Anson Mount joined Star Trek: Discovery as Captain Christopher Pike in its second season, but it turns out that wasn’t his first try to get onto the series. He had auditioned to play Captain Gabriel Lorca in season 1, a role which eventually went to Jason Issacs. And now we can see what helped the producers make their decision.
Mount’s Lorca
Anson Mount has a special Thanksgiving gift, making his first post on BlueSky a video clip from his Lorca audition. Check it out.
The first 1:00 of my audition for Captain Gabriel Lorca about… 7 years ago??? I think you’ll see why they hired the right guy when they went with Jason. In fact, when my representatives told me who they hired, my response was, “Fair enough”. @startrek.bsky.social #startrek
— Anson Mount (@ansonmount.bsky.social) November 27, 2024 at 5:15 PM
The humble actor says he can see why the Discovery producers “hired the right guy when they went with Jason.” And of course Anson has done well for himself. The wide acclaim he got in season 2 as Pike eventually led to him leading the spin-off series Star Trek: Strange New Worlds, which will be shooting its fourth season in March 2025. Season 3 is already filmed and should arrive in early 2025.
From Strange New Worlds season 3 (Paramount+)
Keep up with news about the Star Trek Universe at TrekMovie.com.
Wow. That was bad.
I just saw Pike with a mustache in that audition. Which is exactly how I would imagine a mirror universe Pike. Sort of like mirror universe Spock having a goatee.
Seems fake to me.
Yeah, that was not good lol. And maybe he was just making a character ‘choice’ but the chewing gum seemed a bit odd like he wasn’t taking it very seriously.
But hey, it worked out for him in the end; probably better than anyone could’ve thought at the time.
I think that was Lorca eating the fortune cookie as per the written scene, not Anson chewing gum.
https://youtu.be/sYb9Am7E74Q?si=fok7k9CVv_hbgQpI
OK cool. Thanks.
I’m pretty sure he was eating fortune cookies, since a version of that scene, with Lorca eating the cookies, appears onscreen.
After seeing that video link, I realize that now.
The chewing was distracting, but I hate watching people chew lol
So happy he landed Pike!
Lorca from the first half of season one was a really compelling character; it’s too bad they veered off into the Mirror Universe nonsense.
After the second season, Anson’s Pike is, by far, my least favorite Star Trek captain. “Charades” is exhibit A to this point. Whether that’s the fault of his performance (“he of the dopey grin”) or of an incompetent writers’ room, I can’t say, although I thought he nailed the part in DISCO and early in season one of SNW.
They did not “veer” off in the 2nd half. Lorca was always intended to be from the Mirror universe.
Pike is the best Trek captain since Sisko.
Set the bar a little lower, why doncha? (though with minimal reflection, I agree, despite so much of season 2 Pike seeming to be ‘off’ point.)
Agreed
I gotta go with how it’s written. He was written so well in Disco S2. The Pike of SNW doesn’t seem like the same guyt at all. Anson does what he can, but the character does some things thst make j]him. Not look competent as a starship Captain.
Totally agree, Pike has been written very weakly so far, it’s a shame. And as far as Lorca goes, what a waste of what was a compelling character to start, as someone else said.
I actually agree here. Pike in Season 2 of Discovery accepted his eventual fate and was at peace with it. Cut to Season 1 of SNW and he’s an anxious existential mess who spends hours brooding and getting distracted by what-ifs. It’s like he is a totally different person.
I still like Pike very much but even I have been a bit frustrated how he has been portrayed on SNW at times. They have made him a bit too much like an over concerned parent instead of a starship captain. The poster Legacy has made a great point as well (which I didn’t think about until she started pointing it out) and they don’t feel as professional or mature enough the way it feels on the classic shows and that obviously starts at the top.
The Enterprise is supposed to be the flagship and yet it feels like a cadet training ship at times.
I think that’s because this new stuff seems to be based more on interpersonal feelings and goofing off. There is a smattering of serious moments and professionalism, but not enough of those moments for only 10 episodes.
Maybe they should add a military consultant. Starfleet is supposed to be a military organization. It has been referenced as such in other shows and movies.
only meyer has portrayed starfleet as a military outfit in his SW films.
it is mostly about exploration as well as defense in every other ST tv show.
