Star Trek: Discovery showrunner Bryan Fuller on August 27th called in to radio show Nerd World Report with Hop and Herc to talk about the new series. He touched on the tradition of calling the second-in-command “Number One”, music production, and deciding upon the timeline for the show (Kelvin or Prime).
Fuller revealed that the show’s main character, who was previously revealed to be a female lieutenant commander (with caveats), would be the U.S.S. Discovery’s first officer and would be referred to as “Number One” as an homage to Majel Barret Roddenberry’s character from Star Trek’s first pilot, “The Cage.” Fuller would not say exactly when during the series we will learn the actual name of the character, but that it would be during the first season. Fuller, dodging the question of whether it would be in the pilot, quoted Spock from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan by concluding his remarks on the subject by saying “If minutes were hours…”
Elaborating on Discovery’s protagonist, Fuller remarked “When we introduce our protagonist, she is called Number One for that very reason, in honor of Majel Barrett’s character in the original pilot. And as we were first talking about the series and talking to CBS, we said “Initially, we will only call this character Number One, because in the 60’s, in the first pilot, Gene Roddenberry was very progressive, and he had a female first officer, and CBS [NBC] executives at the time said America is not ready for a female in a command position.”
Despite the series being featuring this new Number One as its protagonist, it will be an ensemble cast.
Prime vs Kelvin Timeline
Fuller said that when he and executive producer Alex Kurtzman were initially developing the story, they felt it could take place in either timeline and that, in his opinion, the timelines were inconsequential to the story they wanted to tell. However, Fuller noted that he and Kurtzman had decided to set Discovery in the Prime Timeline in order to keep the new series independent of the films. As a matter of practicality, the writing staff for Discovery would therefore not need to keep track of what the writers associated with the films were doing, and vice versa.
Fuller felt that there was something nice about setting Discovery in the Prime Timeline as there are so many aspects of The Original Series that would be fun to explore with updated production values.
“Reimagining” Star Trek
Fuller has stated in previous comments that Discovery would “reimagine” Star Trek. When pressed for specifics, Fuller mentioned that one of the cool things they get to do with the show is reimagine all of the alien species that the audience has seen before in Star Trek. Fuller, along with the show’s writing staff, wanted to do something a little unique with the look of aliens.
Commenting on this, Fuller said “It’s fun for all of us who have fetishized the look of these species over the years of watching Star Trek, and it’s fun for us to put a new spin on old favorites.” When specifically pressed about the look of the Klingons in Discovery and whether they would have forehead ridges, or look like they did in The Original Series, Fuller would not comment.
Continuing, Fuller said that “we’re going to try to achieve a new look for Star Trek that is very much Star Trek, but also our interpretation of Star Trek. And I love [for] each of the shows I work on to have a distinct esthetic. So being able to apply the color palette of some of these, whether it’s Hannibal or Pushing Daisies, and going a different direction with science fiction, it just felt like it was a good place to start our signature look for the Star Trek universe and work our way forward as we continue to tell stories.”
Given the timeframe of ten years before The Original Series, Fuller said that the crew’s uniforms would be completely different that those seen in “The Cage.” Fuller continued, saying “I think that when you see it [the uniform] I can tell you specifically what the influences are, and that the styles that [they adopted] a transporter accident in their approach. A happy transporter accident. I think when you see the design, you’ll say “It’s a little bit of this, it’s a little bit of that.”
Bringing up a wardrobe test that occurred recently, he said “it was interesting to think okay we need to take these colors, and we have to put them against the bulkhead that has the ship colors, and see what’s going to be the best looking esthetic for the show. So taking the sets and wardrobe and lighting into effect.”
Discovery’s Production as it Stands Today
Fuller noted that the show’s pilot would be a two-part episode, with the first hour written by he and Alex Kurtzman, while the second hour was written by Nicholas Meyer. Fuller did not reveal whether the show’s two-hour pilot would air all at once, or be broken up into two episodes.
Out of the 13 episodes of the show’s first season, Fuller said that the scripts had been written for the first three episodes. Script outlines have been developed for episodes four and five, but they are not complete yet. However, Fuller and his writing team have fleshed out the story arc for the entire first season. Story concepts have been developed for the remaining episodes.
Fuller noted that Star Trek has primarily been episodic, with the exception for the Dominion War arc on Deep Space Nine. He said that Discovery will be very different from the majority of Star Trek as it will be serialized.
As previously reported, CBS has ordered a 13-episode first season of Discovery. Fuller strongly recommended against doing 26-episode seasons as other Star Trek shows have done, noting that he thought it would fatigue the show. Fuller’s ideal season would be ten episodes, but that the future beyond season one of Discovery changes weekly so the episode orders for additional seasons have yet to be determined.
Regarding CBS All Access, Fuller stated that “We’re talking about all sorts of things that we could do to keep Star Trek interesting for subscribers to CBS All Access,” but he did not go into specifics.
Casting remains in its early stages, with Fuller noting that they had met with some great actors. Fuller revealed that there is of course some people he has previously worked with that he would love to see on Discovery. Fuller hoped that they would have something to say in regards to casting announcements in early October, but that is not definite.
Asked whether Discovery would reuse, or pay homage to, any of The Original Series’s iconic themes, he agreed that it would be cool to use them. Adding, “It would be great to homage some of those things. I don’t think we would use them specifically, but it’s certainly something we’ve had discussions about and I don’t know yet whether or not we’re going to commit to that.”
Fuller also said that they have yet to decide on the show’s opening credits nor its music.
Fuller confirmed that he loves the orchestral scores composed by Jerry Goldsmith and James Horner from the films, but that the production does not have access to that material. The music from the various incarnations of Star Trek on television, however, the series will have access to.
Expanding on the musical style he prefers, Fuller said “I love Jerry Goldsmith’s score for [The Motion Picture]…I love his Klingon theme…I love his Vulcan theme…Ilia’s theme. His music is so important and such a fantastic part of the feel of [the films].”
Continuing, Fuller said “I think there’s a lot of interesting things happening here musically. We absolutely have to have orchestral elements of the show [performed by] live orchestras. If we don’t have a live orchestra for the show we would be the first Star Trek television series [not to use one]. But you look at how some interesting new hybridizations of synth and orchestral scores have serviced Star Trek…First Contact had some very fantastic mixed pieces, and I look at what Hans Zimmer does, and I love his score for Interstellar. So it’s interesting to take a bit of a mix with our approach. And we’ll see when we get to that level of production, but I’m very excited about the music. Music is incredibly important.”
However, Fuller did not reveal whether the show would utilize a single composer, or multiple, nor whether they have been selected yet.
Trekmovie.com will cover Star Trek Mission: New York this coming weekend, where writers Nicholas Meyer and Kirsten Beyer will take part in a panel on Discovery. We will immediately report any news from that event.
I’m really looking forward to this. They have some great people working on this that have major Trek backgrounds. January can’t come fast enough!
Too much reimagining may not be a good thing …
Or it might be a very good thing.
Sometime we end up with crap like Tim Burton’s Planet of the Apes, but there are times when it surpasses the original like Battlestar Galactica. So let’s just wait and hope for the best.
I’ve noticed that with few exceptions, re-imagining works best when the original material was crap to begin with. A-la Battlestar Galactica. But if the original was good to begin with… Like Planet of the Apes… The re-imagining will be “OK” at best. Normally not as good.
I’d hold off on re-imagining outrage until we start seeing something concrete on what that means. I would expect to see reflects of TOS but with a modern feel. A complete TOS wouldn’t fly in 2017
Thats the biggest thing that concerns me. We dont know what it means so it cant be good or bad but cause for concern. Because it sounds like a new way of saying “Star Trek could be great if it changed and was different and I know how to change it and make it different”. Trek doesnt need to be re imagined. It just needs to be done well.
The statements that already say they wont be concerned with ship design as far as making technology fit the chosen time and now the idea that the uniforms wont look like The Cage. So they will look like Starfleet had a design, changed it to something completely different and then changed it back to something similar to The Cage? I get why they dont want to use those TOS style uniforms but at least give us an in-Universe reason…and hopefully they will.
They Never learn, it’s not about them doing their own show using Star Trek, exploiting it for the fans/viewers.
It started with DS9 & just got worse up until today.
They are alienating Star Trek fans as each series goes further away from the Star Trek we know & love & then they blame Star Trek for not being popular even though what they produce doesn’t resemble Star trek anymore.
TUP Today 6:32 am
You make good points. And so does ML31. That Fuller is “re-imagining” Star Trek suggests that he thinks there were certain problems with the format and/or style of the previous 5 Trek series. I’d like to know what problems Fuller is looking to address in DSC. Or, what aspects of past Trek he’s specifically looking to improve upon by fundamentally departing from past style/format. And in what ways will DSC depart from past Trek? What’s Fuller’s mission statement for DSC? What are his artistic goals for the show? “Re-imagining” could yield literally anything. It could mean that he’s turning Trek into a dumbed-down action-oriented show. I hope that’s not true, and I expect that it’s not, but who knows? I like Star Trek because it contains certain elements. Is fuller going to change those elements? Remove them? I’d like to know what “Star Trek” means to Bryan Fuller. What, in his opinion, is “Star Trek” about? What makes Star Trek “Star Trek”, according to Fuller?
