At the Mission: New York convention in New York City today, STAR TREK: DISCOVERY writers Kirsten Beyer (ongoing Voyager novelist) and Nick Meyer (writer/director of multiple Trek films) took the stage to discuss the new series.

Moderator Jordan Hoffman started the panel by cautioning the audience to keep their expectations in check, as there were to be no major casting announcements, new footage, or other major production announcements – and as the event began, the convention staff announced that no photos (from either fans OR press) would be permitted during the discussion, so that’s why we don’t have any new shots of our own as part of this recap.

The lights dimmed, and a new video filmed specifically for this convention began: DISCOVERY show runner Bryan Fuller, along with executive producer Alex Kurtzman, took about three minutes to discuss the legacy of Star Trek, and that the new series is “about the best of what humanity has to offers,” but also that it is time “to modernize Star Trek for modern television.”

Beyer revealed that the very first person she ever pitched a Voyager story to, back years ago, was Bryan Fuller when he was on staff of that show – and she maintained that despite her involvement with DISCOVERY, her commitment to Voyager’s literary future will continue.

Fuller has had “a very specific vision [for the show] since day one,” said Beyer, and that everyone in the writers room is helping to fulfill that vision. “Personally, I’m very enchanted with his vision.”

Regarding the timeline setting – ten years before Kirk’s mission – Nick Meyer spoke positively to the desire to target a previously-unused time in the chronology, where there is “room to maneuver” in regards to Trek canon, without having to involve previously-featured characters from other series.

On Fuller’s now-famous “reimagining” comments, about modernizing Trek for 2017, Nick Meyer commented, “I think all art is a product of its time… we’re talking to scientists. We’re doing the best we can.”

“There are definitely going to be new aliens and interesting life forms as part of the main cast,” Beyer said cryptically, in response to a fan question.

“We have this delicate balancing act, to stay true to what we know [about the look of Star Trek],” Beyer continued, “but now [with today’s technology] we can do so much more.” She and Meyer also talked about the scientific advisers who have been coming to the DISCOVERY writing team to educate them on real science for the Trek universe.

“Most of the research we did at the beginning, watching old episodes,” said Beyer, “was really about getting ourselves grounded in the major events [of the shows],” and additional review work was to get terminology and other Trek jargon up to speed with the staff. Meyer clarified that he was really an “outsider” compared to Trek experts Fuller and Beyer, which contributes to the balance of the team.

When asked about the upcoming CBS All Access (and Netflix) streaming plans for the new series, Meyer lamented the days of “appointment television,” where people could get together after the airings of popular programs to discuss the previous day’s show – and that “live-streaming just isn’t for me.”

“The most important part [of the new show] is the optimism of Trek,” Beyer commented, “so rising to the occasion of that – and one that I’m really not worried about at all because it’s a shared vision in the [writers] room.”

Hoffman than revealed a bit of news regarding a new role for Kirsten Beyer, who – in addition to writing DISCOVERY and Voyager – will be working with Simon & Schuster and IDW Publishing to create tie-in DISCOVERY comics with IDW’s Mike Johnson and popular Trek novelist David Mack. (When we asked IDW’s group editor Sarah Gaydos about this she said, “I literally can’t say anything about it – but I’m unbelievably excited!”)

Beyer discussed her role, saying this round of tie-in publishing will be created hand-in-hand with the television production, rather than “after the fact” as with most Trek publications, a new tactic for the print wing of Trek. She also noted that for those following the @StarTrekRoom account on Twitter, it’s Bryan Fuller behind the keyboard on that.

Lastly, when begged by a fan to “not screw this up!,” Nick Meyer thought for a moment and said – with no malice – that fans should probably lower expectations a bit, as there will always be disappointment when impossible-to-meet personal standards are set. “With all due respect,” he said, “fans do not know what they want.”

beyer-meyer

After the panel ended, both Beyer and Meyer came out to the crowd and offered off-stage selfies, autographs, and were kind enough to speak directly with fans – something very unexpected, as Meyer had been anticipated not to have any time for signing during this weekend’s events.

Stay tuned for more STAR TREK: DISCOVERY news as it breaks, right here at TrekCore.

  • Bifash

    Terrific recap. I have a HUGE respect for Meyer as he always speaks with erudition.

    ““With all due respect,” he said,”fans do not know what they want.” “. Hear, hear. The rabid hate/bigotry from so-called fans before the show has even come out has just been disheartening and downright embarassing.

    They have been vocal in spitting venom because the show DSC may not be putting on-screen their own personal inner-most ( and largely terrible ) ideas.
    While it’s fun to discuss, speculate, etc. the tsunami of pre-judged, ‘without context’ negativity towards DSC has incredibly off-putting.
    Sadly it has been a feature of Trek fandom in the comments sections that has been rife with every iteration of Star Trek ( from DS9 onwards ) that I can remember.

    I had sincerely hoped Trek fans were made of better stuff ( and maybe they are as people who comment on websites do not make up the vast majority of Trek fans around the globe ), but the language, tone, underlying and overtly ad hominem attacks against Fuller & co. have been ghastly.

    I truly believe there are Trek fans out here who are only invested in STAR TREK just to rip it apart and feel all superior like only THEY are the ones who can decide what is Trek and what isn’t.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      In general, I agree with you. But if you are going to, by extension, be one of “those other fans” who complains when people are legitimately critical (e.g. the ship design and shoddy teaser) of certain information that comes out on this series, then you would be just as bad as the people who are constantly negative about the new series (all of you out there whining about paying $7 a month for this – yes, I am talking about you here).

      • Bifash

        No, it is right to be cautious and critical and maintain a “wait-and-see” approach. ( It’s nice to be optimistic too ).

        But I have seen too many commentors ( as you have too I suspect ) quite literally denouncing the series because in their heads it is going to “this” instead of “that” – i.e. making judgements based unfounded speculation.

        A lot also has to do with how one puts across a comment or criticism – it can be done with thought, or it can be done in a very base way ( more fitting for the comments section on youtube ).

        What is troubling is that STAR TREK at its core has a very specific message about humanity, human conduct, growth as a species. But many of the fans have been conducting themselves in a manner that would betray the fact that they are completely missing Star Trek’s underlying philosophy.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Well said!

      • kadajawi

        Mh. I think the main issue with the $6 fee is a) ads, b) poor value for money. For $10 I can get it ad free. Fine. (Personally I don’t mind the ads to save a few $).

        When I spend $10 or so on Netflix, there are no ads. And I get:
        House of Cards. Orange is the New Black. Sense8. Narcos. Stranger Things. Daredevil. Jessica Jones. Luke Cage. Iron Fist. The Punisher. The Defenders. Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency. Black Mirror. Some of these I still want to watch, others I have watched and love. Plus many more shows, some of them I’d probably enjoy. And I’m only talking original, made for Netflix content you can’t get elsewhere here… Netflix has more to offer.

        CBS All Access I get… Discovery. I’m going through the list… I might have JAG or Big Bang Theory run in the background (but I’m really stretching things here, and I would not pay anything for the privilege to watch these shows). And I might finally catch up with Twilight Zone. TNG I have watched in HD already, DS9 and VOY are not going to attract me while in SD.

        If I’m getting a service next to Netflix, it’s going to be Amazon Prime. Man in the High Castle, Jack Ryan and most of all The Grand Tour aka Top Gear 2. Has me much more excited than anything CBS has to offer.

        Fortunately I’m not in the US, so Netflix will have Discovery for me.

    • kadajawi

      Sometimes saying fans do not know what they want is the right thing to say… Steve Jobs had the same opinion, and was often enough right. Sometimes it isn’t (see the JJ Trek writers’ sometimes arrogant tone against fans).

      My issue with DSC is that the writers seem to have put themselves into a very difficult corner, and they simply didn’t have to do that (well, maybe they do, I hope they have a really good reason why it needs to play 10 years before TOS, rather than, say, 30 or 40 years before TOS, where a different aesthetics from TOS makes more sense). I sincerely hope they have considered all of this, and still came to the conclusion that the way they are doing it is the right way.

      Ms. Beyer herself has talked about the issue… they (hopefully) want to stay truthful to the look, but they have much better technology, they aren’t limited like the makers of TOS were. And they need to make it more modern, because our technology has in many areas surpassed what was on display in TOS. Are they running around with huge communicators when contemporary shows show significantly more modern smartphones? What we have in our pockets is far more advanced than what Kirk is supposed to have 250 years from now.

