It’s been just a few weeks since STAR TREK: DISCOVERY showrunner Bryan Fuller made his first comments to the setting and casting of the upcoming series, and we’ve all had a great time discussing what his hints towards the new show’s story will be.

In a new interview with KERN-FM radio’s Nerd World Report with Hop & Herc last night, Fuller spent nearly forty minutes discussing some more details on DISCOVERY and some of the behind-the-scenes decisions going into 2017’s new Star Trek adventure.

discovery-render
An early render of the USS Discovery (NCC-1031).

On the choice to set the show in the “Prime” universe, rather than in the world of the Chris Pine-led Kelvin Timeline films:

Really, when we developed this story, it could take place in either Prime or the Kelvin [timeline] – the timeline was relatively inconsequential, but there was the cleanliness of keeping our series independent of the [Abrams] films. That way, we don’t have to track anything they’re doing; they don’t have to track anything we’re doing – and you can have two distinct universes.

I think [the Prime decision] was just part of the conversation. I remember Alex and I talking about it very early on, where it should be, and we felt there was something nice about the Prime universe because there are so many aspects of the Original Series that would be fun to explore with updated production values.

One of the more fan-maddening comments about the new show – which has kept the nerdiest of us digging deep into Star Trek history minutia the last few weeks – is that DISCOVERY will be set about ten years before Captain Kirk’s five-year mission on the USS Enterprise.

Fuller talked some more about choosing that spot on the timeline… and how the passage of time might be portrayed a bit differently in the new series.

[The time period we chose] came pretty organically, because we are going to try to achieve a new look for ‘Star Trek’ that is very much ‘Star Trek,’ but also our interpretation of ‘Star Trek.’ I love each of the shows I work on to have a distinct aesthetic […] so it seemed like a good place to start our signature look for the ‘Star Trek’ universe and work our way forward as we tell the stories.

With the exception of ‘Deep Space Nine’ when it got into the Dominion War, ‘Star Trek’ has been primarily episodic – so I feel like we’ll be different in that regard and will be very serialized. But time is something that we have the opportunity to play with in uncharacteristic ways.

We know what the story is [for future episodes], but no [time travel] yet. You never know when you want to pull out that [storytelling] device, but I am not anticipating a reliance on time travel to tell this season’s story.

klingons
Original Klingon design, reimagined for new eras: Next Generation, and the Kelvin Timeline.

He also talked about how modern production values will allow the DISCOVERY team to revamp the look of familiar Star Trek alien species – like the possibly-Andorian antennae he photographed in early August – but also mixing up our expectations of Trek costume design as well.

One of the very cool things that we get to do on this show is – we get to re-imagine all of the alien species that we’ve seen before in the series, and do something a little unique with that.

We were looking at a specific species’ costume on Friday, and Jesse Alexander, who is one of the writers, was commenting on the cosplay aspects of it, and how [the design] has gone a kind of quantum leap forward – and what were the people who do cosplay going to do?

Another one of our writers was like, “They are going to rise to the occasion!” So for all of us who have fetishized the look of all of the various species over the years of watching ‘Star Trek,’ it’s fun for us to put a new spin on old favorites.

[Uniform design will be] something completely different [from ‘The Cage’]. I think when you see the design, it’s a little bit of this and a little bit of that. We were having a wardrobe test the other day and it was interesting to think, ‘Now we need to take these colors and put them up against the [ship set colors],’ to see what is going to be the best-looking aesthetic for the show, taking in the sets and wardrobe and lighting style.

ron-jones
Composer Ron Jones conducts recording of the “Best of Both Worlds” score.

Star Trek music is a big part of every series and film, and Fuller clearly understands its importance – the showrunner talked at length about the ongoing discussions his team is having about the DISCOVERY score, and how the show’s pre-TOS time period may weigh on the soundtrack.

We’ve talked about the musical approach to this show, because music is so important to ‘Star Trek,’ and it’s the voice in many ways. We all remember the Spock vs. Kirk fight [in ‘Amok Time’] and the score for that – it would be great to pay homage to some of those things.

I don’t think we’d use [the same tracks] specifically, but it’s certainly something that we’ve had discussions about and I don’t yet know if we’re going to commit to that. [The title theme song] is still in discussion.

‘Star Trek’ music is so important and such a fantastic part of the feel of the show. As for [live] orchestral vs. synthetic – there’s a lot of very interesting things happening here musically, and we absolutely have to have orchestral elements in the show, and we talked about how if we don’t have a live orchestra for the show, we’d be the first ‘Star Trek’ television series not to have one.

But you look at how some interesting hybridizations of synth and orchestral scores have serviced ‘Star Trek’ – Jerry Goldsmith’s score for ‘First Contact’ had some fantastic mixed pieces. I also look at what Hans Zimmer does, and I love his score for ‘Interstellar.’

It’s interesting to take a bit of a mix with our approach; we’ll see when we get to that level of the production, but I’m very excited about the music – it’s incredibly important.

numb1
Majel Barrett as “Number One.” (TOS: “The Cage”)

One of the new rumors going around the web in the wake of Fuller’s early-August character descriptions is that his lead female officer – who he’s described as “a lieutenant commander, with caveats” – may be Majel Barrett’s “Number One,” Christopher Pike’s first officer in the original Star Trek pilot.

In his discussion, Fuller doesn’t say his lead and “The Cage” officer will be the same person, but does confirm that the “Number One” moniker will return – but clarified when asked that his new character’s real name will be made known during the first season of DISCOVERY.

Our character, when we introduce the protagonist, she is called ‘Number One’ in honor of Majel Barrett’s character in the original pilot.

As we were first talking about the series and talking to CBS, we said, initially, we’ll only call the character ‘Number One’ because in the Sixties, in the first pilot, Gene Roddenberry was very progressive and had a female first officer.

So since [our lead character] is a female first officer, I just loved that we were calling her ‘Number One.’

Finally, looking to the future of DISCOVERY news, Fuller reiterated earlier comments that more news will be coming our way sometime in October – and he also touched on his preference for episode counts of potential future seasons of the show.

We’ll probably have some [casting] announcements in October. As of right now, we’ve met with fantastic actors, and of course there’s people that I’ve worked with before that I would love to have on ‘Star Trek,’ and we’re trying to figure out everybody’s schedules – but we’re very early on in the process.

Right now, they’ve ordered thirteen episodes, and that’s all we’re working on. I would strongly recommend that we never do twenty-six episodes; I think it would fatigue the show. Ideally, I would love to do ten episodes – I think that’s a tighter story – to really make it great.

We’re talking about all sorts of things that we can do to keep ‘Star Trek’ interesting for subscribers to CBS All Access, but right now we’re working on thirteen episodes and they’re going to order more – when they’re ready… or not! [Laughs]

While Bryan Fuller will not be in attendance, something he confirmed in this interview, STAR TREK: DISCOVERY writers Nick Meyer and Kirsten Beyer will be holding a panel discussion on their Trek history and their joining the new show at the Mission: New York convention next weekend – and we’ll be there, bringing you any new reveals that pair may offer.

  • iMike

    For an online series I think 13 is a perfect episode count, and he’s right … 26 is too much. If this really takes off there is always the potential of a companion series (sort of how the Walking Dead has Fear The Walking Dead), one could run in the spring and the other in the fall.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      That’s a great idea for down the road.

    • The Chadwick

      The fan in me wants 26 but yea it would get stale and not many shows do that many these days. Game of Thrones does just fine with 10 episodes. Lets just hope every episode is solid and no fillers.

    • Fctiger

      Honestly my guess is they are already planning another Star Trek show if this one takes off. This is CBS we are talking about, the home to 4 CSI shows, 3 NCIS’s, 3 Criminal Minds shows and now 4, count them, 4 interconnected DC shows on CW. And when you remember the All Access they are bringing another Good Wife spin off and Big Brother 2 its almost a no-brainer another Trek show is in the plans down the line.

      • Patrick_Gerard

        I’d rather have two shows with 13 episodes run by different teams and with different settings/tones than one show with 26 episodes. I love Star Trek but the issue with a 26 episode season is that, invariably, you see 10-12 episodes that get far more care put into them than the others. 12 episodes is enough to keep a full staff busy.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Problem with 13 episodes is that it’s over before it’s begun. Of course this won’t be an episodic show so maybe that’s for the best.

  • Nick Knight

    I miss having a lot of episodes. I never seemed fatigued in the past. I guess the younger folks need more rest.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Jesus, don’t you remember the first two seasons of TNG? I should get a fan award for patience with that show for the first two years.

      I love the tight and great storytelling of shows like GoT and Homeland — I am really looking forward to Trek getting that treatment. No Berman 2.0 for me, thanks

      • pumpernikiel

        I re watched the whole series lately and I don’t think the first two season were as bad as you say.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          There are maybe 7 to 8 good episodes from the first two years. The show stunk out of the gate – thanks goodness they were patient.

          • Snap

            Well, thank goodness the show was first run syndicated, as it wasn’t at the mercy of a network executive with an instant gratification complex and an itchy trigger finger.

          • Brian Thorn

            Season 1 and 7 have the lowest good/bad episode ratios. At least Season 1 has the excuse of trying to find the characters, the look and feel of the show, and what would drive the show. Season 7, with its parade of “long lost family members” was horrible.

            Season 2 was actually good, once the 1988 Writers Strike was behind them. The first four or five episodes were bad, and the season finale was horrible, but there was a lot of good stuff in between, including fan favorites Measure of a Man and Q Who?. Even the Wesley episode “The Dauphin” was pretty good.

      • Nick Knight

        Imagine if DS9 had been done on this short season. No thanks. BY the way, I like the first season of TNG, and I even love the first Movie.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          DS9, with GoT production values and 13 serialized eps per year, would have been by far the greatest Trek series ever made if they had applied this approach.

          • Zarm

            I… kind of doubt it, actually. All the character development and interaction and growth that the series is so loved for wouldn’t have taken place; there wouldn’t have been room. There might have been bigger Dominion Wars battles, but they’d hardly have meant as much, because there would have been literally 50% fewer scenes for the characters involved in them to grow and bond and change and interact and become important to the audience.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Funny how GoT, Homeland, Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, seem to have great character relationship, character evolution, etc, withing this format?

            In fact, look at common Top TV shows of all time lists, and it’s really striking how many of the top shows have been serialized series withing the last 15 years that have used this format.

            Whoops! 🙂

          • Nick Knight

            Funny, I think Star Trek, blows those shows away

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I am not surprised one bit that this is your opinion, given your other comments here.

            You win a consistency award — I’ll give you that. 🙂

          • Ski bo

            Seems kinda shallow, everybody gets awards these days. ~Mark~

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You get the award for “most entertaining new contributor” here

          • Zarm

            Especially the still-beloved TNG and DS9, which both had 24-26 episode seasons and a ‘non-modern’ format which only relied on arcs for about 1/2 of one season, total? To me, that puts the total lie to the idea that Trek somehow needs to be ‘updated’ to be good. If that’s true, then why are the others still not only beloved, but benchmarks of the kind of quality we’re looking for in most discussions?

            I also think it’s safe to say that in any given season (certainly after the first couple of each show), there were more than 13 good episodes a year. So any way you slice it, only 13- and that’s assuming that EVERY one is a winner, which is hardly guaranteed- is still a step down in the amount of good Star Trek per year.

          • Fctiger

            DSC will be on a STREAMING site. No show on a streaming site makes more than 10-13 episodes a year. People should’ve known this months ago it was only going to be around a dozen episodes because streaming sites dont have nor make the kind of money a network show does. Neither do cable, also a reason those shows have smaller seasons.

          • Brian Thorn

            CBS All Access is not like the other streaming sites. It is still part of CBS and has the enormous infrastructure of CBS behind it (compare to Netflix or Amazon, Hulu to a lesser extent.) All Access really doesn’t have anything else but old episodes of shows to draw in an audience, no movie streaming, which is Netflix and Amazon’s bread and butter. And CBS wants to use Star Trek to establish itself in this new medium. I honestly was expecting 15-18 episodes per season, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if CBS pushes Fuller & Co. to do so, as he hinted they could.

          • Fctiger

            Yes BUT the problem is its STILL being run on a streaming site and its going to draw in less money than if they put it on the network. Everyone is moaning and complaining they have to both pay for it and still watch commercials but thats because A. The site is too small just to rely on subscriptions and B. The commercials will still be less than on network TV and C. They still charge way less than on TV as well.

            These are the problems. Sure CBS has more money than god to make 25 episodes if they wanted but its not a guarantee AA is going to bring in the kind of money to justify it.

