Ethan Peck Cast As Spock On ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Season 2

Ethan Peck - Star Trek: Discovery - Spock

The search for Spock is over! Ever since the news hit that Spock would appear in the second season of Star Trek: Discovery, fans have been waiting for casting news on who would play the iconic character. Now we have it. CBS has just announced that Ethan Peck, the grandson of movie star Gregory Peck, has been cast in the role.

In a statement, Discovery co-creator and executive producer Alex Kurtzman described the casting journey:

Through 52 years of television and film, a parallel universe and a mirror universe, Mr. Spock remains the only member of the original bridge crew to span every era of Star Trek. The great Leonard Nimoy, then the brilliant Zachary Quinto, brought incomparable humanity to a character forever torn between logic and emotion.  We searched for months for an actor who would, like them, bring his own interpretation to the role.  An actor who would, like them, effortlessly embody Spock’s greatest qualities, beyond obvious logic: empathy, intuition, compassion, confusion, and yearning.  Ethan Peck walked into the room inhabiting all of these qualities, aware of his daunting responsibility to Leonard, Zack, and the fans, and ready to confront the challenge in the service of protecting and expanding on Spock’s legacy.  In that spirit, we’re thrilled to welcome him to the family.

A different Spock

Although this is the first official casting announcement for the new Spock, cast and creators for the Discovery spoke at length about the return of the character at San Diego Comic-Con last month.

Alex Kurtzman noted that Discovery‘s Spock will not be the one we’re used to.

The Spock that we meet is ten years [before Star Trek: The Original Series]. So, he is not formed in the same way that he is formed by the time you get to TOS. What we will learn is a lot of what made him the Spock that he was and what will make him the Spock he is, has to do with his family and his sister.

According to the producers and actors, a big part of the second season will have to do with family and specifically the relationship between Spock, and Michael Burnham who was adopted by Spock’s parents Sarek And Amanda. Sonequa Martin-Green explains:

We are going to be really digging into that relationship, and digging into a lot of family dynamics in season two. And not just in that family between Burnham and Spock and Sarek and Amanda, but also with the entire crew.

Where is Spock in season two?

Spock did not appear in the season two first look trailer released at Comic-Con last month but his name was mentioned a few times. The trailer established that at the start of the season Spock has taken leave of his post on the USS Enterprise, and we even see Michael Burnham visiting Spock’s empty quarters.

Michael Burnham explores Spock’s empty quarters

The brief trailer indicates Spock’s leave is tied to the mystery which drives the season and was the reason behind Pike taking command of the USS Discovery. In the trailer, Pike describes they mystery of seven unknown signals spread through the galaxy, which they will investigate. Burnham is also seen in the trailer talking to Saru saying “Spock is linked to these signals, and he needs help.”

Burnham talks to Saru about Spock in the Discovery season 2 first look trailer

Nimoys salute Peck

Shortly following the announcement, the actor posted a photo of himself on Instagram along with Leonard Nimoy’s son and daughter Adam and Jule, along with their spouses Terry Farrell and David Knight. Peck noted:

Beyond all logic, beyond what I thought was possible, I find myself in this reality. It is with great honor and a sense of immense responsibility that I take on the iconic role that Leonard gave to us and that Zachary did brilliant justice to. Thank you Adam Nimoy, Julie Nimoy, Terry Farrell and David Knight for your open arms, warm welcome, smiling curiosity, support, for making me feel worthy, as I embrace and take into my heart the half alien we know as Mr. Spock.

Started acting in 1995

Peck, who is 32, actually got his start in the mid-nineties as a child actor. He had a starring role in the ABC family sitcom 10 Things I Hate About You. More recently he has had recurring roles in Madam Secretary and Gossip Girl, along with a number of other guest roles. As a child actor, he appeared twice in That ’70s Show as a young Michael Kelso (the role played by Ashton Kutcher).

Ethan Peck as Patrick Verona on the TV series 10 Things I Hate About You

Ethan Peck as Patrick Verona on the TV series 10 Things I Hate About You

As noted before, Peck comes from Hollywood royalty as the grandson of legendary Academy Award-winning actor Gregory Peck. In the 2016 interview with the actor below, you can see and hear him talking about his career and following in his grandfather’s footsteps.

Season 2 of Star Trek: Discovery will premiere in early 2019.


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.

432
Leave a Reply

59 Comment threads
373 Thread replies
5 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
96 Comment authors
newest oldest
Curious Cadet

Nice choice. I can see this. There’s even a little bit of Quinto in the look as well, tying him to the current big screen incarnation.

Michael Hall

Exactly what I thought when I first saw his picture. He actually looks more like Quinto than Nimoy, but since Quinto looks a fair bit like Nimoy himself, it’s all good. :-)

Dustin

I’m sure he’ll be fine. Discovery’s casting has been excellent, and I have no trepidation about how he’ll handle the role. I just wish he, or Pike or the Enterprise, weren’t there at all. I like Discovery and want it to finally try standing on its two feet rather than leaning on its predecessors.

Locutus

I agree. The acting is top notch. The stories might not be perfect, nor does the design style meet everyone’s taste (how could it), but the actors do an excellent job with what they are given.

Tiger2

Yeah I have no issue with the acting or even the characters. The Voq/Tyler thing bugged me but the actor himself did an amazing job with it.

ML31

Another on board with not having any problems with the cast. Some of the characters may be weak. But that is more the writers fault. They can’t all be have Patrick Stewart skills. The ability to make dull characters watchable.

BorgKlingon

Agreed — the casting has been excellent on DSC.

Marja

I agree. As I’ve been saying, I really think they’re setting things up for “Star Trek: Pike’s Enterprise” or some such.

I want Discovery to succeed on its own, too, and did do a bit of a facepalm at the end of S1.

Mainly because the Enterprise didn’t have Prime Lorca onboard, but,,,.

TomB

“Discovery’s casting has been excellent”

You have to be joking…

MysticalDigtial

Who’s been the issue? I can’t think of anyone that ended up feeling wrong for the role.

werwe

It could be worse, but excellent is definitely wrong.

alphantrion

Well, he certainly has legendary acting genes in his blood so this should be good. I wish him good luck and may he live long and prosper in the role. I had no idea he was the grandson of Gregory Peck, there is some good pedigree right there.

Marja

He has a deep voice. That should help the fans who couldn’t get over Quinto’s baritone versus Nimoy’s bass.

Jack

Ha. Alas, nobody’s as pedantic as we are.

Olaf

Exactly! Quinto’s looks were ok, but the voice just seemed off. Not as bad as Chris Pine’s Kirk, but still…

kmart

Pine’s voice made him the male equivalent to Cheryl Tiegs, dramatically speaking. That “I will end you” in ID was wincemakingly bad, like I felt bad for him as an actor — till I remembered how much he got paid to be publicly shamed this way.

ML31

STID was not well written at all. Particularly Pine as Kirk talking to Khan. The “Shut your mouth” line was just terrible and you have to feel for Pine a bit as he was the one who had to deliver it.

GuestA7

STID was a dark. angry, paranoid mess, but STB is the big relief that followed it — not at all perfect, but much, much better. As for Pine, he’s also a lot better his third time around in STB. Better than the Shat and closer to Picard. Just get rid of the vengeance-seeking villains in all of the TREK movies and we’ll be closer to getting back on track with the visionary aim of ST.

RNase-free Jeff

I still don’t agree with the decision to use Spock right now in Discovery, but then again they aren’t paying me to write for the show. I don’t know anything about Ethan Peck, but all I can say is welcome aboard, and remember the rules of acting mentioned time and again by the TNG crew:

1. live in the moment
2. never indicate (aka point at people during a scene)
3. DON’T BUMP INTO THE FURNITURE

BorgKlingon

Congrats on overcoming you RNase addiction. We are all proud of you! ;-)

werwe

Well I don’t think they will be. Haven’t they shot about 5 episodes already and this new actor wont be in it for a few weeks, so maybe 7 done? Just speculation

albatrosity

He looks the part at least! I sure hope his Spock hews closer to Nimoy’s than the emotional Quinto Spock who is a straight up punk. Honestly I think casting Vulcans is the hardest thing to get right. I don’t think Frain made a particularly good Sarek, but nothing can compare to the originals so we can only hope for the best. Just make Spock cool again and we’ll all be happy.

Jemini

Personally I love Frain and I was excited about him playing Sarek knowing about his acting skills and other characters he played. However, I have to admit I’m not impressed by the final product, vulcan make up and all. I wonder if their Spock too will look less exciting when they cover him with a vulcan make up. They wasted Quinto’s appeal as a vulcan too in Beyond where the make up and wig looked too fake.
I get vulcans have a weird haircut, but making them look as people who simply have that appearance versus actors who put on a vulcan make up isn’t impossible (eh Quinto in the first movie). They design far more complex alien costumes, why vulcans are so hard?
But it wasn’t just the make up with Sarek. He isn’t bad, maybe it’s just he’s different from my own idea of Sarek and how I imagine him younger. I also wish he reminded me of his son too…maybe this is what I was expecting.

Marja

Quinto was performing Spock AS WRITTEN. Please don’t blame the actor.

Jemini

And Quinto plays a Spock from another reality anyway so the changes should be all the more easier to accept as the actor being asked to make his own Spock, and him doing exactly that. He’s Kelvin Spock, not really a younger version of Nimoy’s. But pseudo intellectual trek fans love to label everything they dislike as ‘silly’ or ooc to lecturize actual writers (or even Nimoy himself! I read those comments in this site ) about what is real trek ™.

It is going to be fun when reboot haters who are Discovery fans will now have to rationalize and justify a new rendition of tos Spock being more similar to kelvin Spock, in spite of HIM supposedly being the prequel of Nimoy’s version.

Jemini

Marja “Quinto was performing Spock AS WRITTEN”

And he played an AMAZING Spock that was 100% approved by Nimoy (who helped him too).

Haters gonna hate, but the reboot making Spock more contemporary isn’t a bad thing. Unless people live in the 60s and their fav representation of mixed kids is the same it was back then, a Spock who pretends to be only vulcan makes no sense – especially if limited to feelings when we now know for sure that vulcans have them more than the humans. He doesn’t need to play the cold dude, weirdo nerdy alien friend of hero, just to elevate Kirk’s humanity, or to give Mccoy a pretext to be an old fashioned american racist either.

Kelvin Spock is different for many, valid, reasons that certain fans want to ignore because they want everything to be like tos, including the flaws.

FLB

I agree. I think Frain was miscast and/or badly directed. Nothing against him as I’m sure he played the role as he was asked to play it (perhaps by the producers), but at no point did it feel like I was watching Sarek. The voice and the tone felt, for lack of a better word, ‘wrong’.

Frank Mondana

I hope you’ve seen the pilot for TOS. Spock yells and (gasp!) even smiles!
Those were details us old guys forgot on purpose. We tried to shoehorn in “canon” reasons for the emptional Spock, all of which sucked, so it’s great that Disco is going for an official story.

So, don’t expect an emotionless Spock. The character only lost emotion when the network couldn’t deal with Number 1 being female so her lack of emotion was given over to Spock.
So fire up Netflix and watch the original. I can’t wait for the whining and whinging from “fans” about “canon”!

Corylea

I have seen TOS many, MANY times. We may have different opinions about whether to treat Spock’s emotionality as canon, but I’m not an ignorant newcomer; I’ve been loving Spock since 1969.

Who cares

@Corylea

The Cage happened 3 years ago for Discovery and it flat out is canon. Spock’s smile included. Which makes perfect sense for a character who had rejected his homeworld’s rejection of him.

Tiger2

Then how come he and Sybok aren’t closer???? Seems like they would be best buds in this period in Spock’s life then.

I seriously want a scene with Spock, Sybok and Burnham all in a room hashing things out lol. C’mon Discovery, make it so!

ML31

I would think such a scene would be awesome from a fanboy perspective.

Marja

I would imagine Sybok has already run off to join the V’tosh T’Kur just to give Sarek the palpitations

Corylea

I think the emotional Spock in the reboot movies is the fault of the writers, not the fault of the actor. Quinto has to play what’s in the script; they don’t let him write it! :-)

Ashley

Agreed. Quinto did what he could with what he was given, but Spock was poorly written in the recent movies.

Marja

Agreed, Corylea. And the same applies to any actor. They act what they are given, and sometimes they bring something extra in their acting of a role, and it’s magic. Like Nimoy. Like Isaacs.

Frank Mondana

That was one of the lame “canonsplains” we tried in the 70’s.

I wonder if they’ll remember that the Spock of the original pilot was more emotional, smiling even, to contrast with the emotionally reserved Number One and attempt to bridge that gap.

Curious Cadet

@Drew Melbourne — whatever the case, The Cage was not the last time Spock smiled, or shouted. Nor was WNMHGB. In fact Spock was still struggling with his emotions through at least Season 2. And that’s the point really. Not that Spock smiled in The Cage, or shouted in WNMHGB, but rather that he is half human, grew up struggling to repress his emotions as a result, joined Starfleet against his father’s wishes, and continued on his quest for total logic at least up through TMP. That’s canon, and that’s what’s being accurately reflected in the character DISC is going to show us — exactly as Roddenberry envisioned.

ML31

Sorry but I have to say that is wrong CC. In the pilot there was very little known exactly about who and what Spock was beyond a short description. Nimoy had the job and did what he could with it while still following what the director had in mind. Nothing else to it. The concepts you describe were added later. NOT when the pilot was shot. Therefore, it is reasonable to claim that every tic and every movement need not be scrutinized as an honest to goodness character trait. The character was VERY much in flux at that time.

Deciding to go back and try and ret-con reasons for the smile and what not is not necessary nor does it seem anyone really asking for it. It is like the Enterprise season 4 two parter deciding to explain away the change in Klingons from TOS to TMP. There was no need. People get what was going on there.

Captain Ransom

Rolling my eyes at ML.

ML31

Sighing with pity at Captain Ransom.

Captain Ransom

Still rolling my eyes at you. I knew exactly how you react to this article.

ML31

Once again, you get it wrong. I was not responding to an article. I was responding to a comment. A facepalm has now been added to the sigh.

Captain Ransom

Wow. It is still related to the article. I forgot I had to be completely concise with you ML. I should have said, I knew you would be reacted and commented the way you have in this article when I saw the article was posted.
Adding a finger to my ever rolling eyes to you.

ML31

Adding all that still doesn’t change that I wasn’t responding to the article. I was responding to a comment. You can wag a hundred fingers at me. You are still wrong every day of the week.

Captain Ransom

And you are still a negative person every day of the week ML. Whether it was the article your were posting about or a comment you were posting about still doesn’t change the fact that I knew any reaction by you would be as such.

ML31

Is there anything you aren’t wrong about?

