‘Star Trek: Lower Decks’ Gets Release Date On CBS All Access; USS Cerritos Revealed [UPDATED]

Finally, there is news on new Star Trek headed to CBS All Access, with the first season of the first animated comedy from the franchise.

Head back to the 24th century in August

Today CBS announced Star Trek: Lower Decks will arrive on CBS All Access on Thursday, August 6th. Following the premiere, new episodes of the 10-episode first season of the half-hour animated comedy will arrive each Thursday.

CBS also released a teaser art poster today, giving fans the first look at the USS Cerritos, the central ship from the show. The poster features the new tagline for the show: “Rarely going where no one has gone before,” which is a riff on the premise of the show set on a ship that specializes in “second contacts.”

You may notice that the digital teaser image is styled to look like one of those fold-out posters you would get from magazines, including creases.

And CBS has provided an updated summary of the show:

Developed by Emmy Award winner Mike McMahan (“Rick and Morty,” “Solar Opposites”), STAR TREK: LOWER DECKS focuses on the support crew serving on one of Starfleet’s least important ships, the U.S.S. Cerritos, in 2380. Ensigns Mariner, Boimler, Rutherford, and Tendi have to keep up with their duties and their social lives, often while the ship is being rocked by a multitude of sci-fi anomalies.

Pictured (l-r): Eugene Cordero as Ensign Rutherford, Boiler, Fred Tatasciore as Lieutenant Shaxs, Dawnn Lewis as Captain Freeman, Ensign Barnes played by Jessica McKenna, Tawny Newsome as Ensign Mariner, Gillian Vigman as Dr. T’ana

The Starfleet crew residing in the “lower decks” of the U.S.S. Cerritos, includes “Ensign Beckett Mariner,” voiced by Tawny Newsome, “Ensign Brad Boimler,” voiced by Jack Quaid, “Ensign Tendi,” voiced by Noël Wells and “Ensign Rutherford,” voiced by Eugene Cordero. The Starfleet characters that comprise the ship’s bridge crew include “Captain Carol Freeman,” voiced by Dawnn Lewis, “Commander Jack Ransom,” voiced by Jerry O’Connell, “Lieutenant Shaxs,” voiced by Fred Tatasciore and “Doctor T’Ana,” voiced by Gillian Vigman.

Pictured (l-r): Tawny Newsome as Ensign Mariner, Noel Wells as Ensign Tendi, Eugene Cordero as Ensign Rutherford, Jack Quaid as Ensign Boimler

UPDATE 2: Canadian premiere announced

Last week it was announced that Lower Decks will air on CTV Sci-Fi in Canada, as well as be available for streaming on Crave. Both are also home of Star Trek: Picard and Star Trek: Discovery. Today Bell Media announced Lower Decks will premiere in Canada the same day as it arrives on CBS All Access in the USA. Lower Decks will air on CTV Sci-Fi on Thursday, August 6 at 9 pm ET. It will also be available to stream on Crave on Thursday.

International distribution outside of the USA and Canada for Lower Decks has not yet been announced.

UPDATE 1: Animated announcement

CBS also released a brief animated version of the announcement on Twitter.


Keep up on all the Star Trek: Lower Decks news here at TrekMovie.com.

Subscribe
Notify me of
229 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

My god, ugly ship!

I think that’s kind of the point. They’re the lowest Of the low.

That is a lazy point. You can make a low ship and still make it ok to the eye. Look at the Nova, the Oberth, etc.

If the hole show is going to be a joke, they should stop calling it canon. The ship looks like a parody ship.

It’s a comedy, it’s supposed to be a joke!

Then why not make it the typical Excelsior or Miranda class that are ubiquitous in that era, and also more than a century dated?

Honestly, to me, it looks a lot like a Miranda-esque ship but with a TNG aesthetic. Probably filling a similar mission profile.

It’s much, much larger than the Miranda-class.

I don’t see a hole, I see a very large main deflector suspended between the nacelle – which would be needed if the ship is city-size massive.

Doesn’t look all that big a ship to me. Judging by the windows on the saucer, the saucer is bout 10 decks thick. (three decks in the ‘rim’, two below, two above, allowing for some additional decks for the bridge and windowless ones.

Because they have theire own ideas. Arent you courious how they will play out or Do you want a custom tailored Star trek Show?

It like saying: damn why is breaking Bad Not a family friendly Show about magic elves in sportcars.. Mm they should Do that…

So lazy then.

Nope. The lowest deck became the bridge. 😉

Looks alright to me.

It looks ok to me too. I think that the ship will be fine.

We only have one view, but we know that it is a mid-sized second contact ship that needs to be in place in orbit long enough to do heavy lifting of establishing long-term relations without looking threatening.

It needs to be a bit modest looking. It’s not there to intimidate or promote Federation exceptionalism.

If one looks at it as a sort of mash-up of an oversized TNG-era science ship, a Galaxy-class multimission explorer, and a space station, it makes sense.

Last edited 1 month ago by TG47

“mid-sized second contact ship”… sounds like the Orville. :-)

Actually, I meant to say city-sized based on the promotional materials. My autocorrect is in hyperagressive mode it seems.

My God, it’s fine.

Not really, but to your point, so what?

To each his own. I found the Galaxy class ships to be the ugliest I’ve ever seen in the Trek universe.

You monster😲😲😲😆

Dooh!

For this show, I like the ship.

YES IT IS I get Steamrunner vibes

We’ve accepted the Grissom for decades, but this somehow seems…worse. Okay I’ve got to go down this strut, down the nacelle, across another strut, and I’m in engineering. Why don’t they consult with actual naval architects?

