In a panel at New York Comic Con Saturday evening, members of the cast and executive producers of Star Trek: Discovery spilled the beans that Michelle Yeoh will return to the show. The panel, moderated by former astronaut and self proclaimed lifelong Star Trek fan, Dr. Mae Jemison, included discussion about the seemingly darker tone of Discovery, multi-dimensional “bad guys”, and Michael Burnham’s path to redemption. Plus, the panel kicked off with a sneak peek at episode 4 (look for our spoilery description at the end of this article).
Michelle Yeoh will return to Star Trek: Discovery
Michelle Yeoh, who plays Michael Burnham’s captain and mentor Captain Georgiou, made a surprise appearance at the panel. And no one was more surprised than the panelists. Hidden underneath a mask, she approached the microphone and pretended to be a fan asking a question, “Is Captain Georgiou coming back?” Shen then unveiled her identity, and the cast and creators jumped up to welcome her onstage as the audience gave some very loud applause.
“I’m not going to let them kill me, okay?” said Yeoh as she took the stage. As her captain, Yeoh is understandably protective of Sonequa Martin-Green, and she wanted to make that clear to Jason Isaacs, who plays Burnham’s new captain aboard the Discovery.
“The most amazing journey has been with Sonequa. So I’m telling you, Captain Lorca, if you don’t look after my baby girl, I will come and kick your ass. And you know I can do that.”
“I would say I’d like to see you try,” replied Isaacs, “but I really wouldn’t want to see you try.”
At the end of the panel, executive producer and co-showrunner Gretchen J. Berg confirmed that Michelle Yeoh will be back on Discovery, assuring the crowd, “You will see more of this woman on this show.”
Not darker, just more serialized
On the tone of the new Star Trek, host Mae Jemison turned to the panel, saying, “This Star Trek is a little bit darker. Is that fair?”
Executive producer Akiva Goldsman immediately took to the mic. “Let me address that,” he said. “No.” The audience laughed at his blunt, tongue-in-cheek answer. But he went on to clarify:
The truth is, what we’ve been talking about tonight when we talk about Star Trek is the characters, which is actually relatively different than what you would talk about in previous Star Treks. To some degree that would be different for DS9.
[Discovery is] a wholly serialized narrative. In that narrative we get to tell character stories over plot. Which does not suggest that we don’t have plot. If Jim Kirk had to deal with Edith Keeler’s death in [the TOS episode] “City on the Edge of Forever” as if it were real life, it would take a whole series or a season. [On Discovery] we can stretch those emotions out for a season.
Our story is the origin of the feeling that is TOS. That’s why we are 10 years before TOS. But we don’t start there. We get there. The name of the show is Discovery not by accident. It is the story of how these people discover who they are. In long form storytelling, you get the gift of getting to start somewhere. We are layered, complex, dark and light, because the best of Star Trek is always all of those things.”
Understanding the Klingons
The producers spoke about the Klingons and how they are more than our “bad guys” for season 1 of Star Trek: Discovery. The show, at its heart, is going to tell the story of how we come to understand “the other”.
Co-creator Alex Kurtzman spoke about why they decided to make season one about Klingon war.
When we conceived of the idea of having season one being about the war with the Klingons, it was terribly important to all of us to make sure that we represented both sides of the war in a way that was understandable and relatable. And while the Klingons have been given specific treatment in various iterations in the past, we needed to know what it was like for them to go through this, too. And to humanize them for lack of a better word.
Kurtzman went on:
The truth is that we wanted to shift everyone’s perspective about what the Klingons are. Because they are so traditionally relegated to just being the bad guys. And that meant making visual changes too, while hopefully maintaining and retaining the original spirit of the original Klingons.
You’ll see lots of different Klingons. They were all built around the central premise of what Klingons are. It is terribly important for us to humanize them, to give story to their experience. To give an understanding to their culture, to give an understanding to why they want what they want. If we didn’t do that and we made them a one dimensional bad guy, we wouldn’t be Star Trek.
Mary Chieffo, who plays Klingon L’Rell, noted how much work it is to get the Klingon scenes right. “It takes a village to speak Klingon,” she said. On every episode, they work with top Klingon linguists and spend extra time in rehearsals to make sure the translations are correct. “I’ve compared it a lot to Shakespeare,” said Chieffo. “Once you know what you’re talking about you are really then able to connect with the person looking across from you.”
