Well it sure seems that CBS is nabbing the best talent from Star Trek history, as writer-director Nicholas Meyer, who brought Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, and Star Trek IV: The Undiscovered Country to the big screen, is now set to join 2017’s CBS All Access television series.

Said showrunner Bryan Fuller, via The Hollywood Reporter:

Nicholas Meyer chased Kirk and Khan ’round the Mutara Nebula and ’round Genesis’ flames, he saved the whales with the Enterprise and its crew, and waged war and peace between Klingons and the Federation. We are thrilled announce that one of Star Trek’s greatest storytellers will be boldly returning as Nicholas Meyer beams aboard the new Trek writing staff.

This is another big-name acquisition for the upcoming series, and one that’s sure to give fans another ray of hope for this new show.


Order Star Trek:
The TOS Motion Picture Collection!

Order Star Trek:
The TNG Motion Picture Collection!

  • Daniel Shock

    Well. I guess they are serious. They have my money now.

  • scotchyscotchscotch

    This is amazing news!

  • spooky

    Hmm… very interesting. I just wish they’d scuttle that damned all access crap.

    • Wes

      Don’t get your hopes up. From what I understand they won’t do anything to change that.

      • spooky

        Well they might if they find it doesn’t do well enough in all regions.

        • danielcw

          I don’t get your reasoning?
          Why would they abandon the All-Access strategy in the U.S., if the show happens to not do well in other territores?

    • This show was designed specifically to be released on CBS All Access (in the USA). If you’re in the United States, this *will* be the only way to see it past the one-time premiere airing on CBS until some possible home-media (DVD/Blu) relesae.

      • Matt

        My bet is that outside the US, Netflix will get it in the UK. The UK netflix library has recently added a whole heap of CBS content, prominently the Big Bang Theory which is not available in the US library.

        UK netflix is just a short VPN trip away…

    • VulcanCafe

      I think the whole point is to make the show so good you can’t resist subscribing 🙂

  • Chris

    The first thing that popped into my head is “oooooo does this mean we are getting a TOS Movie era series?” and I was excited. Then I remembered how prequels go and the last two incarnations were prequels and succeeded and failed to varying degrees. Still, great news!

    • Locutus

      Star Trek has an expansive timeline and many periods in that timeline would be fun to explore more. I think setting it in the movie era could definitely be cool. The period between Star Trek VI and The Next Generation is very interesting to me. There are plenty of good stories to tell during those kinds of periods.

      I also would be fine if they jumped forward in the timeline. If you follow the Abrams universe, Vulcan is destroyed but Romulus might be saved because of such advanced knowledge of the supernova. If you follow the Post-Nemesis Prime universe timeline, Vulcan might still exist but Romulus seems destroyed. If they ignore the Abrams timeline entirely, will they set it in a universe where both Vulcan and Romulus still exist?

      • Zarm

        That’s funny; I never thought of it that way. Only one in either universe…

      • bytes

        Romulus being destroyed, Nero coming from the future, and even Spock being played by Nimoy, is still all in my opinion the Abrams universe. I see it as all succesful high budget fan fiction. Prime timeline means both exist just fine. Just my view.

      • Brian Thorn

        My proposal would be for a continuation of the TNG-era universe (Bermanverse?), completely ignoring the Abramsverse. No Vulcan destroyed. No Romulus destroyed. Set it 25 to 50 years beyond the TNG era. Romulus is now semi-friendly with the Federation, due to the events of the Dominion War and Star Trek: Nemesis, although there are still misgivings, a’la Klingons in the TNG era. The three Alpha Quadrant “superpowers” have agreed to conduct the first circumnavigation of the galaxy, with a small fleet of ships. The Federation’s ship, and the principal ship of the series, is the USS Magellan (not Enterprise-F or whatever) designed specifically for this mission. One of the ship’s crew, perhaps the first officer, is a cyborg, a human whose consciousness was transferred to an android body near death, the same way Ira Graves took over Data in TNG’s “Schizoid Man” (a very interesting idea never revisited.) The ship’s main computer system is sentient.

        • Locutus

          I like the idea of a sentient computer. Could even be an evolution of the Emergency Medical Hologram. Embody the ship in a human looking hologram. A single crew or small fleet of Romulans, Klingons, and Federation having to work together is another interesting concept.

  • Justin Olson

    Best writer Star Trek ever had.

    • The Bandsaw Vigilante

      Well…alongside Gene Coon and Dottie Fontana, to be sure.