      All I am asking for is that the show feels canon. That means the looks needs to make sense in universe. The tech needs to make sense in universe. Some updating is fine, they did it on ENT and it didn’t bother me. But it is a fine line.

      Everything else… the plot, the characters, I trust Fuller and his team to make proper Star Trek. I know that if I were to run the show, people would send me death threats. It would be way too dark and gritty.

      • Bifash

        Appreciate your thoughts and concerns – it is certainly an interesting notion as to why they chose to operate so close to TOS when they could ( as you point out ) chosen a period of 30 – 40 years beforehand.
        I suspect they arrived at their decision after a long process, rather than making just an arbitrary decision.
        On the surface of it, it WOULD seem like they’d have a hard time ( due to technological fx advancements in our world ) to reconcile the 1960s’ aesthetic with our 2016 “advancements” – I actually think if they can pull off the right balance they should be applauded.
        The mystery of how they will successfully pull this off adds to the excitement for me.

        • kadajawi

          Ms. Beyer said that Fuller had a clear vision from day one, and that may include the setting and general plot. Obviously he must have convinced people with that vision, some of which I trust to make the right decision. That makes me hopeful.

          If they can pull it off… they should be. I keep applauding the ENT team for mostly pulling it off (others may disagree with me there…).

          If they would set it after the Constitution class refits, we’d get much closer to an aesthetic that would work today. Or if it were closer to the NX-01. Again, closer to our time.

          Btw., The Force Awakens pulled it off. It feels very grounded in the Star Wars universe, it absolutely looks like a show that could take place 30 years after the original trilogy. They had a better starting point, of course, as SW was 10 years after TOS and had a much bigger budget to work with. But I don’t think TFA was criticized for looking too dated.

      • Steven Carter

        I’m so tired of hearing how our mobile phones are more sophisticated than TOS communicators- can you call the Space Station from earth? no, not even with satellites in orbit. of course something that strond would still be sizable & as we have learnt, tiny phones are not easy to use so of course they would stick to an established size instead of going micro.
        In the JJ films the flip section was just a cover & who knows what the clear ball on the communicator is. They could make it as slim as an iPhone though.

        • kadajawi

          They’ve got 250 years to figure out how to send a signal to orbit. Oh, and yeah, we’ve got satellite phones already, and they aren’t that much bigger than in TOS.

          The size is just one thing: How about having a display? Touchscreen? There are so many moments in TOS (and later shows) where they would have been way better off with a touchscreen. Or heck, a mute setting and vibration alert! Kirk is sneaking around… suddenly his communicator beeps, the enemy finds him. If his crew had sent him a text, he wouldn’t have been caught.

        • Howard Wilson II

          “can you call the Space Station from earth? no, not even with satellites in orbit.”

          Of course we can. At this very second I have another tab open streaming video from the ISS live. The also have a ham radio up there and people have indeed called them. Google it. Use “can you call the iss” as the search term, the very first link is a Gizmodo article. The second link is from ARISS and tells you how to do it. Fourth link when using that search term? “Pretty much anyone on Earth with a radio can call the International Space Station and chat with astronauts”.

          • Shawn

            But not a smart phone. You need to be close to a tower. Closer than my office is, apparently. Radios are bigger than smartphone.

        • Zarm

          Plus setting off a sonic explosion to cause a rockfall, possibly having a built-in UT, real-time routing that apparently sends to your subject even before/as you’re stating their name… 😉 There is definitely a lot of communicator tech (even if that last one’s a little snarky) that is beyond our abilities today- it just gets overlooked for people to make their ‘oh, but we don’t WANT technology in Star Trek to be canon with original Star Trek because smartphones’ points.

        • ADeweyan

          The classic communicator is probably my favorite prop of all time. I sat down one day years ago and wrote up an instruction manual detailing all of it’s different functions. Sure, all we saw them do was talk into it, but that doesn’t mean that’s all they’re doing. They could be providing transporter lock, bio-monitoring the crew member, context-sensitive encryption, automatic routing of calls and so on… Sure, it’s all sort of ridiculous, and the STNG communicator is probably more realistic given current technology, but it doesn’t take a lot of thought to come up with an explanation for the TOS Communicator size and form factor.

    • pittrek

      I don’t agree. I’m a fan and I think I know pretty well what I want. Stories with likeable characters who will entertain me and at the same time silently teach me something or inspire me.

      • kadajawi

        I think that’s what Fuller is working on, at least that’s how it sounds. Unless for you to be likable a character has to be straight.

        Personally, I don’t need likable characters. Walter White wasn’t. Garak wasn’t… always. Gul Dukat clearly wasn’t. Flawed characters can be much more interesting and entertaining.

        • pittrek

          “Likeable” doesn’t need to mean “good”. There are many likeable villains (e.g. Dukat who you mentioned before). But yes, maybe I should change it to something like “characters I can understand why they do the things they do”?

          • kadajawi

            Ok, I can fully get behind that. 🙂

        • JP

          You didn’t like Garak?

      • Pedro Ferreira

        I’m a fan and I know what I want as well. Something that doesn’t end up like that awful BSG remake.

        • pittrek

          Funny. you are the first person who I found online not liking the new Galactica series. I thought that it’s a horrible show but I always thought I’m the only person on this planet who thinks this 🙂

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I tend to not hop on the bandwagon if I don’t like something. I’m stubborn that way.

      • scotchyscotchscotch

        To quote Men in Black, “a person is smart, but people are dumb, panicky dangerous animals”. Not a word for word direct application in this case, but I think that’s the gist of what he’s trying to say and for the most part I agree, and it applies to any fanbase whether it be movies, sports, etc.

    • Brady McKenzie

      Great post @bifash:disqus. I really don’t get the hostility that seems to be everywhere. Comments and posts with all that unbridled negativity just make me want to stop reading.

      Everyone seems to think they are a ‘purist’, they want a TV show tailored to their own perspective, and they want it now. I think it’s really a shame that it has come to this. You can either have all the trek that exists and like some or all of it. If you don’t like it, then don’t watch those series/movies. Enough with the vitriol about something you know scant about. i.e. the upcoming series that I am really looking forward to. Stop trying to ruin it for me and others.

      Just like the haters when a new phone has ‘leaked renders’ OMG, deal breaker….

      Roll on January!

  • kadajawi

    I still think it is a mistake to place the show so close to a part of ST we have seen… and the part that looks the most dated! Being in the middle between ENT and TOS would be better from a “giving the chance to do something new” perspective. After UDC would be interesting, and they can cover any other crew without having to worry about running into Kirk. Or after DS9… they can again avoid known crews, or just name drop them, or, since they are not that old yet maybe even have small cameos.

    But we’ll see what Fuller does with this rather difficult to display point in time.

    This panel did some damage control… I’m a bit more optimistic about the show. And don’t worry about not meeting expectations… my expectations are very low. I do hope that they do the look of that era justice, but it is going to be really, really hard, because 10 years before Kirk is where the Federation is flooded with Constitution class ships and ships that are designed like the Constitution class. How can you pay respect to that look without being laughably retro and dated looking? I hope Fuller has found a way. They did on ENT, but there they left more space.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Trek series have a history of weak starts. TNG was awful it’s first season, as was Enterprise. Voyager wasn’t much better. Only TOS and DS9 had good first seasons.

      • kadajawi

        Phew. Saying DS9 had good first seasons is stretching things. TNG was extremely awful in the first season, got better thanks to Dr. Pulaski in the second and good in the third, so in comparison to _that_ DS9 season 1 was great. But the show got a lot better once it reached season 3. VOY stayed consistently meh/frustrating, with lots of promise, but the lack of any form of continuity on a show that is based entirely around one goal hurt it a lot. Plus Jar Jar Neelix.

        But anyway, in this day and age a show can’t afford to have a weak start. Maybe not even a Star Trek show. Agents of SHIELD had a (to many… I loved it) weak start, and it never managed to recover from that. People these days have no patience for shows that start slow/aren’t great from the beginning. I watched the first episode of Gotham, thought… oh my… and never watched another. If I had started with TNG… I would have watched Encounter at Farpoint, watched The Naked Now and… then stop in disbelief.

        The setting has me worried. I expect episode 1 should be enough to make my skepticism go away or be confirmed.

