“Star Trek: Discovery” Recasts Klingon And Adds Four New Actors

Star Trek: Discovery has just added five new stars to its ranks. Today, CBS announced the addition of some new Klingon and Starfleet officers.

Shazad Latif, known for his role as Dr. Henry Jekyll in the television series Penny Dreadful, will star as Lieutenant Tyler, a Starfleet officer in the Federation. Latif was originally announced in the role of Kol, a commanding officer in the Klingon Empire. Kol will be played by Kenneth Mitchell whose television credits include Jericho, The Astronaut Wives Club, and Frequency.

Rekha Sharma will star as Commander Landry, the security officer of the Starship Discovery. Sharma’s television credits include Battlestar Galactica and fan series Star Trek Continues. Check out Sharma’s interview with Larry “Dr. Trek” Nemecek in uniform on the set of Continues.

Clare McConnell will star as Dennas, a leader in the Klingon Empire. McConnell’s film credits include Dim the Fluorescents, to be released this fall.

Damon Runyan will star as Ujilli, a leader in the Klingon Empire. Runyan’s television credits include Suits, Supernatural, and Gangland Undercover.

Star Trek: Discovery airs on CBS (pilot episode only) and CBS All Access (full season) “when it’s ready.” Checkout our Discovery page for all the info and news on the new show.

Leave a Reply

175 Comments on "“Star Trek: Discovery” Recasts Klingon And Adds Four New Actors"

Sort by:   newest | oldest

So, what’s the tally? Are there now more cast members than CBS subscribers?

These are not principal cast members. These are likely actors in supporting or guest-starring roles.

For the record, CBS in February announced that both their Showtime and CBSAA apps had around 1.5M subscribers each. For comparison, HBO Go announced the week prior that it had 2M subscribers. It was also announced that CBSAA would become part of Hulu’s bundling deals, similar to Showtime.

I apologize in advance if my facts conflict with your opinion.

That’s fantastic that CBSAA will be an Alá Carte option on Hulu.

Discovery is the most hated star trek franchise to date. It’s missed their audience, obsessed with a TOS reboot, value it only in CBS Online memberships, and has successfully managed to destroy the residue of good will CBS had 24 months ago.
It is unrecoverable at this point.
Achieving such hate before it’s even distributed a teaser trailer is a clear indication of the boycott.
You fools ruined Star Trek, again.

Screw you.

It’s only hated by obsessed Star Trek fans like yourself who are stuck in the past! There’s a whole bunch of people out there who might actually like it! You haven’t seen a clip yet so shut up!

Well.. I guess you’re one of the fewer persons who hates this serie? Clearly you’re pissed off because it’s coming to an On-Demand service.. you’re also saying: unrecoverable at this point! that is based on what? your personal opinion?

Be happy that another Trek-series is coming!

No need to spike the football. Being correct is enough.

No CBSAA is something CBS is keeping for themselves, they’ve gone to great expense to make the service…

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hulu-adds-cbs-to-upcoming-live-streaming-tv-service/

The CBS deal will give Hulu the right to live-stream the nation’s most-watched broadcast network as well as CBS Sports Network and cable channel Pop.

1.5M for an OTT streaming isn’t all that impressive. I mean its on par with a lot of other services that are considered niche like WWE Netowrk and Crunchyroll.

I know they are hoping to boost numbers with this show but Enterprise was considered a ratings failure and in its last season it was averaging nearly 3 million viewers per episode.

Don’t confuse ratings with subscriber numbers.

Those 1.5 million subs for WWE makes them a perpetual profit machine. Their steady growth (albeit slower than expected) will soon make them more profitable than they have ever been.

1.5 million for a start up OTT with limited programming? Pretty impressive. And they want Trek to get them the 4 million.

You accept Orange is the New Black is a successful and popular hit right? Netflix expects the new season to add 3 million subs. So that puts it into perspective. If CBsAA passes 3 million subs on the strength of Discovery, it’s a success

Check out the comments section in this article.

io9.gizmodo.com/what-the-fuck-is-going-on-with-star-trek-discovery-1794639961

Should put a few things in to perspective for the fanboys with regard to general perception outside of the circles of trek fanatics.

Most of the content in that article has been covered on this site already in a large number of posts. The multitude of comments on this site on them are from haters and those that would like to give the show a chance. Hardly a utopia of fanboys as you would suggest.

I have commented on several occasions about the gross negativity at all costs regarding Discovery.

I for one couldn’t give a rats ass about i09 but good luck to them.

To those haters that night find the show is awesome and end up loving it. Don’t you dare talk it up like you were always onboard. You can all fuck right off. Trek doesn’t need you.

Stick to your guns Torch, too many people think they know it all when in fact it’s sweet fuck all. ad nauseum conjecture and random stabs in the dark are worth diddly squat.

Bring it on DSC!, it will get here when it does.

Could you be any more detached from the reality of the wider perception?

@Enter Prize – Could you be any more detached from reality in general? io9 doesn’t represent a “wider perception” of Trek fans. They’re the same fans who show up and on other Trek sites, and on Twitter, and on YouTube. There is no 90% consensus hatred for Discovery, a show that hasn’t even been SHOWN yet.

You are pretending that you can predict the show’s failure based on EVERYONE agreeing with you when, in fact, a huge amount of fandom doesn’t agree at all. But YOU think that YOUR viewpoint is the only valid one around.

You’re delusional. You’re a troll. You need to step back, take some deep breaths, and STFU for a bit.

I doubt they have upwards of 2 million cast members.

Some of us actually understand the clever little bit of sarcasm you delivered. Thanks for the amusing comment.

Seems like this Klingon Empire will be well rounded out. So, do they get to be the communist caricatures of the TOS, or the misunderstood noble warrior caricatures of TNG?

Given the times, I’m starting to worry we’re up for a “misunderstood mujahideen” caricature.

It’s already been done – on Dr. Who. But you just can’t have too much virtue signaling.

