The Media Embraces ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Trailer While Fans Debate The Details

The release of the first images and trailer from Star Trek: Discovery wasn’t just big news for the world of Trekdom, it was big news pretty much everywhere. CBS finally revealing footage from the long-awaited series was one of the bigger news stories to emerge from the last week of network upfront events.  In just over a day the trailer has been viewed over 3 million times on YouTube, more than any other new trailer released in the last week from any of the networks.

Media mostly love their first look at Discovery

Much of the media presented the trailer and new images in a ‘just the facts’ fashion, but some also offered some opinion or commentary as well. Of those that did, the reaction has been mostly very positive.  Here are some of the words used to describe it:

Hollywood Reporter: “lavish”

E!: “gorgeous”

Time: “epic”

Vox: “sumptuous”

People: “gorgeous”

Esquire: “incredible”

HuffPo: “out of this world”

ET: “stunning”

Mary Sue: “entirely fresh”

A.V. Club: “puts questions to rest”

Radio Times (UK): “visually stunning”

Digital Spy (UK): “breathtaking”

However, the praise wasn’t universal. Some outlets were less impressed or focused on the behind-the scenes changes and the long wait for a trailer. Here are some some the words seen in these more mixed views:

The Wrap: “underwhelming”

Forbes: “Gets actual trailer confirming existence”

Ars Technica: “falls a little flat”

Collider: “disappointing” “confusing”

 

Fans go ‘Point/Counterpoint’ over how Discovery fits expectations

One only needs to peruse the many active threads here at TrekMovie to see that there are a lot of fan opinions about the new trailer. Opinions seem to be falling into a few main camps, with some not liking the emphasis on action, the choice of a prequel or how the look of various things doesn’t ‘fit’ with what they feel is the right way things should be. Then there is another camp that embraces the new show and is excited or at least open to changes. We have collected some examples of how this point/counterpoint debate played out on social media.

Star Wars owns deserts now?

Uniforms aren’t supposed to be blue?

There is only one way to Klingon?

…and let’s not forget our history, Star Trek and otherwise:

Striking a note with women, especially women of color

Out in the general public it seems that the trailer is striking a chord with a lot of women, who like the emphasis on lead Sonequa Martin-Green along with Michelle Yeoh. Women of color seem to be particularly taking note of this new show. Here are some reactions.

All quiet on the celebrity front

One group that hasn’t been talking about the trailer are the various veterans of Star Trek. The writers, producers and stars made famous for being part of the Star Trek franchise over the last few decades have mostly not offered up any opinions on the newest entry into the family. One exception was Roberto Orci, co-writer/producer of the 2009 Star Trek and 2013’s Star Trek Into Darkness.

For everything there is a first time

There was one particular tweet that caught our eye and reminded us to put things in perspective.

What say you?

What’s your reaction and those of your peer group? Are your non-Trekkie friends excited or even aware of Star Trek: Discovery? Let us know in the comments below.

Leave a Reply

364 Comments on "The Media Embraces ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Trailer While Fans Debate The Details"

Sort by:   newest | oldest

Just sit back and enjoy it! …or not!

Seriously. That “This will be someone’s first Star Trek” comment is on-point. It’s very much like Dr. Who in longevity, so there will always be TOS fans for who there can be no other Trek. And you know what? That’s okay.

Exactly. My first Trek was Enterprise – so I never really understood all the hate it got. Middle school me thought it was the best. Nearly 30 year old me still loves it. Heck, my wife walked down the aisle to Archer’s Theme!

I had a co worker who was watching enterprise as it aired… his first trek. and he loved it.
TOS was my first (in syndication) and TAS was on when I was prime saturday morning age. But I have loved all trek… even the kelvin films to a degree. I am just happy there IS a new trek series.
And it looks awesome!

Speaking of DW, this is the first time since I think 1989 that both DW and Trek will have new episodes at the same time.

There was actually a month or two when the first episodes of DW’s first (revival) series coincided with the last episodes of ENT’s fourth series.

I agree with this statement… to a point. That point is where those who believe that there can be no other Trek than TOS, or TNG, or DS9 etc. start to detract from the enjoyment of new fans or existing fans who like the new Trek.

The problem with the fanbois is that they seem to believe that theirs is the only opinion. This is the one thing that irks me about Trek fans vs Wars fans.

Star Wars fans have never had to deal with their Franchise being split into 3 onscreen Universes.
There is only One Star Wars Universe so you can’t put that on Star Trek fans as Star wars fans have never had to deal with that situation, they all love the same ONE thing.

Except that fans who grew up with the Star Wars OT, sometimes view the PT as a separate universe.

With the Prequel Trilogy, Original Trilogy and the New Trilogy, I feel like its going to build divides in that fan base as well.

There is now a new wave of hate towards Star Wars TFA and the direction it took. I don’t think any fan base is spared from being split apart. Then again, I’ve heard nothing but good things from all Dr. Who fans.

NO, it’s not. Because these new people won’t be getting Genes Utopian Future of Exploration. Instead a 15 part Klingon War story. That’s not Star Trek.
And Star Trek Fans Want Star Trek. not to be exploited by Star Trek’s name being used on another show.

The problem with definitive ‘that’s not Star Trek’ statements is canon always seems to trip them up. The Federation was more then willing to mix it up with the Klingons, only to be foiled by motivated self interest (evil outside threat) or interference by enlightened supreme beings (Organians). I seem to recall early in TNG where Riker got to deliver a high handed speech about how the Federation would rather die then violate the sacred principle of the Prime Directive. Then Picard and crew went forth and spent seven seasons violating the Prime Directive. If Discovery ends up being a pragmatic representation of the Trek universe, that’ll be okay for a lot of people, and new fans alike.

Now that you’ve declared your knowledge of what all Star Trek fans everywhere want, are you also going to explain to us how we’re Doing Random Initial Capitalization Wrong?

Yes, because a 15 part Klingon war story isn’t Star Trek- just like the TWO SEASON long Dominion War arc in the most critically acclaimed series in the franchise isn’t Star Trek.

Move on.

For the record, some of us would love to see a 15 part Klingon War story for Star Trek. I’ve had enough seasons about exploration, not that I don’t enjoy it. But I do love a good war in the mix, so bring it on.

warp 5, engage!

Personally I enjoyed it. It looked “Wagon Train to the Stars” – humans trying to do the best they can in a chaotic galaxy, finding their way, lots to learn. And the Klingons were not just humans in make up – they looked scary, dangerous and bent on galactic domination. Thumbs up.

We have been in Space 140 years by this point- are we really going to be “Trying to do the Best they can” its ridiculous. These are trained professionalw with 140 years on institutionalised training- like the military.

people were suffering and dying in the western then-US-territories 200 years after they’d been initially explored and the first settlers tried to make a living there… settling land and fighting natives (and genocide, in that case) and taming wilderness was hard even until the late 19th century in the US. Space will take longer. Much longer. 140 years is nothing. They truly will still be doing the best they can.

+1000%

~Pensive’s Wetness

Because Kirk always acted as a “trained professional with 140 years on institutionalised training- like the military?”

There were even references in later series to Kirk being more reckless and more of a cowboy.

That tweet from Laura is actually really nice… I’m happy for her. :) And I’m pleasantly surprised that there are two women in charge of the ship. Something I honestly never thought we’d see any time soon, if at all.

It certainly is one bit of TOS “canon” (does the third season of TOS even count?) that is great they have decided to toss out

Canon? really.you realize canon was made up as they went along.The Roddenberry rules quite frankly is shit today.Star Trek can no longer afford to play by the rules.They need to break the mold to get back on top and to contend with Star Wars. Seems to me Star Wars is slowly breaking the mold.You have to or be left behind.All canon means that someone at sometime decided on what’s canon.Canon holds writers back and you won’t get there best work.Things only move forward when someone says you can’t do that and someone says f you and breaks the rules.I hope they do that.

Thomas P Vinelli,

Re: Canon holds writers back….

Not ALL writers. See: BAND OF BROTHERS’ Erik Jendresen,

https://archive.li/3L8g8

”It would not have been easier for me {Erik Jendresen, to write a STAR TREK script in a canonless universe.}. The whole delight and challenge of doing this, the reason I did it, was because I was bound and determined to write a tale that was completely faithful to the canon, and more importantly, to the spirit of Star Trek.

In spite of the shortcomings in ‘Enterprise’ — which were substantial — the canon was rich enough to provide clues that make filling that gap in the tale challenging, yes, but possible to do.” — Erik Jendresen speaking to SYFY PORTAL’s Michael Hinman, Mar-12-2007,

Quite right. Just because there was a writer’s bible doesn’t mean TOS is scripture.

If it did, though? It would be the Old Testament.

The trailer is great. It’s wonderful to finally see what this show is going to look like! A lot of the criticism of the trailer is silly to me, with the only exception being some of the editing/ audio dubbing. Furthermore, I don’t understand the complaint of too much action in the trailer when there isn’t a single explosion, torpedo, or phaser blast in the whole thing! For someone who has waited these long 12 years without Star Trek on “television,” I cannot wait to see this thing in the fall. I just want high quality storytelling and great acting for this thing, is that too much to ask???

“The trailer is great” “I just want high quality storytelling and great acting for this thing…”

Sorry, but those two statments don’t exactly fall hand in hand… outside of the Vulcan and the alien, the acting was pretty bad.

While I’m not in total disagreement with your assessment, acting can be subjective. This guy may be fine with the acting seen in the trailer.

I see the “wooden” complaints but I dont think the acting was bad. It was not emotional. It might have lacked depth. But we dont know how they were directed. That could be the vision of the director. it could also be a handful of scenes showing more measured drama and there is a lot more depth to come.

Plus, watch Encounter at Farpoint and tell me how great the acting is. Give them time.

My god I hadn’t even thought about the acting yet, it made me feel better about the Fan film acting which I felt I was sometimes making excuses for but this looks poor quality at points.
If they can’t find a full 2 minutes of good acting out of several episodes it is a worry.

Because obviously TOS was a masterpiece of acting, are you insane? Have you ever seen that overacting? Silly acting? It’s laughable for most episodes, complete caricatures. Then TNG, that was essentially two seasons of utter shite with acting more wooden than a tree. Did you ever watch Voyager? Or are you here trying to convince yourself that was some Shakespearean masterpiece of Oscar worthy performances? Jesus you lot, get your heads out of your asses.

Agreed, Bert, Star Trek has never been known for it’s stellar acting. It’s always been sub par at best, even with a few standouts (Nimoy & Stewart most notably).

It always struck me as simply “good enough.”

You could ask for Star Trek that is about exploration & the evolution of society instead of War Trek.

Two words;

Dominion War.

Star Trek Discovery is NOT going to be on television. You said it’s been 12 long years since a Star Trek show was on television, well..keep looking! CBS ACCESS is not “on television” When you watch NCIS on the CBS network..
THAT is “on television. STAR TREK Disovery is NOT.

Robert Smith,

Re: Star Trek Discovery is NOT going to be on television

That is an ABSOLUTELY false statement. Just as the first STAR TREK was first on television in CANADA, STAR TREK DISCOVERY will be on television in CANADA.

