Moreover, much of the buzz around the first two seasons of Strange New Worlds has been positive. The show has been praised for its deepening of underdeveloped classic characters like Dr. M’Benga and Number One, for its reframing of Original Series concepts (see the season one finale, “A Quality of Mercy”), and for returning exploration to the heart of Trek. Heck, we even liked the “Sybok” name drop.
Then came season 3. Perhaps because of the confines of a modern 10-episode season, perhaps because of a desire to recreate the viral moments from season 2, season 3 swung wildly between goofy comedy and abject horror. “What Is Starfleet?” raised big questions that had always plagued the franchise and answered none of them, patting itself on the back the entire way, while “A Space Adventure Hour” made fun of Star Trek itself. “Four-and-a-Half Vulcans” had none of the fun of “Spock Amok,” while the finale “New Life and New Civilizations” raised the stakes to the point that the Enterprise was fighting the actual Devil and then hand-waved the resolution.
We could tell things were off early on, with the introduction of Dana Gamble, a young medical officer played by Chris Myers. Gamble is kind, enthusiastic, and smart, everything an ideal Starfleet officer should be. Which is why, of course, his eyes explode, he screams in pain and terror, and then gets possessed by the Devil to be the season’s big bad.
These complaints aren’t that Strange New Worlds isn’t real Trek, or that we don’t like the race or gender or sexuality of main characters. These are complaints about mechanics and tone, the fundamentals of storytelling. When fans complain that the stories feel sloppy, that they don’t give sufficient attention to the high stakes they raise or that they rely on jokes that make the characters seem dumb, they point to fundamental problems in the construction of the episode.
To dismiss the complaints by comparing the writer’s room to the Enterprise bridge crew and saying, “we have each other’s backs,” as Wolkoff does in the interview, suggests that jumping to warm feelings instead of dealing with the nuts and bolts of a problem isn’t just a storytelling choice.
Wolfkoff does admit that there are “some criticisms in season 3 that I took to heart,” but he doesn’t say which ones. And certainly, he’s just one voice in the room, a room filled with other writers whom he doesn’t, and shouldn’t, want to throw under the bus in this interview. But to disregard legitimate complaints and insist that everything’s fine because the people who make the show get along… well, that’s just as useless to Star Trek as endless complaining.