        • pittrek

          Jesus, how can somebody call the first season of TNG awful? I mean it had a few bad episodes, but also a bunch of GREAT episodes.

          • kadajawi

            Encounter at Farpoint was good. The Battle was. Datalore and Arsenal of Freedom perhaps. And Conspiracy. Wouldn’t call them great though, and those terrible episodes were truly terrible, like beyond bad.

          • Brian

            Of those, only “Conspiracy” would get the “good” vote from me. The others I’d call good from Season 1 would be “Heart of Glory”, “Coming of Age”, “We’ll Always Have Paris”, and “The Neutral Zone”, all late in the season when they were finally figuring out what works and what doesn’t.

          • Fctiger

            I rewatched The Neutral Zone two weeks ago, I think that is actually an underrated season finale and probably one of my favorites. It does two great things by reminding us what Star Trek is suppose to be about but a major tease of an enemy to come (the Borg) while reintroducing the Romulans. Ok, its three great things lol.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Encounter at Farpoint was just AWFUL!!!

            Watching that premier with several of my Star Trek friends was perhaps the greatest TV show letdown of my life (even including the depressing MASH finale)

          • kadajawi

            Compared to the episodes that followed Encounter at Farpoint was wonderful. Also it introduced Q, which ended up being a great addition to the show.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well OK, but that is like saying that the newer cheap food technology Velveeta, was better than the older cheap food technology, Spam. 🙂

          • prometheus59650

            I can call it awful because it was.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Agreed. It is what it is.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Huh???

          • mswood666

            Because I liked only 6 out of 25 episodes they put out. Where No One Has Gone Before, The Big Goodbye, Datalore, 11001001, Heart of glory, Conspiracy. And most of those are just like, not love. the rest of the episodes either or so/so poor or out and out awful. its quite possibly my most disliked season of any Trek series.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yeah if you want to call a season of TNG awful check Season 7.

          • pittrek

            Agree. They definitely ran out of ideas. The finale was fantastic, the pirate 2 parter was pretty good, but the rest was highly forgettable.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Definitely!

        • Fctiger

          Honestly once they kicked Gene Roddenberry to the curve after season 2 of TNG it got MUCH better! Same thing after they get rid of him off the movies after TMP and others took over the other films, same thing. Roddenberry would probably be the George Lucas of today if he had total control of Star Trek in the later years as Lucas had with the prequels.

          • kadajawi

            Hm. Agreed, however I do love TMP. Honestly, watch it as directors cut. I had frequently seen the theatrical cut on TV (heavily cropped… wrong aspect ratio)… it was meh. Then I saw the directors cut, and was in awe. When the Blu Rays were released I watched the theatrical cut again, and was shocked how terrible it was. Soon after that back to the directors cut (and I hate not watching Blu Rays), and it was a wonderful film again.

            They had to rush TMP, and couldn’t finish the film. It’s not just the effects, they knew they might not get the effects in time, so when shooting they shot scenes just in case they didn’t have the special effect. Some of those I believe are still inside the movie, despite the effects having been finished? The effects weren’t trimmed at all… there was no time for that. And overall it was more like an early draft rather than a polished, fully edited film.

            I have no idea why Paramount chose to remaster the theatrical cut. IMHO it should disappear in some vault forever, never to be seen again.

          • Fctiger

            There is nothing wrong if you personally like TMP but there is also a reason why they never made a similar Star Trek movie like that again either. But I agree the Director’s cut is definitely better but the movies have only gone the complete opposite of the tone of that film since, ESPECIALLY the new reboot movies.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Voyager got worse in it’s later seasons with continuity and writing. The first four seasons when Jeri Taylor and Lisa Klink were involved were the best.

      • Brian

        Aside from the pilot “Emissary” and “Duet”, I think DS9’s first season is pretty bad. Lots of very weak episodes in between (“Move Along Home”, “If Wishes Were Horses”, “The Passenger”, “The Storyteller”, and “The Nagus”). Two shoe-horned TNG guest characters making very forgettable appearances (Q in “Q-Less” and Lwaxana in “The Forsaken”) A few fair episodes (“Babel”, “Vortex” and “Progress”). And “In The Hands of the Prophets” was pretty good, albeit with Keiko acting like a total idiot through most of it in order to drive the plot forward. Really, “Duet” is the only Season 1 episode I would put in my “Top 25 DS9 episodes” list, and it would be Top 10.

        • kadajawi

          Sisko sucker punching Q… that alone makes Q-Less worthwhile. It quickly shows who Sisko is.

          But yeah, the first season was… mixed, but it did have Duet. And while it was weak for DS9, for the other shows it would have been a decent season.

      • Barak Aslani

        Why do you welcome a “re-imagining”. What was so wrong with what DS9 did in Trials & Tribulations? What would be so wrong with having set a new Star Trek series post Nemesis and telling exciting stories and making clever social commentary looking forward, not back. God forbid anyone is emotionally attached and invested and Trek that has come before, god forbid anyone does consider ship designs and visual environment canon.

        I for one DON’T welcome yet another “re-imagining”.

        We are Star Trek fans. Give us what we like about Star Trek, not going back and tinkering with stuff we’ve spent billions of dollars in merchandising, dvd and bluray sales, telling you we already liked.

        It’s fine. It’s passed the grade. We liked it. Thumbs up. Move forward. Not back.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          “God forbid anyone is emotionally attached and invested and Trek that has come before, god forbid anyone does consider ship designs and visual environment canon.”

          Jesus, lighten up. Just sharing my opinion here. Fine, you disagree…move on.

        • DC Forever

          Dear Barak Aslani,

          Your text here implies that Star Trek fans must uniformly agree with you, or they are wrong. But, people have differing opinions. Fans are not monolithic, and you don’t get to rather condescendingly decide group-think for everyone here.

          I also would welcome this “re imagining”, but am I going to make you feel inferior for not agreeing with me? Of course not.

        • Xandercom

          It’s just TOS fanboy lip service.
          Not a fan of TOS, don’t see STD as being in any way interesting to me or fans like me who can’t understand why we’re having yet another boring backward prequel situation.
          The mind boggles.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        I was very impressed both Season 1 of TNG and Voyager. Enterprise didn’t however start off good.

  • Steven Carter

    How Condescending. The Real fans, know what they want & what Star Trek needs. To be Star Trek again not to be watered down, more “relatable” or “fixed” & made in to something else.

    • kadajawi

      What is Star Trek? Can you explain that to me? A definition that fits all of Star Trek?

      TOS was preachy, over the top and not subtle at all, campy, optimistic but militaristic, and rather sexist (though I gather that they did it so that the network was so furious about the scantily clad women that they missed the rather blatant allegories).

      TNG was far more utopian, philosophical, idealistic and a bit more subtle… plus not as sexy.

      DS9 showed a darker side to humanity. How would the squeaky clean, idealistic Federation deal with a massive threat? It was a show about pragmatism. It also showed and criticized how condescending the Federation can be, how it is easy for the Federation to look down.

      VOY was… I have no idea what that was. Same with ENT.

      But each of these shows are a product of their time, and they are very, very different. I would like to see something like DS9, but I’m sure many fans would say that isn’t Star Trek.

      • Brian Thorn

        VOY tried to be edgier like DS9 but more exploratory like TOS. It failed at both and ended up feeling like TNG-lite.

        ENT was a disaster of missed opportunities. It tried to be more “frontier” like TOS, but many stories ended up feeling like they could have been just as easily told on TNG or VOY. So many things they could have done with that setting… but didn’t.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Yep!

        • DamienL

          I think Enterprise redeemed its self in the last season. The Vulcan and Klingon arcs for example were outstanding. But overall many wasted opportunities, yes.

        • kadajawi

          I think VOY suffered from inconsistent writing and the magic reset button. Like, there were a couple of different Janeways, which one you’d get depended on what the plot needed/what the writers wanted. Sisko was always Sisko. Picard was always Picard. (IMHO Archer suffered from that too, to a lesser degree).

          How great would it have been had Year of Hell been a couple of episodes, and the rest of the season the crew were dealing with the fallout. Crew members died, the ship is in a sorry, vulnerable state… and Janeway is desperately trying to deal with it, going further than she would normally, because she has to.

          Or in general, if something bad happened, the ship was damaged… let it be damaged in the next episode. Viewers who missed the episode would quickly understand that the ship was damaged. But no, after every episode the ship was in pristine condition. And if it was badly damaged, someone important died, something would happen to hit reset and everything is as it always was.

