After a long series of Starfleet-based Star Trek: Discovery promotional videos, it’s time to shift our sights to the Klingons! T’Kuvma (Chris Obi) takes center stage in this week’s newest Discovery spot, giving a fiery focus to the warrior race.

We must fight for one thing above all: to remain Klingon. #StarTrekDiscovery

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

T’Kuvma:

“They are coming. Atom by atom, they will silence us; cell by cell our souls shall become theirs. We must fight for one thing, above all: to remain Klingon.”

A tantalizing bit of voiceover from the leader of the House of T’Kuvma, adding some more mystery to the character’s motivation in the new series.

Already billed by CBS as a leader who “seeks to united the 24 great Klingon houses to halt the encroachment of others,” this new dialogue seems to indicate his concern is not just to hold back Federation expansion in space, but also on some kind of biological level as well.

And where have we seen a conflict between Human and Klingon biology? The last season of Star Trek: Enterprise, of course!

In 2005, Enterprise established that the Klingon race became affected by a modified version of the Augment genetic enhancements which came about during Earth’s Eugenics Wars, biological samples of which were secretly saved in deep storage at Cold Station 12 through the mid-22nd Century. (“Cold Station 12,” “Affliction,” “Divergence”)

Arik Soong breaks into the Cold Station 12 genetic vault.

The Klingon Empire experimented with stolen Augment DNA in an effort to create their own “Klingon Augments,” a scientific endeavor which ended in disaster when the modified Human genetic material combined with a strain of Levodian Flu and began to spread throughout the Empire with deadly effects – killing millions.

With the help of a kidnapped Phlox, the Klingons were able to halt the virus’ lethal effects, however those infected still succumbed to its most visible side effect: the elimination of their cranial head ridges.

Klingon scientist Antaak, before and after infection.

As seen in “Trials and Tribble-ations,” the aftereffects of the genetic virus were visible to the time-traveling Starfleet crew — solidifying the minimal, 1960’s era Klingon makeup design into canon — with Worf confirming a “long story” behind the biological differences between the centuries.

Worf confirms ridgeless Klingons are real… but it’s a “long story.”

With Discovery set a hundred years after the Klingon Empire first became affected by the Augment virus, perhaps T’Kuvma is fighting to “remain Klingon” not only on cultural levels — but on genetic levels as well.

We’ll find out when the series premieres in September!

  • Tone

    So, we now get to find out about the birth of the Kelvin Klingons… Anything to get round that little licensing problem…

    Oh well, it should be entertaining anyway.

    • DIGINON

      What licensing problem are you talking about? This series has nothing to do with the Kelvin timeline.

      • Jaro Stun

        it has, same production company is behind it.

        • David Lund

          Nope, has nothing to do with the reboot films at all, they’re paramount, this is CBS

          • Jaro Stun

            I think bad robot is the culprit here, not paramount

          • David Lund

            Bad robot are not involved

          • Your Worst Nightmare

            Nope.

        • Your Worst Nightmare

          Nope. Try again.

          The Kelvin timeline films were produced by Paramount Pictures, Bad Robot and Skydance (along with some foreign companies on Beyond.)

          Discovery is produced by CBS and Secret Hideout.

          The only connection between the two is Alex Kurtzman who wrote the first two Kelvin films and is Executive Producer on Discovery. That does not mean that the two are produced by the same production company. It doesn’t mean that Secret Hideout is secretly Bad Robot trying to destroy all of our childhoods.

          It means that Kurtzman and CBS have a good relationship as Kurtzman is EP on several other CBS shows.

          This is not one big conspiracy theory. And I’m sick of everyone and their mother thinking it is.

          • M33

            Don’t soften! Let your 1st Amendment rights be free, my friend!
            (Assuming you are American, that is. Can’t help you if your Canadian or part of the EU, though… “different” rules apply to speech).

            How the DS9 viewing going?

          • Your Worst Nightmare

            I am in the US! So yeah, probably shouldn’t soften but I am I fact a softy. :p

            I’m in the middle of rehearsing for a musical right now so sadly DS9 has stalled until mid-September when we open. But soon! 🙂

      • Tone

        Hows that rock your living under? I see it has WiFi now…

    • Kelvine klingons eould have been prime klingons

  • Now, this intrigues me. About time, Discovery.

  • David Lund

    I’d be surprised if they’ve included an in-universe explaination for the different look. Both this and the we come in peace trailer suggests to me the story is about different cultures and extremism. How far will the federation go to protect itself when it encounters a race who have utterly different morals and world view. My guess is Lorca is a Ransom-type captain and Burnham is so driven by revenge for death of her parents, and her presumably repressed grief for them (having been raised vulcan), that she is unable to see – to start with at least – that whatever the discovery uses those subspace mushrooms for to win the war means betraying the very principles the federation is trying to protect

    • M33

      Interesting hypothesis.
      Again, I am interesting to learn what “discovering” this show will be doing.
      Of all the series, I think TNG perhaps most fit that bill.
      Discovery is benign, even benevolent.
      A more apt name for this series might have been Voyager, since a voyage may easily be made for war not discovery.
      I hope I am wrong.
      I would have liked to have seen then using an advanced warp drive discovering the fascinating differences in multiple galaxies.
      Imagine them meeting the Kelvan Empire of Andromeda Galaxy!!
      We’d finally get to see them having been so evocatively described!

      • Roger Birks

        Star Trek: A Spacetime Odyssey

        Something like that maybe?

        • M33

          Star Trek: Odyssey would have been really cool.
          Or Star Trek: Frontier
          or Star Trek: Infinity

          Evocative titles that roll off the tongue.
          For some reason, Star Trek: Discovery just… doesn’t.
          It’s weird to me.

          • Walter Kovacs

            well, there WAS an actual real-life space vehicle called Discovery, so it’s definitely realistic to have a ship of that name. reality doesn’t always necessarily roll off the tongue 😉

          • M33

            So true.

          • Thomas Elkins

            I always liked the idea the NX-class ships were all named after shuttles, so there was a chance an NX-class vessel was called Discovery.

            Enterprise NX-01
            Columbia NX-02
            Challenger NX-03
            Discovery NX-04
            Atlantis NX-05
            Endeavor NX-06
            Buren NX-07

            That was my headcanon anyway.

          • Karl

            not really. The Enterprise shuttle was named after the star trek ship

          • Thomas Elkins

            In the real world, but not in Star Trek. The Enterprise shuttle does exist in the Star Trek universe.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            Interesting factoid; In Deep Space Nine in Sisko’s office there was a model of the International Space Station which has an in-scale Shuttle orbiter docked to it and if you look closely enough, you will that orbiter is Enterprise!

            So maybe a hint that in the more advanced Trek universe that the orbiter Enterprise was converted to spaceflight worthy condition as was the original NASA plan? 😀

          • Quintillion Tesla

            To me, the “Discovery” evokes 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, which I like.

          • M33

            Also a great film!

          • Quintillion Tesla

            I always thought “STAR TREK: STRANGE NEW WORLDS” might be a good name for a Trek movie or series.

          • M33

            Maybe drop the strange part and that might be cool.
            Unless you were just being sarcastic.
            Hard to tell in text form.
            If so, maybe a mashup?
            “Star Trek: Doctor Strange”

          • Quintillion Tesla

            I took it from the classic TREK line : “Our mission, to explore strange new worlds…”

          • CAPTAIN D-MAN

            “Star Trek: Infinity” is the Russian title for “Star Trek Beyond”.

          • M33

            Really! That’s very interesting, actually!

          • CAPTAIN D-MAN

            And the title for “Star Trek Into Darkness” is “Startrek: Vengeance”.
            For some reason the last 2 movies are Startrek not Star Trek.

          • M33

            Interesting, too.
            Funny to me that the Russian titled are better than the regular ones!

          • CAPTAIN D-MAN

            Wanna know something really interesting? In Russia the Fast & Furious movies are known as “Afterburn”, “Double Afterburn”, “Triple Afterburn: Tokyo Drift” and “Afterburn 4 – 8”.

          • M33

            Again, sounds cooler!

      • Walter Kovacs

        I think the DISCOVERY can definitely be a metaphorical one, as in discovering ways to overcome conflict and unite people. and I’m pretty sure it won’t all be about the big main story anyway, there will be smaller sub-stories of discovery along the way.

    • Walter Kovacs

      but “atom by atom, cell by cell” sounds very much like it’s not just about culture, but definitely about something physical/biological as well 😉

    • Karl

      Well speaking as someone neither from the US or the East, all I can say is that the international perspective sees the USA in as poor a light as ISIS. You invaded their countries then complain when all the tech you left there is turned in to a bloody war with civilians against civilians.
      The terror attacks happening across Europe are a direct consequence of the US’s invasion policies, and roping other countries in to your coalition of fools.