TOS showed Starfleet as an organistion that clearly ran along the lines of a military service, which is not surprising the ammount of WW2 veterans that worked on the show both behind and in front of the cameras. That sense of discipline & professionalism is one of (many) things missing since 2009 “Nu-Trek”
^
It was still structured around Naval / Maritime organizational structure. That’s military as well, and so it makes sense, no mattter Starfleet’s perceived purpose (exploration vs. military).
With respect, this is an extremely silly argument.
Militaries were historically deeply involved in exploration. A top-of-mind example is Captain James Cook, who was originally in the merchant marine but was granted a commission in the Royal Navy and commanded HMS Endeavour in mapping the Pacific (including Hawaii, where he met his demise).
We may think of this role less today, because in the early 21st century, Planet Earth is more-or-less mapped. Not entirely, though: geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) remains very much a thing within the intelligence community, and the main US government agency responsible for it is the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which is under the Department of Defense.
Yeah I agree. We do see them get serious every time the Gorn shows up somewhere or something but overall it really doesn’t feel like a group of serious minded officers as it does a group of friends hanging out.
To sort of keep it on topic, that was actually one of the things Discovery did right in the first season and it felt like a ship with real discipline under Lorca, but they were also in the middle of a war too I guess.
SNW doesn’t have to be that serious, but it should feel more professional.
This is one of the silliest complaints I’ve seen about SNW. Clearly Pike runs a more relaxed ship. That doesn’t mean it’s inappropriate or wrong. He runs a tight ship, but he keeps a loose vibe. Nothing wrong with that.
If you don’t like the vibe, that’s fine, but saying it SHOULD be different, more professional, more serious, is highly subjective.
Personally, I am fine with this. It’s a good show, I don’t care that it has a more relaxed energy. It’s cool with me. I mean, it seems like the kind of ship that Riker would run, honestly.
Starfleet would never survive the dangers of space if the ships were run as loosely as they are in “Nu-Trek”
Well good news, Starfleet isn’t real!
Riker was 1 very disciplined Starfleet officer from what I remember of TNG on the small and big screen. The Pike of SNW would maybe be more suited to doing school children shuttles or something along those lines. He is not Starship Captain material
You are incorrect about Pike is 100% Starfleet material. I know this because he’s in Starfleet and is generally regarded as one of the greatest captains in the history of the organization.
If that means you don’t like the show, so be it. But plenty of us love Pike, love the show, and think he’s an awesome character. You’re a tiny, infinitesimal minority.
Yeah but that was the “proper” Captain Pike, not this reimagined one we are getting on SNW (which is itself just a reimagining of proper Star Trek) and on and on and on.
Tautologies, thy name is RedShorts.
I never said it was wrong, yeah it’s a TV show, so they can do what they want. But IMO, it should feel more professional like the other shows; especially being the flagship.
But just like you, I don’t think the overwhelming majority cares about this either. It comes up here and there, but it’s nothing close to things like all the canon issues for example. But it is something people notice. Pike and Una feels more like parents than commanders. Rebecca Romign said that herself in an interview. That’s why I said it feels more like a cadet crew at times instead of a more serious and mature ship. But I think that’s both how the producers and Anson Mount wanted it and for most people it’s working, so yeah.
But for people who want stuff like rank and chain of command more emphasized and not feel so casual it is a issue. Is it a big issue, probably not, but something they notice and maybe take them out of the show a little.
Even for me, some of it gets a bit too nit picky like how Pike has been called out for calling Ortegas by her first name. That’s something every captain, from Kirk-Archer has done and call people they are close to in their crew. And she still calls him captain unlike characters like Crusher, McCoy, Dax, etc who call their captains by their first names because they were all close to them before they worked together. So yeah, some of it can feel a little ridiculous.
