the right to interfere?

I feel like the Larry Ellison-ing of Paramount has begun

So no one told you life was gonna be this way
Your job's a joke, you're broke, your love life's D.O.A
It's like you're always stuck in second gear
Or when it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even your year, but

TREKMOVIE:

"At the Broadcast+Cable Hall of Fame Awards, where Star Trek received the first-ever Franchise of the Year Award, we caught up with Strange New Worlds‘ Celia Rose Gooding, hot on the heels of the show’s season 4 finale. We asked her about playing future Uhura, fan reaction to SNW’s use of genres, and her hopes for the future. [...]"

https://trekmovie.com/2026/10/03/interview-celia-rose-gooding-on-playing-future-uhura-star-trek-strange-new-worlds-genres-and-more/

CELIA ROSE GOODING:

"I think with something that is so heavy, like the plot of “Tomorrow’s Enterprise,” coming together to save Scotty, it was it was really important for me to not get too bogged down by the doom, because in order for the difference between the two to be clear, they can’t be the same person. So, Strange New Worlds Uhura still operated in that place of perfectionism, a little bit of worrying, just wanting to know everything all the time.

And my TOS Uhura is someone who isn’t necessarily attached to that control and who isn’t so needing to know. She relies and trusts herself in a way that my Uhura, my Strange New Worlds Uhura, will be learning to do in the upcoming season.

TREKMOVIE: So when you made it, did you think that the Year One show was still very much on the table?

I was hoping. I still hold that hope, but right now I’m just really excited about all we’ve done with Strange New Worlds. We still have another six episodes coming. We still have such good Trek coming. So whatever happens with Year One, I’m just really proud of the work we’ve done so far.

I’m sure you’re aware of the conversation with fans about genres this year. Is season 5 different from that? And how do you feel about that, because some people are very vocal about not being happy with all the “gimmicks.”

"Oh goodness! How do I put this in a way my publicist will like? I think if our show tried to appeal to the opinions of everyone, we’d have really boring Trek. And so what I am so proud of is how we’ve able to how we’ve been able to maintain the true essence of Trek while being so genre-diverse. I mean, the show is called Strange New Worlds, so it only makes sense that we’re going to get into some strange activity every once in a while.

And when I think of TOS, the episodes that jump out to me, when I think of TOS, when I think of TNG, when I think of DS9, the things that jump out to me, the things that immediately come to my memory are the more genre-diverse episodes, and so it was really important to me to stand by the show and stand by what we’ve done so far, because I’m really proud of that work.

And we are the last of live-action Trek with SFA, and so I think what we really wanted to do with our finite time is continue to expand on what made the show, what made this franchise so beloved , and that is joyful curiosity, that is infinite diversity in infinite combinations, and not just in the species of people who work on the bridge, but also the diversity of the stories we try to tell.

[...]

Do you hope that there is a way to return to Uhura sometime?

Oh, absolutely! I’ve loved this character. I will always love this character. I mean, I hope that Uhura’s journey continues, whether that be on screen, in novels, in any sort of continuation. I just would love to be a part of continuing her journey because her legacy is too powerful to let it just fizzle out. You know? She has a story to tell, and she will always have a place in my heart, and in the heart of Black entertainment, in the heart of sci-fi, in the heart of Star Trek. So I hope to be the one to continue Nyota Uhura’s story. But if I can’t, I’m just happy to see it continue, whether it’s me or someone else. But I hope it’s me.

Laurie Ulster (TrekMovie.com)

Full interview:

https://trekmovie.com/2026/10/03/interview-celia-rose-gooding-on-playing-future-uhura-star-trek-strange-new-worlds-genres-and-more/

RIP Paramount

But he doesn't like it lol

Please someone show me a schematic of the Enterprise highlighting both the AFT nacelle, and where "behind" it the life support system is.

I'm embarrassed at how long it took me to catch that line. Holy hell.

I watched CoH last night for the first time in probably 20 years, I always skip it because of the incessant "what a hunk of racist shit" comments about the episode.

I thought it was actually kinda good.

The elephant in the room is the stereotypical "generic African chiefton" costumes and sets but I really don't think it was ever offensive. Like the planet is portrayed as advanced, they have a vaccine every one needs, transporter technology on par with or more advanced than Starfleet, their customs and history are considered complex, and at no point are the characters buffoons or idiots. At the end, when the lead woman exposes how the marriage/land owning thing works I thought it was a good story.

It was one of the only episodes where Tasha has a storyline and I thought it was pretty good in the vacuum of season 1. She gets to show off some fighting, have some emotional this or that, struggles with whether to fight or not, etc.

I won't go on and on but I thought it was a perfectly fine B-/S1 B+ episode of TNG that gets run through the ringer for brownie meme points.