      If this is to the the theme of STD no one is going to watch a cinematic remake of pompous arrogance from two aggressive sides hell bent on wiping the other out.
      I’m sure the USA comes in peace too, but their credibility was lost some years ago so far as the rest of the world is concerned.

      They can’t in any reality expect to push any slither of morality and inclusive attitudes in the current state of affairs.

  • prometheus59650

    DSC is a sequel to the Enterprise timeline, which is already pretty far removed from Kirk and the go-go boots.

    • M33

      Here’s what I don’t understand.
      If the 60s fashion is so repugnant to modern tastes, why did they keep it & why was it nearly universally accepted for the recent Kelvin films?
      I mean, gogo-boots and mini-skirts all over the place!
      Now just a couple years later, this is unacceptable and now they need to completely redesign the era’s uniforms to be “modern”?
      I think this is more the case of the showrunners looking to make their mark rather than honestly seeking a way to make it interesting for “modern” tastes.

      • DIGINON

        I can also imagine they trying to distance themselves somewhat from the Kelvin movies. This is not supposed to be a series based on the new movies after all.

        • M33

          True. Might have been in the terms of the agreement between CBS and Paramount that any new TV series made must not look too similar to the Kelvin movies for fear of “audience confusion”.
          Seriously, that is why we had a six month gap before they could even speak anything about the new series after Beyond came out.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            It would be interesting to look into what the actual agreement between the two companies was. I find it hard to believe that Paramount holds the rights to the original Thesis uniform designs given how close the metal emblem badges for Discovery were that were displayed at San Diego Comic Con to the Original Series badges, just metal and not fabric. Would it be so hard to go the extra step and have all-gold and blue shirts with Cage-style collars instead of black ones?

          • M33

            I agree. It would be interesting.
            However, we will likely never see it.

      • prometheus59650

        Well, at this point I’m willing to say that they don’t want to be compared and contrasted to the KT when it comes to look. Though I think, even if one hates the KT films, they are being dishonest if they try to say that the wardrobe is any part of the problem. It proved that the red, gold, and blue are just as filmable as anything else.

        But the DSC uniforms remind me firmly of Archer’s jumpsuits and the ship designs seem to come from the NX-01.

        Now, there could potentially be an explanation for this transition between the “Archer” look and the “Kirk” that we’ll find out about as the series goes, but from this to that is a massive shift.

        I doubt such an explanation is coming though.

        I’ve just accepted that it looks how it looks and am aboard for the ride so long as the acting and stories are solid.

        • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

          Well don’t forget this show claims to be 10 years before Kirk and Cage is 13 years before Kirk, so evidently there were massive differences in ship designs and uniforms in that time…

      • Walter Kovacs

        I think the difference is that the Kelvin Universe is supposed to be pretty close to what TOS was, whereas the Prime Universe has now been “updated”, probably by the Temporal Cold War or by some other changes to the timeline. I think we have to look at DISCOVERY as being the sequel to ENTERPRISE, and not so much the prequel to TOS, if you know what I mean.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Your argument completely falls apart with Gene Roddenberry’s changes to all that stuff in TMP — because they had a better budget from which to re-imagine what he always wanted the Trek future to look like.

        • Karl

          At least it all had an in-universe explanation, which STD doesn’t seem to give a damn about. I find it to be offensive and cash grabbing.

      • Karl

        It looks ridiculous and sexist.

        • M33

          I agree it looks ridiculous, but that is the world they carved out for the story.
          In a way, I am surprised they didn’t try to shoehorn in any males in mini-skirts in the Kelvin Timeline movies.

          • Ace Stephens

            It may “look” sexist but I wonder if it is (in fact, it may be so far beyond it as to baffle many unable of conceiving of such a thing).

            For all we know, within the fictional world, women prefer that style at that time and are given the option not to wear such things but the vast majority choose to. Maybe it’s a thing like with the “words” Lincoln uses toward Uhura or the logic behind Picard’s baldness and so it’s not considered so detestable to be a woman as to prevent the vast majority from accepting a relatively gendered outfit (although, in continuity, I’m sure men would have been allowed to wear such things), including skirts and boots.

            I just find it interesting to consider various possibilities like those. Not that this makes things come across as any less ridiculous or sexist now necessarily but I tend to think fictional worlds must function within their own relative “rules” and so reconciling those with the presumed affiliation with “our world’s” frame of reference (which, outside the continuity, obviously shaped it…as well as inside, really)…interests me.

          • M33

            True enough!
            Just look at fashion 300 years ago and then look 300 years ahead and imagine!

    • Thomas Elkins
      • prometheus59650

        And?

        Nice picture of Archer on that ship from that other timeline when WWIII happened in 1996.

        • VOY retconned that.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            VOY did not recon that. And we get confirmation of WW3 and the Eugenics Wars big time in Ent.

          • Yeah, it did retcon it. TOS put it in 96, VOY went to 1996.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            And?

          • And that was a retcon. They changed the yrar and order of events.

        • Thomas Elkins

          Sigh, you people are something else.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Telling me.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      “the Enterprise timeline, which is already pretty far removed from Kirk and the go-go boots.”

      For this part of your statement, I am in 100% agreement with.

    • DC Forever

      Enterprise never felt pre-TOS to me. I say, canon or not, just pretend it never happened.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        Yet the above article says otherwise so…

    • Pedro Ferreira

      Is that why they brought it back in Season 4 of Enterprise? And before you say “oh that was just a bad decision” read the above article which hopefully goes some way to fix this show.

      • prometheus59650

        The races coming together? They had to to have the Federation and the Romulan war was the catalyst. There’s really no way you can prove that the way it was setting up to happen in the Archerverse is the same way that it happened in the WWIII-verse.

        You can suppose, surmise, and make it canon in your head, but none of that is proof of anything.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          No I was talking about what Season 4 of Enterprise did with costumes, sets and stories.

          • prometheus59650

            Same difference. Certain things have to happen to have a Federation at all. That some elements are reminiscent of TOS there’s nothing that ties it to the Shatner go-go boots timeline.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Oh right so Kirk’s Enterprise looked like that because it was jolly and gay? A one off? Seriously you can’t distance yourself from the style of something because you don’t like it.

          • prometheus59650

            LOl.

            Sure you can.

            Because, if I buy your argument timeline, that’s what’s happening.

            Mine makes far more sense in context.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            We will have to agree to disagree on that one.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            You love to say go go boots

          • prometheus59650

            And?

            It’s an easy shorthand. Everyone knows exactly the era and look I’m talking about.

  • COMMODORE WESLEY

    Discovery is no more than a spin-off of Star Trek; Enterprise, another pre-Kirk era.

  • M33

    Would be really good storytelling connections if they did so!
    Would love it actually!
    Otherwise, this would simply be a dig at “Make America Great Again”, sadly mischaracterized yet again by Hollywood mindsets.

    Well… then again, the two are not mutually exclusive.

    • Walter Kovacs

      I’d love it too!

    • Virginiatpontiff

      Alert116g

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
      On tuesday I got a Smart 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
      !sq76:
      ➽➽
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash366HomeAlert/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!sq76l..,.

    • Locutus

      Personally, I wish they had never retconned the Klingon make-up changes.

      However, an “ancient house” returning to “unify” Klingons by purifying their race of human augment DNA actually makes for a pretty good story that touches upon eugenics, racism, nationalism, and all kinds of themes. Human-looking Klingons might be oppressed and even massacred. By the end of the season, perhaps the human-looking Klingons will prevail or humans (and Sarek) will intercede on their behalf in a violent civil war setting us up for TOS, and the “ancient house” will disappear mysteriously into space …

      … setting us up for Season Two in the post-TNG era when they will return 😉

      • Ajakferreira

        One110a

        Yahoo! is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
        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
        !sw90d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://YahooFinancialJobsCash380TopOne/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!sw90l..,.

      • M33

        Some of the best scifi stories have taken weak or mediocre singular stories and crafted incredible tales off of them, far surpassing the original source material.

      • Melindardavis

        Technology146j

        Yahoo! is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!!!
        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
        !ql166:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://YahooFinancialJobsCash166HomeMax/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!ql166t..,…

      • Karl

        Considering CBS AA is wanting people to accept all these changes with grace and dignity, it’s pushing the boundary of goodwill to put it behind a paywall. Many people are making a stand against that by outright refusing to pay for it, be it $1 or $10.

        What we have had from day one, and will continue to see here is a big fracture in the fandom. There are going to be large swathes of the fandom who outright will refuse to pay, refuse to watch, and refuse to accept these changes, and so ultimately won’t consider it part of the trek universe as a whole any more than the reboot movies have done. For those that DO watch there will again be a fracture of people who think it’s garbage and people who can’t lap it up fast enough.