            And I think you have it backwards, I dont think its Fuller who is really pushing for that I honestly believe its CBS who wants to keep the count low, for now. Fuller may be in agreement but believe me, this is a corporation, if they wanted 20 episodes, they would have 20 episodes. AA is a HUGE risk, they know that, so they are going to play it safe….like every streaming site does now. Now if it was on actual TV, then I dont think it would be any less than 18 episodes per season.

          • Ski bo

            Yo Tiger, I’m in agreement here, that’s why AA can kiss my pink, Polish ass. The second they rolled out the announcement in that wagon I uttered the words, Star Trek is dead. ~Mark~

          • Brian Thorn

            “And I think you have it backwards, I dont think its Fuller who is really pushing for that I honestly believe its CBS who wants to keep the count low”

            Not according to Fuller. He wanted 10. CBS wanted 13.

            “Fuller’s ideal season would be ten episodes, but that the future beyond season one of Discovery changes weekly so the episode orders for additional seasons have yet to be determined.” -Trekmovie, 8/28/16

            13 episodes by the way is the typical ‘up-front’ order for a new TV series on the networks. So CBS right off the bat seems to be treating DSC as more like a network show than a streaming show. Could it be they might place a ‘back 9’ order for a traditional 22 episode season if they like the numbers from All Access?

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian, Even though I was pleased with them naming Fuller as show runner every TIME he runs his mouth about this project he’s giving with one side of his mouth and taking it back with the other. They do a big Red Carpet roll out of the ship and he squeaks out, Uh, that’s not the real ship just yet, we’re not done with it. Then I think there’s a blurb running around here that CBS is taking down all their Trek content from HULU/NetFlix or some such nonsense in advance of the pilot? Gimme a break, they’re killin’ it. ~Mark~

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian, There’s also that article where Fuller is yapping like he knew all along the new initials were going to spell STD and chuckled like, “Thank GOD CBS is giving me more money, I had no idea how I was going to pay for that damn pool”! ~Mark~

          • Fctiger

            LOL OK, but 13 is still not 25. That was the main point. I don’t see it being anymore than 13 because thats what ALL streaming sites have. Look, its basic math, if you are on a start up streaming site that makes tens of millions less than your broadcast channel then you’re not going to have the money to pony up for full season shows. like the network. Sure if its really successful and AA does better than hope then you might get a few episodes but honestly don’t expect many more past 13. This is how streaming sites operates. If the show was on a network, it would be a different story.

          • Brian Thorn

            “13 is still not 25”

            Who said anything about 25? I actually said I was expecting 15-18.

            “that’s what ALL streaming sites have”

            That’s true now. But CBS might be aiming higher. They might very well want to distinguish themselves from the other services (Netflix, Amazon and Hulu) by offering longer seasons and unlike them, they have the resources to do it.

            “Look, its basic math”

            Agreed. A large chunk of Star Trek’s development cost is going to be in standing set design, construction, props, CGI development, costumes, etc. Far more than most TV shows, i.e., your average police procedural or even Daredevil or Stranger Things. A larger buy of episodes allows that upfront cost to be amortized over more episodes. Say, 18 episodes a season sells another month of All Access. And allows a higher price-point for later DVD/Blu-Ray releases.

            As for CBS ordering more episodes, we’ll see.

          • Ski bo

            Yo, That’s why I call it ‘All Abscess’. ~Mark~

          • Zarm

            Fair point. I rather wish this was on a network- it seems like a good number of the un-promising points for me (the lack of standards & practices, the episode number format, etc.) are tied to the streaming service. (Though not all- for instance,t he setting, or the apparent choice of a main-protagonist show instead of an ensemble piece).

            Still, considering the format, the episode-count does make sense.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            One can love star trek, but also at least try to be objective in analyzing great tv series over time. Saying for example, that Voyager is better than GoT just is laughable, for example.

            And I would put TOS up there with those shows I have mentioned. DS9 comes close, as does BSG and Bab 5.

          • M33

            People wouldn’t watch most of those shows if they didn’t have sex, violence, and gore.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            People wouldn’t watch them if they had bad production values, crappy writing and bad acting…like say, Enterprise.

          • Brian Thorn

            I watched GoT _despite_ the sex, violence and gore. I finally pulled the plug last season when it reached the bottom of the barrel and used rape as an entertainment ploy. Ditto Outlander. I’ll never watch either show again.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            The rape scene was awful…like rape is supposed to me. Not sure what you are talking about? Rape scenes and much worse are shown on regular TV on Law and Order SVU all the time.

            And people who got the wrong impression from that GoT rape scene would be well advised to look at perhaps their own thoughts on rape and violence, and not blame GoT — I’ve seen the criticisms, but that “entertainment reaction” was certainly not my reaction to that scene.

          • Brian Thorn

            You’re entitled to your opinion. I absolutely do not share it.

          • Nick Knight

            Could not agree more. The great conflict scenes as the prophet and Kai Winn would never have made it.

          • Brian Thorn

            Neither would any of the good Maquis stuff, like the excellent tandem of “For the Cause” / “For the Uniform”. No Kassidy Yates. Certainly no development of Rom, Nog, and Garak. No getting to see Jadzia’s humor and sexuality.

            DS9 wouldn’t have been the same show.

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian, Tots agree here, don’t forget my fav, The Pale Moonlight! ~Mark~

          • Nick Knight

            No, we would have lost all the outstanding dialog, and personal conflict. What we would have gotten was a lot more cool lasers, wizz wizz bang bang

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Nope — Ron Moore proved the opposite on Galactica, which ran about 15 eps per year. THE SAME GUY WHO LED DS9 !!! Imagine how a very good show, DS9, would have been, if Moore had been given the creative freedom to make DS9 in the serialization format that he did with Galactica!

            By bringing up DS9, given Moore, you have actually proved the opposite of the point you are trying to make here.

          • Brian Thorn

            BSG was good for about two years, the opposite of your claim about TNG not getting good for over two years. It went off the rails after that.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Your opinion. Mine — I loved the entire BSG run.

          • Io Jupiter

            DS9 is the greatest Trek series ever made, not would have been.

          • indranee

            Can you imagine Call to Arms with GoT style production values? Holy mother of god!

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Yep!

          • Ski bo

            Yo Indra, LOL caught me unawares with that one, well done. ~Mark~

          • Ski bo

            Yo, Goose-steppin’ with the Oracle. Ya vohl Herr Komadant. ~Mark~

        • Ski bo

          Yeah I’m hanging with Nick. He know’s him some Trek. ~Mark~

      • Raf

        The first 2 seasons were more reminiscent of seventies sci-fi, whereas later seasons were very much a modern show. It certainly does not make the first 2 seasons bad, I’ve absolutely come to love the unique style of the first 2 seasons!

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          I remember how some Trek friends and I threw a party for the Farpoint premiere of TNG. I remember the extreme disappointment and letdown we all felt — “what was that?” pretty much summed up our attitude. After that, it was about 2.5 years before I started to getting into the show, despite forcing myself to watch 90% crap for the first 1/3 of that series.

          In terms of being a sf fan, I have five keystone moments of supreme disappointment on premieres/big episodes over the years that transcend all others:

          Dune (Lynch)
          Highlander II – The Quickening
          TNG -Encounter at Farpoint
          The Phantom Mencace
          Lost – Final Episode

      • Brian Thorn

        The second half of Season 2 was very good. Unnatural Selection, Measure of a Man, Matter of Honor, Q Who?, Emissary, Peak Performance…

        • indranee

          that’s when it took a turn. Everything before TMoaM was shyte.

          • Brian Thorn

            I always liked “Schizoid Man”, “Unnatural Selection”, and “A Matter of Honor”, the three episodes preceding “The Measure of a Man”, too. I think TNG turned a corner with “Schizoid Man”. Before that, the Season 2 episodes were uninspired messes more like early/mid Season 1 episodes, not even as good as the episodes that ended Season 1, like “Coming of Age”, “Heart of Glory”, “We’ll Always Have Paris”, “Conspiracy”, and “Neutral Zone”.

          • Ski bo

            I just got done watching Matter Of Honor (remastered) and just fell in love with Trek all over again. It’s a great thing to see, (even with insurance commercials) on H&I for the first time in over ten years to have more than two Treks on a day! It’s like seeing an old friend (who you really missed) and remembering all the things you liked about them, it’s very nice especially when you know there’s another Cop related shooting just around the next news cycle. ~Mark~

    • Snap

      I don’t know if a larger number of episodes would fatigue the audience, but I’ve heard (particularly with Scott Bakula and Enterprise) that it is taxing on the production side of things, as he had worked to bring the number of episodes down from 26 to 22.

      I have always, personally, believed the whole “franchise fatigue” excuse to be a major cop out as the audience will never tire of quality Star Trek, but they will certainly tire of bad Trek. One needs only look at series like Doctor Who to see that, while creative forces behind the show may come and go, they show can live on indefinitely.

      With the change in how consumers watch TV, the archaic rating system is no longer and accurate means of determining the success of a show and, really, has never been for a global franchise such as Star Trek when they really only take the American ratings into account.

      • Nick Knight

        But, Enterprise had come after thee full series, with full seasons. If its well written, I agree it would do well. If its as poorly written as the latest three movies, then 10 is far more then enough.

        • Snap

          That’s true, but even with Enterprise the tide had begun to turn back in its favour following the Manny Coto-helmed final season. But the network had already made up its mind and, ironically, Les Moonves didn’t want sci-fi on the network. The damage, unfortunately, had already been done.

          Even though it could be considered a “golden age” for us as Trek fans, I think the fact that there was 21 seasons of Star Trek squeezed into 14 years prior to Enterprise really took its toll on the production staff, especially when the writers room essentially consisted of a handful of people for the bulk of that time.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I always hear the Coto defense and the Moonvies supposed hate — truth is, the ratings continued to decline in the last two years from the previous years — including Coto’s final season — FACT!

          • Snap

            Yes, it is a fact but it is also a fact that if we look up ratings the data is for the United States, not North America as a whole, but the United States alone. Moonvies has claimed that, with international distribution, Discovery is already profitable, so why aren’t the numbers from the rest of the world taken into account?

            While Enterprise was certainly struggling to recapture viewers in the United States, that very well may not be the case in other markets. If I were inclined, I could provide a laundry list of the things I didn’t like about the Coto season as it certainly wasn’t perfect and may even be overrated as I feel First Contact to be, but Moonvies WAS in power at Viacom and brought the axe down on Enterprise.

          • Ski bo

            Dear Nick, I suppose your right and the awful truth of the matter is, we’re spoiled. And/or addicted, (shant leave out the victim minded of us). Again though, I doubt I’ll be seeing it via CBS All Abscess. So there’s that. ~Mark~

    • It’s not about viewers getting fatigued, it’s the people who have to make all those episodes.

      • Nick Knight

        Yes, all the rest of the shows seemed to manage and thrive. I guess 26 is to much work for millennials. .

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Would you please drop the reverse ageism nonsense. I am over 50, and I prefer 13 eps for the reasons I mention in my response to you below.

          • Nick Knight

            Your not making the movies.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Thanks for that incredible news flash…

          • Tim Goodchild

            Game of Thrones seems to survive very well on just 10 episodes a season. I’d rather have high production value, strong story telling for 10 episodes than having 26 mediocre stories dragging a season out. Even the creators of 24 said they struggled often with the middle part of the season to try and fill content away from the core storyline. 10-13 episodes suits me well.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            E X A C T L Y
            ! ! !

          • Brian Thorn

            I would caution that GoT is an outlier, definitely not par for the course. It is a megahit. Plenty of other short-season HBO/Showtime/Starz originals haven’t been nearly as successful: Boss, Magic City, White Queen, In Treatment, John from Cincinnati, Rome, Deadwood, Vinyl, Penny Dreadful, The Borgias…

          • Fctiger

            Game of Thrones is based on a series of books and there is only so much story it can tell. If they made a 25 episode a year show they wouldve went through all 5 books by the second season which means they would’ve just been introducing a lot of new subplots which they ARE doing now. And its also why they announced season 7 and 8 will only be 7 episodes apiece. They have already run out of story to tell.

            This is apples and oranges since DIS will be its own thing and the can tell whatever stories they want but yes of course I agree. Its just going to be easier to make 13 great episodes vs 26 great episodes. I dont think people understand just how much work and crunch time people have to get out 20+ serperate stories a year. Yeah network TV has been doing it for decades but now even they are finally producing less episodes in the season. Thats why, for example, when the new 24 show comes back it will just be 12 episodes and not the 24 episodes and that was one of the few shows that made the daunting task of creating so many episodes a year work but 12 episodes is becoming the standard now.