Burnham’s arc toward redemption (and romance?)
The panel spoke about Burnham’s character arc and how she is on the path toward redemption. To give her that arc, the writers felt that it was crucial to start Burnham at an incredible emotional disadvantage. After the Battle of the Binary Stars, she has to come to terms with the idea that her actions resulted in the death of “not only her captain but also her surrogate mother, her best friend,” explained Alex Kurtzman.
It gives her a very long way to go. It gives her a redemption story. The idea of starting her at her low point, we felt was essential in order to give her that path.
Kurtzman also noted Georgiou’s importance in Burnham’s life saying, “Georgiou represents Burnham’s humanity.” Georgiou is the first person in Burnham’s life to tell her that she does not have to suppress her emotions or her humanity.
Her childhood on Vulcan greatly shaped Burnham. Growing up on a world where outright humanity is looked down upon was very difficult for her. “We’ll come to understand over the course of the season that she’s been through a lot,” said Kurtzman. Burnham has never had a real home. Over the course of this season, she will be looking for one.
When asked by a fan if there will be any romance for Michael down the line, Sonequa answered, “All I’m gonna say… we’re covering everything. With everyone. See what I’m saying?”
The science of Discovery and mushroom power
The panel all agreed that science is central to Star Trek’s story. As Mae Jemison said, “One of the characters in Star Trek is the science.” And it is apparent that the writers care not only about getting the science right but about integrating it into the story they are telling with Michael Burnham.
“Science is so much at the core of Star Trek that before we even started, we had this amazing round table think tank with 10 scientists representing all different kinds of science,” explains executive producer Heather Kadin. “I remember the amazing thing to me was [in asking the scientists] ‘Can you beam from place to place?’ One person said you could and one person said you couldn’t.”
Executive producer and co-showrunner Aaron Harberts elaborated on how the science is integral to Discovery‘s story. “We’re telling a story of self-discovery, of looking inward,” he said. When it came to the science of transporters, the scientists on the panel were split. The physicists agreed it was theoretically possible, but the life scientists would object saying, “you can’t reassemble the human soul.” Harberts says Star Trek wants to explore these questions. What does it mean to be human? What is the human soul?
Harberts also spoke specifically about the ship’s mushroom-powered engines:
“It’s about the function of biology rather than just the function of physics. Our engine is organic,” he said. “We’re set against the backdrop of war. It’s life. It’s death. There is something interesting about the science that we are focusing on right now, being a little more born out of the life sciences.”
Here are a few other interesting tidbits from the NYCC panel:
- Wilson Cruz’s first appearance as Dr. Culber will be in episode 4 (this Sunday).
- Cruz referred to Anthony Rapp’s Lt. Stamets as his “space boo”
- Harberts noted diversity goes beyond the cast to a 50/50 men and women writer’s room and many women on the production as well
- Shazad Latif described his character’s introduction in a prison cell “You meet me with Rainn Wilson (Harry Mudd)…I’m going through some horrible things in there.”
A sneak peek at episode 4 [SPOILERS]
The panel began by showing the opening segments of Sunday night’s episode of Discovery, “The Butcher’s Knife Cares Not for the Lamb’s Cry.” Although she still has no rank, Michael Burnham once again gets to wear a Starfleet uniform.
Computer: Burnham, Michael. Temporary assignment to science division. USS Discovery. Rank: none. Uniform synthesis is complete.
The awkward yet lovable Tilly likes Burnham’s new threads. “You look smart,” she tells Burnham. “It’s a lot less scary than your convict suit.” In the “teaser” We get to see Michael Burnham use a holographic mirror, and she also receives Captain Georgiou’s last will and testament. On the bridge, Lorca reprimands the crew after a failed simulation, reminding them that out on the frontier they only have one chance to get it right. Burnham’s skills are put to use by Captain Lorca, and he assigns her to “weaponize” the tardigrade monster he and Landry brought on board at the end of episode 3.
Initially, Burnham doesn’t like the idea of keeping this dangerous creature on board. But, Lorca is clear, “that thing killed a dozen Klingons on the Glenn, and there’s not a scratch on it from their batleths. If we’re going to win this thing, if we’re going to have a chance of saving the Federation and everyone in it, we’re going to need the best weapons available.”
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.
Thanks to Joe Andosca for his on the scene contribution to this report.
Lol… you said “mushroom power”.
