The entertainment industry is facing down a looming strike by the Writers Guild of America, which could begin a soon as next week and is likely to impact the still-in-production Star Trek: Discovery — something becoming more and more evident behind CBS’s hesitance to stake out a new premiere schedule for the upcoming series.

While we wait for Discovery to leave drydock, however, the network announced today a host of new cast members joining the expanding ranks of the show.

  • Rekha Sharma, best known to genre fans as presidential aide Tory Foster on Battlestar Galactica, joins the USS Discovery crew as Commander Landry, the ship’s security officer.
     
    Sharma also recently appeared in the Star Trek Continues fan film episode “Still Treads the Shadow,” which debuted online last month.

  • Damon Runyan, most recently seen in The History Channel’s Ganglang Undercover, is another Klingon leader, named Ujilli.
     
  • Newcomer Clare McConnell is Dennas, a leader within the Klingon Empire.

In addition, there’s also been a change to an already-named role from earlier in the show’s development cycle:

We still don’t know when Star Trek: Discovery will beam down to Earth, but keep coming back to TrekCore for all the latest news as it breaks!

  • Tuskin38

    Huh, I had no idea Kenneth Mitchell was Canadian, and from Toronto to boot.

    • Xandercom

      Discovery is the most hated star trek franchise to date. It’s missed their audience, obsessed with a TOS reboot, value it only in CBS Online memberships, and has successfully managed to destroy the residue of good will CBS had 24 months ago.
      It is unrecoverable at this point.
      Achieving such hate before it’s even distributed a teaser trailer is a clear indication of the boycott.
      You fools ruined Star Trek, again.

      • Tuskin38

        Why did you reply to my post?
        Shouldn’t have this just been a comment on the article itself?

        • Xandercom

          It’s a comment thread. If you don”t want to speak to people, turn off comments, you control maniac.

          • Tuskin38

            Control maniac? What? I’m just saying it would make more logical sense to use the comment box under the article instead of replying to an unrelated post.

          • Xandercom

            Get lost mate.

          • Tuskin38

            I’m just trying to help.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            That dude is a known hate troll on this site. Ignore him.

          • Tuskin38

            Thanks

          • TIG1701

            You responded to his post not the other way around. You are the one who should be ‘getting lost’.

          • TUP

            This guy made a mess over at the other site. Now he’s here. Ask him about OTT and other CBSAA shows. He is clueless.

          • Xandercom

            I’m British, I couldn’t give a toss about your doomed CBS Access crap

          • TUP

            Actually I don’t get All Access pal. Another thing you’re clueless about lol

          • Xandercom

            “lol”.

          • DC Forever

            “Here across the pond we don’t pay for any online content from any of the terrestrial broadcasters.”

            Yea, because you can’t afford it given your crap currency is tanking so bad.

          • Xandercom

            Who are you kidding?! More USA fake news no doubt https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1bf356db98f3af0928a5ed43577514a67e21bca9a45dd040c96c3e75549f0a04.jpg
            Good luck with Discovery’s recovery, and your little bubble.

          • DC Forever

            You picked one day as the timeframe on your graph….LMFAO

            Are you really that stupid to think that people won’t realize you are cherry-picking a single day graph? Seriously, clown?

          • Xandercom

            11th March – 2nd May. That’s nearly two months!
            Stupidity is a way of life for you people. Good lord.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7d56cad1b0da995cd27929887addb2928c66d60abc4f147cd76f7f1245949022.jpg

          • DC Forever

            https://www.elliottwave.com/Currencies/-/media/0586FB8401EE45028B4FFE0A5095AA0F.ashx

            So congrats on being up .08 the past month two months…

          • Xandercom

            a 7.4% drop in your currency’s worth isn’t exactly what you had in mind when dispensing insults, was it?
            I don’t think you have any clues how currency works beyond buzz words from your news agencies. We don’t stand for that across the pond.

          • DC Forever

            You mean your currencies 7.4% recovery after dropping 40% in two years. LOL — yea, you go celebrate that, Archimedes.

            And while your at it, bring in some more Spaniards and South Americans to prop up you “national” football league.

          • Xandercom

            I admire your backpedaling. With a bit of work and study perhaps you could one day be a politician? Make America great again!
            I wouldn’t bank on it though.
            I’m afraid I have no interest in sports outside of gym fitness.

            What else yo got?

          • DC Forever

            If you do bank on it, do it in dollars.

          • Xandercom

            Sounds like you also need a bit of education on the etymology of colloquial expressions. You’re not doing it right.

          • DC Forever

            In terms of words, thank you for refreshing my understanding of “dumbass” and “troll” — much appreciated!

          • Xandercom

            It’s been a pleasure.
            Don’t forget to tell your friends! I’m here all week!

          • Xandercom

            Or, to put it another way, the Dollar’s falling value against the Pound
            .
            Do you people seriously get told this stuff in the news? The dollar’s steepest fall since the 2008 financial crisis! Incredible ignorance. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dd989f5932359006a841e77e15d3c04946a6f9dcd58c83604f1e255137202979.jpg

      • Stephen

        On behalf of all the people from the United Kingdom, may I apologise for this idiot.

  • The Science Fiction Oracle

    Now it makes more sense as to why CBS was not willing to commit to a date in recent quotes.

  • DS9 is King

    This is looking great they got Rekha Sharma as a security Officer.

  • TIG1701

    I’m praying this won’t be the ultimate shit show but man a lot of problems happening. I have a feeling Moonves is making a mess.

    Luckily we got our DS9 and TNG discs to keep us happy if this thing don’t take off.

  • Thomas Mossman

    Damon Runyan in a Star Trek series?

    “Always try to rub up against money, for if you rub up against money long enough, some of it may rub off on you.”

    -Disputed Ferengi proverb

  • Bifash

    Great to see Rekha Sharma “graduate” from STAR TREK CONTINUES to ST:DSC. I wonder if her character is a descendant of Avi Samara, lol.

    • Steven Carter

      only a 14 year time difference

      • Bifash

        Ah – you’re absolutely right!

  • Visitor1982

    So, we have a show that is being delayed and delayed time after time, a showrunner that has left and now an actor that has been filming for months to play a certain character, being replaced by someone else… Anyone claiming Discovery doesnt have a troubled production is sticking his or her head in the sand.