            Everyone for example is praising Stranger Things on Netflix but its only 8 episodes. Can you imagine if it was 22 episodes like on Network TV? It would be a different thing entirely because its just not enough story to tell. It was already announced for TWD NBC wanted to do a procedral which wouldve been horrible but thats really the only way you can do it with 20+ episodes a season. AMC still has an unusually high episode count for cable but 16 is still easier to manage versus 24.

          • Tim Goodchild

            Yes. But then in the UK, TV series forever have only been 6-10 episodes per series/season. With the volume of TV made today, I don’t want another 26 episode season. It’s too much for the viewer to keep track of, and if CBS can attract a new audience, that’s pretty important.

          • Fctiger

            Yeah I know I was agreeing with you. 😉

          • Ski bo

            Or one good movie in a decade? ~Mark~

          • Tim Goodchild

            *You’re 😉

        • Ski bo

          Yo Nick! That’s it, right in the nads!! Ouch. ~Mark~

      • Zarm

        One might argue that the dozens or hundreds of other shows on television with seasons of that length- as well as Trek past, such as TNG and DS9- certainly seemed to find a way…

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          You gotta be kidding me. TNG? Really? Did you watch the first 2.5 seasons?

          • Nick Knight

            I did, as they aired and loved them.

          • Zarm

            Yes. However, fatigue is not something that usually sets in *at the start.* If the complaint is ‘fatigue,’ ten when the show was just starting out (and affected by Roddenberyan meddling in the first season and a writer’s strike in the second) are not valid examples.

            And personally, I find a lot to like in those seasons despite the flaws. But even if you count out TNG (despite those being ‘finding their feet’ issues rather than ‘fatigue’ issues), you’ve still got dozens to hundreds of other successful shows to explain away.

          • Love season 2 of TNG.

          • Fctiger

            I been rewatching a lot of Star Trek lately and yes in hind sight a lot of the early TNG stuff wasn’t so bad and season 2 did have some of the best episodes of the series like Measure of a Man, Pen Pals, Time Squared and Q Who. It did easily have the worst season finale in the entire series though. That was just an embarrassment.

          • kadajawi

            I loved Pulaski, and a few episodes were decent in season 2, but there was nothing redeemable in season 1, except for Tasha’s outfit once. But really, season 1 was terrible. The writing. The acting. Even Patrick Stewart was awful. Acting only got better when Pulaski added some talent… I imagine Marina Sirtis started to take acting lessons at that point.

          • Ski bo

            It’s on H&I as I type this. ~Mark~

      • indranee

        If you’re fatigued creating 26 episodes of a show at the outset, maybe you should be home napping instead of being paid the big bucks hollywood pays people like you?

        • 10-15 episodes per season is the standard premium television model being use by basically all non-network broadcasters: cable, Netflix, etc. This was not an unexpected development.

          If you read any account of the 26-episode-per-season production from the writers and actors who were part of it, it’s consistently described as a grueling and extremely taxing workload.

          No television show anywhere is doing 26-episode seasons anymore.

          • indranee

            I want more than 15. Sue me. :/

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Are you worth a lot? 🙂

            PS: I like your style. You should post here more often.

          • indranee

            no, but I’m willing to work MY butt off writing for Trek (unlike some people we know) 😉

            …and thanks. I’ll come back if I see good stuff about STD…

          • M33

            DSC… Please! STD refers to disease!
            (hopefully what this show won’t become)

          • indranee

            Glad I got someone’s goat with that one 😉

          • Ski bo

            Yo Indra, You heard the Komadant, if he tell you vork, you vill vork, achtung baby!! ~Mark~

          • Fctiger

            I think most of us want as many episodes as possible lol. But once they announced it was going to be on a streaming site I ALREADY knew it wasn’t going to be anymore than the standard 10-13 episodes. Look at every original show on a streaming site: Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, etc, every show has roughly 10-12 episodes. The maximum seems to be 13 (which this is getting) but can be as low as 8 (which the Netflix shows Sense8 and Stranger Things has).

            And the reality is probably episode quality but two, just less money to make more episodes. Its not enough for these sites to get more people join when you are only charging $10 bucks a month. The reality is commericals and ads still pay the most and WHY CBS is still charging you and showing ads at the same time. The site is still too small, it CAN’T rely on just sign ups alone, so it has to do ads.

            And yes, thats the problem. People want more episodes but they don’t want to PAY for more episodes. And yes I already hear the other people shouting it should be free on TV where the ads pay for it, I agree to an extent but as said people are just watching less and less first run stuff on TV. Lets face it, the industry as a whole is in trouble.

            As consumers we got it VERY good now because we got DVR machines that can record thousand hours of TV and skip the commercials. We can watch anything we want online now (legal or otherwise ;)), we have access to TV we never had before. But all the time shifting is causing a ruckus. Few people are sitting at home and watching a program as it runs for the first time anymore and the problem is that is where networks makes the biggest bang for their buck, that first run viewing. After that it makes less and less.

            And while everyone says the future is online, and they are right, the reality is for networks it still brings in way less money. So while you have all the networks now making original programs for stuff like Hulu its no way you will see 15 new shows every year all running at 20+ episodes each, its just not enough money to justify it. And why you are lucky to get maybe 6 shows at around 10 episodes apiece.

            Thats the reality. When TNG came on in 1987, it was sold in syndication which was considered risky at the time. BUT the move was smart because there is TONS of money in syndication, the problem at the time was few shows were successful enough in syndication since they don’t have the backing of a big network and stations can move them wherever they want. But it worked and they had no issues making 25 episodes a year for TNG because the show was making hundreds of millions off both the advertisers and the stations airing it. For all the talk about streaming and its easy accessibility for the consumer, it still not close to the money maker as airing a show on TV. There is less competition so more success (I dont think a single show from Netflix has been cancelled yet) but the money just isn’t there like TNG and DS9 made in their heyday.

            So yes DIS is a big, big risk end of the day and while I have no doubt its going to make money due to the lack of competition on streaming sites and now the Netflix deal its still not going to make the kind of money a hit show will make on a network and so thats the compromise. We’ll probably have DIS for several years easily but its not going to be anymore than 13 episodes for those reasons.

          • Brian Thorn

            Outlander Season 1 was 16 episodes, but Starz split it over two years. Looks like Season 2 will be 13.

          • Fctiger

            Well I was talking about streaming sites specifically although sure it applies to a lot of cable networks since most of those usually only shoot 10-12 episodes a year. If you look at HBO and Showtime for example, you RARELY find a show that goes over 12 a season.

            But yes some do produce a bit more, mostly basic cable like AMC that makes about 16 episodes of TWD and thats an exception.

          • Ski bo

            Yo, not according to Moonves. ~Mark~

          • Fctiger

            Uh, about what? Can you elaborate?

          • Ski bo

            Yo Tigger, We’ve established the fact Moonves HATES Trek like poor people BUT needs a new Lexus just now, catch up! ~Mark~

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Yep, except for primarily comedies and kids shows.

          • Brian Thorn

            I’m hoping the short season model attracts more famous talent to Discovery, instead of the one-or-two fairly big names and a bunch of nobodies like the Berman-era Treks.

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian, I’m hoping I get to watch more than the pilot, (maybe). ~Mark~

      • Ski bo

        Why you, I’ll punch your lips off! Whose side are you on. Anyways?!?! (lol) ~Mark~

    • Raf

      I agree, like really? 10 episodes per year is what he would prefer? 26 seemed no problem in the past, I mean if you want to cut down on episodes, sure, do 10, do 18 even. But 10? You’re not exactly going to make Game of Thrones here bud…

      • Ski bo

        Yo Raf, We’ve established the fact Moonves HATES Trek like poor people BUT needs a new Lexus just now, catch up! ~Mark~

  • The Science Fiction Oracle

    I’m now feeling a lot better about this…

    • Bifash

      That’s more like it – a measured and calm response. It’s fine and natural to have concerns – but the ones who are outright SLAMMING this series before it’s even launched ( no names mentioned ) need to take a breather – they are talking about Bryan Fuller’s “ego”, and “no one wants to see his vision”, etc.

      I wish they would just chill the f__k out.

      • Ski bo

        Yo Bi, I haven’t even started on Fuller yet . . .

        ~Mark~

  • Snap

    One thing to consider is that the 13 episode order is not a “set in stone” limit, as the network could order more episodes at any time during production, especially if could mean more money from sponsors, etc. Just look at WWE RAW, for example, it is incredibly taxing to sit through an entire three hour episode each week and the quality of the sows can be up for debate, but the sponsorship money gained from the third hour means a reduction back to two hours may be highly unlikely, even if it would benefit the show creatively.

  • Zarm

    “[The time period we chose] came pretty organically, because we are going to try to achieve a new look for ‘Star Trek’ that is very much ‘Star Trek,’ but also our interpretation of ‘Star Trek.’”

    So, completely ignoring the fact that the look and technology for this time period has already been canonically established in The Cage/The Menagerie, then? Sorry, the more I hear about this show, the less interest I have. We hardly need another pre-TOS series to jump in and start ignoring everything TOS established about the technology, aesthetics, continuity, designs, and universe at that point in Trek history.

    Seriously, just about every production decision outside of casting seems to be leading further and further in the exact wrong direction, from my POV. I went from being psyched out of my mind for this show last fall to being pretty sure I’m not even going to watch the premiere at this point. It may be Prime Universe, but it doesn’t seem like it’s going to match Star Trek- in continuity, or the tone of anything that feels like ‘Star Trek’ to me- than the JJ films; it might as well be Kelvin or a new timeline, since they don’t want to be beholden to what’s actually there.

    Still waiting on solid info to change my perceptions- but so far, every creator statement of intent is just a giant red flag for me. (I do quite sincerely hope that many others will enjoy it, however! Much as with the new direction for the Star Wars franchise, I’d be quite happy to see it succeed, and glad if it is fulfilling for a new generation of fans. It just isn’t seeming very fulfilling to this particular fan.)

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      No offense, but that is ludicrous to say that preserving canon needs to be taken so far that they need to make the sets and aliens look like 1960’s production values…the show would get laughed off the air, excepting for the few thousand who worship those silly fan flims.

      • Zarm

        I would argue that a prequel is a parasite leeching off the popularity of the original, and bears the automatic moral responsibility of slavish devotion tot he original. If they’re gonna profit off the brand name, the least they can do is show a little respect. 🙂

        But that said, I’m not talking about 60s *production values.* Designs, on the other hand- uniforms, technology, etc., as they’ve been established- yeah, I sure as heck expect that to be preserved. If one doesn’t want that responsibility, then they shouldn’t set a new show in a known universe in a known time period that has established looks and history. That’s easy. It’s like setting a show during the Revolutionary War and then balking at doing period costumes.

        It’s not ridiculous to expect a show that chooses to set itself in a known time with a known look to actually adhere to it. And if they want to innovate, fine- set the show some time else where there is freedom to innovate.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Well, I do partially agree with you here. I would have preferred that they re-imagined Trek entirely for this series, and not put in either timeline.

          • Snap

            Yes, I agree with that. That is a large part of why I dislike Into Darkness (or, as I call it “Into Rehash”) so much, when they “cleared the canvas” with Trek 09 only to follow up by ripping from Wrath of Khan and even repeating the same character arc with Kirk from the first movie.

            Enterprise highlighted several problem with doing a prequel which would have to deal with continuity issues of what’s to come and, in the case of the final season, going overboard into “fanwank” territory. I would have loved to have seen Discovery take place in an entirely fresh “universe” where we wouldn’t have the established conventions of how starships are supposed to look during whichever time period or what the uniforms look like or whether or not contact has been made with this species or that one.

            My rationale is that using a blank canvas doesn’t invalidate what has come before, those stories will always be there, but if the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few that places serious constraints on what a show being shoehorned into a certain timeframe can actually do. However, if Discovery is exploring events which have been established as happening but haven’t been depicted, perhaps the “shoehorning” may not be so bad an may be largely limited to aesthetic differences.

            One interesting bit is the mention that time won’t necessarily flow the same as in previous Treks, so while season one might be set in 2255, season two doesn’t need to be set in 2256.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well said.

          • DemosCat

            Indeed. If Fuller wants a fresh look with new uniform designs, etc., he could have easily set the new show in the 25th century, not shoe-horn it in a mere 10 years before Kirk/Spock.

            That said, in some ways I hope the uniforms have a pseudo “Forbidden Planet” look. That would fit with being earlier than the 1960’s style uniforms. 🙂

          • Ace Stephens

            It’s been mentioned that it deals with a very specific event in Trek canon, right? So I assume that’s why it’s set ten years before stuff. Somebody heard of a specific thing and so they structured some of their overall approach around that. So I don’t think it’s a “shoehorn” thing so much as it is a “fandom” thing and then the consequences of that are the things that they’re awkwardly adjusting for…

          • (Roc) Wayne Alford

            UNless of course he is rebooting the franchise

          • Wildcat3

            If you want a blank slate and new universe, why call it Star Trek at all? Just create a new franchise at that point.

