First Live-Action STAR TREK: DISCOVERY Trailer Debuts!

304
15093

In New York City today, CBS debuted the first live-action trailer for Star Trek: Discovery, coming this fall on their CBS All Access streaming platform.

If you’re not able to watch the YouTube version above, here’s an alternate:

In addition to this wild new trailer – from which we’ll have high-resolution screencaps as soon as we can get them! – CBS also announced more news about the upcoming show:

  • Originally planned for a 13-episode run, Discovery has been expanded to a 15-episode first season.
  • Rumored back in 2016, the network confirmed today that Talking Trek, a post-episode discussion show, will accompany the series as it debuts this fall.

The additional commitment of two additional episodes is the most tangible evidence you can find in the industry when it comes to studio support. CBS will literally be pouring millions of extra dollars into the production arm for those additional episodes, showcasing a level of support a showrunner could usually only dream of.

There is still no word on an official release date (beyond ‘this fall’), but it was reconfirmed that the first episode will be broadcast on CBS.

CBS also released this new promotional poster for the series:

That’s the big news out of New York today – so watch the trailer, and sound off in the comments below with your thoughts!

  • Your Worst Nightmare

    I think it looks pretty damned good, myself.

    • worgel

      I will watch the first episode and while doing so I will yell BOOOOOO until my throat is sore.

      • Your Worst Nightmare

        Make sure you have plenty of Ricola!

  • David James

    Not totally sold on the uniforms yet, but everything else looks great (including the much more fearsome looking Klingons). I just hope the writing is a lot deeper and more complex than what we got on VOY, ENT, and JJTREK.

  • Oswald Nimoy

    Very excited. I love how the show is looking from the costumes, sets, panel graphics and overall style of the show. Lots of juicy little character & plot mysteries woven in there too.

  • jerr

    hmmm…… Looks good… but are those Klingons? Not sure about that part. I’ll still watch it though!!

  • Tzadik

    Looks good! I hope we get an explanation as to why everyone is wearing a Delta on their uniforms, but other than that… I’m onboard!

    Nice to see the overall positive response from this. Even on the subreddit, where humanity normally goes to die, LOL, people are hyped!

  • M33

    Did they change the ship design?
    If so, looks good.
    However, the inside of the ship looks A LOT like the Kelvin.
    The production design is amazing.
    How does any of this fit into the Prime Timeline?
    Not so sure about that part.
    The Kelvin Timeline no problem.

    • The USS KELVIN is from the prime timeline, and was destroyed in the Kelvin Timeline – the split to the new universe occurred when the Narada came through the black hole.

      • no, there was no “split”. the so-called “Kelvin Timeline” is a parallel universe that already existed before the events of the movie STAR TREK. time travel in STAR TREK physics doesn’t “split” off new “timelines”. the black hole simply took the Narada and the Jellyfish into a parallel universe. the “split” theory doesn’t even make sense in itself, because if the Narada’s arrival from the black hole had branched off a new “timeline” from 2233, then the Jellyfish’s arrival would also have branched off another new “timeline” from 2258. then Nero and Spock would have ended up in two different “timelines” and would never have met. so the only logical explanation that actually fits what we see on screen, is that the black hole took them into a parallel universe.

        • Thomas Elkins

          No, the JJ-Universe has been officially called the “Kelvin Timeline” because the destruction of the USS Kelvin is where the timeline’s diverged. This is even stated in the first movie when they discuss whether or not Nero knows what’s going to happen. He doesn’t because his incursion changed the events of the future making an alternate universe.

          • none of what you say is canon. the name “Kelvin Timeline” doesn’t come from within canon. and the canon never establishes any “split” either.

            listen to the conversation in the movie STAR TREK again. Spock never says that anything was “split off”. all he says is that the appearance of the Narada changed the course of events. and then Uhura calls it an “alternate reality”, which Spock agrees with. but “alternate reality” doesn’t mean that it was split off. it only means that reality was altered.

            and again: if the “split” theory were true, then Spock’s arrival in 2258 would have split off another “timeline”, and then Nero and Spock would have ended up in two different “timelines” and would never have met. so the “split” theory doesn’t apply.

          • Thomas Elkins

            You do realize “changed course of events” and “alternate reality” are the divergent “split” right? Every potential possible outcome creates an alternate reality as explained by Data in “Parallels”. If you walk into a room and turn right, there exists an alternate universe where you turned left. Using this model we can explain that the USS Kelvin in the Prime Universe turned right and returned to Earth without indident. The Kelvin Universe exists because the Kelvin turned left and investigated a spacial anomoly and was destroyed in battle.

            Spock would have arrived in that reality because he followed the Nerada’s temporal wake, but he arrived later and saw the results of Nero’s change.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            no, what you’re saying isn’t correct in STAR TREK physics. if time travel (or anything else) created parallel universes the way you describe, then none of the time travel stories in STAR TREK would happen the way they do.

            for example: when McCoy goes through the Guardian of Forever and changes the past, according to your (false) theory, he would have created a new parallel universe and left the original universe unchanged. but clearly that is not what happens in the episode, because the changes he makes in the past affect Kirk and Spock in the future. so the changes do not “split off” a parallel universe, they change the Prime Universe.

            the same is true for “YESTERDAY’S ENTERPRISE”, STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT, “PAST TENSE”, and virtually every other time travel episode in STAR TREK.

            so your “theory” is absolutely incorrect.

            and again: if the “split” theory were true, then Spock’s arrival in 2258 would have split off another “timeline”, and then Nero and Spock would have ended up in two different “timelines” and would never have met. so the “split” theory doesn’t apply.

          • Thomas Elkins

            Yes, actually it is correct in Star Trek physics because you’re forgetting, or intentionally ignoring, the episodes where this is what happened. Do you remember “Future’s End” when Captain Braxton witnesses the destruction of the Sol System in the 29th century? He ended up traveling back in time in order to destroy Voyager because he held it responsible for this destruction, but when they resisted he ended up on Earth in 1968. The Voyager was also sent back in time, but just like Spock in the 2009 movie, the Voyager didn’t arrive at the same time. Instead they arrived in 1996 where they found Braxton living in LA as a homeless man because he spent all that time powerless to get his timeship back.

            The Voyager didn’t end up in another universe, they arrived in the same universe Braxton did, just a few years later. This Braxton still originated from the universe where the Sol System was destroyed, and despite the fact Voyager managed to prevent this from happening, that universe still exists. The Voyager crew would meet that Braxton again in the episode “Relativity” when they discover him attempting to destroy the Voyager again because he holds Janeway responsible for stranding him on Earth in 1968. He didn’t just disappear because the timeline was “fixed”, it continued to exist. They then capture a Braxton who planted the bomb on Voyager, another Braxton who failed to plant the bomb on Voyager and the Captain who was still in command of Relativity and hadn’t attempted to destroy Voyager yet. All of these people continued to exist, and 29th century Starfleet was apparently able to deal with this paradoxes, but all alternate universes continued to exist.

            In “Year of Hell” the Voyager destroyed the Krenim timeship and reset the timeline, so Annorax never built the ship to begin with. However there is an earlier episode called “Before and After” where Kes would visit the future, (actually start in the future and move backwards), and one of the events she experiences is the Year of Hell. You’d think this universe wouldn’t exist at all because the Voyager “erased” it, but that’s not how quantum physics works. You see, this was only one possible future the Voyager could have experienced. This particular experience was one where Kes was still serving aboard Voyager. Of course in what we call the Prime Universe Kes would leave Voyager and Seven of Nine would be aboard when they encounter the Krenim. This does not change the fact that a universe exists where Kes was aboard ship during Year of Hell.

            This is because the rules of quantum physics is continuous. If you walk into a room and turn right, there exists a universe where you turned left. If you find yourself in an alternate universe, those rules still apply. You’re presented with this left or right choice in the alternate universe just like you would in your own universe. If you turn right in the alternate universe, then ANOTHER universe is created where you turned left. Any and all possible outcomes will play out creating a never ending stream of alternate realities. That’s why Kes could see the Krenim battle even though Janeway “reset” that universe. Every possible outcome still played out, meaning Year of Hell could still be experienced by Kes.

            This means that the universe where McCoy saved Edith Keeler would technically still exist, as well as any other potential outcomes. There could be a universe where Kirk and Spock failed to get away from the police and were arrested. There could be an alternate universe where Kirk is there, but still fails to stop McCoy. The universe would play out all outcomes.

            It’s not always like Back to the Future where they can actually see newspapers change based on what they do. For example, when the Enterprise-C returned to it’s proper time to fight the Romulans, Tasha Yar of the alternate universe didn’t fade away like Marty McFly at the Enchantment Under the Sea Dance. She continued to exist, just as the multiple different Braxtons continued to exist, because realities don’t just disappear.

            So yes, it is within the realm of Star Trek physics for the Kelvin Timeline to exist the way it does. In the Prime Timeline the USS Kelvin would return home without incident and Shatner Kirk would be born on Earth to two loving parents. But when a temporal anomaly appeared, the USS Kelvin instead turned to investigate which created an alternate universe where Pine Kirk is born in space and his father is killed in battle. That’s how this works.

            If you’re still in denial at this point then there is nothing anyone can do for you.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            all you have done now is prove exactly my point. my point has been all along that time travel in STAR TREK has NEVER “split off” parallel universes, and it didn’t do so in the movie STAR TREK either.

            but many people CLAIM that when Nero goes through the black hole back to the year 2233, it somehow “splits off” a parallel universe. and to that i say: if Nero’s emergence from the black hole in 2233 had actually “split off” a parallel universe, then to be logically consistent, Spock’s emergence from the black hole in 2258 would ALSO have to “split off” a parallel universe. but this clearly doesn’t happen, because if it had happened, then Nero and Spock would be in two separate universes which both “split off” from the Prime Universe, and then they wouldn’t meet in 2258. this proves that the whole “split off” theory is nonsense.

            what does happen in STAR TREK is that time travel alters the universe you’re in, you have described in all the examples you mentioned.

            and therefore the only logically consistent theory for the movie STAR TREK is that both the Narada and the Jellfyish went through the black hole into a parallel universe.

            whether the USS Kelvin exists in the Prime and the Kelvin Universes isn’t actually clear from what we see in screen, but i don’t see any logical reason to assume that the USS Kelvin didn’t exist in the Prime Universe. she may have had more TOS-like technology in the Prime Universe, but that is only speculation.