    And please don’t say Bujold vs Mulgrew cos that was totally different. Bujold only filmed for a couple of days and then left. She didn’t film for months and then became Luitenant Torres.

    • We don’t know that Mr Latif has done any filming as the Klingon though. He may have been filming as the new character and only just being announced the character change.

      • DC Forever

        But such a reasonable explanation like that would not fit with Visitor1982’s gloom and doom viewpoint.

    • DC Forever

      Bujold vs Mulgrew!

    • TIG1701

      Discovery is clearly in trouble. This thing has been delayed 8 months and now no one knows when it will show up. It doesn’t mean they can’t fix it, but yeah the show runner leaving before production started, 3 official delays, casting of major characters weeks after production started, etc its clearly a mess.

      I want to like it but being another tired prequel and with Moonves in charge who doesn’t know what good sci fi is if it bit him in the ass (Under the Dome and Extant anyone?) then yeah I’mm worried. I wish Fuller stayed or they got someone like Ronald D. Moore or Ira Behr to take his place. Those guys understands Star Trek and made great TV with TNG and DS9.

      • DC Forever

        A suspicious person might wonder if you and Visitor 1982 are the same person.

        • TIG1701

          Its the internet, so running into suspicious people is not exactly uncommon.

          And all I can tell is no. And just because I agree with him? Yes I’m sure its only me and Visitor 1982 thats ever said this. And if I agree with you on something does that now mean we are the same person as well? Nice.

          • DC Forever

            I didn’t say I personally thought you were the same person. I said a “suspicious person” might – given your similar writing styles and names. Surely you can see that?

          • TIG1701

            How do we have similar names? Because we both have numbers?

            And what ‘similar writing style’? Ok I am Visitor 1982. You caught me. Put me on ignore and just move on then. I’m not going to defend myself over some guy who doesn’t know me. Take it easy.

          • DC Forever

            Look, no need to get so defensive. I apologize

          • TIG1701

            Ok cool. No worries then. Honestly I don’t need to make 10 sock puppets to say the same thing. I’m new to these boards, true, but I been on Reddit for years discussing Star Trek. Wanted a change of pace basically.

          • DC Forever

            Sounds good! Welcome!

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Paranoia is common on this site for some reason.

      • Tuskin38

        “casting of major characters weeks after production started”

        Just because the news was released recently doesn’t mean it happened recently.

        The lead actress had been cast months before we got the press release on it.

        • TIG1701

          Sure you could be completely right but I’m still skeptical everything is sailing smoothly when in the same article one of the cast members is now in a completely different role AFTER production started. Thats really unusual and proves things are very unsettled. I just think this production i s more likely a shit show and there is more chaos happening than they like to admit.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Regardless of one cast member shifting roles, this is right up there with DS9 as the best ensemble cast of any post-TOS Trek series…light years above TNG, Voyager and Enterprise starting casts in terms of acting talent across the entire cast.

          • TIG1701

            You can have plenty of good casts in shit productions. Look at the JJ-verse Trek movies. Good cast, crap movies. I have no idea how you think the production has been back on track since Moonves fired Fuller since the show got delayed again after they let the guy go. I think he’s screwing it up. What the hell does Moonves know anything about quality sci fi? Have you seen the shows on CBS? He’s good at making forensic crime shows, bad comedies and cringeworthy remakes like Hawaii 5-0 and McGayver. He doesn’t know shit about science fiction. Let him cut the checks and let the people like Fuller do their work. Nevermind, he fired that guy.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “I have no idea how you think the production has been back on track after Moonves fired Fuller since the show got delayed again from May to September after they let the guy go.”

            Actually, this is exactly what I am refering to. That’s the period where Moonves replaced shit special effects team Fuller had brought on, completed reorganized the production, which was frankly directionless with the disorganized Fuller trying to do Trek and AG simultaneously, got the writers back on track to create a modern re-imagining, and substantially upped the casting to bring in higher quality actors. Yes, Mooves re-set the entire direction of the series — and of course that took a number of months.

            The vastly overated Fuller was going to give us “Berman 2.0,” and Moonvies wasn’t going for it given what he saw with Enterprise, which he correctly cancelled. Moonvies wants a re-imagining with ultra-high productions values, etc….Game of Thrones like level of production as applied to Star Trek.

            You can cherry-pick Moonves all your want and point to a handful of bad shows, but he’s right much more often than he is wrong — he’s the best TV exec on the planet — fact!

          • TIG1701

            Berman 2.0? What?

            I get your point now but yeah totally disagree with it. Moonves produces a lot of shit. Is there anything on that level that comes close to Game of Thrones quality? Yeah thought not lol. What show would you describe ‘cutting edge’ on CBS? Its nothing but a bunch of legal and crime dramas on that network for really old people. I don’t feel comfortable Trek is in his hands anymore than I do it was in Abrams and Orci. What gave me comfort was when Fuller came on board who actually makes great shows….and none of them were on that shitty CBS network.

            It still could be a great show because they are still following Fuller playbook but I think the farther Moonves is from it the better. Let him be hands on with the new NCIS spin off Miami or make as many sitcoms as he need, I don’t think he has the first idea of how to make a Trek show. And he cancelled Enterprise because the ratings were shit. That probably should’ve been cancelled sooner but the last season was worth it at least.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Dude, this is going to be the keystone show on CBS’s new online network — that’s what I am referring two when I say CBS/Moonvies is pulling out all of the production stops aka Game of Thrones. Of course I am not suggesting that NCIS and Big Bang Theory are at that level. You are twisting my meaning, as you did by suggesting that I though Moonves was taking a creative role, which of course he is not.

            Elementary, Madame Secretary, The Good Wife, Big Bang Theory (with a hell of lot of Trek references), Person of Interest — those are/were very recently some damn good shows. You are cherry-picking some bad ones, sure — we can all do that, such as Brian Fuller worked on Wonderfalls and Dead Like Me — pretty crappy stuff that got cancelled…so?

          • TUP

            To be fair, Dead Like Me got better after Fuller left and ran for a few seasons. I enjoyed it.

          • TIG1701

            Only show of his I never saw.

          • TUP

            Good cast. I wanted it to be a bit more dramatic but occasionally it would be pretty sweet and emotional.

          • TUP

            Berman had some good points. He was good at delivering on time and on budget. He kept everyone operating within certain set perimeters (until he stopped caring about DS9, fortunately) and he made sure everything appeared to exist within the same universe. Casting and effects were mostly strong under his watch.

