Watch: Sonequa Martin-Green Discusses ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Season Two – See A Tease Of The Enterprise

CBS is back with a new promotional videos, after releasing a first behind-the-scenes promo on Friday. This new video is much the same style, but sadly CBS has only released it on Facebook so far. It is not embeddable here, so you’ll have to go to Facebook to watch it.

The video is titled “Reporting For Duty: Sonequa Martin-Green.” The star of Discovery chats about the show and season two. We also get a few glimpses of the USS Enterprise. First, we get a look at a status display on the bridge of the USS Discovery, showing the Enterprise is in distress, displaying “All Systems Offline.”

In dialog from the video it is mentioned the Enterprise has a crew compliment of 203, just as in “The Cage.”

NOTE: The dialog differs from the display graphic. The details of the Enterprise appear to have been pulled from Franz Joseph’s “fanon” book Starfleet Technical Manual. Thus they are not an accurate match with the newer CGI model which has been scaled up in size to match the USS Discovery (ex. the official length of this new version is 442m). Also the display graphic of the Enterprise has straight pylons compared to the backward swept design we’ve seen in trailers (and on all official replicas too). It may just be that these are early and/or rushed graphics. (Similarly rushed graphics of an earlier revision of the USS Discovery design were seen on background displays during season 1).

From the display, a few more details can be made out. It solidifies the launch date of the USS Enterprise as the year 2245, and that Robert April was the first captain of the inaugural 5-year mission from 2245-2250 — previously only confirmed in The Animated Series. Christopher Pike is of course the current captain from 2250 to present (2257).

A status board on the Discovery bridge shows the Enterprise in trouble

Also in the video, we see executive producer Alex Kurtzman as he directs Martin-Green in the first episode of the season on the set for Spock’s quarters on the Enterprise, which we’ve already seen a bit of in previous trailers.

Alex Kurtzman directs Sonequa Martin-Green in Spock’s quarters

 


Star Trek: Discovery is available 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 and Short Treks news at TrekMovie

262
Leave a Reply

29 Comment threads
233 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
72 Comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify me of
Trutrek

Terribly sorry CBS, but I have avoided having an account on Zuckerberg’s privacy-sucking juggernaut for all these years, and I’m not alone in keeping it that way. Maybe you can use the $120M you’re not paying to Mr. MeToo Moonves to hire some marketing personnel with functioning brain cells.

dswynne

Like anyone cares what someone who isn’t planning on watching DSC thinks…

Afterburn

Maybe you should take your own advice and get some functional brain cells. Because people who hate something shouldn’t be spending their time obsessing over it. Reminds me of my ex wife.

I’ll say to you what I said to her:

“It’s over. Move on. Find something else that makes you happy and put your energy into that.”

Tay dervis

Haha, exactly

albatrosity

Relax, Afterburn 🙄

Afterburn

I’m sorry you woke up on the wrong side of the bed, Albatrocity. Please go read all of my comments, I’m here to have productive discussion.

Bob

What people dont get is that TV and movies have replaced religion. No one think what would jesus do, it’s a what would batman or spiderman do.

Weirdo.

Mark Calcagno

That last sentence was hilarious to read.

Afterburn

Not for the reasons he meant it though. It is laughter inducing to think that someone would construct a sentence with such ill fitting, hate-fueled rage logic.

JAGT

Hm. “Edgy” run-of-the-mill internet-rant humour.

Mark Calcagno

That’s why I was laughing. I hadn’t read anything so nonsensical in a while!

slider

If they made fan films more legit they could make money off those for licencing. A simple idea, not sure why nobody at CBS thought of that other than pride.

Afterburn

There are myriad legitimate reasons not to officially license fan made productions. The same reasons why no big company will ever do it, at least not for major franchises.

Seigezunt

you seem angry. Time to watch more Star Trek!

khambattafan

The user’s comment was about CBS making a promotional video exclusively available to those logged in to Facebook, at a time when Facebook is facing the biggest backlash in their existence. Why, just yesterday was the NAACP’s Log Out of Facebook day, and we just got a congressional report that further rebuked the company. User made a fair critique of marketing. The back-and-forth Disco vendetta stuff has become quite tedious to read.

Afterburn

Yeah we got it. My comment stands.

Like your handle

Phil

Complaining about social media on a social media platform. Classic.

FrostUK

Facebook is evil so I see no issue with that part of the original post.

Phil

Pretty sure the same thing was said about the telegraph. FB is only evil when people don’t apply critical thinking skills to it’s use or misuse. If living in the 21st century bugs you that much, the Amish would welcome you gladly into their 18th century community.

Afterburn

Regardless of what you think of Facebook, this isn’t the place to get into that debate.

Bob

Lol. Metoo Moonves. I want them to stop forcing all of this pc stuff on us. Why is it offencive thst Santa is a man?

This is becoming quite the pile on. Thread closed.
To paraphrase a famous line from another space franchise: This isn’t the comment thread you were looking for, move along.

SmartWar

In dialog from the video it is mentioned the Enterprise has a crew compliment of 203, just as in “The Cage.”
But then why in the image says there are 429 on board? Would be 430 (like the rest of TOS) with Spock. And why dont have inclined nacells like Season 1 and the trailers of 2?

PaulB

You didn’t read the article, did you? The article answers those questions (as much as there are answers to be had).

Michael Hall

The crew complement of 430 was always just approximate, what with the redshirt casualties and transfers, etc. The only time Kirk gives a precise figure, in “Charlie X,” the number was 428.

(And yes, some minor kudos for getting the 203 Cage-era figure right.)

albatrosity

Either number is really really small for a ship of that size. Can you imagine a skyscraper with only 400 people in it?

HubcapDave

First, explain how a starship and a skyscraper are similar enough to make a comparison. Also, Voyager is a little bit bigger, and only had 150 crew approximately.

albatrosity

I was only making reference to a starship’s massive size, like the Connie having 23 or so decks, that’s a small skyscraper, and probably has comparable livable space, but only 400 people is like a very small compliment. Voyager’s is even smaller. Where are these 150 people concentrated in the starship? They all must work out of like one or two decks and the rest of the ships is equipment or empty space.

I guess the more appropriate comparison would be an aircraft carrier, many times smaller than a starship yet with thousands of crew.

Lone Browncoat

There’s nothing small about an aircraft carrier except the living space, ie cabins, bunks and hammocks, even for officers.

alphantrion

I think Captain April needs to appear on Discovery as an admiral. Get Robert Patrick to play him.

odradek

Hell nooooo! That would be highly uncanon. He is not an Admiral, he is a Commodore in Counterclock Incident.And I think Werner Herzog should play him or Jürgen Prochnow.

alphantrion

Does the rank of Commodore even exist anymore? Prochnow might be interesting, Herzog actually landed a role in the new Star Wars TV show so he might not be available.

kmart

Prochnow is supposed to be one of the choices Nimoy preferred after Eddie Olmos for the KLingon cap in SFS.

Commodore got changed to the halfassed title ‘half-admiral’ 30 or 40 years back, but I haven’t heard either used in anything outside of television since. Maybe it reverted?