I, personally, am glad that Michelle Yeoh’s character has been killed off. Her acting skills really stink up the place. Talk about amateur hour!
the question is killed off, for how long?
I never thought that she was dead for good.
I assumed flashbacks would keep popping up.
Included in the mirror episode I assume too.
That “amateur” has been acting in films for decades, some of them acclaimed. She also seems like a very nice lady, Ballz, though I’m guessing she could kick your obnoxious ass to the curb if she chose to.
Face it, Hall, her acting “stinks on ice”. I feel like sending her flowers, as she comes across as DEAD on the screen. NO charisma whatsoever!
And here I thought Canadians were supposed to be really nice people. That’s certainly always been my experience. I guess there’s always exceptions, though.
Re: …there’s always exceptions…
I’ll say, “There’s Only One Thing A Confederate Flag Can Mean In Canada:
Canadians have no excuses — not even bad ones.”:
You’re a charmer as well as a highly astute critic.
Maybe, but she is the most sexually-exciting woman that has ever been on Star Trek, so you have to give her that…
I’m sorry she did not work for you. I think she is an incredibly talented and versatile actress, and her body of work clearly shows. And she was GREAT as Georgiou.
I’m not sorry for him. She is a great actress.
Yep, she’s terrific.
Maybe, but not in DSC.
She does not have an american accent… so maybe it throwa some of you off..
Oh and, remeber Walter Koenig, playing Chekov. He had a fairly strong Russian accent, but that does not mean his acting was bad, just different.
Koenig’s acting wasn’t great, nor was his accent.
There is nothing wrong with her acting skills. She just has an accent you aren’t used to, morn least because English isn’t her first language.
Nope nope nopety nope! That’s the Molson’s talking, Harry. Michelle Yeoh is the best casting decision of the new show so far. She is an exciting, smart, fun lady who can kick some serious ass. She was a stand-out, among several, as Lotus in “Marco Polo” (sadly cancelled because it was expensive, not because it was bad). She was also the hottest/coolest Bond girl since Diana Rigg. The only hotter Chinese lady in the whole world is the one wearing my wedding ring.
I disagree. Although I’m glad you’re not getting as personal as when you shared your opinions on Erica Durance.
I always knew she would be back some how and personally I’m made up, Michelle Yeooh IS Discovery💖
“The truth is that we wanted to shift everyone’s perspective about what the Klingons are. Because they are so traditionally relegated to just being the bad guys.”
The entire production team keeps harping on about the Klingons having ALWAYS been the “bad guys”, having always been one-dimensional substitutes for “the Russians” etc.
I really don’t get it. Obviously, TNG and post-TNG Klingons weren’t typically “bad” anyway – quite the opposite in many cases – but apparently the best-selling series of the franchise can easily be ignored.
But even ENT-Klingons weren’t generally THE bad guys. Heck, even on TOS, while being prone to giving Kirk and crew quite a headache every now and then, Klingons were hardly ever depicted as 100% evil. Of course they were “baddies” on TOS, no doubt about that, but they were hardly the “supervillains” of Trek.
That is a genuinely puzzling statement. The Klingons have been Federation allies for 30 years of Trek since TNG premiered.
I think Kurtzman, and Abrams for that matter, tend to look at Trek through a pop culture lens, for better or worse…but mostly worse. Klingons have always been bad guys and Kirk is a super renegade ladies man, because that’s the image people outside of the fandom have. So they play up these iconic images and use them as a starting point because, maybe, they think that’s what a general audience expects to see at first…?
I think there’s some truth to that, alas. But unlike the case with the Abrams movies, they have a writers room with some genuine fans to keep them honest. My hope, anyway.
And It Works.
I think you forget that little Federation-Klingon War-thingy during DS9’s run.
As a life long fan, I am hating Discovery for so many reasons:Michael is raised on Vulcan yet is a loose cannon? Rediculous and suspect looking Klingons? More technobabble? The tardigrade monster? The drive runs on spores? So much BS to swallow.So far, Orville is the better show!
Pro-tip, life-long fan: “ridiculous” is spelled with an “i.”
She was raised on Vulcan, but had spent the last seven years repudiating her Vulcan upbringing. Not so far-fetched that in a moment of crisis that she would snap. Enjoy The Orville .
Except for a little fact that during those seven years, she wasn’t “repudiating her Vulcan upbringing” away in a farm in Iowa, she was the first officer on a Starfleet ship.