Pretty funny how the US misunderstood the mujahideen in the 1980s, when the USSR tried warring in Afghanistand

Afghanistan

More funny is the media take on USSR/Russia. When the USSR occupied the Ukraine, Poland, East Germany et al and had a real campaign of global domination which included the invasion of South Vietnam those opposing the Warsaw Pact were warmongering and the USSR was just misunderstood. Now that we left Yeltsin high and dry that Russia is a wreck, but one with hints of Democracy and a resurgence of Orthodoxy and Obama basically did everything but hold Putin’s hand walking into Crimea well now it’s all a huge Russian conspiracy!!!! The Russians are coming!!!! The plan makes no sense, no time table, strategy unknown but Russia, Russia, Russia – ready the ICBMs. I don’t get the real strategy – punish them for dropping socialism and pushing that agenda? It’s a miracle the we in the West won the Cold War.

Discovery is the most hated star trek franchise to date. It’s missed their audience, obsessed with a TOS reboot, value it only in CBS Online memberships, and has successfully managed to destroy the residue of good will CBS had 24 months ago.
It is unrecoverable at this point.
Achieving such hate before it’s even distributed a teaser trailer is a clear indication of the boycott.
You fools ruined Star Trek, again.

And when it comes out and the first episode gets high marks you’ll rush to subscribe so you can see what it’s all about. You are the WORST kind of troll. Grow up!

All these Klingons point to a series more about intergalactic relations and less about strange, new worlds. Very disappointing.

Once again, someone makes an assumption based on incidental information, invents their own fantasy about what the show will be, and then is disappointed or angered by the fantasy they themselves invented in their own head.

So basically, you’re disappointed by the story you came up with. Sorry to hear that!

Considering the show is going to be one story/situation told in chapters from the pov of one character (not the captain) not sperate episodic stories it is kinda OBVIOUS at this point that it is a Klingon story.

None of the reboot movies did any exploring just drowned in earth politics & vengeful villains with a beef with starfleet so why is it such a streatch to think this tv Reboot would be any different.

Star Trek no longer embodies Gene Roddenberrys optimistic utopian vision but todays U.S. political climate/western media aganda.

Trekboi, have you even seen the original series? It was all about the contemporary political climate. And “Gene Roddenberry’s optimistic utopian vision”? You mean like the fact that every person who gains god-like powers turns into a self-centered amoral monster? How Kirk becomes angry when aliens actually prevent them from going to war with the Klingons? How Kirk specifically stated that we are barbarians who have to make a conscious decision, on a day by day basis, not to kill?

Idealism does not mean that everyone is perfect and does everything for pure and noble reasons. It means we can choose to be better than our natures.

Trouble is that no one cares about Kirk and the TOS other than a subset of fans. In fact many people see it as garbage.

Is that why Paramount produced three films with the Kirk characters and, regardless of whether you liked them or not, generated a large box office take. A lot of people saw those films.

Go out into the street and ask random people to describe Star Trek in one or two words. And then tell me how many say “Janeway” versus Kirk, Spock, Enterprise.

This is why I think CBS needs to release more info about the characters/premise ASAP.

“Very disappointing”… even though no one has ever said anything of the sort. The melodramatic alarmism of some supposed fans is kind of ridiculous.

@ Dingo

Look at the OP. He specifically says “Very Disappointing.” Seriously. Read.

Oh sorr,y you were responding to OP? So hard to tell with this comments section sometimes.

Er… I know. That’s what I was responding to.

Indeed. I’d suggest you google search for the io9 article titled “what the **** is happening with star trek discovery”, and take a look at the comments section. (fill in the stars of that search with a four letter word beginning with the letter F).. Every time I try to post it on here it just gets moderated and removed, which is the real problem here. The fanboys are completely insulating themselves from the reality the shear volume of hate for this bungled prequel mess. There’s zero goodwill between 90% of the potential viewers and CBS, and it continues to go south. “Star Trek: Discovery is delayed yet again. A beloved Next Generation actor was reportedly offered an insulting amount of money to appear on the show. It lost a showrunner with a well-deserved fan base of his own. And CBS has made poor marketing decision after poor marketing decision. So, how screwed is this show? Short answer: Very. Star Trek: Discovery was initially announced in late 2015, with a vague description mentioning new characters and worlds and “dramatic contemporary themes.” CBS made sure to mention was that the new show would have nothing to do with Paramount’s Star Trek Beyond, the movie due out in 2016. The other big bombshell in the announcement was that the show wasn’t going to be on network television or even cable, but on CBS All Access, a streaming site that CBS would be charging a monthly fee to watch. Even back then, this… Read more »

@Enter Prise – We’re all more than capable of going to io9 and reading that for ourselves, thanks. No need to copy and paste THE ENTIRE ARTICLE into a comment here.

Also, “90% of the potential viewers” haven’t said anything at all about the show. They don’t know or care about it. The people who post on the io9 story are, like the ones here, fans, not the general viewing public.

And what’s with the claim about fanboys insulating themselves? Trekmovie’s comments have been filled with people ridiculing the show, griping about its schedule, and generally saying all the stuff your copied/pasted article says. So who’s insulting themselves? Not this site or the people on it.

Wonderfully broken down piece. You lay out exactly how this has unfolded as a brand that has become tarnished by its very owners. I love Star Trek, but in truth I stopped caring about this iteration once all these things became apparent. I’m not paying CBS for anything. In a world of hugely organized Star Wars celebration events, neither Paramount or CBS can ever seem to manage show up on anyone’s radar, to make anyone aware that they were celebrating their own anniversary. Because you wouldn’t know it even if you were looking. They’ve managed to almost make this entire property invisible. To the point that a lot people who just even hear about this, just don’t care. I know the die hards will always push back, will ignore the analysis and deserved criticisms, but it doesn’t change the fact that more and more, those that are supposedly in charge of this property, give the impression of amateur hour, especially when compared to how other corporate entities seem to not only understand their property and their audience but how to maximize its fullest potential as well. You don’t see that here. And that isn’t because there aren’t fans out there, we are here.

Dude, that’s not my writing. It’s Katharine Trendacosta on io9, published Tuesday.
Google it (i gave details at the start of the post) and dive in to the comments section.

Oh I missed that, still its a good breakdown down by them, and thank you for sharing it, because I hadn’t seen it. I think its pretty on point.

That article is laughable. The show might be crap, but we really can’t say until it’s been released. Plenty of great films and great television were bungled productions, or horror shows behind the scenes.

You seem to really go out of your way to shoot down anyone with an opinion or view contrary to yours. And it isn’t just about one show, its reflective of the entire brand through several years of choices and decisions. The article doesn’t come across as laughable, it comes across pretty well reasoned and thoughtout. You may find it laughable, but I think some would find it fairly straight forward.