Since this is meant to be a comedy, the thing to do is to lean into the flaws of the design. All sorts of jokes can be made out of how impractical it is.

“Sir, is there any word from Starfleet on my request for a neck? This ship needs a neck.”

“It doesn’t arrive until Tuesday.”

Ha!

Like what you did there! :-D

Because its Star trek and Not a navy Show….

And… the Comic Book Guy-type hate posts begin.

Can’t we just enjoy Star Trek without constantly being slapped around with minutiae? Geez……

Well you don’t have to marry it.

Plot twist: the ship is actually upside down. The gravity plates were accidentally installed on the ceiling. They simply reversed the ship to correct it.

FFS

That truly looks like one of the least important ships in Starfleet. It’s perfect!

Look at those lens flares.
Hope we get some more in the show.

I like the fake fold lines in the poster.

Those fake fold lines really gave me a double-take.

I think that they’re sly, in a good way.

tear a hole in the poster and shine a line from the back, at least then it wouldn’t be faux.

A month away! That’s sooner than expected. Cool. I hope it’s great!

Lower Decks is already my favorite Trek show to be honest with you Bryant.

Let’s hope it stays that way!

Just from a couple of drawings? Seriously???

Wonder if they have to beam down to that secondary hull/engineering section?

Good point. People have been commenting on the Enterprise’s main pylon being a vulnerable spot because it’s too thin, but what about those nacelle supports… Way too flimsy. But all this is really irrelevant. This is a cartoon and maybe those points are actually part of the intended design.

Yeah, this has been beat to death, actually. No Starfleet ship could actually really exist in the real universe. Sublight flight stresses even in the vacuum of space would tear these ships apart….

Last edited 1 month ago by Phil

Don’t they use forcefields and stuff to increase structural integrity?

Technobabble. Usually thrown out when the ship was being stressed, or structurally compromised. The problem is, these structural integrity fields are still force fields. Just a barrier around a part, or a hole in the hull that just got blown into space. They aren’t going to magically increase the strength of materials. If their constant operation is required to keep the finest ship in the fleet from falling apart, well, how many times did we see starships lose all power? How did they even build this ship if there weren’t force fields everywhere holding it together?

There are still flight dynamics in space, too. Instead of atmospheric forces that would rip a compromised plane apart (assuming for the moment that starships don’t enter the atmosphere – damn it, JJ), you have to have structure that can resist massive amounts of thrust to push a massive starship at close to light speed. Newton still has a say in all this…..

Our kids love Voyager for the technobabble.

Don’t knock it. It’s better understood as the entry window for bright preteen and other geeky potential fans (as I, my spouse and many of our peers once were).

At least the technobabble feels like the process of science and engineering most of the time whether or not it’s actually scientifically viable. We’ll take that over cheerleading “It’s the power of math people!” or “I like science” any day.

That’s fine, as long as everyone understands it’s bulls**t.

why you gotta ruin Star Trek like that

It’s a better stress release then beating a dog….

Injuring an animal relieves stress? Seriously?

Last edited 1 month ago by Methusalah

Sarcasm rarely translates well in print, unfortunately.

OK, no problemo

“He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates 2 dimensional thinking.”

what about the defiant?

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder what the point is of having it connected like that, besides intentionally making it more ugly. It almost looks like the ship should just start doing flips whenever the engines turn on.

Last edited 1 month ago by Zinc Saucier

If you need an explaination for everything, it’s just an equipment pod. No moving parts, multiple redundancy, serviced in space dock only. Shielded Jefferies tube if you absolutely, positively need to be on the lowest deck of the ship…..

Thinking this further, together with that ‘plate’ on the underside of the saucer it kinda looks like the ship could be used as a tender, and attach a large (semi-cylindrical) module for different missions between saucer and nacelles.

Space trailer hitch….

I wouldn’t walk there.

I figure the pylons are still big enough for turbolift shafts and stairs.

Stairs, how quaint.

E-D and E-E had ladders

I’m here for the habitrail!

Turbolifts and Jeffries tubes would just be suspended in the space frame, linking with mechanical and habitable-modules.

If it’s city-sized, then the pylons will be large enough. I’m just wondering about the multi-star arced windows on the saucer.

Yay! I’m so ready for some more new Star Trek. I’ve been holding my breath for Discovery but I’ll definitely take Lower Desks. Lord knows we could all use some laughs.

What about Discovey, when’s that supposed to land?

Last edited 1 month ago by Dvorak

We don’t know when season 3 should premiere, but with Lower Decks covering off the summer/Q3, my guess is that Discovery will run no earlier than late September in order to impact Q4.

By the way, the Guild sheets in Toronto are continuing to show preproduction for Discovery season 4 starting in July on their “Rumoured” listings. So, it sounds like S4 writing may be underway even if postproduction for S3 is ticking along.

soon.

Also of interest, the article on the official site has the following to say about other Trek productions:

“Star Trek: Lower Decks is the first animated series to join the expanding Star Trek franchise on CBS All Access, which includes hit original series Star Trek: Picard; Star Trek: Discovery, returning with season three later this year; the recently announced U.S.S. Enterprise set series Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, featuring Anson Mount, Rebecca Romijn and Ethan Peck; and the development of a Section 31-based series with Michelle Yeoh. A CG-animated Star Trek series aimed at younger audiences is also in the works for Nickelodeon.”

Note that S31 is again confirmed as in development, and Discovery S3 is still “later this year.”

So they still haven’t given up on S31, just sounds like it may be delayed. But I guess you can say that about every show now.

I figured that they pushed Section 31 back and prioritized SNW since that one is easier to get into production once they’re allowed to film. SNW already has the most important set built (the bridge) and has a lot of the main casting done (Pike, Number One, Spock and the few actors that had lines on the bridge plus Sidhu from the Short Treks). They can also do more location shooting if the show truly is episodic and more exploratory.

