The Shuttle Pod Crew Talks Trailers With Guest Larry Nemecek: ‘Picard’ And ‘Discovery’

Shuttle Pod 72 – Talking Trek Trailers with Larry Nemecek: Picard Season 1 and Discovery Season 3

Subscribe to Shuttle Pod: The Podcast on iTunesGoogle Play Music, and Pocket Casts!
Like what you hear? Please leave us a review on iTunes.

Kayla and Brian welcome on special guest and friend of the show, Larry “Dr. Trek” Nemecek to do a bit of a New York Comic Con debrief. Listen along as we discuss the new trailers for Star Trek: Discovery and the much anticipated Star Trek: Picard.

All this talk of new Star Trek stories had us looking back at old ones that never got off the page of a script. In particular, we looked at how Discovery compares to pitches such as Star Trek: Federation and the would-have-been animated series Star Trek: Final Frontier.

Need more Larry in your life?

Who doesn’t? Catch up with Dr. Trek through Portal 47, TrekLand, the Trek Files podcast (also on iTunes), and more all through

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Larry made me more anxious to read scripts for Federation than to watch the new season of Discovery. (I will anyway of course.)

I always loved the Federation idea since I first read about it. I know for some it sounded too cynical and dark for Star Trek, but I always remind people this is a show that involved a nuclear war on Earth, it wasn’t always rainbows and sunshine. ;)

And I think its the idea of rebuilding the utopia that keeps in line with Star Trek and what Discovery will be doing and why I’m excited for it. Even though I wish they just did this in season one, I guess everyone would’ve just said it was ripping off the Federation idea. Although I guess they can still say that lol.

Given that the Discovery creators and writers have steadfastly refused to do “standard formula Trek” (starting with literally killing it in the pilot) but always created some kind of emergency condition – with the Klingon War, with Lorca, with the Mirror Universe, with the Control crisis – I’d say making this emergency permanent by turning “Andromeda” into the formal setting of the show means they can finally follow their natural inclination without coming up with ever more ridiculous twists and turns that prevented the crew from “just exploring”. This is true for the tone AND the technology. However, it must be said that most likely this “freedom” in season 3 onwards will move the series even further away from all other Trek outings of the past 50 years – and not just chronologically.

Picard… “Remember when we were explorers?”

I get that you’ve moved on and don’t wish to watch DSC any longer, but might I ask why you feel the need to continually harp on every flaw you see in it, and hyperbolically dump on the series in every article?

Headline of this article: “The Shuttle Pod Crew Talks Trailers With Guest Larry Nemecek: ‘Picard’ And ‘DISCOVERY’” (emphasis mine).

It’s YOU who can’t move on from questioning my motives. Discuss the post, not the poster.

I’m still watching, and of course I still hope the flaws are corrected. Some of the many of season 1 have been corrected (for good or for worse), so it’s not like they are unable to change.

For good or worse seems an accurate description. Most of the “fixes” of S2 felt really superficial and did not seem to improve the series (let alone the story) in any meaningful way. But no matter. I could still get aboard with this seemingly obligatory narrative that S2 was somehow a vast improvement over S1 (I “get” it, we all love Anson Mount as Pike) if only the story for S2 was actually about something.

At this point I just want CBS Trek to deliver one solidly “good” season of television. Not two, and not three, but just one. Don’t care if it’s a season of STD or of STP (though I guess I’d rather STP start out strong while that’s still a possibility). And I don’t even want a great season at that, but just a good one.

You’re very correct, I won’t stop questioning your motives, because you are a wet blanket who previously claimed to have moved on from Discovery, were no longer watching, and heavily implied you’d stop commenting on it.

That was in a comment in response to someone else, by the way, who took umbrage with your negativity. I’d highly recommend you go out and have some fun this Sunday, it sounds like you have a lot on your mind.

“You’re very correct, I won’t stop questioning your motives, because you are a wet blanket who previously claimed to have moved on from Discovery, were no longer watching, and heavily implied you’d stop commenting on it.”

Sorry mate, you confused me with another poster! I never claimed any of this.

That said, I don’t owe you any sort of explanation or “promise”, and seeing you are simply unable to discuss posts instead of posters, the person causing trouble here is YOU. May I suggest you create your own forum where you can aggressively police critics and dissenters, as you seem to fancy, as you won’t have much luck with this approach on here? I’ve been on here a lotttt longer than you are!

war footing tends to give ‘trek’ a boost as it did with the dominion on ‘ds9’, the borg brining 7 of 9 on Voy and the xindi on Ent.
Disc has always been made in the shadow of BSG and GoT.

I hear you VS, we have discussed this a lot in the past.

And I don’t really disagree that much of what you said. I think that has been DIS problem as well, that it get itself caught up in these comic book like situations a little too much. I think we were all excited about the Red Angel idea because a lot of us thought it was going to lead to some, sorry, discovery of some kind and actually CREATE exploration through the mystery itself. And oddly enough, it did, at least the first two episodes lol. That’s why New Eden is so popular, it felt like an episode for exploration sake although we knew the Red Angel plot line is what pushed them there.