And by that, CBS has already telegraphed their intent to exploit this new series on television in syndication once they’ve extracted whatever subscriber bump they believe they can get from it being on ALL ACCESS in the US first, and just like all the other old STAR TREK series that are available on ALL ACCESS right now are also likewise on US televisions in syndication [See: HEROES&ICONS, and DECADES].

Honestly I don’t have one single negative about that trailer. I think I was just happy to see SOMETHING from this show and I was thrilled with it. From the opening scene in the desert to the cool warping effect (I also like how its done in the KT films too) to just seeing the various characters, all the new aliens and the look of the ship. And its crazy because we haven’t even seen the main ship yet or its crew (although we know both Michael and Saru ends up on Discovery).

And yes I LOVE the fact its two women in charge and both WOC. It never hit me until I saw the trailer (but I don’t think we knew those two characters would be on the same ship). Its sad listening to morons in the comments section who can’t non-white men as the leads but its their lost. This is Star Trek to me and I love they constantly honor its legacy of having diverse characters who are all equal and capable.

But yeah an exciting time to be a Trek fan. It feels like when we saw the first trailer of Star Trek 2009. Its that great feeling of ‘its back’. In this case this show could be around for 5+ years. And not just a movie every 3-4 years.

Agree with you there 1000%, Tiger2! I had goosebumps thorughout the trailer, and it only intensified when Courage’s opening bars to the Trek theme kicked in :)

That music was when the slap in the face actually connected. Such an insult to show this non Star Trek show trailer like & then slap the Star Trek theme on the end of it. Disrespectful.

Where are all the fans who claimed this would never happen? I saw someone as recently as LAST WEEK claiming the show would not air ever, that the production is so bungled, it would not happen at all (despite the network saying 3+ episodes are in the can).

*sigh* yes, because melanin content in the epidermis is all that’s needed to make great television!

Hey Dejected, no one said it was. But better put on that sunblock because your racism is showing.

At least we knew Star Trek 2009 was a reboot via an alternate Universe this was a hidden lie for months being revealed. Not exactly thrilling.

But dude I been saying for MONTHS that this would be a soft reboot. I was saying it as late as the day before the trailer was released. ONCE I saw those Klingons and backstage video they released it was obvious as the sun being up this was a reboot. Fuller called it a ‘reimagining’ last year, thats just a fancy way of saying reboot.

If you could find my posts here you would hear me saying this over and over again for weeks now. Its shocking that so many others were surprised over this. When you first saw the Discovery ship and the hint of what their uniforms would be did you really think you were getting an updated version of The Cage?

Ultimately they’ll do what they can to stay consistent with the stories of TOS, ENT, etc, but will not be hamstrung by it. Visually, they’ll re-write the Prime Timeline, and I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing.

My dvd’s will always exist, so if they show a new version of the same Enterprise and the crew, etc, in the Prime Timeline (as visual retcons)– I am ok with that.

Yeah I’m not bothered either. I hate its a prequel for this very reason but I’m completely fine with the changes personally. And I’m sure if it bothers people this much they can just pretend its in another universe and be happy that way. Whatever mental gymnastics they need to do watching fake people and fake future history on a fictional TV show.

….set a course for dull. Stilted acting dominates a lifeless trailer completely void of any humor or fun. What a mess. ..

Lucky for you there is Orville. That should fill your comedy needs.

at least its not TEH JJ AMIRITE !!!!!!11111111111

nope…reminds me too much of TNG when they tried to be funny. Painfully awkward.

God you are so right jonboc. I rewatch a lot of TNG on Netflix and BBCAmerica and a lot of the comedy is so cringe-worthy and hokey.

Oh give them a brake it was basically a office environment.

To play devil’s advocate, why should that be grounds for giving them a break?

Door’s that way ->

When you watch a Game of Thrones trailer, do they show a lot of the humor? Or do they show the serious stakes, the drama, the consternation, the furrowed brows? And yet there is a lot of fun and humor in the series.

Just relax.

I don’t recall the trailers for most Trek episodes featuring tons of wit and humor. In fact, most Trek episode trailers played up the drama and tried to make them look as serious and tense as possible.

Very disappointing. I was hoping for something much better, and I really should not be surprised by what we got. Abramsverse: The Series.

*yawn*

Or ‘Star Trek from people who don’t really understand or care about Star Trek’. And the one guy they had who did was fired.

That fact really says all that needs to be said.

Abramsverse: The Series- I wish! At least that would keep it down to 2 Onscreen Universes & we would have the recognisable Uniforms & Star Ships & Bridge design instead of The USS Vengence.

I agree with you on this Trekboi, it would’ve worked out and given some extra to the Kelvin-era if this was a prequel to THAT. I guess you can say that it is and isn’t just because anything before Kirk was born is supposedly prime universe and the USS Kelvin (with its look and viewscreen, etc) so Between the updated look of Enterprise and the look of the Kelvin this is supposed to fit in there. And by those standards alone it does its job.

Emperor Mike of the Terran Empire
Ok. I have not blogged on Trek movie main site in a long time. I basically was with Trek Movie from the very Early Days. I usually hang out in the Chat room with Harry and AJ and the others. As a life long Trek Fan of all the Series and Movies. Including the J.J Verse. I am a bit Disappointed in a few things of the Trailor and happy with others. The Good. The Action looks good and having Spock’s Father in there is a wonderful Touch. Coming right out and saying this is 10 years before Kirk and Spock and the Enterprise was Fantastic. Acknowledging what has come before was wonderful. Now the Bad. The Discovery looks to Advanced for being 10 years before The Enterprise which at that time was the most advanced Starship.. Also. The Uniforms of this time line is way off from established Cannon. While I think this show has a lot of wonderful Potential. The Writers do need to to go back and re watch The Cage Pilot. Just for the Uniforms. Hell. J.J Verse did that and simply updated it. Which to me was good. I do hope that they start to up date the Uniforms to the TOS Era. Also. At the time of the Discovery. Captain Pike was in command of the Enterprise along with Number One and a Young Spock. So maybe we will at least hear the Name. Enterprise!!!! I am Cautiously Optimistic for Discovery and I hope… Read more »
KevinA Melbourne Australia

That is not the Discovery in the trailer – and CAGE skivvies– that will do it in 2017! NOT! If you don’t like what you see, don’t watch it – young minds … fresh ideas!

Don’t watch it? Perhaps you don’t get the concept but we are Star Trek fans, the Star Trek fan base, the show is supposed to be made for us. Not Star Wars fans who hate Star Trek. thats why Netflix payed tens of Millions to make the show- to build on the Prime universe fanbase & give us something new to watch.

TNG wasn’t made for TOS fans. As I remember it, they absolutely hated it. Even when I saw Generations in the theater there were TOS fans who said openly ‘I’m only here because Kirk’s in it. I don’t know a thing about TNG and the characters.’

I am sick to death of hearing people whine about the tech and uniforms not fitting with cannon. For f%^&k’s sake you were warned it wouldn’t look like “The Cage.”

If anyone thought this was going to look like TOS with their low-budget designs, cardboard sets, and 1960’s aesthetic, you were only fooling yourselves.

When DS9 and Enterprise did episodes in the ‘TOS past’ they had sets and costumes that looked JUST LIKE THE TOS PAST.

And guess what? It looked great and worked fine. This total ‘JJ-ABAMSIZATION’ of Trek is NOT NECESSARY and is a VERY BAD IDEA.

Yes, and those episodes were mostly gags, or meant as nods to the past for fan service. On DS9 the whole thing was played as a joke.

If this bothers you so much, go watch your old DVD’s.

It does and I do.

Blob,

ENTERPRISE never did an episode in TOS PAST. For one thing, TOS was in their future, and on the other hand it was in the alternate timeline of the MIRROR universe contemporary to theirs to which the Constitution class Defiant from their future had interphased.

Even some of the characters in that mirror episode of Enterprise took shots at the aesthetic of TOS. I mean I get it, it’s classic and I love it and love playing it when I get to in video games but I also understand going with a more updated look.

PEB,

Re: …took shots at the aesthetic

Significant of absolutley nothing, as there’s no rhyme or reason as to what styles of fashion become a fad, how long it lasts, and whether it comes back into fashion as retro chic further down the line.

I’m certain we can find a group of teens taking shots at your current clothing fashion choices, unless you are one yourself, in which case, just patiently wait — it’s coming.

If you watch the 2009 film at the beginning, the Uss Kelvin is prime timeline until Nero came along, and discovery is set 20 years after uss kelvin, It’s the 21st century TV has to evolve visually, we cant have wobbly sets like the 60’s anymore it wont appeal to a wide audience.

If you watch The Cage, it’s set the year before Discovery, absolutely overriding any conflicting styles set by 2009 from an earlier period.

Blob that was fun for a one-time-thing. It was FOR fans, it wasn’t meant to get new fans. This is what you people are missing: The ONLY people who will watch something out of TOS are people who watches TOS now. Like the Kelvin films they are trying to reach A. A new audience and B. A younger audience. No 20 year old is going to watch a show that looks like it was made in the 60s. This is the most unrealistic argument to have.

But yes as I KEEP saying this is why they should’ve put this show farther in the future so we wouldn’t get silly arguments like this in the first place. But Star Trek has to GROW, it can’t look the same with every iteration. Even if they do a 23rd century show or film 50 years from now those would look nothing like the KT films or Discovery either.

Thats so lame, going to the Star Trek fans want them to 100% recreate the original series quality sets & production values to be happy. BS
You can update & modenise the production design with out making it unrecognisable- look at the JJ films (set just 10 years away) they got a few small things wrong but basically it’s Star Trek- believable & recognisable. This No.

Coulda but didn’t. This was the choice they made. They were never going to make all Trek fans happy– if they’d gone the way you’re saying, I probably wouldn’t have liked it.

Difference is though, I would spend my time whining about it online. I’d gripe to a couple of friends and then judge the show based on the quality of storytelling.

*wouldn’t have spent my time whining (god we really need an edit button)

Well, for my money the bridge of the Shenzhou is far more reminiscent of TOS (or even the TNG-era Trek shows) than the Kelvin-verse Enterprise iBridge. Disagree? Fine, but that’s the point–these things are very subjective.

I agree. I think it is possible to modernize the design so that at least there is a recognizable through line. I don’t think it has to be cardboard sets OR Apple Store. If they really put some creativity into it I think they could find a decent midpoint. It just seems they go the easy way out and come up with something completely new without much of a nod to what went before (communicators and maybe tricorders excepted).

Just like a 2017 camaro looks like a 1969 Camaro, the updated production here does need to look like the 1966 Star Trek.

THANK YOU!!

Sanity at last.

Just because the production crew warned you that they were going to do it wrong, that isn’t a justification for doing it wrong. The setting and universe is one the production team chose, out of a myriad of possibilities. That caries with it the responsibility to actually make that setting look like it’s been established; if they didn’t want to do that, they could have set the show in any other time period, or in the Kelvin universe.

That said, it is distressing to see Discovery’s defenders repeatedly passing such blatant false information. Star Trek was a big-budget show, expensive enough to bankrupt Desilu after three seasons. The sets were not ‘cardboard.’ And yeah, their aesthetics were 60s. As have been faithfully recreated in some of the most popular episodes of TNG (Relics), DS9 (Trials and Tribbleations), and ENT (In A Mirror, Darkly).

