Another day, another Star Trek: Discovery preview video! In addition to the week-long rollout of character spots, CBS also debuted a new minute-long commercial for the upcoming series on their social media channels today.

We are a long way from home. #StarTrekDiscovery

A post shared by Star Trek Discovery (@startrekcbs) on

Embedded above is a region-locked Twitter video, only one of two CBS official release points for today’s promo – as the network relies on international distribution partners (Bell Media, Netflix, etc.) to promote the upcoming series in their regions specifically.

UPDATE: The above Instagram embed should be region free.

While today’s trailer contains mostly already-seen footage from previous Discovery previews, there are some notable additions.

First is much better look at the likely accidental, surprise collision of Starfleet vessel USS Europa with a cloaked (Klingon?) vessel, glimpsed only briefly in the Comic-Con trailer:

In addition, this sequence between Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) and Captain Lorca (Jason Isaacs) clearly shows that Burnham has been reassigned to a silver Sciences division aboard the USS Discovery — but does not appear to have been awarded any rank due to her lack of Starfleet insignia.

Lorca: “You know what we need to do?”
Burnham: “We need to win.”
Lorca: “That’s the spirit!”

…and just where are these two headed, down this secretive, darkened corridor?

Finally, the new preview also gives us a set of new dialogue bits from both Burnham and Lorca.

Burnham (voice-over):

We strive toward this dream of peace, where all species can share common ground… yet no dream will protect us from you.

Lorca (dialogue):

The work we do is hard, and it’s not with out sacrifice. We are a long way from home, but I know that is a sacrifice worth making.

Also of note is the TV-MA rating which tags the opening shot of the video; for those outside the United States, this rating is designed to signify that the program in question is “specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17.”

We already knew that Discovery was going to be a more hard-edged series than previous Trek television adventures, and producer Aaron Harberts addressed this in a July interview with Entertainment Weekly.

Every writer’s impulse when you get to work on the streaming shows with no parameters is to go crazy. But then you look at things like: How does nudity play on Trek? Eh, it feels weird. How does a lot of [profanity] on Trek? Not so great.

[…]

What’s important to the creative team is the legacy of the show — which is passed down from mother to daughter, from father to son, from brother to brother.

We want to make sure we’re not creating a show that fans can’t share with their families. You have to honor what the franchise is. I would say we’re not going much beyond hard PG-13.

So while all television programming is required to carry a guideline rating in the United States, it sounds like TV-MA is set to allow Discovery the creative freedom to explore more adult themes, but the production team isn’t turning the series into a free-for-all of swearing and skin.

*   *   *

Lastly, we also have CBS’ newest character spotlights, including Lt. Ash Tyler (Shazad Latif) and Klingon leader T’Kuvma (Chris Obi).

Starfleet Officer Lieutenant Ash Tyler. Stream #StarTrekDiscovery starting Sept. 24 on #CBSAllAccess!

A post shared by Star Trek Discovery (@startrekcbs) on

T'Kuvma, Klingon leader. Stream #StarTrekDiscovery starting Sept. 24 on CBS All Access.

A post shared by Star Trek Discovery (@startrekcbs) on

Keep checking back here at TrekCore for more Discovery news as it beams down!

  • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

    Nice to see that the Xindi are back.

  • Laughing Boy

    It’s mind boggling how bad this looks.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      You said it.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      It looks as bad as Canonball Run and Jigsaw.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      I bet one fan could do a better job. Hmmm…

  • TheRenegadeRebel .

    Looks good. Can’t wait to see the final product next month!!

    • Pamelaerichardson

      Pixel92c

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! :!al82d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      :!al82d:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash372ShopValue/Pay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!al82l..,.

    • Karl

      TV-MA because trek is all about blood splattering violence and sex.
      If anyone had told me 2 years ago that a new trek was coming out, but I’ll detest every morsel of info coming from the marketing machine in it’s entirety, from quanta of minor leaks at the start, to the full on glossy over produced abomination this thing has become, I’d have shit the bed.

      Yet here we are, it is what it is, and I find myself quite rightly in team boycott.

      Incredible.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Completely spot on, I’m in the same boat.

      • TheRenegadeRebel .

        We all must do what makes us happy. If the series doesn’t appeal to you than don’t pressure yourself to experience it. I have a friend who refuses to watch TOS for the same reason. I know others who have similar sentiments for Enterprise. Don’t stress over it. Not every series appeals to every fan. I myself can’t stand Voyager. I still watched it all, but I will probably never go through it again. Just do what makes you happy.

        • Karl

          It’s appeal is not my concern. Rewriting the show I have grown up on is.
          You’ll find that it’s a far more common opinion than the negligible amount of fanboys on these hardcore sites who apparently have a genuine belief that STD is going to be a success.
          The mind boggles. I suppose if the cast and crew believe it blindly, there must be a small set of followers who do too, and it would make sense that you congregate on websites which feed nothing but STD STD STD all day, every day.

          Wake up Neo.

          • TheRenegadeRebel .

            As I said. Do what makes you happy. If you only like classic trek then only watch classic trek. There is no shame in that. I’ve met fans that only watch TOS. Don’t let a series you have no interest in poision your enjoyment of the franchise you love. I admit I was in a similar situation not that long ago with ST12. I simply don’t watch that movie. I don’t enjoy it and it’s not my trek. Other fans love it. It’s the nature of successful expansive franchises to diversify the available experiences. ST12 doesn’t ruin TOS for me. Nothing ever will. Every installment can coexist in the franchise just like every fan can coexist in the fanbase. Anger only comes in when we are pressured into watching installments that don’t appeal to us. I emplor you not to fall into this trap. If what you see is not what you want then by all means do not watch.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Shilling?

          • TheRenegadeRebel .

            My issues with ST12 were not visual. Also, I did watch Voyager, all of it in fact. And having seen every episode I can most assuridly say it is my least favorite trek series.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Voyager is great. Also more true to the ‘spirit’ of Trek than this.

          • TheRenegadeRebel .

            Just like every other series in the franchise I will make no judgements until I’ve actually seen it. And I respect that other fans do like Voyager, I however do not. That is my informed opinion having seen every episode. I challenge you to do the same with Discovery.

          • prometheus59650

            Voyager is not great.

            Admittedly, it has good episodes and it consistently did two-parters like nobody’s business, but it’s a show filled with inconsistent writing and characterization that had literally zero interest in adhering to its own premise.

            I’ll watch DSC and judge it, but it already seems more dedicated to being good than Voyager ever was.

            Because opinions.

          • Karl

            I loved Voyager. As a homo I do tend to notice that heterosexual men seem to have the most issue with it. I think it’s something to do with perception of women in power seeming fake or false to them. Never yet met a fangirl who had anything bad to say about it, and I can’t say that I know any fellow queers who do either. Not one. What’s that all about?

          • prometheus59650

            Your own biases, probably.

            I’m a straight guy that has zero problem with, or concern over who you want to sleep with.

            I’m not sure what the sexual orientation of you or your circle of friends actually has to do with criticism of the show?

            Or, am I somehow a homophobe because I have a problem with a captain so insane that, for instance, she’s willing to potentially sacrifice three members of her crew in favor of holograms that she accepts are not sentient like The Doctor, who was one of the three potential victims of her decision making because they ‘felt real’ to her and the crew that played in it.

            Including her holo-boyfriend.

            But, hey, feel free to continue to passively-aggressively label me a homophobe if it suits you.