But yes that’s why I was very excited about the entire plot line. I thought that’s where they were going, to uncover some big mystery of the universe. But then it all ended up being a Terminator rip off and a Section 31 project that went horribly wrong with of course putting Burnham in the center of it. That’s when it went from Star Trek to a Marvel story IMO. I didn’t hate it, but it fell into the same trap it did in first season.

So I can’t really blame your skepticism about next season. Yes it could fall into the same trap and be more crazy twists just for the sake of crazy twists like Burnham’s great grandson led to the destruction of the Federation or something. IE, not just tell a really thoughtful story on its own like all the past Star Trek shows did. What made something like The Inner Light so special for example wasn’t because they had some crazy twist that the Romulans were tricking Picard for information or that we found out one of them was a long time ancestor of his. They were just a random group of people who wanted someone to know who they were. He wasn’t picked for some special purpose, he just was.

It’s those types of stories that makes Trek memorable for me. It’s not always end of the world stuff or some episode where they face off with the Klingons or Romulans for the 30th time. Those episodes are fine, but its not why I love Trek as I do. I love it for its thoughtful approach to story telling, wonderment and that the characters feel they just been uplifted in what they experienced just as much as we were even if they do this for a living. They don’t always have to directly be part of the story nor does it need some big world ending twist to matter.

That’s the problem with Discovery, EVERYTHING that happens is always about them in some way. Every major twist is only there because someone we know made it happen, even if indirectly.

I’m REALLY hoping next season they get away from that and explore events as, well, explorers, not as the instigators to everything or keep throwing in nutty twists like we find out someone on the crew was actually from the 32nd century the whole time and help bring them there because dun dun dun.

But one thing I do disagree on is that being so far in the future will take us farther away from everything we know. I actually think the OPPOSITE because its pretty clear, at least from the trailer, the show will still have a lot of the familiar aliens we already know which was a brilliant move because it won’t feel totally, no pun intended, alien to us. All the players we’ve known for decades on these shows are still there, we just don’t know in what situation yet. Even the Federation is still there, just not as robust like the TOS and TNG days. I even thought they would probably avoid using a lot of familiar aliens, at least for awhile. But it looks the opposite and they are going all in and will probably help bridge the gap a little.

Nah, not so much. LOL

(Replying to myself because this is for everybody reading) this was TrekMovie’s very thorough article on Star Trek: Federation from years ago. Excellent article!

Thanks Palizia! I re-read the old concept and mourn for the road not taken. Instead of this bold concept going forward, we wasted 10 years in prequels both on Abramstrek and Discovery. Now, one can only hope they are as bold and imaginative in re-drawing the big canvas for 800 years of history as this concept would have, without turning Trek into whole-sale fantasy! I loved reading how the Klingons and Cardassians would change during almost one millennium and that is exactly the kind of changes we should expect, which only such a big time jump could credibly allow. Let’s hope, no, let’s pray the current TPTB picked as lofty scifi literary sources for their year 3000 as the Federation series people did, that is, Asimov’s Foundation series, not Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter…

I think LotR and Potter are at least as good sources to pull from as Foundation. Foundation is incredible sci-fi, even if the characters can be a bit dull at times, and Trek would do well to follow its example. However, Trek has never been hard sci-fi, and there is nothing wrong with them putting some fantasy tropes into their work. They will never go as far in that as Star Wars did, but Trek has always had some similarities to fantasy worlds like Middle Earth.

“there is nothing wrong with them putting some fantasy tropes into their work.”

Matter of opinion, and obviously I disagree – for my taste they already went too far down the fantasy route in Discovery with “spore drives” and “time crystals”. It’s true Trek’s technology was often flimsy, especially back in TOS, but dont we need more, not less, belief in sound science at this time? Justified or not, Trek has been an inspiration for generations of scientists and engineers, and going down that same random, SFX heavy fantasy route as the Marvel universe or Harry Potteresque fairy tale magic would be a sad ending of this legacy.

I’m not saying that Trek needs magic or anything like that. But the Trek universe does have a lot of similarities to Middle Earth and other fantasy worlds. A world that is very different to ours, where humans interact with different races who have different abilities. Where people can do things that we would consider impossible. Stories like LotR play in similar playgrounds to Trek, and it couldn’t hurt to borrow ideas from that kind of story.

Besides, I always found both psychohistory and the Mule to be a bit implausible, but I let it slide because I enjoyed the stories.

It’s been a very long time since I read the Foundation trilogy in my teens.

I’m not convinced that it’s standing up all that well. I’m not as willing to chew along with dry, flat characters just to get hard S-F as I was when I was limited to my local library.

I’ve tried to re-read the series, even buying new copies of the books, but it just doesn’t hold my attention and I kept putting aside the first book half way through.

My spouse eventually asked me if I was ever going to read them, and the set got sent with the donation box to the local library. Given we’re two avid readers with our own hard science expertise, that says a lot.

Hey Guys…

I just listened to your latest podcast and as always great job. I very much appreciated all of your insights into the trailers and what is coming. That said, I think there are two things that you really missed in your discussion.

First is my concern that when DSC goes to the 32nd century the technology will have so surpassed them. Think about where our technology was 1,000 years ago and multiply that exponentially. Even if the Federation has fallen or shrunk, unless everything fell into a dark age – which it seems has not happened – the tech would be so far beyond anything DSC has to be unrecognizable. Imagine a sailing ship from 1019 coming forward in time and leading a renaissance.