As advised, the hard core fandom can’t see the reality of the situation.

It’s not to shoot down anyone who disagrees, it’s to shoot down irrational logic.

It is laughable because it is illogical: it is trying to convince people the show will be terrible because of behind-the-scenes issues. Behind-the-scenes issues are worth discussing, and calling attention to when you’re a sci-fi website, but there is no balance to their perspective, which makes it more clickbait for people like you than actual entertainment journalism.

My only goal is to show the other perspective. The show may very well be terrible. The behind-the-scenes troubles may very well be the cause. Or it may be great in spite of them, or be terrible for other reasons.

The intention is not to be dispassionate about it and analyze it rationally.

By the way, what i’m saying about it being clickbait is that it’s clearly a writer who looked around, saw the majority of fans predicting doom- and because everyone loves an echo chamber- wrote about how doomed the show is because they know it will get attract all of those fans. Best case scenario, the optimists get angry, and it starts a big discussion in the comments which just generates more clicks.

Real entertainment journalism has gone out the window right along with real news journalism, apparently, in favor of “let’s write something polarizing because we’ll get more clicks.”

Again, I highlight that your view is not a widely held one.

It appears that you are completely incapable of understanding that a prequel concept can be a catastrophic turn-off before it is broadcast.

A good yard marker, and assuming you have a job, would be to ask your colleagues at work if they would consider paying a monthly fee to watch a prequel to “Star Trek The Original Series”. You might advise them to watch X episode, and Z movie, but ultimately, just how many people do you realistically propose would go for it?

By shoving STD behind a paywall there isn’t even an option to watch it casually over the season and consider subscribing to it in future.

Mate, you really need to step back, put your own enthusiasm to one side, and let the reality of the situation dawn on you.

We don’t want a prequel, we’ve no interest in TOS characters from your DVD collection, we hate the 3 recent movies, and quite frankly will everything within our power to ensure that there’s no second season.

THAT is the reality of what CBS has done with this.
WE DON’T WANT A PREQUEL IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM.

@Enterprize “Again, I highlight that your view is not a widely held one.” And that right there is the problem– that logical, rational thinking is not a widely held view. Seriously, that is a real problem in our current world, not just in terms of opinions towards entertainment. “It appears that you are completely incapable of understanding that a prequel concept can be a catastrophic turn-off before it is broadcast.” Who said I did not understand that? But it being a turn-off is far different from saying “this show will suck.” The latter is a definitive statement of an opinion based on dislike for a general concept without viewing the actual material, while the former is a gut-reaction, but stops short of forming any definitive or quantitative opinion on the actual product. For example, I hate romantic comedies as a genre, but there are a few good ones out there I enjoy. It being a prequel may be a turn off, but it doesn’t mean it’ll be bad. “A good yard marker, and assuming you have a job, would be to ask your colleagues at work if they would consider paying a monthly fee to watch a prequel to “Star Trek The Original Series”. ” what does that have to do with the quality of the show? And why do I care what my colleagues think? “By shoving STD behind a paywall there isn’t even an option to watch it casually over the season and consider subscribing to it in… Read more »

I respect your opinion.
But,I want to see the finished product before I render my own opinion.

“We” who, Enter Prize?
I agreed with most of what you said until you got to “We” don’t want this and “we” don’t want that.
Speak for yourself, Prize :-/
The singular pronoun is okay.

Well, as a fan of it you would say that, wouldn’t you?
I guess that for you this is an ideal concept. You get to see the origin stories of characters previously written in to trek law, you get to see an expansion of TOS with a huge budget, and you have popular and proven actors playing iconic roles.

However, you don’t seem to grasp the reality of the situation in that no one else wants it.

It’s quite simple really. The enthusiasm you have for Discovery is not a widely held view, and in fact the general view is that this is some kind of fan fiction production.

What you are not understanding is that every bit of information that has come out thus far is precisely NOT the direction the majority had hoped for, and at this point it’s impossible to assume it’s something else.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that, but ultimately it’s like we’re all talking to chatbots.

Why do you keep saying no fans want it? No one wants to see it? 90% don’t suppprt it? You’re pulling nonsense out of your rear end.

Here let me try. Did you you know 97% of all humans actually want a prequel Trek series? It’s true.

As advised, the hard core fandom can’t see the reality of the situation

Please read my response. Rational thinking, logic and seeing both sides of an issue is not an inability to see the reality, it is the ONLY way to objectively view reality.

I would be equally critical if everyone was head over heels predicting the show was going to be the best thing ever.

In fact, I refuse to predict the quality of the show (good or bad) or give any opinion on how it looks, until i’ve at least seen a trailer for it.

I’m with you, Torchwood. I honestly don’t want to judge the show until I’ve seen it. I won’t know if there is truly anything to be worried about until I’ve actually seen the final product.

Even beside the final product– we have NO clue what the story is about other than it involves 2 starships and a bunch of Klingons. We haven’t seen any footage, or even images of finished sets.

They’ve been filming 3-4 of what will eventually be 13 episodes.

How we can assume there’s no “strange new worlds” is beyond me…

I for one am actually pretty excited knowing that there is so much we DON’T know. In today’s day in age it feels like we know everything about a movie before the first trailer!

Here’s what you are not understanding:

You simply don’t have the numbers of viewers in your subset of fans to make it a success, because the more CBS makes STD a prequel show for you, the more unappealing it becomes to everyone else, to the point of being as laughable as it is offensive.

We’re unprepared to give it a chance because we don’t want a TOS prequel, we’ll actively boycott it because it’s entirely the worst possible concept they could have come up with to relaunch Star Trek.

We’ve made this clear with the recent movies, and with the demise of “Enterprise”. Every press release name-dropping characters they intend to retcon from that 60’s tv show just reinforces that.

We couldn’t give a toss about TOS characters mate. That’s it, nothing else, we’re just done with prequels. Completely done. If it were not a prequel it’s highly likely that that it would hold a larger appeal, at least people may watch it before making a decision. You need to get your head around the fact that a prequel is being almost unilaterally rejected without the requirement of watching it.