I agree. I think S31 was pushed back for SNW. It would definitely make sense given all the fanfare for it. I’m just surprised S31 is still coming because they been soooo quiet about that show considering they kept saying it was going to start production after DIS had wrapped. But as said our new reality has probably changed a lot of things.

I assume there are still a lot of pluses to them in making S31: headlined by an international star, first Trek show headlined by an Asian actor to help (potentially) expand global audience, and (potentially) a different style of Star Trek show (maybe not season long arcs and more of a procedural/spy show).

Plus it seems like they really enjoyed working with Michelle Yeoh and are happy to create a star vehicle for her.

I’d be happy to watch it, too, provided it isn’t a Section 31 show.

They can still do all of that with just a different show though. Everyone seems to like Yeoh in general but the Space Hitler character just seem like the wrong approach to lead a Star Trek show IMO.

Hopefully I’ll be proven wrong.

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

That’s fair. We have S3 of Discovery to hopefully see some evolution of her character.

Everyone needs to ask why CBS All Access feels the need to have a show that glorifies someone who committed genocide. It’s not OK to glorify genocide, as I would hope would be patently obvious.

We’re not supposed to be cool with the genocide. She’s a villain protagonist.

I think you’ve found the problem. Worst character in Trek’s history; Yeoh deserved much better.

The thing about the S31 show is they can’t really give any details without spoiling things about Discovery’s third season. Emperor Giorgiou went to the future with the rest of the crew, so even revealing the period S31 is set in would let us infer things about Discovery.

Yeah, good point. I’m not really talking about story info, I just mean WHEN will they start shooting it?? Have they hired other actors to be on the show, etc?

It’s weird how much lack of information there is CONSIDERING it was literally the first announced spin off and officially announced in early 2019. But because Georgiou is still on DIS it hasn’t been pushed through like PIC and LD has obviously.

But I agree I imagine story details are very vague because they will probably be based on whatever happens in season 3. I’m becoming more and more convinced that Gergiou doesn’t actually leave the 32nd century but stays in that era and rebuild S31 there. But I’m prepared to be wildly wrong. ;)

Not to mention that people actually want to see the Pike show, unlike Section 31.

Section 31 was all about marketing in China, anyway. And that may be a negative for CBS after Covid-19, the Uighurs, the South China Sea, and the annexation of Indian territory, not to mention all the negative publicity that companies like Google have weathered after attempting to appease the CCP.

“Section 31 was all about marketing in China, anyway.”

I don’t know why some keep saying that. Just because the show had an East Asian lead? Does that mean that Crazy Rich Asians was marketed for the Chinese market? It bombed there.

And also starring Michelle Yeoh. ;)

She was born in Malaysia and made films in Hong Kong, not the PRC.

Where did even I suggest those things?

I was almost excited, then I saw that they are still missing any mention of streaming options outside of North America and I got rather annoyed.
Just hope it won’t be like Short Treks, season 2 of which still haven’t been “aired” in most of the world.

Interestingly, at the end of the article on the official site, it says that outside the United States, Lower Decks is “distributed worldwide by ViacomCBS Global Distribution Group.”

Not sure what that means, or if there is a possibility that it will run on a number of different platforms.

CTV Sci-fi channel has tweeted out the link to the Star Trek Official Site confirming that it will run Thursdays starting August 6th in Canada.

I read this as: CBS hasn’t found/settled on international distribution partners yet. Otherwise, they would mention a specific network or streaming service. Or it’s indeed different platforms in each market.

Last edited 1 month ago by DIGINON

What’s with the 1 million ads TrekMovie?

Anthony has responded on previous threads.

It’s a glitch associated with the new mobile environment. It seems that it’s being harder to resolve than TM had hoped.

Hopping directly to the comments by hitting the “# comments” link at the top of the thread is a good way to avoid the ads in the meantime.

or hit End on your keyboard and scroll up

This issue was fixed. try reloading? But shortly after i said it was being fixed we reverted back, the endless scroll is no more, just a fixed size ad widget above the comments.

At this point I’m more bothered by the lack of color coded new posts. It takes forever to scroll though the threads without easily being able to spot the new posts…

I miss that feature too ML31.

I’ve been kind of hoping that the lack of colour markers for new posts is another unintended glitch.

I see them on Chrome. As I recall the color coding of new posts hasn’t worked properly in some other browsers for a while now.

Mobile Safari seems to be broken, and not fixed for over a year now.
https://gvectors.com/forum/general-discussion-and-feedback/bug-highlight-unread-comment-not-working-on-iphone/

Last edited 1 month ago by Matt Wright

I’m not seeing them on Chrome on my mobile Matt.

Same TG47. I’m on Chrome literally 100% of the time on my devices.

I did see the highlight on Safari on my iPhone. But I hate using my phone for the site. So much so that I’d rather slowly peruse the date and time of posts before using the mobile version.

But perhaps I should switch from Firefox to Chrome just to see if it works….

I have had the opportunity to use Chrome for a short while now. New posts showed up in an already viewed article and the shading did not appear. Is this something that is gone for good now?

I’m on Firefox. I see green headings and “response to [name]” in blue, which is nice, but that’s it

LOL. Many readers are going thru this festival of endless ads. I was half sleep the first time I was scrolling down the million ads. It was better than Red Bull, to wake me up and do some work. Hope soon they find where the glitch is.

Last edited 1 month ago by Jay

It looks like only certain people are still seeing lots of ads. It’s been normal for me for a week now. I only see a few as before. So it probably depend on the browser or device you are on.

Yep Tiger2, it seems to be variable.