Fact check your arguments, guys, and drop the TOS-hating. The next person to pull out this ‘cheap cardboard’ nonsence, beit it willful ignorance or true lack of knowledge of what they’re criticisizing, gets jabbed with a painstick. :-)

You say you’re a fan of the “JJ Verse” films. Well these uniforms are a direct reflection of the Kelvin uniforms which are Prime canon. The Cage uniforms are being worn on the flagship of the fleet. TOS already showed us that older ships wore older uniforms at the same time. This really is no different.

If the aesthetics of The Cage in the similar time period couldn’t have been kept, then call it Star Trek: The Next Next Generation instead, and don’t poop on everything that has came before.

I don’t disagree with you they should’ve put it in another time period but does anyone seriously want to see something like The Cage in 2017? Would anyone want to see those uniforms?

And how exactly are The Cage uniforms different from basic uniforms in the JJverse movies? I don’t remember anybody complaining about *those*.

I don’t disagree with you, but they wanted to start something new and different. If a fan’s only complaint is that in their mind they can’t reconcile the visuals with canon, then I think that fan is just plain stupid.

Fair criticism i’ve seen includes “I don’t think it looks interesting” or “the acting didn’t satisfy me” or “looks like generic sci-fi.”

Though I might not agree with all of those sentiments, those are fair, logical, reasonable crticisms.

“Whaaa the technology isn’t consistent with a silly kids show from 1966” is definitely not a rational or reasonable criticism for an intelligent adult.

They could potentially solve this by having Starfleet divided into different task forces – i.e. USPAE exploration, military command, etc or different Sector commands. In FASA the Enterprise under Pike was actually assigned to exploration command away from the Four Years War raging.

Torchwood, exactly. If Roddenberry and Jefferies had had access to CGI and not been limited by practical models and sets, who knows what “canon” Star Trek sets and ships would have looked like? I mean, going by non-remastered canon, most other ships are vague blobs of light…

Not to mention when given bigger budgets, Roddenberry and Co. changed a LOT, most notably (and has been brought up countlessly) the Klingons.

I believe there’s even a quote from Roddenberry saying something to the effect of how silly it would be to be tied down to visuals and style established on a low budget TV series produced 15 years before.

He was a big proponent of retconning everything to make a better product.

at least try to form a real argument instead of just trying to insult fans by calling Star Trek a silly kids show lol
Nice try. lol

There is no reason the technology & designs couldnt be updated & be recognisable instead of putting us on the bridge of the Vengence.

I am forming real arguments, you’re just too dense to see them, and get your panties all twisted because you feel insulted by the ACTUAL REALIZATION that Star Trek was never designed to be consumed by nitpicky 50 year olds.

Basically you’re whining because it’s not exactly the way you want it to be. Get over it. Star Trek is not a democracy. You don’t get a vote. If you don’t want to watch it, that’s your best bet of telling them what they need to change.

But if other people start watching it, and reception and viewership is strong, be prepared to cry yourself to sleep for the rest of your life because a TV series you liked didn’t have costumes and sets exactly the way you wanted them.

They aren’t. The Orville uniforms would be better. At least the command colors are on the front panel not on the sides.
Obviously the ego of the new designer had to do something to make their designs different rather than just updating the uniform realistically.
All about them not the good of the show. same problem with Star Trek Beyond The designer changed the uniforms just for attention to themselves instead of continung with the same uniforms.

@Paul — slightly different situation — Abrams was re-creating TOS right down to the original crew of the Enterprise. Those uniforms were an iconic part of that, and one of the few things non trek fans know about Trek, besides Kirk, “Dr. Spock” and “beam me up Scotty”. The Cage uniforms not so much. DISC is not established, and as has been shown in canon, different ships did wear different uniforms at the same time. DISC has its own look which is appropriate for a new Trek show, and conforms to canon.

He’s NOT “Dr.” Spock. Number one pet peeve. How can you even be posting here and get THAT wrong?

Yeah, I think the JJVerse uniforms were at least a bit of a nod to TOS. I wish they would do something like that with the ships too instead of space breweries and Apple Stores. I think a really creative production designer could come up with something cool that bridges the divide without seeming dated. Guess we’ll never know.

I meant The Cage uniforms specially and how much more older and cheaper they look compared to the rest of the show. Don’t get me wrong though if I had my way I would’ve gotten rid of the TOS uniforms in the KT films too but yeah I think fans would lose it if they changed that too.

All I’m saying is I don’t need another show that looks like TOS. I don’t need a show thats based around TOS at all but now that we are stuck with one I’m happy they are trying something different with it.

“And how exactly are The Cage uniforms different from basic uniforms in the JJverse movies? I don’t remember anybody complaining about *those*” Then clearly you have never been on the internet because EVERYONE complains bout EVERYTHING!

“…but does anyone seriously want to see something like The Cage in 2017? Would anyone want to see those uniforms?”

Just take one look at those horrid, high school-Band class rejects that the new crew is wearing in the trailer and you’ll have your answer!

I don’t love the new uniforms either but I would take them over The Cage any day.

Is that the only thing you people can scream? What is wrong with you? You call yourself a Star Trek fan? We are getting a NEW series, don’t you get that through your thick skull? A true fan would rejoice, would eagerly await this new show. Only asinine idiots busy themselves with anal continuity that has absolutely no bearing on the actual show itself. What’s next? Special effects too modern? Oh ok, let’s all dangle a few models from wire and ‘imagine’ it’s actually moving. Let’s also go back to pastel vision, I mean that’s what TOS looks like. All Mary Poppins for you. Honestly, if it were for people like you we would never, ever get a new show. Because it would never be right, never be good, never be completely what you want. Which is essentially a carbon copy of what you know. As punishment for this vinegar pissing you will have to sit through the first two seasons of TNG in one sitting, enjoy that shite.

True Fans, Like Myself don’t KNOW if we are getting a New Star Trek show or not yet but a War series that looks like some Battlestar wars wannabe using Star Treks title & trying to poach its fans.

Your right, The Actual show is what matters, the problem, it looks like it’s not about exploration or the human condition & or Utopian society its a Single Klingon War story in 15 parts.

BTW I’d gladly watch the First 2 years of Star Trek TNG.
The first 2 years of TNG were the best in concept if not quality- they were stand alone Sci-fi stories Gene oversaw- from the 3rd season of TNG it became a soap opera of declining value & originality as other people took over from Gene as he got sick.

Knock off the true fans bullshit. We get it, you’re the only TRUE fan of Star Trek. Seriously, get bent.

LOL. The first two seasons of TNG were complete and utter shite. That said, most of TOS is also utter shite. The reality is that TNG got better when they booted Roddenberry out and started to create a new vision that was more compatible with that periode in time. Roddenberry tried to copy something from the 60’s and apply it to another age. It didn’t work with the first movie, it didn’t work with TNG. New times demand for different applications, new audiences demand new avenues. That is the only way to keep a format alive for a large enough audience. Your ranting about ‘the human condition and utopian society’ is mute. That stuff went out of the window with DS9. With Voyager and Enterprise nobody talked about that shite anymore, it became fringe elements of the show. Which is fine, the concept is strong enough for these to survive in another manner. Your anal ranting is the same as when TNG came on, the ‘True Fans’ screaming it wasn’t Star Trek because it wasn’t TOS. Or DS9 which was a Babylon 5 ripoff. Always complaining. You ‘True Fans’ aren’t actually fans, you are anti-fans. You are the same lot that today are still whining and moaning that they remade Battlestar Galactica into a seminal masterpiece. Clinging to their dvd’s of the ‘Real Battlestar Galactica’ circle jerking with other ‘True Fans’ about the horror that is the new version. You are anti-fans, conservative bigots that would like others to believe… Read more »

Trekboi no one knows that. Lets be honest we still really know nothing about this show even after the trailer. There are people on other sites who think the ship we saw was the Discovery. I WILL agree with you that if this was just one story line based on the Klingons yes I would be disappointed too but I highly doubt it will be solely about them. My guess is it will involve other aliens we haven’t even heard of yet.

They are keeping this show really in the dark. Not too different than a lot of Trek projects, especially all the KT films, but its clear Discovery is the first show or film series that devised such a big story line from the beginning so they don’t want to spoil it yet. Let’s see what happens beyond the pilot at least.

Exactly- don’t use Star Trek prime universe to market something else.

It’s really too early to tell , isn’t it ? It certainly seems in line with the new movies from 2009 onward , and I suspect from the main moments and key dialogue in the trailer , that is what it is . And the main pointer of the trailer is the relationship between the young girl to the father-figure , Sarek . Who we later see as the young woman officer . The exciting suggestion here is that the human/hybrid may be Spock , and he never looked more feminine or beautiful , in this new incarnation of Star Trek !

Welcome Sperk! S/he is trans gendered, trans species and trans race !!!!!!

That should please a few whiners online !!!!!

Thanks David ! When CBS recently promoted Discovery , it was as a Adult-only Series ?

Are you triggered? Do you need a safe space my little snowflake?

Hopefully as snowflakes , we will float in the wind with this Series , Harry Plinkett !!

CANNON!!!! lol

People tend to forget that George Lucas invented the idea of not wearing thick heavy all black clothes in a hot environment.

Thanks for that, now I have to clean Vomit off my floor.

The inhabitants of the middle east actually dress the way they do because of Star Wars! Every time I see a photo from that region I laugh and say “ugh, Saudi Arabia: A New Hope!”

The problem the production/design team has and yes I understand canon! But the TOS show was desgned in the 60s with a limited budget. How’s does a show in 2017 make a ship, uniform or technology look less advanced that what was produced in the 70s. If we are all honest! None of the technology from TOS looks like it’s from the future and all the outfits and scenery was all stylised based on 60s culture with a touch of the future added. I mean come on jumpers as uniforms???? So from what I have seen so far they have similar styled equipment but made it look like it actually is from the future. Surely the main point should be story/time line/characters and a that the show feels like Star Trek. People embraced TNG but yet that lacked cowboy style theme of TOS but it fitted in with modern television. For a franchise to grow it needs to move with modern times. Maybe if the show wasn’t a prequel it would be easier. I am really looking forward to the show, i know it’s not to everyone’s liking. But if you want to see Star Trek on TV/Movies it can’t be stuck back where it was… cancelled / no movies.

Thank God a voice of reason and clarity. Bravo my friend, bravo

Hardly the voice of reason. an insulting assumption that all star Trek fans are elderly & out of touch & want a Star Trek Continues style recreation or nothing.

And yet that is exactly the vibe I get from many here.

“So from what I have seen so far they have similar styled equipment but made it look like it actually is from the future.”

Blue touch screens that look like theyre running apple apps look like they’re from the future? I have to disagree there. At least TOS control boards look like nothing from yesterday or today, so they very well could be some weird color coded tactile controls of the future. They were manufactured for the show so they have no real equivalent. Not to mention the tactile functionality is much more realistic for situations that call for multitasking.

Actually jonboc if we’re being true to life then there are two points to note here. First is, if you’re gonna man a ship with people, then those people need information readily displayed at their fingertips. The new Trek Bridge Crew VR game illustrates the contrast in designs perfectly: the JJ Trek consoles are very easy to understand, loaded with information, whereas the TOS bridge is a completely different beast with little information on the consoles. So if a human is gonna be working the controls, then having those controls make sense — as opposed to candy-colored buttons — is essential.

