Star Trek Producers Say Section 31 and 2 More Live-Action Shows In The Works

Sunday was CBS’s day to present on the Winter 2020 Television Critics Association press tour, around the main presentation were various press interviews. We’ve rounded up the interesting bits that have come out of the reports from the day.

Two more live-action Trek projects on the way

During the TCA press event CBS Trek head honcho Alex Kurtzman told Variety: “We are actively developing a lot of things right now …There’s some really exciting things on the horizon.”

TrekCore shared more details from the morning press event, where Kurtzman gave an explicit number to the statement Variety had, saying: “There are two more live action shows that haven’t been announced yet.”

What are these two shows?

The executives were of course unable to comment on just what those two new shows would be. But TrekMovie can offer some educated guesses: one may well be the Starfleet Academy from creators Stephanie Savage and Josh Schwartz. The academy show has been a possible project since June 2018. So it seems like it may be one of the most mature projects in the Trek project incubator.

Certainly fans are hoping that the second show would be the “Pike’s Enterprise” type series with Anson Mount, Ethan Peck, and Rebecca Romijn. Of course the executives remained tight lipped about that when asked, saying only:

The grounds of Starfleet Academy as seen in TNG: “The First Duty”

Section 31 in “active development”

We still haven’t seen an official announcement about the Section 31 show yet, but it seems reasonable to expect one soon, since it is supposed to go into production on the heels of Discovery season 3 to utilize the common assets, sets, wardrobe, behind-the-scenes crew, etc. Secret Hideout exec Heather Kadin did however confirm it’s still coming, telling the press group:

[‘Section 31’ is] in active development. So that’s obviously a huge priority; Michelle [Yeoh’s] character [Georgiou] is so unique, and you’ve never seen that before. Again, it has to fall under the guise of, ‘is this [show] a unique space we haven’t explored yet?’

The Section 31 show is “in active development”

No MCU-style crossover events

A common question for CBS Trek head honcho Alex Kurtzman was one about following the Marvel model of big crossover events. Kurtzman told Variety that viewers can expect “little references to story points between different series,” but nothing major.

When asked about doing a major team-up type of story he reiterated that they felt no pressure to do so:

I only want to do that kind of thing if there’s a really good reason to do it, not just to do it because we can, there’s obviously a lot of precedent in the ‘Star Trek’ universe for people in different timelines to merge, but, again, we have to have a damn good reason to do it. So we’re taking it slow. We’re being methodical and deliberate.

Don’t expect a massive MCU-style Trek Universe Meetup

CBS Trek content for 2020 is ready

While at the LA red carpet event for Picard TrekCore got a chance to ask Heather Kadin about the readiness of Discovery season 3 and Lower Decks season 1. She revealed that both shows should be ready to go by May, after the first season of Picard ends its run. When asked which was coming first, she noted that it was up to the CBS All Access executives. So as of right now which show is up after Picard has yet to be determined.

The first season of Lower Decks will be ready soon

Keep up with all the news on upcoming Star Trek shows here at

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Discovery will launch in Autumn. Doesn’t make much sense launching in the summer when people are outside a lot more and watching ‘less’ tv. Lower Decks though makes perfect sense because it’s school holiday season and that’s it’s main market!

The nice thing about streaming is you can watch it whenever you want.

That’s the nice thing about the DVR as well.

They still make DVRs? I built one with some PC parts I had around. I hardly ever use it.

I like your logic!

Lower Decks isn’t aimed at kids, it’s aimed at adults. You’re thinking of Star Trek Prodigy which is being made by Nickelodeon which isn’t likely to be out until 2021.

I’m thrilled about everything. I am one of those excited fans. But, I have zero appetite for section 31. Fanboy Fangasm nonsense. I’m disappointed that I’m more excited about the cartoons that Section 31…and I don’t watch cartoons.

Section 31 is headlined by the ultimate cartoon character and Lower Decks’ characters will be more 3 dimensional I’m betting.

Tots! I think you’re right. Section 31 has just become so stupid and irrelevant in recent years. I can’t take it. I’ll watch it. I’ll hope to like it. I’m not expecting much, and I won’t be angry if I hate it.

My prediction is that the Pike show will be a lot more episodic and feel like a more “traditional” ST show.

Also, anyone notice that Star Trek movies are starting to show up on CBS-AA? I’m wondering if this is the beginning of a slow, quiet re-merging that will ultimately culminate in CBS-AA becoming CBS/Paramount (and a much more impressive streaming service than what we currently have.)

I think there is a good chance you are right, Sully. I don’t like the idea of a Section 31 show but God help me I’m going to watch it. Just like I have no reason to watch S3 of Discovery based on their previous 2 seasons. The only reason I am still looking and giving any of this a chance is Star Trek. I’m a fan and will eat this stuff up. Even if it is garbage.

Lower Decks is actually the only Trek thing that is coming that I feel pretty good about. God I hope that one doesn’t suck.

I too am skeptical about the Section 31 series but I also remember how underwhelmed I was when I heard the concept for DS9. I didn’t even watch the show until a couple of years after it finished airing S7. Imagine how absolutely surprised I was watching a great iteration of Star Trek – based on a space station!! So much so, it has become my second favorite ST series. Ever since then, I have been pretty open minded about Star Trek. Hopefully I will be pleasantly surprised. We shall see.

Though I have my doubts, hopefully they can make the ex-emperor as interesting a character as those in DS9. Maybe her path can become the inverse of Dukat’s, who was a great character… until he wasn’t. Until he became space Satan or whatever towards the end. A more cartoonish villain. The kind we’d find in the Mirror Universe.

I hope there won’t be any of that cartoon MirrorU crap like we saw in the other series [I skip them in re-watches]. DSC S1’s expedition was enough. I suppose some people eat that up though. I have never understood how such a place could perpetuate itself; perhaps it goes through ebbs and flows of savagery?

Absolutely Georgiou has to be the inverse of Dukat. I agree. Although many think there is no redemption of “Space Hitler” and she will have to pay. Dramatically speaking, I think they are correct [“Payment is expensive,” per Sarek]. But Trek-wise, can we forgive-but-not-forget the unforgivable based on the doer’s background? Hmmmmmm. They do still have life imprisonment in the Federation.

IMHO, the point of the MU was mainly a character thing. Digging deeper into figuring out how such an upside down world would function was above and beyond.

Marja, I was kind of open to more of Georgiou in season 2 of Discovery, willing to give them a chance, but then came the moment when she literally hissed like a snake and I was out. So yeah, if they give us more of that, I don’t think I’ll be able to hang with it. Just too cartoony, even for TOS era Trek. More like a darker Flash Gordon.

The problem is we now have one of those MU cartoons as a main character in DIS and will get her own show soon. We all know it’s obviously going to be a matter of time before we go back to the MU since her entire background and life comes from there. People will have to be naive if they think we’re not going to get more of those stories once she has her show. I suspect more may even show up in the PU.

I like the MU stories, but when it’s something you do for an episode a season or something as a bit of fun. I don’t want any of them to be running their own show but here we are.

I will give Gerogiou a chance (like we have a choice lol) and hopefully they change her more in season 3. But she was honestly the worst character for me last season and I can say I liked most of them, but she was one of the few I was hoping they left behind when Discovery jumped to the future.

“I too am skeptical about the Section 31 series but I also remember how underwhelmed I was when I heard the concept for DS9”

DS9 had the advantage of not being helmed by a genocidal Space Hitler.