And I can’t disagree with you about Riker lol. He seemed very relaxed, casual and fun as we saw him handle the Titan crew on Lower Decks. But Riker is awesome, so…
But lower decks is “Nu-Trek” so it is not the same Riker. Tell me when was Riker ever informal on the bridge like the crew of the “Nu-Trek” ships were? Riker was harder on the crew than Picard was. Remember the dressing down he gave the lower decks crew members on TNG, the dressing down he gave Shelby on BOBW, how we was constantly coming up against Picard wanting to be on away missions early on in TNG etc etc Riker was NEVER relaxed, casual or fun while on service until “Nu-Trek”
You’re not completely wrong, but I’m going to push back a little. For starters, he was never as top down as Picard was. He joked around with the crew on and off duty. He did treat everyone as a friend, hence joining the poker games and sometimes cooking for the bridge crew…just like Pike does now. And people have suggested he was more serious on the Enterprise because of Picard and followed his lead. Once he got his own ship, he loosened up more.
And Frakes has said in interviews the character from LDS was the character he always saw Riker as and he was the one who told McMahan he wanted to go as big as possible.
So I’m not totally disagreeing with you, but I think to say he wasn’t fun or casual is not true either. There was just more of a time and a place for it unlike Pike who gives off the cool casual dad vibe at all times.
I didn’t say Riker was not fun! I just said he was always professional. Completely different bridge crew dynamic than “Nu-Trek”.
“Riker was NEVER relaxed, casual or fun while on service until “Nu-Trek”.”
You literally said it here. And I disagree. There were plenty of times he joked around even on duty. But as I also said (and where we agree) he was certainly more serious than Pike usually is.
Just so. And this is also why I’m starting to blame Mount, not just the writers’ room. I happened to watch William Shatner’s documentary “The Captains” for the first time over Thanksgiving weekend (I am kicking myself for never having seen it before; it was one of the best pieces of Star Trek commentary I’ve ever seen).
Among the many insights: the early captains all had extensive theater backgrounds, and Shakespearean theater at that. Both Stewart and Shatner said that playing all of those kings in Shakespeare’s histories imbued their performance as starship captains. Mulgrew has extensive theater experience too — she played Desdemona in Othello — as do Brooks and Bakula.
According to his bio, Anson Mount doesn’t quite have zero theater experience, but his theater resume is much lighter than the other captains’. So I’m thinking that may partly explain his lack of gravitas, although I do agree his portrayal was better in DISCO.
That’s true about all the captains in the classic shows, they all had extensive theater training and you really saw it on screen. It’s funny I was just watching an interview on YouTube with Trekculture and Sam Witwer, the actor who portrayed Kirk in the Unification short and he was defending Shatner regarding his ‘overacting’ on TOS. He said most of it came from his experience in the theater was used to playing big so the audience could get his performance in the back row and brought that to Star Trek. And also stated that TVs where obviously much smaller in the sixties as well and pushed many people to perform bigger.
I’m sure this has been said many times and I’m not an actor, so I can only follow what other actor’s thinks, and Brooks probably did the same thing with Sisko. He has been dubbed as overreacting at times too.
But I agree, I do think that SNW and Pike in general lacks the gravitas of the classic shows and have said that before as well. But I think it’s still the writing just as much as the acting though and just presenting a more casual tone.
And The Captains is great. I watched it several times and it’s fun to see them interacting with Shatner. I like his interview with Kate Mulgrew the best.
Riker may have had an easygoing manner, but he was willing to run a tight ship when there was cause for it. For example, he (probably unfairly) dressed down Shelby for her “early bird gets the worm” away team mission. Other examples include “Peak Performance,” “Ensign Ro,” and “Lower Decks” (the episode).
He would never, despite his interest in cooking, have remotely acted the way Pike of the Dopey Grin did in “Charades.”
I don’t know – I like that it shows a different style Starfleet Captain rather than retreading what we’ve seen already. Is the Enterprise the flagship in this series? I thought that was just a TNG thing. Anyways, there are different command styles so its nice to see something different – and by visual evidence in the show itself – it works for him lol.
I love Pike. As I said in my OP, I don’t have a problem with his captain style, but at times, I do wish he acted more serious when it called for it. It just leans too much into him trying to be a cool dad instead of a Starfleet officer. I don’t mind seeing different styles either. I love Picard, Janeway and Kirk as captains as well and they couldn’t be any more different from each other. People used to say Janeway was the female version of Picard, but there is nothing that really compares them to each other than they are both well knowledgeable and gives some amazing speeches lol. But Janeway comes off much more paternal to her crew but when it’s crunch time she turns into take no shit Janeway in a heartbeat.
