Category: Blog

“Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a totally coherent system bound to context and behavior.” — Kenneth L. Pike

The web has accents. So should our design systems.

Design Systems as Living Languages

Design systems aren’t component libraries—they’re living languages. Tokens are phonemes, components are words, patterns are phrases, layouts are sentences. The conversations we build with users become the stories our products tell.

But here’s what we’ve forgotten: the more fluently a language is spoken, the more accents it can support without losing meaning. English in Scotland differs from English in Sydney, yet both are unmistakably English. The language adapts to context while preserving core meaning. This couldn’t be more obvious to me, a Brazilian Portuguese speaker, who learned English with an American accent, and lives in Sydney.

Our design systems must work the same way. Rigid adherence to visual rules creates brittle systems that break under contextual pressure. Fluent systems bend without breaking.

Consistency becomes a prison

The promise of design systems was simple: consistent components would accelerate development and unify experiences. But as systems matured and products grew more complex, that promise has become a prison. Teams file “exception” requests by the hundreds. Products launch with workarounds instead of system components. Designers spend more time defending consistency than solving user problems.

Our design systems must learn to speak dialects.

A design dialect is a systematic adaptation of a design system that maintains core principles while developing new patterns for specific contexts. Unlike one-off customizations or brand themes, dialects preserve the system’s essential grammar while expanding its vocabulary to serve different users, environments, or constraints.

When Perfect Consistency Fails

At Booking.com, I learned this lesson the hard way. We A/B-tested everything—color, copy, button shapes, even logo colors. As a professional with a graphic design education and experience building brand style guides, I found this shocking. While everyone fell in love with Airbnb’s pristine design system, Booking grew into a giant without ever considering visual consistency.  

The chaos taught me something profound: consistency isn’t ROI; solved problems are.

At Shopify. Polaris () was our crown jewel—a mature design language perfect for merchants on laptops. As a product team, we were expected to adopt Polaris as-is. Then my fulfillment team hit an “Oh, Ship!” moment, as we faced the challenge of building an app for warehouse pickers using our interface on shared, battered Android scanners in dim aisles, wearing thick gloves, scanning dozens of items per minute, many with limited levels of English understanding.

Task completion with standard Polaris: 0%.

Every component that worked beautifully for merchants failed completely for pickers. White backgrounds created glare. 44px tap targets were invisible to gloved fingers. Sentence-case labels took too long to parse. Multi-step flows confused non-native speakers.

We faced a choice: abandon Polaris entirely, or teach it to speak warehouse.

The Birth of a Dialect

We chose evolution over revolution. Working within Polaris’s core principles—clarity, efficiency, consistency—we developed what we now call a design dialect:

Constraint	Fluent Move	Rationale
Glare & low light	Dark surfaces + light text	Reduce glare on low-DPI screens
Gloves & haste	90px tap targets (~2cm)	Accommodate thick gloves
Multilingual	Single-task screens, plain language	Reduce cognitive load

Result: Task completion jumped from 0% to 100%. Onboarding time dropped from three weeks to one shift.

This wasn’t customization or theming—this was a dialect: a systematic adaptation that maintained Polaris’s core grammar while developing new vocabulary for a specific context. Polaris hadn’t failed; it had learned to speak warehouse.

The Flexibility Framework

At Atlassian, working on the Jira platform—itself a system within the larger Atlassian system—I pushed for formalizing this insight. With dozens of products sharing a design language across different codebases, we needed systematic flexibility so we built directly into our ways of working. The old model—exception requests and special approvals—was failing at scale.

We developed the Flexibility Framework to help designers define how flexible they wanted their components to be:

Tier	Action	Ownership
Consistent	Adopt unchanged	Platform locks design + code
Opinionated	Adapt within bounds	Platform provides smart defaults, products customize
Flexible	Extend freely	Platform defines behavior, products own presentation

During a navigation redesign, we tiered every element. Logo and global search stayed Consistent. Breadcrumbs and contextual actions became Flexible. Product teams could immediately see where innovation was welcome and where consistency mattered.

The Decision Ladder

Flexibility needs boundaries. We created a simple ladder for evaluating when rules should bend:

Good: Ship with existing system components. Fast, consistent, proven.

Better: Stretch a component slightly. Document the change. Contribute improvements back to the system for all to use.

Best: Prototype the ideal experience first. If user testing validates the benefit, update the system to support it.