I dunno, Dukat was arguably the most compelling character there for a while!


He was damned good until the Pah-Wraith nonsense. It was explained by the killing of his daughter by Damar, but not to my satisfaction.

Mine either. I watched ‘Sacrifice of Angels’ the other evening and I found the ending where Dukat tells Sisko he forgives him and hands him the baseball to be a more satisfying ending for the character.

“DS9 had the advantage of not being helmed by a genocidal Space Hitler.”

Yep. Imagine if Star Fleet decided they needed an evil murdering dictator from opposite land in charge of DS9 and started the show with THAT premise. Anyone think that concept would have gone over very well?

DS9 would have been even more awesome.

I had a similar relationship to ST: DS9. I watched it from the beginning, but I poo-pooed it at the start. By the end of the run, it was my second favorite behind TNG. Today, it’s my favorite. I learned not to judge a Star Trek show too quickly (much less before it premieres)!

” I learned not to judge a Star Trek show too quickly (much less before it premieres)”

These days it’s the actors and behind the scenes people who do the judgment for us, right before the premiere, with their divisive political rants, as if they want to make sure their work is “correctly” interpreted (preaching to their built-in choir, and not convincing anyone else). Kind of kills all enjoyment even before start, even if the end product may not quite live up to the level of “purity” they promised (see: Discovery season 1), but Pandora is out of the box and we can’t un-know their true intentions – stymied by inept execution or not.

I understand what you mean but let’s face it (sorry I may be wrong on this assumption) I assume most who decide to enter the arts for a career are probably more on the liberal side of the political ledger. That doesn’t matter to me as I have friends who are both liberals and conservatives and over a lifetime I’ve learned that I can appreciate and learn from both. Patrick Stewart is the same man he was when he joined TNG back in 1986 and just because today he chooses to show off his politics doesn’t in any way, shape or form influence my admiration for him as Jean Luc Picard. It may be a little annoying at times to hear people get on a soap box, but so be it and if they can positively influence things, that is great. IDIC and LLAP!

To be fair, most of the those who preach in Hollywood are those who are already established. Essentially they have FU money and are able to get themselves producer credit. Beginners and struggling actors are not going to start spouting off political rants. At least not publicly.

ML31, you are most certainly right. I doubt Stewart would have signed up on TNG’s first season “old fashioned French nationalism” plans for Picard if he hadn’t been “the new guy in town”. That’s why I absolutely don’t buy the notion that Stewart and Picard are the same. Picard is a man of fhe people who defends the disadvantaged against self-serving elites, even of the own kind… see “Insurrection”. He is certainly not someone who would declare people are wrong to make their own choices on how they want to live and organize their society.

That said, part of the issue is, again, stemming from serialization. It is absolutely not the case that Trek in the past would take a certain political stance for an entire season. Most often we had a diversity of different ideas in different episodes, and even different angles in arcs. It’s another case how one season-long arc is making a show narratively poorer, and forcing us to ‘take it or leave it’ depending if we like that one idra or not – not for one episode, but the entire season or even series.

VS… You hit up one of the big negatives (IMHO) of a serialized show. It is essentially one very long episode. With stand alones, a bad episode didn’t ruin the show. There would be a new one next week. But in a season long story, if the story is bad, the ENTIRE SEASON is bad. And that is what we got with Discovery.

I would agree DeanH, and try to ignore the behind the scenes material, as others have also suggested, if this material had not in fact announced this is what the entire season, and maybe series, is about. Now, it remains to be seen if they turned the entire world of fhe late 24th century into one singular metaphor of one faction’s view of what is going on in the world, but I will wager that is neither a majority or consensus view nor is this the way Trek dealt with metaphor and political ideas in the past 50 years. Before it had been assumed this show is the offering for legacy fans who liked and preferred the TNG way, and while I will keep an open mind, it doesn’t look that way right now.

As for the arts, it depends on the definiton of “liberal”, but what I see is that contemporary arts in reality is one of the least intellectually diverse and most creatively conformist and incestuous field there is, sadly, quite contrary to their self image. Starting from those thick black-framed glasses they all seem to wear (and that Stewart also took up) all the way to the inside of issues. It is a field that is rife for disruption and reform, so Trek as a mirror of times can also become more diverse again, more diverse than skin-deep certainly.

If it’s that upsetting, then maybe don’t read the behind-the-scenes material before the show airs. Someone has to open the box, Pandora, to know their intentions. And that someone is you.

Actors are by nature curious about seeing the world through other people’s eyes. This is an extension of compassion, and gives a broad viewpoint. Actors are mutually exercising compassion and giving-ness every time they perform scenes together. Calling up raw emotions or understated tensions backed by raw emotions is not easy if actors are emotionally closed off to each other.

I never liked Section 31 in any of the other Star Trek series and I think making a whole series with it is just bad.

I looked forward to PIC when it was first announced and liked the first trailer. But now that we have gotten more information about it in recent weeks, my anticipation has cooled down a lot. It seems they also go in a direction I don’t particular like.

So I also suspect that I might like the cartoons the most and I hardly watch cartoons either.

Maybe they’ll do a few episodes of a Pike show as ‘specials’ rather than a full series. I would guess cast availability and whether that fits into a workable business model will probably be decisive.

Well, they said at TCA that they were developing 2 more live action series, not specials or mini-series, so if Pike’s Enterprise is coming that seems to mean a series.

To be fair, the original announcement of the development deal with Secret Hideout included the possibility of mini-series, but there doesn’t seem to have been any mention of that since.

Rather, reading between the lines, if they are only planning to finalize the concept and scripts for the subsequent season of any particular show after the previous season screens and they have audience feedback, they will need to have 4 or 5 series in rotation to allow for production and post.

It also suggests that they will want to show Discovery in May and June, so that they can get it back into production in the fall.

Another argument for Discovery in late spring is that CBSAA executives have stated that they want an original series event per quarter to hold onto membership. They don’t all have to be Trek, but they don’t obviously have something else coming for Q2 in 2020.

I expect them to continue to broaden it beyond Star Trek though, since they will want to reach other audiences too.

Honestly, I don’t really see casting directors pounding down the doors of Mount, Romijn, or Peck. I bet they’d be more than happy to commit to a regular series.

One of them HAS to be Pike’s Enterprise. It would be silly not to do that. But I would very happy and excited for that Pike show! I hope it has the other characters from The Cage like Dr. Boyce, etc.

For the other, if it is Starfleet Academy then I am all for that as well. I remember Harve Bennet wanted to do something like that in the 1980s. It is far over-due. I just hope it is set in the Picard era!

As for Section 31: Bleh. I have no interest in that show at all. If the Section 31 show is the only new Trek during a particular month, then I will cancel my subscription to CBSAA for that month.

Right on Brotha!

Since Discovery seems prepped to abandon the TOS-era, it does seem ripe for a Pike focused Enterprise series.

Yeah I think that’s the idea. Originally I didn’t really think a Pike show would happen because we had DIS in this period (before we saw the season finale) and Kurtzman kept saying he wanted the franchise the shows to feel different from each other as possible. So having TWO starships literally exploring the same time and era went against his idea for the franchise.

But yes maybe this was all done on purpose by sending DIS off to the 32nd century and keeping the Enterprise there. Everyone kept saying how the last scenes in season 2 felt more like a beginning for Pike. And then you add the fact the first three Short Treks are all Pike focus maybe this is building up to something bigger. I’m still not 100% positive it’s happening, but WAY more positive now with this news of course.

