Watch ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Super Bowl Spock Teaser

Even though the second season premiere over two weeks ago, CBS hasn’t stopped promoting the return of Star Trek: Discovery, including devoting some precious time during the Super Bowl.

Super Spock

This year CBS once again had the rights to the Super Bowl, following two years of the big game airing on Fox. The network took advantage of the situation to promote a couple of their CBS All Access shows, including a brief 10-second teaser for Star Trek: Discovery. The Discovery spot aired during the second quarter of Super Bowl LIII. The spot doesn’t contain any new footage and highlights the return of Spock to Star Trek on TV, promising “the untold chapter of Spock begins.” You can watch the spot below.

A version of this spot was also posted today on the @startrekcbs on Twitter. Netflix posted a version of the same spot on Twitter the day season two premiered.

This is only the third time a Star Trek production has been promoted in a Super Bowl spot. The last time was in 2013 when Paramount purchased a commercial for Star Trek Into Darkness, something they also did for the 2009 Star Trek movie.

UPDATE: Stewart joins Colbert’s Super Bowl party, refuses to beam him up

CBS also had a bit of corporate synergy for their special episode of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert which aired after the game and started with a skit featuring Sir Patrick Stewart – who is currently working on the upcoming Star Trek Picard show for All Access – joining Stephen for a Super Bowl party. The sketch, of course, includes some Star Trek gags at the end, although the props used were from TOS.

Critics promo with some new footage

On Friday CBS posted a different Discovery promo on Twitter touting critics’ reviews of the second season. The 30-second promo features a couple of bits of footage not seen in previous promos, including Tilly talking about a “time tsunami” and Spock being a bit too literal when Michael Burnham tells him to say “goodbye.”

Episode 4 promo

And there is one more Disco promo to share, with a preview for the upcoming fourth episode of season two of Discovery (“An Obol for Charon”) now available on the official Star Trek site.

CLICK TO SEE AT STARTREK.COM

Twilight Zone Super Bowl Ad

CBS also went all out for a spot promoting the series premiere of their new version of The Twilight Zone, which is coming to CBS All Access on April 1st. The twisty spot features co-creator/executive producer and host Jordan Peele and was shot on location at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta, where the Super Bowl was being broadcast today. An extended cut of that ad was also posted on YouTube, which you can watch below.


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. The second season debuted on All Access and Space on Thursday, January 17th, 2019, and on Netflix January 18, 2019.

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

newest oldest
Notify me of
Sean Healy

I remember when TNG (the best Star Trek TV series) came into it’s own and established itself as a member of the rich Star Trek universe….by bringing back on board Bones, Spoke and Kirk to tell us what they did before we watched them in the original series!

Do you know when people say “I won’t watch STD” and then end up watching it? Well, I was one of those people. I actually like the new cast, but I’ve downloaded the last 2 episodes of Season 2 and I haven’t actually bothered watching them. Maybe I will, maybe I won’t….I just can’t be bothered…maybe it’s something I would put on in the background when I am doing something else.

Thank god for Orville!

Gerald 66

Kirk was never on TNG and there has never been a character named Spoke.
I enjoy the Orville as well, for what it is, a funny sci fi show. But it’s not Star Trek. If you’re really going to try to watch Discovery, then sit and pay attention to the multi layered story.
Not just having it on in the background.
That’s ridiculous.

HubcapDave

Kirk WAS on it, it’s just that his episode played in theaters…..

nasty man

When you think about how big Shatner was in the Trek movies (especially II, III, IV) and to have that guy..the star of The Wrath of Khan..in the first TNG movie .. an absolute mindblowing prospect..

and then Generations came out ..

Land O'Calrissian

Kirk WAS on TNG–he was in Generations, the first TNG film.

Arathorn

Read the original post. He specifically referred to the series, not the movie.

slider

Generations says hi!

The River Temarc

Funny you say that. TNG literally brought Bones back for the pilot. It then invoked Kirk in its second episode, which literally almost had the same title as the TOS episode it reproduced. That’s before we even get to “Sarek” and “Unification” and “Face of the Enemy.”

Go enjoy Captain Ed Mercer, though.

Sean Healy

Well I respect that you disagree, but my post referred to Season 2 and both of the examples you mentioned was in Season 1. Also, I don’t think you can compare an entire story arc (STD) to a cameo (TNG) or even an episode. I mean, Season 1 for TNG was a bit of a howler, but at least they didn’t panic and run home to mommy bones, mommy kirk and daddy spock….they doubled down on their characters and pushed forward.

Sean Healy

…and yes, before you mention ‘reunification’ and ‘relics’ that was WELL into TNG’s run and didn’t stink of fan service. Both of those episodes actually brought the best out of the TNG characters (Spoke & Data) (Picard & Spock) (LaForge and Scotty)

Tiger2

Yeah I agree. Those were just small Easter eggs for fans with the Bones cameo and mentioning Kirk. And they weren’t promoted, which makes them easter eggs. Its not the same thing as using iconic characters and building an entire season around them. Its apples and oranges. No Trek show has ever done this. Even with the few TOS cameos on TNG, they were one episode deals. Spock count as two, but he was in one entire minute at the very end in the first Unification story.

Michael Hall

If bringing back these characters is really only “fan service” — and that’s a matter of content and execution, since none of the people posting here have any insider knowledge of the motives of DSC’s producers, much less those of CBS — I’ll take well-done fan service any day over the bland, borderline-incompetent mishmash of tired tropes and lifeless characterizations that constituted the bulk of TNG’s first two seasons.

ML31

I’m right there with you when you say you’d prefer well done fan service to something terrible. For example, the fan service in Season 2 of Discovery is currently better than the horrid mismash of bad writing and plotting that was season 1. Just as the fan service in Enterprise’s 4th season was better than the tired stories that appeared in season 1.

That said, I’d still prefer they keep the fan service to a minimum.

HubcapDave

I wonder if anyone really knows how toy use the term “fan service” properly anymore…..

Tiger2

DIS is the same show that said literally just a year ago we wouldn’t even see Spock on the show. Now its entire season is built around him. I think its pretty clear what the motives are lol. And look, as long as they do it right, its fine. I just objected to the idea what they did on TNG is anything close to what they are doing on DIS, thats all. And of course DIS can get away with it more because it literally takes place when everyone was basically in their prime so you can believe it.

Its still done for blatant fan service just the same. Doesn’t make it ‘wrong’, but that’s what it is just the same.

A34

Did you really think they would tell the fans about their future plans for the show. That’s like expecting the director of a film to tell you how the movie ends before it’s released.