I suppose another possibility is he wants deal with something, perhaps something he himself introduced, back in his earlier Trek stint that he feels went horribly off the rails.
Wouldn’t work? A Mirror Darkly.
& they Don’t have a choice because the look & tech of that time is established & there is very little room to alter anything for improved production quality.
I disagree Trekboi…
Take a look at Ptrope’s Cage Unleashed series of art, basically Pike’s bridge but with touch controls,
like what fans were saying what would Roddenberry do if they had the construction techniques, mechanical and visual FX of today’s imagineers or just a better budget?
Fuller felt that there was something nice about setting Discovery in the Prime Timeline as there are so many aspects of The Original Series that would be fun to explore”
I’ve been saying that for years. The original show set up endless little subplots that no one has ever really fully explored, recognized or even acknowledged.
And as far as music, – – although I love Jerry Goldsmith and his music from the first movie, I really think that Jerry Fielding, Gerald Fried, Steiner, Courage and all of those guys from the original show, with their backgrounds and harmonic and orchestral sensibilities set the tone for what the show was. They had schooling and foundations that I don’t hear in a lot if today’s composers. I hope, and have continued to hope for years, that they mine from those resources to begin with. I hope they have the wisdom to draw from those sources. They laid the original groundwork.
Now that, would help make a show I’d be interested in.
@Andy – I agree with you. I love the era, if its respected. Shame they cant use any movie themes but what about TNG’s main title which was originally a film theme? Not that I need to hear that theme but just interesting when he said they have no rights to anything from the films, only TV.
Have to admit I never agreed with using TMP theme as the theme for TNG. It always took me out of the moment and belonged to another movie and crew to me. I hope they really hire some composers for this show; really put some thought and time into it. Make it a priority.
Speaking of Trek TV themes… I felt Goldsmith’s “Voyager” theme was the best. I do not count TNG’s as a TV theme as it was just a re-arrangement of Goldsmith’s TMP march.
ML31 August 29, 2016 8:24 am
Yup. The VOY theme is the most “explory” sounding of them all. The TNG/TMP theme is more like a march. And the DS9 theme is rather like a slow version of some Eastern European nation’s national anthem.
P.S. The TOS theme sounds not-at-all related to a sci-fi show, but it’s just so 1960s groovy, it’s my second fav.
It’s the bongos. I always dug ’em.
Disinvited Today 1:54 pm
Yes. And the overall West-coast, laid-back feel of the song, which the bongos are a big part of. But, the whole thing feels like an off-shoot of the Getz/Gilberto/Byrd/Jazz Samba / Bossa Nova that was big in the early 60s.
I had been hoping they would explore the setting of the original series too. Instead of just constantly referencing the old series they can directly engage with it.
Though I wonder to what degree they will deal with it, since the reason it’s such a colourful setting with so many loose ends is because TOS was written by people who weren’t constricted by the rules of established canon or fan expectations. They wrote Star Trek as fiction, nowadays fans seem to expect their scifi and fantasy universes to be treated with the seriousness of historical nonfiction (‘Klingons don’t look like that!’ ‘That’s not the right uniform” etc).
That difference in tone is also apparent in the scores. There’s a level of stylistic adventurousness shining through the work of composers like Fried, Steiner, etc that’s apparent even despite the limitations of budget. It’s far removed from the way so many scores these days seem to just sit there in the background being dour and, or ‘epic’.
Fortunately the music for Bryan Fuller’s Hannibal was quite an exception. It was daring, strange and experimental. I have a feeling Fuller will be able to get the right tone for his show.
I just hope they move away from the sterile cinematography of the post-TOS shows.
I am getting a little excited about the new series. But. Will Temper it with a wait and see.
Interesting. This is really going to wreak havoc with canon for a certain core subset of fans. There won’t be a way to reconcile the visual incongruities with the canon timeline, which appears to encompass not just sets, but uniforms and aliens as well.
Assuming the new show is great on its own terms (and while adhering to Trek’s core values), that would certainly be their loss if they reject it over mere continuity/canon issues. But it’s a life choice, like any other.
The biggest red flag is changing aliens. Why? Because Bryan Fuller has a different take? So by that token, if he was hired to do Star Wars, he’d change how core characters/aliens looked? Ofcourse not. Trek aint broke, stop trying to fix it. If he makes aliens look wildly different from canon, he risks breaking the emotional investment from fans and thats the end of the show.
If it is a reimagining that explores the difference in TOS Klingons compared to later incarnations (something referred to in DS9) then it possibly could not be more canon? Time will tell, until then they deserve the benefit of the doubt……
I took that to mean that he was going to essentially do what Enterprise did. Alter them a bit to make them look better for a more modern production. Like having the Andorians antenna move to express emotion or changing a little of the look of the Tellarites. Small things that will still work.
@ML – Im perfectly okay with that. But no orange Andorians or Purple Romulans.
Enterprise added white Andorians, and they worked fine. If there was a good in-story reason for orange Andorians, I’d buy it.
Purple Romulans, though… that might be a hard sell. :)
Or orange-haired Orions!
ML31 August 29, 2016 8:26 am
Here’s hoping you’re right. ENT was kind of a “re-imagining” of sorts. The look of that show is different and something of a departure from TNG/DS9/VOY, which all resemble each other in look and tone more than any of them resembles ENT. ENT was also the first Trek show to have a song as its theme. And for the first two seasons, it wasn’t called “Star Trek”, but rather just ENTERPRISE. The widescreen aspect ratio was another modification. If Fuller’s “re-imagining” means changes on the aforementioned order, that’s nothing to be concerned about. The problem is that we don’t know what the hell he means.
TUP Today 6:34 am
Yeah, really. I’d like to know what Fuller thinks hasn’t been “imagined” in the right way with past Trek. What’s he out to fix?
Re:What’s he out to fix?
It is to be hoped something that he now feels was a grievous mistake that he introduced into STAR TREK via VOYAGER and would like to take the opportunity to excise, repair, or do better?
Disinvited Today 4:05 am
That seems way too specific and minor. “Re-imagining” implies a massive top-down overhaul.
Re:specific and minor
I was thinking something more along the line that snowballed into something that he felt affected STAR TREK overall for the worse as it grew out of control. I don’t actually have any idea what that might be for Fuller, but I can dream that it is something like undoing what I “lovingly” refer to as the BIG RED reset button and banishing it from the Trek universe forever.
That’s not the only or even most obvious interpretation of reimagining. He wants to do a TOS era show in 2017. Shows invariably reflect the aesthetics, technology, mores and most importantly the haircuts of their production dates. It’s easy to see that Forbidden Planet is a 50s movie and Alien a product of the 70s.
Unless you take the view that these shows are documentary newsreels of events that actually happened.
I can’t agree more TUP. Excellent point re: if they trid to pull these stunts with Star Wars. The point is, there’s a culture of fan shaming within Trek since the JJ-verse started. You’re allowed to care a little, but you’re not allowed to care too much. We could set it post-nemesis… But we’d rather go back and muck about with things you love.
I never understood these fans who seem to need everything they see on screen to be a literal depiction. The look of the original series was so dated and crude that I never quite thought the TNG period really took place in the same continuity. So I have no trouble with the new show redesigning things to make them look acceptable to a modern audience.
Since the only way any audience outside of the most hardcore trekkies would accept a modern series with the look of the original series would be as a parody of that show.
There is a difference between TNG looking more advanced then a universe that occurred 70 years earlier. And even if TOS looked dated, look at computers today and then 70 years ago. I always saw that period between TOS and TNG as a rapid “starship age” (akin to our computer age) of rapid development.
But to put a series ten years before TOS and say “F it, we dont care, we’re going to make it look as advanced as we can”, thats disrespectful to the franchise. And not really needed. I think we can all accept some modernization but I dont want another iBridge. I really liked the Kelvin in 09 actually and felt they did pretty well in making that ship “fit” the canon and look modern.
CBS had nothing to do with Majel as number one, it was NBC at that time.
You’ll note the author’s remark of [NBC] next to CBS. Fuller made a mistake and said CBS.
“Fuller would not say exactly when during the series we will learn the actual name of the character, but that it would be during the first season. Fuller, dodging the question of whether it would be in the pilot, quoted Spock from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan by concluding his remarks on the subject by saying “If minutes were hours…””
Not sure why he’s making a big deal about her name. Unless she is a descendant of a known character in Trek history, there is no need for all that secrecy.
How would you know this?
It’s a common TV trope. Not disclosing the name of a character at the beginning of a show is usually done to conceal its connection to another important character within that show.