Perhaps we will get official announcements at STLV? I hope so because I’m still hoping to go for the first time in 2020. I’m kinda glad now that my plan to go last year fell apart.

I honestly have not been this excited about Star Trek since the 90s! As someone who was happy we got new Trek with the Kelvin universe and then later Discovery I was certainly happy we were getting new Star Trek but I wasn’t overly excited about it because it felt like they were resting on nostalgia instead of pushing forward and I don’t mean just the time era either.

But since Picard was announced and we knew we were getting more shows, I have gone a complete 180 about it. Even if I’m not overly excited for every single individual project (yes like Section 31 but still intrigued on how they will do it and I can still fall in love with it) it just proves the possibilities are literally endless now. I would’ve just been happy with Picard frankly (assuming its good of course) but once they sent Discovery a thousand years into the future it really told me that they are thinking outside of the box with these shows, something we haven’t seen since DS9.

Like others I assume the other show is a Pike show and I would be THRILLED with that like the others because we now have a full universe of possibilities and options. If you don’t care about Discovery or the TNG era and want a TRUE prequel to the TOS era you now have Pike (hopefully) and maybe Section 31. If the TOS era bores people and want to go forward again, then you have a lot of options now from the 24th through the 32nd century. If you are sick of starship based shows you have options for that as well. We may even get another 22nd century show! Of course a lot of this stuff are years away but this is a great time to be a Star Trek fan! We could be getting 3-4 shows a year every year from this point on now! That’s incredible considering just three years ago at this time there was no new Star Trek shows on the air at all.

Tiger2, your excitement gives me an image of Tigger bouncing up and down on his tail.

But I feel much the same.

LOL I literally get excited every time I hear this stuff. I can’t contain it. I just love Star Trek so much and like others I have felt a bit down on it over the years, and felt that way recently until the Picard show was announced. But this is the type of direction I’ve always wanted for Star Trek A. As much of it as possible lol and B. that it diversifies and start to really branch out beyond just one crew, ship, time period, etc. That we get a multi era franchise that can explore different aspects of it. Now we are finally getting that. Even during the Berman years, I didn’t mind the other shows took place in the same period and understood why but I always wouldn’t it have been cool if Enterprise was running the same time as Voyager and maybe we have another show set in the 26th century or something but they are running a colony instead of being on a starship? It’s like they read my mind lol.

And it’s more weird because I honestly thought Kurtzman was going to do the opposite of that. I kind of that he was just going to play it safe and stay in nostalgia mode and just basically do a bunch of TOS spin off prequels and everyone is related to someone on the Enterprise. I mean there is still SOME of that with the possible Khan (ugh) show that yes could still happen and Pike obviously but as long as its not ONLY that then its all great IMO. You can play it safe to keep the hardcore nostalgia fans happy but also go bold at the same time for people like us who really wants to see the franchise go boldly and expand in a meaningful way.


Tiger2, I’m also slightly skeptical about the Section 31 show but, like you, I think it’s best to wait and see how it turns out. Apparently the Bourne spin-off show “Treadstone” is very good (just going by what I’ve read online — I haven’t seen it yet and am trying to avoid spoilers), so if a Section 31 show is along the same lines it could turn out okay. I’ve previously written here that it should ideally be like a mixture of the Bourne movies and DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”; perhaps also some occasional Bond glamour to show the post-scarcity luxury lives of regular Federation citizens; plus some of the themes of the recent movies “The Report” and “Official Secrets”. That kind of stuff. But the showrunners obviously have their own ideas in mind, so we’ll have to see what they come up with.

The Space Hitler issue…Well, it sounds like they’re planning some kind of redemption arc for MU Georgiou. I share people’s reservations about how realistic that would be, but it actually depends on whether Georgiou is a sociopath or literally a psychopath. Sociopathy is caused by environmental/social factors, but there isn’t something fundamentally wrong with the person’s brain, so they’re actually capable of changing for the better if they want to. Psychopathy, however, is basically a congenital medical disorder, ie. it’s caused by genetics and the person is effectively brain-damaged from birth; the person can never really overcome these negative traits even if they wanted to (which they generally don’t, because the condition causes the psychiatric disorder Malignant Narcissism).

Why is this relevant to MU Georgiou? *Because she’s genetically the same person as Prime Georgiou*. That means MU Georgiou is actually a sociopath, not a psychopath, so under certain conditions it really is feasible for her to change her attitudes and redeem herself. Of course, I have no idea if the showrunners/writers have actually considered all this. They may be planning to use “convenient” story arcs to enable Georgiou’s redemption, rather than basing it on anything from real life.

Other potential shows…I’ve got to politely disagree with you about a Khan series. With the right showrunners, writers, budget and actors, it could work very well. I’ve suggested this before: Set the show during the Eugenics Wars, use Section 31 meddling from the future to explain the timeframe of the wars changing and merging with World War 3, try to cast the Indian actor Hrithik Roshan in the lead role (google him if you’re unfamiliar with him), and potentially you’ve got a great show that could focus on a lot of the issues currently happening around the world. Especially if it depicts things as having continued to get worse everywhere in the period between now and those conflicts. In that context, it would be realistic to portray the genetically-augmented tyrants exploiting the global situation to rise to power, and in Khan’s case first leading a popular revolution in India and then across South Asia, Iran etc. I don’t discuss politics online, so all I’ll say is this: If you’re aware of current events in that part of the world, including the mass protests, you can definitely imagine someone like Khan eventually doing that. So there’s plenty of interesting real-life stuff that a Khan/Eugenics Wars series could focus on, even if it’s extrapolated several decades into the future.

Let me ask this… Reverse the concept and decide how it might go. Suppose Prime Georgeau or even yourself, having been raised in this side of the mirror… Where murder was not an acceptable means to and ends and whatnot. Do you think it realistic that you or the character could conform to the savage rules? I honestly think in the reverse most of the folks from the prime side who find themselves on the other side would find themselves dead quickly.

I love the premise and idea for Khan story. The issue for all of is we know that Khan dies at end of TWOK. Any peril we create for the characters is false. We know they survive. I’d LOVE to see your story fleshed out and written in book form.

