“Ad Astra Per Aspera”

Started a bit slow, became really compelling in the second act, got a tad sappy when Una revealed she had turned herself in, then got interesting again when the Vulcan prosecutor turned his sights on Pike.

Do they really use hardcover law books in the 23rd century? I just (successfully) sued in small claims court and discovered those books are little-used even now, as the statutes are all online.

Overall, good episode, a step up from last week. 3 stars.

Yo that fuckin sucked. Terribly on-the-nose script with no room for analogy, overcooked direction that radically shifted tone on a whim (what the fuck even was the Gilbert and Sullivan beat?), and a terribly manipulative score. The characters felt distressingly hollow for an episode this early in the season, and I was praying the entire time for a classic 44 min cut.

I’m truly for Star Trek being as progressive as all hell, but this just felt pedantic and limp. Not the way to do it.

Probably worst SNW yet

Loved the episode, especially during a PRIDE month.

So yeah, some of the stuff might have been a bit on the nose and the applause at the end from the crew for the lawyer was a bit too much, but I don't care. The heart of the show is in its right place and that's what truly matters.

*** 1/2 from me

Samuel T Cogley would be proud.

An excellent episode. Yes, some of it felt a bit sappy or cliche (e.g., the crew nearly engaged in a slow clap), and I suspect there are plenty of nits to pick with regard to the procedures of the trial (e.g., should asylum not have been sought prior to applying to Starfleet), but the monologuing compares to some of the best in Star Trek's catalogue of trial episodes and the commentary was on point. Credit to Yetide Badaki as Neera too; she was great.

Favourite little moment: Ortegas and Dr. M'Benga assessing Vulcan body language from afar.

@AMA
"e.g. should asylum not have been sought prior to applying to Starfleet"
this is one of the points I feel a bit of disappointed towards ....it was not really explored in this episode.
But I strongly believe, that it was only beneficial, if not the decisive factor for Una to have a years long flawless service record. In a Season 1 Episode she implies in her perspnal log that she probably only got of the hook in the discussion with Pike because she is "one of the good ones".

Following that train of thought, its very probable that a scrawny no name girl with no big value (yet) to show to the federation society would have been denied asylum ... of course this is terrible (that only asylum seekers that are perceived as promising ... productive ..."valuable" are accepted) and that whole theme deserves its own episode.

I don't get the "too on the nose" criticisms. Is there any "subtle" way to deal with bigotry? Farce? Satire? Allusion? Screw that. Meet it head on. If viewers are upset by the message that says more about their prejudice than the story, and they need to hear it. This episode was in line with the longstanding ethos of the franchise. Is it as good as say, Measure of a man? Perhaps not, but how could it, the question there was a classic.sci-fi trope about the rights of AI, which we have never really had to face, and there the moral position ground of the Federation was less well defined. In this case, two conflicting real world issues were on display, the terrifying possibilities of eugenics (which led in real life to the Nazi belief in a master race and the Holocaust, and issue of immigrants seeking refuge and a better life. I'll take what the shownhad to say anyday.

The Glibert and Sullivan reference was a callback to the *Short Treks* episode "Q & A" that showed Spock and Una's first meeting. Go watch it, it's funny.

No, we don't use codex books in law even today, but I thought Una's lawyer pulling one out was clearly her using a prop to make her point more visceral. I also think it was supposed to be a reference to Kirk's eccentric lawyer in "Court Martial."

I sometimes have trouble with courtroom episodes because I can't help but critique them on their legal accuracy, but this one eventually won me over. Uhura standing up to La'an was a highlight for me. I think they're doing great things with her.

Holy shizzballs that was great. Perhaps the best Trek episode since the end of DS9.

Sure, the metaphors hit with a sledgehammer here. However, sledgehammer allegory is part and parcel of the Trek formula going back to TOS. The episode tried hard to make me feel a feeling, but you know what, it worked in spades, with so many excellent scenes of dialogue between characters that are surprisingly well-established given we only have one season with them (plus a few bits and bobs, like the callback to the Short Trek Q&A).

As on-the-nose as the critiques were here, I liked that they didn't make the prejudice against augments either a one-to-one allegory for racial prejudice or queer issues, but instead blended these together and threw some other things in as well, allowing it to be a "message" episode about prejudice more generally. I also liked that they intimated that Una and the lawyer lady may have been more than friends, but didn't make it explicit as well. The reasons behind the hurt don't matter, just that it was there.

Do I have any critiques? Sure, but they mostly come down to how nonsensical the whole idea of a "ban" on augmentation is. First, it makes no sense how Earth was able to muscle its own feelings on genetic augmentation onto all of the other races in Starfleet (and to a lesser extent the Federation). It also makes little sense how they treat genetic augmentation here - as if it's something that needs to be redone every generation, instead of something that passes down to your children. In both cases, I can overlook this, however, as it's really an issue with how Trek has badly depicted the subject in the past, which couldn't be fixed without tremendous retcons to continuity. You literally couldn't do this story otherwise, and I think Trek is better for having made this statement, here and now.

Four stars.

I LOVED this episode.

When I was a child and watched TOS and TNG for the first time I remember how I was amazed by those Starfleet crews who come from so many different backgrounds and who worked together for a good cause. I really shaped my worldview. And this episode brought all those memories back through Una’s story.

And on top of that comes an allegory about the struggles that minorities (still) face today.

Classic Star Trek.

Random sidenotes:
- those dress uniforms look *chef’s kiss*
- the same goes for Neera’s dresses and the dress of her assistant. I’m a guy and I’m envious of those dresses. :D
- I really like how everyone has slightly different hairstyles every now and then. Captain Batel styled her hair in three (or even four?) different ways in this episode alone. It feels so much more realistic than what everyone having the same hairstyle for years or even for the entire series, like it has often been the case for previous Treks.

I guess this was SNW's The Measure of a Woman then. The outcome of Una's trial was never in doubt but I enjoyed the ride all the same.

I'm not sure we needed the flashback cuts to Una's testimony to show us why she eligible for asylum, especially because it got spelled out again moments later. Other than that a well paced, exciting episode and that's hard to do with court dramas.

That was excellent.

"Ghosts of Illyria" was the only episode of season 1 that didn't really land for me, and at the time I thought it was because the real interest to be mined out of that story wasn't the bog-standard medical mystery / ship in jeopardy plot, but a deeper exploration of *why* Una was keeping secrets for so long.

Well now I got what I wanted, and damn if it wasn't Trek's best courtroom drama since "The Drumhead". It had it all: grand speeches, emotional stakes, political stakes, the hint of foul play behind-the-scenes. As has become par for the course with this show, every member of the ensemble got moments to shine while the plot ticked along. I particularly appreciated Uhura's refusal of La'an's request to examine the personal logs, and M'Benga's expertise with Vulcans.

Notably absent was the show's tendency towards lighthearted humour, which was a well-judged decision by the writers when dealing with such weighty subject matter.

Rebecca Romijn finally got her acting showcase in a way that "Ghosts of Illyria" didn't really deliver, and I think she knocked it out of the park. Number One is a pretty buttoned-down character, and like a Spock or Seven Of Nine, it's all about the nuances, and Romijn played it to perfection.

SNW's best episode so far? I think I still might give it to "Memento Mori", but that's a really close call.

@SlackerInc - I think the hard-copy book was purely for courtroom theatrics, which worked!

@Andrew - I don't agree with most of your criticisms, but I will concede the score was a little overbearing. I'm thinking particularly during the scene when her crewmates testified in her defence.

Okay this rivals A Quality of Mercy as the best episode of the show so far big time. Easy 4 stars.

Finally, the long-awaited trial of Una. Not only was it a consisted plot point through season 1, but it is a common and beloved plot typified by the classic Star Trek era. It is unfortunate, however, that this particular trial would prove to be among the least substantive and sappy portrayals of that theme in the Star Trek canon. Let me explain.

The problem of genetic modification has been deeply embedded into star trek lore, easily being the longest controversial topic of the series (spanning even to TOS). This topic, therefore, has a layered history. From Noonien-Singh to Bashir, we have had many opportunities to learn about how Star Trek approaches genetic modification. So, once this episode aired, I was eager to see a new perspective on the aspect of culpability. In other words, how do we treat those who rather than choosing their modification had it thrust upon them by another authority? We got to see said implications with Bashir (his father took the blame and Julian got to keep his commission). Una’s situation proved similar. She was not culpable for her condition because it was “tradition” that her race would genetically modify itself. With all of this fascinating pretext, we walk into an episode capable of contributing to this 55-year long conversation.

What we find, however, is a writer desperate for relevance, having found the genetics issue a fertile ground, able to be twisted mercilessly to cater to contemporary issues. I have no problem if Star Trek wants to address contemporary issues in civil litigation and human rights – have at it! But when you have to kill the lore to do it, why even mediate it through the Star Trek universe? The parts that were the most interesting in this episode were glazed over, while the fluff remained center stage. I would have loved to know more about Illyrian tradition and why they genetically modify their children. I would have loved to hear more conversation about where Star Fleet can draw its lines to best accommodate situational culpability – perhaps accepting those who can verify that they were modified before an appropriate age of culpability (while punishing the parties that subjected said individual) and rejecting those who modify themselves fully aware of the law. Most of Neera’s (Yetide Badaki) case was attacking a law that subjected specific populations to what should be unlawful discrimination. This is where the episode should have planted its flag. The horrors laid out by Una as she recounted her childhood set the stage for a contextual and lore-rich issue with which to deal. Star Fleet needed to be better about how this law was applied. The law itself was right – the eugenics wars were an atrocity that almost brought ruin to the human race, and history has a tendency to repeat itself. The problem was with its over application – no willingness to delineate between those born modified and those who modify themselves later in life (the latter being very much illegal, as Neera would agree, since she herself would not contend the purpose for inhibiting genetic modification). The intricacies of this debate therefore dismantles the approach – much to a Star Trek Novice’s chagrin – to render this episode about matters like sexuality and gender unless you would consent that both can be modified at the will of the subject. The “analogy” falls short. Overall, I do not believe this episode is well written. It is as though it came from someone who never saw the past 55 years of Star Trek content and googled “Star Trek Lore”, subsequently writing the episode while looking at a Wikipedia article.

Yes, that was a little harsh, and I apologize. I simply dislike seeing a storyline as rich as the Eugenics issue trampled and twisted because the writing team thought “Oh shoot, we need to start incorporating contemporary issues.” And yes, I believe they should, but not if it means dismantling the lore of the universe in which you are building. This would be akin to building the 30th floor of a skyscraper strictly with materials from the first floor. The integrity of the building becomes compromised. Discovery avoided this by jumping hundreds of years into the future, and therefore allowing a (mostly) clear slate for worldbuilding (Do not mistake this for affection. Discovery after season 2 was a steaming pile of trash).

To sum up, Star Trek: Strange New Worlds has been a refreshing return to the priorities and vision of Roddenberry and Pillar, and I have thoroughly enjoyed both seasons thus far. However, this episode was the first to worry me, as I am not one who is kind to witnessing the dismantling of well-established lore for the sake of remaining relevant. The beauty of Star Trek in the past has been its ability to blend wonderful, illustrious, and deep content with lasting relevance. The contemporary trend – as evidenced in this episode – is to blend fluffy, superficial content with relevance, which does a disservice to the agenda. Do you want your message to be heard? Create something truly beautiful, artistic, and airtight. Don’t create a flashy, superficial statement piece with the name Star Trek slapped on it.

