New Images And Story Details From ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ [UPDATED]

UPDATED: CBS has released high resolution versions of the images shown in the Entertainment Weekly SDCC preview and we have swapped those out.

Next Saturday (at 2:30 PM Pacific) there is going to be a Star Trek: Discovery panel at San Diego Comic-Con.  And to give you a little taste, CBS released a couple of new images in the new Entertainment Weekly Comic-Con preview issue.

We get our first look at Mary Chieffo, who plays Klingon Commander L’Rell, along with Chris Obi, who plays T’Kuvma, the leader of the Klingons (who we’ve seen before in photos and in the trailer).

Mary Chieffo as L’Rell and Chris Obi as T’Kuvma in Star Trek: Discovery (CBS)

The brief sidebar on Discovery from EW includes this new description of what the Klingons are up to:

T’Kuvma (Chris Obi), a leader of an ancient Klingon house, goes to extreme measures to unite his people.

This seems to be in line with previous accounts that the Klingons seen in the trailer – who are the subject of much discussion – are not your everyday Klingons, but specifically ‘ancient Klingons.’

The magazine also has some more details about the relationships shared by Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green), Vulcan Ambassador Sarek (James Frain) and Capt. Georgiou (Michelle Yeoh).

At the behest of Spock’s father, Sarek (James Frain), Yeoh’s Philippa Georgiou has mentored Martin-Green’s Michael Burnham for seven years as Burnham rose through the Federation ranks, and Georgiou now feels her protegee is ready to take command of her own ship.

This gives a bit more insight to the previously revealed detail that Burnham grew up on Vulcan and attended the Vulcan Science Academy. The discussion about Burnham getting her own command is something we see at the opening of the trailer released in May.

EW also includes this new image of Yeoh and Martin-Green.

Michelle Yeoh as Captain Philippa Georgiou and Sonequa Martin-Green as First Officer Michael Burnham in Star Trek: Discovery (CBS)

Discovery cast and writers share their Trek love

Many of the cast and crew of Star Trek: Discovery continue to avoid spoilers but still talk up the show on social media, and there were a few good tweets from the week we thought were worth highlighting.

Isaacs talks up Frakes

As we reported a couple of weeks ago, Star Trek: The Next Generation‘s Jonathan Frakes was tapped to direct an episode, and apparently it is the one currently in production, based on this tweet last night from Jason Isaacs (U.S.S. Discovery’s Captain Lorca).

Aliens unite!

Mary Chieffo (Klingon L’Rell) shared this selfie revealing the alien prosthetics bond she has with Doug Jones (who plays the alien Saru).

Rapp’s favorite Star Trek moment

Anthony Rapp who plays U.S.S. Discovery science officer Lt. Stamets, did another impromptu Q&A with his fans (most of whom seem to be from his singing and Broadway career) but there is also a bit of Trek that comes through, including Rapp responding to a question about what was the most memorable moment on Discovery so far.

Writers nerd out on set

The writing team of Bo Yeon Kim and Erika Lippoldt had been in Toronto over the recent weeks watching over production of an episode and before they left town they expressed their inner nerds over the experience.

Sullivan preps for SDCC – gets promoted (and demoted)

Ted Sullivan was also in Toronto until earlier in the week where he showed off his chair (revealing he had been bumped up from Supervising Producer to Co-Executive Producer).

Earlier he also shared this image showing how Bo and Erika had some fun with his chair on set, changing his name to Ed Sullivan and his title to “Ex Producer.”

Star Trek: Discovery premieres on September 24th on CBS with all subsequent episodes on CBS All Access in the US. See our Discovery info page for more details.

Keep up with all the Star Trek: Discovery news at TrekMovie.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Can’t wait to see this.

Ha, guys. Good work, but fast typing.

You might be channeling from times past with that “Suru” typo. :-)

Oops. Sorry. What’s my protoccol fix? Now do I have to yell “Second”?