Additionally, you guys spoke of getting Georgio back to the 23rd century for Section 31. Why do we assume that is needed? Maybe she restarts Section 31 in the 32nd century.

Just thought I’d throw that in. Would love your feedback.

I certainly hope that they send her back in time. A Section 31 show in the 23rd century would be much more interesting than one in the 32nd. They would be able to have Tyler as part of the main cast, and they would be able to explore how 31 went from a relatively well organization in Discovery to a top secret thing that nobody has ever heard of in DS9.

I had just assumed by now the proposed S31 series had been backburnered.

As far as I know the plan is still for the Section 31 show to start filming once Discovery season 3 is done. At least, that’s what the producers have been saying for quite some time.

But how recently have they said it? Half a year ago or more? I mean I’d be fine if it never materialized. I even suspect this will be STD’s last season, regardless how it does, once STP picks up the slack as CBS Trek’s new flagship show.

I think they repeated it during one of the recent conventions.
As for Star Trek Picard replacing Discovery, you seem to be forgetting CBS’s goal to have some new Trek coming out all year round. They don’t want only one Trek show to be the flagship on CBS ALl Access, they want a bunch of shows. 10 episodes of Picard don’t fill a year so it would seem like a bad idea for CBS to drop any existing show before they have something to replace it with.

I’m curious to know if they plan to have concurrent series on the air. Even new Trek all year round doesn’t seem like enough (for me anyway) if it’s only one series at a time.

I also feel that all the series are getting short shrift by making so few episodes of each. Discovery going into its third season is barely beyond the number of shows in TNG’s first season.

I’m right with you there, Palizia. Not a fan of these short seasons. I would gladly trade production value for longer seasons in a heartbeat.

“But how recently have they said it? Half a year ago or more?”

Uh, Kurtzman said it again just last week at NYCC. In fact it’s been said several times in the last six months this site has reported on that Section 31 is starting after Discovery is done shooting. So far no one has said anything differently about it.

Then I stand corrected. They still think they have a premise for this show, which in my mind means they’re still winging it. They may still assume they’re going to extend STD to a fourth season as well (in which case I would again stand corrected). I’d be surprised if they still felt that way when it came time to announce it though.

I don’t understand why would they not assume Discovery is getting a fourth season? I think the show will run a few more seasons easily. And mostly because we have not heard from anyone the show is really struggling or CBS is unhappy with it, etc.

Now make no mistake, I definitely believe DIS is the lowest watched Trek show by far compared to all the others, much less watched than even Enterprise in its final season. But obviously that’s due to the format its on, All Access. But it’s still probably the most popular show on that site by far. That will probably change when Picard comes but its still going to be one of the top shows there.

In fact I don’t think All Access has cancelled any of their shows yet. That’s the advantage of a new streaming site, shows get a lot more leeway in the beginning because there are so few of them.

Netflix pays much of the bill for Disco, so its continued existence is really up to them. Most streaming shows don’t last more than 3 or 4 years these days. Folks who keep insisting that all these new shows are going to run 7 years fail to realize that the broadcast model is completely different from the streaming one. Picard is slated to run for 3 seasons, and Lower Decks has a 2 season order. The days of long-running shows seems to be at an end.

But what evidence is there that Discovery is on its last legs? Where is this coming from? Discovery is not just another ‘streaming show’ its part of a huge franchise and brand that has been running for a long time now and is basically the face of All Access (until Picard comes at least ;)). I’m not saying its going to run 7 years like TNG and VOY did but why are so many people convinced it could be done after 3 or 4 years?

I’m only asking WHY people are convinced its getting cancelled? Based on what other than a gut feeling? Where has anyone anywhere has even suggested the show is done in a year or so? Nothing from All Access has been cancelled yet and Discovery is the biggest show on there (for now).

Look, I’m the guy who has been saying I don’t think Discovery is as successful as CBS hoped and why we keep getting all these crazy changes season after season. But that’s still a big difference from saying its a complete failure as well.

And clearly you don’t understand what is going on with Picard and Lower Decks, those are MINIMUM seasons ordered, the shows can keep going. Picard will most likely just depend if Stewart wants to keep doing it then (assuming the show is successful). He will literally be over 80 by then.

And I guess you’re forgetting Orange is the New Black on Netflix literally ran for 7 seasons lol. Trust me if enough people are still watching a show, its not going anywhere anytime soon.

Hi Tiger – I never said the show was on its last legs. I simply pointed out that most streaming shows don’t last too long. Here’s a good article about it:

And whether Disco is the face of AA or part of a large franchise doesn’t really concern Netflix, who is paying most of the bills. The deal for Discovery was done in a very different business environment than the one we’re in now, and Netflix might not want to continue footing a large bill for something they have no ownership stake in. Could CBS pick up the production and continue? I suppose they could, but they seem reticent to carry the financial burden of these productions themselves. And as you pointed out, Disco’s viewership is low, so there may not be an appetite to finance such an expensive show for much longer. We shall see!

And as for whether I “understand” what’s going on – don’t talk down to me. I know exactly what’s going on. I help run this site and I work in television myself. Picard is designed as a three season show. Could Lower Decks continue beyond 2 seasons? Absolutely, and it probably will. The point of this whole thing is that we’re in a new environment with new rules. That could change as the streaming business evolves, but right now that seems to be where things are headed.