        Rather than bringing fans old and new together, CBS has some how managed to pull a paramount and make the situation worse in spite of the fact that they hold all of the rights to most, if not all of the franchise aside from movies, even though they have an absolutely outrageous budget.

        All they had to do was stick to continuity and boldly move the story on from post nemesis.

        Instead CBS have gone down a very, very risky route, and aside from the aforementioned fans who will lap up anything with a Star Trek label on it, I don’t think CBS really understand the reasons why people are rejecting it, while the hard core are continue to brand everyone else everything under the sun for making their position clear.

        • M33

          Here’s what CBS really cares about:

          $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

          • prometheus59650

            CBS is a business, soooooo…….yeah.

        • mswood666

          Trek has always been created to earn profit. And certainly Trek has already had many hours that have been behind a pay all, and that is films. You would be hard pressed to find people who would exclude say the Wrath of Khan just because the studio was charging them roughly for the time 5 dollars for 2 hours of entertainment.

          And if the public wouldn’t bypass the revenue stream of broadcast TV you might have seen them stick with over typical broadcast tv. But currently many shows have over half their viewers skipping commercials. That is what pays the bills. And Trek, be it back in the day of TOS (at least in the start) to the TNG through ENT years, has been significantly more expensive to produce then the normal hour long drama.

          • Karl

            Making profit is not the issue.
            Slamming viewers of a franchise in which humanity has surpassed money by FORCING those viewers into buying not only some kind of equipment to view it on their TV, but also a monthly subscription cost bigger than that of the ticket to a 2 hour blockbuster movie at the local multiplex, is.

            Why should we pay to prop up CBS’s sub par streaming service by proxy? Why should we validate that payment model by watching it on Netflix?

          • SpaceCadet

            Steaming is the future and natural evolution of television. Who would blame CBS, a for-profit company for wanting to make their stake in this platform when they know people are willing to pay for it? If something has great content and it’s affordable then I am willing to shell over a few dollars a month to access that content whether it be Netflix or HBO Go or CBS All Access. Boycott all you want, you’re just depriving yourself of seeing something you’re interested in unless you pirate it or wait for the season disc set to come out.

    • Ian Fleming

      I’m curious, how would you characterize “Make America Great Again” other than being a mantra for jingoistic White Nationalism where an illusory form of the “past” is preferable to the reality of the present and the untapped potential of the future.

      • Zarm

        A mantra for downtrodden individuals that feel marginalized and the victim of a weak economy desiring to find the economic prosperity of past ages and the feel of a robust, inclusive culture to which all economic classes and races and creeds can contribute which- whether illusory or not- both the present and the potential future as it now appears do not hold for them?

        It’s definitely about dissatisfaction with the present and untapped potential for the future- and the feeling that, whatever progress it’s made, the nation (and especially the economy, for many whose livelihoods and job prospects are far bleaker than they once were) has lost its way, and in moving forward, needs to regain the things that it lost sight of and incorporate them into the move forward.

        I mean, heck- I didn’t support or vote for the guy, but equating the desire millions of Americans have to ‘make it great again’ with white nationalism and racial issues is a gross misunderstanding of where the majority (rather than the radical alt-right fringe) feel that the country has actually lost its way. Think better of your fellow men than just assuming they want to roll back race relations; many of them just want to make a living and feel like their country has a solid moral compass again (which I think both the left and right, for differing reasons, tend to feel has faltered in the last two decades- for who would characterize divided, contentious America as it is now as ideal?).

        • Ian Fleming

          You must be desperate if you listen to the lies of a billionaire who inherited his wealth and has never truly worked a day in his life. A man who has NO moral compass. You also fall into the trap of assuming that America was great “before” and therefore can be “again”. Pining for the days of yore is a dangerous thing. And will lead down a very dark path. And I thought mt fellow Trekkies/Trekkers were smarter than to fall for the silver tongue of a snake oil salesman.

          • Zarm

            I don’t think that Trump is going to make anything great again. But there’s a difference between his failings, and the desires of those who followed him out of the desire for something legitimately better.

            And as I said, I think that, yes, the nation was economically greater at a previous time. I think that at times, we had a greater sense of right and wrong, and a clearer feeling that we were on a path to do some good, than we are now. Don’t mistake that for a blanket assumption that all aspects of the past represent some utopia that’s been lost; it is equally dangerous to assume that all past time periods are inferior to the past in all aspects, and everything new is an improvement. Society- and history- is not that simple. It is made of a hundred aspects; a thousand, each of which flux at their own rate. An era that was worse with race relations could still be better at economic prosperity (and have something of that prosperity worth restoring); an era better at tolerance might be, paradoxically, poorer at courtesy. Progress is uneven, fraught with setbacks, and not universal. Dismissing the days of yore- assuming that there is nothing to be learned from them or nothing our own society has taken steps backwards in, is equally dangerous.

            Which is why I say, don’t assume that when you see people rallying under the cry of making America great again, it is the failings of the past (like racism) that they seek a return to; likewise, don’t assume that every past era as without worth because it had glaring areas in one area of society- it doesn’t preclude still including things of value that would be worth restoring and integrating alongside what we’ve learned in the areas that *have* improved. (After all, our own society is hardly without its marring flaws at the moment; that doesn’t preclude there being things of value worth preserving in among them).

            The people that flocked to the banner of making America great again are looking at different aspects of ‘greatness’ than you are; seeking a return to different elements than you assume. That’s all I’m saying. Not that the man who used that rallying cry was any kind of hero (perhaps quite the opposite), but that the yearning he tapped into with that phrase was based not on racism, but on a legitimate memory of prosperity and civility and in some cases, moral certitude that was, indeed, to many, stronger in decades before this one. Trump may have exploited that yearning for his own ends, but that doesn’t make anyone who has that yearning automatically racist or looking to wholesale recreate the past or roll back the progress that *has* been made. Just to integrate with it the aspects that *were* done better, or seemed better, in times past.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            Donald Trump did not exactly inherit his billions. He made that money using about one million dollars his father gave him and has reached 10 billion today (an increase of 10,000 x). That’s way better than you can do and way better than anyone else here apparently has.

          • Ian Fleming

            “That’s way better than you can do and way better than anyone else here apparently has.” Nonsense. What an utter brownnoser you are. Pathetic.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            How is telling the truth about one man’s great success in life being “an utter brownnoser”?

      • M33

        Because nothing in any of Trump’s rallies or platforms state such nonsense.
        I’ve watched them
        And I’ve watched Hillary’s too.
        White nationalists don’t put non-whites as Secretaries in their cabinet.
        And Trump has stated over and over and over again that he supports all Americans of all backgrounds and races, that we are better as one people.
        And his immigration stance has always been we want people of all types coming into our country, but theu have to come in legally. Illegal is not a race–its a criminal.
        But feel free to find something in his platform that says otherwise.
        I follow politics pretty closely.
        And assumed or implied racism by others is not proof.
        But we can talk politics on a different thread if you’d like.

        • A_Warrior_of_Marley

          Shhhhh…. you’re getting in the way of the alt-left, George Soro funded illusions.

      • M33

        And the past where we were 10tril in debt and not 20 tril is certainly better
        BTW, not republican.
        I’m independent. Both parties have been owned by the same corporate interests for decades now.

        • A_Warrior_of_Marley

          Let’s get some real libertarians and fiscal conservatives in there! It’s time to push Senate and House term limits, too!

          • M33

            I could not agree more.
            Term limits on Congress is badly needed.
            Or let’s just forget electing them altogether and have it be random selection like jury duty… I don’t think we could really do worse.

        • Nowhereman10

          Kinda sad commentary on where we are now as a nation when having a 10 trillion dollar national debt would be better.

      • M33

        However, the Untapped Potential you refer to is intrinsically part of that platform.
        A self-sufficent nation that handles as much of its own needs as possible not reliant on other nations to exist is a sensible thing, and the US used to be like that.
        The past has good as well as bad, but as with all history, we do our best to repeat the good and learn from the bad (ie treating others as second class citizens because of fixed physical characteristics–not good)
        It is not to say we don’t work with other nations or trade with other nations, its more that we take care of our nations needs first, then whatever we have surplus we can trade or even give to others.
        We can’t truly lastingly help others if we can’t help ourselves.
        Untapped potential!

  • Fiery Little One

    I could see this as being related to what happened on ENT.

  • Thomas Elkins

    I hope this means we do see other Klingons, specifically the TOS Klingons. I mentioned in another post it was interesting that Kol leads the House or Kor. This should be because Kor “suffers” from the augment virus and is seen as unfit to lead the House. A type of Klingon civil rights movement where infected Klingons are hated and they must fight to remind everyone they are stkll Klingon could be an interesting premise.