Have no idea why somebody named Robert April needs to be played by a Germanic type, always thought of April based on novels and TAS as overly benevolent very western softie. Does somebody know if DSC’s April is going to be a mirror-universe version? That’s the only reason I can think to go with ‘crazy’ types (though Prochnow is certainly capable of more than just cliche characters — I thought he did wonders with the truncated role in DUNE.)

alphantrion

In any case I always saw April with the mental image of Robert Patrick and I think he can do both benevolent (like in X files) and a villain (like excellently in Terminator 2) role with gusto. He was also associated with both CBS and Kurtzman and Orci as he starred in their TV show Scorpion.

Locutus

Commodore sounds a LOT better than “half-Admiral.”

Captain Robert April

Vice admiral isn’t it (not half admiral)? I’m happy to see April is now officially canon?

Captain Robert April

Actually, rear admiral – Wikipedia says:

It is often regarded as a one-star rank with a NATO code of OF-6 (which is known in the U.S. as “rear admiral (lower half)”), but whether it is regarded as a flag rank varies between countries.[1]

Lone Browncoat

Always has been canon, The Making If Star Trek book, the original draft script, plus one page had a list of probable names for the Captain.

Who cares

@kmart

The rank of Commodore was used until the end of season 1 of TNG. At that time in the real world the US navy phased out the rank and the showmakers followed suit. This was explained by them at the time in interviews.

Lone Browncoat

Although they adopted the american version of Ensign [originally a British Army rank] Starfleet was following the British model and has Commodores. Remember, in Trek, WWIII knocked the bejesus out of everyone and the USA no longer exists as a political entity, Starfleet is not the US Navy, see my long distant posts about this topic.
For a brief time, the Royal Navy used a general staff rank pattern where the full stripes could be placed BELOW and ABOVE the wide band, like FJ displayed, some TOS eps and fan-films reflected this. Plus the wavy line part designated certain auxiliaries. In short, Starfleet IS NOT the US Navy and the conclusion to STContinues got it wrong. [and makes me wince]

In the real world, commodore is no longer a rank in the US Navy. Though, it is still used as an honorary title for distinguished captains.
However in the TOS-era commodore’s exist, so there’s no issue there :-)

Joe

I believe the woman with the name Paris in Star Trek Beyond was a commodore

Which is during the TOS-era (Kelvin universe), like I said :-)

Mark Calcagno

TAS isn’t canon.

alphantrion

Technically Captain April is canon now even if TAS isn’t canon because Discovery made him the official captain before Pike, also I heard that at least some parts of TAS were considered canon especially with regards to the backstory of Spock in Yesteryear.

Mark Calcagno

Sure, influence was taken, but at this point, only the live action shows are canon. That’s what Gene said anyway.

Who cares

@mark calcagno

Gene doesn’t dictate canon, the IP Owners (CBS) do.

Mark Calcagno

I just think a 20 minute cartoon from the 70’s that is largely ignored by the fanbase and was shunned by its creator is probably not under a microscope at CBS.

Disinvited

Mark Calcagno,

Ignored? I wonder whose ears HEROES&ICONS’, who currently air this Emmy Award winning animated series, advertisers think they are bending?

Mark Calcagno

What…?

Disinvited

Mark Calcagno,

As the CBS managed DECADES network notes:

https://www.decades.com/lists/12-fascinating-facts-about-star-trek-the-animated-series

Filmation’s STAR TREK was the first Trek series to win an Emmy Award and the only one to have won a major Emmy Award as such, for one of its episodes. Which is just one of the reasons why the HEROES&ICONS network’s advertisers bothers to pay rates justifying the airing of 2 of its episodes each weekend rather than ignore it as you erroneously suggest is being done.

Disinvited

Who cares,

Actually, STAR TREK canon was totally a fan invention as neither Roddenberry nor Paramount had anyone on staff collecting all the minutia (In fact, they still don’t which is why the authors from the last film resorted to the fan maintained Memory-Alpha and NOT the the copyrights holder, CBS’ startrek.com database.) all the aired episodes on 3×5 cards from audio tape recordings (no practical home videotape recording back then) to form such a collection of STAR TREK’S internal narrative’s “orderly” history.

Roddenberry got roped into canon because he was around and various fan factions would turn to him and his ego to resolve conflicts but as some of the biggest contradictions in Trek seem to originate from the man himself, he was hardly Solomonical or consistent in all his canonical “proclamations.”

This is why the fans, not the IP owners, settled on the definition of canon as “whatever occurs on screen” as its definition. CBS is only concerned with the viability of their brand and to that end will veto anything they imagine would impact this revenue generation engine and via this, have impact on STAR TREK’s canon, but in performing that function, it has hardly bothered to high-handedly dictate to the fans canon as in your dictatorial fantasy.

It took Paramount a long while to realize that what they were originally advocating to Bludhorn was the killing of a golden egg laying goose, but once they realized what they had in STAR TREK they were consumed with worry about killing it, or rather, the fans appetite for it.

Who cares

@disinvited

Every IP has a canon and they have nothing whatsoever to do with GR or fans. This canon, in every case, is decided solely by the owners of that IP. When people claimed that Rue in the Hunger Games wasn’t black the IP owners shut them down. No fan theories made it canon that Robin Masters was actually Higgins in Magnum PI. Etc etc etc etc. Canon for any IP, is was and will eternally be decided only by the IP owner. No argument will change that ever.

albatrosity

TAS is canon! It’s close enough

Chris

I just did some reading on that and it’s a weird that GR would render it non-canon, as there were no or not many conflicts. He even west so far as to decline the use of M’ress and Arixx characters to Peter David for some comics back in the day (so I read anyway….) but ended up using them later in the New Frontier books. Very curious.

JAGT

I’d consider them both a bit too old, to be honest. Prochnow is 77 and Herzog is 76. Also, as a native German-speaker I feel obliged to point out that, while “Robert” is a very common first name, “April” would be highly unusual as a last name.
But then again, DISCO is quite particular when it comes to character names and the actors portraying those characters anyway: Philippa Georgiou – Greek name, Malaysian character, portrayed by a Malaysian-Chinese actress. Gabriel Lorca – Spanish name, American character, portrayed by an English actor. So I guess having a character of (presumably) anglophone descent be portrayed by a German actor would just add to the cosmopolitan spirit reflected in the aforementioned examples.

albatrosity

I have a German last name but my heritage is Hispanic and Eastern European…people can have last names, especially far in the future, that don’t necessarily align with the provenance of their family

Who cares

@jagt

I am a Native American with an Irish first name and a Danish last name. People like Phillipa Georgiou exist in the world right now.

Killamarshtrek

Can any of those actors do an english accent?

odradek

Do they have to? Is it established that April is English? I thought he could be German. That would be cool. Germany had great and famous explorers.

LJ (was LJ)

Only one choice for April, for me that is: Sir Ian McKellen. Get his best friend, Sir Patrick, to persuade him. And we’ll have Dame Judi Dench as his wife, Sarah.

alphantrion

I don’t think they would have the budget for all those names. Besides Sir Patrick isn’t involved with Discovery, only with his own show.

albatrosity

We don’t need Gandalf in Disco!

Cranston

If the schematics here match the digital model used, it’s nice to see that they’ve straightened out the nacelle struts. And assuming those dimension numbers include decimal points, it looks like the reported size is about right for the original E.

Boxker

I would be a little disappointed, I liked the swept back struts.

I'm Dead Jim

The E in this graphic are a preproduction version. They changed to the swept back struts, as seen in season 1 finale, in the end. They have NOT switched back to straight for season 2. You still see a similar situation with the Disco design. Some bridge graphics show a shorter nacelle preproduction version. Guess it’s too expensive to change those graphics once they’re created.

