CBS today released a revealing new trailer for Star Trek: Discovery to the theme of “Star Trek is…,” the first three words Gene Roddenberry wrote in 1964. This is our first glimpse at the show’s sets, costumes, uniforms, and ships.
After slightly altering the delta shield in the Star Trek: Discovery logo yesterday, CBS today released a behind the scenes trailer that shows off sets under construction, costumes, ship designs, uniforms, and a closing shot of the captain’s chair.
Take a look at the full video, followed by stills of the aforementioned elements:
YouTube – region locked
Twitter announcement, may work for other regions
Production has begun on the next chapter. #StarTrekDiscovery is coming to CBS All Access. https://t.co/b1uni2YyKp pic.twitter.com/19pmY4JBFd
— Star Trek: Discovery (@startrekcbs) January 31, 2017
Star Trek is…
Sets under construction
Uniforms and costumes
Other behind-the-scenes shots
EDITOR’S NOTE: For those curious, this ship appears to be derived from a John Eaves design from a few years ago as a possible ship for Star Trek Online.
Haters are gonna hate, but I’m excited for the possibilities.
Overused phrases are gonna be overused.
Re: Overused phrases are gonna be overused.
A cliche is as a cliche does.
Can’t polish a turd.
Here’s a clearer screenshot of the “split” Delta shield
@Mark – did you serve on every other starship that flew around ten years prior to TOS? Unless it happens on screen, it isnt canon so showing us something from an era that never appeared on screen isnt a canon error.
It’s a work of fiction. None of this is historical fact.
Calling this a “Cannon Error” is incorrect. There has never been a reason stated on screen about the insignia. Any conjecture about it has come from fandom. It is a widely held misbelief that the delta was supposed to be for the Enterprise only. In fact the delta was supposed to be for any starship crew. Staff on a starbase or non-starship (using the definition of the term from TOS) (i.e. a freighter) would indeed have something different, but people on other Constitution ships (and similar classes) would have the delta. You can find the memo from Bob Justman online, from December 1967, admonishing the production staff for deviating from this. It seems Bob Theiss (costumer for TOS) had other ideas.
Re: Canon Error
Hmmm…I certainly agree that intent should be taken into consideration but I have been informed by other that many consider canon to only deal with what appears on screen, in which case Theiss’ actions which appear on screen would overrule Justman’s intent.
And that’s “Bill” Theiss; not “Bob”.
@Dis – true, but what IS canon is only canon until something new over-writes it.
Regarding other ships using the Delta shield – From the episode Court Martial a case could be made that the starfleet guys wearing Delta shields harassing Kirk are from a different ship because it seems outrageously insubordinate if they were from the Enterprise. Beyond that Mark Fry’s right – canon error.
Its not a canon-error if its shown on screen in Discovery to not be a canon error.
Why is the Engineering and support services emblem on a blue shirt? Shouldn’t it be the little science globe? Unless they are swapping the colours round again!
The Cage uniforms were either yellow or blue. Think about how often the uniforms changed. Almost immediately after (if not shortly before) the end of Kirk’s 5 year mission the uniforms changed dramatically with TMP. The whole red, yellow, and blue department structure was completely thrown away. In fact, that colour structure didn’t return until nearly 100 years later – sometime after Picard graduated from the Academy. Even then, the command colour was changed from yellow to red.
Stop complaining about so-called canon. I understand we want continuity, and I’m sure we will get it. But we have to give the writers some freedom to develop new canon.
Relax and enjoy the show! :)
No. We don’t.
If they want to create something new they can try creating their own show.
I am demanding from a canon perspective. Just give us a reason for new uniforms. And show us the iconic ones too.
Michael, I have a feeling the uniforms will be a slight update of the blue jumpsuits seen on ENT.
That would make sense.
The hideous new uniforms are obviously heavy millitaristic style uniforms based on the Enterprise era uniforms lamely trying yon bridge the gap when the uniforms of that era are clearly established
Unless it’s a dress uniform
The uniform looks awefull, why do they keep redesigning something that works, is established & Iconic?
Making it ugly, uncomfortable & millitaristic
Who would want to be in that world & wear one of those stuffy, heavy uniforms?
@Trekboi – in that small picture, you have deemed it awful? And what do you mean redesign? There have been numerous uniforms…which one is the iconic one? The TOS pajamas?
There are a variety of reasons they’d redesign. Creative freedom. Merchandising.
I love the fact that everyone responds to canon error by talking about the shape. But my critique is not shape. In an interview with Les Moonves, he talks about the 7 series prior to Discovery. I am guessing that the Pilot is considered one of the series he is referring. So, when you break it down: The Enterprise had embroidered patches, Pilot (which is close to this time period) had embroidered insignia, Original Series had embroidered insignia, Animated series had drawn, but implied embroidered insignia, Next Generation debuted the metal insignia, which went into Deep Space 9 and Voyager. But yet, for some reason, in the middle of all those embroidered patches, we decided to try a metal insignia that we won’t use again for over one hundred years to come? Or is it that this series is truly footed in the Alternate Universe, which also used metal insignia?
I can sum up most of the comments to come: ship sucs, uniforms ugly, I hate the channel it’s on, I will NEVER pay to watch this, captains chair sucks, that typewriter at the beginning is horrific design, the guys hands doing the typing don’t look like Gene Roddenberry’s hands.
You forgot, “That’s not what I would have done if I were in charge!”, and “Why didn’t they listen to MEEEE??”
Im waiting for a “They should hire Bob Orci”. Then again, I guess he isnt doing much at the moment.
The only thing I can get on board with in that comment is the idea of paying for a service to get ONE show. Not a good thing to ask from customers who are accustomed to getting content bundled with others. And for a lower price and at a higher quality.
People seem to be able to understand wildness science fiction fantasies, but Earth bound sarcasm seems to escape them.
This is hilarious and true!
Not forgetting, ‘THIS IS A DISASTER!’
Well the ship IS ugly :D
Beautifully ugly, if you ask me…
Have fun not watching the show
sar·casm -ˈsärˌkazəm/Submit – noun – the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
Your summation is incomplete without “Not another prequel!!”
Baby steps. I’d love to know more, but I guess that’s the point of a teaser, isn’t it? The Discovery still looks like the love child of the E and a Klingon battle cruiser. The uni looks nice, but almost too advanced; same with the production values. It’s almost as if Starfleet was better-funded in the past. Hmmm. It’s an anomaly.
I’m hoping this is a dress uniform, which doesn’t put it far off of the shiny TOS dress uniforms.
Yeah I like it in theory I just want it to fit in the era they chose. If you arent going to respect canon then dont do a prequel. (And I like prequels).
But it looks like a reasonable transition between Enterprise and TOS.
You’ll find that a minority of the potential viewership of this are TOS fans, but you won’t get a real grasp of that by visiting sites like this. It’s such a shame CBS have pulled yet another prequel. I guess the fans of TOS are now getting to the age where they are pretty high up in companies, and so exert influence what they think people want to see.
It’s a shame those people didn’t do any market research, because now they’ve pretty much divided the fan base by age.
For the rest of us, the only hope in seeing OUR trek continue is with some kind of concurrently filmed second Trek show set to explore the period where we left off 14 years ago.
@Mark – yes most people that rise high up in companies will do their due diligence and collect data that shows them the best chance of success…then ignore it because they liked a TV show from the 60’s. I think you’ve hit on it.
But maybe if you whine directly to CBS, they will a TV show just for you. Then you can applaud them for doing what the “majority” want.
That was well said TUP! Some potent sarcasm there
What, you mean like hiring Bryan Fuller?! That worked out well..
@Mark – so by “high up”, you mean people at Fuller’s level, producers? Because there are a lot higher up than him. Plus, your point makes no sense.
RE: “You’ll find that a minority of the potential viewership of this are TOS fans”
…says you’re completely arbitrary and made up statistic that supports only your own opinion.
Divided by age? Not necessarily… I’m only 30, and TOS is my favorite, even though I grew up with new eps of TNG through ENT.
YellowdogSC is 100% correct…I will never watch this program for the simple reason I refuse to pay for it.
Are tptb trying to make this an obscure program?
Who but the most hardcore nerds are going to pay to watch Star Trek (something they have gotten for free for decades) and a bunch of crappy CBS sitcoms? CBS would have to pay me a lot of money to sit through their other programing, not the other way around…I hate to say it, but I think this program is DOA regardless of the quality of the series.
Agree with you 100%, Voodoo. If it’s (that) good, I’ll see it through other means…
As has been covered, Netflix paid quite a large sum to be the home for the series outside of the US. If that continues past the first season, it will be a long run for the show.
As for “who they expect to pay”– I couldn’t say. But people had similar thoughts regarding Marvel’s first shows, and before you say “well Netflix already had a ton of subscribers!” you’d be right, and that’s part of what this is meant to change.
Along with a few other shows, Trek adds original content to CBSAA, and provides a reason to subscribe to get them off the ground.
It’s worth noting that Netflix has more than doubled it’s subscriber base since they debuted House of Cards (their first original program) in 2013. And that programming is why.
CBSAA is no doubt sinking some investment money into original programming with the hopes of providing viewers a reason to subscribe, and grow from there.
That said, I don’t think the future is in their favor. I think we’re headed to a “streaming network” model, where the landscape can really only support 4-6 different $10/m services. I expect in a few years places like HBOGo, FoxNow, CBSAA and other smaller services will fold into the bigger services like Hulu, Amazon, and Netflix.
Well, Netflix covered ALL of the production costs. This can also be the downfall of the series, because Netflix know not only the demographics of the views, but can also generate metrics down to the second of when viewers turn off.
So as far as Netflix is concerned, it can only go one way – The show starts out at one level of viewings and steadily increases viewings and retentions. If, on the other hand the viewing figures start at a peak and then begin to fall, it would be hard for them to justify the same investment level for a second series. And this is all before we even start thinking about critical reviews. The Finale of Sherlock was a classic example of completely missing the mark and causing fans to literally turn off half way through. At that point you’ve already lost them.
Of course, there will be people who just scroll through the Netflix offerings and happen to watch the new series for one episode just because the banners in the interface will promote it as much as possible. The show must retain them too.
But let’s be clear here.. with Netflix paying the entire production budget of a show they neither own, or have any influence in, how long will they be happy to pay for it when they spend far less money creating their own Original content? And if viewing figures slide will CBS realistically want to spend that budget themselves on season 2 on the basis that season 1 didn’t impress?
Would CBS then go on to pitch it at Amazon Prime?
This further prequel hasn’t really struck a chord with anyone who isn’t already a TOS fan, which is a pretty limited audience in the grand scheme of things. We’ve seen with Enterprise and the film reboots that the potential viewership have an opinion which, when ignored, can sink a production.
I feel CBS have done zero market research and instead handed the keys to someone who they think has the right credentials. Unfortunately that person was of the TOS nostalgia subsection of the fan base as a whole, and so limited in producing something he personally was interested in reviving.
It’s such a shame that the CBS execs have such a short memory, and in most cases are completely different people running the board of directors now.
If CBS had ran a poll asking if the audience would like to see another TOS reboot, or a post-nemesis timeline, I think we all know what the prevailing responses would be. It’s a great shame that didn’t happen.
@Mark – so you admit Netflix has intimate stats but then gambled a boatload of money on a show when they felt the audience was the wrong one? You’re laughable now.
Netflix long wanted a Trek series due to viewership of all the series/films that air on the service. The fact they ponied up enough money to grab all non-US distribution should tell you that they think its going to be successful.
Gambling is correct.
So much so that their entire investment in the tax year 2016 is now revenue that has been set aside but can’t see any returns to their investors AT ALL until the end of the 2017 tax year.
Do you have any investments? Time is money, and that’s a lot of financial return suspended from the 2016 investment funds. That will have directly effected shareholders, and Netflix’s investment reputation to them has been lowered accordingly. Cashflow is a cancer in business when money sits around doing nothing. At this point I think investors will consider themselves lucky to see some returns this year, if the September launch date is to be believed.
@Mark – so are you upset that its a prequel or upset about the investment choices of those who own CBS stock? I mean really….knock it off.
Who gives a crap if the investors see a return this year? What does that even matter to Trek fans? And who invested in Discovery? Do you mean Netflix? Im sure they will survive…
TUP, if you don’t make shareholders happy, they don’t give you any more money. They will sell their shares or screw Moonves out of a job.
I wish Moonves would just give up this idea, because I don’t project a positive outcome. I think he should join forces with Neflix for production of DISC. After the first complete run of episodes on CBSAA those shows could be streamed on Netflix as well as CBSAA. The people who can’t wait to see it will subscribe, and more patient folk [like myself] can stay with Netflix, and catch the second run.
So far it looks like CBSAA’s only original content is DISC. Everything else is reruns of some good and some mediocre CBS programs.
Actually thats not true. They already aired Big Brother and The Good Wife spin off, The Good Fight, starts airing this month. Now its still very little I agree but people have to remember just 4 years ago when Netflix made House of Cards, that was its first and only original series. Now look how many are there today just 4 years later?
I get people don’t like the idea of AA but they are trying to emulate what Netflix and Amazon are doing. And they have an advantage those didn’t….they actually already make TV shows. So its just a matter of time before more shows will be made for the site. These are all baby steps and they have to start somewhere.
In other words in a few years that place may look very different. I can see a bunch of shows appearing in time. And I see another Star Trek show airing there in 3 years if Discovery is successful enough.
As for Netflix, if they aired it there after AA it would sort kill the point I guess. MOST people would just wait until it came to Netflix just like more and more people are pushing off watching shows in its first run just to wait for them to arrive on Netflix and Amazon a year later and binge watch them. This is becoming the norm…and the problem for 1st run TV.
And why there will only be more sites like AA. I do find it funny no one complains about sites like HBO Now or Showtime that has streaming sites you can pay for and literally just re air stuff from their channel. No original shows. But I guess its already a pay channel vs CBS which is free.And much better shows as well.
Re:…CBSAA’s only original content is DISC.
THE GOOD FIGHT looks interesting and possibly worth it.
For the zillionth time, Netflix did NOT pay for production. The money they paid to license streaming rights overseas just happens to cover the cost of production. VERY different.
If they get good viewership, they’ll re-up the same deal should CBS do a second season. And considering the netflix fee covers production, i’d say it’s a strong bet we’ll see a second season should the show be good.
Because Netflix is very savvy, and would probably not have put up the money for the rights if they didn’t have a good feeling it would do well for them.
What I can’t get my head around is that the best shows on Netflix are also available in 4k. The 1080p shows don’t really carry as much of a punch in terms of the leading programmes available to watch.
So, either CBS are going to offer a 4K service, or Netflix will have to intentionally offer STD in only 1080p. I can’t see it going down well if Americans are the only country who can’t watch it in 4K, and equally I can’t see it going down well with the rest of the world being forced in to watching 1080p on a 60″ screen.
CBS could film in 4K for Netflix and release it online in 1080 if they so desire. You’re really reaching here. Most people dont have 4K televisions yet so its a moot point.