I only get that now if there are zero comments posted already.

Makes it tough to be the first to comment.

Yay! Finally a release date! Looks like I now know when to re-up to CBSAA. August 10th. (that way I don’t need to pay for a needless third month)

Me too.

Need to get my CBSAA subscription back. Lower Decks is going to be fun. Probably might get one month free.

I’m getting rid of Disney+ first. Hamilton is coming out Friday on Disney+ and that’s about it. Disney+ is great if you are a Star Wars fan or if you love Marvel movies. Don’t need to see a Disney movie ever again.

CBSAA can take my money. Picard was really nice. Now when are we getting Discovery season 3?

I had Disney+ last December only to watch The Mandalorian during my free week. Canceled immediately after. They do have a some things coming that I wouldn’t mind seeing but nothing that I would pay their fee for. And that includes their filming of the stage play “Hamilton”.

At the business strategy level, Disney+ is really vulnerable. There just isn’t that much content to hold subscribers unless they have kids, and even then the age ranges are narrower than one would think.

We have Disney on cable, and our kids are coming to the end of watching the content even as repeats.

Disney+ just doesn’t have much more to add to hold youth and adult viewers over the long haul.

CBSAA with the Paramount library is kind a flip of Disney. A solid youth and adult library, but not a lot of mass market content for kids. All the more so with BET and their other cable channel content.

Adding in Nickelodeon content as well as the Wildbrain/dhx library of kids content (which is huge globally on YouTube) into a restructured ViacomCBS streamer seems really smart.

ViacomCBS still has the potential to come out ahead. Definitely, the tortoise and not the hare.

I’m not re-signing AA for this, waiting for Picard S2. Yup, I know that’s gonna be a while. Unless the Pike show comes along first. Personally I’m enjoying the heck out of Disney +, if only for rewatching Mandalorian and the many documentaries.

Last edited 1 month ago by Danpaine

Fair enough. So far if I was to not pay for a Trek show it would be S3 of Discovery as they have not yet earned it. In the end I’m such a fan that I will go ahead and pay to see S3 hoping it will get better but expecting it won’t. Lower Decks is something I am actually looking forward to and want to see.

First thing off, it needs to be funny. Like, really funny for Trek and non-Trek fans alike. I hope they nail that, if they do the rest will fall into place. That said, given the track record of these showrunners so far, I am not terribly hopeful.

When I think realistically I’m forced to agree. The track record for Secret Hideout Trek is not very good to say the least. But I still want to hold out hope. So I need to think unrealistically when it comes to Lower Decks. :)

August 6 is marked on my calendar!

I feel like Star Trek: Lower Decks will be my favorite Trek show. It balances things out.

USS Cerritos is a cool looking ship.

Looking good for one of Starfleet’s least important ships am I right

I’ll give it a try, but I still wonder how long a show can go as Star Trek comedy before the well runs dry. An hour of a TOS episode like “Trouble with Tribbles” or a DS9 episode like “Little Green Men” is fine, but endless episodes? Well, good luck to Lower Decks.

Hardly “endless”. The season is only 10 episodes. At that rate it will be a while before the well runs dry…

I hope you’re right, but I think it is going to get old fast. And 20 episodes, Season 2 was already approved. That’s a lot of jokey Trek to come up with.

20 episodes is one REAL season. But seems to be two streaming seasons. I’ve noticed that most streaming shows get a two season order up front, anyway. But I hope they are able to keep it fresh. The last season of Rick & Morty only had a couple of good ones in their set of 10. So it’s losing steam already.

For network TV, not streaming or cable. 8-13 episodes is the standard season for those platforms. And now even networks seem to have more and more shows around 13 episode seasons.

The few shows I watched on networks this year were all around 12 episodes.

Sadly it is becoming a little more common. FOX has started shorter seasons for most of their shows a short while ago. But the other networks still with few exceptions have the more standard seasons.

10 half-hour episodes. Which is not a lot of content, but I hope will bring some laughter to these benighted days

I actually like the ship, but I won’t be watching this.

Will the content of “Lower Decks” be considered canon?

“Lower Decks” is considered canon if you like it or not.

The ship is innovative.

Last edited 1 month ago by Faze Ninja

Try reading more carefully. The press release very clearly said the show was “consistent with” canon, not that it was canon. If you’re in PR or law, you notice subtle hedging language like this. TBTP are being very careful to say that if sitcommy Trek isn’t your cup of tea, you don’t have to consider it canon.

It won’t be considered canon, no. It will simply BE canon.

Well put, Bryant.

Nope. Just “consistent with canon.” It will not be canon.

They confirmed the show is indeed canon. I still have no idea why it’s even an issue? Shouldn’t all the shows and movies just be canon?

It’s an issue because some people don’t like animation, and/or regard anything animated as automatically inferior to live-action.

That’s fine, they can simply just not watch the show then. Problem solved. But it’s canon regardless. I just don’t get the argument so if it ISN’T canon, does that mean the people who hate it for being animated will suddenly like it more?? Either way they are going to be unhappy about it. Best solution is just to not watch.

People can cite GR claiming retroactively that TAS wasn’t canon and use that to not count this, but I don’t think CBS will go that route.

Didn’t Roddenberry basically say he didn’t consider TUC canon either? So yeah And who cares? The guy is DEAD! Not trying to offend anyone, just stating a well known fact. And hasn’t worked on Star Trek literally since the 80’s.

From what I understand GR didn’t like any of the Bennett produced features mainly because he had zero say in anything whatsoever to do with them. He was given the Consulting Producer (if I recall the title correctly) credit only out of respect. I think it is partly why he decided to create TNG.