            Where he struggled was deviating from his comfort zone. He had a recipe and its all he cooked up. If there is a berman over-seeing the production but NOT the main creative force, its probably not a bad thing at all.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “The vastly overated Fuller was going to give us “Berman 2.0,”” What?! Don’t you mean Moonves is giving us Berman 2.0? Fuller was going for something totally different.

          • DC Forever

            I think Fuller is overated as well. He’s good at horror stuff and shock-value shows, but he was obviously not ready for the challenge of Discovery. I think he new he was in over his head, and he and Les Moonves probably both agreed he should depart.

          • TIG1701

            I seriously disagree he was in over his head. I mean the show runners now are the show runners from his other shows, but they were his assistants. If the guy who created other shows is in over his head then how are the people currently running it who never even created a show directly on their own.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I now totally agree with you. I just read today about a TV show he’s handling called American Gods where a typical episode is a black woman’s vagina eating up a white man. Fuller’s not even trying to hide his SJW feminist attitude so I definitely think we dodged a bullet there yeah.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Dude, glad to hear you can change your mind on things.

            How about we bury the hatchet?

            I will try to be less negative on Enterprise and Voyager.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Listen I’m not out to attack anyone. just feel we should be respectful of other’s opinions. I didn’t lie or dream that Enterprise was getting some critical praise in it’s fourth season. It’s not bias, I simply remember that happened and when I came to watch the fourth season I reluctantly agreed it was an improvement over the previous seasons.

            I have nothing against people who are looking forward to Discovery, I just don’t think it’s been in the right hands whether it’s Fuller or Moonves.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            OK, I respect your opinion, even if I disagree.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Anyone who liked to watch new episodes of Star Trek were watching. There was quite a buzz around the fourth season at the time. The ratings probably weren’t great in the US (no surprise considering it was shown in the death slot) but globally Season 4 was very well received and there was a massive fan campaign to keep the show going when they found out it was cancelled.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Maybe your are onto something in that it is a U.S. versus international perspective then, because I know a lot of Trek fans here in the U.S. who gradually lost interest (very disappointed in the series) in Seasons 2 and 3 — which fits with the ratings decline figures I am talking about. Maybe internationally, that was not the case, as you are saying?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You could be right there but then I did read Star Trek Magazine. If only a minority in America was still watching it was a really vocal one on Internet forums because Season 4 of Enterprise was getting a lot of press, more than Season 3 from what I remember. Critics and audiences were seeing such improvements in the show and couldn’t believe it was being taken off the air. The uproar over the finale was massive as well.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well yea, I think it was a very vocal and passionate minority. Because, again, and please don’t shoot the messenger here — the U.S. Nielsen Ratings clearly show that as season 4 progressed, the ratings kept going down.

            So we are left with the obvious conclusion that the people who were still watching it at the end of Season 4 thought the show had improved. But too many other Trek fans had already stopped watching, and the general public has largely checked out already in Seasons 2 and 3.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “So we are left with the obvious conclusion that the people who were still watching it at the end of Season 4, though in depleted numbers, predominately thought the show had improved, and were very passionate about it.” When the show was cancelled their was a protest outside Paramount to save Star Trek. There was also the campaign to keep Star Trek Enterprise going. If it was a small minority I’m guessing all the fans banded together to help out, even those that didn’t watch?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Just went back and looked at the news stories from the February 2005 protest at Paramount on the Enterprise cancellation, and only about 100 people were at the protest. That’s not much of a protest considering 10% of the U.S. population (about 25 million people) live in Southern California.

            And then, consider this: despite all of the press that those protests received, look at the ratings chart for the remaining episodes of Enterprise in March and April, and the ratings continued to drop! If after the publicity of the protest, more general Trek fans who had given up on Enterprise would have returned and watch the show for the final two months, the ratings would have gone up, and perhaps CBS would have reconsidered.

            But, the ratings continued the season long trend during season 4 of going down every week, sealing the show’s fate, despite the valiant efforts of a small group of fans who stuck with the show, and who 100 of them went to CBS to protest.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “and only about 100 people were at the protest.” I don’t remember the exact amount that that number seems right. I don’t remember there being thousands of people of anything like that.

            “the ratings would have gone up, and perhaps CBS would have reconsidered.” CBS didn’t have confidence in the show at that point, I doubt it.

            “despite the valiant efforts of a small group of fans who stuck with the show, and who 100 of them went to CBS to protest.” As well as the Star Trek campaign to keep Star Trek going into Season 5. They didn’t raise enough money though. The Friday slot really hurt it and was seen as the reason for pretty much killing the show. Even when that slot was announced cast, crew and fans knew that slot would kill the ratings further.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’m not sure Fuller is any better.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        “Discovery is clearly in trouble. This thing has been delayed 8 months and now no one knows when it will show up.”

        That’s not factual. The show is in production. The writers strike, an external factor out of CBS’s control, is the reason that will not set a premiere date now.

        I guess if you want to say that (due to the writers strike) every single other TV series and movie currently in production is now “clearly in trouble with nobody knowing release dates,” then you would be correct. That is pretty lame though, as it’s not the fault of any shows currently in production that they don’t know what the schedule effects are going to be of the writers’ strike.

        • TIG1701

          The show has already been delayed twice BEFORE the threat of the writers strike. It lost its show runner several months before shooting. I heard somewhere they fired their entire FX crew. They showed the ship once, it was hated, they haven’t shown it again since. I’m not talking about just the writers strike man, this show was suppose to come out months ago and now they have no idea when it will come out. There are other shows out there and they are still scheduled to come out when planned.

          Whats lame is suggesting all the delays and firings is because of a strike that hasn’t happened yet. Did a actor completely switch roles after the production started had anything to do with the strike as well?

          I’m not saying they can’t or aren’t working shit out but clearly this thing is not running as smooth as they like. If that was the case the first season would actually be over now with Bryan Fuller as its show runner. I have a feeling Moonves who doesn’t know jack shit about Star Trek or science fiction is screwing it up….badly.

          • TUP

            Westworld was delayed. In fact, they stopped production because the writers were behind. It was “clearly in trouble”. And boy, it sure sucked didnt it?

          • DC Forever

            Exactly. And boy Mad Max Fury Road sure sucked too, despite it’s 1.5 year delay.

