NYCC Panel And Character Posters Reveal More About ‘Section 31’ Movie And How It Fits In With Star Trek

The big news for the Star Trek: Section 31 streaming movie coming out of the New York Comic Con panel over the weekend was the announcement of a release date of January 24, along with a new teaser poster. But Paramount+ has also released a series of character posters, giving us some character names for the first time. There were also more tidbits about the streaming movie revealed at the panel, which featured executive producer and director Olatunde Osunsanmi along with cast members Omari Hardwick, Kacey Rohl, and Robert Kazinsky. Oscar-winner and star of the movie Michelle Yeoh also appeared via video.

The misfits of Section 31

The San Diego Comic-Con panel over the summer teased how Section 31 features a team of “misfits” and “outcasts,” and we are now getting a better sense of the characters thanks to the NYCC reveals. Here is a breakdown of what we now know about each character (and their new posters).

Phillipa Georgiou (Michelle Yeoh)

Michelle Yeoh as Georgiou in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

Speaking at the panel via video, Yeoh said of Georgiou in Section 31:

“Emperor Georgiou is probably one of the most complex, fun, out of this world characters that I’ve ever played. It was first discovered in [Star Trek] Discovery it’s not possible to let go of a character like that. And so thanks to Alex [Kurtzman] and Tunde [Olatunde Osunsanmi] and everyone back at Paramount Plus, we kept on to this amazing Emperor Philippa, George, and got onto Section 31.”

Alok (Omari Hardwick)

Omari Hardwick as Alok in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

As the Section 31 team are “misfits and outcasts,” the moderator asked each actor to explain how their character is unfit for Starfleet. For Alok, Hardwick explained:

“I am unfit because I have a lot of mental issues… I play Alok and he’s got some bones to pick. He’s got some desires to make our incredible legendary Michelle Yeoh’s character Georgiou pay the price for some things she’s done. And so I devised a plan to recruit a motley crew of bandits who shake some shit up. So in doing that, I fit enough, but I equally don’t fit, and there is Section 31.”

Quasi (Sam Richardson)

Sam Richardson as Quasi in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

Sam Richardson didn’t appear at NYCC, but he was at the SDCC panel over the summer, where he revealed Quasi is a Chameloid. He later spoke a bit more about Quasi on a podcast:

“So I play a physicist shapeshifter, what’s called a Chameloid. This is the second time there’s ever been a Chameloid in Star Trek. The first time was Iman in Star Trek VI… It’s actually very funny. With Iman, it’s like this is a shapeshifter, you want to look good, ‘Yeah, I’ll make myself Iman.’ And then for me, it’s like, ‘Oh good, I’m going to make myself Sam Richardson.’ [laughs]. I’m going to accept it.”

Rachel Garrett (Kacey Rohl)

Kacey Rohl as Rachel in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

Kacey Rohl is taking on the role of Rachel Garrett, who first appeared in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Yesterday’s Enterprise” (played by Tricia O’Neil). As she is representing Starfleet on this “misfit” team, she answered the “why are you unfit?” question this way:

“I play Rachel Garrett, and I’m obviously incredibly fit for Starfleet. It’s just the journey of the film is seeing if that wavers at all or what that actually means.”

Melle (Humberly González)

Humberly González as Melle in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

So far there hasn’t been anything revealed publicly about this character and we have yet to hear from Humberly González, but we now have a a name (Melle). Her bald appearance could hint that she is playing a Deltan, but that is pure speculation.

Fuzz (Sven Ruygrok)

Sven Ruygrok as Fuzz in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

We now have a name for Sven Ruygrok’s character (Fuzz), but he too remains a mystery. The pointed ears and smile hint he is a Romulan, but quirky Vulcan is always a possibility.