Not sure what it’s like where you live, but here in the UK our 4k TV’s were the biggest seller in black Friday. Do you not have 4K Sky TV through the satellite dish yet where you are yet?
@Mark – biggest seller on black friday doesnt mean the majority of people have one. Are you a kid? Legitimate question.
I live in Canada. We have 4K. I dont own one yet because my big screen 1080P is still functioning great. Which means I can load up a Netflix program and watch it and when I get 4K, I can watch the program in 4K if I so choose.
It really has no bearing on sales of Discovery.
TUP, I would venture a guess that Mark is pretty well-off and can afford the new iPhones or Androids as soon as they come out, and buy appliances and cars within the year they debut.
Or, unlike many of us, he doesn’t wait for it to wear out before he replaces it.
http://www.sky.com/shop/tv/uhd which is Sky’s (satellite) 4k box.
The national cable run by Virgin Media is also now with 4K support:
We also have the 4k Netflix package for £9.99 a month, and 4K with amazon prime.
4K is becoming the norm here for serious TV viewers, you know, the kind who pay for Sky, Netflix and Prime etc. Broadcast over the air can’t, and likely won’t every catch up due to the huge timescales involved in changing broadcast standards in the available spectrum.
I don’t think Americans would be even slightly willing to pay for a CBS AA subscription on a 1080p service when they can torrent it from the rest of the world in 4k.
American here, already subscribed to CBS AA, and have been for a while, I will never torrent this or any other Trek.
“The norm?” Really? Well, that would explain why no-one I know has a 4K TV, or gives a rat’s behind about acquiring one. Perhaps that’s because we care about the characters and plot in what we watch, not the picture quality. Same will go for ‘Discovery’. If it ticks the right boxes, in terms of character, plots, and – for want of a better term – ‘Trekiness’, we’ll watch it. If it doesn’t we’ll switch it off. 4K,, 5K, 3D, whatever – who cares?
Never even seen a 4K TV and I’m American. I’m fine with the standard HD stuff I have now. Not everyone is obsessed with the most crisp look ever. As long as they shoot it well enough I’m fine. I’m sure most people who see IMAX films for example see it more for the size than how clear it looks.
@Mark – you should send that memo to CBS. They will be upset to learn they have planned this all out without getting the 4K information from you. This is a disaster. *rolls eyes*. Pal, if you dont want to watch it, dont watch it.
TUP, Yeah, I’m not even sure what Mark is talking about. I think it has something to do with visual quality. How many of us own 4 x 6′ TVs? I dang sure don’t. I stream everything, so I’m not that hep on visual quality. I’m more concerned about quality writing, directing, acting, and [yeah] costumes & “world design.” I don’t need the crispest visuals EVAR.
I’ll buy it on Blu-ray.
I am unlikely to pay for multiple months of any streaming service. I will buy one month of CBS All Access if I can binge all the eps at the end of their weekly release run.
Umm why is that video “Not Available”? Is this the first teaser video all over again?
Exciting stuff though, TOS evangelicals are going to hate this ;)
The YouTube video is region locked. We’re fixing it now.
There’s an embedded version from CBS.com included in the article now, we’re told that works for folks outside the US.
Matt, still not working from Canada…
I see it from Spain
Apparently that was blocked because of the version put up by Space :/
We changed the second video link to an embed of the tweet by CBS, which has been working for folks outside the US, confirmed as working in Canada.
I am intrigued, but I will definitely not be paying CBS All Access to watch it.
Definitely looking forward to this.
I’m a tiny bit disappointed that they didn’t use a different symbol for the Discovery uniforms – I’m sure most people here know that the Delta symbol was originally for Enterprise crew only and different ships had different symbols. It doesn’t really matter tho. I guess for the average viewer, the delta shield is pretty much an icon for all Star Trek, so maybe it’s just simpler to use the symbol everyone has gotten used to.
@Nscates – there is information in the other thread that states this isnt the case
That idea has been assumed in fandom, but there is a memo from Bob Justman saying he wanted the delta for starship crews (you can find other crews with the delta in the background of scenes on starbases for example), but Bill Theiss (costume designer for TOS) appeared to have other ideas.
Interesting, I didn’t know that! Thanks for the info.
Be prepared for lots of these canonical screw-ups. It’s yet another prequel rehash, so creative freedom is very limited to the time period.
@Mark – if you think a prequel limits creative freedom then you’re a very uncreative person. Please hold your head under cold water for 5 minutes.
I agree prequels do lack some freedoms but only if you are super anal about everything which I’m not. I don’t care about stuff like this for example and expect them to use Delta shield. For god sakes people its been used as the symbol of the shows logo for nearly a year now. Are you seriously shocked its being used for the crew lol. I thought that was basically a given a this point.
Tiger2, Not to mention that the Delta shield was used for every Starfleet uniform in TNG, DS9, and VOY– while some say that’s because the Enterprise’s logo “ruled” because she was such a superior ship …
I don’t know and don’t care ;-) The arrowhead design is FINE.
Yeah, I’ll say it again, ITS THE FREAKING LOGO OF THE SHOW!!!! What did people think that meant when the thing takes up 2/3rds of the screen? Did they really think it wouldn’t be implemented in the show?
As said its become a symbol of Star Trek in general and what many people think of when they think of the show. They even could’ve used it on Enterprise if they wanted but respectful enough to say it started on TOS. I just don’t care about this stuff AT ALL. You’re going to let an insignia ruin your viewing of a TV show? I mean I will be saying this again and again but this is why so many of us didn’t want another prequel in the first place. Ironically not because we’re the anal ones, but because I knew the moaning would start from all the Trek fans out there who act like they are watching historical documentaries and not fictional programs that adhere to creative licenses.
Focus on what actually matters about a TV show: The characters and the stories. This is other stuff is the usual whining from Trek nerds everyone else just shrugs over.
You’ve said the same thing 3 times in one thread. Time to change the record. We get it- you don’t like the concept. Move on.
Can someone explain to me the “I won’t pay for this” crowd. If you love Star Trek enough to come to a fan site hours after a teaser drops you won’t pay $6 a month? It’s a 13 episode season with the first episode free on CBS. That means paying for 4 months of All Access or $24 for 13 hours of new Trek.
That’s a literal steal! Tickets for a 2 hour movie go for $15, I don’t understand the nay sayers. I for one am ridiculously excited, sign me up!
But they will pay more than that to watch Bob orci’s latest mistake on the big screen six times, buy the DVD, buy the Blu Ray, buy the sound track and buy the special edition.
Just whiners who can’t articulate relevant perspectives.
I speak only for myself.
I won’t pay for it because I live in an area where access (ironic) to the internet is limited. I live in the mountains and would not trade it for all the Star Trek in the world, which I already own. I have the internet my home through my phone carrier’s home version. To stream things like Netflix or CBSAA it eats up all my data (Verizon obviously). Don’t even bring up satellite internet as that is absolute garbage. Sure, I’d love to watch new Star Trek but I’m not going to rearrange my life around it. It appears there will be plenty of you folks with actual “all access” to keep the show going
@THX – you’re one of the minority of people who wont be able to easily access the program on first run then. It happens. CBS isnt obligated to make sure every single person on earth has an available way to watch it. But I imagine you will be able to pick up the DVD eventually.
I would be curious to actually know what those numbers are. Particularly when one compares them to available viewers that could potentially watch through over the air or cable programming options. It may be surprising just how many people who have internet access such as myself but no easy way to stream. I realize that not one single person cares at all about Star Trek fans like myself and it only sort of adds to the sense of being left out. Perhaps when the time comes that DVD’s are available I will watch. Or maybe I won’t.
@THX – but keep in mind, Netflix paid the entire production cost. So in the grand scheme it doesnt matter if a single person streams it on CBSAA. We know Netflix is very popular and successful so there is no guess work involved as to whether anyone will watch it on Netflix.
Im sure people in CBS DO care about Trek fans like you. But what do you suggest they do? Fly the entire cast up to your rural location and act out the episodes?
CBS doesnt product Star Trek for fun. Its a business. They care about the fans as viewers and buyers of their product. Their intent is to make a show that draws viewers and thus, draws revenue.
Netflix believes the series will add subs to their program, which is why they are paying so much for it.
CBS prefers to air it on CBSAA to help that model succeed. If it DOES succeed, its better for them in the long run then airing this on cable. They were never going to air it weekly on CBS. But they are airing the pilot on CBS so you will likely be able to see it.
If Discovery is good, you will hear about it and seek out the DVD’s. If it sucks, then you didnt miss anything.
My suggestion would be to put it on their network. That would be one way of CBS demonstrating that they actually do want to get Discovery in front of as many eyes as possible. Like I said initially, I am speaking for myself. From my perspective CBS doesn’t care if I see the show so I sort of feel reciprocal about the whole deal. Its not as if there aren’t a plethora of other genre options to watch.
If you want Trek on CBS then you dont want Trek. The pressure to deliver ratings on the network would be astronomical. In an era where networks kill good shows all the time and dont give shows a chance to grow and breath, the last thing we want is Trek on CBS.
They ARE airing the pilot on CBS, so be thankful for that.
That’s a rather hyperbolic statement. If I don’t get with the program then I’m anti Trek? Is this one of those “you’re not a real Star Trek fan” statements? I’d have to say it’s patently absurd. Should I list the science fiction and genre shows currently enjoying popularity on broadcast and cable TV as an example that Star Trek could in fact work well on CBS if the network gave it a shot? Look, I get it. Nobody gives a rip if a small portion of avid Star Trek fans are on the outside looking in when it comes to Discovery. I don’t get to be a member of the Star Trek club anymore. The network has moved on, Star Trek has moved on, the fans have moved on. But if it’s ratings and subscribers they were looking for my personal experience would say fail. Dark Matter, Killjoys, The Expanse, GOT, TWD, Incorporated, the TV versions of the DC and Marvel universes, and a host of other shows shall provide enough entertainment while Discovery enjoys its run.
Re: Should I list the science fiction and genre shows currently enjoying popularity…
On CBS? Please do. TUP has a valid point, despite Moonves’ hoopla about SUPERGIRL, he moved her to the CW. Now THAT’S a channel where a STAR TREK series would have a shot…
Stating that CBS can’t generate ratings for Star Trek isn’t a convincing argument that they’ll generate subscription revenue on CBSAA.
@THX – you’re missing the point. If Trek was on CBS, there would be far more pressure to deliver and maintain a certain rating, because there will always be execs pushing their projects and showing off ideas they think will generate higher ratings. They sell ads based on a guaranteed minimum rating and if the show doesnt generate that, they owe make-goods.
On CBSAA, the standard for delivering viewers is much lower.
Using random numbers, if Star Trek on CBS needs 5 million viewers per episode to keep its timeslot but 2 million subs would be considered a success on CBSAA, where does it have the best chance of lasting?
Trek could be a loss-leader on CBSAA where the actual subs dont necessarily justify the expense of the show but because it shows growth, they keep moving ahead. They are building CBSAA.
@TUP – finally, someone talking sense.
Airing on CBSAA strikes me as the ONLY way they were ever going to do it. Like you say, the pressure for ratings would be too high. Reliant on ad revenue, creativity stifled by rooms of executives worried about ratings and figures saying “no, make the ship look more like this, our focus groups said that.”
It’s possible that if it’s off-the-charts successful it could prompt them to air the series on network, but like Arrested Development Season 4, or Community Season 5, and shows like Longmire, The Killing, etc… Star Trek was saved by streaming.
Full House, the Gilmore Girls, these are two other perfect examples. 10+ year old shows with diehard audiences that could never be sustained by the needed numbers on network, but could thrive on a streaming platform.
Trek and CBSAA is even more interesting, because I have to believe that it’s more of an investment to them than anything else: it doesn’t need to break even, just make noise for the service, draw some crowds, and get attention on their new platform, and provide a reason for audiences to subscribe.
I’m with you. Skip two trips to Starbucks a month and you’ve paid for it.
You guys have some awfully overpriced movie tickets. I’m paying half the price over here – and it still feels like “too much buck for the bang” to me.
Then again, I grew up in the “Here’s a local equivalent of 50 cents, go see some movies and have an ice cream or two” era, so I guess my value perception may vary from yours. ;)
That said, $24 is an okay price for one half-season. If I could get it all at once, I’d pay and I wouldn’t think twice about it.
I live in L.A. which as you can imagine is pricey. The average movie ticket is about $13 now but can go as high as $16 and these are for just normal 2D prices. But the price I quoted were IMAX tickets in big theaters so no even a normal ticket is not that pricey lol. But my point is no one complains about spending $20 on an IMAX movie they see once. Yeah I get it TV is ‘free’ only thats not really true either. Only network TV is free and no one is going to sit here and tell me they only watch network TV these days. Its not 1985 anymore, people have been paying for TV shows for quite awhile now through all kinds of means. They just dont think about it anymore because yeah they been conditioned to pay for all those channels but they’re still paying.
Again I get people are upset its on a new streaming site and all of that but again so what? You’re not tied to it for years like buying cable. You can cancel anytime. All I know is I been to conventions and watch people drop hundreds of dollars on junk souvenirs that is probably collecting dust in a basement somewhere. We’re getting a brand new show and I have to pay $18 whole bucks to watch and I don’t make a lot of money.
Its so silly. Did you hear any Marvel fans moaning about Daredevil being on streaming and saying it should be free? No, I never saw anyone care, they were just happy they were getting a DD show for pete sakes.
And yes I just find the hand wringing over it silly. Star Trek fans will buy some nerdy $20 Trek T shirt at the mall but they act like forking out $6 a month is blasphemy. Now if you just don’t think the show is worth it is one thing but to be so put off by it is absurd. Its not like this is the ONLY show now on a streaming site. Look around quite a few of coming monthly these days.
Yes I do get the point people just dont want it on All Access because its new and not a lot on there. Now that I can understand but for people like me I would pay twice as much to watch it there. I paid $45 to see Beyond twice and I didn’t even love it lol. So no, no issues at all forking out a whopping $18 not only to watch the season but watch it as many times as I went.
I thought it was $9.99 a month.
Thats if you want it commercial free. Its a $5.99 option with some commercials.
Could that be the bridge in the background of the clapperboard photo? It looks like some sort of station with displays and a console.
Looks it to me! So it’s now an Apple Store bridge!
NOT an Apple Store, I mean
Certainly looks it and it also looks more of a darker colour scheme, which seems to follow on from the NX-01 aesthetic.
Seems a bit out of place in a time period where everyone should be pushing physical buttons and watching tiny screens. But hey, let’s screw canon, viewers are stupid.
Ive had pressure buttons on my microwave for 40 years. But I bet they press buttons on the space shuttle. Nahhh
Fuller has commented that he refuses to be visually contrained by the TOS look. The way he sees it (and I agree) is that TOS showed the universe as the 1960’s could best represent it.
As someone said once (I forget who)– imagine TOS was a look at the universe in standard definition, and now we’re seeing it in HD.
I don’t mind the modern updates, as long as they capture the feel and spirit of the show and the elements are appropriately representative of the original show’s intent.