          • TIG1701

            Yeah only I never said things can’t better. I mean I said it plain as day in the post you guys apparently didn’t read all the way through.

          • TIG1701

            Its like people only read a few sentences and stop. I said it in my last paragraph:

            “I’m not saying they can’t or aren’t working shit out but clearly this thing is not running as smooth as they like.”

            Can’t make it any clearer man. I just said what you just said. My only point is if you can’t just admit its currently a shitshow you are in real denial. But yeah TNG was a mess first season and a lot of people got fired and left on that show. Once Roddenberry was finally gone, thankfully, after second season it got better. I’m not saying things can’t improve or won’t. People need to read these posts better before responding. Seriously.

          • TUP

            Its not a shitshow. Its filming. Once it started filming, there have been zero reports of issues. They continue to make casting announcements. Unless you consider two actors swapping roles to be a “shitshow”. Id say that, barring them telling us why, we can assume it was a change for the better, the opposite of shitshow.

            The series was delayed. And the showrunner left. That is not terrible uncommon. Especially when talking about an expensive sci fi series.

            So the idea you want to say its a shitshow and then hedge that it could all work out is disingenuous. Relax. And wait for it to air. Then complain.

          • TIG1701

            I say its a shitshow because thats what it sounds like. You mentioned Westworld. And yeah it was delayed–once! Discovery has been delayed three times now. Three. And now they won’t even give us a date when it will show up. And people can’t use that writers strike excuse anymore, that just been resolved.

            I’ll say it again though, even is stuff is still a mess behind the scenes it doesn’t mean they won’t produce a good show. I imagine thats why it keeps being delayed. But I don’t know why it can’t be a bad production but still turn out a decent show? Do you know the history of Hollywood? This is kind of a fairly common thing. We just don’t hear about it as much when the productions are as high profile as Star Trek is. But yes most that are bad usually turn out bad productions but not all. And yeah its a TV show. They have literally years to figure it out like they did for TNG.

    • Tuskin38

      Just because the news was released recently doesn’t mean it happened recently.

      The lead actress had been cast months before we got the press release on it.

  • Harry Kane

    I would rather they get Star Trek Discovery right rather than rush it out, They have alot of work to do. If those wiered looking things were Klingons they better think again, reimaging klingons is stupid, with pretty much know what klingons look like as well as their ships. They need to get this late ENT early TOS look right too. Not some JJ look either. JJ movies just are a joke. Don’t make the same mistake with the series. Look what they did with Star Wars and do the same to Star trek. don’t keep thinking that TOS is the be all and end all. There were many other great series.

    • TIG1701

      Yeah but sadly they went back to TOS which was just stupid. Yeah the JJ films are loved by TOS fans everywhere (heavy sarcasm).

      They really should’ve did something new. Maybe it will surprise us but if those were Klingons its going to piss a lot of people off. And they are just asking for trouble if the look looks too different from TOS. The JJ verse had an excuse at least, this wont. Don’t get why they keep doing this to themselves but maybe third time is the charm?

      • DC Forever

        Seriously??? Trek now looks different because TOS had mid-60’s production values and a small TV budget. And the Klingons in TOS looked like white humans with shoe polish on their face, which was suppose to be alien? Are you kidding me? LOL

        (not that TOS didn’t look cutting edge half a century ago – it certainly did!)

        • TIG1701

          No I mean if the Klingons from that leaked photo of Discovery are them (which they probably are). I’m not taking about the creepy black face space pirates from TOS. If they brought those back I wouldn’t even watch. I’m saying if they look too different than what was shown in the TOS films and the spin offs. I’m fine with changes but if it looks too off from whats been established since the 80s and 90s it might put too many fans off.

          • DC Forever

            Well OK, but to me, I’d actually like a “more alien” take on Klingons. Klingon’s quoting Shakespeare and mating with humans was charming 25 – 30 years ago, but I’m fine with some more realistic scifi re-imagining of them for the 21st century.

          • TIG1701

            But thats the problem IMO because Trek fans don’t like big changes. I would be fine with that if they said it was a reboot of the universe. But if its suppose to be the same universe we always had but make big changes in alien cultures I think its going to put a lot of people off. Why TNG worked so well was because it was so far off from what TOS did that people accepted it as its own thing while still in the same universe.

            But if they throw in these Klingons that act too differently between ENT and TOS I just think a lot of fans will reject it like they rejected the JJ movies. And the JJ movies were in their own universe.

          • DC Forever

            Some fans will react that way, for sure. But if the show is good, or hopefully, great, most fans will come on board.

            Canon bitching and moaning will only prevail for a large percentage of fans if the show is average or a failure.

          • TIG1701

            True, I just think trying to redo something….but different is harder than it looks. I just wish they avoided the 23rd century completely and did another time period where they can do big changes again. I would love the 25th century because they could reimagine everything at least and give us new stuff. The Klingons are boring as hell to me to be honest but I’m hoping they at least give us a lot of new aliens and maybe newer ones like Cardassians.

            But this is basically trying to have their cake and eat it too where they say its just like the old Trek only they changed it all around. Thats the JJ movies in a nut shell and I don’t think it worked for most fans.

            TNG and DS9 took chances. Actually Enterprise took a chance too basing everything pre-Federation but people seem to really hate that show at the time. Hopefully they learned from their mistakes from that show and the JJ verse.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You bring up DS9. So there, they started a new show in parallel to the time-frame of TNG. That would seem to violate your “have their cake and eat it too” point here too, wouldn’t it? Yet, we can both agree that DS9 worked.

            And it certainly looks from what we know of Discovery so far that they are “taking risks”. Obviously this is not going to be a linear Trek prequel like Enterprise. It’s a special mission, and it’s a single season story every year — that is taking a risk in my book.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’m more for the kind of episodic storytelling TNG with arcs.

          • TUP

            Its really the way it should go. Its the trend in dramatic TV especially with shorter seasons. And while Discovery will be released initially on a weekly basis, I’d wager a lot of people will see it when its fully complete and binge watch it.

            Voyager never mattered. Enterprise tried but the writing was so weak over-all it didnt matter very much. The mini-arcs of the final season were more interesting.

            Discovery will surely have stories that resolve themselves in each episode but some threads will continue over the entire season.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I dislike current TV because of that way of telling stories. TV shouldn’t be binged watched but that’s a symptom of serialized storytelling over bothering to create something new each week.