Take ‘Heroes’ for example, another show that Fuller was involved with, the character of Noah Bennet was referred to in the early episodes of season one as HRG or the man in the horn-rimmed glasses! Few episodes later, it was revealed that his name was Mr. Bennet, the father of Claire Bennet, one of the main characters on the show.
Similar thing happened in the early seasons of ‘The X Files’ with William B. Davis’s character that was known to the fans as CSM aka the Cigarette Smoking Man. They revealed his name later on and his connection to Fox Mulder.
Or perhaps I’m overthinking it and he will name the character after the late Majel as crazydaystrom suggested upthread!
If the character’s name isn’t revealed during the casting announcement, then I’d bet your right and they’re setting it up to be a significant reveal.
Unless IMDB reveals it first. :)
Hmmmmm…who could it possible be. In that era, who could a human female be revealed as that would be significantly related to canon?
So far we know that the series will cover multiple periods and that the Number One character will be a constant. I’m thinking the big reveal will be that she’s Dax.
Does Dax work? If I recall, Emory Dax met a young Bones on Earth so that would fit this timeline. But Emory was a gymnast, not in Starfleet. I dont think its Dax.
The reveal could also be just related to this story. Example, if the villain is a future version of her, or the brother, father, mother, etc of the main character. Any number of reveals that might have nothing to do with a character fans would recognize. After all, the series is designed to appeal to a broader audience so they might not want to bog it down with a reveal that would require foreknowledge.
I don’t think so (although I would love to see Dax or Curzon show up). Since we don’t have on-screen canonical dates for when all of the hosts were joined with the Dax symbiont, it would be between Emony and Audrid’s time. The Star Trek Encyclopedia speculates that Emony met McCoy around 2245. Audrid Dax was joined sometime after that and rose to become the head of the Trill Symbiosis Commission. She died in 2284, when Dax went to Tobin, who died in a shuttle accident the next year, when Dax passed to Curzon.
I believe Jadzia and Ezri are the only hosts to have been in Starfleet. At the time of Discovery and TOS, Curzon was apparently studying to be a Federation diplomat. It would be fun to see a young, unjoined Curzon pop up.
This is outrageous! Imagine re-imaging everything in the prime time line from ships to aliens!
Totally unexceptionable for die hard fans both new and old.
A prime time kick in the teeth and we’re suppose to follow along because it’s the “ALL POWERFUL PRIME TIME LINE”
Trough away 50 years of establishing Star Trek as modern American legend and fill us all wit new flashy effects and big beastly villains taunting new weapons and quasi political BS and passing that off as original.
Didn’t we just have tantrums over JJ doing the re-image and now this!!!
This is going to suck big time.
Again, there are those who just want their trek to look like TOS and their cheesy fan films. The real world doesn’t work that way and if this show is going to succeed it won’t bow to the pressure of the old fart Trek fans who are still stuck in the 60’s. Lets see how long it lasts looking or feeling like New Voyages. It’ll be laughed off the tv forever.
Only if Fuller reimagines Kirk with James Cawley’s Elvis bouffant.
^^^^^ so much this ^^^^^
Okay, good. I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks that not redesigning the original show’s setting would be a disastrous move, fit only for a bad parody of Star Trek.
Ahem… I’m an “old fart fan” from the 60s. Considering they had to usually build a planet set almost every week and it was an expensive show for the time (AND won an Emmy for special effects) it was well done for that era in television. And had the balls to tackle some important sociological issues.
I have no problem updating things for modern audiences from a visual standpoint but I do hope the new show maintains the spirit of the “old fart” Star Trek with it’s philosophical and political references; it’s homages to great literature and history and fabulous music and cinematography.
TOS was made as well as they could make it given the budget, studio demands for action adventure, and a line-counting glory hog at the center. I’m fine with the idea that Fuller will make the show as best he can, respecting the original but carrying it on with his own aesthetic. His Hannibal is not Red Dragon or Silence of the Lambs or Thomas Harris’s writing, but it was by all counts a respectful effort that honours the novelist’s intention. That should allay some fears I would think
You seriously need to go smoke a joint.
I know I do (tho that has nothing to do with DSC).
What you are really saying is: “THIS IS A DISASTER!” Very original, good on you, mate.
Luckily you and everyone else who shares your views have more than 700+ hours of Classic Trek in all forms to enjoy for prosperity.
Me on the other hand, am TOTALLY looking forward to it. I am all for re-imagining and re-booting. As much as I love and adore all things Trek (a fan for over 40 years now) I am open to change. Like real life, you know. IDIC and all that too.
I’m with you, Doc. I want to see major re-dos on a lot of things. I’m an old fart fan since 1966, 50 years. My favorite era was that ten-year period between TOS and that awful first movie, when ST was thrown into the trash can…and only us fans cared about it, and rewrote everything to our hearts’ content (I actually imagined that Earth was saved from a Klingon invasion, ala “Battle Los Angeles”, by an already-existing Federation, and made into a protectorate for awhile as we came up to speed with societal & technological advances…that’s how I re-imagined it. That we weren’t advanced enough to have started the Federation). I’d also like to do away with the transporter idea (it was just a budget-saving story device to get landing parties on-planet without expensive SFX); and the Saucer-shaped hull as the primary hull (it should be the planet-landing base ship for exploring parties who are sent out in smaller shuttles). And battles should have relied A LOT MORE on stun/capture and disabling ships (huge POW camps and “bone-yards” of disabled/impounded ships, NOT so much death & destruction (the way of Empires, NOT the Federation). And there should have been a clearer “Federation vs. various Empires” theme, kind of like how the Swiss Confederation was surrounded by larger,(usually Imperial) political entities but the Swiss existed as democratic Cantons of French, Germans, Italians, Romansh. It was democratic-Republic vs Imperial Oligarchy of (corrupt, devious) oligarchs and subjugated “Subjects”. Likewise, the same Alien races should be present in BOTH the Federation AND the surrounding Empires (makes for lots of “Spy” stories). THIS was the kind of free-wheeling that we young fans of ’69’-’79’ indulged in. It was so fun, not having to “bend-the-knee” to “Canon”.
@Dr Beckett – Enjoy for *posterity*, homeboy, not prosperity.
Jeez relax Dorothy. I am sure there will continue to be craptatstic fan films that will painfully try to mimic the look of the zinc-plated, vacuum-tubed culture that TOS was filmed in. The rest of us will enjoy these new stories by people who clearly love Star Trek. I would still encourage you to watch it so you can complain that the blinking lights on the bridge aren’t using the same bulbs that may have been found on the lot at Desilu in the 60s.
I Khan Believe It An\’t Butter, I strongly recommend having your medication dosage checked.
There we go…
I remain optimistic but I do have my concerns about this show and what I’m hearing from Fuller. Particularly the word ‘reimagining’.
That word sends me into red alert and suggests that this is yet another Star Trek that disregards what has come before in favour of being its own thing.
Well I’ve had enough of these people coming in and wanting to put their own style and their own stamp on this franchise. This is Gene Roddenberrys imagination and vision. There is nothing to reimagine, there is only continuing his legacy.
Going back ten years before his vision began is something I am very wary of. If this show doesn’t look like it could conceivably be set ten years prior to TOS then what is the point of doing a series set in that time period? If that’s the case, If fuller is going to create his own asthetic completely detached from what we recognise as Star Trek then they would have been better off going further into the future, beyond Voyager and Nemesis where they have the room to create something completely new.
It doesn’t sound like I’m all that excited or enthusiastic about this new series but honestly I am, I won’t pass judgement until I’ve seen all 13 episodes.
However I am worried that too many reasons and excuses will have to be dreamed up by Fuller and his team trying to explain why Star Trek: Discovery looks completely out of place with the established Star Trek canon.
It’s time we begin embracing that word and not fearing it.
If though, this is the Rogue One of the Star Trek universe then great. Bring it on but my Andorians and my Klingons have to look like they’re 10 years off being in TOS and not look totally different because they needed to look “cooler”.
I have a feeling that you’re setting yourself up for a big disappointment, guy. Your choice, of course. But I would suggest taking Discovery on its own terms, if at all possible. It might be great, a total misfire, or anything in between–but I can guarantee that it will never be anything like TOS except, hopefully, in spirit. That ship literally sailed 47 years ago, and life is short. Don’t let the missing gooseneck viewers and resin buttons ruin your day. :-)
@Kirk – I agree. These comments are the second time (the awful teaser being the first), that I’ve had reason to be concerned. It could just be a new and more modern writing and filming style, okay. But dont say its going to be in the prime timeline and 10 years before TOS within that canon and then say but we’re changing everything because Bryan Fuller is smarter than everyone else. Dont fix what aint broke. Changing out a core alien race looks (other than advancement in CGI/Make up) is not re’imagining. It’s fixing what aint broke.
If a writer/producer doesnt like/respect/appreciate a franchise, dont take the job. Go write your own space TV show. Dont screw with out.
Having said that, we dont know what it means…so time will tell.