IE: they used square buttons and big levers because that’s what they had in 1966. The designs were clunky and the aliens were bumpy foreheaded because that’s what they could afford.
Now it’s 2016 and they’re updating it. Fine by me.
Do fans still moan about the ridged Romulans on TNG?
Yep. Stupid doesn’t age well.
Torchwood, I do :-)
Only because they were supposed to be indistinguishable from Vulcans. As for the Klingons, there was an explanation given for that … eventually.
Personally, I think this is a poor excuse. You can update the quality and “realism” while still maintaining a retro vibe. They shouldn’t be afraid of using an aesthetic that is different from other modern sci-fi, or using a little artistic flare. It’s not as if we know what 23rd century technology or aesthetics will actually be like. To be honest, a lot of what is shown as ‘futuristic sci-fi’ looks either current or near-future because that’s what we strive for. The same argument has been made with the Kelvin-timeline Enterprise bridge. It’s “more futuristic” than the TOS bridge, but really it’s going by modern trends and aesthetics, hence the additional claims that it looks like an Apple store. If they really want to try to make it look like the future, they’ll probably have to come up with something totally different and probably a little weird. Otherwise, I’d stick close to the TOS aesthetic and just give that more realism, higher quality materials, more detail… The design of the USS Kelvin’s interior was a pretty great interpretation of that, and it didn’t look like a TNG+ contemporary. The retro-touches were there, but subdued. If they add a bunch of touch panels and some variation of LCARS for example, then that’s a cop-out. It’s homogenization of the ‘Star Trek’ look, because the majority of the series have that look, and so it’s pandering for the sake of familiarity. I would just really hate to see that kind of retconning because there’s no good reason for it.
No one under 30 would buy the idea of whats seen in TOS is ‘the future’. There is nothing wrong with SOME retro ideas but you can’t be a slave to it either, thats all. No one said it has to look like TNG either. I think if you look at the Enterprise in the KT films its its own look. It doesn’t look like TOS but it doesn’t look anything like like TNG or Voyager either. Its its own thing and shows an updated modern look. I think Discovery is simply going to go that direction. OR I guess something between the Kelvin and Enterprise maybe.
But yes I don’t see them trying to look like that period of TOS and nor should it if they want more than just TOS fanboys.
…and that is fine. But why even bother with timeline BS if you don’t respect it? If you want to re-invent the wheel, fine, just put it in an alternate timeline like the new movies. Problem solved. But when they are insistent on pointing out that this IS 10 years before Kirk, in the original timeline, i think they should at least pretend to understand the timeline they want to play in.
Shows do soft reboots ALL the time. Thats what the KT films were, thats basically what this is.
But yes I obviously agree with you because I knew, I KNEW this was going to happen the day Fuller said the timeline. There is no way to get around it. If you actually stick to the original timeline of the show and try to do match everything (within reason) you scare off anyone under 60 who didn’t grow up with TOS because it would look pretty ridiculous and outdated. And as said you are competing with other shows and movies TODAY of the future. And how can you expect the same people who watch the KT films and sees a pretty updated version of the 23rd century to suddenly go to some strange retro look of it? It just wouldn’t fit.
But yes once you go the KT direction then you have all thee traditional and anal fans screaming blasphemy because tricorders are now the size of an Iphone and not the size of a tape recorder. So yeah I don’t get it either. And the very people this show is being made with in mind will be the same people yelling at you how much you keep screwing it up, ala Enterprise and the KT films.
Put it in a period no one knows and you can do whatever the hell you want. The entire fleet of ships can look like Discovery (but god hope not).
The JJ films production design was awful. That bridge was awful. That ship was awful. They removed the intimacy of the Enterprise. And if we complain about “buttons” even though there are real world reasons, we have to complain about what JJ did on his films which was to create light and sound for the sake of noise and action.
On the other hand, I loved the Kelvin. In fact, Trek was all downhill after the Kelvin was destroyed.
I liked the look of the production design in the KT films but to each their own.
Tiger2, I liked the production design of the NuPrise, but hated the lights flaring into everyone’s eyes [even, presumably, the officers at their stations]. THAT was totally ridiculous because it didn’t serve the “world reality” — that officers have to do their jobs without being blinded.
Yeah the lens flares got ridiculous, agreed. Abrams just went too far with it. He even knows he went too far with it and said it in interviews. Looks like he took it way down for Star Wars though although I’m guessing Disney told him if they see more than a dozen of them he’s fired.
Right on Ashley!
…try mcrowaving that popcorn with your eyes closed, or try finding and opening that app you want on your phone without looking at it and tell me how much sense it makes to not have tactile feedback on controls in the command center of a starship, where every split second counts.
Re: …mcrowaving [ sic ] that popcorn with your eyes closed…
I do it in the dark with no lit up keypad or display all the time since my internal door lightbulb blew.
But I think you have a point – especially since I keep being reminded that keypad on the nuker has no key bump to center my internal button map. Ever since the first series introduced the character of Miranda the need for alternate sensory feedback has been very apparent.
Jesus here we go. Why I wish they never did a prequel so stuff like this people wouldn’t be moaning about.
And its been said it was NEVER going to look like a cheap 1960s TV show. Its suppose to look like the 23rd century as TOS was suppose to look at the time. Do we live in a period NOW where people are pushing physical buttons??? So why would you want a show that suppose to take place 300 years from now to feel like its less advanced?
If this show looked like something out of TOS good luck getting it to last more than a year. Abrams and company knew this with the KT films and updated it. So yes SCREW canon on this. 100% yes. I already hate the time period but I don’t need to be watching some nostalgia piece. I want to watch a show where I can at least pretend its representing the future, not just the TOS version of the future by having everything look circa 1967 version of the future.
…because physical buttons and tactile control makes sense. That’s why. Touch screens are 100% dependent on sight. Bad design, bad consequences on a starship bridge..especially in battle, when the hangar deck “open” control is “touched” instead of the phaser -fire controls… because the officer, at the weapons station, turned his head away to watch the attractive yeoman who just came out of the turbo lift.
Do you have an Ipad? Shut your eyes and try to type out a, email or text on it…see how that goes, as opposed to the physical keys on the keyboard…where your fingers can be easily placed on the J & F keys, and a legible letter can be easily typed out because of the proper finger placement on the raised key markings…markings that allow those fingers to easily find them…with your eyes closed…if need be.
The fact we are arguing about BUTTONS says it all lol. Look of course it makes sense to have buttons in some places, I’m typing this on a lap top. All I’m saying is the big bulky buttons from TOS (which is funny they made them bigger to seem more futuristic lol) would look out of place to most people because most people they have just as much touch screens. I’m not saying you can’t have both but it would be weird to go back to a time where its all big bulky buttons and levers everywhere, thats all.
Re:…would be weird to go back to a time where its all big bulky buttons
Not if you keep in mind that this fiction’s future still has WW III to get thru and that such things throw designs back and cause Renaissances in future civilizations celebrating the old art and designs that are rediscovered.
Yeah, GOD I miss my button phone, but it didn’t have Android capability. I would like to be able to dial 911 without looking! Trade-offs, trade-offs.
And I have a feeling that NASA still uses bumps, at least, for the astronauts to be able to “feel” their way around controls. As I recall from “Gravity,” they still had red and white BUTTONS to push.
However, “Gravity” was not set 200 years in the future. I guess I agree that we have to keep today’s design aesthetics in mind as opposed to the ’60s look of TOS. For its time, though, it looked FANTASTIC.
@Tger – yes, we do exist in a world where people use physical buttons. Ask NASA.
Uh I didn’t say we didn’t. Its 2017 yeah I know as I’m currently typing on a computer that uses buttons. But I also have multiple devices that don’t. In 300 years it would seem silly to most we are only using just buttons so I think it would be odd to anyone under 30 to see a show suddenly using only buttons and levers again, thats all. I’m only speaking common sense at this point.
Im not sure a space ship 200-300 years from now will look like an iPhone. There are real world reasons space ships NOW use real buttons and levers. Those reasons will still exist in the future. Whether they create “better” touchscreen that solves the reasons not to use touch screen, is anyones guess. But if Im the production designer, I’d use a combination of both.
We do have to accept some modern updates. It doesnt mean the tech is different. Like someone else said, its like creating a show in 460 and then re-releasing it in 4K. It looks a lot different but its still the same. I dont have a problem with that as long as its done thoughtfully.
COntrol panels could be buttons. Personal devices could be touchscreen.
But does it really matter? Trek is science FICTION not science FACT. Even though they are more realistic than most sci-fi, the key part of that word is realist-IC. Not “REAL”. There is some entertainment involved here, and I think touch panels and futuristic looking tech is just fine, even if a guy like you or Neil DeGrasse Tyson might say [pushes up nerd glasses] “well, in a real outer space vessel tactile controls would be more useful.”
There is artistic license, and i’m fine with that, if this is the route they want to go. It’s really ultimately not that important.
We’re not sure of anything in 300 years. The point being we live in a world today where touchscreens is part of every day technology from TV to cars. Again NO ONE is saying there would be no buttons, of course there would, it would just be hard for people under a certain age to imagine a future where it would just be that when they live in a world right now that shows the opposite. Its like going back to the big bulky computers we saw on TOS when today computers are small, thin and sleek. You have to at least appeal to what is going on now or you will look out dated for anyone under 40.
But yes you can do both, I don’t think anyone is saying you can’t.
It is funny as hell to watch “Conscience of the King,” which otherwise is one of my favorite episodes, and see Kirk comparing voiceprints! Recall, though, that voiceprints were brand-new technology in the 1960s.
Control panels could be buttons. Personal devices could be touchscreen.
I like that idea! Makes sense.
Kind of funny we are arguing over this button issue and I just happen to find someone who did an amazing CGI job re-imagining the TOS bridge with updated technology.
I mean WOW that’s amazing work. Thats something that would feel more in line of what we see today. Now not suggesting they should do that for TOS but I can see Discovery looking more like that or a combination of the two.
TOS was not “cheap” for the 1960’s. It was an expensive show for the era.
If viewers see a future with 60’s Trek style tech with big ole buttons and believe that’s what the future tech is going to be like 200 years from now, then yeah they are stupid.
…no…inefficient controls that people want because that’s what they have on their iphone is what’s stupid. Touch controls have a place, where sight is guaranteed. Physical controls can be easily controlled by a blind man, if need be. Tactile feedback is smart. It always has been and always will be, in the real world. Nothing wrong with putting such controls on a starship that is supposed to be efficient.
TNG was all non-tactile. As I recall fans thought it was cool, futuristic, and couldn’t wait until real tech caught up. Now that it has, and that tech is real, fans think it would be logical to go back to big clunky buttons. Go figure.
LOL exactly! Some Trek fans are some of the weirdest fans at times. They believe Trek is about the future and want to see the universe expanded but only if its all tied to the same canon thats been around for decades and think the future should look how it was envisioned in the 60s for some reason. Thats how it looked at the time because it was the 60s just like how TNG looked when it was the 80s. Well now its the 2010s, I don’t care when the new show take place it should adhere to today’s standards and where we see things in 3-400 years. You’re still getting phasers and transporters, why does it all have to look like the same design from an earlier show?
That was exactly the reason the KT films were set in another universe so they can just update anything they want and IMO still didn’t go far enough.
Initial thoughts – the uniform design looks very well done. Second thought – how do they reconcile that non-canon uniform and insignia with the era the show takes place in?
Simple – They aim the show at TOS fanboys who are so desperate for a hit of nostalgia that they can suspend disbelief for the entire run of the show.
@Mark – do you believe that their conscious decision was to embrace the series that lasted three years in the 60’s and purposely alienate the fans of the other three series (I wont count Enterprise since you dont)?
Did Captain Kirk p1Ss in your cornflakes or something?
One of my problems with Star Trek going back in time with the movies and this show is that We have all seen how things looked and what the ships and uniforms looked like. I know that lots of people are good with it and that’s fine. For myself it sort of takes me out of it. That was a large part of my problem with Enterprise: It just didn’t jibe with what I saw before. My preference would be for Star Trek to move the narrative ahead. We’ve gotten three alt universe movies and now two series that are “back in time” adventures.
I think, all things considered, I’d have wanted a “future” set series. But when you think about it, continuing to move forward is a creative issue, without blowing up the whole galaxy. Technology is such that stories are hard to tell. There are no challenges. All the major races are at peace. Sure, they could come up with something, but if you go back to TOS you inherently enter a universe full of drama, challenge, and intrigue:
-The Alpha quadrant is still largely unexplored
-Enemies around every corner
-A starfleet still in its infancy, with things like the Prime Directive still being felt out
-“Cowboy Diplomacy” era, full of fast-acting crew, and less peace-making pacifists
Even during TNG they started to find it difficult to create drama, which is why they invented the Cardassian/Bajoran conflict, and eventually the dominion.
This way, the drama is built in, without having to find some big new narrative thrust like a Xindi, a Borg, or Dominion.
Makes sense to me.
Remember, these are the reasons they created the wormhole on DS9, and had Voyager flung to the other side of the galaxy. It opened up the universe a bit to allow for new enemies and unknowns in the Delta Quadrant, and new exploration and conflicts in the Gamma Quadrant.
Going back in time fixes that without any clever wormhole/caretaker gimmicks.
No they did that because TNG was still going and they didn’t want the other shows to feel like they were just covering what the Enterprise was already doing so purposely put them in other areas of the galaxy to feel like not everyone was covering the same areas of space (although that ‘area’ is freakin huge lol). It wasn’t just for conflict alone, it was trying to have three different shows feel different from each other. Obviously if they had another new show going forward that wouldn’t be an issue since no other show is on the air.
So I dont really buy that. If you put the show on 20 years past Voyager it would be fine.
The producers have said very specifically that moving them into different quadrants was in to get them into new conflicts and new drama. This is not in dispute. The reason DS9 didn’t have a ship to start (and was set on a station) was because they didn’t want them to feel too similar, and didn’t want them to potentially be bumping into each other “out there.”
But the wormhole and Voyager’s premise was very specifically stated to be to create avenues for new stories, new enemies, new exploration. They felt that the Federation had very little exploration left, and these were easy ways to bring it back.
YEs BECAUSE TNG was there lol. Thats my point they ALREADY had a show that was dealing directly with those issues so they made those other shows focus on OTHER issues. We’re basically saying the same thing here. But they wanted TNG to stay the main show covering the alpha quadrant as they were going into movies as well.
All I’m saying is that wouldn’t be a problem NOW because we don’t have three shows currently happening at one time. At that time they had to find a way to make them all unique and not all dealing with just the Romulans or Cardassians. They wanted where TNG would have their own sets of groups to deal with, Voyager theirs and DS9 theirs so you felt like you were getting different story lines and characters. And even then a lot of this stuff still overlapped like dealing with the Borg for example or Q.
Today thats not a problem. There are no shows on the air and the only current movie series takes place in literally another universe so its all wide open now.
Regarding Enterprise – yes, in some ways this is similar. Enterprise was the best idea they ever had since TNG but the execution was a failure. But thats also like saying DS9 and Voy were just like TNG.