It was just ok. Too many speeches and a foregone conclusion as well as a climax lacking in logic. Why on earth would Una put Pike's career on the line with an admission. It just seems out of character for a loyal officer and friend. Trek has done courtroom and augment stories much better than this. See "Court Martial", "Measure of a Man", "The Drumhead", "Death Wish", and don't forget about "Dr. Bashir I Presume" which featured a similar dilemma. "Your honor, Starfleet was founded to seek out new life: well, there it sits!", this isn't.

Una clearly felt like she had no choice but to answer the question. She can't invoke somebody else's right against self-incrimination. In most real trials, the defense attorney would have objected to the relevancy of the question about Pike, and it would have been sustained. I was very puzzled as to why Neera didn't object, but at the end I realized that she needed to get Pike's knowledge on the record to make the asylum claim stick. Smart, if risky, lawyering on her part.

@Andy G - Una was hooked up to a lie detector. She didn't really have a choice in answering the question honestly.

@JJ46 - I don't think I agree with your contention that this was "fluffy, superficial content", and the parallels that Neera was drawing with past cases of human civil rights discrimination were absolutely key to her argument. If the prosecution is hinging their case on "she broke the law, she's guilty" and the evidence for that law-breaking is airtight, then she had no choice but to go after the law itself. She says as much in her opening statement: "A law does not make something just".

Those kinds of statements and arguments will always be relevant, in my view. Timeless, even.

I don't think this has "trampled" the Eugenics Wars lore at all. If anything, it's been the best examination of the after-effects of that conflict that we've yet seen from a Star Trek show. Just the idea of the Illyrians themselves has been a fascinating addition to the canon.

Like you, I hope to see more of their culture explored in this show. I'm not convinced this episode was the best place to do it, given the story we got instead, which I thoroughly enjoyed. I do have faith that it will come back around again, though - the SNW writers have thus far demonstrated a very good ability to manage story threads across multiple episodes.

To each their own, however!

NO DAMMIT so disappointing..where are the Strange NEW WORLDS and NEW ALIENS or ANOMALIES and AWE and WONDER..I don't care about this legal society political augments crap..it feels like Ds9..why couldn't they at least have a subplot with new aliens kr a new world..2 episodes already wasted with no new aliens or exploration of new worlds or anomalies..sigh..

Strange New Worlds and the Orville crib notes from each other again - this time, this feels like SNW's attempt to do a big message episode a la "A Tale of Two Topas"/"About A Girl". Not quite as great as the former, but still very welcome, and probably the best episode of the series so far.

Over at trekmovie, the review of this episode has commenters upset that the Federation grants asylum because asylum and immigration are weakening society (their argument, not mine) -- plus two people wishing last week's episode had been completely rewritten so Uhura got her comeuppance for being uppity to the white IT guy. And these are Star Trek fans.

So, whether too on the nose or not, episodes like this are important. And we clearly still have a long way to go.

@Leif BTW, I keep hearing this gripe about exploration. When was Trek ever about exploring anomalies etc? There's always been conflict and moral dilemmas. Look at TOS: they're often responding to a distress call at an established colony or a research station.

In my head-canon, until it is stated otherwise definitively, the hospital that Jules Bashir was taken to on Adigeon Prime was an Illyrian hospital. Perhaps the Illyrians are one of the few species in the quadrant who did suffer drastic social consequences from their development of advanced genetics.

I thought the episode had some great character beats. Each scene told us something about the people onscreen, rather than just moving the plot along. I was a bit shocked by Spock's outburst, however. ;)

It was no "Measure of a Man" when it comes to the trial, though. The "deeper magic, still" method of resolution was pretty throw-away; not contrary to the "federation character", but still uninteresting. But it still gave us great character moments; Singh's white lies, Una's dedication to being truthful. As a story, it wasn't great, but it was terrific at the character level.

"Yo that fuckin sucked."

Sure, whatever you say, broseph.

Anyway, this wasn't an action episode -- it's a courtroom episode -- and it moved like one, appropriately. Not going to ding it for being slow paced.

We all knew it was going to end with her being freed, but it was going to take something interesting to see how they get there without spoiling future episodes involving augments.

And I think they pulled it off quite nicely. It felt earned, honestly. This is was a resolution that actually resolves the situation, grows the character, answers several questions, and doesn't diminish the stakes going into it to make it happen.

*** 3/5

As an academic ethicist, I found this episode revolting. There is a widespread and very deep opposition to most forms of genetic engineering among philosophers that write about and study the subject.
To compare that opposition to (particularly racial) bigotry is not only illogical, it is perversely ironic given the racist underpinnings of many historical Western eugenics programs. Notably, opposition to genetic engineering comes from many different schools of thought: feminist, liberal, conservative, queer theory, etc.

As with most issues, it is reasonable to have differing views on genetic engineering of sentient life. This episode did not do that. I generally like SNW, it it really seems like the writers here specifically wanted to continue Picard & Discovery's bizarre compulsion to take a dump all over the Federation.

Well, they really picked the wrong policy to go after this time.

I actually thought this was a decent episode. Even if we leave the value of the message on the table , things progressed.. uh, reasonably? Perhaps I'm just rationalizing my joy at a SERIOUS episode.

I'm a bit troubled by comments from @AP and @Jack, or maybe that general sentiment. How does suggesting something is "too on the nose" reflect latent bigotry of the speaker? And latent is implied, because there is no manifest bigotry in that observation at all. It is simply stating the long-realized idea that moral messages land better when the writer's intent is muted in the service of story. And how does the modern need for a message, i.e. "still work to do", reflect any evaluation of a story about it? It doesn't, and shouldn't.

It is tempting to bring down a firewall between message and story, and say that moral value and story quality should be independent / orthogonal. Not entirely. If part of the fictional work's intent is to send this moral message, then evaluating whether it is accomplished is fair game. The moral valence of the message is the irrelevant part.

I didn't think this episode was "too on the nose", but to suggest that this observation reflects bigotry without evidence is absurd on its face.

@Dom

“As an academic ethicist, I found this episode revolting. There is a widespread and very deep opposition to most forms of genetic engineering among philosophers that write about and study the subject.
To compare that opposition to (particularly racial) bigotry is not only illogical, it is perversely ironic given the racist underpinnings of many historical Western eugenics programs. Notably, opposition to genetic engineering comes from many different schools of thought: feminist, liberal, conservative, queer theory, etc.”

Yeah except all that shit ignores that this show takes place in a fictional universe set hundreds of years in the future.

Try not sounding so outdated in your overly literal self important thought process.

When she was talking with Neera, did La'an admit she was genetically engineered too? I'm a bit confused by that. She's a descendant of Khan, but I was under the impression she was not genetically augmented and her line diverged before Khan became genetically engineered. Can anyone offer any clarity?

Overall I liked the episode, even though, hemmed in by continuity, we knew the resolution wouldn't be as grand and sweeping for changing the outlook of the Federation the way we like to believe the Federation, as such an enlightened society, adapts itself to better correct injustice when shown an injustice in need of correction. In short: unlike Measure of Man, the resolution could not be "okay genetically engineered people are allowed now."

So I appreciate the asylum argument. I may have gone with something like . . . the definition of genetic engineering being different if every member of the species does it or some kind of interpretation of the Prime Directive offering protection to individuals of such a society if not that society's institutions. I don't know exactly.

I liked that Una's history with Neera was just as vague as Kirk's with any of the random female guest stars of the week (we get it though) and the show didn't feel the need to make more of it than was necessary just because it was a same-sex pairing.

I'm not a lawyer, but "my client didn't break a law because the law is wrong" is not an argument to be made in a courtroom before a judge. I'm also pretty sure that asking for asylum is a very specific act done before a specific agency knowingly and consciously. And can you seek asylum from the Federation in the Federation? But also... sedition? Really? Since this is a "message" show, was lying about your sexual orientation when joining the US military before "don't ask don't tell" sedition? Certainly it could result in imprisonment or worse, but was it sedition?

@Andy G

"It was just ok. Too many speeches and a foregone conclusion as well as a climax lacking in logic. Why on earth would Una put Pike's career on the line with an admission."

One thing I thought was missing after Una revealed she turned herself in was, I thought for sure she did it to protect her crew and Captain. Sadly, it was all about her wanting to exist publically as an Illyrian. Pretty selfish of her not to consider the implications to her crew and Captain of her turning herself in. Especially since she had that very conversation with Pike when she tried to resign.

I liked it just fine. A great character piece for Una and Robecca played it VERY well I thought.

Why didn't they mention that Una saved the crew in 'Ghosts of Illyria'? Only the fact she was an Illyrian allowed her to do so.

Love the Gilbert & Sullivan reference from Q&A (short trek). My favorite.

I thought Yetide Badaki's performance early was forced but recovered nicely by the end of the episode.

I was really, really hoping to hear "There can be no justice, so long as laws are absolute. Life itself is an exercise in exceptions" (or something to that effect) I think that would have more aptly applied to the defense here more than an after-the-fact implication of asylum. The judge or prosecutor could have easily come back with "Pike never reported he was granting Una asylum".

The only white male other than Pike (Una's first lawyer) is characterized as an idiot.

At least Una realized she got off on a technicality.

I thought of Archer and T'Pol's hug in TATV when Pike hugged Una.

I'll give this 2 stars because I don't think the asylum argument would have stood up in a real court. Just like in Measure of a Man when Picard brought slavery into the defense.

A vast improvement over last week's episode IMO.

I'm glad Una's back!

Two stars. Like most of this series, it’s well acted and filmed but tedious in the extreme. This feels like one of those dozens of forgettable soap opera TNG episodes where people talk endlessly about their identities and loyalties without offering anything resembling a shred of original or compelling drama. Where is the sense of exploration and encounter that the title of this series promised? We are getting unending, stale soap operas and political dramas without anything strange or new. I’m about ready to cancel this series as dead on arrival; it doesn’t even have the crazy fresh energy that propelled the first season or two of Discovery.

@Andrew: "Probably worst SNW yet"

Holy hell, the recency bias is thick around here. I liked this episode; but even if I didn't, it will really take something (which I hope never to see) to top "The Elysian Kingdom" for awfulness.

@AP: "If viewers are upset by the message that says more about their prejudice than the story, and they need to hear it."

You could take the issue I most ardently support, and if you made an episode that underlined, bolded, and italicized that issue, replete with corny, saccharine sentimentality, I would still gag. So, no: if someone prefers subtlety and rebels against things being portrayed too "on the nose", it doesn't mean the problem lies with them and their backward attitudes. (@Narissa's Bath Water made a similar point very eloquently.)

@Chase: "I sometimes have trouble with courtroom episodes because I can't help but critique them on their legal accuracy, but this one eventually won me over."

But you must have had some problem with how the repeated objections from the prosecutor were ignored by the judges. How about a "sustained" or "overruled", or even "I'll allow it", Your Honors?

