Book Review: Late Star Trek: The Final Frontier in the Franchise Era

An unexpectedly enjoyable deep dive into the storytelling of Star Trek in the twenty-first century

Adam Kotsko’s Late Star Trek is an unexpectedly enjoyable deep dive into the storytelling of Star Trek in the twenty-first century. I’ve watched Star Trek for decades and my significant attachment to the earlier television shows influenced my world view. Later in life, I discovered that my love for the show—the characters and the stories—paled in comparison to hard core fans. Late Star Trek does a good job of meeting the needs of superfans while still discussing the storytelling intentions of the various series through a more general literary and social lens. Even if you don’t agree with the ultimate conclusion regarding a particular show, film, or novel, the analyses provide useful context and theories for why some shows resonate with viewers and why some leave them feeling disappointed. In our current era of franchise saturation from brands like Marvel, Star Wars, and D.C., Star Trek stands out as a forerunner of the trend to launch multiple television shows, films, and novels to feed the desires of both old and new fans. Star Trek also stands out in terms of its core values and high fan expectations. Late Star Trek reminds viewers of what we loved about the earlier shows—particularly Star Trek: The Next Generation (optimism, diversity, curiosity, adventure, moral questions) and how those ingrained expectations shape our appreciation of newer iterations of the story, even as the real world changes around us.

Late Star Trek is a focused analysis of what went wrong and what went right with Star Trek in the post Voyager Era. After providing brief background comments on the original Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, and Star Trek: Voyager, the primary analysis shifts to Enterprise and the content thereafter, including the novels, the Chris Pine/Kelvin timeline reboot films, Discovery, Picard, Strange New Worlds, and brief discussions of Lower Decks and Prodigy. The most thorough discussion is the chapter on Enterprise which provides an interesting analysis of that show’s struggles to create a prequel backstory for the Star Trek universe we know so well. Kosko discusses Enterprise in the context of a post 9-11 world, particularly in terms of the perceived need to shift from the relative optimism of The Next Generation era shows, to instead adopt a tone that felt more gritty, more negative, and closer to the stress of our (then) real-life world. The chapter posits that the societal shifts influenced the plotting of the series but that the attempts to align to societal changes were ultimately alienating for fans who wanted the Star Trek they knew and loved. The analysis is fascinating and intensely readable with plenty of specific citations to episodes. Surprisingly, the analysis does not discuss other science fiction shows at the time for a comparison of how other series, such as Battlestar Galactica, utilized grittier storytelling in their reboot, and how the comparative fan expectations may have affected the success or failure of such tonal shifts.

In discussing the Star Trek reboot films starring Chris Pine, the book takes a more superfan and mostly negative analysis of the plots and execution of the films Star Trek and Star Trek: Into Darkness. This analysis is apparently not meant to be a general one but a specific voicing of superfan opinions that generally ignore the substantial commercial success of the two films. This is both the advantage and the potential shortcoming of the text: the way it discusses Star Trek from a general artistic or academic point of view but also from the point of view of superfans specifically.

Just as the shows and novels vary greatly in terms of tone, theme, and appeal, the analysis presented in Late Star Trek adjusts depending on the topic. The discussion of Discovery does a nice job of providing an overall analysis of the initial strengths of the series and the ways it diverged from fan expectations in ways that were both positive and negative. The discussion of Strange New Worlds is shorter but still captures the essence of why that series has met with particular success by embracing the traditional Star Trek ethos and staying true to the existing cannon while still allowing the characters to develop in much more intriguing ways than their original versions.

Late Star Trek is enjoyable for Star Trek fans but also provides a solid overall analysis for storytellers in an established universe who must balance fan expectations and creative freedom. The framing of Star Trek in stages or eras rather than an unending continuum is helpful. Although the through-line of connection remains, the ability to discuss the series, films, and novels in terms of eras allows for a more helpful analysis of what resonates and what disappoints in a universe in which many of us are, for better or for worse, deeply invested. And most of all, it’s a reminder of why, after so many decades and variations, we still love Star Trek.

