That is true and to @ValueSubtracted's point, speaks to the fundamental difference between the morality tale that each episode is setting up for our consideration. "The Enemy Within" aims to make the viewer uncomfortable by suggesting that Kirk's decisiveness is derived from his "evil" half and isn't offering any commentary on the personhood of the "evil" half. So much so that they short circuit that possibility by slapping an expiration date on EvilKirk.
Best I can give you is that it's still technically murder if you kill a condemned man.
I liked Wesley in "A Quality of Mercy" but hot damn, he nailed it here. He is easy to recognize as Kirk and yet is borrowing very little from Shatner's performance. Wesley has managed to "echo" Kirk in a way that Peck and Gooding haven't quite dialed in yet for their characters.
It's funny—given that in both appearances he has depicted an "alternate" Kirk, he's had some built-in leeway to miss the mark and still be credible. He doesn't need it. This man can play Kirk.
It depends on whether or not you think the act of distributing is part of the commonly understood definition of canon.
The definition most reasonable Trek fans operate on is "the shows and movies made by the rights holders," although most aren't aware they've internalized that second part because nobody wants to admit they spend any amount of time caring about "the rights." (Ask them if they think Continues or New Voyages is canon and you'll cut to the heart of that matter real quick.) That latent "rights holders" qualification isn't there out of any particular deference to Paramount, it just gives us a convenient and durable boundary that a huge, varied, and global fanbase can largely agree on. Paramount decides what Star Trek to produce, but that decision results in canon Star Trek because it's a simple enough boundary for Trekkies to collectively accept without much friction.
Point being, Paramount is part of the definition but Paramount is not the source of authority for the definition. The fans are. This is an important distinction if you want to investigate whether or not this ugly Prodigy business has altered or clarified the definition of canon.
This act of cancelling and archiving is uncharted territory, yes. Assuming you agree with my earlier definition, it comes down to whether or not you think there are more qualifiers hiding after the word "made." Something like "made, released, and currently being distributed," which is an interesting set of qualifiers to add because it would decanonize pre-remaster TOS.
Personally, I think that's too much control over the definition to hand to Paramount. We care about "made" because it's the most minimal way to establish this "rights holders" boundary. I think we could have a reasonable debate over whether or not "released" is already part of the intuitively understood definition (i.e. "are deleted scenes canon?") but I would wager most Trekkies will agree that "currently being distributed" is not part of the intuitively understood definition.
An excellent episode which is virtually certain to displace "Measure" as Trek's most venerated hour of space court.
One thing that always strikes me about SNW—even the middling episodes—is just how vivid, bright, and beautiful this show is. Grimdark has its moments, but this visual style is a much better and more natural fit for Star Trek.
I am whelmed. I liked everything about it except for what was ostensibly the "main event."
Putting Spock in command? Interesting choice, I continue to enjoy Peck's portrayal as younger, less confident Spock. Love Pelia. Can't wait to see more of her. Love that we're back to a more traditional Klingon appearance. Love the updated D-7. Good use of La'an, interesting to see a planet which is firmly stuck in the wake of the Klingon war.
But then we get to the main event: Chapel and M'Benga are in a jam. And so they just... take drugs and fistfight Klingons. Yawn. This is the head doctor and the head nurse we're talking about here, and you're telling me there wasn't a more scientific or medically oriented solution? I mean sure, I guess doing some stims counts as vaguely "medical," but that's not really what I mean. It would have been interesting to see them exploit Klingon biology or Federation medical tech in a more thoughtful fashion, rather than just go bonk heads.
But, eh, that's a minor blemish on what was otherwise a solid hour of Trek. I do think it's interesting that they've managed to draw out Una's trial arc into three episodes now... hopefully it's just three? There are Strange New Worlds out there to visit.
One of the most annoying things about Mastodon during the Twitter migration at the beginning of this year was that the only thing Mastodon wanted to talk about was "the Birdsite."
It sure would be nice if we could get through that phase of the Reddit migration at a vastly accelerated pace.
Given the option between hanging out with 3,000 Trekkies who are willing to plunge headfirst into a strange new ecosystem and 600,000 Trekkies who find making an account to be an onerous process, I'll take the former, thanks
Oh, for sure the time he threatened to glass an entire planet because those nerds wouldn't stop playing a beta version of DEFCON hooked up to suicide booths
Reviewing your questions to consider, it's very hard for me to conceptualize a show that fits the description in your title. Most of Star Trek is heading down to the planet of the week. Given the choice between focusing on the away team and focusing on the crew operating the starship, I think I'd sooner follow the away team and consign the ship crew to being nameless extras.
What's interesting, though, is that I can think of at least two occasions where the people making Star Trek had similar doubts to the ones you've articulated here. First, when Roddenberry decided that sending the captain down was too dangerous, which led to the development of Riker as a character. Second, when the Enterprise writing staff decided that what Star Trek really needed were marines and came up with the MACOs.
So, while I can't really envision a Star Trek where the main cast is confined to the ship, I can envision a Star Trek where a starship's senior staff is distinct from a starship's MACO command staff and the main cast is split between the two.
In other words, we're talking about a version of TNG where Riker, Yar, and Worf are not Starfleet officers, but MACO officers. In this version of TNG, away missions are composite affairs: Geordi is still heading down if there's an engineering problem to solve, Crusher is still heading down to respond to a medical emergency, and Data is still heading down in case they need to win $12.5m playing craps. But Lt. Col. Riker is still in command of the the away mission and Capt. Worf is bringing up the rear.
The thing is, this changes the texture of your average away team-centric episode so little that all we've really done is... add marines to Star Trek. This will inevitably pull Star Trek in a militaristic direction and I don't think we've gained anything in exchange.
Closing thought. While writing this response I encountered something that surprised me: Major Hayes is only in five episodes of Enterprise. I suppose it's a credit to Culp's performance that I would have guessed he was in at least ten episodes had you put me on the spot and asked, but on the other hand, it's pretty telling that even though Enterprise kept the MACOs through season 4, they just became redshirts and the Enterprise writers never even bothered to tell us who their new commander was.
It's hard to imagine Lt. Col. Riker faring any better given the same constraints. You can give the Enterprise a MarDet, but if you're going to give them something to do on a regular basis that isn't equally or better suited for the senior staff, then you're writing a far more action oriented show than we're accustomed do.
I was initially skeptical but I really like this Federated business. One question I find myself asking when browsing is "where is this person from?", following them back to their Lemmy or Mastodon and finding a whole bunch of cool posts there!
That is true and to @ValueSubtracted's point, speaks to the fundamental difference between the morality tale that each episode is setting up for our consideration. "The Enemy Within" aims to make the viewer uncomfortable by suggesting that Kirk's decisiveness is derived from his "evil" half and isn't offering any commentary on the personhood of the "evil" half. So much so that they short circuit that possibility by slapping an expiration date on EvilKirk.
Best I can give you is that it's still technically murder if you kill a condemned man.