      • M33

        My “this” was vague.
        I meant “this show”, not the Kelvin starship itself.
        I do know the Kelvin was in both timelines and this shows design ethos does seem to reflect what was established by the Kelvin itself.
        Thanks though in case I hadn’t been aware.

    • M33

      My other issue is I have a hard time grasping that all this tech is running on duotronics, which came out in the early 2240s.
      That technology had a very specific effect on the way the tech looked and worked.
      It will be interesting to see how or if the narrative resolves the seemingly numerous canon conflicts they have already created.

    • TIG1701

      No that ship is the USS Shenzhou, Yeoh’s ship. Whats crazy they haven’t shown anything from Discovery yet. Hopefully that piece of shit will look as good as this though or better.

    • Tone

      The Discovery design has been modified, but was not featured in the trailer at all.

  • Havenbull

    Oh god no… this looks horrible… very feminized.

    • M33

      LOL
      Babe Trek?

      • Havenbull

        It is very much so. At first it had my curiosity, but now it has my concerns.

        • Aaron

          Because there are a lot of prominent female characters? Seriously, that’s your complaint. What happened to IDIC?

          • Havenbull

            Too many prominent aliens… this IDIC wasn’t established in this timeline.

          • Come on. The only reason there weren’t more aliens in the original series was because of budget considerations.

            If you’re actually worried about the girls, we haven’t even seen the Captain of the Discovery yet played by Jason Isaacs.

            These complaints come across like a ten-year-old boy yelling about girls having cooties.

          • Havenbull

            Your avatar indicates you have a hipster beard, so that does not surprise me.

          • Aaron

            Either you’re being a troll, or Star Trek simply isn’t for you (nor was it ever for you with the attitude you have).

          • Havenbull

            Why would I be trolling the Trekcore board if I wasn’t a fan? Fans can’t by snarky or critical…? We have to fall in line with the full inclusionary over-feminatizion aspect, where machismo is a bad thing.

            Lame if you think so.

          • SG

            Leonard Nimoy was a feminist. He would be disgusted at you. If a version of Star Trek with more women than men bothers you, then you should think about how bothered star trek female fans were for 50 fucking years.
            It’s time you grow up.

          • Havenbull

            Nice meltdown. Please show me a female that was bothered by the overly male cast in the last fifty years… and I doubt he was the feminist you think he is.

          • Ilpalazzo

            Michaelle Yeoh and Sasha look to be the captains. Isaacs will probably be the ‘russian spy’ ‘bad white’ captain

          • M33

            Well… in the old days, the Klingons were a stand-in for “bad-guy” Russians. Seems like at least one political party will be happy with the recreation of this dynamic.
            (All in jest, of course)

    • Locutus

      The acting from the female leads looks excellent, particularly Sasha. That is all I ask for.

      • Nick

        You gotta be kidding. Everyone in this trailer was wooden.

        • Locutus

          Commander Burnham is probably a human embracing Vulcan culture, and we see a lot of Sarek and the Burnham character. Face it, Vulcans can be a little wooden. I think folks are misperceiving what is being shown somewhat.

        • SG

          Translation: I can’t appreciate the talent of female actors because I’m a raging misogynist.

  • MichaelMeir-Wright

    Looks like the ancient Klingon rumour was right.

    Amazing trailer.

  • Charlie Carden

    the super duper TREK nerd in me is having the same pangs of continuity complaints…but visually, it already tops anything TREK put on TV. TIme will tell if it’s just a pretty face or the real deal!

  • Kyle Swinderman

    I’m guessing this takes place in the Kelvin Timeline, right?

    • Aaron

      Nope, the producers have already stated this is part of the Prime Timeline.

      • Kyle Swinderman

        Hmmm. Little hard to believe that this is before TOS. ENT was a stretch at times but this technology looks way far ahead of TOS…

        • it’s a parallel universe. or if you have to believe that it’s the Prime Universe, then it’s simply explained by changes to the timeline made during FIRST CONTACT and other time incursions.

          • Bifash

            I like to think it’s the Prime Universe, just told through the lens of 2017 production values – that works fine for me.
            I do like the very 1950s-sci-fi era uniforms though.

          • worgel

            Too bad FIRST CONTACT was just an uninspired generic action movie and sadly the best of all four TNG TV movies of the week.

        • Lora

          CBS lied. This is not prime universe.

          • you don’t know that.

          • Aaron

            proof?

          • Lora

            Trailer is the proof….

          • MichaelMeir-Wright

            Oh for the love of god… get over it. This is the Prime Universe as seen through the 21st century. You would complain if they had aesthetics more in line with the 1960s TOS.

            Quite simply put: you don’t want to like this series for some unfathomable reason and you are grasping at straws. Put the keyboard down and go outside.

          • The Chadwick

            Get over yourself. Take history for example. History changes the more information we find, especially prehistoric. We find new fossils we find new evidence. We find new Roman ruins it updates our history! Imagine we found missing scrolls from the library at Alexandria, history would be changed and updated accordingly. Same with Star Trek, its been called the history of the future. Would it not be logical that it would change? What if the TOS Kirk era actually looks like Discovery rather than what it did in the 60’s? I would say relax and allow yourself to enjoy the show cuz right now it’s the only Star Trek you’re getting and it’s not going to change cuz a small percentage of fans are complaining! But if you want to keep pouting it’s solely your loss. The rest of us will be enjoying with a big ass smile on our face 😀

        • Montreal_Paul

          That’s because 1966 cardboard sets won’t cut it in 2017.

          • Bifash

            Precisely.

          • Zarm

            Seriously, dude. There was no cardboard. And updated TOS sets ‘cut it’ in Enterprise as well as various fanfilms like Star Trek Continues; there’s a difference between building materials and the limits of available construction technology in the 60s, and the actual aesthetic, which can be updated to modern standards of detail, rather than abandoned in favor of an entirely new aesthetic.

          • M33

            As Brannon Braga himself stated, Star Trek is a period piece, albiet a future one.
            It has an established history, culture, jargon, look all its own.
            To hear folks say “its okay because it’s an updated look for modern audiences” would be like redesigning what people wore, lived in, spoke like during the Revolutionary War, or the Crusades, or even the 1950s. Every period has a look that fixes it in time. To reinvent something that is established fact for the sake of superficial appeasement of the masses is to be disingenous to the subject at hand.
            On one hand, this does not come as a surprise to me at all. This is classic Hollywood thinking. On the other hand, while I think the whole thing looks really well-done, I am surprised by the darker aesthetic, considering it was Fuller himself in an early interview who stated how much he wanted to go back to the “colors” and “feel” of the 60s show. This has none of that.
            We shall see. No doubt that it will be entertaining.

          • TIG1701

            I said it here a week ago, if they wanted to do Pre-TOS then just reboot it completely. This soft reboot crap was only going to piss off a lot of fans and I was right. I knew this was coming. I saw it a long time ago. Fuller made it clear it was going to be different but to be this different in this time period would upset people like the JJ verse did. Have no idea what they were thinking? I’m personally fine with it but I agree 100% it would’ve just been smarter to set it somewhere else.

            I forgot Fuller said it was going to be more colorful. But maybe that was changed when he got the boot?

          • Jean Michel

            “That’s because 1966 cardboard sets won’t cut it in 2017.”

            Yeah, and this whole “the look and feel of the TOS-era needs to be modernized for 2017 so that it doesn’t feel retro” thing can be easily solved:

            DON’T MAKE PREQUELS for crying out loud!

          • Jason Drake

            That’s exactly right. The show looks the way it looks because it wasn’t made fifty years ago. I’m as big a trek nerd as anyone, buy I choose not to wrestle with aesthetic continuity and just enjoy the shows. They don’t have to explain to me why the show looks so awesome. They just have to make it as excellent as possible

        • MichaelMeir-Wright

          It’s been said over and over and over and over again by the producers and the fans repeating the producers that this is the TOS era (or something just before it) imagined through 2017. The cheap, kitsch sets of TOS are not going to cut it and you know it.

          Stop whining about things look more advanced than the campy aesthetics and start focusing on the fact that this looks like a first rate drama.

          • worgel

            No disrespect to the production team (well except for the shows executive producers and CBS), but its really the crappy Kelvin multi-verse.

      • Trent

        I think they lied !

        • worgel

          They are producers. Its their stock and trade.

      • it’s a moot discussion, because it can never be established within canon anyway. they can never say “we’re in the Prime Universe”, because that wouldn’t make sense. people in every universe think of themselves as being in the “Prime” Universe. so everyone of us can decide for themselves which universe or “timeline” this is set in. in the end, it doesn’t really matter at all. the “Prime Universe” is just as fictional as any other STAR TREK parallel universe. just enjoy the stories.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        I think they need to clarify this is set in the reboot timeline because it just doesn’t look anything like the Prime Timeline.

    • scotchyscotchscotch

      No Prime. But the uniforms certainly look to invoke more of the USS Kelvin look pre-timeline-split

      • Montreal_Paul

        They look more like a natural evolution of the ENTERPRISE uniforms.

    • M33

      By the way it all looks, one would sure think so!
      It is obvious they are marketing this series strongly to the fans who came on board with the Kelvin Timeline movies.
      Why they had to choose the Prime timeline is probably because CBS amd Paramount couldn’t come to some sort of financial agreement to use the movie-timeline rights.
      How one gets from this highly advanced look to 1966-style TOS look in 10 years is one heck of a stretch.