Second is honestly ships in the future would be controlled by computers, since human brains are terrible at multitasking. A human can’t do half as much as a computer. Why run your ship using them?

Ha ha ha ha, are you serious? It looks STUPID that is what it looks like. It might have looked all cool and high tech framed in the 60’s, but it really looks retarded. All 50’s and 60’s science fiction did that thing, the flashy lights and sounds. It’s nothing special. If you want that shit, why don’t you watch any one of these fan wanking films online, they do exactly that. And they are all goddamn horrible. This is 2017, if you want to play in the 60’s be my guest.

Totally missed the point lol

Which is? That flashing lights, lot’s of knobs and sounds make for a convincing special effect that stands the passing of time? What nonsense. It looks stupid and it looks cheap. It looks like something people came up with because they had no money and had to do with whatever they could manage. And it looks like that period of time, where every SF movie or series was essentially the same. Lot’s of knobs, lot’s of flashing lights. Because that was what they could manage.

Pretty much Bert! Its amazing some people suggest we should go back to this time lol. Its utterly ludicrous. I said this already but the fact the KT films have computers that make beep bop sounds is only to indulge in fan boys who seems to think TOS has to be ‘honored’ in the most ridiculous ways resorting to things like computers making silly noises. IN the 60s it worked because A. No one had computers and B. The few that were around by IBM actually did make some kind of noises. Today however you might here a slight hum from a server room but thats about it. I’m pretty sure another 300 years those machines would be as silent as a cat tip toeing in a room.

Let go guys, the 60s are over.

Tiger2,

Re: … computers making silly noises

I’m not exactly sure what you are addressing? The computer I am using right now makes all sorts of similar silly noises. And the majority of my electronic devices that I activate makes some sort of distinctive beep, boop, or buzz as an auditory feedback that activation is progressing or an alert. The worst noise pollution in these regards being remote electronic activations of various automobiles’ and their other functions.

But I will say that from day one of my watching Trek it always amused me that the sound effects of the computer on this and other shows working were the actual mechanical noises that the Hollerith punch card machines, i.e. IBM 26 & 29 keypunches, 402 Accounting Machine, Sorters, Collators, etc. and that the E’s computer would have to actually say “Working…” because most of the audience had absolutely no idea what all that additional mechanical din was intended to be indicative of.

The 50s and early 60s sf film and television, with which I grew up, all had rockets returning to Earth in reverse of how they launched, on their tails, and soon were dismissed as hopelessly out of step when NASA quickly abandoned that dream.

Now with SpaceX, et al, those old favs don’t look nearly as dated or out of step as they once appeared to be. They seem prescient.

Ummm, TOS looks like what someone in the 60’s would think the future looked like. And while the new series might look like an ipad Im not sure where else you want them to go?

How about a series where everything is controlled by our minds and people lay in a large room on earth and just *think* their way across the galaxy. Every week we can watch them lay there and see the minor changes in facial expressions as they have some sort of never-seen encounter. Now that’s the future!

LOL Jonboc did you seriously argue that this show should’ve had big buttons on their consoles like a 60s TV show???? This is unreal man. OF COURSE they should have some buttons as I type on a laptop now but this idea you expected no touch screens for a show 300 years from now when we have touchscreens TODAY says it all.

You guys need to stop living in the past for a show thats about the future. I lol when people were suggesting the show should just have buttons on the ship because thats how a 50 year old show did it. C’mon!

Tiger2,

Re: touch screens

Are you seriously arguing that you’d have to actually physically touch something 300 years from now when even Trek’s competition, LOST IN SPACE, showed advanced cultures using gesture and thought based activation, in its 1997 and beyond setting? Heck, even Allen’s VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA which took place in its then future of 1968 and after had advanced off-world cultures doing that.

God I wish I can put you on ignore.

And if Trek presented that I would be 100% cool with that, but they simply haven’t yet. But yeah I want it MORE futuristic, which is why I want to go farther in the future in the FIRST place. If Trek was in the 25th century you can do that. But since we are back in the 23rd century and every fanboy can tell you how the 23rd century will look and feel since they saw it on Star Trek in the late 60s, that would be too much for their little brains to handle right? I mean Sulu never flew the ship just using his brain so that would be waaaaaaaaaay out of the precious canon these people live and die from.

But if it was up to me, certainly. Thats something Trek has never done before, thats MY point, I want the show to always think more creatively and not go back to the same ole same ole all the time. But its why we have computers making sounds in the KT films because guess what, they did it in the old show so they throw that in there although no computer or machine today makes bee bop sounds to let people know its working. This is the stuff that needs to go away.

Tiger2,

Re: And if Trek presented that I would be 100% cool with that, but they simply haven’t yet.

Now, you are just talking in circles. Pike’s Prime ENTERPRISE was NEVER shown to use any sort of touch screen, but Spock used hand gestures to change images at his science station in both the THE CAGE and THE MENAGERIE.

Disinvited,

Are you just bored? Thats it right? I’m not talking ‘in circles’. I haven’t seen the Cage like forever lol. I barely remember that episode other than the basic plot of it and the green woman. I can’t remember every single detail from 700 episodes of Star Trek, especially episodes I only seen once or twice. If thats what Spock did, great, then they should do that on the new show. I don’t have any issues with this stuff. Can you go away now?

Your Simply Wrong.

Star trek is a Period piece.
You can modernise but the core style & concepts can & must be maintained or it loses its brand recognition at the very least.

The other issue is Content. It is possible to change the superficial elements if the core of the show is intact & keeping with Star Treks concept- Evolved humanity, Peacefully exploration the universe not War Trek. A 15 part Klingon War Story stuck on the Bridge of the Vengence with no exploration or quality acting.

How is any of it Star Trek besides the title?

If you believe Star Trek is a ‘period piece’ then thats exactly why they shouldn’t do a prequel. I don’t want ‘period pieces’ I want a real version of the future. Again Roddenberry himself got that and why TNG looked NOTHING like TOS because he was presented his version of the future 20 years later vs his vision in the 60s.

Kids its now 2017, these people are simply presenting their version of the future from today. Why is this so hard to get????

Obviously, TNG was maligned by ‘True Fans’ because it didn’t look like TOS. And it wasn’t ‘True Star Trek’ because it had an old fart as a captain. Memory, always so failing. Anally retarded fans complain about this nonsense. Roddenberry changed it because the times had changed and because he could. He could because he had more money and the technology to do it. If he had those options TOS would have looked much different. Stop being so anal, this is a show about the future. Not a show about ‘canon’. If you want to convince a modern audience that this is a show set in the future, you give them a futuristic environment that clicks with that audience. Not with an audience that is anal about ‘canon’.

Thank you!

Tiger2,

Re: … real version of the future.

If you actually sincerely hold that belief, then you should move on. STAR TREK is fiction intended to make us think reflectively and intelligently about our present and our hopes for the future while entertaining. It holds out the possibilty of such a future to use to those ends, but it was absolutely NEVER expected to actually be a REAL version of the future.

Thanks Captain obvious.

My point is no one wants to go back to a time presenting ideas we know is ALREADY out of date or touch. Thats the problem with a ‘period piece’ if you can’t even expand on concepts we have today that are more advanced now than Star Trek originally envisioned them. You are watching the wrong freaking show.

Obviously there is no such thing as a ‘correct’ future but at least present something that looks halfway plausible. Doing anything TOS related would look too out of touch minus stuff like transporters and warp drive, which we will probably never get in 300 or 600 years.

You’re*

Star Trek isn’t a period peice. The definition of period peice is
“an object or work that is set in or reminiscent of an earlier historical period.”

Since it is set in the future it is, by definition, impossible to be a period piece. Also, note the term reminiscent.

This whole thing is laughable. Only people who can’t leave the 60s thinks a show about the future should still look like a 60s TV show. Some of these people are just ridiculous. And yeah clearly Gene Roddenberry didn’t think that way because TMP was as updated and advance at the time and that was only 10 years after TOS. I imagine if it was 20 years after it would look even more different still being in the same time period.

I been a Trek fan decades, watched TOS first in my youth. I loved it even when as a kid it looked outdated to me and this was the 80s. But I never thought or considered this was something that was suppose to be locked in forever. I just assumed, like many it was just made for its time like any old show. And when TNG came around it basically confirmed that.

Again I do understand to a degree it may look too advance for some people but what do you expect? And even then it doesn’t look THAT advance, just closer to the 24th century outlook of the franchise because even the 24th century of Trek is now dated. This is why going forward just made sense so these weirdos wouldn’t take it so personally. But now that its here they have to adapt or simply don’t watch.

I really only have 2 problems with Discovery 1) it’s a prequel 2) The design of the Discovery. Other than that this looks fantastic and will probably love it as I do the new movies. Also, the way I see it, if TOS was made today it would look similar to this. Cheap sets with physical buttons may have worked in the 60’s (as that’s how they saw the future) but with today’s technology going back to that would just be stupid.

We haven’t seen the Discovery yet. That is The Shinzhou.

He’s talking about the bizarr test flight trailer ship.

In 1960s they didn’t have enough money to make it more futuristic. That’s why there were “cheap sets”. Nowadays, however, there is no excuse for making such ugly and crappy sets like that awful engineering-brewery from that god-awful 2009 movie or the cheap design Apple-design bridge. When you have enough money, you make decent sets… like those in previous Trek shows. And I think those in Discovery look decent, too. At least judging from this trailer.

As much as I loved the 2009 reboot, I will admit that brewery engine room was a very odd choice.

Your warped if you think the JJ bridge was cheap- yes the Brewry Engenering didn’t work, maybe if they put an actual warp core in the middle of it it could have but they didnt. At least they could afford to light it.
Even the vengence had lighting.

That Apple-bridge is awful, the worst design I’ve ever seen (even the bridge in Galaxy Quest is far better!). The 1960s TOS bridge is five times better than jj’s Apple-bridge, and the “The Cage” 1964 bridge is 10 times better and looks more futuristic than that “Apple store” bridge. You have a budget of 150 million dollars, and the “brewery engineering” (and an “Apple” bridge) is the best you can come up with? What was all that money spent on?? Bad Robot idiots.

The Discovery producers, having far less money, have come up with far better design, obviously. The USS Shenzou bridge looks like a decent Star Trek bridge. And I’m sure the Discovery bridge as well as other parts of the ship will have a decent futuristic design characteristic of Trek.

@quantum — they had a lot of money, but that’s the best they could do with it at the time.

Yeah right. Why did they then use salt shakers as tricorder instrument? No, they actually didn’t have a lot of money available. They were on a tight budget, that’s why so much of TOS looks so cheap (rubber aliens etc.). Look at 2001. It was made in 1968, and it still looks pretty futuristic by today’s standards.

Well 2001 was a big budget film but yeah I agree with you. TOS clearly was on a tighter budget at the time. Maybe ‘cheap’ isn’t the word but it clearly didn’t have the budget like Star Trek shows today from TNG to Discovery.