I guess what people are saying is they like to see a little more fire under Pikes belly sometimes. It just feels a little too relaxed even in the biggest circumstances. But just my opinion.
But the best example of that was in Quality of Mercy and the confrontation of the Romulans that leads into a war with them because they viewed Pike as too weak, trusting and docile. They assumed that represented Starfleet as a whole and would be easy to defeat them. Kind of proves the guy can be a little more meaner at times lol. The show itself made that evident.
As far as the Enterprise being the flagship, it started under TNG but it has continued past that. SNW referred to Enterprise as the flagship in the episode Ghosts of Illyria in first season. So I guess that means the original in TOS is now considered one as well. But I don’t think every Enterprise is considered one. I think the Enterprise in the Kelvin movies were referred to a flagship too but I can’t remember which movie. So maybe I’m wrong on that. Time to Google. ;)
I’m curious what you mean by “veer of.” Pike was always going to be revealed as the mirror version. What we saw was the original intention.
I’m guessing he meant that the character’s arc took a sharp turn that wasn’t beneficial to the story, not that it hadn’t been planned. To which I would definitely agree.
It all worked out in the end.
I just did a rewatch of Disco S1, just out of curiosity. The Mary Sue aspect of Michael Burnham aside, it’s actually a pretty good sci-fi series right up until the Jump to the Mirror Universe. I can’t say it’s good Star Trek because of all the things it gets wrong about Trek and canon, but Lorca as played by Isaacs is great, and would be better if not for the heel turn he makes. I’d want the prime version of that character to be just like what we got.. that character is much more interesting.. But man, it goes off the rails HARD once they jump universes. Anson ended up right where he was supposed y]to. They’re both great in their roles. His audition wasn’t bad at all, but they got the right guy for Lorca.
I mostly agree. For me, the first season of Discovery was the worst season of Star Trek for many many reasons; the biggest being it just didn’t feel enough like Star Trek. It could’ve been just another sci fi show and no one would’ve noticed. It stayed the worst for years until Picard season 2 (which is now my worst season of all time) and Discovery season 4 showed up. I know some people love these seasons but my God I just think they are awful with a few notable bright spots here and there.
And for season 1 of Discovery it was Lorca who was that bright spot. I didn’t love him as a captain but it’s why I loved him lol. He wasn’t Archer, Kirk, Picard or Janeway. He was cut from a very different cloth from them and made him interesting. Of course you can say that about the entire show but I think he especially worked. He clearly had demons in his closet the way others didn’t. Then we found out why and like you suggested it kind of derailed the character a bit. I never had problems with him being from the MU but will admit it might have been better to present him as a captain going through PTSD or something.
It is weird they have never tried to bring him back at all. I guess he could still appear on SNW but that show has basically ignored Discovery completely outside a few references from it And his character would probably feel a bit too off kilter for that show which has a more bubble gum approach vs Discovery’s very GOT feel in the first season. The fact the only real crossover we got so far involved Boimler and Mariner tells you the tone that show has become and not sure how well Lorca would fit.
But love to be proven wrong.
Season 1 of Discovery is awful, a mess of competing ideas scraped together when Bryan Fuller left. The only bright spots for me are Ash’s storyline (which even then peters out into nothing) and Michelle Yeoh. I actually think the season improved with the Mirror Universe twist, but I still have zero interest in rewatching it.
Seasons 2 and 3 are excellent, in my eyes. I know I’m in the minority but I loved the jump to the future and I loved that for once there isn’t a universe ending threat and that it was more of a slow-burn mystery. Regardless of what people thought about the origin of The Burn, I thought it was a very unexpected and novel way to go. And I’m just glad there was no big bad lurking there. Oyssyra was a hoot too!
Season 4 was more of a mixed bag that got got spinning its wheels for a while, but it was still pretty decent. That two part finale was excellent. VERY Star Trek and very, very affecting. Considering it was filmed in the middle of a global pandemic, they did a great job. I haven’t seen enough of Season 5 to comment on it. I really must get around to watching it!