Tiger2

I don’t understand your point? And it doesn’t take away from mine clearly bringing in Pike and Spock is for fan service. Again, there is nothing inherently wrong with that, I just would’ve preferred they waited until Discovery could feel like a show on its own the way TNG and the others did it, thats all. But as I said I really do like Pike so their decision is paying off for sure even though he could’ve been any new character really.

ML31

Agreed. I was against bringing in Pike but he is turning out to be saving the show. My preference is not much fan service but that does not mean entire story arcs centered on fan service cannot work.

NiclovesTrek

Look I going to disagree here. I not in the producers head but once that Spock had a sister, there was always going to be a story that involved Spock. Personally I was excited to learn that he had sister because it expands the family history. Now we get to learn about a sister and eventually more about Spock. The producers are making their own mark on Trek. I might of did the same if it was in my power. When people where upset that the story was in the past, I was rejoicing. Not everything appeals to everyone but I always wanted to know more about this time in a different ship or if I couldn’t get a different ship then the Enterprise I wanted to see it under the command of Captain Pike. So for me I winning with Discovery. I getting Pike and more background on Michael/Spock.🎉🎉🎊

ML31

Well, that’s not entirely true. Last season producers went out of their way to say we would NEVER see adult Spock. I think they left out the part of, ‘unless CBSAA subscriber total drops’. So if they are to be believed then seeing a Spock story was not a given.

Personally, I find myself caring less about the Spock-Michael relationship than I do about the Spock-Sybok relationship. That is another sibling we knew nothing about. But to each his own.

PS.. If they want to put their own mark on Trek, they have two options. Set it post Nemesis so they are not trodding on what came before or just tell us it’s a reboot.

A34

They can lie. It was a good lie.

ML31

It is unlikely they were lying. This wasn’t some feature film they were trying to keep secret. It is more likely they honestly intended to not have Spock ever show up but certain realities regarding the number of subscribers to CBSAA intervened.

Curious Cadet

@NiclovesTrek — I too am very happy with this time period. They have expanded my understanding of Spock and his family quite satisfactorily. That said, I found it interesting that when they introduced Michael to Spock, Sybok was nowhere to be found. I really would love to see how he fits into the family dynamic, and it would be a shame not to invent some history for him, while they’re immersed in this period of his family life. That said, I couldn’t care less what has or has not been said about the producer’s plans. I like what I’m seeing, however it came about. DISC is currently been ranked as the 6th most streamed original series by Parrot Anylitics, with almost 30 million viewers so audiences must be enjoying it.

Corinthian7

@ML31 I@Curious Cadet I have to agree. It would be a real missed opportunity to not address Sybok, especially since he would seem to be a perfect fit for this seasons themes.

Holden

Co-sign on this, Corinthian7. As forgettable as TFF was for most, Sybok has always struck me as a one Trek character rich with “reboot” potential.

Corinthian7

@Holden If they really want to explore Spock’s family dynamics then they should really feature Sybok and who knows, maybe they might be able to legitimise both siblings for some of those fans that have had trouble accepting them.

Land O'Calrissian

“TNG literally brought Bones back for the pilot.”

As opposed to figuratively bringing him back?

MysticalDigtial

God forbid a Trek show have Trek characters and flesh out parts of their lives that were inconsistent.

I get the complaint in some ways, it’s makes for a small universe. At the same time, idgaf, it’s fun to watch and still gives me messages and morals to chew on and my viewing parties are always on the edge of their seats for each episode.

ML31

Maybe I’m not understanding what you are getting at. But are you saying there are parts of Spock’s life that was inconsistent beyond normal growth and changes?

MysticalDigtial

More getting at his inconsistencies between The Cage and the TOS Spock. I don’t need everything explained, but if TPTB want to explain it, they should be allowed to. Will it be an issue in later Treks? Maybe.

ML31

But that was already explained. In The Cage the Spock character wasn’t fleshed out in any meaningful way. He smiles because the director told him to. (according to Nimoy himself). Nothing there really stands in the way of what Spock became. It’s a HUGE stretch to use that as the basis of some huge character issue for Spock.

MysticalDigtial

I find that explanation funny when so many people complain that ‘because the creatives wanted to’ to not be a good reason to make the Klingons more alien.

ML31

Apples and oranges, my friend. Apples and oranges. When Spock smiles there is not 40 years of continuity being ignored. In fact, there was nothing for why he couldn’t. And again, it was a pilot that was never meant to be seen by anyone except studio execs.

MysticalDigtial

Except rather than ‘stepping on canon’ why not just see it an enriching canon? This use to be a fandom that would try and find explanations for inconsistencies, and revel in fan theories and discussion, not lament that things were inconsistent as they have always been.

ML31

Giving Spock an unmentioned sister isn’t “stepping on canon” any more than adding Sybok to the mix. On the flip side it isn’t “enriching” it either. Also, you did not address my reasons why it was apples and oranges. Should I take that as agreement?

Afterburn

No, he glossed over your point because you’re laughably wrong. Nice try though. Not responding is not a concession. Some points are not worth a response.

Jemini

Tbh, this stuff about emotional Spock is exhausting. I don’t need them to explain why Spock smiles and is emotional in that episode because, truthfully, he always was in tos too (right from the start too! See him openly smiling when Uhura sings about him) but people seem to forget that, and are stuck with this false idea that tos Spock was this guy full in control of his emotions.
I suggest everyone to simply watch tos again. It isn’t so inconsistent, he just was a young guy there and then Nimoy just gets better and better playing his emotions in a subtle way but real Spock has always been emotional. Smiles aren’t this huge inconsistent thing for him.

Even the creative team seems to remember more a fanon idea of Spock than the multi-layered one we actually have in canon. Hence this making the cage such a big deal that it truly isn’t. It only is if you firmly believe that definitive, older, Spock from tos had no emotions and never showed them, which is not true. The unhealthy (for him) thing about Spock was precisely the way he’d preach about not having emotions, and deluded himself into thinking he was more vulcan than vulcans, when it was the opposite. It seems some people believe him and base their perception of the character on Spock’s own delusions and bs when really the point should be looking at him and see that he isn’t really like he pretends to be. He was an unreliable narrator of himself, guys.

Jemini

IRONY is that what the writers would need to explore, if they really need, is why as he got older his conflict got worse and he thus pretended to be who he wasn’t (until he finally accepted himself much later) and was so delusional about his feelings and vulcans in general. What happened to him that turned him into such a troubled guy.

Instead, everyone seems to romanticize tos Spock as this perfect guy without any journey to have. Ethan himself seems to think that his version must be the flawed Spock and only one with still a conflict to resolve, before we get to ‘perfect’ Spock from tos who found himself and had no more more conflict, apparently. I HATE this. No wonder why Ethan feels like that. I love Spock but he is deeply misuranderstood and thus misrepresented by fans, in large part because we idealized Nimoy. But loving Nimoy and prayising his portrayal should never mean we gotta pretend his Spock was a perfect ‘finished’ character with no conflict and no character development to have. It does a disservice to Nimoy, actually.

tacotuesday

DSC or DIS not STD please. STD is juvenile and tacky.