She was supposedly very good at her job as first officer, with all the responsibilities that come with that job, that her experienced captain and mentor thought she is ready to have her own command.
For her to act irrationally, disobey direct orders, attack her own captain and stage a coup don’t fit with her character from what they have told us in the pilot.
Ahmed, for both our sakes I’m doing my best not to engage with you at this point, so I’ll just say this: the answer to your conundrum re Burnham’s sudden change in behavior is actually pretty obvious. Watch the pilot again and see if you can figure it out this time, or not. Makes no difference to me either way.
Even Capt Kirk on TOS disobeyed direct orders from Admirals and such. And Kirk’s actions were almost always vindicated in the end.
“I am hating Discovery for so many reasons but watching every week anyway.”
@Frevitz — nothing like staying isolated while curled up in your warm safe cocoon of regurgitated ideas and concepts from the 1990s, presented by bad actors delivering inappropriate humor, that do nothing to push the boundary of science or humanity. Refreshing! /s
“Our story is the origin of the feeling that is TOS. That’s why we are 10 years before TOS. But we don’t start there. We get there.”
I really liked Goldman at Star Trek Las Vegas. But now I realize he doesn’t understand Star Trek. In only ten years, humanity will go from a ship from where most people hate each other and Landry calls prisoners garbage to the generally loving relationships we see in TOS? This makes no sense. The writers wanted to make a dark show, and they succeeded. But I do not believe they understand Star Trek.
Empireonline put it very well. Don’t talk about Starfleet values- show them. These people on Discovery are the opposite of Trek characters. As they wrote:
“Sure, it has the uniforms, the distinctive style of starships and the tech, and we’re certainly fed heaping helpings of what Starfleet is supposed to represent, but so much of that element is overridden by unfolding events and character moments that seem filled with resentment rather than admiration for what is essentially the franchise’s philosophical underpinning.”
Three episodes in your evaluation seems, at best, premature. (It’s worth noting that the Empire article you selectively quoted also had some very positive things to say about the show, and also advised its readers to wait-and-see.) And if you think that Starfleet and the Federation were always portrayed on TOS in an entirely positive light, I would respectfully suggest that you go back and watch again. You might note the cold shoulder an accused Kirk received from all of his former colleagues on Starbase 11, the corrupt and murderous starship captain Ron Tracy, the occasional mention of penal colonies, Kodos the Executioner, etc. I think the irony here is that you’re doing what Orci and Kurtzman were rightfully criticized for: misremembering TOS by viewing it through the utopian prism of TNG.
You forgot full-on racism towards Spock from a Starfleet officer in Balance Of Terror…
Actually I didn’t forget that at all; I just didn’t wish to spend a year and considerable bandwidth listing all the relevant examples. (Hence the “etc.”) 50 years after the fact it’s no surprise that people would mis-remember a TV space opera, especially with all the more recent sequels and spinoffs to color their impressions of it. But when they think of TOS as being utopian, and not merely optimistic, mid-remember it they do.
It’s true. TOS had the trifecta of Kirk, Spock and McCoy for the moral high ground but there were examples of every good old-fashioned human failing all around them in the 23rd century. Here’s something to think about: take the likes of Man Trap, Mudd’s Women, Charlie X, film it in 2017 word-for-word for a modern audience with 21st century filmmaking and see just how cute and cuddly it ends up. Not a chance. Man Trap’s a horror movie, Mudd’s a pimp trafficking junkie sex slaves and Charlie X is the stuff of nightmares.
Re: You forgot full-on racism towards Spock from a Starfleet officer…
Forget that, how about how facile Kirk was with the pejorative use of the term “half-breed” whenever he needed to piss Spock off to get his attention? I also found it disturbing that, in the future, men of Kirk’s station were familiar with the notion that dog-faced boys (and subhuman Vulcans) belonged in the circus… Hall’s right, Kirk’s Federation wasn’t as perfect as some seem to recall.
Yup. Nor was it meant to be. Surely if there’s an underlying theme that runs through almost every vein of TOS, it’s the quest to better oneself. They’re far from the finished article in the show.
Heck, it’s hard for me to hear some of McCoy’s remarks to Spock. They weren’t always said in a jocular, comradely way.