ML31 and Captain Ransom. You’ve managed to snipe at each other daily now for the better part of a week. I’m closing this conversation thread.

Frank Mondana

Sorry, I didn’t read all the comments. Just wrote one on this very thing.
Yeah, I can’t wait for the response to Spock. It should act to highlight the fair-weather fans. Especially if he smiles.

Stan

You mean the fans who have been watching Star Trek since the original series and have issues with this new show? hardly fair-weather fans.

Marja

Fair-weather fans. What is this thing you speak of?

The people who go off all upset that “Discovery” isn’t the Trek they were expecting?

Or the people the-people-who-go-off-all-upset-about-stuff are all upset at?

Corylea

When we see a much-younger Spock in “The Menagerie,” those are illusions sent by the Talosians. So we have no idea how accurate they are; Spock’s smile could simply by a Talosian illusion. :-)

MattR

Spock also smiles and almost laughs a little when playing chess with Kirk in “Where No Man Has Gone Before.”

Marja

And he still has huuuge eyebrows.

ML31

That was more the result of the character had yet to be fleshed out. Period. It was the PILOT episode. Very little of their universe had been sorted out yet. Are they going to change Kirk’s middle initial to fit what we saw in WNMHGB? Puh-lease….

Andrew SD

To me that has always gone in the same file that Picard with hair would gone in. The file of things that should never had been.

Andrew SD

I must say I do love Frain as Sarek. Everytime he’s on screen, LOVE!

Marja

I didn’t expect to like him as much as I do! He’s very good.

As are his costumes. Work, work, fashion baby!

Jack

Yeah, I like him too. He’s not TOS’s Sarek, but he’s believable in the role.

Strangely, he’s like a centimetre taller than Lenard (Frain is 6-feet), yet on the show he always seemed a little shrimpy to me.

El Chup

I think he’s very poor. Has none of the gravitas that Mark Lenard brought to the role.

Edit: Just saw Preator Tal beat me to it.

Dustin

He’s doing really interesting work without trying to do a Mark Lenard impression (which would not be a good idea.)

Curious Cadet

@Dustin — that’s my problem with Karl Urban; he channels Kelley too much, rather than making it his own character. While I would agree Frain is doing interesting work, I don’t really care for him in the role. Nor did I like Ben Cross in the role either. YMMV

Jemini

Curious Cadet,
in fact, I didn’t expect new Sarek(s) to be exactly like the original one. If anything, it is exciting for me to see the actors doing their own thing.

I liked Ben Cross a bit more though. For me, Sarek is a bit of a blank page because we didn’t see a lot of him, and what we saw was influenced by Spock being kinda an unreliable narrator when it comes to his father. So Ben made me see the controlled vulcan Sarek seemed to be, or I expect him to be, but also hint at different sides of him you’d probably see if he wasn’t such a secondary character. They sadly also cut most of his scenes with Amanda. Spock’s birth for example, you can see he loves his wife and son (‘he has your eyes’) in spite of him being all vulcan logic. It’s quite sweet .
The contrast between the scene where he talks with kid Spock about marrying his mother because it was logical, and then later the realization when he tells him that he loved her is just well acted. His subtle reaction when Amanda dies added to Spock’s a bit more obvious grief too.
Something about him was effortless and natural like he wasn’t trying too hard. He just was Spock’s dad.

Praetor Tal

Oh yeah, I forgot Ben Cross. He exudes Sarek’s disdain but with none of the subtlety. Otherwise the portrayal is a complete miss.

ML31

I’m in the Ben Cross was just fine, category.

alphantrion

Well, he was better than Frain in my opinion.

Praetor Tal

I must dissent. Frain lacks the presence and gravity of Mark Lenard, and his choice of a North American accent is baffling. Lenard’s Sarek had a gravelly, Mid-Atlantic accent with a hint of something ethnic (or alien). And I think he’s probably too young. How is he going to age into the TOS Sarek in 10 years? I’m simply not convinced by the portrayal.

Marja

They can grey up his hair, LOL.
I agree on the accent, but the Mid-Atlantic accent is a product of a bygone day.

Praetor Tal

We have a public radio announcer here with a Mid-Atlantic accent. I like it, but I admit it’s a titch odd. Like someone wearing a union suit, or Jell-O casseroles.

El Chup

Spot on.

Dustin

Frain is older than Lenard was when Lenard first took on the role.

alphantrion

Unfortunately, I must also be in the dissent category for Frain’s portrayal of Sarek. It would have been better if he just used natural British accent. He also didn’t seem to have that hidden integrity that Lenard managed to show so well. He acted the role very superficially I think.

Jonboc

Agreed, Frain doesn’t capture the dignity and underlying emotions that Mark Lenard so beautifully portrayed. Not even close.

Corylea

I agree, Praetor. I’m disappointed in Frain’s Sarek; he has nowhere near the gravitas of Mark Lenard.

Danpaine

Agreed, Praetor.

ML31

I’m sure he will be at least OK in the role. My concern is when they mention stuff like, “So, he is not formed in the same way that he is formed by the time you get to TOS. What we will learn is a lot of what made him the Spock that he was and what will make him the Spock he is, has to do with his family and his sister.” From what I can tell, when he was serving with Pike he was pretty darn close to the person we saw form a friendship with Kirk. It still feels like they saw the smile in “The Menagerie” and ran with it as an excuse to claim Spock is not yet the Spock we all know. There are other reasons for the smile. Not the least of which was the character wasn’t fully defined in the pilot. So I fear this is not going to go over very well. We shall see.

Jemini

My concern is that they could retcon and romanticize Spock’s struggle in tos, altering it and turning something sad in its opposite in order to make Michael the hero and his mentor who finally made him more himself. The thing is, the Spock we saw in most of tos was a repressed guy who had a lot of issues and was basically denying his true self. He had a bad relationship with his father too whom he didn’t speak in years. He was tormented. It took him years to make peace with himself and accept his dual heritage and feelings because unlike kelvin Spock, he didn’t experience some of the events that would make him realize some things sooner (eg. His father admitting he loved Amanda too, him having a relationship too, getting perspective about the fact that his feelings are vulcan too etc) Some old fans had always speculated about the possibility of a negative event or circumstance from his past (before he worked with Kirk) that made Spock like that in tos. Something that made him decide to deny his feelings (btw, this was DC Fontana interpretation too so it isn’t far fetched as headcanon). So that phrase by Kurtzman: the only way they can make Michael one of the reasons why Spock was like that in tos is by essentially making her part of something negative, thus make her and Sarek the the bad guys who ruined his life and were the catalyst for his conflict in… Read more »

Marja

Go over well with whom? My goodness, we haven’t even seen the kid act Spock yet.

El Chup

I think how well it goes over depends how much you are a fan and what you look for in your Trek. Some fans watch the show for the superficial. The action, the ships, the phasers, the pure entertainment value. For many of them the idea of Spock is pure fangasm stuff an many will give it a pass just because they’re bringing him in.

But then there are fans who are more interested in the 50 year story, the characters and the quality of the scripts. Putting aside the fact that this kid will never ever come close to Nimoy, whose Spock he is meant to be playing, the character had almost fifty years of development. We know who Spock is. How he thinks and acts. If you are going to go down the “younger but different” route you’re basically giving yourself an excuse not to stick too closely to the Nimoy Spock and that’s when I get worried, especially since a lot of the writing on Discovery has so far been sub-par. Recasting Prime Spock is something you absolutely have to get right, not only in the choice of actor but very much in the writing. It’s a high bar to jump and if they cannot jump it I fear it’s going to be a particularly frustrating watch for those of us who come to Trek for the scripts and characters.

alphantrion

You know they should have just got D.C Fontana to consult for the writing of the Spock bits.

werwe

Agreed, there wasn’t a huge amount of difference from the short time we knew him then.

Frank Mondana

Oh yes there was. It’s more than the smiling. When that was filmed, Number 1 was emotionless, Spock was loud and brash.

El Chup

Stand by to photograph!

Corylea

When we saw Spock smile in “The Menagerie” (and shout “The women!”) those were illusions sent by the Talosians, so we have no idea how accurate they actually were. The Talosians could have sent illusions of Spock’s behaving out of character on purpose, to keep Kirk glued to the screen. :-)

Who cares

@corylea

Spock told Kirk flatly that what they were seeing was exactly as it happened. The Cage is canon.

El Chup

Well, technically speaking the parts of The Cage in The Menagerie are canon if you’re going down that route. The Cage contradicts The Menagerie, and generally TOS, in some respects and since it never aired I always figured its status as canon was open for debate.

ML31

That’s one way of explaining it away. I just prefer that the character wasn’t fleshed out yet. It was a pilot episode.

Silvereyes

Or it could be that Spock was indeed different. In general he certainly was more expressive…

Corylea

I agree, I prefer to treat Spock’s emotionality in “The Cage” as a production error, since they didn’t yet know who Spock would turn out to be. But some people require an in-universe explanation, so I was coming up with one. :-)

dswynne

None of us are the same ten years ago, or even twenty years ago. Same with Spock.

Curious Cadet

@Corylea — except it didn’t stop with The Cage. We got a Spock who had varying degrees of emotional expression through at least the first and second seasons. And that’s really the point of that character — a life-long struggle to put emotion in its place. It makes perfect sense then that the younger the character is, the less restrained he is, whether you want to exclude his performance in The Cage as a production error or not.

I find it funny that some who would chose to discount this as a production error, are some of the same ones who also are sticklers about what color the uniforms should be, despite that too being the result of budget and production errors.

BorgKlingon

“I find it funny that some who would chose to discount this as a production error, are some of the same ones who also are sticklers about what color the uniforms should be, despite that too being the result of budget and production errors.”

Nailed it! There are a lot of “complaints” that can be attributed to many of the usual suspects here who constantly go negative on Discovery. It’s fair game for you to keep attributing such complaints to that small group.

El Chup

Please don’t attribute all the “complaints” to everyone who has said anything negative about Discovery. Many of us who have reservations have them in different areas of the show and have different ideas on the positives the show has as well. So please don’t lump people together to create a stereotype of the grumbling fanboy. It’s unfair.

Tiger2

Agreed El Chup!

There are just as many people who point out what they like as what they don’t. But of course its human nature to say what bothers you more than what you accept. Discovery is controversial for sure for a few reasons, but so was TNG at the time. Same for DS9. What over came those things were simply improved story telling. If and when Discovery just feel more like Star Trek and have more appealing stories people will jump more on board and the stuff like visual canon will go away. And I don’t think that’s even the biggest problem to a lot of people, it’s just a symptom of a bigger problem.

But none of it is a permanent one if the stories become more appealing and most people who still have issues with the show believes that it can.

ML31

” And I don’t think that’s even the biggest problem to a lot of people, it’s just a symptom of a bigger problem. ”

Yes. This. The bigger problem is the overall quality of the show. I keep repeating this but I totally buy it as truth. If the show were good or even better than it was, the canon inconsistencies would be less of an issue. The better the show, the less of a problem those issues become. In the end, people just want GOOD Trek.

Corylea

If you think I’ve been a stickler about the color of the uniforms, you’re confusing me with someone else.

Oh, I agree that struggling to put emotion in its place is part of what defines the character. It’s precisely because his Cage-era self seems entirely UNconflicted about emotion that I consider his emotionality in “The Cage” to be a production error.

ML31

And another thing, the smile was not a production error. It’s just something Spock did (be it scripted, or done because Nimoy or the director wanted it) in the first incarnation of the character. BEFORE many of the things we know about him became cemented. Much like Kirk’s middle initial. And referring to the United Earth Space Agency or whatever it was they called it before StarFleet or the Federation. These things were in flux at the time and ultimately cemented into what we know the Trek universe to be. It’s really not that big a deal.

Locutus

I agree it’s not that big a deal. Whether the writers depict an emotional Spock (rebelling), an overly logical Spock (overcompensating), or the same-old Spock (consistent), it will be because that is the story they want to tell. They are not going to base everything off a smile or a shout in “The Cage.” Perhaps that inspired some take on young Spock, but I don’t think they should feel compelled to shoehorn it in, nor should fans feel compelled to require a particular take pursuant to “canon.” Spock could be in a very different place developmentaly then he was in “The Cage” or in the rest of TOS.

Curious Cadet

@Corylea — It wasn’t directed at you, just in general. Fans tend to obsess over certain aspects of canon, while choosing to ignore others. I think visual continuity is the least of it, but to the extent that anyone makes an issue out of one bit of canon minutia, then they have to take it all.

While I obviously agree the emotional outbursts by Spock in The Cage, were easily chalked up to production error, so too were the mixing of the division badges in WNMHGB, or Spock wearing gold. And budget prevented them from updating the uniforms for the second pilot to address NBC’s note for more color, which was easily accommodated by a cheap coat of red paint but not with brand new costumes. Unfortunately, if someone wants to split hairs over visual continuity, then they have to accept all of it. The smile is canon, therefore, it’s fair game.

somethoughts

fantastic, s2 is shaping up to be awesome

Danpaine

I think it a big mistake bringing the iconic Spock character into DSC, but that’s just my opinion. Good luck, Kid. You’re gonna need it.

Tiger2

I wouldn’t call it a mistake, especially if it gets more people watching. CBS definitely wouldn’t lol.

But of course I know what you mean. It really will just come down to how its done. If its bad, yeah, big mistake. But if its good, it could get a lot of people on board who wasn’t before.

I personally think it’s unnecessary, but then you realize AA only has 2.5 million subscribers and not all of them are not watching this show. My guess is they need something BIG to get the millions of Trek fans who are still not on board with this show, willing to pay for AA or both.

Discovery needs REAL buzz and while I hate that this show just feels like a back door to get TOS characters on it, the reality is they may need to do just that so I can’t blame them IF they think this will get more people invested. Pike is in literally every episode next season so we know the answer to that.

ML31

Somehow CBSAA failed to even get word out they were doing a new Trek show. I know it’s anecdotal but given the low subscriber numbers I have to think this is a common thing. A number of my friends and colleagues are Trek fans or enjoy Star Trek. And NOT ONE of them had any idea there was a new Trek show streaming until I told them. The lack of getting word out, I think, was a HUGE problem for CBS. Although in their defense, I’m not sure exactly HOW they could get the word out for such a thing short of paying for ads on other, more popular networks.

Tiger2

Yes I have said this before as well, I live in L.A. and plenty of people still haven’t heard of either AA or Discovery. We live in the bubble, so its different for us, but I truly think for a lot of people out there they have not been touched by any promotion of the show or AA at all.

And why Discovery is the least seen Trek show because there is no way to just run into it like the other shows. I mean I still run into repeats of TNG, VOY, TOS, etc on TV. DIS lives all online so its just easy to miss. We don’t even get promotions of next weeks episodes, its only for people who already have AA so that makes their job harder.