@Karl Zimmerman: "It also makes little sense how they treat genetic augmentation here - as if it's something that needs to be redone every generation, instead of something that passes down to your children."

I think that would actually be true for women at least, since baby girls are already born with all the eggs they will ever produce, and I assume genetic augmentation would not go in and change all those gametes.

@UESPA_Sputnik: "It feels so much more realistic than what everyone having the same hairstyle for years or even for the entire series, like it has often been the case for previous Treks."

Interesting take--I think it may really vary. The Slate podcaster June Thomas used to cohost a TV podcast and she actually made the opposite complaint, about how TV shows use changed hairstyles as shorthand to show that a flashback takes place at a different time. Her contention is that most people actually DON'T change their hairstyles even as decades go by, and ever since she said that I have paid attention and found that for non-celebrities that's often true.

@Tim C: "I think the hard-copy book was purely for courtroom theatrics, which worked!"

I get that, but wasn't there an earlier scene where it appeared she was actually using it for her own reference? Also, it might make sense in 2023 to use a law book this way, when we still have a cultural memory of their recent ubiquity; but by the 23rd century, wouldn't this be like a lawyer pulling out a scroll or a clay tablet?

@Leif: "I don't care about this legal society political augments crap..it feels like Ds9"

LOL, those are fighting words for Jammer (he idolizes DS9 if you're not familiar). I'm closer to understanding where you are coming from. Even though I liked a lot of DS9, I didn't love all the scenes of characters pairing off to talk about their feelings, something I can appreciate in an HBO drama but not in Trek.

@Fortyseven: "*** 3/5"

Whoa, we've got a rebel in our midst! I use a five star scale as well when I rate episodes to my TVTIME app, but I always translate them to the four star scale Jammer works (which can be tricky as the relationship doesn't quite feel linear to me).

@Dom: "As an academic ethicist, I found this episode revolting. There is a widespread and very deep opposition to most forms of genetic engineering among philosophers that write about and study the subject."

Interesting. "Gattaca" is one of my favorite films, but despite that I tend to take the opposite view from what the filmmaker is clearly trying to push. I welcome a future of genetic engineering where children get what the doctor describes early in that film: "He will still be from you, but the BEST of each of you."

I would give this episode a tepid 3 stars. It was well acted and I loved learning more about Una, but I've never been a fan of the sledgehammer approach when trying to make social commentary through sci fi. This episode reminded me of The Outcast and Let That Be Your Last Battlefield, two sledgehammer episodes from TNG and TOS respectively. I also don't think comparing Una's plight to racism or transphobia is appropriate, as Una's race makes a conscious choice to engage in genetic engineering, a practice that resulted in the Eugenics Wars on Earth and resulted in tens of millions of fatalities. So they're not being discriminated against based on "who they are", but banned based on what they practice, which history has proven is dangerous. Now granted, that doesn't mean Una should be punished if she has shown herself to be nothing more than a very devoted and capable officer... But all that aside, I thought it was a decent episode that made its point and showcased fan favorite Una quite well. Now I hope they get the ship and her crew out in the universe to explore strange new worlds. That is the title after all!

My only problem with this episode was its canon-restrained lack of stakes. Given that all these laws still exist in Bashir's time, and that there's no shot #1 would be imprisoned for the rest of the show, I had guessed pretty quickly that she'd get off, but there'd be no paradigm shift overall in the Federation - which I think was a pretty accurate guess. Really ook any suspense out of it for me, though I enjoyed seeing the execution on how it'd unfold.

Well, maybe she's the reason Bashir's parents were able to get a plea bargain lol, her case shows Federation courts sometimes allow non-malicious cases to get favorable judgements lol

@RobSolf what does deeper magic still mean? And why didn't you think it was a great episode? I found it touching and inspiring. Even if not my Trekkian cup of tea since no aliens or new worlds

Am I the only fool who thought the twist would be that the laywer herself was the one who tipped off starfleet about Una? I figured she'd do it in order to get the platform to expose the evil federation, etc.

I was very surprised to see the actual twist but it was handled very effectively!

This was no Measure of a Man, Drumhead, or even Rules of Engagement, but for modern Trek it was very good. I had to switch off my brain to allow some of the legal shenanigans in the climax, but from an emotional standpoint it was good.

Spock's apology for his outburst was the most I've laughed WITH a nuTrek show maybe ever.

As a lawyer, I found this episode cringe inducing. My least favorite episode of SNW (a series I like very much).

None of the legal stuff made any sense at all. "Asylum" is not a defense to criminal conduct. It means (in both its legal and non-legal definitions) protection from someone else's persecution, not you get out of jail free. It makes absolutely no sense for Star Fleet to grant asylum from Star Fleet. And she didn't even meet the requirements of the non-sensical law anyways. You can't break the law for 25 years and then claim persecution as a way to get out of the consequences.

The message was great ... a classic Trek theme. But putting it in a courtroom drama setting was unnecessary and detrimental, IMO. Anyone with at least a modicum of sense for what asylum means would have been baffled by the logic at the end. If you must do a courtroom drama, at least make the resolution have some logic to it.

Another disappointing episode -- not truly terrible but quite a bit wrong here from being unimaginative (unoriginal), poor pacing that dragged / got boring, excessively preachy and actually insufferable at times. So SNW wants to do an episode like "The Outcast" or "Stigma" but it has nothing new to bring to the table. It wants to do a courtroom episode but the lawyers offer nothing in terms of clever arguments (like in "Dax" for example) and it just comes down to Una telling a story about her childhood and meeting the criteria for asylum (which Pike didn't even know he was fulfilling).

The episode really goes overboard with telling (not showing) how great and wonderful StarFleet is for having such a diverse personnel. Heck, Una wanted to join it even after experiencing the persecution, discrimination that it brought to her world -- because she saw how diverse SF personnel were! And it wants to get a heroic lawyer in the vein of Cogley from "Court Martial" -- but it goes way over the top with this black woman, who is ultimately portrayed as a hero (no surprise for nu-Trek). She even tells the justices how to do their jobs etc.

And of course the idiot one-line machine Ortegas has to do her thing ("Vulcan bros") -- really hope they can kill her off as a main cast member to show this series has some teeth and doesn't just exist to tell us how wonderful StarFleet is.

I thought things could get interesting when the Vulcan prosecutor suggests Pike is guilty of conspiracy, but then our heroic defense lawyer points to code 8514.

2 stars for "Ad Astra per Aspera" -- now genetic modification is the allegory for being gay or different in whatever way. Classic Trek has told this story already. On one hand the Federation is portrayed pretty negatively based on what the defense lawyer says, but Una's testimony supposedly changes all that. I'm not sure what the episode wants to say. Can't think of a worse courtroom episode in Trek. This one really hammers you over the head with how wonderful StarFleet is -- or something about its diversity. How nu-Trek of it. Finding salvation from the stars??

@Leif

The "deeper magic" trope refers to C.S. Lewis's "The Lion The Witch And Yhe Wardrobe" where the Christ figure, Aslan the Lion, allows himself to seemingly be killed by the magic of Jadis, the White Witch, knowing that his self-sacrifice will set off a "deeper magic" that she is ignorant of (only he knows it because he created Narnia), that will destroy her and free Narnia from her magic forever.

Fwiw, Indonesia thinknthe trope applies here at all. The argument in the episodenisnanstraight forward b legal appeal to precedent.

@Shannon

"I also don't think comparing Una's plight to racism or transphobia is appropriate, as Una's race makes a conscious choice to engage in genetic engineering, a practice that resulted in the Eugenics Wars on Earth and resulted in tens of millions of fatalities. So they're not being discriminated against based on "who they are", but banned based on what they practice, which history has proven is dangerous. Now granted, that doesn't mean Una should be punished if she has shown herself to be nothing more than a very devoted and capable officer... "

Good point. Given the Federation's perspective on genetic engineering, a more analogous issue from modern times than racism or homophobia might be, say, female circumcision (or genital mutilation, depending on which culture you belong to).

Our present Western society feels this practice is abhorrent. We outlaw it; we punish the societies that practice it, and we punish the individual people who do it to others. We don't punish the people to whom it was done. They did not truly consent, and neither did Una. She was a baby.

There's an added element of genetically engineered people potentially being dangerous hypercapable homicidal narcissistic egomaniacs, but if there is no other foundational principle of law it is that a person may only be judged for their own actions, not on what others have done, and Una's record on that was quite clear.

In my head, this case was the precedent that let Bashir keep his commission (with intervening caselaw adding to it no doubt). Not bad.

@Rahul

"Ad Astra Per Aspera" was not a motto invented for this episode. If you go back and watch Enterprise you'll see it was the motto United Earth Starfleet before the founding of the Federation. It is also a variation on NASA's motto irl. Also, check out DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume" where his augmentation is clearly an allegory for non-heteronormativity. Also, your comments about Neera are straight up misogynistic and bigoted. Are you sure Trek is for you?

Regarding the concerns that they aren’t getting out there and exploring enough, I am reminded of the Q speech in All Good Things (“…charting the unknown possibilities of existence), which seems like a good synopsis of one core ambition for the Star Trek project.

Trek has taken different angles and iterations on that idea: sometimes very indirect, slow, ambiguous; and sometimes very direct. This was one of the more direct approaches to pushing on some ethical and philosophical possibilities, which the courtroom episodes have always tended to be, but I think that’s alright. There will also be the more “nebula” style episodes where the strange new worlds are in the foreground and any contemporary resonances or abstract concepts are more personal or more subtle.

So far I have been enjoying SNW’s take on the Trek universe.

The Measure of a Man
The Drumhead
Author, Author
A Matter of Perspective
Court Martial
Tribunal
Distant Origin
Judgment
Dax
Retrospect
Rules of Engagement
The Magicks of Megas Tu
The First Duty
Star Trek VI

These are the Our Heroes as judges, defense prosecutors, or witnesses episodes I can think of most readily. I am sure I left out a few.

TNG for the most part excelled at courtroom dramas. The other series, less so.

“Ad Astra” is probably better than five of these episode (the DS9 ones, the TOS one, Retrospect, and A Matter or Perspective). The episodes that bested Ad Astra, were more confident and lucid in their storytelling, did not rely on last-minute gimmicks like the asylum law that cheat the audience, and had less awkward dialogue and performances

@Rahul
Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:18pm (UTC -5)

"The episode really goes overboard with telling (not showing)... -- but it goes way over the top with this black woman,"




Aw, man. This made me spit my cranberry apple juice all over my computer. My keys are sticking. lmao!

It wasn't hard to see who was going to have a problem with this character. And it boggles the mind how people remain perpetually flabbergasted as to why they get indicted with the usual suspect style criticisms.

Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder both saw that coming. And Helen Keller heard it through the grapevine.

Tell the truth, Rahul. If you said that sentence out loud, how much would you stress and drag out the syllable in "BLLLAAAACCK"? lol

Hey. (knocks on screen)

Hey, you. You, yeah, you. Somebody typed a nastygram on your favorite Trek comment board.

I wanted to tell you something, that I've been skimming through them for several months now whenever a new episode airs, and they tend to be done in the same style, every time, without much alteration.

These people are not being honest about their opinion of the show, if they do in fact even have one. They're just trying to get a rise out of you and you're letting them do it.