The problem is these are nothing but assumptions. That’s my point. Could you be right, sure, but NOWHERE is anyone stating Discovery itself is only a 3-4 season show, right? Look, I just get tired of people treating things on the internet as forgone facts without actual evidence or proof. I wasn’t trying to talk down to you but no one ever said these shows are only running a few seasons and that’s it. Yes maybe they will, but UNTIL someone just comes out and says a show is running for a short time, then no one knows. It’s still just assumptions and not direct proof. That’s my only point.

I read the article you linked and yes that sounds like something Netflix is doing but does that apply across the board? Does that now apply to Hulu, Disney+ or AA itself? Maybe it does but again, we don’t even know what these casts on the shows sign up for? But yes maybe it does apply to others.

But TAKE the Netflix thing for example. Again maybe you know something I don’t because you work in TV, but there are ALL kinds of crazy and conflicting information about the deal between Netflix and Discovery. You say they are still funding the show but I seen other places that says they only funded the first season of it and CBS is funding the rest of it. I hear things that Netflix is ‘unhappy’ with the show and why they didn’t take Picard, etc, etc. Again you could be 100% right, but how is ANYONE suppose to know this unless there is some official word? Again I only ask where do people get this information? Who is saying it? Is the agreement out there somewhere because as far I know CBS, nor Netflix has EVER stated exactly what the agreement is beyond they paid CBS a deal to distribute the show internationally as long as it on and could run the other Trek shows indefinitely. I’ve never heard anywhere beyond that, officially at least.

For the record, I’m not ‘defending’ Discovery. This is not me as a fan that can’t bear the thought of losing the show or something. I like the show but I don’t love it or anything. I wouldn’t lose much sleep if it was gone tomorrow lol, especially with so many other projects in the pipeline. For me, its mostly about separating facts from assumptions, that’s all. MY job facts are very important. Everything has to be crosschecked, confirmed and referenced before it goes on record. But on the internet you know everything is still the wild wild west here. Someone posts something on Youtube suddenly its just a ‘fact’ and people quote it as such, especially when it comes to Star Trek. It drives me bonkers lol.

I mean what’s funny about this is I only commented because what Sam said when he was under the impression that no one has talked about Section 31 for awhile. Not a big deal in itself but again, there is this running ‘assumption’ (I really call it wish fulfillment) that the Section 31 show is getting cancelled any day now and Pike is the show that is taking its place. Could that be true, I guess, sure, but now so many are treating it like a fact literally based on nothing than they just really really want it to happen. It’s implied on these boards ALL the time. Suddenly what fans kind of hope happens treat as if its really happening. We don’t hear anyone mention Section 31 for a week that now means secretly I guess the Pike show is being green lit when no one ANYWHERE has once ever said a show is even being discussed lol. Other than the actors saying they would like it to happen not once has anyone on the production side said there is a discussion on it, but the good ole internet, many are convinced one was being announced any day now, just because, even to the point they knew it was going to be announced in Las Vegas when not a single rumor ANYWHERE. It drives me nuts and I am one of the people who would love S31 replaced by that show.

LOL sorry about the rant. I’m just making a point, you say something enough online, sooner or later it just is. But if others are correct about DIS being gone after 1-2 more seasons then maybe this would explain how they plan to have so many Trek shows on and in reality these shows will be a revolving door of replacing one after the other in a few years? I guess we’ll see.

Anyway, I wasn’t trying to offend you. So apologies.

All good.

It’s a very strange and uncertain time in the entertainment industry right now. Things are in flux, and no one really knows how it’s all going to shake out.

I understand your exasperation – there is a ridiculous amount of uninformed nonsense out there, a lot of it being deliberately spread in order to generate outrage/clicks/views. Pay them no heed. They have no game whatsoever.

Brian Drew,

Just this morning I was listening to Scorsese gush about all the freedom NETFLIX afforded him on some project with DeNiro that no one, Scorsese repeated, no one else would even fund.

In light of that, I assume the number of seasons are concise, because the streaming productions, with that freedom, get to the point of what they wanted to say in any particular show sooner than the circuitous route of having to get successful enough under many broadcast networks’ micromanaged inanities, to be strong enough to get it eventually said out there?

I think there may yet be one more Discovery season. But would not be surprised at all if this 3rd season is it for them. History has shown that changing the locale of a show has never worked to save the show. I honestly do not see how Discovery will be different in that respect.

Well that’s a little different than what is being discussed here. You just seemed convinced the show isn’t doing very well and simply getting cancelled. I don’t agree with that either (although sure you could be right) but that’s a little different than a show just ‘ending’ after a few years because it was always just meant to run a certain amount of time.

But yes I get what others are saying, TV no longer live by the same network standards because so much is changing due to streaming. We all know the only reason most shows went 100+ episodes because they had to make that many to get syndicated and where the real money came from. But today, syndication is feeling less and less important because of the internet and all these streaming sites and deals happening.

But I’m still not convinced this is true of Discovery or AA in general. One, because, and I have said this before, start up streaming sites don’t have the content at the beginning and ironically why so many shows hang on for awhile as they did with Netflix and Hulu when they first started making shows. Yes NOW they a lot of options and can be very choosy of what stays or goes. AA still doesn’t. And secondly, at least for the moment, Discovery is probably the most watched or at least the most hyped show there. I don’t see how they get ride of their star show so quickly??