This all sounds like some kind of nightmare. At least he has good taste in music…
I’m certainly glad to have Star Trek back on TV with the current level of special effects available now and in true high-definition. However, the last retro Trek “Enterprise ” only became interesting in the 4th season as it connected to TOS. And that cast had little chemistry by then. I hope the Fuller team learns from that. The writing is so important.
Also, no raspy lyrics, cringe worthy folk style songs or bland wallpaper background music.
Please, run some serious focus group testing and listen to them and don’t make production people too afraid to voice their opinions about what they are working on.
The stories I’ve read about Rick Berman being the only one who liked the Enterprise theme song, yet it was used anyway, are chilling.
I know you can’t please everyone but keep an open mind to considerate critique.
“Please, run some serious focus group testing and listen to them and don’t make production people too afraid to voice their opinions about what they are working on.” – Be careful what you wish for. I would venture to say that the majority of people in the world that might be slightly interested in this show would actually be looking for something more like JJTrek than TOS. Those focus groups might not tell them what you want them to hear.
TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT would all bomb miserably if they were on television today. Television audiences have moved on. The trick will be in trying to find some way to appeal to a modern television audience while still appealing to Trek fans. I think that Bryan Fuller and the spectacular writing team he’s put together are the ones to pull that off.
Also, I actually liked Enterprise’s theme song and was actually disappointed when they added “Star Trek” to the title (although I understand why they did). They tried something different. Whether it was successful or not matters, of course, but I don’t blame them for trying something different.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you based on the attention spans, maturity, tastes, and overall intelligence of today’s entertainment audiences.
I think anyone who thinks focus group testing hasn’t and isn’t already taking place just doesn’t understand the entertainment industry. And I should add that Netflix and all those other streaming services that had been clamoring for CBS to license them to create the next Trek series ran their focus groups too. It is very likely that CBS got a hold of one of those reports for the others which is what instigated their jumping in.
I think by this time, people imagining that focus groups showing an overwhelming demand for KT stories are doing just that and not facing the reality that CBS already has a report and it’s showing them that the benefits of placing the show in the KT are just not as high as the PT.
Story first, always. Let the cool stuff be just that… stuff that adds flavor. Story first.
Yep. In fact, I’ll gladly take a Discovery that’s a great show first, and a great Star Trek show, second. Heresy to some, I know.
I agree. Great writing uber al, first.
Can’t wait, I still don’t get why everything revolves around the original series though, I’m in my 30’s and TNG was dated when I got into Trek, no one I know in my age group thinks of Trek as Kirk era either. I’m happy to have Trek again but I wish my era’s Trek would get some light too!
Your era’s ‘Trek’ was cold, sterile and lifeless. Where everyone can’t get out of the 24th century and Janeway saves the day and ends the dominion war.
Star Trek was better when it was about philosophy and progression. Not endless technobabble per episode or the Trek version of Lost In Space.
When Star Trek ventures into the 25th century and foes to Andromeda, then I’ll watch.
“When Star Trek ventures into the 25th century and foes to Andromeda, then I’ll watch.”
By all means go watch Andromeda. ;) I never made it through the third season..
I’m 31. The older I get the less desire I have to watch TNG. I remember watching the final two seasons as a kid and loving it, but as I’ve gotten older there are only a handful or fewer episodes out of each season that I can re-watch. Out of my Trek friends I’m probably the biggest TOS fan, but the others lean heavily toward DS9 and VOY. Of course, I should mention that I also like Enterprise. Maybe that’s just my age though.
I’m 34, gonna be 35 before I Discovery is available, and I’ve been rewatching Star Trek. Actually, I started with TNG and to be honest, I have other interests and hobbies (and a wife, and we travel) so I am right around the time I am going to start watching DS9 alongside.
For the most part, I enjoy every episode. There are some dullards, but mostly my time is not wasted. I’ve never figured out how to enjoy TOS nearly as much, though. I also watched more Voyager than DS9 when they were on-air.
We all have different tastes, and it is kind of funny that I watch TNG nowadays and realize where much of my life philosophy comes from. It certainly didn’t come from my family, friends or teachers… it came from TNG. Except I was a lot crueler and sarcastic than any character ever allowed on TNG, but my personal beliefs are fairly shaped by the show.
Re: never figured out how to enjoy TOS
I recommend attending stage shows. Once you come around to the realization that the stage only has to merely successfully suggest something rather than literally recreate it in its entirety for the acting, music, and story to transport you, you’ll get it and why SPECTER OF THE GUN works as drama too.
It’s also why comic books work for those that enjoy them without the necessity of being literal photo-novels.
Well it revolves around TOS because the series is a Prime Timeline show that takes place ten years before TOS
I am really looking forward to this even though I wasn’t so fond of the ship or the era. We have reboot movies in the same era now a new TV show, should have done post Voyager. When the reboot movies finally come to a close, I hope Paramount takes a risk and does a Star Trek movie with a new crew not TOS or TNG moves, but something entirely fresh and the year oh…2556. Back to Discovery..The (preliminary) ship has grown on me and I accept the era. I guess its kind of fitting to come full circle for the 50th.
So is the protagonist is the first officer and that person holds the rank of Lt Cmdr or has that changed? Regardless that fact that this character if the first office and not just a run of the mill Lt Cmdr, might not be a ‘Lower Deck’s’ kind of perspective unless they use the fact that the first officer would be dealing with lower rank crew members far more than a captain would.
I am looking forward to their remaining of aliens, Klingons most of all. Enterprise Andorians looked the best, but those longer slender antenna are indeed Andorian and are animatronic, that will be fantastic.
I am most curious to see the final ship design, the bridge, transporter room, engineering and corridor sets as well as the transporter beam effect (please let it be a new take on horizontal TUC beam), never cared for the twinkly until we got to the later TNG movies, Nemesis transporter beam looks solid. Don’t care for the swirling Kelvin beams. And finally the uniforms, granted they can do whatever they want but wondering how and if they will fit the uniform styles into canon considering they will look different than ‘The Cage’ uniforms.
Yes the fan in me wants 26 episodes a season but I can understand how that can become stale and its not really the fad these days. Game of Thrones does a solid 10 epodes, so hopefully there wont be anything to complain about lol.
The music, YES! I am happy to hear Bryan love the The Motion Picture soundtrack and he is a Hans Zimmer fan. The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan are my favourite Trek sound tracks. And the TMP theme is my fave and is my official Star Trek theme. I did like the violins better in the Final Frontier theme and that it had the Star Trek fanfare before the theme kicked in which TMP did not have, but TFF theme was shorter than TMP’s theme.
Zimmer had solid music, Gladiator, Inception, The Dark Knight series, Man of Steel, Interstellar, his music is so epic, powerful, and moving. I dream of Zimmer doing a Star Trek movie sound track and a Christopher Nolan directed Star Trek, crazy.
I’d love to hear what someone like Abel Korzeniowski would do with the scoring duties. With “Penny Dreadful” off the air, he’s available… Just sayin’… :)
“with the first hour written by himself and Alex Kurtzman”
Him, not himself.
*Sigh* For this cowpoke, Kurtzman is not good new.
Me neither. I’d think they would want that free first hour on CBS regular to be a big hook for the pay service, and use Meyer, assuming he still has game.
But Kurtzman’s credit may be contractual to ensure he gets a cut of everything that follows. Maybe he isn’t actually going to damage things too much (here’s hoping.)
I also 2nd your thought that I’d be more interested in a good show as the main goal, with the trek aspect secondary to that.
Looking forward to the Meyer-written half though!!
I’m going to have to scan the article again. I must have missed something because I was fairly certain CBS was going to air a pilot “movie” and not the first episode.
I’m looking forward to how the new series will look and feel but I continue to question why the show producers want to go backward in Trek history. The series began at TOS and continued through VOY then went back to ENT and now DSC. Since the show is still pre-TOS, this means that the producers will have to walk on eggshells for certain circumstances in order to stay within canon.
I would love to see a TREK show set in the era of starfleet temporal patrol. Following the crew aboard a time ship. Righting temporal anomalies. Exploring any and all eras. A little criminal minds meets trek meets quantum leap. All in service to the temporal prime directive
That’s why I enjoy ST:O. :)
Doesn’t want to do more than 10 episodes, huh?
If this guy Fuller doesn’t know HOW to do a 20-plus season like all past Star Trek, he shouldn’t be running the show. You certainly don’t tell your audience that you can’t maintain quality if the season was longer. That reeks of incomptence.
Seems you have either forgotten or didn’t know that Fuller was part of the writing staff on Voyager, which did 26 episodes a season, which was a massive grind for all involved. So he knows very well how to write that kind of a season.
However, TV has changed. Even mainstream half-hour sitcoms go for 20-24 episodes. Premium hour-long dramas on HBO/Netflix typically go for 8-10 episodes, that are usually a carefully crafted story arc. So this is entirely normal for the market segment.
CBS has ordered 13 episodes, an industry standard number.
Living Witness is one of my favorite episodes. I know Fuller can write a good story, but I still have doubts about some of his comments as producer.