Clearly it is precisely the opposite for you, and good for you. You’re in for 12 episodes of new Star Trek pressing all the right buttons.

yes you are right they can not understand that it is being rejected because it is a prequel and they dont understand that there is no interest in watching it just in case it is not rubbish. and then they will insult you for it. not true fans at all

If the we you speak of is all the other sub-human knuckle draggers who refer to yourselves as a collective pile of horse dung, you can all go off a cliff for all I care.

Stop caring about Trek, is my recommendation, if you hate everything being done with it. Move on. GET A @#$%ING LIFE.

Find something you’re actually excited about. Because WE don’t care about you.

Do you work for CBS? I thought insulting the intended audience is their specialty?

Enter Prize, you insult everyone’s intelligence here with every one of your posts, especially your own.

Dear Royal We,
We’re unprepared to give it a chance because we don’t want a TOS prequel, we’ll actively boycott it because it’s entirely the worst possible concept they could have come up with to relaunch Star Trek.

All these remarks may just get repeated in some clickbait article! Think of it! You and the royal family will be news because you dislike a show you haven’t even seen yet!

And that is just fine. You’re under no obligation to watch it.

Enter Prize – Stop the “we” crap. You are one person, not all fans, and you do NOT speak for us. You do not speak for a majority of us. You speak ONLY for YOU.

Once you started that royal “we” crap, you lost all value in this conversation or any other. You’re trying to shove your personal views down people’s throats despite their rational, detailed replies.

You’re basically a troll, and I’m sure plenty of us will treat you as such from now on. At least *I* will. I can’t speak for everyone the way you do.

“We” is in reference to the 90% of the fanbase you continually disregard with gay abandon.

If You’re quoting percentage with such conviction please site your source.

Where do you get the idea that a show I the TOS era doesn’t have fan support? Are you dense you think you’re opinion is somehow vastly shared by everyone else?

Did you miss the hundreds of millions of dollars of box office that three films set in the….whoa…tos era generated recently?

I get it. I like TNG too. But the era is secondary to the quality of the series.

Stop reinforcing your own biased opinion and open your mind the the possibility you’re not correct. And even if you are it’s not because you have any special insight. The show will be good. Or it will be bad. Or it will be somewheee in the middle. You’re not Kreskin for guessing one of those.

Jesus christ Xandercom just give it a rest already. You are sounding like an unhinged lunatic. You mouth off daily on multiple boards for months now for a show you pretend like you won’t even watch but seem to only think about this show. I’m not super thrilled about a prequel either but my god, take a breath man. You seem to have some mental issues over someone so obsessed and angry about a show you haven’t seen one single clip of yet.

And stop saying ‘we’. Your 16 sock puppets and voices in your head don’t count weirdo.

Again what reality? Are you on set? No.

I’ve read the article, and it’s more about CBS’s problems getting the show going, and maintaining enthusiasm among Discovery’s potential audience, an enthusiasm CBS seems to be diminishing with their disorganized actions.

Heckuva way to treat the family — er, the crown jewel of your new network, CBS.

They must be following the poor example of Paramount re: Star Trek.

Marja,

Re: Paramount re: Star Trek

Far from it, CBS is what was esentially the old Paramount executive suite renamed — it’s the same old, same old in regards to its Trek attitudes.

Dis, I was actually alluding to the crap publicity Paramount “did” for the last three Trek movies.

But yep, same “don’t care” attitude. “Those loser fans will come see it no matter what we do, or don’t do”

All the people so strongly predicting this will be a disaster seem to now desperately want it to be a disaster so they can say they were right.

It could be a disaster. It could be great. More likely it falls somewhere in the middle. We will all know soon enough.

“Predicting” a disaster? It’s already a disaster. Shoving it behind a paywall for you hard core fans to buy is your business. Are you so blind that you really, genuinely expect star trek fans to pay for this? Christ man, get a grip. We’re not going to pay our money for your over budget TOS fan series. Not a cent. Nothing. We are not going to be sucked in by CBS, you, or anyone else.

No amount of insulting, or arguing is going to change that, so give up, enjoy your one and only season, then prepare to spend the next 5 years telling everyone how good it was for you, and be hated for it.

Enjoy!

The OTT aspect is the worst argument to make. You really don’t get it. To dump on the CBsAA part you have to pretend there aren’t a slew of other OTT services.

Then you have to pretend how all the Good Wife fans were alienated when their spinoff went OTT which isn’t true. And how unsuccessful that was which also isn’t true.

And generally goofballs like you who hate the idea of Discovery on AA would be perfectly fine with it on Netflix which makes you either a hypocrite or just not very bright. Perhaps both.

I guess you want it on the main CBS network right? Where it would likely be cancelled by the second commercial break.

So, I guess you’ll be entirely surprised after the pilot when Discovery is not only canceled, but also the most unilaterally hated abuse of the franchise since In To Darkness?

I couldn’t give a toss about CBS, it’s appearing on my existing Netflix subscription, but only for one season.

As far as I know, most American casual viewers plan on torrenting the 2nd part of the pilot, whereby they will make a decision on torrenting the rest of it. Does CBS have a metric for that?

It won’t be cancelled. It might not renewed for a second season. But all episodes filmed will be aired because cbs isn’t beholden to advertisers and ratings under the OTT scenario.

But I bet it’s renewed by the third weeks. Reason is, they will know pretty quickly if the show boosts subscribers.

Also, the fact that you continually, relentlessly cite “everyone” else’s opinions and articles and opinions, going so far as to post that one clickbait article over and over, tells me you have no mind of your own.

Even if you’ve somehow polled every single fan of Star Trek in the world and came to the conclusion that most of them hate this show (without ever having seen it), it doesn’t matter. It’s a moot point. I don’t care what “everyone” else thinks. I’ll make up my own mind when I watch the thing.

I always find it beyond strange when ANYONE on the internet makes claims about how “most people” think or that “all of us fans” hold a specific opinion… like, okay. You’ve been reading lots of negative feedback on fan sites from various members. Even if your email obsessively reading every single comment, how many unique individuals’ opinions are you actually reading? Twenty? Two-hundred? Two thousand?

Basically, if you are someone who makes the claim that you KNOW that everyone feels a certain way because you’ve seen lots of comments on a message board, you’ve just lost all credibility. Have you personally polled all 324 MILLION people in the United States?

Also, wasn’t there similar vitriol and anger over TNG before that actually came out? Everyone was CONVINCED it would suck because it was so unlike TOS. And, granted, it did at first. But look how that’s turned out. Now we have people CONVINCED DSC will suck because it’s not like TNG. The cycle continues.

also, what is “the good wife”?

