Star Trek: Discovery

Great, I'll give it a shot.

But now that white, straight men are not allowed to be the main characters of these sci-fi franchises, the franchises are going to diminish in popularity, ratings and grosses.

Male viewers have always overwhelmingly supported Star Wars and Star Trek, not women so much. If you don't give straight guys someone to identify with and fantasize through, you're not going to get their business.

I'm all for progress, and diversity, but it seems like a white, male, hetero lead is illegal now in the two biggest franchises. Chris Pine as Kirk is the only exception. A teenage girl is the lead of the Star Wars: Clone Wars tv show and the movies now.

The scales are just way imbalanced again. I don't hate, but white guys still need a stake.

Well both the latest Star Wars films seemed to do pretty well despite that

Of course they did well, because while a contingent of young white men like to bitch and complain on the internet, even using these films as an example of white genocide, the reality is that they still go to these movies, and perhaps begrudgingly enjoy them. It's just noise, but everyone gets the chance to be an oppressed victim nowadays.

I hate that my first thought was that Sonequa Martin-Green is gorgeous.

Also, love the uniforms.

White straight men do love to bitch if they aren't at the center of fucking everything!

As at R1..

Michelle Yeoh has been a Bond Girl AND a Star Trek captain? That's awesome, and so is she!

However, those uniforms are a continuity error. In the TOS episode "The Menagerie", the Enterprise crew of that time period were shown wearing the velour shirts and capri pants, although with ugly turtleneck collars.

The Klingons didn't look like that either.

I don't really care. I just want the show to be good, no matter what they're wearing.

I love how R1 declares that white men can't possibly identify with a hero who isn't a white male, but blithely assumes that everyone else on Earth is totally fine with white straight male heroes and LOVES identifying with them.

Looks fucking awful. Way too much SJW bullshit and that was only the trailer! The twofer Captain is horrendous. I get they want to bend over and let China fuck them in the ass but it's so obvious

The lead black chick that has to save everyone, oh dear.

It's a reboot so why even bother to make it ten years before Kirk. Ah quick gimmick ploy, because Enterprise worked out so well didn't it.

It wants to be old Trek but look like JJ Trek. So who is the market audience?

I also don't want to see two lead women that are just plot devices. The captain should have been an alien male. But instead we get an annoying black half breed vulcan with a superiority complex. No thanks.

Vulcans and Klingons are just tired at this point. Move on to new races.

The uniforms just look like updated Enterprise uniforms. Shitty looking.

No way in hell would I pay for this shit. I'm prepared to watch the first episode and have my opinion changed though.

[quote]Way too much SJW bullshit and that was only the trailer!

Yes, depicting someone other than straight white men is automatically SJW. Go back to 2014 when they were still using that term and don't come back, you scared, fusty little troll.

Preach, R8. They think the old state of affairs was the normal state but just the opposite is true; it was a distorted one. Everyone getting an equal opportunity is what things should've looked like [italic]from the start.[/italic] If that means more powerful women for a while to counterbalance the masculinity of the past, so be it.

Love this trailer but I don't understand why CBS is going after reactions to it on YouTube. That's not the way to generate conversation. Should've learned that lesson from Lionsgate.

Talk about a tirade from the sexually repressed Mare in R10. Maybe you need to post on Trekbbs where they lap your sort of blind devotion shit up dear.

No depicting two women of minorities for a predominantly straight white male audience, clunky dialogue of rejection (which is an obviously allegory to sex, gender, trannies), the black protagonist with zero flaws bathed in a hero edit trying to save the no doubt uneducated masses (another painfully obvious allegory). 'Great unifiers', trek has always taken upon itself to be all inclusive of of it's silly rainbow mantra dogma so no doubt the dialogue was to appeal to all those emotional cripples packing a sad looking to belong.

Trotting out the troll excuse is just weak. Either argue the points raised properly or just shut the fuck up. I don't know what rock you're living under but SJW is still being used. Maybe you need to drag your head out of the clouds and into reality snowflake, because you or your opinions are never going to be universally loved.

So, it's only okay to bathe someone in the hero edit and have them save the uneducated masses if it's a white male, R11?

FYI "Trek" has always been about what you dismiss as "SJW shit", and if you don't get that then you don't belong in the fandom.

[quote] However, those uniforms are a continuity error. In the TOS episode "The Menagerie", the Enterprise crew of that time period were shown wearing the velour shirts and capri pants, although with ugly turtleneck collars.

This isn't ten years before the William Shatner show; this is ten years before the Chris Pine movies.

Everything has changed. Keep up.

Nay. This takes place in the Prime universe.

R12 Did I ever say that? No. It was just too much with all the other PC dogma.

Look I've watched every single bit of Trek until this point, so I know what Trek is about. Sometimes they can skillfully intertwine allegories which can be effective other times it's like that shitfest TNG Outcast. It has never been so poorly handled or bluntly in your face with so much of it at once before and certainly not crammed into a trailer that is meant to hook a VAST majority of people in. If they had two gay male characters be featured so prominently I'd still be saying it was a mistake for marketing and PC bullshit.

Don't belong in the fandom? Who made you sole arbiter of who's included and who isn't. You are acting like a bigot that cannot tolerate opinions that differ to you own, which is certainly not the Star Trek mantra. Maybe you should practice what you preach and look up the word tolerance.

R14 Which is bullshit. It clearly looks like from the Kelvin timeline and has androids. I just wish the producers had the balls to state it was a reboot and set in the kelvin timeline as that's what the aesthetics are. Trying to be ambiguous and lie to not upset certain fandom is just absurd. Now they have to worry about all the continuity issues.

I can't see this ending well. I'd love to know the barometer of success for Netflix.

R15, you are why so many people despise Trekkies and serious sci-fi fans.

I would say why and go into detail, if I thought you had even the slightest capacity for thoughtfulness of self-awareness.

R17 Nope fans that can't hear any criticism about their beloved show and get in a tizz whenever somebody disagrees with them is why Trek fans are ridiculed. They take everything so personally and get too emotionally invested in fiction. It's unhealthy, weird and creepy.

Please, go into detail. Don't start something and then don't have the balls to finish it. A bit like not addressing the actual discussion.

*nerdgasm*

Although now that you mentioned it, I did notice there were practically no white males in the trailer. I suppose all the aliens could be white underneath the makeup :D

I'll definitely give it a chance, but I'm tired of prequels. I wish they'd done a show set after the TNG timeline.

Omg, Sasha from Walking Dead is the star of this movie???

Damn, she's probably the biggest success out of that series so far.

When did Yoko Ono become an actress?

Just after her stellar music career R22

The reason the look is like a hybrid of the Prime and Kelvin universes is because Neville Page, SyFy's official Hot Daddy on Face Off, did the production design for the show as well as the films.

I fell in love with STAR TREK on an evening in the mid-late 60s when I watched CHARLIE X air on NBC for the first time. I was late to the table by a couple episodes, but I made it. STAR TREK died for me one afternoon In 2009 when JJ Abrams destroyed it.

R24 CBS probably should have hired someone new and fresh. It really does look exactly the same as JJ Trek, not just production design but everything down to the editing of the teaser. The uniforms even have the same design.

They should have started afresh decades into a future and be done with it. Prequels are just so regressive and piss off the support base your trying to cultivate.

I predict this one is going to be a huge flop.

Between Yoko Ono as Captain, and no recognizable cast members (except for Sasha from Walking Dead), Trekkies aren't going to connect with this movie.

And I say this as a HARD CORE Star Trek fan.

[quote] no recognizable cast members (except for Sasha from Walking Dead)

She's the star.

I agree with the above poster that we don't need another prequel with the same aliens. We should have a totally new Trek, that takes place in the post-TNG timeline.

I'm so ready.

[quote] Between Yoko Ono as Captain,

All Asian women are Yoko Ono? Wow. Just, wow.

Kringrons.

Elsewhere on the web, I've seen other on-the-spectrum fanboys losing their shit because of the lack of white males in the commercial.

They claim to respect Trek's commitment to diversity, but they're seriously horrified by anything beyond tokenism.

Why set this before Kirk? Didn't Enterprise do the same thing. I'd rather see something a generation after Voyager or whatever. New aliens not the same Klingon shit.

I'll give it a shot but, like many others, I have my doubts already. Even the "years before Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise" tag has me thinking, "You mean, like when the same premise was called 'Enterprise'?"

How come none of these experts and "hard core trekkies" who hate the idea of "Yoko Ono" as the captain have read enough about the show to figure out that Michelle Yeoh is captain of The Shenzhou, the first ship where we see Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) but that the show is called Discovery. The captain of the Discovery is Jason Isaacs who, last time I checked, was white, male and (presumably) straight. Sure Sonequa's the main character, but it's Star Trek: it's going to have an ensemble cast.

R36 go daddy.

Why do they keep wanting to go backwards

If they really mean to keep it in the Prime universe, I'll only be satisfied if the computer speaks robotically like Majel Barrett's voice on the original series:

"WORKING!"

Nobody wants to see a Star Trek movie with an old asian lady as captain.

Trekkies want hot studs like Chris Pine as the lead. That's what attracts viewers.

Let's be honest, 75% of Trekkies are white nerd males. A black female lead may not go over well with this crowd

Bingo, R41.

It is not awful because of the feminist overtones smacking us in the face. It is not awful because of the dark and very low budgeted seeming special effects. Voyager looks more ahead of its time even now compared to this shit. It just looks awful because it's going to be awful. Just why?

The look of the bridge for this new series looks much like it did for the last few movies: very messy and confusing. As stupid as the bridge was for The Next generation (with the ridiculous curved piece of wood everyone had to walk around even in an emergency), it was very clean, and you didnt have trouble focusing your eyes on the people at the center.

r6- Bond girl, Star Trek Captain AND a Marvel Superhero (she'll be in Guardians of the Galaxy 3). She's a badass.

i had no idea the female lead was half Vulcan until they had to tell us in that trailer- she's far too emotional.

r44 Apparently we have huge bridge ergonomical issues 200 years from now that will be resolved 300 years from now.

The fmeale lead is not half Vulcan. She was a human being raised on Vulcan and mentored by Sarek, who will be played by James Frain.

Did some of you fanboys ever stop to think that the reason the fanbase is filled with nerdy, straight, white males is because the show was always filled with nerdy, straight, white males? When women and a more diverse racial cast are featured, the fanbase shifts, too. We are so used to watching straight, white males lead in everything that it's nice to see the immature fanboys throw hissy fits as they are put in the position a whole lot of us have always been in, namely, having to relate to characters that do not look or act like we do.

Get over yourselves.

SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER, r48!

And none of you better hadn't DARE tone-police her!!!

Militant lesbians on this thread, trying to justify having Yoko Ono as a Starship Captain.

Screech all you want, the trekkies aren't going to buy it.

We want what we want. And it isn't this.

R50, I'm not saying the show doesn't look like shit, which it does, I'm just saying that it's not because there are women and a racially diverse cast. Enterprise sucked, too, and it had all those straight, white manly men...and the requisite hot alien in a catsuit, of course. Why are you so okay with your own sexism and racism?

Star Trek: SJW

Wow, the Yoko Ono-as-captain idea is really a powerful meme worth repeating!

That trailer did nothing for me. I'm not rushing out to sign up for CBS All Access.

However, I'll watch the first episode for free when it airs on CBS. Maybe that will persuade me to change my mind.

Black people have never really been all that into sci-fi.

R55 ew.

Jason Isaac's is going to be in this? I love him! He's hot, even more so without the blond Malfoy wig!

I hope this is good, not that the trailer gave me any confidence that it is. I'd just live to see some really good Trek, and I'd also love for Isaac's and Yeoh to have a big success.

I thought the acting seemed God awful. I've been a Star Trek fan since I was a kid so I will give this a shot

I'm so here for Yeoh's dignified, graceful slayage.

1. How did I know this would IMMEDIATELY go to race?

2. It looks "okay" but I have a problem with them CONTINUALLY moving backwards to "before Kirk." Does anyone realize how much more fun the series could be if they moved forwards beyond Voyager/DS9?

R60 so true, but that also requires more brain power, lol.

Going backwards is easy because you aren't inventing anything new as much as working your way back.

Bringing Star Trek "to the future" would be A LOT harder and riskier in terms of reception, especially considering the new films.

> Why do they keep wanting to go backwards

Seriously! This franchise ran out of ideas decades ago. A first officer torn between her human and vulcan sides? For real?

I think the trailer looks bad, but then I think most trailers look bad. They're always trying way too hard. I'll certainly check the series out, if only for Michelle Yeoh. Not expecting it to be great but hoping to be proved wrong.

Some of you trolls need to settle down or I will have you EJECTED INTO SPACE.

[quote]A first officer torn between her human and vulcan sides?

She's not a Vulcan. She's a human who was raised on Vulcan.

You seem to have missed the point, R63, but thank God you're technically correct. The best kind of correct!

How many of the main cast work at Home and Garden stores?

Black people aren't going to suddenly rush to Discovery just because a third rate black actress is the lead, just like they didn't when Avery Brooks was the lead and DS9 had three African American regular actors.

Star Trek for whatever reason predominantly appeals to white guys.

R66 Proof?

So many black faces!

R66, are you dense? It's been 50 years of white guys all over Star Trek. In front of and behind the camera, in the writers' room, in the executive office, etc. OF COURSE the fanbase is a bunch of white guys. I mean, really, have you been paying any attention to the entire world since the beginning of modern society? How many shows that are 90% female and black or latino do you watch? Big fan of Jane the Virgin and Girlfriends and Orange is the New Black and all those Tyler Perry movies, right? Uh huh.

I really hope this show doesn't suck as much as I think it's going to because there will never be another Star Trek tv show if this one tanks as hard as Enterprise did. The fact that it is CBS doing it and that their 'make them pay to see it' model is dead on arrival, I think there's little hope for it. And, like everyone else, I have no idea why they keep going into the fucking past. Ridiculous. Is it possible that someone owns the rights to future Trek? Like it's written into some contract somewhere that only certain people or something are allowed to create a universe that takes place beyond Voyager's time? Do any of the books go into a future Trek universe that's not an alternate timeline like the movies? That would explain why the movie had to go alternate timeline. Could the book rights' holders have some exclusivity clause?

It really makes no sense because there's no way that anyone in the fanbase was clamoring for another pre-Kirk series. No way.

[quote]The fact that it is CBS doing it and that their 'make them pay to see it' model is dead on arrival, I think there's little hope for it.

Netflix is distributing the show internationally. They paid CBS so much money for it that they've already made back their production costs. Anything they make off of CBS All Access is gravy. And they upped the episode count from thirteen to fifteen, so somebody thinks it's okay.

Why not make a series set after Kirk and Spock but before Picard and Riker?

The majority of Star Trek fans just want a good Trek and don't care much about the races or genders of the heroes.

The complaints about this show range from the ugly ship that was initially previewed (and may or may nor have been changed since it's not clear whether the ship in that trailer is Discovery or Michelle Yeoh's ship) to the tired retread of a pre-TOS series to the new "look" of the series which just doesn't feel like Trek (it looks good, just not Trek).

The problem with the timeframe is the inevitable need to retcon the events - we know how stuff will turn out due to the subsequent series. Diehard fans don't like when shows create inconsistencies. For them, it's one massive universe. Imagine if a show like GoT (or any show) were to start just changing stuff established in the first or second season - that's the level of irritation.

Also, the fans want something really new. Enterprise and the new movies were both backward looking. It's been over 15 years since Voyager. They want new worlds and new civilizations, not reimagined worlds and reimagined civilizations.

I HATE the bridge! It looks like a game show set! I will stick with Vic Magnana ("Captain Tomorrow"! ) as Kirk in his YouTube Series Star Trek Returns. I love him! Gay Kirk!

R69 Oh, Warf. Don't.

Beam this bitch up, Scotty.

r73 I agree with you 100%!

Nobody wants another prequel. We all still have a bad taste in our mouths from Enterprise, which was just awful. What Trek fans really want is a series that jump ahead from the TNG/DS9/VOY era, with all-new plots, worlds, and alien species.

I would have preferred the proposed series set at the Star Fleet Training Academy, no matter in what time it was set. And wasn't there another series which was going to be about the time agents seen toward the end of Enterprise?

There was a line of Voyager books that took place right after Voyager returned home. I read the first one and it was meh, so I didn't read any further. Supposedly the books got better after a new author took over the series. From what I recall, the books aren't considered "canon" for the TV series, so they shouldn't influence why nobody is willing to tackle a later ST era.

You prissy white bitches are too much.

[quote]Supposedly the books got better after a new author took over the series.

That author is also one of the writers for Discovery.

Um, Klingons and Vulcans are not white...

They're black and Asian.

Vulcans are Jewish, not Asian.

R82 Vulcans are Messianic Jews.