          • M33

            Janeway was whacky. Especially the longer they were out there. She ran the ship like a board of directors, an elitist group that had say over all the rest of the crew.
            Really, over time, there should have been some serious tensions growing on that ship.
            Voyager never really delivered on its concept either.
            DS9, however, did in spades.

          • Karl

            see my message to prometheus below.

          • Tone

            Wow, you really haven’t watched TNG much have you? To say that there is no real difference between Janeway and Picard is insane, and taking the rest of your comments in to account, the stuff of a SJW troll, trying to bait.

          • M33

            Women in authority?
            No problem whatsoever.
            The difference is the situation at hand.
            Picard operated amidst the Federation environment.
            Janeway and crew, mixed with rebel Maquis, were completely detached from it.
            The challenge is isolation,. adn how does that work out over time.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Lots of people say this about Voyager’s concept but they seem to want Voyager to be BG. I have lots of respect for Ronald Moore but one of the best things about Trek is the positive future.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Hmm, I think the character tension would have seemed petty and forced. If DS9 had any tension they still worked together. Positive future in Trek.

          • Karl

            Calm yourself.
            I was merely stating my observations, not attacking heterosexual people.
            The usual complaint is that the acting was bad, and the writing poor. Generally bad acting will make any story seem poor, which wouldn’t account for Voyager’s mass appeal by all but heterosexual men who are always the most vocal in pointing out Voyager’s flaws.

          • prometheus59650

            The acting generally wasn’t bad.

            The writing was miserable for the most part, leaving everyone to do their best with what they had, which often wasn’t much.

          • Karl

            Some examples please sir

          • prometheus59650

            Asked an answerd already. “Spirit Folk” is nonsense ftom start to finish. Janeway’s logic was consistently inconsistent over seven years. Neelix was consistently ridiculous. And Kes was so interesting they basically forgot about her between “Elogium” and “Warlord ” before dumping her, only to spit on what was left of the character in “Fury.”

            I could go on, but there’s no point.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Kes is dull but they should have kept her and got rid of Neeliz

          • prometheus59650

            I can agree that, of the two, Kes was far better. That’s not saying much. It was clear that, by the time “Elogium” came and went, the writers had no comprehension of what to do with her any more than they ever knew what to do with Chakotay.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Agreed, although I like Chakotay

          • prometheus59650

            Chakotay could have been a cardboard stand up for all the writers cared

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Janeway was good in the first four seasons and then they messed her up. Neelix same problem. Kes was a good character who they could have developed more, not sure the answer was to bring in the absolutely annoying Seven of Nine instead.

          • prometheus59650

            Janeway had no consistency. Put Picard or Sisko somewhere and you knew what their response would be and the script was, correctly, written around that. Janeway was written weekly in whatever way got the writers to the end in the most expedient fashion.

            Neelix was never good. He was loud-mouthed, obnoxious, and petty. He was disrespectful towards the crew, particularly Tuvok, more than once. And he stalked Kes like a predator. The creature was unwatchable save a literal handful of episodes.

            And Seven of Nine was at least written consistently, which made her less annoying than the likes of Neelix or Insaneway.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Janeway was absolutely fine in the first four seasons. It’s from Season 5 onwards that it all fell apart.

            Nah, Neelix was great at least in the first four seasons. They completely turned him into a total idiot in Season 5 onwards bar Homestead.

            Seven was in no way written consistently, she was also completely irritating and annoying.

          • Your Worst Nightmare

            The entire series relies far too heavily on tech-ing the tech to get out of any situations. Have a problem that you can’t think of logically as a way to get out of? Here’s the Voyager Technobabble 4000 to get you out of it! It was weak. It was a crutch. It seriously hurt the show. Particularly when the first thing you hear about Voyager is a geeked out technical play by play on the ship.

            STADI: That’s our ship. That’s Voyager. Intrepid class. Sustainable cruise velocity of warp factor nine point nine seven five. Fifteen decks. Crew complement of one hundred and forty one. Bio-neural circuitry.
            PARIS: Bio-neural?
            STADI: Some of the traditional circuitry has been replaced by gel packs that contain bio-neural cells. They organise information more efficiently, speed up response time.

            Riveting dramatic stuff there.

          • prometheus59650

            That was Voyager’s writing strength: the equivalent of me saying that if I hit the buttons on my microwave in a certain sequence (And did it fast enough. Fast was always key) I could get my microwave to emit and anti-proton beam.

            Sure. All the shows are guilty of that to some extent, but Voyager elevated it to an art form.

            That, and, if it cared about its premise and resources were really scarce, that ship would have been a hodgepodge of tech by year seven.

            But nope. Always clean and fresh out of spacedock.

          • Your Worst Nightmare

            Art is subjective for sure. 🙂

            It was a huge problem and took away from much of the dramatic tension because there was always a way the tachyon beam deflection grid or whatever could save the day!

            And I respect that there are different things that people appreciate about Star Trek, the technobabble being one of them. And in 1995, as a geeky teenager, I was probably drooling at what the bioneural gel packs would do for the ship!

            Then I discovered boobs. Bioneu… what?

            As I got used to the idea of girls, I came back and rediscovered Trek and realized beyond the technology of it all, there were stories about humanity. And while TOS and DS9 told these stories in spades, TNG, a little less so… and Voyager? Well, yeah… okay, but only after you could get past all of the overly present technobabble. The characters on Voyager are fine, and even Seven and the Doctor are downright amazing characters!

            As I’ve said before: there is a Star Trek for everyone! Mine was not Voyager. And I’m more than willing to give Discovery a chance. But I will defer judgment until after I see it.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            No way could the ship be slowly beaten up over seven years. The effects budget would be huge! Plus every week nobody really wants to see a slowly crappy looking ship as it limps through space.

          • prometheus59650

            First, you can absolutely do it in a manner that is aesthetically pleasing. Hell, slowly morph so that it looks like one of the earlier mock-ups of Voyager that look better than the swan they went with.

            Second, I could live with it even if they changed the sets over time, with a Hirogen helm console here or an 8472 living warp core there. All those things are not all that expensive in that they are changed once and remain in place, and and open up story possibilities.

            Finally, if they had neither the budget, nor the will to realize the premise, then it never should have been greenlit.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You’ve got to also understand that from a marketing point of view it wouldn’t work. How would you merchandise a ship that changes it’s look between episodes or seasons? I can understand them wanting Voyager not to change over time because it messes up marketing the show.

          • prometheus59650

            You know what, that’s a valid argument for not changing the exterior, though you can certainly call it a marketing OPPORTUNITY in that I get to market the new ship variants…model kits, etc. Given the franchise’s love of the double and triple dip, I have no doubt the powers that be would have been fine with it.

            But okay. Even if I grant that, that doesn’t wash away the notion of changing the interior of the ship over years as the premise might require. Voyager wasn’t selling bridge or engineering playsets.

            As for the characters? Opinions. Insaneway was and is. When Neelix wasn’t cloying he was stalky.

            Examples of INconsistency in Seven?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “Given the franchise’s love of the double and triple dip, I have no doubt the powers that be would have been fine with it.” No, the complete opposite. The marketing loses money if people get confused with a product. Same thing happened with Doctor Who. That logo change caused all sorts of problems apparently.

            “Examples of INconsistency in Seven?” I think I could probably name episodes were she wasn’t annoying or badly written. They forced conflict into the show but overdid it and made her totally incredulous to the point she sucked all the fun out of everything. Couldn’t stand her so you can imagine my frustration when in the later seasons they turned it into the Doctor and Seven show.