Hey Jai, First off I actually don’t disagree that much with a lot of your points believe it or not. I have stated before I was generally excited when I heard about a Section 31 show and you can that tat when the first article came around. I posted in it pretty positive about it because I LOVE Section 31 as a group in general. Unlike a lot of people who hate them because of what they represent was literally the same reason I loved them. I have said this many times, while Roddenberry’s view of the future is a great one, it’s VERY unrealistic obviously and more so when you don’t have things like a military to help protect it. I have no issues with his view of the future AS entertainment (which is all it is for me) so when posters go on how they hate stuff like the no money thing, ‘free energy’ one poster is always going on about, religion is dead, holodecks, etc, I accept it ALL. It all sounds great to me because that’s a future I want to live in. But is it realistic, of course not lol. NONE of it is a minus a few things, but its science FICTION, it doesn’t have to be. I just accept it for what it is and enjoy it. But its hard to believe you can have ALL of this and a Federation where everyone is free and equal but yet somehow has hundreds of potential aliens who are looking to invade and take it all away. With a GALAXY full of potential threats, there would be many organizations out there protecting it just like we have in the real world. What is the Federation’s equivalent of Homeland Security? I’m guessing they have one but it’s never discussed. Literally EVERYTHING just comes down to Starfleet which is crazy. So I think something like Section 31 is a necessary evil for sure. It seems like a no-brainer to have. Yes, they probably go a little too far with it and that they can do basically anything but from an entertainment viewpoint that makes them more interesting. So I had no issues with it AS a show. I thought great, now we can finally get those discussions I always thought something like Star Trek needed. And see another side of how paradise is protected from the real enemies out there. The only issue I have is that Discovery version of it just killed the mystique of the original version. And I will be very honest and say Discovery’s version is a more REALISTIC version of it for sure vs the main one where it’s more like an evil ‘Mission Impossible’ deny everything type of organization. But that’s what makes it fun. ;) So I was actually for it and still am to a degree, but after seeing what DIS did with them I’m not as excited about it, they wiped out all the mystique from them. And while some ways they felt more realistic, they came off WAY more powerful building time travel suits, super A.I. computers who turned into the Termainator and all of that. It got comic booky fast. Imagine what the actual show will be lol. But yes I’m going to wait and see. But its the idea that bothers me at all, it’s really the execution of it. OK this has already gone way too long lol so I’ll keep Georgiou and Khan brief. With Georgiou I hear what everyone is saying and again I don’t disagree fully. Yes, that’s certainly possible. It’s just the way they handled her until now that’s the issue and that she is too much of a cartoon. She is just this person who doesn’t seem to think about anything on a real level. That’s fine as a one time villain in a few episodes, its different when you are building an show around her. Yes I’m ASSUMING that will change when we get the show though. As for Khan I have said this before I have no issues of seeing him again or even seeing him in a mini-series or movies or something. I just don’t need 70 episodes of something that we all know where it will end up. As you know I’m already not a huge fan of prequels but less so when we know EXACTLY where it all eventually lead to. I accept things like movies like Star Wars, but that’s different then watching a show for YEARS! And what’s ironic about the idea of a Khan show is that Kurtzman said the entire reason they came up with the Kelvin universe is because they knew Kirk’s fate and they felt there are no stakes watching these movies if you basically knew where his… Read more »

Tiger2, Dennycranium – Sorry for not replying sooner but I was offline during the weekend.

The issue of knowing Khan’s eventual fate isn’t necessarily a dealbreaker. There have been plenty of excellent books, films and TV series based on history or mythology where you already know the main course of events, including what’s going to happen to major characters in the end. I do have mixed feelings about prequels too — there have been notorious misfires like Caprica or the Alien/Prometheus films — but I think the key is “filling in the blanks” in an interesting and intelligent way and, ideally, including aspects of storylines or characterisation that radically change how you view events or certain people in the original stories. There have been some great examples of this too, not only one-off films like Rogue One but also multi-year series like Black Sails.

Something I would add to the Khan premise is that including Colonel Green as the main villain (and Khan’s main global adversary) has a lot of potential for real-world allegories too. Again avoiding political comments — so I’ll be brief here — people have rightly observed that certain current events set a very dangerous precedent, specifically the likelihood that “next time” will involve someone much more strategic and self-disciplined who doesn’t have a certain someone’s more obvious behavioural flaws or compromised interests. That kind of ruthless, intellectually brilliant, charismatic individual could be incredibly dangerous, however many years or decades in the future they rise to power. *The Khan series could depict Colonel Green as being that person*. Casting options may clarify what I mean: George Clooney would be my first choice, but since that’s unlikely to happen, imagine Jon Hamm in the role. Or, maybe even better, imagine…Bruce Greenwood; intriguing possibilities, no? ;)

Tiger2, I agree with most of your points about Section 31. The galaxy in Star Trek has been depicted as very dangerous — how many times has Earth itself been threatened? — so of course it’s realistic for the Federation to have a secret network like S31 trying to keep out the wolves so that the rest of the Federation’s citizens can have their nice cosy utopia. And the issue of “no money, free energy, replicators, shared resources for the common good, altruistic culture, formal religion not being dominant” etc…well, it’s basically John Lennon’s “Imagine”, at least for humans, especially on Earth. That’s no bad thing either, especially when you consider how much needless, desperate suffering currently exists for so many people in the real world. Is it realistic? Hypothetically. There are various precedents for major shifts for the better in cultural/social attitudes, although it’s often involved traumatic experiences beforehand or it’s happened during times of great upheaval.

I also agree that the notion of Starfleet always being the ones to ride to the rescue is ridiculous. There should be much greater involvement from the intelligence agencies — as you’ve said, but whether the present showrunners will handle it properly might be a different matter — and also from POTUFP, the Defense Department, the State Department, the Federation’s version of Congress, and so on. More “The West Wing” stuff, basically. So there’s plenty of scope on that front too if “Picard” or other sequels want to expand the depiction of the Trek universe. Just needs the right people involved, as always. Will that actually happen? Guess we’re about to find out ;)

Is there any thought that there could be a Gary Seven series being planned?

A future we can believe in!

They have not mentioned anything, but it seems like a potentially great concept.

It’s not something I would be all that interested in but I would be curious to check it out. It’s certainly more deserving of a shot than the Section 31 vehicle.

I’m holding out for The Horta Variety Hour…..

“Pike’s Enterprise” is the good news I’m taking from this

A Pike series is fantastic and even a Section 31 series seems ok but what about at least a mini series for Enterprise featuring the Romulan war. Enterprise was harshly dealt with and doing a mini series about a war which is part of Trek canon would be a fitting send off for a series that I thought was excellent and needs to be given a better send off than it had.

Ed fro Aus, unless they can figure a bring back Tripp from the dead, they can keep it as far as I’m concerned.

That character, and his relationship with T’Pol was about the only thing that kept me coming back to give Enterprise a try. Jeffrey Coombes as Shan was the other.

By the way, other than Tripp’s death, I didn’t hate the series finale as much as many others. I just felt so little respect for Scott Baluka’s Archer that I couldn’t buy into the ‘great leader of the Federation’ stuff they were pushing at in the back half of the last season.

“Ed fro Aus, unless they can figure a bring back Tripp from the dead, they can keep it as far as I’m concerned“

They wouldn’t need to bring Trip back from the dead as the Romulan war happened before his passing. The main issue would be the age of the actors but I don’t think this would be an insurmountable issue as the war occurred several years after Terra Prime. Nevertheless, there is still only a limited window in which it could be done credibly and I don’t see any indication from CBS that this is likely. I’d definitely love to see it though.

Trip’s death was discovered to have been faked in the post-Enterprise novel “The Good that Men Do”. He became a Section 31 agent because he thought Starfleet was not taking the Romulan threat seriously.

The main thing I hated about “These Are the Voyages” (other than killing off Trip unnecessarily) was that the Enterprise cast seemed to be shunted aside in order to tell another TNG story. That was to me more or less Rick Berman extending his middle finger to Enterprise fans.

You know what? I would be perfectly fine with just ignoring “These are the Voyages” for the purpose of giving Enterprise a 2nd chance at a good finale. Would love to see CBSAA do a one off Enterprise mini series of 10-12 episodes. But assuming the actors are all into it and available, more importantly would be who they get to write and produce. If it is from the usual Secret Hideout bag of writers then I would prefer it not happen in all honesty.

Forced to agree that Archer was arguable the weakest lead character in a Trek show. (Up to THAT point.) He did become a little more interesting in the Xindi war, however. I liked seeing him turn more jaded and cynical. Even if it was just a little. But Bakula was not the right actor for the part. He was just too plain. He sorta has a Costner feel to him. There are roles that fit him perfectly well but Archer was just not one of them.

