Harberts Says Nobody Is Safe On ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ + Kurtzman Talks VFX Challenges

Time to catch up on some Star Trek: Discovery news from around the web. We start with a new official video and a co-showrunner talking about character death. There is also news about Discovery’s original showrunner, some new details on the VFX for the show and a few more bits from across the web.

Nobody is safe?

CBS has released another one of their Star Trek: Discovery character videos, this time focusing on Captain Georgiou, who died in the second episode.

A quote that catches attention from the video comes from co-showrunner Aaron Harberts, who says:

I’d say nobody is safe — from the standpoint of in life nobody is safe. You just don’t know how fate intervenes. We have brave people working in dangerous environments and coming up against dangerous situations and dangerous cultures and anything can happen.

Is he just talking about the fate of Captain Georgiou? Or could there be others who won’t make it past season one? Besides a few random crew people and shuttle pilots we did see the death of Commander Landry (Rehkha Sharma) this season. Of course the creatives on the show aspire for Discovery to be akin to Game of Thrones which is famous for killing off major characters, so perhaps “nobody is safe” is a warning not to get too attached to any character.

Fuller exits American Gods

Speaking of nobody being safe. Discovery co-creator Bryan Fuller has left American Gods along with his co-showrunner Michael Green. According to reports Fuller left after a falling out over an impasse and issues with the budget for the second season for the series. Trek fans will remember that it was just over a year ago that Fuller exited as showrunner for Discovery and the reason given at the time was due to his split commitment with American Gods. This may also be a factor with American Gods as it was recently announced Fuller is heading up a reboot of Steven Spielberg’s Amazing Stories for Apple’s upcoming streaming service.

Kurtzman talks Discovery VFX challenge

In a Variety article discussing the growing need for feature-level visual effects in TV, Discovery co-creator and executive producer Alex Kurtzman discussed some of the challenges that have faced the show and why they had to split up the work:

“We were under-budgeted on visual effects, and as we started to grow we realized we needed more money allocated to that. The truth is there isn’t any one single house that could handle everything given the volume of CG we have, plus the turnaround itself. There’s a three-month window of turnaround time on work, and with so much work to do, sometimes different elements within a single shot will be divided between different houses that specialize in things like water or space or texture.”

More Disco Bits

Here are a few links about Discovery for this week:

SyFy: How can we make Star Trek: Discovery canon?

ScreenRant: Could CBS All Access survive without Star Trek: Discovery?

StarTalk Radio: Star Trek: Discovery’s Spore Drive is nonsense.

SyFy: The problem with gatekeeping in Star Trek fandom.


Star Trek: Discovery is available on CBS All Access on in the US and airs in Canada on the Space Channel. It is available on Netflix outside the USA and Canada.

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

newest oldest
Meee

Maybe they could save a little money by ditching the terrible Klingon prosthetics and sparkly uniforms down to the shoes that look like a sparkly track suit from the 70s.

Give us some damn canned ship beauty shots!!

TUP

You think replacing the uniforms would save them money?

Disinvited

TUP,

Well, I do find it puzzling that a production that Moonves stamped “paid in full” before it even went before the cameras should want for anything, let alone an adequate fx budget? And while the trekmovie staff only sees a parallel to Fuller stretching himself too thin across two productions, I have to ask could this noted DISC budget have been likewise a reason for his exit?

But then, I’m equally puzzled by fans that apparently believe they could pay for such budget shortfalls by holding auctions of say, the Georgiou character’s costumes and effects for example?

JimJ

Ditch the Klingons and their “new look” FOR SURE!!!!!

Ian

Fuller is really building a reputation as being a visionary creative with very expensive tastes and a rather too stubborn streak. It’s frustrating to watch.

Tiger2

I kind of wonder why he doesn’t just go into movies? I mean he can certainly find people would be willing to fund his work and he can go a lot higher in terms of scope and budget. I know he’s mostly been a TV guy but its like he hasn’t tried to produce any films and thats probably what would make him happier too.

kmart

Talent isn’t going toward features at this point, it is ducking them like mad owing to the level of compromise on films (his co-showrunner, who is also bailing, is probably the exception that proves the rule, what with BR2049, LOGAN and ORIENT EXPRESS writing credits this year, but that level of success won’t last), which is immense, and almost nobody gets final cut.

And just as important for Fuller, it is short-form, which doesn’t seem to reflect his strong suite. Nobody’s going to pay for (or sit through) a 9 hour feature like SHOAH, regardless of who made it.

Going by the half-ep I saw, I really didn’t get where the money was going on DSC, unless the klingon costumes are made from diamonds. And going by a lot of the comments and the occasional frame grab that turns up here, I still can’t tell. VFX look generic and uninspired.

Trek in a Cafe

Kmart, I was that kid who saw Shoah complete in a theater when it came out and it changed my life. Big mistake?

kmart

More power to you (and your bladder.) It took me three days to get through it on VHS, and it was a great experience. Just don’t think there were all that many takers to offset a huge budget project.

Disinvited

kmart,

You never heard of the Old Vic’ filmed performances of the 8 and a half hour play, “The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby” in the 1980s? The Beeb made a mini-series of it but I have a vague recollection of it getting a film exhibition on our side of the pond quite apart from its Broadway run as a play.