          VOY is the true disaster of missed opportunities. It had the second best to best premise of all the shows IMHO, and did so unbelievably little with it. And when they had a good idea, they usually screwed it up.

          ENT season 1 and 2 are forgettable. Season 2 was getting better, 3 had some really strong episodes, but still plenty of weak ones. But season 4… oh boy. I’d say there were 2 meh episodes…. and right after they aired the show was cancelled. The rest was from very good to brilliant. Granted, those episodes were basically for fans only, but they were satisfying, interesting, … perhaps what DSC might end up being (some episodes at least). And it was well done. It helped flesh out the universe beautifully. I think if ENT had dropped those two standalone episodes, it might have made it until season 5. And from then on to season 7.

          • SpaceCadet

            Regarding the quality of certain episodes of season 4 of ENT, even if every episode of that season was great it still wouldn’t have saved the show and given it a 5th season. What mattered to the production company was the ratings and they were in the toilet at that point. By the 3rd season the series was on the verge of cancellation but the only thing that saved it was the fact it’s easier to sell the show as a package deal in reruns if there are around 100 episodes. ENT finished with 98 episodes which was enough to call it a day in the studio’s mind.

          • kadajawi

            Hm, fair enough. Viewers might have returned though… word of mouth had to spread, and perhaps reruns had to happen (i.e. if a fan who has actually watched it tells his friends who are also into Trek that they should watch season 4)…

    • DamienL

      I respectfully disagree 🙂 — while we all can ramble off a few vague ideas and concepts that we’d love to see in a new series most of us are not professional writers or television producers. We simply don’t have the skills required to make a modern tv show a success.

      Think of that famous Henry Ford quote “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

      There’s no way I could producer a better show than the current discovery writers and producers could. I don’t have the experience or the skills. Let’s wait and see what they can create!

      • kadajawi

        Keep in mind that TNG thrived of fan submissions. Several staff writers started as fans sending in a spec script. Ronald D. Moore’s career started that way.

        Also keep in mind that the first two reboot movies were written by professional writers/producers, with plenty of experience and many highly successful movies under their belt. Yet the writing is very flawed in both movies.

        At least Into Darkness had the right ideas… I could totally see it being a classic DS9 or TNG episode/double episode in the veins of Homefront/Paradise Lost. The idea underneath the story was wonderful, and a great twist on a classic episode, a great what if… what if Section 31 found the Botany Bay.

        • Fctiger

          Oddly enough so did Bryan Fuller’s who did a fan submission for Voyager and now 20 years later running his own Star Trek show. So cool!

          As for STID it was nothing more than one big DS9 episode with a bit of TWOK thrown in. But if you had Khan stay rogue Section 31 agent instead it would feel like a DS9 story end of the day.

          • kadajawi

            There is absolutely nothing wrong with a movie being one big DS9 episode. 🙂 a) DS9 was great, b) that makes it Star Trek, right? Some of the other movies, especially 2009, are action films with Star Trek characters. They aren’t really in the spirit of Star Trek. The problem with STID is it falls apart in several places.

            IMHO the TWOK connections were too strong… had Cumberbatch been anyone else on the Botany Bay (they were all enhanced, after all!) it would be more sensible. It was chance that Kirk woke up Khan, Section 31 might, understandably, be a bit more careful and perhaps check the ship records first before waking anyone up. They would have known what treasure trove they found and woke up the one that is most suitable to their needs. Like a scientist/engineer instead of the leader Khan, who might be deemed too dangerous.

            Spock could ask Spock Prime about the Botany Bay… maybe ask Spock Prime first about Harrison, and when Prime is clueless mention the Botany Bay. SP mentions augments, and Spock starts to fill in… they complete each others sentences. That way viewers who have no idea about Khan and augments get filled in on why these people are so dangerous (maybe even have Spock talk about the events in ENT, how a group of augments would almost have started a war with the Klingons (oh the parallels!)). ENT fans go… ooooooooh. Augments! TOS fans may have found out about Botany Bay earlier, and already know that he is from Khan’s crew. Or, perhaps better, the Botany Bay isn’t mentioned before. Hinted at perhaps (he was found in cryostasis on a ship floating through space…), but not mentioned. That might create an “oh f***” moment, like the reveal of who Krall is.

            And that torpedo that McCoy disarms? A shot from above reveals Montalban is inside.

            Small changes, but I believe they would remove all the to be expected backlash against recasting Khan, having Khan act differently, against the movie being too close to TWOK, and made for a more compelling story with some not over the top references for fans. It also would help with people who don’t have prior knowledge of what happened in the Prime universe.

            These things wouldn’t fix the whole 3rd act, which is a mess, but I’m sure it would be possible to come up with a better ending. Even cutting the death of Kirk might improve it. Or perhaps Uhura is the one to die… find a way for her to die that makes sense, for her to sacrifice herself for the entire ship. Kirk can still come to the realization that the needs of the … At this point in the series it simply isn’t believable that Spock and Kirk are good friends. A few movies later, ok. But the second movie, without having a TV series to establish their friendship, …?

            What is so frustrating, but ultimately redeeming about STID is that it had so much potential, but then made a few wrong turns and bad choices that badly hurt the movie. However I much rather watch a movie that at least tries to be Star Trek, rather than just an action film that happens to include Star Trek characters.

            Btw., Klingons in ID looking different? Failed experiments from trying to revert the effects of the Augment virus.

          • Fctiger

            DS9 is my favorite show lol. So no I don’t have anything against it, but people wanted a TOS story, ie, to boldly go where no man has gone before. Instead, they got an Earth bound conspiracy movie with Section 31 and Khan who did not need to be there thrown in just for the hell of it.

            Even JJ Abrams admitted in an interview the story should’ve been about them going out to their 5 year mission. DS9 wasn’t about that, it was a different animal and at the time it worked because we still had TNG in the movies and of course Voyager. STID though should’ve been about the Enterprise going somewhere in the unknown. What these writers forgot was thats what TOS was about! The first film was understandable but the second film really shouldve been about exploration because they are movies, there is only so much story telling, so get them out there! Its NOT like the TOS and TNG films because we saw those guys in hundreds of episodes already exploring. This is a reboot, its all new, so why are they STILL on Earth in their second movie????

            But yes I agree with you, it had SO much potential to just be a better film in its own right and its so frustrating. They wanted a political thriller instead about exploration, fine, then DO IT!!!! Have Admiral Marcus create a false flag to go to war with the Klingons, not some odd coincidence that happened in the movie. Khan should’ve actually been John Harrison, a rogue Section 31 agent framed as a double spy Starfleet accused of working with the Klingons. The movie should’ve been about Kirk trying to stop a war with the Klingons from happening by trying to prove Harrison was framed and it was Marcus all along. Not some weird ass plot where Khan just HAPPENS to go to the Klingon home world and then just sit on his ass for Starfleet to come after him. WTF???? So much of STID just made no damn sense. And then as you said that whole third act was just so ridiculous and messy. ALL of that crap should’ve been scrapped and instead create a show down between Starfleet and the Klingons with Harrison secretly pulling the strings. He shouldve been the one true and only villain but because they were trying to squeeze in Khan and that WOK mess it just sidelined what could’ve been an amazing 3rd act and film in general.

            OR hey, lets go total Khan then and avoid all the Section 31 nonesense and have Khan and his crew found on another planet after an alien species found a revived them and they manage to take over the planet. And then we would have a story line about actual exploration and Khan being KHAN and really dive into the whole augment thing and go full on. Instead of just taking over a ship like in Space Seed, we now have him ruling over a planet with plans to take back Earth using their technology and Enterprise would have to stop them. Actually not TOO different from what happened in Beyond. At least that would make sense instead of waking a guy up and asking him to build weapons 300 years more advanced than him.

            So dont get me wrong, I’m not bothered by a DS9 type story line, but I can understand why others were since they thought they were geting a TOS one. But then to make matters worse, its a watered down DS9 story line and then an ill conceived fan service sequence of TWOK to let fans know they do know what TOS is about because they all saw WOK. STID was just maligned badly in so many ways sadly.

          • kadajawi

            Some people wanted a TOS story, I wouldn’t generalize there. 🙂

            TOS at its best was about the society we live in, and offered a commentary on that. Into Darkness did exactly that. The only difference was that usually, TOS is set in space, far away from Earth, because otherwise they couldn’t get it past the network and censors. STID didn’t have that constraint.