Season 1 of Discovery started off well and I thought the series had potential and might actually make it as a Star Trek show albeit completely different to what we had got before.
About 2/3 of the way through season 1, the show just fell apart for me. Then when they brought the Enterprise into it I knew they had lost the show for all time as they were basically making it up as they went along, but on and on it went 0h god it was awful awful awful. W – O – K – E
*sigh* Star Trek has always been woke.Yes, I had issues with some of DSC’s writing and how Pike has been emasculated in SNW. (You don’t need to emasculate a male character to make the female characters seem stronger and more competent. Taylor Sheridan has proven this with his universes. What I wouldn’t give to have Taylor Sheridan do a take on Star Trek…)
But even if Star Trek was always woke (which I dont believe personally) it was never so forcefully woke to actually alienate a lot of its audience. That is the difference, and yes the god awful writing (cant forget about that)
Apples and oranges, chalk and cheese, Star Trek and “Nu-Trek”
The term WOKE is so problematic, because no one really agrees on what it means. I despise stories that pander and preach, no matter what they’re trying to pander and preach about it. It’s lazy. That’s modern Star Trek, to a T.
sheridan’s cynicism would trash any ST tv show.
IMO, Taylor Sheridan is doing the social commentary through allegory and complex characters like Trek did before 2009. These shows speaks to all sides, and they’re wonderfully written with great characters. He’s nailing it.
If by “woke” you mean “socially aware” then I hate to break it to you- Star Trek has been exactly that ever since its inception. The Original Series had a black woman in a prominent role at the height of the civil rights movement, a Japanese-American character in an important position only twenty years after WWII, a Russian character at the height of the civil war. Heck, the original pilot had a woman in a command position when it was considered abnormal for women to *work*.
TNG featured a disabled black man in a pivotal role, DS9 showcased a devoted black father as a powerful and respected leader, VOY had a string of brilliant, confident women in lead roles. ENTs first officer was a highly respected and intelligent woman who got things done and didn’t take rubbish from anybody, LDS’ main characters include two black women (one of whom is unapologetically pansexual and badass) and an Asian-American man who is indispensable (and T’Ana who is honestly a rockstar). PRO showcases the power and hopefulness of youth. PIC puts a trauma survivor (Seven) front and centre (once they got over that weird characterisation in the first season), and SNW for all its faults is unfailingly hopeful and progressive in its tone. Just look at 2×02 for evidence of that. Look at La’an. Look at M’Benga. Look at Uhura.
Star Trek has always had progressive values in every iteration (with the exception of Enterprise, possibly). So to decry Star Trek: Discovery as being “woke” (which by the way is not a thing anybody outside of far-right wing circles actually says… so congrats on exposing yourself there) is quite frankly weird because… of course it’s going to be socially aware. It’s Star Trek.
Of course, I suspect that what you actually mean is “I don’t like this show because it was led by a black woman and prominently featured queer and trans characters”. That is usually what people mean they decry something as being “woke”.
So, as usual you have absolutely nothing interesting or of substance to say- so you spout the same, old tired grievances you usually spout about “Nu-Trek”. You are a broken record, and one that is now spout far right propaganda phrases which is, let’s be honest, not a good look for anybody invested in a highly progressive and hopeful franchise.
I mean precisely what I said. “Nu-Trek” is W-O-K-E, and worse than that it is badly written,which for me is the ultimate betrayal of the many people who made Star Trek what it WAS.
You really don’t understand this franchise if you don’t think TOS through ENT isn’t “woke”. Go and spread your alt-right beliefs elsewhere. They are not welcome here.
This is an old debate, and a topic worthy of more exploration than a few sentences can give it. But long and short of it, I disagree. What progressivism meant in the civil rights era — and indeed perhaps what it meant up to, I don’t know, 2014 or so — is very different from what “woke” means today in the sense of critical race theory and indentarian politics.
To cite one example, IDIC — yes, in the 1960s, it may have meant an international and multi-racial crew. Today, I think you’d see progressive circles lambasting IDIC as “cultural appropriation.”
Hey there!