Zeph (Robert Kazinsky)

Robert Kazinsky as Zeph in Star Trek: Section 31, streaming on Paramount+, 2025. Photo Credit: Sophy Holland/Paramount+

After his character first appeared in the SDCC trailer there was speculation Rob Kazinsky (who is a big Trekkie) stamped down speculation that he is playing a Borg. Appearing for the first time for the movie at NYCC, Kazinsky was ready to explain why Zeph was unfit for Starfleet:

“I play Zeph in Section 31 and I am entirely unfit for Starfleet, but I don’t really make up my own mind. I just do whatever he [Alok] tells me to do, whether it’s good, bad, great, ugly, nice, it doesn’t matter. I’ll smash whatever he points me at. I’ll break whatever he points me at.”

Embed from Getty Images

Section 31 colors in new shades of grey

There was a bit more talk about the upcoming movie in general, coming from executive producer and director Olatunde Osunsanmi. Responding to an audience question, he described how the new movie connects with how Section 31 has been depicted in other Trek series in the past:

“Section 31 has appeared in different series, from Deep Space Nine to even Discovery. It’s reputation kind of goes back and forth, and is what it is. We sort of look at it as the CIA of Starfleet or the CIA of the Federation. What was really fascinating about this movie was figuring out, okay, tonally, what part of that do we want to represent? We do want to make sure that we pay respects to what’s been done in the past, but we’re also been tasked with moving everything forward as well. So, what you’ll have in Section 31 is a movie that does delve into the heart of Section 31 and the wonderful characters and the unbelievable cast that we have playing these characters. But it’s also a lot of fun, and it’s wild and takes us on an adventure. It’s full of action. And so I think there’s something wonderful here for you.”

Tunde, who was the producing director for five seasons of Discovery and is doing the same for Starfleet Academy,  talked about how this streaming movie differs from TV Trek:

“I’ve been very fortunate to be part of a bunch of different Treks on the TV side. Craig Sweeney wrote an unbelievable movie that we all got to bring to life. This one was different because it is about Section 31 and a different color of the rainbow. And it does go into places we haven’t gone before. So that part of it was very exciting and a lot of fun.”

He also noted how he can approach things different with a movie:

“With the feature, we get to max it out. So when you’re doing a TV show, you’re pushing everybody hard and you’re all working towards something, but it’s over the course of a year, so it’s a marathon. But when you’re doing a movie, everything is maxed 100% – you’re probably at about 80% on a TV show. So that’s 100% more emotion, 100% more action, 100% more adventure. And you get pushed to the point of exhaustion, but that’s okay, because before you know it, it’s over.”

During the Q&A a fan asked how Section 31 fit with the optimistic philosophy of Star Trek. Superfan Rob Kazinsky jumped in to field this one:

“I would like to take this one, as a fan. When the idea of a Section 31 movie first appeared, I was like, “Nah.” We all hate the idea of Section 31. Nobody wants Section 31 to exist, even when it appeared with Will Sadler [head of Section 31 Luthor Sloan on DS9]. We were presented with a universe where we had moved beyond the need for Section 31. That was the whole point, that we had finally transcended all the things that are holding us down today and evolved to a point where Section 31 didn’t exist. And then Deep Space Nine happened, and “In The Pale Moonlight,” Sisko says my favorite line in Star Trek. He says, “It’s easy to be a saint in paradise.”

When you expand the universe into something more realistic, the simple truth of the matter is, the Federation can only exist if a Section 31 exists. Now, what we can do is we can take it from being a nefarious organization to humanizing it and actually showing the need for it. To showing on the frontier where the Federation doesn’t already exist, there is the need for somebody to roll up their sleeves and live in the gray areas. So the pushback that I always felt, and I always saw for Section 31 even existing, that’s what we’re actually trying to make here. We’re trying to show that in the extended Star Trek universe, actually Section 31 is an integral part of it, as the Federation in its entirety, is. And I think that that idea of what we’re doing, of expanding the morality and the extended universe of Star Trek, I think that’s what you’re going to really really love.

Embed from Getty Images

NYCC panel clips

Michelle surprises the crowd by beaming in via video…

Rob Kazinksy talks about how Section 31 fits with Star Trek…

More to come from NYCC 2024

TrekMovie was at New York Comic Con and we have more coverage coming including interviews with cast and creatives who appeared for the Star Trek Universe panel.