Well first you have to spell protocol correctly. Ha!

And third….

Wait. These are ancient Klingons?? You mean we’ve wasted months whining about how they look? Lol

To be fair it says ancient Klingon house. Does that mean the family dates back a long time or they are actually ancient Klingons?

“Ancient Klingon house” really sounds more like the Klingons know a lot of their forefathers, like there is just a long family history. Not that they are physically more backwards than other Klingons.

They would have looked a bit off wearing ancient powdered wigs….

Could go either way, but my gut instinct says “ancient Klingon House” means an ancient sect has returned, rather than referencing a house that has been around for a long time. Egypt has been a country since B.C. but we don’t refer to modern Egypt as “ancient Egypt.”

But again, could go either way, that’s just some rationale for my gut instinct.

If the Pharoahs still had living descendants we would probably be safe in calling their house ‘ancient.’

I don’t think we would. We would say they had an ancient bloodline.

Sorry, read your comment while half asleep. While it would be safe to call them an “ancient house” I doubt that would be how we casually refer to them.

All clues point to these being some form of ancient race/bloodline. Their look, their style, comments from producers like this one. Perhaps they are long-lost modern Klingons who from an ancient, pure-bred bloodline as Anthony below speculates. Perhaps they were awakened from ancient cry-stasis ship.

Or perhaps they are indeed simply the new-look for Klingons. Who knows, but speculation is fun!

Yes there are those of us speculations with an open mind and those stomping their feet and yelling about how awful this is without knowing any details.


As I put it to someone earlier today day about the Doctor Who casting:

“There are those who speculate out of excitement, and those who speculate out of desperation.”

As in, they speculate to try to find a way that they can enjoy something they are dead-set on hating before they watch it. I saw a group of DW fans today postulating, for instance, that Jodie Whittaker is not the real Doctor, but either a) a different Time Lord impersonating the Doctor or b) actually the new companion, as a red herring so they can surprise us when they reveal a man as the next Doctor.

And in both cases they gave so-called “compelling evidence” to support their theories, from in-episode “hints” to comments from producers.

Yeah true. Ill know, probably within 5 minutes of watching, if I like it or not. And if I do, if its good quality and they make an effort, I can over look some things.

Then the fun, if you like the books, is how they will do all the fan-servicing, linking things together, filling in blanks and making sense.

Star Trek has to be allowed to stand on its own or it wont work.

Yes it is a possibility. I just think their appearance is being overanalyzed by worried purists. I simply think the producers wanted a fresh, more ‘alien’ looking Klingon for the new series. I doubt their new appearance will be addressed in the series. But we’ll see!

They could be modern Klingons in the sense they are 50 years old (for example) but from an ancient line that has been living apart, inter-breeding etc and that is why they look different and want to influence the modern Empire against the Federation.

Looks good

Hopefully a new trailer soon.

;-) Fast!

Looks like KlinGoth is the new black. Some people might’ve already read this in another comments section, but to me those new Klingon designs definitely have a strong “gothic horror” touch: The overall spidery lines, the cobweb-like surface design on the armor, the Nosferatu-like ears, the claws. Gothic Klingons.

While I’m still generally intrigued and I don’t mind the designers taking the next step in the Klingon species’ evolution, makeup- and costume-wise, I’m beginning to wonder how well this will work out on screen.
Most importantly: How could that makeup not be disruptive to the actors’ performances?
Generally, those are the most “impractical” looking Klingons we’ve ever seen in Trek. I hope there’s some sort of in-universe rationale behind those conspicuously “ancient” looking designs. Otherwise I’d say that the show’s designers might’ve overstated their case.

Yes, we’ve all heard or read the term “ancient Klingons” by now, but that might just be referring to the “ancient Klingon house” the article mentions.
You know, like the House of Grimaldi is an ancient house, but that doesn’t mean they look like cavemen, does it?

