Everything Known About ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Season Two (So Far)

Now that filming has officially begun on season two of Star Trek: Discovery, we thought we’d recap what we’ve learned about the new season so far. Thanks to recent interviews, casting announcements, convention appearances, and the big Discovery WonderCon panel, a picture of what we can expect for season two is stating to emerge.


Season 2 stats

Number of episodes: 13

Filming: April 16, 2018 – November 8, 2018

Production location: Pinewood Studios in Toronto, Canada

Release date: T.B.A.

Pinewood Studios in Toronto where Discovery is filmed

The creative team: Few changes expected

No major changes from the first season are expected with the creative team behind Star Trek: Discovery. Aaron Harberts and Gretchen Berg are still showrunners with executive producers Akiva Goldsman and Alex Kurtzman overseeing the show. There may be a few changes inside the writers room. One new addition to the writing team is Vaun Wilmot (creator of SyFy show Dominon, and a Trek fan). Also, it appears Joe Menosky has moved on, and may now be writing for The Orville.

Composer Jeff Russo is returning, and tells TrekMovie he doesn’t expect there to be any changes to the main theme. Nor does he expect any major changes to the style of music for second season.

Alex Kurtzman will direct the season premiere. Jonathan Frakes is returning to direct the second episode, and then he’ll be back to direct episode 10 (coincidentally he also directed the tenth episode of season one). Akiva Goldsman is also expected to direct at least one episode for the second season.

Alex Kurtzman on set of The Mummy

Discovery co-creator Alex Kurtzman is currently helming his first episode for the series

The cast: Some new and familiar faces

New cast members:

Anson Mount – Captain Christopher Pike of the USS Enterprise, he’ll be in at least the first two episodes of the season.

Alan Van Sprang – Leland is the head of Section 31, introduced in a bonus scene that was originally attached to the end of the season one finale. Based on what Van Sprang said at WonderCon, he’s expected to recur throughout the season.

Tig Notaro – Chief Engineer Denise Reno of the USS Hiawatha, guest staring in an unknown number of episodes.

Anson Mount will play Captain Pike in Season 2  (Photo by Broadimage/REX/Shutterstock 5624269k)

Returning main cast:

Sonequa Martin-Green – With her rank now restored, Michael Burnham is a commander in the sciences division.

Doug Jones – Commander Saru is acting captain of the USS Discovery as the season begins.

Anthony Rapp – Lt. Commander Paul Stamets now faces a long road ahead of him, seemingly without the love of his life Hugh Culber and his invention of the spore drive, which is out of commission for now.

Mary Wiseman – The newly graduated Ensign Tilly has a lot to prove on her way up through the command track.

Recurring cast:

Wilson Cruz – Hugh Culber has been confirmed as returning in some form, we’re just not sure how, but Cruz is already in Toronto to film an early episode.

James Frain – Sarek was onboard the U.S.S. Discovery during the cliffhanger ending of season one, so naturally Frain is back in Toronto filming the continuation of the cliffhanger for season two.

Shazad Latif – Ash Tyler (plus Voq’s memories) went off with L’Rell to unify the Klingon houses in the season one finale. Latif has tweeted that he’ll be back on set in May, so we expect the Klingon storyline to pick back up a few episodes into the season.

Mary Chieffo – Cheiffo speaking to TrekMovie at WonderCon, Mary is hoping she will have the chance to explore L’Rell’s struggle to hold power over the Klingon Empire and her relationship with Voq/Tyler in season two. And of course L’Rell was with Tyler at the end of season one, so it stands to reason Chieffo will be back on set with Latif in May.

Jayne Brook – Brook has confirmed in interviews she’d be back in season two. We’re hoping to see Admiral Cornwell explore her relationship with L’Rell as well as dealing with the fallout of Federation decisions during last season’s Klingon war.

Expected to return:

Michelle Yeoh – The (former) Terran Empress Georgiou is out there with advanced knowledge of her version of the galaxy and has been asked to share her secrets with Section 31. So we tend to think that she will pop up at least once this season.

The bridge crew gang – Sara Mitich (Airiam), Emily Coutts (Detmer), Patrick Kwok-Choon (Rhys), Oyin Oladejo (Owosekun), and Ronnie Rowe, Jr. (Bryce). These are all local Toronto actors so they likely come and go from the production as needed, we expect them all to be back for season two.

Unlikely to return:

Jason Isaacs – We saw (Mirror) Lorca killed in the first season and Lorca Prime is presumed dead. And even though death is not necessarily the end in Star Trek, speaking to TrekMovie at WonderCon, the showrunners made it seem unlikely any Lorca will show up this season, but that there’s certainly a possibility for a return in a future season.

The crew of the USS Discovery

Theme of season two: Science vs Faith

The showrunners have said a few times now, on After Trek, and then at WonderCon, that theme of season two is “science versus faith.” Aaron Harberts explains:

What is the role of serendipity versus science? Is there a story about faith to be told? Leaps of faith. We are dealing with space. We are dealing with things that can’t be explained and you have a character like Michael Burnham who believes there is an explanation for everything. And it doesn’t just mean religion. It means patterns in our lives. It means connections you can’t explain.

Harberts also talked about how the tone of the show will change in season two:

[Season one] was an interesting season because it was set against the backdrop of war. One of things we are looking forward to in season two is a tone that we can now be in a more exploratory phase and a more diplomatic phase – maybe a bit more of a Trekian chapter

Michael Burnham with Amanda and Sarek

Likely storylines

Captain Pike and the USS Enterprise

We were left with the Discovery racing to the Enterprise’s distress call in the season one finale, and we’ve got it on good authority Captain Pike (Anson Mount) will be around for the first couple of episodes, could he be around for more?

Section 31

Thanks to WonderCon and the bonus scene from the season one finale, we found out that the infamous clandestine organization, which exists outside the normal Starfleet and Federation laws, will be featured throughout the second season, the head of Section 31 in this era is Leland (Alan Van Sprang).

Young Burnham and Spock

Speaking to convention goers last weekend director Jonathan Frakes teased fans with the tidbit that we may see a young Spock and young Burnham in the episode he’s about shoot (episode 2).

More canon connections

The first season of the show saw a number of connections to Star Trek canon, such as the characters of Sarek, Amanda and Harry Mudd. Obviously season two will continue with the canon connections with the U.S.S. Enterprise and Captain Pike. Speaking at WonderCon, Aaron Harberts spoke about how wants to explore Trek’s canon more:

The idea was to always be in the Prime Timeline. Obviously, there are questions and concerns and things that are different. Our technology is a little different. We have a ship that runs very differently. We are our own show in a lot of ways. Season two is really exciting for us. This is our opportunity to really show how Discovery fits into this Prime Timeline. We are firmly committed to that.

We’ll learn more about Saru and the Kelpiens

On the season finale of After Trek, the showrunners said we’d see more Kelpiens, and then speaking at WonderCon, Aaron Harberts spoke about Saru specifically:

You will learn more about Saru this season. We had to lay some pipe early in episode 2 [of season one]. What are those threat ganglia. What do they do? What do they represent in the Terran Empire and a lot of that stuff will fold back in when we are back on the air.

That little spore and Stamets’ future

The season finale established that Lt. Stamets will no longer be plugging into the ship to enable the spore drive, leaving the ship to go back to old-fashioned warp drive until Starfleet can find a way to make the spore drive work again. On After Trek Aaron Harberts explained this change for Stamets will be played out:

The spore drive is such a metaphor for Stamets as well. Season 2 is all about his second act. He’s not driving the ship at the moment. He has lost the love of his life. So, we are going to be talking about how he pulls that together.

Speaking of spores, Harberts also teased fans about a particular one scene the last time the drive was used:

I think that fans should be thinking about what landed on Tilly.

One last spore

Changes in the USS Discovery

One of the intriguing possibilities with the introduction of the character of Chief Engineer Reno (Tig Notaro) is that she may be transferring to the U.S.S. Discovery, which could involve us exploring more parts of the ship, including the actual engine room, an iconic set on every Star Trek series, but one we have yet to see on the Discovery. When we asked production designer Tamara Deverell about this, she wouldn’t confirm if they had built a new engine room set, but did say they have been making changes to the sets:

We’ve expanded parts of the ship. We’ve added a corridor that we didn’t have so now we have like a loop corridor. We went a little more mechanical with that corridor which I’m pretty excited about. We had designed something much bigger but we could only go so much, so we’ve got new spaces. There’s a new opening into the mess hall, and one into sick bay. One of the problems we had with [Stamets’ Lab] in Engineering was that it was very dark in one area and the DP, our cinematographer, kind of complaining and a lot of light came from the [spore chamber] cube. So, we are doing a little bit of renovation there, and I’m just going to leave it at that. But I’m pretty excited about it.

More about bridge crew

Aaron Harberts explained at WonderCon that they’re hoping to write in more for the supporting bridge crew to do:

There is only so much you can do with an ensemble cast with how you divvy up your time and how you allocate time to different characters. We didn’t even meet the Discovery crew until episode three, so we were already limited in the amount of time we could really create five or six characters that the audience would bond with and love. But now that people know who they are and have accepted them, now you have the space to start pulling people into things.

And speaking about one of the more mysterious members of the bridge crew:

Airiam is part of the bridge crew and we have a lot of thoughts of who she was and what the augments are all about.

More quiet/character driven moments

Speaking to TrekMovie at WonderCon, Aaron Harberts spoke about adding more character moments for season two:

 …one of the things I am excited to hear is that the fans are open to more scenes where things have “stopped down,” scenes where characters are checking in and where we are learning more about stuff, where the plot isn’t necessarily driving the whole thing. I am proud of all the turns, but I am glad to know people are interested in these quieter moments. Mix it up, have a more of a “slice of life” flavor.

Tyler and L’Rell holding the Empire together

On After Trek the showrunners talked about how even though the Klingon war is over, there is still more to explore with the Empire:

Berg: L’Rell has a huge order in front of her, but I think the right person is in charge.

Harberts: The fact that Tyler has stayed with her and the fact that he has Voq’s memories is going to be a help. As we look into season two, Tyler is definitely going to be questioning the wisdom of that decision. He is the ultimate expat.

Executive producer Alex Kurtzman also discussed the state of the Klingon Empire as we go into season two:

There is a détente, that’s forced by ingenuity, but it does not mean that the Klingons have decided that everything’s fine. That problem could flare up at any point.

More exploration

Showrunner Aaron Harberts spoke about writing season two back in January:

This year, we have a fantastic creative team in place, everybody knows each other. But we also have time this year—we have time to do things like more away missions, newer planets. These are stories that might fall a little bit more into a framework of allegory that people love to get from Trek. But we will always continue to have that overarching serialized thread.

And more recently, speaking to TrekMovie at WonderCon he mentioned the idea of exploration again:

We are not at war anymore. It is our hope we are going to be doing more away missions and a lot more exploration. Those people are on the bridge for a reason. They all have special skills and we will start learning more about them.

Remember when we were explorers?

Still much more to learn

All of that may seem like a lot, but there are still quite a few questions remaining about the second season. One of the bigger questions is over who will take command of the U.S.S. Discovery, but there are still many more. There will likely be more guest/recurring star casting announcements during production and it’s likely there will be some revelations at upcoming conventions and events. It’s also likely that a season release date will be announced at the CBS Upfront network presentation in May or at San Diego Comic-Con in July.

TrekMovie will of course continually update all the news about Star Trek: Discovery, so stay tuned.

Star Trek: Discovery is available exclusively in the USA on CBS All Access. It airs in Canada on Space and streams on CraveTV. It is available on Netflix everywhere else.

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

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Leave existing Canon alone. Discovery does not fit into Prime. Let it be its own thing.

Are you stuck in a time loop?


It’s ‘Discovery’ that’s “stuck in a time loop.” It keeps coming back to the TOS era when it didn’t, and still doesn’t, need to.

The TOS era is Star Trek in its purest form.

Coming from someone who hates TOS. Yeah, that makes sense.

I hate the execution of the show. In general I just hate 60’s TV shows, you couldn’t pay me to watch those old shows.

I did enjoy the JJ movies, so TOS with modern storytelling techniques is a win for me.

My, how obtuse.

I don’t think the films are just TOS with modern storytelling techniques though – they are inspired by TOS but are a very different animal. I think that TNG, VOY and ENT are much closer to being a re-imagining of the style TOS with more modern storytelling (certainly the 4th season of Enterprise). Discovery might get there if it starts to have some more exploration and philosophy as opposed to just conflict.

TNG, VOY definitely don’t use modern storytelling techniques. I’m attempting to rewatch VOY and I just find it way too slow and boring for my tastes now. I can’t even make it past the second episode, it might just not be worth my time. There’s way better stuff to watch on Netflix right now.