Or does that extra 30 minutes make all the difference in the world?

Marja

kmart, it isn’t quite fair to say “no one” would sit through nine hours of “Shoah.” It’s very highly regarded in the documentary field and has had repeated showings over the years — and as Trek in a Cafe says, it changes lives.

Regarding money on the screen in “Discovery,” I’d be willing to bet that the craftwork required for the Klingon “look,” sets, and costumes was very pricey. There is scrolling and tracery in the metal worn by the Klingons. There is That Makeup. There are leather costumes, cut, form-fitted, and stitched, and so on. Someone traced all the markings onto the Klingon armor, or someone built the molds for same. Each Klingon “house” has a representative with a very different look to the people of other houses.

The devil is in the details — and the dollars are, too.

As to SFX, I don’t notice them so much unless they’re really clumsy. But I imagine SFX are kind of your bailiwick, from your other comments I’ve read.

Odd thing: in the episodes I’ve watched at a friend’s house, any time the Discovery goes into shroom drive, the screen pixellates [slow transmission over the stream, maybe?] and the VFX looks TOTALLY crappy.

There should be more of a balance next season. I reckon the producers and show-runners are learning from their mistakes in this season.

kmart

I did say LIKE shoah, not SHOAH itself – obviously people did sit through that. But nobody is going to do an 8 hr HANNIBAL THE MOTION PICTURE so that falls more closely into a near one-off territory.

Vulcan Soul

It’s pretty obvious at this point that Fuller likes starting new things better than seeing them through…

Marja

There are some folks who are really good at that, envisioning and starting projects. Then there are folks who are good at running the marathon until it’s completed.

Spock Jenkins

Any chance Fuller will jump on STAR TREK: DISCOVERY??

Kylo

Nope, as stated in the article his new shiny object is Amazing Stories. I really don’t think I would want him back at this point. Too easily distracted.

Marja

Kylo,
I’m reminded of Colbert demonstrating the attention span of the press/media. Sitting at his desk, speaking about the issue, he spies a shiny object descending from above, on a string. Then he bats at it like a cat. Very funny.

Trekboi89

Where is the money really going- there are no effects shots in the show, no establishing shots, mno sets with windows, just the occasional lame space “Battle” Enterprise had better effects & more effects.

PaulB

Nothing you just wrote is true, but okay…whatever.

DiscoTrek

hunh?

TUP

There are no effects shots?????

Chris

Pretty much every shot has an effect in it. viewscreen, phaser blasts, windows, transporter effects, tardigrade, spore drive, threat ganglia, force fields, space walks, crystal radio antenna, etc.

Phil

Apparently you haven’t actually watched the show.

David F. Guy

In other words, Trekboi89 has not watched Discovery. That much is clear since that entire post is incorrect.

Holden

In other words, David F. Guy likes picking low-hanging fruit in order to state an obvious that was already better articulated by others.

AdAsteraPerAspera

it’s old news at this point that Trekboi doesn’t like Discovery and will attack it at any given opportunity. It’s kinda sad.

Soren

They haven’t got a clue what they are doing. How can you build up any collective affection for the crew as a group if main characters are going to be getting bumped off every 5 minutes? As with many other things the producers are just lazily buying into whatever they think are ‘in’ concepts. Viewers don’t have any feelings for anybody on ‘Game of Thrones’, as it is its whole modus operandi is that death, misery and evil are everywhere. Is that really what Harberts thinks Star Trek should now be copying?

MattR

No main character has died yet.

Dom

If there’s even a faint possibility of moving into movies, why would you want your character to be killed off? I have to say, following Sela’s appearance, it would have been fascinating to see alt-Tasha show up at some point…

Marja

Soren, I agree, that is worrying. The charm of Trek in its many forms has always been the “family/friends” we visit with once a week. A few are lost over the years, but the core characters remain.

I do believe that for drama’s sake, the core characters should evolve, and that has happened in later iterations of Trek, thanks be.

Soren

Marja, yes, having that TV ‘family’ to root for and like was what made Star Trek almost unique in sci-fi.

Like you I also have no issues with long form story telling either. Done properly it offers a great opportunity to deepen those bonds amongst the crew further.

Having a ‘Tasha moment’ every year though, with a death done purely for lazy shock value? Absolutely not!

Tiger2

But that hasn’t remotely happened. I think all he’s saying is since the theme is a war one then of course people could die and maybe someone will. He’s only saying is its not like the other shows where no character EVER died unless the actor just wanted to leave the show. If you look at the history of Trek characters and death in Trek they are actually very rare. TOS: Spock. Famously killed off in WOK because Leonard Nimoy wanted to move on from Trek but brought back in the very next film. TNG: Tasha Yar and Data. Denise Crosby wanted off the show in season one and Brent Spiner had been trying to pull a Harrison Ford for several films asking to be killed off. Finally got it in Nemesis which was the last film. DS9: Dax. Terry Farrell wanted off the show in season 6 so producers killed the character off. VOY: No deaths of any main cast members. ENT: Trip died in the finale, but only when the show was cancelled. KT: No deaths of any main cast members. So yeah they are highly highly rare in Trek. Main characters have pretty good job security lol. I mean many have ‘died’ on screen (Janeway probably leads in most people who have died multiple times) but always brought back of course. Star Trek is more like Marvel in that way where its pretty hard to kill off a main character and if they are nearly 90% of… Read more »

Hollyweird

In VOY, the original Harry Kim died. The one that took his place was from an alternate timeline – and it NEVER GOT ADDRESSED IN SUBSEQUENT EPISODES. Fail.