Denny C

Not sure about that. There would be no reason to go into production with a preproduction image that would have been created long before the season finale aired and with many months to correct before season 2 went into production. That’s a relatively simple tweak for anyone who does such work on any television series. They wouldn’t be so sloppy as to use something that stands out so prominently unless there was a reason to do so. What really jumps off the screen are the technical specs which align with TOS Enterprise.

Mark Z

With today’s technology, it’s entirely possible that they’ll fix that display before the episode airs. It’s also important to keep in mind that the video that we saw was not production video but rather behind-the-scenes. For all we know, someone noticed the problem and switched the display over to the ‘correct’ graphics before the shot was completed. Or… it’s a fun blooper that fans in the future will chuckle over. :-)

Denny C

Is suspect that whatever we’re seeing it’s entirely intentional. We won’t know why until the show airs.

Is suspect that whatever we’re seeing it’s entirely intentional. We won’t know why until the show airs.

I would say it’s unlikely that it’s intentional. CBS spent a bunch of time updating the look earlier this year, and then licensed it to Eaglemoss and Anovos to make models of. Anovos sells artisan replicas that cost $9,000 each. Eaglemoss has to spend a ton of time making moulds and metal work to make a new ship and then mass produce it. They’re making it in both regular and XL product lines. You think they’re going to screw over their licensee’s like that?

Will

Yes, I do. Licensors do all it the time- the information given is always subject to change because of a combination of the production cycles of the source material and the products being made.

ST even has a history of screwing licensees over. The new uniforms for Generations? The figures Playmates made followed the abandoned design… Remember the wrong nacelle and impulse drive design made using pre-production artwork of the Enterprise E for First Contact? The ship Playmates made sure does.

Denny C

Star Trek fans don’t chuckle. We OBSESS! ; )

albatrosity

Agreed, the trailer display is sloppy. But maybe they’re just trying to get us fans speculating. I think I actually like the straight pylons better, more true to the TOS Enterprise. As for the embiggened size…no thanks.

Afterburn

I really liked how they mixed TOS and TMP versions. Now, the refit class looks like a natural evolution of the constitution class, while still looking like it fits in the world of the visually retconned era.

I know there’s a nostalgic love for the original, but the truth is nobody expected the designs to live on 50+ years later, and it never had the cinematic design quality that films like Star Wars had, and the franchise isn’t tongue-in-cheek enough like Doctor Who to make keeping the old designs around.

That said, I think some tweaking of what we saw in the finale is fine.

Mark Calcagno

I completely agree.

Tiger2

I agree with this as well.

Boze

You do realize that Boeing 747 was designed back in 1965, and DC-10 in 1966, right? No, of course you don’t. Most people don’t realize, because the design is strictly utilitarian, and thus, timeless. Much like the original Enterprise, which was also designed like an airplane: straight, smooth, clean. After all, it was designed by an engineer, someone who knew airplanes and naval ships like the back of his hand. Someone who knew that “designing something” means removing superfluous details, NOT adding more of them.

All the changes made for the Disco version have one thing in common: they serve no purpose at all. We can safely suspect that they only are there because CBS was contractually bound to make everything 25% different from canon (as the designer unwittingly leaked on Faceboook). ;)

Afterburn

Of course I do, but none of those facts are relevant, and the other facts you are citing are not only incorrect, but ludicrous on their face. Get lost.

kmart

That’s astonishingly rude, even for you, you putz.

HubcapDave

If that is truly the case, why did he make the neck on the TOS E so weirdly?

Afterburn

According to the designer, there was a creative mandate (NOT a legal mandate) that designs be different (he cited 25%). But creatively there’s no definition of a percent difference.

It strikes me that producers just wanted to modernize Trek, and so instructed designers to not hew too closely to the original concepts.

Ad Astra Per Aspera

You’d think, Afterburn, that your last point would be obvious!

Fred Javelina

I think you’re projecting a lot onto something that was conceived for a time when television sets barely had the resolution of the average user avatar on the Web. Any extra detail would have been lost. We’re also spoiled by the remastered versions taken from film, which inherently has a higher resolution than NTSC television. It certainly didn’t look that detailed when I was watching it on Sunday mornings on CBC-6 in Montreal. Interesting that you bring up aircraft. Anyone who flies frequently has seen these planes often enough to know they have TONS of small functional details like lights, the wing flap mechanisms, antennas, retrofitted winglet tips to reduce drag (only introduced some 30-40 years later), different engines than what they would have shipped with originally, updated glass cockpits and fly-by-wire controls to replace the only semi-automated, hydraulic-assisted controls of the past; lighter weight components. And lots of visible panels, rivets, sensor air intakes, warning decals, etc etc, that wouldn’t be visible unless you were close up. And those are commercial planes. Military aircraft (and sea vessels for that matter) positively bristle with gear. If Matt Jeffries was inspired by aircraft it wasn’t the futuristic-for-its-time, yet-to-be built planes like the 747 or even Concorde for that matter. It was what he grew up with, which, being born in 1921, would have been open-cockpit propeller planes (even the first all-metal fighters of the 1920s were open-cockpit). He was adamantly against a “flying saucer” design as cliche, but went with it for aesthetic reasons because the spherical primary hull he thought was more efficient just looked heavy. A lot of his first designs were very 1930s streamliner in style, but essentially, wouldn’t have looked out of place in the movie Forbidden Planet. (Source: http://forgottentrek.com/designing-the-first-enterprise/) So we basically got a 1950s flying… Read more »

Jonboc

Jeffries design was purposely streamlined without all the crap littering the hull because he had determined that, unlike modern Space travel, in the future, crew members would never be exposed to the dangers of space to repair the ship. All intergral parts of the ship would be accessable from the inside…thus a smooth clean exterior. His ideas, not mine. Matt Jeffries aesthetics were by design, both futuristic, and practical.
The new kids on the block should really try learn a little more about their source material and stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

Boxker

I’ve been a star trek fan since i was 6 years old, since the motion picture. My favorite thing about Star Trek is the Enterprise. However, other than making sure that there is a saucer hull, Neck, secondary hull, and nacelles on the top side, I have no need for the ship to look exactly like tos tv show. And I definitely don’t care how big they make the make it. Honestly, for some silly reason, when I was little I thought the thing was half the size of the US anyway.

I’ve always wanted to how it the tos era could look with a good budget and good tech anyway. I just hope they make similar changes to consoles. It doesn’t make sence to have overgrown buttons and knobs.

The tos enterprise is my 4th favorite enterprise, with the refit, enterprise e, and yep the 2009 enterprise being ahead of it. Most of that love for the original tos is because it’s the real enterprise. But if had a chance at owning the refit movie model or the Smithsonian model, I’d choose the refit. It’s just better. So is the E. I would even rather have the Excelsior. (Not the enterprise b, I hate that thing).

Now that thing we saw at the end of Discovery last year is freakin’ sweet. I definitely prefer it over the original. In fact, if I ever get my hands on a time machine I’m taking that design and, either, going back to Gene Roddenberry In the early 60’s or to JJ in 2007.

Kurtis Korwan

Yes, I just looked up and converted the meters to feet, this is the same as the original dimensions in the schematic on Memory-Alpha…

I’m pretty sure the art department simply created those details by pulling information from Franz Joseph’s Starfleet Technical Manual. The phrasing of the crew compliment being 43 officers 387 enlisted is directly from his work. The dimensions and the wording of having overall and then those of the primary and secondary hulls of the are also exactly as he wrote it.