          • TUP

            Opinions vary. I find something new each week boring.

            I didn’t mind tng. because even though it wasn’t serialized there was still a sense of growth and development through experiences. The crew was not the same in episode 100 as they were in episode 1.

            Take the sopranos. They often had little stories per episode but it
            Was still serialized.

            We’ll have to wait and see how serialized Discovery is.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            TNG and DS9 is the way to do TV in my opinion.

          • TUP

            DS9 was a lot more serialized than TNG was. And probably close to what Discovery will be as far as having an over-arcing storyline with week to week stories too. Since its a shorter series, it will likely be more compressed and intense than DS9 but follow the same general vision.

            Which would be fine by me.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            DS9 got it right because it was serialised but had episodic storytelling as well. In my opinion it was closer to TNG than any show made today which is all serialised. If Discovery turns into Game of Thrones, Walking Dead or any other show today we’re in trouble.

          • Eskay

            DS9 was not close at all to the next generation. DS9 was much better then TNG in nearly every area of comparison, and it was a completely different concept. Thank goodness!

            You don’t compare a Lexus to a Kia.

            However, DS9 did capture a lot of the Star Trek character spirit that we hadn’t seen since the original series.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            DS9 and TNG had both serialized arcs and episodic writing. DS9 was more serialised but both did that and very well. I love DS9 but it was way off Star Trek but in that case it worked out great.

          • TIG1701

            Uh thats what they said they would do with Discovery and like DS9. Every episode will have its own story but will be part of a bigger arc. Thats actually how most shows work. Yeah some do just follow the same story all season but most serialized shows actually have episodes with a beginning middle and end, it just connects to the bigger story in some way. That sounds like how Discovery will be done.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Most shows today are nothing like DS9, they’re the TV show 24 without the 24 hour format.

          • TIG1701

            But as I said, it sounds like Discovery will be closer to DS9s model and tell a complete story every episode, just connect it to the bigger arc. And I disagree that most shows are like 24. Yes many are but many aren’t either. I think most sci fi shows though yes most of them are in that format.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Actually, I think Discover will be more episodic than DS9. I think it’s going to be along the line of Game of Thrones.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Lost wasn’t episodic, it was serialised. If you missed one episode that was it.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You are right of course, I had a brain-fart and just corrected my post. I meant “serialized.”

            However, Lost did have some largely episodic episodes they threw in during of the first few seasons. Whereas, Game of Thrones, being based on five novels, is entirely serialized.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It’s how you approach it: for an involving series you don’t want a completely episodic show like Knight Rider or The A-Team but you don’t want a completely serialized show like GOT. You need both like TNG and DS9 or Stargate SG-1. Lost isn’t a good example of that balance.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            We’ll have to see but I’d hate for Discovery to be the first show to just follow the crowd of just doing long, pondering, boring serialised season arcs even if that’s the current trend today.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I would agree that a lot of shows are. But if you go show by show, the majority are still not episodic today.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yep and I think it hurts TV. There needs to be a balance.

          • TIG1701

            Problem is thats how TV is done today, especially sci fi! Sci fi TV is the most serialized than all genres because they can do so much with it. This is all the sci fi shows I currently watch: Westworld, The Expanse, 12 Monkeys, Flash, Agents of SHIELD (that and Flash are comic book shows but basically rooted in sci fi), Stranger Things, The OA, Colony, etc.

            Most of these shows wouldn’t be half as good if they weren’t serialized. That was actually the problem with Voyager to me. I liked it a lot but people had problems with it because every damn week there is a big dramatic crisis, the ship is nearly destoryed, they save everything through technbabble and next week it was like nothing happened. Shipe pristine as always. Voyager’s premise called for more serialization because there was no starbase to stop in inbetween shows. People wanted to see them grow and while they did not at the level they should have like was done on DS9.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Serialized TV is mostly pretty bad today. Most of the time this type of TV is unnecessary. A show like 24 needs to be serialized so it has an excuse but most don’t and most aren’t watchable. It’s lazy storytelling just telling one story. Episodic TV forces the writers to be creative each week. Serialized TV more than often is victim to hardly anything of consequence happening. That’s why people binge watch these shows, because very little of incident occurs in each episode but contributes to the overall arc. It’s really quite poor if you think about it. Voyager wasn’t perfect, no one really wants to see a slowly crap looking ship each week. The problem of Voyager wasn’t episodic writing but the writers working together to drive the characters forward while keeping a continuity.

          • TIG1701

            We disagree about the ‘lazy storytelling’ part. Serialization is long form story telling. Its actually quite hard because you ARE telling new stories while building on a bigger story. Its not like new plot lines and situations are not created, its done all the time, the difference being it adds to a much bigger grander story. Why do you think MCU is so popular today? Its doing something different where its telling this much bigger story but still having each film have their own separate stories. Its exciting how its done because you feel like you are part of this grand adventure that extends to multiple characters and time periods. People like stuff like that because they feel they are involved in this grand mythology.

            And I think thats why serialization is more popular today because people get invested in mythology more and more. Sure TOS and TNG certainly had it but they couldn’t do the deep dive the way DS9 did with its mythology and characters. It tells you everything when I know way more about Nog who was just a side character on DS9 then I do Sulu who was a main character in 3 seasons and 6 films. Thats what people want today.

            You may tell yourself its ‘bad’ today but look around. What are the most talked about TV shows recently? Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, Homeland, Breaking Bad, Stranger Things, House of Cards, etc. Look at what wins the Emmys as well.

            There are still lots of episodic TV and its very popular but who talks about any of it? There are five NCIS shows, all big hits, I never hear anyone ever talk about those shows in a way people talk about Stranger Things, Breaking Bad or the first season of True Detective.

            Episodic TV works great for sitcoms but for dramas its really lost interest for most people and why Discovery is following that trend.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “Its actually quite hard because you ARE telling new stories ” You;’re telling one story with contrived plot twists. That’s how modern TV works.

            “while building on a bigger story that has to make sense and stay compelling years later.” Which they make up as they go along from episode to episode.

            “Lost for example told a new story about a character practically every episode. It was character driven as well as plot driven. ” Lost is a great example of what’s wrong with modern TV. It makes absolutely no sense, even the writers don’t understand what they were doing!