I’m perfectly fine with a 13 episode season. I just don’t like him saying he doesn’t WANT to work on more than 10 per season. Why would he even say such a thing?
If its a hit, CBS might dictate closer to 13, then to under 10. Will depend on their subs (if people drop off after Trek ends). I know Game of Thrones is going to do less episodes with the idea they have the same budget so can spend more per episode for what they feel they need to make epic episodes.
In The Sopranos final season, Chase asked for two more episodes after he had already begun production as he couldnt wrap up in the time he had (but lets not start on what some would say were wasted episodes there).
I gotta say, 8-10 episodes per seasons is kind of skimpy for a proper “series” (as opposed to a mini-series). HOUSE OF CARDS (US) does 13 episodes per season, and that works out fine. I wouldn’t want DSC to go any lower than that, though. I mean, waiting a whole year for just 8 episodes? That seems like it might not be very satisfying.
TV has changed since the days of TNG and VOY… and Alias and Lost… many shows used to get 26 episodes a season, but now those numbers are much smaller. 13 episodes is more and more common. Game of Thrones is only 10 and you can’t tell me it needs to be any longer.
Most 20+ episode seasons wind up losing the continuity along the way. Thanks to LOST and Alias (JJ Abrams, yo!), TV started a shift towards serialization. Now Trek (revitalized by JJ!) gets a chance to serialize… let it. I like both the streamlined TV of today (Quantico is decent) as well as the filler episodes that allow me to learn more about the world around the characters (such as every Q episode I hate because I hate Q).
Yeah, I’ll miss the “world” but Discovery isn’t about the “world”.
Some of us have been begging for this very thing, an HBO style Trek series. This is as close to that. A series on a platform that doesnt reply on commercial revenue or ratings (to the same degree as network) with a shorter season and tighter, more “important” story-telling.
the shorter season likely gives them better access to certain actors too and might impact the budget upwards as well.
Well, hit shows like NCIS, Empire, Scandal and The Flash do a lot more than 10 episodes per year. So there are definitely counter-examples. And Quantico did 22 episodes in Season 1.
Thorny– those shows are not serials. Maybe The Flash, I have never seen it? Quantico was heavily serialized over two seasons presented as one. Remember “sweeps”? That is the mid-season break…and where shows like Quantico have the biggest cliff-hanger just like the end of a season.
Does Star Trek need 22 episodes? Sure we would love a Star Trek serial that lasts the 3/4 of the year, but Quantico was only initially 13 episodes… ABC just bought more.
Fyi most shows are ordered at 13 eps, enough to get to sweeps, then the “back half” are orderee to conclude the season. Most countries just air different shows over three parts of the year. The USA is just starting to catch up.
The Flash had a Big Bad all of Season 1 (Reverse Flash) and another Big Bad all of Season 2 (Zoom), with some standalone episodes scattered in between. Empire and Scandal are probably semi-serialized, with a season-long arc. NCIS is a “crime of the week” story with some recurring elements throughout each season leading to a big confrontation/reveal in the season finale.
I see absolutely no reason Star Trek: Discovery could not follow that model.
“Quantico was only initially 13 episodes… ABC just bought more.” That’s true of almost every show, except sometimes when the network is appeasing some big star or hot-shot producer (aka Shonda Rhimes) in which case the show might get a full-season order from the get-go. Usually, its a 13-episode order and cancellation (Minority Report, Wicked City, Blood and Oil). If they’re lucky, its 13 and a Back 9 (Limitless). If they’re very lucky, they get renewal for a second season (Quantico, Blindspot).
Your only frame of reference is US tv? UK series are usually much shorter and the quality much higher. Coincidence?
Exactly!! CBS wants us to pay for access to watch the show with Commercials, and they can only give us 13 episodes, two of which are the pilot. Good grief CBS, just tell us to bend over and grab our ankles!
“If this guy Fuller doesn’t know HOW to do a 20-plus season like all past Star Trek, he shouldn’t be running the show.”
What is it with all the socially inept drama queens posting to this thread?
He has a damn good point, if Fuller can’t do star trek properly, obeying cannon & established lore & the volume expected he shouldn’t be doing Star Trek. He should go create another series not change Star Trek to his liking- Myer is a Worry too, this is the guy who put no smoking signs on the Enterprise & would have left Spock dead if others had’t gotten involved.
“Get a life!” – some guy
Somehow, I got the impression that CBS was going to air a pilot movie that was going to be cut up into two episodes to be added to the other 10 mapped-out episodes for a total of 12 towards the 13 ordered. I figured the odd episode left would most likely be a well written clip episode which pads its minimal production with flashbacks from each of the past episodes aired prior to when they slate it. These are all standard industry practices with which Fuller should likewise be more than familiar.
Cant wait! I’m excited that there’s a new TV series on the way! :]
Although it may be a little weird watching it as a total serial. But DS9 did that and it worked for that show. But that was a long time ago. Ether way its a good thing that they bring the format up to date imo. If done right it can be something special like BSG, a modern classic.
“Music is incredibly important”
I actually have a good feeling about Discovery at this point. At the very least, it’ll be fascinating to see a Trek series take on the serialized, short-season format that has been employed to such great effect in the best of today’s prestige television. And unlike BR Trek, this ‘reimagining’ will mostly be the product of people who have a track record of doing good work in other venues, and who genuinely love Trek for itself, and not just for the sake of their own careers.
None of that is any guarantee, of course. We won’t know till we know.
I’m with you on this, Michael.
Do your best to talk about issues, challenges, refugees, crisis, Mexican walls, stupid god beliefs, old morals and push things BEYOND political correctness. Then you can have a number one riding in an egg. Star Trek is about the new, the progressive society, not cannon, not have been. Push, push, push!
Didn’t you hear? Progressiveness these days *is* political corectness… it’s about ignoring all of those potentially hateful topics because someone might get their feelings hurt. Now, if Discovery DOES really dive into these topics, I’d love it even more.
Actually, addressing those concerns in a way so-called “conservatives” don’t like (e.g. the freakout we’ve already witnessed over Fuller’s announcement that there will be a gay character) is what’s called “political correctness.” But then, you already knew that.
Better take away the main characters guns! Ie phasers! Those things kill people you know.
Another Homophobe who thinks equality & anyone represented other than himself is “Political correctness” like thoes Other people don’t deserve to be here but we have them pushed on us.
Uh huh… another person who 1) doesn’t understand sarcasm and 2) makes knee-jerk judgments knowing nothing. Whatev..boi. :)
Bryan Fuller is the show runner on American Gods.
Want an insight into DSC – Pay attention to American Gods.
He also wrote (or co-wrote) 20 episodes of earlier Trek so there is that too.
Also Hannibal, one of my favorite shows from the past few years. It’s sad that NBC canceled it, but that allowed Fuller to do DSC and, honestly, Hannibal wasn’t a show suited to network television. There always is hope for more Hannibal with Hugh Dancy and Mads Mikkelsen in the future.
And Pushing Daisies, a show which was utterly unlike anything that had come before. The first season was great, but the second season, not so much.
About the uniforms:
“…A happy transporter accident. I think when you see the design, you’ll say “It’s a little bit of this, it’s a little bit of that…”
I see the Monster Maroon versions of TWOK-TUC with the TOS color palate and ENT / TNG shoulder pads…Mark my words!
Frankly I don’t see any reason they couldn’t go with a retooled version of the Cage uniforms. I’d like to see that whole color palette used, a lot of steel and blue-grey on white, with muted uniform colors. The rank insignia was a little ambiguous, but maybe they can retcon that.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Those were some of the best-looking sets and costume design palettes of the whole franchise:
I agree. I liked the darker tones over TOS. When I was a kid and saw Menagerie for the first time I was like “wow!”
“The original NCC-1701 was designed by Matt Jefferies himself. Now, imagine what could have happened if it was designed by a committee.”
You spend enough time with internet Star Trek forums/communities and one is guaranteed to get a lasting impression. The most vocal and hostile of Trekkies are in fact: disgruntled old males, with over-inflated opinions; who long for the glory days of a certain sci-fi franchise. Whether it is intentional or not, they constantly remind the younger generation that Star Trek in their time was truly special. In other words, its all fancy posturing and divisive fandom politics that thrives on hypocrisy and chest thumping.
So called “classics” can actually be interpreted in many different ways. The secret however, is to always keep an open mind. Continuity is at best a helpful guideline, not rigid dogma. Of course, don’t tell that to the fanboys. Hence the endless Artistic License vs Canon debates that often exasperate Trek artists. Furthermore, Star Trek as an artform has so much conflicting restrictions and unwritten rules that it is easy to get confused on what is deemed “acceptable” and downright heresy. It is amusing to observe that the hardcores are always so defensive, (or easily offended) against the slightest change. And if they don’t get their way, trust them to retreat to their ivory tower using nostalgia as a smoke screen. Is it a case of old hardcore Trekkie privilege? Perhaps.