      • Yeah, Dorothy Fontana is the one I’d like to see on the staff!

    • mswood666

      Not in my book, and Khan is easily my favorite Trek film, but i think every Trek series has produced better written episodes then even the best Trek film.

  • I’m less excited about this than other people are. I didn’t like the Star Trek movies as much as I liked the TOS television episodes; I thought the tone of the movies was different, in a way I found less appealing. Meyer thought of Starfleet as “the Navy in space” and added some militaristic touches to the movies that weren’t present in the TV show (such as people shouting “Captain on the bridge,” which was not present in any of the 79 episodes of TOS). He also changed the characters somewhat.

    So, yeah, the guy does have talent and skill, but I don’t feel as if he ever understood the magic of TV-era TOS, and I was hoping for an optimistic Starfleet, not the kind of show where Kirk could say, of the Klingons, “Let them die,” as he did in TUC. In “Day of the Dove,” it took an alien entity to make Kirk behave that way; when not being mind-controlled, Kirk mostly tried to work out differences. One of my favorite Kirk moments is in “By Any Other Name,” where he and Rojan are having a fist fight, and in the middle of the fist fight, Kirk is still trying to talk Rojan into approaching the Federation as friends instead of would-be conquerors. I also loved his, “We’re not going to kill TODAY” in “A Taste of Armageddon.”

    It’s not clear to me that Meyer understands that Kirk or that Meyer understands the kind of Starfleet or the kind of Federation that could have produced that Kirk. And that’s the Starfleet and the Federation that I was hoping to see.

    • Phyfell

      I think Kirk’s attitude towards the Klingons in TUC is a little more justified considering they were responsible for his son David’s death, and remember, the story was about him accepting change and overcoming his prejudice, which he did. I think TUC understood and embraced what Star Trek was all about more than most of the other films, including TWOK.

      • THEY weren’t responsible for David’s death; ONE PARTICULAR KLINGON was responsible for David’s death. Blaming an entire species for the actions of one person is exactly the sort of thing TOS Kirk would have preached AGAINST.

        William Shatner thought “Let them die” was out of character for Kirk and insisted on a line where Kirk thought better of saying that, immediately after saying it. Meyer let Shatner add that line while filming, so that he would agree to say the “let them die” line … and then Meyer edited it out of the final cut of the movie.

        • Bhansenjr

          I always felt that particular line was the best one in TUC. Kirk spent his life fighting for a better, more perfect future, and for what? Nothing had changed much, and he lost his son, to boot. It was, to me, a perfect response. That he was able to admit his error by the end of the film made it all the more worth it.

          My $0.02.

        • Locutus

          Let’s not forget that the Klingon government also called for the extradition of Kirk with the possible intent to execute him following the murder of his son. I thought the scene is all the more powerful given the Kirk we know from “Day of the Dove” and “A Taste of Armageddon.” Kirk exhibits some disturbingly uncharacteristic and militaristic instincts at the beginning of Star Trek VI. But he eventually triumphs over those negative instincts. That is not really out of character. It’s was also very good story-telling.

        • prometheus59650

          It’s easy to preach against tarring an entire race with the same brush when it’s an abstract concept. It’s a slightly different thing when it’s your son with the dagger buried in his chest.

    • Eric

      Roddenberry himself after he was ousted from any position of authority within the film franchise and being the only person in the world who didn’t like The Wrath of Khan (Besides yourself it would seem) used that complaint, that Meyer had militarized StarFLEET when that was never the case apparently ignoring the naval structure and everything else from TOS. You can cherry pick the fact that they didn’t say “Captain on the bridge” every time that Kirk walked onto the bridge of the Enterprise in TOS to try to prove your case but your spitting in the wind. They fired torpedos, they got their ship names from the navy, their command structure, the works! TOS is positively awash with the exact same military sensibility that Meyer’s ST films were but peaceniks like later life Roddenberry and yourself would like to erase history and remake TOS as a series long version of “The Way to Eden” with a bunch of space faring hippies seeking peace and enlightenment! It would have flopped massively if that was the case and Roddenberry’s bad judgement was the main thing that TNG writing staff had to work around before he died. He didn’t think that there would be any money, or disease, or conflict, or ANYTHING that they could create drama out of apparently by that time so atheist Roddenberry went back to his old standby trope, his “God as a tantrum throwing child” schtick that he always resorted to when he couldn’t think of anything else and gave us Q who surprised everyone by working out as well as he did thanks to the superior performance of John de Lancie. He & the writers working around Roddenberry saved TNG when all he wanted to do was talk for hours about the sexual prowess of the Ferengi and how well endowed they were. He was as much a figurehead for TNG as he was for the films after the disappointment of ST:TMP.