          • prometheus59650

            As long as the logo stays the same, it’s not a problem. And these are companies that have no problem selling you, LITERALLY, the SAME disc repackaged two and three times. These people would have no problem selling you a die-cast replica of Voyager 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0.

            I have an MBA. I know how marketing works.

            And, still, that doesn’t address that they could and should have shown the effects of the premise on the inside.

            I asked for examples of inconsistency in her character and you offered none, so I see no need to continue here. Have fun.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            You seem to want it to be BSG? I like Moore’s work but Trek is optimistic future.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            But the DVDs are the same thing so they’re easy to sell, for toy manufacturers it causes issues. It might be the reason why the TNG logo introduced in Season 5 was only kept for one season.

            “I asked for examples of inconsistency in her character and you offered none, so I see no need to continue here. Have fun.” Her character was always inconsistent because she was never written well and the whole purpose of the character was to force conflict. Not dodging your question, it’s just there’s very few episodes where she was written okay.

          • prometheus59650

            If she were written inconsistently on a regular basis, you could compare actions taken in episode A and compare and contrast with episode B where, in comparable situation, she made a different choice for no apparent reason.

            If you just straight up don’t like her, that’s fine, but “inconsistency of character” is not a nebulous issue . One should be able to answer it specifically if that’s their issue.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It’s not that I don’t just don’t like her, she wasn’t a very good character and was rarely written well. She was probably at her best in Season 4 because Jeri Taylor was still there, having said that Season 4 had some terrible Seven episodes and moments. I can probably name good Seven episodes to be honest.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            They do that with Game of Thrones, difference being they’re having sex while they say that exposition (wink).

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            lol

          • Pedro Ferreira

            In a way nobody can criticise Voyager for it’s technobabble exposition when GoT does it every episode as well.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            What has good writing?

          • prometheus59650

            Generally speaking, everything else.

          • M33

            TNG had mass appeal. Voyagers waned year after year. DS9 was more niche.
            There is a difference.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Holo boyfriend? You mean the character that was only around for about three episodes?

          • prometheus59650

            Reading comprehension is clearly not your strong suit.

            I’ll leave you to your trolling.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            The “Jane Eyre” holo program (that’s what you are referring to, yes?) was quickly written out of the show.

          • prometheus59650

            It isn’t. And what I am referring to is but an example of consistently poor writing.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            K. And just so I understand your position what episode is it?

          • prometheus59650

            “Spirit Folk.”

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Ok, thanks for clearing that up, I’m not big on the Fair Haven stuff.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The Jane Eyre holo program was one of the better ideas for the show. Sad to see that one gone.

          • Tone

            So straight males hated voyager? Really?

            I’m straight, I didn’t like Voyager, but I liked Janeway. Her problem was that the writers made her the master of all trades, and she almost didn’t need a crew.

            The vast majority of the rest of the cast were cardboard cutouts, and apart from the Doctor, Paris (sometimes) and Tuvok, were quite unlikeable.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Ha I will politely disagree. What is your take on this show and it’s characters?

          • Tone

            To be honest with you, I always had the feeling that they had lost their way (pardon the pun) when the designed the premise of Voyager. I think it never really got in to gear, as it were. The characters just never were really like people, more like characters in a sci-fi tv show. There were some good moments, but it never had that sense of family and comfort that TNG and DS9 in its later series had.

            There never seemed to be any warmth or unforced humour between the actors. Maybe I’m wrong, do I need to watch it again? Lol

            I couldn’t stand Neelix, Kes had potential, but was literally thrown away. Kim was as dull as ditch water, and played by a terrible actor. Chakotay (sp?) was also boring and wooden, had nothing to do. Janeway was also very wooden at times, and could be likeable one minute, and totally annoying the next.

            To be honest, the doctor was by far the best character in Voyager, Seven was a good foil for him, and got better with the later seasons.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Thanks for sharing, those are all good takes. Personally , I find Neelix one of the most annoying Trek characters (which caused me to love Tuvok’s reactions to him) but I also really liked Tom and Harry’s friendship, I thought they actually they had one of the best friendships.

          • M33

            Great analysis.
            I agree with most of it.
            Voyager really could have challenged Trek ethos to its core, but chose to keep playing it safe.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Seven was really a terrible character depending on the writer and who was in charge that season.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Voyager is great, no offense meant but I think you are just repeating some groupthink about Voyager and now Discovery.

            And how is Discovery dedicated to being good ? You haven’t even seen it yet and the promos are cheesy.

          • prometheus59650

            Groupthink? No. It’s a considered opinion after having watched 7 years of the show.

            Sorry.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well at least it’s a considered opinion, not just blindly repeating

          • DC Forever

            Yea, why can’t we all have an open mind like you and not pre-judge the show?

            (Sarcasm)

          • DC Forever

            Voyager is awful Trek. Even Enterprise is better.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Not all of it.

          • Karl

            Since when was everything up to the god awful JJ reboots “classic”? This is the problem right there. We waited 15 years for the story to continue, we didn’t wait all that time to be told a line has been drawn under it and here’s it’s perverted replacement.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well said again.

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          You’ll watch this but not Voyager? lol k.

      • Your Worst Nightmare

        Wow, like you haven’t made that clear 1000 times on this site. Look, before you say otherwise: you’re entitled to your opinions, you’re entitled to not want to watch it, but your constant spreading your opinion as fact is tiring. You’ve made your point. You won’t give the show even the slightest chance because of your preconceived notions.

        Great. Move along.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        We’ve heard this over and over from you. This is now approaching spam.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      Shilling?

    • Barak Aslani

      To me, It looks like garbage. I think they are trying to be subversive and undermining their fan base’s intelligence. Star Trek for me has always been about optimism in our future and ESCAPISM. This over saturated blue, gritty, edgey, sexy albino aquatic Klingon future isn’t somewhere I want to escape to. The young female lead looks angry in every promo and I don’t want to pay money to watch pissy people working out their angst, while bleeding heart lefties teach me how bad the democratic West is. I’m a gay man in his 30s from an Islamic background – I am all for Star Trek giving us diversity but this is hollywood privilege with an agenda and I’m not going to lap up their jizz.

      • Quintillion Tesla

        You sound very bitter. And you are seemingly projecting your own biases upon a show which hasn’t even aired: “The young female lead looks angry in every promo and I don’t want to pay
        money to watch pissy people working out their angst, while bleeding
        heart lefties teach me how bad the democratic West is.”

        If you think offering details about your personal background exonarates you from your own thinly-veiled bigotry, think again.

        • mr joyce

          hes probably lying to justify his constant negativity

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          Everything he said is spot on , you just happen to sound “sjw” on this.

          • mr joyce

            everything he said is not spot on, you are definately sounding more and more like a troll

          • DC Forever

            Which of course explains why your post here has one up upvote, with Tesla having 8. Lol

          • The Science Fiction Oracle
          • M33

            Yet, Roddenberry was very human. Like Sir Francis Bacon, he espoused great ideals, but often failed to live up to them himself.

            Which is only human.

            Great photo by the way. Hadn’t seen that one.

      • Karl

        I couldn’t agree more dude.
        If STD had any emotional and cerebral depth at the forefront we would have known about it by now with some clips from scenes specifically chosen to portray that.

        Clearly we don’t get that as every trailer and clip so far is less than 1-2 seconds away from an explosion and sub-bar CGI, a battle, people arguing, and some piecemeal generic trek tag lines. It’s become a parody of Trek due to being shepherded by idiots who claim to know and understand canon and the inbuilt fanbase.