Stop getting hung up on the “era”. Star Trek isn’t a moving timeline. It’s a franchise that exists on screen from Enterprise to Nem (and little jaunts in the past and future).
I get your point but you just described Enterprise. That was exactly all the same stuff. The only difference being the Klingons weren’t our full enemies yet and the show was clearly going that direction with them in time anyway.
I don’t want to make this about prequel vs going forward issue, I agree you can have tension on Discovery but its not like they couldn’t have it going forward either. And even during Picards time the Romulans were still just as much as the enemy as before and they created a lot of new enemies, more so than what we saw on TOS for example. On TOS it was really the Romulans and the Klingons that were considered a long lasting villain. They had others but it was for one episode kind of thing.
By the time the 24th century came we had Cardassians, Borg, Dominion, Ferengi (at the beginning anyway) and Q. And that didn’t include internal conflict like Section 31 and Maquis. Thats actually WHY the 24th century was so interesting because it expanded the conflict in more interesting ways. None of this doesn’t include all the villains on Voyager either. I mean TOS only gave us a cold war vibe with the Klingons, it was actually on DS9 we got an actual conflict with them even after we were at peace. So plenty was happening in the 24th century on that front.
its not like they couldn’t have it going forward either.
No, but setting it around TOS is instant drama/conflict. It’s a time of discovery (no pun intended), stronger foes, a weaker Starfleet, and more “cowboy diplomacy.” Just dropping the stories into that time period almost writes itself. Whereas going into the future would require some clever storytelling resets.
and even during Picards time the Romulans were still just as much as the enemy
Post Nemesis they were on the way to peace. I suppose the prime timeline destruction of Romulus shown in ST09 could be the genesis an interest dramatic dynamic, but that would rely on continuity with the movies, and I think they wanted to stay away from referencing the JJ films.
Thats actually WHY the 24th century was so interesting because it expanded the conflict in more interesting ways.
Cardassian conflict was over, as was the Dominion. And again, not saying they couldn’t have come up with something new, just that the prime TOS timeline era offers instant drama, and is great marketing appeal to fans and general audience. I like it. And if I didn’t, I’d be willing to give it a shot. Nobody really was too upset when ENT was announced as a prequel, if I recall there was a lot of excitement about getting back to the exploration and discovery, and lo-tech nature of a show set 100 years before Kirk.
Prequel or sequel, I think my ideal scenario would for Discovery to follow a different crew in a different time every season, ala True Detective.
Either way though, I’m not picky about when it’s set and those who are overly critical kind of when it takes place kind of annoy me.
Look I hear you but as I said they had a show all about discovery, it was called Enterprise. It was suppose to be the wild west of Star Trek since there was no Federtion, no prime directives, everything was new and shiny. Cowboy diplomacy began with them. It didn’t make the period anymore or less interesting IMO.
The TOS timeline doesn’t seem anymore exciting to me. All we have in this period that we know where tensions are high are with the Klingons. Again thats fine and I’m looking forward to seeing them but yeah thats been DONE already. We’ll get maybe a new angle on it but why I loved DS9 was because the Dominion was something new, forboding and very much part of the show. I already know what is going to happen with the Klingons and the Federation…they become friends eventually at the start of Praxis being destroyed and form a treaty to end their rivalry. I’m not saying Discovery itself can’t be an interesting show dealing with these issues but its not as interesting to me as the later shows because we had no idea where any of that was going. Again why I loved DS9 SO much! I mean that show turned every alliance on its ear. We ended up being enemies of the Klingons, allied with the Romulans (through shady means but still lol), the Cardassians became bitter foes when they were forming at least a diplomatic relationship with them and etc.
But thats the thing, you could shake things up when you don’t know how its going to end and why its more exciting. But I’m willing to see how they handle this stuff on Discovery.
It was suppose to be the wild west of Star Trek
And it was.
It didn’t make the period anymore or less interesting IMO.
First, your opinion. Second, less about YOU the viewer, and about the writing staff. The prequel era was, perhaps, an easier era to derive stories from. No, it doesn’t make them inherently better, but they probably believed it was an easier or better starting point.
The TOS timeline doesn’t seem anymore exciting to me.
I don’t entirely disagree, but again, the writers and producers may feel it is to them as creators. The mindset of a writer is very different than that of the viewer.
As i’ve said, I don’t think the prequel era makes the show inherently any better OR worse, but there are many creative and business reasons to set it there. We just have to wait and see how it turns out.
“First, your opinion. Second, less about YOU the viewer, and about the writing staff. The prequel era was, perhaps, an easier era to derive stories from. No, it doesn’t make them inherently better, but they probably believed it was an easier or better starting point.”
Well obviously I’m talkikng as a viewer and they need viewers to like their concept or they don’t have a show for very long. If more people cared then the ratings wouldn’t have died by the second season. My only point is it didn’t exactly get people excited enough to tune in one way or the other. As for the writing staff these are the same people who also made the temporal cold war to spice up the whole prequel idea in the first place.
“I don’t entirely disagree, but again, the writers and producers may feel it is to them as creators. The mindset of a writer is very different than that of the viewer.”
Fair enough, but I go back to my first point. If you can’t get the viewers excited over your concept then it doesn’t really matter.
But I want to make this clear and not give anyone the idea I’m just being a negative nancy. Not at all, for all my issues with it being a prequel I’m still excited for the story line they are going to tell. Knowing Bryan Fuller and knowing its one story arc (for the most part) has made me excited they will tell a really deep story ala Deep Space Nine or even Enterprise 3rd season.
And I’m also hopeful the show is going to do something different because its been rumored Section 31 will have a big part of the story line. Nothing says ‘shake up’ like when Section 31 rolls into town lol. To me that means the story might be more ‘behind the scenes’ which would be cool. I dont mean the show is ABOUT Section 31 only this particular story line has them involved. So yeah if thats true then I am really on board and we might get a different angle to an old story.
Oh, no, not Section 31! I hate time travel conundrums.
Oh well, I’m not a key viewer anyway ;-)
@Torch – I love the idea of “filling in” the history. Especially this era. This is essentially the era of The Cage. Thats pretty cool. Lets hope they keep it of the same sense of danger and discovery.
TOS was cool because they had this high tech ship but it still seemed like they were one random meteor strike away from disaster. They were out there, alone, blazing a trail. The decisions of the Captain so important because he couldnt just ask Starfleet for orders.
The fact we know how the Federation develops over the next X amount of years is great….because the road there is the best part.
I am actually not excited about the “gap filling” as it were. Go figure. I don’t mind not knowing every in and out of the history of the federation. But I do think it’s an interesting time in the history of the Trek universe, and could make for some fun and dynamic stories, and that’s what I’m most excited about.
Same. I don’t really need endless back story and ‘filling in’ to stories of the past. I mean I don’t mind it but I liked how it was done in Beyond for example like how we found out about what happened to the MACO’s after the Federation formed. Or like First Contact seeing the beginning of a new Earth being created after making first contact with an alien race. I don’t need an entire film or show surrounding these issues though. Looking back on it is fine.
And yes if Discovery can just tell interesting stories, that will be enough. I don’t need to know every little bit of history in this period but same time everything it does will now be canon.
Loving what I see. Though I’ll admit that if those are Klingon’s uniforms, i’m slightly… irked. I don’t mind some stylistic updating/retconning to make it more interesting for the modern audience, but this feels like a huge departure.
Wait and see, I suppose. In the end, if it’s a good show it will bother me a lot less.
It’s a prequel no one wanted.
@Mark – That’s true. CBS didnt want it. Netflix didnt want it. None of the fans here wanted it. You’re NOT an idiot. You see how all those statements are wrong? ;-)
What an insightful response.
Doesnt the “blueprints” pic resemble NX Enterprise a lot?
It’s the sequel to a prequel, expect lots of that junk.
@Mark – You see negativity everywhere. My original point was a POSITIVE statement. Continuity. For a guy who hates Trek you sure make an effort to troll a Trek site.
Nearly 100 years later is hardly a ‘sequel’ to Enterprise.
Mark is still mad that TNG was a “sequel” to TOS.
That’s like saying, when Voyager aired, “Doesn’t the ship sort of look like the Enterprise-E?” Yes, they are Federation ships and many different ships share similar characteristics.
I think it’s cool.
Not for nothing, but Voyager (1995) predates the Enterprise-E (1996).
So the other way around then. Point is, a lot of ships share similar looks and visual aesthetics/configurations. It’s not a bad thing.
I wonder if any episodes with show any constitution class ships? I would imagine they would get a similar redesign as the other props and sets…? Given what Fuller about production design, it seems unlikely that it will look like Pike’s Enterprise – which may or may not be a bad thing. I’ll be interested to see what they come up with.
@Nscates – I think it would be hard to resist the urge to have Pike’s Enterprise show up…
Here’s my question– let’s say Pike’s Enterprise shows up. Do you get Bruce Greenwood to play him? And Quinto to play Spock– but in the prime timeline?
Could be a fun way to get crossover appeal without actually showing the Kelvin timeline! I’d bet they won’t, but it would still be cool.
No. It seems like Paramount and CBS want to keep the two productions as separate as possible and if you throw in Greenwood it would most likely confuse people that the two shows are in the same universe. Dont get me wrong I would love to see it but my guess those two reasons is why it wouldn’t happen.
If that was the case, they could’ve brought back Ben Cross to play Sarek again like in the first film but they recasted that role. My guess is if we see Kirk or Spock, they will be played by new actors as well.
I would absolutely get Greenwood to play Pike. Quinto…meh. Maybe. Greenwood is a more subtle character than Spock. But realistically, fans dont care about CBS vs Paramount. For sake of making sense, it would be nice to use Greenwood since the JJ Pike would look the same as the “real” Pike.
Would be a great ratings draw too.
As Tiger noted (and I realized after I posted the last comment)– the fact that they got someone else to play Sarek, over Ben Cross who played him in ST09 tells me they’ll stay away from the actor crossovers. As cool as it would be to see Greenwood.
Admittedly though, I didn’t care for Cross as Sarek, and did enjoy Bruce as Pike.
Cool! I guess they aren’t using the uniforms from The Cage, which isn’t particularly shocking. I guess Starfleet must have had two uniform styles at the time.
Except that DISC is set 100 years before TOS, innit?
Not thrilled about the revisionism going on regarding the delta shield. It used to be fairly common knowledge that when TMP was announced, it was decided that the Enterprise was the first ship to successfully return from a 5 year mission, and at that point, the Delta shield was to be the symbol for all Federation vessels…as opposed to each ship having it’s own unique design…as demonstrated in the original series. A nice and fitting honor for the big E and her crew. Now, however, this change seems to be in place for all ships 10 years before the Kirk’s crew ever left drydock. Also the chair looks like it has touch pads for controls. No tactile feedback. Bad design, not to mention it flies in the face of what has been established, on screen, in adventures past. If you’re making a civil war movie, do you arm your soldiers with machine guns just because, they’re more efficient than flintlocks? I hate this line of thinking. But time will tell.
@Jon – is that stated anywhere or just fan romanticizing?
I think it was the TMP novelization that no doubt spilled into other ephemera.
Nothing in the novels is canon.
I believe it’s in Susan Sackett’s Making of Star Trek the Motion Picture, released at the time. But it’s been a looooong time! When I get a chance I’ll dig around and see.
It’s a prequel, you’re supposed to ignore important details and instead get swept away in the torrent of fanwank.
@Mark another self-loathing Trek fan. Why dont you find a new show?
Point number one: all you said about the insignia, and the first ship to return from a 5-year mission are not in canon. No matter where you read it, it is not a valid assumption.
Point number two: the insignia (presumably from Discovery) IS NOT the same as the one used by the Enterprise. What about that crack right in the middle of it? I don’t remember seeing it in the TOS uniforms. So it is a DIFFERENT (albeit very similar) logo.
Point number three: even if is the same logo, only with a different style, there is not a single canon source that says that was not the standard unified Starfleet logo at the time. Ten years later, fine, we have a patch for every ship, as per TOS, but the only piece in the same period of Discovery is “The Cage,” and we only see Enterprise officers and uniforms there; we can’t presume what other ships’ uniforms look like. You’re presuming they are different, when we don’t really know that, according to canon.
Point number four: they look cool and Star Trek is back on TV. Give us a break. ;-)
S Nogueira, our contemporary military services modify or completely redesign uniforms about every decade, sometimes more often.
Seriously man, are you shocked they are using the delta symbol??? Have people just forgot the huge one that has been part of the Discovery title logo from day one??? What did people think that meant? Clearly its suppose to just represent Starfleet at this point or it wouldn’t be in the freakin logo. I thought this was basically a given it was always going to be used for the new show or why show it at all?
Looks like the other Federation ship might be the USS Shenzhou. In the Pre Production Art shot, the left of the photo has a partial title of ‘NZHOU BRIDGE’. I like the blue uniforms and i’m trying to recall which Fashion company Bryan Fuller was either getting to make the uniforms or provide some ideas. Looks like the actor wearing the headgear seems to be wearing a red version of the above blue uniform too.
Schenzhou an NX Class ship?
I cant help but feel that this is aimed at people who watched the first TV show in the 1960s. The “be happy we’re getting a star trek” rhetoric does not do anything to address the concerns so many people have with this backward looking rehash.
As with every TV show and movie, the situation is a character in itself. Many sit-coms do this particularly well in which the main characters are in a particular situation (think Scrubs, Cheers, Friends, etc), and it would be quite a different show if the situation were different, and likely not as successful.
To many of us this is a bad choice in choosing the situation. We’ve no interest in more “birth of the federation” this, and “exploring new worlds.. again” that.
The reason so many of us are against this is because we’ve absolutely no interest in looking backward again. It was done with Enterprise, it’s being done with the movie franchise, and now it’s being done with the TV franchise yet again. This is a particular annoyance to people who simply have zero interest in a prequel to a 1960’s TV show we equally have no interest in.
There comes a point where many people get bored of the same being thrown at us again and again, with such short memories at CBS of just what kind of reception to expect.
This was a golden opportunity to push forward into the unexplored time after Nemesis, with a huge TV budget, zero canonical constraints, State of the art special effects, but no.
It’s almost as if CBS want this to fail, as it’s been one disheartening and divisive marketing and press release after another. The TOS superfans can’t see Discovery with anything short of rose tinted glasses, which is a shame, as objectivity is lost in favour of a lust for nostalgia.
I for one have zero interest in a prequel no matter how well it’s tarted up, it’s still stuck within the confines of TOS. By not putting this show at the forefront of the established timeline it’s no longer a show about the future, but instead a show before the show about the future.
It’s a shame that the TOS Superfans can’t understand this, as they are creating for themselves a bubble of joy which is far from being universally accepted right now.
Don’t be surprised if it never gets past season 2, and remember it in another 10 years time when some fruitloop wants to make another rehash. How short some people’s memories are.
Don’t be jealous.
@Mark – the problem is people like you dont stop to consider for one second that your opinion is not shared by the majority. We really cant know. But you assume it is. You belittle people who might disagree as “TOS Superfans”.