But at the end of the day, words are just that, words. Talk is cheap, and no amount of vitriol induced, tersely worded condemnations will deter artists from what they do best. Oh sure, one may possess all the facts and details to the letter. But it takes a completely different skill and mindset to actually sit down and produce visual mediums. The main trick here is to harness that Trek knowledge without the useless negativity. Art is indeed not a democracy, but in my experience, it always helps to do your fact-checking.
Complaints, negative reactions? I’ll ignore em’. “freedom to bs” and all that mwahahahahaha…
Re:designed by Matt Jefferies
Yes, but wasn’t his designs, to a limited extent, influenced buy stuff Roddenberry doodled and Gene’s fascination with FORBIDDEN PLANET?
This right here people… This is some truth for you.
All I want (besides good stories/interesting characters) is production design that fits the prime universe. Not overly updated. Not so blindingly “re-imagined” that it’s not easy to see it evolving into the basic design of 10 years later…
Oh, and none of the stupid “camera can’t track fast enough, oh, there it is, zoom in” space shots. I hate how after BSG did that it became the standard.
It was amazing on BsG
10 bucks says were going to have uniforms with the dumb TNG shoulder lines and think its creative. They copy this in Enterprise, cadet unis in ST09, Kelvin Unis, etc.
Theyre really obsessed with that look and need to find something different.
I think we have to liberate ourself from all this style and tech questions raised by production standards from the 60s / 80s and soon enough the 09s.
Why should we enslave ourself to the idea that all things that are happening in the TV episodes and movies are strict canon down to the visual level? Why should you bother to search actual in-universe explanations for thinks like the rubber of an alien mask coming off its face at some point or why certain historical figures look different (obviously because they are portrayed by different actors…)?
That feels kind of dogmatic to me. Don’t get me wrong, I understand and appreciate the concept of canon as a tool to create coherency in the storylines and to flesh out a universe with a logical sociological and political backdrop. But it’s not a religion.
The Style of the Original Series can and must be updated – as long as the original spirit is still in there.
(of course it’s a matter of taste what ‘to far away from the original spirit’ means on a visual level – I personally don´t like the JJ-verse aka Kelvin-Timeline Enterprise and its bridge because I feel some familiar elements of the original design are actually missing… i would have loved to see those red grids – and where the heck is Spocks viewer???).
I’ve come to think of the Star Trek Universe as a kind of Meta-Reality anyway. Think of it like that: The stories explored in Star Trek are written and put on screen by humans in the 20/21st century on the basis of source material from the future history. That explains why there are mistakes and misconceptions about the source material (aka canon mistakes and plot holes). In a historical drama or a biopic you don’t get to depict thinks a 100% like they really where. Would anyone bother that Abraham Lincoln or Albert Einstein look different in every movie they appear in?
So, there’s a simple explanation why Captain Kirk resembles a 20th Century Actor called William Shatner. Because William Shatner just portraits the actual Captain Kirk – whom we never saw because he lives in the future ;)
This Meta-Reality also explains why “Destiny” will look more modern than “TOS”.
(i am not a native speaker, so please pardon some mistakes)
Although I admit it’s fun to parse out an explanation for why something depicted on screen is they way it is if the drama were real. But I definitely don’t get upset about it, or require that to enjoy a movie franchise.
I believe Michael Okuda proposed something along these lines in 2001 prior to enterprise, to explain why tech in enterprise might appear more advanced than tech in TOS. That in the real trek universe it all looked different than what we see, and these shows are just a recreation of sorts. Of course, this was before ENT showed the TOS enterprise…
Will Discovery be taking into consideration the new events from Star Trek Online? Or will everything in the game be turned non-canon? Anyone who plays STO will know that multiple new story arcs have been fully developed and completed. From the Enterprise F to finishing the Temporal Cold War in the Enterprise J.
I would like to clarify the matter of time travel’s use in Discovery and why we chose not to include it in our article. Many other sites are reporting that time travel will not be used in Discovery’s first season.
When the Nerd World Report folks got Fuller on the line, they immediately pressed him to reveal something that they could use as an AICN-exclusive headline. Fuller did not start talking about time travel. Rather, one of the interviewers brought up the point that each Star Trek episode featured at least two time travel episodes during their runs, and can he write a headline akin to “No Time Travel in Discovery’s First Season.”
Fuller did not commit to this. Instead, he went back and forth with the question. It was clear that beyond the story concept we know as time travel, going backwards and forwards in time, Fuller was also considering flashbacks as he was calculating his answer. This went on for several minutes, and basically Fuller said that time travel wasn’t necessary to tell the story they want to tell in season one. However, he also doesn’t want to rule out its use as the scripts have yet to be written for episodes 4-13 and much can change in the process.
As the answer wasn’t stated definitively, we made the editorial decision to omit that from our article. Other sites are also making the leap that by referring to the main character as “Number One,” Fuller intends her to be the same character that Majel played in “The Cage.” He was clear that calling her “Number One,” as she was a first officer, was done in homage to Majel and that first pilot.
Well The Cage took place one year before Discovery, correct? So “Number One” *could* be the same Number One… transferred from the Enterprise…
That’s right…the events at Talos IV took place in 2254. It’s certainly possible that Number One could be the Number One, and there’s a good theory out there from Blastr about how to do it (which I really liked), but all he had to say about the name was that it was paying homage.
Its sort of a weird thing to pay homage about since we had “Number One” on TNG for years, which would certainly be far more in the consciousness of Star Trek fans. It will seem like an odd homage to Riker, than to Pike’s first officer. The “homage” might go deeper…ie. being THE Number One from The Cage.
What s Blastr? Can you post or link the theory?
SyFy’s news aggregator site.
Here you are:
Ah ha! So Shatner could be telling a story in flashback. It still begs the question whether that means a young Kirk has to be in it, or whether he’s presenting it as a lecturer with a holodeck simulation.
I don’t see this happening. Starting off the series in such a manner isn’t a best way to introduce the characters and get into the story. The first 10-20 minutes are incredibly important if someone is on the fence about the show, and throwing Shatner in won’t do it…a compelling story will.
With that said, I wouldn’t be surprised to see familiar faces later in the show. I’m actually betting that we’ll see the Enterprise under Pike at some point.
Reference – Number One: No, the NBC Executives said that they didn’t want Gene’s mistress to be co-star of a new series on their network.
Yup. Gene spent decades selling the ‘I was a martyr for women’s rights’ bullshit when all he tried to do was nepotism – giving his girl friend a big part in his show.
I’ve read some Solow and his interviews. He, like Gene, was very much a product of the glass ceilinged misogynistic industry of the times in which they romped and self-promoted themselves.
The tale that NBC knew Majel was Gene’s mistress and didn’t want her because of that does not fly any further than Solow’s contention that Lucille Ball didn’t have a funny bone in her body. I just saw her on DECADES extensively interviewed by the probing Dick Cavett on one of his old shows from back then where he dedicated its entirely to interviewing her. She’s no Bob Hope, but she was spur of the moment witty and able to elicit a spontaneous laugh or two — far from having absolutely not a single funny bone.
Also, the Majel tale falls apart because supposedly the way Gene got her past NBC’s girlfriend blacklist was by fooling the execs into not recognizing her by changing her hair color. I mean where’d Solow get this tale? SUPERMAN?
She never changed her acting moniker with its very rare (actually her own) first name! This was an NBC which just half a decade earlier was helping to maintain and implement a THE blacklist (One that no less than Lucille Ball herself had to extricate herself by testifying in front of that Senate subcommittee.) of names blocking the employment of suspected communist sympathizers at the network, and all the people on these lists had to do to get past them and gainful NBC employment was merely change their hair color! IMAGINE THAT!
I don’t even think the ceiling was glass in the 60s. It was pretty opaque from what I can tell, and somewhat lower.
When Herb and Gene started in the TV biz back in the 50s it was glass, but clearly by 1966 it was pretty brunette.
The thought of serialized Trek…a Trek that has to be revisited in 13 hour binging blocks leaves me cold. Yet, everything else…his take on the music, the aesthetics… gives me great hope. Looks like I may very much enjoy this series, if only once, But I guess that’s better that having 26 episodes that I can revisit one at a time, anytime…but they all suck. lol
New minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant! :-)
I’m hoping! Fingers are crossed that there is a small thread of continuity within the episodes, that can be viewed, if one wishes, as stand alone adventures. If the total enjoyment of episode 4 is totally dependent on having seen episodes 1-3, I’m not going to like it. I’m going to watch it, and probably enjoy it. But 2 years from now when I want to rewatch an hour of it on my lunch break…I’m not going to be happy about it. :)
“But I guess that’s better that having 26 episodes that I can revisit one at a time, anytime…but they all suck. lol”
I feel your pain; it was a real struggle to sit through the dreadful 3rd season of TOS. Going from one stinker to another was too much sometime, that it took me two years to finish all 24 episodes.