So you’re making all sorts of concrete statements about the chances of success for Discovery on AllAccess and have no idea about the The Good Wife/The Good Fight??! Hahahahahahaha

Yup you’re opinion is credible.

I’m telling you the reality of the wider perception of Discovery, but you don’t want to know.
You refuse to take in comments on articles on other websites, you refuse to take in reddit threads, you refuse to take in what people are telling you here.

You and people like you are idiots, you’ll accept it whatever happens, you therefor can not be trusted to give any informed or impartial view. You have no validity.

Enter Prize/Xandercom stop sounding like an unhinged idiot please. You got some real issues. Could Discovery fail, of course, but no one will know until they actually see it and give their thoughts on it. You can bet the pilot will be well watched so it will depend on how people respond to that mostly but if its good it will do well. THey already renewed The Good Fight on CBSAA after just four episodes which had no hype and advertisement. I live in L.A. I never seen a single ad for this show anywhere and yet it got a million subscribers alone.

But stop sounding like an immature nerd practically wanting it to fail because its a prequel. Get over it. You won’t get everything you want in life, you should know that by now. All the obsessive whining about it has gone overboard.

What makes you an expert on the ‘wider perception of Discovery”? Because you read one article? You admiringly lack knowledge about how CBSAA works so why should we take you at face value that you somehow have insight we’ve all missed?

I don’t often chime in just to criticize other posters’ opinions, but I’m moved to remark that yours is ridiculously over-dramatic. The attitudes that you’re relaying don’t resonate at all with me. In short, your comments are much ado about nothing. And, if I didn’t know better (which I don’t), I’d think that you have some specific agenda for wanting the show to fail. And I actually wouldn’t fault you for that, if you were to state honestly why you want the show to fail. You’re entitled to your values and feelings, if you’re honest about them.

Hmmmm, Cyg … Enter Prize doesn’t sound as “ate up with it” as Alex Peters ….

You’re right Vger.

Though I didn’t care much for Rekha Sharma’s appearance in “Star Trek Continues,” she was just awesome in Battlestar Galactica. Very glad to read of her participation in this project.

What character did she play?

Tori–the most boring, pointless character on the show.

I am wondering since when an appearance in a fan film counts as TV credit?

northstar,

I’d say somewhere around the time that episode productions exclusively shown on internet streams [see:NETFLIX] became eligible for Emmy nominations.

Oh I hope Damon Runyan’s Klingon uses a lot of 1920’s gangster slang. ;-)

Hee! He might as well just spell it Runyon. It’s a memorable name!

Indeed.

Damon Runyon, the writer, was born Alfred Damon Runyan. The newspapers shortened and misspelled his name.

Interesting. I wonder if the actor could be a distant relative. Anyway, thanks for that bit of trivia. Cheers.

Damon was Runyon’s mother’s maiden name, so it’s unlikely it would be a cousin. Runyon did have a son named Damon Jr., so it’s remotely possible this is a direct descendant. Someone will ask him, I’m sure.

Ah, I see. Thanks.

Wonder if Latif had already shot scenes as Kol or not. Could require a bit of re-shoots depending on how far into production they are and the size of Kol’s role.

I don’t know, Platitude. Actors playing Klingons are pretty well disguised in all the turtlehead makeup, beards, &etc.

@ Marja: Even in makeup you can see if it’s the same actor. I mean not all Klingons look alike. I can’t imagine they will just exchange the actor from one episode to the next and have it be the same character on the show. So either reshoot the scenes already shot or rename the character and introduce the new actor as a new character.

I find it interesting that they are recasting the character but are still keeping the actor as a different character. Recasting probably happens a lot on TV, but keeping the actor? I wonder what happened there. If they didn’t like him, why keep him in the show? If they like him, why recast? Maybe he couldn’t handle the Klingon makeup.

DIG, I imagine the makeup could be pretty tough on the skin. Glue and other substances.

Maybe they kept the actor because he’s convincing and he has good chemistry with the cast.

You’re right, people can detect the real actor. I was doing some lame humor about Klingon makeup thar.

@Marja, makeup is horrific on the skin. First the glue, suppressing the skin’s ability to “breath”, and then there’s the removal using spirits to dissolve the glue so that the appliances can be reused. Add to that, the glue takes longer to dissolve than anybody wants to wait, so they use little spatulas to accelerate the process. Talk about exfoliation!

OUUUCH!
This is why they get paid the big bucks ;-)

I find this interesting also, but just because we are learning of the change now, doesn’t necessarily mean that the change happened recently. Perhaps the change was made before filming started.

I find this interesting also, but just because we are learning of the change now, doesn’t necessarily mean that the change happened recently. Perhaps the change was made before filming started.

Rekha Sharma was excellent in BSG. Great bit of casting!

I love Chicken Sharma. Interesting they’re using it in Star Trek. I wonder if it will show up in the food dispenser right along with the colored foam balls?

Harry Plinkett,

I love Barbara Sharma, and she would be outraged

Wow, say that five times fast :O

She was the show’s weakest link.

So now it will not be just on a pay for play platform?

The pilot will be broadcast. After you’ve watched the pilot, you’ll need to pay CBSAA for the remaining episodes.

Or wait very patiently until they go to Hulu.

It sounds like there’s a LOT of acting talent on Discovery! I hope the writing staff can come up with interesting things for all of those folks to do; when Trek has been bad in the past, it’s almost always been because of bad writing…

I am excited about the casting, too.
I really hope that it all works out.

I’M WITH YOU GARY 8.5, LET’S ALL STAY POSITIVE, GRATEFUL, AND SUPPORTIVE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO ALL HAVE A MONUMENTAL TASK OF PLEASING NOT JUST US HARD CORE FANS, BUT NEW VIEWERS IN THIS FORAY!!! I’M JUST WONDERING HOW MANY EPISODES ARE COMPLETE COMPARED TO HOW MANY WILL BE DONE IN ALL THIS SEASON???

WHY ARE YOU YELLING!!!!?????

IT’S ALL SO VERY EXCITING!!!!