“Generally, those are the most “impractical” looking Klingons we’ve ever seen in Trek.” — Sadly, the first Khitomer Conference of 2259 ended in disaster because the Federation event managers set out bean bag chairs, balloons, and beaded curtains. The Klingons’ armor spikes caught on everything, leading to decades of bloody conflict and general grumpiness.

I don’t know. I can easily imagine the Klingon’s creating crazy outfits like this, especially if it’s an “ancient family.”

” How could that makeup not be disruptive to the actors’ performances? ” —
Watch Babylon 5 – they had actors under super heavy makeup who were able to give great performances and facial expressions under it all— and that was last century. They should be able to pull it off here no problem. The makeup and prostecics people wil figure it out- it is there job after all. Have faith!

Andreas Katsulas as G’Kar was a joy to watch.


Damn! Big news, shut the haters up!!

Can’t wait!!!!!1!!!!111&!!!

Ancient House could mean they are of a bloodline that is very pure. They could be selectively interbred and look the way they look because they are not watered down klingons. Even within a series Klingon foreheads change. Worfs ridges changed first to second to third to fourth season. After about the fifth season they stayed mostly unchanged.

In Undiscovered country several klingons had previously unseen smoother foreheads. Christopher Plummer forehead looked very different than Worfs

Just because we have not seen them in Enterprise does not mean they are not cannon. We’ve not seen the show. Perhaps there will be Smooth forehead post Augment Virus TOS klingons along side these Ancient House Klingons. One could hope that the show continuity experts are incorporating these types of little Easter eggs into the show without compromising the story telling or production value of the show.

Agreed @Anthony C. There are plenty of little nods to the previous show’s continuity that can be made without minimizing the look they want to achieve with Discovery.

To be honest I wish enterprise had never cemented the smooth head look. Better to just imagine tos Klingons look the same

Agreed! The origin of this problem was “Trials and Tribble-ations.”

They should never have said anything. In fact, it made ZERO sense– wouldn’t Klingon History taught at Starfleet Academy have mentioned this? Why was Bashir unaware? Clearly just a little fun bit as a meta joke that fans (and subsequently Enterprise) felt the need to further address.

Yes. They should pretended it was not odd at all.

I want the Klingons to all look the same. Just like all humans look the same

Every freethinking, godthing-fearing American, Canadian, & Sumatran dedicated to the timeless precepts of Gene Coon must boycott this STD video on demand. The show supposedly takes place ten years before the reign of The Lonely Salt Vampire which means the hairstyles and postures must look like 1956. THESE HAIRSTYLES DO NOT LOOK LIKE 1956. I am hopping angry and insist on a CBS VOD refund which I’m entitled to because I haven’t even watched an entire episode of The Good Fight starring Cush Jumbo.

I’m going to assume this is satire.

Also, if so, well done. You hit most of the required notes there. :-)


Even that weapon T’Kuvma is holding looks very intricately designed. These are the Baroque Klingons. :-)

Everything’s designed for HD, baby! No more shower curtain environment suits!

That’s just fine. If it’s not baroque, don’t fix it! :D

Okay, I know there has been some grumbling about the GOT’s comparison. Something to consider, while broadcast standards prevented actually showing it, TOS Klingons had a rather fearsome reputation, you know, running man cutting thousand throats, take no prisoners kinda stuff. If that is being explored in a bit more graphic detail, that got to be quiet the jarring juxtaposition against a (somewhat) utopian Federation society that may (or may not) have been sheltered somewhat from that kind of bloodletting. How Federation society is coming to grips with this may explain some of the grittier, graphic hints we have been seeing about the show.

Feel free to disagree.

Yeah, I guess you are right. This is exactly what’s going to happen. I’ve posted about this in previous threads/articles. These new Klingoths are going to be this series’ Dothraki.

However the question that still remains is how much your “explored in a bit more graphic detail” actually means…TV-MA vs TV-14.

