Watch ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Clip Of Anthony Rapp As Grumpy Lt. Stamets From “Context Is For Kings”

Today gets not one but two Star Trek: Discovery updates with a couple of exciting afternoon releases. There is a new clip from “Context is for Kings,” the episode being released this Sunday. Plus CBS released a new promo with a few new bits included.

Clip from “Context is for Kings”

The following is the first scene in Star Trek: Discovery featuring Anthony Rapp as Lt. Paul Stamets. He meets Micahael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) in the engine room of the USS Discovery. This is an extended version of the clip shown on Sunday’s After Trek, now available online at Entertainment Weekly.

New web promo

CBS also released a new promo on Twitter touting all the reviews for the premiere of Star Trek: Discovery. Included were a few glimpses that haven’t been seen before.

A Closer look

Here are some shots from the new clip.

Michael Burnham enters USS Discovery engine room

Surly officer tells Burnham to find a station

Ensign Tilly (Mary Wiseman) says there are assigned seats

Burnham checks out the “reaction cube”

Lt. Stamets enters holding a glowing cylinder which he inserts into a wall receptacle

Stamets tells Burnham he was expecting a Vulcan

Stamets wipes off some sparkly dust

Burnham given data card and a task to complete

And here are some new bits from the Twitter promo.

Klingons invaders are zapped by Lorca

“Hold tight everybody”

Discovery is attacked by smaller ships



“Let’s do it”



Star Trek: Discovery is available exclusive in the US on CBS All Access with new episodes released Sundays at 8:30 pm ET. In Canada Star Trek: Discovery airs on the Space Channel at the same time. Discovery is available on Netflix outside the USA and Canada with new episodes made available Monday at 8 am BST.

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

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I love the look Burham gave Cadet Lilly like “Girl I will snatch you bald!”

And wow, its nice the engine room looks like an engine again like you find in TNG or TOS and not a beer factory like the Kelvin films. ;)

I noticed the physical switches on the control panels. Not as much touch screen.


While Budgineering is no one’s favorite Trek set, I appreciated it for its more “hands-on” feel like the USS Kelvin sets, which made a starship more industrial and tactile to me than it ever did. I also very much appreciated the “reboot” of the engineering set in STID, which was an actual particle accelerator in some physics lab. THAT felt a lot more like an advanced piece of technology and because of it I have no quarrel with Kelvin engineering. But I do like this new set just as much as the other classic ones.

Sorry, but the concrete floors and low-grade industrial appearance of the vats, pipes and lighting absolutely killed it for me as a representation of 23rd century technology; I half-expected to see extras from TITANIC stoking the furnaces. Fermilab definitely worked better, but still looked way too low-tech for my taste. I’m delighted that this set really honors the original TOS design while avoiding the overly comfortable look of TNG.

Lawrence Livermore lab in California actually, that’s the National Ignition Facility. The original Tron used a different laser lab at the same facility back in the day. Fermilab is in Illinois.

Thanks for the correction.

First time I saw Brewgineering I was uncomfortably reminded of Space Mutiny, a movie starring Reb Brown rightfully riffed by MST3k. The ship’s engineering was basically a factory. Lots of railing kill fodder, though.

Like the point Tiger2 made about Burnham’s look to Cadet Tilley when she lied about the stations. Considering we have heard they would be rooming together at some point, I assuming when she first comes aboard considering in the pictures she is wearing her prison jumpsuit, things could get ackward between the two of them later on.

Not sure if it’s the lighting or the paint or a combination of things, but not too keen on the rounded metalic surfaces on things, like the railing, looking like cheap plastic.

It’s nice to see that this show might actually have a sense of humor. Trek can be serious and address important topics, but it also needs to be fun along the way. Looking forward to Ep2.

Technically, it’s episode 3.
12 episodes to go.