Suggestions of Entropy

That isn’t true and clearly you are utterly ignorant of 60s production. I was high budget TV for it’s time.4

Suggestions of Entropy

I mean: That isn’t true and clearly you are utterly ignorant of 60s production. It was high budget TV for it’s time. I was never high budget TV at any point in my life.

Sadly, you’re probably right. The 60s sets were designed by an engineer who fought in the actual war, flying actual warplanes; today, sets are designed by comic-book artists who can’t seem to understand that excessive sharp corners, weird angles, intricately profiled wall panelling, or support beams positioned conveniently enough to give you bruises, does not equal “futuristic”.
Thing is, the *real* future starship interior will look more like The Cage than Discovery. Ever been to a modern military ship or plane? It’s utilitarian, today just like fifty years ago. That’s why original series sets are so good: they were designed by a man who actually knew what he was doing. Read a bit about it if you will, you might be surprised: http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Constitution_class_sets

Physical buttons, potentiometers and rocker switches are not going away anytime soon, either. Tactile feedback is a must for efficient work. Touch panels may look flashy, but they have a major problem: they can’t be operated without looking at them. With physical buttons, once you get used to their layout, you can actually look away and keep working.

Here, meet A-350, today’s most advanced airliner. Can you see all the mechanical buttons and switches? They are there for a reason.
comment image

As a commercial pilot you are spot on.

I’m surprise Meyer didn’t force them to add buttons to the consoles as he did with the ST:V bridge.

I agree with this.

Im very interested in seeing the Discovery because of how awful that first look CGI was last year. But the Shenzhou looks very detailed and well done and in keeping with what came before.

Hopefully they dont present the Discovery as a “newer” ship and Apple Store it up.

Because Meyer isn’t in charge of the show. He’s just a writer and consultant. He could’ve suggested it but he has no power to make anyone do it. He’s not the show runner. On the films he was the director, big difference.

Bremmon this is a perfect example of someone not watching the trailer closely, there ARE a lot of buttons. You noticed the screens but there are stills that even show there are a lot of non-touch screen buttons on the bridge. I also never understood why people reference present day aircraft when talking about ships that travel in space SOOOOOOOO far into the future. It would be like saying hey this car I drive in the 60s, let me design a car for the year 2020 and make everything the same because this is what I can relate to. Think of how much has advanced technologically in this short period of time, now jump ahead to the time of TOS and imagine how much things would change. I respect and love what was on TOS and all of “prime” Star Trek but we also have to be a little bit more honest with ourselves

Thanks for educating these people.

@Paul — but this is still anchored in the past technology. There’s nothing to say that the Touch Screen panels seen in Trek don’t have tactile feedback, and relief contouring, to allow someone to work without looking at the panels. These are things we don’t really have yet. The worst problem with the LCARS system in TNG was the ability to customize key panels to ones individual taste — like weapons.

It’s nonsense. We are talking about a science fiction show. Hundreds of years in the future. You are talking about current tech in current times. You need buttons for tactile response. Did you not think that perhaps in 200 years you might not need actual BUTTONS to get tactile response? That any panel might update itself based on the situation that you need at that moment? With complete feedback directly into your brain? Look at this image and compare it with something 30 years older, already many things have changed including the MASSIVE screens. In another 30 years, who says you need those buttons? What conservative bigots you are.

There are already prototypes of adaptive touch screens today that raise up tactile “bumps”, and we have haptic feedback on phones, smart watches and game controllers. An Airbus is interesting for its glass cockpit, but compare that to the cockpit of the Concorde, which had about 10x as many switches and all-analog gauges, or even the first revisions of the Space Shuttle with hundreds of dedicated buttons and switches and CRT displays. In addition, the Airbus has a sidestick fly-by-wire joystick, not an old-school flight yoke connected to the elevators by cables and pulleys. So it’s fair to say that while the Airbus still has tactile switches, there’s many, many fewer of them than in previous generations of aircraft. Most commercial planes today have seriously huge software packages that automate things for safety – autopilots, landing modes, anti-collision systems – not to say pilots don’t do anything but computers help way more than they did 20 years ago. It’s realistic, then, to think that 300 years in the future, computers will be doing a lot more of the work (calculating flight paths at warp, compensating for gravitational pulls, optimizing the course, etc) vs manual flight control; etc. Also, let’s remember that the Bridge isn’t solely for flight control. Science, comms, defense/tactical, environmental control and engineering, plus mission-specific configurable stations. If you’ve ever visited JSC in Houston, you can peek in at the live, working ISS mission control, and it’s dozens of stations with dozens of flat-panels, keyboards, and some dedicated… Read more »

Agreed Matt, those are my only two issues as well. I’ll get over the prequel bit though if they don’t turn it into some nostalgia piece for TOS fan boys and so far it doesn’t look to be the case. As for the ship, yeah it sucks but others say they have modified it greatly. My guess since they are keeping it SO secret now they really have changed it and want to wait for the right moment unveil it.

Again its weird the show called Discovery never once showed Discovery so its probably for this reason.

Look behind the spacesuit. Tell me what ship that is. Unless I miss my guess it doesn’t look like anything we’ve seen in the trailer so far.

Wait, is Michelle Yeoh the first Asian woman Captain ever?? That can’t be right…right? I could’ve sworn there was at least one Asian woman Captain in an episode somewhere. If so, wow, she is making history. I see why Laura is so proud! :)

Michelle Yeoh casting is fantastic!!!! I hope they use her as much as possible (I fear that she’ll only be in the pilot when she is just a first rate actress).

Yes I fear that too. I really hope at the very least she’s in the first season even if thats it. It will suck if she’s killed off in the pilot.

Suggestions of Entropy

a first rate actress in English? I love a lot of her other films but she’s bloody awful and utterly stilted delivering dialogue in English. What films would you say show off this first rate acting in English?

According to IMDB she is scheduled to be in all 15 episodes the first season. And as for other characters, Harry Mudd is scheduled for 9 episodes. How does that sit with TOS?

There was an Asian female Admiral at Starfleet in TNG and an Asian male Captain but yeah…surprisingly this is the first Asian female Captain (unless you count mirror Hoshi taking command of the Defiant and the end of the pt2 Enterprise episode.

Yes that IS crazy. You would think with sooooo many episodes there would have been one Asian female Captain somewhere, even if for a five minute scene. Its crazy 50 years on and Star Trek is still breaking barriers of its own. Nice to see.

Reading the comments on everything Discovery related one could believe that is a MMA show or something. I didn’t remember trekkies so narrow minded or openly dumb.

Some are just in it for white dudes with phasers, alien women, and space battles, unfortunately.

Some (not all) are, as I’ve found out while debating a few other fans.

So Offensive- I’m white & the issues with Discovery have nothing to do with race, gender or casting (maybe acting-its early to tell) some snowflakes are upset even though the discovery will be captained by some old white dude, just the impression of them not being in charge tightened some sphincters.

If you include yourself in that some, then it’s your own fault that you’re “offended”.

Suggestions of Entropy

Yeah it’s much better to insult fellow fans who have different taste rather than actually discussing the show.

I’ve watched the reactions with amusesment – particularly from some of the more unmoving commenters on TrekMovie and TrekCore – and seriously… to those getting upset it doesn’t sit in with the aesthetics of a pilot produced in 1964, get over it! For anyone annoyed that it looks more advanced than TNG-era Trek, move on! We have technology TODAY in the real world is more advanced than TNG-era Trek. Have you seen how big and chunky Picard’s desktop computer is? I write these words on an iPad Pro which makes TNG’s PADDs look quaint and a throwback to a distant late-80’s vision of the future. Which it is. In fact, of all the Trek series, and I’m a lifelong fan since childhood, I personally feel TNG is the one that’s aged worst. Star Trek, like much of science fiction, has inspired technology, engineers and designers since day one. I think it would have been a really sad decision to make a show from 2017 look 53 years old! Forget the fictional technology and aesthetic, the visual language of television in 2017 is worlds away from 90’s heyday era of Trek, let alone those early days of color TV. The best of contemporary drama is cinematic in scope, design and photography. Forget about story, because the trailer told us little or nothing, but cinematically it looks on par with the best of the best. Look at the technical credits on the pilot, and the names involved in setting the tone of… Read more »

Hear, hear. And it’s the easiest thing in the world for someone to anonymously post hyperbolic nonsense like, “This looks inferior to fan films!”

Thank you! Thank you very much. I mean its bizarre this is being argued at all. Its like people are upset that Nolan made a Batman movie for today instead of not going back to the 1960s Adam West Batman. Incidentally also premiered in 1966 and lasted 3 seasons.

Do you see Batman fans whining and moaning Batman shows actually look modern and updated and complaining because it doesn’t look like a cheap TV show. “How come Nolan didn’t take any aesthetics from the 1960s Bat mobile?” “Why couldn’t they use some of the features from the old Bat suit?” “Is it really so much to ask that they couldn’t adapt some of the old Bat cave from the show?”

Thats what these people sound like…ridiculous! TOS HAD its time. You now have movies with these characters and now you have a show in this time period again but its still not enough for them unless it looks like some fan film on youtube.

About the Klingons, they became HUMAN looking around this time. And it affected the entire species (I believe). So this is why I’m a little grrrrr about the look more than anything. I hope that it’s address here.

Apart from us hardcore Trek fans, to a casual viewer a Klingon looks like Worf. Suddenly throwing human-looking Klingons into the mix won’t make any sense to them.

And thank goodness this show is not going after the hardcore fan or it would look like a fan film and the whole show would be cancelled 2 hours after the pilot airs.

…kinda like how this seemingly void of fun new series, riddled with bad acting, would be canned adter two episodes on network television…you know, that place where they depend on ratings? Where people have to watch it to keep it on the air because they don’t have a guaranteed run on the website owned by the folks who are producing it?

Enterprise should NOT have addressed the Klingon look. I enjoyed the episodes and it was clever. But I thought it was one of those things that didnt need answering. We were all able to accept that the TOS klingons should have been ridged but for budget. No every issue needs fixing.

In a 30 second clip you can make broad statements about the series? We get it, you WANT to hate it. You wanted to hate it before the trailer and you still want to hate it. You will watch it and already have your grumpy post ready to go before the opening credits roll. You WANT to hate and thus you will.

You really think you can make a reasoned judgement about this show’s acting, based on what you saw in that one trailer?

Gotta agree with you Harry. And this is coming from a guy who loves the fan films but they’re aimed at the die hards (which is fine and actually how it should be). Just let this show breathe. I’m tired of seeing Trek cannibalize itself. Some fans only want certain stories and a certain aesthetic. To echo Kirk, “some people are very frightened of change.”

The hardcore Star trek fans are the people keeping star trek alive as usual after the JJ blockbuster fans moved on (they never joined the community) what made Netflix pay for CBS to produce this superficial slap in the face.

The problem is that they believe that only one thing can be Star Trek

The Augment story in Enterprise didn’t suggest that every Klingon around between 2154 and 2270 looked human. All it implied was that several Klingon colonies were infected with the virus and that the changed DNA would be passed to future generations. The reason we only see human looking Klingons in TOS could be that it was a TV show with limited money to spend on make-up, that Gene Roddenberry hadn’t thought about giving them ridges at that point or that there was some political struggle/civil war within the Empire that saw the human-like Klingons take control for a period of time (which might also explain Worf’s reluctance to talk about the difference in appearance).