But once you put someone like Spock on, suddenly news sites are reporting on it, entertainment sites are talking it up and it builds buzz. Look what happened when it was announced Picard was coming back, TM posted that trended more than Star Wars news Leia would still be in Episode 9. So I think they will be doing this for awhile and using iconic characters to both increase awareness and get more subs. And why I wouldn’t be shocked they just make a Pike show. That and the Picard show could easily over shadow DIS though but who knows, they may make Scotty a permanent character by season 3. ;)

ML31

Yep. I’m convinced the lack of popularity of STD and/or CBSAA in general is why we are now getting Stewart back and Pike on Discovery. If either of those are things people are happy about, they can thank Discovery not pulling in the subs like CBS hoped.

Marja

Six thousand quatloos on a “Pike’s Enterprise” series.

Corylea

Hee! Love the in-universe comment, Marja!

El Chup

Agreed.

werwe

If they screw him over like they did the Klingons it will be the end of the show for many.

PEB

What’s really SO bad about the Klingons?

Mel

Everything. I didn’t like the Klingons since TNG, but somehow DIS managed to make them even worse!

Tiger2

Honestly, they put hair on them, most people will probably accept them. They don’t look that different with hair seeing some of the photo shops fans have done.

ML31

Forced to agree, Tiger. The elongated skulls would be more hidden with the hair. And I found the fan alterations with the hair to make a HUGE difference. The hairless look was indeed a mistake. I recall watching the pilot of STD. I saw the first Klingon and the first thing that went through my head was “New Klingons. Must be because there are different races of Klingons. That means we will see TOS Klingons and TNG Klingons among the different houses. Was disappointed when they ALL had the crystal skull look.

Tiger2

Yeah I HATE the elongated skull thing, which someone on the production said was a direct influence from the Alien movies. It just doesn’t work for me personally, although it may for others. But you put hair over it, then it disappears at least.

But literally the minute these Klingons were introduced the internet exploded for a reason. I have no problems they wanted to change the look of the Klingons, in this case the look they went with just doesn’t work for a lot of people. Having no hair for Klingons today is like Andorians not having antennas or Vulcans not having pointed ears. It’s an important cultural marker of the species and has been for decades.

Maybe they are just trying for another look that is still different than what we seen before. If they at least add some freakin hair I’m guessing most fans will come around even if they still look different from the TNG/TOS films look.

BorgKlingon

I agree with you. The best Klingons ever were TMP klingons with the vertebrae containing to their forheads, with 2nd place going to the JJ Abrams version in STID, which are underrated in my opinion.

Tiger2

They are just too weird looking for my taste and too much of a disconnect from the prior Klingons. Hopefully the changes will make them a bit more popular. They are only changing them because they know most fans hate them.

PEB

“They’re only changing them because they know most fans hate them”

When you’re actually in on the creative process, you could say that definitively. It’s a little funny that someone would say that who has no insight on what’s actually going on. They’ve said from the start that not all Klingons are bald, that they wanted to show different spectrums on Klingons. But now all of a sudden a change is because fans don’t like what they’ve done?

BorgKlingon

“But now all of a sudden a change is because fans don’t like what they’ve done?”

Even if that is the reason, it is allowed under the “The Roddenberry Klingon Re-Design Precedent”.

People need to stop sweating this. It is what it is. And for the fans that don’t like it, I bet they come up with some bull-crap canon reason like that fan-pandering dumb-ass explanation/episode in Enterprise so that those weak-minded fans can sleep at night knowing everything in the Trek fictional construct still works for them…lol

Tiger2

“But now all of a sudden a change is because fans don’t like what they’ve done?”

Pretty much. This isn’t rocket science. One of the biggest issues for fans were the Klingons, literally since they were first seen in that infamous break room photo. It’s not ‘all of a sudden’ people have been complaining about them from day one and it hasn’t stopped.

ML31

“They are only changing them because they know most fans hate them.”

That does indeed seem like what is meant when one reads between the lines regarding the “change”. But I guess we will not know for sure until we actually see them.

Tiger2

I mean why else would they do it or even make a big deal about it? They were consistent in all the films from TSFS through TUC and on TNG they stayed basically the same through Enterprise.

This is the first time they are getting another major change just one year after the show started. Klingons change, but usually when a new production started. This is the first it happens a second time with the same one.

ML31

I’m agreeing with you, Tiger. I see no other reason for the change apart from negative fan feedback to their previous re-design.

Tiger2

OH I knew you were! Yeah tone can be hard on the internet at times.

Captain Ransom

They have said it right from the beginning that we haven’t seen all the Klingon houses yet in terms of their looks.

El Chup

Probably the fact that they ignored 10 movies and 25 seasons, totalling hundreds and hundreds of hours of Klingon portrayal to offer up some strange blue lizards.

Captain Ransom

El chup… You can also say that 10 movies and 25 seasons ignored the original series Klingons… by YOUR logic.

El Chup

No, by no logic they overtook the tiny handful of appearances in TOS to become the definitive Klingons.

Captain Ransom

Doesn’t matter. Still different than originally set… How does this differ from your statement. It’s a little hypocritical.

BorgKlingon

@Captain Ransom

Yep, with TMP, Roddenberry established “The Roddenberry Klingon Re-Design Precedent” by which any future Trek production team can change/update the look of the Klingons without regard to canon. It’s an allowed canon exception established by Roddenberry himself.

PEB

Exactly.

Frank Mondana

You’re not gonna be happy!

Corylea

I was against it, too, but given that they’re doing it, I’m wishing the new actor all the best and hoping he can pull it off.

Marja

Godspeed, Mr Peck!

Corylea

Or live long and prosper. :-)

Jordan

Yep.

Trek Fan1973

Totally agree Danpaine

BorgKlingon

“Gregory Peck’s grandson” That says it all for me — well done!

I predict that this Spock is going to be more emotional, and the canon reason is there for that early Spock being more emotional from The Cage scenes which re-appeared in The Menagerie (i.e. a very emotional Spock). I like this, but for fans who want to see classic Spock, I see a lot of fan controversy on this one.

El Chup

““Gregory Peck’s grandson” That says it all for me — well done!”

Because being the grandson of someone talented somehow immediately means talented. Curious logic.

BorgKlingon

I’m not claiming it’s a fact or that it can be proven in logic, but it certainly provides me a good feeling in that in many cases acting families all multi-generational, and produce good actors. I am allowed to have a “good feeling” about this, right?

Philk

Right? By this logic Greg Lemond’s daughter should win the Tour de France.

BorgKlingon

@Philk

I’m not claiming it’s a fact or that it can be proven in logic, but it certainly provides me a good feeling in that in many cases acting families all multi-generational. I am allowed to have a “good feeling” about this, right?

But even though we disagree, I think it’s great that you gave my “reverse groupie” (ML31) a chance to potshot me again…the dude stalks my posts and just lives for these opportunities to “indirectly” challenge me through others’ posts…lol

ML31

Exactly. LOL!

werwe

I don’t see traditionalists like me complaining (much) if it’s done in a convincing way with solid reasons.

Denny C

Going with a relative unknown was the best way to go. Truth be told, this isn’t one of those casting announcements that causes dread or excitement. It’s how the part will be written, not so much who will be playing it.

El Chup

I beg to differ. Nimoy was so fundamental to Spock Prime that I think that both the actor AND the writing has to be particularly good to convince people it’s the same character.

Denny C

Right, but this is probably closer to Nimoy’s Spock in “The Cage” than Spock from TOS onward. Those were two very different takes on the character from the same actor.

ML31

Except, the Spock in “The Cage” was basically still in fetal form. No one really knew what the character was supposed to be (wasn’t he supposed to be Martian?) or anything else. I consider it a mistake to put too much stock in any kind of small minutia found in a pilot episode of any show beyond the overall major event.

Walter

Why is this web site still called TREKMOVIE.com?

Marja

PaulAndy, How about
Trek: Nothing is the Same Anymore

Dustin

Because it was started during the long wait for the 2009 film, and the name stuck. It’s now their brand, and most of us don’t mind.

Walter

Yes I know the origin of this site.I view it often since its debut. I also like most Trek including Discovery for the most part and I am excited about the new series to come, but I thought there should be more content about the movies. Sorry.I guess I will go to “youropiniondoesn’tcount.com”.LOL all in gest my friends!
Cheers all.

Tiger2

Walter, they only provide movie content when it comes. What do you want? They reported on the fact both Pine and Hemsworth has walked away from negotiations literally a few days ago (actually it looks like everyone did lol). But what else is there to report at the moment?

And the fact is TM is really the ONLY site that reports on any sliver of news about the movies. If an actor comments on it in one line, it gets reported here. In fact many accuse the site of click bait since most of those reports aren’t really ‘news’, just actors saying they hope it happens.

And the fact it takes 3-4 years to even make these films stretch everything out to a ridiculous level so majority of time there is just nothing to talk about until actual production begins. It’s damn if you do or damn if you don’t.

Phil

Well, absent an actual Trek Movie, we’ll talk about Trek TV. There’s a thread for that bastard stepchild, The Orville, if you’d rather talk about something else.

How about a new name? TrekContent.com? ComplainTrek.com? TreKannon.com? RealTrek.com? DieJJAbrams.com? IHateLes.com?

Marja

LOL Phil. Nail hit on head as usual!

VZX

Lol “complaintrek.com!” But, the squeaky wheel gets the oil!

Garth Lorca

Great choice! I’m glad he’ll finally be on that show. Reminds me of Superman on Supergirl… first they denied he would ever appear and then he did some great episodes and nailed the character a lot more than his cinematic counterpart. Mr Peck will be a great Mr Spock… Ethan Spock so to speak…

Wow, I’ve just checked out his voice… A LOT closer to Nimoy than Quinto. And his grandfather Gregory also looked a lot like older Nimoy. He’s just spot on!

Watford

Peck should make a great Spock. Hiechlin is the worst Superman ever. Cavill is way better than him.

Watford

Hoechlin that is.

Dustin

I’ve not seen Hoechlin’s take. But it would be difficult for anyone to do worse than Cavill’s dour, miserable, misanthropic Superman.

El Chup

Hoechlin is definitely the inferior actor, both in performance and looks, but his Superman is a better portrayal than Cavill’s. It’s hopefully and inspires confidence.

There is a reason many feel Cavill should have another standalone film because many feel he just hasn’t been given the chance to play the confident, inspiring hero that is more commonly associated with the character.

alphantrion

Even Cavill himself wants another solo movie, I think this would have made the character closer to the hopeful and imaginative hero that he was known as.

ML31

Personally I think Snyder’s influence should have been gone after Man of Steel. I liked the take but don’t think that is the direction DC movieverse should have gone. I realize they felt they could not copy Marvel’s plan but quite frankly, it was the best way to do. DC should have done the same. Do some standalones with Flash, Aquaman and WW before the Justice League. And I also think Superman should have had one more standalone before JL. But the damage has been done now. I’m starting to wonder if we are ever going to see a big screen Flashpoint.

PEB

Cavill wasn’t miserable, he just played the character like a farm boy who had the weight of the planet on his shoulders. He was a superman who wanted to be the best he could but didn’t know how to make everyone happy. It was literally a modern superman. Imagine if he dropped out of the sky today. Twitter and the talking heads on the 24hr cable news wouldn’t be “awe shucks” about him, they would be picking him apart and pitting their viewers against him. It was genius, sadly the audience couldn’t wrap their head around it and accept who we are today vs say…the late 70s and 80s during Chris’ superman run.

ML31

I think it was a good take, too. I even like Routh’s take from Singer’s “Superman Returns.” But in both cases I seem to be in the minority.

Agreed. Big fan of Man of Steel’s take on Superman here.

El Chup

The seventies was not some great time to be alive. You’d gone through Nixon, Vietnam and the Cold War was very much still on. It wasn’t exactly and uplifting time, and the new media was around then even if social media isn’t.

In fact if there is ever a time when you need something positive and uplifting to balance out the toxicity in society, now is the time.

ML31

I think they both did fine.

Spider Bat

He’s got a good, resonant voice, closer to Nimoy’s than Quinto’s, so that should help. I just hope he commits to the haircut so they can avoid the bad Moe Howard wigs they slap on most Vulcans these days.

El Chup

I hope they get the ears right. The Vulcan ears on Discovery so far have been TERRIBLE, especially on Frain and the Vulcan admiral. They look like elf ears. The make up dept doesn’t see to have gone back and looked at previous productions to examine the way in which they were designed not to point outwards. They’re got to get Nimoy’s ears right.

ML31

Haven’t Spock’s ears changed over the years anyway? I guess that can be explained by age though. But I think the appliances have changed themselves. Or at least I think I recall Nimoy himself saying they did. Or am I mistaken?

Jonboc

Agreed. It’s not like there aren’t 79 hours of Spock to study to get the angles right. They screwed up Quinto in Beyond after nailing the character in the first 2 films…very frustrating and inexplicable.

Disinvited

Wigs and hairpieces have been with STAR TREK since day one. Back in the day Chekov’s wig or Rand’s beehive was never an issue. If all the other vulcanoids’ hair look is accomplished by wigs, I’m not sure what dramatic utility that’s accomplished by having the Spock do stick out like a sore thumb? And if that means the hairdresser ultimately has to make Peck’s haircut look identical to the wigs so it doesn’t stand out, what’s the point?

TalonCard

I was hoping someone would mention the voice–that pushed the casting over from “Oh, that’s nice” to “I can’t WAIT to see him play Spock” for me.

Spock Jenkins

I wouldn’t mind if they gave him a “CAGE” era haircut, but I’m sure they’ll give him the standard bowl cut that we’re all used to.

Spider Bat

No, I’m definitely expecting the bowl cut. But you can always tell the difference when they go with a wig. Just a pet peeve of mine, I guess. Nimoy always had his actual hair cut in that style, of course, as did Quinto for his first film. But Quinto went with a wig later on, and it showed. Ditto the myriad Vulcan guest stars over the years. I realize it’s kind of an extreme cut to go with if you’re just doing a few days work on a series. But hopefully he’ll go “natural” to help put his stamp on the role.

Kevin Lee

They nailed TOS Spock with Quinto’s make-up and hair in ST09. It was amazing to see. I think it was still Quinto’s hair in STID but Beyond was certainly a wig.

Peck’s hair looks considerably curlier than Quinto’s or Nimoy’s. I suspect he will use a wig. Besides, he can’t take a chance of infringing on his modeling career with an awkward haircut.

Disinvited

Spider Bat,

Oh, so what you are actually calling for, is the hair and makeup department and/or CGI to stop doing such an excellent job of making the alien hair look like it’s not natural to the planet Earth?