Another example, In season 1 when star maps were displayed they were copies of maps seen in the Geoffrey Mandel’s Star Trek: Star Charts book.

CharlieX

I agree – I think Discovery’s re-imagined design looks better with straight nacelle struts – and would look even better without the cut-outs.

Silvereyes

Crew complement 430, not 203. 43 officers, 387 enlisted.

Kor the Scrivener

Per “The Cage” it’s 203.

Alex

We don’t know the context. Maybe it was 203 because their resources were stretched a bit after the war. 430 is the standard crew complement, but they can operate the ship on less personnel.

Afterburn

Additionally, ships compliments can vary wildly from year to year. If they’re in war time, they may not be staffed with all of their scientific teams. But as others have pointed out, 203 was the ship’s compliment in “The Cage.”

Denny C

My thought as well.

TrekkerChick

Or, it was a really… REALLY… bad mission for all of those redshirts.

No wonder Captain Pike needed a drink from Dr. Boyce.

Hauke Fischer

Well Pike does mention they lost a third of the crew IIRC.

There’s no mention of losing 1/3 of crew in The Cage.
Pike says there are 7 injured and 3 dead from the Rigel mission, and that he’s tired of being responsible for 203 lives.

Gary 8.5

Looking good so far.
I have a feeling this wont be the last video of a crew member reporting for duty.

Gary 8.5

One month from today everybody.
EXCITING!

Captain Danno

Interesting info on the Enterprise. It appears that the dimensions listed on the screen match previously established dimensions of the original Constitution Class and aren’t enlarged as previously reported. It also appears that in the schematic the nacelle pylons are straight as compared to slanted as seen in the season one finale. I have not seen the video as I am not on Facebook, but I read on the screen that the crew complement is 430, consistent with the original series, not 203 as mentioned in “The Cage.”

Afterburn

In dialog Burnham clearly states with relief that she detects the entire ships complement of 203 as alive aboard ship.

Mark Calcagno

Which means Spock is on the Enterprise then.

Afterburn

Possibly. We really don’t know what episode that clip was from, could have been after Spock shows up, and gets into some kind of crisis. After all, the line might not make a ton of sense if Pike was already hailing them in the finale.

Of course, they could just have forgotten to account for Spock’s appearance when the line was written. Little details like that can be missed when scripting episodes. The line may have been written as “I’m detecting [number] lifesigns aboard!” with instructions for an intern to insert the appropriate number after researching it…

LJ (was LJ)

I’ve always been interested in just why the crew complement is more than doubled between Pike’s tenure and Kirk’s. Is it because Kirk’s mission is so much farther out that it precludes, or makes very difficult, reinforcement? Is it because of specific mission requirements (Kirk’s 5 Year Mission has, known, additional necessities, whether they be scientific, security, or otherwise)? Or is it because more space is available for personnel because apparatus specific to Pike’s mission, or coinciding events, is no longer required? Most interesting.

I’m not a fan of the series (yet), but I love the enthusiasm she has for it. She’s a real asset to this production. I hope the second season does right by her more effectively than the first did.

slider

First impressions matter. If they haven’t made Burnham likable in the first however many episodes then for Season 2 it’ll be too little too late.

Michael Hall

For you, maybe.

slider

I’m not sure how many seasons you need to decide on a character?

Michael Hall

Well, put it this way: my feelings about Jamie Lannister are considerably different than they were seven years ago, when by design he made the worst first impression possible. That’s not an uncommon reaction, either, though of course YMMV.

albatrosity

Maybe you’ll like her more in Season 2, slider? I could reference characters in GOT that I hated in the early seasons and grew to love by the later ones. People change, after all.

Fred Javelina

Does she have to be likable? Likable, in most cases, really means do they appear to be “available” and “pliant” to male viewers’ / characters needs.

If her character was a white dude, he’d be “complex and dark.” Like Jon Hamm’s Don Draper, by any measure, an “unlikable” protagonist that we couldn’t stop watching.

Arguably SMG was given some clunky dialogue at times (that closing speech at the medal ceremony was…odd) but remember, her character is a pragmatic outsider, a human raised among aliens, who has dealt with trauma as well as the not-so-subtle species-ism of the Vulcans. Her decision-making is sometimes flawed, but the portrayal is grounded in reality – what it’s like to be an outsider has emotional consequences. Some people double down on it. Seven years in Starfleet doesn’t negate that, even as she explores what it means to be a human among (mostly) humans.

ML31

For me, it’s not a matter of being likable. It’s a matter of being interesting. Lorca, before we knew the truth about him, was hardly likable but he was interesting. And I think this is probably a minority opinion but I found Don Draper to be dull and uninteresting as well.

kmart

The Draper reference is intriguing. I found Draper to be engaging largely due to his creative genius (and for his visual resemblance to my mind’s eye view of James Bond), whereas I found Peter to be the jerk of all jerks. My wife felt they were equally creepy, just that one was handsome and artistic while the other was not. Guess there’s a lot that can color a perception.

Danpaine

Agreed SMG’s enthusiasm is a great thing, but I find the character of Burnham wooden, preachy and very uninspiring. Besides the fact being a convicted mutineer is a bit of a character flaw, in my book. Speaking to the writing, not the actress herself, of course.

Agreed. I’m not a fan of Burnham at all. But a course-correction could hypothetically change that. Not sure it will; but you never know.

albatrosity

With you 100%. Love SMG. Not big on Burnham.

Afterburn

It’s funny, in concept I really love the character, but have not been totally in love with the portrayal by SMG. She comes off very stiff at times. Whether that’s intentional because of her Vulcan heritage, I don’t know, but it’s not convincing– it just comes off as stagey.

albatrosity

Yes, thank you. Like that line in the trailer about the looking glass.

I want a model kit of that Enterprise!

John Ruschmeyer

The explainer in me wants to have a field day with the Enterprise status display. Let’s see… possible post-Talos IV refit of Enterprise including uprated nacelle struts and increased crew complement; Discovery display is out of date and/or shows stock Constitution graphic (not Enterprise refit-specific). Yada, yada, yada… :-)

kmart

DSC makers can always claim continuity with the original feature films to explain away screen graphics not matching current physical vessel, because there are phase 2 ENT graphics on screen in various films starting with TMP, and probably some graphics pinched from the TECHNICAL MANUAL that topped the NYT bestseller list in the 70s. The bridge graphics were often being created the night before filming, so they were grabbing whatever they could to deliver the volume of film to be rear-projected for the next day.

TokyoGaijin

The gents at TrekYards just did a whole live stream event on the graphics. The supposition about the graphics being an “early design” seem to be wrong. Go check out what TrekYards did in their live stream of that one screenshot. It’s informative and awesome!

slider

So the people behind Discovery got it wrong?

Denny C

No, I would say they made some adjustments after the season finale aired.

Unlikely, we’ve seen the Enterprise repeatedly in season 2 trailers, it still has the angled nacelle struts.

The more plausible explanation is that it’s a simplified background display. Not meant for scrutiny.

Example:comment image

HubcapDave

You’d think they’d know by now that EVERYTHING is scrutinized these days….

Locutus

Bingo!