The more supporting/recurring actors, the better! That’s what made DS9 great

Anyone notice in this article how they cast the white people as Klingons and the others as Starfleet? Not saying that any of them can’t be one or the other but it seems strange that they switched the roles of the two actors, I probably wouldn’t have noticed had I not read that they switched. With all the talk about how “diverse” and “progressive” this show is supposed to be it seems like they’re going a bit overboard when they’re switching actors’ roles to make Starfleet more diverse as if aliens aren’t enough. That may not be the reason and I know it sounds like a bit of a stretch but that’s what I got out of it.

No.

Ummm, so it’s okay to have black actors play Klingons but not have too many of “them” in Starfleet? TM11, I think you’re going overboard staying behind the times.

I don’t know. Is it easier from a make up perspective to have actors with darker skin play roles that require make up to darken your skin? I imagine it makes no difference with modern make up and effects. But I have no idea.

TUP, I imagine that’s so, from a makeup perspective.

I was addressing this hooey: With all the talk about how “diverse” and “progressive” this show is supposed to be it seems like they’re going a bit overboard when they’re switching actors’ roles to make Starfleet more diverse as if aliens aren’t enough.

Unless the populations of China and India were wiped out in Trek’s purported World War III, people from those most populous areas of the world would predominate in the Terran part of Starfleet. So, there’d be even more minorities for TM11 to cope with. Fictionally.

Modern make up might make it not matter. But I know in TSFS, it was hard not to see Christopher Lloyd whenever the Klingon showed up. Not that he wasnt really good. He was. But if all you see is a white actor in dark make up…sort of ruins the effect.

TUP gets what I was trying to say. I don’t know much about makeup but I imagine it would be easier to have actors with darker skin portray characters that have dark skin. And the Christopher LLoyd reference is a perfect example, having a white actor in a role that requires such dark make up does ruin the effect cause you can tell, although yes it is probably much better with modern day makeup.

And Marja, you’re trying a little too hard to make an issue where there wasn’t one. My question was perfectly logical and makes total sense especially when it comes to applying makeup on the actors. My point was that it’s almost as if they noticed that people with darker skin more often than not portrayed Klingons and they were like oh let’s switch it up to have more diversity. It’s the fact that they switched actor’s roles that seems odd and seems to me like it was done on purpose.

You know, paramount really flubbed the timing on this mess, but I haven’t seen anything to convince me that the show itself is going to suck. Reading between the spoilers, it still sounds cool to me, and I’m game. I09 can speculate on shortcomings, but I’m still pretty optimistic that we’re getting a show to enjoy. I’m prepared to be wrong.

Paramount makes the MOVIES; the TV shows are made by CBS, so Discovery is a CBS project.

Paramount was too busy totally botching the Beyond release to botch the Discovery release.

^^ THIS ^^

Paramount CAN’T botch the Discovery release, because they have nothing to do with it; Paramount only has the rights to the Star Trek MOVIES.

Oh, okayy, Corylea, be logical about it ;-)

I just take any opportunity to express my dissatisfaction with Paramount’s “publicity” for Beyond. Phooey on them.

Thorny, Marja, & Corylea,

Actually, I believe a reasonable assertion can be made that nuParamount contributed to DISCOVERY’S botched release when they made CBS wait for BEYOND’S theatrical release and run.

Stains By name, Stains By Nature

Hmm, getting a bad feeling about all this…

Why, are there Rathtars in your cargo hold?

It’s not my faaauuult!!!

I wonder if the Shazad Latif thing is because he’s replacing somebody who’s left?

You mean, somebody else left, and Latif is taking his place so a third person has to take Latif’s place? Why wouldn’t the new actor just take the role of the person who left?

Because Latif would already have been under contract and possibly in Toronto?

Could a scheduling conflict have arisen for somebody and moving Latif laterally be the easiest way to fix it?

“[Rekha] Sharma’s […] credits include […] fan series Star Trek Continues.”
So, fan productions are not allowed to use talent that worked on professional Star Trek, but professional Trek can poach talent from the fan productions? Does this mean she can’t do STC again?

I haven’t followed the whole thing in detail but don’t the rules CBS/Paramount came up with basically forbid a show like Star Trek Continues anyway? I thought fan productions weren’t allowed to do ongoing stories over several episodes.

As long as it’s not Axanar, it’s okay :P

The Star Trek Continues team has always been respectful of CBS and Paramount. Vic even got to voice a character in Star Trek Online, so that usually helps!

STC shooting production has been concluded from my understanding. There are 3 more episodes to finish effects and editing, but the casts are done.
Also, the fan film guidelines are such that if you follow them, CBS & Paramount will not interfere with you making them. If you don’t follow them, then CBS & Paramount could decide to sue you. STC has done a lot of work since the guidelines came out, so it also appears that if you follow a certain percentage of the guidelines, and you’re not making a profit off of products, or raising a million dollars for a vaporfilm, or perhaps if the main producer isn’t a giant douche, that CBS & Paramount might be cool with you too.

Until this show actually broadcasts, it is highly illogical to say that it’s not gonna be good.

And all this nonsense about how “we don’t want a prequel” is just silly.

It’s not even a legit prequel when you really think about it. The last series was Enterprise, and at least this show is about a century after that, so it’s a continuation of a prequel but not really a prequel.

Also, although I’m sure the majority would rather have a show in the 24th century or beyond, I did initially, but that doesn’t mean I want this show to fail.

My main concern is in the long run. Is one show enough? I’d like a variety of series myself like it was in 90s. I just hope if it does get canceled, that it doesn’t push back the possibility of future installments to another twelve years down the road…I seriously can’t wait that long.

I agree.

I like the prequel. I can acknowledge that some don’t. I accept some people want to keep pushing further and further out. I just personally think it takes us farther away from reality. Star Trek is science fiction not science fantasy.

You can write good stories post nemesis. And if that is true it’s also true you can write good stories in the TOS era.

I’m hoping Marc if Discovery is a hit we will get another spin off soon. Hopefully one that takes place post Voyager like so many of us really want. I’m giving Discovery a chance either way at this point (whenever it makes it on the air). I just don’t want it to be Enterprise: The Next Generation. ;) And yes I want it to succeed even if this is the only show we get for a long time. But even if you’re not big on the prequel idea you want it to succeed to get another show in the future. As you said if it gets cancelled we won’t see another show for a long, long time.

Hopefully they will get the prequel thing out of their system and start going forward again. We had the TOS movies and TNG going at the same time, we can for Discovery and another series if it comes to that.