Get it together.

Correction: the Ferengi are Jewish.

Correction: the Zeons are Jewish. Also, Kirk and Spock.

[quote] Um, Klingons and Vulcans are not white... They're black and Asian.

Could have fooled me!

I loved the swarthy, Persian/Russian/Mongol barbarian militaristic Klingons of The Original Series. I thought the "re-imagining" of them into this bumpy-headed, emotionally-challenged, primal-Afro-warrior race was asinine. Although it did give us a chance to contemplate Worf/Troi sexytime.

The Klingons are obviously.....you know .Especially in this new series.

Michelle Yeoh is a legend in Asian cinema. She was a BAFTA nominee for "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," and was awarded Chevalier de la Légion d'honneur by French President Jacques Chirac, and later, Officier de la Légion d'honneur by Sarkozy. It's a shame some of you have dismissed her as a "Yoko Ono Captain."

I agree with the others who are disappointed that this is yet a other pre-Kirk series. Part of the excitement of Star Trek was the exploring of new worlds and the introduction of new technologies and gadgets. Going back to pre-Kirk years does seem regressive.

R89 Just because she is/was brilliant in Asian cinema does not mean it automatically transfers into English productions. Whatever you think of her and whatever her role, all she was hired for was to pander to the Chinese audience with a name they'll recognise. It's why she dominated so much of the trailer. Hollywood is desperate, like a prostitute with cold sores needing her next john desperate, to tap into China in any project at any cost.

I also don't happen to think she was any good and yes the Yoko Ono tag fits. Sometimes you get based on first impressions in life and hers stunk. Sad but true.

As to why we don't actually get a decent series set after Voyager, it's like the writers are afraid to have unlimited imagination and prefer to have limits imposed and spend eons defending their shitty decisions when they inevitably piss off fan bases. I'm still shocked CBS learnt nothing, absolutely nothing, from Enterprise. It was a debacle from the get go.

I think Discovery will last two seasons, the second being shorter with a significant budget reduction. I think it will be too much egg on their face if it's a one and done. Although I would kill to see what Netflix is making of all the delays and awful reception. To think of how much money they sank into this project for it to be looking like a colossal turkey. Though I guess they should be used to it after Marco Polo.

The thing that I miss and value about Star Trek were the "Big Ideas", the myths, the metaphors, the tragedy and the poetry - even when embedded in the cheese and the pin-ups. Finding a planet where Apollo has fled to - wanting only to be loved and worshiped, holding the Enterprise in his meaty God-hand. Ridiculous, and yet...

I'm not a fan of any of the iterations since the original series (well, I loved Wrath of Khan), and this appears to continue the pedestrian, derivative TV science fiction of all the other Star Trek series. The first series was something great and lyrical.

Now I go to embrace my Tribble Fleshlight. Our love is pure

Michelle Yeoh is Chinese Malaysian. The Yoko Ono tag does not fit. It's like saying all these Asians ladies are indistinguishable from another.

Why hasn't anybody mentioned the blatant speciesism of Humans playing Klingons and Vulcans? Shame!

R90 can tell all about the quality of an actors' complete performance, after seeing five seconds of her in a trailer!

And R91 gets it Love it or hate it that's the core of Trek, and it's a shame the people behind the new production don't have the nerve to think big. They could set a new show after the Dominion war or send an expedition to deal with some interesting menace the Voyager found, and go on from there. But the fucking "Menagerie" era? Feh.

[quote] send an expedition to deal with some interesting menace the Voyager found, and go on from there

That would have required Voyager finding an interesting menace and not just the Borg for the umpteenth time.

"Discovery" of what, the One Eye of Horus?

It's frightening how racist and misogynistic some of the comments are in here. Assuming it's gay readers who are posting I would hope that they are more empathetic to other oppressed groups' ordeals. Just shows me that people never learn and can still be assholes if they are not affected personally. And yet they show up at conventions embracing and celebrating diversity -as long as it is limited to their own liking. Anyway... in terms of prequel (which I am generally opposed to as well) I am not passing judgment before I've seen a couple episodes. In hindsight I'd say that being a prequel was not ENT's major issue. The fourth season had some of the show's best episodes where they totally embraced the fact that the show was leading up to the creation of the Federation. They also had some major mis-steps with Borg and Ferengi, but after a while they figured out how to use the prequel aspect to their benefit.

Also: I am not even sure the show is a full prequel. There are so many rumors about stories that the possibilities seem to be endless. One rumor says that the show jumps in time. So this season it would be a prequel while it is going to be a sequel at some later point. (Another rumor even mentioned that the Discovery is a former Klingon ship, rebuilt for Starfleet use.) I don't know if any of these rumors are true. They may or may not. But it tells me that everything is possible and I know nothing for sure at this point. So why not just watch and see what's going on.

[quote]In hindsight I'd say that being a prequel was not ENT's major issue.

Of course it wasn't. It just had shitty people behind it.

You will all watch.

[quote]You will all watch.

Well, we'll all watch the premiere and at least a couple episodes before deciding whether to bother.

But, as with so many other Trek shows, if it proves to be lame, just being a Trek will not be sufficient.

I don't have a problem with a prequel series set in a time pre-The Original Series. In fact, I would LOVE something set in the era of the Christopher Pike helmed "The Cage" (or, if you'd like, "The Menagerie"), as long as it captured that same late 1950's sci-fi spirit and ethos. And keep the velour shirts and the design style. But above all, it would have to capture the spirit and themes of that era, not that of of early 21st century TV cable science fiction.

R94 Life must be pretty shitty for you taking an eternity to make your mind up about something. She sounded stilted and clunky. I'm not going to watch her to see if she improves. If she can't act at her age then there's no hope for her.

R97 Season 4 was pure unadulterated fan wank. I liked some of it but if that was the best Enterprise could do it deserved to be cancelled. It spent way too much time trying to resolve plot inconsistencies rather than writing natural storylines and the constant shoehorning of all things TOS was just embarrassing and overkill.

R98 Yes it was. Even before it aired people hated the idea of a prequel because there was so much story potential to explore in the future rather than regressing to pre Kirk that hardly anyone cared about. You have spent 14 years of world building to suddenly drop all that and focus on an era that was not at all popular. What really did in Enterprise though was rehashed story leftovers for the third time in the first two seasons with really lame actors.

Did anyone notice all the lens flares in the trailer? The technique was used to painful excess in the J.J. Abrams ST reboot along with the shaking camera. No. Just no.

The idea that Star Trek fans are all white males is apparently a myth.

I wouldn't put much stock in some fan poll R104.

r60, if I knew who you were, I would offer you some damn good head for saying that.

I'm sooo sick of this pre-Star Trek: Original Series CRAP. One word: ENTERPRISE. Yeah, it worked so well the last time. With the right people, there are still plenty of damn good story to be told in the TNG/DS9/VOY timeline.

Also, making people go to some pay-access shit is just dumb. I'll watch the premier on CBS prime but it would have to be one of the best damn series premiers in TV history to get me to shell out money for some goddamn CBS Access. I'm a lifelong Trekkie and I'm so over the narrow-minded mindset behind the ST franchise.

r106 you can still watch it on any number of streaming sites for free.

There's a tasty dark haired twink helsman. I'll watch the show until he either gets plugged or killed off.

So it's more "add more pussy" and fuck the Trek legacy, right?

Pine needs to come out of the closet.

Chris Pine is a closet case? Spill!

r110 have you been living in a cave?

This thread reminded me of how excited I was for Enterprise. I love Scott Bakula, could envision him as a Star Fleet captain. The initial episodes (maybe the first season) was interesting... the universal translator not quite working... the lack of a prime directive... meeting alien races we know from TS:TOS.

The ship had a more military/nautical feel, the cast was hot to look at, they provided enough skin to keep things interesting.

The Vulcan on board (whatever her name was) was the big disappointment - creators decided to go with another 7 of 9 look in catsuit and tits. Her dislike of humans was irritating.

Then the writers and producers just ruined the show... there was the attack to Earth (WTF?) - the five alien races conspiring to destroy the planet, etc... the love interest between the Vulcan and another crew member. (he was so fuckin hot - what was his name?).. what a waste of a great idea.

Connor Trineer played Trip Tucker.

Honestly, Enterprise had a rough first two years, improved a lot in the third, and was verging on good by the final season.

Even with Fuller's departure, the talent behind this is a lot more encouraging.

WEHT Connor Trineer? He disappeared after Enterprise.

It's very possible that Michelle Yeoh's character dies in the first episode. One theory is that the USS Shenziou is defeated during an unexpected ambush by some previously unknown Klingon tribe. Some people have speculated that the fucking ugly USS Discovery seen in the Comicon trailer a few years ago is a hybrid ship made from the working parts of the Shenziou and a Klingon destroyer.

Unfortunately, I have to agree that this show has disaster written all over it. Here are my problems with it in no particular order:

--the setting. As has been stated repeatedly already: why the fuck would you set a show ten years prior to TOS? There were references to this huge Klingon-Human military campaign at Axenar in this time period, but so what? Address that in one episode of a show set in a far more interesting time, either between TOS and TNG, or after TNG/Voyager. This choice of setting leads to many problems, not least of which is:

--continuity. TOS was made in the 60s and yes, was very futuristic for the audience of that time (I know, I was there...ok, as just a kid, but I grew up on the reruns). But, to create a ship and crew set [italic]before[/italic] the period portrayed (2250s?) and use higher technology such as touch screens and transparent displays that are far more sophisticated than the clicking relays and transistors on perfect board of TOS ships creates credibility problems from the very start.

--so Lt. Saru is part of a race designed to sense imminent death? WTF? Can you imagine the Herculean contortions the writers are going to have to go through to explain why he didn't come in as the deus ex machina and save the heros every goddamned incident? If I were a red shirt stepping on the pad in a landing party that included Lt. Saru, I'd be looking for any glum expression on his face and would jump off before beaming started.

--In the TOS episodes and books, a central part of the Sarek/Spock dynamic was Sarek's disowning of Spock after he chose Starfleet instead of the Vulcan Science Academy for his professional career. Now we have Michael Burnham (btw:Michael? For a woman's name? WTF?), presumably another child of Sarek with a human, and she too goes into Starfleet? Do you think Spock might've mentioned this along the way in seventy something episodes and six+ movies?

--How the fuck is the USS Shenziou so much more advanced than the Constitution class Enterprise that is yet to be commissioned? Are we going to start off with another time-traveling excuse for shitty writing? Or, worse, if it is the same time period then this shows the producers don't give a fuck about continuity.

--Bryan Fuller--by all accounts--was run off the project he created because of head butting against network execs who didn't give a fuck about Trek canon, continuity, honoring fan loyalty, etc. If he washed his hands of the whole thing, that's fucking scary. (He is still hired as a creative consultant, but he has little to do with DSC at all).

--the content delivery method: not on broadcast TV, not on Netflix (except for Europe, and after a year probably in America) but on a paid CBS-All Access outlet? What new fuckery is this? It's like they have intentionally decided to make this fail before even one episode is aired. It's NBC moving TOS to 10PM Friday (and wondering why ratings took a nosedive) all over again.

I honestly, truly want Trek to continue on TV again. It's been too long. But with this shit show in the making, it's almost like "The Producers" in that the execs seem to be saying "we need to do absolutely everything possible to make this bomb spectacularly!"

[quote]Now we have Michael Burnham (btw:Michael? For a woman's name? WTF?)

I know a woman named Michael.

Was she learned?

[quote]--Bryan Fuller--by all accounts--was run off the project he created because of head butting against network execs who didn't give a fuck about Trek canon, continuity, honoring fan loyalty, etc. If he washed his hands of the whole thing, that's fucking scary. (He is still hired as a creative consultant, but he has little to do with DSC at all).

Network executives were also responsible for much of the stupid on Enterprise.

What they don't seem to understand is that Trek fans live and die by continuity and debating the minutiae of the show. You screw with the continuity or force absurd retcon and fans will leave.

The fact that fans had to create - and the producers had to adopt - the "Kelvin Timeline" nomenclature to account for the movies should tell you all you need to know about the need for continuity.

Connor Trineer got ugly.

I agree with R118 - continuity and 'canon" are (well, were) key to my enjoyment of Star Trek. Unfortunately it's been treated like a comic book by Braga, JJ Abrams and many others - there is no continuity in 2017. Just a re-boot, after re-boot... sort of like deciding you're back to issue #1! All is forgotten! It's magic!

I watched the first Star Trek movie and the destruction of Vulcan, for me, was a big FUCK YOU to Roddenberry and what he created. PLUS the fact that had to bring in Nimoy and have him exist at the same time as Quinto was just messed up for me to follow.

R118 Actually no. They wanted more 24th Century trek, it was B&B that wanted a back to basics Enterprise. Executives were having kittens because it didn't resemble Star Trek (It wasn't even called Star Trek originally) and wanted time travel and more 24th century ideas/gimmicks. That's how B&B created and bungled Future Guy.

What they did do was force B&B to shoehorn ideas that run across shows during specific weeks like the T'Pol has vulcan 'aids' episode to celebrate/address aids awareness week.

Amen r115! Do a Trek series right or don't do it at all.

I knew that two women of color in key roles would trigger the white boys. 😴

R123 One hag that mumbles English and a shit overhyped actress to be fair.

[quote]Network executives were also responsible for much of the stupid on Enterprise.

r121 - actually yes, as you even corroborate in your post. I didn't say all. But, let's face it, if nothing else, Trek is a whole lot better off without B&B.

[quote]Executives were having kittens because it didn't resemble Star Trek (It wasn't even called Star Trek originally) and wanted time travel and more 24th century ideas/gimmicks. That's how B&B created and bungled Future Guy.

[quote]What they did do was force B&B to shoehorn ideas that run across shows during specific weeks like the T'Pol has vulcan 'aids' episode to celebrate/address aids awareness week.

Both those are a whole lot of stupid from the network.

R125 No Future Guy was not from the network, that was all B&B's idea to appease the networks. If B&B had been competent they could have come up with something better. But these are the fools that came up with a male pregnant.

UPN wanted transporters, phasers and everything 24th century. For once the network was right. As it is B&B originally wanted to not even be in space at the start.

UPN's biggest crime was not booting B&B sooner and not being more strict on continuing on from Voyager even it was 100 years after Voyager.

Fine r126 - you're right, I'm wrong. You're the big Trek expert.

You're not even pretending to read what I write, so as they say in the future, resistance is futile.

Whatever you say.

R127 No, I read what you posted and you're wrong. You're too lazy to do your research and when you get called on it you get passive aggressive.

I can't help your ignorance, only you can.

Um, yes I have seen trailers where taken out of context an actor seems really off or bad but when seen in the film they are fine even excellent. Surely I can't be the only one with this experience.

I am getting quite a laugh at the idea that diversity in Star Trek is new. The original series was breaking ground 50 years ago. No one who objects to this is a true Trekkie.

I'm not a Star Trek fan but here's an article related to the debate going on in this thread:

[quote][bold]Racist Star Trek Fans Decry Discovery's Diversity, Revealing They Know Nothing About Star Trek[/bold]

[quote]When original Star Trek: Discovery showrunner Bryan Fuller and executive producer Heather Kadin were developing the series, they were both adamant about making sure that the show stayed true to Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry’s vision of social progressiveness and inclusion. But for a vocal contingent of racist “fans,” Discovery’s emphasis on diversity is tantamount to “white genocide.”

[quote]There’s nothing particularly new about fandoms hating any sort of deviation from classic franchises, which were historically dominated by white, cisgender heterosexual men. Racist fans take it a step further, by claiming any attempt to rectify unequal representation attacks white men like themselves—e.g. the recent Ghostbusters reboot, Star Wars, basically everything.

[quote]What sets this breed of intolerant Trekkies apart from other types of internet loudmouths, though, is how deeply incorrect their understandings of their beloved franchise’s core concepts are. Star Trek is quite literally about an organization of interstellar explorers who could not do what they do, were it not for the fact that their society is based on interplanetary cooperation and acceptance of one another.

[quote]From the very beginning, Star Trek has tried to champion onscreen diversity in ways that other shows like it haven’t. The original series that ran from 1966-1969 was noted for its inclusion of a black woman and a Japanese man, both of whom played substantial roles that didn’t play up to racial stereotypes of the time. Later series like The Next Generation and Deep Space 9 carried on in this tradition by featuring black and female ship captains leading ethnically diverse crews. On the whole, Star Trek hasn’t always succeeded as much as it could have, with regards to representation, but over the decades the series has steadily improved.

[quote]When Discovery was first announced, Fuller promised the show would feature a diverse crew composed of people with different ethnic backgrounds, sexualities, and genders, all reflective of the myriad cultures that contribute to Starfleet. The show seems to be fulfilling that promise: of the seven main leads, four of them are men and women of color. It’s also great that the show’s first trailer features First Officer Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) and Philippa Georgiou (Michelle Yeoh) so prominently.