Agreed, sorry to say. Bakula is *likeable* and in some cases acts very well, but an actor needs a solid relationship with their character. [In other cases he was bland or one-note, or visibly *acting*]

He was able to build a more solid bond with his charcter Archer in Season 3’s Xindi arc, and I liked that too.

Archer was the GWB of Trek captains. I can’t for my life figure out why somebody would find such a crude loud mouth likeable, but then again, many people find GWB likeable too!

I figured the Academy series had morphed into this unnamed Nickelodeon animated one.

They also mentioned a Khan series, but that seems to be done with Meyer out.

Captain Pike and the Enterprise? YES!!!!!!!!!!!

Admiral Georgiou and Section 31? YAWN!!!!!!!!!!!! (shut it down now)

If space Hitler wasn’t headlining it, I think people wouldn’t be so against a Section 31 show. It’s what mostly put me off about the show as well but I’m going remain positive for now.

I agree, Tiger2. When it comes to Michelle Yeoh, I’ve seen better acting in high school plays. She REALLY stinks up the place.

Since they are going to do a show about a Space Hitler and call it Star Trek, they should also do a show about a bunch of people sitting still and looking down at the ground and call it Star Trek. Both are equally consistent with what Star Trek is about.

They could call the latter Star Trek: Bitter Fans

Just which actresses DO you admire? … any?

Yes, of course, Marja. Plenty. The female lead in Season two of You is superb. Also pretty much any female lead of British TV shows. In movies, you have Cate Blanchett.

Tiger2, I’m going to say that I don’t like the ‘space Hitler’ reference.

I know that several posters on this and other boards have used it, and there have been debates here and elsewhere about whether it’s a good fit.

That aside, in this time when white supremacist memes and symbols are being promoted through social media to kids that have no idea of what they mean, I believe we need to take more care in using any of these labels.

Yes, she was an appalling tyrant who bombed and destroyed planets, an ultimate Machiavellian ends-justify-the-means hegemon. Yes, she had no respect for the rights of other species.

There have been many such tyrants in science fiction literature. They are intended to show us why we don’t want that kind of leadership in our own societies. I don’t see reviews and critiques of these books referencing Hitler or the Holocaust unless the allegory is clearly intended.

So, could we not use that language for Mirror Georgiou please?

TG47, at least for me the point to make sure I use this term to describe the character, every single time, is to make sure we are not being lulled into forgetting what sort of atrocious character it is TPTB have created here as a future series lead, which is not just anti-Trek, but, as depicted, even worse than Hitler and with a “service record” no doubt featuring a whole plethora of Holocausts. When TPTB (btw, the same TPTB who rail against “isolationism”) talk about how “delicious” this war-hungry and genocidal character is, or fans who talk about “examining her inner feelings about her guilt’ and” work for her redemption”, I want people to mentally replace “Georgiou” with “Hitler” in their mind and think if they STILL are okay with doing these things with such a character, most of all, in a Trek series that up to has been posited as some sort of fun- and action-driven “Mission Impossible” – or maybe realize how ridiculous and in bad taste this is!

And yes, that the first Asian series lead in Trek, played by the fine Michelle Yeoh, should be such a monster is most, most unfortunate.

That’s a great point VS, I think it’s not to let her off the hook of what she truly is even if the producers are trying to redeem her in some way. For a lot of people, they don’t want someone like that redeemed. She is evil and done AWFUL things, things we have never seen another character do in Star Trek. We know its fiction and end of the day they can change the character how they want. But they introduced her in such a nasty fashion, most people just wanted to see her dead by the end of the season. As you said having a person like this lead their own show just comes off as really bad taste to many people, especially for something like Star Trek.

But they have time to redeeem her and maybe it will happen in season 3. It certainly didn’t happen in season 2.

Also her proclivity towards genocide is played for laughs. That might work on Lower Decks but it sure didn’t work even in something as laughable as Discovery.

Sorry. But describing the character as “Space Hitler” is 100% appropriate. I will not refrain from it nor would I ask anyone else to refrain from it merely because of my personal sensitivities. There are terms that irritate and annoy me but I don’t go asking people to not use them around me. I find that to be rude and even selfish. We are grown ups living in a free society. People are going to say things we don’t like to hear. We just have to deal with it in a grown up fashion.

We could refer to her as “Space (insert evil despot name here)”. Would using some other despot be OK? Earlier I referred to her as Space Pol Pot just to change things up a bit. But the Hitler reference works much better because so few are even aware of Pol Pot.

Well I don’t really call her Space Hitler that much but it seems to a common name for her everywhere now, certainly here lol. I understand why others don’t see her that way or think it’s appropriate but I heard much worse things said about her.

She is worse than Hitler. She has way more blood on her hands, actually completely succeeded in a few genocides and even ate intelligent lifeforms. The only reason why using “space Hitler” might be inaccurate is, because it minimizes her atrocities.

That has been my assessment as well. A Section 31 show as a concept does not seem to be what is causing the bulk of the fan resentment. It’s heading the show with Space Pol Pot.

If they planned for a Section 31 show, while it’s not my favorite aspect of Trek, I do see there might be some potential there.

BTW… They may as well have a MU set show with a person from the Prime side who goes in there and converts everyone to the Prime way of thinking. That is just as realistic as mirror Georgeau changing her spots just because she finds herself on this side of the mirror.

ML31, I love the idea of a person from the Prime Universe going in there and converting people. Or, a person from the MU who learns Federation values and takes them back to the MU.

I think there must surely be a huge number of people in the MU who want to revolt, and I had thought [during the course of DSC S1] that Lorca was the MU person who was going to use Discovery to help fight that battle. But alas, they went for the cartoon.

The problem with that is… Scorpion.

“They may as well have a MU set show with a person from the Prime side who goes in there and converts everyone to the Prime way of thinking.”

This idea is actually way more in line with Star Trek than what they are going for: “Space Hitler heading the (prime) FEDERATION agency Section 31”

I stand with Harry Ballz on this.

Thanks, GarySeven. I appreciate that! :>)

It is possible to have too much of a good thing. Picard, Discovery, Below Decks, Section 31, ST: TBD #1 and ST: TBD #2 is a lot of Star Trek, especially for a show that’s reaching a very specific audience.

I like it, it’s sounds like everything is going to be different enough compared to the TNG era where everything was feeling the same more or less.

But they’re running the same risk here, even with shows set in different eras. One show ends its season, another takes its place creating an endless cycle of Star Trek series which runs the risk of the entire franchise running out of steam within a few years.

I really doubt at this point there is any show planned, now or in the future, full run or even just limited, aimed at “legacy fans” – and no, Star Trek: 90210 ain’t it. I mean, “legacy” says it all. It means “please go away”. Even Berman was on to it already 20 years ago when he placed Enterprise as ‘not your grandfather’s Trek’. Well, this ‘granddaughter’s Trek’ is hardly recognizable anymore, outside or inside. The eternal pathological struggle of Trek has become: how not to be Trek (and still cash in from those gullible fans’ wallets). Compared to Star Wars, that looks like deep insecurity and minority complex. Star Wars is not afraid to be what it is, “critics” be damned, as the last movie showed, and in the rare occasion it strays, such as in TLJ, it gets the much deserved backslash and subsequent course correction.

Well, if really enjoying DCS and being incredibly excited for what we know about the Trek that is to come makes one gullible, I guess this “legacy fan” (45+ years) is about as gullible as they come.

Yes, Mike2, we are the “gullible sheeple, ready to accept our serving of drivel”.