            I like keeping it in the known timeline. Allows the possibility of connecting to the characters/actors we love at some point. Aesthetics, uniforms, ships will be familiar but with a modern look/twist. Sounds great.

          • Fctiger

            Yeah, they did that before….it was called TNG. I think thats what is confusing about this because why not just set it in a different time period where you can have the same stuff as before but still ‘reimagine’ it. That was the ENTIRE point of setting TNG in advanced time period because you can still have Starfleet, Klingons, Romulans, and everything else but same time have a different asthetic to to uniforms, ships etc.

            This basically sound like they are going to take a period that is suppose to set up TOS but do it so differently it will feel like another show….so why do it? I guess I dont get the appeal of this time period. Everyone once to set it there but then reimagine it. Thats basically all the Kelvin Timeline films does now and look how big that went over with fans.

          • Frank B.

            I would have really liked them to explore the time period between Star Trek VII and TNG, plenty of historical events there (according to TNG) that would have deserved exposure.

          • Fctiger

            Agreed. WHen that rumor came out it was going to take place after TUC, I think people were generally excited about it. Yeah its still a ‘prequel’ but it had decades to explore before TNG and we actually know very little about the time after TUC outside a few references in TNG and others but as you said a lot DID happen but only mentioned so it wouldve been interesting to see what they did in that period.

          • (Roc) Wayne Alford

            Yes between TOS movies and TNG
            Since I think it is a reboot I don’t think it will matter. To me it will just be another Batman universe since they already have 50 different ones

          • (Roc) Wayne Alford

            Think BSG Reboot, same basic characters, same basic story all in a slick new modern way. I believe this is what fuller was after.
            Also CBS did not want to use the Kelvin timeline so it wasn’t quite just a toss up about what to use

          • John Dishman

            I agree, this series would be more exciting for me if it picked up 10 years after DS9.

        • Ski Bo

          Totally agree here. I would also add that I too smell some potential sabotage from CBS with it’s persistence in keeping it Pay Per View. Gives me flashbacks of Voyagers last season and how hard it was finding a CLEAR channel to view it on. I kept saying to myself, I hope this is the last one cause if it’s not Viacom, it’s CBS, or it’s Paramount. Just seemed like management WANTS this fail, (or otherwise EXPECTS it to). ~Mark~

      • Snap

        I think, in terms of aliens like the Klingons, Romulans and Vulcans, preserving their appearance when there is nothing broken about them, wouldn’t be a bad idea. The Klingons and Romulans were updated post-TOS and preserved into the Enterprise prequel era, so I don’t think changing anything about them physiologically is necessary. Adjust the wardrobe and tech to fit the setting, of course, but to make changes for the sake of changes is not logical. Why not go a step further and change what a human in Star Trek is supposed to look like?

        I can agree with the decision to update aspects such as prosthetics such as Andorian antennae as the technology to produce those effects has advanced since Enterprise went off the air.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          On one hand, I seep your point. On the other hand, the “actor with a mask of the week” thing is getting a bit stale for me in Star Trek.

          • Snap

            I can’t argue with that. With CGI at the level it is now, there are more options which can be taken advantage of. There were multiple non-humanoid aliens in the original show, such as the Horta which could be revisited and updated with modern tech. I guess it will just come down to how much it costs and how much they have available in their budget.

          • pittrek

            Even in 2016 CGI looks fake. You can’t beat a practical thing

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Where do you come up with these blanket pronouncements?

          • pittrek

            Well, it’s simply the truth. CGI looks fake, because it IS fake – it’s not a representation of a real object or scenery. If you can watch at a scene and know what is CG, it’s because it looks fake to you (even if you might LIKE it) and your brain recognizes it’s not real.

            Wise filmmakers knew this, so they used CG shots as short as possible and combine them with other types of effects shots, if you do it correctly, you can quite simply “fool” the brain into thinking you’re looking at something real. Unfortunately this ended with (probably) The Lord of the Rings trilogy, these days everything is CG so your brain can easily tell which elements are real and which not.

          • DemosCat

            Here’s an idea. It’s very well possible that if we ever to encounter real aliens in real life, they might look “fake” to us because they won’t look or move in ways we are ingrained to think of as “real.” For all we know, real aliens might fall into the “uncanny valley” and look like animated corpses.

            And we, in turn, might fall into their uncanny valley as well. 🙂

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Claiming that you can tell definitively what is CGI and what is not in well done movies today is in the category of “urban legend.” It is simply a false statement — you’re basically, saying “trust me, I can tell the difference.” Well, I don’t.

          • pittrek

            Sorry, but you’re simply wrong. You remind me on the people who try to convince me that it’s impossible to tell a difference between an mp3 and a flac file – I took several blind tests and I think the worst result I had was 95% successful. The same goes for CGI. The last time I had problems to tell CGI apart from practical effects was in the Lord of the Rings movies. In many movies my eyes don’t even see actors in a scene, but actors in front of a green screen composited into CG background.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            All conjecture, and “trust me, I’ve done personal testing.”

            Sorry, that’s just not very compelling, and it’s completely subjective.

            Get back to me with some objective data, then we’ll talk again on this.

          • kadajawi

            That is fine and good for new species. Not for existing ones (unless doing very subtle).

            Also, there’s no way they are going to pull off regular CGI aliens. Those cost money. Even Game of Thrones uses CGI characters sparingly, and they have a massive budget.

          • Bifash

            I envision subtle changes. perhaps different costumes ( from parts of their homeworld we haven’t seen ), perhaps different military uniforms, different hairstyles – I think that will be fine for the aliens – just look at our own world and how diverse humanity is.

          • Bifash

            I think we have the technology now to really represent some truly inhuman aliens, even as members of the crew. That will be terrific to see.

          • kadajawi

            What, Daisy will be on the show and cause earthquakes?

            (ok, no one will get that…)

          • Bifash

            I got your AOS ref, lol!

          • pittrek

            Yes, we have the technology. But not the artists. Most of the “CGI artists” have no clue how to create something which looks real.

          • Bifash

            Fingers crossed I think we should be okay – I have faith in Fuller after HANNIBAL which was a masterfully crafted series – visually, and aurally stunning, with a powerful underlying tone through the series – if he can apply that level of craftsmanship to the aliens and overall aethetics of the series, we will hopefully be in good hands ( fingers crossed as I say ).

          • pittrek

            Well the only things I’ve seen from him were the episodes he wrote for Trek and they were not THAT good IMHO. I’ve never seen Hannibal so I can’t compare

          • Ski bo

            Agreed here as well. I’m glad (for the most part) for the people they picked for the work, I’m just seriously doubting that I’ll get to see it (and may not want to) unless it get’s a DVD release. ~Mark~

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yes more CGI, more selfies, more binge watching for the ADHD generation, OMG OMG!!!

        • Ed Lilli

          “Why not go a step further and change what a human in Star Trek is supposed to look like?”

          Actually, they should change what a “future” human looks like in Star Trek, Snap. Humans won’t look the same as they do now. In fact, humans are getting taller. We’re also getting fatter and live longer than at any time in history. These changes have only occurred in the past 100 years or so. This will certainly change as time shifts forward. Also, some doctors predict we’ll have much larger eyes and brains than we do now.

          Change for the sake of change isn’t logical. You’re right. However, isn’t it presumptuous to assert what those changes might be, if any, and why they were made? No one knows much about Star Trek: DSC.

      • I agree. This is not a period piece that they’re making. It’s a show about the future, and it should be represented as best as possible using today’s technology. I choose to look at all Star Treks as the best possible representation of the “actual adventures” as they can pull off using that era’s technology and design.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Thanks!

        • GIBBS v2

          And that is precisely what each design team through the decades has strived to do. Well said.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Yeah, I mean it’s not like any fans study continuity any way right?

      • Darth Trulane

        Keep in mind the fact that they said they want to reimagine the alien species. Why the hell would you want to redesign a Klingon for an andorian while at the same time saying it’s in the prime timeline..? We should all admit that this is silly.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Because IT’S FICTION. It’s not a REAL FUTURE HISTORY.

          Sheesh!

          • Darth Trulane

            You didn’t think through what you just typed… But I’ll play along with you just for fun. I say we go ahead and throw in some X-Wings into the new series… you know why? because IT’S FICTION and it’s not a REAL FUTURE HISTORY. Given this fact, according to you we have no accountability when it comes to being beholden to what has previously been established, right? So you know, we can do whatever the hell we want…

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You mean like mixing Darth Vader from Star Wars with Trulane from Star Trek?….whoops! 😉

          • Darth Trulane

            Actually, the Sith title is Trulane, not ‘Trelane”. Whoops! The name Trulane (full name Lars Trulane) comes from a very obscure early Star Wars comic. lol Was funny though when I googled the name and saw who the guy Trelane actually was in Star Trek. 🙂

          • Bifash

            THANK YOU – some common sense here at last.

        • (Roc) Wayne Alford

          Reboot , think BSG

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The remake of BSG was terrible.

      • kadajawi

        It has to be done tastefully. The ENT Andorians look a lot like TOS Andorians, just with updated production values. They work. The KT Klingons don’t look anything like TOS Klingons, and they don’t look anything like ENT/TNG Klingons. That is an issue.

        And yeah, it would be tough to make the new show look like TOS, but that’s why you shouldn’t place it at that point in time. Find a point where it works!

        • Bifash

          The KT Kligon seemed like a odd choice – especially when the concept artist designed some incredible concept pieces that DID look like Klingons – but they didn’t go for them.

      • GIBBS v2

        A high budget fan film is exactly how it would be labeled if they made it look like the original series. It has to have modern production values and design sensibilities that take cues from the original to be taken seriously.

        Since it has already been declared an anthology series perhaps next season we get that story that takes place after TNG to satisfies that part of the audience.

        • SpaceCadet

          Where was it decaded an anthology series? Bryan Fuller specifically stated just a couple of months ago that that rumor is not true:

          http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/06/bryan-fuller-shoots-down-two-star-trek-2017-rumors/

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Sheesh, you are not really paying attention — it’s not going to be anthology series.

          Maybe get back to us when you get updated on what is going on with this production? It’s hard to respect your opinion where your info is months outdated?

          • GIBBS v2

            Golly mister, I sure as sorry for being so ignorant! I don’t live here like you evidently do. Sure am sorry I wasted your time when you could have been posting other stuff. Did you post what 30 times here in this single thread today?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You are right. I apologize.

      • (Roc) Wayne Alford

        He chose Primetime because he didn’t want to worry about considering the events in 3 two hour movies.
        If we think he is going to worry about 700 plus hours of canon I think we are mistaken
        This is a reboot

    • Ace Stephens

      I think there will be a sense of the aesthetic probably – perhaps some brighter colors or things like that. But do we have confirmation that all ships at the time had a standardized uniform for all members of the crew? For all we know, a few episodes into season two they stumble across another ship that has the exact same uniforms as those from The Cage or Where No Man Has Gone Before. I mean, even TOS had women in trousers for a few episodes.

      While I understand the want of it, I don’t expect much overt uniformity from things like, well, uniforms (from ship to ship to ship in some exacting sense), when they’re seemingly dealing with such disparate objectives, crews, captains, etc. I expect it to fit an aesthetic, roughly updated, but don’t want some “cheap recreation” of anything unless it’s an exact thing. For instance, “We’ve been invited aboard the Enterprise while it’s docked at…” type stuff. Then it would make relative sense so as not to destroy the illusion of interconnectivity.

      Sort of like what was done on Enterprise with the USS Defiant in In A Mirror Darkly.

      • Zarm

        I don’t know. Uniforms, I could possibly forgive (even though they seem in all other Trek series as if they are uniform, no pun intended, across vessels). But are we going to see bigger-than-TOS flip-top communicators? Laser pistols in common usage? They may skip out on the odd gooseneck viewer or push-button console (though I’d argue even that’s unacceptable; if they don’t want to copy the look, then they shouldn’t assume that responsibility by choosing a time period with an established look), but these are the established technology in use by the Federation flagship of the time. The transporter has an irritating high-pitched jingle and a longer cycle than any post-TOS show (even Enterprise) has allowed for. There are (awesome) mobile laser canons that can be beamed down from the ship. Even if we’re not going to see photographs of printed pages on viewscreens for the library computer (and again, fair enough), the look, technology, and condition of Starfleet has been established- and I just really doubt they’re going to hold themselves to those conditions. Uniforms, maybe, or even interior decoration, they can fudge (even then, I would disagree, but I could overlook it)- but if they’re not going to stick to the established props, technology level, etc. of the established time period, then they’re both disrespecting TOS and what it established, and demonstrating exactly why it’s a terrible idea to keep doing prequels in an established timeline when they don’t want to be constrained by what’s established.