Disinvited

Hollyweird,

Not to mention Kes and Naomi Wildman. And one would have thought duplicate Wildman’s orphaning and adoption would have been addressed at some point in her maturation?

Disinvited

Tiger2,

The KT’s Christopher Pike was indeed, main cast.

And while you may not consider George Kirk a main character, someone at Paramount apparently does to the point of dropping coin on him. Also, supposedly the whole KT film series, not to mention the founding television series itself, couldn’t have been launched without Prime Spock according to some.

Tiger2

No I don’t consider Pike as a main cast member since he was rarely even marketed. You also have to remember at the end of the first film he was basically kicked off the ship when Kirk took it over so I never thought he would have a big role from that point on even if he stayed in the films. But it was clear he wasn’t going to be on the adventures in subsequent movies so he was more of a supporting cast member and always just a set up for Kirk to take his role as Captain.

But OK, we can agree to disagree on that.

Disinvited

Tiger2,

Re: I don’t consider Pike as a main cast member

Your backpedaling attempts don’t matter. And your marketing nonsense even less so as it would mean McCoy’s not a main character which is ridiculous.

Besides, this very site listed Bruce Greenwood as a member of the main cast.

Tiger2

Disinvited, is as if you are THIS bored in life and want to start up silly arguments.

I never considered Pike a main character because it was clear he wasn’t going to be part of the crew in future films. In Star Trek, especially the ship based shows, the main characters are part of the ship and not an admiral sitting on Earth somewhere.

But if you want to agree to disagree, I said FINE man. Its not a big deal, geesh.

Disinvited

Tiger2

Re:…wasn’t going to be part of the crew in future films. I

Now’s who’s being silly? You keep repeating this wrong statement of yours as if somehow it makes it not wrong, when you know that in fact the Pike character WAS in the next film AND in command of the Enterprise when he was killed.

It was never clear what you asserted prior, and even made less so by the fact that the exact opposite occurred to what you claimed would happen. What IS clear is that you were and ARE wrong.

There’s no agreeing to disagree about it. You were wrong about Pike not being a part of the crew in the following film. What IS apparent is an assertion you’ve often felt I needed reminding of “You are not a part of Paramount or Bad Robot.” and their thoughts for their product, and the PIKE character in particular, clearly did not go your way.

Tiger2

LOL he wasn’t part of the crew in STID man which goes to my entire point. He was sitting in an office behind a desk in his first scene in that movie. They only made him command of the Enterprise for the story man, but he it was always going to be Kirk actually in charge of the ship. How I know? Because they literally killed him off before he ever stepped foot of the bridge. Did you miss that small giveaway in the film?

Disinvited, you’re just so annoying. Stop wasting time with these useless, hair splitting arguments. Agree to disagree and move on already. Geesh.

Disinvited

Tiger2

Re: They only made him command of the Enterprise for the story man

Everything that happens in any film is for the story. You are are just spewing the obvious and claiming it means something else so you can speciously pretend it somehow makes you right.

And as for “actually” being in charge of the ship, Pike actually was in charge of the ship in the previous picture; therefore, by your stated logic, part of that film’s main cast which contradicts your constant protestations as to it actually being otherwise — a main cast, whose future disposition in the following films you never had a single clear clue at the time no matter how “clear” you claim it was.

And as for splitting hairs, you are the one engaging in that with these behind the scenes fantasies you keep concocting and proffering as ersatz eyewitness testimony to how the film’s stories were constructed and for what purposes.

Disinvited

Tiger2,

KT Kirk was every bit as killed off as his Prime counterpart.

Tiger2

Disinvited, no offense but you clearly didn’t either get my point or read my post correctly. I’m saying characters who are killed off for GOOD. This is what the entire discussion is about. Not killing a character for two seconds but permanently for story development. The producers of Discovery are saying main characters may be killed off for good which is pretty rare in Trek as I have showed.

And I said that they kill off the characters within the story all the time, but bring them back as was the case with KT Kirk. In fact I think every Captain has been killed in an episode lol. MAYBE not Archer since I can’t recall if he ever died once but I think all the others (the entire crew of Discovery has now been killed off over 50 times thanks to Mudd ;)). I made that point pretty clear. Its not the same as a character dying and never showing up again like Tasha Yar or Dax.

C’mon man, this was my entire point.

Disinvited

Tiger2.

Re: characters who are killed off for GOOD

I think you were and are clearly confused.

That’s not what you said in your closing, “In other words its hard for any Trek character to die or stay completely dead.”

The proper conjunction is AND if you meant what you now claim, not OR.