Of course, we know Picard and a dozen other Trek shows are on their way, but until they are officially on the air and prove themselves, it seems really premature to cancel one show for another right away, ASSUMING that’s the plan. I have no doubt Picard is going to be a more popular show lol, at LEAST in the beginning. But yes as much as I hate to say this, the show could still end up being really bad and people dropped the subscriptions. It seem like you want to keep as many of these shows on until the dust has settled.

But I keep hearing this gloom and doom around Discovery and you know I’m pretty fair about this stuff. Even when I thought the show sucked (and I still don’t think its anything close to amazing now, but better at least) I always said there is no proof ANYWHERE the show was in trouble directly. And there is still no proof now.

Again, “doing well” is subjective. I still think for now it’s the most watched thing on CBSAA. But from the outside looking in it really does not seem to have generated the “buzz” CBS was hoping it would. At this point other projects have been accomplishing that. Hence it is not unreasonable to think that CBS may decide to move on from it if the venue change doesn’t invigorate it. Especially considering what they have in development at the moment. Discovery very well could stick around for more than 4 seasons. But if I were a betting man I would wager 4 max. By that time the other Trek shows will be swooping in and I have doubts the production crew of Discovery will be able to write their way into a more “buzzworthy” show. Just my take. Nothing else.

I disagree. Section 31 in the 32nd century would be much better from my point of view. Given the state of things it feels like it is needed more then than in the 23rd.

Hi David Moss, it seems as though this technology issue is really a barrier for you.

I hope you can have a bit of open mindedness about this and not bring up your sailing ship metaphor on every thread.

We’ve gone over this quite a bit on a recent thread. Tiger2, myself and others talked about a long track record of asymmetric technological development in reality and in Trek, and how – to avoid catastrophic extinction – humanoids in Trek have had to step back from untrammelled use of scientific discoveries in nuclear, biological or other warfare.

I found the ShuttlePod discussion about how the Federation seems still ‘shiny’ but small and constrained very interesting.

It seems likely given Burnham’s search for a ‘domino’ that set off a series of events, that this season’s mystery will be a search for the explanation about how the Federation’s progress was set back and how Discovery can contribute to restoring the Federation’s vision.

Instead of a single catastrophe, it sounds as though there was a more subtle ‘chaos theory’ butterfly wing explanation.

It will be really boring and annoying if you and others dig in and say ‘it just can’t be’ for the entire season when the whole point of the season may be to find out just ‘how can this be?’

tg47, If that’s the whole point of the season, then they had really better bring some marvelous revelation, because failing to pay stuff off in an interesting way seems to be a theme with this show thus far. This is the problem with most puzzle box storytelling (plus it doesn’t lend itself to rewatching) outside of TWIN PEAKS, which is so joyous in its dementia and quirkiness that it transcends. Thus far, 21st century trek doesn’t transcend, it just detours/derails (based on s1 and first ep of s2, all I’ve seen thus far, plus what I’ve read of the rest of s2.)

Totally agree kmart.

It’s a real risk for any serialized television.

Slowly revealing the cards falls flat if the solution doesn’t make compelling sense.

It’s why I’ve never rewatched the Battlestar Gallactica reboot, even though I liked it well enough to buy the DVDs for the early seasons.

I’m hoping that Discovery will have more than one puzzle, enough interesting episodes along the way to the solution, and enough coherence in the plotting to make S3 hang together in a way that the previous seasons haven’t.

But I’m getting really bored with the ‘it just can’t work because’ interjections before the season even kicks off.

Discovery is not intended to be the Trek for every Trek fan. Let’s see where it goes before asserting it can’t work or demanding the solutions to every conundrum.

I find that watching small batches of GALACTICA work best rather than rewatching the series. The PEGASUS stuff by itself, or the first part of season 3, like 33, are good standalones for me. I did rewatch the whole series about 3 years ago, and didn’t find the ending as obnoxious as I had originally, but it still didn’t really hang together for me, and it’s a shame when you really like parts but feel that the overall effect is spoiled (sort of like how the VFX just about ruin AIR FORCE ONE for me, even though all the live-action parts of the movie engage me throughout, despite serious improbabilities.)

We have a spare TV that we are going to hard-wire in the bedroom, and perhaps that one will let us order All Access (it is not available through our main TV and cable provider on the wireless hookup. I don’t really understand the whole ‘this is not available in your area’ when I’m in the US, but I assume it is just another case of how things get fractured when it is financially advantageous to some groups to make them that way.) My wife really wants to see season 2, so I’m willing to be in the next room listening in while she watches if we can order it on the other TV (let’s me avoid what I find to be dubious ship VFX that way, something I’m seriously allergic to.)


Hate to say this, but yes I and a lot of people that I know do have some difficulty here. I am not trying to bash DSC, but in my Star Trek, I do want some level of realism. Yes, I know transporters and warp drive are not real but they are scientific extrapolations. Time jumping itself is not real but can be extrapolated as well. Having no significant level of technological advances in over 900 years I just don’t see it as plausible. Even as bad as Andromedia was, there were several episodes that showed the tech had advanced and they were only talking 300 years (very bad show.. ugh!).