Perhaps some of the commenters honestly hate the show, sure ok that's they're prerogative. But the comments that lack any inventiveness, spark of imagination, or seemingly even the depth of thought necessary to compute gas mileage, are being treated like they are somehow relevant. I find that odd, and I'm thinking that it probably should not be so.

As for me?

Oh yeah, I came to see this s***

Damn fine hour of dialogue; no action, really, but the action that is there is of an intellectual nature. How long has it been since we got an episode like this? A while I think. Nothing exploded, no phasers vaporized anybody, there were no hokey hostage situations, no fisticuffs, and no shields being down to eleventy percent.

I was on board with it, sure, ffs Trek where you been? I give it an easy 3.5, with 1/2 star off cuz there wasn't any warping to strange NEW worlds today, just ones that I personally haven't seen yet. It does belie the title of the show a bit, to stop and look at the Federation itself.

I hope next week they go do something in a, you know, Strange New World somewhere. Illyria is strange, and it is a world, but it's not NEW to Cmdr. Chin-Riley, now is it?

Go forward move ahead try to detect it it's not too late to WHIP IT

WHIP IT GOOD

I'm extremely tired. I can dig a ST episode about ideas, sure gimme, my brain needed some food for thought today

Woah, it's the Queen herself (Yetide Badaki from American Gods). Fantastic performance.

"Admiral, it would seem the rules of Starfleet only apply when a Captain deems that they do." - yep! :lol:

This one unexpectedly got me in the feels at the end. You might be right @Karl Zimmerman - certainly the best SNW episode so far in my book, at least.

Excellent start to the season.

4.5 / 5.

@Karl Zimmerman
Thu, Jun 22, 2023, 10:28am (UTC -5)

"It also makes little sense how they treat genetic augmentation here - as if it's something that needs to be redone every generation, instead of something that passes down to your children."



We have a clear division between germline gene therapy and somatic cell gene therapy in real life. Why would that distinction cease to exist in the future? Especially in a future when genetic modification is illegal? The reason why this distinction is going to persist is clear. Say you're trying to cure a deadly disease. You develop a gene therapy that teaches your immune system how to make a new type of white blood cell that annihilates this disease. Your cure is approved after human trials so you distribute the cure to millions of people. 20 years down the line you find out that your modifications eventually result in a deadly autoimmune response, rampant indiscriminate autophagy, in 30 percent of cure recipients. If you confined your cure to somatic cell therapy then this is a far more manageable situation than if you've been annually performing tens of millions of germline gene therapies over a 20 year period, and during that same time your patients have been having hundreds of millions of children who will suddenly drop dead before they graduate college.

It's an alright "talky" episode but the resolution kinda irked me because they really tried to hoodwink us and gloss over it with lots of sentimentality and self-congratulation. It's not just in how the entire closing argument was a complete non sequitur that obviated the need for most of what came before. It's more that I don't see how general asylum policies would be applicable to a military organization like Star Fleet, nor how it would retroactively excuse the actual charges that were brought against Una, because they are two independent occurrences that are separated by vast time-spans.

It would make more sense if instead of "Starfleet" they had said "The Federation" because of course there would be provisions for people fleeing persecution to join as civilians of the the Federation, and it would be fair for Una to ask for that. But joining Starfleet is not a civil right but a privilege that is dependant upon various conditions and approvals. It is something that is earned, not deserved. Furthermore, if Una had been upfront about her identity and formally sought asylum at the time of joining Starfleet because of imminent persecution, there may have been a case to be had, however bizarre it would be for the aforementioned reason. However, since the life-threatening conditions had long since passed and she was already enjoying a pretty safe and happy life within Starfleet, the conditions in which she could be an asylum-seeker would have long since passed. Plus she was already in Starfleet, so... how would that even make sense? Maybe they're trying to argue that Starfleet's own policies are tantamount to persecution, but by that logic any attempt to narrow the entrance requirements would itself become an invitation just because you felt hard-done by being excluded by those very policies.

In any case, the charges she was indicted on that have to do with hiding her identity and such preceded any attempt to seek asylum, so whether she could or couldn't seek asylum has no bearing on whether the evidence shows that she broke those other rules. And since she pretty much admitted to it, she could very well be found guilty of those charges even if she were granted asylum in this very strange and retroactive way. If reason prevailed, I would expect the judges to tell her that she is indeed worthy of asylum...as a civilian citizen of the Federation, which is precisely gist of the plea bargain that they offered her before, but which she ungratefully rejected.

@Andrew

“what the fuck even was the Gilbert and Sullivan beat?“

In Short Treks, when Spock is an ensign on the Enteprise he and Una are stuck in an elevator and Una sings “Modern Major General”.

Rewatched the episode, and something that really struck me on a rewatch, La’an is quickly becoming one of my favorite Trek characters. The subtlety in her performance here, worried she may have put her best friend and hero in this position, might have been the some of the best professional crew acting in all of NuTrek we’ve seen so far. She does so much in so little screen time. And I love how Uhura turned down her request.

I have to agree with Andrew in some respects:

" a terribly manipulative score. The characters felt distressingly hollow for an episode this early in the season, and I was praying the entire time for a classic 44 min cut. I’m truly for Star Trek being as progressive as all hell, but this just felt pedantic and limp. Not the way to do it."

I'm not sure about it being "the worst SNW yet," but it certainly goes in my lower rank. FAR too talky and predictable. No tension at all. The dialogue (really, usually monologue) was carefully written but uninspired and repetitive. The two scenes I liked the most were completely outside the trial: Uhura standing up to La'an's illegal request, and Mbenga interpreting Vulcan body language, with the funny Spock followup.

A well-meaning episode, but very poorly executed. Not one I would bother to watch again.

In light of all the people complaining about it being really on-the-nose or taking issue with making direct comparisons between Una's plight and racism and such... I'm surprised that no one pointed out the implications that these criticisms mainly have to do with what Una's civil rights lawyer said in court. It is completely aligned with her character to pull every rhetorical trick in the book in try to emotively sway the court in order to win her case, even if it's a bit disingenuous or fallacious.

I also don't think the lawyer is meant to be a direct authorial self-insert who merely acts as mouthpiece to the "official" moral pronouncements of the showrunners in this case. There is some moral complexity here in the fact that she nearly jeopardizes Una's case by focusing more on attacking high profile members of the Federation than actually defending Una. So she is deliberately and understandably inflammatory because she has an axe to grind with the Federation.

I know some weary watchers have complained that the showrunners must, too, hate the Federation in so loving to portray it as flawed and grey in morality, as well as to have it criticized by some of the protagonists. And they will no doubt take this episode as further evidence of that. But running through all that, especially in SNW is at least some faith in classic Federation principles and the idea that moral societies do not get to rest on their laurels, but must continually progress and fight for what is right.

This episode makes the case that - between MOST of Picard season 3 and MOST of Strange New Worlds overall - "Nu Trek" is becoming less of a derogatory term and more just a way to describe post-Nemesis/post-Enterprise TV episodes of Star Trek.

Honestly, I still remember being 12 and reading how "watered-down" some people thought TNG was compared to TOS and TOS movies after TNG seasons 1 and 2.
Then came Yesterday's Enterprise, The Survivors, The Defector, Sins Of The Father, BoBW Part 1, etc.. and everyone forgot the pre-1990s-lashing they gave TNG.

Then what a piece of crap everyone thought Voyager was until Scorpion, Timeless, Barge of the Dead, Pathfinder, etc...

The difference now is it's taken whole shows to get to great Trek again. (Personally, I liked earlier Discovey better than S 3&4 but most ppl seem to think it got better w time, and Picard s1&2 in retrospect were less good than I remember, at least less Star-Trekky and Prodigy is just boring)

But finally, Star Trek has worked through what streaming execs needed it to be to greenlight it and is now once more what makes Star Trek great (MOST of the time)

So, did the Vulcan prosecutor Pasalk know that Una was going to win her case?

I mean, c'mon. How is he, of all people, not going to be familiar with Starfleet Code 8514? There's a look he gives when Neera asks Batel to read out the relevant passage which suggests, to me, that he knew all along that this was the logical play. His prosecution of the case was full-throated, but again that would only be logical - he's a prosecutor, he can't simply not do his job, and knowing that the law in this case actually favoured Una to a degree meant that he was free to do so without truly risking anything. It handily absolves Pike of covering for her - he used his discretionary powers as captain under 8514 to grant her asylum, this court case merely confirms that. And it means that Starfleet can point out to anyone disgruntled at the verdict that a genuine attempt to prosecute the case was made.

@lukaeber

"As a lawyer, I found this episode cringe inducing. My least favorite episode of SNW (a series I like very much).

None of the legal stuff made any sense at all. "Asylum" is not a defense to criminal conduct. It means (in both its legal and non-legal definitions) protection from someone else's persecution, not you get out of jail free. It makes absolutely no sense for Star Fleet to grant asylum from Star Fleet. And she didn't even meet the requirements of the non-sensical law anyways. You can't break the law for 25 years and then claim persecution as a way to get out of the consequences."

I'm not a lawyer and figured that out. You'd think the writers could.

@James Smith

So, did the Vulcan prosecutor Pasalk know that Una was going to win her case?

I mean, c'mon. How is he, of all people, not going to be familiar with Starfleet Code 8514?"

I'm sure he could quote it. His agrument was 100% in line with the law. Code 8514 shouldn't have won the day. See some commenters here that are lawyers.

This isn’t court in the United States in our time with a jury. This is a space court hundreds of years in the future with a completely different way of doing things, and one of the key points in the defenses case was that starfleet constantly picks and chooses when the law is to be followed as written or ignored for the greater good. Una’s crimes were ignored for the greater good. It does not at all go any deeper than that. God, I bet half of you would argue Data is a robot and starfleet property that should have been disassembled.

@James Smith

So, did the Vulcan prosecutor Pasalk know that Una was going to win her case?

I mean, c'mon. How is he, of all people, not going to be familiar with Starfleet Code 8514?"

Pasalk is very probably familiar with the code, but that does not mean that the opposition, a non Starfleet civil-rights laywer, is familiar with it. Or that they choose to go down that road. Or that the justices will accept that line of reasoning. So he will certainly have been aware of the possibility, but until the judges returned their verdict he didn't "know".

I'm really, really in two minds about this episode. 'Measure of a Man' it tries to be, and nearly, very nearly, at times succeeds. And then falls flat on its face. It is a very frustrating episode for that reason.

It's a courtroom drama, played as a rollercoaster. Fair enough, I'm game. But the problems start straight away. The first third of episode is simply boring. It expects an unearned investment. But okay.

Where this episode really excels is its middle third, where the courtroom procedure begins and Una's crewmates take the stand. It's excellently written, and there's a very palpable sense of camaraderie and esprit d'corps that is all too often taken for granted on SNW without being shown. Here it's depicted wonderfully.

But then the episode falls off a cliff. It degenerates into the bizarre NuTrek with discrediting the idea of Federation utopianism. I utterly despise that NuTrek is obsessed with this. It's horrible to watch. The Federation allows persecution and apartheid on one of its worlds? No, fuck off, it doesn't. Stop this.