Tiger2

LOL man, you are this bored. Again, the entire argument is about characters actually being killed of the show. KT Kirk was never going to be killed off the franchise lol. It was just a plot development in the film which was resolved literally 15 minutes later like most Trek stories. I mean seriously.

Disinvited

Tiger2,

Re: KT Kirk was never going to be killed off the franchise

The exact same thing was said and believed of Prime Kirk and Prime Spock both of which whose deaths disproved your PT Kirk impossibility, no matter how many times you repeat it, the moment you first said it. Supposedly, the whole reason for the creation of the KT was so that the possibility of anything, including the irrevocable death of KT Kirk, WOULD be possible. That ANYTHING negated your NEVER long before you came up with it. Also, despite your never claim, Tasha Yar DID come back and NEVER had an on screen irrevocable death after that resurrection.

Disinvited

Tiger2,

Re: KT Kirk was never going to be killed off the franchise

“PT Kirk impossibility” should be “KT Kirk impossibility”

David F. Guy

“How can you build up any collective affection for the crew as a group if main characters are going to be getting bumped off every 5 minutes?”

Since no main character has yet died… what are you talking about?

Plus–Game of Thrones.

David F. Guy

I just don’t get some of the people who post here. They keep making things up in their determination to trash the show. They’re like Trump–completely delusional and dishonest.

The linked article from Syfy Wire is a strawman attack. So the fans’ criticism about Discovery is essentially because of its gender/sexual diversity, is directed at women of color, and comes from white men? Seriously? I don’t know what the columnist has been reading all the time (perhaps in a politically biased filter bubble, which still wouldn’t excuse her prejudices though).

Many fans don’t like Discovery, and for diverse reasons. The series throws an established continuity of 700 episodes overboard, it comes with fake nostalgia, the Klingons are just dumb, the atmosphere is cold and militaristic, characters are either unlikable or unlikely, stories are contrived, and so on. These are the actual reasons why many fans are put off that we can frequently read in social media. A very small minority complains about the series’ diversity. But some people make this insignificant minority a big deal because it fuels their political views or is simply the more exciting news. In the sad logic of some people, the mere fact that we criticize Discovery makes all of us racists.

DiscoTrek

but you watch it and go to its message boards and bitch….k

JimJ

Thank you for your carefully thought out logical thoughts, Bernd. You hit the nail on the head though the agenda makers and lovers want to cry wolf (racism/sexism) because it’s the lazy way to defend this slop. WE know the truth!

BoredomCorner

Except that there ARE a lot of people attacking DSC for exactly that reason. You’re more thoughtful critique is a rare one.

David F. Guy

A lot? No. Some? Yes. But they’re a vast minority, despite being vocal. Statistically, they don’t matter. The majority of fans are better people.

Tiger2

I will actually agree with you Berend that the majority who don’t like the show are because it feels too much like a reboot, hates the Klingons, don’t like the story lines, etc. I read Reddit and those are the biggest issues. I do think others don’t like it because of the diversity stuff but that is a pretty low minority at this point and those people get shouted down on most boards and certainly on Reddit. And yeah as I suspected once the show came on most of those people would just go away anyway like many now have like on these boards. I do think majority who don’t like it are for valid reasons. Now it doesn’t mean you have to AGREE with those reasons personally but if someone really don’t like how the Klingons are portrayed or that their new look is just too distracting then yes its a problem for them. I personally like the show despite some issues like it being a prequel or feeling more like a reboot of the universe instead of a continuation of it but as I have said many times I’m giving the show a wide berth and even with my issues with it I still like it than don’t. But even I have to admit, there is something a bit ‘cold’ about it versus the other shows. Maybe its jumping into a war theme off the bat or that the characters feel a bit too unlikable but I don’t… Read more »

Kirok

@Tiger

I will freely admit that I am certainly being harder on the show than I would be had it been on a platform I didn’t have to jump through hoops to get in addition to paying extra for. Since we are paying extra specifically for this show I think the viewers have a legit beef when it doesn’t gel well right off the bat. It ought to be judged as harshly as a feature film would be. I honestly believe I’m not alone in that.

Tiger2

And thats fine. I have never gotten on anyone’s case if they didn’t like the show for ANY reason outside of the diversity stuff. And of course when you pay for something you will naturally be more critical of it, I agree, which is why films are so heavily scrutinized. And CBS knows this which is why they kept delaying it and spending a fortune to get it on the air because they know they have to make it worth people’s money. That is actually the side effect to streaming shows versus normal TV anyone saw coming because so many people thought internet shows would be cheap and sloppy affairs but its turned out to be the opposite. They are expensive well produced shows just like premium cable because you are paying for it and its easy to stop paying for a cheap quickly produced show over a well funded and produced one. It still doesn’t mean the shows are good but it does show they are trying and they are certainly trying with Discovery. I have no issues paying for it though and will keep paying for it even if I don’t completely love it. Its still worth it to have (especially when I’m only paying $1.50 per episode and I spend more on that on sodas) and its exciting to just have a weekly show again. And yeah Trek are known for so-so to bad first seasons but improve in time. I still think if Enterprise got 7… Read more »

Hollyweird

My wife and stepson are black, and love Discovery.