            Khan wasn’t necessary. Agreed. Section 31 didn’t hurt though. The story is about a secret service going too far, and Section 31 is just right for that.

            IMHO STID wasn’t bad because it wasn’t exploring in space (not sure if that’d even work with current audience), it was bad because it made some bad choices in the execution of the story.

            Didn’t Marcus create a false flag to go to war with the Klingons, sort of? Anyway, the film you suggest would be interesting too, though IMHO you don’t even have to have such big changes. I also liked how Section 31 used an augment to create superior weapons. They are about opportunism, so have Section 31 run into the Botany Bay is brilliant. It shows the differences in mentality. When Kirk discovered the Botany Bay, he genuinely tried to help them. Section 31 however saw an opportunity.

            I haven’t watched STID in a while, but I thought most of it made sense… happy chances there were a few, sure, but we’re talking about Star Trek. That is in the DNA of Star Trek (though 2009 was excessive).

            Harrison isn’t the real villain, Marcus is, and I like it that way. I prefer it when the secret service at its core is rotten, not just some rogue agent.

            The second idea with Khan taking over a planet and Kirk trying to clean up the mess, because Khan is from Earth, sounds interesting too. But yeah, we essentially got that in Beyond.

            With Khans superior intellect it IMHO makes sense that he is able to adapt and improve on the weapons that exist.Some people wanted a TOS story, I wouldn’t generalize there. 🙂

            TOS at its best was about the society we live in, and offered a commentary on that. Into Darkness did exactly that. The only difference was that usually, TOS is set in space, far away from Earth, because otherwise they couldn’t get it past the network and censors. STID didn’t have that constraint.

            Khan wasn’t necessary. Agreed. Section 31 didn’t hurt though. The story is about a secret service going too far, and Section 31 is just right for that.

            IMHO STID wasn’t bad because it wasn’t exploring in space (not sure if that’d even work with current audience), it was bad because it made some bad choices in the execution of the story.

            Didn’t Marcus create a false flag to go to war with the Klingons, sort of? Anyway, the film you suggest would be interesting too, though IMHO you don’t even have to have such big changes. I also liked how Section 31 used an augment to create superior weapons. They are about opportunism, so have Section 31 run into the Botany Bay is brilliant. It shows the differences in mentality. When Kirk discovered the Botany Bay, he genuinely tried to help them. Section 31 however saw an opportunity.

            I haven’t watched STID in a while, but I thought most of it made sense… happy chances there were a few, sure, but we’re talking about Star Trek. That is in the DNA of Star Trek (though 2009 was excessive).

            Harrison isn’t the real villain, Marcus is, and I like it that way. I prefer it when the secret service at its core is rotten, not just some rogue agent.

            The second idea with Khan taking over a planet and Kirk trying to clean up the mess, because Khan is from Earth, sounds interesting too. But yeah, we essentially got that in Beyond.

            With Khans superior intellect it IMHO makes sense that he is able to adapt and improve on the weapons that exist.

          • Fctiger

            But if its about TOS then I’m pretty certain people expected a TOS story, right? Would you put Kirk and Spock on DS9, of course not, they wanted stories that reflected the original show.

            That said no one is saying it COULDN’T be about what happened in STID, I just think it was probably too soon of a storyline to do end of the day. If it was the 3rd or 4th film it probably would’ve been fine, but I think people really wanted to see something about exploration. And as I said you can still combine exploration with a conspiracy story line. They have actually done it quite a few times on the shows already.

            I just think people don’t like the film because it just felt too different from a typical TOS story, shoehorned in Khan and then that whole WOK fan ending just made it worse.

            And in all honesty I think that’s why Beyond did so poorly at the BO because they were put off by STID. I’m not saying everyone, but I do think a lot of Trek fans just stopped caring. Hopefully the new show will get them interested again.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      LOL, and I suppose your one of the “Real” fans.”

      Nice try, Larry the Cable Guy fan.

  • Trent

    I trust you and am willing to wait and see , but that ship is as ugly as the Abramshitprise CHANGE IT PLEASE!!

    • Neo Racer

      DOWNVOTED!!!!!!!!!!

    • DamienL

      I agree it’s a pretty terrible design — I’m hopeful that isn’t the final design and we will see at least some modifications.

      For me personally it didn’t really remind me much of the Kelvin timeline starship designs…

  • CaptainDonovin

    “With all due respect,” he said,”fans do not know what they want.” – Boy did he nail that one. Glad someone pointed that out. I will say I do know what I want, Star Trek back as a series & that’s what we’re getting. I’ve enjoyed the previous shows & no doubt will enjoy Discovery.

    • DamienL

      Absolutely correct. We all have our opinions and story ideas, but unfortuentleny most of them are terrible and would be a total disaster.

      Let’s trust the professionals and see what happens in January.

  • DamienL

    It’s 2016 — the visual language of the new show has to reflect the times. Just like TOS was a reflection of how people in the 1960’s imagined the future this show has to do the same. If that makes the continuity of the ST universe a bit messy than so be it, that’s life. I for one think what they did on Enterprise (in terms of a visual style) to be overall really brilliant.

    Let’s all try to keep an open mind here. We haven’t had Star Trek on television for over 11 years now, let’s be thankful and give this show a chance in January! And for the love Zefram Cochrane, even if the first season isn’t the greatest (i.e. TNG) there is always room for improvement (think Enterprise season 4)!

    • kadajawi

      I also like what they did on ENT, but the difference to DSC is that they placed it far enough in the past of TOS so that they could have an entirely different visual language and still make sense within the universe. But during the time DSC plays the universe is full of Constitution class ships (prior to the refit). The Excelsior class (which also looks very different) is still quite some time off). Maybe they got the Discovery from some junkyard, or it is made with stolen parts from various species. In any case, Mr. Fuller has some explaining to do in universe.

      • Fctiger

        As much as I DON’T like the prequel idea (again) it will be interesting to see how DSC fits into this timeline because yeah, no way does that ship belong there, so I can’t wait to see what they do and how just like I couldn’t wait to see how they explained Spock going back in time and gave us the Kelvin Timeline films.

      • Shawn

        Fuller has specifically discussed how fun it is to work with the iconography (and style) of that time period. I think he gets that.

  • Star Fox

    I like the comments from Myer that states they are Modernizing Trek for Modern TV So that means more Action and Space battles and when he said With All Due Respect Fans don’t know what they want while looking down on them, it’s true the fans do not know what they want and this tells me they won’t listen to the fans they will make this a Modern Trek series despite the fans protests.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Sounds good to me. They should make what they think if the best show possible, and not try to listen to the fans, who can’t agree on much of anything.

      • Star Fox

        How am I agreeing and Disagreeing with them all I am saying is that I agree with what Nicholas Myers said and I think they should ignore the fans cause Number one they don’t know what they want number 2 if they listen to the fans they will make it Preachy and Hyper peaceful and that kind of Story won’t fly in todays TV, and I know fans are trying hard to keep it Old Star Trek but it can’t be that way anymore it has to modernize.

        • kadajawi

          I’d consider myself a fan, and I’d make it a show about a Section 31 ship using “obtained” parts from Klingons, Romulans etc., that goes on secret missions. Assassinate a Romulan senator who wants to start a war with the Federation, acquire information from the Klingons, infiltrate and deal with the Orion Syndicate, even using their services perhaps (how else would the Section 31 ship have a cloaking device?), develop weapons of mass destruction, fabricate evidence, support dictators in order to gain support for the Federation, … .

          Think the Equinox crew, just darker, more cynical and pragmatic. All the while a nosy Starfleet officer is investigating, and when they find out they ponder on how to deal with the issue… That could be the red line throughout season 1, and the conclusion is the officer has an unfortunate accident. Think Breaking Bad. Better Call Saul. Game of Thrones. Dexter. House of Cards. Preacher. Daredevil (especially the Punisher character). Heck, 24 and Homeland.

          All the while the show can discuss/let the viewer ponder what is ok and what is not. We don’t have to sympathize with the characters.

          It would take the darkest episodes of DS9 as baseline, as starting point. Fans would loathe the show.

          But to me it looks like Fuller wants to do a preachy, optimistic show. i.e. what I guess many fans want. Which is fine, I guess, if well written. I just hope he stays respectful of the time line, and not modernize things too much in those areas. The ship shouldn’t zip around and fire like the JJ Enterprise does.