      You can not like whatever you want but don’t claim that Nick Meyer made ST into anything that it wasn’t already because he didn’t. He just made it better than practically everyone else had and his addition to this new show is the one thing that DOES give me hopes that it might be good.

      • robjoh

        And why can’t Corylea like whatever he/she wants? Anyone can like whatever they want,no one but oneself decideds that. And I’m on that very short list of not liking WOK that much,so saying the only person in the world isn’t totally accurate,lol. Yeah,yeah,I know you haven’t asked EVERY person in the world if they like it or not,lol,it’s just that when someone says EVERYONE or ONLY ONE,how on Earth does that person know that?! I KNOW it’s a figure of speach,but when I see someone say it and I’m NOT one of the everyone’s or only one’s,I usually let them know. No one can speak for the enitre human race. LOL!

        And I guess this is good news for some and not that good for others. Plain and simple.

      • prometheus59650

        There’s the fact that Starfleet was ALWAYS military. It just was. From the entire premise of a Klingon/Federation war in “Errand of Mercy” to General Order 24.

        Starfleet prosecutes the Federation’s wars. Period. Starfleet is military. That may not be its sole focus, but Starfleet is the military arm of the Federation. That Meyer put that more front and center is no shock and it works.

        • The Bandsaw Vigilante

          Agreed, and there is tons of dialogue and other canonical onscreen evidence in TOS reinforcing the notion that Starfleet is very much a military outfit — it’s not until TNG that Roddenberry tried to change this whole notion, but back in the 23rd century, it was a very overt thing.

        • Matineer

          Both shows you’ve cited are anti- war shows. There was more to Star Trek than the uniforms and command structure. There’s subtext. General Order 24 is a plot device to force Anan-7 to see the futility of war, and at the end of “Errand of Mercy” Kirk is forced to realize the futility of war by the Organians. Yeah, in Mercy, Kirk says, “I’m a soldier,” but they had to ramp up his military mindset to bring him back down by end of show. There’s a reason every show starts with: It’s five year mission, blah blah,” with no reference to any military mission. MASH had military characters too, but it’s not really a military show, whatever that means.

          • prometheus59650

            Subtext of the episode is irrelevant to the structure and purpose of Starfleet.

            Starfleet was going to fight the war. Period.

            And, who cares if GO 24 was a plot device or not? It exists as canon. Starfleet has a mechanism that allows for the complete obliteration of an inhabited planet. That’s not a scientific function. That’s not an exploratory function. It’s the ultimate expression of, “We do not negotiate with terrorists,” if anything.

            And, which Gene are we talking about, because 60s Gene and 80s Gene were two entirely different people, as one had swallowed the humanist Kool-Aid served up by his fandom while the former had not.

            Because I know of nowhere where he stated that WWII shouldn’t have been fought or that he regretted his participation in it.

    • Zarm

      That was somewhat my thinking, too. Meyers is a great storyteller, but his versions of Trek have all tended toward the action-heavy tone that people are saying they don’t want for this series. Still action with a message, thus mpre thoughtful and Trek-y than the Abramsverse films… but not exactly the ‘boldly going spirit of explorative Star Trek’ that people are clamoring for. So I take this news as mixed… a good storyteller, but maybe not exactly the kind of stories we want to see…

      • mswood666

        Part of that problem is outside of Star Trek Into Darkness with Trek films we never see the Enterprise actually on a mission of seeking out new life and new civilizations. Again with the one exception of the beginning of Into Darkness all the films have the Enterprise responding to some threat 9and Into Darkness has this as well, but they do start the movie as explorers.

      • Sykes

        “his versions of Trek have all tended toward the action-heavy tone that people are saying they don’t want for this series”

        Really? Just how much actual action is there in Treks 2, 4, and 6?

        • Zarm

          Well, the majority of TWOK (minus a pause int he Genesis Cave) is either buildup to, presence of, or aftermath of action; again, not without thoughtful moments- but the whole thing is pretty battle heavy. Some of it is more in a cat-and-mouse sense than outright guns a-blazing, but it has little emphasis beyond finding and defeating a bad guy save for the start and end. (Not meant as a criticism, mind you, I like the movie).

          IV has little to nothing in the way of action scenes (depending on whether the carrier chase even counts)- but it also wasn’t Meyers’ concept; just his hired re-write of an existing concept created without him.