Actually season 2 is probably still my favorite season of Discovery. I have gone back and forth with season 5 since I liked that one too but season 2 actually had some of the strongest episodes overall. New Eden is probably my favorite episode of Discovery to this day and obviously loved Pike and Spock on it. But it’s the Terminator like twist and the Section 31 stuff I really hated. Until we saw that turn and the Red Angel being Burnham’s mother, I thought it was great overall. And it just felt like a nice reprieve after how bad and overly dark season 1 felt. As I said, I loved Lorca but Pike is what changed my view of the show for the better.
Season 4 had a lot of promise and that’s the thing, I love the story line itself. It is probably the most Trek-y season of any of the modern shows. But the pace just killed it for me. They could’ve gotten rid of half the episodes and you lose nothing IMO. Yeah COVID was probably part of the issue along with Picard season 2 but I can only judge the end results.
But even though I had my issues with the show’s later seasons for sure, I still think it was smart to move the show to the 32nd century. I seem to be a minority on this board but yeah it just gave the show a new life and it was no longer compared to TOS in every scene. As I said, I feel season 2 is probably my favorite overall so I was resigned to it being in the 23rd century but going to the future was bold IMO and finally gave us something uniquely different I haven’t felt we gotten since DS9 ended.
I know I’m very hard on this show,, but I was rooting for it every season. But every season ended in frustration for me in a way no other show has time and time again. But it stuck to landing in the end IMO. I think you will love the ending when you watch the season.
Hey hey!
They could have at least three of the back half episodes in Season 4, which really stalled the plot. I get they had an episode order to fulfill and- like you said- the pandemic probably played a major factor- but that back half was wheel spinning of the highest order.
I do think Season 4 stuck the landing- and I would probably argue so did 2 and 3- but of course it’s a matter of personal opinion. Discovery’s determination to tug at the heartstrings does grate after a while (even for this die-hard fan of the show)- but I do think the emotion was really earned in the season finale. I have no shame in admitting that 10-C returning Book to Burnham did make me cry! And I was ridiculously invested in T’Rina and Saru!
I will eventually get around to watching Season 5. But I do struggle to say goodbye to any show that I love dearly. Disco was far from perfect, but it’s the scrappy little show that could- and for that it will always hold a special place in my heart!
I will agree and say season 4 stuck to landing as well, but I was so checked out by then I just didn’t really care. But I can’t say they didn’t wrap it up in a meaningful way either.
But ultimately that was the problem, the second half just felt so lackluster because there wasn’t enough story. Book and his partner in crime were running around the galaxy trying to find a way to blow up Species 10C but there was so little energy to it because there just wasn’t enough happening. It was obvious they were stretching every plot point out. I went into my usual extended long whining rants about it several times that season and I won’t do it here (although if anyone wants to hear it again, I can. I got time. Any takers? No one? Really no one? Whatever.) but ultimately most episodes felt like they were 50 minutes with about 5 minutes of plot in them and it just lost me.
And the season made me so angry I literally wanted Michelle Paradise fired lol. Yeah I feel a little bad saying that now, I know everyone is trying their best, but that’s how disappointed and frustrated I felt. But I thought she made up for it in season 5 even with my issues of that season as well. Still far from great, but an improvement at least.
And take your time, it’s not going anyway. If and when you do watch the season, please tell me your thoughts on it! I think you will love it though.
Given Isaacs’ politics and the speech he had to give as Lorca extolling the virtues of Elon Musk, I wouldn’t be surprised if he now wished that Anson Mount had gotten the part.
Um Isaacs’ admitted he adlibbed the Musk part because he was hoping to get a Tesla.
Heh, really?! Hadn’t heard that. I’d bet a whole load of dilithium and gold-pressed latinum he regrets it now, though.
LOL I never heard that until now either. That is pretty funny.
People forget that Musk used to be beloved by the left before he jumped on the Trump Train.
To echo Picard downplaying his relationship with Riker in CAPTAIN’S HOLIDAY, I wouldn’t go quite that far. Way back when, it was nice and something of a novelty to see somebody rich and connected as an advocate for space exploration, but I certainly wouldn’t use a word like beloved.