          • Star Fox

            I like your idea for a new Star Trek series I hope they do something like that with the new Star Trek TV series, I hear that this could be a Ship going on secret missions and it has been proven that it will take place during the Klingon Earth War this is great news.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          OK, thanks for clarifying that. You original post didn’t come across that way — maybe that if my fault?

          • Barak Aslani

            You are so antagonistic. Pecking at people like a hen. I think this style is better suited over at TrekMovie. Thankfully fans at TrekCore haven’t fallen for the ‘fan shaming’ that goes on over there and people like you perpetuate.

            When I read Star Fox’s comment, I understood perfectly. Meyer’s comments had somewhat reassured Star, but ultimately felt they would do whatever they wanted.

            The way ENT was soooo successful for not listening to the fans. The way John Logan was sooooo succesful for not caring about fans…. The way was Into Darkness’s inclusion of Khan, much to the protest of fans, was such a successful move.

            Fans do know what they want. We want Star Trek back. Exciting stories, social commentary. I have a feeling Fuller will deliver, but do I need him to reimagine what I am fond of? Dilute or contradict what I care about? No.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Wow, and you are saying I am antagonisitc?

            I simply misunderstood Star Fox’s comment, and I even said it was likely to be my fault.

            Perhaps lay off the Red Bull or whatever…no need for getting personal with me here…sheesh!

          • Eskay

            Looks like TSFO thanked Fox for his response, and took some accountability for misunderstanding it. Why all the histrionics?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Thanks. Barak has a history of anger managment issues on this site. Here is recent exchange where Barak just went off a person for no real reason:

            Dawn • 4 months ago
            this is what appears to be happening.
            If they are going to do this, they will probably make it a series of PILOT SEASONS for various spin offs, becuase actors have been targeted for 4 seaosns.

            Barak Aslani • 4 months ago
            You illiterate liar.
            “Bites…bites…” You come across as someone with severe mental retardation.

  • I certainly hope we get to see more soon, rather than later…considering the premiere is only 4 months away…

  • Ellie Arroway

    “With all due respect,” Meyere said,”fans do not know what they want.”

    Ah! AH! AH! aH!

  • Harry Kane

    With all thats being said, Im really turned off by DSC. And how condesending “Fans don’t know what they want” Excuse me? who the hell do you think you are. 90% Of ST Fans want Post Nemesis Trek. They just don’t want to you to screw up the ENT-TOS gap with JJ style trek.

    • Fctiger

      Yeah exactly! Its kind of like when fans were saying over and over and over again they DIDN’T want Khan again in another Star Trek movie. There are actually polls on it on Trekmovie making this clear as day the overwhelming majority didn’t want Khan back.

      And what did they do? They put Khan back.

      And look, they don’t have to listen to a few vocal nerds on a website, I get that. BUT then they can’t be shocked either when so many of those same fans complained including Khan was a big, big mistake. They KNEW for literally YEARS most Trek fans didn’t want Khan and they stuck him in anyway. And now STID is the black sheep of these new films partly because of it.

      And yes most people wanted a post Nemesis show. Again same thing they don’t have to listen to us and if its executed well then most wont care. BUT if its not, they can’t be suddenly surprised going “How come no one wants this show, are they tired of prequels or something?” And considering it will be the third prequel series (yes I count the KT as prequel films basically because thats mostly what they are) then they can’t say they weren’t warned.

    • Barak Aslani

      Hi Harry, I agree 100%. Fans of the 50 year old legacy, this incredible institution that crosses generations and multiple series WANT to see it continued, post-nemesis. Continuity makes the universe feel so real, fans are emotionally invested. But god forbid anyone is ever allowed to say that in polite company! There is so much fan shaming going on… You csay anything bad about the JJ-verse, or admit that you miss the prime universe, and suddenly you are a troll or a fan-boy who doesn’t “know what they want”. My jaw kind of dropped when I saw your post as most comments are buying into the emperor’s new clothes… After ENT didn’t deliver, and Axanar is essentially shut down, why Fuller would want to revisit that period and “reimagine” is beyond me. I’m grateful it’s in the prime universe and will most likely honour continuity… But can’t new and exciting stories, with clever social commentary be made post-nemesis – looking forward… Not tampering with the past. Call me cynical but I actually think Fuller’s decision about the timeframe has A LOT to do with the JJ-verse. That they do want to capitalise on the exposure of the JJ cast, maybe have cameos. I feel excited to have new, episodic Trek. I just wish Star Trek took the same kind of pride in itself that Star Wars does. While JJ preserved continuity and worked hard to recreate authenticity… Star Trek keeps apologising for itself and fans who say they are attached to it, ridiculed.

      • Michael Spadaro

        Axanar was ‘shut down’ for very good reasons.

    • Cap’n

      It’s bad decision after bad decision, yet they seem to be sticking their fingers in their ears and carrying on regardless.
      Dig your own hole Fuller, and then blame your audience.

      • Harry Kane

        If DSC turns out to actually be good and hence earns CBS its money, then maybe, just maybe we will get a POST nemesis Trek series.

  • Harry Kane

    Fans want the new series to link between ENT and TOS properly, We want to see the first consitution class ships being launcheddesigned We want to see TOS look. But a TOS look that respects the heritage but updated for a modern audience like ENT did. But not overdone and then cheesed up,aka JJ prise with sewage plant engine room and way too fussy bridge.

    • Gene’s Vision

      Some good points! What about a bridge designed like a Hotel lobby like in TNG?

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      I would prefer they ignore Enterprise completely. That show just did an awful job at trying to map our pre-TOS history.

      • Harry Kane

        That may be your view which I respect, I however disagree and had wished it had gone on up to season 7 to fill that gap as was intended.

    • Xandercom

      no we don’t.

      • Harry Kane

        Yes we do, otherwise it will suck as a poorly written and poor concept. Simple.

  • Sounds very promising!

    I’d love to see some of the “Gee, whiz, space is so COOL” of the ENT era, coupled with the professionalism of the TOS crew.

    I’d love to see complex characters that speak to many different people in many different ways, the way Spock did.

    I’d love to see morality plays that are less heavy-handed than some of what Trek has done in the past but that still use the science fictional setting to shine a new light on human problems.

  • Zarm

    “Nick Meyer spoke positively to the desire to target a previously-unused time in the chronology, where there is “room to maneuver” in regards to Trek canon, without having to involve previously-featured characters from other series.”

    Sooooo… total ignorance of Star Trek, then, considering that the VERY FIRST TREK EVER FILMED was set exactly in this time period?

    • Michael Spadaro

      I wouldn’t call it ignorance. Don’t forget that The Cage was never aired (as an episode in it’s own right).

      • Zarm

        But the events were canonized in the Menagerie, the notable only 2-parter in TOS… so I’d still label it a pretty… uninformed statement, to put it more politely.

        • Michael Spadaro

          It’s heretofore the only episode set in that timeframe, whereas TOS mapped out 3 years. I’d say there’s room to explore.

    • Snap

      It’s a new show and will have to stand on its own. I think people take things too literally and take far too much offense with such comments. It’s a fact that the time period between “The Cage” and “Where No Man Has Gone Before” is practically a blank canvas with very few specific events detailed. Furthermore, they are on a different ship so they don’t have to use previously established characters and, thus, can create an entirely new crew.

      • Zarm

        Possibly. I just see that era as not-at-all a blank canvas; I mean, Enterprise had few ‘established events,’ but conflicts with Romulan history, the nature of starships, the technology level of the Federation and various other entities, and first contact situations, still ended up clashing badly with TOS (particularly statements from Balance of Terror). It wasn’t so much of the existence of events on the calendar that clashed, but the use of things, events, or statuses that could not logically fit with or lead into the established TOS period. (Or required a bizarre intervening century in which individual technologies demonstrated almost no advancement or change).

        To me, that problem is amplified manifold with the closer time period. Not that it will specifically contradict with an event established or established not to have happened 7 years before TOS or somesuch, but that it will create a universe, technology, status, and potential conflict with established items (like things that are unknown or seen for the first time or treated as uncommon in TOS) that simply can’t logically lead into TOS (or that clash with what was established in the Cage/Menagerie).