        Bullshit.

        It’s quite clear what STD is, and that’s the Kelvin timeline in TV form in all but name. This experiment began when JaJa’s reboots were bringing in money for Paramount, and before the financial and box office flop of Beyond, but by that point it was too late as sound stage sets were up, filming had begun.

        Now CBS is left with quite a mess. A tv show based on an outright box office flop which has no idea of it’s own identity or where it is in the 50 years of established timeline, a massive backlash from the fanbase, and potential legal action from Netflix.

        The piece de resistance? a paywall.

        • Husnock

          i really don’t understand all these preconceptions about the story. The trailers for TOS, TNG and DS9 were action packed and low on ‘cerebral depth’. TOS was officially a western in space. And DS9, one of the most liked Trek shows, had a few seasons of war.
          Let’s just wait and see DSC, before we say it has no depth.

          • DC Forever

            Exactly!

        • DC Forever

          Lol – all from an 80-second trailer.

          Go back and look at the early 87 TNG trailer – it had more phaser shots and explosions that the Discovery trailer.

          Your complete pre-judgement is laughable.

      • Spyros Spyrou

        I love your comments… they pretty much exactly sum up what I feel, only with more grace and humor. Thanks.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          “grace?”

          LMFAO! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

          • mr joyce

            grace aka bullsh*t

      • Spin-El

        so how can you tell the difference between star trek giving us diversity, and the Hollywood privilege with an agenda? Especially since we’ve only seen 3 minutes of trailer footage, which is mostly action (its a trailer, that’s what they’re for. To grab peoples attention)? I’m honestly curious? Besides, who cares. Either way, a new generation of young people gets to see diverse people working together. In light of recent events (making it more obvious than ever that a lot of people are still bigoted and hateful), I think having a diverse crew is amazing and important.

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          Spin doctor?

          • DC Forever

            That would be you

        • mr joyce

          because hes building something out of nothing based on, and to support, his own bigoted views on diversity. labeling the makers as sjws, all others who call him out and those who disagree with him, is one way that shows this.

      • DC Forever

        Yea, you sound like a real optimistic, positive person.

        Lol

  • Thomas W.

    Aah, federation star ships under attack…. Very innovative. When did we ever see this in VOY/ENT?

    a) “Captain, we are under fire!”
    b) “Captain, our shields are down!”
    c) “Captain, there are intruders on the ship!”

    In comparison with space in Star Trek, Manhattan is deserted.

    • M33

      Don’t forget d) “We’ve lost internal dampeners.”

  • Spyros Spyrou

    Yeah, a TV-MA rating on a Trek show… just what I want from Trek. What garbage. Thank God I’ll never waste a cent on this.

    • DS9 would have got it too.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        How so?

        • DS9 covered a lot of tough subjects. Rape , genocide, terrorism, ships blowing up. People being stabbed, all the time, the main character helping plot a murder. Really DS9 had very little blood, but it was wall to wall violence at times.

  • SpaceCadet

    Nice! Looks more like a feature film than a TV series! Sept. 24th can’t come soon enough!

    • Soledadcjones

      Bank230s

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !al270d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      !al270d:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash270TopMedia/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!al270z..,.

    • Lynnsmchugh

      I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is where i starte ➤look➤ at
      ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancialCashJobs390TopLine/Home/Wage….
      ✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹::::ah100

    • Sarahjsmith

      our buddy’s mother makes $77 an hour at home… she has been fired from a job for six months but last month her income was $15079 just working on the internet three hours a day, ➤see➤ this➤ site
      ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancial332CashJobsShopCore/Daily/Wage….
      ✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔::::su42.

      • M33

        And I am sure that’s your real photo, too!
        LOL

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Yes it does look like a feature film, the JJ Abraham movies. Enjoy!

      • SpaceCadet

        Great! Enjoy it too!

        • Pedro Ferreira

          I don’t like those films but if you like Star Trek that isn’t really Star Trek by all means enjoy it.

          • SpaceCadet

            You seem to be very negative about a show that hasn’t even premiered yet. Judgmental much?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Based off what I’ve seen so far yes I am. Just not liking what I’m seeing, sorry.

          • mr joyce

            he is quite negative about the show, but he has a lot of other good ideas too, unlike others on these message boards who dont seem to want to talk about anything else. pedro is not so bad, i got time for him, he actually knows what hes saying, most of the time 😛

          • prometheus59650

            Let’s please not debase ourselves with “You’re not a real Star Trek fan because you don’t like what I like and hate what I hate.” and variants thereof.

            If you only like TOS? Star Trek Fan. If you like everything but Voyager? Fan. If you ONLY like Voyager? Still a fan. If you like the Abramsverse, which I do while still having watched everything Trek since the 70s? Fan.

            That’s what you did here, and it’s nonsense.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The show looks more like the reboot films than actual Star Trek. Not sure what the confusion from your point of view is.

          • prometheus59650

            There is no confusion. You posted:

            I don’t like those films but if you like Star Trek that isn’t really Star Trek by all means enjoy it.

            How is someone to take that OTHER than, “If you like the films, you’re not really a fan because that’s not really Star Trek.”

            Please clarify what you really if there is a misunderstanding.

            The movies are Star Trek. You may not like them and that’s fine, but they are Star Trek. And people that like them are Star Trek fans.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “How is someone to take that OTHER than, “If you like the films, you’re not really a fan because that’s not really Star Trek.”” Well it’s not really Star Trek is it? Even Abrahams as well as critics have mentioned the reboot movies have more in common with Star Wars which is why he got the job on Star Wars.

            “The movies are Star Trek. You may not like them and that’s fine, but they are Star Trek.” In name only of course.

            “And people that like them are Star Trek fans.” They may like the movies but they haven’t experienced proper Star Trek.

          • prometheus59650

            Yes. It’s Star Trek. All of it. And it’s not just that the trappings are there (Kirk, Spock, etc.) While not everyone’s cup of tea, the first two films are replete with Trekian moments of nobility and moral certainty. Nimoy himself saw that. He didn’t sign on to Abrams Trek because he needed the money.

            And this was a man responsible for creating a lot of classic Star Trek at the height of his involvement with the films. You cannot suggest he didn’t know what Star Trek was.

            And Beyond? That was Star Trek through and through.

            In name only of course.

            In your opinion. Your opinion is not fact. It’s particularly not fact when we’re discussing something as wholly subjective as the interpretation of art.

            They may like the movies but they haven’t experienced proper Star Trek.

            But the fact remains that it’s still Star Trek, and they are still Star Trek fans. As to what ‘proper’ Star Trek is, again, your personal opinion is not fact and you are not the arbiter of what a fan is to the point that you get to pop into a thread and passively-aggressively malign them.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “It’s Star Trek. All of it.” In name only. It was more Star Wars than Star Trek. Beyond was a better movie because it felt more like Star Trek but even that movie still had elements of the previous ones.

            “In your opinion. Your opinion is not fact. It’s particularly not fact when we’re discussing something as wholly subjective as the interpretation of art.” That is true but you could apply that to anything.

            “As to what ‘proper’ Star Trek is, again, your personal opinion is not fact and you are not the arbiter of what a fan is to the point that you get to pop into a thread and passively-aggressively malign them.” I know my opinion isn’t fact but I know what Star Trek is and the reboot movies are Star Trek in name only.

          • prometheus59650

            In name only.