[quote]For many longtime fans of the Star Trek, Burnham and Georgiou’s introduction was the fulfillment of Roddenberry’s promise that the franchise would literally and narratively boldly go where other television shows had never gone before.

[quote]But even beyond mere casting, Star Trek was focused on fostering tolerance and understanding. When you look back at original Star Trek episodes about the crew’s encounters with hostile aliens from another planet, the day was almost invariably saved by Kirk and company figuring out how to see things from their enemy’s perspective, and ultimately trying to work with them instead of against them. Where fists and phasers failed to solve a problem, understanding and diplomacy prevailed.

[quote]Star Trek has always argued that being able to see past one’s differences from another is the single greatest ability that a person—one that could lead to the creation of a truly fantastic society. Star Trek hasn’t always lived up to that message itself (see: preponderance of white guy captains in the franchise’s history), but Discovery is attempting to make sure that it does.

R130 cisgender? Yeah no thanks.

Everyone knows the only reason Nichelle got her gig on Star Trek was because she was fucking Gene. Racial diversity in Trek has always been an afterthought or to tick boxes.

I don't think this show is going to do well, not because of the diversity issue but because nobody really wants to see another prequel, and it's also going to be on that All Access bullshit, which will limit the audience.

r124 Bitch don't talk about your mom that way

I'd [italic]love[/italic] to see another prequel but the All-Access thing is bullshit.

And I know people want to see more technological progress and would love to have a StarTrek series set in an even more distant future than TNG, but the reality is that can get boring really fast when you have a super advanced ship. It means every adversary needs to have even better weapons than you or has to outsmart you in some way. Like Voyager going through the Borg territory with that armour from the future; exciting for an episode but would get really old as a full series.

That's why I loved Enterprise because they didn't even have shields! The stakes are so much higher that way.

r135 you were the only person who loved Enterprise. Everybody else thought it was complete shit.

This twinky engisn better get plugged in the first few episodes or I will give up on Discovery

R136 I loved the structure of its seasons, the storylines and the technology. I thought the casting and the acting were shit, with only an exception or two. And the general atmospheric feel of it was that of a snoozefest as well.

I think I'm fond of it largely because there was so little of Star Trek TV series to go around in the past decade I was willing to take [italic]anything[/italic] at that point.

R134 You're about ten years too late for that comeback, but continue triggered Asian lady.

R138 Hold up. Structure of its seasons? Did you watch the meandering mess of the first two years that was completely devoid of structure? The stop, start nature of the third season was distracting (did we really need a Hoshi & the beast episode?) and the fourth season was like bad fanfic with a few bright spots.

You're right about the casting, it sucked!

Everything about Enterprise felt like all the bad leftovers from previous Treks, only made with more ineptitude. They copied so many Voyager stories it was embarrassing and the original stories they did have (that alien bimbo cargo, Trip pregnant, Porthos episode) were awful. Stories that were okay somehow fell flat or felt off. It always felt hollow and going through the numbers.

I hope some great Star Trek is made so you don't have to subject yourself to some awful sado masochist brainwashing.

R140 Yeah, I was thinking about the Delphic Expanse storyline; so just the one season, really. The rest was so bad I probably forcefully submerged it into my subconscious and couldn't recall it even if I was tortured.

I just [italic]adored[/italic] the actor playing the doctor and that entire character so much that perhaps I had inadvertently transferred that love onto the entire series. Thanks for reminding me how I [italic]really[/italic] felt about it at the time.

[quote]Yeah, I was thinking about the Delphic Expanse storyline; so just the one season, really. The rest was so bad I probably forcefully submerged it into my subconscious and couldn't recall it even if I was tortured.

The fourth season was pretty good. That was the first time that what the series should have ACTUALLY been about was showing how the universe we saw in First Contact turned into the universe we saw in TOS.

R141 John Billingsley? He was great in Cold Case too.

R142 So much of it was unnecessary. There was no real exploration anymore and all the writers seemed to do was fix continuity errors, poor mistakes from past seasons (Trip & T'pol) and desperately race to bridge the series to the Original Series. If they had used it as a baseline then they would have been on the right track though. What the season did show was that Braga and Berman should have been replaced after Voyager. They get a lot of shit, some rightfully so, but they were running on empty and season 1 should have alerted those higher up.

R143 Yes, John Billingsley! I just loved the way his mouth moved, for some reason. Plus I liked his home planet and the customs of his people; made me wish I lived there.

[quote]Star Trek: Discovery will debut on CBS on September 24th, 2017 at 8:30 pm ET/PT. Following the premiere, subsequent episodes of Discovery will stream through the CBS All Access streaming service.

Voyager is the best.

It was like watching a young Katherine Hepburn lost in space.

R145 Another Voyager fan! I mentioned it in another thread and they bit my cock right off. I was also there primarily for Mulgrew's acting.

Counting down to the "warp salamander episode" mention in 3...2...1...

I loved Voyager too. Their two-part episodes were some of the best Trek ever. Of course, there were episodes that were total shit, but every series has them. Overall, I thought Voyager was a great show. Mulgrew was absolutely perfect as Janeway.

Mulgrew was DIVINE, R146 /R147.

I loved the sexual tension between 7 and janeway

Kate Mulgrew was always vocal about the lack of gay/lesbian characters in Trek, and she wanted that to change.

R148 People bitch a lot about Voyager, but Mulgrew's acting is never among the complaints. I've rewatched Voyager a couple of times just to see her acting become more and more relaxed and self-confident as the series progressed. It's great!

R149 I know Mulgrew talked at conventions that she thought the showrunners' idea of her and Seven having a mother-daughter relationship wasn't that great. But that's not how I've ever registered their chemistry. I've always seen them as a student being guided by a mentor/teacher in the (forgotten) ways of humanity. So much more relatable than an android-human relationship and it has really shaped how I see the world to this day. The fact that they brought in Seven as a sex bomb to up the ratings I can't comment on because I'm gay so I've never looked at her that way. I [italic]would[/italic] have complained if Seven's acting or her storylines were shit but that really wasn't the case.

It's funny because I had watched this series religiously on TV when it was on and I remember saying to myself (this was before I got an internet connection): "I wonder what's the deal with this Bryan Fuller guy as his name keeps popping up so frequently." Well, little did I know...

Voyager has a lot of crap episodes - I've been watching them on BBC America. But there are some really good ones as well.

I'm surprised at how irritating I found The Doctor and the early seasons with Kex... blech.

7 of 9's introduction was genius. Jeri Ryan is great and Mulgrew's performance is definitely kicked up a notch with that character's addition to the cast. My complaint about Seven's addition to the cast... I really wish they had taken a half dozen episodes to remove all of the Borg implants, have her appearance change over the season. But they went with the: she's Borg, she's hot! Give yourselves a wank fanboys... wrapped up tight in a catsuit, all tits, ass and heels (You will comply - Resistance is futile.)

I had great hopes for Enterprise, loved the first season, but the producers.show runners.network competed for direction and the program became a mess, which is really unfortunate.

The show I should re-watch is DS9. I think that's a bastard stepchild to TNG. I've read that it's really very good and was given the opportunity to tell long form stories.

All the next gen franchise first seasons suck TNG, DS9 and Voyager all really didn't get good till around season 3.

R152 Yeah, Voyager was no doubt the greatest offender when it came to wiping the slate clean every week, so I'm totally on board with you regarding the Borg implants. I remember it getting so bad on this front I got giddy whenever something from one of the previous episodes or seasons was brought up. How sad! And yes, the Doctor was terribly grating pre-Seven.

I don't intend to bitch about Jeri Ryan because she made something brilliant out of what she had been given. Plus, she [italic]did[/italic] give us eight years of Barack Obama, so there's that.

Sonequa Martin-Green spills the tea on Commander Burnham.

And wank they did R152.

R152 You sound like a bitchy jealous frau on Seven/Jeri. All the females wore heels and at least one woman had to be the sexy eye candy on each Trek show. Seven was the only one with brains AND looks. Maybe you need to stare at Kira's ginormous ass in spandex and listen to her wail about the prophets and BAJOR to appreciate Seven. As for the catsuit, Kes pioneered them on Voyager first. Seven was just following suit.

Everytime I rewatch DS9 I like it less and less.It is so overhyped. Their long running arcs were always disjointed. The dominion war was constantly backburned for Klingons or holodec adventures. Seriously you're in the middle of a war in the most important sector in space and you're playing baseball against one dimensional Vulcans or having an imaginary bank heist with that annoying piece of shit Vic Fontaine all the while listening to Avery Brooks insert his black history month speech bonanza. The religious tones are beyond annoying as is the silly religious battles with Prophets & Pah Wraiths.

"All the females wore heels and at least one woman had to be the sexy eye candy on each Trek show"

Actually, the crew-women on TOS wore the same low-heeled boots as the men, which was about the only thing that made those awful miniskirts believable as work uniforms. Of course in the recent remake, Zoe Saldana added high wedge heels to her uniform boots, which made running or any real activity impossible. It's a tiny detail, but an annoying one.

R157 Every time someone on that show said the phrase "Pah Wraiths," I heard "power wraiths" instead and wondered why everyone went high British for that one word alone.

But yeah, I watch Star Trek to [italic]escape[/italic] the religious thing. Also, the holodeck episodes are what happens when you want to go big, but the bosses won't give you more money. And there's rarely anything Star Trek about those episodes.

R158 They still wore heels though not flats and point taken about the men on TOS. I see this criticism of Seven's catsuit/uniform all the time though like she was the only one not in sensible footwear, but her costume makes perfect sense given the Doctor gave her her wardrobe and makeover and the aesthetic was going to something akin to Pygmalion.

R159 Agree.

R160, the women of TOS wore flat-heeled boots, which still looked great. The tights and boots were very flattering to the legs but still didn't impede movement. Which is the nicest thing I can say about the damn miniskirts.

As for Seven's outfit... eurgh, don't get me started! Nobody as logically-minded as a new ex-borg would wear heels instead of flats, or worse, put her hair in a deceptively complicated updo that required teasing and fiddling around at the back of her head, someone who valued appearances as little as she should would either hack off her hair or just let it hang there, or at best, put it in a pony tail. However, a person entirely devoid of vanity might like the catsuit because it's comfortable and doesn't get in the way, although she'd have no clue about its sexual connotations. But then, an ex-borg who was 90 years old and weighed 200 pounds might like the catsuit for comfort, too.

As a young gayling, I used to masturbate to Jonathan Frakes as Riker.

[quote]Which is the nicest thing I can say about the damn miniskirts.

Nichelle had great gams. That's really the nicest thing.

Seven's catsuits may have been to provide wank material for teenage boys, but the fact that she could wear them and still kick ass is a testament to how awesome Jeri Ryan is.

R157, this is R152, replying... I love 7 0f 9. My critique was that I wanted the transformation to occur more slowly, to see her over a half dozen episodes become more human looking and have to contend with the removal of the Borg implants. I don't care that Seven wore the catsuit which was all tits and ass. Ryan rocked the outfit and gave fanboys a lot of j/o material.

The heels however, were ridiculous.

I always used to pretend I was Wesley Crusher getting my ass reamed by first season twink riker.

First look at transporter room.

Discovery* ditches “Roddenberry’s Box”:

[quote]As part of Trek creator Gene Roddenberry’s utopian vision of the future (and one that Trek franchise executive producer Rick Berman carried on after Roddenberry’s death in 1991), writers on Trek shows were urged to avoid having Starfleet crew members in significant conflict with one another (unless a crew member is, say, possessed by an alien force), or from being shown in any seriously negative way.

[quote]So for the CBS All Access series coming Sept. 24, that restriction has been lifted and the writers are allowed to tell types of stories that were discouraged for decades.

[quote]Another major change is the new series is heavily serialized, unlike all the previous iterations which mostly consisted of close-ended episodes (with occasional story arcs that were two or three episodes long, plus Deep Space Nine‘s more ambitious Dominion Wars arc, among other examples).

*Is there a consensus regarding the abbreviation yet? Are we calling it ST:D (insert STD joke here) or DISC or what?

I think they're using DSC.

Well, I suppose that's why this one and ENT were prequels, not a sequels. The 'perfect Star Trek character' started with TNG, not even with TOS. In the early Starfleet times, humans could still be flawed and have drama ensuing edges.

[quote]Discovery to be the first Trek series where main characters won’t be safe for creative reasons

I'm thinking Michelle Yeoh is a goner before the end of the first season.

The Red Shirt Wedding!

[quote]“In the different versions of Trek, the Klingons have never been completely consistent,” Harberts said. “We will introduce several different houses with different styles. Hopefully, fans will become more invested in the characters than worried about the redesign.”

[quote]Showrunner Aaron Harberts noted that original series showrunner Bryan Fuller was an advocate of updating the look of the Klingons and was involved in the redesign — and that the look of the Klingons has frequently changed over the franchise’s 52 years.

I don't know, they look like beetles to me. I'll have to see them in motion.

Just spare us any more men in dresses and skirts

it's the future asshole. men can wear whatever they want!

R171 = W&W!

I like the new look of the Klingons.

See, it's stuff like this that makes me less optimistic about the new series. Imagine being in a perilous situation and instead of getting all the help you can get, some smart-ass comes to you and says "I can sense death." Well, no shit! Even less useful than Troi's empath "abilities", which I didn't think was possible.

I'm also quite uncomfortable looking at him. He looks like a burn victim with a genetic facial disfiguration to boot. And fish eyes on top of that.

Gods, the more I read about this, the more I despair.

I [italic]did[/italic] like their tech tweets this week, though.

What's with them wearing the Enterprise arrowhead? It was explicitly show in TOS that different ships had individual badges. It wouldn't be for decades that Starfleet would standardize the arrowhead in honor of Kirk's record-breaking fuck-list of alien chicks.

r179 That was one of the first thing I noticed when Next Generation debuted.

Suddenly everybody in Starfleet was wearing the Enterprise symbol. They never offered any explanation, but I like yours.

There's the "break the internet" news that Burnham is the daughter of Spock's mother Amanda, and then there's the smaller news, that Wilson Cruz is playing the husband of Anthony Rapp's Lieutenant Stamets. Finally, a connection between Star Trek and My So-Called Life.

New trailer released at Comic-Con.

Those battles look dope as fuck. And that camera moving through the shield?! I'm all in.

I want to be teleported to my wedding with that effect at 1:50, please.

The actor at 1:40 is giving me Jared Leto in SS/Andrew Scott in Sherlock levels of cringe. Not good.

R182: The uploader has not made this video available in your country.

Does anyone have another link for it?

Here.

It looks like generic space opera, not Trek.

Did anyone else catch the guy with the beard saying in response when she said, "you're mad." "No, I'm Mudd."

[quote]There's the "break the internet" news that Burnham is the daughter of Spock's mother Amanda

I hope they don't make everyone someone's relative. As for her being Spock's half sister - that would be idiotic.

The trailer looks really good. I still don't get why it has to be a prequel. They could just say that it all takes place 100 years after Janeway where everything has changed and is in disarray.

R185 For some reason, they removed that trailer from their official channel? What the fuck is [italic]happening[/italic] with their marketing team?!

About damn time as well.

[quote]Both Cruz and Rapp also starred in [italic]Rent[/italic] on Broadway, although the former didn't come back for the 2005 movie.

Wilson Cruz, for reference. Cute coupling.

Wilson Cruz could GET IT

He really looks like Alan Tudyk in the pic at r189.

That's three gay castmembers. That has to be some kind of record.

[quote]That's three gay castmembers. That has to be some kind of record.

Have you ever watched "bewitched" R193? Even once?

I'm pretty sure R193 was only referring to Star Trek shows.

[quote]Have you ever watched "bewitched" [R193]? Even once?

Now, see here, Derwin, Uncle Arthur was just too busy to date, and preferred to do it in Europe anyway.

ST needs to GO AWAY for good, no mo movies or shows. YAWN now, give us a sci fi series wif an all people of colour cast, give Entaintment magazine something to pop a load over.

[quote]Did anyone else catch the guy with the beard saying in response when she said, "you're mad." "No, I'm Mudd."

They announced Rainn Wilson would be playing Harry Mudd a while ago.

I have to admit, seeing it in action, I like it a lot more than I did as a concept. But it's also hard to square a vaguely threatening Mudd with the guy who showed up on TOS, who was basically the Federation's version of Uncle Arthur.

[quote]R197: I need to GO AWAY for good, no mo movies or shows.