Roddenberry had McCoy there to symbolize the prejudices people of color were encountering in public and working life. It was so overt. Not that it’s “all better” now, but at least there are more actors of color in vital roles on TV. Bravo, “Discovery,” for leading the show with Sonequa Martin-Green. And Michelle Yeoh.
For me, many of those values are fleshed out in later series. There are several flawed humans in TOS: Crater, Stiles, Karidian, the Pergium miners, Garth, Mudd, Tracey. There was conflict among Federation members (Journey to Babel for instance).
I think it’s OK to show transition to ideals and different sides to everyone’s character.
If we judged every show after three episodes there’s probably only TOS that’d be worth watching.
Worth remembering Discovery and her crew are not the norm in Starfleet. Kinda thought that had already been made obvious.
Starfleet values sometimes include planning to strand your best friend alone on an abandoned mining colony! Utopian indeed!
Klingons as traditional villians, huh!! I think no one in the production team watched Star Trek TNG. Worf was a villian?
That hasn’t happened yet, dude. And in TOS the Organians stepped in for a reason.
I highly doubt we’ll see the Organians in this show.
Contrary to what you may think, Star Trek didn’t begin with TNG. There was that whole 21 years of them being the bad guys
“After the Battle of the Binary Stars, she has to come to terms with the idea that her actions resulted in the death of…”
The show kept saying that she was responsible for the war, for the death, etc.
HOW? Her actions resulted in none of these. Take Michael out of the equation, and all you’re left with is perhaps the Captain’s death if she still decided to try to capture instead of kill.
Starfleet has no way of knowing at this point that the Klingons were spoiling for a fight, regardless. Even Burnham has no way of knowing that. So while your point is technically correct, it’s also irrelevant, though that may change.
Re: Starfleet has no way of knowing…
I’ll say. One wonders how it is that after Archer’s run, we find that the Vulcans are still withholding valuable intel? And where in the writers’ room, is this fascination with Vulcans as Starfleet’s lifeline calls coming?
I agree 100%. She didn’t kill Georgiou, Tkuvma did. She didn’t start a war, Tkuvma did. Yes she committed mutinee, and you could say she started the war by landing on the Klingon ship when she was ordered to do a “flyby”, but we can’t overlook the actual people carrying out the war and the killing of Georgiou… the Klingons! It seems so unfair that Starfleet would treat this as black and white when it is clearly not.
It is most definitely unfair, even though Burnham seems to mainly agree with her colleagues’ harsh judgement about her conduct. Apparently scapegoating is still a thing in the 23rd century, sad to say. But bear in mind that this is a wartime situation, with thousands getting killed and tempers and judgements running hot. Historically, people are rarely at their best in such situations.
I’m really enjoying the show but honestly nothing about it feels like TOS. I mean, nothing. It takes place in the same time period and they added a few props and sound effects but thats it. NO ONE would ever guess this show takes place in the same era of TOS if they weren’t told it took place in that time. In fact you can do the opposite and say the show fits in post-Nemesis and it would feel just as believable once you take out the references.
It really does feel like its own thing. Obviously there are TOS connections but it feels nothing like the show IMO. Nothing like any of the shows although I guess a bit closer to DS9 but thats mainly its story line itself.
I’ve come to believe that all of the Trek series, movies, novels, etc. are really their own thing. Uniforms change without warning; sets add and lose details and coloration; Picard becomes an action hero, and so on. Nick Meyer addressed this issue a quarter-century ago when he compared Trek to musical interpretations of the Catholic mass: the same text, but all different, depending on the artist. And still the canonistas refuse to get it. Well, their choice, but by taking a larger view they might be able to enjoy what looks to possibly be a pretty good show, and spare themselves some heartburn.
@Michael That’s a pretty reasonable way to view it. Think about “comic book time”. The setting in comic books is always “the present” even if various characters have been around for decades. It’s a sliding continuity, with updated looks and technology.
Nicely put, Michael Hall. Not sure if I agree 100% with Meyer’s interpretation, but I like it.
“”Harberts noted diversity goes beyond the cast to a 50/50 men and women writer’s room and many women on the production as well””
Who cares ? We only need good writers. That’s it. If all good writers are men, ok, deal with it. If all good writers are women, ok, deal with it.
This is why STD is failing right now
That you assume a series is “failing” because its creative staff is diverse says everything anyone would want to know about your character.
Failing? What the hell are you talking about? What a dumbass statement.