But then the episode redeems itself by turning once again into a deeper examination of the issues at hand, although Una's disciplinary proceeding apparently turns into an asylum appeals case (!). Good God, talk about mixed messages. But it's fine. I see what the writers and producers are aiming at here and couldn't resist.

Anyway. Of course Una is absolved, because she is on the bridge of the Enterprise in 'The Cage'. This lack of stakes is a serious problem that SNW isn't imaginative enough to evade.

What did I really like? At least they took the La'an issue bull by the horns. Thank God. So it's clear that she's an unaltered descendant of augments. That's fine by me. I also liked the continuous recognition of the Eugenics Wars throughout.

One last bouquet: I really enjoyed the NuTrek versions of the TOS dress uniforms. I don't like NuTrek, but I appreciated the effort they put in there. Fair play to them.

Oh, and it got very silly watching the trial being turned into an attempt to put everyone else on trial. That's not how procedure works.

I forgot to mention the applause at the very end was absolutely appallingly cringeworthy. NuTrek really needs til wise up with that sort of carry-on. Was it ad libbed by the cast and crew? So absurdly out of place.

I LOVED THE EPISODE!

To me, this is about the ideals of Starfleet and the Federation. The lawyer was good and it was executed well.
I liked it.

//The heart of the show is in its right place and that's what truly matters.//

That is the whole point. Indeed.

@Karl Zimmerman
'Holy shizzballs that was great. Perhaps the best Trek episode since the end of DS9.'

Go and watch Lower Decks' 'wej Duj', and recant.

@Bok R'Mor

I'm fairly certain that the incidents in "The Cage" take place before this episode. Talos IV had been deemed off limits three years before the events of "If Memory Serves" from Discovery's second season.

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Talos_IV

//I don't care about this legal society political augments crap..it feels like Ds9..why couldn't they at least have a subplot with new aliens kr a new world.//

TNG had legal issues. Voyager had legal issues. Be quiet!

Catching up with the comments here.

@Jack
'When was Trek ever about exploring anomalies etc?'

During 1987-2001 and it was the best Trek era.

@Pike’s Hair

"This isn’t court in the United States in our time with a jury. This is a space court hundreds of years in the future with a completely different way of doing things, and one of the key points in the defenses case was that starfleet constantly picks and chooses when the law is to be followed as written or ignored for the greater good. Una’s crimes were ignored for the greater good. It does not at all go any deeper than that. God, I bet half of you would argue Data is a robot and starfleet property that should have been disassembled."

But that wasn't the verdict, right? I agree, the angle that should have been pursued was that one blanket law can't be draconically enforced across all spectrums... and I thought we were going there... but that's not what happened.

@Moldorf
'I'm fairly certain that the incidents in "The Cage" take place before this episode.'

I didn't realise that. Thanks.

This means now that I really don't under when SNW is actually meant to be set (despite your very helpful link).

@Shannon
'I would give this episode a tepid 3 stars. It was well acted and I loved learning more about Una, but I've never been a fan of the sledgehammer approach when trying to make social commentary through sci fi.'

I'm a huge fan of Rebecca Romijn as Number One and Anson Mount and his fabulous hair as Pike and his hair. But I agree that this episode couldn't restrain itself from, or even apparently plan, the sledgehammer commentary.

And no, I am not a Trump supporter, gentle reader. Left wing my entire life. Before @Booming jumps in, which she will.

"So SNW wants to do an episode like "The Outcast" or "Stigma" but it has nothing new to bring to the table"

SNW is technically a prequel...

“But that wasn't the verdict, right? I agree, the angle that should have been pursued was that one blanket law can't be draconically enforced across all spectrums... and I thought we were going there... but that's not what happened.”

That is what happens. For the present, they could only consider the defense's motion, to judge the defendant's specific case on their own regardless of the written law. Just as April did to violate the prime directive, and Pike did in not turning Una in.

That’s the whole point of the courts summation that the rules must shift when necessary to allow them to make the right choice.

@Bok R'Mor

It looks like SNW is set in 2259-2260.

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline

Okay, very nicely acted but surely the Law is the Law (even if we think it's wrong) so the case would be judged on what the Law currently is, it doesn't really bend in the way this episode wants it to. (Or does it? I see we have a few legal people commenting here.) And before @Pike's Hair tells me yes I know this is a drama and it's set way off in the future but I still think the Law will be rigid then. Eugenics is shown as such a major issue for the Federation I think they'd be disinclined to allow Una to remain in Star Fleet because she asked for asylum as what message is that sending out?

Also, there's no real jeopardy in this episode as we know Una gets off.

I'm with Leif here - I hope we finally get some strange new worlds next week!

“Also, there's no real jeopardy in this episode as we know Una gets off.”

This is false. It was foreshadowed that she wouldn’t make it out of the trial in the last season finale, and they did kill a crew member. There’s no guarantee anyone other than Pike being in the wheelchair and the other characters actually on Enterprise in TOS are safe ever.

@artymiss

"Eugenics is shown as such a major issue for the Federation I think they'd be disinclined to allow Una to remain in Star Fleet because she asked for asylum as what message is that sending out?"

They allowed Bashir to stay in service. True, his dad was sent to jail. But Illyria wS denied entrance into the Federation, so Una's family are beyond reach. And Julian, as Federation citizen would not meet the criteria for asylum, nor would his parents.

Well... I guess there was good intention, and this episode can be a good introduction to questions like "unjust laws", "law vs morality" and all of that. But otherwise pretty weak execution. It doesn't felt like a confrontation of two strong and justified points of views; it felt like good people with all the reasons vs old bureaucrats whose arguments where only about words in a page. Altought that is, in fact and sadly, a pretty commom thing in real life, it is not compeling to watch.

And the "asylum" argument was not at all a "clever solution pulled off by the bright lawyer". Una can get asylum and be rescued by StarFleet, live as a federation citizen, so on and so forth... AND that still doesn't mean she can JOIN StarFleet as a member, lie in the admission forms and so on.

Meh

@Pike's Hair
Okay I'll rephrase. I personally didn't get a sense of jeopardy from this episode. It felt a foregone conclusion to me that Una would be allowed to remain as Number One.

@Bok R'Mor

"The Federation allows persecution and apartheid on one of its worlds? No, fuck off, it doesn't. Stop this."

Unfortunately it does. Shown in the TOS-episode "The cloud minders". Was quite a shock for me when rewatched it after some time. I did remember the torture and caste-system, but not the detail that Ardana was explicitly mentioned as having full membership in the Federation instead of being just another world the Federation trades with.

Well I think this is just about the worst, most didactic, vague, and overstretched way to attempt to do an analogy for literally *every* civil rights movement ever

But I am glad people are loving and connecting to it. It’s a good message, just told without tact or subtlety

@Andrew

Why opt for tact and subtly when addressing bigotry and fascism, even in allegory?

I do prefer space stories before court stories. Still, trek has made some pretty good one and this one joins the club. As this is fiction many the critical arguments from the real world falls flat to me.

It was a good drama. To me quite strange sceenes was, pikes breathing mask, not neccecarly the applause but una sending the crew back to the stations felt silly in the way it was conducted. And why was Batel in theroom celebrating? yes I know why but it felt quite constructed.

May I look forward to a new world next week perhaps?

@AP

"Why opt for tact and subtly when addressing bigotry and fascism, even in allegory?"

Because at the end of the day, the purpose of this show is to entertain and draw viewers, not push a political ideology with a sledgehammer. There are two sides to every issue, and the side that you're on is not the righteous one just because it's the side you choose to be on. We all see the world through our own political lens, and these days too often demonize those who think differently than we do. We're too quick to call the other side unjustified names just because they see the world differently.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind when the writers tackle social issues, but it's important to strike a balance and remember that viewers from BOTH sides of the political aisle love and enjoy Star Trek.

Absolutely awful.

Nu-Trek at its worse.

Cancel this drivel now.

@Shannon
I think that the writers are not under an obligation to cater to the political left, or to the political right, or to any other group. The writers, to me, are bound to tell an effective story.

The movie Dirty Harry was, to me, a piece of pro-fascism demagoguery. And yet, it was enormously entertaining and I've seen it multiple times because it was made very skillfully.

I think Michael Moore's documentary was left-wing agitprop, but, again, I enjoyed it. It was skillfully made, funny, and entertaining.

As Nicholas Meyer said, "Art is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship." A filmmaker or television writer, to me, has no obligation to satisfy any one person or group's political interests, interests in continuity, "interests" in seeing a movie where Luke Skywalker does nothing but kill people with his lightsaber for 150 minutes.

Was this particular episode of SNW entertaining? Yes and no. Sometimes in a desire to please a particular audience, the writing/filmmaking can come of as awkward and stilted - and maybe even contrary to what the writers were "trying" to say. If the intention here was to preach liberal beliefs in tolerance, the actions undercut the intention - in, for example, having Noonien Singh bully Uhura into doing something illegal. Also, while one viewer might find Una's self-disclosure admirable, another might just as equally find it selfish - she put a number of crewmates through a tremendous ordeal to obtain her particular brand of justice. Was the episode "really" suggesting augmented people are selfish manipulators of others? I don't think so, but I think it is a fair question to ask.

I take as an example of actions undercutting intentions the movie Philadelphia (1993) with Tom Hanks. Its creators were on record as stating they wished to potray gay men stricken with AIDS in a positive light.

But, as film critic Owen Gleiberman notes, maybe they (including director Jonathan Demme() went a little too bit too far:

"Philadelphia is so pious in its attitude toward homosexuality that, at one point, Demme actually comes close to endorsing the prejudices he’s fighting against. When Hanks, on the witness stand, sorrowfully admits that he had anonymous sex in a porno theater, but only once, the film implicitly begs the question: Would Andrew have been less worthy of compassion had he engaged in a hundred anonymous encounters?"

Fair point.

Movie and TV show writers and directors run the risk of preachiness and of undercutting their own good messages in an effort to be fair and balanced - to be liberal the one week and conservative the next. Why not just *be*?

For the most part I liked this more than I thought I would; courtroom episodes of tv in general and Trek in particular are very hit and miss for me. But Una's final testimony talking about genetic modification being part of their culture felt a little off to me. In the context of the story, it makes just enough sense so I just went with it. But it made me really uncomfortable on a "but all scifi is actually talking about now and not the future" level. It's easy to make the comparison the show obviously wanted to make and compare this bigotry with the various isms we deal with in real life. And I don't disagree with the show's stance that banning all modified folks from starfleet seems stupid. But looked at a certain way, it could be taken in a very pro eugenics way. And facing bigotry for a medical procedure is a lot different then racial/ethnic bigotry, which seems to be the analogy they are going for. It felt like it missed a point somewhere.

@artymiss

“Okay I'll rephrase. I personally didn't get a sense of jeopardy from this episode. It felt a foregone conclusion to me that Una would be allowed to remain as Number One.“

That’s fair

@Pike’s Hair

"That is what happens. For the present, they could only consider the defense's motion, to judge the defendant's specific case on their own regardless of the written law. Just as April did to violate the prime directive, and Pike did in not turning Una in.

That’s the whole point of the courts summation that the rules must shift when necessary to allow them to make the right choice."