For their time, I meant. Some of the last season of Enterprise might stand up now.

STD is the furthest thing from “TOS with modern storytelling techniques”. All Kurtzman and co. are doing is making Star Trek look like everything else, to the point where it’s so mutilated and malformed, that it barely resembles anything Star Trek related, much like the Klingorcs who somehow invented cloaking devices but have lost the secret of the light bulb to antiquity. There was nothing even remotely as memorable as City on The Edge of Forever, The Doomsday Machine, Where No Man Has Gone Before, Court Martial, What Little Girls Are Made Of, or even The Inner Light from TNG.

And what are “modern storytelling techniques”? If by that you mean “dark and gritty”, then you are stripping away anything that makes Star Trek “Star Trek”. So far those “modern” techniques have consisted dressing a plank of wood in a uniform, and then positioning everyone around her so that little Mikey Sue Spock can come along and solve what ever problem needs to be solved, because “she’s the bestest evah!!”, while humansplaining and telling everyone how they can be better, too. Yawn.

STD is a not just bad, it is a disease of the mind. And it must be cured.

I vaguely remember those episodes and I seen all of the them more than twice.

I have a feeling we may be saying the same thing about Discovery in a few years time.

Nope, I remember every episode of Discovery and I haven’t even started my rewatch yet.

LOL its a few months old. Yeah I think everyone would now. I said in a few years.

“STD is a not just bad, it is a disease of the mind. And it must be cured.”

Come on.

You don’t like Green Acres???

Does anybody like GREEN ACRES? When I was 6, I watched it just for the pig, so I had a semi-excuse (along with being 6.) Same with the robot on LOST IN SPACE, and Lee Meriweather on THE TIME TUNNEL (along with the tunnel itself, which still holds an op-art fascination for me over 50 years later.)

Fortunately, you don’t get to decide that.

Do you have anything specifically insightful to add to your comment?


Ha. Yeah, you have my love, HN4. But that doesn’t answer the question.

Outside of an updated aesthetic and a few minor technological differences I see no issue….

Did the borg show up early?

I don’t recall, was it Enterprise F that showed at the end?

Is Kirk a Vulcan?

Speaking of Vulcan, is it still destroyed?

Oh…just updated tech and an Enterprise that looks way more badass….

Gasp, it must be a new timeline

“I see no issue…”.
Apart from a super massive war that nearly destroyed the federation, that went so badly for the federation that the Kligons almost captured Earth, yet was was never mentioned again.
Add to that the use of invisiblity screens (cloaks).
And that is without mentioning the “minor” technological differences like being able to instantly travel.

Yeah, ‘little’ things like that. Couldn’t agree more.

True. The inconsistencies seem endless and range from very large to very minor.

That is simply not true.

Lots of things of enormous import to the Trek universe were in fact never mentioned earlier; that’s just the nature of episodic television and, to a degree, of life itself. Does the absence of a shuttlecraft when it would have made all the difference make “The Enemy Within” a bad episode? Not to mention all the huge developments that should have had huge implications for the future (e.g. Kelvan warp drive) that never got mentioned again.

Lots to legitimately criticize in DSC, but canonistas need to get over it.

If you don’t want people complaining about it not fitting in with canon, don’t claim it fits in. It’s that simple.

No one complained that superman returns clashed with superman 3 and 4. Despite all three films being sequels to superman 1 and 2.
This was because the creators made clear that superman returns was a sequel to superman 1 and 2 not 3 and 4.

The same is true for revived shows like Rosanne, Will and Grace etc. They all made changes to their final episode or even final season. At least those creators explained the changes and did not insist that the new season fit in with the original canon.

If the discovery creators want to make changes that’s fine, but don’t insist that the changes are not being made at the same time.

I don’t know–were you interested in responding to what I actually wrote, or just in talking to yourself?

Yes I was responding to you. You said “lots to legitimately criticize in DSC, but canonistas need to get over it.
My point was people won’t stop criticising it for not fitting in with canon as long as the creators insist it fits with canon.
It’s that simple.

There was also a paragraph which preceded the one you’re referring to. Did you miss it?

She pretty obviously did respond to what you actually wrote.

No, she did not. Read for comprehension, please.

I responded to your final sentence. That is because there is no way to respond to the paragraph. The points are you are making are kinda silly.

The idea that …. “lots of things of enormous import ….were never mentioned earlier” can be used as an explanation for why discovery fits in with tos. In that case let’s just make up anything and claim it was never mentioned before no how a radical depuature from the original show.

In that case in a prequel to tos can do stuff like that mentioned below and still claim it fits in with canon.

Tribbles before tos were 10 feet tall with teeth.
Vulcan were hedonists before tos.
The federation enslaved pre-wrap world before Tos.
Romulans build ships in the shape of pigs.
Vulcan tried to conquer the earth when they first arrived.
Half of humanity defected to the Romulan empire during the Romulan earth war.

Just because none of these things were mentioned nor fit in with the spirit of tos under your idea they do not clash with the original.

Also in regards to developments like the kelvin wrap drive never being mentioned gain. The same is true for practically everything that was encountered in tos.

That is because tos was originally an episodic show with a loose continuity. This continuity became harder over time. Discovery is not an episodic show, it does not even fit in with the lose continuity of the early episodes like the cage or the very early episodes of tos like using warp factor instead of warp speed, or Vulcanian instead of Vulcan.
If your point is that because tos had a loose continuity, discovery can fit in (despite being way different) it would really help your argument if discovery used some of the terminology of the early shows. But it does not.

The fact that they make all these changes while insisting they’re not making changes is really a problem to me, because it sounds a fuck of a lot like gaslighting, which is a common psychological abuse tactic. The fact that this is what’s being done to the Trek fanbase is deeply concerning, because it seems to indicate that CBS thinks that they can literally abuse the most devoted customers of the franchise into paying for All-Access.

Abuse? REALLY!

“sounds a fuck of a lot like gaslighting, which is a common psychological abuse tactic. ”

Dude, try decaf.

Gaslighting, yes, but a form of it that gets a boost from peer pressure, bolstered with ye old, ‘you aren’t entitled to critique it unless you keep watching it.’ I think you may have nailed it. Be interesting to see how long it takes till this backfires, and terrifying if it doesn’t.

About the Spore Drive. Remember the VOY episode “The Omega Directive” ? I’m sure Starfleet gave the Spore Drive it’s own Directive and keeps all information about it beyond top secret. A technology that has potential to destroy all life in the universe isn’t something you want people to know about. And this is why no one on TNG or the other shows talk about the Omega molecule or the Spore Drive.

AhhhHHHHhhh, I like the way you think.

Plus they could use Spore Drive to travel through time [oy veh]

I think they should go back and win the war with the Klingons [heh-heh] because otherwise the Federation will be rebuilding for DECADES.

@Marja The temporal prime directive would prevent that that. LOL

I loved how the TOS Enterprise could pop out of the galaxy when every they wanted to.

@Michael Agreed. What difference would it make if the producers released a statement saying they’re ignoring episodes 34, 41 and 79 (a la Superman Returns ignoring 3 and 4)? Fans would suddenly stop griping?

I think the whole reason fans obsess about canon is because it gives us something we’re good at — “look, we watched a TV show so many times that we know all the details” — and think we can be better at than the people making the show. And it lets us pretend this whole thing is real.

hahaha, great point Jack :)

You act as if TOS had a detailed history of the Federation at that point. Didn’t Kirk state that he worked for the United Earth Space Probe Agency in early episodes?

His tombstone in “Where No Man Has Gone Before” also read James “R” Kirk. There was great debate among those working on the remastering if that should have been changed. They opted not to. But you also need to remember that the show was in its infancy then. A number of things were not settled on yet. (And as a little homage Archer I believe referenced the UESA.) If STD wanted to start their own show in their own world they can do the same.

The TOS era is a good setting for Disco. TOS is pretty much a blank slate.

I don’t think it is since it clashes so much of what we know about the TOS era. Maybe if they put it in a different universe like the Kelvin films but for many its too distracting and for a very valid reason.

What do we really know about the TOS era? I’m not talking about books or head canon, but from the 3 years of the show.

Sigh. . . “What do we really know about the TOS era?” I can’t take anyone seriously on this site who writes something like that (to say nothing of someone who thinks TNG, DS9 and Voyager doesn’t exist). Why does someone who clearly hates Star Trek and Star Trek fans spend so much time trolling this site?

@Holden “Why does someone who clearly hates Star Trek and Star Trek fans spend so much time trolling this site?”

This nonsense has no business in an adult conversation.

Er, a show set in 1980 would be a heck of a lot different than a show set in 1990. Etc. Etc.

Heck, even true with 2008. Are most people talking about the Iraq War in normal conversation now?

@HN4 — I agree. What I like about this era is that it sticks to many of the original limitations of the series as conceived. That said, I was somewhat disappointed to see them instantly push the envelope with inter-ship beaming, though even that still falls technically within canon.

I don’t see why inter-ship beaming would be such a big problem. It should be easier to do than long range beaming when you think about it. I can imagine that they did many short distance beaming tests first when they was developing the technology.

“What I like about this era is that it sticks to many of the original limitations of the series as conceived.”

Yes but on Discovery nothing about this is true. You have a ship that can LITERALLY transport itself to any part of the galaxy in seconds. Discovery was in a war for months, did anything about the ship or crew feel they were falling low on resources or the ship look like it ever got a single dent? It was Voyager all over again. Even if there was a conflict that hit the ship hard, the next episode everything was pristine and new again.

I honestly thank this is the problem, people seem to think this and the Kelvin films are following the ‘Wagon train to the stars’ motto. It isn’t, not when you have ships that is far more durable and advanced and technology like spore drives, magic blood, super warp speed and transporters that can get you to Kronos from Earth. The only limitations I see is that they rely less on replicators. Everything else feels like Trek in the last 30 years, minus Enterprise oddly which DID feel like there were limitations on that show at least.

A lot of these problems emerged right off the bat with TNG, since replication took away the frontier-feel in a lot of telling ways. If you can’t run out of supplies, you’re in a far different boat than 99.999% of folks, and that affects storytelling drastically, if you believe that what drives story is NEED. That’s why DS9 is the only post-TOS that worked for me, because they put in some workarounds. VOYAGER was in an ideal position to put even more workarounds, so you’d see people in torn and stained uniforms aboard a ship that was breaking down visibly, and they did NOTHING with it — they always even had power for the holodeck! I think ENT and DSC both still feel like conventional Berman-minded 24th century storytelling, in that most stories don’t seem to involve compelling need, they just state in dialog that something is important but you aren’t often made to feel that on a gut level (and yeah, there are exceptions — I’m ashamed to say that PEN PALS does work emotionally on me, even though it is wrong in what most would consider to be Trek terms.) I have a lot more empathy for all of the maquis than I do for any Ent character except maybe Phlox, and the same for DSC, where, while I’m amused by Tilly, I’m not really seeing anyone who seems appealing.

See for me, I never cared about the ‘frontier feel’. Trek took place in the future where you can literally get to a planet in a few seconds and they could cure practically any disease while matching fire power with most aliens. They weren’t going out to look for another place to live ala Lost in Space or Interstellar, Earth was paradise. Exploration was essentially a luxury, not a necessity.

I mean I never saw it as a show like the Expanse where there is no warp drive, people can’t just transport to a planet, they worry about food rations, they don’t have shields and where traveling from planet to planet still takes a lot of effort and resources, even within the solar system. And yet The Expanse ALSO takes place in the 23rd century. See what I mean? Thats the ‘frontier feel’. Star Trek compared to most space sci fi always had it pretty easy IMO.

For me, Trek was suppose to be very advance and while exploration was still dangerous it was pretty common to do. Meeting aliens was just not a big deal. To be honest I never even thought of that ‘frontier’ aspect of it until I came to sites like this. I mean the TOS films doesn’t feel like that either. My guess is when the writers of TOS wrote for it, the idea of space travel was still an idea just in fiction only (and the way its done in Star Trek is still very much fiction) so it was all new to them. But they still made Starfleet literally centuries old. Starfleet for TOS is still older than how long humans have been flying and yet no one looks at flying today as some dangerous or risky notion because everyone does it and its pretty common today. Thats how I always saw it in TOS because even non-Starfleet ships were warp capable so humans could travel anywhere they wanted already.

And basically every show and film has made it more advance starting with the TOS films. Naturally TNG took it to another level because its a century later so things would feel more advanced and comfortable. Yeah I will agree when they went to DS9 it felt more frontier but they literally put it on an old alien space station that was used to mine resources and not to explore space or a scientific vessel. They put it on an alien base to strip it of any luxeries because again look at a Starfleet base even in the 23rd century like in TSFS, it looked pretty luxurious to me.