I know he had nothing to do with films much past TMP. And another reason why I don’t really care about his opinion on what he considered ‘canon’ or not. That’s CBS job to actually determine it. As for GR, who knows about his thoughts of any of the shows past TNG since he’s, well, dead. And if he was willing to wipe canon from some of the best films in the franchise because he didn’t make them, that says it all for me and why no one should care what he thinks on any of it. All that matters is how you care about it; period.

But I’m sure he would’ve praised Nemesis though! ;D

I’ll just agree that trying to please GR is a fools errand. No one involved in Trek today should be trying to make something they think Gene would approve of.

Perhaps one of the reasons why Secret Hideout has been so weak with Trek could be because they seriously are thinking about what Gene would want?

He died something like 36 hours after seeing it once, doubt there was much time or inclination at that point to go nuclear with a condemnation that could impact his piece of the action. He did say that about TFF, though — after it had made its money.

True. Personally I honestly don’t care if it is canon or not. I just want it to be funny.

As they said recently on the Trek This Out podcast … “Canon, schmanon.”

With the only other TNG era show currently in production being Picard I feel fairly safe to say that its canonicity is a moot point. The only time the distinction has any consequence whatsoever is when someone’s trying to develop a new script that directly or indirectly relates to the events or consequences of a previous episode. Outside of that, all canon is headcanon.
And can you really imagine the writers of Picard deciding that it’s absolutely vital to check back in with the crew of the Cerritos?

I thought it was Discovery starting in September! Glad this show is coming soon. Will restart my CBS subscription for the premiere!

Well I guess this will be coming out before Discovery after all! But glad SOMETHING is coming out sooner than later. When it said August I thought we were still in for a wait until I realized it’s already July 1st lol. Time is starting to fly, even in quarantine. So I imagine we are going to get tons of stuff about it all this month. It’s still bizarre we haven’t gotten a trailer for it since it premieres in a month but I guess that’s coming soon now.

But its exciting to get both another new Trek show and post-Nemesis one. They can do so many possibilities with this show. Can’t wait to see what old TNG era characters will eventually pop up! :)

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

I’d be fine without any known character cameos but I think we all know they won’t be able to resist the opportunity.

The creator confirmed months ago we will definitely see cameos, they are just keeping quiet on who it will be.

And no one can be surprised, this sounds like this is going to be a huge fan boy type of show with tons of Star Trek/TNG easter eggs and fun references.

The only bad part of “Ephraim and Dot,” the animated short, was the awkward animated McCoy, Kirk, and Khan in Sickbay. They looked like something from a very early RPG

What?? I loved that part lol.

The 2380 date is somewhat interesting in that it is a year after Nemesis and just before or right at the beginning of the Romulan evacuation.

I thought the Romulan evacuation didn’t happen until 8-9 years after Nemesis? But I can’t keep up with all these dates lol.

But I’m just happy Voyager will already be back in the Alpha quadrant by then at least so we can possibly see some of those characters too.

The actual supernova is 8 years after Nemesis, but the evacuation began a few years before that.

OK gotcha. I even brought and read the Countdown comics before the show started and I still forgot lol.

To be honest, I’ve decided not to get too hung up on that sort of thing. It’s TNG era. That’s enough for me.

oh myyyy god, alright the ship is hideos, but loving the Galaxy class vibes. Also this looks so much like R&M and Solar Opposites in its animation style, particularly the faces. I see Summer and Morty in some of them. I just prayyy it’s actually funny and that it isn’t an “alternate universe” of Rick and Morty

ship name sounds like a tortilla chip, should have been a like-shaped imperial star destroyer.

Yes. I’ve been thinking of it as the USS *brand name* for months. I know it’s a place, but can’t help comparing it to a USS Monster Munch.

Or named after the no-win Kelpians — the Kobayashi Saru!

I can’t help but think of Cerritos as the part of LA where the car dealers are located.

My mother got her last car from that area two years ago. ;)

Yes, that was my immediate thought

If Cerritos is the car dealership capital of LA county, then the USS Cerritos really needs to have a sister ship called the USS Mississauga!

Mississauga, just west of metro Toronto, and adjacent to the Toronto Pearson Airport, is where the new CBS Studios is located. It’s often just lumped in with the Greater Toronto area (GTA), but it’s a decidedly separate and independent city.

Mississauga also has such a high concentration of car dealerships that a few years ago the city planners warned that it was running out of space for new car dealerships. (As if 121 wasn’t enough…) The planners admonished car dealerships that they couldn’t use light industrial zoned land (i.e. the kind CBS Studios is on) for selling cars. Let’s appreciate that the car dealers didn’t take being labeled as retail well.

Last edited 1 month ago by TG47

The design is neat and fits into to the TNG time period. Reminds me of a kit-bash, which is very appropriate for the era. The USS Cerritos is not meant to be the Federation flagship, but for a support ship this design fits well along side the Nebula and Steamrunner class starships!

“Rarely Going Where No One has Gone Before”

The irony is you could’ve used that same tag line about Discovery in pretty much all of season one until they got to the MU. They expanded out a little more in season 2 but only a little. Which is pretty ridiculous considering they have a spore drive that can get them to the Delta quadrant and back in two minutes.

But it looks like season 3 is going to make up for that. ;D

“Rarely Going Where No One has Gone Before”? Seriously?

CBS All Access would do very well to remember that when folks start to parody your golden goose franchise, it’s on thin ice. Remember what the AUSTIN POWERS films almost did to the Bond franchise?

It’s even worse when the franchise begins to parody itself. Anyone remember Joel Schumacher and Batman? Roger Moore and Bond? Or indeed even DIE ANOTHER DAY (replete with invisible cars) and Bond?