    • Spyros Spyrou

      There’s no way we’re seeing TOS Klingons in this.

      • M33

        That would be a shame, I think.

      • Thomas Elkins

        Why?

      • God i hope not. They need to stay in the 1960s were they belong

        • M33

          But they were in the 2000s, too.
          Ridgeless Klingons span the decades!

          • They were a stupid thing in response to a joke. They need to be retconned out

          • M33

            Well, I loved the explanation, and the DS9 crew meeting the 23rd century Klingons and confronting the glaring seeming-discontinuity. I love when shows do stuff like that, make the unbelieveable believable but with style.

            Case in point in spades:
            Doctor Who.

            Own the cheese and make it cool!

          • I hated it. Utterly hated it. It was too stupid to swallow and pretty much broke so much background with a joke

          • Walter Kovacs

            but surely you can understand that just because you hated something that happened in STAR TREK canon, that doesn’t mean it’s not canon, right? you can hate it all you want, but it will always be canon. you’ll just have to accept that.

          • I never said it was not canon. I wont cliam something i dislike is not canon when it is. Notice I use the term retcon.

            And bo, we do not know it will “always” be canon. Trek retcons stuff all the time.

            If they leave it, stupid but whatever. I am just giving my opinion of what I would like them to do.

          • Walter Kovacs

            has that ever worked?

          • Sometimes, this is the look I wanted for a new show sooooooo……

          • Walter Kovacs

            do you think they made it look like it does because you wanted it that way?

          • What can I say, the magic chat worked.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Actually, I will categorically say it’s not Prime Series canon. Berman and company made up a new pre-history for Star Trek that deviated from the Prime Universe. Enterprise takes place in the NX-01 Alternate Timeline.

          • No, drone makes it clear its not. First contact can be blamed for any alteration as they bleed future histry to the natives like crazy.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I’m not going to go through all of my reasoning again, but TMP clearly established that the first starfleet Enterprise was the XV-330, not the NX-01, plus no Prime Timeline Trek series every made a reference to the supposedly famous NX-01 and Captain Archer.

            I’m not going to debate this all over again — but I have concluded satisfactorily in my own mind that Enterrprise is not in the Prime Timeline.

            Interestingly though, it’s possible though that the NX-01 Timeline and the Kelvin Timeline are the same timeline, since a reference is made to “Admiral Archer” in Trek 2009. (yet, not once in TOS canon was Archer ever mentioned…again reinforcing that Enterprise was not in TOS timeline)

          • But it is man. You can do your own headcanon, which is fine. I think we all do that.

            I do think some of Kelvins look came from ENT, same gies for DSC.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            There is NOTHING in any Star Trek episode ever prior to the first episode of Enterprise that established the NX-01 and Captain Archer as elements of Prime Star Trek canon. In fact, TMP established that the predecessor Enterprise to the 1701 was the XV-330, not the NX-01, so that establishes a divergence from the Prime Universe. And this divergence is reinforced by the known fact that Captain Archer, a very famous Captain of the first Enterprise, WAS NEVER REFERENCED ONCE IN THE PREVIOUS 605 EPISODES OF STAR TREK? NOT ONCE!

            I get that this is not a popular view, but no, you cannot dismiss it simply by claiming “but it is, man.”

          • Once more,offically it is. It is prime, like it or not.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            No it’s not. But you take the last word — I am comfortable with my view, which is supported by both content and lack of content in Prime canon.

          • Lol, prime is whatever the owners of the IP says it is. They can retcon and alter it as much as they like because they control what is prime or not prime. This is just reality.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well of course they still call it Prime Canon. It doesn’t mean that those of us who really assess canon need to buy into it.

            I don’t believe what the nutcase leader of my country says just because he’s officially my President.

          • They control what is and is not canon. Disney for exsample nuked 20 years of star wars canon, poof gone. And yes, it sucked but they own it so they get to pick what is canon.

            What you are doing is called fan canon. Its cool, but you need to understand it is simply your homebrew version of the setting and not canon.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            No, there you are wrong. You are right in that they can market stuff as “Prime Universe” if they want. But canon is what is on-screen, not what a studio markets or says — the studio does not get to say what you are claiming. Canon is what is on-screen, period!

          • Lol, nope. The studio picks what is canon. They own the IP.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Nope. You simply don’t understand the definition of canon. Canon is what is on screen, period.

          • Yeah man I do. The IP holder chooses.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            No Go ahead and do you “I have to get the last word thing” again here if you must, but canon is what appears on screen, period.

          • This is how canon works. I gave you an exsample of a company drumping canon

          • M33

            Unfortunately, even this is not sacrosanct. Canon gets trampled on a lot, storywise and visually.
            Just Hollywood in action.
            Or is it inaction?

          • Endymion

            And still you will be hacked. And then cursed.

          • M33

            LOL And millions of other folks said the same thing about Obama when he was president.
            The politics of duality.

          • DC Forever

            Except Obama was sane and not a moron. lol

          • M33

            I think anyone seeking to President has some degree of madness. Genius and madness is a fine line. That is one hell of a responsibility, and if any of them prevent all out nuclear war during their tenure, then they at least did something right.

          • Thomas Elkins

            That is such a flawed argument. There is NOTHING in any Star Trek episode ever to establish the USS Enterprise CVN-80 as elements of Prime Star Trek canon either. Does this mean that if a painting or model of the CVN-80 appears in DSC, that automatically means it’s an alternate universe?

          • DC Forever

            That seems a rather silly point since the XV-330 was an early Starfleet Starship. Even though the 330 and the 01 look different, would it really have been all that difficult for them to call the NX-01 the XV-330 instead, just to acknowledge TMP canon that was already established by GR?

            Rick B, Drexler and staff got lazy by not reviewing what came before as established by GR. So we ended up with a series in Enterprise that looked much more like a TNG prequel than a TOS prequel. You can’t really argue that point.

          • M33

            I’ve often thought that ENT could really have been an altered timeline. That if we follow past the events in Voyager and then into the 30th century with the time traveling Federation, then when they interfere with the 22nd century, the timeline we follow from their interference on is an alternate timeline than where TOS originally began.
            Therefore, anything after ENT can be completely different from the series and films preceeding ENT.

          • DC Forever

            You know, that makes a lot of sense.

          • M33

            Thanks!

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Completely agree. See my post above.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I completely disagree. It’s the worst example of fan pandering ever in Star Trek series writing. I don’t consider it valid Star Trek at all.

          • Thomas Elkins

            A canon explanation is better than a lazy retcon, IMO. Enterprise explained what happened so they’re all canon. If Discovery acknowledges this, then that’s a good thing.

          • There was no need for a damned explination! It was a silly joke thst until that episode had never been acknowlaged, ever.

          • Thomas Elkins

            It doesn’t matter if it didn’t need one. It got one and it’s canon. No reason to toss it out now.

          • Disagree, I see zero need to keep it.

          • Walter Kovacs

            define “need” when it comes to a TV series.

          • It depends. The story or caon as a whole has no need for it to work

          • Walter Kovacs

            the story or canon as a whole doesn’t have any “need” for any single particular story to work. all you’re saying is that you hated a specific story and you want it erased from existence. that’s pretty childish.

          • Nah, that is just reality. Childish was making a story out of a throw away joke

          • Walter Kovacs

            your only “argument” is that you don’t like it.

          • No, its thst it is silly, screws with 30 years of history for a joke

          • DC Forever

            It’s embarrassing to watch that episode. It’s like Spock’s Brain in that intended serious parts make me laugh out loud.

            It should be ignored by current and all future Star Trek Writers. Most of that series is like that, unfortunately.

          • Thomas Elkins

            Is there a logical reason why a two-part episode should be tossed in the garbage, other than you just not liking it?

          • Yes, it was garbage that makes zero sense.

          • Thomas Elkins

            How does it not make sense? Two Augment humans slaughtered the crew of a Klingon ship and that concerned the Government. They authorized genetic experiments of their own in order to counter the Augment threat. The Klingons didn’t know it was an isolated incident, they saw it as a real threat to their dominance. Their experimentation ended up having unforseen consequences which resulted in disfigurement and death. They were able to prevent future deaths, but the disfigurement remaind.

          • Lets just look at the effects and not talk how it messed up 30 years of trek.

            With one shot, it reworked a klingons bone structure on seconds, painlessly at the DNA level. The whole skeletal structure, who knows what it clearly did to the organs.

            How does this make sense?

          • Walter Kovacs

            so THAT bothers you… but “beaming” people, which violates Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and is therefore physically impossible, is okay?

          • You did not answer.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I love the fact that all the pro-Discovery fans are now complaining about Trekcore’s article that might actually take Enterprise’s Season 4 episodes into account. Got to love some of you people, you are hilarious.