--

The Math

Nerd Coefficient: 7/10

Highlights:

• A broad range of Star Trek content with helpful citations
• Superfan focus sometimes outweighs larger storytelling analysis
• Engaging exploration of strengths and weaknesses in Star Trek

Reference: Adam Kotsko, Late Star Trek: The Final Frontier in the Franchise Era, [University of Minnesota Press 2025]

POSTED BY: Ann Michelle Harris – Multitasking, fiction writing Trekkie currently dreaming of her next beach vacation.

By the Numbers: Why STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Might Suck

I want Star Trek Into Darkness to be good. I thought the 2009 reboot was everything Hollywood does best, and I hope the follow-up lives up to the expectations set by Star Trek. But alas, for every Spider-Man 2 there's a Matrix Reloaded or, God help us, Speed 2: Cruise Control. I am sadly unenthusiastic about the Into Darkness trailers, but hoping to be surprised. Lacking any real insight into what's happening, I'll do my impression of ESPN and run some numbers.

Bear with me, folks. We're going down the rabbit hole...

The Creatives - 5.67

J.J. Abrams is currently hailed as some kind of directing demi-god, which is weird, because he's only directed three movies that have been released, which I would assign an average nerd co-efficient of only 6.3 (Mission: Impossible 3 = 5, Star Trek = 9, Super 8 = 5).

Make enough great TV shows, kids, and you too
can awkwardly remake E.T.

Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci -- stalwarts from the Abrams cast of regulars -- have some impressive sci-fi credentials, but some equally deadly ones. By my count, these two have written seven produced feature films in the last eight years. God bless them, anybody who can do that in Hollywood deserves a reverent doff of the cap. But to my taste, they only have one standout accomplishment (Star Trek), and their other films include the Michael Bay extravaganzas The Island, Transformers, and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, as well as Cowboys and Aliens and The Legend of Zorro. We'll say they clock in at a generous 5.

Number of Recycled Tropes in the Trailer - 3

We don't know who the villain is, but the Internet believes him to be either Khan (TOS episode Space Seed and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan) or Gary Mitchell (TOS re-shot pilot Where No Man Has Gone Before). While he's probably neither, he is clearly some type of superhuman bent on mass destruction. Not only is this a familiar trope from the old timeline, but it's the plot of pretty much each of the first four or five episodes of The Original Series. It's a little long-in-the-tooth already, even without knowing who he is. Also, the Enterprise appears to be destroyed in the Super Bowl ad. This was not only a pivotal moment in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, but also in my childhood. I'm unlikely to suffer the same way again at seeing the ol' girl go down in flaming bits a second time. And finally, there's a quick shot in the trailer of Kirk kneeling down, pressing his hand up against some glass enclosure, with someone else inside of it pressing his hand back against Kirk's. This is probably Spock, and is clearly evocative of Spock's unforgettable death scene in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I am equally unlikely to feel much at going through the same motions again. Even if new Spock is inside there.

It literally takes them 15 minutes to go from
the space dock to the Enterprise. Fifteen. Literally.

The Odds of Evens - 5

It is a widely accepted belief that all of the odd-numbered movies in the original Kirk-and-Spock series of films kinda sucked. Some of them a lot. But in 2009, Abrams, Kurtzman, and Orci altered the timeline. In so doing, there's a 50/50 chance that they also altered the natural order of sequel suckage. On this new, different timeline where Kirk never knew his father, it is entirely possible that the even-numbered films are destined to suck, no matter what.

The Odds of Lightning Striking Twice - Not Good

We have the same creative team returning for this film, which Francis Coppola and Mario Puzo made work for The Godfather and The Godfather, Part II, but otherwise has a pretty poor track record. Sam Raimi avoided this pattern twice, by either adding or changing writers between both The Evil Dead and Evil Dead II and Spider-Man and Spider-Man II. George Lucas did it between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. You know who stayed the course, though? The Wachowskis. On the Matrix sequels.

So in my totally haphazard and unscientific analysis, this gives me a coefficient, even throwing out the lightning thing, of only 4.55. That means there's a 55% chance that the new Star Trek movie will kinda suck. Hey, I'm rooting against that being the case, but the numbers are in...kind of.