The key question: “Which option lets users succeed fastest?”

Rules are tools, not relics.

Unity Beats Uniformity

Gmail, Drive, and Maps are unmistakably Google—yet each speaks with its own accent. They achieve unity through shared principles, not cloned components. One extra week of debate over button color costs roughly $30K in engineer time.

Unity is a brand outcome; fluency is a user outcome. When the two clash, side with the user.

Governance Without Gates

How do you maintain coherence while enabling dialects? Treat your system like a living vocabulary:

Document every deviation – e.g., dialects/warehouse.md with before/after screenshots and rationale.

Promote shared patterns – when three teams adopt a dialect independently, review it for core inclusion.

Deprecate with context – retire old idioms via flags and migration notes, never a big-bang purge.

A living dictionary scales better than a frozen rulebook.

Start Small: Your First Dialect

Ready to introduce dialects? Start with one broken experience:

This week: Find one user flow where perfect consistency blocks task completion. Could be mobile users struggling with desktop-sized components, or accessibility needs your standard patterns don’t address.

Document the context: What makes standard patterns fail here? Environmental constraints? User capabilities? Task urgency?

Design one systematic change: Focus on behavior over aesthetics. If gloves are the problem, bigger targets aren’t “”breaking the system””—they’re serving the user. Earn the variations and make them intentional.

Test and measure: Does the change improve task completion? Time to productivity? User satisfaction?

Show the savings: If that dialect frees even half a sprint, fluency has paid for itself.

Beyond the Component Library

We’re not managing design systems anymore—we’re cultivating design languages. Languages that grow with their speakers. Languages that develop accents without losing meaning. Languages that serve human needs over aesthetic ideals.

The warehouse workers who went from 0% to 100% task completion didn’t care that our buttons broke the style guide. They cared that the buttons finally worked.

Your users feel the same way. Give your system permission to speak their language.

Picture this: You’re in a meeting room at your tech company, and two people are having what looks like the same conversation about the same design problem. One is talking about whether the team has the right skills to tackle it. The other is diving deep into whether the solution actually solves the user’s problem. Same room, same problem, completely different lenses.

This is the beautiful, sometimes messy reality of having both a Design Manager and a Lead Designer on the same team. And if you’re wondering how to make this work without creating confusion, overlap, or the dreaded “too many cooks” scenario, you’re asking the right question.

The traditional answer has been to draw clean lines on an org chart. The Design Manager handles people, the Lead Designer handles craft. Problem solved, right? Except clean org charts are fantasy. In reality, both roles care deeply about team health, design quality, and shipping great work. 

The magic happens when you embrace the overlap instead of fighting it—when you start thinking of your design org as a design organism.

The Anatomy of a Healthy Design Team

Here’s what I’ve learned from years of being on both sides of this equation: think of your design team as a living organism. The Design Manager tends to the mind (the psychological safety, the career growth, the team dynamics). The Lead Designer tends to the body (the craft skills, the design standards, the hands-on work that ships to users).

But just like mind and body aren’t completely separate systems, so, too, do these roles overlap in important ways. You can’t have a healthy person without both working in harmony. The trick is knowing where those overlaps are and how to navigate them gracefully.

When we look at how healthy teams actually function, three critical systems emerge. Each requires both roles to work together, but with one taking primary responsibility for keeping that system strong.

The Nervous System: People & Psychology

Primary caretaker: Design Manager
Supporting role: Lead Designer

The nervous system is all about signals, feedback, and psychological safety. When this system is healthy, information flows freely, people feel safe to take risks, and the team can adapt quickly to new challenges.

The Design Manager is the primary caretaker here. They’re monitoring the team’s psychological pulse, ensuring feedback loops are healthy, and creating the conditions for people to grow. They’re hosting career conversations, managing workload, and making sure no one burns out.

But the Lead Designer plays a crucial supporting role. They’re providing sensory input about craft development needs, spotting when someone’s design skills are stagnating, and helping identify growth opportunities that the Design Manager might miss.

Design Manager tends to:

• Career conversations and growth planning
• Team psychological safety and dynamics
• Workload management and resource allocation
• Performance reviews and feedback systems
• Creating learning opportunities

Lead Designer supports by:

• Providing craft-specific feedback on team member development
• Identifying design skill gaps and growth opportunities
• Offering design mentorship and guidance
• Signaling when team members are ready for more complex challenges

The Muscular System: Craft & Execution

Primary caretaker: Lead Designer
Supporting role: Design Manager

The muscular system is about strength, coordination, and skill development. When this system is healthy, the team can execute complex design work with precision, maintain consistent quality, and adapt their craft to new challenges.