Bit that's not what happened. Javas granted Una asylum. She spoke to shifting rules, but didn't bend them at all. (which I think should have happened)

"JAVAS: I think we could all agree that the issue of genetic engineering
is a nuanced one. The laws prohibiting it exist for very good reasons.
And regulations must persist so we may not one day face another crisis like the Eugenics Wars. But this court also believes that these reasons cannot and do not allow us to treat every individual augment, Illyrian, or other persons with modified DNA the same. Lines must be drawn, but they must also shift when necessary. Perhaps someday Starfleet and the Federation may change its views, but today I'm afraid all we can do is consider what the defense has asked. That we judge the defendant's specific case and unique circumstances independently. And in that, we grant the defendant's request for asylum and find Una Chin-Riley not guilty of all charges."

Una NEVER requested asylum. Not 25 years ago, and not when she turned herself in. As I mentioned in my first post, we should have got some SLP here... that argument should have won the day.

Loved this episode. Classic Trek writing and a lot of character building for Una. Better than last week where my head was spinning from 6 different storylines going on at warp speed and conveniently wrapping up in the last 5 minutes. Also, I laughed at "I regret you had to witness that outburst. Pasalk truly brings out the worst in me.".

@ mouse
They were born genetically modified, they didn't choose for it to happen to them. Remember the planet in "Ghosts of Illyria" where Illyrian colonists died trying to reverse their genetic engineering in order to join Starfleet?
So yes, it is similar to racial/ethnic bigotry.

For everyone arguing that the legal argument is not entirely sound according to modern legal principles . . . well, yes. But this is a fictional society, in a fictional future, and there have surely been refinements to schools of thought on the purpose of the law and its processes in the intervening time. For example, "the spirit of the law" seems to matter more than "the letter of the law" in Starfleet courtrooms. An argument can certainly be made that this is borne out by the canon, and, indeed, this episode makes that point in a bit of a meta way by commenting, in effect, "Starfleet captains break the letter of the law all the time and it's fine."

Similarly, for everyone pointing out that asylum may grant Una Federation residency but not the right to serve in Starfleet . . . who says, exactly, that's the case in the future? Yes, it's the case as we understand "asylum" as a legal term in our present. "Asylum" may very well be full citizenship granting all rights and privileges including access to a Starfleet commission where the reason for the asylum would otherwise be disqualifying criteria. I feel that there is some canon evidence for this too. People seem to end up with Starfleet commissions on merit despite backgrounds that according to the law would otherwise disqualify them, regardless of the unorthodox way they arrived at those commissions.

See:

Ro Laren regaining her commission despite betraying Starfleet
Tom Paris
The entire Maquis crew of Voyager, including Chakotay being promoted to Captain and being assigned a command
Seven of Nine ending up captain of the Enterprise despite all the things she did as a Fenris Ranger
Kira, a former terrorist, being commissioned as a Commander in DS9 S7

There are probably more.

@Leif

Sorry! "Deeper Magic Still" is a CS Lewis thing mostly, where the audience is completely left in the dark about a clear solution until it's convenient. Resurrection of Aslan in "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" is where I got it. Some people might call it Deus Ex Machina. I promise to stop trying to be pretentious, now; for a while, anyway :)

I really liked the episode from a character standpoint. My favorite scene was the bar scene with Ortega poking fun at Spock and how that all went down. So even the pilot gets pulled into this episode, and that's my favorite thing about it. They really tried to pull many characters into the fray that normally would be sidelined.

But the overall puzzle box solution to the problem was just, X law says "this", but we'll wait to reveal that Y law says "that", which somehow overrules X law.

I hope my original post didn't seem negative, because I consider this series to be the best Trek since DS9. In this episode, the court plot didn't do much for me, but the character work definitely did.

@AP Thanks for explaining! Even if you don't agree that it applies to the subject material.

This was very classic Trek and it was better for it. I greatly enjoyed it. Maybe a little on the nose with the rainbow colored badges but honestly that uniform looked tight tight tight.

Also that lawyer was great, really nailed it with the acting.

Very good episode; perhaps one of the best of SNW.

I did get a chuckle that we have to have that "one guy" in the comments section that is mad the guest appearance and character important to the story happens to be a black woman. I guess we can't get rid of that thinking 100% :)

She did a great job in the role but I do think they made her too sour at the beginning, which I guess was to tease us as to whether she will take the case or not. Once she took the case she was fantastic. A well played effort laying this assylum story and then dropping that part of the law upon the judges.

They wrote the judges to seem quite relieved they did not have to incarcerate her. Which I liked. We have to remember judges rule in interpretation of the law and are often in situations where they are making rulings they personally hate because they have to.

The law is the law, but it is not always right or just. That is why civil rights lawyers are so important. They not only defend their client but also attempt to argue that the law itself is wrong.

@Jack what do you mean..Trek has ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT NEW ALIENS and WORLDS and ANOMALIES..Even in Th e Cafe we had Talismans and The Man Trap and in Caretaker we had aocampa and the Nacene and even in Emissary we had the prophets and the wormhole and Ebxlunter at Farpoint we had the Q and the Star Jellies...That is the main if not the only reason I watch..usually the only reason or at least the main reason..I like the mystery PM tests and some character humor too....So I always get disappointed if not totally frustrated and crestfallen and crestfallen an episode has no new aliens and/or anomalies..but hey if you watch for the more social /political commentary or character epis9des..more power to you..to each his own..It'sjust this series is billed as being more my taste aka tje former than the latter..but yet it'sacting more like the latter or DS9 or Picard with this episode..thanks for answering though..

@Michael
"But the fetid stench of decay can't be disguised no matter how many body parts are cobbled together, how perfectly the rosy lipstick is painted onto the monster's smiling lips."
Ok, Shakespeare. You don't like it. Time to move on.

@dave

"The law is the law, but it is not always right or just."

I agree. Wasn't it Captain Picard who said: "There can be no justice so long as laws are absolute. Even life itself is an exercise in exceptions." To which Riker followed up: "Since when has justice ever been as simple as a rulebook"... I know a lot of you hate that they did that and wished Wesley would have been executed, but I digress.

I can sympathize with the position the judges were in. They know the law was broken, and it's a law they believe is necessary and just, much like April does, but standing before them is an outstanding officer who has devoted her life to Starfleet and the Federation, a person who can't help who she is because of a decision made by her species to engage in genetic enhancements. So they made an exception, and it was the correct decision.

I wonder, this episode did tell us quite much about the effects of the eugenic war. It also told us more about life in the "colonies". New worlds somwhere away from earth where the happy unity does not seem to work although controlled by starfleet. TNGs Tasha Yar gave us some background regarding the outside worlds.

So I wonder if and when we will get episodes or spin offs covering more of this.

Best episode yet.

And yea, starfleet is a pile of shit if they disqualify and punish people because their parents had them circumcised.

Modern Trek had fed us plenty of garbage, but they need to give raises to the people who give us SNW. After a season and 2 episodes this is over all the best offering in over 2 decades. (Pic S 3 was special with all our TNG actors back and their amazing chemsitry, but it was stlil mediocre NuTrek writing)

@Walding

Of course. But what I was trying to highlight was the trend in NuTrek* of the writers and producers portraying the Federation as an edgy, corrupt dystopia. That to me is the very antithesis of the optimistic future Trek has hitherto typically portrayed, exceptions aside.

*To be entirely fair this isn't just NuTrek. One could argue that DS9 began this trend when Section 31 was brought into the picture.

@Jammer didn't Unnatural Selection establish genetical engineering wasn't allowed in the Federation?

@Visitor1982: I checked MemoryAlpha re: Unnatural Selection:

"The genetic engineering of advanced children apparently ignores the fact that such engineering is banned and outlawed in the Federation. This is stated in at least three different Star Trek series (ENT: "The Augments", DS9: "Doctor Bashir, I Presume", TNG: "A Matter Of Time"), albeit all of them were produced after this episode creating continuity issues."

I liked it pretty well. Obviously very formulaic, but well executed.

Plus, the episode highlighted SNW's strength -- the ensemble mindset. Pike was only a side character, but the episode worked because unlike other NuTrek the series has spent enough time on the other characters so that we (or at least I) care about their interactions. We know that there are many more relationships in the ship that just those that involve Burnham/Picard.

Another very good episode. I am really scratching my head at some of the hate-filled reviews. I love SNW, and for the first time in years, feel like I'm watching real Trek, with all the elements that made me love it in the first place. I think now, in Season 2 of SNW, what impresses me most is the ensemble cast. It gives the stories more texture and richness to have everybody involved, and I love seeing their deeper layers and backstories as the episodes progress. My biggest worry is that the Gorn will turn out to be conventional, one-note, Evil Nightmare Villain Monsters. I truly dislike horror, so am hoping we don't get too much of that.

While waiting for new SNW episodes, I have gone back and watched a lot of Old Trek across the series and the seasons. Some of the worst-reviewed shows seem campy and great fun now. Take a look at Spock's Brain if you don't believe me. It had me laughing out loud and going off to bed with a grin on my face. God, how awful! Hahahahahahahahaha.

@lizzzi
'My biggest worry is that the Gorn will turn out to be conventional, one-note, Evil Nightmare Villain Monsters. I truly dislike horror, so am hoping we don't get too much of that.'

The Gorn have already been 're-imagined' in SNW as swipes of the xenomorphs from Alien.

I know, @Bok R'Mor. That is bothering me a lot. I hate that kind of thing.

I am concerned the next episode is the ye olde 20/21st century visit which seems to happen every second season in Trek. I guess it is Trek tradition.

yes, I don't like the Gorn becoming Aliens ..... all they need is one coming out of a redshirts stomach and doing a dance.

@lizzzi

With todays eyes TOS quite often is very silly. But on very many occasions magnificent. It made peopel then, and event today reflecting. My "favourite" among the worst is the "Omega Glory".

I definetly share your opinion thet SNW is todays TOS. My only objection is that they try to do everything so tecnically perfect making. Lowering the aims slightly could give us more episodes.

An enjoyable episode, but the "courtroom drama" was poorly executed, and in fact does a disservice to anyone who has ever gone through the incredibly hostile process of applying for (let alone receiving) political asylum. That big Starfleet codebook that Neera was throwing around obviously doesn't contain any rules of procedure.

Other Trek courtroom dramas obviously ham up legal proceedings for dramatic effect, but at least in the Measure of a Man, the actual issue under dispute ("Is Data conscious?") was what resolved the case. Also, anyone who knows anything about how difficult political asylum cases are in real life will have thrown a massive eyeroll here. Lying to the authorities in the past is usually *FATAL* in immigration/asylum cases.

For some reason, I find it easier to suspend my disbelief about the sci-fi elements of Trek than I do about the policies and procedures of the Federation/Starfleet.

@Jeffrey's Tube

"For example, "the spirit of the law" seems to matter more than "the letter of the law" in Starfleet courtrooms."

Yes, but the conflict was about Starfleet starting prosecution because of the letter of the law, so it feels a little cheap when the solution is "hey, what about you guys forget about letter of the law and go with spirit?" haha

"who says, exactly, that's the case in the future [about asylum]?"

Well, sure, the asylum strategy may hold if asylum means something else in the future. But I don't think we have reason to think asylum would mean something different in the future. And, also, it doesn't look like it actually means something different, by what is stated on "Starfleet code 8514".