Rich

Agreed …. No other show has ST in its three letter abbreviation, and would that not make Deep Space Nine also STD then?

As the poet Taylor Swift once said … the haters gonna hate.

Dr. Image

Ahem- No one cares if you’re “offended.” Grow. Up.

Spiked Canon

Grow Up if it’s a known dig at the show? Why so rude?

DeanH

I know some who use that abbreviation for Discovery think it is funny, but quite honestly it causes me to ignore their post and not bother to read their critique which might actually have some value. Discovery, Disc or even Disco is much better – but just my opinion.

ML31

Your loss then. I would suggest moving past it but hey… To each his own.

NiclovesTrek

No, not each it own when that abbreviation is use to be disrespectful. How about just be polite and not use it. Politeness is real thing and it builds connection and encourages peace. Would you not like to have peaceful well thought out discussion on the show.

ML31

Why not just accept that there are many who prefer the abbreviation STD? Does it change your life any? It’s not a big deal and it has nothing to do with being disrespectful. That’s just an excuse because you don’t like that abbreviation for some reason.

MysticalDigtial

The only reason they prefer it is it’s juvenile humor and they are lacking for maturity.

ML31

Or, they could just be using the first letters of each word of the show. That is the reason I use it.

Stuart Baird

No, you use it because you are an utter douche of a guy!

NiclovesTrek

ML31 I care because I am on other platforms and I have seen that abbreviation use to be disrespectful. It started as a joke but quickly lead to internet trolling and bullying. I read those disgusting statements. So it would be polite to not use that particular abbreviation. Does it change your life not to use it?

ML31

Sorry. You need a thicker skin. It doesn’t change your life any. I don’t like the fact that “In God We Trust” is on our money. But I don’t go around whining about it. So just let some people call it STD. You know what it means. What is with people today? If someone doesn’t like yellow they demand no one wear yellow anywhere within sight. Jeez…

Holden

I would think it’s a given that nothing regarding our Trek fandom, or how we choose to express it, changes anyone’s life in any way. Though there is always the optimism that it will . . . for the better!

That said, it’s a pretty well-worn topic that how one chooses to label ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ says a lot about their investment in the show. So, if a Trek fan chooses to use a term that’s been established as derogatory, they shouldn’t be surprised or offended (or lecture others about needing a “thicker skin”) if others pounce.

ML31

Fine. But I have yet to see anyone use an abbreviation for any Trek show that could be deemed ‘derogatory’. The only reason I have seen thus far for one being offended by those three letters is because in a different context they abbreviate something else. Something that itself is hardly derogatory as well. It’s not the first, and likely not the last time letters do such a thing.

A34

Well Said.

TrekFan

I really loved STE and ST and STTNG. STV was my least fav. But I really liked STDS9. ;)

Michael Hall

For me, it’s the online Trek-commenter equivalent to “the Democrat Party.” I’m a frequent critic of DSC myself, but once I see “STD” I’m not much interested in buying whatever it is you have to sell.

NiclovesTrek

Yes DeanH I’m in agreement. If you can’t be respectful, I feel that your criticism are not genuine but are skewed negatively. I like to hear genuine critic. I may agree or not be I get broader picture on the discussion. Using that abbreviation that been used to make fun of the show and those who enjoy it shows that no matter genuineness of critic of the show that you are not respectful to the show creators, cast, and crew. Honestly I wish that the abbreviation be banned on this site. The use of the abbreviation in a comment would be automatically sent for review.

slider

You want me to take you seriously when you call a Star Trek show ‘Disco’? Oookkkaaayyy.

A34

I love calling it DISCO. They even call it DISCO on the show.

slider

That’s more sad than me calling it STD. I feel for you, no I do.

slider

No one wants STD. No really, no one wants STD. The Orville is better.

JRT!

I will always call it STD just as I call Star Trek Enterprise STE. Just a preference,s’all.

Corinthian7

TNG was a sequel series. It ran concurrently with the TOS movies.

Levi 90028

What happens when fox does what it normally does to good to half way decent sci-fi by the end of its second season, and cancels it?
The ratings are not all that great this season.

In any case The Orville is a good show, but it’s its own thing, it’s NOT Star Trek, saying is a disservice to that show, which is mapping its own course.
And no reason why you can enjoy both shows.

It was already approved for a 3rd season

Rich

Source please … because the Google machine brings up nothing.

Thorny

Yeah, you might want to source that. If there is to be a season three that actually starts in the fall, I’d imagine they would be into pre-production now, and there’s nothing going on to suggest that is so.

Spiked Canon

it has not been approved

A34

It hasn’t been announced yet.

Curious Cadet

@Levi 90028 — what is this FUD about it being cancelled due to poor ratings? Parrot Anylytics currently ranks it as the 6th highest streamed original series, with almost 30 million viewers.

ML31

30 million? Interesting considering that last year CBS themselves said they had only 2 million subscribers.

A34

Netflix, Canada

Tiger2

That has nothing to do with U.S. numbers though. And Canada doesn’t make the show, America does.

As far as the U.S. and AA Discovery gets somewhere between 1-2 million, not 30 million lol. I just always find it funny how when someone likes something they spin it the best they can and when they hate something, they spin that the worst they can.

My guess is Discovery is doing OK and certainly the biggest for AA and why it WON’T be cancelled. But if it was doing as great as people believed, CBS would’ve just told us the numbers long ago and not have a third party company like that data company give us approximate figures. But I always believed its probably doing better on Netflix for many reasons, mostly just having a much bigger subscription base.

Corinthian7

I don’t know if that stat is correct or not but it’s worth remembering that Netflix has over a 137 million subscribers worldwide so it’s not out of the question.

ML31

I don’t know. The show is not good enough in the US to be causing people in the US to subscribe to CBS in droves. They likely get a few more eyes internationally (more so in Canada no doubt due to ease of access) from people who already have the Netflix service. But I really wonder exactly how many are streaming it on Netflix considering that Trek has traditionally has really only been popular in Britain and to a lesser extent Germany overseas.

A34

Where’s your source? No Facts, No Honey.

ML31

Clarify. What fact do you want confirmed? Is it the fact that CBSAA is not exactly overflowing with subscribers? Here..

https://trekmovie.com/2017/03/07/cbs-expects-star-trek-discovery-to-get-all-access-to-4-million-subscribers/

followed up with

https://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/tca-2018-cbs-all-access-has-2-5-million-subscribers

macman48

Do you know when people say “STD” they’re dismissed as trolls and haters?

