On Sunday the first phase of the Paramount+ launch campaign wraps up, with the “expedition” finally reaching the top of the “mountain of entertainment.” Today they released the 90-second spot, which will run during the Super Bowl—and this time Patrick Stewart isn’t just narrating.
Patrick Stewart greets the Paramount+ expedition
Paramount+ is the rebranded and relaunched CBS All Access, which arrives on March 4th and will include original and library content from across the ViacomCBS family. It will also be home to the original Star Trek streaming shows, including the upcoming Star Trek: Strange New Worlds. The first phase of the launch promotional campaign has been running for the last couple of weeks and has featured Pike and Spock from Strange New Worlds and Michael Burnham from Discovery interacting with other people and characters from ViacomCBS shows.
The “expedition” series of ads culminates in this new Super Bowl spot, which features Star Trek: Picard star Sir Patrick Stewart, who has been narrating the entire series. Joining Stewart at the top of the mountain is Stephen Colbert.
More to come from Paramount+ launch campaign
As outlined earlier this week by Ad Week, the “expedition” series of ads leading up to the above Super Bowl spot is just the first of a three-phase campaign. There will also be more phase one promotions during the game. The second phase will begin that same evening with a new series of ads starting with some of the CBS programming after the game and running through to the Grammy Awards in March.
ViacomCBS is planning a “mega-stunt” on launch day, March 4, to kick off phase three, which will highlight Paramount+ original series and include trailers for upcoming shows. The campaign will continue into March Madness and through to mid-April.
Get 50% 1 year of Paramount+
ViacomCBS has also rolled out a new promotion. If you sign up now for a CBS All Access annual plan, you can get 50% off your first year. On March 4, your subscription will automatically switch over to Paramount+. To get the 50% off deal CLICK HERE and use the code PARAMOUNTPLUS. This limited-time offer expires on March 3rd.
Keep up with the Star Trek Universe on TV here at TrekMovie.com.
I’ve really hated these so far and am a little ashamed to admit that I REALLY enjoyed this one. Surprised that they pulled it off.
I have to agree. This one, unlike the others, felt like a Super Bowl ad! (I still don’t see much I want to watch on Paramount+ other than Star Trek, though.)
They could probably do a decent Mission Impossible revival on Paramount Plus, but I think Tom Cruise has the rights to all that tied up.
Tom also not get younger. But I doubt he would mind getting sweet executive producer money for a show where he only shows up for the pilot and each finale episode for sweet special guest appearance money.
If they reboot it, I’d rather they do it without him altogether, or perhaps a passing of the torch in the pilot.
Ok, that was funny!
Good God, this ad campaign is stunningly bad.
What an embarrassing waste of talent… sorry, Colbert doesn’t have any talent anyway.
Such a lonely, sad and bitter person you are
Are you kidding? Colbert does a brilliant job with his opening monologue every night. Imagine, delivering 10 minutes of fresh new material every night, AND making it engaging, thought-provoking and funny!
Colbert was more engaging in the Mr. Goodwrench commercials.
All late night sucks since Craig Ferguson called it quits.
Spoken like a bitter QAnon supporter….
LOL. I would have gotten in trouble if I had said that.
Yeah, Colbert has severely gone downhill. For some reason since he took over for the vastly superior Letterman he has suddenly become monumentally unfunny.
Colbert is funny, but he he’s too partisan for my taste. I’m an old f**t who still remembers Johnny Carson making fun of candidates and political parties equally. That kind of “equal opportunity offender” doesn’t exist in Hollywood anymore.
Well “back in the day” we didn’t see one side ignoring established facts 24/7 and then to overthrow the government to stay in power.
There is that. :-)
Yeah…. let’s never do that again, thanks.
Amen to that.
Meh… Sweet Victory is always awesome, though.
Why isn’t this video available in Canada! Why can’t we watch this in Canada? Grrrrrr
Check out their Facebook page, works there in canada
One thing you can take from these commercials is that who you saw in these are who CBS considers are THE STARS of this new steaming network, both human and animated. So we got Stewart, Martin-Green and Mount. But we got zero LDS characters, yet plenty of other animated stars from CBS.
This points to CBS not considering LDS to be a major show of theirs, unlike DSC, Picard and SNW, and unlike Beavis and Sponge Bob as well.
It is what it is.
More likely they had a limited number of space for characters and they figured that the live action Trek stars were more recognizable to a general audience than the LDS characters would be.
You are saying what I just said, but you are couching in more “glass half full” language.
Not really. I was pointing out that LDS is not considered a minor show as you stated. The causal link you posit between lack of LDS characters in the ad and lack of value of the show by CBS I think is not true.
LDS? The Mormans have a show on CBS?
No no, it’s what Spock did too much of in the 70s.
Ian, that was going to be my next post. Well played, sir.
Dude, this was covered like 6 months ago. That’s why McMahan wanted to go with the LDS acronym — the acronym is an inside joke regarding TVH.
Damn it, I was gonna say that. :P
That’s the official CBS acronym, and Mr. Pascale has requested everyone use the official acronyms for the CBS Trek series’ please..