            “Its doing something different where its telling this much bigger story but still having each film have their own separate stories.” The MCU fails for me for many reasons, one being that it heavily relies on watching all the films in order to make any sense.That’s a very cynical approach to movie making.

            “People like stuff like that because they feel they are involved in this grand mythology.” I feel no involvement at all. But then I don’t like big soulless CGI movies.

            “Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, Homeland, Breaking Bad, Stranger Things, House of Cards, etc. Look at what wins the Emmys as well.” Tastes have changed true but that doesn’t mean people have good tastes does it?

            “There are five NCIS shows, all big hits, I never hear anyone ever talk about those shows in a way people talk about Stranger Things, Breaking Bad or the first season of True Detective.” NCIS is episodic storytelling at it’s worst.

            “Episodic TV works great for sitcoms but for dramas its really lost interest for most people and why Discovery is following that trend.” Which is probably why it will fail because people want to experience and see wondrous new worlds and civilisations. You can’t do that with one paper thin plot spread across an entire season.

          • TIG1701

            Reading your responses it comes down to you just don’t like serialized story telling. Well sorry but thats how it is because most people do. Episodic TV was the 80s and 90s. Its a different approach today.

            And I disagree with you about MCU. You don’t need to watch all the movies to understand what is going on. Thats false. There are still 3-4 movies I have never seen (Hulk, Iron Man 2 and 3 and Ant Man) and I understand everything else just fine. Because the movies do tell their own stories and give you background on past stories in those movies. The only movies you probably have to watch are the movies in the individual franchises like for example you probably need to watch the Captain America movies to understand Civil War. Or watch the first Avenger movie to understand Age of Ultron. But generally the films are made where you can watch them all or separately. They don’t have just one story going from film to film, just elements of stories being played into them. And movies like GOTG are basically standalone.

            However the one thing we do agree on is LOST. You’re completely right on that but LOST was a bit different because they didn’t have a plan when they made the first season. They were just winging it. They thought the show wouldn’t last longer than a season so they just threw in a lot of crazy shit to get people watching. But when it became a hit they had to change a lot.

            But I think since LOST many writers and producers have learned from that mistake and have planned their stories from the beginning. Someone mentioned Westworld on this page and thats exactly what they did. They shut down production and rewrote everything because they wanted the mythology to last five seasons so wrote the first season in that way. Its been said Discovery mythology was already completely written out before they wrote the first episode. That might have changed since Fuller left and they made changes to it but they at least planned out where the entire season was going from the beginning. They didn’t do that with LOST and why it became a shitshow later on.

            And its funny you say Discovery will fail spreading a plot across one season when DS9 had no problems doing that for five. 😉

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “Its a different approach today.” And not for the better.

            “You don’t need to watch all the movies to understand what is going on.” The MCU films aren’t full movies, they don’t standalone, they were made to be binged watched which is why Marvel release something like two or three Marvel movies a year. Sure the movies sometimes feature different characters but the structure is the same, the tone is the same. I know some directors behind the movies have complained about Marvel movies all having to be the same, they can’t do anything different.

            “They thought the show wouldn’t last longer than a season so they just threw in a lot of crazy shit to get people watching.” They were still making it up as they went along, all the way to the end. Even some loyal viewers eventually stopped watching due to feeling like they were being scammed. I could have told them that with the pilot.

            “But I think since LOST many writers and producers have learned from that mistake and have planned their stories from the beginning.” Yet episodes of any TV show still feel the same as one another, none have an identity of their own. One episode becomes another without any differences. Westworld is exactly the same as LOST.

            “when DS9 had no problems doing that for five” DS9 handled it great because of – guess what – episodic writing!

          • TIG1701

            Maybe this would be easier if I knew what shows are you currently watching today? I mean what are you watching this year? What are your favorite shows? Because I can tell you all the shows I love and watch are serialized. The best shows considered on the air today are serialized. GOT is easily the hottest show and yeah its no way that show would get away being anything but serialized. So you say ‘not for the better’ well then tell me what you are watching right now that you think is ‘better’?

            As for MCU, you don’t have to watch every single one to understand what is actually going on thats all. But of course they are made to be binged watch. They are comic book movies thats the point, they want and expect fans to watch them all just like if you are a Star Trek fan they expect you to watch every episode even if you don’t have to. As far as the formula being the same that’s different from your argument they all have to be watched to understand what is going on. That is completely false. As I said its not to say you can watch all of them alone and understand it, that would be false too but not all of them. Usually 1 or 2 and thats for films that are 2nd or 3rd in a franchise. You don’t watch the movies…I do. So I have a little more back up regarding this.

            That’s not completely true about LOST though. Yes they were make it up mostly but by second season they created the mythology for the show. But the problem with that and Damon Lindeloff has discussed it many times was that because they didn’t know exactly when the show was going to end they still added more mysteries to keep the show going. This is the problem with American TV in general, especially for shows like LOST which isn’t meant to run for 10 seasons. So in other words they actually had a plan where they wanted the show to go the issue was they didn’t know exactly when the show would end and it made it harder on its direction. But at the end of the third season, they finally negotiated with the network when to end if and the writers had a roadmap to get to the end after that. But yes by then the damage has been done and they wrote themselves into the corner a lot of times. I’m not saying they didn’t make mistakes, clearly they did but it would be a different show if they knew from the first episode just how long the show would last. Unfortunately in American TV its all about ratings. So it could be cancelled after 10 episodes or last 10 seasons. Thats not easy when you just don’t know season by season.

            Actually whats interesting about DS9 was it started out as an episodic show like TOS and TNG did. But you probably don’t know is Steven Ira Behr wanted to serialize the show from the beginning. He thought DS9 had to tell its story different from the other two because it was in one place and he wanted the stories to grow past a crisis of the week. But Rick Berman and the studio was against it. But he finally started to get his way was because of the Dominion and said the only way they can have a war arc was for the stories to continue and create a broader story line. Berman and the studio didn’t like the idea at first but to their credit trusted him and let him do it but only if not every episode was about the Dominion, that they made other stories as well and thats what they did. But the writers wanted the show to be more serialized from the start.

            And I think the studio changed their mind on it because this was around the mid 90s and serialization was really staring how we see it today. Shows like ER, NYPD Blue and X Files (still told standalone stories but the alien arc became heavy serialized and made the show really popular) were becoming big hits and that they kept their audience week after week. But notice they still couldn’t do that on Voyager but Voyager was a network show and already getting higher ratings than DS9 so didn’t want to rock the boat I guess.