Maybe TOS felt more primitive to the other shows but it was also written during a much different time. Nothing about the Kelvin or Discovery feels that way because I don’t think the writers look at Star Trek in that view either. Sure they may not have super luxuries like holodecks but all these ships look really comfortable and easy to live on.

I always found it funny how people put the Enterprise D down as a hotel in space and yet the original Enterprise wasn’t some hard ship to live on. They still had nice quarters, recreation areas, dining halls, etc. Any of us could live on it today. Its not like anyone was suffering on that ship. Look at how real astronauts live in space. They would all be in heaven if they got to live on any Starfleet ship.

Well, there’s frontier and there’s frontier. I see what you mean regarding THE EXPANSE (which I really wanted to like, as I adore Allan Steele’s ORBITAL DECAY and LUNAR DESCENT), but I found the visual treatment very off-putting and also didn’t like a lot of the cast, so I barely got through season 1.

Regarding 24th cen TREK, I just feel that a lack of finite resources makes things too easy is all.

Also, even in some of the TOS novels that seem to show them as very advanced tech-wise, like my beloved THE WOUNDED SKY, there is a real boldly-go feel that makes you feel the frontier in a less scrappy way, but it still feel very TOS, in that they got the characters righter than right.

Total departure, but something I’ve been thinking about lately, and the word ‘frontier’ prompts this. Unlike most people, I really like STAR TREK 5 (along with TMP and KHAN, it’s among the only ones I really do like), but where I take it to task is that they missed out on some better storytelling alternatives with the tale. I think they could have told the same story, but have Kirk Spock & McCoy marooned on Nimbus III by Sybok, then have them forced to team with the Klingons to chase the Enterprise to the center of the galaxy. You’d have integrated the Klingons into the story in a better way, done more with the ‘fostering relations’ angle, and gotten even more of an exploration of the big three than we got.

The Discovery could go to a Starbase when ever they needed to for repairs. Discovery was never about the war.

It’s only a “blank slate” to those who don’t care about Trek in the first place.

The future is the only blank slate, and Discovery choose not to go there, so canon criticism is fair game.

Last time I checked, TOS took place in the future.

Cute try, but you know what I meant. TOS is from the past. Discovery should’ve been about the future.

Sorry but I really don’t get you. TOS was the 60’s view of the future, Discover is our present view of the same future.

I literally wrote that “TOS is from the past.” Your response? “TOS was the 60s view of the future.” Get it now?

@Holden No. Now how much drugs do I have to take to understand what you’re going on about?

None. But if that’s your take on the conversation . . .

It really is. Fans scream about how we know everything but we really dont.

There are eras we know less but of all the eras we’ve seen, TOS is the least fleshed out.

In fairness, setting something in the TOS era doesn’t mean you get to ignore what’s later established in TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. Just because you’re backtracking to a period where that material was unrevealed to the audience doesn’t mean that the audience forgets about seventeen years of content already presented.

@Carter Dohoney As far as I’m concerned TNG, DS9, and Voyager doesn’t exist anymore.

Well thank god no one cares about that opinion but you. It all exists. Thats WHY its called canon. Stop trolling.

The opinion is mine. I don’t need others to care about it. That’s how it works.

But thats not how canon works man. And what’s funny is I have suggested over and over again if they just make the show an official reboot then you actually WOULDN’T have to care about the other shows. Thats the entire point of a reboot, ie, starting from scratch.

And thats why its annoying to some people, instead of just saying that and making the universe however you want, they keep pushing the notion its canon with all the other shows from TOS to Voyager and yet feels like it conflict with them.

I don’t get why they just can’t call it that? Or put it in another universe which is essentially an in-universe way to reboot as the Kelvin films did. It would make their problems go away tomorrow. Maybe not all, but most.

And its also why I don’t have an issue with the Kelvin films like others do. I LIKE it can just do its own thing and not conform (completely) to canon. Fine, let Discovery do the same if they really feel those other shows are too outdated and they don’t want to put it in a more appropriate time period.

Its like they are afraid people will stop watching if they call it what it actually is.

Only you guys have a problem with this. I don’t care that much about canon. It’s a tv show just relax and watch it, or not.

Uh, you mean ‘guys’ as in the fanbase. Yeah well that’s more than a few dozen people. Its on every Trek site out there for a reason. TM doesn’t live in a vacuum. And again, if you DON’T care about canon then this conversation isn’t for you, right? No one is telling you TO care. Its for EVERY ONE else who does.

And as its been said over and over again, if you’re going to tell people it suppose to align with canon and many feel its not doing that, then what do you expect exactly? You think people will just ignore it? Is this your first time on the internet?

Yes its just a TV show. Notice I’m not calling for anyone to die who makes it and or have ever insulted anyone who does make it. And I also still support it as I like more things about it than I hate overall. But I can still posts my criticisms of the show just the same. Right?

I mean are you going to sit here and say you never complained about a movie or a TV show before, ever? And I always find that funny how people say this when its something they like but yet that notion goes out the window when its something they hate.

No one is telling you not to like Discovery. But for people who don’t they have very valid reasons why they don’t, JUST like you have very valid reasons why you may not like other Star Trek shows or films and express it. That’s how it works around here.

I have personally supported every Trek show with the exception of Enterprise and even for that show I still came around and now love it and TRUST me when I say my complaints of that show was ten times harder than this one. My criticisms of Discovery is oddly not that different than most Trek shows, but most simply got better in time. Take a guess chief why so many improved in the first place? Because they listened to the complaints of people like here and made changes. That’s all I’m hoping Discovery will do in time.

I don’t go out of my way to watch TV shows or movies that I don’t like. So no need to complain about them on the internet. You should try it. Feels good.

Yeah like I believe that. And I DO like Discovery, I’m simply pointing out my criticisms which is why you have message boards in the first place.

I mean do you just want posts of how everyone loves a movie or show? Sorry but that doesn’t exist anywhere on the internet lol. Even Reddit, which oddly enough I think is the MOST supportive of any Star Trek board I ever been to naturally still have a lot of criticisms but generally seem to love the franchise as a whole. So you can find a balance.

Again MOST people here seem like they really do want to like the show. Yes there are a few naysayers who are convinced the show will never improve or shouldn’t exist but they aren’t the majority. Most people DO have valid reasons why they don’t like it and those people are simply stating their opinion of it.

No one is forcing you to be here. If you can’t take any criticisms, then the internet isn’t for you.

The reddit star trek board is awful, that’s why I left.

OK fine but I disagree. Most seem to actually love Star Trek and unlike here (and you btw) its not a constant ‘my Star Trek is better than your Star Trek’ nerd war which sadly one of the issues I have with some people like you here on TM. Again I GET everyone will have their favorites and not so favorites, but what I hate (and this applies directly to you once again) is people should stop acting like whatever Star Trek they like is the only one that matters OR they are not ‘true fans’ if they like something you don’t. It gets SO annoying to read and yet its sadly done all the time here. Star Trek universe is HUGE, everyone can enjoy what they like without stomping on the rest. Its been around fifty years, it will be around another fifty so it all matters regardless of people’s personal preferences.

And I guess what I like about Reddit is that that stuff is done at a minimum because of the points systems. Yes you get a lot negative people there but they are in the minority. And its not a constant stream of why so and so Trek show shouldn’t be canon (although yes there is a lot of that with Discovery sadly). But I think overall there is more of a celebration of the franchise as a whole vs here where its people constantly going to their same corners over what Trek product represents the franchise over the other. My god, if you don’t like something fine, just enjoy what you DO like. And stop treating people who make the stuff like they are the devil.

I’m NOT perfect but I LOVE Star Trek, all of it. Even when I’m critical like I been over Enterprise, the Kelvin films and Discovery I will support it 100%. Yes I gave up on Enterprise early but I was just burnt out by then (for people who claim there was no fatigue, trust me, I’m proof that it was) and regretted it later.

I WANT to love Discovery, in time maybe I will. Right now, its more of the ‘its OK’ slot for me, which is not bad, just far from great. At least it can go up for me and hopefully in time it will like all the others did. But the issues I DO have with it are fundamental ones but no, nothing that will make me stop watching the show either. Or at least not yet.

@Tiger2 The reddit point system useless. Russian trolls have been gaming it for years now. Just post some cute cat pics and watch the points go up. That site needs to be shutdown.

LOL you have said this before. Do you honestly think its that many ‘Russians’ on the Star Trek sub reddit? And if so they really know their Star Trek at least. ;)

I don’t know about the russians. I know the place was full of racists when they found out a Black woman was the lead of the show.

“I don’t go out of my way to watch TV shows or movies that I don’t like. So no need to complain about them on the internet. You should try it. Feels good.”

You should take off a day from trolling Star Trek fans. I took a day off from dealing with trolls. Felt good.

The only ones responding to your posts are those of us who continue to support Trek and DISC. So try another line of attack.

“I don’t go out of my way to watch TV shows or movies that I don’t like. So no need to complain about them on the internet. ”

And somehow you magically know what will be good or bad BEFORE you see it? What an awesome power you have…

“Every one else” doesn’t necessarily care about canon. The various shows have done all sorts of contortions to get around it, ignore it, or brush it off entirely.

Wait, which TV show are you talking about? You seem pretty worked up here regarding TV shows you don’t bother to watch. Just relax, or not.

The INcanon NOTcanon question is a bit of a bore to me. You’re right, if the showrunners just said “it’s not canon” it’d be easier for a bunch of people to go with it.

Yet there’d be canonistas bitching about that too. There is no end of bitching from canonistas. It’s like on the Geico commercials, “You’re a TOS canonista. You bitch. It’s what ya do.”

I don’t disagree too much Marja but they really made their jobs so much harder and I can’t for the life of me figure out why? And what’s funny is THEY acknowledge the show doesn’t follow canon or else they wouldn’t constantly say how the show will sort of evolve to TOS which I think, especially given everything said, is only superficial changes at best.

I know I been branded as the I hate prequel guy but this is not what this is about. Trek fans want what every person wants when they get invested a story: logic and consistency. At the end of the day, thats all what canon is, to be able to follow a story or story universe from point A to point B. The problem with Star Trek of course is its gotten SO big and convoluted and span so many decades its just gotten harder and harder to do, especially with so many different people’s hands in the jar. Thats why I thought it was smart to put TNG in a different era and Trek was oddly enough still in its infancy in many ways.

But by the time the Kelvin films came around it completely made sense to reboot it in another timeline. And YET they still screwed it up because they ignored their OWN rules they set up in STID when they introduced Khan. This is what gets frustrating for people like me. I am FINE with whatever you do. You can set it anywhere, it can be about anything, even if I’m not completely happy I will still watch and give it a chance. But DON’T tell us you are following a certain set of rules only to ignore your own rules later. That’s what bothers me not just a Trek fan but someone who just loves stories. If you are going to say the show is suppose to be in the same universe as the others, then its your obligation to make it fit in SOME way. They have done a POOR job of it so far and I’m one of the people who support the changes….but not to the point where nothing looks recognizable to the rest of the universe you set it in.

If you can’t do that, then why are you even bothering?

The majority of people just don’t care about all that minutiae. Star Trek ignores their own canon all the time.

Like the time during the first season of TNG when the Klingons were members of the Federation.

You can say that about every franchise imaginable, from Marvel to Star Wars, the point is the hardcore fans will see it differently for a reason. And especially when the filmmakers throw out platitudes of how important of this stuff is but then do the complete opposite anyway.

And I’m not sure how Klingons being members of the Federation goes against canon? It was established between TOS and TNG, literally a century gap that they stop becoming enemies and learned to become friends. And that point was reiterated in TUC and how that turn began once the Klingons could no longer keep up the cold war and lead to the Khitomer Accords.

So I’m not following? What happened in TOS to suggest decades in the future they would still be enemies? In fact it was Errand of Mercy that the Organians first suggested they would become friends in the future and even work together. This was the very first episode Klingons appeared on the show. So yeah, no idea where you are getting that.

The Klingons were never members of the Federation, but they were full members in the first season of TNG right up until the writers decided that it was a bad idea and swept that piece canon under the carpet never to be seen again. It was the reason Worf’s Baby Mamma was working for the Federation for some reason.

Wait, they aren’t members of the Federation? I’m confused now, I thought they were lol.


The Klingons were NEVER memebers of the Federation. Not even in the first season of TNG. It was never mentioned. In fact, it was said that Worf was the only Klingon in Star Fleet. But he was raised by humans.

There’s a scene in the TNG episode “Samaritan Snare”, Wesley Crusher asked Captain Picard if an event happened “before the Klingons joined the Federation”.

OK. I’m forced to trust you as I have only seen the vast majority of TNG episodes only once. (Most are not good enough for repeated views) But I got the distinct impression that it was a mere treaty or agreement between the two. Could that have been one of the early episodes? Before they really had a handle on what they were doing?