Networks have been wrong before but do you think CBS has stats to show you are correct and they said to heck with it, lets make a show that appeals to the smallest audience?
You ignorantly call it a backwards looking rehash without seeing a single frame of the show. And quite frankly, its people like you who lack the imagination that Trek was founded on. Like a simpleton you equate Pre-TOS era with “looking back”. The era does not dictate the quality of story.
What dont you understand about that?
If the show ends up being awful, you will come here and say “I told you so” as if you have provided even one intelligent reason for your prediction. But if the show is really good, we will never hear from you again.
The problem in reality is that people such as yourself spend so much time on this site, and similar Trek sites that you’re only conversing with the other hard core fans who continually come to this site, multiple times every day, and then claim that you and fellow obsessives are the majority.
@Mark – actually, you are once again coming across as a blithering idiot since I never said I was the majority. Although I might be, because Im a fan of story-telling and I enjoyed all versions of Trek. So this so-called TOS fanboy actually counted DS9 was my favorite series. But that doesnt fit your narrative of “CBS didnt make a show just for me, so everyone else is wrong”.
I am NOT a fan of TOS at all, and I am psyched as %^&* for this show. Has a great creator (Fuller), an amazing writing staff (including Meyer), visually looks stunning so far, and sounds like an interesting premise, from what we know so far.
Nothing that we know of it so far has me terribly concerned or skeptical. Certainly nothing that would dim my excitement for a new Trek series before i’ve seen it.
I’ll judge based on the first few episodes, as I do for most shows.
For example, after Daredevil, I was super pumped for Jessica Jones. I gave it two episodes before deciding I hated it. Then I moved on, and even as a huge Marvel fan wasn’t going to spend my time lamenting how much I disliked it. It is what it is.
So if you want to be critical of what you’ve seen, fair enough, but no point trying to convince those of us who are excited why we shouldn’t be.
The majority needed to make this show a success exist way beyond our little Trek fandom bubbles, wherever they are. The majority exists out there. If this were being shown on an advertising based network, and Trek fans were the the only ones tuning into this show, it would be dead on arrival.
I have to agree with Mark, and I have been saying the exact same thing since it was announced that this would be a prequel.
We know how it all ends up, it’s already been shown in hundreds of hours of TV programs and movies. So the primary USP for this series is a “how we got there” premise. That’s a pretty hard sell to people who have no interest in where “there” is to begin with.
I think CBS have shot themselves in the foot here with no way to get out of it now, and agree that had they done even the smallest amount of market research (outside of the “original series “Superfans”), they would not be commissioning this.
People know a bad idea when they see one. Here in the UK the reboot of “Top Gear” was an absolute flop. Everyone said it would be before it began filming, much less aired. Why? Because the presenters were the key to the whole thing working. With them no longer there it was an utter and spectacular failure.
Now, here we find ourselves with a new Star Trek series, but not set in the unexplored future, the basis of it’s success, but instead have learned it’s a prequel. The producers have decided to take away the asset which makes the whole thing work, which is the show being set in the distant and unexplored future. Instead of the great unknown we now have a slither of time slapped between two cancelled TV shows for no other reason than nostalgia for a very select group of fans.
It simply will not work, the same goes for the “you haven’t seen it yet” generic response from TOS fanboys. Sorry lads, it’s just not got any mass appeal. I wasn’t around when TOS was on tv, I’ve no interest in seeing an entire series leading up to it, because all the things I want to see will p*ss all over the canon you’re tuning in for.
@Cap – how do you know how it ends? You mean, the Federation isnt destroyed and all humans annihilated? Did you think that a realistic possibility in Nemesis?
You have no idea how Discovery ends or what happens to these characters.
I think it’s more likely that it’s being aimed at a contemporary audience, don’t you? People who don’t necessarily have a sentimental attachment to either the original series or the 80s-90s series.
@Drew – bingo. I think its likely they developed a series based on what they think would be a good story. I doubt their consciously said “lets make it like TNG to appeal to TNG fans” or “lets make it like TOS to appeal to TOS fans”.
The fact is takes place in this particular era, we dont know why. It could be they felt going further into the future hamstrung them from telling more grounded stories. They might have wanted to be closer to “now”.
We wont know til we see it.
It could also be that Fuller has a fondness for the TOS era and wanted to play in that world a bit. It could be that creatively, they felt a post-Nemesis universe was boring or tougher to write in, or that the TOS era was MORE interesting.
Or it could be they had a particular story they had in mind that they loved and it happened to be a story that took place (or could only take place) before TOS.
But it’s moot. This is the era they chose. The fact that it’s pre-TOS does not inherently make it good or bad. Watch the show, decide then.
The contemporary audience (outside of fan sites like this) have no affiliation to any time period. Either they become completely disengaged with constant TOS fanwank Easter Eggs, or you p*ss off the TOS fans by isolating the show too much.
Either way it’s creating problems needlessly when even TOS fanboys wouldn’t object to a continuation of the post-nemesis time period.
Why create such issues intentionally with so much riding on it?
Those TOS fans have had a failed prequel already, and most of them moaned when they couldn’t suspend their disbelief of canonical violations in Enterprise, and general moaning that it basically wasn’t TOS and too advanced technologically.
Does anyone remember when Trek was set in an unknown future? I do, it was great before the money-hungry Paramount and CBS decided to cash in on prequels.
Only in the retconned brain of fans like Mark was all previous Trek amazing because it was set “in an unknown future.”
Voyager has its fun episodes, and I do like it on balance– and there are some things to appreciate about Nemesis/Insurrection– but let’s not pretend they were great cinema or the best television just because they were set in an “unknown future.”
There were plenty of great episodes of Enterprise, and it was a prequel. The show wasn’t great, but that was mostly on the part of a lackuster cast and overexposure. I think by 2002 or so, Trek writer’s were out of ideas.
But some of the best episodes in my mind are ones that could only have been told in the prequel era. “Daedalus” being a particular favorite.
Nemesis bombed didnt it? TOS characters and show are iconicand thats why we have this prequel.
Could be a part of it, though without Kirk and the Enterprise itself, does setting it during that time period, and changing the entire look, really help?
Exactly! And Kirk and the Enterprise bombed last summer with strong critic reviews and during their 50th anniversary. So NOTHING is guaranteed either regardless of when they set these shows or what characters they use. End of the day the show or film has to be able to stand on their own. Star Trek made 4 shows after TOS and three of them were successful. And while Enterprise wasn’t as successful it still managed to go one season longer than TOS did.
Uh, didn’t Beyond ALSO bomb? Lets not play that game. Nemesis bombed because it was simply a bad film. And that was literally 15 years ago now (wow). I mean if you want to go by that argument you should be avoiding any connection to TOS like the plague since the actual TOS reboot couldn’t even get enough Trek fans to see it on its 50th anniversary with a 85% RT score in the middle of summer.
I’m not suggesting that I’m only making a point.
Tiger, the Tos ‘reboot’ kelvin world, with apologies to jj & co, is like the bizarro world of Tos. All that’s missing are the backwards starfleet symbols. ;^)
And the main fault is simply the stories. They have to be a lot better.
Regardless man its canon and it exists. But your comments are the perfect example of why they should stop trying to appease TOS fanboys. I hope from this point on they avoid any reboots of TOS, TNG, etc and just come up with new ideas and new characters. It will save them the headaches (although it doesn’t mean new characters will be headache free either). You’re not going to please fans with rebooting old characters at this point so don’t even try.
And for the record I like the KT films and I don’t think of them as ‘bizarro’. I love the idea we have another universe to play in even if I’m disappointed what they done with it so far. Assuming we get at least one more film with them I hope they go out strong but yeah its still on the fence we’ll even see another movie yet since Beyond didn’t do well.
T2 illogical, see comment below.
over and out.
No your comment is the one illogical. How is it the ‘bizarro’ world? Isn’t that the Mirror Universe…literally lol.
The KT universe is basically the same as the Prime one, simply a bit more updated. There is nothing inherently different about it. Its still the Enterprise on its 5 year mission seeking out new life and civilizations. How has that changed in any way?
Mark I actually agree with you. I think a lot of people feel the same way as its been stated often here and other boards.
THAT said though I always remain positive they could break free of all the canon and try and do something unique with it even if its set before TOS and those photos give me some hope they are not just restricting themselves to TOS. The uniforms already look completely different and updated. Maybe more than the KT films uniforms are. Obviously the ship looks VERY different lol. I still dont like the look of it but the few pics we see it does look a bit better…but not a lot. But it still going its own way.
But yeah I still hate the time period and the overly TOS fan service like bringing in Spocks parents and all of that. What made shows like TNG and DS9 great was because they could forge their own direction. Its not like TOS was forgotten, they kept all of that canon, which they didn’t have to do, but it was a clever way of keeping everything we knew about Star Trek but now can just come up with a completely different look and feel and not step on anything.
But with Discovery people are already moaning how ‘different’ things look and that seem to include yourself. But yeah I would HOPE it does look different but this is the issue with prequels. If this was set in the 25th century and we saw the same pictures from the ship to the interior sets no one would raise an eyebrow (OK the ship is still ugly but it could fit fine). So I dont get it? They didn’t seem to learn their lesson with Enterprise, then the KT series, I don’t know if they can break hold of trying to appease TOS fanboys but end up falling flat on their face again.
All I can say though is I’m still excited about it even if not thrilled with the premise so far. We’ll see but either way IF we want another show into the future Discovery has to succeed. Because if this thing bombs believe me you won’t be seeing ANY show for a long, long time like after Enterprise got cancelled.
Frankly I don’t care how well DSC, bomb or success. Above all I want it to be good. I don’t want them to sacrifice quality for pandering to get a good response so they can bankroll future seasons, as much as I want a long-running show. I’ll take one or two seasons of A+ over 7 seasons of C-.
So I am hoping the emphasis is on quality first, and the choice of prequel era is more for storytelling reasons rather than marketing.
Considering they’re changing the visuals, not including Kirk and the Enterprise, tells me maybe that’s the case.
Well yeah, I mean thats a given. And for it to succeed it usually have to be good.
My point is if it sucks and cancelled in season 2, look for an even longer wait before we see another Trek show. But if its GOOD and it does well, really well, this is CBS, we could have another Trek show within a few years time. This is the network that has made 4 CSI shows, 3 Criminal Mind shows, 4 DC shows (on the CW), etc. Another Trek show is almost guaranteed if this really does well. They just want to test the waters first if people are gunning for a Trek show like TNG and its spin offs ended up doing.
Honestly Nick Meyer himself, when asked at a convention this fall as to why they put it in the TOS era said, simply that they picked it because they thought they had the most freedom to operate within the established canon. Boom, easy as that. There’s plenty of room to play. Literally one episode [or a two-part episode] of canonical prime timeline Trek takes place in the 2250s. It’s more or less a blank slate.
Well I have no idea why he would say that because it makes no sense. I mean in this period they can’t even show you the Romulans because it was established in TOS no one in Starfleet even knew what they looked like. That wasn’t an issue in the later films and shows. I mean sure, they have freedoms but its silly to say its when they have the most freedom when you have people arguing if an advanced 300 year old ship should have buttons on its console or not.
@Tiger – why do you need to see the Romulans? By the way, what year would you like the series to take place because I have a newsflash, you cant show the Romulans for very long post Nem either…(hint: their planet gets destroyed).
LOL why do I need to ‘see’ the Roumulans? Uh because seeing the characters face the other characters are kind of what is done in story telling.
And you assume because Romuluos was destroyed that ALL Romulans are dead? Seriously? The Romulans are a big empire and colonized many worlds. That is the entire point of the neutral zone. This isn’t Earth today, they are all over the place. Sure I’m guessing they lost a great deal of their people like the Vulcans lost theirs when Vulcan was destroyed but like those people there would still be plenty of Romulans around regardless. That would be an interesting story line to see, what would have happened to the Romulans and their relationship to the Federation. Do they go ahead like the Klingons did and find a truce after Praxis was destroyed or do they isolate themselves more? Even blame the Federation like Nero did. Would be a great story to tell the day we get a show or film to highlight this period again.
Tiger – Im saying why does the show have to have Romulans? Its a creative choice, if they choose not to show Romulans, so be it. But in this time period, Romulans exist. Why cant they have Romulans on the show? Just because the crew cant see them (per canon), doesnt mean we cant.
I can care less if we never see the Romulans. I’m arguing against Meyer’s argument that this period would give them the MOST freedom in terms of canon. The fact you can’t even show one of the most important villains in this period without doing some crazy acrobats to explain it kind of goes against that point, thats all.
And for the record they had the Romulans on Enterprise but it was the same problems. They obviously had problems present them as foes but yet had to keep them hidden at the same time. A few episodes, sure, but after awhile it will get old. And to be honest its probably why so many writers avoid the Romulan war period because they know its something fans want to see but then they are tied to the ridiculous canon of presenting an war where you never see your enemy. Of course there was talk fifth season of Enterprise was suppose to start it but maybe they would’ve retconned it.
I would be fine if all of that was retconned for Discovery so we can just see them normally like we did from TOS to Voyager.
@Tiger – but I just explained to you why you’re wrong. Starfleet has interacted with Romulans by this point so there is no canon violation in including Romulans in the story. What’s your point again?
If you had said Borg, I’d be more open to your position. Then again, Enterprise ret-conned Borg to appearing earlier. So thats not an issue either.
It could be that within a science fiction TV show, nothing is off limits when told in a compelling and interesting way.
I could say most of the same things you said, only swap TOS for TNG/VOY/DS9… Except that I don’t want to speak for everyone. The problem I see with going forward, is that it gets pretty boring without a lot of changes. It would have to be set far enough ahead so it’s not the same thing as those three series. Look at “Endgame”, it was early 25th century and it looked only slightly different. You’d have to get away from that entire aesthetic for it to be interesting again. But then the problem becomes the technological development. “Treknobabble” has already been a huge problem. And there’s only so many ways you can use the main freakin’ deflector to get out of a situation. Go further ahead, you amplify this problem, because technology can solve all the issues that are encountered. This doesn’t have to be the case, but it’s the precedent that has been set. Voyager would have been a heck of a lot more interesting if it didn’t rely on tech to fix everything, or other contrived plot devices to hit the reset button. “Year of Hell” was great. That should have been what the whole series was like, because the consequences would be real and lasting, and that creates real character development. But instead they reset everything, created a safe bubble for the ship to coast back to the alpha quadrant in, and thus character development was forced. This is why we ended up with Chakotay and Seven of Nine dating in the end. The writers were running out of things to do with the characters because they weren’t being challenged. I just worry that anything post-Nemesis would end up worsening these same problems, because it doesn’t seem like there’s enough creativity left in the franchise, or at least not enough creative freedom. Star Trek has become quite stagnant, but going forward in time isn’t enough to change that. Honestly, what would be best is a complete reboot of everything. Otherwise we just have to admit we’re beating a dead horse and it’s not going to get much better. At least going backwards offers the ability to get away from the deus ex machina plots, and perhaps focus more on stories and characters.
The problem I see with going forward, is that it gets pretty boring without a lot of changes.