Keep up with news about the Star Trek Universe at TrekMovie.com.

56 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Regardless of how good or bad this Section 31 movie is, I hope Kurtzman holds on to this Kazinsky guy, he is a terrific ambassador for the Trek cause!

I would be shocked if Kazinsky knows less about Star Trek lore than the people who wrote this movie.

Yet another element of original Star Trek that’s been twisted and contorted beyond all recognition to make it “cool and modern”. These characters share nothing in common with the Section 31 that we know of old other than the name. They walk around shooting at everything, blowing things up and shouting the name of their organisation to all and sundry from the rooftops. Operating in the shadows is what made Secton 31 so intriguing but yet again modern writers just don’t get it and/or don’t think it’ll appeal to a modern audience so they spoon feed us one action set piece after another to disguise an otherwise shallow story with nothing much to say.

With respect to those who like it, that’s been my biggest beef with all of modern Trek. This being the latest example.

Have these creatives ever seen a real spy movie? Sit their butts down to watch THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR maybe, or riff on THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD like Ron Moore did with his S31 script, the one with the unpronounceable latin.

they have seen ‘spy fi’ films like bond, flint, helm and have based this movie on that type of spy story.

Hey, I’d be good if they leveraged their thinking off FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, the plotholes there aren’t all planet-sized (though it is sad to think that screen 007 hit his creative peak over 60 years back and for me hasn’t really been a spy who came in with the gold since 1989.)

OHMSS, ‘living daylights’, ‘goldeneye’, ‘casino royale’ and ‘skyfall’ are great post 60s bond films.

I must say that all of this rhetoric about “misfits” and motley crews bodes very poorly for this movie. The writers seem to be obsessed with intelligence agencies without having the slightest clue about how intelligence agencies actually work.

The thing is in DS9 S31 operated nothing like an intelligence network. They operated much more like sa terrorist orgtanizarion with seperate cells that operated independently from one another. So this explanation they are giving of the CIA does not sound right.

That’s because modern writers know nothing about Star Trek. They don’t understand it nor do they care about it. Their goal isn’t to further the Star Trek adventures. Kurtzman himself said it, he wants Star Trek to be a platform. We all know a platform for what.

I think there’d be plenty of disagreement here over what that platform is or might be intended to be, owing to poor execution as well as actual intent.

That’s true, and both sides have valid points. That doesn’t mean one side is more legitimate than the other. It just means people disagree.

Already saw the movie?

this movie is ST doing full on ‘spy fi’, less intrigue as with past S31 and more action.

I have to say that as someone who has hated the concept of Section 31 since its introduction on DS9, I found Kazinsky’s comments here to be thoughtful and well-considered. If they reflect the final product, maybe it’ll be okay. But that trailer was dreadful, and I have no interest whatsoever in MU Georgiou (prime Georgiou would have been fine). But I love Michelle Yeoh, and Star Trek, even now. They got me.

I liked Section 31 from DS9 cause if no other reason my head canon says they were the ones responsible for the federation coo in Star TRek 6. DS9 was not the first time Federation citizens uprose against the establishment.

and the rogue admiral in ‘insurrection’.

I like the Deltan and Rachel Garrett’s movie looking phaser. I don’t mind the Section 31 characters looking all non Starfleet, but wish we saw a Monster Maroon in there to link it with standard Trek. My worry is all the hallways and bar scenes of new Trek taking the place of alien worlds, colonies, dilithium mines, functional starships/starbases, etc.

Deltan is doing the Shazam! bubble gum poster. Garretts phaser looks like it might be a Trek III style but probably a Disco/SNW one..Hopefully if there’s timetravel we’ll get to see some of the familiar movie eras and the maroons

Hmmmm….bald character. Maybe she’s a Picard?

Or a Blofeld, or possibly a Kojak. Or a Luthor?

No earlobes!

Gosh I hope not. That really didn’t work in Picard S2.

Zeph looks like an understudy for Beast Rabban in the 1984 Dune movie.