@Capt. ransom — This is where these forums fail
There’s no posting history, so it invites these drive-by slams by people who have never posted before, and seemingly never post again, much less respond to the heated debate they initiated with their ridiculous comments. It’s getting to be enough to stop participating on this site …
Cadet, we hear you. If you have ideas to make our forums better, please email me! Kayla at TrekMovie dot com.
Careful, your privilege is showing.
I just assumed that the show would show The Federation “before” everyone just got along.
It’s before TOS – so it’ll probably end up there.
I would hate to be a Klingon in this series. It looks like it would take an hour to get dressed every morning.
…and the prosthetic teeth are clearly a hinderance to actually saying dialogue.
That’s…pretty much been the case since The Motion Picture
The teeth weren’t such a hindrance in TNG and DS9. Makeup designs really went overboard this time. It has the negative effect of making the Klingons sound like growling, incomprehensible animals. Thank God for the subtitles.
I understand what they’re trying to do with this series as far as bringing Star Trek up to date according to modern TV drama. That’s fine, but I don’t think (and I’ve seen just bits of these characters) that this crew could ever reach TOS. Those people were ethically and morally enlightened and that can’t happen in ten years. In fact, those people( the TOS crew) are already in Starfleet at this time. Roddenberry didn’t just envision technology changing, but people too ( for example, the crew’s nuanced view of Khan in TOS, or Kirk’s description of our 20th century as “paranoid” and “primitive.”) For myself I wouldn’t want a ten episode arc covering Kirk’s recovery from Edith’s death. Some people might, which is OK. But not sure that would be Star Trek (or Kirk Trek) and likely Kirk would either do his job or request leave.
Could ever reach TOS?
It’s not like TOS is on some mountain somewhere and no other Trek series could exceed it in quality.
If those that are criticizing Discovery would stop comparing it to TOS they might enjoy it more.
We are FOUR episodes into the freaking series, of course they’re not “at TOS” yet. That’s the whole point of the show: how does Starfleet and the Federation get there?
Kurtzman really hasn’t seen much Bermsm Trek has he? Klingons always bad guys? I’m hello, 15 years of a little known character named Worf?
*Sigh* I would guess that the writer of two Trek feature films and producer of the latest Trek series is actually aware of the Worf character, yes.
Re: …the writer…
I think it would be more accurate to characterize him as “a” writer. It’s not as if he came up with his contributions totally devoid of other writers’ efforts. In fact, I’m fairly certain he wasn’t responsible for the origination of any of the 3 central big SF ideas around which the three Trek scripts for which he wrote revolved?
However, his writing talents and strengths definitely had a contribution to make in his role as a strong editor giving the scripts a final pass.
And yes, or to be more specific, he had Worf’s ancestor in his final Trek motion picture opus, so doubtful that he was unaware of the character as the same actor played both roles.
Sloppy language on my part; thanks for the correction.
Worf was raised by humans. The peace between the Federation and the Klingons was always shaky at best. Worf was an exception. Look at the way the other Klingons looked at him.
TNG happens over 100 years later. It’s not relevant.
I wonder if the series finale will be the Discovery gets captured in the Borg quadrant? And they use the spore engine technology as a transwarp?
Given the total absence of Discovery references in canon up till now, I’m betting on a very bittersweet finale.
PLEASE from henceforth have the Klingon’s use the universal translator! If I have to suffer through anymore SUB-TITLES, I’ll take a hammer to my head!
So you want the Klingons, whose whole motivation for going to war is to “Remain Klingon,” to use the language of the people they’re fighting against because you’re tired of having to read subtitles?
Talk about first-world problems.
Actually of ALL the characters I favored most it was Michelle Yeoh’s !!!!
I am enamored with Ster Trek Discovery … the U.S.S. Shenzhou, the U.S.S. Discovery, capt. Philppa Georgiou and first officer Michael Burnham parralells capt Kirk and first officer Spock’s beginnings. Mr Spock was one of Kirk’s instructors at the academy soon destined to become captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise and Kirk his 1st officer. Spock found a weakness in his temperament and relinquish the captains 1st officer Kirk. I suspect the same thing is going to happen to captain Georgiou and former 1st officer Burnham. Them smug former shipmates of Burnham is going to get their comeuppance.
Should an article have a spoiler in the title? How about News About Michelle Yeoh (possible spoilers)
Did they seriously just say that their engines run on mushrooms? GTFOH how can anyone seriously buy this crap?