Is Canceling Star Trek Starfleet Academy Really the Course Correction Fans Think It Is?

A week after canceling Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, what many fans are calling a long‑awaited course correction may actually be a pause that risks the franchise’s future—our thoughts on what could be lost and where Star Trek should boldly go next.

It has been a week since the announcement of the cancellation of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. Since then, there has been much speculation about the future of the franchise, including extreme comments from nearly every side one can take.

Is this really a good thing?

I see very little good to come out of an outright cancellation of any series. This means there is no actual ending—circumstances that Star Trek, as a franchise, hasn’t experienced since the original series ended in 1969.

There is a prevailing opinion that eliminating current Trek head Alex Kurtzman and his Secret Hideout production company will course-correct a franchise that is ailing. While it may ultimately result in change, it’s not necessarily going to materialize in the way critics think.

First off, consider the depth and variety of Star Trek that has been available, including content for all ages, animation, comedy, and more. Even if you hated all Star Trek from the past few years, there was surely an episode or two that brought you joy. For all those who love the Berman era of Trek, you were surely excited to see the TNG crew back on the bridge of their old ship in Star Trek: Picard.

That’s gone now. The chances of seeing those characters—or new ships like the Enterprise‑G—are slimmer. Were we ever going to get more of that early 25th‑century era? Who knows? But if we do now, it’s likely quite some time off, as there is no new Trek series or movie in production or even greenlit to move forward.

But Star Trek is woke now.

We have been critical of modern Star Trek since the launch of Discovery in 2017. Readers know of our dislike of the word “woke,” simply because it isn’t used in a way that accurately reflects its meaning. There are many—too many—instances of forced diversity implemented in a way that negatively impacts the plot or the characters in the story being told. That can be called “woke,” or whatever expletive the situation deserves, but don’t let that be an excuse for bad writing. And in Star Trek, that is key.

With 60 years of legacy, it is no easy feat to maintain strict canon. Every Star Trek series (except maybe Prodigy and Lower Decks, ironically) has at least bent, if not broken, canon. But it has become far too frequent to see canon simply ignored in new Trek—either for the sake of bad storytelling or, more likely, ignorance.

When online commenters and video creators attack Star Trek for being “woke” and share their often vitriolic grievances, they immediately create a division. That—its own kind of ignorance—immediately gives the writers a pass. There’s more than just the right‑wing, anti‑diversity side and the left‑wing, super‑diverse side. There’s also the side that understands the philosophy of Star Trek—of a Federation where all are accepted—while also knowing that you can’t beam someone up if the shields are up, or travel from Earth to the Klingon homeworld in two minutes.

What about Star Trek: Legacy and/or United?

The assumption is that getting rid of the current Star Trek productions makes way for the Trek we really want—Star Trek: Legacy, a continuation of sorts of Star Trek: Picard’s third season, and Star Trek: United, a West Wing–style series featuring President Jonathan Archer.

First off, for all the critics who complain about current Trek being too different from the traditional Trek template—have you seen The West Wing? We have, many, many times, as it’s our favorite TV series, along with Mad Men. Star Trek doesn’t naturally translate to that format. There’s a lot of talking—a lot of strategizing—and not a lot of ships or action.

Beyond that, there are legal challenges that would have to be overcome with elements of new Trek created during the Kurtzman era in order to use items like the Enterprise‑G or characters like Commander Raffi or Jack Crusher.

There is a general acceptance that Starfleet Academy’s third season was canceled because Paramount’s new owners were not up for more “woke Trek.”

While they have certainly indicated a right‑leaning political stance—though we expect this is much less of an issue in the industry than one might believe—it’s equally possible the series simply cost too much to make. Star Trek is not a cheap franchise to produce, with high‑paid stars and extensive special effects. You only need to look at interviews with Trek stewards of the old days, who lamented the shoestring budgets Berman and those showrunners were forced to work with.

What would I like to see happen?

In a perfect world, I’d like to see Starfleet Academy return for its planned four‑year run. We’d like to see more of characters like the new Dax and Captain Ake—and the Athena itself. It would be good to get Prodigy back, or even a Janeway live‑action series. Even if it’s a mini‑series, I think there’s a lot to be mined from this era.

Then, I’d like a new series set roughly 100 years after the TNG/DS9/VOY era on a new Starship Enterprise. Far enough removed to do its own thing, but close enough to occasionally tap into nostalgia—not unlike how TNG related to the Original Series.

We like the idea of a Star Trek Studios concept that can build a universe around new content—not just what we see on screen. It would be great if they had more influence over comics, novels, and other merchandise. Surely there are lower‑cost ways of producing new Trek—YouTube‑style shorts, for example. Maybe something set during the Picard era, or even an animated format that revisits DS9 or VOY with the original actors.

With all the media and digital opportunities available today, why is it so difficult to do something creative?

If remastering DS9 and VOY for a modern viewing experience is too costly, how about doing “movies” like TNG did? Two‑part episodes like “Best of Both Worlds” and “Unification” sold as separate releases outside the full season. Surely “Way of the Warrior” or “Scorpion” would be great candidates if redoing the entire series isn’t an option.

And finally, we’d like to see William Shatner brought back for one more adventure as Captain Kirk. Whether it’s animation, a TV movie, or a mini‑series, it’s a disgrace that—assuming he wants to do it—there hasn’t been a vehicle to bring Kirk back to our screens since 1994.

What do we hope doesn’t happen?

We could point to something like the Star Trek: Year One concept, which continues Strange New Worlds into what is essentially a prequel to TOS with TOS characters. That doesn’t sound particularly interesting—though maybe as a mini‑series it could work.

In the same vein, we’re not enthused about the Star Trek: United concept. While the fourth season of Star Trek: Enterprise was pretty good, I’m not sure “resetting” the Trek world using the least‑watched and least‑liked series of the Berman era is a great idea.

But most of all, we don’t want to see Star Trek enter a dark age. We don’t want to see it go away altogether. While there were the J.J. Abrams movies, it was a long slog between Enterprise’s “These Are the Voyages” and Discovery’s “The Vulcan Hello.” Best not to do that again—there may not be that many fans left when you decide to come back from the void.