Fixed.

r197 Get over yourself you half baked no wit

[bold]First openly gay Star Trek TV character revealed[/bold]

[quote]Exclusive first look at Anthony Rapp as Lt. Stamets in Star Trek: Discovery

[quote]Ready to meet Lt. Stamets? EW has a first look at Star Trek‘s first openly gay character in the franchise’s 51-year television history. Played by Rent fan favorite Anthony Rapp, the character is anastromycologist (that’s a fungus expert) who has a crucial role in the show’s story.

[quote]“I’m really excited and happy when a gay character is a part of a story — especially when a gay character is created in a complex and human and non-stereotypical, interesting way, and that has certainly been the case with Stamets,” Rapp tells us. “And you get to see his relationship. There was a little glimpse in Sulu in Beyond, and it was a nice nod. But in this case, we actually get to see me with my partner in conversation, in our living quarters, you get to see our relationship over time, treated as any other relationship would be treated.”

He looks weird in that photo. Probably just harsh lighting and a bad angle. Lovely article.

Yeah, I see now that he looks way hotter in the video interview accompanying the article.

Such is the curse of group photos, unfortunately.

No religion allowed! I love this show already.

[quote]The imposing Captain Gabriel Lorca strides across the Starship Discovery bridge, squinting at the raging battle on the viewscreen, rattling off orders to his crew with rapid precision. There’s a Federation ship under attack by Klingons, and the Discovery is rushing to join their fight. “Lock on the Bird of Prey!” Lorca barks. “Basic pattern Beta 9. Hard to port! Fire at something, for God’s sakes!”

[quote]Too late.

[quote]The Klingons blast the Discovery. Lorca and his shipmates lurch hard to one side. The high-tech set’s thousands of lights flicker anxiously, conveying the ship’s wounds.

[quote]The director halts the action and Lorca, played by British actor Jason Isaacs of Harry Potter fame, steps off the stage. The episode’s writer, Kirsten Beyer, approaches to give a correction on his “for God’s sakes” ad lib.

[quote]“Wait, I can’t say ‘God’?” Isaacs asks, amused. “I thought I could say ‘God’ or ‘damn’ but not ‘goddamn.’ ”

[quote]Beyer explains that Star Trek is creator Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a science-driven 23rd-century future where religion basically no longer exists.

[quote]“How about ‘for f—’s sake’?” he shoots back. “Can I say that?”

[quote]“You can say that before you can say ‘God,’ ” she dryly replies.

All is revealed.

Always had a job and good income and never lived in Mama's basement. This--like all ST--is not for me.

[quote] Beyer explains that Star Trek is creator Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a science-driven 23rd-century future where religion basically no longer exists.

Roddenberry didn't get that memo.

Incredible. So R205 actively sought out this thread - as it definitely wasn't among the active threads of the past day - only to comment on how he is above it all. So much mental illness around these parts.

I'm comforted by the fact that you'll be dead one day.

R206 A throwaway line does not a zinger make. It's been clearly established that humanity is beyond the cancer of religion by that point in time.

It is a known fact that ALL ST fans are out of shape fatties who will develop heart/metabolic diseases from living their lives out througha mediocre TV show ratherthan actually doing something with their OWN life. Farewell R207 and other basement dwellers. Did you hear Shatner 25 years ago?

You'd think a homosexual showrunner getting sacked from his dream gig would generate more discussion on a homosexual message board.

Instead, it's just snobs sounding off and religious freaks producing obscure YouTube clips to prove Christianity rules supreme even in a futuristic utopia.

I'll check into this asylum of a thread again when the series starts. Maybe actual ST fans will make an appearance then.

Star Trek was created as a social justice warrior series before there was any such term, and it was created explicitly to promote diveristy and unity of people across human lines. That is the ENTIRE purpose of the show: to show that we are all one collective group of sentient beings and that we have the potential to go beyond futile interspecific squabbling. Anyone who watched Star Trek and didn't get the point is a tribble.

SJW's invented Star Trek.

[quote]SJW's invented Star Trek.

SJW's what?

SJW stands for "social justice warrior."

No mature content, even though they could've gone nuts on streaming.

I have to say I agree with their argument that it would come off weird on Star Trek.

I'm okay with it too. It would be a bit like the Thirteenth Doctor flashing her tits.

[quote]SJW stands for "social justice warrior."

No kidding, R213. The plural of that would be "SJWs." The possessive of that is "SJW's" which is what exists in R211. So the question is "The SJW's what invented Star Trek?"

[bold]Why ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Female Lead Has a Man’s Name[/bold]

[quote]We've worked on many shows with Bryan. It's a motif. It's his signature move to name his lead women with names that would typically be associated as male.

[quote]We were going through male names and we all sort of hit on Michael. The entire room was like, 'This is a really, really interesting name'. Of course, an archangel is named Michael as well. It just had a lot of potency for us.

Star Trek aside, I am really looking forward to The Orville. Not sure I can take this as a long running show, a mini-series probably should be ideal. The type of humor might wear off too soon. But for a while this should be fun. I'm surprised how many Star Trek alumni are involved in this. Jonathan Frakes seems to direct episodes in both shows.

[quote]MacFarlane added that the two shows “could not be more different” in tone. “They’re continuing in the new direction they’ve chosen to go with that franchise; we’re more old school.”

[quote]On Wednesday, Discovery writer Ted Sullivan seemed to react to MacFarlane on Twitter, saying “For a guy who’s never seen an episode of a show, @SethMacFarlane sure has A LOT of opinions. Interesting to see what he thinks when he does”.

Some cattiness there. I'm also looking forward to The Orville but I expected the trailer to be funnier and I will never see Seth as leading man material. He's too bland looking.

Another cunt show.

I worked in the Toronto TV & Film industry from 2000 to 2014 doing thinks like set design and location scouting. I still have numerous friends in the business and the word leaking out of Discovery is that the show is quote "troubled." There is serious worry that the show is not going to be well received by Star Trek fans given the lukewarm reception from test audiences. There have been numerous re-shoots of earlier episodes to better align the show with Star Trek canon, but there is a real possibility is CBS will ditch this incarnation at the end of season one and completely relaunch the show in season 2 with a new cast and setting claiming the show was always going to be an anthology.

R221 Which is exactly what Fuller wanted in the first place but CBS rebuffed him as it would cost too much.

No way can the first ST series with a gay couple fail! [italic]No way![/italic]

R222 CBS didn't actually rebuff him. What they said, according to Entertainment Weekly, was lets do a season with a continuing story line and go from their. Basically the door has always open to do an anthology but they're not saying that to see how fans respond to the show.

Uh, no. They dismissed that concept from the start. You can't just [italic]not[/italic] know whether your entire cast will have to be changed when you're drawing up contracts.

R224 Quote from the EW article: "CBS instead decided to move forward with a serialized season, and would see how audiences responded." They didn't say no rather they didn't want to set the show up as an anthology right from the start rather see how the first year is received. If it's crap, CBS will reboot the show.

I imagine the actors probably signed the standard 5 or 6 year deal however actors contracts always come with a season per season renewal clause which basically means the producers/network can write you out of the show at the end of the season which nulls and voids the rest of their contract.

The show being troubled for what reason ever might explain why they split the season in half. When they do that with other show I always thought it puts the show at risk. It's a lot to ask for a viewer to engage into a show for seven episode, then wait a couple of months and then get re-engaged for seven episodes again. I don't believe they split seasons in such short chunks for good ratings. There must be more behind it. Maybe it has something to do with subscription renewals to CBS All Access, but I doubt it.

They did expand the episode count from 13 to 15. That has to show some kind of confidence.

I'm annoyed they're putting it online and not on television. Why? I don't want to bother with hooking up my computer to my TV, I'm not going to watch it on my laptop, and I'm not getting a smart Samsung TV that's going to spy on me. For fuck's sake, I just threw away my microwave for that reason!

Okay, KellyAnne.

Who under 35 or 40 is going to pay for this CBS all access bullshit when they all know how to watch it for free? And a lot of older people don't want to pay for another damn streaming service. They should just put the damn show on TV.

R227 There are some speculation the extra episodes were added in order to give the season proper closer rather than leaving threads dangling.

R231 Well, of course there is. Anything connected to this show is being given a negative spin. Because why not, at this point.

The streaming service arrangement sucks. How many streaming services can people be expected to subscribe to?

To be honest, I don't care [italic]how[/italic] they proceed forward, as long as there's more Star Trek on our TVs. Especially what the world is going through right now, we simply [italic]need[/italic] ST in our lives!

I [italic]will[/italic] miss the gay couple if they do decide to go the anthology way, though.

R233 CBS is known for spinning off everything that is even slightly successful. So I would assume there will be spin-offs if DSC is successful.

Spin off to what?

Klingons In The Middle?

Transporter Garage?

[bold]Mirror, mirror: The cast and EP of Star Trek: Discovery on capturing turbulent times[/bold]

Extensive article with plenty of new promo photos.

This one already stole my heart.

So pretty.

Too much cunt. Can't they be satisfied with the DC franchise and leave Star Trek out of pussydom?

I'm hoping the show does a Captain Kirk on Captain Lorca (Jason Isaacs), having him get into a lot of fights which involve his shirt being ripped and torn off.

Theme song revealed.

Early buzz! Read all about it!

Main titles! Bit James Bond-y.

Best main trek main titles (Exclusing ToS):

1.ST:The Motion Picture/TNG

2. VOY

3. ST: The Voyage Home

4. ST: First Contact

5. DS9

6. ST: Generations

I guess R243 really didn't like ENT.

[quote]I guess [R243] really didn't like ENT.

Who did, really?

I did, very much.

Delayed until 8:48 due to football/60 Minutes.

The show is pretty good so far...

They should have made Captain Lorca the star.

The opening segment was certainly gorgeous ... they've spent some money on this baby.

So far the script is awful and Martin-Green cannot act at all. Even Michelle is coming off wooden and stilted. That Saru guy seems the most natural so far. Even with all that make up on.

It was cool when the Star Trek theme came on.

I'll stick with Orville.

Can the Klingons just speak English?!

The Klingons are more interesting so far. For all the money spent and things happening it lacks energy.

The lead is an absolute stiff. Atrocious casting. Huge mistake. And Michelle Yeoh can’t act her way out of a paper bag.

This show is 90% commercials.....ugh

THIS is why I watch WETA-UK all the time - No fucking commercials. Oh and people who can act and writers who can write. Even on the most inane shows.

This has made me want to rewatch Battlestar Galactica. Compared to this BSG was Shakespeare.

It got better towards the end.

Random thoughts: I missed the beginning so I didn't try to follow the plot, also was the sound bad for everyone else? I had to turn the volume way up. The cinematography was gorgeous but I didn't get much sense that there was anyone else on the ship, just the bridge crew and they didn't have much interaction except the binary guy. Liked the uniforms! It should have been a two hour premiere.

Last week I happened to see an early episode of TNG, not the pilot with Q, but right afterwards when they were still introducing characters like Troi, Wesley, Data to each other. You could see that it was still a new production. Captain Picard had awkward scenes, some bad dialogue, behaving differently than how we know him to behave. Nothing major, just an indication that the ensemble was still new.

So this one could still come together. Or it could be another Voyager.

If it weren't supposed to be Star Trek, I'd think that the episode was serviceable and would probably continue watching it.

However, this wasn't really Trek. It was generic sci fi masquerading as Trek. It attempts to borrow resonance by using a lot of Trek touchstones - it's like it is taking a shortcut to world building. At least Killjoys and Dark Matter both attempt to build unique universes to tell their stories. STD wants to do what it wants without having to go to the effort of that world building on its own.

I guess we also now know why they fought so hard against Axanar - which certainly both looked and felt much more like Trek - the legal issues from splitting the movie and TV rights notwithstanding.

I'm on the CBS app and both the sound and picture are great- plus, obviously no commercials.

Episode one is all set up for the battle in episode two, which I'm enjoying much more. I like Yeoh more than Sasha from TWD.

Just finished episode 2 and so far I like it.

Episode 2 was much better than the pilot. Different director and script writers certainly helped make the difference.

Still, I prefer my Star Trek to be character driven rather than action/special effect driven. Give me an ep of TNG or Voyager any day.

The Orville is better than this, shockingly.

I like the new look of the Klingons.

It's funny. All this (racist) talk about race, but no one discusses the fact that Trek villains were often depicted in unbelievably racist ways.

I hope in future episodes they up Sonequa's wig game. That ratty-ass Korean shit they have on her head now is tragic.

I want that blonde hologram inside me quite deeply.

I've been reading that the CBS allaccess streaming has LOTS of commercials. People are bitching that they have to pay for the streaming plus watch commercials. Not sure what R261 is talking about? Which is correct?

I enjoyed the 2-part pilot episode much more than I did the ones for Enterprise or DS9. I have hope.

R268, you a choice of signing up for no-commericals for $99 a year vs $59 for "limited" commercials.

R270, thanks for the skinny.

Should I feel guilty that in R249's pic, my eyes went immediately to Jason Isaacs' crotch?

R268, The way I remember it, when the app first launched you could still watch eps of any current CBS show on cbs.com for free, but there were lots of commercials (LOTS) and the player on their website sucked. The picture quality was made and it started and stopped like crazy.

Then, with the app, you could see the same shows, but this time the player was much approved, and although there were commercials, it was more like 2 ads a break instead of 5. There was no option for commercial-free viewing.

Then they introduced the commercial-free option. I remember this because I tried to upgrade my account, but couldn't. I called a CBS tech support and they told me I would have to cancel my subscription entirely and then re-sign up for the commercial-free plan, which I did. I pay a month-to-month fee; maybe you can now pay for an entire year, but that was not the case when I signed up.

[quote]I guess we also now know why they fought so hard against Axanar

Sure, it probably had nothing to do with the stealing.

I think making the show exclusive to the new CBS All Access and not airing it on broadcast is a mistake, because the ratings will suffer. Everybody and their mother who is under 40 knows how to stream tv shows online five minutes after they air, and that's going to take a huge bite out of the ratings. I don't know anyone who's signed up for this All Access shit.

[quote] Should I feel guilty that in [R249]'s pic, my eyes went immediately to Jason Isaacs' crotch?

Silly goose, R272, why do you think I posted it?

I have all access and so do four of my friends, so obviously some people have it. How did you watch BB or the BB live feeds? How did you watch The Good Fight?

It's also nice to have for their current line up, plus you can live stream local CBS NFL games on Sundays and Thursdays.

Best shit EVER! The albino Klingon, the camerawork, the dialogue were all great. Even the Vulcan stuff wasn't boring me to tears. Can't believe Orville is being mentioned in the same breath as this. Don't make me fucking laugh!

To the poster saying Sonequa can't act... clueless. She's the only one who [italic]can[/italic] act. Michelle Yeoh, bless her soul, has obviously never heard of face acting. Totally expressionless the entire time.

[quote]So this one could still come together. Or it could be another Voyager.

So the best ST series ever, then. I'd love that!

Teehee.

I only know Jason Isaacs from Harry Potter. Is he a decent actor?

That was odd. I'm trying to picture any of the other captains or starfleet officers behaving like the characters in this one and just can't see it.

R281 I guess her childhood trauma came roaring back after all those years of suppressing it and that resulted in her outrageous actions, the Vulcan nerve pinch being the worst of them all. In other words, never underestimate the power of trauma; it can't be resolved through logic alone. And to be fair, firing on that Klingon ship first [italic]would[/italic] have prevented the ensuing slaughter of Starfleet people. So she was right but the rigidity of the Starfleet code rendered the Vulcan wisdom unusable.

Other than that, I found the captain to be exemplary in her decisions and actions. I guess they're just giving Michael the Paris treatment.

[quote]Sure, it probably had nothing to do with the stealing

You really need to do some research on the history of fan Trek productions before you make idiotic comments.

There are literally hundreds of Trek fan productions on youtube and across the internet, many are about as silly as the kid using a lightsaber, but many also have almost professional quality effects and production (acting notwithstanding).

Trek has traditionally left most of the productions alone, recognizing that trekkies are a unique fan base which has kept the property alive for 50 years. The Axanar controversy hinged on a handful issues, and while the suit was obviously a copyright suit, fan fiction has rarely been subject to claims of copyright - except in rate instances like the Harry Potter encyclopedia that someone attempted to publish.

Two aspects of Axanar appear to have driven the suit - the use of Go Fund Me to fund the production and the specific storyline that is a pre-ToS Klingon war. They've made very little attempt to shut down any other fan productions - again, of which there are many.

>the use of Go Fund Me to fund the production

I always assumed that was the real problem. They were asking for money for better cameras, I think.

A GoFundMe page for the production? Did they get mauked by a pit bull?

And, while I agree that Michelle's acting left much to be desired, Sonequa cannot act. Period. Her stilted delivery was painful. Pretty faces and nice bodies get you nice jobs. Doug Jones was fine and James Frain was good. I am willing to consider that the writing (mediocre at best and full of cliches) and direction may have failed the actors, but anyone who thinks this is good acting has very low standards.