        • Snap

          Well, Enterprise was its own thing with a different team in charge.The thing with the Romulans is something which TNG itself mucked up because if, like the Klingons, they were always supposed to look the way they did in TNG but could not due to budget constraints, it contradicts “Balance of Terror” which has them looking identical to Vulcans, not just to the audience but in universe as well, otherwise the double takes from the Romulans on screen to Spock wouldn’t make much sense. It doesn’t help that even in the TOS movies, the Romulans maintain their original series appearance, including The Final Frontier and The Undiscovered Country, which were produced well after TNG redesigned the Romulans.

          As for Discovery’s setting, it certainly isn’t a “blank canvas” in the sense that the Bad Robot movies wiped the slate clean so they could do whatever they want, but more of a side story where events are being depicted from a point of view which is not that of the Enterprise. It’s a big galaxy and the Enterprise is only one ship, I think there’s plenty of room for the stories of another ship and crew which don’t have to be connected to what the Enterprise experienced. If the Discovery adventures don’t outright contradict events which were established in TOS (and, keep in mind, TOS episodes often contradicted themselves multiple times within the same episode, just look at all of the different classifications of the Antares in “Charlie X”) then the “room to maneuver” shouldn’t be any problem.

          After all, we don’t hear anything about the Cardassians occupying Bajor in “The Wounded” when the Cardassians are introduced. It’s not until the Bajoran’s are introduced the following year that there’s this revelation, even though at least one Bajoran had been in Starfleet for some time by that point. Discovery should be fine.

  • Anyone seen the tweet from Bryan Fuller? He’s shown a preview of the new uniforms http://www.aintitcool.com/node/76146. Looking very bright.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Very plain looking…hmm

    • That was simply a screenshot from the Gucci website he tweeted as a joke.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Thank goodness!

  • Michael Spadaro

    Does this mean that the novel(s) and comics for Discovery will be considered canon, and if so, what does that mean for the existing novel series?

    • Snap

      I think the issue of “canon” would be an issue of personal preference. My personal view is that what we see in the body of the show i canon, whereas script notes (or otherwise writer intent which was ultimately not reflected within the show) and the like are not. As neither the comics nor the books are depicted within the body of the show, I do not consider them canon.

      I don’t see how Discovery novels, whether “canon” or not, would affect the existing novel series, except maybe spread new installments even further apart.

      • Michael Spadaro

        I meant whether or not considering Discovery novels canon would mean that the other novels were considered canon (particularly the relaunches for the spin-offs). Historically, only what has been seen on screen has been considered canon.

        • Snap

          I would hope not.

          There are a lot of novels I really enjoy, but with the relaunch novels being interconnected then that would mean even the complete garbage books would be considered canon. I’m looking at “Before Dishonor” a perplexing aberration for Peter David as it has to be one of the worst books I’ve read and definitely a Trek book I will never re-read.

          In the end, though, I think the concept of considering the comics and the novels as canon entries is a major headache as they often contradict each other, sometimes in irreconcilable ways. For instance, the “Countdown” comics tie in to Trek 09 contains material which completely contradicts major events in the “Cold Equations” novel trilogy and, between comic and novel, the “Cold Equations” version of the story is far superior. There are novels in which the story, if taken as canon, actually change aspects of episodes they provide backstory to. For an example, read “Kahless,” which is an excellent book and changes your perspective on the episode “Rightful Heir.”

          It would be foolish to try and shoehorn comic continuity and novel continuity into the on screen continuity, especially with a series still in production.

          • Michael Spadaro

            Yeah, Before Dishonor was a weird one. Interesting read, for sure, but some of the events in that book are…hard to swallow, even if one of them was undone later on.

  • Geoffry Woods

    Nick Meyer is absolutely correct. Think about Star Trek history for a moment. He was directing TWOK, and someone (many thing Gene himself) leaked that Spock was going to die. Fans, even, then went BERSERK. Death threats arrived at the studio (seems impotent death threats traveled even by snail mail back then). Take it a step further. Had he come out a few months before the release date and said “we’re making a movie where Khan comes back for revenge, we meet Kirk’s illegitimate son, and Spock dies saving the ship,” fans would have universally decried that AWFUL idea for a movie. Yet, TWOK was a great success at the box office, and even today is generally considered the best ST movie ever made. Same thing happened the next time, when the news leaked (many think again, Gene) that the Enterprise would be destroyed, fans hated the very notion. Yet they cheered when the Enterprise-A swung into view in Star Trek IV.

    So, yeah, he’s right, the fans don’t know what they want, and it’s not the writer/producer’s job to try and per-emptively write stories that pander to them. The ones that try that approach usually fail. All they have to do is write a GOOD story, with believable characters, and the fans who are right now saying “no, no, no” will enjoy it. Meyer knows this, because he’s been through it before. More than once.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Well said. I am kind of shocked that so many here don’t get this — it is so freaking obvious.

    • Matineer

      Agree with you 99% — they should do what they think will work. I accepted both Spock’s death and the Enterprise’s destruction, but they were both reversed with the next installments. People cheered because the ship was back (in exactly the same configuration), not necessarily because they agreed with scuttling it. Totally with you that the story is most important. If it’s good, people will like it.

  • Dawn

    Fans know exactly what we want and you are not listenining.
    Johnson is a shit writer why is he involved.

    • Snap

      I think Meyer is correct. Fans may THINK they know what they want, but you could have a group of fans with the same expectations watch the same material and come out of it with completely different interpretations. Some fans will be put off by the level of technology displayed, others will be put off because the Andorians are a much darker shade of blue than depicted in TOS. Some will even be put off if the show isn’t a slave to “fanwank” and doesn’t slather the stories with references from TOS just for the sake of making those references.

      To be perfectly honest, I have seen what fans have claimed would be “better” than what ultimately ended up on screen and, nine times out of ten, what the fans come up with is just as bad if not worse than the official product. Or they take extremely superficial similarities in a story and then denounce it as nothing more than a rip off of Wrath of Khan. (alarmingly, many fans cannot even spell “Khan” correctly)

      • Dawn

        im calling bulshit on that.
        look, these are the facts.
        fans want the series to go forward, cbs wants it to be 23rd century. fine, work with that.
        fans want a series that balances what was, and what can be without undermining the original which discovery as premise has more than liklihood of doing becuase its too close, whilst at the same time, fans have proven they wanted something different, namely the success of axanar prior to the lawsuit.
        Now fans themselves have written episdoes for trek, its actually how fuller got his start in hollywood, fans have always been listened to and look at DC television, things would not have happened in various shows, had the fans not demanded it from the network. Those hows are doing better than people thought they would as a consequence.

        • Snap

          I cannot agree with all of that, because while it may be true that it is what SOME fans want, even yourself, it does not reflect Star Trek fan as a whole.

          Personally, the ideal setting would be the TOS movie era as I prefer the aesthetics of that time period. I have no interest in the post-Voyager era as the ships just continue to get uglier and the tech all powerful.

          Writers who were fans of the show were a large part of the final season of Enterprise and it certainly showed. As much as I enjoyed it as a whole, there were still those eye-rolling “fanwank” moments where you would expect characters to look directly into the camera and wink.

          The thing with Axanar is that the very existence of that project essentially prevents any official production from going in that direction because those behind it could actually sue CBS for stealing their ideas. It’s why productions won’t even read unsolicited scripts. The question, though, are those fans who supported Axanar a clear representation of Trek fandom as a whole? Or was it just a few thousand vocal fans who happened to love the idea? See, you can’t just lump everybody under the particular umbrella which best exemplifies your own personal preferences.

          So, really, the “fans don’t know what they want” line should not be taken literally, as the fans want different, often contradicting things, and the vocal members of those fans will cry out if their expectations are not met. So one group may yell “We want this!” and that may ultimately happen in the show while another group will yell “We didn’t want that!”

          You can call it “bullshit” all you like, but the fans are never going to agree on what they want. It would be arrogant presumption to believe that our own desires are the only ones worth listening to and that it is everybody else who doesn’t know what they’re talking about. In the end, the production should not be creatively shackled to what a fractured fandom demands of them.

          • Dawn

            Fuller was a fan when he sold the script. It was a fan script, nothing officially commissioned, that epsiode empok nor.
            I accept that many people want it in the 23rd century, fine, lets work wth that, set it after the undisocvered country, you can do virtually anything you want, AND yppu can build on whats established.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      You are quite the intellectual here.