The Lead Designer is the primary caretaker here. They’re setting design standards, providing craft coaching, and ensuring that shipping work meets the quality bar. They’re the ones who can tell you if a design decision is sound or if we’re solving the right problem.

But the Design Manager plays a crucial supporting role. They’re ensuring the team has the resources and support to do their best craft work, like proper nutrition and recovery time for an athlete.

Lead Designer tends to:

• Definition of design standards and system usage
• Feedback on what design work meets the standard
• Experience direction for the product
• Design decisions and product-wide alignment
• Innovation and craft advancement

Design Manager supports by:

• Ensuring design standards are understood and adopted across the team
• Confirming experience direction is being followed
• Supporting practices and systems that scale without bottlenecking
• Facilitating design alignment across teams
• Providing resources and removing obstacles to great craft work

The Circulatory System: Strategy & Flow

Shared caretakers: Both Design Manager and Lead Designer

The circulatory system is about how information, decisions, and energy flow through the team. When this system is healthy, strategic direction is clear, priorities are aligned, and the team can respond quickly to new opportunities or challenges.

This is where true partnership happens. Both roles are responsible for keeping the circulation strong, but they’re bringing different perspectives to the table.

Lead Designer contributes:

• User needs are met by the product
• Overall product quality and experience
• Strategic design initiatives
• Research-based user needs for each initiative

Design Manager contributes:

• Communication to team and stakeholders
• Stakeholder management and alignment
• Cross-functional team accountability
• Strategic business initiatives

Both collaborate on:

• Co-creation of strategy with leadership
• Team goals and prioritization approach
• Organizational structure decisions
• Success measures and frameworks

Keeping the Organism Healthy

The key to making this partnership sing is understanding that all three systems need to work together. A team with great craft skills but poor psychological safety will burn out. A team with great culture but weak craft execution will ship mediocre work. A team with both but poor strategic circulation will work hard on the wrong things.

Be Explicit About Which System You’re Tending

When you’re in a meeting about a design problem, it helps to acknowledge which system you’re primarily focused on. “I’m thinking about this from a team capacity perspective” (nervous system) or “I’m looking at this through the lens of user needs” (muscular system) gives everyone context for your input.

This isn’t about staying in your lane. It’s about being transparent as to which lens you’re using, so the other person knows how to best add their perspective.

Create Healthy Feedback Loops

The most successful partnerships I’ve seen establish clear feedback loops between the systems:

Nervous system signals to muscular system: “The team is struggling with confidence in their design skills” → Lead Designer provides more craft coaching and clearer standards.

Muscular system signals to nervous system: “The team’s craft skills are advancing faster than their project complexity” → Design Manager finds more challenging growth opportunities.

Both systems signal to circulatory system: “We’re seeing patterns in team health and craft development that suggest we need to adjust our strategic priorities.”

Handle Handoffs Gracefully

The most critical moments in this partnership are when something moves from one system to another. This might be when a design standard (muscular system) needs to be rolled out across the team (nervous system), or when a strategic initiative (circulatory system) needs specific craft execution (muscular system).

Make these transitions explicit. “I’ve defined the new component standards. Can you help me think through how to get the team up to speed?” or “We’ve agreed on this strategic direction. I’m going to focus on the specific user experience approach from here.”

Stay Curious, Not Territorial

The Design Manager who never thinks about craft, or the Lead Designer who never considers team dynamics, is like a doctor who only looks at one body system. Great design leadership requires both people to care about the whole organism, even when they’re not the primary caretaker.

This means asking questions rather than making assumptions. “What do you think about the team’s craft development in this area?” or “How do you see this impacting team morale and workload?” keeps both perspectives active in every decision.

When the Organism Gets Sick

Even with clear roles, this partnership can go sideways. Here are the most common failure modes I’ve seen:

System Isolation

The Design Manager focuses only on the nervous system and ignores craft development. The Lead Designer focuses only on the muscular system and ignores team dynamics. Both people retreat to their comfort zones and stop collaborating.

The symptoms: Team members get mixed messages, work quality suffers, morale drops.