@ML31 No Netflix? I saw the clip on youtube once. I’ll try to find it for you.

Update: I found the youtube clip


So I don’t see huge leaps — yet — in logic or consistency. They’ve said repeatedly that the show will eventually explain how it segues into the TOS era.

I hope they don’t over-explain it (I always thought Enterprise’s need to explain the TOS Klingons was dumb and unnecessary).

There are all sorts of plausible explanations for not mentioning the six-month Klingon war in daily conversation in TOS (and maybe it wasn’t widespread knowledge that they got as close to Earth as they did). The same way all sorts of oversights (“Maybe Chekov really was somewhere on the Enterprise during Space Seed.”), whether accidentsl or just needrf to make a story work, have always been.

“This is the United Spaceship Enterprise”
“Contact Space Command”

More evidence that they were making it up as they went.

I don’t interpret this in the same way. They hadn’t yet established much of the lore of the show, that was to come later, so earlier episodes talk about ‘Earth ships’ and so on. Really it shows how quickly it was all evolving. This is very similar to the ‘bottom up’ approach of making a D&D campaign in that you only map out the details you need and the world gets bigger as you explore it. There’s eventually a point where you have to think more about the bigger picture and make things consistent. This I think is what the writers were doing during that first season of TOS.

And we excuse that because it was early TOS. They actually did a decent job of retconning some of that to be canon. (Earth Space Probe Agency for example). But it didnt really need explaining because we know the reality.

I agree James.

Cheers, I’m watching and enjoying the show. It’s good, it’s just frustrating to have them turn Harry Mudd into a psychopath and Sarek into a warmonger.

The whole thing reeks of Dork Age already.


Discovery fits right in. There’s plenty of Berman era Trek for you to enjoy if you’re not into this. Meanwhile, Discovery is going to continue on as it should.

Yawn… Whine whine whine. It’s not the prime timeline complain complain complain. Looks like this is what we have to look forward to from the fanboys. Yippee.


Let’s skip the boring debate and get right to the end:

Spoiler warning

It’s Prime.

Please bring Lorca back.

he’s dead

@SC — maybe. Or maybe he’s living in the Mycelial network with Culber.


….just a shout-out to Anthony and Matt and the rest of the Trekmovie crew. You guys do an excellent job keeping us in touch with the Trek universe. Despite the frequent arguments which break out (which is a testament to we fans’ passion), this site is one I visit and enjoy the most. Many thanks.

That said, please send Discovery into the future and leave the TOS era alone. Probably won’t happen, but a guy can hope…

It won’t happen. Just make peace with it. It’s a done deal.

Nobody has to make peace with ‘it’, it’s his opinion, leave the guy alone. You make peace with other people being unhappy with what they’re doing with the franchise.

Negative. He shared his opinion, and now I’m doing the same. That’s how conversations work. Besides, I’m not saying he isn’t entitled to an opinion. I’m just saying he shouldn’t hold out hope for something that CLEARLY is not going to happen.

To be honest, I’m not holding out much hope.

“That said, please send Discovery into the future and leave the TOS era alone. Probably won’t happen, but a guy can hope…”

I wholeheartedly agree. I honestly have no real issue with setting the show in the TOS era. And I have no problem making it a modern TV show. But it has to, you know, at least ENVOKE the look and feel of TOS. It seems like that was just too great a task for the STD people. (and that’s not even getting into the mediocre writing and extremely poor plot decisions) For me, best case scenario is to scrap Discovery altogether and just start a whole new show. With a new production team. (yes, I know that’s not happening. I just have to hope what appears to be unsalavageable is salvageable.)

I think a scenario where Discovery is *permanently* thrown into the future through some anomaly in the spore-drive would make for some damn good sci-fi. Then this new crew could truly Boldly Go, with a wide open canvas to draw upon. Then they could introduce any new species they want, any technology they want, without messing with canon. Leave past Trek and its characters alone.

Be courageous, writers. Create. Build new. Don’t borrow or alter what’s already there. It’s a big universe. Make it bigger.

“Make it bigger.”

Yes this is my motto about Star Trek and WHY I don’t like prequels in general. Because they don’t really expand the universe in any meaningful way although some certainly do.

But its actually why I don’t mind the Kelvin films even if they are technically a prequel because they are literally expanding the universe by being in a different one and giving us a different angles of stories (and why I think it would be an AWFUL idea to ‘fix’ it). For some Star Trek is about one ship and one particular time period. For me Star Trek is a huge multiverse that covers literally centuries of story telling with various crews and situations. Thats what Trek is for me, to push forward like TNG did or to show a different side of working in Starfleet like DS9 did or even being in a completely different part of the galaxy like Voyager did. I don’t want another retread of what we already know. I want Trek off exploring in different time periods, universes or eventually other galaxies. Thats how you keep the stories fresh and relevant.

When I found out Discovery main story line was the Klingon war part of me almost doozed off. Do we need to fill stuff to everything we already know about? Thats why I was hoping even if Discovery takes place in the 23rd century, since they have the spore drive they now have chances to go to any part of the galaxy they want or even other universes. I HOPE they take advantage of that with that kind of technology instead of more of the same.

Even Berman knew the 23rd century was a dead end after Voyager. Do we really need more forehead alien of the week Star Trek? Sounds boring to me.

Its not like you even read it. What does this have to do with Berman? I’m talking about Trek as a whole which has become very expansive in the last fifty years. I like to see it keep expanding and not be reduced to safe and comfortable nostalgia instead of taking real chances. Where did I mention anything about forehead of the week aliens? Stop trolling.

You basically want old boring forehead of the week 90’s trek back. Well it’s not coming back. Thank god for Discovery.

No I never suggested anything than actual and more creative story telling. Discovery did nothing but showed Klingons every week in a boring war, how is that not forehead of the week?

Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I want to see Star Trek expand, not just feel evolve around the same characters we gotten for decades for marketing purposes. You really come off like a troll with these silly responses.

So giving Spock a hott human sister isn’t expanding Trek? News to me.

OK you are trolling. Stop wasting my time man. I wish TM had an ignore button, seriously.

Ignore with your eyes, man, just SKIP ON DOWN. Don’t reply. If you believe he’s trolling, DON’T RESPOND TO A TROLL.

The problem, @Marja, is that when you ignore trolls, you just give them an unfiltered platform.

Exactly Holden! And the thing is when he tries to make a real argument, I have no problem having a civil conversation. But then it gets really childish. He says he’s 40 but it really doesn’t seem like it at times.

If she’s a hottie, she’s a hottie. I bet Spock was checking her out.


HN is doing to you what a certain unnamed poster did to me. Put words in your mouth. Repeat things you never said as if you said them. Then you have to spend the rest of your posts denying it. It’s an endless cycle. Because of that, I too wish there were an “ignore” feature. Yes, I ignore with my eyes but it would be a lot easier with the ignore button.

Absolutely agree, the Trek universe is actually huge if only the makers and producers are willing to explore it. There are literally thousands of way to approach this, all you need is some creativity and courage.

Exactly! And to be fair they have given Discovery a way to do that so I’m willing to see them take real chances with it. The Klingon war was not it IMO but its early.

” all you need is some creativity and courage.”

Based on season one STD seems to be lacking in that department.

@ML – don’t be obtuse. The backlash they have taken from so many bigots over a black female lead and gay characters indicate plenty of courage in the right direction.

But it wouldnt alleviate the concern for the vocal minority about it looking futuristic NOW.

Yes I think thats a great word, invoke. It doesn’t do any of that when compared to TOS. Whats funny is Enterprise did that much better even though it was a century before TOS but they actually did try to create elements as that show. You can argue how good it was but there was at least an attempt.

I think the only reason why Fuller even chose this period was because he wanted to do the Klingon war and it was a way to tie into some TOS characters like Sarek and Mudd. But outside of that they completely rebooted everything in the universe to the point you have to ask what is the point?

And I don’t think they need to scrap Discovery but they should stop pretending the show is a direct prequel to TOS. We have eyes, it isn’t.

Tiger, Yes, Enterprise did feel like it totally could evolve into what we saw on TOS over 100 years down the line. STD could have made their production design different but still remind everyone that it was in the TOS era. But they opted not to. Either because they lacked the talent or they were ordered to not make it look like it was not in the TOS era to begin with.

And yes, if they had said STD was a complete reboot there would be absolutely NO canon complaints from myself because they would be free to do whatever they wanted. But the bad plot decisions and writing would likely still be an issue.

Thank you Startrekmovie.com team for keeping us updated. Thank you too for letting us voice our concerns or praise on the comments section, we can only hope the writers and execs are not so far up their own backsides that they do read fan comments and whether here or on a youtube video, whether from hardcore fans or just casual ones, that they listen.

It’s refreshing to see more and more people standing up for the pointless changes and the blue filter on everything and the badly written war arc. It’s a shame you can’t voice any criticism of their creative choices (and by creative choices, I mean ignoring the rich 50 year tapestry that came before this series) without sarcastic comments or worse insults by the defensive NuTrek fans. I don’t hijack their comments praising the series, why are they hijacking mine. There’s a culture of ‘shutting people down’, you see it alot in politics.

For me, Discovery is a lot like the emperor’s new clothes fable. I see their empty ‘change for changes sake’ choices as being insulting to the original universe so many of us feel so passionately about. Entirely transparent but they tell us they’re breaking ground. My toes curl everytime I hear them use the word ‘Prime’. The tech is wildy different, the aesthetic preserves nothing of the Pike era or TOS (Watch The Last Jedi if you think retro can’t be sexy) and visually rebooting the Klingons when so much work had gone into their visual continuity, with even entire episodes dedicated to explaining the look… it’s just insulting. Not only to what we’re now forced to call ‘the prime universe’ but to the title Star Trek. We wanted diversity, we wanted gay characters, we wanted a hopeful positive uplifting future, we wanted to see the undiscovered – instead we had a badly written war arc taking up the entire season drenched in blue filter. Alex and his hipster buddies could be writing any show. This show doesn’t deserve the name. And they don’t deserve to be working on it. Transformers anyone?

This ^

And of course the backlash to calling a reboot “prime” was 100% predictable, as anyone can attest who remembers the nitpicking that UPN Enterprise was subjected to. I have to think people from the Berman Trek era warned Team CBS about this, and warnings were ignored, so I don’t see much reason to pity the Kurtzman regime. Don’t feel too bad about being attacked, a lot of that is Operation Gaslight being carried out by the CBS Intern Mafia (AKA the Moon Krew).

You deride other Trekkies for being defensive, and label them “NuTrek” as if their opinions are not valid. I think that’s a bit hypocritical. Arguments will always have two sides. If you post a negative/critical comment about a show, someone is going to respond in defense. It’s not ‘hijacking’. People will disagree – welcome to the internet. And I actually agree with your comments on ‘change for change’s sake’. But I know the story has been set, and the pieces are moving. Dollars have been spent on marketing, production and casting. The series is as it is. We either accept it in the spirit of Trek, or we stop watching. No point in hoping for massive shifts in the direction or feel of the show. It’s just not going to happen.

“Dollars have been spent on marketing”

They have?

I don’t know about you, but I saw a “Discovery” preview IN MY LOCAL MOVIE THEATRE. That must have cost CBS a pretty penny if they did it in other cities.

It was cool enough for me to get excited about the series.

I saw next to nothing promoting Discovery. Nothing in the movie theaters. No billboards. Nothing on line apart from the Trek sites. All I did see were tiny 10-20 second spots here and there on CBS. That was all. Maybe CBS was relying on word of mouth when it started. But it didn’t even get that.

Did you live in a hole? I saw ads on CBS all the time, plus it was everywhere on the internet.

I don’t watch much on CBS. Neither does Mrs ML31. And it was NOWHERE on any internet sites I frequent apart from the Trek themed sites. But those sites are preaching to the choir. Further, my 15 year old son who peruses the social media sites fare more than I do (and watches perhaps 3/4 of his TV on his phone or tablet) didn’t see anything about it and didn’t know about it until I told him. Also, you would think that at least ONE person I know would have been aware of the show. No one was. Not a single one. Not until I told them about it. Take that for what it is worth.

You call out so called “NuTrek” fans for being rude to people…. And then you insult the production staff of STAR TREK: DISCOVERY by saying they don’t deserve work on the show. That is MASSIVELY hypocritical. It is fans such as you that make me roll my eyes and make me embarrassed to be a life long Star Trek fan.

You don’t like DISCO? That’s fine. You want to complain about it? Fine… but don’t call out people for being disrespectful to you and your opinions- and then proceed to be disrespectful to others. It makes you no better than the people you complain about.

What of Nick Meyer?