Further, just look at the advances in tech between TOS and TNG. The holodeck, replicators, recalibration of the warp drive to significantly faster speeds, emblem communicators, quantum torpedoes, artificial life (Data), Geordi’s visor, and more. And that was only 80 years!

Okay, so enough of my rant. I will watch and give it a chance for sure but I do think this is just another thing they haven’t thought out. Maybe I am wrong and they’ll pull a Battlestar (unnetwork all our computers). We’ll have to wait and see. That said, after watching the latest Short Trek (Tribbles) I become a bit more disillusioned.

David Moss,

Re: Time jumping itself is not real…

I beg your full free and absolute pardon, Einstein worked out velocity and gravitational time dilation over a century ago and it is a verified scientific FACT which makes jumping forward in time REAL.

David Moss,

You use words, but I have to doubt your comprehension of them when you try to suggest that during The Renaissance, which took place from the 14th to 16th centuries, people then wouldn’t have used a still seaworthy ancient Greek ship full of preserved Ancient Greek texts to do just that?

I did not say The Renaissance. I said A renaissance.

David Moss, I’m glad you’ll give it a chance.

We’ve all been given reason to be concerned about Discovery given ‘the worst birthing of any Trek series’ as the ShuttlePod crew commented, but let’s not seek to be pessimistic.

I’m particularly concerned that not to let folks get too tripped up by something that’s always been an issue in Trek.

The 23rd and 23th century technology really isn’t far enough advanced if one plots a straight linear line from the mid 20th century, let alone the kind of nonlinear functions of technological development that’s been accelerating since the 17th century.

Looking at Trek in the 1960s, nuclear annihilation and eugenics were global social concerns. Trek history had humanity surviving conflicts about both and then limiting these technologies. As well, overcoming the risks of technology was one of the reasons that achieving warp drive was the test for the Prime Directive.

So, Trek has always envisioned limits in technological development, while at the same time exploring and pushing limits.

If we take the temporal cold war of Enterprise as a firm part of Prime timeline canon, it wouldn’t be all that surprising for a retrenched Federation to be holding on to the technology and values it has been able to retain.

We shouldn’t assume the end of the temporal cold war was a good outcome for the Federation.

David Moss,

Re: I said A renaissance.

I know. But you have to understand the word’s origin to use it properly, and my example is still that of A renaissance where they would have done the exact opposite of what you suggest with the discovery of a perfectly preserved ancient Greek ship and its contents.

Amazing. Why don’t you look up the word in Websters and see the various definitions, one of which is rebirth. Can we stick to the subject?

David Moss,

Re: look up

No need, as I already noted that I looked it up in THE OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY.

Re: rebirth

Depends, are you still going to obstinately insist that a perfectly preserved Ancient Greek sailing ship laden with perfectly preserved Greek texts, as preserved as Discovery would be in its future, could NOT possibly be found useful or contribute anything to the actual emerging original “The Renaissance” at the same approximate jump forward in years into the Ancient Greek ship’s future?

Additionally, you guys spoke of getting Georgio back to the 23rd century for Section 31. Why do we assume that is needed? Maybe she restarts Section 31 in the 32nd century.

Oh meant to address this when I saw your comment the other day. Sorry for late reply. There’s a couple of reasons. One is real-world, the other is in-universe:
A. They’ve said they want to use the existing sets they made for Section 31 during DSC Season 2. That’s one of the reasons why a Section 31 show is so enticing to them, they have a lot of the production design already done, making it lower cost to execute.
B. The writers setup Tyler to supposedly course correct S31, and they also gave Tyler and Georgiou a better relationship as the season wrapped up. So it stands to reason that the Section 31 show would be Tyler and Georgiou reinventing S31 their way.

(B) Which I read to mean as, more syncing up with canon. Which I guess is unavoidable, if they’re going to do more S31 at all. But considering their efforts with “syncing up” in S2 (let’s grow our hair shoulder length in just a couple days, and then make it “treasonable” to mention Discovery even if you had family on it), I’d really just prefer they didn’t even bother. Just keep their ultra-class spy ships and other canonical BS, consider yourselves stuck with it now, and better luck researching canon next time.

Thanks for this ShuttlePod crew!

It was good to step back after the 2 Short Treks and reflect on all the NYCC Trek news.

I appreciated the think back to the Star Trek: Federation concept, but principally the discussion about how Discovery seems to be trying to get the fine balance between the shiny utopia Federation and a failed dystopian future.

When you all made the comment Burnham’s her hair grew a LOT in the year she was separated from Discovery all I could think was this podcast needs some Black people on it because that was some of the whitest nonsense I’ve heard in awhile.

“some of the whitest nonsense”

Your attempt at a racist slur unfortunately fell flat because nonsense does not have a skin color :)

Sonequa Martin-Green has used wigs and extensions throughout the series, so the hair length and style is easy to point at and ridicule if somebody wants to. I think Kev was saying that making it an issue at all is racist (and the fact is they don’t do this to Mary Wiseman).