The treatment: Reconnect around shared outcomes. What are you both trying to achieve? Usually it’s great design work that ships on time from a healthy team. Figure out how both systems serve that goal.

Poor Circulation

Strategic direction is unclear, priorities keep shifting, and neither role is taking responsibility for keeping information flowing.

The symptoms: Team members are confused about priorities, work gets duplicated or dropped, deadlines are missed.

The treatment: Explicitly assign responsibility for circulation. Who’s communicating what to whom? How often? What’s the feedback loop?

Autoimmune Response

One person feels threatened by the other’s expertise. The Design Manager thinks the Lead Designer is undermining their authority. The Lead Designer thinks the Design Manager doesn’t understand craft.

The symptoms: Defensive behavior, territorial disputes, team members caught in the middle.

The treatment: Remember that you’re both caretakers of the same organism. When one system fails, the whole team suffers. When both systems are healthy, the team thrives.

The Payoff

Yes, this model requires more communication. Yes, it requires both people to be secure enough to share responsibility for team health. But the payoff is worth it: better decisions, stronger teams, and design work that’s both excellent and sustainable.

When both roles are healthy and working well together, you get the best of both worlds: deep craft expertise and strong people leadership. When one person is out sick, on vacation, or overwhelmed, the other can help maintain the team’s health. When a decision requires both the people perspective and the craft perspective, you’ve got both right there in the room.

Most importantly, the framework scales. As your team grows, you can apply the same system thinking to new challenges. Need to launch a design system? Lead Designer tends to the muscular system (standards and implementation), Design Manager tends to the nervous system (team adoption and change management), and both tend to circulation (communication and stakeholder alignment).

The Bottom Line

The relationship between a Design Manager and Lead Designer isn’t about dividing territories. It’s about multiplying impact. When both roles understand they’re tending to different aspects of the same healthy organism, magic happens.

The mind and body work together. The team gets both the strategic thinking and the craft excellence they need. And most importantly, the work that ships to users benefits from both perspectives.

So the next time you’re in that meeting room, wondering why two people are talking about the same problem from different angles, remember: you’re watching shared leadership in action. And if it’s working well, both the mind and body of your design team are getting stronger.

As a product builder over too many years to mention, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen promising ideas go from zero to hero in a few weeks, only to fizzle out within months.

Financial products, which is the field I work in, are no exception. With people’s real hard-earned money on the line, user expectations running high, and a crowded market, it’s tempting to throw as many features at the wall as possible and hope something sticks. But this approach is a recipe for disaster. Here’s why:

The pitfalls of feature-first development

When you start building a financial product from the ground up, or are migrating existing customer journeys from paper or telephony channels onto online banking or mobile apps, it’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of creating new features. You might think, “If I can just add one more thing that solves this particular user problem, they’ll love me!” But what happens when you inevitably hit a roadblock because the narcs (your security team!) don’t like it? When a hard-fought feature isn’t as popular as you thought, or it breaks due to unforeseen complexity?

This is where the concept of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) comes in. Jason Fried’s book Getting Real and his podcast Rework often touch on this idea, even if he doesn’t always call it that. An MVP is a product that provides just enough value to your users to keep them engaged, but not so much that it becomes overwhelming or difficult to maintain. It sounds like an easy concept but it requires a razor sharp eye, a ruthless edge and having the courage to stick by your opinion because it is easy to be seduced by “the Columbo Effect”… when there’s always “just one more thing…” that someone wants to add.

The problem with most finance apps, however, is that they often become a reflection of the internal politics of the business rather than an experience solely designed around the customer. This means that the focus is on delivering as many features and functionalities as possible to satisfy the needs and desires of competing internal departments, rather than providing a clear value proposition that is focused on what the people out there in the real world want. As a result, these products can very easily bloat to become a mixed bag of confusing, unrelated and ultimately unlovable customer experiences—a feature salad, you might say.

The importance of bedrock

So what’s a better approach? How can we build products that are stable, user-friendly, and—most importantly—stick?

That’s where the concept of “bedrock” comes in. Bedrock is the core element of your product that truly matters to users. It’s the fundamental building block that provides value and stays relevant over time.

In the world of retail banking, which is where I work, the bedrock has got to be in and around the regular servicing journeys. People open their current account once in a blue moon but they look at it every day. They sign up for a credit card every year or two, but they check their balance and pay their bill at least once a month.

Identifying the core tasks that people want to do and then relentlessly striving to make them easy to do, dependable, and trustworthy is where the gravy’s at.