Denny C

I think back to the Infinity Wars trailers which prominently featured the Hulk only to have him swapped out with Hulk Busting armor. The old joke used to be that you can fix everything in post but when it comes to anything generated in a computer you can actually do that.

ML31

Yeah, it’s just a graphic. It’s not real world. Just look at the system map on most city’s trolley systems. All those straight lines with no curves that don’t match the reality of the actual route at all.

Afterburn

What I’m wondering is when this stuff started to be contentious. Back in the day fans enjoyed pouring over these details, laughing and dissecting the many errors or in jokes. It was fun! Now it’s just fodder for criticism.

UthertheGreenShirt

Looks like the graphic is of a rebuild or retrofit after the E is knocked out and damaged for most of the season.

TrekYards is a fansite too, they don’t know anything more than we do. I can tell you with certainty, that early design graphics, and outright graphical errors, made it into season 1. It makes sense this is the same case here. So calling what we hypothesized “wrong” is certainly overstating things.

albatrosity

Thanks Matt for the clarifying comments! I think between the screen grabs you shared and the point you made about the licensing to various model makers [Eaglemoss’s XL is already up for pre-order and it has swept back nacelle pylons], there’s no doubt that the display graphic in the trailer is inaccurate compared to the ‘real’ Enterprise that we’ll see in Season 2.

DeanH

Interesting changes to the design from the ship we saw at the end of Season 1. As a fan of both Discovery and TOS, I didn’t mind last year’s version but I know some were not happy about the TMP-style nacelles struts – so this version might make SOME of those critics happier. Primary hull also seems less streamlined. Btw, if the ship design is indeed changed, I wonder if future versions of the S1 finale will CGI this version into the closing?? I noticed TNG did something similar when they showed a TMP-style Enterprise in the Naked Now but then edited later versions of the episode to show the TOS Enterprise instead.

Afterburn

I wouldn’t mind that. My real concern here is that they seem to be really cow towing to critics. I think it’s fine to listen to what the audience has to say, but I do get the impression that the producers are letting the audience micro manage them.

As Ron Moore said, the writers and producers need to insulate themselves from audience commentary because the truth is you’ll never make everyone happy. Best to just make the best show you can, and something you believe in. If the audience doesn’t embrace it, the network can change producers and writers. Perhaps then this is an effort for them to keep their jobs.

And anyone who’s ever worked in their life knows that when you perform just to keep your job, the quality of the work suffers.

DeanH

Agreed, I am in PR and there is nothing more frustrating than writing something “by committee” haha. I think you want the new Disco production team to have some “artistic license” to be able to make some minor changes. I don’t mind that they listen to SOME of the critics but IMO they should not worry about trying to please everyone.

Afterburn

I’d rather they make a show I absolutely hate than take suggestions from fans on twitter. I can’t %^&ing stand The Orville, but this is the show HE wants to make, and I can respect that.

DeanH

It is pretty much accepted that social media polls and opinions are seldom representative of the masses. So just because you see some opinionated video shared on Youtube or a twitter poll, you have to take it with the proverbial “grain of salt”.

Afterburn

For this example there is a VERY vocal contingent who hated the E re-design, in particular the swept-back nacelles. Yet if a real poll of EVERY viewer were taken, I would guarantee an overwhelming number either liked the look of the ship or didn’t care.

I would also bet that of the small percentage who disliked it, 99% would continue to watch the show regardless.

That said, as the article states, we don’t know if this is just the use of old pre-production designs, or demonstrate actual changes. Though if they are using pre-pro designs I have to scratch my head: those designs would have likely been from almost 2 years ago, and they could have just as easily used the actual FX renders from the final design for those overlays, particularly as those are likely post-production FX inserts.

particularly as those are likely post-production FX inserts.

No those are live displays on set displayed on specialty transparent monitors. In BTS videos they’ve stated they got a number of cutting edge transparent displays direct from a manufacturer (they didn’t say who). Panasonic, LG, Samsung, and Planar Systems have all made transparent displays.

Afterburn

Huh. Interesting.

Though with them being built AFTER the introduction of the E, I am still somewhat questioning the timing and why they’d have to use pre-production images.

Denny C

Those aren’t pre-production images. They’re there for a reason. We’ll know soon enough.

I think the answer is pretty simple, it’s likely indicative of a disconnect between various facets of the production. It seems likely they didn’t have proper orthographic renders available to them, so the on-set graphics people made something in a hurry. The final VFX renders are not done on site, they’re done at the production’s CG vendor Pixomondo. Season 2 was already running behind schedule and over budget when it started production. The most plausible answer is that it’s an oversight, they needed to whip something up for a graphic that shows up on screen for probably 30 seconds, and likely only 3 seconds of which you can see it clearly.

ML31

And that is why it was hard to respect the show’s previous runners. They spent the bulk of their time defending their decisions when they should have gone out there and said something like, ‘We made the Star Trek show we wanted to make. We are making the best show we can. We hope it will be well received but we cannot control that. We are only going to make the best product possible.’ Instead, the took the defensive route.

Afterburn

Yep. No reason for them to get on the defensive, I think that’s the fault of CBS who was so afraid of fan backlash they tried to manage the response by giving producers and actors talking points like it was a political campaign.

kmart

That desk in Spock’s quarters looks pure TMP Klingon to me … does nobody look at the architectural lines and raise obvious objections, or do they just say, ‘cool it is different looking’ and go on from there? (not saying it doesn’t look cool — I’d love to have one — but it is about as far from Starfleet and Vulcan design as you can get, unless you count Regula Station and the refit torpedo room, both of which were built out of … you guess it … the Klingon bridge from TMP.)

The inconsistency with whether the dialog (203) and the graphics (430) are correct for crew complement makes me think of how the BEWITCHED movie was originally going to be made in the early 90s. They were going to have two different actors switching off playing Darrin (probably where ROSEANNE got that idea for Becky) to echo the switch in the series’ mid-run. Maybe DSC’s ENT should keep veering from canon to convenience and back again, that way everybody will stay on their toes.

Mark Calcagno

Do you think your enjoyment of the series will be impacted by these things?

kmart

My enjoyment of anything in visual arts is based in large part upon lack of distracting elements … unless it is something so stupid and seemingly deliberate (see ACTION JACKSON) that finding those wrong bits becomes part of the fun.

In the trek movies, spot-the-set-recycling was actually kind of okay by TSFS, though I found the Klingon stuff aboard the E and at Regula in TWOK to be seriously distracting (and that the klingon elements painted over were doubly inappropriate.)

Mark Calcagno

I get that. A misplaced prop can really being me out of a scene.

Afterburn

In the HD version of TNG I once spotted the seam in Worf’s makeup and I had to turn it off. Completely ruined the show for me. Total trash.

HubcapDave

I’m almost afraid to ask what happened when you first saw Kirk’s toupee lace line….

Mark Calcagno

WILLIAM SHATNER IS BALD?!?!

Afterburn

Back in 1989 when I saw the TNG cast on Good Morning America I just couldn’t keep watching. Seeing them as actors on a sound stage just completely crushed the reality for me. If I can’t be completely tricked into believing I’m watching a totally true reality, than what’s the point?

Harry Ballz

Afterburn, that is exactly the reason Patrick Stewart REFUSED to appear on that GMA segment. He said it took away from the illusion.

Afterburn

Wrong again.