Defo helps with some humour! Commenting with a joke on some other site about the cgi when someone said the cgi looked really bad when it was actually real,lol,didn’t go down that well. But then again,Trek fans aren’t known for their sense of humour,as experienced so many,many times on my travels. Luckily there are more Trek fans WITH a sense of humour than not. The nitpicky OC bunch need to go to clown school.

Episode 2 aired last week. This is episode 3.

My bad. That’s what I meant. :)

The engine room doesn’t look half bad! I like.

Damn it Stamets!

This needs to be on T-Shirts, posters etc… I’d love this to be the number one catchphrase. I had the idea for it the day they introduced that name to us… Only second to “Burnham all!”

I’m so curious about the reaction cube! What will it be? What can the glowing space funghi do?

Reaction cube looks quite empty, hmm.

From the promo it looks like Burnham is in the reaction cube and gets exposed to the spores, and then something interesting happens. Organic warp drive? Instant teleportation?

I know we think the photo might be showing engineering but given the shape of the room and the ceiling – I’m wondering if this is actually inside one of the Nacelles given the red light at the end of the room. Just a thought that there might be two rooms like this. I know the TOS Engineering had the red lighting though.

@Neil — that’s what I like about this — it’s very reminiscent of the TOS engineering section behind the grille, with the red glowing area deep in the rescesses of the room.

Glad to know that ‘The Beatles’ are still popular in the 23rd century.

Loved the pop culture reference–especially that it was the Fab 4–which have been all too rare on Trek.

Paul McCartney and Gene Roddenberry were to collaborate on some project in the early ’70s, but nothing ever came of it.

Makes sense. Beethoven is revered in the 21st :)

@Arathorn — and in the 24th Century. Don’t forget, in the 23rd century Spock is intimately familiar with the works of Brahms, so much so he can recognize Brahm’s handwriting.

@Curious Cadet,

You’re such a freaking hypocrite.

You were ranting nonstop about ‘The Orville’ using pop culture references & here you have ‘Discovery’ doing the very same thing and you have no problem with it at all.

No one is a bigger hypocrite than you Ahmed.

Note my comment below, made about three hours prior to yours, and take a chill pill, soldier. A little of that sort of thing is fine; do it too much and you may risk the credibility of your world building. MacFarland may not care overly much about that as his show is a kinda-sorta-comedy, but the Discovery producers definitely should. Also, too, I’ll just point out that it may in fact be more credible that space explorers centuries in the future would be familiar with the Beatles than Kermit the Frog (much as I love the little green guy) and Frankenberry cereal.

MacFarlane’s pop culture references are to literally just repeat a joke from another film. That’s literally what he does. He’s not clever and his shows are all the same. Dick jokes and racial stereotypes on The Orville ? Who didn’t see THAT coming….

@Michael Hall,

That’s ridiculous statement; both shows are referencing 20th century pop culture. There is no way for you to determine that spacers will be more familiar with one element than another.

Oh, really? No more likely that The Beatles’ music would be remembered centuries from now than Frankenberry and Friends? Do tell.

Artifacts of culture largely endure due to their artistic worth, historical relevance, or, in special cases, infamy. That you would apparently see these examples as being equivalent would actually explain a lot about your tastes, except that I’m actually inclined to believe that it’s really just one more example of your need to pick fights when none are called for. It’s not like I criticized The Orville for using so many pop-culture references–it’s a jokey show, and meant by design not to be taken all that seriously.

(On reflection I am willing to give you Kermit, though. He deserves to live down through the ages, and may be the subject of cult-worship by the 23rd century for all I know.)

@Michael Hall,

Yes, genius. Same reason why for example on ‘Babylon 5’ you have Garibaldi, a fan of Daffy Duck, a cartoon from the 20th century.

My original comment was to Curious Cadet, someone who has made it a habit on every Orville threads to rants about usage of pop culture references on that show and yet, here he is, very enthusiastic that pop culture references are being used on ‘Discovery’. You jumped in with your ridiculous comment that people in the future would surely remember the Beatles but not Kermit.