      • TIG1701

        Thats an interesting theory, which I can get behind. You’re right this looks much closer to a post-Kelvin show than it does a pre-TOS one. Of course mainly because they are made in the same era but I think maybe this was done on purpose to attract those fans.

        This seems more of an appeal to those guys than old TOS fans. Which most seem to hate the JJ verse.

      • SoCalOtaku7

        ToS had serious limitations, not just with technology of the era but budget. If ToS could be redone with current budgeting and graphics, keeping the 60’s aesthetics, I’m sure it would be a much smaller step.

    • Michael

      This takes place in the Prime universe. CBS said so

  • Matthew Weiss

    Very exciting! There is a lot to chew on here. I like the redesigned Discovery.

    • JP Cardin

      It’s the Shenzhou, not the Discovery 🙂

  • Nick R

    Visually it looks great… but i don’t know. I still don’t connect with prequel stuff because it just doesn’t feel right.

    • I feel that Better Call Saul shows a prequel can be done well. It’s just a shame that Enterprise and the Star Wars prequels dropped the ball. Hoping for the best with Discovery!

    • TIG1701

      Agreed, I don’t get this obsession with prequels when its all changed anyway.

  • Kyle L. Dennis

    That looks Mothervulcan amazing! I love the look of the U.S.S. Discovery. Well the bits we could see anyway.
    It looks like Commander Burnham likely has a personal connection with Sarek. Going back to when she was a child.
    I am psyched for the first episode!

    • Tone

      The USS Discovery was not in that trailer, not for one second…

      • Kyle L. Dennis

        I realize that now. It took more views before I saw that it was in fact the Shenzhou.
        I like the design of that ship. Though my guess is that it may not survive the pilot.

      • Martin Venema

        Not in the trailer, but it is on the poster

  • scooternva

    I’ll say the same thing here that I said at trekmovie.com: Holy hell, this looks AMAZING.

    And to the continuity doomsday naysayers, I say… eh. You’ve got 500+ hours of the original series and its spinoffs that you can rewatch to your hearts’ content (I certainly have).

    I love TOS and DS9 and TNG and ENT and yes, even VOY, but the youngest of these series premiered over fifteen years ago and most are more than two decades old. It’s time to bring the 23rd century into the 21st century and tell new stories for a new millennium. LLAP.

    • Lora

      They already tried that with reboot movies and they failed. They will fail again. Most fans want Prime universe back, not this.

      • Aaron

        This is the prime universe – the producers have said as much. You just don’t like how it looks….so perhaps move on?

        • Lora

          It does not look like prime universe. It looks like reboot universe. Soo it is not prime universe.

          • MichaelMeir-Wright

            Yes, because you can clearly tell that from a 2 minute trailer. You’ve obviously seen the entire first episode.

          • Zarm

            Uniforms, technology, ship design, ship interiors- we have seen what all these things look like in the Prime Universe in this era. It lacks the Prime universe aesthetic; that is a fair, valid, and factually-supported criticism.

            That doesn’t mean write off the whole show, and I don’t think Lora was suggesting that. Just that the look is wrong for the setting that the showrunners(intentionally and with full knowledge of what it entailed) chose.

            But just as in my own post, that criticism is not an indictment of the entire production- just an isolated element that does not sit well with some fans. The rest of the show will be judged on its own merit; the ‘look’ is just wrong for the established setting that it’s supposed to fit into.

          • zeeman1

            It has a full blown Kelin timeline aesthetic.

          • Zarm

            Precisely. ‘full blown’ is a very apt description; it’s not just minor elements.

          • TIG1701

            Yeah because for newer fans its all they know. Do you think those same fans would watch those movies but then watch a show that looks less advance from that? TOS just looks too cheap and dated. Sure they could make it look better but the look will still look too dated from a non-TOS new Trek fan and thats the issue.

            In other words they are giving them something everyone knows now, both old and new fans. It just makes sense from a marketing perspective.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Looks nothing like the Prime Universe even though it’s supposed to be.

      • Nehemias Lugo

        this is prime…. just because our tech has evolved so we don’t need cardboard anymore to make the bridge doesn’t mean it isnt prime….

    • Lora

      Star Wars is great example how to honor the past and aesthetics of universe. They were able to make Rogue one to look more modern. But they did honor the canon and classic look.

      This series is polar opposite.

      • Aaron

        Star Wars was never designed to look like our future – Star Trek was/is. There were very different ideas of what the future would like back in the 60’s. Hell, with the way technology is advancing, our ideas of what the future will look change constantly. I guarantee you, 10-15 years ago the vast majority of people would not have guessed that the vast majority of humanity would be walking around carrying full blown computers in their pockets.

        TL;DR, Star Wars doesn’t need to evolve it’s look because it isn’t based on any future – Star Trek has to because it is very much based on OUR future.

        • Lora

          Star trek is not our future. Klingons do not exist. Star trek will not happen. That is not the point.
          Star trek is fantasy universe, that has its own history and future that is different from our universe.
          You can not just change the look of everything every few years and just pretend that always looked like that. Sorry but I can not.
          Why not change look of human then. Humans look soo boring. Why not make humans purple with 3 eyes and 6 arms. To make humans look more ”modern” and ”cool”.

          Sorry, but to make one universe to work, you must have continuity.
          Choose one look and stick to it.
          And you can experiment with new aliens, not old ones.
          Also if they dislike the look of TOS, why they did not make post Voyager series. There they would be free to change the look of tehnology.

          Sorry but this whole show is huge violation of canon and
          continuity.

          • like you said, it’s a fantasy universe. and actually, it’s a fantasy multiverse. so what you’re calling a “violation of continuity” is simply a parallel fantasy universe.

          • TIG1701

            Man, you have made your point well but I think you’re missing the point as well. For some people it does mean something when they say a story line is suppose to belong in a certain universe. Yeah we get your point, its all fake and made up, there are a gazillion universes, etc, the point is the producers should SAY that then. But what pisses people off is they are trying to have their cake and eat it too by saying its back in the universe everyone knows and loves but then it looks like a different universe entirely which feels like they are being conned.

            Again, everyone gets your point but yes it matters to people on some level. Most will probably watch it and not care but you are on a board of Star Trek fans. There is one guy upset they added a symbol on their uniforms because the show from 50 years ago said it wasn’t suppose to be like that. THis is the fandom you’re talking to. Maybe you’re not a long time fan but this is the level fandom takes this stuff. Yeah sometimes it goes a little over board but in this instance I can understand why people are bothered even if I’m not that personally bothered myself. I hate the entire idea of a prequel and going to back to TOS just bores me to tears so for me I’m just happy its not really TOS again although they are ‘selling’ it that way.

            But for fans who really wanted to see a true TOS prequel, well I get why they are pissed about it.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            look, i’m the biggest and long-time TREK fan you’ll find out there, i was a fan of TOS years before TNG was a twinkle in Gene’s eye, and i take it very seriously. but i don’t let it be ruined for me by “continuity issues”, when there is a very simple and logical in-universe explanation for every “continuity issue”: parallel universes.

            the fictional sentient beings in one TREK universe matter to me just as much as the fictional sentient beings in any other TREK universe do. i can care about stories in the Prime Universe exactly as much as i care about stories in the Mirror, Negative, Kelvin, or any other parallel universe.

          • TIG1701

            OK I get you but you do understand how important continuity is for others. The JJ verse actually DID take place in another universe and fans still slammed it because how different everything was……although they were told it was in another universe from the beginning. Even though they were told Nero coming back in time helped change that universe. All of that was explained and yet people were still pissed off why Spock and Uhura were together or that the ship was too big or that engineering looked like a beer factory or that Kirk became Captain in less time it takes to read all these comments.

            You know that, YOU may be able to put aside the differences but others can’t. Not saying you can’t say your peace on this of course but the argument ‘just pretend like its in another universe’ isn’t going to really fly with people who are upset about this when A. We know it ISN’T in another universe as the producers made clear and B. You already seen how people are still upset even when they do know its in another universe.

            Look I’m personally fine with it. I never cared that much for TOS anyway. I watched it but it was never my favorite and I didn’t watch the whole thing until I watched all the others. But for long time fans I can understand why they are upset about it. Its why they should’ve just mad it post Voyager in the first place. They could’ve kept all the characters (minus Sarek) and all the technology the same and it would’ve fit just fine. But they did this instead. Big mistake.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            i get your points. it’s just that you’re describing the status quo of how people currently feel about these things, and i’m giving a suggestion for a “change of attitude”, if you will, that can actually help people be less upset and enjoy STAR TREK more 🙂

            and the cool think (in my opinion) about this change of attitude is that it makes total sense within the canon of STAR TREK, or at least it doesn’t violate the canon specifically, because STAR TREK is a multiverse, and that allows for an infinite number of parallel universes.

            so, the way i see it, it’s really up to every fan what kind of attitude he or she chooses to have. they can choose an attitude that allows them to enjoy it, or an attitude that upsets them. i, for one, know which attitude i choose 🙂

          • TIG1701

            But what I’m saying is some of these people couldn’t even put aside their differences to the JJ movies in a brand new universe that didn’t exist until those films were made a few years ago. So what chances do you have of convincing people to just ignore all the changes to the universe they known and love for 50 years now? Its a tall order.

            Look I agree with you and you’re just speaking common sense. It was always going to look different. No 20 year old is going to watch this show if it looks like something their grandfather watched. Its totally unrealistic. Same time maybe thats why its just smart NOT to do a prequel. Enterprise failed and people complained that looked too advance and that was 100 years before TOS. Unless this is really good people are going to slam this even harder for looking so out of place and changing things like Klingons and the uniforms.

            I don’t get why they were so determined to make this in this time period? Most people I know care about the post 24th century because they watched those shows and way under 50 year olds. They seem to think they have to keep appealing to these old fans and I just don’t get why? Again, ask most old fans what they think of the JJ verse? A lot of those people are just too fickle and set in their ways. Meanwhile most people are fine with Trek evolving and changing. The writers want to do something new though in an old timeline and it could seriously bite them in the ass with the people they are trying to please.