Boze

When people dismiss others as “trolls and haters” merely for making fun of
a TV show, maybe THEY themselves are trolls and haters. Did that occur to you?

If the producers and actors didn’t want us to point and laugh at their work, then maybe they should’ve made a good show in the first place. Making a good show isn’t really that hard; most TV shows in 80s and 90s managed to be successful WITHOUT actively insulting its fans. Even the ill-famed VOY:Threshold was a rare exception in a comparatively decent show, not a recurring weekly event spread across two seasons.

Speaking of Voyager… back in my time, I had said some very nasty things about Voyager. Poking fun at rabid fans of Voyager was my favorite weekly pastime. We argued something fierce, yet nobody even tried to call me a troll or a hater. Why shouldn’t I be able to treat Discovery the same way I treated Voyager back then? What makes Discovery so special and worthy of protection? After all, if it truly has any redeeming qualities, then it doesn’t need to be defended – and if it has none, then it doesn’t *deserve* to be defended.

NiclovesTrek

So you think it okay to make fun of people. Really?

Tiger2

Its not what you say, its HOW you say it that’s the issue.

I have no problems with people who gush over the show. I have no problems with people who hate the show. As someone who is in the middle but has leaned more negative in the first season but a little more positive in its second season (so far) everyone has a valid reason to feel the way they do. Art is subjective, always has been. You’re not right OR wrong on how you feel about the show, its simply how you feel. However, you can still act like an adult and talk about it in a mature way instead of silly insults or attacking others who disagree with you.

No one is perfect, certainly not me, I have definitely said things to people I regretted later, but you get wrapped up in trying to be ‘right’ and forgetting you’re talking to a human being you’re hurling insults at. But I certainly don’t come here to attack people over theirs views one way or the other.

In fact 99% of my posts has nothing to do with other fans, I simply say how *I* feel about it, which oddly still upsets people lol, but yeah that’s their issue not mine. I’m here to post my opinions regardless how they feel about it or vice versa. But I don’t spend any time here either ‘poking fun’ at fans who like something I don’t. Then again, I haven’t been a teenager in a long time.

And frankly people who do that should be banned here for doing it…and has.

slider

So I have taste? Cool!

Funny. You don’t bother watching, but you bother commenting…

JAGT

Why do you waste your time telling people what you haven’t watched? That’s really not that interesting an information. Just watch S2E2 and re-think your opinion. Simple as that.

Perplex

I’m not particullary impressed with Disovery’s storytelling either, but good god you Orville folk are annoying. For liking a silly TNG rippoff with dickjokes, you’re riding a pretty high horse.

Michael Hall

Pithy, but Ouch. :-)

Afterburn

What does Orville have to do with the rest of your well-conceived and fair criticism? You undermine yourself with that.

Spiked Canon

Downloaded from where?

PEB

Member when TNG brought back Bones and Scotty and Spock and Sarek and did a direct re-do of The Naked Time? Member when DS9 inserted their cast into an actual TOS episode? Member when Voyager brought back Sulu? I could site more things that counter your argument but it would just get redundant. Just stop trolling.

odradek

Member when it was not kewl to butcher ze länquatsch.

Danpaine

Ha!

ML31

Member when TNG did an entire half season around that major TOS character?

NiclovesTrek

Look I read some of your posts . It seems you not happy with the choices that Discovery producers has made. Once the producers decided to give Spoke a sister this storyline was eventually coming. It not fan service. It is part of the story. You can’t say something is fan service when it the actual story. By the way Discovery has had plenty of fan service moments that did not service the story but were there for hard core fan who would recognize them, but there very little dissent about them. I don’t think your problem is with fan service. It the fact that the main character Michael is connected to Spock as family.

ML31

It was known to be coming if the producers ever felt they needed to use Spock to get more subscribers. It was fan service to make her his adoptive sister to begin with. Do not confuse an easter egg with fan service. They are different things. And while yes, I am not a huge fan of making Michael Spock’s adoptive sister it is not what ails the show. What ailed the show’s first season was the bad writing, characterizations and plot decisions. And to a lesser extent, picking and choosing of what bits of canon to keep and what to toss out.

Curious Cadet

@NiclovesTrek — exactly. This is the story. Some of us appreciate it. And frankly, I don’t really understand what difference it makes if the Star Trek franchise is relying on established characters to further the brand? There seems to be some misguided notion that the series is no good because it doesn’t consist of original characters and stories that succeed on their own merit without any connection with what came before, as if the reason people are watching has nothing to do with the fact it’s labeled with the Star Trek brand. And that’s just ridiculous. They could base the entire series on original characters and it could still be bad (as we have seen with the Kelvin films), or original characters fail to connect on their own (as we have seen with DS9, VOY and ENT) regardless of the fan service, and even the later TNG films lost connection with fans despite their original stories (one might say because of them!) — either way, if what they’re selling doesn’t connect to audiences, it really doesn’t matter whether they use established characters or not.

ML31

CC… This is very typical and myopic of the Discovery defenders. They feel like those who do not like dislike it because of silly reasons like “it’s a prequel” or “it’s serialized” or “it needs to rely on original characters”. Yet the reason most were unhappy with the first season was NONE of that. The reason was it was badly plotted out. The characters were boring and the writing was gawdawful. Dipping into a beloved original character AFTER being told we would never see him tells a great deal about how the show is being received if one would only take the blinders off.

NiclovesTrek

Maybe you new to producer “talk”. They made have said no to seeing adult Spock but if a storyline serves what they want for variety reasons,they were going to do it. We can’t speculate the reason but can know as a fact. Also you blamed the writing but I personally did enjoy some the writing on the show. I also overall enjoy Discovery. It’s different but still Star Trek.
Producers change their mind all the time. Also except for Kurtzman and few others most of producer are gone. Kurtzman on one the after trek shows said no adult Spock at this time. I knew right then he was looking for a adult Spock.😀

ML31

Nicloves Trek, the reason producers change their minds on this sort of thing is not because they had a change of heart. It is normally guided by outside influences. In this case, it was the need to get more subscribers.

There are some folks who liked the first season. What I was saying was the reasons why most who disliked the first season was NOT the ridiculous ones that the defenders often like to use. The reasons THEY didn’t like it was because it was a poorly put together show. This does not mean that you and some others didn’t, or shouldn’t enjoy it. It was the real reasons why many did not.

Tiger2

Yep!

I didn’t like it was prequel but that’s not why I didn’t like the first season. It was just a badly plotted, overly convoluted story that did very little with its actual premise (the Klingon war in case people forgot…and I can’t blame you) and turned everything into a soap opera twist with barely likable characters.