        And of course, I could be wrong, and they will do exactly that- my pessimism is mostly based on Enterprise and its lack of self-control when it came to keeping things ‘less advanced’ than TOS (usually by slightly altering the name or look of the prop, then giving it TNG-era capabilities anyway); maybe with Fuller in charge, this show will show the proper restraint.

        But if they don’t, then it begs the question- why are they setting it in a TOS-connected period, and trying to tell TOS-related stories, yet completely ignoring everything that TOS has to say about the period? Once again, if you don’t want to work with horses or wagons, then you don’t make a period drama about the Revolutionary War. 😉

        • Ace Stephens

          I essentially agree with you. And I know certain things are more uniform later on (and, in some sense, perhaps earlier) but I think the differing ships, missions, etc. allow for a bit more variety. While Enterprise was sort of starting out, this could be when somewhat separate elements kind of come into play as they’re getting out there more but before things are more formalized.

          As for the tech, I agree there. It should be very close or else it raises questions about why things weren’t used otherwise or stuff like that. Of course, if they address those, fine. “We have the best technology ever – oh, wait…it kills everyone who touches it. Ban that. We don’t talk about that.” There are some ways to work around stuff if they’re clever.

          As for Fuller, it seems like he’s assembled a team of people who know Trek really well so I have a hard time thinking they just won’t care about these things. I’m by no means arguing that they’ll be perfect but if they get quite close yet just have differing uniforms and a somewhat more “modern” aesthetic with various touches of what made TOS look as it does, I see no grand issue there.

          But I agree that putting these constraints on it is…risking something.

      • mooslug

        Agreed – if it’s a ship we’ve seen before, they should hew closely to the prior example… BUT… The thing is, the ONLY example we’ve seen from this pre-TOS era is the Enterprise itself. That’s the only costume/ship interior established, and that ship was already 10 years old at the time of Discovery. There is plenty of room for variation in ship interiors. Compare the look of early TNG to Voyager or First Contact. HUGE difference in 10 years.

        Also, it’s shown repeatedly in the other series that multiple uniforms are in service at the same time. In reality this was because converting all background costumes to the new style was prohibitively expensive, but throughout TNG and DS9 you see a mix of uniform styles in different parts of Starfleet, particularly in DS9 on Earth and when other ships visit the station. For an even more extreme example, the scene below from “The Rapture” has Sisko in a First Contact uniform and a visiting commander in the TNG style. Generations used two styles even on one ship. TNG had season 1-2 suits used through season 3 for extras.
        http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/5×10/rapture_320.jpg

        • Ace Stephens

          The thing is, the ONLY example we’ve seen from this pre-TOS era is the Enterprise itself.

          That’s a good point regarding specifics but aren’t there other known ships which also have a history during that period (perhaps including a look) and could be referenced in some form? I don’t recall.

          Also, it’s shown repeatedly in the other series that multiple uniforms are in service at the same time.

          Thanks for the clarification. That’s what I thought but someone else indicated that they were roughly the same in other iterations so I figured I must have been misremembering or something.

          • mooslug

            That’s a good point regarding specifics but aren’t there other known ships which also have a history during that period

            I’m not 100% sure about that point, but even so weren’t the only Starfleet ships on screen in TOS other Constitution classes, like the Enterprise? If so it would make sense to have a uniform appearance to the interiors on those.

            The other unknown for the new show is that the Discovery ship could already be decades older than the Constitution class by the time of the series, or it could be brand new (versus the Constitution class which is at a minimum 10 years old at the time of Discovery). Yet another thing that justifies (or even requires) a different interior aesthetic.

          • Ace Stephens

            I’m not 100% sure about that point, but even so weren’t the only Starfleet ships on screen in TOS other Constitution classes, like the Enterprise?

            I think they were, yeah (because they couldn’t afford more models)…so that makes sense if directly referencing TOS. But I don’t remember everything as well as some of the more diehard fans do and thought there were probably later references to earlier ships that might have included showing them in some cases. Sometimes I forget about really obvious instances of things so I was leaving some room for those (if such things exist).

  • Dawn

    now you see, you see, you concerning me even more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    CANCEL IT NOW AND DO SOMETHING ELSE

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      How’s that soft-core S&M web surfing thing working out for you? 🙂

    • Bifash

      I hope you are just taking the mickey out of the nutjob fans poo-pooing every aspect of this show in advance, wanting instead to push their own personal ( and often laughably bad ) ideas.

      • Dawn

        no, but they have no idea what they doing.
        I think about this long term, and i think about this practically.
        This is on a pay per view platform which means its dependent on the fans being happy, what information they are giving us, is not making fans happy, sure you get the people who like star trek for a title, but thats not the issue, they not doing this right, they not listening to what the fans in general want, and they certainly are not doing the series the fans want, instead they going out of their way to make a story they wont tell us about, be controversial, without any reason, and doing something that has more potenital than any other series to undermine the orignal series.

        • Ski bo

          Yo Dawn, I’m hangin’ with you! You knows some Star Trek!! CBS is gonna screw this pooch and us fans right along with it. ~Mark~

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Looks like Dawn is literally hanging for you.

          • Ski bo

            Yo Mien Herr, So she does italian, the hard way, (bet you do to, Ya Vohl?). This was fun, take care Komadant!!
            ~Mark~

    • Ski bo

      Yo Dawn, I’m with you!! It’s a FAAAAKE! ~Mark~

  • Greenspan

    No lyrics in the theme song please and make the show about exploration.

    • Nick Knight

      Its been a long road, getting from here to there blah blah blah ;-p

      • Snap

        It may be blasphemous, but the Star Trek theme I dislike the most is actually the original 60s Star Trek theme. I didn’t even have any problem with the Enterprise theme.

        • I disliked the choice for Enterprise, but I must admit, I’m so used to it now that I don’t give it a second thought.

          • The Chadwick

            Watching it on blu-ray, I just always skip, next scene, that theme does not exist in my mind. I combined other music to make a letter theme lol.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS-Q1MyE3tw

          • indranee

            I like it.

        • The Chadwick

          I don’t care for it much either, its not really a sci fi theme. My favourite Trek theme will always be Motion Pictures theme, but probably sounded best in the end credits of all the TNG movies. Enterprise, ugh its like the 60’s, not sci fi. Its a soft rock ballad, its just not sci fi, spacey, Star Trek.

          • Brian Thorn

            Uh, no. “Faith of the Heart” is nothing like the ’60s. Soft-rock ballads were much more late ’70s/ early ’80s.

      • The Chadwick

        No, don’t sing it lol

      • Hauke Fischer

        To be honest, I never hated the theme song. It was a very good fit to the opening credits, and I even have to admit, the first time I saw it, I choked up a little.
        Saw it in a packed auditorium full of Trek fans, knowing nothing about the show going in apart from it being a prequel.

    • The original series theme had lyrics.

      • Well, to be fair, they were lyrics that Gene Roddenberry shoehorned in and forced upon Alexander Courage so that he could get some residuals every time the theme played. But, did we ever hear them?

        • As of this date, there is no official Star Trek product that plays the theme with the lyrics that Gene wrote for it. He never intended the lyrics to be used but did so anyway because, as you mentioned, money.

          It wasn’t until fairly recently that someone decided “Hey, if Gene gets some of the royalties, why not give him credit for creating the theme?”. So despite the fact that there is LITERALLY NOTHING of Gene’s contributions, he now gets co-creator credit whenever the theme is credited. The man who used his series to preach how humanity would do away with greed… wound up ripping the artists off.

        • The Chadwick

          Yea, so happy that never happened. Ive heard the recorded version of that theme, its bad…its really bad.

    • The Chadwick

      Yea, no kidding. I made a little update to the Enterprise theme, posted it on a bunch of Star Trek facebook fan pages and %90 liked it but oh that %10 that didn’t like it, really let me have it lol, they love Enterprise’s theme waaaay too much lol. Me, I skip it every time, I simply cannot listen to a soft rock ballad. Check it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS-Q1MyE3tw

      • Harry Kane

        Intresting, but I still prefer the Star Trek Enterprise theme, The updated version you hear in season 3 and 4.

      • Harry Kane

        I really like this one, The Season 1 and 2 theme i felt was a bit slow and lacked punch. Season 3 and 4 updated theme was great. https://youtu.be/urYH6xEyXw0

        • Fctiger

          Agreed, I always liked this version more with a more upbeat tempo.

    • GIBBS v2

      Voyage might be my favorite opening theme. Just throwing that out there. Love TNG and DS9 but Voyager’s theme just feels beautiful and epic.

      • Brian Thorn

        Goldsmith stood head and shoulders over Dennis McCarthy.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      How much exploration do you think they’ll be able to do in a 13 part serialised show? Visit a few planets?

  • Fiery Little One

    So our new main will be the first officer, that’s close enough for me. (If this detail was previously released, I just missed it somehow.)

    • Mrplatitude

      Pretty sure you’re right, that was new.

      • indranee

        So she won’t be a lower decks person.

        • Fctiger

          Never thought she would be. End of the day the action is on the bridge so I always suspected they would be the bridge crew. No one wants a show where they spend they day mostly in sick bay or engineering.

  • OnlyManWhoCan

    I’m happy to hear that they’re going for shorter seasons – God knows I love almost all of Star Trek, but the only way to film 25 episodes a season is to make them look very pedestrian. We have beautiful, cinematic TV now and that takes time to do, so I’m happy to have a new Trek TV show with modern ‘prestige TV’ sensibility

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Well said!

  • Barak Aslani

    Thank you TrekCore for posting relevent and exciting news about our beloved Trek. Over on TrekMovie there’s some nonsensical article about the Avatar-type JJ-character that knew how to fix cloacking devices and holodecks and a starship… Then I come here and see there is actually REAL NEWS. Thank you for being our font of knowledge and for all the great work you do.

    • Bifash

      Trekmovie have updated with the Fuller story now.

    • Fctiger

      Actually Trekmovie just upped the game by throwing out a cool infographic detailing everything we know about the show so far. Just posted it today. So you have to give them a +1 on that lol.

      • Ski bo

        Oh bad Tiger, bad. Go lay down! ~Mark~

  • indranee

    So it won’t be THE Number One, just “a” Number One?! Ugh. Interest waning already 🙁

    • Bifash

      Christ almighty.

      • indranee

        Unfortunately, *he* can’t fo much to help out 😉

      • Ski bo

        Yo Bi, I’m lovin’ it!! Lol . . . ~Mark~

    • Brian Thorn

      “Number One” is usually the nickname of the ship’s First Officer. There will be only one First Officer at a time.

      • indranee

        LOL ok. As a thirty-years+ trekkie, I believe that’s…no more helpful to me than any of Fuller’s “revelations”. 😂

        • Brian Thorn

          It’s an old Royal Navy tradition to call the First Officer / Executive Officer “Number One”, by the way.

    • Ski bo

      Yo Indra, Did you just use bathroom humour? ~Mark~

  • indranee

    For chrissakes, Bryan Fuller, when will you all begin to realize that people are NOT interested in YOUR idea and interpretation of Star Trek… they want to see CANON. Just give it to us instead of yet another exercise in ego.

    • Not sure if you’re serious or not, but I definitely want to see Bryan Fuller’s idea and interpretation of Star Trek. Innovate or die.

      • indranee

        I was half serious. I don’t want another fan war aka Enterprise where there’s so much moaning bitching about canon that the stories get drowned out in the hullaballoo.

        • kadajawi

          I thought ENT worked, and it worked because it kept enough distance so they could do an updated look that looks connected to our time as it did to TOS and what followed. It is a relatively believable step between the 2000s, TOS and TOS movies/TNG. But 10 years is way too close, especially considering that the Constitution class is everywhere at that point, and ships from that era have a very distinct look.

          • Bifash

            I appreciate your concern, but until we see what their plans are, we really don’t need to jump the gun.

    • Bifash

      I’m interested in Bryan Fuller’s take on STAR TREK. If you’re not interested yourself, you’re free to not watch it.

      • indranee

        You really expect a Trekkie not to watch this show? You do know that we as a group LIVE to watch/rewatch/mock/rewatch/discuss/write-fanfic-about/rewatch/praise/rewatch/denigrate/rewatch/trash/rewatch/pummel-TPTB/rewatch… Well, you get the idea. Fuller or Ira Behr or Ron Moore or the Beebs…it’s *our* show and we will always be territorial about it.

        • Brian Thorn

          No, it is CBS’s show. Where did you get the idea it is your show?