In all of these cases, the franchise, wittingly or unwittingly, began to devolve into parody, and the only way to resurrect it was with an intense, hard-core, comedy-thoroughly-banned, reboot: the Christopher Nolan films, Daniel Craig.

This is exactly what CBS All Access is risking with LOWER DECKS. If it flops, it will harm the entire franchise. If it’s a win, it will do little to expand the franchise. This is very poor corporate strategy on CBS’ part.

Personally, I’m not holding my breath on it being funny. SPACE FORCE is rip-roaringly funny with subtle acting. It could almost be a Brit-Com. There is no way Star Trek is going to become SPACE FORCE or even FUTURAMA. It shouldn’t try. Very few Trek comedic episodes stand the test of time. The much-ballyhooed STAR TREK IV has not aged well. Comedy is not Star Trek’s strength and never has been.

Last edited 1 month ago by The River Temarc

Oh please. There have been countless parodies of Star Trek over the decades, and yet “serious” Trek has survived. They’re still making it. Chill out.

IDK, I’m not as cynical about it because there are still other more serious Trek shows on to keep that balance. I remember when The Clone Wars were starting and many Star Wars fans didn’t see the point of adding a cartoon and at the time many thought it would kiddify Star Wars too much (although there were other cartoons in the past). But in fact it did the opposite and made people appreciate the franchise and even the prequels more. It oddly placed the franchise on a deeper level not many saw coming until it happened.

Now yes, its different because TCW was/is a serious show, just made for kids (and its amazing for a ‘kids’ show how many people are killed in it lol. GOT has nothing on that show, except the blood maybe ;)). LD is a broad comedy so it won’t be the same thing but I don’t think it’s going to devolve the entire franchise either. I mean I liked the Austin Powers movies, but I never looked at the Bond films any differently.

But I know people don’t like the idea of a animated Trek comedy. Could you be right, yes, but if its GOOD then I don’t think it will be an issue. I think most fans can just view it as its own thing even if its part of the bigger universe. We just have to wait and see. This is probably the first Trek show we know very little about before going in so its just hard to say. It would be nice if we got a trailer with this announcement. The entire build up to it has been very odd compared to the other shows but I guess you can blame that on the virus.

Anyway I think no matter what some people are not going to like this show because of what you said. But if its a SMART parody that makes you appreciate Star Trek while making you laugh then I think many will love it. For me, I’m still excited about it but prepared to be disappointed too, especially after both DIS and PIC.

I’m guessing they will put together a trailer but given there are only 10 episodes I really don’t want to see a trailer where they pack in the best jokes of the season. Trailers for comedy are really hard to nail.

I mean for everyone else. We’re seeing the show regardless. ;)

Sure, comedy is Trek’s strength. That’s why GALAXY QUEST is the best Trek movie.

I’ve seen that film recently (3rd time) and I still think it to be monumentally overrated. There is still only one laugh in the entire film. Pretty bad when you are actively TRYING to get people to laugh.

I’ve seen GQ at least 20 times, including a viewing this year, and it sounds to me like you’re confusing it with SPACEBALLS, which I recalled as having exactly two laughs.

But I think what makes it work so well (for me anyway) is that it is a largely gentle comedy buttressed by character. The seriousness of the situation balances some of the laughs, enough so that you can actually create suspense and worry while folks have a good time. That makes it a perfect little unit of entertainment for me, like the excellent near-perfect MIDNIGHT RUN or infinitely rewatchable MEN IN BLACK. (there are lousy movies that fall under my perfect unit of entertainment notion, but I’d be undercutting my own argument to include them here.)

Not confusing it with Spaceballs. But I can understand as Spaceballs was stunningly bad, too. By that point Brooks seemed to have lost his touch for sure.

I’m glad you liked GQ. I was not entertained by it. I felt it an epic fail. Found nothing redeeming. Saw no character nuances and the jokes were non existent. And that’s saying something because Weaver and Rickman have shown they are pretty darn good at comedy in the past. So if THEY can’t save it then it most certainly is the script.

It was nothing like Midnight Run. Which was quite enjoyable and well done. I sat through Men in Black the one time and that was more than enough for me.

I like GALAXY QUEST. It wasn’t produced by any Trek team. And it wasn’t just a parody of Star Trek, but of *William Shatner* (and the other TOS cast, to some extent). That’s what was the genius of it.

I remember what happened to the Bond movies after “Austin Powers,” yes. They were all hits, even “Die Another Day.”

Powers changed the direction of the Bond films. They were afraid of doing stuff about Bond’s character and backstory for years because the third AP peed all over that. And when they finally did that stuff in SPECTRE, it was utterly laughable (and would have been even if Powers hadn’t gone there first.)

why they didn’t just hire the writers of SPOOKS/MI5 to do this century’s Bond films, I’ll never know. There’s more spy smarts in any two hours of those than Craig’s whole sorry tenure.

Spooks/MI-5 was very very good. But it’s not Bond. Bond is a different genre.

If you’re doing traditional Bond, yes. But the makers have insisted on trying to make Bond relevant and semi-realworld, so they are treading on a different kind of film while still throwing in semi-successful big set pieces, and to do that right, they need really good writers who can tell the story succinctly, which is definitely not happening with the Craig films. Except for QUANTUM, which has its own separate problems (but is still the only rewatchable Bond for me made this century), all of these things are immensely padded messes that made previous bloated Bonds look like lean masterpieces (TB, YOLT) or ordinary bad movies (MR, AVTAK, TND, DAD) by comparison.

True but still Bond is a different category from MI-5. The current Bonds have tried to be more grounded. But you can only ground Bond so much before it ceases to be Bond. Bond cannot be MI-5.

Bond is better off without a backstory anyway.