No matter how you or others spin it, both shows are using pop culture references. You don’t get to criticize one show while praising another for doing the very same thing.

Wow, you seem to have a real problem with reading comprehension. Again–I have no problem with MacFarland using so many pop-cultural references on The Orville, it’s just that kind of a show. You also seem to have difficulty with the idea of context, hence your ludicrous false equivalency between “While My Guitar Gently Weeps” and Frankenberry cereal. Finally, it looks like you’re having real issues with your memory–you might want to look into that–as I noted just yesterday in this very thread that the Lennon reference was fun since Trek almost never does anything like that, but that the producers needed to tread carefully and not overdo it. (Which is why, incidentally, I had no problem with Garibaldi’s love of Daffy Duck as a one-shot pop culture reference on B5, and even used it to defend The Orville on a review thread on this very site–go check it out for yourself.)

And thanks for the “genius” compliment, flattering but untrue as it is. I wish I could return it.

Ahmed also had an issue with the cadet using the word ‘cool’ yet is completely fine with the “dick’ jokes and verbal cultural references in Orville. What a hypocrite.

@Captain Ransom,


Ahmed stop being an Internet troll. If you want information, go look for it or shut up. I’m not doing your work for you. Lazy troll.

@Captain Ransom,

Since you seem unable to reply in the relevant thread, here it is again.

Learn not to present falsehoods as facts and then ask people to look for proof of your own lies.

We are done here.

I saw Paul last week, trust me his music will never die!

It works when it’s not a regular thing.

Agreed, too much and we’re getting into Orville territory. But that it’s so rarely done on Trek is what made this (and the airline patter in the pilot) fun.

There is an old Vulcan proverb… ‘Only Nixon could go to China’

@FLB — I almost mentioned that. There were a few pop-references in TUC, as I recall, probably after Nick Meyer’s experience with TVH, which the studio likely kept hammering into the producers — ‘make it funny!’

I was actually bothered by some of them. Spock saying that was as bad as the Klingon’s claiming Shakespeare was a Klingon. Though in fairness, that’s a little more in line with Chekov bragging about everything being invented in Russia. The only pass I’ll give them on this is at least they are historical references that stand a chance of surviving 300 years, much like I’d expect for the Beatles. TVH literary reference is up there with ORVILLE’s FRIENDS quip though. I seriously doubt anybody’s gonna remember Ross and Rachel 300 years from now.

I always took Chang’s statement as an ironic jab, not a serious claim about “Hamlet’s” Klingon authorship. There was also “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” a line Nichelle Nichols refused to say so Walter Koenig did it instead.

Pop culture references happen all the time in Star Trek. Or at least, at a level of frequency I would not describe as rare. Bride of Chaotica is a riff on Flash Gordon serials. Tom Paris loves old cartoons. The TNG & DS9 crews love old music like Irving Berlin tunes and DS9 has a Sinatra/Martin-eque lounge singer. TOS and TNG both played with mobster stereotypes. That one Voyager ep with Sarah Silverman and Ed Begley Jr. had a ton of 90’s references (pop culture of the setting, so maybe not technically worthy of my list). I dunno, Trek makes lots of 20th century pop culture references. Heck, Data’s love of Sherlock Holmes is more pop-culture goodness.

@UAB — there are general historical references, and then there’s relying on intimate understanding. Paris explained Chaotica to his alien shipmates, and those unfamiliar. Indeed Burnam seemed unfamiliar with Stamets reference to a John Lennon and a Beatles cover band. I’d have to go back and look at that 90s episode in VOY, but even if it does have more pop references than I recall, I’d classify it as a TVH rarity. There’s one in particular Disinvited brought up about junk food at Doger stadium for breakfast, but again, I think that’s a universal joke without having to know what the Dogers are, or a Big Gulp. My point here is in ORVILLE the pop references are in every episode. And they’re esoteric — while being tortured, the first officer says her ‘friends live in brooklyn and are named Ross and Rachel’, at first I was confused, then after a couple of triggers went off in my head, I let out a huge groan of recognition. I don’t recall Star Trek ever doing that.