That’s precisely what i’ve been trying to say, but not putting it as simply as you did. lol.
But yes, a galactic reset, a major change in the status quo would be needed to make it compelling. The technology is a big part of that. When things are so advanced as to take away all drama– medicine that can cure any disease, weapons that can obliterate entire planets, shields that can defend against entire fleets, engines that can traverse a quadrant in a week, replicators that can create anything you need at the push of a button… it becomes more difficult to create drama and tension when everything is so easy.
And such a dramatic story change to reset things would take away everything noticeable about Trek, and essentially make it set pre-TOS anyway!
@Torch – its funny because a lot of people wanting a post-Nemesis series also wanted some sort of galactic shift, like Earth defeated or thrust back into a less technologically advanced age.
So they wanted the series to say it was 2500 but act like it was 2200. Really weird.
I find post Nemesis boring. And as a writer I’d hate to deal with the technology aspects I’d have to cut through to get to good stories. You take the tech of Nemesis and the tech that now exists today in 2017 and try to extrapolate a series beyond Nem and you end up needing convoluted plot contrivances to explain why tech doesnt solve every problem.
And if you do that, like have a damaged ship in deep space, or some sort of war that blasts the Fed back a few hundred years, you’ve undermined the whole point of going post Nem.
Those people fail to see the storytelling benefits of going “inter-franchise”. The idea we know how it all ends isnt true at all. We know Kirk’s Enterprise survives. But this show isnt about Kirk’s Enterprise. We know the Klingons eventually become pals, but so what? In fact, there is far more Trek with the Klingons as buddies then not actually…
One of the dumbest posts I’ve ever read. This crazy notion that any series past Nemesis would mean technological advances so great there wouldn’t be any room for story telling or drama is just baffling and laughable. It must take a really limited mind to think this way. Thankfully many a great science fiction writers have kept pushing forward into the future and creating exciting, fresh stories within their own created universes. Go do some research of all the great science fiction series out there. Even a science fantasy movie series like Star Wars won’t set up an artificial barrier that they cant cross. When your mind is so limited where you think the only way a franchise can go forward is to go backwards you need to open your mind a bit. I guarentee Gene Roddenberry wouldn’t agree with your take on things. If he did he wouldn’t have set TNG 80 years after TOS. Star Trek is about the future not the past. You still have one quadrant of the Milky Way galaxy unexplored and billions of other galaxies out there. Why not go intergalactic post nemesis? The best Sci fi video game series out right now, Mass effect, is doing just that with their next game. Star Trek online is still going strong and is one of the top MMORPGs out there right now which is pretty incredible given the bad reviews that game got. And guess what? That explores the Trek universe post Nemesis. Post Nemesis book series like Titan are also very popular. There’s an unlimited number of story telling options when you go post nemesis. Maybe the federation’s technology development has stagnated. Maybe only a few advances have been made. It doesn’t have to be this crazy thing where the federation develops technology to the point of being invulnerable or you have to regress them back to the Stone Age post Nemesis for it to be intriguing. What’s with these two extremes? The lack of creative thinking on this site is astonishing. PS- The only reason I’ve been so rude to you in this post is I’ve read and have seen the utter lack of respect you show others on here who don’t agree with you.
Read your post again and then mine wont be the dumbest you’ve read. Also, wall of text makes for a difficult read. Paragraphs are your friend.
The only people I am “rude” to are the ones who are either rude, ignorant or bigoted. And I will respond in kind. For example, you dont deserve a quality reply from me. Thus, you wont get one. If you try to muster the skill and maturity to reply in a reasonable way, even if we disagree, I will do the same. And it will be a nice convo.
No one said you CAN’T tell stories with advanced technology. But it take a lot more work, and you are limited in the types of stories you can tell.
For example, look at TOS. Technology wasn’t even that advanced, it was just outer-space versions of what already existed: warp drives just allowed them to visit planets, phasers were just futuristic pistols, transporters just allowed them to get from ship to planet without a shuttle.
But by post-NEM you had borg tech that could cure any disease, torpedoes that could obliterate entire fleets, replicators that made economy meaningless, and all sorts of things that made it more challenging to tell a wide range of compelling stories without a story editor saying “nah, that’s not going to work, because they have tech that can make it pointless.”
Remember that Trek needs to stay true to its storytelling style. So while Books like the Foundation series can tell fascinating stories in uber-advanced civilizations, they may not be the stories that they want for Trek, and remember that Trek needs to tell potentially upwards of 20 stories a year.
So… not impossible, but certainly more challenging. And right now, with the first Trek series in 10 years, is not the time to try to do something too challenging.
I do, however, expect they will one day continue post nemesis.
Engineering bolt insignia with a blue uniform? SACRILEGE!
I’m honestly stoked to see this. I was beginning to wonder if production would ever actually begin… now we have video proof! LLAP
Guys, I have to say, with whats going on in this world, this is the perfect time for real Star Trek again. With likes of Nick Meyer etc contributing: this will be great. Best wishes to the cast and crew in Toronto. Here’s to science fiction with depth as well as action adventure.
Many thanks B Kramer!
Very welcome Silver.
Version with narration:
Version with narration:
Thank you, I detest geo-blocking.
Very welcome Richard.
Very welcome Richard.
The new uniform looks sweet. I was hopping for a uniform simaller to the one from Beyond. The gold lines look sweet i like that idea. Really looking forward to seeing the comand gold uniforms. I hope those aliens uniform/armour is klingon mabey a more midevil look tot he Klingons fro Next Generation.
TOS fanboy by any chance?
@Mark – what are you? TNG Fanboy? Orci Fanboy? Sucking-on-exhaust-pipe fanboy?
A fanboy of a show set in an unknown future, not a fanboy of a “here’s what happened before all that”.
@Mark – what show is that? Also, is the 2200’s a “known” future? lol
The universe is big. There are 100 billion stars in the Milky Way. Assuming they’ve only charted like 5% by this period, and I don’t know 50% by the time DS9 and VOY’s forays into the Gamma and Delta quadrants pass, that’s still 5 billion stars in the mid-23rd century, 50 billion by 2379. We’ve only seen a tiny fraction of that in all the Star Trek that’s ever been produced. We still don’t know much of anything from any period of Star Trek.
No im 31 and grew up with TNG. I have only seen maby one episode of TOS if that.but I love every trek there has been. I am just a big fan of scfi.
Other then the TOS seeing how I have not watched and episodes other then the DS9 episode that went back in time to the TOS episoed with the tribals ball things
Well, it looks to me that the Discovery isn’t copper/gold colored anymore. Thank heavens.
I’d argue that wasn’t the color that was the problem with the ‘Discovery’…it was it’s actual ship DESIGN that was the problem!
I can’t believe all the negative comments on here. Well, actually I can because this is the internet. Oh and By the way, I do plan on PAYING for this new series Because I love Star Trek. Regardless of what happens with the production value, the cannon violations that will be debated for decades, and the medium it is presented to us in, The world needs Star Trek more than ever and with the writing staff they have assembled I am 100% confident that a great story will be told.
Shame it’s a prequel which have caused large numbers to turn off before it’s even begun shooting.
Good thing it’s a prequel so that large numbers of fans get excited even before shooting!
Large numbers don’t even know it is a prequel. Relax.
Funnier still, large numbers don’t even care. Today’s viewers want quality storytelling, and don’t care whether something is a prequel or not.
Better Call Saul, Hannibal, Wet Hot American Summer 2, Bates Motel, Gotham, and Fear The Walking Dead are all prequels that have been well-received and accepted by audiences.
Again, audiences want quality, end of story.
Literally all Trek that’s come out in the past 8 years [i.e. some of the highest grossing films in the series] has had the TOS uniforms. The casual viewer watching this will see TOS uniforms and realize what it is. They don’t think of it as a prequel. They’ll think of it as Star Trek, the Star Trek most familiar to most people in this day and age. It’s a brilliant move.
Yeah the KT uniforms were fine and they updated them a little. I really loved the uniforms in Beyond though. They made them look more sophisticated.
I’m not excited of it being a prequel but I’m excited its Star Trek regardless. I can care less how much it matches TOS, most of us DON’T want a prequel because we don’t want this thing to look like some archaic looking 1960 nostalgia piece instead of looking more bold and progressive. But I was never worried about that because A. Fuller said from the beginning it would look more updated and B. The KT films proved long ago that you can actually update it to modern day sensibilities and people will accept it. It was no way they were going to suddenly go back to some outdated look after you had $150+ million sleek films with modern day sets to compete with. Whatever Discovery looks like its going to look much closer to the look of the KT design than TOS. And it should to keep it consistent with those films since they are both being made around the same time. Yeah I know different universe, but that doesn’t mean much end of the day. Audiences want to feel like they are seeing a future 300 years from now from their perspective, not from the 60s perspective.
As for the All Access thing if its good more people will be paying to watch it than not.
Glad someone out there is looking at this in an optimistic light. I have to admit, I was actually hoping for a complete franchise Reboot. Star Trek needs it. Our understanding of Science has evolved, our technology has obviously evolved to the point where things that were bad ass in the 60’s: Communicator, Tricorder and so on look archaic and redundant. Communicators obviously are related to cell phones but now a Cell Phone can be many things we’ve seen in trek throughout the years. a Cell phone can now be a PAD, Communicator, information data base, Tricorder, it just keeps going. Star Trek is popular because its not Science Fantasy, Its Science Fiction. It is a projection of where Humanity is going, in my mind that’s what truly separates it from Star Wars. I’m okay with them Updating the look of the time period.
As far as anyone dissing it for not being on TV. F that noise. TV is going the way of the dinosaurs. Even Data remarked in an earlier season of TNG that Television fizzled away in Trek’s 21st century. We should be proud that Star Trek was chosen to spearhead all access. All Access is CBS’s first attempt to evolve beyond the television medium. its fitting.
In TNG’s The Measure of a Man, in 1989, it’s funny to hear them boast about the 24th century android’s abilities, that hardly seem impressive by today’s standards.
The helmet looks like it could be a motion capture rig for the actor.
Im having trouble seeing the differences in the Discovery ship from the original teaser. It still looks awful to me. The other ship looks cool.
Seeing speculation that the plot involves a Klingon sleeper ship and those alien uniforms are “ancient” Klingons. Hmmm, TUC as a touchstone, eh? A deep space mission where they discover these klingons and everyone is forced to work together?
Let the speculation begin! I kind of like the idea of a standalone single season story that forces two enemies to work together. Lots of interesting dramatic possibilites. Two opposing ships out to uncover some big secret in deep space, and decide to work together to get to the heart of the mystery.
Maybe the villains are the Romulans, and the story will end with the Klingon/Romulan alliance we saw in TOS…
But now that you mention those Klingons as possibly being from an Ancient sleeper ship, I feel a bit better about their design!
That’s been my assumption of the direction of the show. I guess most of it comes from those leaked designs from last year, especially the “Klingon sarcophagus.” I think maybe the sleeper ship has a communicable disease on it or something. I imagine archaeology will factor in heavily.
Perhaps the Discovery is an ancient ship as well, which would make sense as to why it looks terrible (and is an “older” concept design). Maybe they are all on the Shenzhou to begin with and the “Discovery” in the name is because they have to find that ship.
I’m excited about this – I know every tiny little thing seems to get criticised and every seems pissed off because the show doesn’t look like it was made in 1956 (10 years before Kirk!) – But, come on… I for one want Star Trek to be around for another 50 years – I don’t care as much about what everything “looks” like, I want good stories about reflect humanity in the way Star Trek has (almost) always done. I’m excited – and I will embrace any change in costume, set design, continuity – and if I don’t like the show, I wont bitch and complain – I will watch The Original Series or TNG – Because No One is RUINING Anything – TOS will still be here, they not deleting anything created before… They are just adding their take of the franchise and I hope it is different and unique and relevant and I hope that people that have never seen any Star Trek watch it and love it and maybe, finally, go back and discover some of the older stuff and appreciate what came before…
Well said gazzy :) I’m looking forward to seeing what they do with it, that little vid has got me excited!
Good stories are important, but I care what it looks like too. I actually think if they went with a made in 50s look it would be cool.
digging the royal blue shirt. And I do love the ship….because it is DIFFERENT !!!!!
“It’s never gonna be released”
“I have serious doubts whether the show will ever be made”
Ahaha, keep those doom comments coming!
Why are people still saying this??
I mean they been hiring actors for months now. Do people think it was just to troll? You don’t get someone like Michelle Yeoh and pluck her out of China unless you actually plan to use her.
I don’t want this to happen but maybe all of the uniforms will be blue like they were on George Kirk’s Starship in the beginning of the JJ Trek movies. I personally love the uniforms from Beyond I would like to see a mixture of those. Someone said maybe these are the dress uniforms I don’t think so because I still like the color would look different on a dress uniform
Alright, not bad, not bad. Looks promising. Keep it coming CBS. Tell some great compelling stories with great characters and please promote the hell outta this thing and make me believe in Trek TV again. Great start IMO and a very nice little teaser.
@Harry – Whaaaaat?
I’ve had some serious doubts, this alleviates that a bit. I do want it to do well and this shows me a small glimpse that things are indeed heading in the right direction. Much much better than the CGI ship reveal a few months back.
Looks like Discovery is gonna be fighting Necromongers! You keep what you kill!!
Engineering insignia on science uniform.
Noticed that too. My guess is that all the uniforms are blue in much the same way as the Enterprise (prequel) jumpsuits were all blue with department colors being on the shoulders. Maybe all the uniforms are blue. :(
You’re assuming thats a science uniform. Its 10 years before TOS, a lot could change obviously.
Go look at memory alpha for uniforms and insignia from this period. You’ll see some very interesting things happening with insignia and department color. As far as canon goes, there’s plenty of room for interpretation.
I woke up today a happily married man, with a job I love that pays well. It was a sunny and beautiful day. I had a wonderful night’s sleep. I felt such gratitude for my life.
Then I saw this promo video.
I went into work, and got fired after 27 years on the job. I was so upset and I really needed to talk to my wife and get support. I came home. Instead of supporting me, I caught her in bed with another man.
Then it started raining outside really hard.
If it wasn’t for Star Trek Discovery none of these bad things would have happened. Everything on this promo looks horrible. Star Trek Discovery is very very bad.
Gary, just use your pen thingy thing to fix everything. LLAP
While I tend to be skeptical of these things, this looks verrry interesting. The only things I don’t like include that “scaly-plates” suit pic at the top of the page. Too much of a Giger-esque ugly-arse ALIEN(S) look. And the stupidly-too-futuristic-looking “Akiraprise” ship on the computer screen. But hey, at least it’s not just another screwy fanfilm from the pickpocket quadrant.
Oh dear, its that time of the year again… Time to break out this rant:
There are times when I can sympathize with the views of the so-called “Purists” of the Trek fandom. They treat this 1960’s series as some sort of infallible gospel that symbolizes the perfection of classic hardcore sci-fi. However, this view is merely an opinion, not fact. The overzealous glorification of The Original Series (TOS) should not become the be-all and end-all of what constitutes Star Trek.