            So yes there are lots of reasons to this. None of black and white. The point is though story telling today is very different. This is what audiences want, at least most. And you won’t find one sci fi show today that isn’t serialized which means you must not watch any sci fi shows on today. I watch plenty and they are all done that way. When TOS came on there was stuff like Twilight Zone and Outer Limits. Episodic TV and anthology story telling was in. Today it simply isn’t.

          • Eskay

            LOL Lay off the crack pipe.

            Most critics and the vast majority of the general public agree that we are in the golden age of TV now with many cable serialized shows being viewf ad better than most movies Hollywood puts out.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Maybe you should lay off the drugs? I say that because that’s the funniest thing I’ve had all week. Honestly you’re winding me up saying that aren’t you? You’re not being serious. Come on, own up.

          • TIG1701

            DS9 was completely different from TNG though. Hell it was different than everything. Yes Discovery sounds like it will be something different but then then throw in Sarek and Harry Mudd and my heart drops. No one needs that nostalgia crap ram down our throats. Its like they think we need 50 year old characters to show up to watch. Oh yeah thats how we got the JJ movies. Groan.

            I’m giving the show a chance but Star Trek needs to grow and do something different. The JJ verse did ‘different’ by turning it into Star Wars and lost fans that way. I’m hoping Discovery will be different and actually intellectual again and not just dumb down like the JJ movies. Hopefully it will. Maybe you’re right and this could DS9 again in the sense its something never done before and not just a TOS redux.

          • Eskay

            Weren’t you the guy who just a week ago was whining about the Klingons looking different? But now you’re complaining that the series needs to be completely different? Huh?

            Make up your mind; which is it?

            Some people complain here all the time so much that they even contradict themselves without even realizing it .

          • TIG1701

            You obviously didn’t read what I said very well. I said I have no problems with the Klingons looking different if it was in its own canon, ie, a reboot. I don’t give a shit the Klingons look different, I’m saying it will probably piss people off if they look too different from the canon in this timeline.

            Thats why I think it was stupid to go back to TOS. I want something completely different but I realize you really can’t do that in a set timeline and it has to conform to a lot what came before or people will bitch about it. Thats my issue man.

            But I would also be fine if they just rebooted the whole thing and put the series TOS but not have to constrain itself looking exactly like the other shows did. I would be all for it. The problem here is they are trying to pull another JJ verse move and make it different while telling you its the same. And that was in a different universe. I just don’t think Trek fans will like the idea of a soft reboot in a known timeline. Thats the real problem IMO.

            Get it now guy?

          • TIG1701

            I have no idea why but I wrote to you several times but for some odd reason my response keeps getting rejected. I’ll try it one last time.

            Reread my posts please. I NEVER said I had a problem with the Klingons being different. I was saying I think others will because it will be in an already set timeline. I said I’m completely fine with it if they had it in new canon or timeline. But because they are trying to do a soft reboot in an old timeline would make it harder to accept for fickle fans.

            Thats why I said putting the show in TOS timeline is just stupid IF they plan to make major changes to everything. Most fans just won’t accept that. Look what happened with the JJ movies. Those movies were literally in another universe and people still bitched everything looked too advance and the ships were too big. Believe me, they will be bitching if Discovery does the same thing.

            So do you get the difference now man? I personally don’t care how the Klingons look. In fact I would be fine if they rebooted the TOS timeline and made it as different and advance as they wanted. The problem is they are trying to say its still the same timeline from the Kirk show but change everything in it. I just think thats heading for trouble personally. Soft reboots can work but usually in sequel form. Stuff like TDK movies or the new James Bond films were hard reboots so people accepted that. Thats what they should do with Star Trek but for some reason really scared to try for some reason.

          • Eskay

            Well posting that “others may have a problem with it” comes across to me as “negativity with plausable deniability.” 🙂

          • TIG1701

            Well then your reading comprehension is worse than I thought if you can’t distinguish when I say *I’m* OK with it but it may suck for others. So glad you understand now bud. Live long and prosper.

          • TIG1701

            “I’m fine with changes but if it looks too off from whats been established since the 80s and 90s it might put too many fans off.”

            That was literally in my second post. This is why message boards are useless. People either have very bad reading comprehension or they don’t take the time to read all the responses but then want to argue over an argument that is false. One you would’ve known if you just read the posts more clearly. Sigh.

          • M33

            In a way, however, “canon bitching” is what took down Enterprise.

          • GIBBS v2

            That’s why they shouldn’t mess around with the past. I personally want to jump another 50 years past TNG then no one can complain about anything.

          • DC Forever

            That’s an invalid conclusion.

            Enterprise was not a very good show — the uneven casting and acting, the generally abysmil writing, and the lack of quality production leadership until it was too late, was why the show was bad.

            Enterprise was a poor show, regardless of it’s time-point in the Star Trek timeline.

          • M33

            It is true that no matter how much Hollywood can stuff a show or movie full of “production value”, if the writing is terrible, the show will die and be forgotten (unless Mystery Science Theater 3000 rediscovers it).

            The only exception to this rule so far seems to be the modern Transformers movies. Terrible writing, huge budgets, big box office returns.
            God, those movies are awful…

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            The reason the Transformers movie succeed financially is because they are geared to 4 to 14 year olds, and become movies that parents will take the entire family to…that is a huge market, just like the Disney animated movies.

          • M33

            True, but I wouldn’t put them in the category as “family” movies.
            At least most of the Disney animated movies have some taste and don’t always seek the lowest form of barely palatable humor.

            Just my opinion anyway.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I hear you, but when I’ve gone to the theater to see a couple of them, it’s been July, and the theater is filled with kids and their parents. So in terms of “families buying tickets,” (which drives the worldwide box office results) that was my point.

            I am not claiming these are good movies…only explaining the box office results. Kids want to see them — it’s that simple.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I agree. Enterprise was so bad that you really can’t draw any conclusions from it that relate to Discovery. A turd is a turd,

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The last season was pretty good. Had it started that way Enterprise would be a winner.

          • M33

            Even the writers for the 24th century shows complained about canon tying their hands. A 25th century show would still have all the prior shows canon to contend with, meaning they really couldn’t muck about with established species very much like Klingons, Vulcans, etc.