Of course outside of cuckoo land, there is nothing racist in saying the actress looks better with long hair (and I don’t mean the Marge Simpson version of long), same as Wiseman looked better with her straight MU hair style and without that super noticeable forehead pimple she had to sport most of season 1 as (apparently) another “feminist statement”…

My point was that the discussions about the impossibility of her hair growing in that time frame wouldn’t have come up had a Black woman, or even just any Black person, been on the podcast because the comment was born out of ignorance. The reason I posted was they had such strong opinions about what was happening with her hair while demonstrating colossal ignorance about Black hair.

I don’t think “white nonsense” has ever been a slur.

It has never been a phrase that made sense (outside of a political and/or racist insult) either… These two colors, that arent even colors, are being abused for the wildest attributions in certain circles these days. It’s cookie cutter racism because it assumes ALL individuals have certain traits, privileges or disadvantages solely based on their skin color. It reduces people to that and thus is antithetical to everything Trek is about.

I think the OP was just saying that a black woman’s voice would have been appreciated when talking about black woman’s hair.

That’s how I interpreted it as well. So let’s all move on shall we?

Chancellor Gowron, that’s EXACTLY what I meant. Thanks for picking up on that.

I did phrase it the way I did because the comment made in the podcast about Burnham’s hair made me angry and the lack of awareness in making it, and doubling down on it by all of the participants in the podcast, pointed out that there is an unintentional irony having a podcast about a show that celebrates infinite diversity in infinite combinations while failing to even try to use that lens when examining the show.

Hey guys, i’ts good to get over and read some TM thread comments. No, really. 😄
Just to say.. I don’t recall the hair discussion much except in passing, but I hope the record shows I didn’t say much about it because I hadn’t even noticed it… as in, made perfect sense to me. Then again, I didn’t really stop and ponder over the dream-Data face, either. #texturenottrivia

The misconception, and the story that the powers that be keep emphasizing, is that the problem with Discovery is that the prequel concept and established canon inhibited creativity and freedom. NO. That has never been the problem with Discovery. The problem has always been poor writing and a lack of basic storytelling. Personally, I don’t see how this writing staff will suddenly produce quality stuff now that they’re 900 years into the future.

I seems RikersMailbox that TPTB are no longer indulging that message about canon constraints, and even last season were insistent on respecting canon for key Pike era elements.

The Discovery writing team did very well with Pike and Spock in my view.

Production designer Tamara Deverell also did brilliantly with the Enterprise bridge while maintaining some aesthetic continuity with Discovery’s original designer’s work.

So, they could work creatively within canon.

But it’s clear from the comments ‘that we debate canon every day’ that Discovery’s unhappy writers room had too many senior Discovery writers that felt constrained by canon.

The ShuttlePod crew’s observation that Kirsten Beyer didn’t have the power in the room due to the hierarchy of screen writers, despite a long list of Trek novel credits (as well as a theatre degree and acting credits) is an important one.

Going forward, the balance and leadership of the group in the writers room has changed. Showrunners Paradise and Kurtzman are talking about how canon has not been left behind. The message you are talking about may not be so pertinent.

More than that, as Larry pointed out, we have been shown that they are walking the talk. Andorians, Lurians and Cardassians will be working with humans in future. Trill will be part of the story arc. We’ll just need to wait to see if the writers have settled enough to have a more current and better paced story arc.

Last, Larry noted how Chabon has been very clear that there is enormous creative space within canon and has demonstrated that with his two Short Treks, and signs are good on this point for Picard.

Mike McMahon is enthusiastically embracing canon in developing Lower Decks, and has brought Trek author David Mack on board as a consultant. (Mack’s also consulting on the teen animated show.)

All to say that the franchise seems to be attracting and keeping writers who really want to write Trek, and love Trek — and their enthusiasm for canon is pushing back on the ‘we need to be free’ whinging that seems to have been a significant factor in Discovery’s painful birthing.

No that wasn’t the problem per se. Its not that it was a prequel that was the problem, it was HOW they created the prequel that was IMO. Again, why call something a ‘prequel’ if you literally ignore everything in that universe? To me, its more of a reboot than anything. For me, Discovery felt like a prequel to TOS about as much as Batman Begins felt like a prequel to Tim Burton’s Batman movie.

But yes poor writing was a problem too lol. I DO think both the writing and feeling somewhat like TOS improved in second season which is why, ironically, I thought they were staying in the 23rd century. I thought they were going to pull an Enterprise and make third season feel more influenced by TOS. But by actually bringing in more of those characters from that era and slowly make that show feel like it exists in that era like season 2 was trying.

And for the record, while not thrilled about it, I would’ve been completely fine with that direction, especially after doing such a great job with Pike and Spock. But honestly I’m so happy that wasn’t the case and they are striking out on their own.

I do think in all honesty the writers just wanted to do their own thing and just be able to create anything they wanted. The fallen Federation story line basically hints at that. They couldn’t pull that story off in ANY prequel setting. Now they can. Yes, they do have the freedom to work in canon, but I don’t care what anyone says, in a prequel setting there will always be more limits of SOME kind, this story line being the perfect example. It’s very hard to ‘go big’ in a prequel when you already know the basic outcome. It’s why we always knew no matter what happened in the Klingon war, it was going to end up a stalemate because TOS made it clear both sides were still pretty powerful just a decade later, we just didn’t know the details of how they end up in the stalemate (and after what they came up with, I wish we still didn’t know ;)). I mean you can’t kill Pike off pre-TOS but post-TOS you can do anything you want with him. Hell even make him walk again lol.