If I hated it for being a prequel then I wouldn’t like the second season as much as I do so far and have said so. We have said it many times, if the show is simply better written the other stuff like being a prequel or not matching its time period will go away. Few people would care because they would be too invested in the story to care. Sadly season one didn’t do this for a lot of us.

Jonboc

Truth!

Tiger2

Yes its the story CC, its not the story everyone likes or MUST like for that matter. I have been on the record saying I don’t like the idea of having Pike and Spock on ALL season because it just does a disservice to the characters who actually the leads in the show. I mean look at the promotion of season 2, that clip tells you everything you need to know.

Now that said I’m enjoying Pike a lot, I can’t deny that all. His presence has frankly gave the show a shot of the arm it was deftly missing IMO and that is just feeling like a Trek show again. I never hated any of the DIS characters but I never loved them either. This season they are coming off more likable, probably because they heard how much people hated them lol but also because they have used Pike to bounce off their personalities more. They couldn’t do that with Lorca which was the other issue.

So I can admit while I didn’t like the idea of having Pike on all the time, it was definitely a good fit to have him. Still and be honest, they couldn’t just CREATE a guy like this from the beginning? The name sells the character but he could literally still be any new character and he’s very different from the Cage anyway.

But that character wouldn’t have Spock or the Enterprise attached to them so it sells better.

Afterburn

Funny how in 1987 fans didnt want TNG because it wasn’t Kirk and Spock. They didnt want new, they wanted old. Now it’s been flipped around. If you get Kirk or Spock it’s “no we want something new.”

ML31

First, it wasn’t so much “we don’t want TNG we want Kirk and Spock” it was more, “Can we have Star Trek without Kirk and Spock?” I actually felt something similar in 1984. I thought, can we have Star Trek without the Enterprise?

Fast forward and we have seen Trek shows with whole new characters. Obviously we can have Trek with new characters and even new ships. And it’s at the point where many would rather see something new. It’s not ‘funny’ at all to me. It feels perfectly reasonable.

Tiger2

Exactly ML31,

I always said TNG and DS9 were the biggest tests to the franchise because both of those represented something very different for Trek at the time. TNG just being a show with not just new characters but also in a completely different era. And DS9 being a show that didn’t rely on being on a starship much less being set aboard another ship named Enterprise. Once those two became as popular as they were it basically proved the fanbase wasn’t as fickle and rigid as many feared. They not only can handle new ideas but WANT them as well. The irony over so much dissension in Discovery wasn’t that it was different, the problem is it wasn’t different ENOUGH by relying on a time period everyone new attaching it to old characters. Thats why so many of us wanted a post-Nemesis show in the first place, a new slate. No one was begging for a TNG reunion, most wanted new characters in their own era to set itself apart.

But when TOS was on, Star Trek was really just a product. Once TNG became the hit it did and created other spin offs thats when it really became a brand and became something different for everyone. Star Trek isn’t Superman anymore, it’s D.C.

Tiger2

That’s because before TNG came along, Star Trek was ONLY Kirk and Spock. Decades later Star Trek is a very different entity that has proven multiple times over it can actually have new characters with new ideas and shockingly people will watch it. Fortunately we had TNG to pave the way in the first place.

And you also have to remember most people watching today probably didn’t start with just TOS if they watched that at all. Majority of Trek fans now were born into a world with multiple shows and characters around if you were born in the 80s, 90s and 2000s and not the 50s-70s a lot of people on this site were born into. Its a very different generation of Trek fans in general now and why I think its crazy they keep going back to the well of Kirk and Spock when younger fans are use to seeing new characters and eras. In other words one show alone doesn’t define Star Trek for them like it might do for older fans born pre-TOS.

But I guess because they were always first they will be seen as the most marketable. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they are the most popular either. Not anymore.

Well, the original comment mentioned TNG bringing back Kirk, Spock, and McCoy specifically to tell backstories. Overlooking Spoke as an autocorrect error, this criticism is built on a fallacy, which is why people are pushing back on it.

Spiked Canon

lol a member berry. Well made points

Spiked Canon

Member when Enterprise was just a simulation on Next Gen? ;-)

Michael Hall

That TNG was the “best” Trek series is debatable at best. But if you feel that way, it’s certainly no surprise that you’d find The Orville more to your liking than Discovery. Enjoy.

(Incidentally, does “downloaded” actually mean “stolen” in this context?)

odradek

I can download the episodes with my Netflix app on my kindle. That is total legal.

Spiked Canon

ya, I thought the same, but if outside the US I guess they could download from Netflix

ML31

I do not consider TNG to be the best Trek series at all. It’s not even top two and may not even be top three. But I still preferred first season Orville to first season Discovery. 2nd season the edge currently likes with Discovery.

Not a fan of your flawed logic that if you don’t like one specific show it follows that you will like some other specific show.

ML31

Kirk had nothing to do with TNG until Generations.

And respectfully, TNG wasn’t even the 2nd best Trek series.

Regarding Orville, Glad someone is enjoying it. It’s 2nd season is terrible so far. I’ll save the rest for the Orville thread.

Spiked Canon

Well….unless you think a once a year urinating ritual is good TV, I have to differ with you.

ML31

It was a funny joke back in the first season. That episode however… Was a huge bore.

kmart

Must-Pee TV is how I choose to label it.

Strange, I have no recollection of Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley reprising their roles on TNG to share their pre-TOS adventures.

Spiked Canon

At least 2 shared Post-TOS adventures though…

slider

Well said!

Vulcan Soul

“The critics agree. #StarTrekDiscovery is back and better than ever.”

Well that is nice that the “critics agree”, but they still need us lowly commoners as an audience to make this series a success!

It seems some of those people in their ivory towers have learned absolutely nothing of the past few years.

MysticalDigtial

The funny thing about all of this, in 5 years, Discovery will be Star Trek to all the naysayers, and whatever thew new one is will be ‘not real Trek’. It’s happened with every single series so far, it will happen again.

Sean Healy

Do you honestly want to watch “the hidden chapter of spock?” I mean….NO NEED! Just put the Discovery into an unknown quadrant of the universe and let the imaginations go! I mean, it’s not like the Enterprise D spent all of their time on diplomatic missions, surveys, rescue missions….they had at least THREE episodes where they discovered something! And the deep characterisation of Sulu, Checkov and the chick at comms who kissed the captain is SO much better than what we see on Discovery…..wait….I’m all over the place here….I don’t know if I like STD or not….and TOS….oh god….