All I ask for in a show or film is a good story, good writing and good acting. Or maybe just one of the three if it's strong enough to cover flaws in the rest. So far ST may pull off a good story.

As someone who turned my nose up at the reincarnated Battle Star Gallactica when it first aired, I was amazed at how good it was in all those three aspects once I stumbled upon it and finally watched it. Now THAT is a great watch.

[quote]>the use of Go Fund Me to fund the production

[quote]I always assumed that was the real problem. They were asking for money for better cameras, I think.

While that may have been the stated purpose, there were some, ahem, "inconsistencies" with that description.

There were rumors that they were paying professionals - which gets the the heart of the question of whether it's a "fan" production. Fans typically absorb the entire cost of the production, donate services, and equipment. While one could argue that it was "fans" who were funding it through donations, it does come right to the line and perhaps crosses over - If you're donating $100 to Axanar does that deprive CBS All Access the money for subscribing to watch STD? How elastic is Trek demand?

Also, there were a few rumors that the people running Axanar were actually making money from it. If you're paying actors (many of whom are big names from the Trek universe and convention circuit), at what point are people profiting from using copyright material.

I do believe that had the basic premise for Discovery not been a Klingon war prior to ToS or if no new Trek series were under development, they probably wouldn't have gone after Axanar or would have settled sooner.

[quote]Sonequa cannot act. Period.

You say that like it's an objective fact. It is not, merely your opinion. [italic]In my opinion,[/italic] formed by years of watching tonnes upon metric tonnes of movies and TV shows, she was brilliant and knocked it out of the park in the very first episode when ST actors are usually wooden as hell. I can't imagine just how much better she's going to get and am excited at the prospect.

Michelle's acting is suitable for Crouching Tiger... but doesn't translate well (enough) for our Western sensibilities. Or perhaps she's just botoxed into oblivion and couldn't face act even if she wanted to. She did look thoroughly "refreshed", didn't she?

I thought Yeoh was so much better than Sonequa.

If I'm giving Sonequa a massive benefit of the doubt I think she was going for stiff and emotionless. She was raised in a Vulcan society, and although a human, she can't quite shake that Vulcan upbringing.

From the previews we saw for episode three, it looks like she will loosen up after being in prison for a while. This looks like it will go the exact same way as Janeway pulling Paris out of the New Zealand prisoner's colony. I think Sonequa's bad wigs are meant to contrast the nappy prison hair she sported in the preview. It seems the production and Sonequa are playing the long game, which is just hard for us to see from the first too eps.

Of course she was going for stiff and emotionless; I got that from the first line. She's trying to imitate her acquired culture as it represents her whole identity.

Anyway, the critics love her and here's a collection of reviews that came out today.

It looks like the JJ universe. If it's supposed to be the TOS universe, they should have gone for that cleaner, better aesthetic, and just gone for better effects. Given that it's supposed to pre-date TOS, it looks completely wrong.

I'm sad that Continues is being shut down. It was a lot of fun, better then Discovery, which I think is a mess.

Even with the football delay, Discovery got a healthy audience AND a record number of All-Access signups.

[quote]Also, there were a few rumors that the people running Axanar were actually making money from it. If you're paying actors (many of whom are big names from the Trek universe and convention circuit), at what point are people profiting from using copyright material.

They were also using it as a springboard to launching a production company plus were planning on selling original merchandise.

I'm really sorry that Continues, Phase II, etc all got caught in the crossfire, but there's a reason those were left alone. Axanar poked the bear.

The Starfleet officers are so brave. I'd piss my jockstrap if confronted with a Klingon warship! I'd beeline straight for the Andorian system and let [italic]them[/italic] deal with this shit.

R280, Jason Isaacs played a dastardly villain in THE PATRIOT, opposite Mel Gibson. I thought he was terrific.

So.. it's basically the multi-ethnic multi-species Federation VS. the Alt-Right racial purity Klingons.

It really is SJW In Space.

With lens flare, and such bad writing.

He was also in a decent British crime procedural called Case Histories.

And he was Louis in the original production of Angels in America: Perestroika in London.

[quote]So.. it's basically the multi-ethnic multi-species Federation VS. the Alt-Right racial purity Klingons.

While I've always been opposed to jamming diversity into movies and tv, in this case it fits within the long-established canon for Trek.

The Federation has always been about cross cultural cooperation and the Klingons have always been about the superiority of their race which entitles them to conquer and dominate all other species.

All you have to do is watch Galaxy Quest to understand how important canon is for Trekkies. The JJverse has been dubbed "the Kelvin Timeline" to account for canon changes. STD actively attempted to mislead Trek fans by asserting that it was in the so-called "Prime Timeline" meaning that its continuity was consistent with ToS and all series and movies through ENT and Nemesis.

Of all of my objections to the mutilation of canon by this series, that isn't one of them.

After watching both available episodes I still need someone explain to me why this show had to be set ten years before TOS. Judging from the story so far this could have been easily set 20 years after Nemesis. No line would have to be changed, just one number in Michael's personal log.

R299, that's been a recurring criticism of the showrunners;; why pick that time period where it does nothing but guarantee canon conflicts? The only argument I've seen is they liked the ability to obliquely tie it in to TOS.

r299 I thought the same thing. They should've set this after the TNG years, it would make more sense.

This show is garbage. Terrible acting, shit writing, zero respect for canon, ludicrous Klingons (they're just primitive cavemen at this point, with bonfires on the fucking bridge?!), ugly effects, crap set design...the worst Trek yet.

And the worst part? Her crazy-ass emotional breakdown, attacking the captain, panicking like a little bitch...what the holy fuck?! I've never seen a star fleet officer behave as badly as that. Made Bailey's breakdown in The Corbomite Maneuver look reasonable!

A note to the show runners: it's no use celebrating girl power if you make the lead a hysterical loopy cunt. Just FYI.

Oh god, the "it's SJW because there's a black female lead!!" troll is back. Wait till the gay couple shows up; that'll surely blow his mind.

You can explore the human condition with a prequel or a sequel. Personally, I'd find any show set after Voyager boring. Also, the canon has become stale in my view and needs some freshening up.

Does anyone know who will be the Captain of the Discovery?

[quote]Personally, I'd find any show set after Voyager boring. Also, the canon has become stale in my view and needs some freshening up.

You don't know what "canon" is or are playing as fast and loose with the definition as the producers who claimed that they were adhering to it.

As information regarding Fuller's departure have become known, what's clear is that canon is the furthest thing from the producers' and studio's minds. This is plain and simply a money grab for CBS All Access.

R305 I know exactly what canon is and I don't give a shit about it. I've just seen a YouTube reaction to the first two episodes by a nerd who kept talking through the entire dialogue about the fucking canon ("no magnification at that time!!!"). Jesus fucking Christ, no one wants to see 1960s aesthetics in a 2017 ST show. Young people couldn't care less.

I'm sure if Fuller had stayed on as a writer, he'd be the one getting the full blowback right about now. It's probably a blessing for him that he left when he did.

R304 Captain Lorca, played by Jason Isaacs!

R303 The folks behind the show have said it's meant to be an SJW show. So there's that too. Go look up some of the interviews. I don't oppose that, personally, but I think they're resorting to tokenism, instead of just casually hiring a diverse cast.

R308 Whatever the intent behind the casting, the end result is the same: a black actress competently delivering her lines and a segment of an excluded population finally feeling included because of it. No one loses a single thing so there's no reason for anyone but the white supremacists to be upset about it.

And I'm pretty sure Uhura wasn't "casually hired" back then, either.

[quote][R305] I know exactly what canon is and I don't give a shit about it. I've just seen a YouTube reaction to the first two episodes by a nerd who kept talking through the entire dialogue about the fucking canon ("no magnification at that time!!!"). Jesus fucking Christ, no one wants to see 1960s aesthetics in a 2017 ST show. Young people couldn't care less.

You cannot freshen canon. You can ignore it. You can violate it. But, you cannot "freshen" it as you idiotically stated in r303.

[quote]Personally, I'd find any show set after Voyager boring. Also, the canon has become stale in my view and needs some freshening up.

The point is not whether you people could or couldn't care less about canon. As I noted previously, what has kept a show that aired for three seasons alive for 50 years is the diehard devotion of fans who've love the details, lore, and in-world history.

People would easily give on the visual aesthetics if the show didn't wholly abandon fundamental elements of the Trek world. What the producers and studio have done is jammed their own story into Trek, so they could have their cake and eat it too. They want all the benefits of being a Trek show - such as a built in audience, no need to create their own world or lore (which would be expensive as it would take longer to do) - without having to satisfy the fans on whom they are depending.

You can argue that no one wants to see Trek anymore - that's fine. It may well be a tired old premise which ought to be left to rot at geek conventions. In that case, why bother with calling it Star Trek and simply build a new franchise - but, we know the answer to that.

Also, you can easily satisfy the need to update visuals and stay within canon - just look at Axanar. There are few Trek fans who object to what they did in terms of visual effects - just think of what studio-backed effects could accomplish (the issues from the divided property rights notwithstanding).

I love the "Why are they using holograms?!" meltdown the nerds are having. Because TOS was a cheap ass show, that's why. The proper question should be "Why [italic]weren't[/italic] they using holograms in TOS?"

The reason the transporters were thought of in the first place was because back in the 60s they didn't have the money or the time to show a shuttlecraft landing and taking off on a planet several times in every episode.

[quote]The proper question should be "Why weren't they using holograms in TOS?"

While it's all just make believe science, voice takes less bandwidth than video, and video would take less bandwidth than holograms.

You're sending messages over light years of distance. Sending less data would take less time and be subject to less degradation due to data loss.

It's all make believe, but all science fiction and fantasy worlds attempt to operate consistently within their own sets of world rules.

R312 Hah, exactly, I totally forgot about that piece of trivia. I also read an article the other day that mused about the starship viewscreen always looking like a windshield of a car for some reason. To say nothing of only rudimentary autopilot functionality when we're entering the age of driverless cars already. Any future AI could steer a starship better than a human pilot, especially in a battle.

But of course, it's the sacred canon, so let's not change a single thing in order to satisfy a small group of dedicated fans (religion. anyone?). The All Access part [italic]is[/italic] nasty and I don't think you'll find anyone disputing that. I even heard a great argument against it that said deprivileged kids won't be able to see this, which is just shameful.

[quote]But of course, it's the sacred canon, so let's not change a single thing in order to satisfy a small group of dedicated fans

Without the dedicated fans supporting this, it really doesn't stand a chance of succeeding. Do you really think there would be a sufficient audience without them?

I see the IMDb credit page for the show is busted as it credits the actor who played the admiral on 13 episodes and James Frain on one episode only. And Maulik Pancholy (Alec Baldwin's gay secretary from 30 Rock) is credited on all fifteen episodes. What's the chance that he'll be the doctor on Discovery as well? I thought Wilson Cruz will be playing that part.

And here's Marco Perretta, a Canadian actor playing another medical doctor in five episodes. Look at that insane jaw structure!

Thank you, R307

Just finished the CBS pilot. Incredible cinematography. Fantastic special effects. Would love to have seen it on the big screen. Lots of potential there. Especially liked the Starfleet uniforms -- best of any Star Trek series.

There were some sound problems, as has been mentioned. I had to keep turning up the sound for important scenes to hear what was happening, especially with Michele Yeoh's dialogue. And was it really necessary to do all the Klingon scenes in Klingon? A few lines of dialogue, then switching to English would have been better.

The plot had its moments, but over all was cliched. By the end of the episode, I kind of liked Michael Burnham. The scene with Sarek really helped humanize here. I disliked Michele Yeoh as Captain Georgiou; she definitely felt like the weakest actor in the bunch.

Thing that kept bothering me is that conflicts with existing canon, especially given that TOS series starts 10 years after this one. I see no reason why this show couldn't have been set 100 years after Next Generation.

Money's tight, so I'm not signing up for CBS All Access. Maybe sometime after all 15 episodes have dropped, I'll sign up for a month. Or maybe I'll discover one of my friends has All Access.

It was a steaming pile of shit with the name Star Trek attached so CBS can tap into a few more pockets on name recognition alone.

Acting sucked, Burnham is a Mary Sue, overuse of lens flare, more overuse of Klingons, as usual another prequel series that sucked.

Thanks for your insight, R319.

R309 Yaaawwwwnnn.

Yes, Nichelle was casually hired, because they were hiring a diverse cast, that being an end unto itself. The new show is using 'diversity' to PR itself. There's a difference.

I keep reading this Mary Sue thing. What does it mean? Is it like a Gomer Pyle?

Oh, I see. These quotes from R279's article are totally not dripping with poison, then:

[quote]But what has Trekkies even more upset is that the beloved Vulcan, Mr Spock, has been replaced by a blind character who sees through robot eyes.

[quote]Lavar Burton [yes, misspelt], who had a starring role in Roots, will challenge Spock's memory as Geordie LaForge.

Not to mention the bitch from Atlanta who led a campaign to prevent the TNG production from happening as she just couldn't bear a black guy ruining her Star Trek. So Uhura got casually hired and Geordie got casually hired, but Michael Burhnam is a token and so should be denigrated, protested, and the show boycotted?

Also, stretching out your yawns does not an argument make. Not in real life and certainly not on DL.

R322 It's a sexist man's take on every strong female character. As if Kirk wasn't a male Mary Sue (also called a "Gary Stu").

TNG premiered thirty years ago today (it was actually shown first on the 26th). Where are its stars today?

Need to find a good torrent

R323 You're talking to two separate people, genius, first of all.

Secondly, you completely missed my point. Because you're the kind of racist and sexist who thinks that tokenism is progress. The original series hired for diversity, but didn't try to score points with it. The two leads were Jewish, the cast was multi-racial, it was done in a way that was inclusive, not just too generate PR.

You're an idiot, BTW..

Why is this show getting tons of hate?

R328 I've read from people in the Star Trek subreddit who have been at this game much longer than I have that it's a standard response from hardcore ST fans to [italic]any[/italic] new ST incarnation. The All Access scheme and the black female lead in our brave new Trumpian world don't help either.

Watching one of those fans react to this show and saying repeatedly "This isn't how it [italic]should[/italic] be" told me that it's just your generic attachment to the sacred canon they have dedicated their lives to. The Ghostbusters Syndrome, if you will. Thankfully, they don't represent the majority of today's audience.

But the critics seem to like it and the aforementioned ST subreddit is pretty positive about it as well. So it's not all bad news. Though a segment of the super fans [italic]is[/italic] working very hard at tanking this. Just look at R279's post to see history repeat itself over and over again.

Some thoughts: Sarek is that one Vulcan everyone knows. Can't have it be a new character - no, no, no.

Of course our heroine is a chosen one and has special never before discussed telepathy across the galaxy. It can't just be about her as a person. Didn't they learn from the whole Wesley Crusher debacle?

Klingons are space inner city blacks.

I'm old enough to remember when Voyager started and the people r329 describes going apeshit that there was a female captain.

And then of course Kate Mulgrew turned out to be utterly fantastic as Janeway.

[quote]special never before discussed telepathy across the galaxy.

Like how they never discussed Spock feeling a starship full of Vulcans die from lightyears away?

I'm just happy to have Trek on TV again. I'm willing to see how it develops.

I'm really looking forward to this week's episode

I know people will argue with this but I think the first 2 seasons of Voyager were much stronger than those of TNG and DS9.

I'm so excited for today's episode! Getting to know the new crew, finally seeing the setup of Discovery, assignment of the week... Can't wait!

[quote] Nichelle was casually hired, because they were hiring a diverse cast, that being an end unto itself.

Also because Nichelle was fucking Roddenberry. That helped.

Chekhov though was totally tokenism, brought aboard on the the second season due to criticism about ignoring the USSR.

The new show aside- did anyone watch After Trek on Netflix? I could do five minutes, then had to turn it off. It was so goddam awful.

Never heard of After Trek r 338. What is it? Tell us about it, please.

It's an after show in a talk format. Some guy who is a huge fan of Star Trek invites guests related to the show and interviews them. In his first edition he had the actors playing Michael, Sarek, Captain Giorgiu and some executive producers. All those names ... a really promising group. But in the five minutes I watched the host wouldn't go beyond YouTube fancast level. It was so bad. 'Watch what happens' on Bravo is high class journalism compared to this. In all fairness, I only watched five minutes. Maybe someone else here got a better impression.

I don't give a shit about post-shows of any stripe.

So, Stamets is kind of a bitchy queen. It's like if a Datalounger joined Starfleet.

The fascinating thing...they said the Klingons would represent Trumpsters and be racists/racial purists. Then they hired black actors to play them??? Seriously?? No one thought this was a tad racist?

L'Rell, the female Klingon, is played by a white actress.

Klingon's have always had darker skin tones, all the way back even before the head-bump thing.