            In your opinion. Your opinion is no less, but, more importantly, no MORE valid than mine.

            That is true but you could apply that to anything.

            Anything open to artistic interpretation, sure. I respect what The Beatles have contributed to music, but I think they mostly suck. That’s how I interpret the artistic merit of the band.

            But it is music and I don’t seriously get to tell someone else that likes them that they aren’t fans of ‘real music.’

            You can’t apply that mindset to things like “The Earth is 93 million miles from the sun. It’s not open to subjective interpretation by rational people.

            If you know your opinion isn’t fact, you shouldn’t insult people who like something you don’t.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “If you know your opinion isn’t fact, you shouldn’t insult people who like something you don’t.” I understand your logic to an extent but if everybody was allowed to follow their opinion and not do the right thing we’d have a lot more problems in the world that’s why there’s rules in place. Opinion only takes you so far. With Star Trek it needs to feel like Star Trek, my opinion but again modern Hollywood’s obsession with remakes and reboots is their opinion taken too far.

          • prometheus59650

            I understand your logic to an extent but if everybody was allowed to follow their opinion and not do the right thing we’d have a lot more problems in the world that’s why there’s rules in place.

            Now you’re just engaging in, frankly, ridiculous levels of false equivocation. We’re not talking about someone’s ‘opinion’ on stealing a car or killing someone and dumping them into a shallow grave.

            There is no moral issue (“doing the right thing”) when it comes to what TV shows, movies, books or music you like. You like what you like for whatever reasons you like them and you’re not harming anyone else by doing it.

            Since you have vaulted this conversation off the rails and into moral relativist nonsense over a TV SHOW I’m not going to give any semblance of credibility to it by engaging in it one word further.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “There is no moral issue (“doing the right thing”) when it comes to what TV shows, movies, books or music you like.” I agree but certain creative integrity is required. I never said anything about committing crimes, I’m sticking to the topic of making changes to entertainment where none are necessary. I’m not sure why you’re so defensive and confrontational.

  • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

    So does the lead actress, Michael, ever smile?

    • SpaceCadet

      Uh, because in all of these action clips it would be appropriate for her to smile? Have we seen any of the characters smile? No. And Michael is the name of the character, not the actress.

    • Quintillion Tesla

      I see you’ve re-edited your earlier and tired comment “Does she ever smile?” as you are no doubt fully aware that there are plenty, PLENTY of behind-the-scenes images and video of the actress smiling.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Yes, I actually had to be fair when I saw the actress smiling in behind the scenes shots.

        The character still uses that one facial expression at the other times, however.

        • Your Worst Nightmare

          Yes, because in the five minutes of promo footage we’ve seen, we’ve seen her give every acting beat of fifteen hours of television. :rolleyes:

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Well that’s what happens when you come off The Walking Dead, none of that cast had more than one facial expression.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      I’m sorry I just can’t get past this, I can’t stop laughing. It’s like she’s stubbed her toe:

      https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohzh2CctH9zBgNsis/giphy.gif

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Lol

  • pittrek

    Nudity and profanity? What the …

    • Eric Cheung

      Who said that’s in there? A TV-MA rating could mean lots of things. And frankly, even if that’s in there, that’s better than violence, which is more likely to be the source of the TV-MA rating.

      • Americans do not think of killing, explosions and death as a major thing.

        • Eric Cheung

          This American does.

          • Just using Americans as a whole man. Its our culture.

          • Eric Cheung

            That’s my point. You’re lumping Americans together as a whole. I’d rather no group get reduced to a stereotype, as if it’s totally immutable. It’s not. We’re not prisoners of that perception if we speak up and argue against the desensitization of violence.

          • It is our culture man. That is the American cultural view

          • Eric Cheung

            Cultures change. If I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t be the Star Trek fan I am.

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          I do.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Well they are going for Game of Thrones quality so…

  • James

    Well, I think the TVMA rating is sensible, what with the ageing fanbase. A number of the movies were rated 12 and I think TWOK was a 15. DS9 wasn’t always suitable for the kids either. One thing I am concerned about is the quality of the writing. The following exchange reads like poor fan-fic.

    Lorca: “You know what we need to do?”
    Burnham: “We need to win.”
    Lorca: “That’s the spirit!”

    Yah, that’s some weak dialog right there.

    Production values look good and there is a lot of writing talent involved, so I’m still optimistic. It will be interesting to see if the tone is so dour throughout the series.

    • GhostLoveScore

      That’s what is looks like to me too. Special effects look fine, but somehow all of the dialogs sound like they are trying too hard to sound wise. “We strive toward this dream of peace, where all species can share common ground… yet no dream will protect us from you.” that sounds so cringe-y

      • Locutus

        I suspect they are from personal logs or something. People don’t normally talk to each other like that.

        • GhostLoveScore

          I hope so. Man, I can’t wait to see first episode and end all these speculations.

          • Locutus

            Agreed.

      • Karl
      • mr joyce

        words taken out of context will always seem weird out of context, but i get what you mean

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      Yikes to that dialogue

    • Karl

      Dude, this is 2017 MA ratings, not changing Klingon blood to purple in order to get past the censors.
      Expect violence, sex, gore and adult themes.

      There goes a generation of kids who might have grown up to become astronauts, scientist, professionals and teachers. Instead they’ll get stabbed in a fight when trying to take on the neighbourhood “klingon”.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Another scene I’ve watched:

      Lorca: “You realise what the weather on that planet is like?”
      Burnham: “Yeah…cloudy”

      Ha, ha!

  • Robert Anthony

    Very likely a more adult rating because *gasp* gay people exist. lol

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      More adult rating because of gays? Hmm? What little I’ve seen of game of thrones has lots of naked guys in it and the rating isn’t made more adult because of it.

      • Robert Anthony

        My comment was meant to be really flippant, but this article does state that just because they can cuss and exhibit nudity on Discovery, doesn’t mean they will.

        For many, depicting LGBT folks in a “normalized” light is most-certainly “enough” to raise an adult content flag. The same people who would get their knickers in a knot over Renly giving Loras a hummer, wouldn’t be the same people displeased that there are gay people depicted now. Pretty much all previous Trek might theoretically support the view that humanity has put all the gays ‘out-the-airlock in the future, so I wouldn’t doubt it’s a contributing factor in a new, more “adult” rating for Discovery. ‘Just my opinion though. Cheers.

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          Ok, thanks for explaining that, although many characters could have been gay/ bi in previous shows, they just weren’t in your face about it or used it as the character’s only defining trait. That’s much better than having the Discovery guy saying he is gay in every scene he is in, if that is what happens. Personally, I don’t have any issue with those scenes in thrones (except for something like when they are in “littlefingers” place and he has a long conversation with two naked women. I’m like, “why?”)

          I do think the violence in the show is really over the top, however.

          • M33

            Why?
            Because the industry is obsessed with sex and they know sex sells.
            Simple as that.

            That’s why they created those awful decon chamber rubdown scenes in ENT.

          • Sex has always been a part of trek. Slave girls and kirks endless conquests ring no bells?

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well Slave girls were only in a few episodes and I don’t think I’d call that endless, He got the same amount of relationships as most tv leads.

          • Flaunting his heterosexuality like that!

          • M33

            Allusions to, not in your face.
            There is a big difference between fading to black and watching the sex play by play.
            One is tasteful.
            The other is pornography disguised as “story”.

          • We see nothing to suggest it, although ENT did show a lot of skin.

          • M33

            TOS showed plenty skin too.
            But there is a limit.