Will we be getting people eaten alive by Targs, a mass-murderous Bloodwine production plant, piles of severed heads and skulls in the High Council, Bat’leth splatter scenes and graphic blood rituals with a semi-religious undertone?

I cannot say I’d be looking forward to those kinds of atrocities being displayed on Trek…

This is speculation on my part, but I don’t see the producers turning Trek into a splatter-fest. If the show is focused primarily on space exploration, I doubt there would be much need for excessive gore. I’m not a sociologist, but Federation society is presented as fairly utopian, having set aside greed, revenge, anger (but not lust, apparently), where fairly hedonistic lifestyles would represent a culture clash of epic proportions with the Klingons. Trek usually avoided the inevitable conflict by having supreme beings interfere – so what happens if that doesn’t happen in the Discovery universe? It may be necessary to understand why a member of Starfleet could develop a burning hatred of the Klingons…

I wasn’t sure about the new Klingons at first, but the more I see them the more I think I can get used to them.

Same. I am not really sure how I feel about them, but I certainly won’t pass judgement before seeing the show. Maybe i’ll hate it, but at least i’ll hate on it’s own merits, rather than from a knee jerk reaction to how alien make up looks.

Looking forward to The New Fox Sci fi comedy “The Orville.” I at least be able to watch that without any additional costs…So, I’ll be just watching the first pilot of ST:Discovery….

@Aaron — I remember when VOY launched on the UPN — a channel some people literally couldn’t get for any price.

Haven’t you heard? Tv is free. Netflix is free. Cable is freeeeeee

Lol. The UPN was a syndicated network. In my location it was on a UHF station.

I am also looking forward to watching the Doctor Who Christmas Special. So what?

First woman as the Doctor. I guess that means we get the first male companion?

Rory was a companion. Nardol was a companion. Jack Harkness, Mickey, Adam, Ben, Steven…

There’s more… shall I go on?

That’s going to be awesome. Peter Capaldi, David Bradley, and Jodie Whittaker.

This has absolutely nothing to do with this article. Stop whining.

After spending 27 years in the military, I do agree with those who think the new Klingon uniforms are not practical. They do not look like a uniform that a Klingon Warrior could wage a fight in. So maybe these are only ceremonial uniforms equivalent to the Class A or Dress Blue military uniforms. They looked nice at ceremonies but were not intended end to wear into combat …


Mini skirts and go-go boots aren’t practical, either. About the only place where Trek uniforms have seemed practical has been in some of the TOS movies.

Good point, but these Klingon uniforms don’t even look like the wearer could bend over if he dropped his weapon. Guess we’ll have to wai til we see them in action.


I still don’t think they’re uniforms. The Klingons look more like they’re wearing some ceremonial garb or something.

The look of the Klingons in this convinces me I just don’t want to watch it.

Good. Can it also convince you to not comment?


“Good. Can it also convince you to not comment?”

Srsly? Any opinion that is not a praise is “then do not comment” to you?

You made your point. You dont want to watch. Dont watch. And thus, no need to be here. I dont watch Hawaii Five-0 so I dont go to fan forums and post about it.

Are those ancient Klingons the same as killed the Gods Klingons like as Worf tell in DS9?
Or maybe, the ‘gods’ Klingons as himself?

Are those ancient Klingons the same as killed the Gods Klingons like as Worf tell in DS9?
Or maybe, the Gods Klingons as himself?

Font: DS9 4×10 – Homefront

Always loved that line, and the way he delivers it; it’s really as if he’s saying he has no time for ANY religion.

Like that.


“This seems to be in line with previous accounts that the Klingons seen in the trailer – who are the subject of much discussion – are not your everyday Klingons, but specifically ‘ancient Klingons.”

It does not.

Those are Klingons?

You’re a fan?

They ARE Klingons. And it is a long story.