A quote from the Mirror Shakespeare “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet” 

in the mirrorverse wouldn’t it be, ‘a rose by any other name would smell as sweat

Rachel Garret’s inclusion definitely narrows down the WHEN this might take place — she’s Captain of the Enterprise-C in 2344 (and killed in 2366 in the alternate timeline) so Section 31 with Garrett (assuming she’s about 40 or so) would take place 2300-2344 timeframe, unless there are some time-travel shenanigans involved.

I do agree with others that ‘Section 31’ feels more like ‘Suicide Squad / Misfits’ and not so much Star Trek — BUT — will reserve any thoughts further until I actually see the film.

The preview seemed to imply that she had been pulled out of time? Or maybe they travel to her in the time span you indicated. It is unclear.

It’s more likely that it takes places during SNW’s timeframe (~2260) and they simply messed up canon by including a Rachel Garret that wouldn’t be born for another 40 years

“Its easy to be a saint in paradise” is from :The Maquis, Part 1″ not “In The Pale Moonlight.

I’m just happy he’s a super fan who adores DS9 and can quote Sisko at all. We all have mixed up quotes anyway.

Also, that line is from “The Maquis Part II.” See? ;)

Yep after Ben finds out about Cal’s defection. He was not a happy man.

Dying of laughter here. By coincidence, less than a week ago I just rewatched The Maquis, parts 1 and 2. Came to the comments prepared to offer this correction, then thought I would need to correct the already-posted correction, then saw Ian’s correction to the correction!

Star Trek fans. Is there any group more devoted to pedantry? (I mean, of course, other than Star Wars fans.)

Ah, but about the Section 31 movie: it looks like it will appeal wonderfully to 11 year old kids who have never seen anything Star Trek and for whom PG-13 rated violence set to terrible pop music is something akin to ‘edgy’.

I never want to judge a movie before I see it, but I’m pretty sure this will go down as one of the worst—if not the all-time worst—thing ever created under the banner of Star Trek.

Now, what else could they have done? Back up a truck full of money to Alexander Siddig’s house, pair the former Doctor (now aging and disaffected operative) Bashir with Michelle Yeoh in a character-driven drama that has them working as frenemies under the guise of Section 31 to save the universe from something or other. At the end of act one, throw in a surprise appearance by Andrew Robinson as Garak who saves Bashir in a crucial moment, and now you have the makings of a taut thriller with three great actors (playing one and a half great characters, but who’s counting?)

I guess that wouldn’t be ‘moving forward,’ though. Well. Good luck finding an audience for whatever this is, Paramount. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Trek Beyond was also predicted to be the worst Trek project ever after its first trailer.

The fact that par hasn’t locked down or bribed Ron Moore or behr to come in and write/right the ship is enough to make me figure they don’t care about the quality, even if it is quality that can also puts butts in seats.

Nothing says Section 31 like martial arts poses.

Not impressed with the trailer, but I have to admit I am intrigued by the S31 movie. I know many don’t like the concept of S31 from DS9 and even Enterprise, but let’s admit it – many of the admirals on TNG (and even in the movie The Undiscovered Country) were essentially and covertly acting like they belonged to S31. So let’s not pretend the TOS and TNG Federation/Starfleet was all rainbows and unicorns.

This movie has a lot of potential and I am cautiously optimistic and looking forward to seeing what they come up with.

I’m not even sure what the “concept of S31” is. The Federation and/or Starfleet have intelligence agencies — Spock referred to “Starfleet intelligence” in “The Enterprise Incident,” if memory serves, if it didn’t come up earlier. This shouldn’t be a huge surprise to anyone in a galaxy that is contemporary international relations writ large.

The writers seem to like portraying S31 as “accountable to no one,” which is stretching things if the Federation is a democracy. Congress has oversight of the intelligence community.

It appears that Starfleet Intelligence is an open part of Starfleet and totally accountable and acts under the direction of the Federation.

S31 seems to operate to promote both the Federation and Starfleet but completely outside of the jurisdiction of both. TNG admirals like Pressman (who wanted to break the treaty with the Romulans to develop phased clocking tech) and Kennelly (who wanted to assassinate a Bajoran leader) and TOS movie Fleet Admiral Cartwright (who wanted to do the same to the Klingons suing for peace) all were doing the same thing. The difference is, as open members of Starfleet, they were all accountable for their actions.