Shoot, Ross Perot was the guy way before Musk who was advocating for mining the asteroid belt, back in the early 90s when it became known that there was enough platinum out there to shift the entire financial structure of this planet for at least decades if somebody went out there and started bringing it back. That was vision (enough so that I actually voted for him, even though I knew it wasn’t going to make a difference.)
Matt Yglesias had some very astute commentary a few days ago. The tech sector in Silicon Valley was, until this cycle, very Democratic-leaning. Yglesias argues, very persuasively, that it was far-left progressive elements that ginned up a conflict between Musk and center-left Democrats in order to marginalize the latter.
What the progressives didn’t count on is that the center-left Democrats might feel comfortable abandoning the Democratic Party rather than being defenstrated. Which is very much what happened with Musk. Even figures like Aaron Levie of Box, who supported Harris, have been remarkably sanguine about the outcome.
As a member of “the left” — whatever that might mean in these United States, especially now — I always thought Musk was more than a bit full of himself (aka something of a d!ck), but could balance that against our shared passion for space exploration and the practical advances his businesses were making to address climate change. Actually, it’s the MAGA types now idolizing the man who forget that Musk quit Trump’s technology advisory committee during his first administration over climate policy. Now he’s allied himself with some of the worst and most science-denying political actors in recent memory. Trust me: I haven’t forgotten anything, nor will I.
To be clear, I was in no way digging on the left here. It’s Musk who shifted. So saying he was beloved by the left is not me saying the left should have known better. Unfortunately, that line won’t age well for Trek lovers in the future who will know nothing other than him going all in on Trump.
Wouldn’t have worked. The man is just too likable to be Lorca. :-)
That was my feeling too. Jason Issacs is good at playing evil. I still don’t think Lorca worked at all though, and was one of the many things wrong with Discovery from the beginning. It was good that Anson Mount did not get sucked into that Lorca mess.
He is not the person I think of when imagining the Christopher Pike of The Cage / The Menagerie.
Helium light weight actor (but keyboard warrior for sure)
Keyboard warrior? What does that mean?
It means somebody who trolls online. Much like the OP, actually.
When has Mount trolled online? So far as I can tell with your ‘woke,’ certainly, the only trolling in this thread has been done by you.
I don’t think M1701 was saying Mount trolls, just explaining what keyboard warrior meant. I was a little lost on that phrase lol.
I think he’s gone after people pretty hard on social media that have come at him over politics.. so I get what they’re saying, just disagree that his stance should be seen as derogatory.
When I post on a Trek forum it is about Trek, if they give us proper Star Trek again believe me I will be the first to sing their praises. Mount is another one of those that has gone into meltdown because your US DEMOCRACY voted a certain man in as your 47th US president, by a sweeping majority I might add.
I guess a popular vote victory of 1.5%, the lowest margin by a Presidential candidate in many decades, is what the young’uns these days call a “sweeping majority.” Either that, or those words do not mean what you think they mean. And so long as he doesn’t, you know, storm the Capitol or anything, Mount is perfectly entitled to voice his unhappiness with that outcome, same as any citizen.
What’s wrong with that? I’m a far leftist revolutionary minded activist who holds disdain for most centrist liberals, but he’s certainly entitled to express his opinion.
The fact that you speak in terms of “proper Star Trek” tells me you are not an unserious individual living in your own fabricated reality. SNW is proper Star Trek whether you like the show or not.
It is a TV experiment for the people working on it so they can get as many “big swings” in as possible because they have the kind of budgets and technology a lot of producers would love to play with, then they will simply move on having used (abused?) the Star Trek name simply as a stepping stone for their curriculum Vitae
And the fact that all of that means it’s “not proper Star trek” is precisely why you are an unserious person. I am not gate keeping when I say this, but it sounds like you aren’t even a fan of Star Trek and nothing you say to the contrary will convince me.
Instead you’re a fan of a very specific thingg and you want nothing to deviate from that. Outside your view of “proper” and it doesn’t count, it isn’t real. This sounds a lot like certain social attitudes that Trek itself preaches is wrong and ignorant.
Ie; a gay or trans man isn’t a man because they don’t fit your narrow-minded, bigoted definitions.