And lastly I also think, just speculation on my part, that they DIDN’T want Discovery to just be known as the TOS prequel show, they probably wanted it to feel like its own thing. No one ever calls TNG a TOS sequel or DS9 a TNG spin off because they all stood on their own at the end of the day. All acknowledged being canon but shows that went their own way. And my guess they want Discovery to stand on her own too.

But you’re not wrong, if the stories suck it doesn’t matter where its placed. Hopefully putting the show in a new era has inspired them.

” To me, its more of a reboot than anything. For me, Discovery felt like a prequel to TOS about as much as Batman Begins felt like a prequel to Tim Burton’s Batman movie.”

I feel the need to repeat this from time to time but this was exactly how I felt watching the show right from the very beginning. It totally felt like (and still does if we want to be honest) like a complete reboot. Which I would have been totally fine with, btw. I was only irritated when producers kept telling us it wasn’t when all the on screen evidence suggested very strongly it was. And then, not only was the PD all messed up but then the writing ultimately ended up being piss poor. The characters were bland messes. The entire show looked to be a complete disaster. I mean, I would have easily let go of the rebooted look of the show if they had just come up with a compelling story with even mediocre characters. But we didn’t even get that.

When you make a Podcast and half of the Podcast is they complaning about the fans, is funny. Fans are what keeps Star Trek alive, stop complaing about them and start been a bit more neutral a no so pro Disco.

I didn’t notice any complaining about fans.

Summing up the fan reactions – e.g. commenting on the elements of Discovery that have generated a strongly negative fan response, or noting that fan reaction to Picard to date is almost universally positive – does not equal ‘complaining about fans.’

Wow a great podcast! I have a confession to make, this is the first one I listened all the way through lol (Some are just a bit too long for me) but this one I listened from start to finish. And I have to say I agree with pretty much everything.

And I think your points about the reception of Discovery versus Picard are great observations. Yes Discovery is divisive and they did make a LOT of mistakes in season one where as Picard it seems (so far) to be a total love fest. But as said they obviously learned their lessons with Picard after having such a rough first season with Discovery that Picard feels a lot more reassuring. For starters, the people who made Picard didn’t get fired before they started making it lol.

Discovery had a lot of problems but we all know the biggest came from the fact it was Fuller’s creation through and through. They over saw something very few of them had a direct hand in creating. Even Kurtzman seemed like he had came up with very little of it. He help write the pilot but had very little hand in what the show actually was. We can definitely see the differences in influence in season 2 and mostly for the better IMO. It doesn’t mean everything in season one was bad, but they are clearly trying to move away from the most divisive elements, one of its biggest was the placement of the show. Again, it doesn’t mean you can’t do a good TOS prequel, but Discovery biggest problem is it never actually felt like one as you guys said and a ship that looks that advanced with bald Klingons, spore drives and giving Spock a sister literally out of nowhere did it no favors.

Now its in its own era in the 32nd century and not only don’t have to worry about the canon issues as much as before but the other beauty of it as you guys pointed out we are still going to get our favorite aliens even if we aren’t getting any familiar characters like Picard is. I think, if they do this right, Discovery could become a truly popular and iconic show, ala TNG and DS9 popular. And I say this because now the show can define itself ANY way it wants. It can shape the universe any way it wants. And it looks like they are going big by the ending the Federation as WE know it. This excites me to no end. And you still have all the guys we know and love like Andorians, Trills, Cardassians, etc makes us invested even if its still nearly a thousand years from everything we ever knew.

I know some people on these boards are still skeptical about this show and you every right to be, but I think everyone can at least admit they HAVE heard all issues fans had with it and trying to create something special and unique with both its setting and its stories. Maybe you still don’t like a lot of the characters or doubt the writing team, but I say give it another chance. This show is FINALLY doing something I been wanting to see Trek do again since DS9….taking a bold risk! And this is pretty risky lol. So I’m hoping this will work, but I have never been so excited for this show until now.

Wait, Hugh was in the new trailer? I totally missed that.

Thanks. Very cool.

Disco? Really? Why this aversion to say all 4 syllables? Too lazy to say the whole thing? What possible benefit can it give you to give a second of your life to say “-very”?

Perhaps you should ask Disco’s producers, since some of the characters wear tee shirts bearing that very name:

I think you’re over thinking it a bit. It’s just more of a nick name for the show as well as a short hand. I mean fans call Deep Space Nine DS9 and that literally has the same number of syllables. You save nothing lol. It’s just another way to call the show as I imagine Discovery is.

TNG is definitely made for short hand though. ;)

Gerry Alanguilan,

I encourage you to take a deeper look and further explain to us why “grup” for “grown up”, “heater” for “machine gun”, “laser” for “light amplification through stimulated emission of radiation”, etc. should be the mammary liquid left in too long that wilts our crunchy morning cereal?

Not to sidetrack the flow here (is that even possible? 😄)…
But for the updates on my annual Open House in Portal 47 Oct. 22/Tuesday I mentioned here — now announced with guest writer-producer Robert Hewitt Wolfe … and pre-event giveaways… you can check out

Hope I’m not about to be agonized over some TOS. And I don’t mean ST:TOS.