          VI definitely has more mystery and drama to it than II, but (along with III, arguably), is still the most combat-oriented of the films after II.

          Now, I’m not complaining about that, and I don’t dislike any of those films. BUT, in saying that we want a return to the boldly-going exploratory themes of TOS, and a departure from the fight-the-bad-guy formula of the JJ films, this just doesn’t seem like such a huge step toward that goal. Laudable for getting a great writer? ABSOLUTELY. But signifying a less-predilection-for-combat approach? I don’t see it doing that, is all I’m saying.

          IV shows that he *can* write that kind of thing, but II/VI kind seem like when he chooses what he does write for Trek, that’s what he tends toward. And if we get more stories like II/VI, that won’t be a bad thing. But it’s not exactly the epitome of what everyone seems to have been clamoring for, either.

          • Muzer

            Look at some of the best TOS episodes, and a lot of them have combat in them. Balance of Terror especially springs to mind as being very Wrath of Khan-like in its tone, but I could also name plenty of others. I don’t know where this idea came from that TOS had nothing in the way of combat. If you read the early bits of information about the programme, it’s clear that Gene knew this and didn’t mind.

            While Wrath of Khan had combat in it, every scene was in some way to advance the plot or to reveal something relating to the human story that the film was telling. There were zero gratuitous action scenes that you could remove from the film and it would still be just as good.

          • Zarm

            I don’t disagree; heck, Doomsday Machine is my favorite episode. I’m merely saying that in being militarily focused and oriented around action and combat pieces (the majority of the movie is one big cat-and-mouse, after all), TWOK (and to a lesser degree, TUC) share more in common with the action-based JJ films that a lot of fans claim they want distance from than with the more cerebral Trek that a lot of fans claim to want.

            I’m not knocking any of Meyers films; they probably represent my second and third favorite Trek films (it’s always hard to rank them consistently. 🙂 ). Just saying that this news, while definitely cause for potential excitement, doesn’t really further the ‘less action, more deep thought, distance ourselves from the JJ style’ mantra being espoused by fans; or at the very least, furthers it the least of any potential candidates, since he’s the closest to his generation’s equivalent of those kind of stories for Trek.

            Again, not that this made them bad stories in any way- they were just the most action-movie-ish of Trek in that era (with some deeper human storylines running through)- which, for all the flack they get, is a pretty good way of describing the JJ films of this era, too. 🙂 Neither are wholly without depth and combat, but both hang a lot of their plot on conflict and combat and military operations. Certainly, the balance between the two was better with Meyers, and the films better written; it’s just the same general approach, is all.

  • October_1985

    Boom! Mind blown! I’m extremely pleased so far.

  • M33

    Right On!!!

  • Bradley Harris

    I, for one, am incredibly excited at this news. I feel that Meyer had a big role in making Trek more literary and improving the aesthetic of Starfleet and character development. This makes me very hopeful for the future of Trek!

  • jackson roy kirk

    Yeah, I guess I’m in.

  • iamawild


  • TrekRules

    Interesting but I am not sold quite yet. You can have great writers and directors but on a tv show, the executive producers have all the say. Look at the first couple years of TNG compared to the last 5 – no doubt things got better when the writers were actually allowed to write and not get shot down by Gene all the time. I mean, we wouldn’t have gotten episodes like Family if Gene had his say – that’s the power of the executive producer. It is encouraging and I am more willing to give it a chance now but not sold on it yet.

    • Hayde Christiansson

      Gene no doubt had some wacky ideas in his later years but I think the style of The Motion Picture and First two seasons of TNG is really cool.

      • SFSeries&Movies

        For me the first 3 seasons are TNG’s best

    • danielcw

      Gene was actually opposed to Family, but the other executive producers convinced him.
      t is a team effort, and what made TNG constantly great from season 3 onward was not the absence of Gene, but the new writers hired in season 3 and beyond

  • Havenbull

    Coincidentally, only the even numbered episodes will be good…

    • danielcw

      Until episode 10 🙂

  • Locutus

    Absolutely stunned. Awesome!!!.