            It is a creative conundrum for many writers, and that is also what frustrated so many of the Enterprise writers, too.
            Eventually, the same stories get retold over and over, but with “insert new race here”, or “insert new planet here”.

            I think what worked best is something like DS9 where you get to use existing canon, but blended with new things that are the primary storytelling device, and you have characters that develop intricate connections over time, which creates its own story.

            I think the same could have happened with a new series that maybe opened up the exploration to wider than the galaxy, say a new drive that brings an experimental ship into different galaxies, different risks, and close bonding of characters.
            Kinda like Stargate Universe except without all the dark & gloomy and WB-drama-cheese.
            Voyager tried to do that as well, but fell into catering to the “TNG-comfort” crowd, sterilizing the storytelling power.

            Just my 2 cents.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            GREAT POST M33 !!!

            I pretty much agree with everything you are saying here.

            However, the one new cool, original and risky thing that we are going to see in Discovery is the season-long story arc. That may provide some of the newness and originality that we saw in DS9, but which was lacking in Voyager and Enterprise.

          • TUP

            Canon is only a problem when a writer accepts a job writing for STAR TREK and then cant believe they dont get to write whatever they want.

            JJ had no issue with canon when he wrote Star Wars. Hmmmm

          • DC Forever

            Well I think you just proved out what I said.

            Most fans think of Enterprise as at best, average, and at worst, a failure. And so, yes, canon bitching became a big issue with Enterprise

            The fans’ response to Enterprise validates my point. Thanks for bringing up that example.

    • DC Forever

      Lol — Klingons keep changing with every new era of Star Trek. Get real!

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Yeah look what they did with Star Wars and…oh dear…

  • Harry Kane

    Good Casting Changes btw, the better sort the look out of the Ship and Starfleet. Everyone undestands it can’t be exactly like the 1960’s TOS look but it needs to be best of bothworlds like ENT did, So discovery should look %50 late ENT and %50 early enhanced TOS look, bearing in mind how the 24th century starfleet look would evolve to what we see in Star Trek Nemesis, which is a current modern look

  • Harry Kane

    Star Trek Evolved by going through the century’s. STO has done a fine job doing what CBS and Paramount failed to do on TV and in the movies

    • TUP

      Thats not really true. There were two “centuries”, TOS and TNG and everything sprung from them. They didnt advance TOS 100 years. They advanced a reasonable period considering the passage of real time between the 60s and 80’s. Voy & DS9 and TNG films were all modern to TNG.

      Enterprise is the outlier but was really sold with the idea of showing us a pre’TOS, but it also contradicts your assertion.

      there is no substantial history of Trek “evolving” by advancing the time line. They did it once. And since then have actually gone back to exploring the pre-TOS time line.

  • Harry Kane

    If the people designing STO were doing discovery, we wouldn’t have any concerns about the new show working fully with established designs and principlies in ENT, TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and the TNG Movies….

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Here’s a thought. String all of your sentences together in one post.

  • I wonder if the book that Kenneth Mitchell is reading has been specifically suggested to read by the writers or has any significance on the show?

    • Barry Ellis

      I’m pretty sure you’ve hit on something there. This book tells an ‘Undiscovered Country’ kind of story (which we know has been an influence), but it tells it from the Klingon point of view (i.e. The conspiracy is with the Klingons).

      It’s a shame that most people on here are so busy bickering in their un-optimistic, anti-Star Trek way that they probably won’t even notice!

  • Fiery Little One

    Some interesting names from the new comers. I wonder what caused the change though to one of the previously announced actors.

    • spooky

      Reaction to the makeup perhaps?

      • Fiery Little One

        I was thinking it had to be something along those lines actually. It wouldn’t be the first time either. The only reason we never saw Jadzia in a Klingon disguise, even though she knows just as much as Worf, is because Terry had a bad reaction to it. Or so I’ve heard.

        • Xandercom

          Shoddy acting, writer’s strikes, poor planning, not having shot an actual episode yet.. could be anything!

          • Fiery Little One

            There is that, yes.

  • Darkthunder

    Ujilli ?

    That’s a strange name for a Klingon. Names usually sound a bit more powerful:

    Worf, Martok, Gowron, Duras, Kang, Kor, Koloth, Gorkon… and Ujilli.
    (one of these things is not like the other)

  • TIG1701

    Well some good news people. Hack Les Moonves said the show is still coming in the early fall. It was confirmed today. So I guess now that the strike is averted things are back on track. Lets hope they really mean it (this time).

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      There you go again. Sigh

      • TIG1701

        Having an opinion. Yeah. Sorry.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Since Moonves took over, the schedule was eventually brought on track from the Fuller cluster-f#ck, production was started, a stellar cast signed up, and only the writer’s strike was in the way of another delay.

          ALL OF THE DELAYS ARE ON BRIAN FULLER.

          • TIG1701

            Are you Moonves boyfriend or something? Its not just the delays I have said I think its idiotic to try and do a soft reboot in TOS time period. Its just going to piss fans off. But I think its idiotic to set it in TOS period, Should’ve been something completely different where they can really do new things. But Fuller gets the blame for that one too since he set the show there.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Now you are changing the subject. LOL

          • TIG1701

            WTF I din’t change anything man. You responded because I called him a hack. WTF do you think I meant by that? Can you go away now? You seem pretty annoying on these boards.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Your initial post refereed to the schedule and being sarcastic about further delays. Stop begin obtuse.

          • TIG1701

            No man I was actually complementing the guy. I was saying I was happy the show was back on schedule and why I shared it. I still think the show is going in a totally wrong direction but I’ll wait to be proven wrong on that when it airs. But everything I heard so far though it just sounds like a bad, bad idea coming from this guy.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            OK, well I apologize then if I misread your intent. It sure looked sarcastic, but I will take your word for it.

          • TIG1701

            Yeah I meant it. Look at my first and last sentence. If I wanted to be a smartass I can do better than that.

            Now I feel bad for telling you to go away. I apologize too. OK?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Yea, no problem. Truth is we both want the show to be good, but I am “reading the tea leaves” in a completely different way than you are.

          • TIG1701

            Ok thats cool. Look I hope to be wrong, I do. I been waiting for a new show like everyone else here. I just don’t want them to F it up because if it fails we’ll probably be waiting another 10 years for another.

  • Lora

    I really hope that they will not change a canon look of klingons in this series. I want TOS like klingons.