Conversely, S31 does not seem to be accountable for anything. That goes back to Harris in Enterprise AND to Sloan in DS9. As they said in DS9, “The Federation claims to abhor Section 31’s tactics, but when they need the dirty work done, they look the other way. It’s a tidy little arrangement, wouldn’t you say.”

It will be interesting to see if the new S31 movie broaches this subject of accountability.

I hope Section 31 still exists on ST: Starfleet Academy

They probably fund the damn thing, assuming there is money again in that time period.

I imagine evn S31 would have had a hard time existing after the Burn but who knows.

There were theories that Kovich/Daniels was a Section 31 agent when he appeared. I even thought the Section 31 show might have taken place in the 32nd century. I thought Kovich would eventually recruit Georgiou and she leaves Discovery to do covert missions for him. it would’ve made complete sense they were still around then; especially after the Burn. In fact I would still like to see that lol.

I’ve also seen theories Temporal Agents basically worked under Section 31 in the 31st century and that Kovich/Daniels could’ve been both.

Fuzz? Quasi?

Oh, boy.

These names are as dumb as the trailer.

They can be nicknames, not their real names. “Quasi” is clearly a play on the fact he’s a shapeshifter.

They sound like characters from prodigy, the show everyone here loves.

Trash.

The less canonical connections they make, the more willing I am to just take this as an aside. I dare to say I’ll just have some fun with it, because it sound like that’s all they’re trying to do, is play with the fringes of the Trek ‘universe’. I can be down for that, so long as they don’t contort this to fit in with something we know, event-wise. I’m open minded enough to take it for what it is, if it’s good, and doesn’t get too cute with trying to tie it in to the larger universe.

I think Heyberto’s post is basically another way of saying that Star Trek canon has basically become a cafeteria plan. Each viewer can pick and choose what is “canon.” I blame NuTrek and its obsession with time shifting, and its strategy of “through mud on the wall and see what sticks,” for all this.

If by some miracle S31 is good, it’s canon; if not, it gets memory-holed, like “Threshold.”

I’m not holding my breath about “not contorting” S31 into some galaxy-historical event in the Trek universe. They’ve already parachuted Captain Garrett into the plot.

Not exactly what I mean… I think when something is good, it becomes easier to overlook those violations. When it’s bad, it amplifies other issues. But for me, personally, they’ve botched canon so badly (and the worst part, is they do so willfully) that I just don’t care much anymore. Just make it good.

“the simple truth of the matter is, the Federation can only exist if a Section 31 exists. Now, what we can do is we can take it from being a nefarious organization to humanizing it and actually showing the need for it. […] We’re trying to show that in the extended Star Trek universe, actually Section 31 is an integral part of it.” That is the most reactionary bullshit I have ever read in relation to Star Trek. I’m really a bit shocked.

Exactly. They’re basically saying the Federation does not have the rule of law.

Setting aside the fact that it’s incompatible with Gene’s Vision (TM), it’s not even particularly realistic. Stable democracies generally enjoy the rule of law, which is a big reason democracies tend to win the wars they fight. They may not always live up to it, but cases like Iran-Contra or the Bay of Pigs are exceptional, not the everyday modus operandi.

The writers, in an attempt to be edgy, seem to want to make the Federation at best a police state, East Germany and its stasi writ large, or at worst something like Somalia writ large.

No thanks.

we have seen how members of starfleet have gone rogue and even attempted a coup d’état in the case of pressmen in that DS9 story.

and ‘enterprise incident’ was an OS ep where the crew went on a covert mission to steal romulan tech

his vision showed the Fed as largely hidebound by bureaucracy in the OS and later TNG.

Well, it’s one way to rationalize a controversial part of Star Trek that it’s been revealed is older than the Federation itself. I don’t love how it’s constantly getting fixated on, but we also can’t ignore it. We have to figure out how it fits into this universe.