Well, tell the commenters that hate Discovery, because they still derisively refer to it as “STD” when the official acronym is “DIS” (Though I still prever DSC, which is how it’s abbreviated on the shuttlecraft).
‘STD’ doesn’t even fit with the established naming patterns. We never call Voyager “STV” or Enterprise “STE”. The shows are always acronym-ed with the series name only, never including the franchise header.
I thought it was officially DSC.
It depends on the source. The Official Star Trek Encyclopedia uses no abbreviation for TOS, TNG, DS9, VGR, and ENT. Newer shows have yet to be included.
Memory Alpha is a fan created page but many think of it as official. They use TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DIS, LD, and PIC.
Star Trek’s official website uses TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DSC, LD, and PIC. (which are btw, what I use, and what I think make the most sense).
Many like “LDS” for Lower Decks to keep with the three letter system, but clearly there is some difference in usage across various sources.
But no source EVER uses “STD” for Discovery, other than trolls and people who hate the show and like to make childish jabs.
That is incorrect. Many have used it because it just makes the most sense. It has nothing to do with trolling or making so-called “childish” jabs. The way one can tell is the context in which it is used. Some of us just use the abbreviation that works the best. Nothing more do it. To read anything more is a bit insecure, I think.
I’ll use whatever acronyms I want to use.
Wow, you sure showed me, son. LOL
Anyway, I am just stating the facts on the acronym. I didn’t come up with it, and Anthony did recommend we all use it. Don’t shoot the messenger.
He can absolutely use whatever acronym he likes, but his attitude says a lot, and is unwelcome. Personally, I’m not even a big fan of LDS or DIS. I they they are both just “OK,” even for what they are trying to be. I thought DIS had a lot of potential, got a bit better in S2, and then reverted back to mediocrity last year.
But referring to it as STD is just chilidish, and I see no reason to get nasty when discussing Trek and acronyms! How silly. We are all here to have fun!
You’ll get over it, I have.
I’d like to be able to use whatever acronym I’d like to use as well. I consider “STD” to be appropriate. But I was told it was used by “trollers” and was asked not to use it. It’s their site but I do feel that intent is more important. And I have never used it for “trolling” purposes. Ever. I asked if the same feelings go towards using “LDX” for Lower Decks as I feel that is a better and more appropriate acronym. Did not get an answer. So unless I’m specifically told otherwise by TPTB I will continue to use LDX and attempt to stop using STD on this site. Just to be safe, I think I should just refer to the show by its full name to be clear. Star Trek: Discovery. Don’t want to give anyone the false idea that I’m trolling, you know.
To be clear moving forward all posts using STD are auto-deleted by the system. It is clear trolling red flag. So anyone who uses it wont be seen here or even by the admins… it simply disappears into the darkness that is the spam system.
Thank you for this policy, it is much appreciated.
What was the zombie with Beavis and Butthead from?
More likely, Bob Orci’s agent. :-)
Samara from The Ring
Thank you, Tenacious.
My God, it actually got worse! I ask, again, how does that make anyone want to give them money?
Yeah, they’d be better off with a traditional fast-cut promo emphasizing volume of content plus highlight choice exclusives. Show off CBS, the library of content, Star Trek, Spongebob, Daily Show, Good Fight, CBS Sports and News and do something less laborious to get the mountain logo top of mind.
Maybe it will work, I understand that lots of people don’t actually get the networks for free with HD antennas even though they can.
I actually thing this would be more effective. It shows some of the things they have but does so in a slightly entertaining way. If they solely focused on what is in the CBS/Paramount library people would realize they really don’t have much at all.
Well, that’s unexpected.
And an excuse for one of our kids to put the Sweet Victory music video on repeat, once again.
Thanks a lot. Works in Europe.
Video unavailable outside U.S.
Our overseas brothers and sisters are fortunate.
B. Kramer provides a link just above to an article that has the video embedded in it.
Works in Canada.
I thought it was entertaining. But I get a kick out if offbeat and/or British humor, so there is that.
Have only watched the first one besides this… thought the first one was meh.
“Of,” not “if.” Darn it… typing on my phone too quickly and didn’t proofread.
I’m canceling after the last episode of “The Stand” and probably won’t be back until the next Trek series debuts. If the new Beavis and Butt-head happens first, *maybe* that will bring me back early.
What did you think of The Stand? I’ve read the book a number of times and was a fan of the 90’s mini-series. I hear reviews were mixed.
I saw the first few episodes. It moved along pretty slowly. But then, I recall the book starting off pretty slowly, too. What I saw wasn’t great. But wasn’t crap either. So far it’s rather “meh” and not enough to get me to keep my subscription going. I’ll catch the rest when I re-up for the next Trek show.
I am an enormous Stephen King fan, and I have liked aspects of this new version but mostly find it to be awful. It’s like most of the other CBS All Access shows I’ve seen in that the wrong people with the wrong ideas were hired and then did a very mediocre job.
Thanks much, I was afraid that was the answer. Huge King fan myself. I’m just going to keep not paying for AA until they manage to come up with something good. What a shame.