I find myself wondering if he ever really had anything to do with it at all, just a legendary Trek name used to draw older viewers…

Here’s the thing, people should be asking this more loudly. Because we get stories about every detail, even mundane things. They note Joe left.

But its as if this is a forbidden subject or something, that everyone is ignoring. Why? What happened that Meyer has been erased and no one wants to talk about it?


The strange thing is: The twitter account @StarTrekDog which supposedly belongs to Nick Meyer still tweets about Discovery regularly. This would suggest that there hasn’t been a fall-out between him and the Discovery crew.

Exactly. So SOMETHING weird is going on. Just tell us.

I find it hard to believe the good people running this site just dont care to inquire. Which means they have and there is a reason they havent mentioned his status.

It is kind of like that new Clive Owen Andrew Niccol sf movie ANON, only this time ‘They’ have erased Nick Meyer from all of the general public’s consciousness.

I’d dearly love to know what, if any contribution he has made to the series.

The one concrete contribution he was announced as making in the early days of the show development was writing part of the Discovery pilot with Bryan Fuller. Whatever his contribution was to that was apparently discarded, as his name not on the finished product.

I think he never had any role in the first place. His name was just used to draw some old school Trekkies into the show or perhaps he saw the direction they were taking early on and didn’t want anything to do with it.

I think he did when Fuller was in charge. He was one of the people giving the interviews and talking up the show in the beginning. But after Fuller left you heard nothing from him after that point on. Its either that or they didn’t like his ideas and went in a different direction. Maybe both.

I’m thinking that the behind-the-scenes on THIS show’s 1st season is probably going to be more interesting than the show itself.

As awful as most of TNG s1 was, and with all the terrible stuff going on in the Paramount Hart Building (writer’s offices), I’m thinking DISCOVERY’s b-t-s must have been nearly as toxic (not that CBS is about to let anything too terrible leak, going by the lack of authorized stories, which makes me think of it as DSC-No-Access.)

I myself having the same thought, that it is totally dysfunctional. I mean, look at the way DSC narrowly skirted Development Hell. They had to chase off the showrunner to get it moving again. And then how many executive producers does this thing have, eight? Thirteen? How can it not be a camel–a horse designed by committee. And don’t forget network executives, they surely are calling some of the shots. This hot mess is certainly a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth.

Yes thats probably true as well. It is funny how they make everything seem like its going so great and everyone is happy and yet Joe Menosky, a guy who was involved in Trek for literally decades, left that show after one season. I imagine there is a lot more conflict going on behind the scenes then they would ever let on.

And of course its not completely uncommon, this happens a lot in many first year shows. And when you have a big brand like Star Trek there are going to be a lot of hot headed opinions of where to take it.

I mean look at Star Wars, that franchise basically grows money on trees and every film now makes at least a billion dollars but looking at all the turnover there, directors losing their jobs as they are literally filming the movie, it really does prove creative differences is a real thing, even when you still have a sure thing no matter how much you screw it up.

Or he got offered more money to write for Orville. And its probably an easier gig too since earlier today my dog threw up and it vaguely resembled an Orville story.

Just kidding Orville fans. ;-)

Menosky’s presence makes me think they’re looking to get some seriously weird inventive stuff going there. Trick will be to make sure it doesn’t get rewritten down into pablum or become weirdness for its own sake (my faves of his had other folks balancing him up, like Ron Moore on THE CHASE.)

I’ve been watch Trek since I was a kid and had no idea who Meyer was. Trek needs new fans not old ones that only complain.

Trek fans need informed opinions. I knew who David Gerrold was (and had read two of his books on TREK) nearly a year before I even saw TROUBLE WITH TRIBBLES. Your not knowing who Meyer was is quite frankly, mind-boggling, given your presence here and that you weigh in on TOS and TOS films in the slightest.

You’re a weird guy. I still like you though.

Not knowing who Meyer is explains alot. You’re a Trekkie and not a Trekker.

I’m a Sci-Fi fan.

Yet you didn’t know the guy who was responsible for TIME AFTER TIME also put the trek train back on the rails (with help from Bennett and Sallin) on TWOK and also delivered TUC? Or made THE DAY AFTER?

I tap my foot to the melody rather than the beat, so obviously am not tremendously knowledgeable about music, but still already knew who film composer Jerry Goldsmith was by the time I was 14, and was actually choosing to see movies with his name on them by 15, the way other folks apparently chose films by the people starring in them.

Are you still a kid?

I can understand watching films and not paying much attention to the credits but Meyer’s credits were pretty important ones on two of the most beloved films in the franchise.

And once you’re in the bubble enough to regular post on fan forums, not not know who Meyer is…well, I dont know man. How old are you?

I tune out during the credits. Most people do. Plus I’m not a fan of ST 2, I found it kind of boring. That old bad guy was lame. Into Darkness is my Fave.

I only know about Meyer because he got $10,000 for being a witness in the Tim Heidecker Murder Trial. Google “Tim Heidecker Murder Trial Day 5” to see him.

@TUP Here’s the youtube link to the Meyer at the trial if you’re interested. It’s pretty powerful.


I’m sure Nick Meyer was shown the door of the writer’s room when he read the first scripts and said “ you’ve got to be kidding me.” Or something to that effect…Nick is an intelligent, well-read, outspoken writer…clearly his talents were not utilized. More’s the pity.

You have a guy, who has essentially taken over writing Sherlock Holmes stories from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who has made some classic films and directed two of the best Star Trek films ever made as a producer, and what do you do? You don’t listen to what he has to say and show him the door. A vulcan would ask where is the logic in that?

Also, does EVERY article have to be open season for the “it aint prime” or “it doesnt work, move it to the future” crowd??

I was going to say a mean thing about them, but I won’t. It does get tiresome doesn’t it?


It’s just an opinion that some people have. People like me, who dearly love Star Trek and love how it ties together so well, on the whole. I watch Discovery, I enjoy it. But why try to tie it into canon so poorly. Forget the fact that the ships now use Holotech, the spore drive, the scaled up Enterprise, the Klingons and the myriad ships that we’ve seen. I get it, it’s a visual reboot, along the lines of saying, well this is how it should have looked.

What about beloved characters like Sarek, who is now revealed to be a warmonger. Or campy old Harry Mudd, who is now a psychopath? And let’s not even get into Spock having another long lost sibling, and a human one at that.

For me, the best episode was that one where they went to Phavo, that strange new world with the aliens. Great. Forget the boring war with the Klingons, which was wrapped up way to fast and conveniently, we never really saw or felt the impact of said war like we did on DS9. Forget the mirror universe antics and tell new and original stories. I also liked the whale creature one, it was a good story, despite how evil Harry Mudd was in it. Also, DSC has the strongest cast of any Star Trek, they’re very good actors who can do great things. Let’s have some more character scenes, longer episodes. I’m working my way through Lost in Space right now, and I’m blown away by the superior VFX work and also with the writing for the characters. DSC needs to up its game, so that every episode is great like Lethe, a rare character piece.

Remember the VOY episode “The Omega Directive” ? I’m sure Starfleet gave the Spore Drive it’s own Directive and keeps all information about it beyond top secret. A technology that has potential to destroy all life in the universe isn’t something you want people to know about.

Hi there, James. The reason they try to tie it into “canon” is that it gives them a template, I suppose, and it is the ultimate fan service. So in a way, it is a manner of making the Trekverse work — not only for them, but for a large segment of fans and non-fans.

How much more spectacular is it for CBS and Paramount that DSC is part of Star Trek, than — for example — “The Orville” is on its own? Even though I like “Orville,” I’ve stopped watching it. I’m just too tired to keep track of it. I understand Mr. Joe Menosky is on its staff, and with his creds, there should be no problem with creative story-writing. Yet, there is a panache to Star Trek like nothing else. Even Star Wars doesn’t compete completely (although, of course, Star Wars’ financials do blow Trek out of the water in terms of cinema).

So I answer the question of why DSC is even Trek, very simply. It is Trek because Trek deserves a continuing tradition (in the eyes of many fans) and also because it serves the real interests of the producers.

I can’t really see much more than that as an answer.

Literally, they could post a story that reports what Burnham ate for breakfast and the thread would be rife with “it aint prime”.

We get it. But you cant keep pushing a false narrative.


[everybody looks at Gorkon]

I see we have a long way to go.


The internet is godsend for Debbie-downers. There are plenty of people who love ST: Discovery, I have great conversations with a lot of them and so enjoy those conversations. Also Star Trek shows seem to always take a season or two the really fly. I’ve seen every episode of every show. In many cases two or three times over. And Discovery is off to a really good start. Unfortunately NOT ALL trekkers/ies are as open minded as one would think them to be.

Agreed. Sometimes I read the comments here and I’m like

Well it’s a new season with a fresh start, so we might just huh wha gulp egad … “Syfy’s Dominion, may be one of the dumbest, worst-acted, most poorly written series I’ve seen in ages. In no way should this encourage you to tune in hoping to rubberneck this bit of awfulness in hopes of creating some kind of new drinking game. Life’s too short. And you will choke on your own vomit and die alone. Don’t be a hero. One of my actual notes from watching the pilot, verbatim: ‘This is unbearable.’ You can file this among those anomalies where you wonder if the actors knew how bad it really was while it was happening. Like being in quicksand, having lost their voices. All they could do was look at each other with searching eyes that perhaps said, ‘Does what I’m saying and how I’m acting seem as terrible to you as it does to me in this very instant that it’s happening? God help us.’

Sometimes good acting can overcome bad writing — when you see it happen, please clap politely for the dedicated actors who elevated the art despite the odds. This is not one of those times.

At every turn in Dominion you wonder what the director was doing and also ponder if executives at Syfy are actually paid to watch the shows they create. Were there no notes for this Dominion pilot? Like, ‘Can you rewrite this so it doesn’t sound like an 11-year-old had a class assignment?” Or, ‘Let’s agree to never do this again.’ – Tim Goodman, The Hollywood Reporter

Since it appears they are attempting to weave vaguely supernatural woo into the series — not that it wasn’t there previously with things like mind melds and telepathy — does that mean we can expect to see homeopathy and acupuncture to go with the magic mushrooms?

Oh, please. I’m as much of a rationalist hardhead as you can imagine, but that doesn’t preclude the value of other modes of thinking even from my jaundiced perspective, let alone justify the false equivalence between your snark and what Harberts stated they were going for in season 2. Trek fans either need to lighten-up, or move on.

The dudes writing on an obscure Trek forum, surely he won’t move on as you put it. Anyone wanting to “move on” though, might try the excellent series The Expanse and the rather good Lost in Space

Yeah, “The Expanse” was great! I watched the first season on Amazon Prime but can’t find the second anywhere without having to pay for it. Since I already pay for Prime and cable TV (with On Demand), I’m irritated at being asked to pay more when I’m already forking over bucks for them. In short, I haven’t seen Season Two.

Just finished “Lost In Space” and was pleasantly surprised. I was never really a fan of the original ’60s show and while this new one has its share of plot holes and scientific head scratchers, it was enjoyable. I thought Parker Posey and Ignacio Serricchio did best with their characters.

No… But perhaps a Tilly Fal-tor-pan to extract Culber’s pseudo-Katra? In other words, a debate between Vulcan mysticism and logic?

Forgive me, T’Lar! My logic is uncertain where my [ward] is concerned…

At least someone else here has a sense of humor.

One thing I’d like to see in season 2 is exploration of the Beta Quadrant. I believe at this point the federation extends through the Alpha and Beta Quadrants. And it seems most of Star Trek has been focused on the Alpha Quadrant. I’ve always wondered what’s going on in the Beta Quadrant beyond just the Klingon and Romulan Empires. Are Saru and the Kelpiens a Beta Quadrant species?

Also let’s have more on the Tholians. Non-Humanoid species are more rare than I’d like on Star Trek (probably because they cost more to “flesh out”) but Discovery has the budget and the opportunity to do something really cool with the Tholians I think. Enterprise did a good job with them I thought (one of the high points of that short lived show). I’d like Discovery to really bring them out of the shadows.

One other idea, wild though it may be, from TNG, Guinan. She’s out there, very much so alive in the 23rd Century. We all know there’s more to the El-Aurians than meet the eye. Guinan’s and Q’s interactions are evidence of that and “Yesterday’s Enterprise” is as well. Woopi Goldberg loves Star Trek and would probably do an in person or CGI reprise. Just a thought…

I have really tried to be more rational and level headed on this website over the past few weeks despite appearances to the contrary but Martin’s rant about not being able to express an opinion without being disrespected before being disrespectful himself is the final straw.

I am embarrased to be part of a fandom that has become so vitriolic to any sort of change from the norm. I am embarrassed that fans of a franchise that extols “infinite diversity in infinite combinations” can be so hateful and vitriolic and so close minded when they dislike something. I embarrassed by the racist, sexist, homophobic attitudes that I have seen on this website by so called fans of the franchise. But most of all, I embarrassed that people on the website have dragged me down to their level.