–signed, a fellow fan of all the Treks

I think Enterprise was extremely similar to the other Berman-era shows in tone and style though. It wasn’t until Star Trek (2009) and now the Kurtzman shows that there was a real change.

“I think Enterprise was extremely similar to the other Berman-era shows in tone and style though. ”

That’s true. But the attitude was there already. That the most successful and critically acclaimed Trek series of all was somehow stained and something to be ashamed of, and needs to be “corrected”. This attitude carries through right into “Picard” it seems, and this time, after Discovery, I have no doubt they mean “business”.

That’s not my recollection of the situation at all VS.

What I recall was that from DS9 through Voyager and Enterprise, the powers that were of 90s Trek kept on saying that they heard the views of longtime (TOS) fans that the TNG Federation was too perfect, that they needed to get out and really explore etc. and that these 3 series were designed to enable that – each in its own way.

When DS9 was announced, there was a lot of hype about it being at the edge of Federation space, a crossroads where Federation norms didn’t hold, and the Gamma quadrant was new space to explore.

Voyager lost in the Delta Quadrant had the same theme in its pitch, as did Enterprise in a pre-Federation era.

So, thinking back, the message was not that Trek wasn’t good, but rather that they knew that, despite TNG having better ratings and a wider fan-base than TOS ever did, there was a longstanding core of fans that were looking for something TNG wasn’t designed to offer. It seemed like the ‘holy grail’ of 90s Trek series development after TNG.

As a fan of both TNG and TOS, I was frankly exasperated at what seemed to be fan-service overriding coming up with good solid premises for the new shows. That is, I felt it warped show development and undermined the later 90s series potential to be their best selves, as well as explained why they had weak early seasons.

This is one reason why I’m so positive about Kurtzman’s strategy. It isn’t looking for the ‘holy grail’ of a Trek show that appeals to everyone. It’s looking to cover the waterfront of possibilities and fan interests.

I also note that, with Pike, Spock and Number One, the new team has backed into something that many TOS fans have been able to get behind. I hope that when a Pike’s Enterprise show comes to be, fans can accept it as itself.

“That’s not my recollection of the situation at all VS.”

Is it not? I will go further and say as far back as DS9 season 4 there was desire to distance oneself from TNG and what it stood for – with more war and action, more babes, more fantasy elements and most certainly, less” Utopia”. Sure enough, every single time, in DS9 season 4, Voyager season 3 and Enterprise, the cited reason was “ratings decline’. But here’s the thing: no matter how hard TPTB tried to turn Trek into something different, the object of their envy – be that Star Wars, Babylon 5, Farscape/Firefly or Marvel – the ratings never permanently recovered. Showing what an erroneous path they had chosen because why pick a show known for its “nerdiness” that was trying to become a copy of something else if you could just watch the “cool” original?

The thing is VS that TNG was cool, ‘sexy’ and much more of a broadbased cultural phenomena while it was on the air than TOS ever was in first run.

But, there were always a group of TOS fans complaining and saying TNG wasn’t their Trek.

So, of course management wanted to find a way to expand the TV Trek offerings to bring these folk in, while hoping to keep the TNG fans watching the new series at the same time TNG moved to cinematic features.

But the strategy wasn’t very well conceived. Basically, it was still a mass market broadcast television strategy. It always seemed to me that the TOS fans who didn’t like TNG were trying to ruin it for the rest of us who liked it. (Including those like me who found TOS pretty cringy and decidedly uncool at that point – I’ve come back around again.)

Streaming allows us now to have 5 live action and 2 animated series being developed and made in rotation with no single show being burdened with the need to draw in every possible Trek fan. I understand that you are sincerely concerned about ‘fracturing’, but in my view that started with whinging, relentlessly negative TOS fans in the 90s.

I think you overestimate the influence “disgruntled TOS purists” had on these decisions – they were a force in 1987, yes, but not in 1994 at the peak of TNG’s popularity! I clearly remember all these measures – Worf, Klingon War, Seven of Nine, “Decon Chamber” on Enterprise (God help us) – were introduced to help the ratings, and yet they kept falling until Enterprise was canceled. That tells me these measures to distance the new shows from TNG were the wrong ones, and the actual reason (as apparent in the show most closely resembling TNG as its sequel, Voyager) was that the writing was of much lower quality compared to what TNG delivered. I seriously doubt the ratings declined because these shows were too Utopian. It’s the writers, and even Berman himself, who could never really wrap their head around it and wanted to jettison it through the backdoor, but along the way, they threw out the baby with the bathwater.

One could argue that TNG was “cool” and “sexy” and had “broad appeal”. But I would argue it would have NONE of that had there been no TOS before it. It was TOS that was great right out of the gate. It was TOS that had the legions of fans who created fandom. The conventions and fan fic and stuff. TNG would looked like it was the broader appeal but it merely stood on the shoulders of TOS. Had they decided to take TOS trek off the big screen and make a series from it, I strongly suspect it would have had the same, if not similar reach TNG did. Also, had it started with no TOS shoulders to stand on, looking at how that first season went it is very likely it would have been gone by it’s 2nd season if not the first.

Now again, I freely admit this is said with TNG not being my favorite. So perhaps I ought to have dialed it back some to be fair. But I still think my main point stands.

I remember fans posting Kirk v. Picard polls as recently as 10 years ago, perhaps even more recently.

A lot of TOS fans thought TNG and Picard were too ‘stodgy’ and not action oriented, that the department head conferences [though realistic] were ‘endless’ and so on.

As for the “babes” factor cited above, I recall Deanna Troi and Dr Crusher wore VERY tight-fitting uniforms. Heck, Troi’s even had decolletage. Verrrrry professional /s. And the female guest stars were often costumed for, shall we say, “boy appeal”.

You forgot Jeri Ryan PASSED OUT in her silver Borg catsuit? Troi’s and Crusher’s clothes are nothing in comparison ;)

I did not realize she passed out in the catsuit, but if you look closely you will note it is structured like a corset, so that does not surprise me at all. Imagine filming wearing that thing for 10 – 14 hours/day.

Jeri Ryan deserved better.

Personally, my complaint with TNG wasn’t that it was “stodgy”. It wasn’t that it wasn’t action oriented. Such things didn’t bother me. Much of TOS wasn’t action oriented either. My thing was I felt it obvious they were trying desperately hard to recapture the magic TOS had, especially among the main three characters. I feel like they should have tried harder than just separating them by 70+ years. I found the characters to be dull. None of them grew on me either. Not to say there weren’t any gem episodes. There were. But the best ones were ones where the characters didn’t matter. It was the situation they found themselves in that was interesting.

Regarding the “sexy” line… I figured TG was referring to the overall attractiveness of the show. In the same way someone says a car is “sexy”. It had little to do with the costumes worn by the female cast.

You think TRoS was a “course correction”? OK. But for me it was the worst Star Wars film since TPM. I’ve bought them all but I have no plans on purchasing RoS. I’m just going to pretend the sequels end with TLJ. That film felt like an ending anyway.

It was hardly original and felt oddly derivative, but it was not the huge middle finger that TLJ was to many people. It’s not purely Abrams’ fault though. Oddly enough, the last Star Wars trilogy suffers from the same core problem as the last Star Trek (Abramsverse) trilogy: a complete lack of planning and making it up on the way (with different, wildly inconsistent directors) – which is more than ironic in the age of “serialized storytelling”. While Trek may be excused by missing a clear head honcho for the movie franchise (though that may change soon), this one’s on Kennedy.