That said, I didn’t care for the fixation on the 20th Century pop culture in Trek, and still don’t understand why they kept dwelling on it. I’m not sure I liked the Beatles reference here either — but I’m willing to accept that The Beatles are as universally recognizable as Brahms in 300 years. If they’d made a reference to a Destiny’s Child song as ORVILLE did, then not only would I have not gotten the joke, but once I did I would have been just as critical.

There’s a difference between what I’ve always known Trek to do with “pop” references, with the rare exception, and what ORVILLE does on a weekly basis. If that’s not clear, then I don’t know what else to do.

So… Stamets is a science officer (silver uniform)… but is he the chief engineer?

The only series not to have a regular chief engineer was TNG until they promoted La Forge in season 2… so I was wondering who would the CEO in Discovery. Is it Stamets or am I ready the scene wrong?

My impression was he was a specialist. But could be chief.

My thought is that he is a science specialist (fungus), but that the fungus is somehow used for the the drive system, hence him loading that module with the shiny particles on his shoulder.

Nice engine room.

At least we’re not getting the J.J. Abram’s brewery engine room. Glad to see they’re trying to recreate the 23rd century era set finally.

Hmmm. I’m not too excited now. As a gay man with a biology degree and not sassy I was looking forward to seeing a gay man on TV who is NOT a cliche. But this clip makes it appear that we are getting yet another Sassy Gay Friend stereotype. I’m hopeful that maybe it’s just one moment and he will be a professional scientist (who happens to have a BF) and not a Profesional Gay Man (who sometimes does sciencey things). I can’t be the ONLY one!

I did not get that impression at all.

I didn’t see what you saw. Saw an actor playing a character with some arrogance and an immediate dislike for a mutineer.

Let’s wait and see how Stamets behaves in episode 3 around his husband, Dr. Hugh Culber.

Speaking of whom: I may need 5 cc’s of Cordrazine Sunday night… Wilson Cruz is simply heart-stopping.

Scott you are so right. I loved the image released of him in uniform

@Scott Gammans,

According to recent reports, Dr. Culber will appear later in the season. He won’t be in episode 3.

I’m also gay and I took this as total grumps behavior–like an annoyed post doc. I know plenty of gay post docs who act like this.

I don’t get it.

I do understand the desire to have a non stereotypical gay character on television. There are so many of those out there no matter what field they work in. For me though the clip wasn’t enough to go off of. I couldn’t tell if this is one of the ways there trying to show how difficult he is to work with. As in his arrogance manifests itself as him thinking he is so brilliant to the point where he is above everyone else. Or he just has the sassy personality. Hopefully it’s his arrogance and not the sass.

Struck me as just plain arrogance, honestly. I don’t even necessarily think it had anything to do with Burnham’s current status as a pariah; he just assumes you’re more trouble than you’re worth until proven otherwise. Trek and SF in general have a long tradition of such people.

As a gay dude myself I didn’t pick up anything cliche about him. Just seems like Burnham’s reputation precedes her which would bring that kind of treatment especially from other Starfleet officers.

@PEB — exactly so, recall in “Court Martial” how Kirk was received by his old friends at the bar. They had already tried and convicted him without really knowing any of the facts.

It was also clear that Stamets was expressing his disappointment that Burnham wasn’t a Vulcan as he was expecting. He probably thinks he is so smart, only a Vulcan can be useful to him.

Ensign Tilly looks like she’s a big girl; I’m concerned about how she’ll look as the show progresses, and they put her in a TOS mini-skirt uniform…

…No words for this…just…no words…


I am glad they put someone other than a size 0 in a uniform. No offense to anyone that is that size but it’s nice to see women of different sizes in the show.

Having larger women and men would go against Gene’s vision of a healthy human race that had its sh*t together.