I get it. Some of you don’t like Discovery. That is your decision. When you can explain why WITHOUT resorting to calling production staff liars, claiming that the show isn’t Prime- or being extremely derogatory to female cast and production staff (as Mirror Galt has repeatedly been)- then I am willing to have a lovely, civilised debate. But when I see nasty, vitriolic and unnecessary comments- another part of me becomes more embarrassed to be a Star Trek fan.

This site has become a cesspit of toxicity, bullying and bottom. And I am mortified I have contributed to it. I’m done.

This ^

Don’t go. If you leave, they win.

No, if they leave, nobody really wins, because the dialog becomes less than it was.

That’s one of the principles of fighting what one believes to be the good fight. (but I get that it can become tiresome and tiring, and that’s coming from somebody WAY across the other side of the street from you guys.)


The biggest problem with TrekMovie these days is this “Us vs. Them” mentality that both extremist groups perpetuate here.

I am a Star Trek fan. I am also a Discovery fan. There are no winners or losers when people insist on pitting fans against each other.

We should have a Star Trek Fight Club.

Or not.

or just agree not to talk about it.

Let just all meet on Paper Street.

There really is only one extremist side. Liking something isnt an extreme view. Its the shouting down of that enjoyment by people, the vast majority of which are unable to articulate why they feel that way in relevant terms.

Every so often a nice discussion occurs between people who disagree and it does not contain bigotry, hate or nastiness. It proves it can be done.

Its the internet so the trolls come out in droves when they arent immediately pushed out. Im not sure how regular long time users of this site can help that occur.

@AdAstraPerAspera I broadly agree with your points here. There seem to have been two extreme sides evolved in the DSC debate, both of which have demonstrated extremely unpleasant tendencies on this site. For instance, there are some posters (usually the same suspects too, but I won’t name and shame) who, if they see a post about DSC ‘not being “Prime”‘ and regardless of how logical/reasonable/sensible the argument is in that post, will jump all over it screaming “it’s prime, get over it”. Get over it. From an apparent Star Trek fan. Seriously. On the other side of the debate, I’ve seen people (again, usually the same suspects) post some truly horrible things about DSC. I get it – you’re passionate about Star Trek, but… wow. I have my own beliefs about DSC. They don’t align with some of the *ahem* louder voices here, and I’m fortunate that I’ve never been shouted down when I’ve posted on this site. Almost every discussion I’ve had here has been polite, enlightened, and I’ve usually come away from it feeling that I’ve had my horizons broadened (Star Trek theme plays in the background…). I try to formulate my arguments in as much of an objective way as possible, with examples to back up my points (I’m an academic, so I don’t feel my argument holds water without appropriate secondary support haha!). The fact that some people can’t handle that kind of intercourse is unfortunate, but, as several people have commented here, don’t let that exclude you from the discussion. The way I see it: in a world where there is a group on one side yelling about Shakespeare in the ‘original Klingon’, and a group on the other yelling about ‘inalienable *human* rights’, don’t be Chang or Kirk.

Be Gorkon.

In re supportive evidence, as a fellow academic, it drives me nuts when people here drop an unqualified pronouncement, argue from authority, etc. But as, unlike academia, there is no barrier to entry, we have to expect spurious reasoning (or none!) and the odd troll. I too will not name-and-shame, but I can think of a handful of sinners, two of which it dumbfounds me they haven’t been banned. If only for their incivility, and not just debasing the discourse.

…but, but that’s not what Gene would have wanted!!! (ipse dixit haha!). Yes it does make me wonder why there’s not been more of an admin/moderator presence on a lot of recent threads here. There are some individuals on both sides of the debate whose banning would benefit us all…! Maybe we should start marking posts? “Try not to make unsubstantiated claims” and “your argument is unsupported – can you cite the source of this data?” These are common bits of feedback that I use lol! Otherwise anyone who makes sexist/racist/intolerant comments (or tells anyone to “get over it”) should be exiled. Let Enabran Tain make the decisions!

Well met! Amazing how these bits of Latin continue to serve as a sort of Masonic handshake for academics. I try to do the same and intercept unsupported fiats and ask for reasoned clarification, but it’s a sisyphean task and not everyone so challenged bites.

I hope you’ll stick around, AdAstraPerAspera. You *have* contributed to the toxicity here (as I have at times as well). But we both like DISC and you seem like a good egg overall, so I hope you stay positive and we’ll maybe get through this.

I agree. I expected the periodic efforts to moderate was meant to clean up the hate, bigotry and trolling. It seems its mostly to stop those that push back against those things. Weird.

Perhaps if they added a “report post” function, people would be more inclined to report rather then push back.

I’ve been back and forth on this site for about 8 or 9 years now. To be honest, the us vs. them has always seem to have been here. I’ve seen some arguments get out of hand. Initially it was the Abramsverse fans vs. the non-Abramsverse fans, and yes, it would get a bit trying at times. I consider myself a fan of all Star Trek. That includes the original series, all the spin-offs—the Berman years if you will, and I liked the Abrams movies and so forth. That’s not to say I don’t have criticisms at times, and I’ve voiced them. I used to post here pretty prolifically, then stopped for a while because it just wasn’t fun anymore. I have come back here and there but haven’t posted much in the last 3 or 4 years. I think people just need to realize we will not all agree. And it’s fine to debate that. I don’t personally like the nu-Klingons, others think they’re great. I’m ok with that. And it’s a free country. If you hate Discovery, you don’t have to watch it. What’s great about Star Trek these days is there is literally thousands of hours of it. You could pretend Discovery doesn’t exist and still have plenty to entertain you. I always say if something is not moving in show biz it’s dead. As long as Star Trek is being produced in some form, currently with Discovery and the Abramsverse movies, then it will live on. If nothing else, that’s how I look at it.

Excited to see you he Spock!! 🖖🏾

This season is going to suck so bad a more exploratory Vibe More quiet/character driven moments that’s the stuff that Nerds Trekkies like, for me I’m going back to Star Wars to greatness to the Majority Audience, bye Nerds.

DS9 was indeed king, the high-water mark for the franchise. But you may wish to reexamine your statement. DS9 had a fair amount of action, it was light on exploration, yes, but the characters and their actors were what drove the show, its grit, its honesty.

Unless your comment was meant to be read as sarcastic?

I’ve never really understood any general disrespect for the military. I understand and support skepticism against war, and I do think that there is a tendency toward unnecessary violence related to some aspects of military action. But by and large, I find the virtues of the military to be, in the ideal, supportable and founded on necessity; those who support the military’s highest current ideals are, if honest and honorable, highly of our discretionary support as free citizens.

Starfleet, as a fictional construct, is ultimately a quasi-military organization since it is charged with defense. There is no “Starfleet Star Force.” Starfleet is it. Starfleet IS the military defense arm of the Federation. Therefore, aside from clandestine operations, Starfleet is bound to military ideals and traditions, as well as civilian oversight and control.

I don’t have much time for those who disparage the serving military (including the Coast Guard) of civilized Western nations. I fully recognize that extremes have broken the law; that the My Lai massacre has left a vile stain upon American actions; that there are more contemporaneous examples of such outliers. But ultimately, the military is an extension of civilian policy. We cannot, and must not, make stalking horses of those who try their hardest to protect us with honor.

Typo: “…highly deserving of our discretionary support as free citizens.” As corrected.

While I am on this rant, I might as well acknowledge the thoughts of people such as Noam Chomsky and many others, who are critical of the political actions of the West and contemplate that most actions in that realm on the part of leading Western nations are self-aggrandizing. Some say that the actions of the West have been genocidal in the last several hundred years. These people can say these things; it is up to all of us to decide for ourselves whether this is true. But the serving military is subject to civilian control.

To coin a resonant phrase: The fault is not in the armies; it is in ourselves.

Seventeen years with the Coast Guard Auxiliary. I joined the spring before 9/11. I don’t disagree with what you say, but your comment seems like a non sequitur–did you mean to post it elsewhere in the comments?

No. I wanted to express my support for our serving military.

I have a friend who I’ve known for decades. He served or served in the UN in a relatively high capacity. I know him and I know of the function he provided, which pertains to humanitarian relief. I would respect him in that capacity whether or not he was in the UN. And I think he would be the same person were he to be called to military service given the combination of factors.

Probably close to 20 years ago, I walked into a local bar in Western NY and seeing a number of Marines, I volunteered to pay for a round of drinks. I thought I owed it to them.

I’m of a generation that does not personally remember WWII except through history lessons and personal interest. I do remember the Vietnam War and the alleged atrocities there.

Weighing all of this brings to mind a balance, which I have tried to express.

We unleash hell when we go to war. But blame not the soldiers we send.

I still don’t understand how we got to expressing support for service members, but regardless I concur. At least at the deckplate. Sometimes the flag officers share in politicians’ crimes, figuratively and literally. Kirk was right to rethink being an admiral.

BTW, I spent 10 years in the Buffalo/Niagara Falls area for ten years, between 1994 and 2004. We now live in Corning, but up until last year I still had my 716 cell number!

Good! It’s a fine number.

I remember the days of the late Irv Weinstein, WKBW. Even as kids we knew he was the only one to watch for the evening news! Sorta. (Very sad he passed on recently.)

Commander Tom — now, he was a presenter (of children’s TV)! (Also a weathercaster.)

I think the Commander was before your time in Buffalo/Niagara, but those were the days, I tell you.

I remember Irv (in a weird twist of fate, he retired to and died in my hometown in California) and Commander Tom, albeit only as the weatherman. Mostly, though, I caught the morning news from WIVB, before Kevin O’Neill changed stations and was still the Why Guy. Eventually I got away from TV and just read the papers. At this rate of technological regression, I’ll end up getting my news from town criers, bards, and cave paintings.

LOL at the cave paintings commment.

I miss Irv Weinstein. I was in California much of the time he still maintained his position at Channel 7. He really is a legend and he was an inspiration even to his rivals.

In SoCal, there were people who were similar — Nick Clooney, for example, was always impressive to me. (Yes, the father of the actor, George.) Kelly Lange. A number of others. L.A. was obviously a major nub of news — and the news industry.

In another life, I would have continued as a journalist myself. It’s a very honorable profession.

By the way, thank you for your service!

You’re welcome, it’s been an honor to serve.

Where in Southern California? My hometown is El Toro (now “Lake Forest,” sigh), between Mission Viejo and Irvine, about five miles inland of Laguna Beach.

Small world — I used to work in Lake Forest! I liked it. Lake Forest is also home to the famous Saddleback Church, led by the famous Pastor Rick Warren. Oddly, I never set foot in that church even though it was quite the attraction.

Aside from where I worked, I remember that little plaza nearby with a Taco Bell and a Ralphs, I believe, that I used to go to for lunch.

It was a heck of a commute (from L.A.!) where I lived, but I like the work environment there and needed only to be in the office for three days of the workweek.


Come to think of it, I think it was a Stater Bros. supermarket in that plaza.

Small world indeed! I lived at the corner of Trabuco and El Toro, across from the Albertsons–which is now a Stater Bros. Fun fact: Taco Bell is HQ’d in Irvine and Del Taco in Lake Forest. I don’t think Rick Warren was operating yet, and in any case I think the area his church is in had yet to be annexed to the city. I’m a clergyman, and when I was consecrated a bishop I had to choose a titular see. The convention is you take the name of a place that was overrun by heathens and no longer exists. So I asked to be named the titular bishop of El Toro. :-)

(Apologies to any fans of the Rev. Dr. Warren–doubtless he’d tease me, too!)

Interesting! I just checked and it was and is a Del Taco, not Taco Bell. Although I generally prefer Taco Bell, I like and miss the 1-lb. Del Taco beef burrito. They don’t have Del Tacos in Toronto. They had a few Carl’s Jr.s (nice burger place) in T.O. but they all suddenly closed a few years ago.

Also, I didn’t know you were a clergyman. Trek fans come from all walks of life, it goes to show you.

Praetor Tal,

Re: El Toro

Nice to know it had a resurgence after that July alien battle.

It had an alien battle? Aw man, I’m on the wrong coast. Though July isn’t the best month to visit.

I googled it, you got me. My dad was stationed at MCAS El Toro in the early ’80s, but it’s not coterminous with the city. I believe north of Bake Parkway it becomes the City of Irvine. Wherever it is technically located, it was a huge installation in its day. I believe it was closed during the Clinton years, when I’d already moved east. Another closed nearby MCAS (where he was stationed when I was born) is at Tustin, which featured the world’s largest freestanding wooden structures in the form of airship hangars.

Discovery is more inspiring to me than the level of discussion here. But not by all that much.
I miss the old days, not because they were old, but because Star Trek once had a loving message.