I don’t see it as the same problem. The KU was not created to be a three part story. They were essentially three stand alone stories. The SW sequel trilogy was planned to be three from the beginning. Their problem was it seems no one mapped out the story from A to B to C. They easily could have said, “these are the beats we want to hit ultimately culminating in this.” Then let three filmmakers decide HOW they were going to get to B and C. But it seems there was NONE of that. Which if you are planning on making a three part story one would think you have that overall story in mind when before you begin. I do agree that the SW blame can be laid at the feet of Kennedy. She is also the one who OK’d Johnson’s story, which, like it or not, completely felt like the final film rather than a middle one. But the hot mess that was TROS can be shared with both her and JJ. JJ and Terrio.

Sadly we seem have Colin Trevorrow’s original script for Episode 9 that has surfaced lately. And after sitting through that horrid ROS it makes me wish that was the film they made. Now Trevorrow doesn’t exactly make classics and doesn’t have a great track record for me but what I have discovered about it is that while it has some fantastical elements it comes across as a vastly superior script over what we ended up with and I find myself wondering what was in it that KK had issues with. Even the title was great… Duel of the Fates.

I would like to see the former mirror universe empress begin her transition into her new position admiring the former life of Captain Georgio, and wishing to redeem herself in this universe by giving the former captains life meaning. I’m not sure if I’m making sense but it’s hard to reconcile the fact that she’s NOT Georgio, and never will be Georgio. If she’s the protagonist then how can we ever trust her character to have the federations best interests at heart?
That’s why I’d like to see her redeem BOTH characters. Then maybe she can go back to the MU and become an agent of positive change.
I still want to see how she gets back to her timeline. Unless??? Nahhh!

Michelle Yeoh is a HUGE star in the Asian community. Billions of people in China, folks. It’s a vehicle to get CBSAA global reach. It may not do well here but I suspect it will be popular around the world.
I will watch it when it airs and I’ll have an open mind to it. If I want TOS? I cue up The Doomsday Machine. The gatekeeping that’s going on in 40 – 50+ year old franchises is getting disturbing. Just because a fan may have discovered or plugged into Trek at a certain time or place in their life? In my opinion ,that fan does not get to dictate what Star Trek is or isn’t. Or worse, try to define what a “true fan” is.
There’s room for everyone at the table folks. It’s a big universe.
I do think a Pike based show is a slam dunk for CBS. Please, CBS if you read this forum? Make a Captain Pike show. Let new fans discover that magic we TOS fans got in the ’60’s and ’70’s. Let that flow into TOS with a new Kirk and Spock. Oh, and that time suit? Burnham can use it one last time to save Pike from his eventual fate. ;-) There, I solved Star Trek.
It’s a good time to be a Star Trek fan.

Been saying for a while now, Section 31 isn’t a show aimed at North America, it’s for the foreign market. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Sorry. It most definitely is NOT aimed at a foreign market. That makes no sense. Do they hope it will play well in foreign markets? Of course! But unless the show is done in Mandarin or Khmer or Vietnamese then dubbed in English for the rest, it’s main market is the English speaking one. That same logic says ABC’s Fresh off the Boat is aimed at a foreign market. It isn’t.

How about, a mass-murdering maniac SHOULD NOT be redeemed, other than in hell? I know we’re high on moral relativism these days, but that’s a slippery slope to walk down…

All Trek all the time!

I look forward to it!
I’m sure the shows will appeal to a wide variety of fans and potential fans. And, me, I can pick and choose which ones I like, without slamming the others.
Constructive Criticism, yes, Slamming for the Sake of Slamming, no.

Ex-Emperor Georgiou has so far failed to win my sympathies. (Every time she got a minimum of goodwill from me, she went on to destroy it again by commenting on one of her past crimes in a way too casual way….)

BUT: If she is the central character, this COULD be used to flesh out her inner life more. Does she have feelings of immense loss? (She went from being a powerful emperor to being a misfit outsider after all.) Or will she indeed come to a point that her conscience and thus feelings of guilt catch up to her? (E.g. similar to 7of 9’s eventual feelings about her time as Borg drone.)

Empathy is something that develops first through relationships with others. It doesn’t sound as though the Mirror Universe provided much scope for what we would consider normal, healthy human attachments or respect for other beings to be established in a personality.

We saw that Georgiou’s attachment to Burnham was helping to change her behaviour and led to some self-sacrifice during Discovery S2. But that kind of psychological growth and change will not come in one great epiphany, but rather in fits and starts, with backsliding.

Erica Lippoldt, one of the showrunners, has a PhD in neuroscience as I recall. She’s very well placed to imagine what putting someone like MU Georgiou into a completely different society and culture would do to her brain and personality.

I expect that we’ll see Georgiou continue that change in Discovery S3, but that the Federation will in some earlier era ask Georgiou to step back into S31 to help, putting her ethical progress at risk.

If the Section 31 show’s main theme is the redemption of Space Hitler then that will be in the running for the lamest, dumbest, most idiotic thing Trek has ever done. Rivaling making Lorca come from the MU. This character cannot and should not be redeemed. At best she needs to find a way to get back to her natural environment. Where her natural instincts are a plus rather than a negative. The show should be about her using her new position to find a way home and should end with her either dying a gruesome and horrible death or finding her way back to the MU.

Lorca. Now there was a waste of a good character and actor. Honestly I’d forgotten about him.

I hope they #FindPrimeLorca.
All his time in the MU should make him … interesting.

TG47, Tiger, This sounds AWESOME.
I think a Trek that asks, “how does a horrible person redeem themselves?” is a valid and potentially quite interesting one.

Except she’s not just a “horrible” person. Any more than the lion is horrible because it murders and subsides on its prey. The lion does that because that is what a lion is. MU dopplegangers do what they do because that is who they are. It’s the scorpion and the frog.

Funny I didn’t even respond to the OP but I get a mention lol. Again, yes this is not anything new of course. The character just really rubs people the wrong way in general, that seems to be the problem, ie, people just don’t like her, period. And its not just for what she represents but that she comes off so one dimensional and cartoonish. If she was layered like Dukatt was for example who ALSO was responsible for millions of deaths but had real depth then it might be a different story. That guy is LOVED by many in the fanbase and if anyone wanted to see a redemption arc it would’ve been with Dukat. But the writers actually thought he was SO evil underneath that he really didn’t deserve one but gave one to Damar instead. And in Georgiou’s case she is not only much worse than Dukat (say what you want about the guy at least he never ate people), she simply sucks as a character for many.

Here is an example of the difference between the two and why the reaction between both are so mixed. When Dukat get into a discussion with Sisko and Kira over the things he did on Bajor, there is a serious discussion going on. Dukat always come from the angle ‘it had to be done but I tried to fair’. He is a smug person in general but yet he always makes it clear he knew people are bothered by the things Cardassians did there but hope in time they will come to see it wasn’t all bad. Regardless how you feel about him, that was a thoughtul approach and argument. But with Georgiou that’s the problem, nothing is ever taken seriously. She comes off smug and turn everything into a laugh. The few times its even discuss she just shrugs it off and don’t remotely take ANY insight to the things she’s done, at all. And that’s the problem.

Unlike Dukatt, She’s not a love to hate character for some, she’s a hate to love character and that will be a tough turnaround for them. All that said, they have plenty of time to convince people.