  • Robert Anthony

    I hope that the canon of Enterprise is honoured in Discovery. That’s pretty-much my only caveat. I love Beyer and I love Fuller. I have every bit of faith that this show will be fantastic and that I’ll grow to love that ugly, clumpy ship in much the same way I learned to love the shape of Voyager’s Intrepid hull after loving the Galaxy class for as long as I did. I’m not a kickin’-n’-screamin’ fan that needs to be dragged anywhere – be faithful to the spirit of Trek and Lead On! (And give me DS9 and Voyager remastered on BluRay.) ; )

  • Thomas W.

    Wait and see. The producers shouldn’t care for the fan’s wishes but present something they are convinced of. That may become a hit or a flop. But in the long-run all Star Trek shows have been profitable.

    It should feel and look familiar but also like 2017 and not like 1969, 1987 or 1998. The look and the narrative style of TV series fundamentally changed during the last 15 years.

  • JTK

    Fuck of Brian Fuller and the badest of all Alex Kurtzmann, who was also reponsible for the bad 2009 Star Trek reboot cinema films, which are entirely crap. Sincethe bullshit of Robert Orci and JJ Abrams JJTrek/JJPrise I am not expecing really a good Trek. LOOK AT TODAYS SHITTY STORYTELLING AND THE BAD DESIGNS OF TODAYS SCI-FI. This show will maybe sucks hard. STD will be maybe the badest Star Trek series of all time. Modernize what? Just addig LGBT characters and a story tellling without episodic story arcs and just no captain centric focus? Really so a boring TV show like todays Sci-Fi with Dark Matter and Killjoys, with a lame mysterious background story and with low budget CGI? Come on…

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      While it’s doubtful that your F-bomb posts are going to impress us, I can categorically state that mispelling your attempted curse phrase is impressing absolutely no one here, clown.

      • Xandercom

        Speak for yourself “Oracle”..

  • Xandercom

    Fascinating. Flop Gear approves.

  • Xandercom

    Clearly nothing anywhere near where this TOS fanboy STD stuff is going.
    This is what happens when you hand over the keys of the family car to some idiot who thinks that more prequels is what people want.

    No, Bryan, it’s what you want. Your take on X, your revisiting Y, and your vision of Z.
    I guess the real problem here is not Bryan, but the idiotic executive with dollar signs for eyes who thinks that his is a capitalist opportunity to shoehorn a failing online streaming service to anyone who will drool over new Star Trek stuff.

    5 months remaining until the big flop. I only wish Fuller’s career down the pan to be the only casualty. Unfortunately it will deeply effect the franchise too, and so we’ll probably have to wait another 15 years for a different marketing executive’s eyes to light up with dollar signs and hopefully look forward, rather than backward, if it happens at all.

    For now the best you can do is grab some popcorn and watch, because obviously we’re not being listened to, again, and being told that “fans don’t know what they want”.

    Excuse me? How dare you presume that your ideas are what people want? So far I’ve seen nothing of what the majority wants, you’re just plowing through the fandom regardless and hoping the minority TOS fanboy population will back you up enough to get it in to production. Buddy, you’re creating a minority spin-off which isn’t going to go down well in general audience ratings.

    This is worse than having left the franchise alone for a bit longer.

    • Mirror James T Kirk

      I agree with Nicholas Myer Fans don’t know what they want, this is a good indication that they will not listen to the Fans and I couldn’t be happier cause the fans would make it all preachy and Happy like TNG when it needs to be modernized more action more adventure and more villains set during the Klingon Wars.

      • Cap’n

        Correct. That’s precisely what we don’t want.
        Dark Trek Rises, action packed explosionfest, no thanks, that’s what’s killed the movie franchise.

  • Cap’n

    This show is basically Enterprise Mk2.

    I think people are right to be concerned. Every time a new bit of info comes out there is a collective sigh of worry as to the direction discovery seems to be heading in.
    Aside from being the 3rd successive prequel, there also seems to be an overwhelming focus on TOS, which let’s face it, isn’t of great interest to the masses inside or outside of the fandom, particularly those born in the 80’s and beyond.

    It seems that CBS hasn’t learned from it’s mistakes with Enterprise, and obviously since this project was announced STB has pretty much flopped once marketing and advertising costs are thrown in. This in it’s self is a warning sign to Discovery, but is pretty much too late now to replace Discovery with something more futuristic and in line with previously successful TV Trek.

    As each little bit of news works it’s way out I find that I’m getting more and more disappointed, with everything from the format of the show, that ugly star ship design, and the constant overwhelming need to “do things differently”. Last time someone tried that we ended up with “Faith Of The Heart”, angry Vulcans and Sam from Quantum Leap. Now they are doing it all again and expecting different results!

    Many of us voiced our concerns that the NX01 looked way to advanced for that time period and we were ignored. Now here we are again with a god-awful door wedge of a star ship and people already worried that the visual language isn’t going to match up with that time period unless the set designs are basically TOS copies (which will look too dated to be believable). BSG got it right and explained the dated look of the ship perfectly – it was built without networking so the cylons couldn’t effect it, and the ship was already a museum. Will we have some similar explanation in this, or are we just supposed to ignore it and carry on?

    I suspect this is why we’re getting virtually no production news aside from the odd sound bite here and there, as they have underestimated the backlash from the very core of the people they are trying to sell it too who are under 40 and really not interested in going backward, again.

    If you want some nostalgia, go buy TOS DVD’s. You got a very nice remastering a few years ago to keep you occupied.

    The rest of us want to move forward. What happens to the federation after nemesis? Was there finally a peace plan with the Romulans? What happened with all the cool tech Voyager bought back from the delta quadrant? That quantum slipstream drive could probably get us some trans-galactic exploration. Did the borg get completely destroyed by “Admiral” Janeway? Did Sisko ever return to DS9 or is he still with the wormhole aliens?
    When a new series was announced, many of us thought we would finally get to see a continuation of all the previous stories, even if only hinted at here and there. A brand new Trek, moving forward, more futuristic, more amazing tech to inspire real-world tech development, maybe even the commissioning of the Enterprise F and her new crew.

    But then came the news that this is another preTOS project and suddenly all those hopes are out of the window in one fell swoop. Every time a new bit of news filters through it’s another nail in the coffin which is turning people OFF, not ON. Many of us simply don’t understand and can’t relate to the thought process going in to this, as on the face of it there’s very little to look forward to unless you’re a die-hard TOS fan and about to get all your Christmas presents at once.
    I can see the appeal to that kind of audience, but I’m not going to pay to watch it in any case, because for me Trek is all about the future, a future where mobile phones came from, ipads, touch screen displays, and what happens to people as we advance, our relationships with eachother, what issues still might affect us in hundreds of years when war and famine have vanished. It’s this future many of us fans want to see pushed a little further in to the unknown beyond the 24th century.

    Now all that wonder and potential has been snapped away from us in one fell swoop, and each news story coming out of production is cementing those losses with silly storytelling ideas, ugly ship designs and an insistent need to “do things differently”, aka ignore all the previous successes and go in a different direction like Enterprise tried and failed at.

    I’m not in any way enthused for the 2017 generic sci-fi show currently in production.

  • Harman eyes

    I share the concerns of others, in that making the thing a serial will obliterate casual viewers, and this heavy focus on TOS is out of the interest area of most people not born in the 60’s & 70’s.
    This is going to suffer exactly the same fate as Enterprise due to the inherent impossibility of cannonical continuation. Even worse that this guy seems to want to go in different directions, so we’ll likely end up with something which doesn’t fit the established feel of that time period. We know exactly what that time period looks like as 2009 already established it at several points in the 10 years before Kirk got the Enterprise. I think people will be far less willing to write it off as some kind of alternate timeline again.

    And yes, it is a disappointment with every little bit of news filtering through as I for one want to see the federation going forward, not yet another prequel about it’s formation and early days. It holds no interest to me whatsoever. I get bored with TOS now just as much as I did as a kid in the 80s.

    It seems this is only going to be of interest to “fanboys” who always choose Kirk-era cosplay at conventions, alas it’s not for me.

  • Abarmard

    “With all due respect,” he said, “fans do not know what they want.”
    Not a very good attitude. Actually, the majority of fans know exactly what they want. They want the concept, which is based on friendship, trust, humanity, peace, equality, Prime Directive, along with going forward. Most fans would be more than satisfied if the core concept was met with new technologies discovered from Voyager era.
    So with all due respect, you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s why you want to take us back to pre-Kirk era. Most fans would say NO.