Not really–at least, I don’t recall him ever saying so. People come in all shapes and sizes. That said, as a quasi-military outfit I would expect that members of Starfleet would be expected to maintain a certain standard of fitness, though with all the species involved keeping track of those standards would certainly be a challenge.

There’s a really cool photo-set floating around the internet of Olympic athletes. These are people who are in peak physical condition.

About half are larger than average, but you can still see the foundation of muscle in their cores.

Think Maui from Moana.

In other words, just because a person is larger than average doesn’t mean they are unhealthy, and counter, just because a person is skinny doesn’t mean that they are. See those who are anorexic.

Inserting glowing tube things into wall-sockets strikes me as a very Star Trek thing.

Oh, you had to go there.

Have you ever noticed how many scientists in Star Trek are obnoxious and arrogant? ‘Cause Stamets sure acts like one. How dare he call his captain “Lorca”?! Even if he wasn’t part of Discovery crew, it would be proper to call him “Captain Lorca”. I think in the future we see in Star Trek, scientists are what rock stars are today: revered, loved, and immensely spoiled.

Plenty of them aren’t obnoxious as well. We saw one small clip. If he’s arrogant because he’s brilliant I don’t have s problem with they.

Extremely valuable employees often get away with more than others. It happens. If Stamets is not replaceable, he can get away with referring to the captain as Lorca, at least when Lorca is not around.

I’ve dealt with somebody like that in my professional life, a long time ago. My department manager ended up finding a way to circumvent him. The arrogant collegue left for a while (burnout) when he realized he wasn’t irreplaceable after all and that nobody actually liked him enough to want to work with him.

That engine room looks like a more modern take on what the engine room in TOS looked like. It looks awesome, but my favorite engine room set will always be the one from TMP.

@Trellium G — I agree. I got an immediate TOS vide when I saw it. After TMP, VOY is probably my next favorite engine room. They really tapped into something when they created that long glowing, pulsing tube that cuts through numerous decks. TNG Is my least favorite. And the warp core looks like it was rubber for her pleasure — which takes on special meaning considering the design of the Enterprise D.

@Curious Cadet, I get the feeling, so far, that Discovery is going to end up being a proper modern “reboot” for the prime timeline. I can already imagine a variation of that engine room on the Enterprise.

I like the look of engineering as well…. but isn’t the discovery supposed to have a vertical warp core? I’m guessing the warp core may be somewhere else… through the reaction chamber perhaps?

@Joel, I haven’t seen the specs for Discovery, but Memory Alpha says that in the 23rd century, the warp core was not situated in main engineering, at least until TMP. It also says of the original Constitution class warp core, only the dilithium converter assembly and warp engine plasma conduits were ever seen in TOS.

I guess we will find out more about how Discovery works as the show progresses.

Burnham, Stamets… Diversity (or IDIC), thing that Discovery does right. Gene Roddenberry and Michael Piller would be proud.

I dunno, I get a USS Equinox vibe from the Discovery. Something shady is happening on that ship.

Totally agree!

I agree!

LOL same! I know I’m going to be wrong but there might be a Section 31 connection. IF so it would explain why the ship is so different and almost secretive in nature. I really can not wait for the next episode. In many ways THIS is the episode most of us really wanted to see given we will see the actual ship that is the title of the show.

Would also explain why they have Jason frigging Isaacs for a captain. Could be a red herring because he’s played so many bad guys, but I wouldn’t count on it.

I think Lorca is probably more complicated than being secretly a villain or anything like that. He leaves me with an impression he’s like Aslan from The Chronicles of Narnia. “Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good.”

I just came back to this page to say you were right, Spike. Things are not on the up-and-up after episode 3!

Ok I love that engineering looks like an actual modern take on what we’ve seen in TOS. Even the purists have to agree that they got the look right. I’m loving this show so much. I’ve been re-watching the first two episodes more than I thought I ever would. While I enjoy ST Beyond, it’s a shame that we didn’t get this show to mark the 50th Anniversary.