We don’t know if these Klingons are 23rd century Klingons or something else. They could be ancient Klingons or Klingon/Hur’q hybrids for all we know.

We don’t know what kind of Klingon they are. We have actual humans who range in size, shape, and color. So this makes sense to me. Maybe they didn’t ascribe to genetic tinkering.

I could definitely see Worf and Klingons of the ilk being the product of “human” looking Klingons and these Klingons we see in the trailer.

I still think you have to remember the fact that this ship they’re on has been called a Sarcophagus ship. There’s got to be something to that. My gut tells me they look more like Klingon ancestors for a reason. But then if the reason was to simply be able to make them look more alien and less “big human with bumpy foreheads” then I’m also ok with that too. To your point, also remember that not all Klingons were affected by the augment mutation either. Enterprise made that part clear. You can only do so much story-wise to cover for practical makeup budget issues from the 1960s.

Yes. And starships used to dangle from wires. Aliens were just humans with some clay added to their heads. Or some hippy painting scheme. Artistic freedom and advances in special effects make for better viewing. That is why the Klingons looked human: no money, no tech. And that is why they changed them in the first movie and later on they were changed again. It has been an evolution. Aliens should look alien, Klingons should look like goddamn aliens instead of your father with some bumps.

just remember this is the crew of the U.S.S Shenzou, NOT discovery.this is representative of HALF of what the show is about, and seemingly not the main component. I love seeing new Trek.

The trailer looks good, just not sure it looks like star trek to me, but it’s a trailer, I hope the program explains the klingons, why they don’t fit without cannon look, like I said it’s a trailer and that trailer needs to grad eyeballs 👀 as for two female leads of colour, I so don’t have a problem with that, two good actors

Who cares about your precious ‘canon’. Honestly. If I can choose between Klingons that actually look like aliens with an attitude instead of grandfather bumpy, I’d choose that. Or are you also going to complain that starships should dangle from wires and that it doesn’t look technicolor enough? What Star Trek looks like will always change, don’t you understand? If it doesn’t there is no longevity. TNG was completely different from TOS. The basics remained, the dynamics but everything else was completely different. And oh how did the TOS freaks complain about that, the stupid new Star Trek series with an old fart as a captain.

One good actor. the others look uncomfortable & are unproven at this point.

HA HA HA HA HA. What a sad asinine person you are. TNG, only Steward was a somewhat known actor. TOS, shatner was a somewhat known actor. Mostly stage performance. This series has more well-known acting and writing prowess behind it than any other series. But you live in some alternate reality where Star Trek was a Shakespearean experience with otherworld acting. I think you mistake it with the Battlestar Galactica remake, that was some powerhouse of acting.

So far the positive sentiment far outweighs the negative – may this trend long continue. Marketed correctly, this show can attract the much-needed new and non-fan audiences.

Those rabid whining fans can crack out their boxsets and enjoy The Cage when DSC premieres. Me, I’ll be eagerly watching DSC and only then decide whether the show is worth it or not. And I’ll be basing my views on story and merit, not aesthetics and canon.

Well-said

Why is appealing to Non-Fans a good thing?
If They don’t like Star trek & the show is nothing like Star Trek just to chase their Star Wars dollars?
Then we end up with nothing.
What good is a successful “Star Trek” if it is in name only?
Just make an original mainstream tv series & leave Star Trek to be Star Trek even if that concept doesn’t appeal to everybody & will never be as Mainstream as some other TV shows.
At least it has integrity, internal consistency & a loyal dedicated fanbase that supports it- sometimes I feel “fans” just want to sell Star Trek out for Star Wars level success so they can say to Star Wars fans “Look my show is as successful as yours” even if it is ruined in the process.

Idiot. Do you think everyone who watches a show is suddenly like you? A hardcore anal retarded ‘True Fan’ who lives and breathes Star Trek? You are wrong, very wrong. You lot make up perhaps 1% of the intended audience. Who wil watch a series, enjoy it and then move on to the next. Who don’t spend all of their pocket money on a costume, spock ears or conventions. Who don’t spend all of their time on forums spouting their negativity. They are also fans, just not hardcore ‘True Fans’ like you. Who are actually not really fans at all. You represent a demography that is very small and is never satisfied, you represent the old and not the new. You are not a seeker but a confirmer.

I say, “Go, Star Trek!”

“These were all aliens in Star Trek, but some of you are already complaining that ST:Discovery Klingons will ruin the show.

Come on.”

Sometimes in the echo chamber of this site, I lose hope that there is common sense out there but tweets like this re-affirm there are logical, thinking Trek fans out there who aren’t rage quitting everything Trek in the last decade over the dumbest nonsense.

On other sites I visit, the biggest thing is the Klingons. In the thread, I pointed out at least three separate times that we dont know if this is a creative decision for “new” re-imagined Klingons or if there is an in-universe reason. And people still replied saying “why did they have to change the Klingons”.

We simply dont know. If people were forced to think before they posted, perhaps they wouldnt post so often. Most complaints are easily answerable by thinking. And the rest are irrelevant because none of us have seen the damn show yet.

How do any of those aliens disrupt cannon & a consistent believable universe?
They Don’t.
There should be an IQ test to get onto this site.

Because it’s an obvious dog in a fur suit. And anytime I see it, I can’t help but laugh so please don’t say it’s believable… The TNG grey alien tricked Riker the one that looks similar to the large head, big-eyed, grey guys that’s commonly used for generic aliens except oh wait, this one looks even more ridiculous. C’mon man you can’t argue against that tweet.

It’s so great I can’t stop watching the trailer…anyone have the number to the Addiction Center?

Again, for me, I would love to see a few more nods to the Cage, aesthetically, but it’s done so well as it is & the talent behind it is outstanding. No way I’m complaining. I’m as excited for this as I was for the Force Awakens. Bring on my childhood & let’s have some fun!!

I think your confused.
the force Awakens was a continuation of the same Star Wars Universe we all shared in our childhods. This “Star Trek” show appears to have nothing to do with anything we enjoyed as children or even last decade.

Speak for yourself Trekboi

TFA is what you get when you create a product that caters so much to fanboys that it becomes a piece of derogatory bullshit. That was a very bad movie wrapped in layers of screaming fanboys. A rehash, a senseless and lifeless piece of shit. The first new Star Trek movie was a thousand times better than that pile of rehashed nonsense. But that’s what fanboys essentially want: a constant stream of the same thing and which is why so many fanboys did not like ‘Roque One’. Because it was too far away from their beloved Star Wars ‘story’.

The Force Awakens is rubbish, and it made me thrilled JJ wasn’t involved in Trek movies anymore. Rogue One was a better film.

OK, I didn’t read all the comments, but I am very surprised that Star Trek fans would complain about women of color as the main characters of a Star Trek show. What would Gene Roddenberry do? I believe that Gene would embrace these casting choices. It was he that fought (and lost) to have a woman as at least the first officer, he also wanted the Enterprise to be like Earth and represent all types of people. Remember IDIC?

It was Star Trek that taught me to be tolerant, accepting, and embrace differences among people. I am just very surprised that people could be fans of Star Trek and be closed-minded like these comments complaining about WOC as the leads.

I liked the trailer, am open to changes, and excited for the show. That said, I agree the acting was stilted, especially the delivery of the line: “we have engaged the Klingons” was so dull and non-dramatic. Here’s hoping there are other takes with more pizzazz!

I think more context is needed before anyone can judge line delivery.

Where are the male snowflakes complaining about women leads (the captain of the discovery is an old white guy btw) I haven’t seen this ugliness yet.

Why would there be? Dude is awesome. He played Lucius Malfoy in Harry Potter. He has a weighty presence. Good casting IMO.

His name is Jason Isaacs, BTW.

There are too many inconsistencies in doing prequels. This one will suffer the same problem. The Klingons look horrible, I dont understand why they needed to change them? Why do they insist on making them hairless? They never were – not even in TOS. Whats with the nails on them too and their oversized nostrils? The ships, far too advanced to be ships 10 years before Kirk took command of the Enterprise. They should have looked more like the Enterprise. Say what you will but look what the TV Show Enterprise did with In a mirror darkly… they made it work, take that and add on – lets not go full on touch screens and nacelles that wouldnt be seen until 20 years later.

So, you are also asinine about the change they made in TNG and onwards? I mean, Klingons are supposed to look like humans, right? Double standards. Klingons are supposed to be a dangerous alien race, not your grandfather with a set of bumps on his head. They should look as little as human as possible, they should feel alien, they should breathe alien. The only thing you are doing is showing how much of a sour vinegar pissing anti-fan you are. You are obsessed with irrelevant things while you forget the most important thing, which is that you are getting a new Star Trek series. THAT is something a true fan would rejoice. Not wanking in your safe zone about uniforms, technology and other bullshit. If you want that, go watch one of these god awful fan projects.

@Bry — Sorry, no. In a Mirror Darkly did not work for modern audiences, it only worked for nostalgic veterans like you who can’t get over their obsession with cardboard sets. The biggest mistake the Berman Braga era made was pandering to fans, which left the franchise mired in the past rather than pushing forward and keeping up with moren audiences. In case you forgot ENT was cancelled after 4 seasons of plummeting ratings.

Ok it’s official now… The future of Star Trek is rubbish and it’s disgraceful. Give me Seth Macfarlane’s ‘Orville’ over this next trek junk anyday. I’m glad I just decided to cancel my Netflix subscription now.

I am still hoping for time travel ;)

…if it’s the Kelvin timeline fine. But if you’re going to play in the prime timeline, and you acknowledge that the fictional universe created has rules and you make a case for following established canon, like it’s some sort of big deal….then follow it. You don’t go back and make a film about the civil war and make the wool uniforms out of silk because they’re more comfortable and dye them red because you think it looks better. Treat the established history as it was or just leave it alone. If fans get all butt hurt because they simply don’t care for the aesthetics…oh well. That’s how it looks. Period. Unless we’re in an alternate timeline, these designs are too far off base to be taken seriously as any real part of the fictional universe Trek has created. TNG was set in the future, so we had no choice but to accept it’s Hilton-esque, uninspired aesthetics. And now, that is, officially, how the 24th century looks. Whether I like it or not is immaterial. I accept that. How sad that so many new fans and producers can’t get behind this concept…in effect, unraveling the very threads that hold this fictional universe together.

In the real world however, where numbers matter above all else, this means absolutely nothing to a newcomer or to non-fans. And believe it or not non-fans FAR outstrip us hardcore fans on any given day.

Between studios who have no idea how to properly nurture the gold they own and fans constantly running down the franchise anytime something new is attempted, the franchise is now on life support.

Star Trek is not Star Wars. Drastic change is needed for it to survive. If it means changing aesthetic for broader appeal in the hope of the franchise lasting another 50 years, then I am all for it.

Let’s wait, see and give it the chance it rightly deserves.

Live Long and Prosper.
#IDIC

And this isnt about non-fans. This isnt an effort to say “screw the Trekkies, we need new fans”. I dont see that at all. I see so many reasons that give me hope and confidence that they get it, that they get Trek, that they respect canon.