But how do you get to bedrock? By focusing on the “MVP” approach, prioritizing simplicity, and iterating towards a clear value proposition. This means cutting out unnecessary features and focusing on delivering real value to your users.

It also means having some guts, because your colleagues might not always instantly share your vision to start with. And controversially, sometimes it can even mean making it clear to customers that you’re not going to come to their house and make their dinner. The occasional “opinionated user interface design” (i.e. clunky workaround for edge cases) might sometimes be what you need to use to test a concept or buy you space to work on something more important.

Practical strategies for building financial products that stick

So what are the key strategies I’ve learned from my own experience and research?

1. Start with a clear “why”: What problem are you trying to solve? For whom? Make sure your mission is crystal clear before building anything. Make sure it aligns with your company’s objectives, too.
2. Focus on a single, core feature and obsess on getting that right before moving on to something else: Resist the temptation to add too many features at once. Instead, choose one that delivers real value and iterate from there.
3. Prioritize simplicity over complexity: Less is often more when it comes to financial products. Cut out unnecessary bells and whistles and keep the focus on what matters most.
4. Embrace continuous iteration: Bedrock isn’t a fixed destination—it’s a dynamic process. Continuously gather user feedback, refine your product, and iterate towards that bedrock state.
5. Stop, look and listen: Don’t just test your product as part of your delivery process—test it repeatedly in the field. Use it yourself. Run A/B tests. Gather user feedback. Talk to people who use it, and refine accordingly.

The bedrock paradox

There’s an interesting paradox at play here: building towards bedrock means sacrificing some short-term growth potential in favour of long-term stability. But the payoff is worth it—products built with a focus on bedrock will outlast and outperform their competitors, and deliver sustained value to users over time.

So, how do you start your journey towards bedrock? Take it one step at a time. Start by identifying those core elements that truly matter to your users. Focus on building and refining a single, powerful feature that delivers real value. And above all, test obsessively—for, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Alan Kay, or Peter Drucker (whomever you believe!!), “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

This article contains spoilers for the two-part series premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. A new era of Star Trek is upon us. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds has officially wrapped filming on its fifth and final season, and although we won’t even see its fourth until later this year, there’s already a distinct sense […]

The post Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Premiere Review – A New Era Begins appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

Maggie Gyllenhaal did not set out to make a typical monster movie when the Bride of Frankenstein entered her life. This might seem obvious to those who watched this morning’s fabulous new trailer for a genre mashup fantasia pulled together from various sources of style, influence, and aesthetic. (A bit like the good, undead woman […]

The post Maggie Gyllenhaal Is Determined to Give the Bride of Frankenstein Her Voice appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

This Agatha Christie’s Seven Dials review contains no spoilers. When you hear the name Agatha Christie, your mind tends to go in one of two directions: Hercule Poirot or Jane Marple. The author’s most famous fictional sleuths, these two characters solve murders in a combined 45 novels and over 70 short stories, have inspired long-running, […]

The post Agatha Christie’s Seven Dials Review: Chris Chibnall Brings Contemporary Depth appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere. After a particularly tense stand off between cetologist Gillian Taylor and Spock, Kirk offers some friendly correction. “About those colorful metaphors we’ve discussed,” Kirk says, using their term for profanity, “I don’t think you should try using them anymore… for one thing, you […]

The post Starfleet Academy Proves Star Trek Still Doesn’t Have the Knack for Swearing appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

The following contains spoilers for the first two episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. The premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy has to cover a lot of ground, from introducing over a dozen new characters and establishing what everyday post-Burn society looks like, to reminding viewers of why an organization like this should exist in […]

The post Holly Hunter Explains Chancellor Ake (Including Why She Sits Like That) appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy. Like all new Star Trek shows, Starfleet Academy adds a host of characters to the franchise. There are the cadets like outsider Caleb Mir and giddy Kasqian Sam, alongside the half-Lanthanite captain Nahla Ake and her half-Klingon/half-Jem’Hadar first mate Lura Thok. But, […]

The post Star Trek: Voyager’s Doctor is Already Starfleet Academy’s Best Character appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains slight spoilers for Marty Supreme. In one of the most unexpected moments of Marty Supreme, Marty’s benefactor Milton Rockwell declares “I was born in 1601. I’m a vampire. I’ve been around forever.” Most viewers just interpreted the line as metaphorical speech about the nature of the rich sapping strength from laborers like […]

The post Robert Pattinson Has a Secret Marty Supreme Cameo appeared first on Den of Geek.