Denes House

Dang, he’s got his grandfather’s eyes…

VZX

Cool, but at this point they might as well cast all TOS characters and just remake that show, why bother making anything original? SMH

Mel

I would really like a TOS reboot. But I think we won’t get one as long as there are still movies with Kirk, Spock, etc. in the cinemas.

Curious Cadet

@Mel — and that’s debatable how much longer that will last. If they get the 4th movie off the ground, and it premieres in theaters by 2020, that’s more than enough time to set-up a TOS reboot to debut in the Fall, or even 2021, while it’s fresh on audiences minds. There’s unlikely to be a 5th movie with the Kelvin cast, or another reboot of TOS after that. If the QT movie ever materializes, I suspect it too won’t focus on the TOS era, or at least Kirk & Spock. So TOS rebooted on CBSAA could be upon us sooner rather than later. Though I’d rather see a Pike series for a few season before they seque into TOS again.

El Chup

Yup.

werwe

Hey, lets make a show in an established show, at an established time and then fux with everything at a fundamental level. Then let’s take races and characters from 51+ years of lore and fux with them too!

Philk

this

Brian Middleton Jr.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this season spun off into a more traditional Trek show with Pike and his crew on the Enterprise.

Tiger2

I hope not but I wouldn’t be too shocked. But now that I’m getting the 24th century again they can do whatever they want lol. I’ll give it all a chance anyway.

Michael C

Here’s hoping!

Danpaine

….my concern exactly.

ML31

Yep. Season three they run into Lt. Kirk. Season 4 they take on a Dr on his first space assignment named McCoy. Season 5 Reno takes on a young Montgomery Scott to be 2nd in her engine room…

I joke but sadly I can totally see this happening.

Tiger2

Oh yeah I can see this happening too. If Pike and Spock is a big success they will definitely show up in season 3 and I can see them finding ways to bring in Kirk, Scotty, Sulu, etc.

And canon wise, none of it stops them. They gave Spock a human sister, it won’t be a problem for a Lt. Kirk to do a short tour with Discovery.

ML31

True. Others can show up with no canon issues whatsoever as very little of characters history is “official”.

El Chup

Yup. As soon as the Entrprise showed up you knew the lazy TOS mining would start.

ML31

Especially if the stunt leads to more subscribers.

PEB

Why not though? What would be the problem with that as long as they don’t overwhelm the story? Dax’s former host had a love affair with Bones, Picard and Sisko meet, Bashir, Data and LaForge hang out on the Enterprise, Scotty’s been hanging out in the transporter and just HAPPENS to meet the TNG crew – of all the ships that could have encountered that Dyson Sphere, Quark and Harry Kim and Tom Parris interact, captains conveniently went to the academy together and reference it as if they hung out and knew each other and there were many other instances throughout Trek. So why not actually see more of it? You can’t reverse age the living TOS actors so it just makes sense and it opens the door to use them in other series/spin-offs, etc.

ML31

As a one off for one perhaps two episodes and if it were done SPARINGLY we can live with such stunt casting. But as continual story arcs every season? Of if a TOS character shows up every season? It just means CBS has NO faith in Discovery to be it’s own show.

Andrew SD

The look seems right that’s for sure. This is so exciting. I didn’t expect to find out until the session had started. I can’t wait to see him in “ACTION”, wink wink!

Andrew SD

OMG and he’s got that sumular great deep voice Nimoy had, slight chills…

Garth Lorca

Indeed. His YouTube videos truly give me major chills, especially the one that’s made with a cheap webcam (Popstar!). The sound quality is closer to TOS audio and that makes him sound exactly like Spock back in 1966…

Kerry

I was really hoping for Zachary Quinto, but Ethan Peck will be good.

Tiger2

It was never going to be Quinto for many, many, MANY reasons. And they want their own Spock so they can start with a blank slate. That’s reason number one and why it was a good idea to find a new actor.

Spock Jenkins

Zach is about 20 years too old to convincely pull off a young Spock.

Corylea

I haven’t seen him in anything, so I have no idea what he’s like as an actor. But when I think about the casting of Discovery, I adored the job Jason Isaacs did as Lorca, I adore the job Doug Jones is doing as Saru, and I adore the job Mary Wiseman is doing as Tilly. So I’m hoping that means that they’ve done an equally good job casting Spock!

Spock is a difficult role to play, but Leonard Nimoy was no more famous when he was cast in the role than Mr. Peck is now … I’m keeping my mind open and hoping for the best.

I was against their showing us Spock, but given that the decision has been made, I’m REALLY hoping that Mr. Peck can pull it off.

Garth Lorca

There are a couple of very good short videos of him on YouTube that give you an impression of his insanely brilliant voice which nails Spock 99% even without him playing Spock.
I especially recommend the clips “Popstar! Gets to Know” and “Mr Porter”…That IS Spock…

Corylea

I saw the videos someone posted to the Trek Core site, and you’re right; his voice is excellent. I like Zachary Quinto, but his voice is too high and nasal and just, well, not SPECIAL enough for Spock. Looks like they nailed the voice with Peck.

Disinvited

Corylea,

In HEROES, Quinto’s villain had a much more gravelly voice which I attributed to his, like Nimoy, being a smoker. I always wondered where it went in his Spock? I finally just chalked it up to Nimoy convincing him to quit the firesticks.

But I always wondered if someone in the production had the boneheaded notion that Spock, a vulcan who doesn’t age as fast as humans, was younger and needed to sound that way way to evoke his being younger to the audience?

Corylea

Hmm, interesting idea. I thought maybe the tension an actor has to carry to play Spock might produce the kind of tension in the vocal cords that made his voice higher pitched.

odradek

Nice. I’m a great fan of Gregory Peck. He played two parts which became influential for Trek: Hornblower who was a predecessor of Kirk and Ahab was a predecessor of Khan.

Jordan

I’m confident in this actor. Not confident in the writers.

Hadn’t heard of him before but looks like a great choice! He seems to have a winning combination of warmth and gravitas, like his grandpa.

Garth Lorca

Now I’m rooting for a spin-off series set on the Enterprise. Anson Mount, Ethan Peck and Rebecca Romijn alone could easily pull this off. Add some more characters and it could be awesome to back aboard the Enterprise! They’ve got the sets built, the CGI model is ready to fly… maybe, they’ve been planning on this all along… That would be truly geektastic!

Tiger2

Honestly Garth Lorca, as much as I hate the idea, I think that probably would’ve been the better approach than Discovery IF they were going to be so close to TOS.

I can only imagine how crazy the fans would’ve been if Fuller announced he was making a Captain Pike show with a young Spock, it may have gotten the same response as Patrick Stewart announcing he was coming back.

El Chup

Ugh. Please no. Putting aside the fact that we know where Pike, Spock and The Enterprise herself are all heading, why do people just want TOS mined to death and regurgitated? Wasn’t JJ Trek quite enough?

New crews. New worlds. New stories. If the showrunners can’t do that and can only keep going back to the well of the past and recycling stuff it shows a fundamental lack of creative thinking.

Keerock

Respectfully, Star Trek did “new crews, new ideas, etc” for 4 different series and each got progressively duller and duller with the same tired format and mix of stock Starfleet characters. And now we have “The Orville” which is even more of the same tired tone and format and derivative by its very nature.

I for one am glad we are exploring the backstory of TOS, because for this franchise, THAT is actually a unique approach. We’ve done the “new ship, new crew, new mission” thing for 100’s and 100’s of episodes now. The TOS era has 3 seasons and 6 movies.

If the entire PURPOSE of Discovery is to do stories and explore characters that were linked to TOS, that’s not lazy or uncreative…it’s a purposeful and unique focus for a series.

Frankly, it’s a hell of a lot more unique than “USS Whateverthefuck with it’s bold new Captain and crew in yet another Star Trek formula show.” We’ve never seen a Star Trek series purposefully designed to flesh out the legacy of another.

I think it’s great that DSC is looking at the legacy of TOS and that backstory, while the new Picard series will similarly build on an iconic character from TNG.

Sometimes the “new ideas” are far more creatively bankrupt than these purposeful explorations of established eras and characters because there really ISN’T anything truly new there under the surface. See VOY and ENT as examples.

ML31

” We’ve never seen a Star Trek series purposefully designed to flesh out the legacy of another. ”

Actually we have. It was called “Enterprise”. Look it up.

Keerock

What other series did Enterprise build upon? It was a prequel, but not directly linked to the legacy of another series by involving backstories of iconic characters etc. I looked it up and still couldn’t find any. Can you help me? Seems like you know what you’re talking about.

ML31

OK, Keerock. I read “We’ve never seen a Star Trek series purposefully designed to flesh out the legacy of another. ” as purposefully designed to flesh out the origins of what TOS was. Legacy refers to what came after. So my bad.

Vulcan Soul

And for all the public attempts of Discovery to make itself look distinct and different (visually, certainly), its run so far is awfully similiar to Enterprise, just condensed: old style Trek (Enterprise season 1/2, Discovery pilot), then controversial war arc and break things to stir up publicity through notoriety (Enterprise season 3, Discovery season 1), next fanboy appeasment by bringing in TOS big time (Enterprise season 4, Discovery season 2). What comes next? For Enterprise, it was cancellation. And the fact is, if these new shows, the Picard show certainly, prove much more popular than Discovery, I don’t see CBS being shy about putting the ax to this show. They are certainly unhappy about its high cost as they have shown time and again, and not being bound by traditional syndication rules there is absolutely nothing that requires a certain number of seasons, let alone seven, for Discovery to be regarded as past its prime, especially if the show keeps sticking to gimmick-of-the-year and twist-of-the-month instead of developing a consistent, real philosophical core.

ML31

VS, I guess I can see a little resemblance of STD to Ent season 3 & 4. But I honestly don’t think it a fair comparison. Circumstances are drastically different. Too different to draw such a parallel.

Tiger2

Fine, then just make a Captain Pike show and be done with it. They can find ways to bring every TOS character they want.

If you need characters from other shows to make THIS show feel more relevant, then its not saying much about this show. But why I hate prequels.

Thorny

I wouldn’t call DS9 duller than TNG.

Keerock

Right, but DS9 was the only other series to try something considerably unique. It went off-formula, unlike the other spin-offs of that era.

But, TNG was more dull than TOS, as was VOY and ultimately ENT. Each formula-driven series got progressively less interesting from my point of view.

alphantrion

I really don’t like that term “formula driven”. It has that connotation of looking down at something. Even if you have a formula driven show you can still absolutely be creative and original within the framework of that formula if you have the talent.

Keerock

Yes, but that’s not really what Trek had done in its past.

Tiger2

Well that’s YOUR POV. Others, like me, thought TNG was a better show than TOS and I grew up with TOS as many did here. And DIS is not TOS, it has nothing in common with it outside of being in the same time period, which is why I find this argument strange. Play any episode of TOS and then any episode of DIS, what makes them similar? Nothing about them are the same other than sharing some of the same characters. But Discovery could take place in the 25th or 26th century and no one would blink here. No one.

The time period itself doesn’t matter, nor does it decide if a show is ‘exciting’ or ‘boring’ no more than if its ‘good’ or ‘bad’. It’s simply the people who write for it and how they write it that does.

I don’t understand why people never get this? If putting a show in the same period AUTOMATICALLY makes that show similar to the others than Discovery actually would feel and look like TOS.

Keerock

It is absolutely MY POV. And it’s one I will stand by. TNG, as much as I watched every episode and cherish my 7 season BR set, is dull. It’s a slog for me just to get through. TOS and DSC have in common that neither are dull.

Additionally, I never said that that dullness or similarity to TOS had anything to do with era. It’s FORMULA. Another ship with another crew going planet-to-planet / anomaly-to-anomaly is “the same old formula” and is (from MY POV) dull. We’ve done that for a total of 25 seasons. I love Star Trek as much as anything, but I don’t need that any more. I welcome more DS9 / DSC type boundary-stretching.

Additionally, my point is that the era DOES matter in this case. Not because of anything you’ve cited here, but because DSC has taken the position that they want to tell stories that are linked to TOS characters and events. That’s a purposeful decision, and one that I find enjoyable and is paying off.

From MY POV of course! ;)

ML31

Keerock, I can appreciate you like Discovery. And you aren’t alone in that, either. I like STD wanted to do something different, too. Where we differ is that the desire to do something different does not mean the end product will be good. I found the end product to be mostly facepalm inducing tripe. Just ONE good character building episode. ONE. The next best episode was a “filler” episode that had nothing to do with the season long story arc. Something that didn’t seem like a good idea when the season is so short to begin with. But I digress. There is nothing wrong with your opinion or mine or anyone’s. We are just having fun talking about Trek.

Tiger2

Yeah, I agree. I think most people WANT something different, I certainly do and WHY DS9 is still my favorite show. I just felt how DIS did it just simply wasn’t very good for the most part. I would take something ‘formula driven’ if it works versus trying a new approach that doesn’t.

This is why stuff like MCU and Star Wars is so popular today, because they found a formula people liked and will watch again and again. In fact ALL franchise rely on a formula. Some certainly change it up now and again like what they did with Bond and Casino Royale, but it also worked at the time. You can also argue Star Wars did try to change it a bit with Solo since it wasn’t really about defeating the Empire/Sith/whatever for a change and was more of a character based film. Unfortunately it didn’t work for everyone and Disney may not go that direction again.

But I don’t want DIS to just abandon what it’s doing either, it just needs to be tweaked a bit more I guess and probably what they are doing next season.

Tiger2

Did you already forget they announced a post-Nemesis show with Picard like a week ago lol.

Its a slog for you, not for every one man. TNG was not only the most watched show, it’s still probably the most popular one today. Last year in a vote Star Trek.com listed it as the most binged watch show. And to say they wouldn’t make more original shows because YOU didn’t think they were exciting enough is inward thinking and myopic.

It’s one thing to say you won’t watch, it’s another thing to say they won’t make more because you won’t watch. Seriously. It’s nice to know you don’t need anymore but it’s not about YOU or your POV lol!

Keerock

Are you talking to me? You’re not making any sense whatsoever. It’s almost like you’re not reading my posts at all.

I don’t hate TNG. I’m not bashing it. I never once said I won’t watch the Picard series (I assure you I will watch every episode). I simply said TNG and the other similarly structured series are dull. The format is old and played out. That’s all. I like chocolate cake too. But if I ate 800 slices of it, I’d be tired of it and want a different flavor to bring a little excitement.

I’m not sure how many times I need to say it.

Tiger2

OK my mistake then. It sounded like you were saying people didn’t like the other shows as much and why they wouldn’t make any post Nemesis shows. But if you weren’t saying that, I apologize.