“The few times its even discuss she just shrugs it off and don’t remotely take ANY insight to the things she’s done, at all. And that’s the problem. ”

And the problem there is because to HER what she says IS perfectly normal. Of course she would shrug it off. It’s who she is genetically. She’s looking at everyone on this side of the mirror as screwed up. The way we would look at those on the other side. Giving her a redemption arc is a mistake on par with having Lorca come from the MU.

What proportion is nature (genetics) vs nurture?

Burnham said aloud that she could sense the MU was reshaping her, leading her to do things that didn’t mesh with her values.

Georgiou is going in the other direction. How with the Prime Universe Environment and society change her brain, her behaviour and her values?

Moving a human being from Prime to Mirror Universe or vice versa has to be the single most profound environmental change possible.

TG47… This is not nature v nurture. This is instinct. Once again, I bring up the tale of the frog and the scorpion. MU people cannot help but be who they are. It is the very nature of the MU. Mirror. As in, reverse of the other side.

“It’s who she is genetically.”

She’s genetically the same as Prime Georgiou.

Except she’s opposite.

“Except she’s opposite.”

Because of her environment, not her genetics.

Nurture, not nature.

“It is the very nature of the MU. Mirror. As in, reverse of the other side.”

Except a person’s genetics.

Also, characters like Spock, O’Brien, Dax, Bashir, T’pol etc are shown as being fundamentally the same decent people in both universes. The MU versions are not the opposite/reverse of the Prime versions.

It is not just her environment. But it is also her instinct. It is who she is. It is how the MU is wired. To get by in the other side one must fundamentally change to the opposite of who they are.

Scorpion and the Frog, Jai. Scorpion and the Frog.

“But it is also her instinct.”

Instincts are a result of genetics, ML31. This is actual medical science. MU Georgiou has exactly the same genetics (and therefore the same instincts) as her Prime counterpart. “Who she is” at her core is the same as Prime Georgiou.

This applies to all the characters shown in both universes. Some of them are the same decent people — I’ve listed some notable examples in my previous comment — and others have clearly been shaped for the worse by their environments and experiences.

Come to think of it, MU Jennifer Sisko was also eventually shown as being fundamentally the same person in both universes, at least when it came to Jake and the redemptive effect of that maternal bond. She actually ends up sacrificing her life for him.

You seem to be misunderstanding the “mirror” aspect of Mirror Universe. It doesn’t literally mean “opposite/reverse”; it refers to the fact that the same people exist in both universes. A frog in the Prime Universe isn’t automatically a scorpion in the MU (and vice versa). Again, see Spock, O’Brien, Jadzia Dax, Bashir, T’pol, Jennifer Sisko etc.

The correct analogy isn’t the Scorpion and the Frog. It’s genetically-identical twins who were separated at birth and have had very different life experiences.

Well, in this case she does have the same genetics. We are talking about a made up sci-fi universe whose goal is to showcase opposite versions of ourselves. It makes zero story telling sense that such a person can be “redeemable” especially so since from that person’s point of view she is being corrupted rather than being redeemed.


One thing I’m cautious about, is while I hope to live long enough to have my lifespan considerably extended by medical science, I’m concerned that all that extra time might allow one to significantly stray from the path of “good”.

Enough with Section 31.

Section 31 was a great idea. A shadow organization that was a mystery to the characters and audience.

The writers killed that already. Mirror Georgiou is a horrible character. Kill her off and develop another series.

Here the the comment that caused me the most doubt by Kadin…

“Michelle [Yeoh’s] character [Georgiou] is so unique, and you’ve never seen that before.”

We haven’t? Coulda sworn we have in pretty much every MU episode Trek ever did. Does she think Discovery is the first time it appeared in Trek? Sorta feels a little like the claim that Trek had never done story arcs before.

While it’s not specifically mentioned above, one of the points that Kurtzman has been speaking to recently is that the Trek franchise is inherently ‘Hopepunk’. (I believe he’s cited on this on the official site.)

Ok, I totally confess that I had no clue what this term ‘hopepunk’ means when I read this.

Yes, I had a good feel for the concept of ‘grimdark’ going back to Hammer 40k (a miniatures warfare gaming system that I always steered clear of specifically because I didn’t like it’s worldview).

But ‘hopepunk’? What?

So, I informed myself. Kurtzman seems to be dead-on in describing it as an essential and defining characteristic of Trek.

(I’ll let you all Google yourselves into understanding on this one.)

Point is, if the Secret Hideout management is clear on this point, I think that whatever shows they develop will be fine.

How they get MU Georgiou over to Hopepunk remains to be seen, but they won’t be celebrating nihilism.

And this explains the ongoing course corrections in Discovery. Burnham seemed to be mapped out from the start as more like a noblebright character than a character in hopepunk. I hope they continue to correct that.

(Noblebright involves characters with a personal destiny to be heroes and reach a happy ending, vs positive characters working to build a positive and just society and make good choices in the face of ongoing challenges.)

if i have to wait even longer for disocvery i’m gonna wig out… 2020 is obviously going to be one of the busiest years in trek history… between the tv stuff plus we should be getting definite movie news on two fronts… and i’m running out of ds9’s… just finishing season 6… i can’t move on to voyager… i just can’t.

Well, Tom Riker, if you only saw Voyager in first run, you might be surprised.

It’s the most watched Trek series on Netflix for a reason. It really has aged better than I’d expected.

Our middle-grade kids started into Voyager a couple of years ago and I rewatched with them, and was positively impressed. There are some really top notch Trek episodes in Voyager.

I admit that I was floored when one of our kids did a school project and said that Janeway was their role model. It really made my spouse and I reassess our view on the series and particularly on Janeway as a captain.

Awww, tom, give it a chance. Go in around Season 3. I liked Voyager. Not in its original broadcast and not for 20 years, but I finally tried it last year. Pretty good!

The good thing about Voyager is, it has a captain who doesn’t yell at both friends and enemies all the time, and doesn’t threaten to “knock the a$$” of his female subordinates…

I never had a big issue with Voyager like others. And oddly to this day Voyager probably had the best first season for me (not counting TOS). But it never rose to greatness either the way TNG or DS9 did but I always loved it even with its problems. But everyone is different, if its not for you, its not for you.

The unique thing about the MCU wasn’t simply that characters from different movies turned up together, it was that all of the different movies told pieces of one larger story. That was an incredible feat for the MCU, and would be incredible to see in Star Trek. We got a taste of this in All Good Things, when the TNG crew from different times in their history had to join together to solve a problem. Imagine an all-encompassing story that has stories from Discovery, Picard, the new series, etc., all mixing together into one grand story with an epic conclusion. If done well (it’s exceedingly difficult to do this well), this would be amazing.

When and where is the Pike series?!?!?!?!? Can’t wait!!!!!

I’d take another TNG/DS9/VOY-era “sequel” show over a Pike show and definitely over a Starfleet Academy show. I hope something else emerges on that front eventually. Though I’ll be cautiously optimistic about anything! (And a Pike show WOULD rule regardless.)

Star Trek Sisko.

I’m so not into a Section 31 show. It’s completely against what my believe of what Star Trek should be about. And although I like Michelle Yeoh I find her character in Disco pretty unsufferable, so count me out.

Spaceballs the T-Shirt! Spaceballs the coloring book! Spaceballs the lunchbox! Spaceballs the toilet paper! Star Trek the cartoon! Star Trek the movie! Star Trek the comic! Star Trek the three TV shows! Star Trek the after show!

Slow down. Chew your food.

Section 31. The show nobody asked for or wants. Wish I cared.

3 more seasons of Enterprise, please.