          And enough with the royal “we” already. You do not speak for all of us.

          • Ski bo

            Dear Brian, As much as what you just wrote sickens me, I believe that’s EXACTLY the way Management at CBS sees it. They’ve been hiring people who think just like that since the Enterprise days. I’m so glad H & I channel is playing all five series, (remastered at that) I’d imagine it’ll be the last time I get to see ANY Star Trek on my TV while I’m alive. ~Mark~

    • Harry Kane

      Agreed, You can’t remake a classic, The other show’s evolved Star Trek, because they added a new chapter that worked with the old yet didn’t mess with it. The more I read, “It could be told in either Kelvin or Prime” indicates to me that the ship will look a feel like kelvin timeline design, They do need to mess up the Alien designs, Enterprise got it right and updated the klingons and andorians, we also got to see a proper gorn and tholian. Instead of fucking around with aliens and shit, they need to get the ship design right because it the biggest piece of shite I have ever seen. However, you can tell that it will look like abramsverse ship interiors because, the registry on the outside of the ship is an exact port of the font for JJ abrams enterprise, which means they are already, trying to copy that into the Prime Universe,

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Sure you can successfuly remake a classic: A Fistfull of Dollars, True Grit, The Fly, Scarface, Hawaii Five-O, Battlestar Galactica, The Office, Homeland.

        • Harry Kane

          Shows that could easily be remade anyway. I did like the Battlestar Galactica remake. My point is they have got it so wrong in the movies, ratings and takings have been declining.

        • Brian Thorn

          The remake of Hawaii Five-O stinks, though. True Grit is based on a book, and the Wayne version deviated quite a bit from the book while the remake didn’t. Fistful was a remake?

          Not impressed with the previews I’ve seen of The Magnificent Seven remake, either.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Fistfull was a western version of Kurosawa’s Yojimbo Sumarai….like nearly scene for scene. It’s a kick of watch them back to back.

            Being based on a book doesn’t change the fact they remade a classic movie and it was as good as the Wayne version, but in a different way.

            I didn’t bring up The Magnificent Seven…and BTW, the original version was also a remake of a Kurosawa Samurai Film, The Seven Samurai, which is one the greatest movies ever made.

          • Brian Thorn

            I knew Magnificent Seven = Seven Samurai. Had no idea about A Fistful of Dollars though. The remake True Grit was much better, mostly because it didn’t have the awful Glen Campbell trying to be an actor.

        • Ski bo

          Yes but why, why, WHY must they do so with every damn thing whether or not it made a dime the first time around??!! Doesn’t ANYONE in Hollyweird have an original pitch for a freaking movie?!?!?! ~Mark~

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Battlestar Galactica was a disaster to be honest. Commercially, it even did badly towards the end. And Hawaii Five-O was a success? Really? People tune in to see it as much as the original?

      • Ski bo

        Yo Harry, I have GOT to admit when I saw that ship my heart fell right through my ass. That’s when I REALLY started to think what a bad omen Kurtzman was. Tots agree here. ~Mark~

    • Harry Kane

      They have fucked up the movies and made Star Trek a super laughing stock, so now they are going to do that with the tv series side, I am not intrested in a radical departure. Its intresting how Bryan Fuller keeps ingnoring Enterprise, He goes on about the only time Star Trek played as a novel was the dominion war arc. Wrong fuller, Star Trek Enterprise season 3, Xindi War arc.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Enterprise was absolutely horrid. It and Nemesis nearly sunk the franchise.

        • Harry Kane

          Enterprise was real and I think did work really well, Nemesis didn’t sink the franchise, the franchise had been decling for a long time, there was just too much trek, the novelty wore off. Just like with a new game, after awhile its gets boring, so you give it a break. Rick Berman pleaded with Paramount to have a break because this is what was happening, the franchise had been overdone in such a short space of time, it needed a break. Nope and then we have the poor box office performance of nemesis in 2002 which I felt was a great movie, and also they didn’t know it was going to be the last until late. Enterprise I enjoyed aswell and I felt was a great way to addin what was before TOS what started and created the Federation. Sadly we didn’t have the other 3 seasons which would have bridged the gap that Fuller is now trying to exploit yet screw with.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Berman drove the franchise into the ground. Sorry, there is no getting around that. Voyager and Enterprise are just not good Star Trek. DS9, Ron Moore’s baby, was the last good Star Trek series. I do give Berman credit for salvaging TNG, and making the call to give Moore DS9, but it all started falling apart when the lackluster Voyager premiered. That was the beginning of the end.

          • Harry Kane

            Whilst I enjoyed Voyager, When I watch it now, it feels like recasting of the old shows, Whilst a totally new crew and ship and story. Same writers pretty much, and by ENT Rick Berman and Brannon Braga said they were so tired and were on there last creative legs as far as Star Trek Goes,

          • Fctiger

            As a guy who hated Enterprise when it first aired, I started rewatching it again after STID came out and in all honesty really enjoyed it after that. Especially when it got into 3rd and 4th season. While its still not my favorite out of all of them its now ahead of Voyager for me which I still liked even with flaws.

            But yes Berman and Braga was simply burnt out. I dont understand though why couldn’t they just let someone else run the show day to day like they did for Moore and Behr for DS9. Obviously they finally did that with Coto in the fourth season but it is sad they couldn’t have done that in the first they probably would’ve gotten a better reception from the start if they went that direction as fourth season if first season was more like that.

          • Harry Kane

            But yes it was kinda like telling the same stories all over again. my point is they don’t have to make pigs ear about the new look. It could work and be good or it could be bad.

          • Ski bo

            Yass, Attack of the Killer ‘B’s!! I still love ALL the series, (just NOT equally). What’s her name Jeri Ryan deserves some blame for Voyagers demise as well to be fair. Most who worked across more than one of the series quietly fingered the ‘Killer B’s’ for running the name Star Trek into the ground after ENT. That’s just unconscious knowledge. ~Mark~

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well said!

          • Ski bo

            Why thank you Mien Herr, ~Mark~

          • Pedro Ferreira

            DS9 was not Ron Moore’s ‘baby’. It was created by Piller, Berman and taken over by Behr. Moore was just a writer on the show.

          • Ski bo

            Harry TOTS agree! Well said indeed, (except that part about Nemesis which would’ve made a reasonably ok episode). ~Mark~

        • Harry Kane

          I am fully aware that they are serperate production companies, but reading there rhetoric and coments, It is clear they are sharing the same values, whilst it will be in the prime universe it will also remake everything that has been built over 5 Series and 10 movies. Not a good move at all and will only alienate viewership. Also its very amateur to go and release a crap CGI render of this supposed ship as a “Big Reveal” it looks crap, it is crap and that is what people are going to see, There is alot of continuty in the design of Enterprise, uniforms, architecture, the look of ships, people, planets that could evolve into a fresh version fo TOS and the later TNG and future era’s. JJ style trek does nothing, it is a bad look for Star Trek and it isn’t Star Trek its a very poor look i mean everything. It’s not hard to work out that the reason Alex Kurtzman has been brought in is to fully reboot the tv series side and make money off the Star Trek Brand. Its not hard to see that, and you are going to see more of it in weeks to come, mark my words. If the didn’t want anything to do with the kelvin timeline looks then they would not have got Alex kurtzman in. Its a very deliberate move.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “Also its very amateur to go and release a crap CGI render of this supposed ship as a “Big Reveal” it looks crap, it is crap and that is what people are going to see,”

            I will agree with you on this point.

          • Harry Kane

            They should have waited until finalising the model before releasing it, It has now taken the spark of the “New Ship” idea. People hate it and it looks like a very very bad fan design. There are alot of ships designed by fans that would look far better than that. It’s gonna always eat away at viewers minds when they see it on the show, they have to rethink otherwise it will affect the show in a negative way. And then when Les starts wondering where all the money and profitablity is, will say told you so, you put out crap when so much better is avalible expect crap results. There will be a minority of uber uber die die hard fans that will love the ships despite the fact its the worst ever looking ship to be made, and to think it was commsioned professionaly but those in charge is dissaspointing.

          • Ski bo

            Dear Harry, I’m afraid you may have a point, (besides the one on your head). ~Mark~

    • Brian Thorn

      Speak for yourself, please.

    • Steven Carter

      Thank you indranee

      They Never learn, it’s not about them doing their own show using Star Trek, exploiting it for the fans/viewers.
      It started with DS9 & just got worse up until today.
      They are alienating Star Trek fans as each series goes further away from the Star Trek we know & love & then they blame Star Trek for not being popular even though what they produce isn’t Star trek

    • Pedro Ferreira

      He just can’t leave alone can he?

  • Darth Trulane

    The most troubling thing that was said was reimagining alien species. How can you reimagine a Klingon or an andorian if you’re saying it’s in the prime timeline? Why not just be original? Typical parisitic hollywood ‘creatives’ who can only pervert what has already been established instead of creating something inspiring and new. The people running the show are clueless and I have no desire to see this.

    • indranee

      The issue is also the ego factor. Creative types always want to create something new, which is fine and dandy. But then placing this show in an era which would very obviously and glaringly showcase any missteps in style and execution from something we’re all already extremely familiar with endangers that particular ambition. OTOH, TPTB can’t let go of the draw of TOS and the ratings it will pull (just because this is close enough to TOS so people like me will be interested). They’re in a bind. If they truly wanted to innovate, they’d have placed this thing a little after the dominion war and created the hell outta that story arc and said forget it to the ratings gurus. But then that takes courage… oh well.

      • kadajawi

        Placing it this close to TOS disinterests me. There are many fans who aren’t interested into TOS… it is a very, very outdated and jarring show. Many grew up with TNG instead of TOS, like I did, and I never got into TOS. Watched it, thought meh. The movies are better.

        Continuing after the Dominion War wouldn’t be a bad idea, ratings wise. Many people have watched the preceding shows and would want to know how it continues. It’s an open canvas. The ships also already look modern, effects and creatures are modern. Worried that people may think they need to have watched the previous shows? You can easily explain the important things in the first few episodes, or just throw viewers into the cold water, let them pick it up as they go. You can watch Star Wars 4-6 before or after 1-3, both orders work. It changes a few things, like either the twist will be Anakin turns into Darth Vader, or Darth Vader is Luke’s father, but it works either way.

        • Bifash

          “There are many fans who aren’t interested into TOS… it is a very, very
          outdated and jarring show. Many grew up with TNG instead of TOS, like I
          did, and I never got into TOS. Watched it, thought meh”

          That’s hilarious.

          • indranee

            Yeah, TOS is definitely still the winner in any fan-interest contest.

        • Harry Kane

          Agreed more TOS style trek does not intrest me, Which is why the poor remakes of TOS era in the movies with JJ makes me think they will do the same here. Every poll done, has said that fans and non fans want to see Star Trek Movies and Star Trek Series set after Star Trek Nemesis which set the Star Trek Universe up to evolve further in time, Enterprise filled in the gap between The early starfleet years and the TOS era, and given a full normal 7 seasons would have finished with the seeing the Enterprise NCC 1701 built and launched completing the handover to TOS. Star Trek evolved by going further into the future and not trying to remake the past. Bryan Fuller and crew and JJ abrams are remaking the past and remaking a classic. Its very boring and I will watch the first episode, but if its crap and JJ’fied then I won’t watch it. I am young and have fresh mind. I am telling CBS and all the JJ abrams trek lovers, JJ abrams trek is a crap remake, it could have been good but they didn’t need to do it. Prime Universe trek brings in the money for CBS as well as the traffic. People continue to want Prime Universe Trek that does not fuck up with looks and values. The idea that they use the “Gay Character” plot as a marketing tool I think is really bad and in a sense dosen’t treat gay people as equal normal people. There was no need to put a gay character in for the sake of and if they want to do it without making a fuss, What about a straight character… There is no need to make a fuss. The new design of the ship and interiors should look just like Gaberiel Korners design of the enterprise. Which WOULD work with ENT and also with the other series aswell. One could practically also use the restored connie look from the smithsonian. But yes we don’t expect the interior to 60’s but it should look like a prequel in design to the clean and iconic TMP bridge, and also the later the shiny clean Enterprise A bridge from Star Trek IV which was the best bridge ever in the classic era. Do this new show right and it will win over old and new fans as well as viewers, do it like abrams and it will suck and will finish in the first two seasons.

        • Fctiger

          Yes I agree as well. I grew up with TOS but I was a kid at the time I didn’t care how it looked and I got use to it. But its no way I would want that look today and yes I believe in going forward in general. We have already gone backwards twice with Enterprise and now the KT films, neither which were loved by fans.