MysticalDigtial

Yeah, and how many of those diplomatic missions and surveys and rescue missions did we have any character growth that actually mattered later in the series? How often did we get a good deep look at a character and see them struggle and maybe, be wrong? Not freaking often. I like Discovery because it offers me more than a forehead of a week and a trite moral story handed to me on a platter with no thought beyond lip service and a captain’s speech like an after school special.

Do not take this to mean I do not like TNG and DS9 and TOS etc. I love them all (though I love Voyager and Enterprise a hell of a lot less than those three)… This doesn’t change the very fact every series has had it’s proponents and naysayers, and eventually, the naysayers in general accept it because every Trek show found it’s footing in season 3 (except TOS which started strongest) and by then a new series is already in production and it’s such a huge departure for any variety of reasons than it’s NOT REAL TREK.

Well, it’s not your Trek right now. It may not ever be your Trek. But it is somebodies Trek, and it doesn’t serve anyone for the naysayers to keep bashing every single different thing in every single new Trek show because TPTB do not care in the grand scheme about your yelling, and all it does is make people who are excited for the new stuff, and new to the fandom, feel unwelcome and like they are being kept out because what they like ‘isn’t real Trek’.

Fans these days seems to have a very specific idea of how their nostalgia boners are meant to be whacked, and when it’s not whacked the right way it ruins their fangasm and then that thing must be made to suffer… and it’s just sad. Trek fans of like being in an abusive relationship, even when the show is pretty good, if it’s not perfect and up to exact ideals and standards it’s beaten and bashed.

A34

Do you honestly want to watch “the hidden chapter of spock?”

Yes, yes I do !

Me too! An order for two, please! :-)

Afterburn

Yeah, I love Spock, so i’m excited about this.

ML31

Great. I don’t think there is any “hidden” chapter of Spock. He’s pretty much as fleshed out as a fictional character can get. Trying to get more out of it feels desperate.

Michael Hall

It won’t feel desperate to me, so long as it’s done well.

ML31

Even if it was done well, it would still feel like a desperate move. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Michael Hall

To you, they’re not. I myself have no opinions as to the mental state of DSC’s producers, nor do I care to have any, it being to me completely beside the point.

ML31

it’s not just to me. It is a fact. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. This is not subjective.

Calling “a desperate move” a mental state of mind sounds a bit harsh as well.

Michael Hall

Actually, given his central place in the Trek mythos, by modern standards the establishment of Spock’s background was pretty haphazard (and at times, inconsistent) at best. Up until Enterprise we ironically knew far more about Klingon culture than we did about life on Vulcan (and in fact what we did learn in ENT was pretty dismal). Do we necessarily need to know more about him? No, but if it’s well-done and imaginative in the vein of “Lethe” — I’m not saying it will be, mind you — why not?

ML31

I will give you this much. Lethe was well done.

HubcapDave

Every day and twice on Sundays….

Spiked Canon

Yes I do, thanks for asking

Michael Hall

I certainly respect your preferences, but why must you assume that they apply to everyone, or even most people?

MarechalDavout

No, this won’t happen. Large parts of the fandom have never accepted Nemesis. Many of us have never embraced the Abrams movies and viewed them as a watchable parody at best. The cancellation of the fourth Kelvin timeline movie proved that the reboot was not sustainable.

Tiger2

Because Nemesis was just a bad movie. It had nothing to do with people ‘accepting it’. The TNG cast was well loved, it doesn’t mean they are loved in everything either.

As for Discovery its too early to say if the fans will accept it or not. Its been 18 episodes, how are you so sure if they won’t be accepted? Go back to TNG, many love that show today but many still hate its first two seasons, right? Why is everything so black and white on the internet? In reality most of how people feel about Trek is a lot more complex. People can say they hate Voyager as a show but then can tell you a dozen episodes they loved in it. You can believe the TNG films mostly sucked but say First Contact is one of your top films in the franchise. The Kelvin movies are probably more divided for sure, but I don’t think they are hated by most of the base either.

Discovery is still an infant in episodes terms. And I don’t love it myself yet, but the show is young. No one knows how they will feel until we get some growth from the show. Eighteen episodes are not it.

Ixley

And don’t forget the challenges that DS9 faced in its early seasons :-)

I remember being a DS9 megafan in the 90s. There were so many hyper-vocal fans who denounced it as “not Star Trek.” A lot of folks talked about how DS9 corrupted Roddenberry’s vision of the future. It was sometimes utterly exhausting trying to defend that show. Lo and behold, now a large chunk of the fandom absolutely reveres DS9.

Afterburn

And Enterprise! The backlash was palpabable. The ship was ugly, the visuals looked out-of-continuity, many said “why not just call it a reboot”? or “This is fine, just don’t call it Star Trek!”

Sound familiar?

ML31

The only negative comments for Enterprise was the fact that came out at a time when the franchise was showing a little fatigue. That and some didn’t like the idea of a prequel series. The design of the ship itself was quite well received.

Afterburn

Please go look at actual old comments from 2000-2001. The design was NOT well received– I just looked at a page from July, when the ship was first leaked out. Most fans were uspset that it it didn’t look like it was from 100 years before TOS, they said it looked like a 24th century ship. Others were upset that they didn’t use a Daedalus style ship, or a design that was congruent with other 22nd century ships seen throughout the franchise.

Yes, many fans liked the design, just as many fans like Discovery, but there was a segment of the fanbase that was MAD AS HELL.

ML31

Yes. I did. It confirmed what I said. There was the occasional whine but overall the consensus was it looked OK.

kmart

Gotta disagree completely here, ML. I was on trekbbs and while there was then seeming studio mouthpiece Dennis Bailey singing all praises of ENT, there was a lot of criticism of the -x as just a knockoff of a FC bg ship, hence the AKIRAPRISE jeer nickname. I don’t remember anybody liking the design, myself.

Where people differed is that some people actually thought the VFX looked good, when they looked absolutely godawful. The first shots with a workpod vehicle looking at the ship in dock were incredibly flat and painted-looking, and a future library at the start of s2 (when I stopped watching) was just like a computergame cutscene, incredibly unconvincing.

ML31

We will have to agree to disagree then. Because when I was looking at the imagery from back then while there was a minority that bashed it the consensus was that it looked like it could evolve into the Constitution Class in another 150 years. And still looked modern enough for them.

Michael Hall

Really difficult to say, as the dynamics of the internet (and thus fandom) were so different back then. I remember feeling pretty let-down myself when the ship and interiors were finally revealed, though I appreciated the difficulties the producers faced in trying to do a believable prequel to a series that had been produced decades earlier; I just didn’t think they got there.