For all the complaining, if you put a big wig on them and add beards to the males then they’re easily what you think of as a Klingon. The ridges look more prime than what was seen in Into Darkness, they simply look slightly more alien. I like it. It really made me wonder what we would’ve seen in an early film or on TNG if they were made today.

Everyone should just admit that this is a fundamental change to the look of the Klingons and be done with it. Rogue One was a perfect example of how to do a prequel. Granted, Star Wars aged a lot better than the rickety sets of TOS era Trek, but still. If the aesthetic were kept similar, but the production values upped massively, it could have worked. I’m going to watch it on Netflix and I’m sure I’ll enjoy it. And yet, I wish the keepers of Trek would have the same respect for the aesthetic of ‘days gone by’ as those who make Doctor Who and Star Wars. In recent Who we’ve had the old 60s Cybermen back. Exactly the same. We saw Alpha Centauri, an alien that looked silly. But it worked, it was cool. It was internally consistent. The makers here are missing the mark again. They’re going for ‘super cool future look’ when retro is in vogue. And I bet anyone here a million dollars they’ll reach out to the casual fans with retro in five years time when it’s no longer the cute crowd pleaser it is today.

Doctor Who is a very different franchise. As a fan of both, I don’t think they could quite embrace the absurd silly 60s sets in Trek the way they do in DW. Mostly because DW embraces it’s silliness, in a very self aware way.

I for one do not want to see the old silly 60s stuff in today’s Trek.

Star Trek has always had a slice of cheese to it. Why can’t it be self aware? If Star Trek is a place, then it should adhere to internal consistency.

If Star Trek was going to be self-aware and acknowledge a slice of cheese, they’d have commented on the look of the big E in “Trials” and never felt the need to explain the ridge-less Klingons in Enterprise. A bit of comedy is not the same as “cheese.”

Agree to disagree. I do not want internal visual consistency if it means trying to play a serious drama in a cardboard set from an old kid’s show.

That’s your opinion but if you can’t watch TOS or a new show using the sets from that era than you’re not a true Trekkie. You can’t be a true fan of a franchise without having respect for the original incarnation of said franchise. And your blatant disrespect for TOS and it’s production is downright disgusting and insulting to any true Trekkie. To call it cardboard sets from an old kid’s show makes you sound like a typical immature glib millennial. And if your older than a typical millennial that’s even more frightening. The pioneering men and women who worked on that show with a shoe string budget using practical effects from the time period deserve your respect and admiration. Not some juvenile criticism from a superficial modern entertainment consumer. Also TOS is consistently ranked number 1 or in the top 3 sci fi shows of all time. Some of the best sci fi writers ever contributed to the show. It is most certainly not a kids show yet kids can watch and enjoy it for its adventurous colorful tone and enthusiasm for the human condition. Stick to Torchwood.

Oh the old “you’re not a true fan” line. Gun in mouth time.

It might be an age difference thing. Or if you grew up on TNG having never really watched TOS, I can see the dislike for it.

I grew up on TOS (im not that old, but re-runs aired weekly in my town) and I was young enough I had no idea it was a 15 year (or so) old show when I first began watching it.

We’d go to the local rental store to look for something and I was shocked to see a “Star Trek” movie… (it was The Search for Spock). I remember my mom even said I wouldnt understand it if I hadnt seen the first two (which were rented out) but I was determined.

So I fell in love with the TOS characters.

I LOVED TNG also. No internet at the time to inundate us with the cranky “get off my lawn” types that hate everything. It was different but equal, in my mind. Watching TNG on TV and TOS in movie theatres was no big deal. It was GREAT actually.

Not a big fan of Voyager or Enterprise though I like them because they are Trek.

But as far as TOS goes, if someone doesnt enjoy the show, thats their prerogative. I still enjoy them from time to time. But disliking them should not change the importance placed upon that show, those characters and those actors. Without them (and the creative people), we arent having this discussion today.

But to your points:

“you can’t be a true fan of a franchise without having respect for the original incarnation of said franchise.”