It’s true that season 3 was the weakest overall, but there are a lot of great episodes in that season, including my favorite TOS episode; The Cloud Minders.
The only episodes that aren’t good: And The Children Shall Lead (the absolute worst episode of TOS), The Way To Eden (dumb hippies episode), Turnabout Intruder, and Spock’s Brain (which isn’t as bad as some people say). So basically that’s just a handful of bad episodes.
The Paradise Syndrome is slightly better than the other ones I just mentioned, if only to see Kirk’s marriage to Miramani. But that’s pretty much it, none of the remaining 20 episodes are bad.
Give it another chance!
So, orange Andorians were just the start? This is actually gonna be a full reboot, and in an actual alternate universe, rather than just an alternate timeline branching-off from the main universe’s Prime timeline; despite their claiming that it’s gonna be a prequel to TOS.
Is that a rumor for Discovery?
@ Gary 8.5
Bryan Fuller tweeted this photo of a makeup test.
That looks like unfinished base foam or latex. Probably hasn’t had the surface paint coat / details added. I wouldn’t read too much into it.
They originate from the Drumpf region of Andor; we just never saw them before. It’s a huuuge planet, after all.
Apparently Star Trek 10 years sooner then TOS is going full Trump with orange Andorians.
It would absolutely warm my heart if Number One’s name is revealed to be…Majel.
That would be so right in so many ways.
Personally I was hoping that they would do a sort of mix of serialised and self contained episodes. Even if they only did one or two episodes that were standalone just to break up the season and do a few more fun episodes as a refreshing change from the more serious and dark serialised episodes which I am sure they will be.
13 episodes though is a good number. And I am hoping that they will allow the episodes to run as short or long as they need to naturally go. Whether it be a 43 minute episode or a 53 minute episode. Star trek episodes in the past tended to feel artificial in how they always wrapped up at 42 or 43 minutes because of the need for commercials when originally aired. Commercials from what I hear is not so much of a hindrance and demand in the online medium so hopefully this will benefit the show, and the viewers because we will get more time to watch these stories.
So…. This article was to tell us that the producers have really yet to finalize anything and cannot tell us the few things they have finalized.
Wake me when CBS decides to tell us if and how the show will be available AFTER the 13 episode run on AA. Those are the specs that really matter. How available will the show be to the fans…
This has really dampened my enthusiasm now….I generally do not like reimaginings unless their like how enterprises were and they’re subtle…..this sounds like more drastic changes but of course I could be wrong….when I first heard Bryan Fuller was going to be show runner I was excited….when I heard it was going to be set in the prime timeline I was ecstatic….when I heard it was going to be another prequel I was let down and now this….I just don’t understand it….if you just set the show post nemesis you could create your own new look to the show, you could come up with all the new interesting aliens you wanted and you wouldn’t contradict what’s come before….now the visual aesthetic will be totally inconsistent and off….for some that doesn’t matter but to me it does….ill probably still watch it because it’s trek and I support all trek (even the JJ movies) but I just won’t consider it real trek (again like the JJ movies)….that’s me though….Star Trek is my favorite thing in entertainment and I hate when people mess wth it….
I have similar thoughts. For me, Prime Universe canon is both aesthetic and story. However, I understand that they can’t use 1960s era production techniques. But I really hope the “reimagining” isn’t wholesale changes. And I also hope to the extent there are any changes, especially with things like uniforms and ship design, there will be some easy to understand explanation.
“And I also hope to the extent there are any changes, especially with things like uniforms and ship design, there will be some easy to understand explanation.”
You should drop out now. It’s pretty clear there won’t be any explanations for anything — it simply will be the way it looks, which if viewed by Captain Pike from THE CAGE would look no different to him than his series looks to us.
This isn’t some Orci-fied transition to another alternate dimension affected by a different flap of some butterfies wings — it will just be different, because nobody would ever design a set and uniforms that look like TOS did in the 1960s, today.
Of course, someone could easily assume that the Federation went through yet another of its short-lived mercurial uniform design changes as they did with TMP between TOS and TWOK, and in 2255 they changed all of their designs from ships to uniforms for a period of time, but by 2265 had changed back to the old design style, seen in WNMHGB — which even explains why all the new red accents appear in that episode.
Maybe that will work for you. Of course if the Andorians are orange, then we’ve got a whole other Klingon ridge problem, but in the end the same sort of retconing works too I guess.
All things considered if that really matters to you, then you might just want to sit this one out.
@CuriousCadet – you are probably right, and I am actually pretty good at stretching my imagination to accommodate certain changes :-) I remember back in the TNG days, I sort of assumed that the look and feel of TOS was not “really” how things looked and that, much like when a character changes actors, we should just assume that Klingons always had ridges and the Enterprise always looked like something from the future and not a 1960s era low budget television production. However, that all changed when “Relics” aired and we were led to believe that the Enterprise (no bloody A,B,C, or D) really did look that way. This was later reinforced in Trials and Tribbelations, when Dax actually commented that the aesthetic was classic 23rd century design. And, later in the Mirror Universe episode of Enterprise we again saw that this “look” was real. I always assumed that it was just a design fad – and that under all of those cheap looking sets and props there really was a very sophisticated starship! So, if Discovery breaks that tradition (which it sounds like they are going to), then you are right – I just need to get over it.
See I never thought that. I always thought TNG looked different since its 8 decades into the future. Also I know a lot of people can’t watch TOS because it’s from the 60s and had a small budget but the show is an utter classic and deserves every Trekkies respect regardless if it’s your favorite series or not. Star Wars didn’t think of updating the millennium falcon’s interior (for episode 7) even though that has an obviously late 70s retro look to it. No JJ stuck to the look of the original trilogy even though it’s 30-40 years old. Even ENT and TNG had the balls to recreate the original series bridge albeit briefly. For some reason though now it seems creators and fans can’t seem to pay the same respect when it comes to the original Star Trek series. If you don’t want to make your ship, clothes, etc. look like it did during TOS no problem….pick another timeframe then and have at it…but no Fuller and company want to have their cake and eat it too….it’s just irritating….
Well I would disagree with the Millennium Falcon, I think that ship holds up incredibly well, and I would buy that entire ships design if it were introduced today. I don’t understand the reference to the late 70s at all. Space 1999 had already happened by then, and a lot of the Eagle design had influenced sci-fi ship designers. THe Eagle holds up incredibly well too. Not to mention 2001 ASO which had significant influence on future designers, and still holds up — 2010 actually seems dated by comparison. Even TMP was leaps and bounds ahead of the TOS bridge, despite only taking place not that many years later in canon.
As for the recreating the TOS bridge exactly in TNG & ENT, I wouldn’t call that balls, I’d call that pandering.
Well we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that. I think the interior of the millennium falcon and the some of the aliens of the original Star Wars look very dated. The ship has a late 70s look to it. Space 1999 has a dated late 70s look to it. That doesn’t mean they’re bad. On the contrary I love both the original Star Wars and Space 1999. But JJ didn’t think of recreating the look or aesthetic of the original series is my point. He didn’t update the chewbacca costume or any of the original aliens or ships. All I’m asking is the same respect be paid to the original series of Trek. And for you to call ENT and TNG pandering for recreating TOS enterprise bridge boggles my mind. It makes me question how you can even call yourself a Star Trek fan for saying something like that. This is one of the things that has shocked me about so called “Trekkies” that I’ve learned since coming to discuss Trek on the Internet. Star Trek has the strangest, most fickle, most disrespectful fans of any major franchise bar none. No other fans of any series I can think of would call recreating the look of the original show, movie, video game, comic, etc pandering.
You must really have a hard time wrapping your head around the historical fact that teens in the 1950s took old cars from the 1930s and 40s and made them relevant for their generation. They introduced modifications but they were always recognizable as the 1930s and 40s things that they were.
Well if we’re going to agree to disagree then don’t call into question how I can have a totally different opinion form you, and still be a Trek fan.
My point about the Falcon is that it did not need to be updated to be believable, whether you think it looked “dated” or not. In fact, though I disagree, to the extent it did look “dated”, that only helps the fact it was a ridiculously old and outdated ship, even in the context of the universe we see it in. The TOS bridge from the 1960s is not believable by any metric used today, other than paying homage to the original. When I first saw THE CAGE, I was blown away by how much more modern, and believable the bridge set looked then what ultimately came afterward. It actually captured the timelessly futuristic 2001 ASO look years before, but gets none of the credit.
The only reason to recreate that ridiculous 1960s design exactly is nostalgia. And since that design takes the viewer right out of the “reality” created by the surrounding series, by virtue of the stark contrast in construction and technology, especially when compared to existing technology in the late 20th and early 21st century, there’s only one reason for it — pandering to the core fanbase.
Everything about the design of the TOS bridge looks ridiculous by today’s standards, and is frankly a little insulting to a modern audience’s intelligence. When Scotty, and then Sisko, and finally Archer walked onto those sets, I thought it was really cool for that episode or two, but I was acutely aware that I was no longer suspending my belief and immersed in the story telling of a modern space drama, but rather actively analyzing the sets, for their attention to detail. That’s the last thing you want in a serious drama. Moreover, most any new viewers are going to think it looks like some kind of cheesy 1950’s movie set and be turned off by the visual appearance alone before a line of dialogue is spoken.