The idea is not to target fans or non fans. Its too make a good TV show. Make a good TV show and people will show up.

I realise every franchise has these fans that hate change. The Walking Dead people get irate over changes from the comic to the TV show. Let’s give them a chance to succeed.

Anyone ripping this show that they have not seen is an idiot. You HAVEN’T SEEN IT!

You are 100% WRONG!!!

This Myth, this belief that Star Trek is broken & hast to be fixed by being changed into star was is the very problem.

Each major contradicting change takes Star Trek farther away from its iconic, phenomenally successful core concept.
Divides the fan base & dilutes the numbers.

Star Trek TNG complimented the Original series & was ratings Gold before they split the universe the first time with the Anti-TNG Deep Space Nine, ratings went down, the fanbase devided, Voy was true to TNG but they used it to try to sell UPN which made it unavaliable to many & the ratings continued to decline. Enterprise devided the fanbase again by going back in time, although they created their own era & they didn’t directly contradict the other series the perception was enough & removing Star Trek from the title was the writing on the wall along with UPN failing.

The new “non fans’ outweighing the real fans is a myth, go to any convention or expo & there are no “non-fans” there buying merchendise ect ect but the show is made for them to view once & dispose of? Great plan.

How has Star Trek morphed into Star Wars? Please share

Except for the first season (i.e. the worst), TNG has very little to do with TOS. TNG and DSC are equally different from TOS.

Suggestions of Entropy

some mediocre director who really wanted to make Star Wars movies instead got his greasy paws all over it.

Flat out wrong. The “Trek to Wars” thing started because JJ Abrams admitted to being a Star Wars fan and not a Trek fan. So ofcourse, his effort was to make Trek more action packed and spectacular and limit the human aspect.

TNG did tremendous ratings. And held to its usual (slow decline) when DS9 debuted. DS9 also held its viewership fairly steadily over its run with expected slow declines as it wore on.

Voyager was the victim of the UPN thing and the fact it was a lame rehash of TNG.

So the argument that there is a concerted effort to make Star Trek into Star Wars, aside from the JJ films which I think were less an effort to make it Star Wars specifically and more an effort to just mute a lot of what Trek Trek, is rather silly.

And there is nothing in the trailer that indicates an effort to be Star Wars or to alienate Trek fans.

Star Trek is not turning into a show (or universe) that revolves around religious zealots(Jedi) that once were conscripted by a government(Republic) to go out and do things for them until it got all crazy… a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

I really dont get this, Jonboc. You’re complaining about canon? Really? You’ve seen a first look trailer. What exactly is your issue? That the Uniforms, which are entirely in keeping with Enterprise and Kelvin dont look like the TV show from the 60’s? Should they use SFX from the 60’s too? You cant look the same as TOS AND respect the continuity of the other series’ at the same time. You just cant. So you have to make a choice. In the limited scenes we saw, they have a TOS era communicator, tricorder, sound effects, logos etc. And you’re griping because it doesnt look like the 60’s??? they could have said screw it and went completely in a different direction. But CLEARLY they have taken great care in respecting canon in many ways. And the NEW items were obviously designed to fit into the modern extrapolation of Enterprise & Kelvin. I have ripped the JJ films for needless canon violations. I am a canon junkie. And Im saying, this is a GREAT first look that shows us they CARE about the franchise. Let’s see what else is there before we start ripping them apart. If this site existed when TNG debuted, EVERYONE would be burying it six feet under. Just relax. If you’re a fan, friggen relax. Give it time. Appreciate the fact from our LIMITED viewing, they are producing a very expensive show with a GREAT cast, GREAT visuals and clearly committed to producing a very good show. Will… Read more »

If the producers were to do things like you want it, then they would be filing for bankruptcy in a flash. Catering to anally retarded so-called fans is a sure way to end your business. This is 2017, deal with it. If you want Trek to survive and find new audiences, you will need to change your attitude. Otherwise you will choke on your bile and forever wank on your TNG dvd’s moaning ‘this is what the future looks like’. While the rest of us true fans enjoy a goddamn NEW STAR TREK SERIES.

..no, you will be enjoying a new TV series called Star Trek. There’s a difference. You, sadly, can’t see the destiction so I won’t bother trying to explain it to you. But I do hope it’s good. Doesn’t look like it’s going to be, just from the bullet points…acting…writing…art design…but I do hope it is. It has pretty planetscapes.

Again: how can you make definitive judgements about the acting (or, to add, the writing) based on the miniscule sampling from this trailer? Do you have access to more material than the rest of us? C’mon, give!

They said the same thing about TNG. They said the same thing about dS9. Etc etc etc. Every time a new iteration was made the ‘True fans’ shouted foul and their negative asinine vinegar pissing.

F**king Brilliantly Said.

For anyone outside North America my advice is seek out the CBS trailer. Netflix’s one makes the show look dire with crap editing and utterly awful music.

I like the music. And I prefer the Netflix trailer better. Less narrative, and lens flares,

I also prefer the Netflix trailer to be honest.

And really,T’Kuvma? Between the sarcophagus and that, it screams the Kuvah’magh. Blech!

Sadly I think we know what Peter’s Axxanar was such a threat now (and I don’t like what he did but that is preferable to this). Wake me when this is canceled.

Peter’s Axanar cost around $1.4m and was a couple of unfinished sets and some CGI renderings.

David , preproduction on Axanar was completely finished , and has already been prepped for the short movie versions , that Viacom will allow !

I think Roddenberry would dig it. I doubt he was anywhere near as precious as a lot of fans are about details like the look or the timeline as the fans are. All he cared about was telling stories and showing characters he wouldn’t be able to get away with in a contemporary show. He tended to disregard all but the most recent version of the show with which he was involved anyway.

So, I think we should all just relax MST3K style and enjoy the fact that this will certainly at least break ground on several fronts, such as having three regular ships, gay character(s), a black woman first officer as the lead, an Asian woman as an experienced and gravitas-filled captain, Sarek, and hopefully Fuller’s assertion that the tone and philosophy of stuff like The Undiscovered Country which was all about how we really can work together for a common good.

LLAP

IDIC

Ignoring visual cannon is symptomatic of the main problem.
Destroying Star Trek by trying to make it into something it is not. (Star wars/Battlestar Galactica)

I’ve seen this comment from a lot of different critics, and I still don’t get it. What about this trailer looks like Star Wars or BSG? It actually looks a lot more like the Abramsverse movies than anything else. It also kinda reminds me of Enterprise, if Enterprise had had a bigger budget.

The ‘TRUE FANS’ said the same thing when the first TOS movie was made. THEY ARE DESTROYING TREK!!!!! Then they said the same thing with TNG. Then they said the same thing with DS9. Essentially, TRUE FANS hate every change because it is NOT STAR TREK. And they will whine, whine, moan, moan. That is not fandom, it is anti-fandom and not understanding Star Trek at all.

Suggestions of Entropy

If it’s as bad as the MST3K reboot, blegh. Ah well — at least David Lynch is bringing us 18 hours of weirdness this year.

The fact is that via creative design work, they COULD have made it look like it make sense within the prime timeline without literally changing every aspect of the established design aesthetics. They could have easily updated the costumes, sets, make-up, etc. and kept the, “feel.” But no, as with Abrams, they wanted to re-create it in their own image- even more so. That’s what’s disappointing. And can you imagine the outcry if Disney had done this with Star Wars?? I give them credit for not going down that road.

Sure man, that will really do well with a modern audience. Not. The Abrams version is a success, just not with your lot. You are the ones who will be left behind, forever whining about what is wrong. While the rest of us who are actually fans enjoy new Star Trek. Good luck with your vinegar pissing.

You’re drawing a connection between those that loved the JJ films and those that like what they see fro Discovery. That isnt a fair conclusion. JJ films sucked. Discovery looks great. Thats my opinion.

No I don’t. I am simply stating that any new iteration must update itself to ring with a modern audience because this is supposed to be a vision of the future directly based on our society. Not Star Wars which is a fantasy. You think the new movies sucked, too bad for you. I don’t think the second one is very good, but to state that they all sucked? No. What did suck was TOS. And the first seasons of TNG. Utter shite. Perhaps ground breaking in concept but goddamn awful in execution. Inapplicable to a modern audience. You either update yourself and survive or you die.

Again, that is completely wrong. the mistake you make is assuming your opinion is fact. its fine for you to dislike TOS. TOS still holds up today. Must one get past the 60’s SFX? Sure. But the same can be said about any TV show or film from the distant past.

I’ve detailed all the issues with the JJ films and repeatedly said is people liked them, great. But if someone prepares for you a 7 layer cake and you eat the top layer, declare it tastes great and dont proceed any further, good for you.

Well, I loathe the Abrams production design, and don’t think this trailer had much in common with that at all.

You’re right, it doesn’t. There’s a bit of Kelvin and Franklin in there but that’s it.

Star Wars has a much stronger fan base, and much more timeless look than 1960s Trek, not to mention taking place in a galaxy far far away. Add to that Disney decided to remake SW for that fan base rather than anything new and fresh. It actually bored me. Trek is our future, and as such it should plausibly look like something we would expect to see 300 years from today, and the look of TOS ain’t it.

“. . .not to mention taking place in a galaxy far far away.”

That’s the whole thing, in a nutshell. STAR WARS has no connection to “our” future, and much of the production design is anything but futuristic. Not to mention that the films themselves (the original trilogy, at least) are meant to recall matinee serials from the ’40s. That’s why STAR WARS ages so gracefully, and holds together as an imagined universe much better than Trek ever will.

” In just over a day the trailer has been viewed over 3 million times on YouTube, more than any other new trailer released in the last week from any of the networks.”
And it could have been much more without the stupid decision to GEO-blocking the video. WHO the hell came up with that studid decision? Aren’t they willing to achieve much views as possible?

Yeah, that was a huge stumble in the launch. That said, I’m still intrigued.

Just a guess but I suspect geo blocking issues might pertain to US vs International rights. For example Netflix trailer was not available in the US, right? (Or Canada). Regardless, they are both on youtube and freely available.

In Australia, took ages to find a video of it that was quality, not a “Review” & without adds. Ughh

So happy for Laura. :)))) Big reason why representation is a good thing. So people have more tools to play and imagine and dream of themselves being whatever they want.

Alright, all you nay-sayers can just go to your room! This trailer is AWESOME!! My only gripe are the lens flares … lol. I guess JJ influences all. I hope they’ve redesigned the Discovery and this ship looks like a logical design continuation of the NX-01 design. We will learn more about the Klingons and thier history here in this series that ever before. These Klingons could represent generations of the species!! This is the sarcophagus ship! Is our Captain Vulcan? Is she Human/Vulcan? Is she just human raised on Vulcan? The uniform look fantastic! So happy to finally see something and can’t wait to watch this!! Trek is back on TV!!

I love everything about this trailer. I actually teared up watching it because Star Trek means so much to me. It is more than “the look” and ‘canon” to me, it is the idea of Star Trek that gets into your heart. With people like Rod Roddenberry, Nick Meyer, and others involved who clearly care about Star Trek, I know the show will be something special. I am excited.