          • Still not an answer

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Wasn’t meant to be. It’s an acute observation which makes you guys complaining look silly.

          • Thomas Elkins

            If you watch the episode you’ll see it was FAR from painless. It was shown being quite painful actually. Besides that, how is that different from every other technobable explanation in Star Trek? How many times has someone been sick and instantly cured within seconds of being injected with something? Remember “The Deadly Years” when the crew suffers from rapid aging? Kirk is dying of old age and within minutes of being injected with the cure, he waltzes onto the Bridge back to normal and ready to take command.

          • Good point, I still find it too silly. It just breaks it for me.

          • prometheus59650

            Even his hair was slicked and pretty again after all that thrashing.

          • Walter Kovacs

            he asked for any OTHER reason than you not liking it, and your only response is that you didn’t like it.

          • I explianed to someone in this thread, sorry if I missed it. I am in 5 threads today and I am getting swapped in notifications

          • DC Forever

            We should just laugh it off like “Spock’s Brain” and ignore it. It’s just so bad.

          • M33

            LOL
            I think I am one of the few people whi actually likes that episode.
            Now “And the Children Shall Lead”…
            That was awful…

          • Ace Stephens

            I recall hearing about Spock’s Brain in-premise and how it was so hated…and then I saw it and went, “Eh, seems fine.” I really don’t understand how some people get so worked up over how this or that was so horrible when it suits a relative tone in-place. Now, These Are The Voyages and Nemesis and these other things that kind of went off in their own directions contextually? Even if I may not agree, I can at least understand why a vocal portion of the fanbase is so upset.

            “That idea’s pretty stupid,” however, would undermine probably a fifth of Star Trek episodes if it was enough to disqualify these things from being considered of an appropriate quality.

          • M33

            I 100% agree re Nemesis and TATV.
            Besides, isn’t Gamesters of Triskelion more cringeworthy than Spock’s Brain?
            You are right… so many worse episodes than Spock’s Brain.

          • Ace Stephens

            There are a lot of episodes like that, which remind me of episodes of recent CW-type series (Smallville, Supernatural, etc.) where they seem to be ripping off popular stories or tropes at the time but with half-baked results. Saw, Hangover, Matrix, whatever…but they often (although not always) don’t fit in with the show we’re watching so much as they seem to be the result of a desperate writing team struggling to come up with original ideas. There are plenty of odd, filler episodes of Trek series like that. In fact, I found Enterprise was closer to TOS in these regards, tonally, than the other programs. I can’t think of any by name right now off the top of my head but it felt like there were a decent amount of knockoff or trope-based episodes in there that made me go, “…What are you doing?” More than the perhaps occasionally self-repetitive series (in theme/story regards) otherwise.

          • DC Forever

            Yea, they should just ignore it.

          • Agreed

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yet the above article say otherwise…

          • The artical is an opinion based off a single line. Funny how no one need to explian to kirk those guys were klingon.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You’re just in denial that continuity from Enterprise might be used. It’s ironic.

          • I like ENT, but hated that joke based retcon.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Well I’ve learned that we can’t get quiet what we want so join the club. ha, ha!

          • If they leave it, I will deal. But I see zero indication they will leave it. You guys have a single line, taking as the literal truth, where I and many others see impassioned rhetoric

          • TUP

            I tend to agree that this statement is not indicative of using the Augment virus as a story point. I think it’s just hyperbole from a Klingon perspective.

            But its fun to speculate. Thats what us fans do. We take one line and blow it up into an entire franchise-defining historical significance.

          • I have heard people in real life say things like that, so that is where I go first. Nothing we see makes me think they are gonna do that.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I hope Discovery is littered with continuity references from Season 4 of Enterprise just to annoy you. Ha, ha!

          • It will not bug me, I simply hope they kill the retcon joke. All they need do is never show a “black face” 1960’s klingon and I am totally happy.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I hope they absolutely link the ‘retcon joke’ to Discovery just to annoy you.

          • It will not annoy me man. I would just like to see it die. Nothing I have seen even hints they will use the joke retcon. I see examples leaning toward them retconing it out, but nothing leaning toward them using it

          • Pedro Ferreira

            So you ignored the above article? Keep the denial going…

          • The above is pure speculation based off a single line

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Search your feelings, you know it to be true…

          • TIG1701

            I agree with this. If Discovery acknowledges the way it was canonized in Enterprise then thats good. It makes the universe whole.

        • Walter Kovacs

          they’re part of the STAR TREK canon. trying to deny their existence doesn’t make a lot of sense.

          • Sure it does. It was crapy make up from the 60s. Trek went near 30 yesrs and ignored them.

          • Walter Kovacs

            and then it stopped ignoring it and made it canon. now it’s canon. you will have to accept that.

          • Nah, they can retcon it out. Would be a damned minor retcon at that.

          • Walter Kovacs

            but they probably won’t.

          • 50/50 at this point.

          • Walter Kovacs

            how do you calculate that probability?

          • A guess. They totally redesigned the race. So far its not the ENT version, its not the Kelvin version (which is also prime), its not the TOS version.

            This is a new take, nothing we have seen shows older versions. Even the house of Kor looks like the new versions, but purplely.

            Other than a single line, that oeople ate taking very literally, nothing we see points to this.

          • DC Forever

            You are confusing production values with canon.

          • DC Forever

            Exactly!

          • TIG1701

            No one is denying their existence. They DO exist and if anything it was Enterprise that made sure of that. But we don’t need to actually see them again. My guess is if we do they will make them look better like they did on Enterprise at least and not just creepy black face space pirates like TOS.

      • TIG1701

        I agree. Lets let the TOS Klingons stay in the 60s. That said if they come up with a story line to explain all the differences then I can go with that.

    • Quintillion Tesla

      I feel we won’t. But who knows? Maybe though, there’s enough wiggle-room to allow the different physical types of Klingons to exist within the same space in the comics – might be something really worth exploring in a big way.

      • Thomas Elkins

        I doubt we’ll see it in Season One, but I hope they leave enough room for it to work in a second season. Kol is from the House of Kor, so they’ll have to decide what they’re gonna do if/when they introduce Kor himself.

    • M33

      I wonder if they will have transgender Klingons.

  • Barak Aslani

    I hope this is true. And continuity is such a big deal breaker for me and many others.

    If Discovery goes to these lengths to sink into Enterprise’s continuity, again, which made efforts to link with what came before it – then I would honestly watch this show with some excitement and feel it was honouring, not embarassed about it’s own identity. Give me some vessels and designs that fit into Pike era and I would happily put this side by side with the other Trek series.

    It does looks way too angry and gritty – eith no optimism, positivity and happiness – not something I would volunteer to tune into. But if they honour continuity, if they expand on the history and universe I love without contradicting anything, they can have my money. I wanted The Orville, instead, I’m getting the moody, blue soaked, over-baked, lens flare contrived forced sex appeal that Battlestar already did. Badly.

    We didn’t want a prequel. We didn’t want the first one. We didn’t want reboots either. The ships and tech on Discovery look like you’re throwing 50+ years of design out the window. Treat the brand ‘Star Trek’ with respect and we’ll watch.

    I’m so excited about The Orville, it’s not pretending to be something it’s not. I tune into the news, I want the news. I watch Star Wars… I want to hear John Williams. I watch Game Of Thrones, I want to see a peasants skinned alive and pregnant princess stabbed in the stomach seven times… I watch Star Trek – I want to escape to a positive, comforting future where humankind lives in a wonderous time…

    Orange Is The New Black is incredible. It straddles sad and funny so well, gritty ‘dramedy’.

    This producers of this series show no faith in their brand and identity and that makes us feel like this could be any sci-fi show, but they’re using the name Star Trek to make money.

    Give your fans more credit and they will be loyal.

    • M33

      LOL
      Your description of Game of Thrones is EXACTLY why I don’t watch it!
      Not my idea of “entertainment”.

      But Orville does look fun… like a TV show version of Galaxy Quest (which is a brilliant film).

      • I fear the Orville will be super juvenile. I hope not though.

        • M33

          I share the exact same concerns.

          • Well that, and its on fox. The odds of it going all season are 40/60

          • M33

            I really hope it is good.
            Seth is a smart guy who has pigeonholed himself into crass violent humor with Family Guy (The first 4 seasons were good, then it just became gross).
            And since it keeps going, you can tell how bored he is with it and had said so on many occasions.
            Maybe this will be the new creative freedom to really let him shine.

          • I hope so, I would love something funny like this.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Agree with the first part,Thrones is too “grimdark” and with all the violence and nudity seems like the target audience is 13 year olds, and to me Orville doesn’t look that great but at least it looks more true to the spirit of Trek than discovery.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Thrones is targeted at 13 year olds? Really? Dude, you don’t have a clue.