I very much hope that upsets some people.

TUP

The more we hear about Fuller, the more its probably a very good thing he moved on from Disco. Its great to be have a creative vision but if you cant get along with people and you cant deliver on time and budget, whats the point?

American Gods has a $10 million per episode budget and he wants more.

And some of these tidbits we hear support that Fuller might not have been right for Star Trek. Some of the decisions fans seem to dislike the most were his. And there were rumors one of the big issues were lousy SFX and now we hear they feel under-budgeted.

Hopefully the SFX get even better as we go forward. Personally I like them though I dont always like HOW they are rendered (the very dark space shots, the very fast ship shots etc).

TUP

Are all comments going through moderation before posting or just mine? (or is this a glitch) lol

DiscoTrek

probably a glitch. I’ve noticed at times as well

Phil

It still appears that certain words or phrases will flag a post for moderation.

TUP

I know of one word that always goes to Moderation which is the word that comes after “US War on….” So whenever we discussed STID, it would happen lol

Marja

Iraq? Afghanistan? T3rr0r? Drugs? VD?
LOL

Phil

Yeah, my line of work, !n$ur@nce advisor, gets sucked in, too. Financial Advisor is okay, apparently.

Martin

Fantastic! I had a post which was badly botched by quick iPad typing combined with iPad spell correction – the moderator fixed it so I wouldn’t look like a doofus.

On iOS devices, where you pick the dictionaries, you should be able to also pick Memory Alpha as a spelling source.

Marja

I noticed this for the first time today! I wrote “cr@ppy” and thought it was that, but my subsequent comments, completely free of iffy language, are being held as well.

But this will probably be held, so when you see it in six hours, you’ll know you aren’t alone :^)

Phil

Did you say something bad about AP?

Kirok

Budget issues have always been a thing for shows like this. Even GoT has their own limitations. That said, it seems to me there are plenty of places they could have saved money. And many of them would have given the show a more canonical look. Like get rid of the holographic communicators. That’s just money spent for no good reason. And I’m sure the new Klingon prosthetics cost more than the ones used in TMP and the spinoff shows since. Do they really need all that out of context stuff in Capt. Lorca’s office?

Not really a fan of Harberts using the “no one is safe” line. Sure, we can lose a character here and there but this isn’t GoT. And they shouldn’t try to be. It really feels like they are trying too hard to be a Trek version of GoT. They should aspire to be their own thing rather than copy some other popular (albeit very well done) show.

TUP

I cant say what specific elements cost. But I cant imagine the Holo stuff costs much. That original on-location shoot that was rather pointless likely cost a ton though. But thats a cost borne by the “Pilot”.

Reportedly, Disco is, what $6 million per episode? America Gods is $10 million per episode. So we’re doing fine. Its probably more allocation than actual budget. Those sets would have cost a bundle to build.

I think the SFX are all really great but they could render the ships in more dramatic detail. But its hard to tell. I want a slow, close panning beauty shot ala TMP to really appreciate. But to be fair, when they do the pan and scan of the Discovery (moving into a window or screen), they look pretty good.

DataMat

TNG copied off TOS in S1. VOY copied off TNG in S1. DS9 was sort of unsure what it was, but TNG feel/structure was sort of present in S1. ENT was structured like VOY in S1. Point is most shows struggled for an identity in S1. Lets give Discovery some room and time to grow before we make any firm conclusions. Game of Thrones is a current show with huge success so naturally a lot of TV shows are inspired by it.

Kirok

The difference is those shows were all spinoffs. They fed off their own universe of what came before. Not what some other popular show at that time was doing. TNG did not emulate Moonlighting or Murder, She Wrote. It fed off of TOS.

somethoughts

I would still watch the show if they used the 60s style look, that would have saved so much money. At the end of the day as long as good stories and acting and good special effects, I would be as happy as a horta eating rocks. I have really enjoyed Discovery so far and watched it every Sunday like how I used to watch every TNG episode back in the 90s.

Phil

I still think Lorca is going to get it. He seems to irritate people way to easily.

Tidbits. Discovery is canon. Deal with it. Discovery won’t be around forever, All Access will survive without it. Warp drive is nonsense, too. So are transporters and starships, for that matter.

Kirok

@Phil

I find Lorca to be the most interesting person on the show.

Danpaine

Agreed about Lorca, Kirok. If they lose him, big mistake, imo.

TUP

I agree. My sense is, he was probably destined to die. However, he really should stick around.

A few clues tell us that might be the case.

The series was always said to be a more “below the decks” perspective. Thats not really been true but one could argue the Captain isnt the MAIN focus. The series seems very ensemble though, Lorca included. So unless they intended to shift to where the Captain was the main focus (by promoting one of the others), whats the point in changing?

And secondly, who would take Lorca’s place among the crew? If they killed him but did not replace him from outside the crew, there is really no one ready or believable in that role.

Michael seems destined to get their eventually (its her arc) but she isnt there yet. It would be nearly as bad as Kirk’s Cadet to Captain promotion. Saru is cool but as Captain, I dont see it. There is literally no one.