He said he wanted to take his role, and the show, seriously, and not play it as a joke. He felt having correspondents dressed in their uniforms, with “beam in” gimmicks made the show feel silly. He wanted to be taken seriously as an actor, and the show to be taken seriously as a drama.

Had nothing to do with illusion.

HubcapDave

Do yourself a favor, and never read any of Phil Farrand’s Nitpickers Guides…..

alphantrion

It might seem small details for you, but obviously there are people out there who give importance to these kind of stuff.

Mark Calcagno

My intention was genuine curiosity, not an attack.

Afterburn

I feel a sincere pity for people who base their enjoyment of this show on trivial details like that.

Michael Hall

I think the production design for Spock quarters looks great.

Locutus

I just can’t get worked up over these graphics inconsistencies. It is a background graphic. It’s fun but not really meant to be dissected. Whatever is said onscreen is generally what I go by.

Danpaine

Since they’ve felt compelled to resurrect the original E, much to my chagrin, I will say I’m pleased they’ve respected its history to the extent they have (from what we’ve seen so far). That said, it’s highly doubtful when I watch a TOS episode at some point in the future I’m going to say to myself ‘oh yeah, same ship I saw on Discovery.’

Locutus

At least, until they issue The Original Series Remastered REMASTERED, and they replace that clunky old 2006-2008 CGI Enterprise 1701 with this one!

;-)

albatrosity

I am very much looking forward to TOS-R-R lol I think it needs revisiting cuz those early CGI shots are just…not good to me

Tiger2

I guess I’m a weirdo but I really like the TOS remaster shots. They are on Netflix (where I mostly watch Trek these days although I have Amazon and AA too but I don’t know if they do have the remaster episodes) and I like them for the most part. I really like the additions on the planet scenes. And I like they didn’t over do it like Lucas did with all the special editions stuff he did with the OT but I’m guessing they didn’t have anything close to his budget. ;)

albatrosity

They were certainly improvements in terms of the scope and maybe the storytelling, but they’re just so dated, they look like cheap CGI to me, and I just wish they had hewed a little closer to the original vision of the show. Yeah, they didn’t have a lot of space shots to work with. That’s ok, they didn’t really need more than they had. They made it work for the story and that’s what CBS-D should’ve done, I think. Or at least would’ve liked to see.

Afterburn

When I watch TOS it’s hard for me to even see the same characters and universe as the films.

MattJ

I don’t know the context of that Enterprise graphic but wouldn’t it be a lovely little touch to have her prefix code on there

Danpaine

It would, indeed. Neat.

Locutus

Yeah, that would have been cool!

Phil

Considering how ridiculously easy it has been to steal Starfleet vessels in Trek lore, the Enterprise prefix code is probably NCC1701. Or Password1234.

kmart

If CBS actually WAS doing a RELIANT series, they should have codenamed it 16309.

slider

I see they’re trying so hard with the continuity references which makes it all the more depressing how it still looks disconnected. It just looks contrived.

Danpaine

Dubbing this feeling “the prequel blues,” myself.

JAGT

“The link you followed may have expired, or the Page may only be visible to an audience that you aren’t in.”
Ugh, those policies are really starting to grind my nerves.

Raul Quiles Jr.

Strange that the graphic doesn’t match the digital model from season 1(since they started filming season 2 months after the final episode of season 1), also in the first trailer for season 2,it clearly showed the same version of the Enterprise from season 1.

Mark Calcagno

Which one do you like better?

Raul Quiles Jr.

I like the swept back pylons clearly inspired by the Motion Picture version of the Enterprise. The designers created a perfect version of the Enterprise taking elements from all the previous versions.

Mark Calcagno

I have to agree. I don’t have the nostalgia that comes with seeing the same ship for 52 years, so I really prefer this Enterprise to the original. They’re both beautiful, truly, but I like one better.

I just can’t get past how weird the TOS Enterprise neck looks…

Afterburn

Agreed. Not a huge fan of the potato peelers, but it’s a very minor quibble.

Tempus

I’m sure this means nothing, but across the top of the screen there’s the letters A-F and they’re grouped into ABC and DEF. Picard show hint? No idea, but doubt it. Random graphics? Probably yes. I just like the idea of the grouping and the, probably unintentional, nod to all of the Enterprises.

Afterburn

Probably just for organizing the info on the screen like Microsoft Excel. Keep in mind this information is being portrayed as utilitarian for the characters in-universe, not just a graphic for us to look at.

Cmd.Bremmon

They should do a Pike / Number One / Spock USS Enterprise spin off. Am I the only one worried I’m going to be more interested in what Number One and the big E are up to while Pike is on the Discovery? I already wish they’d go back and show us what the E was up to during the Klingon war.

Danpaine

Exactly. I said the same thing when the Enterprise first showed up.

Mark Calcagno

Performing first contact with a species the Bajorans, but the Enterprise was forced to retreat when two unknown warships showed up claiming this planet was in their space. Further details to follow as Starfleet Intelligence uncovers who this mysterious race was.

Tiger2

I really hope they completely move on from the Klingon war. It was boring and didn’t add any real depth. I’m sure they will tell us though.

Cmd. Bremmon

That they made the war boring with bland Klingon ships and without showing the Battle of Starbase One, occupation of K-7
and the fall of major Fédération worlds is confirmation we aren’t dealing with excellence in Trek. Maybe a Pike / Number One / Spock show could go back and fix that.

Tiger2

Honestly its just no need IMO. We know what happened, let’s just move on to something new and hopefully more exciting. I’m more interested in the new story of the Red Angel (hoping its the Iconians but holding my breath) and the seven bursts instead of a war I was never that invested in the first place. Unless its something important to the new story line I don’t see the point.

Danpaine

I’m all for going forward in the timeline too, Tiger. But if they’re going to insist upon bringing back established characters from 50 years ago, which it appears they are, a Pike show would be the way to go, I suppose.

Tiger2

No I was just talking about Pike flashing back to the Klingon war arc on Discovery next season. I’m not bothered if they do it, its just no real need unless the war arc still serves a purpose next season but it sounds like they are moving on from it completely.

Luke Montgomery

YES. YES. YES. They should make a Pink/Spock/Number One spin off. Makes TOTAL sense. It would be amazing.

Joe

I hope that it is on the drawing board

Afterburn

Given the names they’ve cast– including an award winning actor who’s lead a critically acclaimed tv series and a borderline movie-star as his first officer, I can’t imagine it’s NOT under consideration.

Tiger2

Yeah I assume it is as well. At the very least they are probably going to judge the reaction of how popular they come off on Discovery (and more importantly if more people subscribe to AA in season 2) and I imagine if the reception is big enough it would be an idea. And that might be a better way to go instead of a Section 31 show which people seem pretty divided over. They could still use Yeoh and have her on that show as a Section 31 agent if they wanted.

Afterburn

I think if I were in charge i’d have TWO ongoing series and a bunch of 1,2,3, or 4 episode minis here and there throughout the year.

This would give fans enough variety to keep the entire fandom subscribing 7-8 months out of the year.

Afterburn

I agree they should, but I disagree that it’s a problem that you care more about that. That’s a natural reaction considering we’ve only seen 15 episodes of Discovery, but have 50 years of the Enterprise, Spock, etc. Even Pike and Number One, despite only being shown in 1 episode, have a nostalgic connection to fans.

I imagine fans in 1987 were saying “Am I the only one worried I’m more interested in the events of Star Trek V and what the 1701-A is up to instead of the 2nd season of this new Next Generation thing?”