    • mr joyce

      lol, you upvoted yourself?

      • That is just sad.

        • mr joyce

          yep

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            I believe you can you remove an upvote, yes?

          • mr joyce

            if someone left an upvote, they can remove it, but they cant do a downvote, if that makes sense

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley
          • mr joyce

            lol, good one 🙂

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            One of my fave all-time manga/anime characters. And I’m surprised no one’s commented on my nick given what a huge SNK spoiler it is. 😀

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      You voted for yourself again.

  • God I hope this is not true. Retcon out the stupidest and most unnecessary story it star trek history. Let it die in a fire!

    • Sub Rosa?

    • DC Forever

      Really bad episode!

    • Pedro Ferreira

      No, us fans will keep it thanks.

      • Some of us fans wsnt this joke retcon killed

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Good thing they’re listening to the actual fans then huh.

          • Still no answer huh?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I don’t even know what the question because there was no question. I saw no question mark.

          • Sigh

          • Pedro Ferreira

            That’s how I feel responding to your comments especially comments about letting whatever you don’t like die in a fire.

          • I have explained why I dislike it and how it breaks canon that came before it. I also asked you guys to explain something you act like you never saw. So maybe read comments you respond to , k.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It didn’t break canon, it ‘explained’ canon.

          • Sigh, no.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The whole of Season 4 was heavily continuity based, not sure what you don’t understand.

    • TUP

      We might disagree on this. lol

      I kinda enjoyed the Augment story on Enterprise even though I recognized while it was happening that it was stupid and unnecessary. The Klingons looking different was a problem that didnt need a solution. In fact, the DS9 episode and the Enterprise Augment story was a solution looking for a problem to solve.

      But its happened now. Its out there. And I think its irresponsible of Discovery to pretend it doesnt exist. They chose this era and thus, they have to eat the shit that comes with it. That doesnt mean they have to make it a plot point. They *could* effectively ignore it and only have a passing reference or even an acknowledgement from the creators that its there but its not the story they are telling. Thats fine.

      And sometimes, you have to cut bait and not throw good money after bad. The idea of trying to make the silliness of Enterprise (and DS9) work over-all sounds like a bad idea…it sounds like it would end up making a bad situation worse.

      But…if they pull it off by making all that silliness work and be taken more seriously with a deeper story and deeper consequences, Im intrigued.

      • DS9 and VOY ignored and reworked the timline of spaceseed and WoK. So I disagree you can’t retcon it out. I would ignore the ENT storyline totally, just as they did spaceseed, there by removing and reworking it

        • TIG1701

          They ignored Space Seed because that story line no longer jived with modern day events. It just felt out of place.

          The augment story line is unnecessary but it does explain something fans wanted to know. Even my girlfriend at the time wanted to know why the Klingons looked so different on TOS and she didn’t even watch that show. She was really a Voyager and TNG fan. But it bothered even her at the time. So there it is. The execution and story could be stronger but it did give fans an explanation for those that wanted it. For others who didn’t it doesn’t really matter anyway.

          Or maybe it will now.

          • It was a joke. There was zero need to explain this to anyone, In setting they ignored the change. It did make everyone before the joke look super stupid though, I mean the klingon empire hide this from the galaxy and starfleet was so inapt no one knew about this well known history. Even Kirk himself forgot!

          • TIG1701

            We all get it was a joke but Trek fans still wanted to know why they looked so different, so someone explained it.

            And even when it was explained, it was 8 years after the DS9 thing which means it wasn’t exactly a priority for anyone. I think someone just said maybe it be fun to do a story explaining it since they were trying to make more stories that connected closer to TOS and that was one of them.

            I don’t disagree it was unnecessary but it did answer it for people who wanted to know so it did its job.

          • I think it was just a sad desperate fanwank in vain hopes the die hards would keep ENT afloat if they kept throwing them bones.

          • TIG1701

            And thats a fair assessment. I think they were just trying to connect it to TOS which fans wanted from the beginning but it was too late I guess.

          • I think they should have stuck to the season 3 style personally. I found it to be the strongest season, but season 1 and two was totally lost. It had some good stuff here and there, but it was clear it had no plan.

            Really, I am glad they are killing the episodic thing and going with linked stories and long arcs. We see this in many online series now days and it can be very strong. IF the scripts are strong.

  • Walter Kovacs

    YES!! this is finally starting to make sense! “atom by atom, cell by cell”, I hope that means that the augment Klingons are threatening to outbreed the original Klingons. another possibility would be that these are ancient Klingon ancestors after all, and the story isn’t only about a conflict with the augment Klingons, but also a conflict with “regular” Klingons as well, who might be seen as “not really Klingon” by these ancestors. I, for one, would be very happy if this Klingon “design change” actually made sense in the story.

    • TIG1701

      Wow, now THAT could make me give a shit about the Klingons again. Make it more than just more boring ‘honor’ stories and one about science and biological warfare.

      • A_Warrior_of_Marley

        It could still tie into stories about Klingon honor and culture, just give it a focus through a new story narrative: science and biowarfare.

        • TIG1701

          Of course. I just mean if we get a story more than just that. To be honest, I never loved the Klingon stuff, most of it bored me. I like Worf as a character, but I never cared much about his Klingon story lines, although I did like them more when he joined DS9 and thats because shit got real. 😉

  • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

    Cough Xindi Cough

    • How are you still trolling xini? The maje up does not even vaguly look alike?

      • DC Forever

        This spamming of his is getting very old. Hopefully the mods are noticing.

        • I mean, a real complaint I would not mind. However this complaint is just silly

          • Endymion

            And you are screwed. I will be especially cruel with you.

          • You got banned from the other channel because of your racist and homophobic slurs. I will now block you. I do not see you lasting long on this channel saying what I had to ban you for

          • TUP

            Was this our friend from the previous thread?

          • No, I mod another channel. This person stalked me from there as I banned them for making really vile racist and homophobic slurs. Those are strictly prohibited on that channel

          • TUP

            Ohh ok. yeah, its sad how many nasty people this series has brought out. I guess the events down south (from my perspective) have emboldened those people that would normally be too embarrassed and ashamed of their positions to come forward.

            One guy who had a bunch of posts here deleted (and I *think* banned or suspended) took his mocking handle to another Trek site. Sad really.

          • Pretty sure this person is not even a trekkie. They just looked though my post history, found the most recent post on a channel I did not ban and followed me here.

            I mod on a religious channel. Angry trek fans are nothing lol

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      We heard you the first 20 times.

      • IS it just 20 times? I am pretty sure he makes this comment in every single thread

  • The Science Fiction Oracle

    The whole Klingon augment virus thing is part of the NX-01 Alternate Timeline in Star Trek, which is where the Enterprise series fits. It’s not Prime Universe canon.

    • Sadly, it it prime canon. Stupid, yes, but prime canon.

    • Thomas Elkins

      So it’s ok to dismiss Enterprise as an alternate timeline, but if someone tries to dismiss Discovery as one you say “It’s Prime, the 60s are dead, get over it!” That would be hypicrital.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        Ah, but you are comparing a completed series of four seasons to a 90-second trailer. That’s not a legitimate comparison.

        Get back to me with this argument after we see 10 eps of DSC, then we’ll talk.

        • Thomas Elkins

          No, you’re definitely being a hypocrite here. We can already see the changes to the aesthetics in the trailers and yet you argued for days that the 60s look was old, Discovery was new and updated for a modern era and everyone needs to get over it. Now we see you dismissing ENT because of similar complaints.

          ENT differs from TOS and therefore it’s an alternate universe. DSC differs from TOS and it’s just fans being whiny and not accepting of change. It’s hypicritical.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I am not being a hypocrite. You might actually be right, but we don’t have enough information yet.

            All of you dudes who keep making all of these broad statements and conclusions about DSC based on a 90-second trailer are just being silly and wasting a lot of emotion and conjecture. Go back and look at TNG trailer in 1987 — it looks very little like what we saw in the series, and had tons more action and grittiness…just like the DSC trailer.

            Point is, you can’t make all of those conclusions based on a trailer.

          • Thomas Elkins

            What information do we need? I’m fairly certain I can see with my eyes that DSC visually looks COMPLETELY different from TOS just by watching the trailer. I don’t need to watch the full episode to see that.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well of course it’s going to look different — we’ve got a TV show with production values 51 years more modern then TOS. Heck, GR;’s TMP, just 10 year after TOS ended, completely updated the look as well, and we were all told as fans by Gene to accept it and “don’t worry about the man behind the curtain” with regards to changes to the Kkingons and the overall look.