I like TOS too, grew up with it, but no, I don’t particularly need to see anymore of it. I want new and fresh ideas, not just going down memory lane for old fans. It just doesn’t appeal to me at all. If you want a show that ties in TOS characters, then just make a show with TOS characters like they are doing with Picard. That said I do like the Kelvin films for what they are.

ML31

” Others, like me, thought TNG was a better show than TOS and I grew up with TOS as many did here. ”

We have differing opinions on that one. I found TNG to be a pale imitation of the original. I found it to be an attempt to recapture something the original had but failed in doing so. The one and only one thing it had on TOS was the acting cops of the lead. Stewart had the charisma to make a bad episode watchable. Beyond that, and perhaps production values, TOS was the superior Trek. I can appreciate TNG for what it did. Bring Trek back into the popular culture in a big way. And it did lead to DS9, too. So kudos to them for that. But I found only Worf to be interesting and the ratio of good to bad episodes was amazingly poor. But again, your mileage does vary.

Tiger2

Again, I’m not saying everyone has to like any particular show, we all have our preferences here, that’s fine. But plenty of people had no problem with TNG and the later 24th century shows or they wouldn’t have ran for 21 freaking seasons. TNG still had the biggest audience out of all of them.

TOS made it three seasons, most seem to think only the first two seasons were good. Of course obviously it got much more popular in its syndication era, but there is still just as many people NOT into TOS today just like there are people who are not into TNG and the others today. I know this board is mostly older people, many who watched TOS when they grew up, but that’s not the case with the vast majority of Trek fans today. They are much more diverse in their views in general. Many certainly like TOS, it could be others favorite but there is no proof the overwhelming majority considers it their favorite show today. It’s definitely not on Reddit and that’s the biggest Trek site online. And I get that doesn’t mean its NOT the most popular but there are large active communities who see Trek beyond just one or two shows, thankfully!

Its just smart to have shows to appeal to all segments of the community and exactly WHY the Picard news was so big.

ML31

Tiger, I’m not arguing which was the better show. Obviously that is subjective and is fine. I was just saying in this instance we are on different pages and my reasons why. We seem to be on the same page for a number of other opinions, though.

Tiger2

Agreed. I want something completely new and different. But these are the same guys who has the Khan show on the drawing boards, so thinking out of the box isn’t really their thing. And I would take a Pike show a thousand times over a Khan show or Starfleet Academy.

Jonboc

TOS was just a “look”. It was a style of storytelling and film making that created a phenomenon and has yet to be copied effectively in new incarnations. I say keep regurgitating it until you get it right.

werwe

This has been a theory ever since we knew Pike would be in Discovery for the entire season. Just enough time to get to know him, like the character and peel him off to a new series..

Trek in a Cafe

And… by this theory… Discovery could be some kind of incubator for future Trek series. There’s no reason that they can’t do a Captain Lorca series ten years from now.

Corylea

That would be very cool!

One problem, though, is that with Pike being a much more … restrained … guy than Kirk, Number One being nearly robotic, and Spock being a Vulcan, there’s no high-energy contrast for all that restraint, the way there is with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. Unless they change Pike’s character to be more Kirklike, there’d be too much restraint and not enough feeling, and I say that as someone whose favorite character has always been Spock. But I’m a writer, too, I know that contrast is necessary for a restrained character to work properly.

alphantrion

I think from the trailers we can see that this Pike seems much more fun and open than the one from “The Cage”.

Curious Cadet

@Corylea — actually we have no idea what Pike became after Talos IV. So there’s a blank canvas to expand the character on here.

Arathorn

Right? I was thinking that myself. I think this Enterprise crew is shaping up to be far more interesting than the Discovery bunch. But I guess we’ll see…

Brian Middleton Jr.

I’m hoping for the same. I’d love to see them do a more traditional take on Trek with Pike on the Enterprise while continuing Disco as is.

I need to check out some of Ethan’s previous roles; though I am already intrigued since his relatives are legendary in the world of Hollywood. Looking forward to Season 2!!

CmdrR

I guess they traded saturnine for smoldering. Ah well, welcome aboard, Mr. Speck.

NuSpock is… hot. :O

“Nu” was generally adopted by the fandom for the Kelvin movies.

I think this would be “Disco” Spock :-)

Corylea

Disco Spock for the win! :-)

Tiger2

LOL Disco Spock does sound more fun!

Trellium G

Agreed!

werwe

Isn’t it NuNuSpock? or NuSpock2?

Spock Jenkins

Technically it’s be NuNuNuNuNuNuNuNuNuSPOCK.

werwe

Why oh why put BREAKING in titles when they will inevitably become old with time? I thought it was only attention grabbing kids, tabloids and Alex Jones that did that.

Disinvited

werwe,

Including datelines has the same going out of date problem, but I find them essential in evaluating things like the title and the article proper.

R Falange

Wow, I was certainly naive to have believed the producers when, months ago, they said we would potentially see a child version of Spock, and that they had no intentions of re-casting the iconic role made famous by Leonard Nimoy. Am I the only one that recalls reading that on this same website?

Jemini

That lie surely creates a precedent for them possibly lying about other things too…
Stay tuned.

Philk

The showrunners promised that, but they got fired, thus it’s all fair game now.
If done well, awesome.
However DIS hasn’t had the best track record. Fingers crossed

Tiger2

No you’re completely right. It was reported on TM. I said it myself why I didn’t believe they would do it.

But my guess is CBS was the one who stepped in and decided they wanted this to happen. They clearly know DIS did NOT hit it’s goal of subs and they probably listened to the fans who say they don’t like the show because it doesn’t remind them ENOUGH of TOS so now they are pushing for a stronger connection. Probably the same reason the Klingons are being revamped as well. I think DIS just felt too different and foreign and they are trying to line it up better in canon and it always helps when you have familiar characters to do that.

I highly doubt for example they had planned for Pike to be that involved next season. MAYBE they did but I have a feeling this is all coming from the top and they want more familiar elements to get more buzz from the show. It’s probably the only reason why we are getting the Picard show as well.

Vulcan Soul

With all these changes coming, who would’ve ever thought that network interference could be GOOD thing? :-)

ML31

Network interference generally is not a good thing. It remains to be seen if it was in this case. I still think going the fanboy route with Pike doesn’t speak well to Discovery as a show that can stand on its own two feet, however. All Discovery really needed was a change in show runners and a change in production design. Perhaps some more interesting characters, too. However, Pike will likely increase subscribers some. But I still think CBS has a promotion problem. How are people who didn’t know Discovery even existed going to know about Pike being on it?

Vulcan Soul

I was speaking in jest of course, however what it really means is that the course of this rudderless ship was so obviously erratic that even the suits at CBS look like thoughtful, creative decision-makers in comparison (and I know that TOS fanboy appeasement is
a quick fix that couldn’t save Enterprise either, so with likely much less divisive and more popular shows coming up soon *cough* Picard *cough*, Discovery may be doomed already anyway). Sometimes it takes an adult to take the toys away from the kids and say, enough fooling around, let’s do business.

ML31

Actually by the time the 4th season came around (because of fan protests like the 3rd season of TOS) Enterprise was pretty much dead man walking anyway. Nothing was going to save that show at that point. What might have saved the show was not starting it for a year or two AFTER the Voyager finale and letting Manny Coto run it from the start.

alphantrion

Its kind of interesting though, I don’t think the fans had trouble with the characters not being closer to TOS but rather the design and visual elements of the show. If what you say is true, then CBS took this criticism to mean that fans wanted more TOS characters which, personally for me was very far from the truth. So in a way CBS might have took the wrong message from the fan criticisms.

ML31

I think Tiger is right. However I also think, and this is too common in many places, CBS is taking the criticism is a way it was not intended. They hear, “Discovery doesn’t look like a ship from the TOS era” and “Klingons don’t have the established Klingon look” and for some goofball reason they think it means they need to link the show to TOS more. That is NOT what the criticisms were. What the fans were complaining about was if you are going to set a show in or near the TOS era, it needs to actually look and/or feel like it is actually IN that era. Not that we needed to see Spock and Pike so we can all have fangasms.

Tiger2

I agree with that of course. I don’t think this is the ONLY change they are doing to the show, its just the only one that can bring more attention to the show in general.

But clearly they are making changes to the show all around if the new trailer is any indication. They are trying to just make the characters more likable which many of us said was the problem. They have stressed the show will be more about exploration and just FUN which is what TOS was. A lot of people still love it because it really was mostly a fun action adventure show and not the super heavy depressing show DIS felt like a lot of its run. And obviously they are making more cosmetic changes to fit in more like the uniforms.

So I believe they are trying to do ALL of that, but they also put this show in this era FOR a reason, because they think fans want those TOS connections, or why have it be a prequel in the first place? They probably planned to bring in other TOS characters in time, they may have just sped it up faster to bring interest in a show people were already barely watching.

alphantrion

Yup, this is exactly what I was trying to say up top :))

Tiger2

Obviously its all just my speculation. But I say that for the simple reason they ARE connecting DIS closer to TOS next season, from the uniforms, Klingon changes and yes more TOS characters. To me anyway the uniform kind of suggest it because it seemed pretty clear someone had decided TOS uniforms was a no-go last season and now we have them.

And maybe not everyone is happy we are getting more TOS characters but be honest, what would attract people more, a new no-name Captain next season or Pike? Maybe it may not get everyone on board but a known character will always peak people’s interest more than an unknown one. And since they made Burnham and Spock siblings, they are getting to the heart of one of the shows biggest questions and that is how close are they and maybe why Spock never mentions a sister (besides the obvious ;)). So this reunion may dive into that.

I fully believe we are only getting the Picard show for that reason. They seem to think you will just draw more interest with who people know. They’re not wrong but the stories still have to stand up on their own.

Vulcan Soul

“I fully believe we are only getting the Picard show for that reason. They seem to think you will just draw more interest with who people know.”

And boy are they right about this! It feels good to know that adults with a sound understanding of audience and business are back in charge and the duo infernale with their silly politics have been flushed out!

Tiger2

Bringing back Picard is the biggest no-brainer ever. He is still one of the most iconic characters in Trek history and many people just wanted a post-Nemesis show. What’s crazy is I don’t think many thought we would get a post-Nemesis show with TNG characters that started this era of Star Trek so its really a great tie in. We get to have one of favorite characters back and FINALLY get to expand this universe again.

And I suspect if this ends up being much bigger than DIS then it will lead to other spin offs. Patrick Stewart is simply the stepping stone back in this era.

Vulcan Soul

If the Picard show kills off Discovery eventually, that would make my day :) Sequel > Prequel.

Luke Montgomery

The role was re-cast, like, 10 years ago. You can relax, now. “Young minds, new ideas. Be tolerant.” -Kirk to Scotty in ST:III

alphantrion

I don’t think he minds the recasting, I think he is talking about the producers not being totally honest with their statements regarding Spock being cast for Discovery, which I at first believed too and yes I read it on this website as well. Well I think it goes to show how Hollywood really works, people shouldn’t just believe everything they read, this is probably true for life in general too.

Luke Montgomery

First things first… HE IS HOT. Also, it’s important to consider that HE IS HOT. And I don’t want to let it go unsaid that HE IS HOT :)

Philk

I know we’re in a brave new world of social justice, but would it go over well if I commented about how hot a newly cast female actress looks (over and over)?
Just trying to find the red lines here.

Luke Montgomery

I’m gay. A gay guy being out and visible and commenting about a guy whom he thinks is hot is not the same oppressive power dynamic as a straight man reducing a woman to just her looks thus playing into a sexist and oppressive mentality of society as a whole that values women only for their looks. So it’s different. :) (oh, and this new Spock actor is hella crazy hot, not sure if I made that point clear.)

ML31

Wow, Luke. That sounds so very much like the line, “When the President does it it’s not illegal.”

alphantrion

I live in Europe and perhaps we do things differently here, but I don’t mind complimenting a lady for her beauty.

Philk

I live in Europe too! But I spent several years in Washington DC. It’s going to take a while for me to recover from that place. Hence my questions now.

Corylea

Spock is hot because of who he IS. What he looks like has always been irrelevant.

That stunningly virtuous character! That magnificent mind! That endearing sense of humor! That heart-tugging mixture of Vulcan and human! That suppressed pain (as in “The Naked Time”) that makes us want to soothe his hurts and take care of him! That sense that he is both tough and vulnerable, both knowledgeable and innocent, both wise and clueless.

You could put all that in the body of a warthog, and I’d find it compelling. :-)

Luke Montgomery

I feel like Dax looking at Spock in “Trials and Tribbilations”… Sisko would need to pull me away too.

Trellium G

“Those eyes”

Luke Montgomery

I’m very much looking forward to this. I trust this team that has made what has turned out to be my fav Trek show yet. I was nervous at recasting Spock but I think they know “the gravity of the situation” (a little STV joke) and are going to be careful at every step. I just can’t believe that we have SPOCK BACK!! #LiveLongAndProsper

Trellium G

And he is HOT!

Luke Montgomery

Huh, I hadn’t really thought about that… but now that you mention it, I think you might be right… HE IS HOT!

Dyonesse

Yep, I could totally see him as the shaggy-haired, caterpillar-eyebrowed, grinning, emotional Spock from The Cage.
Just please make sure he shaves SMOOTH before filming. Quinto’s stubble was driving me crazy. :P

Stuart Carr

For those that put “The Cage” as cannon – lets put it this way, Spock smiles and laughs. So if this happens, and you get angry, don’t class it as cannon then!

Jemini

Not bad. Dark expressive eyes.
Quinto reminded me of Nimoy’s Spock. This guy reminds me of Quinto’ Spock. I bet it was deliberate. He’s bulky like stid Quinto too, he could play Superman.

This series will either get borderline ridiculous with its ostensibly trying to make it pre-tos through the most forced retcons, or they’ll pull a ‘lost series finale’ in the end and reveal they are all in purgatory an alternate reality. I don’t envy the creative team.

Danpaine

Agreed, Jemini. An uphill battle for the writers, either way you look at it with regards to continuity. All because they had to deem it a prequel in the prime universe, which wasn’t necessary at all.

Mirror Galt

Finally! A Spock with a generic Hollywood rhinoplasty nose!

Michael Hall

Guessing that the producers felt they couldn’t keep this a secret much longer and so decided to put it out there on their own terms. I’m totally unfamiliar with Peck’s work (if–of course–not his pedigree), and he certainly looks the part, particularly if you can buy into Quinto-as-Spock. I’m neutral on that subject, as well as the question as to whether it was a good idea to drag Spock into Discovery at this point (or at all) in any case. So, we’ll see. Still, I have to admit it’s all pretty interesting!

i was really hoping for Gilbert Gottfried, but i guess this guy will do

Michael Hall

I always did like the Spock telling of The Aristocrats the best.