          • Over the years its got more and more sex on TV as a whole.

          • M33

            As I said elsewhere, its because sex sells. It doesn’t mean sex-filled stories are good. They’re just base.
            Same with gore and violence filled shows.
            Trek should be better.

          • Trek loves to push sex, so many catsuits. I am hoping the stories are good, because as we saw in ENT, nothing can save poor scripts.

          • M33
          • Painful to watch that clown, but funny.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Catsuits aren’t a long scene however. M33 is spot on.

          • They are. They stuck troybin ine most of TNG and shoved her cleavage put there every time. Same with 7 of 9

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Exactly

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well I will say it is ridiculous that showing a head blown off gets a lower rating than the quick flash of a breast.

          • Welcome to America. Most the ppsters here can not understand the violence is the issue. In America blowing stuff up and killing is PG-13 but sex is just too much

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            That’s exactly my point, yes.

          • When DS9 was on the studio got all kinds of angry letters and calls over the Dax same sex kiss. One person was talking about how it was now no longer kid friendly for their children.

            DS9 was not child friendly. It was the most adult of all treks and covered very adult topics. But its the American mindset, anything sex based is super taboo. However, war, and knifing someone to death are fine child friendly things.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well like I said earlier, that standard has always been bizarre to me.

            Also, don’t forget DS9 had the most Ferengay comic relief episodes, they are certainly kid friendly.

          • American man. We have some backward standards.

          • TIG1701

            Yeah, its true. In fact I saw an interview with G R.R. Martin talking about GOT and he said he always laugh how people get so upset with him because there is so much sex and nudity but no one ever gets upset when someone head is cut off. Its really weird. Sex is not only natural, its how we all got here in the first place. Violence is what we teach as not to do and yet no one ever cares how much of it they see in a movie or a show. Show a penis, its the end of the wold. Show someone cutting it off, not so bad I guess.

          • Yep, its an American thing. We have this cultural issue with nudity and sex. I mean we push sex everywhere, but you can’t actually show it. But blow up a dozen guys or nuke a city and its just good clean fun. Look at old westerns, death everywhere but can’t curse and show nudity but shooting dozens of people is just fine.

          • M33

            Yeah… that is very messed up, too.
            Look at Family Guy.
            Gore is funny now.
            Sad, really…

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It’s called bad writing, most modern TV is like that.

          • mr joyce

            and how do you know he will be saying he is gay in every scene he is in?

          • You picked up almost every single characters sexuality very fast. It was flunted and rubbed in your face a dozen times per episode. Kirk/Riker threw it out with gusto

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Wasn’t the defining trait of either of them however.

          • Yes it was. The fact they were ladies men was a major part of both. The fact they were heterosexual was nother thing thrown up all the time.

            You are just used to seeing all those glaring signs.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Maybe major but not the only thing about them.
            I have a feeling ( I’ve heard the new Doctor who is doing this) in every scene with the new gay character he will mention how he is gay. The audience gets it…

          • I think we will get the same level of “gayness” as we currently get :hetero”. I mean if you really pay attention most characters announce it a dozen times an episode

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Hmm

          • How often did Rikers and troy come up? Or Riker and his effect on women? Even Picard it was made clear, over and over he liked women. Him not marrying was a running theme.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Surprised they never acted on Picard and Crusher.

          • They kinda half did and never went though with it. Although she was under his command, so that was likely a no, no

          • DC Forever

            Lol – did you even watch Kirk in TOS?

            Complete lack of Trek knowledge.

          • mr joyce

            because hes trolling

          • Robert Anthony

            Well, in answer to “why” Littlefinger would be having long conversations with naked women is likely because he operates a brothel.

            Perhaps I’ve become desensitized to the violence, but I think everything about Game of Thrones is well-done and obliterates my suspension of disbelief. If human beings are as violent as they are now, surely they were more so in the “age of Westeros”. 🙂

            I don’t think we have to worry too too much about Trek wandering into the realm of gratuitous violence. They’d have to abandon the notion of humanity being civilized and evolved enough to make it into space. I’m just going to “wait and see” what they do with Discovery.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “Perhaps I’ve become desensitized to the violence,” That generally means you find it difficult to sympathise with or relate to the characters and if that happens you have to ask yourself why are you watching?

          • Robert Anthony

            I’m sorry, have we met? My opinion of violence has nothing to do with my relating to characters. Don’t project your generalizations onto strangers please and thanks. I don’t “enjoy” violence per say, but these days I do tend to overlook it. And “why I watch” should be of no concern to anyone. I tend to think if the producers and creators of Discovery are paying attention to any Trek that’s come before them, that any violence depicted, will not be glorified as the moral high ground.

            I’m peacing-out of this message board. It goes from zero to hostility way too quick for my liking.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’m speaking from my own personal view but it kind of makes sense that if you have trouble relating to characters because you expect bad things to happen to them then that is the fault of bad writing. Modern TV has this problem.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            That is really aimed at 13 year olds , sex and violence is ” adult” to 13 year olds.

        • TIG1701

          TV shows have gay characters all the time now. They don’t get ‘TV MA’ ratings. Where has everyone been? There have been gay people in TV for 20 years now. I just think it will mainly be language and probably some nudity, gay or straight.

          • Robert Anthony

            Mitch and Cam are “cartoon” gays. There’s nothing friendlier or less confrontational than the way sitcoms depict LGBT folk. That’s all I’m gonna say. ; )

          • TIG1701

            Who is Mitch and Cam? And I don’t mean just one show. And there is nothing wrong to present friendly gay people on a sticom. Its a sitcom, most people are presented as friendly and nice. Even the dicks are usually lovable dicks right?

        • M33

          Modern Family isn’t TVMA. Gay married couple with kissing and sexual innuendos in that.
          No… Discovery is probably trying to be the next Game of Thrones or Outlander.
          I really really really hope I am wrong on that.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      The show seems so far an immature idea of what being adult is. See other TV shows today for further examples. I’ve been watching the 70s Incredible Hulk series recently and the writing in that is properly adult.

  • Barak Aslani

    I am so excited about this show! FINALLY Star Trek is brave enough to have diverse casting. Finally a female captain and main characters who are black, asian and middle eastern. Oh wait.

    But they’re throwing away continuity at least, sexing up the Klingons, because we haven’t seen enough of them. Oh wait.

    But it’s all about war at least. Who doesn’t like war? I don’t know about yall but when I turn over from watchign the news and reading the newspapers – when I want to escape… I want to watch a sci-fi show about war. The future enlightened mankind exploring the infinite cosmos – please give me really edgey, gritty stories about war. Moody, angry young lead with have zero emotional connection to – sign me up! No Star Trek series has been brave enough to have an episodic war story-arc yet. Oh wait.

    But at least we can enjoy the cinematic grading of over saturated blue tones and that really cool broken star trek logo. They’re inverting pop culture. So subversive. And most importantly all about war. The production team are doing SUCH a great job. I can’t wait for them to tell me how bad Western democracy is and how things are never black and white.

    I just want to rush out and spend money on this. They’ve improved Star Trek 10 jillion percent.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      Very, very well said.

    • M33

      It will be interesting to see what Star Trek Discovery is actually “discovering”.

    • DC Forever

      Yet you keep up your own war with fans here.

      Why don’t you get some new material. We’ve heard this from you dozens of times now. Your are getting to be reductive.