I think you need to re-watch TOS

I would not say “loving message” was a constant there

Well said, Marja. While honor and respect were themes, even in the oft-cited “Balance of Terror,” the enemy (and one Federation citizen) perished. There was, in essence, lots of violence.

I think there was a central theme of kindness to others throughout, of course — viz., Love Thy Enemy. This is (among other precepts) a Christian (and other religious) doctrine. But this is not particularly unique to Star Trek. What Star Trek offered was a particularly attractive vision of both excitement and a form of progressivism. Both were in the mix. Excitement and hope flavored a technological ideal wherein humanity, aliens (typically quasi-human, except for those such as the Horta), and machines could reach out all over the universe and find what we were looking for.

The sociological aspects of Star Trek are amazingly complex and it is probably not correct to reduce them down to utopianism, as you and I appear to agree.

A lot more than one Fed citizen, are you forgetting everyone killed on those three asteroid bases taken out?

Apologies. You are right. I should have said only one Enterprise crew member was killed.

And nor was it about quiet exploration. Somebody name five episodes that didn’t involve some degree of fighting and conflict.

Conflict is the essence of drama, you shouldn’t be able to name
ANY episodes that don’t involve that aspect. And perhaps the key is that even though there is often shooting, it is not usually taken to the Nth degree. Even after all the stuff that precedes it in ELAAN, the E lets the Klingons go after hurting them enough to chase them away. Even after the events of BALANCE have mostly played out, Kirk is still willing to take survivors off the Rom ship. ARENA is one of the few times we see Kirk really looking for blood in a big way early on, and that is largely to offset or complement his later take to spare the Gorn. The fighting and conflict is part of the storytelling, not a be-all/end-all, and as such it often (though not always) does support a kind of loving message.

I agree that Star Trek was once held up as a very idealistic optional future in some respects during the Roddenberry/Berman years, immediately following TOS. I’m speaking primarily of the first seasons of TNG. But that has long fallen by the wayside….

Even during the ENT era (in production reality), there was at best a mixture of idealism versus quasi-realism.

Both TOS and TNG are less idealistic that many hold out.

There is nothing wrong with idealism at all. I am wistful for utopia.

But the Jessup speech from “A Few Good Men” comes to mind, about those who patrol the walls of the frontier so that liberty can prevail. (Yes, I realize it was mouthed by the villain of the piece.)

An excerpt: “Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. … And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, *saves lives*. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something.”

I don’t think Jessup was an all-out villain….

I think he was more like the alt-Picard of “Yesterday’s Enterprise.”

Can’t wait. ‘Loving this incarnation of trek. Y’know what else I’m waiting for??? Season One Blu Ray. When oh when?

Some interesting possibilities ahead for the Discovery show it seems.

I’ll be going into the 2nd season with no expectations of how everything looks and unfolds this time around – but will continue to look on it as occurring in a completely different part of the ‘multi-verse’ to the TOS show’s ‘prime’ setting, no matter how much the ‘canonistas’ wail. ;)

Let’s be honest – this show has proven to be a complete visual reboot/re-imagining of the original concept and it’s setting, but I’d rather not look at it that way. So ‘alternative universe’ characters set apart from the TOS setting is the continued way forward for me, when viewing this show…and I look forward to a bit more ‘exploration’ of where they haven’t gone before in it, this time around.

I’m hoping they start connecting those dots to TOS. I’m curious if they retconned the Enterprise’s bridge set as well. Because it’s fine, they just need to make the consoles more modern than still pictures of the originals. And holos wouldn’t be bad either.

As for the Klingons, I still waiting for a legitimate explanation why they look different. Behind-the-scenes they still haven’t given us a solid answer if they are indeed retconned or they well do a explanation on the show. In fact, I really hope they actually show all 3 generations of Klingons (TOS / Augmented, TNG / Ridged , and DSC).

Same goes for Klingon ships. Odd they go from one design aesthetic to a completely alien design and then back within a decade. I like to see some explanations.

The Klingons got a higher makeup budget. They look like real aliens now and not guys from a comic con cosplay party.

I still think that they could use the bridge of the Cage as template. IMO it looked a lot more modern with its grey-steelish color-pattern than the multicolored TOS-bridge. Remove that strange 50’s-style lamps, extend it a bit and modernize the consoles. And make the set look like it’s made of real steel. Voilá – they would retain almost the same style without looking outdated.
I think the bridge of the Kelvin or the Kobayashi-Maru-simulator in ST 2009 comes close to that.

comment image

I agree. I hope the Enterprise bridge looks good. I suspect it will be gigantic since “larger” seems to be some weird fetish of designers nowadays.

Larger is always better. You can learn a lot from Sir Mix-a-Lot.

I think the only reason they changed the makeup of Klingons was to hide Shazad Latif so that people would not recognize him also playing Voq the albino Klingon. They could have included the original and ridged versions of Klingons on several occassions but they didn’t. I think they were also counting on this to make people discuss the show more. Well, we are lucky they didn’t change the vulcans.

The reason is because the 90’s Kiss Army Klingons just don’t look believable today. Worf looks like a joke now. No way does he look like an alien.

As opposed to the orcs of discovery.

You know there is next to no chance aliens will be humanoid at all.

All discovery did was put orcs in space…. what creativity.

The discovery Kligons look like they walked on to the wrong set and should be off shooting some 3rd rate lord of the rings knock off thing.
Add to that the make up sucks, they all look like they are wearing cheap rubber masks like the background apes in the original planet of the apes. They are not even able to express emotions nor even talk properly because of their fake teeth.

At least the new Klingons have two sets of teeth. The 90’s Klingons was a sad joke.

😲 two whole sets of teeth? Will wonders never cease?
How ground breaking and awesome 😏.

They are so original, it’s not like we have never had hairless rubber faced orcs before….. oh yeah aside from the Remans.
The orcs looks even worse than the Remans of Nemesis.

The discovery kilgons look like generic cheap orcs. They can’t act because they cannot express emotions, they struggle to talk and aside from being as dumb as rocks they have as much charisma as a rock.
Who’s ships look like pieces of junk including one that looks like a toilet brush. Which is so terrible looking that it’s not even good enough to be a toilet brush.

But who cares that they are terrible, when they have two whole sets of teeth? You know what would have made them even better? If they had 3 sets of teeth or about maybe even 10 sets of tenth. What the hell give them a million sets of teeth…. that will really make up for the fact they cannot act and their boring generic cheap orc look.

Don’t forget they now have two penises as well. That was just utterly dumb.

There’s a scene in TNG that talks about Klingons having two of everything. I thought you was a Fan.

Its actually a diagram picture.

It’s pretty funny how you can respond to that but not to the criticism of your amazing discovery kligon orcs.

You attempt to belittle what other people like about Star Trek with comments like “the 90’s Kligons were a sad joke”, “….not comic cosplay” etc. But I guess you can’t take it when it’s directed back to you. And I did not even attempt to belittle your discovery Kligons I merely pointed out the giant flaws in them.

I find the new Klingon females quite attractive.

I dont think that was the reason. Because they had originally announced him as playing a Klingon. And then announced he was switching roles. So I think the idea of hiding that fact came later, probably when they realised he was unrecognizable under the make up.

The Klingon change was because Fuller wanted to change everything.

Maybe the Voq/Tyler arc was something added after Fuller left. So maybe Fuller had actually wanted Latif to play just a Klingon (the one he was first announced to play).
I’ve said this before: I believe they could have hidden Latif under the old Klingon make-up as well. No need to change it for that reason.

I agree. Make up change fro Klingons was just what Fuller wanted and had nothing to do with the Ash storyline.

Fuller said that well known aliens would be reimagined long before they started filming the show.

And yet, once he was gone, other well-known aliens were very much in keeping with established designs and only had relatively minor updates that were mainly modern FX related.

Im not griping about the Klingons because every incarnation of Trek altered them (some even from season to season). But it was a Fuller idea to “change” for the sake of change I think.

Even without Fuller they would have changed them. It’s not the 90’s anymore.

I find that doubtful. I get the impression that had the show been run by people who actually know and respect the source material a little bit the Klingons would not have undergone the massive change they did. I’m sure there would have been some tweaks. There always are. But they still would have been recognizable as Klingons and not some brand new made up alien.

So I finally watched Discovery and in all honesty as a Star Trek fan I’m not impressed at all, sure it looks pretty but the first season had fifteen episodes and it felt like the story arcs we’re knee jerked paced to be kind now season will have thirteen….. Yeah sad thing is I’ll watch it because I’m a fan not because I care about what the is even going on with that god ugly ship smh

Same. As a fan I tried hard to like it. And I have convinced myself to enjoy much of it, which is not what I’ve had to do for any modern prestige TV shows, which are good without any mental gymnastics on my part.
Looking forward to season two …with anxiety.

Here as well. The entire first 2/3 of the season I was trying hard to like it. It was mediocre (save for “Lethe”) so there was hope as the story unfolded things would improve. But then came the MU. And everything fell apart. Instead of getting better it actually got tons worse. That is where the show lost me. And I was doing my very best to see the positive side of things. That became more and more difficult the longer they stayed in the MU and all the dumb plot reveals they threw at us.

So here’s a theory – somebody suggested here a while ago (I forget who it was, so if it’s you, please let me know!) that the Vulcan extremist group who tried to blow up Sarek might reappear in season 2. I’m hoping that was indeed an Easter egg for s2 and that we have the extremists reappearing to try and make Vulcan cecede from the federation and become isolationists. Given the state of affairs at the end of s1, we have an uneasy situation on Qo’Nos that could ignite at any time, where an untested leader holds the whole planet hostage and a federation that’s recovering after the worst war in its history. What if the extremists try to exploit this? Perhaps security in the federation has been compromised as a result of the war (damage, etc.) so Vulcan agents are able to get into the Klingon empire and sew discord. Trying to set the houses against one another and against the federation. A new sustained conflict would allow them to convince the Vulcan high command that they should become isolated from the rest of the galaxy. The key opponents to this on Vulcan would be the Vulcan science directorate (who would be for staying in the federation for the sharing of scientific data and knowledge – because IDIC). Thus, the faith of the extremists would be set against the science of the science directorate. This would be mirrored in Burnham’s internal struggle to be logic and science oriented while at the same time having faith in starfleet (you know from her speech at the end of s1). Or maybe it’ll be the Borg. But hopefully it’ll be the previous story.

Vulcan extremism seems inherently illogical

Agreed. But TNG said it best:

“Tallera: Extremists often have a logic all their own.”

It’d be a nice nod to Tallera’s Vulcan extremist isolationist group if DSC had this kind of storyline. And I’m sure that even a Vulcan extremist group would be able to twist their own logic to justify their position.

There is a DS9-type vibe connected with this series, alongside the more modernistic inclincations of Star Trek: Enterprise.

From the point of view of aethestics, there is no difference between DSC’s reinvention of the Star Trek universe and the constant reinvention of the actual real past of our human history. Think, for example, of how many times the cities of the ancient past were depicted in different ways in art and cinema. Think, for example, of how Sparta was depicted half a century or more ago, and how it was depicted in more recent films. Think, for example, of how King Lear (a fictitious character) has been imagined and endlessly reimagined since the Bard’s day. So, too, the quintessential elements of Star Trek can and should be reimagined, and the nitpicking as to physical appearances is a tempest in a very tiny teapot.

The overall arc of the second season appears to involve elements of the Mirror Universe as reflected in our own (courtesy of “Captain Georgiou,” in reality a former Emperor. But the overall thrust of the season could involve the development of the Federation in its underpinnings. That is, the propagandistic lean of TNG (“Everything is Wonderful, Thank You, Since It’s the 24th Century”) is subject to deep examination.

In no case has there ever been a paradise on Earth that matches the ideal supposedly depicted in TNG. As fans, some of us are eager to see how the actual fictional history of the Federation is unearthed, so to speak, via a deep dive into Section 31, the defeat of alien races, the build-up of Earth as a hub of Galactic importance, and other aspects … while retaining the interest in the science-fictional aspects of Trek that always has been. (Space Nazis? Yes, Trek has that!)

I am extremely excited for Trek’s future. I think I have a fair sense of how Trek has both influenced and reflected some deep currents in culture. I think the second season will give us the surprises we will appreciate years down the path of the stars.

Hat Rick

You forgot to add “Kurztman and CBS have not been telling the truth to us all the time by insisting that this is the prime timeline”.

Hate speech! No, I kid. I agree, this isn’t Prime. Merely saying a thing does not make it really so. In folk parlance, “Don’t p*** on my leg and tell me it’s raining.” I think it is easier to think of Discovery as a development fork, as often happens with software. You see this in Linux distributions all the time. Linux (itself a fork from UNIX) begets Debian begets Ubuntu begets Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc. OSX and iOS and Android are all based on Linux. And despite not looking alike, they’re all Linux. I don’t want to drink the Kool-Aid and call DSC “Prime,” as it patently is not, but I can accept it as a development fork. Its existence does not threaten earlier iterations. It’s just different.