          Of course doesnt mean another prequel can’t be great but people are not that excited about them. Rogue One has a lot of buzz around it but mostly because its ONE film and the new trilogy will be going FORWARD so now you get a set of prequel films while a set of sequel films. Here its been nothing but prequels since 2001 and its getting tiring. TOS was great for its time but I don’t need to rehash that period over and over again. And why do it if you are going to reimagine it anyway? You set it in the 25th century you can do whatever you want.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        I was never a big Bryan Fuller fan.

    • Tim

      “How can you reimagine a Klingon or an andorian if you’re saying its in the prime timeline?”

      Have we all forgotten that the TOS movies and TNG – two beloved franchises – reimagined both Klingons and Romulans? Reimagining aliens is nothing new in Star Trek.

      I just want a well-done show that reflects the essence of Trek.

      • Darth Trulane

        I didn’t forget that and neither did the writers of the show “Enterprise” who wrote an entire story arc that explained the physical differences between the Klingons in the original series and the movies and shows thereafter. 🙂

  • The Chadwick

    I am really looking forward to this even though I wasn’t so fond of the ship or the era. We have reboot movies in the same era now a new TV show, should have done post Voyager. When the reboot movies finally come to a close, I hope Paramount takes a risk and does a Star Trek movie with a new crew not TOS or TNG moves, but something entirely fresh and the year oh…2556. Back to Discovery..The (preliminary) ship has grown on me and I accept the era. I guess its kind of fitting to come full circle for the 50th.

    So is the protagonist is the first officer and that person holds the rank of Lt Cmdr or has that changed? Regardless that fact that this character if the first office and not just a run of the mill Lt Cmdr, might not be a ‘Lower Deck’s’ kind of perspective unless they use the fact that the first officer would be dealing with lower rank crew members far more than a captain would.

    I am looking forward to their remaining of aliens, Klingons most of all. Enterprise Andorians looked the best, but those longer slender antenna are indeed Andorian and are animatronic, that will be fantastic.

    I am most curious to see the final ship design, the bridge, transporter room, engineering and corridor sets as well as the transporter beam effect (please let it be a new take on horizontal TUC beam), never cared for the twinkly until we got to the later TNG movies, Nemesis transporter beam looks solid. Don’t care for the swirling Kelvin beams. And finally the uniforms, granted they can do whatever they want but wondering how and if they will fit the uniform styles into canon considering they will look different than ‘The Cage’ uniforms.

    Yes the fan in me wants 26 episodes a season but I can understand how that can become stale and its not really the fad these days. Game of Thrones does a solid 10 epodes, so hopefully there wont be anything to complain about lol.

    The music, YES! I am happy to hear Bryan love the The Motion Picture soundtrack and he is a Hans Zimmer fan. The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan are my favourite Trek sound tracks. And the TMP theme is my fave and is my official Star Trek theme. I did like the violins better in the Final Frontier theme and that it had the Star Trek fanfare before the theme kicked in which TMP did not have, but TFF theme was shorter than TMP’s theme.

    Zimmer had solid music, Gladiator, Inception, The Dark Knight series, Man of Steel, Interstellar, his music is so epic, powerful, and moving. I dream of Zimmer doing a Star Trek movie sound track and a Christopher Nolan directed Star Trek, crazy.

  • TheRenegadeRebel .

    Wait. So the main character, a Lt. Commander, is also the first officer? Is there no one holding the rank of Commander on the Discovery?

    • DemosCat

      Speculation: Perhaps the Captain of Discovery holds the rank of Commander? In naval tradition, the person in charge of a ship is called “Captain” regardless of actual rank. This leaves room for everyone to be promoted during the course of the show without transferring officers to other ships.

    • Brian Thorn

      Spock was a Lt. Commander in TOS. The rank of Commander didn’t debut until Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

      • TheRenegadeRebel .

        Spock wore the rank of Commander for the entire run. Look at the sleeve braid. Also, his rank is clearly stated as Commander in “Amok Time” and “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”. The only issue is that they made a mistake with the script in “Court Martial” and referred to him as Lt. Commander. But he did wear the Commander Baid for the entire series.

        https://youtu.be/kOvuzrpHqwo?t=1m41s

        • Brian Thorn

          Kirk introduces Spock as Lt. Commander in “Tomorrow is Yesterday”, so that’s two, which unambiguously establishes that Lt. Commanders can be First Officers.

          Note that when addressing someone with the rank of Lieutenant Commander, you refer to him or her as Commander. (Same way with Lieutenant Colonels in the Army/Air Force, and all the General and Admiral ranks) so someone saying “Commander Spock” later does not automatically make him a full Commander.

          But Spock does call himself Commander in “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”, so I’ll withdraw my assertion that the rank did not appear until the movie era.

          • TheRenegadeRebel .

            There is some inconsistency. But again, Spock’s uniform says he holds Commander rank. The sleeve braid never changes.

  • Tony

    I’ll be curious to see how this will play out. Setting it in the prime universe 10 years before TOS (basically during Pike’s time) but then saying they aren’t going to stay faithful to the look of that period strikes me as odd and ultimately problematic.

    On the one hand I understand wanting to go for a more contemporary feel as so much of the look from that period is quite dated by today’s standards. On the other, if you don’t have an explanation for why the look diverges I think a lot of people will fixate on that.

    I don’t understand why they are so averse to simply doing a full on reboot rather than linking it to established TOS lore; it would free them of so much baggage and allow them to pick and choose what to do without every decision being second guessed. A far better solution I think that trying to have it both ways.

    Maybe this is their way of eventually leading into yet another reimagining of TOS, done in their more updated, serialized, sexed up style.

  • TRIALS AND TRIBBLE-ATIONS established that the “different designs” of Klingons (and of lots of other things) actually existed within the story. and ENTERPRISE did a pretty good job of explaining the whole Klingon thing. several other episodes, like TNG’s YESTERDAY’S ENTERPRISE and VOY’s FLASHBACK, maintained continuity between different eras and their respective “designs”. so, if they “reimagine” things for DISCOVERY, they’d better explain those changes within the story.

    • Hauke Fischer

      Vain Klingons with in-universe prosthetic foreheads? 🙂

  • bytes

    JJ already did an updated version for this time period. We saw what it looks like. Why do it again and describe it as if it is an original idea?

    • Fctiger

      Exactly. Its ALREADY been done and very very recently. I get it this will be Fuller’s version but we already have a revamp of the 23rd century. And setting it a mere 10 years before Kirks mission doesn’t make a whole lot of difference at this point either.

  • kadajawi

    His talks about updating the looks of aliens etc. has me worried. I’m fine with the way it was done for aliens on ENT, but hated the way it was done in the KT. As for the ship, it should look like a Constitution class ship unless a good explanation is given, like built by Section 31 with parts from other ships, an early prototype testing advanced technology that would inspire the Constitution class refit and the Excelsior class, … and of course if they encounter other Federation ships, it should probably be the Constitution class and look like that… just like in ENT.

    I just don’t understand why, if he wants to re-imagine Star Trek, he had to pick this time period. To stay in continuity, the ships in DSC need to look a lot like those in TOS… the Constitution class was a popular ship floating around at that time. He could be showing a predecessor, but that, too, greatly limits the design possibilities. The Excelsior has the Constitution class refit to draw the bridge between the TOS Constitution class and the Excelsior. The Enterprise C looks like the ship that fits in between Excelsior class and Galaxy class. Intrepid and Sovereign class are similar, and both draw lines to the Galaxy class, Excelsior class and other Federation ships. This has always been very important to Star Trek… even the Enterprise J looks like an updated, more futuristic version of the Enterprise. And going in the other direction, the NX-01 can be updated (and was to be updated) into the traditional Federation design with a secondary hull… which would be awesome, as it draws a direct connection and gives an explanation of why that happened.

    The further Fuller moves the show away from any timeline we’ve seen on screen, the more artistic freedom does he have to re-imagine Star Trek without causing problems.

    Heck, JJ Abrams had the decency of resetting the timeline, which allowed him to make updates to the ship design. The ship that started it all, the Kelvin, still looks like a ship that works in the Prime universe. Then, 30 years or so later, the ship design has understandably evolved into what is seen on screen. Because Nero’s attack influenced the engineers and designers.

    • Bifash

      I imagine the updating could eaily take the form of costumes and Klingon/Andorians/Vulcans etc, we’ve never seen before – it wouldn’t break canon.
      Look how diverse our own world of humans is, there’s no reason we couldn’t see some other aspect of an established alien species we haven’t seen.

    • Ski bo

      Yo Kads, It’s a FAKE!!! Look the whole things getting setup to fail. Now CBS has their boy Kurtzman in there the whole thing is going to be ‘Run By Committee’. Should anyone try to gain consensus on a particular production point, Kurtzy will go running with his dress over his head to Moonves or some other boot licking lackey and Fuller and the rest of them will get ‘paddled’ like the old school days. Oi Kavault! Talk amongst yourselfs, discuss. ~Mark~

    • Xandercom

      It’s because they’ve handed the keys to a TOS fanboy.
      I couldn’t care less about that time period so likely won’t be watching it, certainly won’t be paying to watch it.

  • kadajawi

    Things CBS can do to get people to subscribe? How about remastering DS9? One season of ENT is going to cost how much? Lets be conservative and stay with a small budget, maybe 1 million per episode, that would make 13 million for the season. What was the number thrown around for TNG? Mr. Burnett said 70000 dollar per episode. 70000 vs 1 million. Hm. That would mean DS9 costs 12.3 million… less than Discovery, but for 13 times the episodes. People watching it are going to have to subscribe for quite a while until they have finished watching DS9 (some will binge through it, but even they will be watching it for a month or two… it’s over 5 days of day and night content. For less than what one half size season of the new show costs. Even if DS9 costs more to make… say 100000 dollar, thanks to the CGI, we’re at 17,6 million.

    • Ski bo

      Yo Kads, That’s a done deal. CBS ain’t bitin’. I hope Miene Herr doesn’t either . . . ~Mark~

  • pittrek

    I’m starting to get REALLY nervous after reading this. It looks like a bunch of very bad decisions

    • Harry Kane

      Me too, this particular crap “we get to re-imagine all of the alien species that we’ve seen before in the series, and do something a little unique with that” and “because we are going to try to achieve a new look for ‘Star Trek’ that
      is very much ‘Star Trek,’ but also our interpretation of ‘Star Trek.’” So it means a radical departure from the look of Star Trek and a JJ abrams look, need I say no more. The ship look like it was designed by 1 year old. Its the worst ever ship ever,

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Is that you, Promoboy?

  • Harry Kane

    The new Enterprise should have been gaberiel korners version, and bryan fuller should be looking for that esthetic in the new design of TOS. that would work with ENT and would work with TNG,DS9 AND VOY.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      The NX-01 in ENT looks nothing like what I would have expected a precursor to TOS Enterprise to look like — the NX-01 was a complete fail by Berman and company. And no way should they try to make this ship look like 24th century Trek ships.

      • Harry Kane

        If you really understand how the ENT look was formed then you can see how it would grow into the cleaner smoother painted hull look of the TOS era enterprise. I have never said it should like 24th century ships either, thou an change to gab korners look should be to make the hull whiter

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          I’ve been studying the Enterprise since the 1970’s. And that rendition above looks awful…like a metal casting of the Enterprise for a hood ornament on a luxury car.

          And no, I think a pre-Enterprise would have even smoother lines than TOS Enterprise. Notice how in the 24th century the ships got less smooth and more busy…your understanding is actually the reverse of what the trend was up until they blew it with Enterprise.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Here is what the NX-01 should have been…

          • Brian Thorn

            That’s too primitive, I think. Archer’s ship definitely needed the twin nacelle configuration pioneered by Zefram Cochrane, and generally the hallmark of Starfleet designs. I’d have preferred a big, bulky sphere ahead of the nacelles, and leave the saucer design for much later, after Daystrom’s duotronics revolution permitted greatly reduced crew sizes.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Nah, it would have been brilliant and groundbreaking. Like Interstellar meets Star Trek.

          • Brian Thorn

            Until all the retconning about that Enterprise being the first FTL Earth starship, i always figured it was some sort of solar system interplanetary ship (which fits chronologically between Space Shuttle on one side and NCC-1701 on the other.) or maybe a settler ship to Alpha Centauri or something. It looks nothing like the warp ships that came later. So how does that flow from Zefram Cochrane’s Phoenix?

            And you evidently liked Interstellar a lot more than I did! I wanted to like it, I really did. But the silly last hour ruined it.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well I was looking for a much bolder and interesting series that what we ended up with in Berman’s Enterprise. And given the show stunk, I think it’s clear I was right on that. No originality, just incremental changes from canon, and ship design that did not look at all right to me.

            I am glad to see the Fuller is kind of reinventing the pre-TOS look, because I personally don/’t consider Enterprise canon.