Maybe think about the analogy here and do some self reflection.
I agree about being a fan of a “very specific thingg” and that thing is ALL of Star Trek made between 1964-2005.
Making assumptions about the motives of creatives based on your distaste for their work (or their political leanings) is never a good look, or even a safe bet
Just look at John Milius (or don’t, instead read his stuff instead of hearing about his love of shotguns.)
The politics of John Milius are so gonzo I’m not completely convinced that he takes them seriously himself. Nevertheless, I have no problem giving him his due for APOCALYPSE NOW. It was a brilliant concept, and though Coppola’s rewrites thankfully swapped Joseph Conrad’s thematic ambition for Milius’ macho posturing there’s no question that the film’s tone and many of its best moments are his. So why, when it came time to give Conrad his due, did Milius have to be such a d!ck about it, fighting before the WGA to keep Conrad’s name out of the credits? Stating that “if APOCALYPSE NOW is based on ‘Heart of Darkness’ then ‘Moby Dick’ is based on the Book of Jonah” might have satisfied his need to sound clever, but of course you don’t get to say that and then boast to the world of having succeeded where Orson Welles failed.
How did I not ever hear about that? Dick move to say the least …
Then again, maybe Hill and Giler should have had Milius advocating on their behalf during WGA arbitration over ALIEN’s writing credits, because I think they were very wrongfully screwed over on that.
I don’t know if I brought it up here or not before, but a couple weeks back it occurred to me that if they had hooked Sean Connery just a little bit with their pitch for TFF, he’d have certainly demanded a rewrite. Since he would have Milius, the acclaimed script doctor, brought on to RED OCTOBER right around this time or shortly thereafter, I’m wondering: could Milius have been brought in to rewrite TFF in order to lock Connery in? Connery and Milius had been on good terms since THE WIND AND THE LION, and Connery was first choice for Thulsa Doom in CONAN THE BARBARIAN, though I guess he was occupied doing OUTLAND or WRONG IS RIGHT at the time.
Suddenly, Connery as Sybok goes from being a nice wish and could-have-been-really-something in my mind to just a side benefit, with Milius possibly improving TFF massively in all sorts of storytelling ways. I understand Paramount not wanting to pay Lustbader a fortune to write TFF, but Milius had a real track record, from ‘Do you feel lucky’ speech in DIRTY HARRY and most of MAGNUM FORCE to the Quint speech about the INDIANAPOLIS in JAWS, and could have been as much a shot in the arm to TFF as Meyer was with his TWOK rewrites. I’ve been wondering how Milius’ native abilities could have fueled Shatner’s ambitions for the film and possibly even seduced Paramount into having more faith in the thing.
Plus having the guy who made RED DAWN do a Trek movie just prior to TUC seems somehow very fitting to me … for all I know, they might have given him TUC to make if he had delivered TFF’s script in a significant fashion that impacted the b.o. of the final product.
I recall definitely agreeing with the CFQ story’s conclusion that Hill and Giler deserved co-writer credits on the ALIEN screenplay, just as Meerson and Krikes did not on THE VOYAGE HOME. The WGA accreditation process is, or at least was, definitely mucked-up somehow.
As to Milius and Conrad, I can understand given the claim of the former that he didn’t review HoD at all when writing the screenplay for APOCALYPSE, and was working strictly from his memories of a story read decades earlier, that he might have felt not crediting the original author was reasonable. But this leaves out Coppola’s rewrites, which brought the film much closer to the novella, up to and including repurposing chunks of dialogue from it. Seems to me that Conrad deserved an “Inspired By” credit, at the very least.
And the two guys on TUC, konner & rosenthal, apparently didn’t deserve the screen credit either, going by what Nimoy and Meyer have said. The only original notion I’ve seen from K&R had to do with referencing Ulysses for this final mission. But they had some paramount suit named Teddy Z lobbying for them and slowing down preprod enormously.
In my best Star Trek VI voice:
“Solzhenitsyn, Russia/Vermont, 1976.”
Don’t get the reference, sorry. Can you explain?
Earth, Hitler 1938.
Still don’t get the joke, or whatever he’s driving at. :-(