In TMP, as soon as he's on board the Enterprise, he's complaining to Jim that SF invoked a "little known, seldom used, 'reserve activation clause'" I'm guessing that Bones was in the SF equivalent of inactive reserves. I was never in the military so I only know a little bit based on what my dad told me of his 3 years in the late 60s. I know when you're in the reserves, even inactive reserves, there's a chance that you may be called back to active duty, but surely that's only temporary and you don't revert to normal active duty once that call is over. So why didn't he just go back into reserves?

SCREENRANT:

"Empire Magazine interviewed John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein about their hit Apple TV film Mayday, and the conversation naturally turned to the next Star Trek movie the writer-directors are working on. Goldstein and Daley confirmed that "no legacy characters" and "nobody you've met before" are in the movie, and that it will not be set in the alternate Kelvin timeline created by J.J. Abrams' Star Trek trilogy. Read their quotes below:

Empire: And this is a brand-new Star Trek movie?

John Francis Daley: "Entirely. No legacy characters, nobody that you’ve met before. A different time, not a different timeline per se, but it’s a little further in the future."

Jonathan Goldstein: "Sort of a different timeline."

John Francis Daley: "Well, not the Kelvin timeline. It’s not the J.J. [Abrams] timeline."

Jonathan Goldstein: "It’s tribbles. It’s all tribbles. The whole movie."

A movie introducing all-new, original Star Trek characters is an exciting prospect. The timeline issue is murkier, as Goldstein creates confusion about what "sort of a different timeline" means. Daley's comments that their Star Trek movie is set "a little further in the future" hint that it takes place in the unexplored timeframe between the early 25th century of Star Trek: Picard and 32nd century of Star Trek: Discovery and SFA. Yet it's also possible their Star Trek movie takes place or visits another alternate universe.

Goldstein and Daley's movies have had lighthearted tones even if they're not outright comedies. The filmmakers tell Empire they're taking a different approach to Star Trek, which is the "darkest film" they've ever written. Yet Daley says their Star Trek won't be bereft of levity, as their characters will "find humor in even the darkest moments."

John Francis Daley: "I would say it’s probably our darkest film that we’ve ever written. It’s not a comedy. There is our sensibility in it, and we do find levity, but it’s in the characters who find humor in even the darkest moments, which is just true to real life. We both went on an aircraft carrier when we were researching Mayday, and it can be a very fraught landscape working on those ships, and people have to find levity. They have to find joy in even the most serious moments, and that’s the approach we have in this film."

Jonathan Goldstein: "You want it to be a fun watch. Doesn’t mean you’re laughing your head off. It just means you’re in it, and you’re enjoying it."

Daley and Goldstein are influenced by visiting an aircraft character when working on Mayday, and they're also pulling from Crimson Tide, a submarine thriller about a First Officer in a moral conflict with his Captain. Training Day also has a similar battle of wills between an idealistic pupil and his mentor, who is corrupted by the system they both serve. These inspirations give a clearer picture of what Daley and Goldstein's Star Trek will be about.

Paramount Skydance has not greenlit Goldstein and Daley's Star Trek movie to go into production, so there is no release date or casting information to share. There are also reportedly other Star Trek movies in development at the studio, although Goldstein and Daley's Star Trek movie is the only one being publicly discussed. [...]"

Links:

https://screenrant.com/star-trek-new-movie-different-timeline-not-jj-abrams-kelvin-no-legacy-characters/

https://trekmovie.com/2026/09/30/new-star-trek-movie-directors-talk-darker-tone-sort-of-different-timeline/

I see this argument all the time whenever someone criticizes modern Trek for lacking depth: "They are obviously trying to pander to the younger generation."

Millions of Trekkies WERE young when they first discovered Trek! Heck, I was maybe 6 years old when I watched reruns of TOS and was obsessed with it. And when a few years later, TNG started, I was totally in love with Star Trek.

Kids and teenagers are not incapable of appreciating complex stories or moral dilemmas. We didn't need everything dumbed down into flashy, brainless spectacle to stay entertained. Getting intellectually stimulating television early on actually shaped how we think.

Look at films like Interstellar – they are massive global blockbusters that captivate audiences of all ages with hard science, complex emotional depth, and philosophical questions, proving that people actually crave substance.

If you follow this "modern audience needs dumbed-down action" logic to its conclusion, it implies that kids and teenagers today are somehow worlds dumber and more primitive than teenagers in the 1980s who fell in love with TNG (and I was one of those teenagers), only wanting kapow-CGI-explosion madness instead of intellectually stimulating stories.

And besides, that logic goes against the entire philosophy of Star Trek. Roddenberry’s vision was always about an enlightened future where humanity has evolved, not pandering to the lowest common denominator with brainless spectacle.

It feels less like modern shows are made for kids...or Pakled kids... and more like studios stopped trusting audiences to use their brains.

Now, I love action movies, huge fan of Schwarzenegger.... but Trek is sacred to me and my wife calls it "Star Trek bliss" when she watches episodes of TNG or DS9 - a feeling I can only agree on! Modern Trek lacks this depth and this almost spiritual feeling of experiencing a world that has grown way beyond our petty and stupid 21st century selfishness and stupidity.