          • well, i’m not trying to convince anyone 😀 i’m simply offering people a way to enjoy new STAR TREK without getting hung up on continuity issues. i don’t really care who takes that offer and who doesn’t 😀

          • TIG1701

            I hear you but I think everyone can already decipher that for themselves long ago. If people are determined to hate it, thats not going to change.

          • look at ROGUE ONE, which many STAR WARS fans see as one of their favorite (or even their favorite) STAR WARS movie ever, even though it’s set in the time period of the original. good stories can be told in any time period. people should watch DISCOVERY and then judge it.

          • The Chadwick

            I take continuity seriously as well, by not seriously enough that it will hinder and rob me of enjoyment of a new series we’ve been waiting 12 years for!

            And if people can’t put that aside, they should seek therapy.

            This is the show we’re getting, there is NO stopping that. So those pathetic haters can keep hating and moping and being melancholy, there is no changing what is to come.

            Those fans are also being selfish. The actors and writers are all working so hard and these “fans” BIT#HING and complaining are disregarding that. Chris Obi poster on twitter to give it a change, he’s already feeling the hate from “those” fans. The haters are selfish and petty for that reason alone!

          • TIG1701

            I don’t disagree with you but this was obviously going to happen. People have a hard time accepting change, especially Star Trek fans. There are people moaning about the insignia even though thats actually in canon. But its not completely in canon to a 50 year old show so they bitch about it. This is the fandom that exists.

            BUt yeah I agree with you. Its the first show in over a decade. If this one fails it will be another decade before we see another one. The JJ verse films now looks dead since there has been zero word from Paramount about it after Beyond bombing so this show is all we have. People should at least wait to see it and give it a chance but nothing is ever that simple of course. Hopefully most will get over the changes if the show is good.

          • The Chadwick

            “but i don’t let it be ruined for me by “continuity issues” Exactly! I love my canon but I’m not going to let it hinder my excitement or enjoyment of a new series! That would be petty!

          • Nehemias Lugo

            for you to say that star trek is not our future….wow….ipads….cellphones….laptops…..tricorders…. beaming tech (yes there is such a thing) …. all of this tech came from the ideas of star trek…. combadges like the ones used in hospitals…. i mean i can go on and on lol

          • The Chadwick

            Purist like you are pathetic and give the fandom a bad name!!!

      • GIBBS v2

        You just described the JJ movies everyone seems to hate. There is no winning.

        • Lora

          Nope. I described what honoring of canon, history and continuity. This show is just like JJ Abrams movies. Total violation of canon and continuity.

          • GIBBS v2

            Then you could say the same thing about ST:TNG.

      • TIG1701

        Did you totally not watch the prequels? (If you didn’t, good for you)

    • zeeman1

      This clearly looks to take place in the Kelvin timeline, which could be a good thing…

    • The Chadwick

      You get a standing ovation! Well said! I feel exactly the same way! I’ve been a fan for 30 years, since I was 4 watching TOS reruns and new episodes of TNG with my father. Needless to say I’m a hardcore fan, I love every series and every movie including the Kelvin universe! Enterprise was a great prequel filling in gaps and giving an in canon explanation of TOS Klingons which I still attest is great!

      Star Trek discovery looks amazing. I find the purist fans so distasteful especially in the fact of not accepting something new and different. Star Trek is over 50 years old! As you said the last show premiered over 15 years ago, decade and a half! How can people expect it to be the same!?

  • Cabo 5150

    F**kin’ LOVED IT!

    Super excited for this show.

  • Michael Broadhead

    Very optimistic as it didn’t end up being a spacebattle-ridden trailer. It looks to focus more on characters, drama and exploration.

    • Yes! Character development and exploration! Character development and exploration! I’m so psyched for this.

  • Fiery Little One

    Hmm… That’s a lot to chew on.

  • Thomas Elkins

    I’m still on the fence. It looks promising, but I don’t know if I can get over some of the design choices. Changes to uniforms and some tech I can forgive, but there better be an explanation for these Klingons. When the Klingons went from TOS to TMP we had the “Bigger budget/better makeup” explanation. What reason was there to change them now? It just bugs me because Disney made a prequel to Star Wars and made sure every detail was respected and accurate. CBS makes a prequel and they change everything. Why?

    • bulletproof1979

      They updated the Klingons in the Motion Picture because times had moved on and the look needed refreshing and modernising after the 13 years since they were introduced. The Klingons have now had the same basic look for 33 years – and time and makeup technology has moved on. If you could accept it then, there’s literally no reason not to again.

      • Thomas Elkins

        That’s a load of crap. Disney didn’t make Chewbaca completely unrecognizable because they felt his 40 year old design could use a refresh. Star Wars was treated with the utmost respect, while Star Trek isn’t and they treat the fans as the enemy because some don’t like their unnecessary changes. It’s a little insulting to be honest. Even ignoring the budget/better makeup reasoning, DS9 and Enterprise acknowledged the change and ENT even went so far as to give a canon reason for it so they are both well established. If there is a canon reason for the Discovery Klingon’s appearance then I’ll accept it, but if they’re changed because they felt like it, then I won’t be as accepting.

  • looks awesome! anyone concerned about continuity issues needs to remember that STAR TREK has long been established to be a multiverse. we have the Prime Universe, the Mirror Universe, the Kelvin Universe, and the countless parallel universes we see in the episode “PARALLELS”. so, the simplest explanation for any continuity issues is that this is simply another parallel universe, with many similarities to the Prime and Kelvin Universes, but also some differences.

  • Lora

    This looks awful. Like reboot Star Trek movies. And I hate these movies. Nothing in this trailer looks TOS-like. And klingons look awful. This series is not part of prime universe.

    • so? it’s another parallel universe then. the Prime Universe isn’t any more “real” than the Kelvin Universe or any other STAR TREK parallel universe. so why not simply enjoy this series the same way you would enjoy any other STAR TREK series? it’s no less “real” just because it’s set in a fictional parallel universe.

      • Lora

        I do not care for parallel universes. I wanted prime universe back. I will pass this. Looks awful. This is not my star trek.

        • the Prime Universe is also a parallel universe to all the other parallel universes. there is literally no physical difference.

          • Lora

            Iike I said already. I do not care for parallel universes. Only universe I care for is PRIME UNIVERSE. I’am fan only of prime star trek. Everything else is a crap. This is the same as JJ Abrams star trek. And I hate that false Star Trek.
            God, I’am soo disappointed with this.

          • and like i said already: the Prime Universe is also a parallel universe.

          • Lora

            Like I said twice times already. I DO NOT CARE FOR ANY UNIVERSES OTHER THAN PRIME.
            i’am a fan of only that timeline. I will pass this same as last two reboot movies. It seems that my Star trek is over for ever. I will watch old episodes.

          • why do you care only for one arbitrary universe? 😀

          • Lora

            Because that prime universe is a star trek I love. I’am fan of that star trek.
            This is not my Star trek. This will be a flop, just like reboot movies.. They again did not listen fans.

          • you haven’t even seen this yet, so you cannot know whether you love it or not. just because it’s a parallel universe, that doesn’t mean that you won’t like it.

          • Lora

            And I will never seen this. I will pass this just like last two movies ( did not watch them too ).

          • your loss.

          • Lora

            I doubt.

          • you’re judging something before you see it. that is literally prejudice. not very STAR TREK-like of you 😛

          • Lora

            I have seen enough to hate this ( just like Abrams movies ).
            CBS again did not listen. And again they will fail. Reboot movies are fails ( box office is awful ) for the same reasons.

          • hahaha, sure, the new movies are “fails”, that is why they have made 3 of them and are working on a 4th movie 😀 lol

          • Lora

            They are box office fails.

            1. Star trek – $140 million to make ( not counting marketing cost ) and it made only $385,680,446 worldwide

            2. Into Darkness – $190 million to make ( not counting marketing ) and it made only $467,381,584 worldwide

            3. Beyond – $185 million to make ( not counting marketing ) and it made only $336,648,340 worldwide.

          • Aaron

            *sigh* Some people just won’t give up. You don’t want to give Discovery a chance because you THINK it’s not in the prime universe or whatever, so be it. If the show ends up being terrible you can lord it over all of us if that makes you feel better. I, however, am choosing to go in with an open mind. If the show ends up being amazing, then awesome! If it ends up being terrible, well no skin off my back.

            As far as box office receipts go – Star Trek made enough money for Paramount to justify Into Darkness, and Into Darkness made enough to justify Beyond. Beyond was definitely a disappointment based on the previous two movies, but Paramount has yet to decide if they consider it a “fail” or not. Regardless, many people enjoyed those 3 movies (with Into Darkness being highly controversial)…so who cares whether you think they failed or not?

          • Ace Stephens

            Not only that but Star Trek works can make money over time as new fans jump on and other fans join in with “completist” mindsets or the like. So the home media, streaming, etc. revenue from those films will continue to make money for the studio due to the association with a beloved property.

          • Lora

            John Carter and Jupiter Ascending can too. But that does not make them box office succes.

          • Ace Stephens

            Those fell far shorter of turning a profit at the box office (so will take far longer to do so overall). You’ll note the lack of sequels. They tend to only produce one of those if the prior entry, in some form, has proven profitable.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Exactly. This person is really ignorant to the point of being extremely irritating. I need a drink.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Hey Mensa,

            You just completely disproved your own point. Those two movies did not make enough $ to warrant a sequel. ST 2009 and STID did.

            Next???

          • Lora

            Sorry but all these movies were box office disappointments. And fact is, most people dislike them. Most fans would always choose prime universe over reboot fail of these movies.

          • TIG1701

            To be fair only the last movie bombed. But yes its probably why we seen the last of them now.