      • mr joyce

        theres a couple of them that keep saying the same thing over and over, usually alongs the lines of ” sjws are ruining trek ” or ” diversity is being pushed too hard ” etc, bigoted troll losers in other words

        • Pedro Ferreira

          They are mostly right though. You have a problem when one of your cast makes a casual racist remark in an interview while your creator says he’s so happy to finally get his SJW way.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            They said that? Ruh rho.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Both happened yes.

          • mr joyce

            never knew about that casual racist remark thing, can you point me in the right direction, i wanna check it out. thanks.

            gotta disagree on your other point though. we’re talking about people who recycle the same thing over and over and over again with regards to the new show being nothing more than ‘sjw propaganda’, usually something along those lines, and dont see past the modern marketing trend towards highlighting diversity etc. its just a sign of the times. not something to get so upset about, almost every show wanting to get noticed these days has a marketing department which uses this as a tool.

            as for the show being good or not, well, we can just wait and see on that one. i like your point in another comment about modelling being something that should be used more as opposed to cgi though.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “never knew about that casual racist remark thing, can you point me in the right direction, i wanna check it out. thanks.” In one of the previous press interviews one cast member mentions he was taken aback by his name because it’s very a white name. Does the over-push for diversity in Discovery mean it’s okay to make racist remarks towards white people?

            “and dont see past the modern marketing trend towards highlighting diversity etc. its just a sign of the times.” It’s not a good sign of the times. It’s the extreme left agenda slowly seeping into left wing politics. The fact it’s forced makes the whole thing pretentious. Creativity ends up going out the window in favour of ticking diversity boxes. You never put your own politics in front of creativity, never.

          • mr joyce

            “In one of the previous press interviews one cast member mentions he was taken aback by his name because it’s very a white name”

            – do you know any dates roughly for this? i genuinely want to check it out.

            “It’s not a good sign of the times. It’s the extreme left agenda slowly seeping into left wing politics. The fact it’s forced makes the whole thing pretentious”

            – i wouldnt say its a forced thing in this case, its just part of the way society has ‘popularised’ these issues, and over the course of time has become a political topic. the way a show nowadays attracts viewers is very influenced by populist issues, and not really by any political creed, thats why i wouldnt say its anything to do with leftism, because populism takes themes from all sides. i can see, however, why it would look pretentious though, in that its a very ‘look at how cool we are because we tick all these boxes’ sorta thing, specifically with how the show has been promoted. trek has always kinda been like that anyway, being ‘diverse’ in some way.

            “Creativity ends up going out the window in favour of ticking diversity boxes”

            – somewhat agreed in other areas, but not in this case, because the actors assembled are all pretty good. i wouldnt say that any of them have been bad choices, not saying that you said that though.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “- do you know any dates roughly for this? i genuinely want to check it out.” http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/08/stlv-interview-sam-vartholomeos-and-wilson-cruz-join-starfleet-for-star-trek-discovery/ “So my name is Dr. Hugh Culber, and even though by the time we get to this time in history, I have a very white last name — but am very much Latino.”

            “thats why i wouldnt say its anything to do with leftism, because populism takes themes from all sides.” We’ll have to agree to disagree on this. There’s a reason Extreme Ghostbusters was so poorly received and laughed at.

            “somewhat agreed in other areas, but not in this case, because the actors assembled are all pretty good. i wouldnt say that any of them have been bad choices, not saying that you said that though.” Good actors or bad actors, it’s not an excuse. It’s just the left and the SJW wanting ore control.

          • mr joyce

            “- do you know any dates roughly for this? i genuinely want to check it out.” http://trekcore.com/blog/20… “So my name is Dr. Hugh Culber, and even though by the time we get to this time in history, I have a very white last name — but am very much Latino.”

            saw this, id say its more poor judgement from the actor rather than some coordinated effort from the producers/creators to push some sort of political agenda. not a good look though thats for sure.

            ” We’ll have to agree to disagree on this. There’s a reason Extreme Ghostbusters was so poorly received and laughed at.”

            no worries, we dont have to agree on everything. ghost busters was just sh*t though, it could have worked even with the obvious shoehorning in of a purely female lead cast

            “Good actors or bad actors, it’s not an excuse. It’s just the left and the SJW wanting ore control.”

            i dont get this? control over what? last time i checked, i havent seen any leftwing government in control of any somewhat powerful country in the world, the left around the world are largely powerless. i wouldnt use the ‘sjw’ label in this case either, as the groups of people who are often tagged this way, never have control over anything anyway. whether thats media, art, politics etc

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “saw this, id say its more poor judgement from the actor rather than some coordinated effort from the producers/creators to push some sort of political agenda. ” I agree. It wasn’t a conscious attempt but along with all the diversity promotion this all adds up. I saw at interview with that guy and it comes across as scatty and not knowing something as simple as what a hypospray is (he’s the Doctor!). Not sure why he was even considered for the role in the first place.

            “ghost busters was just sh*t though, it could have worked even with the obvious shoehorning in of a purely female lead cast” Are you talking about the reboot? Even if they’d cast an all male cast it would have been crap.

            “i wouldnt use the ‘sjw’ label in this case either, as the groups of people who are often tagged this way, never have control over anything anyway. whether thats media, art, politics etc” A lot of people in charge of creative control in entertainment are left wing. They’re making decisions based on their political bias rather than trying to make every side happy. As a result they’re alienating half their audiences with some of these decisions. They’re making changes or looking for problems where none exist.So yeah Bryan Fuller, Paul Feig, Joss Whedon, Emma Watson, they’re SJWs.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Very well said of both points.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The second point I made is an unpopular opinion among the left but it’s very true. This is coming from someone who is neither left or right.

        • M33

          As long as the show doesn’t become AntiFA Trek, we should be fine.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Well said. Who cares about actually being able to see what’s on screen when we have bad lighting and fake CGI.

  • M33

    Displeased with MA rating.
    If this becomes Trek of Thrones, that will be really a sad day for Star Trek.

    • Star trek has always been violent. This is what you get now days with death, explosions and bloody combat

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Not game of thrones violent, and they shouldn’t pander to what’s currently popular.

        • No, but DS9 should have been MA. It covered rape, war crimes, genocide, people got stabbed to death and murdered all the freaking time. Ships got blown apart and so on. DSC is not made for only Americans, and most of the world would consider most Treks MA shows for the violence.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        Not THAT violent.

        • Yeah it is that violent. How is blowing ships up “not that violent”? How about gutting people with bath’leths? Or stabbing? shooting them though the chest? Disintegration? Trek has always been violent, they just tried not to show blood.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      I 100% agree with the first part.

  • Lynnsmchugh

    I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is where i starte ➤look➤ at
    ➜➜➜http://www.GoogleFinancialCashJobs390TopLine/Home/Wage….
    ✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹✹::::ah100.

  • TIG1701

    Off topic but Terry Farell and Adam Nimoy are now engaged!! Keeping it in the Trek family.

    That guy definitely married up!

    • Your Worst Nightmare

      Go Adam!

    • M33

      Ultimately, Adam can thank his dad for being able to marry Terry.

      • TIG1701

        LOL probably true. 😉

      • DIGINON

        Are you suggesting that Terry Farrell is only considering to marry Adam Nimoy because of his dad? That’s insulting to both Terry and Adam.

        • M33

          Don’t be silly. Nothing so reductive. It is all about the interconnectedness of life and how those connections interwine into the beautiful synchronicities we all experience.
          Glass half full, man!

          • DIGINON

            Oh I see. You’re saying that they only met because of Star Trek.