On the other hand, all of this, “but it does not look like The Cage” nonsense in 2017 in ridiculous. The Cage was REJECTED by NBC. Between The Cage and shooting the new pilot with William Shatner, the uniforms were re-done so they did not look like sweaters from the a thrift store and the “technology” on the bridge was updated. Captain Pike had a TV in his quarters that looked like it was from the 50’s and the bridge consoles had those things that look like an adjustable lamps from the 60’s. When NBC and Desilu granted the Star Trek production team the ability to do a new pilot, even then they tried to update it and make that look better. Trying to make a new show in 2017 to adhere to that kind of “look” is ludicrous. CANON is what ever the writer and the production designers come up with at the time, but people carry on like this stuff is a historical document on par with the Magna Carta. It is just television and writing.

Point of order, The Cage looks much more futuristic than the rest of TOS, with the exception of the few anachronisms you point out. They didn’t try to make TOS look more futuristic, they updated the look to have more “pop” on color TV sets made by NBC parent company RCA.

“. . .The Cage looks much more futuristic than the rest of TOS”

You’re right on the issue of color; but otherwise, how so?

It’s amazing what a little hair will do to make that Klingon look a little more like what we are used to. They honestly really didn’t change too much about them.

And it really isn’t to difficult to believe that MAYBE there are some Klingons who prefer to go without hair (worf preferred a ponytail) – for one, bald would give you an advantage in battle – in football it is fair game to grab someone with long hair by it and bring them down.

Please, don’t be silly. Of course the media loves it. Modern journalists haven’t a clue of what Star Trek is, half of them were children when it was at it’s height during TNG and DS9. This is “Super Cool Generic Sci-Fi Space Show”! A desert world that looks like Star Wars!

Details matter to Star Trek fans. If you’re going to pontificate ad nauseaum that this new show is set in the “prime timeline” only “ten years before Kirk”, the least you could do is not make the Klingons look like the hell beasts of Ghostbusters.

Good god, the uniforms look like Galaxy Quest, the warp effects are right out of JJ’s playbook, and there are still lense flares!!

The one thing this show has done well on is casting. That’s the one hope I have, that group of actors all come from some of my favorite movies and shows. This isn’t enough to get me to buy CBS’s stupid service… but I’ll hope it shows up on netflix eventually.

“Details matter to Star Trek fans”

And that’s why I can’t wait for them to die out.

@DRS — I find your post offensive as a “fan”.

I actually love the warping effect. Really dug that they went with an Interstellar style actual-warped-space in Beyond, and i’m fine with them re-using what worked in the JJ films.

Though i’m not a fan of the lens flare, i can forgive it as long as it doesn’t wind up being too excessive.

OMG! So many whiners!

This fan LOVES what he sees.

Fans that balk before actually watching the show are not true fans.

So your idea of being a “True Fan” is bending over for CBD/Paramount, handing them your money & not asking if your going to be fisted, Barebacked or made love too but just take what your given? lol Riiiiiight.

Trekboi, is CBS raping you? Are they forcing you to watch, to post comments, to give them money? No, they are not. Stop acting like a child.

These people are funny. A company creates a commercial product which they like. Now, this company has a moral obligation to them somehow. Somehow, this company is indebted to them and has to do what they want. It’s the world turned upside down. The reality is this: Star Trek is a commercial product that has to make money. It is very expensive to create a series or a movie, more money than these guys will earn in ten lightyears. So it has to cater to an audience that is larger than these anally retarded ‘True Fans’.

Bert Beukema,

Re: These people are funny.

You are funny. The companies that actually created STAR TREK were DesiLu, NBC and Norway.

Paramount’s custody of it came with a vociferous conniption fit protest worthy of the ones you bemoan from ‘True Fans’ as Bludhorn literally had to order his purchased Paramount reluctant execs to do something with it as they wanted nothing to do with it. They even tried to sell it to Roddenberry for $157,000 because that’s how little it was worth to them in their eyes.

I hate it when someone proclaims that those who like what they seen in the Abrams movies are not ‘true fans’. And I hate it when someone calls those uninterested in Discovery ‘not true fans’ too. You are not the arbiter of who is and who is not a true fan.

Yes, the “true fans” stuff is ridiculous and it should be a banned term here. Its lazy trolling.

I’m stoked beyond words. That last tweet caught my eye, too, because TNG was the first show *I* ever watched. Now Star Trek’s coming home, and this trailer looks pretty great. Do I have reservations? Maybe, sure. Do I expect Discovery to be flawless right out of the gate? Nah. Star Trek rarely is. Do I think it seems promising? Absolutely. I can’t wait.

Looks pretty boring is what I say. The one guy was right: “Come up with your own style”.

For those of us who are having a hard time with the slap in the face that is Star Trek Discovery, It would be easier to stomach if they had been honest & not lied to us about it being a REBOOT.
For the longest time Real Star Trek fans were promised another Prime Universe Show to balance the Re-imagined JJ Abrams Star Trek Films but we never got it.

Get over this dramatic nonsense.

I have seen less drama from the queens on RuPaul’s Drag Race. Your face wasn’t slapped, you weren’t lied to and you weren’t promised anything. This is a freaking TV show. Good lord.

I’m sorry for your loss.

I’m genuinely surprised that none of these publications, and barely any fans are pointing out that this show is 98% blue and orange.

98% have no idea what you’re talking about.

I don’t know what this sh*t is but it sure isn’t Star Trek.

The events in Star Trek the Motion Picture took place 4 years after the original series ended and the Starfleet uniforms changed drastically in those 4 years that passed. 3 years later the Starfleet Uniforms changed again in The Wrath of Khan. When Star Trek Next Generation premiered Starfleet uniforms changed again. During the time period of TNG, DS9 and VOY I believe that the Starfleet uniforms changed 4 times. In the TOS episode “The Menagerie” it is stated that the events that took place on Talos IV happened 13 years earlier. It is conceivable that Starfleet uniforms could have changed at some time between the events of Talos IV and the time when Star Trek Discovery takes place (10 years before Kirk). The bridge layout in Star Trek Enterprise was more angular compared to the bridge on TOS. It is conceivable that some of the bridge design elements from the ENT time were carried forward into the time when Star Trek Discovery takes place. As for the bridge in Star Trek Discovery being more dimly lit, this was the same thing during the battle scenes in TWOK and the battle bridge in TNG. As for the Klingons, maybe there will be some kind of explanation as to the different looks (head ridges ect.) compared to the TOS time. Again, remember that the events in TMP took place 4 years after TOS ended and the Klingons had ridges then. Maybe the audience will understand why Worf’s reply as to why… Read more »
Wrath of Khan is set something like ~18 years after Space Seed (2267-2285), which puts it about 14 years after TMP, not 3 years, so the uniform change wasn’t so hasty. The red uniforms were used for something like 60-70 years with only a little bit of change here and there (the biggest change is that they drop the belt at some point when you get close to TNG). Star Trek Discovery takes place between The Cage and Where No Man Has Gone Before, both which use the same uniforms. The Uniforms changed sometime between Where No Man Has Gone Before and The Corbomite Maneuver (based on chronology, not air date). That’s a potential discrepancy. I was just a young kid in the 80s (and wasn’t there for when TMP was released) but even growing up the animosity towards the TMP uniforms appeared to be pretty much universal among the fandom, even without the help of the internet. While no official explanation was made, unofficial one is that the later TNG uniform and DS9/VOY’s darker uniforms were different duty uniforms, and that’s why both the TNG and DS9/VOY uniforms were used concurrently (on DS9 in particular) until the First Contact uniforms replaced both uniform styles (except on VOY, for obvious reasons). Enterprise, whether people like it or not, already explained the different look of the Klingons lacking ridges, through genetic experimentation. Any further explanation as to why the new show has Klingons that look totally different than any iteration of… Read more »
The Trouble With Dribbles
As a lifelong fan of Star Trek from the very beginning, I look at the trailer this way: Star Trek means a lot of things to a lot of people, but as long as the series is ‘Exploring strange new worlds’, ‘Seeking out new life, and new civilizations’, and ‘Boldly going where no one has gone before’, It’s Star Trek, and I’m sold. In the end, it’s not the characters, the timeline, or the look of aliens that matter. If the series is forward thinking, and well-made, as long as it retains the meat and potatoes of what Gene Roddenberry’s vision entailed, I’m happy. The trailer contains all the elements of what ‘Trek’ is, and offers clues to what it ‘can’ be. It’s always fun to see the actors attempt at pulling off the technobabble for the first time, and trying to convey the seriousness involved in their respective rolls. Keep in mind, the actors have yet to grow into their roles, and it excites me to be able to witness how they evolve. The principal actors all have in common an ability to make their roles their own, and nurture them into memorable characters. This is history in the making. Sure, I could nit pick all the quirks, and perceived flaws, but why would I want to focus on the negative aspects when their are endless possibilities, and enormous potential in the trailer, and the series as a whole. Keep in mind, Star Trek will outlive us all, and… Read more »

Perfectly summed up!

Yes. :)

well said

Sooo, as to the Klingon look…

http://blogs.harvard.edu/houghton/2016/04/12/caliban-inspires-klingon-makeover/

Maybe more inspired by what Rodenberry, et. al. would have done with a better budget than many would admit? No?

This is a really cool link and bit of history. Thanks for sharing!

A few thoughts…
I didn’t pick up on the chatter that Discovery was ‘too diverse’. Granted, even though there is a misogynist in the corridors of American power, if anyone figured this show would see a return to the days where Kirk could rape Yeoman Rand and have free reign in his ship while the crew ‘figured it out’ was sadly mistaken.
Squawking about desert uniforms? Did anyone miss Khan in the opening segment of Trek II?
Tech…we are at the point where we are going to need to ignore the Trek tech on TOS. Accept that it works, and quit fixating on gel buttons and data tapes. We’ve discovered thousands of planets, now, without leaving the confines of mother Earth, AI is on the verge of doing things now that make Data look like a ‘four function’ relic of a calculator, insisting that Trek be a visionary look at the future pretty much demands it NOT look like it’s past, and that is a heresy the fan base probably won’t tolerate.

@Phil — don’t forget how Spock and the others were dressed on Vulcan at the opening of TMP.

But we need paper printouts on the bridge!

I had mixed feelings. Overall, the production values were stellar! I like the choice of cast. I like that there are more women leads and a variety of new aliens. I don’t mind that the bridge is dark (I always preferred the darker bridge look). I like the supposed subject matter, and don’t mind a slightly more action-packed Star Trek (as long as they remember to keep the intellectual character and social commentary aspects in there as well). I love the background scenery and special effects! That said, I think they could have done better with continuity. Instead of reinventing the look of the Klingons, just take what the canon has set in place for the last several decades and just tweak it a little to freshen it up for a modern audience. Maybe just add some rough skin texture to the canon look and update the uniforms a bit (while keeping the same overall aesthetic). And yes, there have been bald Klingons before, and yes there are natural differences within a species, and I know the look changed before between TOS and TMP (that’s been satisfactorily explained both in and out of canon), but on the whole a Klingon should be recognizable as a Klingon. I could only see a very slight resemblance with one or two of the presented “Klingons”. Most of them should have hair and various shades of slightly orange-brown skin, even the darker skin tones here are fine. But the dead-gray-white Klingons are a little… Read more »
wpDiscuz
Advertisment ad adsense adlogger