Last edited 1 month ago by AllenWrench

Yes to that, yes indeed.

Disagree about the Craig era, it is often as stupid as the dumbest Moore and Brosnan films, just covered with a veneer of seriousness that doesn’t withstand my scrutiny. I rank SKYFALL and CASINO down with VIEW TO A KILL and MOONRAKER and DIE ANOTHER DAY. It amazes me that they could mis-use so much solid Fleming in the way they did. And none of that is getting into the still-unbelievable casting of Craig, who with that face should have counted himself lucky to get a job as the assistant to a Bond heavy or maybe a post-sharkbite Felix Leiter. Connery and Dalton: awesome. Moore: Bond’s gay uncle. Brosnan: if they’d let him play it like he played TAILOR OF PANAMA, could have been really good. Even though Cavill looks like a musclebound lunkhead now, he would have been a great Bond in 06, and would have offset the bad parts of the script by being age-appropriate for a rookie Bond, which is really hard to swallow with Craig, and makes the film character’s instability and pscyho-0brattiness even more ridiculous.

If you want to believe Moore saved the franchise, so be it, but to me, he killed the Bond character in order to achieve that. And it wasn’t a worthwhile trade. I’ve basically only seen real deal Bond in two films since Connery, and those are the Daltons (there are a few moments in QUANTUM, but they’re offset by Craig.)

It seems like you may be responding to me. But I did not say Moore saved the franchise. In fact, it was his first two outings that nearly killed the franchise. TMWTGG was arguable the worst Bond ever and the box office reflected it. They kept Moore as it was decided he wasn’t the problem, changed the tone and gave it one more try. The Spy Who Loved Me was a hit. You can hate it all you want (it’s not a favorite for me by any means but I don’t hate on it and there are a lot worse ones out there) but the numbers ensured the survival of the franchise.

I think you are off base quite a bit. Roger Moore’s Bond literally saved the franchise when they decided to go over the top with The Spy who Loved Me. The previous two were disappointments and Brocolli decided to give it one more shot.

Doing the comedy Trek is a good idea. If it crashes and burns it won’t kill the franchise. There has been bad Trek before and it didn’t kill it. Animation might be the better way to go with it but I sorta would have liked to see a live action comedy. However The Orville (for the first season at least) seems to fill that void. But Trek easily could have done that. In fact, it might have been a good idea to reach out to Seth M to get him to do one instead of Orville.

Forced to disagree about Space Force. It’s really not all that funny. It’s more subtle than anything else. There was one episode (I’ve only seen 8 so far) that had a good number of good laughs. But most episodes just evoke smiles or small chuckles at best. “Rip-roaringly” funny is certainly not the term I would use to describe it. Very few things have earned that title. Airplane! and Monty Python and the Holy Grail are at that level.

I will give you that comedy in the serious episodes is generally not done well. TOS only tried perhaps twice and came away with only one winner. TNG failed every single time. And DS9 had a winner with their Tribble tribute episode. That was it. But this show is designed to be comedy from the outset. Which sets it apart from the other shows.

Okay some REAL news RE Discovery which I have been waiting for. Looks like post production holdups are delaying things until Q4, but at least we have Lower Decks to tide us over. When this series was first announced, I was not really interested simply because it was animated, but I have to admit the more info that we get, the show seems to grow on you haha. As Tiger2 said, August… oh yeah that is only 4 weeks away!
As for the look of the ship, not exactly the Enterprise or even the Stargazer, but I guess they did that on purpose because it’s not supposed to be, is it!?
Regarding S31, let’s see what they come up with to redeem Georgiou, because I don’t see her character as is heading up a show. I do however really want to see Michelle Yeoh becoming an integral part of Star Trek, so I will stay patient and see what they come up with. After the first half season of S1 Discovery, IMO Kurtzman and his team has slowly improved things, so you never know.
Anyway Lower Decks is on the way and let’s hope the Disco post production team get’s its act together so we can see the 32nd century sometime beginning in late October.

Well, the ship looks a little strange, but hey . . . at least it looks like it fits into the Trek universe a bit. Unlike some other ships from other shows that I will not name.

It looks as ugly as the Orville, which is perfect for this show. Looking forward to it. Not every ship in the fleet is the flagship

The Orville is a different design. This ship is your typical Starfleet ship. Hey, at least this is not the USS Enterprise.

Looks great 👍, can’t wait.

This show may turn out to be our favorite because imagination has no price point. We may see exactly what we hope to see – new and a greater variety of aliens expressing themselves in unusual ways. Look forward to it!

And I still think Discovery will wait until all or most of our election drama is done.

Yay, no more Planet of the Hats or Heads of the Week!

Not sure why DSC would wait until the “election drama is done” since it’s all filmed and SFX and score are being worked on now. If anything I will crave Trek more than ever during that time!

Whoa, that is one ugly starship!

I respectfully disagree with you. Whoa, that is one beautiful ship!

That is what I said when I first saw the E-D. In fact, my good friend felt it looked so much like a hotel that it should be the USS Hilton.

I was thinking if they wanted to do this ship as a little funky, you could just have a loose Bussard (nacelle cap) that jiggled a little whenever the ship slowed down or turned or stopped.

That will be great canon, for sure.

The ship is amazing. It is not the USS Enterprise but at least that ship has a personality. I can’t wait to watch Star Trek: Lower Decks in August!

Now all I need to do is get my CBS subscription back. Last time it was for Picard. Star Trek is in a good place.

I love that the poster is reminiscent of the first Star Trek: The Motion Picture poster. Very cool.