Why does the next series have to take place in the 24th century and move forward? There’s no logic at all in that. It’s basically saying — every story possible has already been told in the 22nd, 23rd and most of the 24th century, so let’s get some new technology and tell some new stories in the future untainted by events of the past. That’s like saying there’s no good WWII stories left to be told. It’s ridiculous.

People just think in such simplistic terms. Going forward = going ahead in time. It’s Frustrating when people are that simple.

Because people like stories that move forward? How is that not ‘logical’ 95% of all story telling is going forward. No one is saying they CAN’T tell more stories in the 23rd or 22nd century, all they are saying they like to see stories past what we already know as well. Your WW 2 example is flawed because no one is saying you can’t tell those stories, of course you can. All people are saying is they don’t want to only see those stories either and obviously we don’t.

Put it like this if Star Wars only stayed in the Clone Wars era it will certainly get a lot of fan interest but there will always be more interest in the series of where its at now from The Force Awakens and beyond because we are totally in the dark of what will happen next and thats just more exciting for most people out there.

Another “we” who doesn’t necessarily speak for me. I don’t give a tinker’s fart what era of Trek it takes place in. I want Starfleet, ships, and space, damn good stories/scripts, and great acting.

Again, NO ONE is saying no one wants a prequel or that they are bad. I say this over and over again, I would be FINE with a prequel if we didn’t have two others in the last 15 years. We got Enterprise and we got the KT movies. Again, both fine. But also neither won over majority of Trek fans. Does it mean because they were a prequel? Of course not but I just find this argument really odd that people are somehow convinced prequels are the way to go and YET the people who want them hasn’t been satisfied with the last two (or some of them haven’t). I just think its funny that they think Discovery will somehow avoid all the mistakes they hated about those others. I just don’t think it will frankly and thats basically the bigger issue. Star Trek fans are just too fickle IMO. They hold on to cannon like they hold on their children during an earthquake. And already the complaints of Discovery is already happening: Why do the Klingons look different? Why are they wearing the arrowhead symbol? Why does one of the ships look too advanced for this era? And I’ll make this clear A. This is probably not a big deal to MOST fans (certainly not to me) and B. whatever (major) differences there are will probably be explained in the story regardless. But the point that fans are already asking these questions based on faint images already tells… Read more »

Technically, Tiger, I don’t consider the KT movies as “prequels.” If anything, they’re *alternate universe* to TOS.

But that timeline happened bc Spock broke the post-TNG timeline by going thru the black hole or some … MY BRAIN HURTS

I consider it prequel Marja because we never saw TOS original outing. Think about it in TOS, they were all just there going on the missions together. No one ever talked about how the all ended up on the Enterprise or obviously shown.

The KT films are basically TDK movies to me in the sense we are seeing how it all came together and how the characters we know became those characters. But yes because its an alternate universe their origins have been changed a lot but its still a prequel to TOS to me. Its not until the third film we caught up to where TOS would be in terms of timeline.

This is an interesting point because some naysayers will tell you no one cares about TOS but in reality, the JJ films show us it wasnt hard at all to get a lot of people to care. Unfortunately, they squandered it, but still, they attracted a lot of eyeballs.

No one is saying they don’t care about TOS, people are just saying they don’t need multiple versions of it. Star Trek is not a comic book franchise, they don’t need to reboot the same characters over and over again. That said I have no problems they did it with the KT films because I always assumed at SOME point they would reboot TOS. I’m shocked it even took this long.

But same time I don’t want it rebooted again and again. I’m at least happy Discovery has a new crew and ship even if I’m not happy with the time period. If they just gave us another TOS show that would’ve burned me to no end. And there are people out there who not only wanted yet another TOS show but they wanted it with the same KT actors. C’mon people, think outside the freaking box. I mean this is why Hollywood redo the same thing over and over again. We have those guys in the films, let them do a film every few years assuming another movie will be made but at least on TV give us something new, fresh and original.

Star Trek has been doing that since 1987 and pretty successful at it. Don’t just spin your wheels with the same characters for eternity. That would make Trek feel as stale as yet another Terminator reboot.

How could Discovery, with its new cast, new characters, new ships, etc be a version of TOS? Was DS9 a version of TNG? People really get wrapped up in the era its set in and drive themselves nuts. Even the JJ films werent so much versions of TOS outside of the names. It was vastly different. I’d suspect the reason producers look at the TOS era is because its the most closely identifiable period for the widest possible audience. That might seem counter-intuitive considered TOS was a long time ago but TNG era was relatively recent. But let’s be honest, ask 1000 people on the street to give a one word response to “Star Trek” and you’ll get more “Kirk” “Spock” than you will Picard and Janeway. Regardless, its a decision of the people in charge. Had they wanted to go post Nemesis, so be it. Personally, I think (and I’ve said this many times) the further out you go, the father your get from what makes Trek Trek…the grounding in OUR reality. There is a lot of turmoil in the world right now. A perfect time for a thoughtful Trek series. But going 500 years in the future…meh. If Discovery takes advantage of modern SFX to make everything look more advanced than TNG then yes, I’d say they made the wrong choice in eras because if you want to go fantasy-route, then go that way. If you go prequel or TOS era then you should be committed to constraints… Read more »

LOL I just said Discovery ISN’T TOS TUP. My entire point was I didn’t want another TOS show now that we have them in film form and that I was HAPPY we got a new ship and crew. I only mentioned TOS at all because you said people don’t want TOS again. I was mostly saying they just don’t want to redo the same crew when they could come up with something new and fresh. And you can probably say that about TNG and DS9 as well.

I never said Discovery was a version of TOS lol. You have to read these posts better.

As far as Discovery looking more advanced than TNG well then you might have to prepare to be disappointed because I think thats EXACTLY what they will do. They did that for the KT films so my guess is they will probably do the same for Discovery. In fact I found it funny in the KT films its suppose to be a century below and yet they already invented personal transporters that can take you across the galaxy and can communicate from the Klingon neutral zone to Earth like someone calling L.A. to N.Y. when in TNGs time it would take a day just to receive communication. That says nothing about how much more advanced the ship itself looked. My guess is they will have just an advance looking ship because they want to capture people under 50 to watch this thing.

So Tiger, you’re saying you’d rather have an average series beyond Nemesis than an above average series that is a “prequel”?