Would love to see some 20th century firearms hanging on Capt. Pike’s Wall…

A bit of vanity:

When I lived in L.A., I would often drive past the Paramount Studios on Melrose as part of my commute. The complex is quite impressive, and last time I looked there were public tours.

There, I met in a private meeting for about 20 minutes with a personage involved in a Trek production, during its run, and I was highly impressed with him. I doubt he remembers me, as I think he has much more prestigious memories. I do remember that he showed me a very nice guidebook to which he referenced at some point or points during or prior to production.

In any event, I say this because I am given to drive past Pinewood, Toronto, these days. This is a somewhat strange coincidence. But I do think it triggers in me the understanding that somehow, Trek is with me as it follows me as much as I follow it.

If I were to build a solipsistic universe around Trek, I don’t think I could do much better of a job.

An AK-47 perhaps … it’s possible.

Pike was played by an actor, in TOS, who also played Jesus Christ in a famous movie.

There is a misconception that Christ was and is pacifist. But Christ/God returns with a sword in the Bible.

Justice shall be done.

A righteous vengeance is the province of the Creator. Not humankind. Symbols are a different matter.

Honestly, if Pike hadn’t showed up, I would’ve pulled the plug on this train wreck.

Why is this a train wreck? From a production and reception point of view, it is a success.

If you could summarize why you are unhappy with the production, other than that it prevents your enjoyment for subjective reasons, then I think this would be illuminating to me.

Is it the story arc or arcs? Is it the fact that we see diverse leadership? What is it?

I think some of this proceeds from real expectations that need to be addressed directly rather than otherwise.


Reception has been mixed at best. Rotten Tomatoes gives DSC an 82% rating, but if you narrow it to top reviewers, it drops to 71%. Audience score comes in at a disappointing 56% percent. I.e., two stars out of four, or merely one thumb up.

In terms of production, the writing is hit-or-miss and occasionally slapdash. And while the art direction is impressive, it significantly diverges from established visual continuity which has been upsetting to many longtime fans.

To some minds, these qualify DSC as a “trainwreck.” I have merely called it a “hot mess” for which I am disinclined to continue paying.

Hmmm, that’s not really mixed. Generally when something has 82% approval, no one describes it as mixed. lol

Although RT is hardly the best judge of quality.

But certainly, anyone describing Discovery as a train wreck has never seen a train wreck.

‘hot mess’ is pretty good descrip-wise, though I’m now tending more toward the absolute of ‘missed opportunity’ since I’m thinking it isn’t likely to get better until and unless they clean house in the creative department (i’m figuring the departure of Menosky and the list-him-as-missing Meyer as not being part of this process, since theoretically those were the good guys.)

Im never afraid to call it like I see it (STID was awful) but I like Discovery. Its not perfect.

My patience will be thinner for season 2 though as they had all the usual issues with any show in its first season PLUS dealing with Fuller being canned.

Season 2 should be exactly what the team wants it to be. Good or bad, its theirs. So Im more optimistic but also, with higher expectations.

See, my concern is that now that they think they got away with s1, that they are going to go WAY off the rails in s2. And what happens when you go way off the rails? You actually do wind up with a train wreck. And if you want a more specific vision of my idea of the established level for ‘SF trainwreck,’ I’d say seaQuest season 2 would be the gold standard, what with the sub getting up to 88knots (or whatever) to travel through time and so many more ludicrous moments.

I also just think that self-consciously trying to create a water-cooler phenomena akin to GoT is a self-defeating attitude, like a reliable singles-hitter in baseball deciding to swing for the fences at every at-bat. It’s like trying to create a cult movie (lots of folks tried to duplicate the ROCKY HORROR effect, way back when), and I don’t think it can ‘snap!’ just happen out of planning. I remember that Bezos is wanting this ‘next GoT’ for Amazon too, but I just don’t think infinite dollars can be relied upon to create that level of blockbuster magic, because there are intangibles involved.

Well, Discovery is serialized so they for sure want story-telling in the vein of GoT which is great. Very lofty expectations to try and meet.

But I have a sense these show runners are MORE inclined to respect canon than Fuller. Fuller strikes me as being akin to Orci, JJ et all where they LOVE canon unless they have an idea that doesnt work and then it’s “a new universe”. But then when they want you to know how smart they are, it’s “canon” or they want trek fans to love it, its canon.

Most of the things people dislike, seem to be Fuller ideas. And I strongly suspect if the show runners could pick, theyd be in a different era.

So im hopeful Season 2 sees the promised transition (or start of it) towards TOS.

I would love to be wrong–truly I would–but I believe you will be left waiting until the crack of doom. At which point they’ll still be telling you it’s Prime, cross our hearts and honest to golly.

” From a production and reception point of view, it is a success. ”

It is? How do you figure? CBS doesn’t tell us how it’s doing. And the fan and critical reaction, from what I have seen at least, has been mediocre at best.

I have a comment as a matter of my of my humble opinion on the pseudo-legalistic criticisms of DSC relating to the design of the fictional starship Enterprise, certain elements of whether the DSC presentation is in the “canonical” “Prime Universe,” and so forth.

My comment is similar to William Shatner’s famous exhortation to get a life. I don’t wish re-create the controversy, so my actual commeent will be: “Please try to re-evaluate.”

The Eaves issue is as described in a previous article posted by the owners of this website, and I cite it. Similarly, I wonder how many other criticisms are based on misunderstandings of a comparable origin? That is, people say that they think something is wrong, in good faith, but then the matters proceed in contradiction? Why is it that Star Trek should suffer from such controversies?

I think we have a long way to go before perfection. Thousands of years, not hundreds. Trek is a process of learning. We should proceed to learn that the human adventure is slower than we want.

A cybernetic exception does apply, I believe: A human-machine hybrid will move at its own pace and all bets are off.

Hat Rick

At the risk of seeming off-topic, I cite “The Red Badge of Courage,” written by Stephen Crane, an American author. I think it has given inspiration to many.

This well-known work is startlingly unreflective of our current culture. It is perhaps best reflected as an honorific in high school classes, but we are overmuch involved in other causes, primarily of leftist origin. I say this as a progressive who understands reality.

As Trek fans, perhaps we should become more involved in the now, rather than this fictional future insofar as we will argue over how many pixels can dance on the head of a pin upon Enterprise.

Think of the real future potential that lies ahead, if you please, and do not be distracted by tweets or which lives matter.

Does your life matter? I think so. So do the lives of all you love or hope to love, or wish to love, or anticipate that humanity will so, as well. That’s all that matters, perchance.

Hat Rick

I tend to agree with those that indicate the showrunners would be better off if they didn’t keep insisting Discovery fits in existing canon. We have some here who complain that it doesn’t in fact fit with canon, and others that argue it doesn’t really matter.

Personally I don’t think it fits all that well with canon as we know it. I think the writers would have been better off saying that Discovery is a reimaging of the Star Trek universe. They could even say that the plot may fit with existing canon, but the look and feel of the show has been updated/reimaged.

I think the problem is they try to insist that this show fits perfectly with the time period as seen previous incarnations, while at the same time saying it’s been reimaged, in effect, without coming out and saying it’s been reimaged.

I guess you could say that’s my issue, that they’re being a bit disingenuous. It’s a reimaging. I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. But just come out and say that’s what it is. Don’t try to fool Trekkies. That just makes them mad.


Wise words.

But, may I say, the cruellest strike of all is when fans “reimagine” the reimagining, or hold it to its ancient past.

No question on my mind that if they presented an 1701 exactly as it was in “Trials and Tribulations”, it would please many fans.

Ibid, it would also mark a world of ridicule.

The best goes on.

Is Trek to be mothballed as a Relic, or shall it move on?

I disagree with some laments of DSC. But pure aesthetics will not be top 10 contender for why.

And disagreement about “canon” is a lagging competitor in that race.

The main issue I have is not the re-imaging per se. I mean, I’m a Trekkie and have liked all the incarnations of Star Trek up to this point, the original series, TNG through Enterprise, and the Abramsverse movies, and sure, I’d love a faithful adaptation to the prime timeline (a la Trials and Tribulations and In A Mirror, Darkly). But I do realize that was probably not practical. It works for one off episodes like the ones I mentioned, but it probably wouldn’t work over the long term. The Abramsverse movies did not pretend to make it them faithful to prime universe canon movies. They are linked to the prime universe but it was made clear they exist in their own continuity.
Time and again the Discovery showrunners have told us, nope, this is prime timeline and should be accepted as such. It’s a bit disingenous. I can’t speak for everyone, but I’d have more respect if they just say it like it is. It’s a reimaging of Star Trek. It’s based on Star Trek, they can even say the storyline represents the prime timeline. But the designs, special effects, upgrades, nu-Klingons, etc. are reimagined for a new audience, or something to that effect. Personally I think there’s be a lot less complaints (some of course would never like it, but for me, I could accept it on those terms–just be honest with us the fans, and themselves).

I could have supported a refinement–i.e., basic designs remain the same, but with more detail and better materials. Or they could have claimed a fork in the timeline, or set it after Nemesis, and so forth. But what they’ve chosen to do pokes a stick in the eye of longtime fans, the sort of fans who historically have been the bread and butter of Trek. We wrote letters to keep it on the air; we pioneered the fan convention. Yes, a lot of us are aging, but there are ways to keep bringing in new fans and still honor the past. But if you’re going to do a reboot, call it a reboot, or brand it as something entirely else. Don’t string us along saying “It’s Prime! Honest! Just wait!” and then deliver something entirely else, expect no one to notice or object, and then respond with defensive indignation as some of the production staff have done during more unguarded moments.

Personally I think they would have been better off in the future myself, say 100 years post Nemesis or further. That way you could pretty much have free reign with minimal canon problems, and it would even leave the relaunch novels mostly intact (well unless you included the Borg or something like that). Setting it so close to the original series really backed them in a corner, esp. with them insisiting this is prime universe canon.

Damian, it’s more reboot than it is reimagining. At least from my point of view. Although some might say those two are similar if not the same. So I will say it is far more reboot than it is a visual reimagining.

“I guess you could say that’s my issue, that they’re being a bit disingenuous. It’s a reimaging. I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. But just come out and say that’s what it is. Don’t try to fool Trekkies. That just makes them mad.”

Hear, hear. I don’t like being taken for a fool.

It’s like you went to a McDonalds and ordered a Big Mac but instead they gave you a McChicken in the package of the Big Mac.

And then insisted it was in fact a Big Mac, that it’s you who are mistaken, and you’re a fogey/basement-dweller/fanboy for thinking so.

A Big Mac is a physical object. Star Trek’s visuals as it relates to era are an idea. Totally different.

People are getting caught up in the idea they are being sold on something they arent getting. Its not true.

It would be like ordering a big mac and it comes in a Styrofoam container. It’s still the same big mac. But it aint the 70’s.

I understand what you mean about the intangibility of something presented on a screen, yet it is still a product with predictable elements taken in visually, audibly, and intellectually. The visuals are not just the wrapper, they’re part of the product. The problem isn’t the aluminum can, it’s the New Coke inside it, liquid and fizz.

Sorry. I meant to say that I agree with some of the laments.

I sincerely apologize.

Not a fan of Section 31. Roddenberry would have hated it!

Im not sure Gene hating an idea puts it in the “con” column.

Ha-ha. True. Roddenberry had a great creation in Star Trek, but I think it worked better when others put the details into action. I liked his ideas that humanity was moving in a positive direction, but we’re still not perfect and we make mistakes.

Yup. Some people are idea men, some are detail men. Every so often, you find one who is both. Like, Orci, I say seems like a great idea guy. Just not a detail guy.

Look at Tarantino, obviously an idea guy AND a details guy but he likes his Trek story enough to let someone else flesh it out since he’s busy. So idea guy without the ego to insist on doing everything himself.

I dont know about anyone else, but the video pop up we’re now subjected to on this site causes my internet to freeze and/or crash constantly if I dont close it fast enough. Ill donate to the site if you make it go away!

It doesn’t happen on the desktop version, although my ad blocker says it has blocked 99 elements on this page alone. It happens on my Android phone and it won’t let me click it away until the video has fully played.

Fun fact: The average American sees 1,500 ads a day. And that statistic is several years old now.

Too many ads, especially invasive ones like video pop ups, are going to drive people away. Im serious when I say I’d donate money to this site if it meant doing away with that stupid video.

When you add it all up, season two looks like it should be good! Here’s hoping the show finds its feet some more

Wadda fock, no Spock!