            Is that your concern here? What did you expect — Star Trek Continues with better acting? 😉

          • Thomas Elkins

            “TMP, just 10 year after TOS ended, completely updated the look as well, and we were all told as fans by Gene to accept it”

            Actually the Enterprise changed, but it was because she was finishing up a refit. The change is part of the movie’s plot. They didn’t go “We have a bigger budget and so this is what the Enterprise should have always looked like” They gave a reason for it. The Klingons changed, but even Roddenberry provided an explanation for that. Of course it wasn’t said on screen and, as you’re so quick to point out above, that only what’s on screen is canon. Gene’s explanation for the Klingons look is therefor not canon and what was seen on ENT is.

            Of course you dismiss that as “fan pandering” and consider ENT an alternate universe. Will you feel the same way if DSC brings the TOS Klingons onto the show and acknowledges ENT as canon?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “Gene’s explanation for the Klingons look is therefore not canon”

            LOL^2

            I will go with Gene over Berman on any and all days.

          • Thomas Elkins

            “But canon is what is on-screen, not what a studio markets or says — the studio does not get to say what you are claiming. Canon is what is on-screen, period!”

            See, hypocrite.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Is “Gene Roddenberry” the name of a movie studio I am not aware of? Or is “Gene Roddenberry” a studio marketing executive perhaps?

          • Thomas Elkins

            Gene Roddenberry is a man behind the scenes and what he said was not said on screen.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Gene Roddenberry was the series creator, not a studio nor a marketing exec. Stop twisting what I am saying, please; although congrats on your obviously cathartic, “See hyporcite”. 😉

          • Thomas Elkins

            You’re the one who is twisting your words. You said “Canon is what is on-screen, period!” And now you’re saying Gene is an exception because he’s the creator. Sure, sure. More like you like his explanation better than what was shown on-screen so you’ll give him a pass. But not Berman who worked with Gene and continued the series after he died.

            I guess everything shown after Gene’s passing is an alternate universe then right?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You are getting confused. What is on screen is canon. But you seemed to need an explanation for why series’s look different in different eras of Star Trek — well, it’s because production values change, and I was using Gene’s comment to illustrate that. Their is no inconsistency in what I am saying.

          • Thomas Elkins

            You’re very inconsistent. You say we need to accept DSC’s visuals because it’s a different production era and things will naturally look different. And yet you criticize and dismiss ENT for being different, even though it too was a different production era from TOS. That’s what’s hypocritical.

            You then try and say that TMP was different from TOS and Gene said everyone needed to get over it, but you’re wrong because TMP gave a reason for the changes. The Enterprise was refit in the movie and that refit was part of the plot. They didn’t retcon TOS and say “we have a bigger budget so this is what the Enterprise should have looked all along”.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You are cherry-picking different statements of mine that are out of context with this current discussion. First, you are still confusing what I consider to be production updates in why series “look different” with significant canon divergences in the story-line and major elements. THESE ARE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS!

            Secondly, in a discussion with another poster, he was claiming that there were literally hundreds of alternative timelines and that for every minor canon inconsistency, we get a new Trek timeline — that’s ridiculous, and I responded as such…but now, of course you plop that in here in a different context so as to make your hypocrisy point. I have been perfectly clear that I am talking about huge, deliberate, unnecessary canon deviations, like the inexplicable creation by Berman and company of the NX-01, when the XV-330 had already been established as the predecessor Enterprise in Starfleet. Yea, that created a new timeline.

            And I will surprise you by saying if that DSC violates canon by completely fabricating something like Berman did with the NX-01 on Voyage, I will be the first to say that DSC is creating an alternate timeline.

            I think a lot of this comes down to you simply not liking that I am not giving you a free-pass to make huge conclusions about the level of canon in DSC based on a 90-second trailer. You’ve posted a lot of “conclusions” about DSC based on the very limited information we have, and in light that in general in TV, trailers frequently are like hyperactive versions of what actual episodes look like. I would submit that given the limited information we have, making all of your judgments on DSC is just wack — none of us will really know until at least we see the premiere, if not the first half of season 1.

          • Thomas Elkins

            “First, you are still confusing what I consider to be production updates in why series “look different” with significant canon divergences in the story-line and major elements. THESE ARE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS!”

            But they’re not. TNG, DS9 and ENT all established what the TOS era looked like because they recreated it several times over. We can’t just assume it’s different now across every single show that ever showed the TOS era. And what about little details like in “Birthright” when Worf runs his fingers through a Klingon woman’s hair and reveals her Romulan ears? Considering DSC made all the Klingons bald and smooshed their ears into the heads, this changes a decent sized reveal in a TNG episode. Sometimes visual elements are needed for plot reasons and this is one plot point harmed by the complete retcon of the Klingon’s physiology. Unless of course they do introduce the other Klingons.

            “he claimed that for every minor canon inconsistency, we get a new Trek timeline — that’s ridiculous,”

            Yes that is ridiculous, but that doesn’t change the point. You said if one were to believe that approach, dismissing inconsistencies of canon as alternate universes, then why bother adhering to canon? And that’s what you’re doing with ENT and clearly you’re willing to do it with DSC. If you don’t like it, then it’s an “alternate universe”. Then why bother arguing about canon at all? You said what’s canon is what’s on screen but ENT had a lot of things on screen and you dismiss them because you don’t like it.

            “when the XV-330 had already been established as the predecessor Enterprise in Starfleet,”

            No it wasn’t. It predated the 1701 but it was NEVER said to be a Starfleet vessel. Decker said this display showed ships all named Enterprise. That’s it. And ENT and STID both acknowledge that ship’s existence next to the NX-01 anyway. Your entire NX argument is incredibly flawed, but you always ignore me when I bring up the existence of the newest Aircraft Carrier named Enterprise. Clearly it was never shown in any previous Star Trek incarnation because it didn’t exist yet, but it’s still canon to Star Trek because Star Trek is still set in the future. The same thing applies to the NX-01 because the show it was on didn’t exist yet in the real world, but as a tv show it still takes place in our future, but their past. That’s why it wasn’t shown before, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t canon. If DSC shows the CVN-80, would you dismiss the show as an alternate universe because it was never shown in Trek before?

            “You’ve posted a lot of “conclusions” about DSC based on the very limited information we have, and in light that in general in TV, trailers frequently are like hyperactive versions of what actual episodes look like.”

            The hyperactivity of the trailer is irrelevant. I’m not complaining about action, or pacing issues. We’re talking about visual consistency and those aren’t going to change from the trailer to the show’s premier. The Klingons will still have been retconned and the visual universe will still look completely different from the universe it’s supposed to be set in. Unless of course they acknowledge past canon info like the Augment Virus or something, in which case you’d just dismiss it as a Fan Pandering Alternate Universe anyway because it dared to acknowledge another prequel series as canon.

            At which point we would have to wonder why we bother adhering to any kind of canon anyway. Things are different; Canon be damned!

          • DC Forever

            Elkins, you are also being hypocritical by holding someone to a higher standard of debate content than you yourself are willing to adhere to, given you seem to be continually drawing all of these conclusions on Discovery based on very little information, and a trailer which hardly shows much at all?

            I agree that Oracle has some inconsistencies here, but at least the elements of Star Trek he is referring to are from actual episodes/movies and known production history, and not the sort of ill informed conjecture that you and others keep promulgating here on Discovery when we haven’t even seen one single episode. That’s rather silly.

          • TIG1701

            I don’t disagree people shouldn’t knock Discovery at least until they see an episode. I have a lot of issues with it too but I have faith in the end they will pull it off. But you can’t go on and on telling others to stop whining about it not being ‘real’ Star Trek but then turn around and say the same about a show they don’t like. Yeah, Discovery is probably going to suck for a lot of people because it just looks nothing like TOS and the rest of the shows but yeah they should still give it a chance. But I find it funny how people will say Enterprise should be in another universe when it at least LOOKS like it belongs in the prime universe even if a bit more advanced in places.

            Discovery looks like its just the JJ verse all over again. But I have faith it will still be good.

          • Actually nothing in discovery look like the reboots. Non of the styling is the same at all.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You need to watch the reboot movies again. Pretty much everything is the same!

          • Not even a little.
            Ship designs are nothing like this
            Prop design is nothing like this
            Uniforms are nothing like this
            Klingons are not the same design

            Please list what things are just alike.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Lens flare
            Poor CGI
            Shiny starships
            Terrible colour saturation/digital grading
            Poor humour
            Sets look similar

            Anything else?

          • So, nothing

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Confirmed: Shannon didn’t read the above post I made.

          • You listed nothing alike. You listed modern filming style, not a single element of the setting shared between both

          • TUP

            Maybe I am confused. But the argument from this person that Discovery is set in the KT or is a retread of the films doesnt make any sense when his examples are simply modern film technique.

            Im fine if he or anyone else doesnt like those techniques. I dont know if I do yet. Im reserving judgement until I see the entirety of it…and in context.