          • MichaelMeir-Wright

            Yes so many fans hated the first one that they made a second film, which also ranked so they made a third film.

            Your argument is so weak. Just give it a rest. You have long passed the point of being boring.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “Sorry”

            Apology accepted for your ignorance, Mensa 😉

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            lol, if the movie STAR TREK had been a financial fail, then there wouldn’t have been a STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS. same with the next one. and so on. once again, everything you say is factually incorrect.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You mean the three movies only made $1.2 Billion worldwide?

            I just knew they were box office failures…LOL…lay of the crack pipe

          • and btw, the new movies are not “reboot” movies. learn what the word “reboot” means.

          • Lora

            Abrams movies are reboot movies.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            no, they are not reboot movies. a reboot in fiction discards all previous continuity in a series of movies, tv series, books or other works of fiction. the important part is: it discards all previous continuity. these new movies do not discard the previous continuity. they even have a character from the Prime Universe in them, Spock. so these new movies are set in the same multiverse continuity as the rest of STAR TREK.

            btw, nothing you have ever said on this entire talkback was correct. you really need to check your facts.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Jesus, what a moronic position. And your poor sentence makes it sound like you are passing a kidney stone…not to mention your weird use of past tense when you mean future tense. I get typos, but for Christ’s sake, you sound like a 3rd grader here. LOL

        • MichaelMeir-Wright

          Yawn. You are getting boring. You’ve said something akin to this multiple times. If you don’t like what you see- don’t watch it but don’t force your opinions down our throats.

  • Kyle Swinderman

    I’m guessing this takes place in the Kelvin Timeline, right?

    • it takes place in any universe you want it to take place in. it could be the Prime Universe, but altered by changes to the timeline. it could be the Kelvin Universe. or it could be another parallel universe altogether.

    • Lora

      CBS lied. They statedmthat it will take place in Prime Universe. But now it is obvious that this series is in the same universe as these awful reboot movies.
      They just lied to get old fans.

      • it’s not obvious at all. this could be the Prime Universe, altered by changes to the timeline. or it could be a different parallel universe altogether.

        • Lora

          It is obvious that this is not prime universe. Altered universe is not prime universe.

          • you’re wrong. when a universe is altered by time travel, it’s still the same universe. like, for example, when the universe is altered in the episode “YESTERDAY’S ENTERPRISE”, it’s still the Prime Universe, but altered by changes to the timeline.

            i think you need to try to understand the distinction between changes to the timeline on the one hand, and parallel universes on the other hand.

          • Lora

            Altered universes are not prime universe. The end!

          • you’re wrong. the Prime Universe has been altered by time travel many times, but it’s still the Prime Universe.

          • Lora

            Nope, it was not. Altered universe was always alternative universe. Original timeline in prime universe.

          • mswood666

            Idiocy. We haven’t seen original timeline since during the original run of TOS episodes. We have had various levels of changes to the timeline from small to planetary in size during just TOS and TOS films, let alone adding on TNG, DS9 and Voyager.

            Lora, on these points you are absolutely wrong. Now that doesn’t mean you can’t hate anything outside your own views of what you feel the way Trek was presented before, but what you call the Prime Universe has had massive changes made to it through the unnatural act of deliberately changing time.

          • Lora

            Nope, I’am not wrong. Result of every change in timeline would be alternative timeline. Prime universe has only one timeline. Different timeline is different universe.
            In star trek prime series, they always change back to normal timeline.

            Sorry but if this series is in alternative timeline, then it is not part of prime universe.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            LOL — it’s a fictional construct where the look of the entire universe get’s changes with each era of new Star Trek based on production values, make-up, alien designs, etc. It’s dynamic, not static.

            And the vaunted Prime Universe is already DOA since Khan never happened in the 1990’s.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Can I ask you something? If they decided to recast the main characters from Star Wars do you think people wouldn’t notice?

          • MichaelMeir-Wright

            You should probably stop paying any mind to Lora. They are clearly determined to hate anything that doesn’t conform to their narrow expectations of what Trek should be about.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            you’re probably right. i tend to automatically expect too much of people when they’re STAR TREK fans. 😉

      • TIG1701

        I think they took the look of those movies because its really the only Star Trek new fans knows about and its no way in hell they were going to make it like the cheap 60s show. I don’t think they lied, Fuller always said it would be in the prime universe but look different. But I knew this was going to happen and why it was idiotic to put around TOS. It looks like they could’ve put it post Voyager but whatever.

        I’m looking forward to it though.

        • Lora

          All this tehnology change would work in post Voyager timeline. But 10 years before TOS it does not work. It does not look like prime universe. They do not even have viewscreen. They have that stupid window from reboot movies.
          There is nothing there that looks like prime universe, it just scream reboot universe.

          • TIG1701

            You’re right it doesn’t. Lets be honest its just a very different take. I don’t mind that though. Did you really want a cheap looking show with big buttons on the consoles and everything look boxed in?

            I agree with you it would make a lot more sense this was post Voyager but I’m happy it doesn’t look anything like TOS either. The Kirk show is just too outdated to take seriously.

          • zeeman1

            The window is the view screen, as it’s a HUD design. We have this technology now.

          • archer923

            That’s not really the point.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            So explain to me why Gene Rodenberry himself completely changed the look of TOS for TMP, which supposedly took place just 3.5 years after the last episode of TOS? How did the entire look of the Star Trek universe, including ships, planets, uniforms, interiors, change in just 3.5 years?

            Here is another example. Why didn’t Enterprise, which comes before TOS, go back and give us the more human looking Klingons that we saw in TOS? And also, why didn’t Enterprise give us more of the “clean looking ships” designs that saw in TOS, but instead the ships in Enterprise look more like primitive TNG ships, bypassing TOS ship design aesthetics altogether?

            (Here’s a hint — BECAUSE IT’S A FICTIONAL SHOW WHERE NEW ERAS OF SERIES AND MOVIES OVER THE YEARS ALWAYS UPDATE THE LOOK AND PRODUCTION ASPECTS OF THE SHOW.)

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Those changes you talk of were explained in the shows though.

      • MichaelMeir-Wright

        No they didn’t. You have selectively forgotten Bryan Fuller’s repeated statements that they cannot use the aesthetic from 60s TOS because it’s too primitive by today’s standards.

        Hell, even Enterprise looks more advanced than TOS.

        It’s tragic that you feel the need to drag Discovery based off a 2 minute trailer. When was the last time you left the house?

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Exactly !!!!!

  • it’s a moot discussion which universe or “timeline” DISCOVERY is set in, because it can never be established within canon anyway. they can never say “we’re in the Prime Universe”, because that wouldn’t make sense. people in every universe think of themselves as being in the “Prime” Universe. so everyone of us can decide for themselves which universe or “timeline” this is set in. in the end, it doesn’t really matter at all. the “Prime Universe” is just as fictional as any other STAR TREK parallel universe. just enjoy the stories.

    • Ace Stephens

      While I agree to an extent, at the same time I think that “shared history” and perhaps any returning cast members portraying the same characters (if any) would lend a significant amount of credence to the suggestion that this is one timeline or another.

      • Thomas A. Anderson

        those cast members can return in a parallel universe as well.

        • Ace Stephens

          Anyone can return as or play anything, in theory (even deceased people can have their likenesses/voices used…), but that has little relevance to the “Is it the same continuity?” question. So while someone may play the same or a similar character in parallel universes, that’s not really what most are concerned about here even when they use those terms. They’re concerned with continuity.
          This is one of the things that may frustrate some about the various recasts occurring as it further blurs that line (not that there weren’t recasts within continuities before but, when all else was the same, it tended to hold as the same continuity). People are concerned about integrity so the suggestion that things naturally differ isn’t of much comfort or relevance…since that probable or perceived (as notable) difference is the reason for their concern.

  • Here’s hoping the “death sensing” alien doesn’t turn into the next Deanna Troi!

    • Spyros Spyrou

      No, he’s just sensing the future of the show.

      • worgel

        HA!

  • Looks very slick. Hoping for the best!

  • Daniel Martinez

    Just a crazy, off the wall thought. Maybe the argument isn’t Prime v. Kelvin, but maybe it’s a misdirection. The ship we see looks like the Shenzou, not the Discovery (in my opinion). Plus, isn’t Michelle Yeoh’s character the captain of the Shenzou? We don’t see the Discovery nor Jason Isaacs’ character who is supposed to be another captain. I’m starting to wonder if this show is set in the prime universe and maybe starts in the future, post-Nemesis/Voyager and the unexplained phenomenon sends Burnham back in time. Perhaps everything that’s set in the 2250s has yet to be revealed. I know it’s a total stretch, and really out there, but I found it odd that we didn’t see Discovery nor the Isaacs captain.

    • Alan

      It is indeed the Shenzou in that trailer. At about the 1:50 mark in the trailer there is someone wearing a helmet which says “U.S.S. Shenzou” on it.
      And I had the same thoughts you did as well…but I then began to wonder about the hand held communicator used earlier in the trailer. Would Starfleet resort to going back to handheld over the badge communicator

      • Daniel Martinez

        Ah yeah, good point about the communicator. I’m still thinking (and hoping) this is some sort of misdirection.

        • Alan

          Oh, me too. I’m on the same page as you. I reckon there’s got to be an aspect of time travel / alternate universe hopping in this new show somewhere to account for…well pretty much why it isn’t exactly going boldly with the TOS look more strongly in even the slightest way. It definitely invokes more of a JJ Abrams vibe to me.

    • Tone

      This could be that the Pilot show will end in some kind of time travel or spacial anomaly, interference from a time traveler etc, resulting in Burnham getting put on the USS Discovery.

      Maybe the story is Burnham “discovering” the past…

      • Daniel Martinez

        I think that’s another great theory. It would explain her in the retro gear…she’s preparing to go back. Hm, if this turns out to be the case, I think it could be great.