I can understand that TOS should be respected and admired, but there are times when people take it too far. There is no such thing as “real” Star Trek or “true” fans. That is just some made-up technical drivel meant to fragment Trekkies into idiotic warring tribes. I will never understand why some fanboys have this misguided obligation to “educate” the non-believers into submitting to their absolute belief that TOS is the only Trek worth paying attention to. All the others, by their “standard” is just crass, derivative, mainstream dumbed-down hogwash.
Some Trekkies just have this pathetic sense of self-entitlement. Clearly, TOS should be the standard where all other spin-offs are measured, but my god, it won’t always be perfect. Every pedantic little detail, continuity error or aesthetic direction should not affect your enjoyment of Gene Roddenberry’s greatest legacy. Canon, reboot, prequel and continuity are just words, never let them get to your head. I’m not saying we should lower our standards and expectations, but being an uptight by-the-book dogmatic nitpicker isn’t helpful either. Star Trek is fundamentally an entertainment franchise, try to remember that it will never always go your way.
“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.
“Better for me, better for you. It’s better for them… Think about it.”
– James T. Kirk, Star Trek IV
Time for you to watch Nemesis. LLAP
Lot’s to enjoy in Nemesis. My then girlfriend, now wife, watched it with me in the cinema and as a non-Trekkie, totally enjoyed it.
Happy for you. I took my Godson to see it and we were both pretty disappointed in that one.
Thanks, more Trek for me to enjoy ;) I actually do like it, in the same way I like Star Trek V. There are certainly enjoyable aspects in both films.
The funny thing is with Star Trek V, my main problem was the effects. Other than that, it felt like a third season episode. ;^)
Jetfreak-7, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post and I agree with you wholeheartedly.
This part is especially true to all the naysayers – KEEP AN OPEN MIND! Being closed minded and arrogant goes completely against what Star Trek actually stands for.
Having an open mind should pretty much be a life philosophy actually.
I like when those that think they are smarter then everyone else come along and try to belittle those they disagree with as “fanboys”. You’re not a fanboy? Posting on a Star Trek message board? lol Yeah right.
There are far more people here in this thread whining about the fanboys and TOS-lovers than there are “fanboys” (in the negative sense) and TOS-lovers). Its like you people need to create an opposition so you can rant about them. Just relax.
Canon is important and should be respected. Its how you build a rich and deep universe and pay things off over time. if you dont understand that, save yourself the embarrassment of posting.
Just because some choose a more optimistic view where others choose otherwise, it does not make one less of a fanboy. Good or bad, we are all fanboys.
Speaking of canon, there are tons of contradictions throughout all the different Trek series. It simply comes down to writers not remembering every single detail from 100s of hours of storytelling. Mistakes will happen, it’s something that will never go away. And that’s okay.
End of the day, generating new interest in Trek and bringing new fans on board is essential to the long term survival of the franchise. We need new customers, even – and I will say it – if it affects canon.
To put it into perspective – I work with many young people under the age of 25. When we talk movies and Star Trek comes up, the majority actually like the JJ-verse films but are not even bothered about everything that has come before it. One colleague went as far as saying he tried watching some of the older films and ‘couldn’t stand it.’
Trek unfortunately needs to adapt, or it will die. Catering for us old time hardcore fans is not sustainable neither is it good business.
Thank you for your sane, rational perspective, Doc.
Well I have to say I liked everything I seen so far EXCEPT the ship Discovery itself. It still looks ugly as hell to me. Everything else though, from the interior to the uniform looks like your classic Star Trek look with an updated feel (for this time period). So I’m happy what I seen, including the other ship. Why can’t THAT be Discovery? Oh well. I’m hopeful though we are going to get a good show and its just so exciting we now have a new crew and cast of characters to travel with. I like the KT films but yeah I’m one of those guys that want as many new characters for Trek as much as possible. Expand the universe!
The pip is clearly to help an action figure stand up.
The pip is weird. Is it a button, indicating these are communication devices? Was the one shown an ensign and higher ranks will have more pips (might look awfully crowded).
Seems too small to be a button. Seems like a design element. May be a groove or a ridge, rather than a pip.
Let Frakes direct and give Jeffrey Combs a full time role please!!!
As much as I love both those guys… no. New blood is needed.
No offense but I don’t get how this works then? People applauded bringing back Nic Meyer who last involvement with Star Trek was literally 25 years ago and Fuller who also been with Trek since Voyager. In fact people sound like the more veteran Trek writers the better. So I don’t see how Frakes directing an episode would be a big deal, especially since we know in TV directing it all looks pretty standard end of the day.
Combs however I have to agree only because he already has made two very popular characters. I like him too but making another might be pushing it.
New blood in front of the camera. As for Frakes, I never felt he was a great director. A competent one, but not so great you need to bring him back.
Frakes strengths were in understanding the relationships between the characters. I thought First Contact showed a very natural and familiar interaction between them. He brought to the fore the casts’ natural affinity for one another. He found something interesting for the entire ensemble.
I think he’d be very good at a TV series where you have even more time to develop relationships. Star Trek excels when the characters have those natural relationships. TNG and DS9 really captured that. Voy and Enterprise were a bit more forced.
Frakes worked because he knew the characters so well. That’s pretty much it. Beyond that, he was only ever a competent director. I don’t know anything about the new directors, but I have no such special fondness for Frakes as a director to want him to return. I wouldn’t mind him being called in for an episode, but I don’t get the love for him behind the camera.
The guy directing the first episode had directed a lot of generic CBS shows. I’m not putting him down but I think I would love to have someone like Frakes any day.
I love the new Delta shield. It’s different enough that it could be a variant symbol for a different ship.
So glad we’re finally seeing some production progress. I am not a fan of the Discovery ship design but everything in this video gets my stamp of approval. Looks terrific!
Looking good. I can’t wait to see this!
I don’t give a rats about all the bs and hate. You can all get stuffed as far as I am concerned :) It’s Star Trek, It’s Star Trek in yet another form. Big deal! If you have already decided that you are not interested go read other posts and pour out your vitriol and comments somewhere else. We get it, you feel jilted. You know what? no one owes you anything.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is indeed in full effect here as it has been for so many years.
I don’t care whether it’s canon, what the uniforms look like or which timeline this fits in. This is brand new Star Trek, people!! I for one am ecstatic and will pay to watch it. Have been a Trek fan for over 40 years now and always will be.
When they said ‘we know we want a woman and we KNOW we DON’T WANT A WHITE WOMAN’ they lost me. For good and forever.
When I was young, Id go to the bar and once in awhile I’d say the same thing to myself! Diversity is good!
Awww. Sad when racists can’t get their way. Boo hoo. 🙂
So saying “we don’t want a white woman” is not racist Luke?
No it’s not racist at all. It’s saying that they want the characters on the show to reflect the population… and that means not showing the minority of white people in positions of representation and power and further excluding people of color (the VAST majority of the planet’s population.) Get with the future. It doesn’t look like your current contemporary white supremacist society. :)
Just saying “I don’t want [insert race]” is not inherently racist. There could be many reasons, some perfectly valid, not to want a particular race. Someone may not want to see a woman or a black man as a captain because it’s been done before. They may prefer an Indian, an Asian, or heck even an alien race in the captain’s chair, for the sake of seeing something new.
Saying “I don’t want a woman captain, I prefer men because no woman would ever make a good commander. Keep the women in the mess hall” is sexist. Saying “Keep blacks off the bridge, they’re all thugs” is racist. Saying “No gays, please, they’re disgusting” is homophobic.
But the desire in and of itself is not inherently hateful.
Me? I like the diversity. A gay character is loooong overdue for Trek. Women, minorities, whatever, keep Trek diverse. IDIC.
I am really looking forward to this.
I’m still not excited by the ship design. The first time I saw the Enterprise “D” on the cover of a VHS tape (how I first got to watch the series) I cried! I couldn’t believe my Star Trek was back! Since then I loved Voyager, thought of the Defiant as a ‘sports car’and the NX-o1 as a great first ship. The Discovery …. gee I hope it looks better i action.
Yeah I think we all do. Its kind of funny the biggest consensus about the show so far is that the ship looks bad. And its not just a cosmetic issue, it just doesn’t look like it fits in Star Trek. It obviously has to be some kind of experimental/prototype ship because the second ship we seen on that video looks more like your standard Starfleet ship. The only issue I heard with that one is it may look a little too advanced for the time period. Well I’ll take that over Discovery Klingon’s hybrid any day.
What if its an old ship? We’re making assumptions and speculating about “old” or sleeper ship Klingons. What if the Shenzou is the Federation ship sent out on a deep space mission. Finds the sleeper Klingons and old Federation ship. Perhaps it was the first super deep space exploration ship. Maybe the point of the season is to “discover” the Discovery.
It would allign with the design of Discovery being an “old” design for the Enterprise.
You could be right but I actually heard a different theory/idea on another board. And that maybe either Discovery or the Shenzou (maybe both) actually came from another time period. Some people are now suggesting the split in the insignia on the uniform (and in the logo) has a deeper meaning and either its because they are on a special mission or simply a ship from the future. NOW if this is true then the Discovery would make a lot more sense obviously. And its been noted the other ship we saw (people are theorizing is the Shenzou) as said looks more advanced than what is normally in this period. So that ship could be from the 24th century or above as well.
Obviously 100% speculation but it would make a lot of since why the Discovery looks so out of place in this period at least. I think that would be an amazing idea if this show was really about ships in different time periods on a mission. Something Star Trek has never done before.
Yeah but that’s a real mess for canon. We know there’s temporal agents (unfortunately). We know Daniels secretly gave Archer assignments (even more unfortunately), but to actually authorize a joint mission between the past and future crews where so much could be changed, or information leaked from the future accidentally is too big a risk and makes no sense with what we know should be happening. And frankly, I really don’t want to see another temporal cold war … I suffered through it once on Enterprise, and that was plenty.
Again only speculation but it doesn’t mean any future ship is purposely working with a ship of the past or that’s any kind of ‘war’ involved. It could be nothing more than repairing something in history that was changed and one ship discovered the other one.
But Fuller said there is no time travel in the story but then again they also said there was no time travel in Generations. Its all how you phrase it I guess. Nothing may come of it but yes it WOULD explain how two ships that doesn’t look like they belong in the period exists at least.
Or Discovery could just be a Section 31 built ship in this period with advance tech that’s also rumored. Anyway speculation is what makes Star Trek fun!
I didnt get the impression the Discovery looked futuristic. It looked “old”. To me if you said the Discovery was a 100 year old ship lost in deep space, I’d think it makes more sense.
But you never know. Wasnt there speculation about the “Lt Commander” being long lived because the character would advance through different era? Time traveller?
Its hard because if you tell me there is time travel, Im thinking oh God, they will screw this up like Enterprise did. But time travel has produced some of the best Trek.
But like said above, it DOES screw with canon a lot. And I think if you arent careful, you risk alienating the audience. I think one of the issues with the JJ films when it comes to Trek fans was, they didnt care about it like it was “real” Trek because it wasnt. They started out by saying that this universe is a pretend one and nothing here matters.
CBS shouldnt make that mistake. Playing in the Kirk TOS sandbox is genius if done right.
And why are temporal agents bad? I think it only make sense to stop timeline incursions…especially as Kirk was the worst of them. 17 temporal violations! They probably created the agency just to keep that dude in check. ;)
To each his own. I hate the Enterprise D. I have since I first saw it on Prime Time syndicated TV in the 80s. CRT video resolution of the time did it no favors either. And it looke no better in GEN either, which by the way, many fans cheered the destruction of in the theaters. I admit it looks better in restored HD, but it’s still a horribly misguided effort in my opinion.
The Ent-D will always be “my” enterprise. The original Enterprise, while revolutionary and a classic, was never a favorite of mine.
Lets be honest, the other federation ship looks just like the one from Anaxar; that and among other factors contributed to CBS suing the producer. Maybe thats why the writer of the article didnt point it out?
Most likely somebody pointed that out earlier in the comments, but I aint got time to go through 200+ comments.
Actually it’s an old John Eaves design which he appears to be using for this project:
Its a good looking ship. And would make sense as a transition between Enterprise and TOS…although more Enterprise than TOS to be honest. But perhaps its an older ship.
I’m a big Axanar fan but the ship looks more like a Star Trek Online ship than the ship from Axanar (that has an extreme TOS aesthetic). It would be like saying that the Ares looks too similar an Akira or the NX from Enterprise. The discovery ship just looks obviously Federation if anything.
@PEB – You got it. The ship was a pre-production idea by John Eaves from the early days of Star Trek Online.
Will people please shut up about that awful fan film already? Jeeezus.
yeah. The ship looks like a ship from Axanar which looks like countless ships from Star Trek but CBS ripped off Axanar? lol Enough with that illegal theft. Someone steals your car, they dont get to keep driving it because they like it.
New Ships, New Uniforms and more. Hurra!
So many negative comments. The first Trek series to suffer the wrath of internet commentators! Imagine the hate TNG would have got if the internet had been around in the way it is today back in 1986/87.
So true. I remember going to the movies to see Star Trek: Generations with my mom when I was younger. So many TOS fans in the audience even then after the long run of TOS who were openly saying “I’m only here to see Kirk and Scotty.” “I don’t know anything about Next Gen, I’ve only watched a few episodes. They’re not as good as the old crew.”
I guess we just have to go through this with every generation of Trek. Some are just bound to say “my Trek was real Trek and this new stuff doesn’t cut it.”
To parahprase Spock and kirk in STUC..
Spock: Jim the old TOS fans are dying
Kirk: then let them!
Statements like this have no class whatsoever. Literally wishing death on older Trek fans because they don’t necessarily agree with you? That is sad, and frankly pretty disgusting. Yeah, what a ‘great’ fan you are. The future of Trek clearly needs more ‘fans’ like you in it.
Dan I agree. Tos is still going strong out of all the Treks.
What’s funny is, its the Anti-TOS crowd that is desperately clinging to any idea that TOS is dying off.
The film franchise unceremoniously dumped the TNG era in favour of TOS. The TV franchise chose to go with the general TOS era also. Yup, TOS is dying.
TNG was argualbly midhandled in the later movies.. just saying.
It was a reference to the moany folk who keep whining abouut “oh this show is going to be so shit”, and based on the era its set in tends to be the TOS hardcore who are worried about canon abnormalities.
Actually the most moany people about it are the ones who hate TOS and have an odd love of Voyager for some reason.
Oh stop being such a square and lighten up, “Literally” nothing to cry about here.
I’d be a lot more excited it it was being shown on a non-subscription channel.
Id be even more excited if CBS beamed it directly into my brain while I slept. Even less effort required on my part!
@ TUP: Maybe wait to see if the show is good before asking to have it beamed directly into your brain. Otherwise, you could end up with some very bad nightmares :-)
Done deal, time to move on.