Unless the ship ends up “somewhere else” and Lorca dies and they have to fend for themselves, they’d either have to keep Lorca or cast a new actor and new character to be Captain. I dont really see that.

Danpaine

I don’t see it either, TUP. And if they do knock him off, at least they should wait a while. In both Georgiou’s and T’Kumva’s case, they killed them off way too early, far too soon for any viewer to get invested in the characters. I don’t miss them at all because I never got to know them. It even takes the edge off Burnham’s arc, because I’m not ‘feeling’ her guilt like I feel I should, over this captain who was killed who we barely knew. Yeah, apparently they had over a decade of adventures together, but we heard/saw nothing of them. And I don’t want to read a comic to get the ‘backstory.’ That ship has sailed. For me, anyway. We need to get to know these characters, and like them, before they get killed off – and hopefully in a meaningful way, not just because the showrunners are trying to make it ‘edgy.’

Marja

Danpaine, I don’t agree so much about Capt. Georgiou. I got emotionally invested in the character, either because of her mentor chemistry with Burnham, or because of Yeoh and Martin-Green’s excellent portrayals.

If Lorca dies, there will probably be a number of people who stop watching. He is a very interesting character — complex, with unplumbed depths [so far]. And who would want to lose an actor like Isaacs? That would be just crazy.

I do believe that Burnham would make a much better first officer than Saru, and the captain/FO working relationship would be interesting between her and Lorca. He’s willing to do just about anything in the war [and probably exploration too]; her approach is more moderate and “Vulcan” [except for that mutiny thing, which was predicated on the “Vulcan hello” grin].

Though I love Doug Jones and his dedication to acting alien characters, and his sensitively acted Saru, I feel the *character* of Saru as conceived by the writers isn’t quite … suitable for Starfleet. It’s because of the fear thing, mostly, but I keep wondering how Saru would have made it through the Academy. It seems like the first battle simulation or Zero-G exercise would have totally freaked him out, not to mention the tendencies of young humans to prank others, “pull their chain,” gossip, and so on. I would like to see more development of this character so I can believe in him more.

somethoughts

yes in st2009 we learn alt spock lecture kirk on facing fear in certain death, to control one’s fear. That is the attribute of a star fleet officer and captain. Saru should not be 1st officer or in starfleet.

Martin

I didn’t realize it until today, and don’t think I have seen it elsewhere, that Mudd’s second episode… where he tries to take the ship.. was released the same week 10/31/17 as the 50th anniversary of I, Mudd, 11/3/1967, the second Mudd episode where he tried to take the ship.

Marja

Wow, Martin, either you have been studying Memory Alpha,or you have a well-thumbed copy of “The Making of Star Trek” ;^)

How appropriate for Mudd: “trick or treat!”

Martin

Actually I was born on the same day that I, Mudd was shown. Still didn’t make the connection until I saw Rainn Wilson on Conan the other night and then started to wonder about the week of that second episode.

AJ Dimick

I genuinely love this show but I have so little angst over any of these characters being safe. Not really invested in em.

JimJ

Ditch them all and start over with likable characters and a ship that fits Trek history/lore. I’m all for that!!!

DataMat

I like the idea of a more serialized ‘trek tv show. I don’t like the idea of our chief core characters being bumped off for ‘reality’ sake. This is entertainment and it is not true reality. We have enough reality outside of tv and Star Trek. If any big characters are killed, at least do it only if it is really the right thing to do.

Perplex

I have to say, for all the money, the FX in the space shots look underwhelming. But that might be more about the style than the technical quality.

Danpaine

You’re not alone there, Perplex. I’ve been very disappointed in the space shots, which are historically one of my favorite things about Trek.

kmart

ORVILLE is doing the space environment stuff pretty well; the VFX super told me they studied those earlty model shots very carefully for CG replication and have been able to do later CG views of the ship that are awfully convincing, especially in later episodes.

Tiger2

Yeah I have to agree. The space stuff does look underwhelming, especially since we know how much they are paying for the show. I remember being enthralled with the effects from TNG through Enterprise. TNG just looked great after watching TOS for so long lol but they in hindsight they didn’t get really good until third season on. DS9 had decent effects in early season but also greatly improved in its third season IMO. Enterprise was great from the start and it was obvious they were taking advantage of CGI more than any other show by that time.

In other words Discovery will probably improve since they all have in time. But its really no excuse today since effects look pretty amazing on most shows now. I mean The Expanse is also a space driven show and probably only a fraction of what Discovery costs and has amazing effects.

DIGINON

Looking back at Enterprise some of the CGI shots don’t hold up very well. Some of it may be due to the low resolution that they were rendered. Even though the show was shot in Full HD I read that many VFX shots were only rendered at 480p or 720p at most for cost reasons. Also some of the CGI sets they tried in season 4 look pretty bad.
I like The Expanse quite a lot but some of the space shots took some getting used to. A friend of mine almost gave up on the show because of the effects before he was hooked by the story (took him some episodes).
As for Discovery, I agree that some of the space shots feel like they are lacking something. Some shots look beautiful but are often quite short. I have found some ship movements to look pretty bad. Bad choreography, basically. I am sure there are a lot of VFX shots on the show that we are not even aware of. But I hope they improve on the ship shots.

kmart

Enterprise’s spaceship work always looked bad to me, right from the very flat views of the ship in dock at the beginning. But it wasn’t till that godawful library at the beginning of s2 that I threw up my hands and turned channels. That wasn’t even WING COMMANDER level, it was just abysmal, like the spacesuited figures in B5’s WORLD WITHOUT END.