ML31

Was that in the extras on the disc? It wasn’t in the feature itself that’s for sure.

Wallace

This production team seems to me to spend too much energy and time relying on past TREK ideas: producing yet another star ship series; giving us Spock’s half sister; parading the Klingons before us, yet again; dragging back Harry Mudd; patch working another mirror universe storyline–something already mined by TOS, DS9 and ENTERPRISE; bringing back TOS Enterprise ship and Pike; a new Picard series; a Khan series; now here we have Spock himself, who they promised was not gonna actually appear in the series. I had small hope they would at least attempt making original, quality programing in the likes of The Wire, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, and Black Sails, but they don’t seem to have this spirit in them, but would rather take the easy route. Really sad, but good luck to them.

alphantrion

The reason for me why they should have stood on their own foot for a little while longer is the fact that Discovery has less episodes than other Trek shows. If you had 20-26 episodes, then yes, you are bound to bring in at least some guest stars from previous shows, but when you have 13-15 episodes every characters screen time becomes very important, because you can’t have as much time with them. So it would have been better to at least wait until the third season to bring in original series characters, because we still barely know the new ones and with 13 episodes for season 2 we will still barely know them.

ML31

That is 100% true too. The mini series nature of the show just is not conducive to “guest star” episodes. As fun as they can be there is not much time for such things when you have limited time to complete your season long story arc. The Mudd episode in the first season felt like a GIANT waste of time considering the war arc they supposedly were on. Although at that point Burnham’s journey was magically complete so maybe they COULD afford some “filler” shows. lol

HN4

This soooo boring.

Tiger2

Exactly! DIS is still, excuse the pun, discovering itself. According to this show we haven’t even met the CMO or the chief engineer yet. No one even knows what the show is about. And what I mean by that, we knew first season it was about the Klingon war. Well that’s over, so it seem like it would be nice they spent a season establishing the show with its own characters first before others show up and take it over. There is literally an entire bridge crew no one knows about. I doubt most people remember their names.

I mean if you want Pike, Number One and Spock to show up, fine, but to give them an entire season this soon kind of tells you maybe this just should’ve been a Captain Pike show if they don’t think DIS has strong enough characters on its own.

Vulcan Soul

” No one even knows what the show is about.”

Neither do the producers! The interesting thing is, this is really Enterprise redux, the other prequel, only that that show’s season 4 (TOS fan service) will now be rolled into Disco season 2. What comes afterwards? For Enterprise, it was cancellation.

Tiger2

That may happen in time Wallace. I DO hope the next series will be something completely different that doesn’t have any connection to any old characters which TNG did. In fact what I liked about all the spin offs is that they didn’t rely on this. The only show that even had a former character on was O’Brien on DS9 but that was just a natural fit and not trying to shoehorn iconic characters like Discovery is doing.

My guess is after the Picard show we may get a Discovery spin off show though so I’m not holding my breath too much. But I have to believe at some point they will make a completely original show that will live on its own. We knew that wasn’t going to be DIS the second we heard it was so close to TOS and one of the characters was related to Spock. This was done for this very purpose in mind.

Wallace

You’re right. As soon as I saw the period Discovery was in, my heart sorta sank. I knew the mind set of the creators of the series right from the start. And, when I saw they were yet again going to put the show on a star ship, I got bitterly disappointed and my heart sank even further.

ML31

My heart sunk not at the time frame they set the show in, but when it was revealed that Burnham was SPOCK’s adoptive sister. Not just a human taken in by a Vulcan family. But SPOCK’S family. There just was zero need from that except to link Discovery to TOS. Once they announced that, you knew the Enterprise appearance was inevitable. I just hoped it would be later rather than sooner.

Afterburn

If you’re looking for 100% originality in the 7th Star Trek series, a franchise that has featuring crossovers and guest stars since literally the first episode of the first spinoff, you’re looking in the wrong place.

If you want original, go watch The Expanse. Go watch Dark Matter or The Colony or Orphan Black.

Plenty of great original science fiction out there. But this is Star Trek, a franchise built on its connected universe. Since 1991 thats been one of its most fun and unique features.

I mean, this is like when fans complained about Iron Man appearing in the Spider-Man movie. The crossovers and guest spots are sort of the point of a connected universe.

Wallace

It doesn’t have to be 100% original. As I said above, it’s possible to see another area, aspect, direction of our TREK fictional universe without constantly crossing over the same material, in the same way, with the same people, from the same perspective. DS9 proved for all time you can do TREK from another angle. It’s not necessary for me to abandon TREK to get something fresher and more original from it. I don’t agree with you. What it takes is creative courage from the producers.

Afterburn

We’ve gotten creativity and courage from the producers a and you know what they got as a thank you from fans like you?

Hate mail.

Wallace

Wow. I hardly think I’m hating on the show by expressing my disappointment. If I gave that impression, I apologize. It’s just sad they didn’t push the envelope so far as the TREK concept itself, as presented in 6 of the 7 TREK series. In this fictional universe, there has to be more to do and explore beyond seating characters in from of a giant view screen time and time again. However, there is hope with the announcement of new TREK shows and concepts–many of which seem to finally get away from only that concept.

Tiger2

Even though I feel all Trek fans do get a voice here, it does usually feel it falls into the TOS or TNG camp.

But for use hardcore DS9 fans, I do feel we don’t get enough to talk about what we want. I know for many DS9 falls in the TNG camp since it was made by the same people and in the 24th century but it really was very different from TNG and the rest just by NOT being on a starship.

And that’s where people like us fall in the tiny minority who wants to see Trek take a risk like that again. I would love for the next Trek show to be on a starbase, a planet or even Starfleet headquarters. Show a different angle we have never seen. I will give credit to them about doing a Starfleet Academy show because it IS different. But I also don’t want that show because I just don’t trust it won’t just fall into teen melodrama Star Trek style. But maybe they will prove us wrong?

But yeah if I had my way I would REALLY want another DS9 show again. Not the same show, just the style of it. Shake it up again! I don’t even care what period its in. I would be fine following officers on a starbase in the 23rd century. Or go the way of The Expanse and follow people who build the starships on Mars.

Wallace

Wow. Good points. I have the same concerns about the Starfleet Academy show also. They’ll have to tread very carefully there. We’ll see.

You expressed some interesting concepts. I’d love to see a TREK series that focuses on a space colony with minimal involvement from Starfleet, but they would have a presence there. Even the Federation. This, with a riveting storyline could be really interesting. At least I think so.

If we as fans can sit down and come up with interesting ideas and approaches, why can’t TPTB? TREK has an incredible foundation to work from. A fantastic fictional universe exist! It should be explored! There is no reason the franchise should be in the position it is in! Here’s to a bright future!

ML31

I don’t MIND seeing another group of Starfleeters in front of a viewscreen again. But I’d PREFER to see a new twist like you. I’ve joked because it’s CBS but there is some truth to the idea of Starfleet JAG or CSI: Vulcan or something… I, too do not mind the idea of a Starfleet Academy show either. But I don’t want it to turn into 90210 in space or something dumb like that. There is an entire universe out there where much has not been expanded upon. Would be nice to not limit yourselves to starships and the military.

I feel I need to add, however, that to do this they would need to abandon the Roddenberry idea that humanity has evolved to be perfect. (Which was dumb IMHO) Unless they wanted to have a cast of aliens.

Tiger2

This is the one hope I do have now that All Access will be turning into All Trek in a few years and they have a chance to go very differently with the shows. Even in the 90s, despite what people think, there was never a real push to make endless Trek shows. It was just the timing of TNG ending and UPN starting up as a network around the same time. The studio wanted to replace TNG with another show of course and we got DS9. But if UPN never showed up I kind of doubt we would even have more than one show on the air at a time. And they only wanted a TNG type of show which I understood why. But adding more shows was more of timing than any long term plan to do it. But All Access is something MUCH different and they are planning to make multiple shows at once so they have an opportunity to do something exciting just as long as they don’t fall into the trap of making 5 shows all taking place on a Starship in the 23rd century…and everyone is related to Spock somehow. That’s why while I’m still hesitant of what we do know, they have the chance to really diversify the franchise like we never seen. They can have a starship show in the 25th century, another that takes place in on a moon colony in the 22nd, a Starfleet Academy show in the 23rd, a… Read more »

Danpaine

“We’ve gotten creativity and courage from the producers…” you really should have added an “in my opinion” to that. Totally disagree.

Wallace

Didn’t think I had to since every comment here from everybody is an opinion.

Curious Cadet

@Wallace — I agree, it gets pedantic to qualify every obvious opinion as such. However, there are some who state matter-of-factly: “You are wrong”, as an objective truth. That kind of declaration is definitely in need of some temperance on a forum, so as not to be confused with correcting factual information, vs. disagreeing with an opinion. An opinion is not right or wrong, unless supported by facts. Stating unequivocally that someone is wrong and supporting such a statement with an opinion is confusing and unnecessarily inflammatory. But these people know what they’re doing.

Wallace

Great point. Thanks.

ML31

Yes Wallace. Some people seem to think that we need to classify obvious opinions as opinions. Usually from people who disagree with your opinion. There has been one poster who has ripped on me for claiming my opinion was fact. It’s a very weak response, to be honest.

Afterburn

No I don’t need to add that. Because creativity and courage as the OP seems to be defining them are by their very nature subjective. A movie critic doesn’t start every one of their reviews with “in my opinion.” And that’s why it’s funny that you disagree so strongly. I thought the stories and writing were plenty creative and courageous in terms of what the OP was looking for. You’re disagreeing doesn’t make it not so. Everything we talk about is subjective that’s the nature of this discussion. But you seem to act as if your opinion is ironclad. Just as bad as that HN4 guy on the other side of the spectrum. The writers took chances on the kinds of stories they told and the way they told them, took chances with new characters and old ones, and what they got in response was hate. So now they’re taking a step back and seem to be giving fans what they’ve been screaming for and what they get is… more hate. This just reinforces Ron Moore’s comments about not letting fans demand get in the way of the creative process, which would be my only genuine harsh criticism of the producers. (Ultimately I think season one was great and I have a feeling season two will be great too though) I’m all for constructive criticism and a healthy debate on the merits of stories and characters and the quality of the show. But you two just seem like angry bitter… Read more »

ML31

“and what they got in response was hate. So now they’re taking a step back and seem to be giving fans what they’ve been screaming for and what they get is… more hate. ” They got hate because the majority of fans felt like they were told one thing about the show and ended up not getting any of it. They were told they were going to examine the Klingons like never before. Most I think felt that was a deeper look into Klingon society. What they gave us was different ships and different looks to the point where many didn’t even recognize them as Klingons. Viewers were told that the main character was going to have a difficult journey ahead of her as she was ostracized for being the catalyst to the war. Yet she was fully embraced by everyone within 4 episodes. And then the audience got plot twists that were seen from miles away or that many thought were inexcusably dumb. The war they claimed would be the story arc for the season turned into the B story for the entire 2nd half of the season while we took a side trip to the MU. When they got back the season was nearly over so they had to wrap up the war story in a neat little bag in such a way that even people who STILL liked the show up to that point hated. Producers response to this? Add MORE TOS stuff. Have Pike take command… Read more »

Wallace

Offering a strong opinion doesn’t necessarily mean it’s being presented as ironclad, just passionate.

Yes. I would agree they attempted to take risk in some of the storytelling and characters. I just wish they would have taken those risk in the laying down of the concept of the series itself.

ML31

I disagree as well. Discovery had creativity and courage in areas where there was no need for more creativity and courage. They needed to move those elements from production design to plotting and writing. Which are MORE important anyway.

Wallace

Definitely in agreement with that.

Luke Montgomery

All Trek after TOS “relies on past ideas.” The problem is?? That is what makes it a “franchise” and a “universe” and not a one-off show that aired and was canceled and that no one loved enough to revisit. It continues to build out the world. BTW, why are you on a Trek blog… you know this whole “Star Trek” thing is based on a 1960’s TV show that they just keep bringing back in different forms, over and over, beating a dead horse because Hollywood has no creativity or originality. I hear that they still have those pointy eared guys because they are just recycling past ideas. (SARCASM) So let me get this straight… you want a show based on “past ideas” that is Star Trek… but it can’t be based on “past ideas”? #YouConfusedSon

ML31

Don’t think you understand. Fans, I believe, are hoping to see something new set in the same universe. DS9 was able to do it. Are you saying that producers and writers are that creatively bankrupt that they cannot come up with an original story set in that already created future world?

Wallace

There is a whole fictional TREK universe that we know very little about. The majority of the time in TREK, we see mostly one area of that universe: star ships, captains, exploring, etc., and because alien quadrants, cultures, planets are being explored in most of the series, we know very little about the actual TREK universe itself. TREK sometimes reminds me of parents, who spend so much of their time helping other kids in their community, they ignore their own kids.

I think I loved DS9 so much because it proved you can do great TREK without the same basis of “past ideas.” It was so refreshing to see a different expression of that fictional TREK universe.

Tiger2

There does seem to be two camps of Star Trek fans: There is the camp who wants to live in the period they were introduced in when they started watching the show, TOS, TNG, etc and wants a continuation or constant connections to those eras and characters. And then there is the camp who just loves the concept of what Star Trek is and wants to see that concept pushed and expanded as much as possible that constantly innovates it instead of redoing what we already seen before, just from another angle. I will say the great majority of Trek fans are probably in the first camp. Hell, I mean I would put myself in there as well at times and why I’m so excited about the Picard show. It doesn’t JUST mean they want endless prequels and reboots either but they are happy with the Trek that gives them familiar characters and why we have so many shows that takes place on an Enterprise lol. But I am very much in the second camp too. And I think Gene Roddenberry fell into the second camp as well! BEFORE YOU THROW STONES AT ME, hear me out! I don’t think he had any problem with redoing TOS for example, but its clear he didn’t want Star Trek to just stay in place or even had one thing to say for another 50 years either. He wanted it to be reinvented, that’s why he made TNG in the first place. He… Read more »

Wallace

Very well put. Thanks.

alphantrion

If you want my opinion about Trek, I want it to be innovative again in terms of technology. I want it to inspire us to create more technologically sound stuff (like it was the inspiration for the Pads and Cell phones). This is why I want to see the future of Trek, I want to wonder what kind of new technology would they develop that perhaps can inspire us to develop a similar technology. I don’t want to be in a limited box, I want Trek to make people think outside of the box again.

Tiger2

I agree with you completely. You are clearly in the second camp.

For *me* what’s fun about Star Trek is just seeing the endless possibilities, especially in technology. I always find if funny when people argue they don’t want another show to go past the 24th century because it will turn into ‘magical science’ or some nonsense. If they don’t want to see that fine, but there actually people who DO and why we watch Star Trek in the first place.