  • Guest

    Now just bring on Ron D. Moore. Still not jazzed about the CBS All Access B.S. Star Trek was always a niche audience. If CBS think this is going to force millions of people to subscribe to their service so they can compete with the likes of streaming giants like Netflix, Hulu, YouTube and Amazon, they’re woefully mistaken (this is coming from a HUGE Trek fan). Here’s how this is likely gonna go down. A relatively paltry sum of die-hard Trekkers are gonna subscribe to this service just to see the new iteration of the franchise. The rest will patiently wait to see if it eventually gets released on Blu-Ray and just buy that to avoid the subscription fee (or, they’ll torrent or watch on extralegal tube sites). When the low viewing numbers come in from the All Access subscription service, CBS will have two options: Cancel the show, or move it to television and other popular streaming services where it might have a chance.

    • Cabo 5150

      My thoughts exactly – great post.

      I feel CBS have almost doomed the show before it starts.

      Given the success of Daredevil, Jessica Jones etc on Netflix – I think Trek could be tremendously popular on a platform like that.

      Ah well…

    • iMike

      While I would prefer they partner with at least Netflix for viewing rights, I do not want Trek on network television. TV has changed, especially network TV and definitely not for the better. ‘Enterprise’ failed on network television. ‘DS9’ arguably would have been canceled on network TV, and I don’t think ‘TNG’ would have made it to Season 3 on a regular network. Streaming is the best format because the writers/producers/directors can be as creative as they want to be without a suit trying to box them in to network TV constraints.

      I think the success of CBS All Access will depend on how much new content is available. I’m sure Star Trek isn’t the only new show they are prepping. If they can offer a good amount of brand new content, as well as their massive back catalog (much of which is not available on the other services), it might fly.

      The addition of Ron Moore would certainly be a coup, but from the final interviews he gave for the TNG Blu Ray project I got the feeling he’s had his fill of Trek.

  • Alan Light

    Wouldn’t shock me to see Shatner as part of the premiere episode. The odds have really gone up with Meyer on board.

    • prometheus59650

      Never happen. Kirk is dead.

      • The Bandsaw Vigilante

        Technically, Kirk’s only dead in the Prime Universe — if this series is set in the “present-day” Abramsverse, he’s still alive, although they’d have to use Pine in the role.

        • prometheus59650

          Less likely to happen than Shatner appearing.

    • danielcw

      Why would Meyer being involved make Shatner more likely to appear?

    • Locutus

      I am not a die hard “Bring Back Kirk”-er, but Nicholas Meyer wrote Kirk well. Perhaps they could use Kirk to bridge the story-line back to a restored timeline in which Romulus and Vulcan both still exist? If anyone could write a compelling story about a 70 year-old space Captain who returns from the dead to save the universe (!), Meyer could. If CBS was really sadistic, they would use the TV pilot as a stand alone story that teases the return of Shatner’s Kirk. At least half of Trekdom would buy into All Access that instant. The point is the possibilities are limitless. I’m not saying that bringing back Shatner’s Kirk is necessarily what I want to see happen. But now or never.

  • jurassicbond

    I’m so thrilled to read this! I have high hopes for this new series! I hope it’s going to either be a totally different Trek or set in the prime universe.

  • Io Jupiter

    Now this is dame good news. Meyer should have been in charge of 09 Trek movie and the rest.

  • This now has me mildly interested and optimistic about the project.

  • Crazed, cantankerous, and angry, but Harlan Ellison is still alive. Are they going to bring him in for a show or two?

  • Eric

    Here is a Nicholas Meyer interview about his new role in Star Trek… http://www.denofgeek.us/tv/star-trek/253329/exclusive-nicholas-meyer-says-new-star-trek-series-is-innovative-and-different

    “If Nicholas Meyer was your parents’ Star Trek, then your parents’ Star Trek was awesome” — This is true.

    However, there was only one clear moment in Nicholas Meyer’s scripts that I did not like. For comic relief, in The Undiscovered Country, he has Uhura, a seasoned communications officer, need an ancient, old book to speak Klingon. I always thought this was a failure of imagination from the original series. Uhura should have been a linguist and polyglot from the beginning. Happily, that was corrected in the 2009 reboot.

    Many others complained about the fact that Meyer had the primary characters in TUC say blatantly racist things. Nichelle Nichols, the black woman who played Uhura, expressed her displeasure with this. That, I think, given her generation, is to be expected. Humans in Star Trek were supposed to be past such things. I think Nicholas Meyer got that right. Even if I was uncomfortable hearing it, we needed these characters to still be human, that is, biased and blind to their own prejudice. So bring it on, Nick!

    Just don’t make them stupid.

  • Chris R

    Nicholas Meyer is the greatest Star Trek writer ever. And in my opinion more important to Star Trek than Gene Roddenberry