GAME OF THRONES, whatever you think of the story, delivers on the environment as well as the critters, and if DSC aspires to GoT level devotees, they’d better realize that doing a short shrift presentation on EXT. SPACE of all things is going to detract in a major way.

Mawazi

One thing that GoT has going to its advantage as far as “look and feel,” is that it’s based on (basically) a real time period in world history. So, lots of available references, rather than “make it futuristic.” Designing for futuristic Sci-Fi is hard, and usually expensive.

Fritz

It would help if they just held a shot of space for longer than a couple of seconds once in awhile. One of the joys of Trek has been the sense of wonder for the infinite. Is a ten or fifteen second shot of a starship passing a beautifully rendered planet or nebula asking for too much?

somethoughts

Yes, TMP and TUC had great space shots. These are space ships moving slowly amd gracefully through the infinite galaxy and universe. They need to slow it down.

Fritz

Maybe not the lengths of TMP, ha, but yeah some beauty passes would be cool.

Mawazi

Ah, yes, I had forgotten why TMP is affectionately referred to as “The Motionless Picture.”

somethoughts

lol

Tiger2

I agree, I don’t think we seen the ship moving in a planet orbit yet which is a Star Trek main stay. There isn’t enough of the ship just gliding through space like so many of the other shows did.

I don’t think we got one long shot of the ship either. Its just too many quick cuts and weird angles.

We did a better job on new voyages, lol.

Ace Frehley

Is this the prop master extraordinaire himself?

Wesley

The part about the VFX makes me chuckle. They had a perfectly good in-house team comprised of skilled, veteran, Emmy award-winning, VFX artists. Those artists had experience in previous Star Trek series, Firefly, and BSG. The VFX side was never “under-budgeted.” It was always planned that some of the VFX would be farmed out to vendors with the in-house team taking the bulk of the load. Then, very poor decisions were made, like dissolving the in-house team, which resulted in budget consequences on the VFX side.

While there may be a fair amount of compositing work being done, nothing that I have seen in this series thus far, especially on the CG side, save the tardigrade, should have taken, or looks like, a 3 month turnaround.

AtzeH

Hmm… would be weird to see Michael Burnham die. I think the first Candidates are Ash and Lorca. The first because of Voq and L’Rell, the second because of the other universe and to free the captains chair for Michael.

Marja

AtzeH,
That would be a mighty sudden ascent for Burnham, from condemned mutineer to specialist to captain. Boggles the mind, kind of like Kelvinverse Kirk.

Although if she is forgiven for her “crimes” by Starfleet brass, as a former first officer, that’s quite possible.

But … Lorca! They should not kill off this character!

somethoughts

They really shouldnt kill anyone unless the story made sense. Landry for example was terrible.

Georgiou should have lived too, Michael needs a friend and motherly figure in space.

T’Kuvma should have lived also and maybe killed off near the end of run for satisfaction and a conclusion.

Some of the best star trek is about near death or death episodes or movies but there should be a reason and theme for it, Picard in best of both worlds or Spock in TWOK.

Dont just kill off characters for the sake of being like game of thrones.

Make your own path.

FLB

Exactly. And if you are to kill characters, at least wait until there is some kind of emotional attachement. I did not care in any way, shape or form about Landry. Her death was useless and did not make the story move forward. She was essentially what pop culture refers as a ‘Red Shirt’.

That said, the character I want gone is the one who *cannot* die, i.e. Sarek.

Tiger2

Well not quite Marja. Burnham was first officer for years on the Shenzhou. She fell from grace over what she did but she clearly already has the skills and experience to lead her own ship and crew which wouldn’t be a huge leap if that’s where they are going.

KT Kirk was a young cadet who has never spent any time in space from what I can tell until Nero showed up and he’s now Captain of (I guess) the flagship. Thats a great leap even if he was a star cadet who was now commanding people who been serving on starships for years.

somethoughts

Kirk is a legend though and I guess they wanted to portray him as such regardless which time line he in. Being born during a space battle and taking down the baddy that killed his pops. Going from young cadet kirk in 2hrs of screen time 😂 to the newest flag ship of starfleet.

I guess they tried to fix that in STID bh taking the ship from him then giving it back. Hopefully the next movie they wear the nice red uniforms seen in TWOK and TUC.

For the next movie maybe they do the Dinosaurs time travel idea for the first TMP idea. Or cancel KT and reboot with prime time.

Tiger2

I do understand why they did it that way because there was no guarantee the movie would be a hit and if it was a one off film they wanted it to feel complete with Kirk and crew together and in their familiar positions like on the show.

But it still felt too much of a stretch. But hey, it happened so you either accept it or you don’t at this point (and I do).