          • M33

            Its the gift that keeps on giving!

        • Pedro Ferreira

          I think she very much respects Leonard. It’s easier to respect the son then which can then turn into attraction.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Hmm how’s that?

        • M33

          Spock is part of what made Star Trek famous. Had that not been Nimoy, there may never have been the movies, then the spinoff tv series–i.e. No DS9, no Trek fame for Terry, and no DS9 documentary.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            She has been more or less retired since she left her sitcom though, yes?

          • M33

            True. But one has to consider the arenas of interaction which would have brought the two of them in contact. The DS9 doc would be one, the convention circuit would be another.
            I would be surprised if they just happened to connect at a bookstore or grocery store or something. They both have dabbled in the same field.
            I may be wrong.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Ah I see what you mean.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            They were heavily flirting at the recent Trek convention.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      Marrying up? Did he already have a wife or something like that? And she is more attractive than his previous wife?

      Or are you suggesting he married “out of his league”?

      They look like a handsome couple, on the same level of attractiveness to me.

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Well she always did like Spock…

  • Jan

    There’s one thing never changes. Star Trek Fans full of hate, intolerance, prejudices and negative energy. Please let’s wait to see it before juding!

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      Judging

      • DC Forever

        Pot calling the kettle black.

    • DIGINON

      Whenever I see this behaviour from fans I am reminded of the scene in The Undiscovered Country where Spock talks to Kirk about becoming too old and inflexible. Some fans seem to be stuck with an image in their head of what they think Star Trek must be (maybe what it once was to them) and they lash out against anything that deviates from that image. However, Star Trek has always changed and adapted to the times it was made. In order to stay relevant it needs to keep updating itself. This may alienate some fans but Star Trek cannot rely solely on its existing fan base if it wants to keep going for the next 50 years.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        So you’re saying they should dumb Trek down to make it more appealing?

        • DC Forever

          No, he is saying that your behavior is moronic.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I thought your behaviour here was moronic.

        • DIGINON

          Try again. I said no such thing.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        There’s being old and inflexible and knowing what’s rubbish. If everyone used your excuse no one would believe good visual effects come from practical models not CGI. It would just be CGI. There’s times to embrace stuff and times to point out something new looks crap.

        • DIGINON

          There are plenty of practical model effects that look like crap, and there are very good model-based effects. The same is true for CGI: There are great CGI shots and there are CGI shots that look like crap. There are probably a lot of great CGI shots that you are not even aware of. You just notice the bad ones. Basically, if used right, both technologies can yield great shots. If used wrong, both can end up looking like crap.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            CGI dates worse than practical effects. James Cameron recently said today he would probably have the helicopter chase in T2 in CGI but we all know it would look terrible, the fact they did it for real makes it realistic.

          • mr joyce

            modelling + cgi together often works best

          • Pedro Ferreira

            More reliance on miniatures and a small amount on CGI is what works best. See Independence Day, then compare that to the sequel. The original looks real, the sequel doesn’t.

          • mr joyce

            i guess it depends on a bunch of factors, but you made a good point there

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The visual effects in the first movie which includes CGI looks realistic. The sequel is completely CGi from what I’ve seen as looks really fake.

          • mr joyce

            the first movie does still hold up visually, they did well on that one. the sequel, which i’ve seen, looks pretty cool, i wouldn’t say its obviously cgi though. its not a great movie story wise though, its one of those throw away popcorn flicks most people will forget about, and probably already have. but the visuals look cool though.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The visuals from what I’ve seen look terrible which is odd considering it came out last year.

          • mr joyce

            nah, they dont look terrible, they look good, watch the movie one day when you have some time to waste

            edit.. im not saying its a masterpiece though, and jeff goldblum is a bit annoying in this one lol

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I can’t say I’ve seen any clips where the effects are anywhere near as good as the original. It’s a good comparison though, they should be aiming for a mix that works well as in the original compared to the sequel.

          • mr joyce

            for sure

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Exactly!

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Sure, first present me with something good, then I can give it a chance.

  • Renan Cariolando Feitosa

    the colision of the uss europa is not accindental.. the klingon ship is like the 18 century ships with naval ram this would be driven into the hull of an enemy ship in order to puncture it and thus sink, or at least disable, the ship.
    note: from concept arts we can see that ships with ram and the site author describes it as a klingon carrie.

    • That would be very interesting. It would kinda fit with Klingons, they love the close in kill

  • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

    So wait this is ten years before Kirk but Cage is around 13 years before Kirk and the ships and uniforms look nothing like this.

    Also you know they will have revisionist history where the girl named Michael is a huge Starfleet hero, a part of a very important Trek event, they will retcon the other shows to have her mentioned.

    I know this is a third timeline from TOS and JarJar Trek but still

    • Your Worst Nightmare

      So you would prefer to have a small universe where we’ve heard everybody speak of everyone else?

    • DIGINON

      So you only just realized that Discovery is set 10 years before Kirk? Welcome to the party. We’ve known that for what, over a year now?
      How will they retcon the other shows? This isn’t Star Wars where ghost-Hayden Christensen suddenly floats around with Obi Wan.
      The Star Trek universe is big enough that you add a few characters that we haven’t heard of before.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Nowhere do I imply I just realized it , but as they release more the ” 10 years before Kirk” doesn’t fit with what’s been established for that time period. Again, third timeline…

        Also, my point was they are going to retcon her as a pivotal character in Star Trek history , when they release another version of the shows / movies they will likely edit in some picture/ reference to her.

        • DIGINON

          Sure, they will edit her into all the other shows and movies just like they did with Archer. Maybe they will even replace Kirk with her in all the TOS episodes while they are at it.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Well I did think it was cheesy when they used advertising that said Archer was Kirk’s childhood hero.

            And I don’t know if they say First Contact changed the timeline or what, but even as someone who likes Enterprise a lot the ship itself, with the NX used to get around things, is a huge retcon.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      You just figured this out now? We’ve known that for a year now? Come on!

      LOL

  • Pedro Ferreira

    Yeah visual effects here still look rubbish compared to TNG and DS9.

  • Neill Stringer

    I see that Star Trek Discovery is being rated for more mature audiences, they are advising it to be viewed by audiences no younger than 17. I know a lot of fans will be happy with that but it means that kids will not be able to watch the show and I think that is a mistake, How many Star Trek fans got into Trek when they were kids? Probably a good number of us and although war seems to be the main setting in this show. Yes DS9 had the Dominion War but there was so much other stuff as well in the show.

    I agree with Seth McFarlane, there is no longer any optimism on TV anymore and I am looking forward to seeing The Orville, but I don’t know if anyone agrees but I like the return of Star Trek to maintain optimism. I love that in the future of Trek we have overcome our differences.

    I think there is something cool loving Trek as a kid, it really opened this amazing world. A view like no other sci fi.

    • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

      One of the best aspects of Trek is the optimism.

    • TIG1701

      The kids will get over it or secretly watch it on their phones. I don’t think thats a big deal. Most people who will be watching it will probably be much older people.

  • Jack Burton

    “Re imagined” garbage as usual. WAR! Battles! Splosions! The whole first season is devoted to war. DUMP THE RODDENBERRY optimistic vision for LAZY WRITERS to create mass appeal FX laden violent drek. And no doubt a good salting of social justice warrior PC approved content to repel free thinkers. Don’t fool yourselves. This is another Star Trek in name only. Total spit in the face to fans of all the things that made Trek on TV special. All the real fans I know are avoiding like the plague.