I thought the third episode was the best of the three. The two-part pilot was all just a prologue to get us here.

Great episode! Stamets is such a DLer like R341 noted and Michael's roommate is that office mug-cradling frau that DL hates so much. She's gonna make a great fibro-riddled admiral one day, I'm sure of it.

I died a little inside when I saw Akiva Goldsman's name at the beginning but the episode was competently directed, I thought. Saru is really growing on me and I was the one who had bitched the most about his facial prosthetics in the promo shots. I'd love to have him as my First Officer!

Jason Isaacs is a mumbler, but I'll just have to get used to it. (I always thought he was British for some reason?) His standing desk sets up his character nicely.

[quote]You cannot freshen canon. You can ignore it. You can violate it. But, you cannot "freshen" it as you idiotically stated in [R303].

I suspect R310 is Pope Pius the XII

They truly are the fundamentalists of the sci-fi genre. I can't even imagine what it's like listening to them in person. I can just smell the fustiness through my screen.

"Worship the canon! Resistance is futile."

He's probably having a conniption right now over my "freshening up" the Borg motto like that.

Video discussion of the third episode.

Jason Carter (of the Rupaul's Drag Race pit crew fame) joins the discussion and he's never watched any ST show before. Worth watching for his trainwreck ass alone. He's all cringe from beginning to end and I know he's fucking reading this as well.

I'm a bit amazed that the first episode was in the Nielsen top 10 for the week.

[quote]Michael's roommate is that office mug-cradling frau that DL hates so much. She's gonna make a great fibro-riddled admiral one day, I'm sure of it.

There's no way Tilly is what she's presenting herself as. They wouldn't stick a dangerous criminal in with an impressionable cadet, and she was way too cool in the confrontation first with the Klingon and then with the "kitty" aboard the other ship.

The coolest little continuity touch was when Lorca was showing Michael the fungus transporter, the places he showed/sent her were all from TOS episodes--Starbase 11 from "Court Martial," the Janus VI mining colony from "The Devil in the Dark" (where the Horta lived), Amerind, the planet of repulsive Native American stereotypes played by actors in redface from "The Paradise Syndrome."

Also, while I hated the design of the Discovery when they revealed it, I actually really liked it in motion. The shot of it in front of the red giant was gorgeous.

[quote]I'm a bit amazed that the first episode was in the Nielsen top 10 for the week.

Sounds like CBS fucked themselves by moving it to All Access as opposed to just airing it on their network.

It had the biggest Canadian audience for a series premiere in 2017 and the biggest Canadian audience for a series premiere on a speciality channel ever. A Redditor did some quick math and found that 6% of all Canadians tuned in live to watch Discovery, as opposed to 4% of Americans.

Speaking of Canadians (and there are [italic]a lot[/italic] of Canadians on this show), I would like to mention one particular Vancouverite, Rekha Sharma. I loved her as Tory on Battlestar Galactica and as Kali on Supernatural, back when the show was still half-decent. She's doing a wonderful job here as Commander Landry.

I don't know why, but I'm incredibly partial to actors of Indian and Pakistani descent. See my love for Shazad Latif at R237. Too bad Maulik Pancholy was in the first episode only.

R343 Oooh, one actor was white. Doesn't change my point at all.

And yeah, 344, the Klingons were always made to look dark-skinned. Racism. But Discovery said it was using Klingons to represent white supremacists, so you can see the problem with hiring black actors to portray the, surely.

The first episode was in the top ten because it was free. I think the first three are free? We'll see what happens when they go to being pay-to-see.

[quote] they said the Klingons would represent Trumpsters and be racists/racial purists

Who said this? Got a link?

The show has a lot of Canadians working on it because it was filmed in Toronto.

Cadet Tilly annoyed the hell out of me. I guess I am a true DLer. But then Stamets annoyed me as well.

Jason Isaacs IS English. He's always good and usually dishy.

I don't like that Jason Issacs is doing an American accent but whatever.

[quote]The show has a lot of Canadians working on it because it was filmed in Toronto.

Yes, I think that much is obvious to anyone.

No, R356. Only the first episode was free and that meant that the US could only see half of the premiere epi since it was in 2 parts. In some parts of the world it is included in Netflix subscriptions so no extra fee is required to watch it - pretty sure that includes Europe and maybe the UK. Not sure about Canada. This may be the saving grace for the show. Actually Netflix paid an amount that covered the entire production costs plus some.

No, it isn't available on Netflix in Canada either as they can watch it on basic cable. Hence the huge viewing figures.

Did anyone else see the standing Gorn skeleton in the glass case?

Yes! Some spotted a Cardassian vole as well. And of course, there was that one Tribble on the desk.

So Captain Lorca has tribbles, and he has had contact with the Gorns even though Kirk and crew were--according to canon--the first to encounter both the tribbles and the Gorn. So, is it possible that these encounters never made it to the declassified databases, and that perhaps Lorca and crew are actually working for the Federation's Section 31 division (i.e. Starfleet's black ops division)? Since Kirk would not have a need to know, then he wouldn't have known about the previous contacts with either lifeform. To me, this is the only way they can be in line with canon since Section 31 is their "escape clause." Dunno.

[quote] Kirk and crew were--according to canon--the first to encounter both the tribbles and the Gorn.

Au Contrair:

[quote] Tribbles were first encountered by Humans in the early 2150s when Denobulan doctor Phlox brought a small number aboard Enterprise NX-01 as an easily sustainable food source for his pets. (ENT: "The Breach")

The Gorn were also known of by the 2150s, though not encountered as living beings until Kirk's time.

In TOS, the Enterprise crew acquired the Tribbles from a trader on the starbase. They didn't discover them.

Yeah, I remember the lovely Phlox having them in his medical bay on Enterprise.

Fun fact: they were born pregnant but won't start multiplying like crazy unless you overfeed them.

Can someone confirm if this is the first time we heard the word "shit" in a Star Trek series?

[quote]Can someone confirm if this is the first time we heard the word "shit" in a Star Trek series?

On TV, yes. Movies, no.

[quote] Tribbles were first encountered by Humans in the early 2150s when Denobulan doctor Phlox brought a small number aboard Enterprise NX-01 as an easily sustainable food source for his pets.

I don't recall that but this would mean McCoy or Spock should simply have been able to look up "Tribbles" in his computer and learn how they needed to be handled. Instead of waiting to figure it out after the starship was overrun and the stoage holds of quadrotriticale consumed.

Best First Officer in the fleet my ass.

[quote]the stoage holds of quadrotriticale consumed

Storage COMPARTMENTS. Storage compartments.

Fuck this thread is pretty dead. Yep such a success story. At least CBS can save on All Access where they don't have to suffer the embarrassment of it crashing and burning on their flagship channel.

Top 10 for the premiere episode is hardly an embarrassment.

Love that gif, R369!

They're bumping one episode from 2018 to 2017!

[quote]Originally, it was announced that Discovery's first season would be split into two halves, with eight episodes airing this year and another seven following early in 2018.

[quote]This week, however, CBS has confirmed that it's shaking up that season order just a little bit, by bringing one episode forward to join the 2017 run, meaning the mid-season premiere will now air on Sunday, November 12.

It's a huge-ass tardigrade, you guys.

Big fucking deal R374. There shouldn't be any breaks in a 15 episode season.

Lots of shows break up the season. Didn't Madmen do this?

Are there any numbers on people signing up to watch this? I doubt anyone did, at least beyond whatever trial period they may offer. CBS is stupid.

I believe they said the number of subscribers for All Access jumped 200% year-on-year and it's exceeded expectations. So that bodes well for renewal. However, many people on Reddit are saying they will only be signed up for those months ST is playing. Alternatively, they will subscribe the month the series ends and just binge it.

[quote]So that bodes well for renewal.

The bigger issue will be how it does internationally. As long as Netflix is willing to help underwrite it, they'll do okay. And I'm sure they've accounted for people subscribing and then canceling. HBO probably has a fair number of people who only subscribe during Game of Thrones.

Do we know how the international market compares to the domestic one when it comes to ST in general? How did the previous shows fare overseas? I know they've been in syndication for near eternity and that's exactly how I first came across Voyager in my shithole. Could the ST reboot movies' overseas earnings provide a good indication of how this series is doing as well?

Generally, the Star Trek movies seem to be a more American thing. Beyond and Into Darkness did better internationally than domestically, but given that the former underperformed domestically, that perhaps isn't surprising.

TV is more Star Trek's natural home, and I believe has a decent international following. Add to the fact that it's visually closer to the Kelvin movies (although I think the whinging about that is overblown, since it's not like the bridge looks like an Apple Store), and that it's--storytelling wise--similar to DS9, which seems to have had a renaissance of a sort around the 50th, I can see it getting a pretty good audience. And this is the first time international audiences can watch contemporaneously with the US, which worked out pretty well for Doctor Who.

I wonder if they looked beyond, uh..., Beyond. If the show does well on TV they probably want to expand it to the big screen as well. If they can sort out the rights. Paramount would probably be happy to ditch the current crew and replace it with something more viable as long as it is a sure-r business case.

R378, I believe they said they had a record setting number of signups.

I wonder if Stamets is going to be as snippy with his boyfriend as he is with the rest of the crew. It would be terrible for representation if they're both bitchy DLers.

Bonus shot of Wilson Cruz opening to receive.

I actually found it hilarious how 'drama' Stamets was. Call it stereotypical, but I liked it. First, it makes him a bit edgier and not so white washed like other 'straight' acting gays on TV. And second, I find this behavior totally in line with real life, and totally acceptable. I don't find this portrayal demeaning rather realistic.

R386 Oh, I found it refreshing as well and I love his character after just one episode! But two of those would get exhausting so I hope he balances him out in some way.

As far as record breaking, going from one to two is a 100% increase. CBS AllAccess didn't have a very high start number to improve upon. And, as was said above, I doubt they'll stick around. I'm actually picturing a whole bunch of older Star Trek fans having "signed up" accidentally and, after realizing that it's not like Netflix and they're going to actually have to stay signed up past the trial period in order to watch the whole show, they'll cancel it. All the younger Star Trek fans are torrenting it.

I'm also getting annoyed with companies like movie/tv studios and Amazon, etc. giving better deals to other countries while they screw over their American customers by limiting content or charging a ton more. It's not as important as the drug companies doing the same thing but still annoying.

R388, so you're just tossing out idle speculation on the number of people who signed up based on absolutely nothing.

R389, I think what he's saying is that you can tell nothing from saying it increased a certain percentage. You have to see the actual numbers. And, of course, CBS wants you to think everyone is signing up.

Thanks, R390. There's a reason they refuse to give any actual numbers. One article says that their goal is 4 million subscribers by 2020, compared to 53 million current Netflix subscribers. If they're at 1.2 million now (which is one of the last reported numbers I could find for 2017), I doubt their one-day signup record accounted for very much and I don't think a ton of them will be sticking around at $5.99 a month for one show.

R390, assuming they're the same poster (I'm not bothering to check) that's only one of the several things he said, all with little to no basis.

R392, are you a CBS shill? It's called logical hypotheses bases on past evidence and predictable human behavior. You are waaaay to invested here. Seek help.

[quote] assuming they're the same poster (I'm not bothering to check)

R392, how do I do this? I have been here since around 1998 and I cannot for the love of all things holy and unholy figure out how to trolldar anymore. How do you check? TIA.

My plan is to wait for the whole season to drop, then sign up for All Access for a month.

This is my first ST series I'm watching as it airs and I can't convey just how excited I am every week! I had no idea I had been missing ST in my life so much. However, ST and Will&Grace being on our TVs again makes me think we'll be engaged in a new war soon, and that makes me anxious.

The last episode of the season airs in February so we can all discuss it again with those who will binge it then. At 15 episodes, it should prove a very satisfying binging experience, I'm sure.

[QUOTE]Burnham is a Mary Sue

Kinda surprised I'm not hearing this more. Do people not use that phrase anymore? Am I showing my stardate? Granted, in the pilot she spectacularly failed at being right at everything. But her connection to Sarek is such a classic Sue-ism.

[QUOTE]I died a little inside when I saw Akiva Goldsman's name at the beginning

Astounding, the career he's had.

I guess the doctor is going to be the nice spouse in the Stamets/Culber relationship.

Wilson Cruz has a shapely butt in those tight uniform pants.

And don't get me started on Ensign Square-Jaw, who appears to be Discovery's communications officer (?).

R396, if this impresses you then I suggest you watch Battlestar Galactica. Far superior in all aspects.

R397 I do still hear it but I believe people have just been accustomed to egotistical creators inserting themselves into their work and characters and writing poorly like fanfiction (exactly like STD).

As for her failing, it was only so she could be proven right later on and give her artificial 'growth' as a character. Very predictable and by the numbers. She's still a Mary Sue. She's no different than Wesley Crusher.

For those who are looking to view but not pay, torrents have started showing up on various torrent sites. I've downloaded from the linked site many times in the past w/out any problems.

This is so good I can't believe it's not fattening. I had a stupid grin on my face for the duration of the episode.

So Stamets and the doctor are not in a relationship currently but will start one during this season? That's even better! Isaacs' mumbling is getting on my last nerve but his ass looks great in those pants, plus he's calling out the racists so I'm willing to overlook it. I'm also incredibly attracted to the albino Klingon; don't ask.

[quote]Wilson Cruz has a shapely butt in those tight uniform pants. And don't get me started on Ensign Square-Jaw, who appears to be Discovery's communications officer (?).

[italic]Incredible[/italic] ass. And if they're willing to kill off my darling Rekha Sharma so early on, you can bet the delicious Ensign Square-Jaw is not long for this world either.

I find Michael much more tolerable than Wesley Crusher, R400. So she's got that going for her!

Speaking of faint praise, while I'm not enthused about the show I'm still watching. It's holding my interest so far, if not always in a good way.

[QUOTE]So Stamets and the doctor are not in a relationship currently but will start one during this season? That's even better!

That does sound promising. Haven't exactly been wowed by Rapp's performance so far but he's had some bad writing to deal with. Seeing a different side of the character should be good.

Too bad about Ensign Twink dying. I could have imagined him sucking off one alien knob after another as he explored his sexuality across the galaxy

In case you wanted to know what Ensign Twink looks like without a shirt:

I don't know how any Star Trek fan can stomach this show. It's not only bad Star Trek, it's just plain bad. Here's a vid breaking down just why and specifically how it sucks. Worst Trek ever. I suggest The Orville instead...it's excellent.

R408, that was a brilliant commentary. The guy is really quite good.

Ugh, not really brilliant by any stretch of the word. You know it's bad when he describes his own rant as "epic". And what's with the mask schtick? He's more scared than the Nazis at Charlottesville. Also, the Orville comment... just no. Some of us are ready to move on from the old Trek.

Four episodes in and it's my favourite Trek ever. Shedding some fans from the previous series was inevitable, I just hope they've had their say now and will move to other things soon. Bye, space Felicias!

R405 I think by now it's safe to assume that everyone who's Canadian won't make it past the first season.

It's a shame they got rid of a badass female Indo-Canadian character so early on. But we're getting Shazad Latif in return so I won't complain.

[quote] R397: Kinda surprised I'm not hearing this more. Do people not use that phrase anymore? Am I showing my stardate? Granted, in the pilot she spectacularly failed at being right at everything. But her connection to Sarek is such a classic Sue-ism.

Prior to your comment I had never heard of this term, so I googled "define: 'Mary Sue' " and got the answer. What a great term; thanks for educating me!

People don't use that revolting term anymore because it's only used by sexists these days to describe any half-empowered female character.

Oh? I took the definition at face value, as a character invented by the fan author who has no flaws, is imbued with abilities to handle anything, never is defeated in tough situations, and always gets her way. Is that not the correct definition?

Holy shit, we're getting a mirror episode in the first season already!

I love the slightest of lisps that Wilson Cruz is rocking. So endearing and it's turning me on. As is all the grey in his hair and his beard.

Look at how crisp that uniform is and how great his badge looks.

He looks much younger in this shot. Better lighting and a quick nap before the scene, probably.

[quote]Holy shit, we're getting a mirror episode in the first season already!

This just proves what hacks the showrunners are that they NEED to go to this particular well - let alone doing it this early.

Next up - Tribbles.

I wonder how they'll work Khan into this series.

I'm disappointed with the casting for the gay couple. Maybe it's just me, but Wilson Cruz & the Science guy both seem very average to me. Like they are fine enough in an average person in everyday life kind of way, but in tv shows, average is more like 7/10 instead of guys who are 5's. And don't play the racist card, I'd be happy with a more attractive latino guy , this guy just looks like a shaved chipmunk.

People have been spoiled by CW shows where they cast models. I find them both gorgeous and relatable.

Star Trek, whilst occasionally casting one very good-looking dude (Enterprise being the exception), tended to go more for character actor types.