But Burnham is a very different case. She is a very experienced officer who has been in a leadership role for years. Its more about her showing she can be trusted again in that role and not if she can actually do it or not.

FLB

The first I think is Stamets.

And soon.

Marja

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I love Stamets, from his cockiness to his impatience to his ‘shroom-trippin’ kindness. He’s “the smartest guy in the room” and not everybody likes him, but he seems, in many ways, like a real scientist [perhaps missing a good sense of geeky humor]. And, delightfully, a thorn in Lorca’s side.

Gary 8.5

Stamets and Tilly are my favorite supporting characters.

Some guy online incorrectly predicted that Tilly was going to die at the hands of our suspected Klingon spy in the midseason finale, having walked in on Tyler/Voq sending a message to the Klingons.

i am VERY GLAD that he was wrong.

Mawazi

Lets hope not. He’s one of their more interesting characters.

Hollyweird

I think Fuller is on the way to proving himself a flake. I hope not, but come on….

Mawazi

Don’t get the ‘flake’ thing. He’s proving himself to be stubborn and unwilling to change things he doesn’t feel need to be changed. I can respect that about him. When you’ve put your blood, sweat, and tears into something, it’s perfectly natural to feel some sense of ownership.

Marja

Have I been banned from TrekMovie? Or does it take 10 hours to pass the moderation process?

Marja

I only asked bc I submitted about four comments to this thread earlier today.

Not gonna re-type them. Sigh.

Disinvited

Marja,

Re: does it take 10 hours to pass the moderation process?

It can. I’ve had to wait days for some.

somethoughts

Would have been cool to just have a starfleet show, where you follow Michael thru the academy, Shinzou, and then on to uss discovery then join and command a constitition class starship. From young to old. Forget the Klingons, just show different space adventures and sci fi twilight zone episodes with drama and character development.

Marja

It may change in Season Two, somethoughts. We’ll see. CBSAA is bound to take the reactions and pleasure of its audience into account, so they can continue succeeding with the show.

I think, based on seeing previews in theaters [more of them than Paramount even did for “Beyond”], that DISCO has brought in viewers new to Trek, and perhaps some who, tired of KT/JJ Trek, were looking for a steady source of Trek.

FLB

If only one thing was to change, I think it would be the use of the Klingon language. It seems to be an irritant for many viewers, looking at various forums/social media.

Mawazi

Luckily for them, we seem to have already entered the next phase of the show, at least to some degree. This new storyline doesn’t seem to be part of the Klingon war storyline, though I could be wrong.

Honestly, I’ve never been a fan of Klingon episodes of Trek. I think Klingons and their society are pretty boring and one note. I’ve enjoyed season 1.1 of Discovery, but I’m hoping they’ll branch out a bit from here on out.

Tiger2

Because it is. I don’t mind it when they speak it here and there like they did in the movies and shows (minus TOS where they ONLY spoke English) but it is too much in Discovery. I applaud the effort trying to make the Klingons more ‘alien’ but they already are and listening to a fake language, slowly, doesn’t make the story itself any more stronger.

I realized how much more I enjoyed the last episodes with the Klingons because they were speaking English most of the time and in a normal pace at that.

somethoughts

very true, I am very happy to see quality star trek on tv again. I wonder if boborci has been enjoying it also.

Tiger2

I asked him directly that question last month on this site and he actually responded and said he haven’t seen it. That was probably about 4-5 episodes in. Maybe since of course he’s given it a shot but sadly I think Orci’s Trek fandom has faded a great deal ironically since taking the reigns over it.

The endless abuse by some of the fans over his movies (some on this very site), the way he was treated over the third film being removed both director and writer and Kurtzman being the one asked to develop a show I think has made him a bit bitter about all of it. I could be completely wrong, but just reading his comments and reading between the lines I think he just wants to move on from Trek at this point completely.

Tiger2

Wow, talk about weird. After I wrote my post to you I scrolled down and saw that he responded in this thread as well and (if you haven’t seen it yourself yet) he says he still haven’t seen the show and have no interest in developing another film.

So yeah, I think he is kind of bitter about the whole thing at this point or at least no longer excited about the franchise. Its a shame, especially after you spent so many years being able to put your own personal stamp on it.

Although if its true I can’t really blame him.

Kahless

Harberts is a dumbass

Picard’s Patty

The CGI is dreadful on STD. TNG had better CGI 30 years ago!

kmart

Get your acronyms right, back then and now it was visual effects, at which point CGI was only a subdivision, not the nearly entire enchilada as it is now, unfortunately.

Boborci

True. No one is safe

Gary 8.5

Hi Bob, enjoying Discovery?

boborci

Haven’t sen it.

Bamasi

How have you been, sir?

boborci

Moving and shaking. You?

Anthony Thompson

Bob would you like to be on the team writing Trek 4 for Tarantino?

Boborci

No. It would be holding on to the past. Been there already.

Anthony Thompson

Fuller has been indulging a hissy fit over Discovery. Not a word from that “Executive Producer”! BTW, Tarantino (movie) Trek is on the way!

ziplock9000

Hopefully everything they have done with Klingons is not safe too and they realise the stupidity of the mistake they have made crapping on 51 years of something loved, iconic and established.