Tiger2

Its funny but I had the same views of the NX-01 as I do with Discovery now and that is I think the exterior is ugly but loved the interior. One thing I felt they got right on Enterprise was a ship designed in the 22nd century. Although I do love how Discovery looks inside thats its biggest knock, there is no fluidity at all between it and TOS. Yes, we debated this a billion times so I’ll leave it alone but thats its biggest issues for some fans. I personally love the way it looks actually but every time I see it I do have to remind myself this is pre-TOS and not post-Voayger.

ML31

I still cannot associate Discovery with the TOS era. It just doesn’t feel like it belongs there. I must be honest… If the show was better the look would still be an issue for me. It would be relegated to a mere nit pick, but it would still but me a teeny bit.

Rich

Nemesis had a bad script, and a director who had no idea who the TNG characters were.
I think it would have been a much better move without the embarrassing B4 segments, which was a cheap way to keep Brent Spiner in if there was a 5th TNG movie.

ST2009’s 4th movie was shelved as Chris Pine wanted more money. No other reason. A lot of us enjoyed ST2009 and Beyond. Into Darkness has some weird script choices, very similar to Nemesis.

And you know, probably the majority of the fandom hates ST5 too. A single bad movie does not kill a franchise.

ML31

I think Nemesis failed because the franchise was becoming tired. Changing directors was a good move after the blandness of Insurrection. It was a good story that moved the characters along. B4 would have been a better concept had we not seen it before with Lore. But one of the best scenes in the movie was a scene with Data and B4 together. The characters in that movie were completely themselves. (unlike the characters in TVH but that was played as a bad screwball comedy so I guess they can get a bit of a pass there)

STIV was shelved partly because of the Pine contract but also because of the poor performance of Beyond. Which is unfortunate because the film got a lot of things right.

Tiger2

Pine DIDN’T want more money, he wanted the money that was originally promised to him. And frankly if Beyond was a hit, then it wouldn’t be a discussion now and would pay him what he wanted.

But I agree a single movie doesn’t kill off a franchise. The word is out if we will see the Kelvin cast again but its a 100% guarantee we will see another movie and probably within the next five years.

HubcapDave

You’re talking movies. The phenomenon in question has to do with TV series.

slider

I don’t remember that happening with other Star Trek shows.

Dr. Image

Yes. The propaganda over this show is stunning.

Michael Hall

Please elucidate on the “propaganda,” so that we may determine how stunning it is.

slider

It’s at this point amazing.

DeanH

Those who understand movie and tv promotion, this is a standard marketing tool. To be fair however, media critics like NPR’s Morning Edition or the NYTimes definitlely think it is improved. Regardless, I did go to a suggested fan site Jammers and read the episode reviews. Just like Trekmovie.com many of their readers thought S2E1 and S2E2 were quite good but the third episode was not liked by many. Let’s see how the rest of the season plays out. In the end, try not to get too upset about promotional marketing – they are just doing their job.

PEB

Funny thing but the “lowly commoners” are enjoying it. It’s the purists and so-called fandom gatekeepers who want to bash it constantly.

Curious Cadet

@PEB — yup. That’s why Parrot Anylytics just ranked DISC as the 6th highest ranked streaming show.

slider

You said it, not me.

JAGT

Why does everyone feel so entitled to speak for the “silent majority” these days? Damn, the internet sucks!

Michael Hall

Yes, it does. And I can’t think of too many who are entirely silent these days, much less any sort of ‘majority.’

slider

Not sure. I think you’ll find the silent majority aren’t that any more judging by the underhanded tactics of social media and websites.

ML31

Context. “Ever” obviously refers to just Star Trek Discovery. Not the rest of the franchise. And being better than season one is a very low bar to set indeed.

That “goodbye, Spock” bit was groan inducing, BTW.

Michael Hall

Yes, we know. Having a billion dollars and the power that goes with it doesn’t make you an elitist, but preferring the wrong brand of mustard does. That millions of people of modest means apparently believe this does make life easier for some people, that’s for certain.

slider

Have a look at Rotten Tomatoes and you tell me those critics don’t have an agenda.

DAVID DESJARDINS

Still surprised at the level of vitriol some people have for Discovery as if it needs to be broadcast for free, on your Daddy’s Magnavox using UHD. Trek is at it’s best when it changes for the times. TNG sucked in season one, found it’s legs in season 2 and by season 3, they kicked ass. Enterprise didn’t get goo until its last season. Voyager was a miss for me, and DS9 is an obligatory annual rewatch.

TOS still had the monster of the week in its last year.

I’m happy to pay for Trek, and I’m enjoying what I watch. I’ve never watched STD.

slider

Dear God, even TNG’s first season was better than Discovery.

Thorny

“I am… fully functional.”

“I’m with Starfleet. We don’t lie.”

“Ugly! Ugly bags of mostly water.”

Tasha Yar getting killed by an oil slick.

Opinions differ, but I think DSC hasn’t come close to that level of badness.

ML31

“We are Star Fleet”.

“Let’s make the Empire great again!”

Lorca being relegated to a mustache twirler.

The Ash Tyler transformation that served no purpose.

Dual pee streams.

Yeah… I think STD comes out ahead wen it comes to badness.

slider

Yea.

slider

Erm…no.

Tiger2

Thanks TM, you guys are on top of it!

And the critics TV spot, is that Spock and Burnham on the Section 31 ship? I lol at the last line. I forget Spock actually does have a sense of humor, even if its on the dry side.

Ixley

I actually thought there was some sort of mind control aspect to that part. Some S31 technology at work? Burnham has a mischievous look on her face, which is somewhat confusing.

Yeah that’s Leland (Section 31 chief), Spock, and Burnham on the S31 ship.

JonBuck

I’m fairly certain S31 framed Spock for those murders.

Yep sure seems like it.

Tiger2

Wow cool! Thanks. It did look like Leland but wasn’t sure.

Tumbler

I’m digging the look of the TZ revival. Though, this does remind me of a certain network that had the last revival of the show, that also had a Star Trek show as their flagship program…

Best of luck to you, All Access!

Pollux Kahless

Love how the show is evolving and tieing in with Trek lore. Out of the top three sci-fi shows it’s possibly #1. And c’mon, movie-level sci-fi in a TV show genre. Yes, please.

Chap

CBS really messed up by not launching Discovery Season 2 directly after the Super Bowl as a free promo. Launch Season 2 with the biggest lead-in they can give it and fill it with ads about CBS All-Access. If CBS wants people to subscribe to All-Access, promote it with the best advertising real estate it has.

Spiked Canon

more people would rather watch the stuff they aired.

Chap

I agree. A new episode of NCIS would probably get better ratings than “The World’s Best,” but historically (not always), networks have used the post-Super Bowl slot to push a new show. Direct more eyes to the streaming service!

Denny C

But that’s ultimately not the point. It’s the easiest way to reach as large an audience as possible. It was a missed opportunity.