I am so excited for a new Star Trek show I am 31 years old and grew up watching the Next Generation Deep Space Nine an Voyager. I also watched Enterprise wanted to love it but had a hard time with it until I rewash it on Netflix last year and then wished it was still on. I have maybe watch one episode of the original series show which was actually not even a regional series episode it was the DS9 episode that went back in time two Kirk’s time period. I have mentioned this already but I love what we’ve seen of the new uniform even though it’s such a small glimpse of it. The idea of a new uniform new symbols and badges really just knew everything is very exciting to me. With people saying that they’re not going to pay the money this evening new show I can understand that even though it’s only about $6 a month. I know I will have to try to justify that to my wife I mean having three kids a fourth one on the way car payment house mortgage to justify to her to pay for a channel to watch just one show is a little ridiculous. Especially when I already have Netflix but you can only watch on Netflix if you’re from out of the states. on to other things the alien armor looking thing I hope is a badass Klingon warrior battel armour.
Sorry I meant to post the alien looking Armour which I hope this is Klingon. But that blue fedaration uniform is beautiful.
Are you really 31?
Haha yea why bc I suck at spelling.
I really like that blue. I hope the overall aesthetic is very much a uniform and not pajamas. I think it’s why I like the dress uniforms of TOS and the latter uniforms of TNG etc. They all went from just looking like a costume to looking like a believable uniform.
I can’t agree with you anymore. I myself have always been big into uniforms military, police, expecially the different Star Trek uniform the thwy have had throughout the years
Brian you’re spot on! Even as a kid I gravitated toward the TOS film uniforms. They looked the most realistic/practical and similar to you, I’ve always loved real-world and film/tv uniforms as well.
Thanks PEB do you remember the Star Trek magazine that came out late 90s early 2000 when it was a much bigger magazine. I don’t know if they still have that magazine out. They had a spread of all the uniforms throughout the years it was fantastic
A Star Trek made in the age of Millennials. The chances are it will not be good. Just a big PC agenda, Social Justice Warrior platform mess.
God I hope not. The pwopl3 making the show are not millennials. The rumors i have seen say it will be taking place guring a federation klingon war. If thats the case ylu can’t really be PC in a war setting.
I’m trying to parse your reply. Standing up for progressive values is fine in peacetime, but if war should occur, we need to throw respect for other people, human rights, and centuries of legal and constitutional precedent out the window? If you do that, then what are you fighting *for?*
With the great talent that they have lined up going back to the original, the odds are against this. One of the smartest moves they made: recruiting people like Meyer, Fuller, Roddenberry etc.
Trek has traditionally had a liberal PC agenda.
Ted no offense but how are you even a Trekkie when TREK has always been about being PC in the best ways possible? TOS and TNG ring a bell?
I have beeen a Trekki my hole life and never have i been described as being a libral or PC.
Brian, “political correctness” is a term used by authoritarian bullies to shut down discussion, particularly when minority groups have the gumption to ask for respect. If you replace the words “PC” with “treating people with respect,” you start to see how thin the arguments of those bullies are. “Liberal” is another one of those words that authoritarian bullies tries to use as a knee-jerk reaction against people who try to advance the causes of fairness, equality, and reason. The United States of America was *founded* on liberal ideas, by people who (at the time) would have been considered liberals. (This is leaving out the small-L sense of ‘liberal’ in economics, i.e. someone who believes in a totally free market with no to little government intervention…) The Founders rejected the idea of a king who ruled by divine right — something that had been in process anyway since the Parliament of Regency England curtailed the influence of the Royal Family on British politics — and believed in an elected, representative government. Most weren’t religious in the modern-day understanding; none were even mildly fundamentalist like many of today’s conservatives. At least one, Benjamin Franklin, was even a scientist! You know, who believes in the scientific method, trial and error, and believing in empirical facts instead of ideology. Star Trek is profoundly liberal in origin: – The Federation is a representative democracy with a Parliament, a constitution, treaties, etc, NOT an empire with colonial ambitions on neighbouring territories. – Rather than conquering by force, they negotiate. If a species or world doesn’t want to join, they go away! – Starfleet’s primary missions are exploration, science and diplomacy, and only secondarily defence. They are far closer to NASA plus the UN peacekeepers, than the US Navy. – The Prime Directive ensures non-interference and avoids cultural contamination. They don’t offer membership until a species is warp-capable, at which point they would have made first contact anyway. That’s a 180-degree turn away from ‘Manifest Destiny’ and the colonial era, which really only came to an end in the 1960s. – The Federation is made up of dozens of worlds and represents multiple species, each with their own laws, political systems, and cultural norms. Respecting and accommodating these norms (while adhering to common principles and laws) is a basic part of how the Federation operates. – They DON’T USE MONEY. It’s not even a capitalist society. Technology + the replicator plus social policy means everyone has food, shelter and healthcare. – If anything, Star Trek’s world offers a kind of radical individualism, where self-discovery and self-improvement mesh with collective goals. In episode after episode, ethical decisions come down on the so-called “liberal” side. — Kirk chooses not to kill the Gorn – mercy is a liberal idea. (TOS:”Arena”) — Kirk has to make peace with the Klingons to defeat a common enemy (TOS:”Day of the Dove”, and also in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country) — Kirk has to remind the Yangs what the words of their Constitution actually mean, rather than mindlessly repeating broken syllables (TOS:”The Omega Glory”) – i.e. ‘We the People’ — Kirk points out the ridiculousness of believing one race is better than another (TOS:”Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”); — Archer also does this for religion in ENT: “Chosen Realm.” — In TNG: “Who Watches the Watchers,” accidental cultural contamination has to be dealt with by being open, honest and scientifically true, rather than the other choice, which would have been to indeed act as if Picard was a god. — Nazis + authoritarian dictatorships are bad. Kind of obvious, but still. (TOS: “Patterns of Force”) — The idea that people of differing genders or sexualities ought to be treated equally; likewise, the idea that people can be “re-educated” to comply, which is a blow against equal treatment and individual rights. (TNG: “The Outcast,” ENT: “Cogenitor”) — The environment and endangered species need to be protected from pollution and overpopulation (ST IV: The Voyage Home, TNG:”Force of Nature,” TNG:”Home Soil”, TOS:”The Mark of Gideon”) — The sovereignty of indigenous peoples are to be respected. TNG: “Final Voyage,” re: moving the First Nations colony off their planet, and ST: Insurrection is all about protecting a native people from being moved off their world in order to accommodate a plan to mine their atmosphere. (NoDAPL, anyone?) — The rights of life forms to be recognized as sentient, even if not exactly like us (TNG:”The Measure of a Man”) — Fighting political ‘witch hunts’ or establishing loyalty tests based on nationality (TNG:”The Drumhead”) I could go on and on and on, but the point is, if you think Star Trek isn’t liberal – or at least, on the side of standing up for “PC” minorities and individual rights — then I have no idea why… Read more »
YES. Everything you said. :)
That was well said. I will be honest I didn’t read every episode and the discription of the episode but I read everything else. I never said Star Trek was nota libral show. Just said I have never been called a PC or a libral. I love Star Trek started watching it with my mother when I was a litall kid along with Star Wars. I just love scfi tv shows and movies. Thanks for putting all the effort into your response it shows you have ot of passion for Star Trek and what it represents.
What you describe can occur under a republic as well as a democracy. Just because you choose peace over war does not make you a liberal. Star Trek is more progressive than anything. Far from liberal. If it was liberal it would be Deep Space Nine, without weapons, shields, or anything that could be construed as aggressive. They would never be able to keep a “Peace-keeping” armada together, nor would they keep borders.
Star Trek is a mixture of multiple political agendas combined under one premise that sees humanity as something greater than what it is right now. You cannot describe it in liberal terms, because that simplifies the complex micro-economics, and interstellar politics involved in holding it all together. Over 150 member worlds with their own economies (even though the federation is barter-based) their own politics, etc.
Starfleet is, in and of itself responsible for defending these worlds, and is- by nature- non-political.
And while many hard-left writers have written for the franchise, it’s had it’s share of conservative, and libertarian writers.
Star Trek can never be given a blanket political background- it is exactly why the franchise is suffering right now- because of the hard-left political Hollywood elite, hell bent on force-feeding their agenda, and portraying their all-inclusive, everything’s free mentality as humanities future. Even liberal Gene Roddenberry understood this in the early days, and when he pushed his Utopian agenda in TNG, he ultimately had to take a back seat to his own creation. Star Trek and politics DO NOT mix.
You had me until you reached for the blanket pejorative of ‘hard-left political elite, bent on force-feeding an agenda’ – which, aside from being a sweeping blanket statement intended to dehumanize one’s opponent, verges on paranoid conspiracy theory, if it wasn’t patently silly. Yes, all the Hollywood directors get together to discuss their latest propaganda pushes… not. And the studios bank all their billions in order to plot the overthrow of capitalism…hardly :)
Are you familiar with the concept of the Overton window? It’s a term that describes the range of acceptable political discussion in a society. Most political scientists agree the United States’ window has moved much further to the right over the last 40 years.
What most Americans consider “hard left” is, on a global scale, barely left of center. The Democrats would be the equivalent of Conservatives most other places… and your ‘conservatives’ at the moment are much further along the axis of theocratic authoritarianism, to be blunt.
Things like equal rights for minority groups, or single-payer healthcare, are uncontroversially centrist and mainstream everywhere except in the United States. (True ‘hard left’ would be advocating for an end to private property!)
This shift is likely because of conscious efforts by the US right wing to change the discourse and reframe things to their liking (see: George Lakoff) Their use of ‘liberal!’ as a pejorative rather than a mere descriptive, the subtle reframing of who exactly is a ‘real’ American, i.e. the completely made-up battle between ‘coastal elites’ and ‘hardworking midwesterners’ – like there aren’t farmers in California, and working-class people in NYC? – or the disparagement of unions as some sort of yoke, as opposed to a tool of empowerment, just to name a couple.
All intended to pit American against American, so they don’t realize there’s a billionaire class undermining their ability to get ahead, and unite as they once did in a popular-progressive front, backed by strong unions. We may yet see national strikes return…
Brian, how long is your whole life? The way you speak and spell makes me think not very long. Or not very educated at least.
Well my hole life is a grand totally of 31 years. The way I spell probably has something to do with the fact of having attention deficit disorder and dyslexia. But hey thats ok if you what the point that stuff out I’ve dealt with it my whole life. I apologize if everything I have tiyped is not spelled correctly and the grammer is wrong.
Funny, you were actually the first person to bring up your own bad spelling. Your initial response to a comment asking if you were really 31 was “why because the way I spell?”
Yea bc I have gotten crap for it my hole life.
That’s not …very Star Trek of you.
Have you ever even watched Star Trek? All the characters are “Social Justice Warriors” with an awesome PC agenda. Deal with it. So bored with all these racist butt hurt white people (I’m white) who whine that women, LGBT people and non-white people are being represented. White men are a minority who have been in power because of the vulgar violence of sexism and racism. Glad to see other trekkers slamming your primitive backward “thinking.” Social justice warriors unite! :)
Star Trek… Social Justice Warriors for 50 years and counting! Love it!
Okay, I’ve now seen enough to let me know that I will be looking on this as a show merely set in an ‘alternate universe’, rather than the actual ‘prime timeline’ universe that the TOS show/movies are set in.
I might actually enjoy it this way, rather than getting riled up over various production stylings/’re-imaginings’.
OMG, this guy again.
*big wave* to you.
You’re free to pretend the show takes place entirely within your grandmother’s snow globe if you choose.
Of course I am TUP, and I’m adding this show to a small selection of properties which I feel the urge to ‘keep seperate’ from their original source material…despite whatever the ‘re-imaginers’ make of them. ‘Discovery’ might be classed as an ‘official’ pre-cursor to the original TOS show and it’s characters…but I’ll stick to my own ‘head canon’ which imagines it as being set in a totally seperate, unrelated ‘alternate universe’ to get the best out of it for myself. :)
Jesus man, can you sound anymore ridiculous? No one cares.
Yet you seem to care enough to complain about my thoughts on this…for a second time. No need to get bent out of shape, you enjoy the forthcoming show your way, and I’ll try to enjoy it my way.
You say this in every thread as if we haven’t heard multiple times now. It gets annoying and we can’t put you on ignore. Maybe just ignore the show or just get out of the 60s already. You TOS fanboys come off ridiculous.
I meant SOME TOS fans, not all.
Actually, I don’t post very often around these parts compared to the stream of consciousness you seem to indulge in on various topics. You seem to be overly-riled up about the fact that I have some misgivings about this forthcoming show – take a deep breath, go for a walk, think about something else…as it’s only a TV SHOW, and it doesn’t matter a jot whether we agree about it’s merits or not at the end of the day. Relax.
You’re the one who needs to take the breath. Yes its only a TV show, act like it and stop this silly nerdy ‘head canon’ you bring up every time you show up here. Everyone has got it over and over again as if we need to know this constantly. If this is what you need to do just to watch these shows and films says you way over think this stuff.
Yeah, except its not in an alternate universe. I mean, Trek fans are like dogs on a bone when it comes to Canon, myself included, but can you imagine watching Frasier and having to physically instill in yourself and others that you believe it takes place in an alternative universe to Cheers just because it changed some of its own canon?
@Cervantes – You could do what mature, rational adults do, and just wait until the show actually airs before forming such a drastic opinion. There isn’t enough yet to form any kind of informed opinion.
Sorry, but I’ll have to disagree on that point. I’ve seen more than enough now to form an informed opinion for myself – an ‘alternative universe’ show it is for me!
Anal TOS fanboy. These people still live in the 60s sadly.
Still more? Try repeating to yourself ‘It’s only a SHOW…it’s only a SHOW…’
(To be fair, I’ll promise to do the same…except I’ll add that it’s one set in an ‘alternative universe’ to TOS!)
If someone is so upset by a fictional show’s setting that they need to compartmentalize it away from the source material to enjoy it, then they have some real mental problems.
If I ever seek out a psychoanalyst, I’ll be sure to let them know about your concerns.
However, I’m not upset in the slightest…merely underwhelmed with various things I’ve seen and read about this latest ‘Star Trek’ entry so far.
As far as ‘compartmentalizing’ certain ‘re-imaginings’ of shows/movies I like, it helps to make certain things a bit more watchable for me I find…but don’t let that fact ruin your day.
Exactly! This guy doesn’t seem to get how crazy he sounds. I mean to do it and then repeat it every time he shows up shows how off some people are. He can do what he wants but to keep repeating it over and over again on every board sounds like someone who takes this too seriously or has issues just to watch TV shows and enjoy them.
I’ve got a little secret to confess Tiger2 – I’ve kept this going for the last few days since your original comment just to see how many times you’d bluster a response. As far as crazy goes, I think it somewhat reveals how way too seriously YOU take all this, lol.
Anyway, it’s been fun, but I really shouldn’t keep this going, so I won’t. I’ve no doubt you’ll post yet another reply to this, so I’m content to let you have the last word on this if you must. As I say, I won’t be replying to this anymore, so knock yourself out.
But I certainly look forward to whatever forthcoming reveals this show may yet bring, and will continue to have an opinion on it, thanks.
No one cares man, people are only saying just stop sounding like a nut in every thread with this silliness. How hard is that? Apparently hard.