  • Aaron

    This is a really minor thing, but has me oddly excited – at about 40 sec we get what looks like a ship at warp. The effect looks very similar to the warp effect in Beyond, which I absolutely loved (again, I got oddly excited about that…), so here’s hoping 🙂

  • Northstar Deplorable

    Maybe I’ll watch the pilot on CBS, but as far as the rest of it: no.

  • I’m worried. The trailer does look good, but I’m surprised by how brazenly they are trying to reinvent the Klingons, and still pretend that this is somehow in the prime universe. The Klingons are just such a well defined species, that it seems a bit risky to just completely redo them. At least the Vulcans still look like humans with pointy ears.

    • Ace Stephens

      Many have speculated that they’re not meant to be precisely the same variation of Klingons. For instance, these ones may be “ancient” or maybe further mutations or any number of things. Of course, if this is never addressed onscreen this first season (although presumably it will be…), I’m sure it will be eventually by some narrative associated with the property.

  • Locutus

    Some fans obviously love this trailer, some fans obviously hate this trailer. I for one LOVED it! I am even more optimistic about this series than I was before. It definitely screams STAR TREK!!! I am curious to know more about the Michael’s connection to Vulcan and Sarek. Perhaps she was a pupil of Sarek? Looks intriguing.

  • Ace Stephens

    I have continually defended the possibility of the show’s narrative success. However, I found this trailer to…not inspire confidence in me. I had more faith prior. Even so, I still hope it’s great.

  • Eric Cheung

    Pros:

    * It looks cool for a TV show. The planet shots are beyond what ENT looked like. That show left the air more than a decade ago, but it still holds up pretty well.
    * The Klingons are fine. They have ridges, look big, have weird noses, and have nasty teeth. They’re certainly close enough for me, and look better than the stealth shots from that fired crewman. This is especially acceptable if these are ancient Klingons, like it’s been speculated (I saw what looked like the sarcophagus ship, and an actual Klingon sarcophagus!). The look of the Vulcans must be the most consistent alien looks in all of Trek.
    * The transporter beam looks a bit TOS-movie era, except with this interesting grid look over the bodies. It’s unlike what I’ve seen before.
    * The uniforms look clean and sharp, though not as bright and department specific as The Orville uniforms. I like that landing parties have environment-specific gear. That gives the show much more production value and realism.
    * The dialogue definitely sounds like Trek. The JJ films tended to sound too informal and 21st century. I’m glad to see the language sound more timeless again.
    * “Starfleet doesn’t fire first!”

    Cons:

    * I miss bridges that are well lit and comfortable looking. The darkness is too much. The JJ movies were actually better in this regard.
    * I do wish it could look a bit more in line with The Cage era, and had ship specific mission patches.
    * Is Doug Jones’ species really only there to detect impending death? I assume not, but that’s the implication of the trailer.
    * Still no release date!!!

  • David Dennis

    Very pleased with the trailer. Looks great! September(?) — it will be a wait.

  • TIG1701

    Have to say this looks good. I’m actually surprised how good it looks. I still think it was stupid to put it in the TOS time, it looks way too advanced to be there and as predicted the fans are bitching over it. But thank god there is no hammy acting or cheap looking sets from the 60s. They have an advanced updated show that looks like it could be in the 25th century. I like the new uniforms too, those look updated from Enterprise. It looks like the show took a lot of stuff from JJ-verse which isn’t surprising. I think the look of that universe is cool, its the shitty stories and character development thats the problem for me. So I’m cool with that.

    So I’m going to give it a chance even being another tired ass prequel. But since it looks absolutely nothing like TOS it doesn’t really matter I guess. Even the Klingons are totally different. This could be as good as TNG and DS9. Maybe even better? So I have hope now.

  • Dick Higdon

    Kind of disappointing. Sick of Klingons and sick of prequels. If Star trek is supposed to be all about looking forward and discovering new this and that, why the hell do we keep going further and further back with the damn shows and movies? Move on from Kirk and the gang already.

    I’m going to watch it obviously, I just might not like myself for watching it.

    • TIG1701

      Yeah I’m sick to death of prequels too but this really does look very different at least. But yeah they need to move on from Kirk’s time already. They are just trying to appeal to mostly old Trekkers and look how well that worked for the JJ verse films and Enterprise.

      But I am going to give it a chance though.

  • MidnightEkaki

    I think this looks incredible and I am super excited!!
    Two things though:
    1. Not happy with the Klingons, where is their hair?? Will have to wait to see how they’re portrayed.. but they look too alien, I think Klingons always had a warmth to them even when they’re enemies.
    2. Yeah definitely getting JJ Abrams vibes, but I personally don’t dislike the movies, I think their main downfall was the focus on the Hollywood action and lack of social political commentary that makes ST special, as long as they have that in the series I think its fine. Plus they’re trying to attract new fans so they probably want to make it look appealing especially for movie-only people so I can’t blame them for that.
    Except the technology is a little too advanced looking for the time period.. though happy they still use the old communicators at least

  • Kuato

    Star Trek has come full circle. The first thing the trailer reminded me of Lost in Space circa 1998. Also, I am very interested in seeing how they rationalize Discovery personnel wearing the Enterprise arrowhead badge.

    • TIG1701

      Seriously you are concerned about the arrowhead badge?????? Uh chief, they did that here too:

      http://cdn.idigitaltimes.com/sites/idigitaltimes.com/files/2016/10/10/chris-hemsworth-star-trek.jpg

      You do realize that took place over a decade before this show right?

      • Thomas Elkins

        There are a lot of people who don’t realize or refuse to believe that scene was part of the Prime Timeline.

        • TIG1701

          Yeah thats what it must be I guess. But they should educate themselves fast because basically it looks like this show is an extension of the Kelvin.

        • Thomas A. Anderson

          no, it’s a parallel universe.

          • Thomas Elkins

            TECHNICALLY it’s an alternate universe because that specific image takes place during Nero’s temporal incursion, which is what created the alternate universe to begin with. BUT, the USS Kelvin exists in both universes. That’s the part stubborn fans refuse to believe.

          • Thomas A. Anderson

            i don’t know what an “alternate universe” is supposed to be. there’s no such thing in real-world physics, not even such a concept. all i am aware of is the concept of parallel universes. can you explain the difference between an “alternate universe” and a “parallel universe”?

  • pittrek

    I couldn’t watch it with sound (I’m at work) but visually it looks … interesting. The new Klingons looks horrible, but the ship looks fine.

  • pittrek

    By the way CBS – if somebody from CBS is reading this by any chance – you do realize you are trying to promote the show GLOBALLY, do you?

  • pittrek

    And here is the Asian trailer featuring different bits and pieces : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77H8VrVNHPc

    • That contemporary song makes the whole thing come off much worse IMO. Reminiscent of Enterprise’s previews. I do like the Trek theme at the very end of this video better than the US trailer.

  • TIG1701

    Damn the comments section on Youtube is brutal”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dxe_ugmIVM

    This is what happens when you try to do a prequel but then change everything. People aren’t stupid, if you are going to make it a prequel, then yeah you should make it a prequel. I’m going to give it a chance but I understand why its bothering people.

    • Thomas Elkins

      Yeah, like Disney did with Rogue One. They’d have been crazy to deviate from the original film. I don’t know what makes CBS think they can do it.

      • TIG1701

        Yeah they were smart with Rogue One. THATS how you do a prequel. It felt like ANH with a bit of differences here and there but that film felt connected with the OT.

        This however is a ‘prequel’ in name only. They are going to throw a bunch of 50 year old characters to remind us it takes place in the same tilmeline but when you look at TOS all you will think is ‘WTF”? Thats the reaction on youtube right now. People seem truly confused this show takes place before TOS. I

    • pittrek

      Can you give here some “best of” comments? The video and the discussion is unavailable outside the USA

      • TIG1701

        Sure, I’ll throw up a few! Ones with less ‘language’ I don’t want to get booted off. There are already over 4,000 comments though but I’ll give a few from the front page.

        “Star Trek: Lens flare the Series. sigh”

        “Making this a prequel was a really bad idea.”

        Too much NuTrek influence. Things are looking grim.

        And that bridge is annoying to look at.”

        “CBS, I gravely fear you’ve really missed the mark. I am getting very worried that you’ve really taken what would have been a great opportunity to bridge the gap in fandom between the “reboot movies” and “classic Trek” and squandered it.

        I may still give this show a chance. But I am not nearly as excited about it as I should be, given how much I love Trek. You have only yourself to blame for how I and many other fans feel about this.”

        “WITHF did they do to the Klingons!?” (Thats a very common one as you can imagine)

        “WHAT THE (bleep) WAS THAT? THIS LOOKED MORE LIKE MASS EFFECT THEN STAR TREK….HOW IN THE (bleep) IS THIS 10 YEARS BEFORE KIRK IN THE CLASSIC TIMELINE! AND GOD IN HEAVEN WHAT THE (bleep) DID YOU DO TO THE KLINGONS? THEY LOOK EGYPTIAN!”

        “Enterprise fans will no longer be ashamed after this comes out.”

        “I’m honestly shocked by how much this looks like JJ-Trek. I thought CBS would’ve realized that a new series would need to get as far away from the reboot films as possible in order to bring back the fans and bring Star Trek back to its roots. I’ll still give it a chance, but I feel there’s a good possibility I won’t watch past the first episode.”

        “I don’t understand why they keep going to the past before the icons capt Janeway, Picard, and kirk. they should progress the storyline expand the star trek universe.” (Agree with this guy)

        “I grew up on Star Trek:TOS and watched it ever since with the rest of the shows and movies, even the ones by Jar Jar Abrams. This is the first time I think I’m going to pass. Multiple people at CBS and Paramount need to lose their jobs.”

        “Another prequel? Didn’t they learn from Enterprise? I was hoping for something after DS9 and Voyager. Post borg, wars with locals (Klinks, Rommies, etc), and more exploration into the UNKNOWN. An alien that can detect death? Revisiting pasts that have already been beaten to death.. That’s the best they could come up with? Good thing Gene and Roddenberry and Majel Barrett aren’t around to see this.”