The Stand is okay, but I think overall the 1994 version is better. There are some creative decisions I disagree with. The superflu pandemic is told entirely in flashback (this might have been CBS attempting to minimize that horror during an actual pandemic). Some characters get poor development (in 1994 it was Frannie, this time it is Nick.). There is very little of the religious aspect of the story in this version, with great, haunting scenes like the “God’s Tom” hypnosis scene, and Mother Abagail healing Frannie with a touch after the bombing, cut completely. The wonderful exchange between Nick and Mother Abagail, “I don’t believe in God” / “That’s okay. He believes in YOU.” is also gone. On the plus side, Rita Blakemoor is present in this version to help build Larry’s character, and Nadine is fleshed out with the scary Ouija “Nadine you will be my queen” flashback. The boy playing Joe/Leo is better this time around, and Kojak the dog is much better (Kojak even gets his big standoff against the wolf scene.)
Apparently, King wrote a revised ending for this version, which gives Frannie her own ‘stand’, since she didn’t go to Vegas to stand against Flagg with the others.
“he wonderful exchange between Nick and Mother Abagail, “I don’t believe in God” / “That’s okay. He believes in YOU.” is also gone.”
That’s not actually true. That scene is present, but it’s so underplayed that I can see how you would have missed it. Most of the Christian themes have been cut down greatly, which is offensive even to me, a dyed-in-the-wool atheist.
I *really* missed the “God’s Tom” scene.
The 12 month, 50% off promotion deal needs to be locked in by March 3rd.
It might be more affordable than cancelling and signing back on.
Only if one plans to have the service for more than 6 months. Which at this point, there is no reason to. The longest stretch I’ve had it was 4 months. And that was this last stretch where they put on Trek shows back to back. I certainly don’t want to commit to a year that service. I only bought Disney for one month and don’t plan to get another month again for another year.
I guess the only thing I’m kind of looking forward to seeing is Lower Decks, but it’s not with any kind of urgency. And I fear SNW will suffer from the same writing problems DSC has, but will reserve judgment until it arrives. Not thrilled with yet another prequel, I wish they’d leave that era alone.
Fair warning… I was looking forward to Lower Decks as well. But came away SEVERELY disappointed. If you think tons of references and fan service are funny or entertaining, then you will love it. If you are looking for comedy from a comedy show… Prepare yourself for a major letdown.
That’s true, but the odds of me using the service aren’t good, so it would be 100% wasted no matter what I spent. Whenever something comes along that appeals to me, I’ll go month to month; I almost never do annual subscriptions on these things.
It’s a good deal, I’m just maxed out on streaming services right now.
Like black and white Lucy and Ricky…
That was “hilarious”, not…
What a dreadful campaign …
Dear Lord …
I knew this ad campaign was drawing criticism from my friends in the Anti-Alex Kurtzman Trek Club (membership is free and all are welcome to join by the way) as cringeworthy, but I didn’t realize that it was badly received by the wider audience going off of these comments. I thought my group were just hating as sometimes just seeing Mikey Spock and Spork can do that)
Conceptually, I think it’s a bit cheesy, but not the worst idea. It seems just like a bit of fun from all involved, which I’m cool with. Perhaps, it’s fallen short in execution ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ or I just don’t have good taste!
Oh Patrick, your voice sounds so old now. Makes me sad.
Sad to some, but inspiring to others – he’s over 80 and in great shape and still working on new projects, something most actors can only wish for. We can all be so lucky!
Yes, time catches up with everyone. But he’s still active, vital, and taking age approximate roles, aging with dignity. His TV captain counterpart, turning 90 next month, still muses out loud about action hero roles, even though I suspect he knows that ship has sailed. So there’s that counterpoint…
“…which is also a streaming service.”
Not gonna lie, I LOLed pretty hard at that line.
So… Pike meets Picard is canon now? ;-)
Technically it’s Pike meets Patrick Stewart.
He is addressed as Patrick Stewart in the ad. So Pike meets Patrick Stewart. Unless it’s really Picard masquerading as Patrick Stewart.
I think it’s Q masquerading as Picard masquerading as Patrick Stewart pretending not to be Picard.
They never did officially renew or cancel THE TWILIGHT ZONE – it just faded away – the lack of any reference in the P+ trailers is obvious…
It was underwhelming. The 1980s revival version was far superior.
Seems obvious to me the show started with a two season order. As many streaming shows do. But if there has yet to be any announcement regarding a 3rd season then yes… Odds are the show is toast. As it should be. I only saw the first 10 episodes but they were amazingly baaaaaad.
And yes, George Kirk, the CBS revival in the 80’s was the exact opposite of Peele’s version,
A couple of episodes excepted, I actually really liked the second season. The first season was almost entirely awful, but the second was much improved, at least for my tastes.
The first season was so bad I didn’t even bother to look when I re-upped my subscription last August. I’m off it now. But I guess it really couldn’t get any worse. I just did not expect it to improve at all.
Any international link please? ^^
See the comment by B Kramer on February 4.
.. should’ve been The Shat and Sir Patrick! That is if paramount is going to run real trek