Now, this isn't a big deal. The episode isn't weak just because it doesn't present a genuine legal solution. That would be fine. The problem is the episode doesn't do a valid solution, and neither presents a dramatically interesting conflict. It's just a bland exposition, where we see the easiest position being defended, against a weakly presented opposition, without any hard choices, sacrifices or dramatically relevant consequences for anyone involved. It didn't cost anything to anyone to get through this.

In other words, Una's case felt very cheap as an end-of-season-cliffhanger, and if this episode is all it took to resolve that (as it seems to be the case), it indeed confirms that feel...

@Maq

"I definetly share your opinion thet SNW is todays TOS."

That's an interesting question. I would say SNW isn't even close to be todays TOS, but I would like to see arguments from both sides in this.

TOS
I was young and could only watch at my grandparents because it was on cable tv. A decade later, local PBS got master tapes and ran 3 episodes every Friday night. Especially during begathons. I contributed a few times from my paper route or inventory clerk job money, to get those talking heads to be quiet. Later in college I would go home early from parties on Friday night to watch them.

SNW
I am old and I can only watch on my Apple TV in the upstairs office because it’s on Paramount Plus. I contribute to paramount each month with my engineering job money, to get those commercials and paramount interruptions to be quiet. I check early on Thursday for the new episode drops and don’t plan any parties on Thursday night so I can watch them.

The patterns are the same and consistent over a 50 year trend line. TOS = SNW

Saying TOS = SNW is like saying the Great Pyramid = The Luxor Hotel in Las Vegas.

They bear some superficial resemblance to each other and each capture the attention of those seeking some entertainment, but one trades heavily on the currency earned by the other and could scarcely exist in own right for its own merits except as a means to profit off the tourists it manages to ensnare.

@Pike's Hair: "This is false. It was foreshadowed that she wouldn’t make it out of the trial in the last season finale, and they did kill a crew member. There’s no guarantee anyone other than Pike being in the wheelchair and the other characters actually on Enterprise in TOS are safe ever."

I would have objected that "Number One" appears in TOS, but I suppose if people are saying these events are taking place after that (which if true is kinda wild), you may have a point.

@Andrew: "Well I think this is just about the worst, most didactic, vague, and overstretched way to attempt to do an analogy for literally *every* civil rights movement ever
But I am glad people are loving and connecting to it. It’s a good message, just told without tact or subtlety"

You describe very well why I docked it a point. There was a midsection there where it got really flabby and overwrought. But I guess I liked the earlier and later court scenes more than you did.

@AP: "Why opt for tact and subtly when addressing bigotry and fascism, even in allegory?"

There seems to be a solid portion of the public who seems to agree with you there. And indeed of the creative community: Apple TV got a bunch of huge name actors (Meryl Streep, Tobey McGuire, Edward Norton, Kit Harrington) to make an expensive, on-the-nose anthology series called "Extrapolations of a climate change future, out earlier this year. Then there was the 2021 Netflix movie "Don't Look Up" with Jennifer Lawrence and Leo DiCaprio. These huge stars seem to flock to projects that wield a sledgehammer and an infinite supply of earnestness. Not for me, hard pass.

@Sony: "So yes, it is similar to racial/ethnic bigotry."

Sounds to me more like FGM, which some people do defend on just such a "cultural" rationale. (If we include routine infant circumcision, which I also believe is morally wrong [subsequently I saw @Harry Kim Eats Worms drew the same parallel], it hits even closer to home.)

@Leif: I like both aspects of the show, but you make a fair point that the title as advertised indicate that it should be right up your alley. A certain amount of frustration on your part is understandable. Hopefully we'll get a new alien or anomaly this week.

@Shannon: Well observed.

@Steven: "I am concerned the next episode is the ye olde 20/21st century visit which seems to happen every second season in Trek. I guess it is Trek tradition."

I didn't know about that tradition but I wouldn't mind seeing that continue.
I saw on here (without actually watching) that Picard did that last season and it didn't work, but there have been a lot of fun ones in that vein over the years, including an early appearance of Sarah Silverman as a Nineties chick.

Aliens was better than Alien. By your definition, TNG, VOY, DS9, well hell, all of them

“bear some superficial resemblance to each other” and “capture the attention of those seeking some entertainment”

And without doubt, given the canon
“trades heavily on the currency earned by the other”

Then this ad hominem, unprovable statement. I think if we looked at audience numbers of TOS vs SNW, not only would we find a larger SNW audience, but higher revenue dollars. Thus

“could scarcely exist in own right for its own merits” doesn’t hold water,

And this suggests you speak salvation in the wrong places because I subscribe to watch trek to be entertained.

“means to profit off the tourists it manages to ensnare.”

I may be pedestrian, but I’m paying and I bet you are too. Is there a different bar you’re going to with special trek snobbery?

@Harry Kim
"I think if we looked at audience numbers of TOS vs SNW, not only would we find a larger SNW audience, but higher revenue dollars"

Not a fair comparison, I think. The entertainment market now is way bigger than it were on TOS times. I wasn't thinking about "money" when considering TOS vs SNW, but I guess if we are going on this metric, we should look at percentages, not absolute numbers, at least...

For me, SNW may have the looks right, but doesn't have a bit of TOS's soul.

One thing that stands out for me is in TOS we see pioneers, boldly going, in a universe that feels empty, silent, dangerous, unkown. The thing is SNW is supposed to be before TOS! So, we should be going even harder on this. But —not to mention the already well observed total lacking of actual Strange New Worlds being displayed— in SNW the universe feels crowded, explored, dominated; the Starfleet, a well stablished organization; the Enterprise, a crew of teenagers captained by nice papa Pike. SNW should be lefting us scared and thoughtful, about the universe's good and bad possibilities and about ourselves (like Black Mirror, Rick n' Morty and TOS did), in my opinion, not this bland experience of "let's steal the enterprise yeeeey! And fuck Starfleet they are just old conservative people hurraaay"...

@Pike’s Hair
”garbage show made by a ****”

most illogical correlation. Please refrain from such logical errors in a trek forum haha

But seriously, c’mom, first episode goes into some weird jokes in fact, but first 3 or 4 seasons were awesome, with even some trek inspired concepts being brought — and, more to the point, letting us with some strange new sci-fi and philosophical things to think about.

@F

"One thing that stands out for me is in TOS we see pioneers, boldly going, in a universe that feels empty, silent, dangerous, unkown. The thing is SNW is supposed to be before TOS! So, we should be going even harder on this. But —not to mention the already well observed total lacking of actual Strange New Worlds being displayed— in SNW the universe feels crowded, explored, dominated; the Starfleet, a well stablished organization; the Enterprise, a crew of teenagers captained by nice papa Pike. SNW should be lefting us scared and thoughtful, about the universe's good and bad possibilities and about ourselves (like Black Mirror, Rick n' Morty and TOS did), in my opinion, not this bland experience of "let's steal the enterprise yeeeey! And fuck Starfleet they are just old conservative people hurraaay"...

Yes, this bothers me too. I would much rather SNW was doing plots like TOS where the Enterprise is so far out exploring the unknown that it is pretty much on its own much of the time. Instead it is doing TNG-like plots where the ship is more often a "statesman-ship," so to speak.

The thing is, that's fine too as long as the show is doing it well, and in my opinion, it is. Twelve episodes in and it is doing it well and improving steadily, too. Right now it is fun but by season five I expect SNW to be turning in Trek classics. Maybe even earlier.

I am very sympathetic to the people who want the show to be something else than what it is; however, I would argue for that not ruining your appreciation for what the show actually is at the same time. These things can co-exist. Just like with Voyager. It could have been a lot more than what it was, but what it was, overall, was fairly enjoyable.

For what it is worth (and that's not much imo as this is just a silly tangent), way more people watched any given episode of TOS in its initial airings than have seen any episode of SNW. There used to be three television networks. Just three. Audience numbers for any television program have massively decreased from the 1960s until now. You can google just how much. It's staggering.

But the revenue models have changed accordingly.

Yes, TOS was canceled for getting about one-fourth of the televisions in the country tuned to it every week, in a world where there were three networks. Today if you get 25% of all households watching you, you must be the Super Bowl or some other huge NFL game, or else you are a phenomenon we have not seen in modern times.

@Harry Kim Eats Worms: "Aliens was better than Alien."

Hard disagree! On Jammer's scale, I would rate "Alien" 3.5 or 4 stars (call it 3.9 if we are going beyond half-star increments, just to differentiate it from a total masterpiece like "Blade Runner" or "Children of Men" that would get 4.0 stars). "Aliens" was IMO a huge letdown, which I rated 1.5 stars. But then, I can't think of an Eighties action movie I actually like: I wasn't into "Rambo", "Top Gun", or any of that sort of thing.

I haven't seen anyone point out the reason for the eugenics band. Like the way that we exclude improperly obtained evidence and therefore sometimes let criminals go free to protect the integrity of the system, it is at least conceivable that augments would have such an advantage in Starfleet (like Bashir) that allowing them in would excessively incentivize the crime.

I didn’t find this episode to be as politically charged or allegorical the way it seems a lot of others have. If anything considering when it was written MAYBE a connection could be made with Covid paranoia. How she was treated as if she was infected

@F

There is of course many differences between TOS and SNW.

TOS was something completely new.

SNW has the free standing episodes. They have a quite broad pallete of episodes. It seeks clever solutions and not just confrontation. It seems to have been quite succesful with good response.

There ar differenceses, character development, broader crew, cgi, more considered scripts. Tos sometimes seemed very improvised and had a quite short production time.

Disco and Picard did not have this. TNG had, In VOY and DS9 they had stronger main theme. ENT also had season themes.

What about the so called woke, perhaps leftism and gender issues? As a European, self beeing a little leftish I don't even notice it. The gender issue was definetly Disco. Here? Well the cast have more females, I have no problems with it. SNW is very far away from a typical romance soap.

So at the end SNW feels more like TOS than anyhing else since TNG. I really hope that I have not offended anyone with this quite liberal veiw.

"I may be pedestrian, but I’m paying and I bet you are too. Is there a different bar you’re going to with special trek snobbery? "

fmovies.taxi

You're welcome.

This was a nice tight courtroom drama, certainly nowhere near TNG's "The Measure of a Man," but it lands some appropriate social commentary. The characters are all well-written and well-acted. An improvement over last week.

Long time lurker, never a commenter. But hi everyone…

Regardless of whether you liked or didn’t like this episode (I enjoyed it but do agree with the lawyer’s notes above about the asylum idea being a bit off), I think that when your top complaints include “this black woman,” you may want to maybe take a look at the bigot in the mirror. Shame on you @Rahul.

Slowly getting through this season but my god the good will built up from the largely/mostly promosing (if not amazing) season 1 has almost run out already.

It's not Discovery levels of bad yet but there's just better things to watch (Like Apple's "Silo" for example).

I honestly can't imagine how anyone could find this good social commentary but I'm not going to be one of those commenters who arrogantly states everything like a fact rather than subjective.

TNG/ToS (and DS9) all did far superior courtroom drama episodes.

Would they stop turning Spock into a clown? It's not funny. It's just embarrassing.

