On top of that, the Ellison regime didn't change the personnel directly in charge of CBS Studios (though they did change the people in charge of Paramount+, which is also relevant).
There's also the lingering question of Kurtzman himself. He signed a five-year extension...five years ago. Not a peep regarding a renewal.
Time travel's been outlawed by the Temporal Accords, so I hope not - someone could be in a lot of trouble.
I would imagine people are more uncomfortable with the "standing and chanting" aspect - you definitely can't argue that those aren't Starfleet values with a straight face.
I know what you mean.
I was thinking about it, though, in the context of the post-Burn setting. A lot of these kids probably didn't grow up with a strong sense of any of those things, so maybe it makes sense to be pushing those values pretty hard.
This is in no way a defense of the new owners (they're bad), but the bribe was made by the old owners (they were also bad).
Even a broken clock...
I agree with all of your examples but Harry, and I think it's meaningful that the rest are mainly...well, cadets.
This is something that Star Trek has always explored.
Sure, but there's at least potential here to give it a more in-depth treatment.
I'm a lot more interested in the way the 32nd century setting plays into it all.
That's really not how it works. One show doesn't exist at the expense of another, or in this case four others.
Either that or the math teacher. Could go either way.
Captain Rand, reporting for duty!
ohhhh now i get it
What's wrong with comedies?
Star Trek has a long history of comedy episodes, and arguably even a film, depending on how you feel about "The Voyage Home".
Comedy and morality certainly aren't mutually exclusive.