I never said I didn’t respect it. I absolutely do. But that’s it. I don’t enjoy it. I enjoy other incarnations, like TNG, which I grew up on (and if someone calls it a kids show I’m not insulted, because I have thicker skin than that). Someone who was a kid in 2009 and loves the JJ films, I would never say he’s not a “true fan.” He’ a true fan of those movies. Anyone who likes something is a fan. GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE.

“And your blatant disrespect for TOS and it’s production is downright disgusting and insulting to any true Trekkie.”

Only if you choose to take it personally when someone doesn’t like something you enjoy. That’s pretty sad if you ask me. I have plenty of friends who hate things I love, but I don’t take it as a slight against me. I have no problem with you and others enjoying TOS. But I don’t.

“And if your[sic] older than a typical millennial that’s even more frightening. ”

BOO! I find terrorists and the thought of my children being in danger frightening; if you think my being over 40 and not liking TOS is frightening, than you have some serious soul-searching to do.

“The pioneering men and women who worked on that show with a shoe string budget using practical effects from the time period deserve your respect and admiration.”

And they’ve got it. Not that it matters.

“Also TOS is consistently ranked number 1 or in the top 3 sci fi shows of all time.”

Lots of things I don’t like are popular, from Ed Sheeran to Transformers films to live performance game shows like X-Factor and American Idol. Doesn’t change my opinion of them.

“It is most certainly not a kids show.”

It was aimed at a family audience, and designed to be consumed by all ages. If I want to call it a kid’s show, I will. TOS was a kid’s show. Oh, the pain you must be feeling!

Really sorry to have triggered you, Da Trufe Snowflake.

Oh, and by the way, I doubt anyone under 40 could bear to watch TOS with their cardboard set, stilted dialog, and ham-fisted acting.

By your logic then, there will NEVER be any new “true fans” and in that case, maybe we should just let the franchise die.

No, this is a franchise who’s concept transcends special effects and sets, and can adapt to new eras. It’s themes are inherently adaptable to changing times, and we it would be incredibly narrow minded to let it dies simply because it’s historical origins aren’t palatable to today’s audiences.

Star Trek is a brand that has the power to educate and inspire the next generation of scientists, explorers, educators, and politicians, and it would be a real shame to deprive younger audiences of the lessons that Trek can teach simply because older, backwards-thinking fans refuse to let go of some old cardboard sets.

My wife is still 39 for another month and the original series is her favorite. You certainly need to go into it appreciating it as a product of its time, but saying that it’s impossible to enjoy TOS today is like saying it’s impossible to enjoy “It’s a Wonderful Life” or “Singing in the Rain” because of the old timey acting.

(And if anyone asks, she’s 31.)

I totally agree with James. Completely writing off the old look, without at least trying to adapt and update it (which can be done as proved by other franchises) seems like a cop out and a lack of effort. A cohesive visual look across the different series makes it easier to accept this as a full, fleshed out universe. Instead, we get jarring visual differences without any attempt to make the eras flow together naturally. A truly creative team could have done it without using the excuse that the 1960 vision of the future is “too old and outdated looking”.

I’m glad you agree with James. But that doesn’t mean they were uncreative; perhaps they had a way of addressing the visual changes (and they still may– we haven’t seen it!) — but they rejected the very idea of trying to explain it because ultimately it’s a waste of time.

This is a new Trek for a new generation. They don’t owe you an explanation for their creative decisions, they are attempting to rebuild a broken franchise (in terms of viewership) so taking the effort to explain things is just getting bogged down in stuff that doesn’t matter when the goal is trying to tell an engaging story.

I mean, when roles are recast, do we need to have it explained why the person looks different? No, because it doesn’t matter and we all understand the real world reasons.

The same applies here.

I find it strange that going to the effort of modernizing the look while keeping the basic elements of a show from the 60’s is called “lazy”. Lazy would be to either make it look like the 60’s, Styrofoam rocks and all or make it something wildly different.