You have to be otherwise the repeated arguing in favour of it are irrelevant. Who cares when it takes place? Il come here and complain until you’re sick of hearing me if this series does not, even remotely, respect the era its in. But lets see it first.

Otherwise, it doesnt matter if it takes place in the 23rd century, 28th century or 12th century.

TUP I have answered this same question from you over and over and over and over and over again. And I will do it once again. Hopefully the last time but if history proves probably not lol. I want a GOOD series, period. I don’t know how many times this can be said. But yes ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL meaning we get a good series post Voyager as oppose to pre-TOS then yes I would want the post Voyager series for all the reasons thats been said. But no man, I don’t want a bad sequel show to a good prequel show but I don’t want a bad show period so this is just a false argument to have. The funny thing is the ONLY Star Trek show that I didn’t like where I just stopped watching altogether was the prequel one, Enterprise. Not only did I stop watching after first season it took me 8 years to watch the show in its entirety. When it was over, I loved it btw. Not as strong as DS9 or TNG but it was definitely better than Voyager. But the problem was I just didn’t really care about it being a prequel and I gave it a chance the first season but after that it was just OK and I didn’t return. I think a lot of people didn’t. And I will say it again, I’m not saying I thought it was BAD because it was a prequel, I just didn’t really… Read more »

@Tiger – again, stop with the qualifying. You’re saying “I want a good series regardless…but I want it to be a sequel”. We get it. You want post Nemesis for reasons you’ve never been able to articulate or that make sense.

TUP, do me a favor don’t tell me what I can’t and can say here. Ok, thanks. I wrote an entire essay making my feelings clear on this. I have said over and over and over again I don’t love prequels but THAT said I give everything a chance, which I will Discovery as I not only will I give it a chance but has defended its existence on more than a few occasions at this point. So stop acting like I’m against the show man, jesus. I went into the whole spiel on Enterprise and how skeptical I was about it. Well guess what, my feelings changed on that so hopefully I will like Discovery as much as I ended up like that show. What else do you want me to say at this point? I’m not like that idiot Enter Prize/Xandercom and his other dozen sock puppets saying I think its the worst show ever and I want it to fail. I have been the complete opposite of that. And YES I WANTED A SEQUEL!! I’ll say it again, I wanted a sequel show. But you wanted a prequel, right? So whats the difference again? So stop making this about me man, everyone want their own preferences. I mean again, turn it around for yourself. Are you not saying, “I want a good series regardless…but I want it to be a prequel.”? So whats the difference? You have said time and time and time again why you don’t… Read more »

And TUP, I can turn it around on you: You rather have an average prequel series than an above average series beyond Nemesis?

So whats YOUR answer? You now see how asinine the question is?

@Tiger – no because I’ve consistently said that quality is more important than setting. You’re the one complaining about the setting. And others too. “It will suck because its TOS” “Make it post Nemesis or no one will care”.

So not the question was perfectly relevant to you. But makes no sense when asked of me.

I’m not fond of the setting, but I have also said time and time again I will be fine as long as its GOOD. And don’t put words in my mouth man. I NEVER said or implied if its not post Nemesis it won’t be good. What is so annoying about you is that you come across like a old man who can’t seem to accept people can have nuance opinions on this stuff. TUP, use your brain for a change. If I was SO against the setting as you claim then explain: A. Why do I like Enterprise which is set in the 22nd century? And why do I like more than you? B. Why do I like the Kelvin Timeline films which is set in the 23rd century? And once again why do I like it more than you? ;) So can you shut up already, thanks. I have NO problems accepting the setting man lol. I have accepted a pre-24th century TWICE now. In fact it seems to be YOU that has the problem accepting these things because you are the one who come off way more anal than me over it. You’re the one that has to have Star Trek in this neat little box or it doesn’t count for you. Not me man. AS I said I give everything a chance. Yes it took me awhile to come around with Enterprise but only because I stopped watching after first season. But now I realized if… Read more »

@Marja, agreed. Too many “we”s around here.

The worst argument people can make is to say “going forward” as proof positive that a sequel would be better as if that phrase somehow brings enlightenment to the masses.

What does “going forward” even mean? Too many people break down the idea to such simplistic terms. “duuuhhhh going forward mean you go forward in time duuuuh”.

Come on…

Good writing is good writing. But Im sticking to the notion that Star Trek is at its best when its as closely related to US (ie. you and me and our modern world) as possible. The idea is that its humanity just far enough that its overcome war and poverty and has ventured out into the galaxy. If you get too far into the future, you can still write good stories, but its not as identifiably US.

I think thats part of why First Contact was so popular. And its an example of what Enterprise could have been if it didnt decide to be a warmed over Voyager pretending to be DS9.

Curious, I agree.

FWIW, I think ever since Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale introduced the movie going public to the concept “You’re not thinking fourth dimensionally, Marty.” that people watching Trek narratives with shifting future focus just don’t have this problem of seeing sequels that take place in their yet to be realized futures as NOT “moving forward”.

And if excessively obsessive compulsive about Trek fans, are indeed some sort of “problem” that needs to be addressed, I can tell you from personal experience that they aren’t going to go away, or be cured by avoiding prequels. If it was as overly simplistic as that, they would have showed up at the box office for NEMESIS; the least attended Trek film of all time wasn’t a prequel. And once TNG aired, the movies during its run instantly became prequels and every one of them bested the attendance of that NON-prequel.

So here’s a question- has Discovery passed the point where Star Trek Phase II was? All these announcements about cast, and only a couple very limited, short videos, and just a few pictures— it seems very much the same as Phase II did in 1976.

Its actively filming. Lol

wait a second… im gonna nitpick and speculate here. according to Gowron women may not serve on the high council and lursa and b’etor basically manipulated power behind the scenes. So I’m assuming McConnel will be the lady of a great house, Like martok’s wife.

I think Gowron meant that women may not serve on HIS High Council. If you check TNG “Sins of the Father,” I believe you’ll see that his predecessor, K’mpek, had at least one woman among his councilors.

The Trouble With Dribbles

All that matters to me is “New Crews, New Worlds, New Enemies,” and Great, thought-provoking story telling. The rest is moot. Just bring it on. This Star Trekker is hungry for more Star Trek

i

have had

enough of

KLINGONS!

wpDiscuz
Advertisment ad adsense adlogger