          • Ski bo

            Well look who’s crawling into bed with CBS now, Meine Herr, Ya Vohl?? ~Mark~

          • Fctiger

            Nah it would’ve not worked at all. And Interstellar is not Star Trek. That movie didn’t spend any time fighting with Klingons, Romulans or the Borg.

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian That’s what the Killer ‘B’s told Drexler to do and well, see above comment. ~Mark~

          • Fctiger

            LOL no one would’ve watched it with a ship like that. It looks boring and drab. And not an ‘action’ ship.

          • Harry Kane

            Will it would have been nice to see what a smoother nx class ship would have looked like. It was meant to be much brighter than in the show. However I have come to enjoy the NX Class and one of my favorite ships and looks, The changed the Galaxy Class around quite alot, so when you got to see it it did in the next generation look very builky rather than the gracefull beast that should grace the galaxy with it presence. We only really I feel got to see this ship in its prime in the short sequence in “These are the voyages and Voy “Timeless” The ships design is meant to be big and gracefull, generations also did wonders for the look of the galaxy, bar the one sequence with the aft shot before the scene with picard and data. With modern CGI than can use and do cool real action shots. But also no we are all maybe too well informed thanks to the internet and digital age that we can and will scrutinise every scene, ever frame. Which I guess is good for quality not for enjoyment of the moment.

          • Brian Thorn

            “Notice how in the 24th century the ships got less smooth and more busy…”

            Huh? Excelsior-class is more smooth than the Constitution-class. Enterprise-C is a bit on the fat side, but still smoother than Constitution-class. The Galaxy-class are VERY smooth and streamlined compared to the Constitution-class. Voyager is even more streamlined and less ‘busy’. Ditto the Sovereign-class Enterprise. There were a few clunky designs in the middle, like Stargazer, but now we know from “Beyond” that Stargazer was a 23rd Century starship.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You call this smooth? SERIOUSLY???

          • Brian Thorn

            Compared to the spindly Consitution-class with its flimsy pylons, skinny neck, silly old radar dish, and bumps all over? Sure! You don’t? SERIOUSLY???

            Seriously, I get it that you didn’t like Voyager. But don’t hold the lackluster writing against the beautiful ship.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            LOL — give me a break. Look at all those pits, cut-ins, nodules, etc. The Constitution Enterprise was a clean elegant ship. The Voyager — let’s be honest — looks like the Battlestar Galactics with Klingon engines.

            It’s not an ugly ship like the D, though. I kind of like it. But just don’t try to tell me it’s a clean design. Look at it — it’s a “busy” design, vastly unlike the original E, an aesthetically more in common with the NX-01.

          • Ski bo

            Oh here comes Herr Oracle again wishing it was the German Sprockitz version, Ya Vohl, Miene Herr. ~Mark~

          • Ski bo

            Yo Brian, The Enterprise ‘C’ is Big Boned!! Also my fav. ~Mark~

      • Ski bo

        Yo! In Drexlers defense, he was shot down by both the Killer ‘B’s and Parahump. He tried TWO rather acceptable versions of the ship and they all ran around screaming with their dress’s over their heads, the wusses they are. ~Mark~

    • Ski bo

      Yo Harry, I got past that when they hired J.J. Science fiction Serial Killer. ~Mark~

  • Harry Kane

    More TOS style trek does not intrest me, Which is why the poor
    remakes of TOS era in the movies with JJ makes me think they will do the
    same here. Every poll done, has said that fans and non fans want to see
    Star Trek Movies and Star Trek Series set after Star Trek Nemesis which
    set the Star Trek Universe up to evolve further in time, Enterprise
    filled in the gap between The early starfleet years and the TOS era, and
    given a full normal 7 seasons would have finished with the seeing the
    Enterprise NCC 1701 built and launched completing the handover to TOS.
    Star Trek evolved by going further into the future and not trying to
    remake the past. Bryan Fuller and crew and JJ abrams are remaking the
    past and remaking a classic. Its very boring and I will watch the first
    episode, but if its crap and JJ’fied then I won’t watch it. I am young
    and have fresh mind. I am telling CBS and all the JJ abrams trek lovers,
    JJ abrams trek is a crap remake, it could have been good but they
    didn’t need to do it. Prime Universe trek brings in the money for CBS as
    well as the traffic. People continue to want Prime Universe Trek that
    does not fuck up with looks and values. The idea that they use the “Gay
    Character” plot as a marketing tool I think is really bad and in a sense
    dosen’t treat gay people as equal normal people. There was no need to
    put a gay character in for the sake of and if they want to do it without
    making a fuss, What about a straight character… There is no need to
    make a fuss. The new design of the ship and interiors should look just
    like Gaberiel Korners design of the enterprise. Which WOULD work with
    ENT and also with the other series aswell. One could practically also
    use the restored connie look from the smithsonian. But yes we don’t
    expect the interior to 60’s but it should look like a prequel in design
    to the clean and iconic TMP bridge, and also the later the shiny clean
    Enterprise A bridge from Star Trek IV which was the best bridge ever in
    the classic era. Do this new show right and it will win over old and new
    fans as well as viewers, do it like abrams and it will suck and will
    finish in the first two seasons.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Good God, man, please, no Berman 2.0 post-Nemesis Trek.

      I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THAT.

      PS: And check your homophobia at the door next time…don’t really need to hear that sad whining any more on fan web sites. Get over it!

      • Harry Kane

        I was not being homophobic, I am gay myself. My point was they shouldn’t cast people as gay for the sake of political correctness, they should just naturally cast us just like straight people are.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          We spent a month here with people covering that and bitching about it…I am just tired of the issue.

          • Harry Kane

            I can understand the frustration about, but then world society is fucked up, with everyone wanting there own thing to be law. More of a justification that we need to stop fighting eachother in pathetic wars over land and religion and putt all our resources into education and science and developing a real NX Class ship that the human race to the stars.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Here, here!!! Agreed!!!

          • Ski bo

            Yo Harry, We’re getting off point here, CBS still sucks right?! ~Mark~

        • Ski bo

          Yo Harry, Don’t forget, this IS CBS. ~Mark~

      • Harry Kane

        Its very offensive when they make a big deal about it. Where are not being treated as equals when we should be.

      • Harry Kane

        What I will say is, what are you yourself looking for from and in this show in the Prime Universe?

    • Ski bo

      Yo Harry, Tell ’em again, they didn’t hear you!! ~Mark~

  • grandadmiralbinks

    If you ask me, for this new series to be truly revolutionary and truly go into uncharted territory, while still coping with known races, it should have been set at least 50 years after Nemesis. Following the events in the Destiny trilogy and it’s aftermath, new alliances, small cameos of those still alive (it’s nearly a tradition), while still showing a completely new, state-of-the-art ship, a new crew, and possibly go beyond the Milky Way Galaxy. Now THAT would have been a new Star Trek. Placing it between ENT and TOS is somewhat unoriginal, IMHO.

    • Ski bo

      Yo Grandad, Yes, well, umm. How to say this. Not happening? ~Mark~

      • grandadmiralbinks

        I’m ok with that, no need for a reply like this.

  • criag

    I’m so excited for this series, I will wait to pass judgement until I have seen the first few episodes, but reimagining Star Trek in the time frame it’s set doesn’t bother me one bit, all Star Trek series have done it. As long as the story’s are compelling and the characters are ones I want to watch then let them do what they want.
    End of the day I want Star Trek back on tv that at the end of the episode has made me think, laugh, cry, enjoy but it has to be Star Trek, and with Fullers pedigree I’m excited so let’s all give it a chance

  • CoolGeek

    Just as long as its not set on a boring space station it should be fine.

  • ReveurIngenu

    Does anybody else think we just need a NEW space show, instead of another Trek? Personnally, this Trek show doesn’t interest me one bit. Prequel, sequel, whatever, everything seems to be so limited because it would have to respect whoever’s vision and whatever established lore there is. Maybe what we need is simply a new futuristic space show, one that would have COMPLETE freedom to do whatever it wanted, without ever having to respect whatever has come before it. I don’t know. I don’t really see what period Trek could make this show interesting again.

  • SpaceCadet

    If Bryan Fuller intends to use actors he’s worked with before on Hannibal, I think it would be a dream come for me if he brings Hugh Dancy to Discovery, and also Laurence Fishburne and Gillian Anderson.

    • Ski bo

      Yo, I see how you chose your name. ~Mark~

  • Edward Hines

    Hi. I’m new here, but a 40-year Star Trek fan. Sorry if I repeat what others have already said.

    We can’t really argue if Fuller wants to “revamp” the look of “some” Star Trek aliens. As we know, there have been multiple makeup designs for the Andorians and the Tellarites from TOS through Enterprise. We can easily postulate that these species have physiological variations. Although some may have their hearts set on the Enterprise/Shran design for the Andorians, for example, there is precedent for Fuller to change up the look (check out the TMP design – the most radical yet!).

    However, I hope Fuller does not mess with the Klingon makeup (assuming they appear at all). Enterprise established why they changed and appeared more “human” in the early to mid-23rd century. Maybe this didn’t affect ALL Klingons, but I hope Fuller will follow continuity and throw in some human-style baddies.

    I’m most disappointed that Fuller is moving away from “The Cage” style of Starfleet uniform, especially because he seems more concerned that the “colors” look good with the ship. C’mon, man. If you’re gonna set the show in an established Star Trek time period, then follow continuity. Use the uniforms and props of the 2250s. That means trousers for the ladies and LASER pistols for the crew. AND those awful, bulky communicators with the exposed innards. If you don’t like it, then you made a mistake when you set your time period.

    Your show ISN’T gonna be on TV. You DON’T have to appeal to a TV audience who probably won’t go for the 60s retro costumes and gear. You have Star Trek fans PAYING to see a series set in an established time period. You CAN afford to play by Star Trek’s rules this time. Otherwise, what’s the point of this grand online experiment?

    • Ski bo

      Yo Ed, You’re far to balanced and measured. We’re looking for more anarchy types. How’s about swatting CBS with a baseball bat for sticking it on the internet in the first place?? ~Mark~

  • Michael

    To everyone who is concerned about the “uniforms and look” please relax. Discovery is a section 31 ship and their “uniforms” are vastly different than regular starfleet for a reason. REMEBER that Discovery is starfleets “dirty” ship. Built by section 31, manned by section 31, doing off the record ” damned the prime directive”things to preserve the federation.

    Discovery is built for subterfuge, equipped with a special hull ( note the sharp angles ) designed to confuse sensors.. Which is why it’s not the color of normal starfleet ships. It also is heavily armed – more so than a Constution class. It also features a cloaking device “courtesy” of the Romulans that was “acquired”

    • Xandercom

      With zero factual evidence, you’re prediction is nothing more than that, don’t try to peddle it to others. Are you aware of how silly you appear?

      • Michael

        You have no idea what I know. I have been a superfan for a very long time. I have some very good friends who are very good friends of specific people working on this show.

        • Xandercom

          We’ll all consider it as nothing other than your fantasy holodeck programme for now, hope that’s ok with you Mr Barclay.

          • Michael

            It’s ok, I have screenshots of what you said. When what I said is shown next year, come back and eat the crow. My source is rock solid.

  • Xandercom

    The more I read about this, the less enthusiastic I am for it.
    I remember feeling excited earlier in the year of the prospect of a post nemesis trek, but this IMHO is absolutely uninteresting.

    • Michael

      You won’t be missed. Real fans will watch anyway.

      • Xandercom

        You keep telling yourself that, right up to it’s cancellation.
        You’re money won’t be missed by CBS.

        • Michael

          Anyone who claims to be a fan of Star Trek and is not excited about a new series is no fan at all.

          • Xandercom

            Idiotic troll be gone.

          • Michael

            People who use the war cry of “troll” only do so when they realize they lost the discussion.

  • Pedro Ferreira

    So less Star Trek, a main character who will only be known throughout the first years as ‘Number One’, a Hans Zimmer style score and cosplayers beware! All going to be great I see…that was sarcasm by the way…

  • Abarmard

    I said it in another discussion and would like to repeat it here.
    Perhaps it’s time to develop some alien cultures in their planets. Similar to DS9, a combination of space travel and in depth stories of characters living in their own planets and dealing with their systems. Possibilities are endless there and allows to draw similarities with today’s issues, along with developing stories far fetch to satisfy those who love Science fiction, action-adventure, and romance. That’s the only way that going to the era before DS9 or Voyager would be satisfactory. Otherwise, if it’s about exploration, then make sense to continue from Voyager, with new added technologies and space map.
    Hope they consider their plans carefully, because a mistake here, would end Star Trek for true fans, for good. I trust the Star Trek franchise to make it right.