And Wilson Cruz has a butt that won't quit.

Red Alert! R411 is triggered! Red Alert!

R420 Great, right-wing garbage people are in the Star Trek threads as well. Nothing is sacred anymore.

2017 is slowly ending so you better get a new buzzword soon, garbage person.

R421 Enh, just ignore the deplorable oaf. I love this quote I saw on Reddit the other day:

[quote]Nothing makes the Star Trek fans angrier than a new Star Trek series.

Plus ça fucking change and all that.

One of the writers confirmed on Twitter that they wrapped shooting today. The CG for this show is so intensive, it seems to me like they're cutting it close, but what the hell do I know. I guess shooting on location is a totally separate process from the external shots of the ship and whatnot.

Disagreement or teasing must come from a "right wing garbage person"? If you're R411, you're not exactly disproving my characterization of you.

[QUOTE]Nothing makes the Star Trek fans angrier than a new Star Trek series.

Tis true! Was it in this thread or elsewhere that someone posted outraged reactions to TNG from back in the day? I'll look for it later. It was funny, in a head-shaking sort of way.

I suppose we all have our own personal ideas of what Trek "should" be. I grew up on TNG and that set my expectations. I don't care for the Abrams movies because I find them generic, and I'm ambivalent on this new show because the "hard men making hard choices" vibe doesn't at all feel like Trek to me.

When you close your eyes because you trust your man will get the nose just right.

Who hasn't been there before, amirite?

CBS Chairman and CEO Les Moonves offers his thoughts on the future of the series:

[quote]“Looking at the future of CBS, streaming and OTT”—over-the-top content, industry jargon for internet-only media—“is a very important part of it,” he says. “There’s real upside for our company to have All Access be successful. There’s a lot riding on Star Trek.”

[quote]To date, All Access has racked up about 2 million customers. The average age of its subscribers is almost 20 years younger than the typical prime-time CBS viewer, whose median age is 61, according to Nielsen Co. Executives say that, with the help of Discovery, All Access can blow past its target of 4 million customers by 2020. Future seasons are likely, Moonves says.

Just finished episode 4.

I am loving this series.

[quote]Georgiou: Take good care. But more importantly, take good care of those in [italic]your[/italic] care.

I just about lost it at that line. I want my dead mentor to appear as a hologram before me and say those words as well! So sad and yet so inspirational at the same time.

[quote]Just finished episode 4. [quote] I am loving this series.

As am I. The show has made good use of the "Previously on Star Trek: Discovery..." intros that a person could easily avoid the so-so 2-part opener and go right to episode three. As to episode four, I enjoyed about 50% of it, specifically, the 50% that [italic]wasn't[/italic] scenes where Klingons with mouths full of cotton choke out grunts and snorts at a glacial pace. In fact, you could remove all of the Klingon scenes in episode four because they had no relevance to the rest of the episode at all.

I take back my remarks about The Orville at R408 and elsewhere. I find myself enjoying it more and more with each new episode. And while I still vastly prefer Discovery, I love that The Orville brings me back to the talkier, slower 90s Trek. And above all, I love that we have both of these shows on the air right now because they both push different buttons for me. Besides, you can never have enough shows about people in space!

[quote]Shazad also let slip there might be a bit of a romance for his character and Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green), admitting there's "chemistry" between the pair.

[quote]"There's definitely chemistry between them, and they're both going through some things. So they're trying to help each other find who they are.

[quote]"They could find some solace in each other. That's all I can say!"

Nooo! I wanted Shazad to be a part of the gay love triangle.

Just a decade after Discovery...

This clip actually makes me want to see TOS. Was it campy like that all the time? Because that's right up my alley.

Does it seem like a whole lot of the people loving this show are pretty new to Trek or is it just me? I read a lot of comments along the lines of, "I've never watched Trek before but I love this show!", etc. To me, someone who's watched all the Trek shows except Enterprise, the show doesn't seem much like Trek.

That's a good sign as every franchise needs to replenish its fanbase in order to grow. I'm the biggest Voyager fan ever, which was as formulaic an ST show as they come, but I'm in love with Discovery. No, it doesn't feel like ST at all. It feels like an ST/BSG hybrid I never knew I needed in my life. Perfect for Peak TV era.

Stamets and Culber are kind of adorable together. And it's refreshing that both halves of the couple are played by gay actors.

Star Trek's first F-bomb.

Goodness, I was hoping for a little situational homosexuality between Lorca and Tyler.

I already didn't like that they made the new Star Trek movies feel so Star Wars. I like my Trek, Trek. My Star Wars, Star Wars. And my BSG, BSG. If they're all going to look and feel the same then what's the point of separate shows, story lines, universes?

Whereas BSG was dark and gritty and depressing as hell 90% of the time, Trek was supposed to be about believing in a hopeful future. I miss real Trek.

I am DS9's biggest fan and loves this one too. The show is overall very well done. I am just soooo happy to see that they try to be ambitious and not go for the lowest common denominator.

God Shazad Latif. I would love to give him some hard dong

Nice domestic gay closing scene ... with a twist!!!

So many dumb things about this show. I can't decide if its the injecting yourself with mycillium makes you a supercomputer on the subspace network or magically being able to determine the location of a single Klingon battlecruiser so deep within Klingon space it can't be reached by regular starships, but you can pinpoint its location accurately enough to jump right next to it.

And Ensign Square-Jaw has been joined by Lieutenant Gayasian Twink on the bridge.

So, so good. I just assumed Stamets and the Doctor would enter into a relationship during the first season, but the rug's been pulled under me. They've always been in a relationship, they have just... wait for it... [italic]acted professionally[/italic] while on the job. How refreshing. Although I'm so cynical I'm telling you now they're snatching this away from us by having it take place in the mirror universe.

Wilson Cruz isn't really fully embodying his role as the ship's doctor, but whatever. I had to laugh when his broad shoulders and bulky form were juxtaposed with Saru's lean physique.

I swear everyone's ass looks amazing in those pants. Except for Saru, of course, who doesn't have one. But he's a great individual and I would love to bitch to him about my problems. Seems like his calm demeanour and reasoning skills could help me out a lot.

[bold]Conservative activist wants gay Star Trek characters to ‘cure’ their homosexuality[/bold]

[quote]Right-wing activist Peter LaBarbera has suggested that Star Trek should ‘balance’ the number of gay characters on TV by having some ‘ex-gay’ characters.

[quote]Speaking on radio station VCY America, LaBarbera claimed that the media should include more characters who have cured themselves of homosexuality for balance.

[quote]He said: “The homosexual activists are never satisfied, they always want more, more, more. We have yet to see an ex-gay, a former homosexual prominently portrayed in Hollywood.

[quote]“This is more activism, and I guess all we can do is not watch Star Trek.

[quote]“I wasn’t going to watch it anyway, but certainly with this sort of propaganda. I think Americans are tired of it. They’re tired of all the political correctness, and that’s why Trump won in the first place.

[quote]“You can throw up your hands and say, I can’t do anything about it, but the other side never stops fighting. There is a battle between good and evil in this country.

[quote]It's a shame they got rid of a badass female Indo-Canadian character so early on.

I had the feeling that the show is going to jump universes at some point and that was confirmed last episode.

It's totally possible we'll see her and Michelle Yeoh again. She's totally going to end up being this series', "Tasha Yar" randomly popping up anytime we jump universes.

R444 Oh, I'm [italic]counting[/italic] on seeing both Landry and Georgiou again! It would be great if they made the former gentle and the latter a monster. People seem to really hate Landry on Reddit (I don't know why!) and this just might change their impression of her.

Anthony Rapp's character is named after a real-life mycologist Paul Stamets. Here's he's giving a TED talk on how fungus can help save the world.

R441 Patrick Kwok-Choon, the Sino-Mauritian Canadian, is one hot fucker indeed.

Indeed, R447. ST:DSC is filling quite the stable of hot men!

r447 yummy

Any one have any nudies of Shazad Latif? Um..I',m just asking for a friend

Apparently, male Klingons have two penises.

Or perhaps it's a shape/length thing...

So this is sweet. Both Rapp and Cruz responded to a post about his late gay brother being a fan of both Rent and Star Trek.

‘Star Trek: Discovery’: Anthony Rapp on Relationships, Curse Words, and Dental Hygiene

Just don't read the deplorable comments.

Rapp and Cruz both seem like lovely, thoughtful people.

I wish the deplorables would go off and form their own society and allow the social liberal to form theirs. I can't help but wonder (not really) which society would be the happy healthy one.

[bold]Jason Isaacs says Star Trek: Discovery is "of our time, and for our time"[/bold]

[quote]I wouldn't have ever wanted to do it if I thought it was a reboot or that I was treading on any echoes of the Star Treks that have been before. What's the point? It was done so fucking brilliantly.

[quote]Ours is a completely different show; it's Star Trek of our time, for our time.

[quote]I am not so stupid to think that telling stories is going to change the world at a time when the most powerful man in the world seems to be advocating for right wing, white supremacist groups.

[quote]You are taking in a vision though of a future where people of all races, nationalities and sexualities work together in harmony and that's a pretty healthy contrast to the stuff you are being told about how we should all hate each other and separate from each other.

I'm so fucking attracted to him right now.

Cruz and Rapp have no chemistry, damn. The closing scene was ice cold. Reminded me of "Malec" and with those guys I thought the problem was that they were played by straight actors... But I guess sexuality is not the problem here.

I could not disagree more with that statement, R458.

The show is not getting good reviews, especially from the old Trekkies. It's ridiculous that CBS is trying to appeal to a new audience with all that grimdark tone and serialized storyline but instead of airing it they put on on a paid streaming service... What? Only diehard fans will sign up to see this and they are NOT liking what they see. I'm sad 'cause I actually like the show despite being a Trekkie since I have no stick up my arse like a lot of the old fans do. At this point it's getting bombarded from every corner: the fanbase is disappointed in the plot inconsistencies, the rightwingers are disappointed about the "gay" and "black" agenda, the SJWs are disappointed about the show killing off asian women etc. How did the fuck up so royally?

R458 I found that scene brimming with warmth if not exactly sexual tension, so I guess it wasn't objectively cold. I'm sure it's hard for them to muster much chemistry because they're longtime acquaintances and coworkers. Besides, viewers on both sides seem to be expressing satisfaction that it was played casually like that, without a kiss or anything. You know we'd be getting even more "SJW!" bitching otherwise. Ugh, that fucking phrase...

R460 The reviews are neutral to bad from old Trekkies and excellent from newbies, which is the demographic CBS is aiming for. The ST subreddit seems to be getting more and more positive with each passing episode.

And they didn't fuck up royally at all; the [italic]American[/italic] response is indicative of the current social, political, racial, whatever tensions in the US. But the world is bigger than the US and not all of us living outside have your particular problems. I'm sure Netflix will also take [italic]our[/italic] viewing figures into account when deciding on financing any additional season(s). It really is a brilliant series.

[quote]The show is not getting good reviews, especially from the old Trekkies.

Nothing pisses off Trekkies more than a new series.

[quote]The show is not getting good reviews, especially from the old Trekkies.

Some, sure, but not this old Trekkie who remembers watching ST:TOS episodes as they aired for the first time. Granted, I was just a kid then, but the syndicated reruns were my steady diet of scifi for a good 20 years.

[quote] Only diehard fans will sign up to see this and they are NOT liking what they see.

Generalize much?

Here are some viewing figures, released yesterday but I've no idea how to interpret those "average demand impressions". Could someone look at the tables and give us a rough estimation of how Discovery's doing?

What a thrilling addition to the series. Discovery is surprising, poignant and best of all, extremely relevant.

Episode 5 was fantastic. Probably my favorite so far along with episode 4. I think this will turn out to be my favorite first season since TOS. It just feels so fresh and spectacular.

Sonequa Martin-Green, reminiscent of a young Angela Bassett, is excellent as the fiery and enigmatic Michael Burnham. Michelle Yeoh is luminous and as always perfect and though not obvious choices, imo, Jason Isaacs as the utterly gorgeous and edible brooding and ambiguous Captain Gabriel Lorca, Doug Jones as the weary empath Saru and Mary Wiseman as the rattled Sylvia Tilly nearly steal the show.

The effects and overall production values are top-notch, making this the most cinematic television entry of the franchise.

I really hope this one succeeds for a good number of seasons because it has all of the ingredients to be great. In fact, it already is.

R465 If the first seasons of ST series are usually weak, I can't imagine how much better this is going to get!

[quote]It just feels so fresh and spectacular.

You know, as soon as Saru barked "How [italic]dare[/italic] you treat me like one of your xenoanthropology subjects" at Michael in the last episode, the freshness of it all hit me square in the face. What a revelation it is when the (default) human point of view and entitlement is called out so openly. It flips the whole perspective on its head in an instant. Saru's the best.

I also can't stop slapping gifs from this show onto my posts, whether they're pertinent or not.

R466 Agree! I love me some Tully, too.

....

*Tilly

R467 I laughed out loud when Tilly said she's going to be a captain one day. And by the time the fifth episode ended, I wanted to see her become an admiral!

Good lord. I laughed out loud when I read R454. Reads like nothing more than a show publicist. Shonequa is nothing like Angela Basset, not in looks nor in acting prowess. Though she is cute. Sadly so far Tilly is just annoying.

Sorry. I meant R464, not R454

I stumbled on that article somewhere but have no idea how to interpret the viewing figures as they're given in absolutes.

Calling someone a publicist (as a supposed insult?) is a bit dated; I would definitely recommend a fresher angle of attack. And also a better sense of humour if that post made you laugh.

I wasn't a Trekkie by any means, but I absolutely love this series. Best of the lot by far. And so happy to see a gay couple as well.

When you're trying to ignore nasty commenters accusing you of being a studio shill but you just can't help yourself.

As an aside, I need Shazad Latif's lips around my cock [italic]now.[/italic] And a wig made from his hair. Just because.

Is this a tumblr frau invasion?

I've been kinda hate/cringe watching it for the past five episodes; no idea what the hell is wrong with me. The writing is soooo bad. The dialogue in particular is atrocious. I wish they wouldn't have connected this thing to the Trek universe, where it is a bad fit. It could've been a new stand-alone series, also bad and badly written, but without the built in initial audience, I suppose.

And why do the Klingons speak English better than they do Klingon?

Let's face it. CBS thinks the fans are gullible idiots. Best we can do is hope CBS sells the IP to someone who would actually care. Seriously, I've talked to some people behind the scenes and this is the general attitude.

And so another photon torpedo is launched by Dicktor Von Doomcock at Star Trek Discovery! Warning - spoilers follow (along with ranting, ice skating, Cthuhlu, flying monkeys, and allegations regarding the use of illicit mushrooms...)

Haters be damned, damn it!

Why are so many people on this thread so heavily invested in wanting this show to fail? If you like it, great. If you despise it, go watch something else. Problem solved.

also, and this is totally totally totally petty and makes me a very bad person for thinking it and now saying it, but I am so surprised at Tilly's bad skin making it on air.

R479 It [italic]is[/italic] bizarre that Netflix is covering all the production costs but CBS is still allowed to foist the All Access thing on its US customers just because they have the IP. I wish they find a better solution in the future but that little additional revenue from All Access will be hard to resist. They'll let the series tank first before they let that happen.

It's so unfortunate that we all can't have the same viewing experience.

R477, can you elaborate what you dislike about the writing, especially about the dialogues?

It's the only show currently on air that regularly makes me all misty-eyed so I also don't get the complaints regarding the dialogue. Sure, the exposition/recap while they were trying to solve the problem in the recent episode was a bit much but other than that?

And I'm a pathological cringer who regularly bitches about bad dialogue. (See my nervous breakdown over an awkward figure of speech in the Ozark thread.)

r485, ... I find none of it believable in how actual humans and human-like beings talk to one another. It doesn't feel "real" or authentic, which seems like it was one of the goals, a more realistic science opera. More specifically, a huge amount of the dialogue is long-winded expository recapitulation of plot points designed to keep the audience up to speed on what is going on. This happens ALL THE TIME. I'd actually have to spend more time reflecting on this show to give you a better answer, much of my reaction at this point is just instinctual, to be honest.

While I'm complaining about the show (I should say I'm Gen-X, not a trekkie at all, loved the original series so much and am basically meh about almost everything else that has come after, save Wrath of Khan), I'm going to add the mis-casting of Sonequa Martin-Green as some kind of technical vulcan-trained emotionally repressed genius. I've wrestled with this one - is it some kind of implicit racism plus sexism on my part? - but she just doesn't come off as a STEM genius. I liked her on the Walking Dead very much, but I think she was miscast.

r486, "de gustibus non est disputandum" and all that, but what has made you misty-eyed in this series so far?