Cmd.Bremmon

TNG 1701-D never was as cool as Star Trek V and the 1701-A… and that was the A at her worst (not counting the way better 5 second cameo in IV and one good movie in VI).

Afterburn

My brain hurts, did you just say that The Final Frontier was cooler than TNG?

HubcapDave

No, just the ships

Afterburn

Ah, ok. That I understand. For nostalgia reasons I have a soft spot for the ENT-D

Tiger2

I do love the Enterprise refit ship in the movies but the ENT-D is my ‘home’ ship and to this day the most seen ship in the entire franchise being in the most episodes and Generations.

I’m really hoping we get an Enterprise F on the Picard show though so then we will have two ‘new’ Enterprises when you include Discovery’s version.

Afterburn

You know, the Picard Show could open with Jean Luc attending the launch of the Enterprise F, and being drawn into it’s first mission.

This would allow the series to take place on the Enterprise.

Tiger2

Wow great idea! I have thought of a similar idea before as well and that the show starts with the new launch of the ship.

I’m guessing unless it ISN’T a starship based show, I really have a hard time seeing how they wouldn’t go for a new Enterprise. To me, its a no-brainer and they know the name Enterprise increases marketing value. They might surprise us but my guess is they want another Enterprise as much as the fans do.

And it will be a new Enterprise for a new century as we had a ship represent every different century in the franchise. One for the 25th would continue the tradition.

Afterburn

The one detail about the last 25 years i’d like to know is who captained the Enterprise E after Picard retired. His first officer from the end of Nemesis? Did Riker get command and transfer from the Titan? A new character?

Tiger2

I’m guessing it will be a new character but I WOULD love it if it was Riker who finally got a chance to Captain it.

ML31

Perhaps it’s my age, Tiger2, but I NEVER warmed up to the D. My friend joked it should be called the USS Hilton. Over the years it never grew on me and was happy to see it bite the dust in Generations. I just tolerated it. The E does look better but I’ve always felt the best looking Enterprise was the refit one. No bloody A, B or C. ;)

Afterburn

I’ve actually been very careful to reference the ship as the ENT-D. Because otherwise it just… well, it doesn’t read well lol

Tiger2

That’s fine, not everyone will love every ship. I admit though I fell in love with it the second I saw it for some reason. I was a kid though so I wasn’t hard to please lol but I just loved how big and majestic it looked. I was in awe in how incredible and sleeked it looked inside. I wanted to live there lol. I DID think the saucer was probably a bit too big at the time but I adjusted pretty quickly. I also love the E as well! So if there is an F I really hope to love that as well as sadly I don’t love the Discovery at all.

As far as the refit and the A, isn’t it really just the same ship though? I mean literally, isn’t it the same model they used in the other films?

kmart

It’s the same model, except for some pieces around the front of the sensor dish that got lost around the time of TVH. It got horribly dulled down finish-wise at the time of TWOK when ILM got their mits on it and decided to shoot it against bluescreen, and the whole paint job was ruined (along with the paint job on the K’tinga, which has a ton of white paint dumped on it) after TVH when the model was loaned out to Universal for their Florida ride experience … Ferren’s people repainted the whole model (rather poorly) for TFF, and then ILM repainted the model again and redid the trashed wiring when they got it back for TUC.

Tiger2

That’s what I thought, thanks. I know story wise fans make the distinction but yeah its the exact same model in all the films, although it sounds like they did a poor job with it in the later films.

Yeah the model as it was in TMP was pretty amazing. That’s the only time it had the famous pearlescent paint job. And they had an attention to detail that no other film had, in TMP the deflector dish purposefully changed colors, it wasn’t always blue; it was blue when the ship was in flight, and pale white when the ship wasn’t moving. After TMP, they just kept it lit blue all the time for ease.

kmart

I think the color was predicated on whether it was at warp or impulse.

Duh yep, you’re right.

ML31

Yes Tiger. The A is pretty much the refit. I just never warmed up to the idea of adding a letter to the name. Felt that was silly, too.

MattJ

Those straight nacelle pylons in the display – Check out the display when Chekov detects the intruder in Spock’s quarters in Star Trek 3

Denny C

I suspect that whoever they gave the job to on that image pulled something from TOS and was probably someone who had worked on the previous films or a Star Trek fan for that matter. Kind of an ‘oops’ moment with no choice but to run with it.

kmart

One of the main suppliers for TSFS screen graphics did the job just for credit, essentially for free, and I guess they got what they paid for … stair-steppy messes.

JonBuck

The saucer section on that graphic is a Galaxy-class-style oval rather than a circle. From the discussion here this really looks more of a production error than anything.

Ben Adams

The screen is at an angle, so the saucer *appears* to be an oval. But it’s not. Same thing has happened to the Starfleet Command insignia on the screen as well.

Mark Calcagno

Circles look like ovals when you look at them from the side…

Boze

As for the pylons, well, Discovery has this rotary saucer gimmick. It’s entirely possible that Enterprise has variable sweep gimmick. That would instantly make the show 200% more funny… though probably NOT in the way its creators intended. ;)

AJinMoscow

If Pike says he’s responsible for “203 lives” in The Cage, doesn’t that make the full crew complement of Enterprise 204?……

Afterburn

Two people either already died or were re-assigned in between.

albatrosity

By the time Pike mentions 203 lives in The Cage, the crew was still recovering from some disastrous mission that resulted in three deaths including his yeoman. So who actually knows what he’s referencing, whether 203 is the current [reduced] crew compliment, the standard compliment, what have you.

Trek in a Cafe

Not enough is being made of the idea that Roddenberry had floated in the TMP novel, at least as I recall it, that Kirk’s Enterprise was the first five year mission that returned largely unscathed. That would be totally canon and bring up so many dramatic possibilites.

ML31

Interesting note… In STID when Pike was informing Kirk of his demotion one of Kirk’s arguments was that he hasn’t lost a singe crew member since he took command. Your comment just triggered that memory for some reason.

albatrosity

All I can say is this graphic better be fixed by the time the episode airs or I’m going to demand my six dollars back. For a show this important, the production can’t afford to get tiny details like this wrong. And I’m not even kidding! If it’s legible on screen, it better match up to the reality they’re creating.

Mark Calcagno

Are you actually not kidding? Please tell me this is a joke.

Afterburn

I am reminded of the kid in that John Cusack movie. Albatrosity is some 8 year on his bike chasing down a CBS employee screaming “I want my six dollars!!!”

HubcapDave

Better Off Dead

Afterburn

F^&*ing great movie.

Danpaine

A true classic.

Chris

Did you know John Cusak hated that movie and walked out of it’s screening 20 min in and berated his director for screwing him over? Turns out it was one of his most memorable movies…..

Afterburn

Interesting! That’s actually my favorite movie of his, but it is pretty bizarre so I can imagine on first watch he must have been like “WTF IS THIS?”

Phil

I detect a hint of sarcasm….

albatrosity

I’m being a only a little over the top, but I stand by my point. Like, this truly better be fixed in the finished episode. It would be like seeing Gandalf’s staff change shape between scenes or something, like it’s an irritating and noticeable gaffe that takes me out of the world they’re trying to build. It’s a lazy oversight for a show with this much money.

ML31

Yeah. Not interested enough to go to Facebook. Used to have an account there. Dumped it ages ago.