        “Prime timeline show… but tons of Kelvin tech? Full-bodied holograms, yet canon-wise they weren’t developed for StarFleet til DS9? Those weird, full wall, made-of-glass viewscreens with GUI on them? Consoles that look way too futuristic for the time?

        Are we being friccin beaned? We were told this was a Prime timeline show yet everything from the art direction to the tech is Kelvin…”

        ”What have they done to the KLINGONS????? And Televsion??? NO it is on All Access, only I think the pilot will be aired on TV!!! I wanted a series in the future, relative to where the furthest Trek went, 2379 with nemises, something after that like in 2380s, so we could get old characters return in a new series, and you could still have this whole “Discovery theme”. I do not want to go to the past!!! Did you not learn with Star Trek Enterprise? I hope this succeeds, only if to allow for another series taking place where we left off!!!!”

        Well I hope you got the gist! And I left out all the ones of people saying its SJW and not enough white people in it for them. Thats just another level of arguments I don’t want to waste my time with but yeah its a lot of bitter people on that page. But they hate the lead is a black and Chinese woman. Obviously there are people who liked the trailer and defending it but from what I can tell they are in a small minority.

        But it doesn’t mean the majority feel this way of course but I am shocked how much people don’t like it. And I think a lot didn’t know it was suppose to be prequel or that there would be changes either.

        • pittrek

          Thanks. While I do agree with some of the comments, some of them are just way too … “off”

          • TIG1701

            Yeah this is some of the kinder stuff lol. You know how it is over there. I will say though I’m on Reddit and people seem more upbeat/positive about it. Some of the same complaints but a lot of them do seem like they are at least wiling to give it a chance. Others are outright gushing its the greatest looking thing since TNG (when it got good I assume ;)). So yeah who knows.

  • James

    My take I that this looks fantastic, really good. It also looks like the Kelvin universe, which is fine. A retro Trek would have been a backwards step. Still don’t like the prequel concept, but excited for this.

    • TIG1701

      Me and you agree bud! I don’t mind it looks like the Kelvin universe even if I think the films are shit. But they at least looked really good. I too think the prequel idea sucks but again this doesn’t even look like a ‘prequel’ it looks like something completely different. At least on Enterprise that show was 100 years before TOS you can sort of buy it would turn into TOS in time. Here, not at all. Its apples and oranges.

  • MeisterOlsen

    I have a bad feeling about this.

  • My only takeaway from this trailer not to read comments. 🙁

  • David Lund

    Utterly disappointed…with the reaction of the vocal minority of Star Trek fans who post on here and other sites. The discussion is all about buttons and uniforms and screens looking different. Is that all Star Trek is to fans these days? It’s like people are standing ready with a list of technical details to tick off and if it doesn’t match, boy they start to hate.

    Star Trek is about story, adventure, ethics, morality, exploration – of space and humanity.

    50 years on, of course the show is visually updated to reflect 2017’s view of the 23rd century. So much tech has changed since 1966, and even 1986 or 2002 it would be laughable to present the same jelly bean consoles and whiring computer tapes.

    The reboot films did the visual update but totally forgot the heart of the story and characters. From the limited info we have from the trailer, it looks like Discovery is trying hard to get that right too.

    A human child raised as a Vulcan, a journey of discovering her humanity, scenes of the wonder of the cosmos, strange new worlds…it ticks most of the boxes on my checklist.

    I’m really looking forward to seeing this series – if I end up being disappointed myself, it will be because of poor writing or dull characters, not because a set looks more convincingly from 250 years in the future than it did on tv 50 years ago…

    • MichaelMeir-Wright

      Oh my goodness… I cannot like this post enough.

  • Varun Kumar

    Star Trek “fans” will be the end of Star Trek. This looks absolutely terrific.

  • Thomas W.

    Looks like Neelix’ old Noodle soup… ENT 2.0. VOY 3.0. Dark Bridge, dark look. Ship is crap. Bet they found some old VOY scripts to recycle. Way too modern for 23rd century. That’s why prequels suck. Boring. We will see Borgs and Ferengi before seaons 2. Will be canceled before season 3.

    Nevertheless I will buy all blurays and merchandise of this. I can not help.

  • Rana Rahman

    All the naysaying here is very reminiscent of when TNG premiered. TOS fans were the first one to vilify it. Now look at them – most of them appreciate and even love it. I for one welcome change, and fuck continuity and canon – this show needs to reinvent itself for new audiences – they can’t be slaves to hundreds of hours of homogenous TV.

    • Thomas W.

      Then don’t call it “Star Trek”… And don’t call it “prequel”. They could do everything they want if they like to create an all new SF series.

      • Tone

        Slap the words “Star Trek” on it, and instantly it makes a shit tonne more money.

    • TIG1701

      I do think this is a different situation though. TNG was trying to be Star Trek without Kirk and Spock, that was just unheard of at the time. Now thats no longer an issue, Star Trek is very popular without those guys since no one I know ever watched TOS but loves Star Trek. For many people Star Trek is not just about one show or that show anymore.

      But Discovery is a bit different because unlike TNG its kind of remaking what came before. That was the entire reason why JJ verse they created another universe. so they can do what they want. Here to some people its ‘erasing’ the original timeline for a new one. Now yeah you will say TOS is a decade away but remember this is suppose to be happening during the Cage period and its safe to say this doesn’t look anything like that.

      I think older Trek fans has accepted there is more Trek beyond TOS but I think a lot of them was just happy that none of the other shows ever tried to erase it either. In fact most of those shows really went out of their way to honor the original show all the time. They bent over backwards to let the rest of us know TOS should still be honored and respected.

      Now this show shows up and is the first show to kind of say TOS is kind of old hat and should be redone completely now. I don’t think thats what they are trying to say but for some Trekkies thats how its feeling now. If you never watched TNG it never effected TOS so it didn’t matter what that show did. Even Enterprise was so far away it changed things but it was a century before so it made no difference. None of those characters was even alive.

      This is the first show that is a direct assault to it by its placement and how much it changed everything. I’m not saying any of this bothers me, this is what I’m getting reading other peoples issue with it. I think there was some people who was excited they were going back to the prime universe and the original era but now feel pissed they were duped because its just the JJ verse again, only this time in their universe.

      In other words its going to get ugly!

      • Pedro Ferreira

        Really good points.

    • Binyamin Koretz

      As an original when-aired TOS fan I was psyched for TNG but very disappointed by the bland blandness of most of the first season episodes that came after Farpoint. So I don’t know whether vilified is the right word, but it sucked at first. Until Conspiracy! I know it’s not popular among the “better future” fans but I thought it managed to recapture the raw humanity of early TOS episodes like Court Martial. I’m still waiting for the sequel promised by the ending! Eventually things got better and there were a number of classic and near-classic TNG episodes.

  • Tony

    Discovery is neither bad nor perfect. My reaction to the trailer was neutral and leaning to excited. We’ll have to see more before we judge if it’s good or not. I didn’t like that they changed the Klingons’ appearance. Also, the lens flares were very annoying. I hope that the series has NOTHING to do with abrams-verse(Kelvin timeline). It would be nice if we see guest appearances of actors from TNG, DS9, VOY or T’pol from Enterprise. We want to see other species too like the Xindi, the Borg, the Romulans. Why CBS put a geo-block on the trailer? Discovery is gonna be available worldwide.

    • TIG1701

      One thing that never bothered me about JJ. verse was the lens flares. I dont know I never had an issue with it ( I had an issue with everything else though ;)).

      The show probably won’t have anything directly to do with the Kelvin verse since its a completely different universe. I would like to see people from TNG, Enterprise or DS9 as well. We probably won’t but maybe Enterprise.

  • David Francisco

    Please don’t let it be a half Vulcan half Human woman on the verge of “discovering” herself and the meaning of life, acceptance and hopes that everyone can accept her for whom she is and not for what she is, thus the Discovery title……
    Again we go back in time to rewrite what was done by Gene Roddenberry….. in the JJ time lime apparently, (just take a look at the Klingons) oh and I love the JJ time line but if the story of the series is going to be again a half and half searching for my soul Trek, well then I will wait for it on bluray.

  • Zarm

    Welllll… I hate the uniforms, JJ ship aesthetics, and Klingon look (unless these are ALL ancient Klingons) inspire day Into Darkness; and yes, I think these are COMPLETELY valid criticisms since the team with total creative freedom for setting *chose* the Prime Universe and Pike era, so the beholden-ness to existing continuity is a burden they chose to assume.

    BUT, other than that- a pretty cool trailer. I like that the spacesuit bears echoes of the TOS design, and they even have the igniter-enable bit from TMP. That’s very cool.

    Aesthetics aside, this does look pretty great.

  • Ian Fleming

    It looks very pretty. More of a sequel to Enterprise than a prequel to TOS. Making a 21st century TV show look like a show from the Sixties would be madness but I do want to see more connective tissue to what has been previously established. I am cautiously optimistic about this.

  • archer923

    I’m neutral. I’m just annoyed they just copied the movie designs. instead of going for split the difference. Incorporate ENT and TOS designs. Here, they copied even down to the annoying lens flares. I’m gonna watch the pilot. And base it on the actual story telling. But, the designs scream laziness already.

    • worgel

      Whole heartedly agree.

  • Io Jupiter

    I think this will skip town faster than Enterprise did.

  • His Eminence

    Ah, yes. The continuity debate rages in the comments, like I expected it to.

    I’m old enough to be a teenager when TNG started, and I remember the Trekkie purists refusing to watch that show, too.

    Like many of you, I had serious problems with the JJ Abrams version of our beloved Star Trek, but not because of new uniforms or new technology or a young cast playing old characters. It was because they casually scrapped the hard work of other artists who labored on Star Trek for 45 years before they got there. To wipe out the entire Trek universe, only to steal plots, characters, and even entire scenes from them later, was artistically lazy and as a fan, unforgivable.