Got caught up with the latest episode. I like Michael the idealistic scientist much more than Michael the smug bridge officer. I hope they keep her out of the chain of command.

But Captain Grimdark leaving a Federation citizen behind? Yikes. Do not want. Also I got distracted during one of the prison scenes and I think I missed something; I was confused during the escape when the Klingon interrogator taunted the cute prisoner about "all we've been through together." Was it implied earlier that they had some kind of twisted relationship? Was Officer Cutie raped? Yikes again.

I agree that the gay couple has no chemistry, but it's early days yet. Uh oh, I think I'm getting sucked into this show.

We need one of the men to take their shirt off already so we can use it as the main photo for the new thread.

The series has some good points but what I don’t get is if it’s supposed to be, what, 10 years before the Original Series, why does the technology seem so crazy advanced? Jumping through space on a spore network? Site to site transport? Can’t conceive how this fits into the Trek universe.

R491 The producer's response to that:

[quote]The producer did, however, address continuity concerns people have about Discovery. Goldsman said he was aware that Discovery could potentially catch up with The Original Series and, if that were to happen, the show would acknowledge The Original Series’ timeline in some fashion. Until that point, Goldsman said Discovery will exist within its own universe.

[quote]“We are the original timeline with the TV shows and movies that fit into that,” Goldsman said during a press conference at New York Comic Con. “We are wildly aware of everything that appears to be a deviation from canon and [bold]we will close out all of those issues before they arrive at the 10-year period and hit The Original Series.”[/bold]

Personally, I couldn't give a shit about all that, I'm just here for the personal stories. But I definitely prefer the updated technology to the TOS-era aesthetics. Pople have no problem with most of the alien species conveniently having human bodies so I don't understand why a more polished look breaks the illusion. Every TV series reflects the time it was produced in. And it's not like ST is a period piece; there's no arguing about what's "right" in a series set in the future.

This show is absolutely terrible, and I say that as someone who was a teenage Trekkie. The plot beats are thudding. Agree with those who complain about the writing— whenever I find that I can predict the next line a character is going to say before they say it, I know I'm watching committee-produced hash. The Klingon scenes are excruciatingly boring, made worse by the insanely slow speed at which the actors speak. I want it to be good so much— the most recent episode has some intriguing ideas in it, the kind of stuff I absolutely go for— but it's so continuously lifeless. I feel like no one involved in it understands any of the things that made past Trek shows good when they were good. Or how to write television, for that matter.

On the upside, it's only medium-bad compared to some of the truly dire TV that has premiered this year.

Does anyone else think that this dark, crueller world is actually in the "Mirror, Mirror" universe? And that at some point in a future episode, something will suck Burnham and other bridge officers into the lighter, cheerier world of Star Trek we all know and love?

I want this show to succeed but I just don't think it will. Too much studio meddling got in the way of good writing and the weird move with CBS All Access is destroying its viewership in the US.

R481 Tilly has been having such a profound effect on me in these last few weeks. I find myself thinking "If Tilly manages to remain bubbly and kind and the very best humanity has to offer in the middle of a [bold]space war with the fucking Klingons[/bold] where she could die at any moment, what's [italic]my[/italic] excuse of being a total bitch to people around me?!" So I bite my tongue more and more and try to focus on the positive and ignore the rest.

Also, I like that she's a bit chubby and that the camera isn't working around it. Same goes for Shazad's ever so slight midsection spread, which I hope makes an appearance soon because it drives me wild!

It's all so different to sausage fests of the past. No wonder some seem to hate it so viscerally, especially here on DL.

It isn't, of course, but if this turned out to be the Mirror universe that would be the one big redeeming factor for me.

R496 I love you.

R496, actually, R493 here to say that one of the things that makes me want it to be good is its diversity. However, a wonderfully diverse bad show is still a bad show. I'll stick with the Exorcist, a diverse show that's actually good.

R499 lmao.

Right.

New episode tonight.

R501 Can't wait! Unfortunately, I got spoiled on Reddit regarding one character but I can't see how they could have kept that a secret for long.

[bold]Star Trek: Discovery star Wilson Cruz slams homophobic viewers after backlash over gay relationship[/bold]

[quote]Wilson Cruz, however, didn’t have time for homophobic viewers and took to Facebook on Tuesday (October 17) to write a scathing Facebook post against them, saying he’s “focusing on the love.”

[quote]“I’m not here for your comfort. That’s not why we are here. We’re here to grow. Star Trek is and has always been here to challenge you to look outside of yourself and to see other people and other experiences in yourself. There is no division between you and me. I am just another human giving and receiving love, just like you. That is all.”

[quote]“You can turn your TV off, sure, but you’ll only be cheating yourself. LGBTQ people aren’t going to just disappear because you put your head in the sand. We share the planet with you. We have always been here. We will always be here. You just don’t see us. I’m happy to tell you we won’t be invisible anymore. Not for your comfort.

Okay, all the men on Discovery need to just have a big orgy. Well, not Saru.

Holy shit, is Jason Isaacs a hot daddy.

r504 damn my body is ready for that body. I sprang a boner while watching today's eppy and then had to sex chat my boyfriend on facebook messenger

What seems clear is that a significant portion of the longer-term, diehard Trek fans do not like the show for a laundry list of reasons - most having nothing to do with the critique that it's a sjw wet dream mess.

There are some Trek fans who obviously enjoy the show. However, like the JJPrise rebooted movies have proven, dancing on the line of trying to expand the audience while keeping the dedicated fans happy is virtually impossible. When you alienate a sufficient number of the dedicated trekkies, the incremental uptake by the extended, non-trekkie base is insufficient to make up for the loss - it's like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in the bottom.

Great if you enjoy it. But, it's got a difficult road - of it's own making - to succeed. While a lot of people were pissed that it was only being shown on the CBS paid service, now that may be it's only hope since the economics and decision drivers are different than they would be for network TV or even HBO/Showtime and such.

The CBS and Hulu format of releasing a new episode every week is so dated after getting used to Netflix dropping a whole 10-13 episode run in one fell swoop.

I'm OK with it, but it's more Battlestar Galactica (the reboot), than any iteration of Star Trek. The producers overestimate the interest in Klingons. Wilson Cruz is miscast. Don't buy him as a Dr and he has no chemistry with Anthony Rapp Sonequa's teeth are just jacked. No dentists on Vulcan?

[quote]I'm OK with it, but it's more Battlestar Galactica (the reboot), than any iteration of Star Trek.

i liked the BSG reboot. However, unlike BSG, Star Trek had 50 years, 5 series (I suppose I have to count ENT), and 10 movies of storytelling history to which a large number of fans were devoted.

What really seems to be setting people off is that the producers keep insisting it exists in the so-called "prime" timeline of ToS and all the series and movies (excluding JJPrise in the "Kelvin timeline"). In some ways, they would have been better off just saying they were rebooting it - it's not as if the reception by trekkies could have been any worse had they done so. The show clearly does not - and that's fine, but stop insisting that it does and move on with telling whatever story you're trying to tell.

At this stage, the diehard fans are not going to change their assessment of the show or suddenly start liking it. That train has left the station without them on it.

This show continues to top itself with each episode. It's willingness to explore the darker aspects of Star Trek, which have always been there, is both refreshing and realistic. "Discovery" manages to retain a good dose of the whimsy and warmth the series is known for, but it's also willing to reflect the dark times we're living through.

The cast was on point. Martin-Green made some interesting and quite frankly wonderful choices, especially towards the end of the episode.

Jason Isaacs and Jayne Brooks were particularly wonderful this episode, with Brooks sharing MVP status with Martin-green.

The big reveal had me squealing.

Love. This. Show.

This episode changed everything!

Didn't it get kinda soapy tonight?

The Admiral plot thread, the Zarek thread. Silly ginger girl...

This was a fantastic episode. They really fleshed out Lorca's character and made him super intriguing. Is he a bad guy or is he a good guy with issues? Will Ash be undercover Klingon or is he actually a good guy ("it's being human!" nice one there)? Something's happening with Stamets but it's too early too tell. Vulcan looked beautiful.

Too bad if it gets axed because of the idiotic streaming service and overly nostalgic fans. Hopefully, this season wraps up nicely in case it doesn't get renewed.

R513 The ambiguous conflicted hero is such an overused trope. Needless wangst.

If I never see another Klingon in Star Trek it will be too soon. Sick to fucking death of them. The only time they were interesting were in the Original series (which I normally hate) and B'elanna from Voyager.

Focus on a different race or better yet they could have created a new race if they weren't tethered to another fucking irrelevant prequel.

It's pretty pathetic that CBS had to pay so many shills on Trek forums to sing this shit shows praises.

At this rate I'd rather the CW Trek series by Meyer.

I'm just glad that Anthony Rapp has a non-Rent role. He might be a desperate rice queen but I enjoy looking at his weird face.

It's not just that they insist this is in the TOS timeline, but it's using all this advanced technology way beyond what was available in Kirk's time. Tonight it was the holodeck, and as many others have pointed out, the Klingon's didn't have cloaking technology until much later (they got it and the bird-of-prey design from the Romulans).

Perfect episode and the soapiness to me feels like old Trek, R512. Vulcan martial arts kick ass. Tilly remains an absolute inspiration. Do you think Lorca hesitated to rescue the admiral because she now knows what's up and would start proceedings to take Discovery away from him?

Groundhog day episode next week!!

R505 I got hard when I saw Ash chowing down on his food and holding the fork like a brute. So hot.

Pretty sure Lorca suspected the whole pece talks thing was a trap and he was delighted to have a way to get rid of the Admiral, r517

*peace

Which makes him a monster, R518.

Yeah, I think he's so damaged by PTSD and also convinced that Starfleet can't deal with the Klingons without his help, that he is now resorting to these monstrous choices. Or perhaps he's mirror Lorca?

Kinda spoilery: Making Ash a security officer is a great way of both keeping him close [italic]and[/italic] making Ash think he trusts him already. Do we think he's always carrying the phaser around because he got nervous after seeing how good Ash was in that Klingon simulation?

Oh, the joys of new weekly Star Trek episodes!

[quote]It's pretty pathetic that CBS had to pay so many shills on Trek forums to sing this shit shows praises.

Based on how some of the responses in this thread are written, I don't think it's just Trek forums.

I suppose that a STD thread on a gay forum, given the push they've made with gay characters on this particular show, it makes sense that there would be an attempt to influence more viewers.

The biggest problem is that a failure of a show with this much hype, on top of the declining performance of JJPrise movies, may turn executives away from the franchise. There was a four year gap between ENT and the movie reboot. How long might it be before they try again if this series fails. If for no other reason than that, I hope STD succeeds (though I suppose referring to it as STD instead DSC as they are desperate for it to be called probably doesn't help with that).

Oh, gods, I see some are still in that "Shills everywhere!!1!" denial phase.

Grow up, seriously. In all my years on DL I have found posters here to be more mature and logical than that. You're as bad as deplorables with their constant fake news paranoia. Yes, it's so fucking incredible that after 50 years of Star Trek a gay Trekkie like me who lives in a homophobic shithole and is physically cut off from other gay guys would be exhilarated after seeing someone like himself finally represented in this show. No, that simply won't do; I just [italic]have[/italic] to be a paid studio shill, right?

We get it, you don't enjoy this show. Now move on, get a hobby, get laid, whatever. Just [italic]please[/italic] stop posting here already.

Renewed!

R523 A-ficking-men.

How pathetic can you be to reduce yourself to hate-watching Star Trek, lol.

[quote] It's willingness to explore the darker aspects of Star Trek, which have always been there, is both refreshing and realistic.

This is a good observation - contra the claims that Trek has always been about heroics and super-evolved humans, there HAS always been a darker side to it where we see the main characters are vulnerable to the worst violent and ignoble impulses.

This latest episode reminded me of the excellent DS9 ep 'In the Pale Moonlight', where we are shown the Machiavellian lengths to which a Starfleet captain might be willing to go to win a war. DS9 of course already took a bit of a blowtorch to the whole edifice of Starfleet morality/nobility, with its Section 31 storyline and the revelation that Starfleet covertly sanctioned the use of a genocidal weapon in the Dominion War.

In fact I think DS9, with its dark philosophical/religious themes and its serialised structure in later seasons, is the true progenitor of STD rather than BSG.

R526 Totally agree.

R526 And those moments always felt as exciting to me as when they took the moral high road and sent the signal that that's what the Federation is all about.

I remember watching with my mouth open when Janeway went all Ahab on that renegade Starfleet captain. I was like crack and I wanted more if it immediately.

[bold]All Y’All Nerds Need to Calm Down About “Star Trek: Discovery”[/bold]

Tom (of Tom&Lorenzo), an old-time gay Trekkie, wrote an insightful essay/review of the first six episodes and where we stand today when it comes to Star Trek. I adored his Twin Peaks reflections and I'm so glad he took this on as well.

On a side note, does Lorca look fantastic in this photo or what?!

Shirtless captain! It took them long enough...

[bold]CBS All Access Suffers Streaming Glitches in Middle of ‘Star Trek: Discovery’[/bold]

Would a studio shill post this article here, bitches?

[quote]About 5% of CBS’s All Access users had problems accessing the over-the-top streaming service on Sunday night — just as the latest episode of flagship original series “Star Trek: Discovery” debuted.

[quote]CBS did not identify the content-delivery network in question. According to a source, Akamai Technologies was the CDN that encountered technical issues on its network that led to the All Access problems.

The worst time to be having these issues. I hope this platform improves markedly for the second season because previous ST shows that can also be accessed on it are reported to be of terrible quality. Though I was listening to Guy Branum's podcast the other day and was surprised to hear that he actually likes the design of this platform very much so I guess it depends on personal taste.

We can always hope they'll just give up on this service by 2019.

Well, he's no Captain Archer, but I approve.

I haven't had problems streaming it before, but it stuttered all over the place last night.

I guess because I like something other people don't, I'm just a shill, but I'm pleased as punch at the renewal.

i'd fuck anthony rapp tbh.

I like how they toyed with how riding the cosmic shroom wagon seems to have altered Stametz’s outlook on life. This will hopefully be expounded on at length. I still think it’s possible that he could now see all worlds, including our universe and the Mirror, Mirror universe.

Of course this pile of embarrassing shit was renewed. Did anyone really think it would be cancelled after one season whilst trying to launch a new streaming service.

I'm shocked Netflix is bothering with another season though considering the budget overruns, failed deadlines and massively over paying for the first season.

Though I do laugh that season two isn't due back until 2019. CBS has botched AA horrendously. It launches with only one new exclusive scripted series and now seems to be milking as much money from subscribers with producing as little content as possible.

R536 = A Klingon

This man is hot. Is he gay?

What is R536 talking about?

R535 The sneak peek of next week's episode shows that Stamets is high off his rocks (I guess from all the shroom trips). And Dr. Culber calls him his "partner"! I hope the episode will feature more gays.

R539 It's just Klingon garble.

r536 take your bloody finger out of your mom's shit encrusted buthole and then eat it you down and out louse

Thread 2 is ready for you, bitches.

Poor Sarek, he was screwed by his own people and would have been screwed by the Klingons.

Sarek, the twice screwed.

R543 Thanks!

“Transport R536 directly to sickbay for an emergency cephalorectal extraction!”

Thanks for that link to T Lo's review, r529. I agree with a lot of it, especially how it compares to previous ST shows and how well it fits in with most of them.

I will never understand posters like r536. If I don't like a show, I don't watch it and certainly don't write bitter screeds about it.

[quote] Thread 2 is ready for you, bitches.

Why? There's over 50 responses left in this thread before it gets closed. Were you that desperate to be a thread starter?

R538 All signs on the internet point to "unknown". He probably scrubbed his Twitter feed even before the casting announcement.

R548 I bet he was just itching to use that Spock gif! Which [italic]is[/italic] nice, to be honest.

R547 is new to TV threads.

Yeah, I hate detractors as much as the next guy (especially those who write long-ass posts about it) but I will admit to coming to the Fargo Season 3 thread week after week and bitching about it viciously. Same for The Orville, although I kind of like it now.

Though to be honest, I did that only because I was so passionate about the first two seasons, and I always tried to add something constructive which could make the show better (in my opinion). So even the vilest posts come from a good place, we have to remember that. Also, it's hard to accept being in a minority on something; we're just wired to register that as a personal attack.

R549, Latif is not gay. He's not an unknown in the UK. He's had girlfriends and I think just ended a long term relationship a bit before he got cast in ST. Unless he's been in the closet all his life secretly pining to join DL. There's a little fantasy hope for you.

Discussion threads about movies and TV shows are not reserved for the fan boys.

Got the first two seasons for Christmas. I don't care for the show. I don't care about the genders or the races. This is supposed to be before the original Star Trek, yet the technology of the past is slicker and more advanced. I get why, but it just doesn't fit.