Interesting you picked Rogue One to hold up as a good prequel and skipped right over the prequel trilogy.

At the time there was LOADS of criticism fromStar Wars fans saying the prequel era tech did not mesh with the original trilogy. People forget that it seems.

For all of George’s faults as a storyteller, one virtue he had in spades was a willingness to change and adapt to the times, and push the boundaries of visuals, not just in terms of FX, but in style. His constant changes to the original trilogy show he’s happy to retcon the look of things, and if it had been cost effective I’m sure he’d have re-designed even more stuff than what he did!

Not thrilled with this Klingon design.
Cobwebby gold relief looking outfits with lots of pointy things.
Weird almost laughable and cringe worthy egg shaped heads.

I’m not sure that “ancient Klingon house” necessarily translates to “ancient Klingons,” as these could be members of a house that’s ancient, but by their look, I hope it does.

Worf said in DS9 Season 4 Way of the Warrior he said ”If my people go back to the Old Ways no one would be safe” he also said in a TNG episode before the Federation came around there was no word in the Klingon Language for peacemaker. These quotes made me interested in Ancient Klingons as it made them see more Warlike aggressive and bloodthirsty in other words Great Characters I would like to see and we finally will.

I would’ve NEVER read “ancient Klingon house” as a “house of an ancient Klingons”. It’s definitely an “ancient house of Klingons” to me.

Very exciting stuff, can’t wait!

I need to be transported to the alternate universe where I was put in charge of the first new Trek show in 12 years. Having to sit back and watch people, not only on this, but on so many genre/franchises in Hollywood butcher these great IPs they supposedly “love” and “know so much about” is frustrating to say the least.

I need to be transported to 1966 where I was put in charge of TOS and make it a watchable show!

I’d go back in time before anyone new anything about DSC and ask if they’d watch a new ‘Trek series for $6 a month and watch a resounding “hell yes!” from them all :/

This series is going to be a disgraceful disaster. Too much retouching, too much element that does not match the original saga. I would not mind watching her fail.

Did you write this now or when TNG debuted?

Having read exhaustively about Discovery I’m relieved to learn that there is a very good explanation for the visual look of the Klingons in the show, and I love the phaser design for being so respectful of the original series and fitting in while looking very cool in its own right. I had wished for the bright colors of the original series as Bryan Fuller envisioned for Discovery – been waiting for that for 47 years since TOS ended when I was a kid – but at least canon is not being violated … unless … unless they have no satisfactory explanation for using insignia that was, at that time, only for Enterprise crew.

At the time Discovery begins Robert April was in his last year as captain of the USS Enterprise NCC-1701, a ship which had been in service already for 10 years. Captain Pike was soon to take over. This is very different from the Abrams timeline where the Enterprise wasn’t even built until Kirk was ready to take it after a very brief command by Pike. But Discovery takes place in the original timeline, not Abrams’ timeline. In the original timeline it was not until Kirk’s 5-year mission ended that the Enterprise insignia was adopted by the entire Federation. In the original show very different insignia can be seen on crew members of other ships. If they slipped up a couple of times in the history of Trek – I believe they did so exactly twice – that is no excuse to adopt an error as the trademark of an entire TV series and to blatantly flaunt the error on everyone’s uniform. The little split in the insignia does not somehow magically makes what is instantly recognizable as the Enterprise delta, a different insignia.

To those who say this is just fussing over details and is not important, I acknowledge that story and character is of prime importance, but the details are important too, especially where you are calling upon viewers to suspend disbelief on so many fronts – aliens, warp travel, and so many other fantastical things. If they don’t ground us in consistency with the details, the whole thing becomes flimsy and the drama is ineffective because viewers can’t suspend their disbelief. They really need to fix with by going back and doing so with CGI effects, or have a very clear and credible explanation.