Afterburn

I’m still baffled when people feel the need to tell everyone that. It comes off as some kind of odd boast, like people who don’t have TVs, or don’t eat meat.

ML31

First, it was a video that was found only on facebook. So the comment was pretty appropriate. It’s not like it was pulled out for no reason. Also, I find it odd that someone who routinely rips people for having an opinion that differs from theirs feels it necessary to out of the blue tell everyone how confused they are by comments they see as “odd boasts”. Particularly when that is exactly how they come across in their own comments. There is a word for that sort of thing….

Tiger2

I dumped my FB years ago too ML31, so haven’t seen the clip either. Not a huge deal I imagine it will find its way on Youtube soon. But FB has just too many issues, the latest news just out today they let over 100 corporations look at people’s private emails. Having access to your page is now not enough, they want to know your personal thoughts to your friends and family as well. That’s really low and spooky.

Afterburn

So? If you need to say ANYTHING how about “Ugh, can’t watch it if you don’t have facebook? That sucks.”

No, you are doing the whole vegan thing. And that, my friend, is hilarious.

Tiger2

All he said was he doesn’t like FB and so can’t see it. You’re taking something he said in one line and making an argument out of it for some reason. It would be different if he was upset about it. He’s not. Let it go.

Afterburn

Please re-read his comment. He actually didn;t say that at all. I’m laughing my ass off at you people who are so anti-social media. You’re the ones who need to let it go.

kmart

Tig, I don’t know who this Afterburn is but he seems to be polluting the board pretty ferociously as of late. Explaining you can’t see something because you’re not on Facebook is probably near to necessary in this age where being on all these social media platforms is ‘supposed’ to be the norm.

I also don’t know what he means by ‘the whole vegan thing’ but it sounds as offensive as anything else form him … then again, it might just be making noise for its own sake.

Afterburn

Have you ever met a Vegan? They tell you about being vegan when discussing movies.

As for poisoning, I think you are barking up the wrong tree. Tiger and I have had some healthy discussions.

ML31

Kmart, AB is nearing the point of reaching my personal ignore list. He seems to be stalking me and making intentionally antagonizing responses that are unnecessary. And yes, I’m at fault in that I often cannot resist taking his bait.

Mark Calcagno

Afterburn and I often agree, and you and I often don’t, but on this point, it does look like AB is going after you every time you post. I think you need to ignore him, and vice versa.

Afterburn

Lol when I respond to people I never care who said it. I even agreed with you up above on something. Chill out.

ML31

AB, so I’m not allowed to add a bit of an editorial on something that is relevant to the article… But you are free to do it even with things that aren’t? I reference that word again that I eluded to earlier.

Mark Calcagno

Afterburn, ML31 and Tiger2 are fighting? In a Trekmovie comment thread? Didn’t see that coming…

Can you all just agree to disagree and stay away from each other?

This has become a bit ridiculous. Enough dog-pilling and trying to get the last word. Thread closed.

Nice to see that Robert April is finally canon!

Who cares

So it appears that in the Prime timeline Spock was serving in the Klingon conflict when Kirk “solved” the Kobyashi Maru, who knows if he even programmed the test in Prime. I wonder if Jim will show up this season or next lol.

According to the Star Trek Online Age of Duscovery story Tilly knows both Kirk and Finnegan, she mentions that he has taken the KM twice. I believe she is a year or 2 behind him as he should be aboard the Lexington by now (IIRC from Obsession), or Farragut. I feel a good deal of security in predicting his eventual appearance in Discovery.

Any speculation who might take on the role?

ML31

Been saying this for months… They way they have been mining characters I would not be surprised to see Lt. Kirk show up, most likely next season. We could very well see Scotty or McCoy, too. I think it all will depend on what the subscriber numbers are for the 2nd season.

kmart

I think it would have been cool if they’d run into the FARRAGUT instead of the ENTERPRISE. Have always wanted to see a really interesting actor play Captain Garrovick, somebody in the Martin Sheen vein.

Who cares

@ML31

You seem to be operating under maliciously false information perpetuated by Midnight’s Edge that is utterly debunked by every reputable information source.

That aside, since before season 1 started the Producers talked about have a long term plan for the show and setting up things that wouldn’t be answered or resolved for a season or more (fairly common in CBS shows, NCIS does a lot of it). I’m fairly sure that what lead to the dismissal of the showrunners was their descision to not use an adult Spock and the writers saying “to tell this story we need him”. In a writers room that kind of argument can escalate to the kind of verbal abuse they were fired for. Look at the various interviews before and after and the whole tone of how they talked about Spock changed.

I expect various characters to appear simply because they can and like myself many of these writers are fans who would watch an episode and speculate a follow-up episode. Or speculate about the past record of various characters. I fully expect the reason why Kirk and Spock never discuss Michael, aside from stock standard Spock behavior ex3mplified by never talking about Sarek or Sybock, is tbat Kirk already knows her and knows the story. Kirk certainly knows who Michael Burnham is at this point, as mentioned by the timeline he is already a Lt, Burnham’s mutiny is public knowledge, and Kirk served in the war.

Who cares

One more note, Kirk could still be a Lt and not have taken the Kobyashi Maru 3 times, Saavik took it as a Lt in TWOK. The conversation in Star Trek Online with Tilly took place on the day after Binary Stars, 6 months before Burnham boarded Discovery.

ML31

No, I am reacting to what little information there is and putting two and two together logically. It has been confirmed that subscriber numbers are nowhere near what CBS was hoping for. That information plus the turnaround that original regime told us about the show add up to my conclusions. Your version is indeed possible. But as it sounds like a bit of a reach I think it unlikely. If there was a multi season direction that included Spock, it seems the Spock denials would not have existed. If what you say is true for marketing purposes alone it would have been left ambiguous at best. Instead we get “NO SPOCK” in no uncertain terms.

I expect other TOS characters to surface no matter the result in subscribers from this season. Not only because they can but because they seen to feel the need to use known characters to create what little buzz the show generates.

Who cares

All the ingormation given by CBS and Netflix says exactly the opposite ML. According to Netflix Discovery was their 4th most watched show worldwide. According to CBS Discovery boosted subscriber numbers by “record breaking levels”. There is no evidence whatsoever that there was any disappointment in the numbers. You don’t renew a failing show, you don’t spin it off… especially not twice before the second season starts, you don’t sink millions into a side show in a failing situation. No TV network in history has ever done that. If you think these actual facts add up like you say, then you failed math.

ML31

CBS themselves have said they have some 2.5 million subscribers a few months ago but before STD debuted they claimed their hope was to have some 5 million by the end of 2018. “Record levels” means very little when the record to beat was virtually zero. That tells you nothing about what the expectations were and what is really necessary to maintain a viable streaming service. Now of course CBS reveals precious little about their service (and I’m actually surprised they even made public their low subscriber numbers) but the prevailing theory is that CBS is committed to AA and desperately wants to be a player in the streaming business. They saw the low sub numbers and also saw that the churn was probably a lot greater than they expected. So as a result of all that they decided it was worth while to go more balls out immediately with their Star Trek product. They were obviously not going to grow or even maintain subscribers with what they had.

Further, you are applying decades old TV strategy to modern streaming business. While there are some similarities there are also some major differences that render using that line of thinking irrelevant for the streaming world.

ML31

I honestly would have preferred the more obscure reference, kmart. But for obvious reasons they HAD to use the Enterprise.