I choose not to live in the past. I am perfectly capable of being a fan of Star Trek, and embracing re-imaginings of classic designs, updated for a realistic-looking modern perspective. I thought ENT did a very good job of incorporating technology we take for granted today while giving it the appearance of predating TOS. But there’s only so far you can go with that approach. And while I think the Bad Robot movies went too far, particularly changing the classic circular design of the bridge, ENT didn’t go far enough for this era. And the original TOS sets will always have a special place in my heart, but I do not ever want to watch another serious effort set in that visual environment on a recurring basis ever again. If you think that makes me undeserving of being a Trek fan, then I guess we’ll just have to throw logic out the window and agree to disagree.
Re:the TOS bridge looks ridiculous by today’s standards
As I recall those thrilling days of yesteryear, in the face-off between LOST IN SPACE and STAR TREK, fans listing what was better, worse or the same in comparison between the two in regards to the original set designs of each’s first season, TREK fans always acknowledged that Robert Kinoshita’s ship set designs for LIS’ 1997 already outstripped Trek’s 23rd century futurism. I recall it was one of the most common laments of Trek fans wishing Desilu and Norway could figure how Allen was pulling off affording it.
In fact, I suspect the desire to see STAR TREK afforded better set design budgets was likely one reason the changes introduced in TMP were far more readily accepted than any other changes introduced in the decades ahead. I even recall that Roddenberry himself was out promoting the changes for TMP in what I believe is a slamdunk for your 1960s sets contention, because I clearly recall him saying the TV sets design aesthetics were adequate for the small screen of TV but absolutely inadequate for the larger screen of the cinema — and the much larger screen is what now rules in our TV’s of the now.
Personally, I think the first STAR TREK series, like a local municpalities’ live stage theater company with its minimal stage budget, embraced its minimalist sets for a sf production and still managed to tell great stories that still resonate even on the larger screens of today with its original unreimagined FX and sets. But given Roddenberry’s view on the larger wider screen, I can’y really grouse much about its being updated for its current syndication as has indeed taken place. And I’d be hard pressed to conceive of a cast of current young actors that could pull it off with those old 1960s sets in say a STAR TREK LIVE! holiday production for an NBC Network TV’s Halloween season.
It’s interesting that those early B&W LOST IN SPACE episodes are so much more compelling than Trek in a lot of ways. I feel like I’m actually out there. WNMHGB also has that feeling because they use those marvelous backdrops and matte paintings of a what a real alien world might look like, rather than just colored lights on a cyclorama. But once they adopt those ridiculous vibrant colors, for no other reason than to sell color TVs, they stopped being as real to me. As a child they were fine, but they’re comic book-ish now. In the same way they got rid of Superman’s red shorts, modern aesthetics have changed, and hanging onto the look of something that was done a specific way for budgetary and marketing purposes, period trends, or otherwise, is simply not a reasonable course of action for a modern production.
Every time Bryan Fuller opens his mouth about Star Trek Discovery I get more and more turned off to the idea of the new show. :O\ #Dissapointed
Again, Number One!
I only discovered this site a couple months ago. I am very impressed with how on top of every story you are. Looking forward to continuing to visit as the new show comes out. Thank you.
Thank you ever so kindly for your patronage, Lenny. We’re so excited whenever anything new on Discovery comes in. I, for one, am looking forwards more to this television show than I did Beyond, or am with any future Kelvin Timeline film.
Yeah why do 26 episodes when you can just do half as many? Modern television, like modern bands that take years to produce a 3 song ep. And we still don’t even have a cast and this is supposed to be on air in four months? Anyone else feel like this is going to be rushed?
Doing half as many shows allows for a series to find an audience without the investment necessary with an entire season. Actors don’t have to be tied up as long, allowing them to work on other things. This is part of why film and TV actors can now cross over without the stigma once associated with either medium. It’s actually a good thing.
And no it does not have to be rushed. They start filming in September. That’s 4 months from the first broadcast. New TV pilots have less time than that before they are trotted out at Network upfronts for all to see, on a schedule that usually runs from March to May. STD has been in pre-production for quite a while, and VFX likely have been going since July. It takes generally 2 weeks to shoot the live action, and 4 weeks in post. So starting in September they can conceivably deliver the first episode by November 1 — over two months before it’s needed. And that gives them more than enough time to fix anything, and work out the bugs in workflow.
This is pretty much TV by the book.
Curious Cadet August 29, 2016 1:28 pm
This is part of why film and TV actors can now cross over without the stigma once associated with either medium.
Is there really a “stigma” associated with being too busy as an actor? As far as I know, the TV stigma had to do with the quality of TV content. Film used to be the more respectable, higher-impact medium. But, now that’s largely reversed, with films having become largely devoted to chase scenes, lasers and explosions, and TV having become more artistically inspired and respectable.
Re:As far as I know, the TV stigma had to do with the quality of TV content.
Nope. That became the retcon “excuse” the studios created to cover what they had been doing when they felt threatened by that upstart TV. But what really happened was just a continuing part of the overall tale of the entertainment industry, starting with the motion picture studios, maintaining all sorts of blacklists to police the uppity “help.” It’s the reason the blacklist backed line “You’ll never work in this town again!” had been said so many times that it became a cliche both on and off screen. I introduced this topic from the TV network side of using blacklists themselves here:
When TV was first invented no one had any idea of how good or bad it could be as it hadn’t yet produced much content, but the heads of the motion picture studios set out to purposely make sure it could not possibly get “that good” by letting it be well known that any motion picture actor, that had any aspiration of a continuing career in Hollywood, better not accept an acting gig on television, as they could then forget about one as they would be blackballed from ever working for any motion picture studio in Hollywood ever again.
Of course, this TV performer blacklist eventually broke down on two fronts: People standing up to Hollywood’s most infamous blacklist backed by The Senate Committee on Un-American Activities, and television actors becoming so famous and beloved that Hollywood could ill afford to ignore them as their use in motion pictures would likely increase the box office over say, an unknown.
Disinvited Today 8:09 am
Interesting. So, the chain of causation was (1) Movie industry prohibits movie actors from working in TV; (2) movie actors gain enough power to buck the prohibition; (3) quality of TV shows improves due to movie actors working in TV. And perhaps, (4) movie actors working in TV attract top-tier Hollywood writers/producers to TV. Either that, or the Hollywood writers/producers came to TV first, and were soon followed there by Hollywood actors.
Ok…NOW the main character makes sense. That info on her being the first officer was being curiously omitted from every article I read about this new info until this one.
As for the uniforms, why would they be completely different from the ones in The Cage? This takes place 10 years prior to the Original Series and the events in The Cage supposedly take place about 11 years prior to the first season 2 part episode The Menagerie. So…did Starfleet change their minds twice (or is that three times) within a 12 year period?
When you think about it, redesigning the uniforms in an era that has replicators is simple. Instead of clothes being sent out to be laundered, they are broken down into constituent atoms, and reassembled by whatever pattern is required. This is especially useful in a starship with a limited water supply. So, when the brass at SFC come up with a new uniform design, they merely upload into subspace and all Federation ships and outposts implement it, and the next day all of their personnel get a surprise in their wardrobe replicator closet.
I mentioned the same thing. if the Uniforms are markedly different (and not just the “same” uniforms with modern takes, like with JJ’s Trek), then it means they had a uniform, changed it, then changed back to something very similar.
On the other hand, they can create in-Universe reasons for new uniforms. If they show people in the classic Cage era uniforms and new uniforms and its implied there are several options to choose from…or the Discovery is a different branch of Starfleet, thus a different uniform. I’d prefer one line that gives us an in-Universe explanation then no explanation at all and the producer eventually says “meh, we wanted to change them so we did”. Its a TV show, you always have time for one line to make things work in canon.
Regarding the music, just please PLEASE do not use the same lame scores from TNG, DS9, VGR or ENT.
OMFG. Why set it in the Prime universe if your just going to ignore canon & “Reimagine” everything?
They should have just done a Kelvin Timeline Series, well I guess they are they just aren’t calling it that because they want to try to keep the fans that the JJ films have alienated.
They Never learn, it’s not about them doing their own show using Star Trek, exploiting it for the fans/viewers.
It started with DS9 & just got worse up until today.
They are alienating Star Trek fans as each series goes further away from the Star Trek we know & love & then they blame Star Trek for not being popular even though what they produce doesn’t resemble Star trek anymore.
Star Trek doesn’t need to be fixed, conforming to the current popular trends just takes away what made Star Trek special & something people believed in.
I reserve Judgment untilI see what they actually do.
Hoping for coolness.
Reserving Judgment until I see what they actually do.
They chose this ten year period for a reason.
I am very curious about what that reason might be.