Two small but telling things I also liked: Burnham’s very Vulcan raised eyebrow at Stamets’ Lennon reference, and the recognizable-yet-updated take on TOS-style memory cards. I still don’t much care for the complete overhaul on the Klingons, but there’s a lot on the Starfleet side that this show is getting right.

Stamets sounds like a jerk.

Yes, he kind of does. Did you have a point?

@Michael Hall,

He’s a jerk, that’s point. Is that too hard for you to understand?

Not hard to understand at all, thanks for your concern. I was just wondering if there was a point to your observation.

@ahmed… a jerk, much like you.

The fact that people immediately think you’re trolling when you make a general observation should tell you a lot about your behaviour and how you’re perceived

A moment of self reflection might help

Well yes he does sound like a jerk but many Trek characters have started out that way but mellowed after awhile. The doctor on Voyager and Kira on DS9 probably the two biggests when we first meet them but then became big fan favorites.

It takes one to know one. Sorry LOL

@Amulius Victor,

So you agree that he comes off as a jerk, thank you. :)

The helmsman of the Orville is also a jerk, albeit of a different kind–and an imbecile to boot, by the testimony of his own first officer. So, again, was there a point to your observation beyond just trolling?

@Michael Hall,

I watched the clip and my impression that Stamets sounds like a jerk. It’s as simple as that but somehow you seem personally offended by that description. That’s your problem, not mine.

Not going to repeat myself for a third time but you’re more than welcome to keep at it.

Sure. What was the point in sharing your observation?

(And just to clarify: disagreement and vigorous debate don’t offend me; pointless trolling does.)

@ahmed Insight, it’s wonderful thing isn’t it? ; )

I feel weird saying this but, I think y’all should back up off Ahmed’s hiney on this one. He was simply stating an observation – and an astute one. Stamets is indeed a jerk. However, his jerkiness makes sense, once you hear his anguish over the hijacking and perversion of his work by Starfleet.

Prior Trek canon had me convinced they’d found a cure for the homosexual birth defect. Oh well. Still no fat people allowed though!

You’re proof-positive that even in 2017 we haven’t yet found a cure for the a$$hole defect. We continue to work on it.

One of the biggest problem of humanity in the future will be OVERPOPULATION.
Nature does have a clever solution for that… Yet some people are so stupid and think the most important thing in the future might be finding a cure for something they consider as a “birth defect”. Next achivement in “prior trek canon”: make contraception useless…
Don’t care about that – other people are convinced that a cure for the “stupidity birth defect” will have been found in the future!

I really hope that’s a joke.

The diametrical opposite of a joke is not a tragic story but the failed attempt at a joke.

I guess all you anti-science geniuses favor the “lifestyle choice” explanation? Did you not fully think through “born that way”? What’s your take on pedophiles? Does the explanation for sexual preferences vary according to whether you approve of the preference or not?

The blind man who wants to tell seeing people what colours are has spoken.
Where in the big Star Trek universe is the problem due to people that are born that way and mean no harm? Why should there be a need for “a cure for the homosexual “birth defect” “?!
Where is your logic explanation for sexual preferences of other species?

“Does the explanation for sexual preferences vary according to whether you approve of the preference or not?”
Why does your explanation for sexual preferences vary according to whether YOU approve of the preference or not?! And why is that YOUR business?
And how can you approve “interspecies” sexual preferences which are more related to zoophilia while trolling homosexuals?

Horizontal warp core.

Wow, just came back from the EW page this article links to. The comments section there… well, I recommend you just don’t go there.

The comments section is just another proof that it will be very difficult to cure the “stupidity birth effect”.
Oh my gosh… claiming about how sinful a gay couple in a fictional tv-show is but having no problem with interspecies couples… where is the logic is there? Wouldn’t “god” condemn such relationships as even more sinful?
comment image

Wow JAGT, you are not kidding. And according to what I’ve read on other message boards, vitriol like that is pretty common amongst ‘the masses.’ This does not bode well for DISC, at least in the U.S.