Being a life long trek fan, and reading about this show I feel it has potential. But that ship looks terrible. The studios should revamp it and make something better. Live long and prosper

In light of today’s great news, I’m going to honor it by watching the episode Lower Decks tonight! :)

Not seen it in years and oddly I didn’t watch it during all my TNG rewatches for Picard.

It is one of my favorite TNG episodes. Story of promise, the uncertainty of youth, redemption and sorrow. Also the importance of strength of character!

I’m still rooting for Taurik (or his twin Vorik from Voyager) to show up in Lower Decks or Picard.

Looks almost as bad as the Grissom. The nacelle struts look like they are covered in Bondo. Looks like the nacelles and secondary hull were detached and lowered. Wow.
Still looks better than most of the Discovery and Picard ships.

Last edited 1 month ago by c d

“Still looks better than most of the Discovery and Picard ships.”

Unfortunately that’s not too hard though.

Did everyone catch McMahan’s tweet TM posted:

“STAR TREK: LOWER DECKS premieres Thursday, Aug 6th on @CBSAllAccess. Wow, that’s very soon!

Here’s a list of @startrek episodes you should watch to prepare:

All of them.”

I think I’m going to like this guy! :)

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

” Which episode should I watch?” “Yes.”

Great, more TNG based crap.

And it weren’t for the millions of Trek fans who embraced and loved TNG, Trek would not still be going as a franchise.

I guess that we need to know that bitter TOS “TNG is not real Trek” fans are still out there.

And for the Discovery and Picard fans who are stunned by the negativity of some long-time fans, just keep this in mind when someone says that the resistance to new Trek was never so bad in the 90s.

I’m already in love with this ugly duckling of a ship. It has flown directly into my heart. I can’t wait for this!

Last edited 1 month ago by Scott

💐 glad someone is giving the Cerritos love here Scott.

THE NACELLES ARE ALL WRONG

Looks like someone took apart a Franz Joseph ship and reassembled it using TNG-era parts. I can’t believe I miss Rick Berman. Let us all take back the awful things said about him.

Welcome to the family Lower Decks… I look forward to spending some time with you this summer…

Hideous, idiotically-designed ship. More Eaves’ handiwork?

I hope the token white guy won’t be the butt of all jokes, but I’m not holding my breath.

I wonder if Futurama came out today if it would catch this same crap.

Poor design, but that seems rather fitting for this show, as it looks to be another “comedy” that forgets about the importance of the comedic straight man, who keeps dignity and isn’t silly.

All of the elements of this show look silly.

Saw this on Reddit. Someone pointed out the poster seems to be a homage to the TMP poster:

https://imgur.com/kiGIq2L

It’s easter eggs like this that makes fans smile. I really hope we get tons of things like this in the actual show!

Last edited 1 month ago by Tiger2

Ha!

So, whoever said above that the Cerritos is upside down in the poster-picture has it right.

(The planet and ship are inverted from the TMP poster.)

Ensigns, ensigns, always the ensigns. Why Does Star Trek never do a series about the enlisted of Starfleet?

It was called DS9, starring Miles O’Brien :^D

O’Brien’s rank got very muddy over time.

Yes, in TNG he was clearly enlisted, and Worf’s adoptive father noted this when he transported onboard.

But in DS9, O’Brien had the function of a Chief Engineer. More he was often referred to as an officer, and not in the NCO sense.

Basically, Star Trek has been ill-at-ease with the concept of enlisted crew vs officers throughout its history, and many of the writers don’t have a good grasp of military ranks.

Worse, in TOS, senior enlisted roles were devalued: red shirts were expendable, and Yeoman Rand, who had an important NCO role on the bridge, was presented as an eye-candy secretary instead of the senior enlisted responsible for correspondence with command and performance assessment of the ranks.

Only one of four in the entire fifty year history of the franchise.

They did have a crewman problem on TNG. I honestly did not recall them ever having a non officer aboard. Then during my rewatch there was a crewman on “The Drumhead” who was hiding his Romulan ancestry. It was the first time we saw one save for O’Brian. But he was an odd case. He was referred to as “Chief” and I assumed it was his rank. A Chief is not an officer. At least not today. As far as I know the only Chiefs are Petty Officers. And they are enlisted men.

Because O’Brian was made head of Operations on DS9 and on that show he spoke about attending the Academy I am forced to assume them calling him “Chief” was not official and perhaps a term of endearment of some sort? His status I think technically is a mystery.

Yes, it’s a mystery – basically due to unresolved continuity errors.

There is no way to reconcile Worf’s adoptive father talking about “working for a living” with O’Brian if we was an Academy graduate and commissioned officer. On the other hand, Worf says at some points that his adoptive father was an Federation officer who took him in after finding him the aftermath of the Khitomer attack. One could read that as his adoptive father being an NCO of some kind, but it’s all sloppily done and confused.

In Discovery, it seems that the writers are trying to clean this up by having the Command program be aimed at future “captains and chiefs” where chiefs are what 90s Trek referred generally to as “department heads.”. So, O’Brian was always some kind of department head, but not one that was part of the senior staff that met for wardroom meetings with the captain.

I like the arrow swooping toward the ship. LOL.

Can I just say to Anthony, Matt, and all y’all how much I like the new comments format? I can do italics without HTML coding and the comments are nested! Yeeeee-hah!

Thanks goes to Matt!

This is canon? Haha. It’ll be hilarious when Kurtzman forces writers of Picard and Discovery to reference this ship and crew to validate it.

Episode one: Warp engines vaporize entire crew compliment in secondary hull first time engines are engaged. The the secondary hull rips away nacelles aren’t designed as hull support. Ship explodes. Shortest series ever.

why don’t they do a real series about the enlisted? Because current Star Trek is all about lazy story
telling

UGH! It’s a cartoon, people!