I want to see technology pushed, thats WHY I watch it. Some people act like Star Trek is suppose to represent our real world. It doesn’t, its all magical ho-cum NOW unless someone is suggesting we are going to be able to teleport anywhere in the universe (or universes) using large tardigrades and fungal spores? It’s all about as realistic as a Marvel movie is.

In fact that represents the ‘magical science’ some of these people complain about lol. Which goes to my point over and over again, this idea that an ‘earlier period’ is going to produce less crazy shit is unrealistic because science fiction writers sort like imagining crazy shit in the future. That’s the job.

PEB

Seriously? I thought the biggest complaint from people is how much of a departure this is from design and aesthetic to the storytelling format. Damned if you do I guess… Literally every series has borrowed or brought on a guest from a past series or made mention of a past series character/ship and it all worked out just fine.

ML31

No… I think the complaints of the departure from design and the aesthetic are off shoots of the problems with the sub par show to begin with. Again, if the show were better, the aesthetics would be less of an issue.

Wallace

I can accept that to a degree, however the sub par nature of the show in my estimation, in part is due to continually going to the same placel time and again. Sooner or later, making a copy, of a copy, of a copy is going to get you diminished returns from the copying in and of itself—not to mention the aesthetics and the design. It’s not surprising to me at all that Voyager, Enterprise and now Discovery generate the most complaints among TREK shows. Sure, most genres generate the familiar, however, TREK is not a genre. It’s in no way comparative. It’s like comparing a planet to an island. There are more things to discover and experience if you are circumventing and exploring a planet verse an island; more things to take in, write about, discover, etc. A planet is simply more expansive. The best way for TREK to solve this conundrum is to create original concepts with it’s movies and television shows that present to us different elements and aspects within its small island… it’s fictional universal matrix. DS9’s significance in this area, can not be overstated. It proved that you can think out of the box and create original TREK programing without time and again, just plopping traveling characters sitting in chairs in front of a viewscreen. This is why I’m more excited about the recent announcement of upcoming new TREK programing than I ever was with Discovery. Finally, TPTB seem to get it.

Wallace

The departures are only window dressing as far as I’m concerned. Yes. TREK shows have brought guest from the past as a slight nod, but to me the TPTB of Discovery are making way too much effort mining the past, looking backward and not looking forward and going their own way. Also, after so many similar iterations of TREK, it’s become more and more a stale approach to take.

Tiger2

That’s not the same thing though. You can still have the show look consistent to the period its in and not have it be a revolving door of past characters and story lines.

And you’re not wrong, every show has had on past characters but Discovery is going MUCH farther with it. When past characters showed up on TNG or VOY for instance, they really were done as a guest star, you see them once and probably never again. DIS from day one has made past characters as part of the show in itself. Obviously Sarek who already been in more episodes of DIS than Mark Leonard’s appearance as Sarek for 25 years (it’s true look it up) proves they are part of the show’s make up and not just for a story.

Pike is going to literally be in every episode next season. My guess is that they are making a big deal about the next Spock because he’s going to be in more than just one episode as well. I wouldn’t be shocked if he showed up in half of them. I could be wrong but I would be shocked if it’s anything less than three.

And don’t get me wrong, we ALL expected this the day Discovery was literally announced. But I was hoping the show could do its own thing before all the appearances. I thought they may wait until season 3 or 4 to bring in Spock.

Wallace

Absolutely in agreement. I want Discovery to work. Hell, I’m a Star Trek nut, but I have been bitterly disappointed because I believe TPTB are spending too much time appeasing the fanboy in us, rather than breaking new ground beyond window dressing.

Tiger2

This is why I was never super excited about the show. Once Sarek and Mudd was announced to be in multiple episodes first season it basically set the stage for anything after that. I have no problems with seeing old characters, that makes it fun. But I do believe a show shouldn’t have to rely on them either for support and sadly they seem to think Discovery does.

Can you imagine in season two of TNG, it was announced Spock and Bones were going to show up and be in half the season? It would’ve been music to a lot of fans ears but it also would’ve told everyone they don’t think the show is strong enough on its own. At least wait a few seasons before you do it so DIS can feel like its own thing and its own characters well developed. But CBS needs to sell more subscriptions to AA so I guess you can’t blame them too much.

ML31

“Can you imagine in season two of TNG, it was announced Spock and Bones were going to show up and be in half the season? It would’ve been music to a lot of fans ears but it also would’ve told everyone they don’t think the show is strong enough on its own. ”

Yes. This. Exactly this. That is exactly what Pike being on the show for all episodes says to me, the viewer.

And again, yes. We all knew Pike would show up. Probably Spock and Kirk as well. But I would have hoped it would have been 3 or 4 seasons down the road. AFTER this series was well established as their own thing.

Tiger2

Yes, until CC, I was under the impression Pike would only be in the first two episodes, which I thought was perfect. We get to see the character again, get a nice little back story on him, story wraps up, the Enterprise warps out and Discovery continues on its way.

But now we know this is MUCH bigger. Pike is going to be the center of this show next season. You can’t spin that when the guy is now the Captain of the ship as well. Maybe that will change in the season somewhere but I doubt it because he’s in every episode. I’m still trying to imagine how it would look to others if Spock showed up in season two of TNG and took command of the Enterprise for the entire season? Yeah, it would signal to everyone they feel they need the character to carry the show, which is not a good signal to have.

I will admit Pike is a little different because he’s never TRULY been a TOS character like the others but he has oddly become iconic by simply being the first Captain we saw leading the Enterprise. And he’s still been around 50 years so he’s become a legend over it and they know his status carries more weight than anyone on DIS at least. But it’s sad they don’t think enough about the characters on their own show can’t bring in more fans.

ML31

But the sad fact is the characters and situations they created DIDN’T bring in more fans. So we end up with… This. Everything we are seeing in season two seems to be a direct result of season 1’s failures. Which in my mind is both a good thing AND a bad thing.

Vulcan Soul

Given how “try something new” worked out in season 1 (it involved the words “rape” and “childhood”), I’ll take my fanboy appeasement with pleasure, thank you!

Curious Cadet

@PEB — personally, I think trying to weave well established canon characters into a new storyline is one of the most difficult things a show can do. It’s the opposite of the easy route.

ML31

OK. Maybe MAYBE easy is not the right word. It certainly is the SAFER route.

Disinvited

Wallace,

I agree with Curious Cadet. While it definitely follows the classic Hollywood Executive Suite formulaic attempt to make a safe bet by banking on the name recognition of a known quantity just as they do when they buy the rights to best-selling books, it is far from easy for creative writers to turn such into 2 hours of compelling award-winning cinema that attracts the fan numbers that consumed both that the studios were pursuing in the first place when they made the bet.

Wallace

I just think fresh and original has to work a little harder and goes down a little slower than the familiar does with a ready made audience. All the latter has to do is mix, match and rearrange. I’m a graphic designer and believe me, working with the familiar–mixing, matching and rearranging is a lot easier than being creative and working with a blank page and from scratch.

Disinvited

Wallace,

I recommend you read the trials and tribulations that one, Harlan Ellison, had in writing his award-winning Trek script.

Oddly enough, the blank page never seemed to be an obstacle for Ellison, he would do writing stunts for KPFK fundraising on the air, and DANGEROUS VISIONS Bookstore’s window that turned out amazingly gripping good stuff.

Wallace

Yeah. I am familiar with the trials he verses Roddenberry and the TREK production team went through in creating City on the Edge…. I just think that was the exception, and you also have to take into account it involved the usual over-passionate Ellison and his ego and toxic nature… god rest his soul.

Disinvited

Wallace,

Re: Exception

If there is any substance to this supposition on your part, please point me to the stories of similar difficulties with Ellison for the two original concept scripts he wrote for THE OUTER LIMITS prior to COTEOF?

Wallace

I never implied in EVERY case writing originally and creatively couldn’t be easier any more than it’s opposite. That was my point and perspective regarding an exception. We’ll have to agree to disagree.

Wallace

I guess we see it differently. Being creative without relying on gimmicks or things that worked in the past is a lot harder to make work. This is why we are getting so many sequels, prequels and mining of past popular shows, movies, etc. That’s the easier and less risky road to take.

El Chup

A pretty boy. What a surprise.

Dreading this unnecessary step.

PEB

Right, because actors in hollywood aren’t good looking people. Grow up.

El Chup

Was Nimoy a conventional pretty boy? Patrick Stewart? Avery Brooks?

PEB

Apparently he was enough at the time that people admitted having a huge crush on Spock.

Kevin Lee

I think this guy resembles Antonio Banderas more than he does Nimoy.

Michael Hall

Then I think you need to pay your optometrist a visit. 😋

Michael Hall

Was Bill Shatner? The question is, why express doubt about an actor’s talent solely on the basis of their looks? Either way, it’s not very fair.

Afterburn

Want to complain he doesn’t look like Nimoy? I’d disagree that it matters but a valid complaint if that is important to you.

Judge him by his performance. Judge the producers on their choice by how well he inhabits the role. For all we know he aced his audition and plays a great Vulcan.

Besides, Star Trek and Hollywood in general tend to cast attractive people. Kirk, for starters. Specifically chosen because the network wanted a young attracted white lead.

Nichelle Nichols, a dancer and performer. Jonathan Frakes, Denise Crosby (a playboy model), Siddig El Fadil, Terry Farrel, Nana Visitor, Robert Duncan McNeill, Conner Trineer, Jolene Blaylock, the list goes on.

LOFC_Ed

Decent choice but has big shoes to fill….however, whoever was cast, it is still a MASSIVE gamble to re-cast prime Spock.

Tiger2

Yeah but they needed some big buzz for the show. I’m not really for it but I understand why it was done.

Tony Shillings

Folks,

How ’bout we leave it at “Infinite Diversity and Infinite Combinations” ?
seems reasonable.

Spuhura Addict

Welp, there goes the Kelvin timeline. It’s over. Familiar Characters have been recast ne’er to see the likes of the screen again. “He cannot exist while the other remains”. No single franchise character can concurrently occupy two mediums at the same time.

Jemini

Are you serious?

Thorny

Sherlock Holmes? Three variants at once. Robert Downey Jr. in the Sherlock Holmes movies in theaters. Benedict Cumberbatch on BBC/PBS’s Sherlock, and Johnny Lee Miller on CBS’s Elementary.

Jemini

Exactly, Thorny. And those 3 had little in common, they are like alternate realities of each other. For the most part, they had their own fanbase too.

besides, Spock isn’t the main character of discovery. I mean, really, if he were to make more than a guest appearance then the writers are jumping the shark because this series is about michael&Co and another ship with a different purpose. Making it all about tos characters would be silly and scream desperate. They are already being over the top now, tbh.

Tiger2

Thanks for letting us know Les Moonves. I think multiple franchises proves that’s not the case, nor ever been. Having two characters appear in both movies and a show is not exactly a new thing.

Spuhura Addict

Uh huh… wait for it….

Afterburn

I hope this is a joke because several franchises have done this. Mostly DC comics with Smallville and Superman Returns on at the same time, and the current movies releasing while The Flash and Gotham air on TV.

Doctor Who did it as early as 1965, and Terminator had Salvation and The Sarah Connor Chronicles in 2009 (and we’re clearly separate continuities).

Audiences will not be confused nor will producers have any real issue with this. If anything, Paramount could use the hype around to increase confidence in another movie.

You know, assuming the cast doesn’t demand huge paychecks. And not to sidetrack but if I’m the cast I accept a lower base right with a bonus based on box office.

Spirits Addict

Wait for it…

Tiger2

It’s even more bizarre because we know for a fact these are two different Spock’s anyway. So they don’t have to explain anything, one is one universe, this one is in another. So it doesn’t even matter because they are two completely different characters.

Spuhura Addict

Heck I love the Kelvin. I love Trek on the screen. It just seems it’s getting harder and harder to get these films made for viewing. Actors are being actors and demanding more dollars and with film conflicts, the path of least resistance seems to be to shift the attention someplace else- which will also be cheaper to produce, hence the tv medium and Discovery. Hines and Pine are looking elsewhere so maybe the production company will as well. I’d hate to think this but I think that’s the direction they’re going. It has nothing to do with the confusion of timeline or characters.

Jemini

A trek series that is only available through a streaming service (that many aren’t willing to pay or it isn’t available for their country) cannot compete with a movie franchise. Discovery is inspired by the kelvin timeline and believe me, these guys would make it a spin off of the movies if they could. I almost see a.. longing. Their casting of Spock makes it obvious because this guy screams Zachary Quinto.

In either case, I doubt paramount will give up about the movies because of discovery. If anything, the series can only help the movies and viceversa. .but I think the different realities thing is more an issue for Discovery than kelvin trek precisely because the movies have a bigger audience that won’t care about the series because it isn’t with the current version of the characters that they know and love. The lack of connection between the two prevents these two trek iterations to fully take advantage of the success of the other, which is a pity but sadly this is how the trek franchise is handled.

Afterburn

Any white make with dark hair must scream Zachary Quinto to you.

I’m really not seeing it. He reminds me as much of Zackary as Quinto reminded me of Nimoy. As in, not much.

What Peck does have is a nice deep voice, something Quinto really lacked and something I’ve always felt was important in the portrayal of the Spock character.

Jemini

I don’t think that if they had cast, say, Lee Pace or even Adrien Brody, people would see Quinto. But this guy? As soon as his picture was posted in some sites a lot of people commented that he has a Quinto flavour to him. It’s obvious that this casting used the most recent Spock as reference, after all the show is in the hands of the same guy who wrote the movies too.

This thing about Quinto’s voice not being deep enough is new to me, tbh. A new complain about the reboot that seems to be trendy in this page right now.
It certaintly is a different voice, but I can’t say I was complaining when I listened to his audio book of the first movie’s novelization. I surely like the way kelvin Spock sounds when he delivers his lines, he’s spot on to me. He’s Spock. I don’t define Spock with the tone of Nimoy’s voice only. In some countries they get dubbing anyway so I might argue the looks and acting/body language is the most important aspect. Kurtzman suggested that their main goal was finding someone with expressive eyes.

Tiger2

Trust me, I was on IMDB when it had boards when Quinto was first announced as Spock, that was the leading criticism against him that he didn’t have the voice to pull it off. It has gone away as more people just got use to his version but it was literally there from day one. It has zero to do with this page.

And I’m not saying everyone felt that way, I never cared personally. But I have also said that’s why its fun to see different interpretations from other actors because I EXPECT different interpretations. Characters aren’t made out of stone. Maybe on page, but when they are represented through an actor, others will always bring something different to the table from the last guy, some better, some worse. Not every fan is THIS anal but there are many out there as we know that are lol.