This article contains spoilers for the two-part premiere of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.

If you only saw the promotional materials for Star Trek: Starfleet Academy, you would be forgiven for thinking it was a teen drama, something that would fit on the WB or the CW—not next to Voyager on UPN. Awkward adolescents like Sam and Jay-Den Kraag fumble through social interactions, brooding hot guy Caleb Mir starts a rivalry with haughty hot guy Darem Reymi, try-hard Genesis Lythe insists she’s going to do it her own way. Those characters pay off the threat made by the infamous “kids under a tree” poster, in which the young cast smiled up at the camera from the Academy lawn.

But alongside those juvenile hijinks, something very different is happening on Starfleet Academy. A captain consults her crew for suggestions while dealing with a surprising threat. A teacher emphasizes the importance of procedure. A scientist uses logic and expertise to approach a new discovery. In short, there’s a lot of classic Star Trek stuff happening alongside the bouncing hormones and personal affirmations that were sold in the Starfleet Academy marketing.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the second episode, “Beta Test.” Even though it’s mostly interested in the romance between Caleb and Betazoid Tarima Sadal, the episode is driven by Admiral Vance and Captain Nahla Ake’s negotiations with Betazed’s President Sedal as they try to bring the planet back into the Federation. A onetime ally so important that its loss in the Dominion War signaled a new low, Betazed had left the Federation during the Burn, the (kinda dumb) event from Discovery that destroyed dilithium supplies and drove apart the planets.

As we see in the back and forth between the leaders, Betazed still believes in the basic ideals of the Federation, but doesn’t trust this incarnation to enforce them. This problem can’t be solved with the same action that resolved the show’s premiere “Kids These Days.” Nor does the problem involve a clear good guy and bad guy, someone who needs to learn the error of their ways and join the right thinking people. Instead, writers Noga Landau and Jane Maggs and director Alex Kurtzman give the characters enough time and space to state their grievances and change their perspectives.

These types of intellectual conflicts are the chief appeal of Star Trek, and something that’s been missing from the show in its latest era. In The Original Series, when Kirk wasn’t urging some ideological enemy to consult their better angels, he was debating with Spock and McCoy about trusting his head or his heart. In The Next Generation, episodes such as “The Measure of a Man” and “The First Duty” gave Patrick Stewart an opportunity to deliver monologues with the passion of a great cinematic lawyer, and debates happened regularly in Picard’s ready room.

The idea that reasoned debate could win the day is as crucial to Star Trek as its fantastic settings and cross-universe adventures. While we still want to see space battles and daring escapes, Star Trek’s optimism demands that we don’t respond to difference with fear and violence. Rather, it insists that we can listen to other perspectives and win them over with a rational and empathetic argument. Or, at the very least, we can reach some kind of compromise, if agreement is impossible.

Nu-Trek hasn’t completely abandoned that principle. Season 3 of Discovery in particular built to a conversation between Admiral Vance and Osyraa of the Emerald Chain, as the former tried to seek a compromise with the criminal syndicate, hoping that an alliance would help him rebuild the Federation. But too often, modern Trek has relied on big explosions and big emotions, turning reasonable disagreements into small issues—nothing that can’t be solved with a good cry and a strong hug.

In “Beta Test,” problems don’t get solved with a hug. They get solved by hearing one another out and offering a compromise. Specifically, the Federation offers to build its new headquarters on Betazed, which gives the President an assurance that the new version of the alliance has no intention of abandoning them. It’s a reasonable and professional solution to a legitimate problem.

Of course, all of this happens in the background of the episode. The A-plot is mostly concerned with Caleb wooing Tarima, which leads to a big emotional bit about his mom and his inability to trust people. And, if you want to get grouchy about it, Caleb’s sob story does provide Captain Ake the inspiration she needs to come to the Betazed conclusion.

But that’s to be expected in a show that sells itself with good-looking teens under a tree. The teen drama is inextricably part of Starfleet Academy, but it’s not the only part. There’s plenty of old school Trek in there for us old cranks to enjoy. Hopefully, these kids will learn from it.

New episodes of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy premiere Thursdays on Paramount+, culminating with the finale on March 12.

The post The Best Part of Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Isn’t the Teen Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.