    The big difference between TNG and its spinoffs, vs. Enterprise / JJ Trek and now sadly it seems, Discovery, is that they seem embarrassed by what came before, and like a rebellious teenager, they want to do it “their way”.

    Updating Star Trek is not the problem. Destroying what came before it, and therefore negating the hard work of so many people, is.

    • Thomas W.

      I couldn’t have said it better myself.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Ah great, another person who has seen the first episode already. 😉

        It’s great that you and His Eminence were brought into the studio and shown the first episode — I envy your inside access to Discovery!

        • His Eminence

          Quit being snarky. If you’re entitled to an opinion, so is everybody else. Stop acting like NewTrek’s nanny.

    • Matineer

      There’s financial incentive to make any new Trek not look like TOS — that would mean greater royalties to the Roddenberry estate, even if doing it that way would make more sense. I would love to see somebody like James Cameron reboot Trek, because he has clout enough and imagination to make big changes work. I’ll accept this show (Discovery) for what it is, knowing full well that the magic of TOS and TNG is not likely to be repeated without its creator.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        That’s silly. The Roddenberry estate wouldn’t get a dime more if the look of Discovery matched TOS look from the 60’s. LOL — lay off that crack pipe. 😉

        • Matineer

          Look up reimagining movies and derivative works. Changing a property makes it a derivative work.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            It’s already derivative. The “look” of it won’t result in a dime more if it looks more like TOS in the 60’s. Whatever money the Roddenberry estate may or may not be getting from Discovery will not hinge on the look of the show.

          • Matineer

            I’m not a Hollywood lawyer. I do know that many changes to superhero films (costumes,etc.) are made to avoid copyright royalties to creators. Smallville avoided the costume for this reason (they wanted a fresh take, also). It’s logical to assume the same here. Peace.

          • bulletproof1979

            Far more logical to assume they’re not going to ape the dated costumes and aesthetic of a 50 year old plywood set made on a budget because it would be commercial suicide, I’d have said.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Yep!

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Whoa there, talk about jumping to conclusions. I’m not seeing anything in the trailer that highlights they are “destroying” what came before or are “embarrassed”??? WTF???

      Based on the information we have to date, and the trailer, you are way out of line in making this claim.

      • Tone

        To be honest, I don’t think he is wrong. But only time will tell.

        But I think the best way to look at the visual style is to think of Discovery as a sequel to Enterprise, then a lot of it makes sense.

      • His Eminence

        Follow me closely. I said the JJ track universe, and I said it appears that discovery is taking the same tack.

        I agree with you that it is premature, and I will give the show a chance, but this does not look promising so far.

      • His Eminence

        No one is way out of line to speculate on anything. Are they way out of line to think that the trailer makes the show look awesome? That’s ridiculous.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Totally agreed. It doesn’t fit in the Prime Universe at all. Hopefully someone from marketing will quickly come out and say it’s actually set in the reboot universe as that’s what it looks like.

      • Michael

        CBS has already said it is set in the Prime universe

        • Pedro Ferreira

          They’ll need to change that because this in no way looks like the Prime Universe. It looks like the reboot movies.

          • Michael

            I agree, but Moonves himself said this is the prime universe

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Someone needs to give ol Moonves the memo.

  • Michael

    Claims set in “Prime” universe, actually set in Kelvin universe. Epic fail.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Epic bullshit from you again.

      • Michael

        Epic dodge of the original comment

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Excuse me, but you already forgot today what you said here yesterday about the Kelvin universe. Today, you contradicted yourself by saying:

          “Michael • 2 hours ago
          The rumor is this is not the prime nor the Kelvin timeline but a brand new one using elements from both”

          So you are obviously just making this up as you go along, and are not even careful about your lies.

          Tomorrow you’ll probably tell all of us that Discovery is set in the Mirror Universe…LOL

          • DC Forever

            Notice how Flynn refuses to explain his brainfart where he changes his “universe story” here.

    • Eskay

      Michael,

      Again, if I were you, I would not trust your source’s new claim that this is in the Prime Universe. You are being used. This source just feeds you good and bad news at random, so who really knows???

      • Michael

        CBS itself has said it is set in the prime universe

  • Michael

    Wait till they reveal that they changed the culture of the Klingons. No more code of honor or anything like that

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Kind of a metaphor for your posts on this site.

  • Michael

    Thankfully, they plan to completely reboot the show during season 2. The writing dog hinted at that. First they need to get rid of this season that is some kind of aborted fuller/moonves bastard child.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Please go away. Some people drank your Kool-Aid here earlier this year, and got burned.

      Your posts from earlier this year have now been shown to be completely full of shit, and it’s clear you have no inside source given how wrong you were.

      • Michael

        I was fooled as well friend. I was fed false info and I scooped it up like a fool. I admit
        I was tricked.

        • Eskay

          Michael,

          I think it’s more likely that your orignal information is correct, and your friend got busted, and now he’s be directed to feed you negative information so as to mix themes up here and discretid your earlier scoops.

          You even mentioned yourself here that some of the information you were being fed was fake, as I recall.

          So I think your information soucrce is not credible. So if I were you, I’d be questiioning this new negative info you have received. It’s probably fake information.

          You are probably being used by your source to cover-up his past information, which he got in trouble for providing you.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            His inside source is all in his imagination.

            But you are correct in that even if there was a source like this, any information from that source can no longer be trusted.

  • Martin Venema

    Many keep complaining that Discovery looks more like the Kelvin timeline than Prime timeline. Technically USS Kelvin is from the Prime timeline. So if you compare the design of that ship (exterior and interior) and the uniforms the officers on that ship are wearing with Discovery, it’s not strange it looks alike.
    Even Enterprise looked more modern than TOS. In the 60s TOS looked futuristic, now it looks old fashioned.
    Star trek is about our future, even though it’s fiction. It should look futuristic.
    In my opinion Discovery succeeds well in this.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Well said!

  • Michael

    Will this be streaming in 4K at 60fps?

  • The Science Fiction Oracle

    In analyzing this trailer further, I think the ship in the clouds above the desert planet (my guess: Vulcan) in the opening sequence is the Discovery, not the Shenzhou.

    • Michael

      So in other words, you think the ship still looks like a POS.

  • Michael

    She does not look tough enough to be the lead of the show. She looks like a reject from a Peter Pan fan tribute movie posted to YouTube

    • SG

      Spot the misogynist/racist fuckboy who’s mad because he’s not the center of attention anymore.

      • Michael

        So it’s racist now to give my opinion that she does not look tough? LOL

        • DC Forever

          Well, misogynistic f-boy is certainly still in play, Flynn.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Oh yea, she’s a real mall-flower…

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2-hrhbNIxI

      • Michael

        Not talking about other shows obviously.

  • Michael

    Not enough lens flares

  • Peter Deluka

    This show looks expensive, so this will need huge ratings. Isn’t that one of the reasons Enterprise was canceled, I think i heard that it was one of the most expensive tv show at the time.

    • Michael

      Sadly, the kids who went to see the popcorn JJ verse “Star Trek” movies will NOT be subscribing to this series as they will quickly become bored because there will be actual plots – and no beastie boys music

  • Pedro Ferreira

    This looks really disappointing. If it’s supposed to look like it’s set in the Prime Universe they did a terrible job. The Klingons looks terrible, the ship looks bad, the whole thing looks like the reboot universe. The trailer doesn’t make me feel optimistic.

    • Michael

      I agree with you 100%. We were promised the prime universe and we instead get some kind of hybrid JJ verse crap.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        I just can’t get my head around how it’s supposed to be a prequel but doesn’t fit at all. I mean did we really need more lens flare???

        • Michael

          No, we did not. They really have the gall to say this is the prime universe 10 years before TOS

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’m all for a fresh take and style but because the reboot universe already looks like this (putting aside my subjective distaste for that style) it looks like the Kelvin Universe. At a stretch you could say the uniforms are an evolution of the Enterprise ones but really I think CBS need to clarify this isn’t set in the Prime Universe.

          • Michael

            They have said multiple times it is set in the prime universe. In fact, to ease fans fears of the show being set in the terrible JJVerse, it was one of the first things they announced when the show was revealed.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I know but as you can see it hasn’t worked.

          • Harry Kane

            Saying that it was set in the prime universe I believe was completly a PR stunt to pull people in, It will be for all intensive purposes a trek series set before the 2009 movies. No hard work at all. Star Trek Online shows how it is done, these lot have not got a clue

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Sssshhh, don’t let TUP hear you say that. He’ll have a field day. You’re supposed to love the new show according to him.

  • Michael

    A terrible joke. We were promised the prime universe and are getting some half and half cheap JJ verse rendition

  • Leopold Nienhaus

    I like it a lot. I didn’t expect them to reproduce the aesthetics of The Cage, which even the creators back in the 1960s decided were in need of revamp. I actually like that they go for a completely new look rather than doing something in-between. And they seem to borrow from all corners of Star Trek. And it makes sense to borrow from the fairly successful movies of late. Like an evolution of the industrial USS Kelvin, but sleeker and more minimalistic like TOS. I like the new uniforms which even give a slight 19th century navy vibe.

    As for the new Klingons: the gold guy looks like an evolution of the Into Darkness “Blingon” (bald, flat nose, jewelry), but to me, it looks like even in the story these aren’t supposed to be ordinary klingons. the sarcophagos also seems to show of several more classical klingon features like hair, ridges, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we actually get to see yet another design for the “regular” klingons.

    Overall this trailer showed adventure, intrigue, discovery, wonder and mystery which is something I missed in late 1990s/ early 2000s Star Trek. Also, Star Trek was always more about today than really about the Star Trek universe itself. I also think Sarek is spot on. When I first saw the actor, I wasn’t sure he could pull it off.

    All in all I’m excited for this fall and hopeful for the future of the new Star Trek.