There is virtually no drama in “Ad Astra.” The people barely move! For some reason, the onlookers are not in the actual courtroom at all. The hostility of Pasalk is so understated that it has to be brought to our attention verbally, and it’s never explained. Una is played very statically, even more than usual. This shows up most blatantly in the ending scene, where I expected her - or at least someone - to start bubbling over. But no, no group hugs, no high fives, no cheers. Just some restrained applause as the lawyer leaves. Also, in a weird directorial choice, Capt. Batel leaves with the Enterprise crew when they’re told to get back to their stations. It would have been more natural for her to stay with Pike.

The good parts of “Ad Astra” are all non-trial scenes: Pike gasping for air, Ortegas making fun of Spock and Mbenga correcting her, Pike and Batel yelling at each other, Uhura standing up to La’an about personal logs.

But the biggest weakness for me was that I barely care about Una. She has been in, by my count, 9 episodes prior to this (including Disco episodes) and honestly hasn’t shown much personality at all, except perhaps that she is “where fun goes to die.” In “The Measure of a Man” we’d already had 34 episodes of Data in various moods and situations, and the issue was life-or-death for him. In “The Drumhead” we didn’t know the accused, but that episode was more about the prosecutor/conspiracy theorist and how close Worf came to turning evil. In “The Menagerie” we didn’t know anybody, but there was a lot of action involving Spock and Pike. In all of these other trial episodes, the emphasis was on telling a good story and showing us the issues rather than just debating them in court. “Ad Astra” falls down on that front, and it spoils it for me.

The large speeches are competently written, but as an earlier poster noted they pretty much sledgehammer you. It seems to me that people love this episode because they like the content of the speeches. Now, I like the content of the speeches too, but it's nothing I haven't heart before, nothing creative, and even the best actor of the episode, the defense attorney, couldn't really keep me awake for them.

I just wish the writers had done a lot more showing and less telling.

This was so devoid of drama that instead of feeling like you were in a courtroom, it felt like you were in church. I was just waiting for someone in the crew to shout "PREACH!"
Unable accused her lawyer of just wanting a platform. Ironic because the writers were clearly on their soapbox.

The former Discovery writers were shipped over to write this one, while the displaced writers were forced to pump out all these 10/10 reviews for their supper.

Though there are good scenes (e.g. Urhra vs. Khan), I agree with what F and Andrew have already written.

This was a fairly good courtroom episode of Trek, but I find many of the themes were better served in “The Measure of a Man” and to some extent “Drumhead.” The guest actor was not compelling and her acting fell flat for me. The overall idea of banning any augmentation still seems as silly as it did before, but it did keep my attention for the entire episode. 2.5 stars from me.

An attempt at recreating the success of Measure of a Man at approximately the same episode in the series? Interesting.

I don't think it's quite "up there" but it's pretty good.

On the nose? Hmm maybe. Maybe we need that though. Subtlety doesn't seem to have changed the world. Like the new Doctor Who actor says about criticisms of box ticking, good, "tick those f**ing boxes"

Probably the worst court drama Star Trek has done, even Devil's Due was less silly.

I'm not sure how the potential crimes of the captain imply anything about this case, nor why the Vulcan feels it is logical to use this as evidence of her bad character. A completely circular argument given his guilt would depend on hers.

The whole thing seemed very implausible, and didn't have any kind of original twist or take on an issue.

As a European progressive, I certainly get the intention of the episode and I don't share any "trek is too woke" sentiments or whatever, but damn, that was A. Lot. Of. Speeches.

And it also suffered from superhero overpowering syndrome, a mistake that is very frequently made when Hollywood wants to show "strong women".

Like, ooooh, that lawyer is not just a good lawyer. She's the best in the universe. With the most righteous cause ever. And she had it all planned out. And is one step away from gloating over the superiority or her arguments. While the antagonist Vulcan lowers his head in shame when rightfully lectured from her.

Well... That's just not how you do it. That's why this isn't measure of a man, not by a long shot.

It's the old Ellen Ripley VS Captain Marvel thing. Ripley is perceived as one of the most badass female heroines because she has weaknesses to overcome and is relatable as a normal human. While captain marvel isn't.

And that's not a women thing either. It's how die hard single handedly ended the series of goofy 80s action hero movies. Because Bruce Willis nearly dying was more relatable than Arnold Schwarzenegger not even breaking a sweat.

I really don't know why they make this mistake again and again. It does the actual goals of the storyteller a huge disservice, and when you add insult to injury by having the overpowered character behave as if she's fully aware of her superiority, the character becomes unlikeable.

They sabotaged Michael "I know the universes fate rests on my shoulders and noone but me can do this so I'm gonna go rogue" Burnam in the same way for several seasons.

It needs to stop. They need to learn this. Take a character writer class at James Camerons villa or something. It's not rocket science.

I don't think I've shouted at my screen as much as I did for this episode in a long time. What utter dreck.

- Character witnesses spend so much time lauding over Una, telling us how wonderful and talented and dependable she is. She's the best. And yet, I haven't seen almost any of those qualities in the entirety of last season. I barely even know who she is. This insistence on what a great, fantastic officer she is just comes off as completely hollow.

- The Defense Lawyer's neutral expression is Smugface. This actress doesn't seem to know how to do much else, and it REALLY doesn't endear me to her. She's not a smart lawyer working hard against impossible odds, she's the best lawyer in the galaxy who clearly knows she's gonna win before she starts. Ugh.

-As others have pointed out, the law sucks here. She's asking the judges to confirm Pike's granting asylum to Una. Which a) isn't what happened. Una turned herself into the authorities, not to Pike. She only confessed her Illyrian heritage to Pike, who decided to ignore it, and that's not the same thing. Also, turning yourself in isn't the same thing as asking for asylum either. b) The claim is that she's fleeing persecution, but the evidence of persecution that the episode specifically points to in that moment is from when she was a CHILD, not from someone serving aboard the Enterprise. c) Asylum is ridiculous in this context anyway, since the two entities are the same. Granting asylum by starfleet...from starfleet?
The only even remotely passable argument this lawyer has is that Starfleet lets the rules slide all the time when it feels like it. Which is debatable, depending on what exactly the rules around General Order One are, but it at least has a stronger foundation. It's too bad then that all that testimony was struck from the record! Can't use it! It sure would have made for a better closing argument!

- This writing has no sense of subtlety. It's so in your face, it's practically breathing on your nose.

- The issue of genetic engineering is far more nuanced than this series gives it credit. There's a lot of interesting discussion to be had around the subject, but the series wants to boil it all down to "it's bigotry". (just as one example, DS9 makes the comment in "Statistical Probabilities" about how genetic engineering was made illegal partly so that parents wouldn't feel pressured to do it to their kids just so that they could keep up with everyone else) This stance doesn't help the episode, as so much of the argumentation is hammering on the same soapbox over and over, "We're fighting for JUSTICE!! We're the Good Guys!!" Not convincing.

- Holy hell this music needs to calm down. Do we really need the score to tell us what we should be feeling at every. single. moment? AGGGGHHHHHH!


I sure do miss the days of two people sitting in a room, in silence, and just having an interesting discussion.

Eh, not so impressed with this one. Another 2 1/2 star outing.

This was preaching at church more than anything. Speech after speech about how people are feeling, and why I should feel things. Show don't tell please. The characters are in service of the story in this one, not the other way around.

I want to buy into Una's premise here. I like the actress and character. But good writing does not have characters talking about what they feel, it shows them feeling it, from good well written dialogue and circumstances. This show has no room to breathe. I bet the script was so long with all the dialogue, and the actors / editing seem to be rushing through it all to get all the words in edgewise.

Moments that were highlights for me was the montage of the crew sticking up for Una. I actually felt emotions, because these are characters we know, sticking up for someone we know. The lawyer in this episode came across to me as overly "fierce" / "slay the day" kind of warrior lawyer. She walks all over the courtroom with grandiosity, has no self doubt, is completely self-assured, and in the end, she still is. There's no real arc here. She's not a character, but a preacher at a sermon. Her job is to deliver "The Message"tm, not actually be a real character. And as for the message, if they are trying to analogize trans people with the idea of Ellyrians practicing body modifications / genetics, well they really side stepped anything remotely connected to that issue, because there is far more to explore. I don't really even know what I was supposed to learn from this episode.

On the positive side, I enjoyed seeing Spock in the lounge and HIM being called out for an excessive outburst. That's more in line with Spock's character than last week's "I want the ship to go. Now" Spock. I also liked his little wink to Una regarding singing. He's not lieing, but not telling the truth. Thats how Spock is supposed to behave.

All the actors are watchable here, but truly, this show could get so much more right now from them. We know the cast can deliver the goods...so give them the goods! Give them a script as people, with real consequences. Stop diminishing characters in roles of authority, especially the men. Pike hugging Una at the end like a child getting back his mommy makes him so much weaker. I'm seeing too much of this from Pike. He's putting up with back talk from his subordinates, seems to lack a backbone in military situations, is a 50 year old yet is clueless when dating women (last season's love story). And of course he was cast as the "coward" in the costume episode. Una is the one in this episode who nearly went to Jail. She's the one who should be exhausted and broken down. Yes Pike was threatened, but c'mon, he's the captain of the freaking Enterprise. Maybe he is indeed the boy scout he was referred to as earlier in the show. How are we supposed to respect this guy if this is how he "leads" week after week? My suspicion as usual is that it's the whole "demasculinise men", approach of modern productions. Can't have the male Captain be stronger than the woman 2nd in Command. If it made more sense I would be ok with, but it doesn't, and fits a pattern of modern nutrek productions. (See Picard season 1, I barely recognize the guy.)

I miss Hemmer. He was professional and competent (surprising and yet not suprising he was killed off). Right now I think he would have been a better captain than Pike. I like Pike, but i'm losing faith in his ability to command. Spock still has credibility, as long as they don't make him a punchline like they did last week. I also think Una would be a good leader. Perhaps that's where this will eventually go.

I'm harsh because I care. SNW can do better.

Best part of this episode, for me, is how neatly it presents that “gray” is necessary in Starfleet, the Federation, and by analogy any ideal society. Black and white answers simply don’t cut it. (Earth today could do with recognizing this.) An ideal society can’t box itself into rigid rules that leave no room for unforeseeable future scenarios. But an ideal society *does* establish standards for ideal behavior, and a failure (even repeated failures) to meet the full potential of those standards does not mean it’s a failed society — as long as it continues striving to meet them (arcing toward justice, to quote a great phrase).

I agree with comments above that there’s not really a way to tell the story of bigotry other than the sledgehammer approach, and this episode uses its sledgehammer with finesse. (See here for such a thing as finesse with a sledgehammer: https://youtu.be/LuimD6DBoYo)

Jammer makes the good point that “a single episode of DS9…retroactively established the entire legal framework around genetic engineering in the Federation. Up to that point…genetic modification had not been established as universally canonically illegal.”

One of many reasons to like DS9 is it explores “gray” well — so it’s ironic that one of the few times DS9 came up with a black-and-white rule, the Trek makers found themselves 3 decades later, retconning in some gray thru SNW Ad Astra.

It's not that it has a bad message, but I'm surprised that people aren't more offended by writing that talks to its audience like they are little children attending a church sermon.