I have a few, my fav is Jessie Gender, who gives insightful reviews but doesnt shy away from criticism of Trek. I also like how she looks at things from a gender critical angle, which is something few peoppe think about. Sean Ferrick is another cool one, as are the guys from Trekyards who are more focussed on tech and ships. Who else should I look up on?
I often disagree , but I find the reviews by Treklit author Keith Di Candido on TOR interesting, and the comments participation of another author Christopher L Bennet interesting to follow. Both know the history of onscreen canon very well and have spent a lot of time working around it as tie-in writers. It’s good to see their takes and their debates.
I agree that Jessie Gender has some solid reviews as well.
As for most of the rest, the reviews of Picard season three have really made me reassess who I find worth my time to pay attention to. Many revealed themselves to be just locked in a a gatekeeping idea that 90s Berman Trek is the only ‘real’ Trek and it’s not something I want to give my views to.
That is, some reviewers whom I had considered sometimes tough but balanced, seemed to turn off any criticism of Picard season three as the nostalgic hits rolled out. Many of the same flaws they had repeatedly criticized in Discovery or earlier seasons of Picard were given a complete pass. And they are back being hypercritical of SNW now.
As someone who eventually stopped supporting the 80s fanzines run by TOS fans that couldn’t accept TNG was its own different thing, I feel the same way about Berman-era fans who are now gatekeeping what Trek can evolve to.
The Picard issue feels like most of what I hear online about it. I suspect in a few years the consensus on season 3 of Picard will have changed.