And I don’t see this guy looking like Quinto at all. I been on multiple boards since it was announced and you seem to be the only one I have read who has pointed it out.

Jemini

Tiger,
“You are the only one”

Have you read the trekbbs board, twitter and tumblr? The facebook pages etc. Comments below articles? If you did, I find it extremely hard to believe I’m the first and only fan you read making that observation (that he reminds Quinto), when even in this very page there were other people before me who said that. I mean.. sure Jan. .
Perhaps, I’m the only one YOU noticed, and I’m flattered by the attention I guess, but it’s disingenuos.

This inability to disagree with a point, without making hyperboles about the other person making it supposedly being ‘the only one’ you read, is the kind of gatekeeping cr*p trek fans are known for. Trek fans just can’t resist doing that. We are condescending and presumptuous.

Tiger2

Jemini, I read this entire board right here which now has over 300 posts. What other people are you talking about here? Maybe I missed a post somewhere but from what I see you are literally the only one who has brought it up. I’m not saying you can’t see it, I’m only saying you are probably in the minority who do.

It’s not a big deal. I didn’t say your opinion was wrong, I’m only saying it doesn’t seem to be a very common belief. I don’t even understand why it matters either way? He was hired because he look like Spock, that’s really all that matters. But maybe others do see it though. Not here to fight about something that has little bearing on anything.

Jemini

Tiger,
Examples like Curious Cadet and Michael Hall are right in the first comments here, but that’s OK – you didn’t see anyone making similar comments in other trek sites too (such as the discovery board over trekbbs), in spite of apparently being a fandom expert who reads it all.
As for how people can even get the idea, I mean, it isn’t like Kurtzman himself hinted that in his comments.

It isn’t important that you agree or not, but this whole pulling the ‘lol, you are literally the only one saying that’ lie argument everytime you disagree about something is silly and counterproductive.

Tiger2

Ok, I didn’t see anyone else made the comments, but I now see two others did. It wasn’t a big deal, I wasn’t saying you can’t see that, I just don’t think most do. I still stand by that. But yes, I was wrong, others here did, so I apologize to you, I honestly just didn’t see them.

Tiger2

Yeah, I agree as well. I don’t see much of a resemblance between Peck and Quinto other than the fact they have some of the features anyone would have playing Spock lol. I don’t get how someone thinks he was hired with a connection to Quinto in mind. And his voice is very baritone which many said Quinto lacked and why they don’t like him as Spock.

For the record, I do like Quinto as Spock but there are certainly tons more actors out there that could’ve played this role and maybe matched up to Nimoy a bit better.

Tiger2

I don’t think Paramount will ever give up the movies but I can definitely see them moving on from the Kelvin movies if they are just becoming too costly and not getting enough in return.

While I don’t think they will cancel the next one if Pine really does walk I wouldn’t be too surprised either because that’s a big risk to lose their star in the fourth film. I just don’t think the films are really popular enough for the budgets they have but now have a pretty expensive cast. In the long run it may be better if they just started over with a new cast and smaller budgeted films from the beginning. Either way I have a feeling if they do make this movie and it does as bad as Beyond did these films are finished. If Paramount doesn’t even want to pay Pine the money they promised him in the first place it tells you all you need to know how they are feeling about these films longevity.

Jemini

Tiger, like you said, the issues of the movies right now have nothing to do with discovery. In the end, they already got a successful trilogy, for the most part, that revived interest in trek. Other movies with this cast will be something of a plus, but they don’t necessarily have to give up about the kelvin reality regardless.

It may be indeed frustrating that paramount doesn’t seem to fully utilize the potential of the thing they already have, all the while seeing how much TV trek is desperately trying to get an ounce of the attention the movies got (especially back in 2009/2010).

Tiger2

The TV show isn’t getting the attention because its on a pretty bad platform most people don’t even have. I am told its more popular outside of America being on Netflix but I can’t speak to that since I don’t know anything about it. That said someone said on Reddit the show trends on Netflix like the other Trek shows so that’s good at least. I think DIS does have more of an image problem then even its fans want to admit but that can easily change if they just make the show more appealing.

As for Paramount, sadly they squandered these films. They waited four years between the first one and STID and then barely gave Beyond any attention and why that bombed. I’m realistic to how popular Trek is but these films could still be doing $500+ million if they had made them a bigger priority and came up with a real game plan like Marvel and Star Wars had did. They didn’t have to make a new film every year but it would’ve went a long way if they got them out faster and built a long term story to keep people coming back.

But after Beyond, I don’t see a real hunger to do them. Obviously they want to make more but its no longer a priority as before and why we are still waiting for an official start date to the next film.

ML31

Just thought I’d add that on top of CBSAA having a recognition problem it feels like word of mouth regarding STD after season one is over is not doing them any favors either.

Mel

“I am told its more popular outside of America being on Netflix”

I guess it depends on the specific country.

https://www.statista.com/chart/10311/netflix-subscriptions-usa-international/

Netflix has 130 million subcribers. 57 million in the USA and 73 million in the rest of the world.

Those 73 million are for sure unequal distributed among the countries. There might be a few countries, where a big percentage of the population has Netflix, but I think in most countries it is still a niche product and the clear majority of the population don’t have Netflix.

Tiger2

I don’t disagree with that Mel. We really don’t know until these companies just tell us how many are watching a show. In Netflix case though they wanted the show so badly because of how well the other Trek shows do in reruns internationally so I’m only guessing everyone who is watching the old shows maybe enough of them are giving DIS a chance too at least to make them happy.

I believe many more in America would be watching if it was on Netflix but there are still people who refuse to even sign up for AA out of principle or whatever.

But I had no idea America has nearly 60 million subscribers lol. AA has a long way to go to catch up to that.

Tiger2

Well I don’t disagree with any of that but the issues with the Kelvin films have zero to do with Discovery.

You have to remember a completely different company makes the films, in this case Paramount. So whatever Discovery does has no effect on what they do. They only care about the movies. This isn’t the old days where Trek was under one roof so if there was no film for a few years or one bombed, they still had the shows to make money with. For Paramount the Kelvin films is the ONLY Trek they have at the moment and one of their few viable franchises, which is why they are trying to get the fourth one made.

So you could be right, a movie may not happen because of Pine and budget issues, but Discovery will have zip to do with it. I too hope they make another one, but I’m not too bothered one way or the other now. I’m really into the Picard show than anything. Now THAT has to get made lol.

Tiger2

Man a lot of crazy Trek news is coming out these days lol. This looks like a great choice. Never heard of him but he can definitely fit the look at least. I’m getting more and more excited for season 2.

To make this CLEAR, I still wish there was no Spock showing up on this show but now that there is then just do it right. I’m pretty excited to see how they will bring him and Burnham together.

But please get this right Discovery. If this guy is a miss, we will be hearing about it for years lol.

HN4

Great minds have purposes; others have wishes.

Kevin Lee

Hey, wait a minute! He’s not in One Direction. What the?!?!

HN4

Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

Just Another Salt Vampire

Yep.

HN4

I’m ok with the new Spock. I was just getting my fake outrage out of the way. Just like all the other posters here.

BorgKlingon

LOL. Great post !!!

Cervantes

His relative was a marvellously watchable actor, and Ethan Peck will look just fine with the pointy ears and bowl cut I’m sure.

I’m very relaxed with the casting choice for this ‘Disco Spock’, as he should fit in nicely with my chosen way of looking on ‘Discovery’ as merely being an ‘alternate universe’ adventure which isn’t set in the ‘Prime universe’ to begin with.

Personally, I’ve no qualms about whether he’s made to be ’emotional’ (as in ‘The Cage’ pilot), or whether he acts more like the conventional character we’re used to in the ‘TOS’ show itself…as I’ll not be looking on him as being the ‘Prime universe’ version anyway.

So I’m equally fine with the ‘Disco Pike’ and ‘Disco Sarek’ too, along with any further characters culled from the actual ‘TOS’ show’s roster in future – you know they want to. ;)

To be honest, I’d have preferred to continue this adventure aboard the equally alternate ‘Disco Enterprise’ itself, rather than the good ship ‘Discovery’ design…but hey ho, on with the ‘spore drive’ we must go.

Anyways, I’m still interested to find out what the writers have in mind for these mysterious ‘red anomilies’ come season 2, and am sure this particular actor will fit into the show just fine.

Danpaine

“…as I’ll not be looking on him as being the ‘Prime universe’ version anyway.”

This^. Exactly, Cervantes. Much easier to swallow whatever they’re going to hand us if I consider DSC that way.

Luke Montgomery

But it is the prime universe version of Spock. So you’ll just have to deal with that fact. So you also like to consider Savvik in STIII to be a “not prime universe” version of Savvik in ST II also? Hmm.

Danpaine

Saavik, bad example, Luke. A secondary character who was replaced altogether by Valeris later on in the films, she was so insignificant. Anyway, there’s different schools of thought on this which have been re-hashed over and over. Many fans make personal adjustments in their brain in order to try to enjoy a show more. If believing DSC takes place in a slightly different universe makes the show more watchable for me, that’s how I’m dealing with it. I’m not the only one. LLAP.

Trellium G

Saavik was important enough that they did replace her with Valeris. It was my understanding that they decided to not use Saavik as a villain. So they made up Valeris instead.

ML31

It was my understanding that Nick Meyer wanted Kirsty Alley back for Saavik and if she wouldn’t do it he created a replacement character instead. Pity she didn’t. Saavik would have been a little less obvious as the insider.

Trellium G

That’s one side of the story.

Roddenberry was supposedly against Saavik being turned in to a traitor because he believed the character was beloved enough by fans that it would not go over very well to make her a villain.

ML31

TrelliumG, I do believe I heard that Roddenberry was not happy with Saavik being the bad guy either. But at this point he was long out of the creative picture regarding movie-Trek. But I still believe it was Meyers who wanted to change the character if he couldn’t get Alley back.

Trellium G

And also I believe the ultimate reason was that Kim Cattrall wasn’t interested in playing a third version of Saavik. So they created Valeris for her.

But anyway, I never thought of Saavik as an unimportant character. I think had Kirstie continued in the role, the character would have been featured as a regular. I accepted the other actress as Saavik, but was never satisfied with her performance. The same way I feel about QuintoSpock. He’s Spock, but no Nimoy. And it shows.

Michael Hall

ML31’s version is, I believe, the correct one. Alley refused to return, so Meyer decided to create an entirely new character. Due to health and other issues, the truth is that Roddenberry had almost no input whatsoever into the TOS films by the time THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY went into production.

Captain Danno

Maybe the anomalies are key to “syncing with canon” that will apparently happen this season… I for one sure hope they come up with a way to not only reconcile any story issues but also fix the visual continuity issues as well.

Luke Montgomery

You want the show to look like a low budget cheap 1960s production? Instead of simply accepting that starfkeet changed the look all the time of the ship itself and uniforms? Think TOD to TMP. Massive “visual continuity” change in what was supposed to be just 5 years in universe.

BorgKlingon

“You want the show to look like a low budget cheap 1960s production? Instead of simply accepting that starfkeet changed the look all the time of the ship itself and uniforms? Think TOD to TMP. Massive “visual continuity” change in what was supposed to be just 5 years in univ”

EXACTLY. It’s hilarious how some here like to conveniently ignore this so freaking obvious point, which gives completely license to similar changes now with DSC. Like, duh!

alphantrion

Did you just compare TV show visuals with visuals designed for a motion picture? The Motion Picture changes were absolutely necessary because its in the name, they were making a motion picture and it needed to have absolutely best visual designs, you were supposed to watch it in the big screen not a tiny TV. Now in the modern day there is not much different between movies and TV shows, and they should definitely update the designs, but while updating they should keep some of the essence of the original as well. In some parts they managed to this very well with Discovery, in others not so much.

BorgKlingon

@alphantion

Weak excuse. Go back and read the history of the making of TMP. Roddenberry, Westmore and Probert updated everything because they wanted re-imagine and re-visualize the whole look of all aspects of that future, including even the aliens…BECAUSE THEY COULD!

And comparing DSC to TMP is NOT NEARLY AS SEVERE a comparison as TMP was to TOS.

ML31

Alphantrion, I’m actually stunned people still don’t understand that is why people are annoyed with the PD of STD. It’s not the change. It’s that change that makes it not look like Star Trek of that era at all. We all expect upgrades and updates and changes. But not… THAT.

P-D Cougar

I haven’t seen any mention of this anywhere: Are we getting a Dr. Boyce in all this? Or a Yeoman Colt? Or a Jose Tyler?

Joe Kewl

Why hasn’t Adam been considered for the role? At this rate

at least thinking about the possibilities might be a worthwhile

endeavor 🤔

Andsoforth

Adam Nimoy should be considered for directing an episode, as he’s directed other projects. For that manner, he should be considered for The Orville.

Afterburn

Are you talking about Adam Nimoy?

1. He’s far too old. His kids would be more likely to be considered.
2. He’s not an actor. And before you ask, his kids aren’t either.
3. They did consider other possibilities. This is why it took so long to cast.

Stelios Arianoutsos

Casting for Enterprise’s crew is made VERY VERY CAREFULLY! I bet everything… a “Star Trek Pike” series is in the works and they just don’t telling us.

Mel

Optically I like him more than Quinto. I can’t say anything about his acting as I don’t remember seeing him in anything before.

DIS is adding more and more TOS aspects. I don’t mind it as I like TOS far more than DIS so far, but it kinds of indicates a lack of trust into what DIS was doing before. They already announced that they wanted to change the tone a bit and make it lighter and more humerous and then they added even more TOS characters. First Pike in a main role and now even the iconic Spock character. And seemingly the main mystery of the season will involve Spock quite a lot.

Tiger2

Exactly Mel and that’s the problem. They seem to know DIS is having problems tapping into the bigger Trek base so changes are natural and a positive. But they are doing a disservice to their own characters by bringing in people like Pike and Spock. Again, if they popped up in an episode somewhere, that’s fine. But this case Pike is literally taking over the show. And we know the entire story line is about Spock disappearance, so it’s basically a TOS story next season.

Of course I do expect them to have a lot of side stories and build on the other characters but the focus should be all about them next season. Maybe Saru goes missing and they need to find him. That’s what DIS should be doing to build up the cast it has and not just shoehorn in others.

EuJayne

So now, in addition to Spock Prime and Spock, we have S’Peck.

Called it. 😌

EuJayne

Mixed feelings on bringing Spock to Disco. Seems like network manipulation. But that’s neither here nor there regarding EP. I think his looks are fine, if a bit glamorous, for the role. I hope his abilities are equal to his beautiful deep voice and that he’s also inherited some of his gramp’s acting chops. Best of luck to you, Ethan!