I walked away from Worlds Best fifteen minutes in. After the second act also scored a 99, it was obvious this was shaping up to be the AYSO of talent shows – everyone gets a trophy!!

Dillan

A lot of people on Disqus agree with you! It’s a bit odd they didn’t air Discovery or a special episode of The Twilight Zone. The exposure would have been great.

Chap

Furthermore, the Star Trek “Let’s Make a Deal” episode airs the day after the Super Bowl. CBS could have cross promoted that as well!

ML31

I didn’t watch the game as I have zero interest in American football. But that Twilight Zone spot killed. The Spock one… Not so much.

Jako

I dont want a time tsunami :(
even the word sounds rubbish!

MysticalDigtial

It’s a Cronoton Particle Wave emanating from the pulsar that’s distorting Space Time as it passes through this system.

There ya go, TNG style, same damn thing, still just as dumb, I’ll still watch the hell out of it.

kmart

I think I’d like to see a full-on spoof use what an ILM guy who worked on FIRST CONTACT suggested when talking about portraying chronometric particles and time travel — to throw wristwatches and old clocks inside glass fixtures past the camera.

SPACEBALLS so completely missed the opportunity to do a smart and funny parody of spaceflicks, in favor of whatever the Hell you call what he did (I call it awful, with maybe two and a half working jokes — the ‘hello my baby’ and the ‘gone to plaid’ and ‘i’m on a shipful of a>>//////’ for the length of the runtime.)

MysticalDigtial

Well, it was more of a direct send up of Star Wars, which has always been Space Fantasy.

That said Tuvok saying “We Ain’t Found Shit” was awesome.

Michael Hall

If Mel Brooks had never done anything but THE PRODUCERS (original version) and YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN I’d be in his debt forever, but SPACEBALLS was indeed a whiff on just about every level. Shame, that.

ML31

I feel Mel’s high water mark was Blazing Saddles. Everything after High Anxiety was lost on me.

Mark Calcagno

Fry: Usually on the show, they came up with a complicated plan, then explained it with a simple analogy.
Leela: Hmmm… If we can re-route engine power through the primary weapons and configure them to Melllvar’s frequency, that should overload his electro-quantum structure.
Bender: Like putting too much air in a balloon!
Fry: Of course! It’s all so simple!

Scooter

Perhaps I’m in the minority, but I really like STD. It is very different, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Since the story lines are from mostly Burnams’s POV, that is a departure from previous Treks that focused more on the Captain’s POV. Trying to compare STD to The Orville is almost apples to oranges. Orville is much more campy and often comes across as a spoof of Trek, not unlike Galaxy Quest. I just take STD for what it is. It’s a made for streaming show based on a world of fiction. The actors are good, most of the stories have been compelling and the effects are excellent.

MysticalDigtial

I’d recommend not using STD for Discovery. Generally it’s used by trolls and people making fun of Discovery and it’s fans. Officially it’s DSC, though DIS and Disco are both commonly accepted.

Also none of the other TV shows have follows the ST_ scheme in their abbreviations.

Scooter

Great point.

slider

Yes let’s call it ‘Disco’ because that doesn’t make fans sound like trolls either does it? (shakes head in disgust).

Dillan

It’s “DISCO” because that’s what the ship’s crew have on their T-shirts.

slider

So they’re part of the problem. No surprise there then.

Tiger2

But that’s what the crew calls it too. In fact NO ONE called it that until the shirts popped up in an episode and it stuck.

A34

Who doesn’t love Disco? During the Mudd episode the crew was play a remixed Disco song. That was brilliant.

slider

Why should I take a show seriously when the people who work on the show aren’t making that effort???

JRT!

I use it as the name of the show,nothing else. Not trolling or making fun of it,just a name for a show I really enjoy.

ML31

Use whatever designation for the show you like. We all are smart enough to know what you are talking about. It is not offensive in the slightest.

Scooter

True, but it did feel odd typing STD. I’ll use DSC in the future. Less likely to be confused with whatever it was Kirk got with the green chick.

ML31

Fine. I just hope you do it because you want to and not because some anonymous poster guilted you into doing it.

Danpaine

Kirk may very well have…..ha, nice.

LLAP

While that’s technically true, the acronym also now has baggage associated with it that immediately sheds a comment within a certain light. It’s not offensive, but it is now a needless and avoidable layer to peel back. Nothing wrong with Mystical pointing that out for Scooter’s own sake.

slider

STD is for people who aren’t really into Star Trek I find.

JRT!

lol! Well I’ve been into Trek since the beginning and still call it STD. Then again,I’m just a casual Trekker and not a Trekkie,lol!

slider

What is the difference between ‘Trekker’ and ‘Trekkie’?

martin

I do like Discovery also, but I do hope that season 3 shifts to a Pike & Enterprise based show. Since Calypso, at some point Discovery is lost– move the captain and crew to the 1701.

I do see that Orville is very Trek like, and don’t see it as a spoof – but more of an homage to Next Generation specifically.

One thing I find incredibly interesting is the Braga haters have turned into Kurtzman haters and now they are flocking to the Braga produced Orville. So if nothing else Discovery’s creation has finally brought fans to respect Berman and Braga Trek again.

skyjedi

One of the best things is that they tried to do something different. Some fans just want more warmed over TNG from the 1990s. The Orville provides that. I hope we get more of that Star Trek optimism at the same time the show reflects the issues we face in this century, not in the 1960s. I get the it is too different from Berman Trek complaints, i really do. But it had to be. Star Trek needed a new lease on life. Enterprise was cancelled in 2005.

slider

It’s all in the ears?

skyjedi

Wow the production values on episode 4 of season 2 are ridiculous, like film quality. I cannot wait to watch the Entire season like i recently did season 1. When it is available outside of CBS all access.

ML31

The only way to do that thus far is to buy the discs when they come out. Why not just wait until late March and buy one month of CBSAA for a fraction of the cost?

martin

Or better yet, add one more month and see Twilight Zone at the same time.

albatrosity

I barely read the comments and I haven’t seen a single episode of Disco season 2. But I gotta say, those people that get rubbed the wrong way when commenters abbreviate the show STD…like idk, I read it the way the writer intends. I don’t look into it. I think we can be mature enough to distance ourselves from what the abbreviation *can* mean with how it’s being used. They’re called context clues…like really, it’s on you if you’re associating STD on a Star Trek message board with STI, and in my opinion is the more juvenile mindset, even more so when you complain about it.

As far as the article itself, I liked the TZ promo! Jordan Peele looks like he might be a good host, although I would be worried he might venture too far into the realm of parody.

ML31

Shifting gears a bit… How is Gritty getting so much national exposure?