            But if the “its not Prime, its KT” argument has now evolved into “okay, its Prime but it sort of, kinda, once in a while, in a general way, has similar cinematic techniques as the JJ films”, we’re really going down a slippery slope.

            Its like the claims its a Bad Robot production because Kurtzman used to work for Bad Robot but doesnt anymore. Its like Pedro cooking us a wonderful 7 course meal and us saying “it tastes like McDonalds” just because he used to work there. (I dont know if he did, just an example).

          • yeah, I have no issue if he does not like modern film styles. But I have pointed out nothing is shared between the two.

          • yeah, I have no issue if he does not like modern film styles. But I have pointed out nothing is shared between the two.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Really? Explain how each of my examples is wrong.

          • TUP already did that. Nothing you listed was setting or prop related other than “shinny ships” You are talking about filming and production styles, which are used in say the Defenders for example.

            The ships are not the same style as the reboot, not even close to the same style. They do match the ENT styling most, but they are not the same style as that either.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Everything about the new series looks like the reboot movies. Not sure what else to say, I’ve already given valid examples.

          • TUP

            You’re conflating your opinion with fact. Its your opinion that the series looks like the reboot films. It’s not fact. Ill grant there is some similarities because some of the same production people worked on both and because the creators of Discovery want it to look cinematic.

            Its Star Trek. The ships have saucers and nacelles. Ohhhh must be the same.

            Whats your point even? If the TV series looks suitably cinematic, thats a good thing. When you drill down to specific visuals that many people disliked about the JJ films (the super large ships, the Apple Bridge), those elements do not appear to be in the TV series. So…find something else to complain about that isnt true.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Those aren’t even complaints I’m making. I’m saying all the stuff that made the reboot movies bad is in Discovery. My opinion but my examples are true.

          • You have yet to list a thig that looks the same. Modern filming style is not a setting element.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It can be seen as a visual continuity most certainly.

          • Which is not canon. And has been dead since ENT.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Since when has it been dead? The Star Trek Online game still uses those 80s/90s designs. And yeah visual continuity creates canon. They didn’t just present a new looking Enterprise in The Motion Picture and just expect people to go “yep, it always looked like that”.

          • Once more, a look is not canon

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It contributes towards canon which is why we have…reference books!

          • TUP

            No, only that you listed a bunch of things that didnt actually support your original premise.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Good thing I wasn’t responding to you eh? Now where’s your better brother TUPwood?

          • TUP

            If you want to have a private discussion with someone, have a private discussion.

            Beats me. Lol

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Take out Lens Flare, and you’ve just described Voyager to a T.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Poor CGI? Only in Seasons 5-7, I get your point there though.
            Shiny starships? See above.
            Terrible colour saturation/digital grading? No way, it looked natural.
            Poor humour? Okay this is debatable since humour is subjective but the reboot movies were definitely more self-conscious which ruined the humour for me.
            Sets look similar? Absolutely not! Not sure how Voyager could have corridors like the reboot movies at all or Discovery. No way!

          • DC Forever

            Lol. Yep

          • TUP

            Those are production things, not visuals of the universe. You misunderstood the debate. They are also subjective, some of them and others are simply not clear yet.

            You want to dislike it so you’re extrapolating conclusions based on very little evidence.

            Lets take them one at a time, for fun.

            Lens Flare: Meh. Some like the technique, some dont. Its not a creation of the JJ films. I believe different teasers used different flares also so it could be mostly the teasers/trailers where its being added for effect. We dont know since we havent seen an episode yet. We’ll revisit this later.

            Poor CGI: Well, Im not sure which is funnier, your assertion the JJ films had poor CGI or that the TV show does. If the TV show’s visuals are comparable to the films, I’d say thats a win given the disparity in budget.

            Shiny Starships: Im not sure what you mean. Like the outside of the ship appears shiny?

            Colour Saturation: Again, that would be a production element (or a post production element) and could be something done for the teasers. Even if its on the show, its not in-universe so the idea Discovery shares anything with the JJ films has nothing to do with production techniques when the argument is generally Prime vs KT.

            Poor Humor: I disliked much of the attempts at humor in the JJ films. But unless you’ve seen Discovery, which you havent, we have no context or understanding of the humor in Discovery. The usual complaints are that the teasers and trailers have been far too serious. We’ll have to re-visit this.

            Sets look similar: Maybe in the very general sense that it’s Star Trek. But that hardly supports your usual narrative. You’ll have to be more specific.

            Yup, anything else? Cause that isnt enough…

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Oh yes let’s have some fun by knocking down your poor responses. Okay here we go. Ready?

            Lens Flare: Yes it is a creation of the JJ Abrams films. Show me where it was used before in Star Trek.

            Poor CGI: Yeah I think it’s kind of obvious the CGI in DS9 is better than Discovery by a long shot!

            Shiny Starships: Yes, like looking like a piece of plastic. Next!

            Colour Saturation: So what you’re basically saying is that it’s not directly related to the reboot films when it clearly is? Cool. Next!

            Poor Humor: Subjective but I’m sure you’ll praise it. Next!

            Sets look similar: Like almost the same?

            “Yup, anything else? Cause that isnt enough…” Considering you guys think there was five significant make up changes to the Klingons in TNG I call BS on what you’re saying.

          • TUP

            Nope. You’re still holding up film technique as an example of in-universe continuity. It simply doesn’t make sense.

            Not remotely. And it’s a really lame argument. If you don’t want to watch don’t watch. But like Behr said, people they don’t want to like something will find reasons not to like it. You’re all over the place my friend.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Less it’s a lame argument that every single thing about the reboots is part of the new series. Of course, as usual, you’re making perfect sense.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            All from an 80-second trailer? Wow!

            You should go into politics! 😉

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Based off promotional material which there’s been a lot of yeah.

          • DC Forever

            Would you buy a car based on a brochure, without doing a test drive?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            People complained when the Retron 5 was released that it was a buggy, disappointing console. I ignored them based on the hype and bought it. I now agree with them (drops mic).

          • TIG1701

            The creators literally said they took some of the look from the reboot movies several weeks ago.But if you don’t see it, I don’t see how?

          • Explian what.
            The ships are not the same style
            The uniforms ate not anything alike
            The props are not the same at all
            The klingon designs are not the same

            Please list anthing the same as Kelvin changes.

          • TIG1701

            Watch Trekyards on Youtube. They go into immense detail of how the show has taken a lot of stuff from the JJ movies and evolved it, mostly from the Kelvin and Franklin ships. I’m not saying it ALL looks the same, but you have to be blind if you don’t see influences. And the creators said this themselves they took some things from the movie visually.

            I’m not saying thats a bad thing and I thought the JJ movies were shit. But to majority of the people out there, its going to look way more in sync with those movies than TOS, thats for sure.

          • Treakyards IMO is a waste of time. Once more the two ship styles are nothing even remotely alike. There are a lot of keys from ENT, but really not a thing from the kelvin movies

          • TIG1701

            Ok then don’t watch it. My point is for many of us we do see many similarities. I’m not saying thats a bad thing (although I thought JJ verse was a joke) it makes sense to just be updated and keep things from the films that worked. I never had a problem with the visuals (and even the 200 lens flairs never bothered me) and as said the creators have said they took some of their influence from those films. They said it wasn’t a lot but its clearly there.

            You think they are lying?

          • I think they are clearly not talking about exterior ship design. I am not sure what they are talking about really. I could be the sets, but it can not be the starship design.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “I don’t disagree people shouldn’t knock Discovery at least until they see an episode”

            Thanks!

            “But I find it funny how people will say Enterprise should be in another universe when it at least LOOKS like it belongs in the prime universe even if a bit more advanced in places.”

            That is a matter of opinion. I have never thought it looked like what I would have expected the Trek universe in that time-frame to look like. And this stars with the ship itself, which looks nothing like the clean TOS ship design era, which was confirmed by paintings and sketchs from Gene’s team in the 1970’s to go back to the early days of starfleet star-ships. Instead, we go this TNG-prequel looking “busy design,” smacked on incrementalism/design by committee sickness, was a butt-ugly starrship to boot,

          • DC Forever

            I expect that GR would have at least called the NX-01 the XV-330 instead. And I bet he would have brought in Probert to create a bold design that would at least have some elements of the concept art that became canon by being in TMP.

            Instead, Rick B simply revised it because he could, and he went with the B team (a converted career make up designer) to design it instead of spending more budget to bring in Probert, who knows how to created bold ships that also respect canon.

          • TIG1701

            I was talking about the show in itself, not the actual ship. I didn’t think the ship was that great either, at least outside. I liked its interior a lot because it felt like something people would explore in feeling a bit like a submarine and the space station.

          • DC Forever

            Enterprise failed to come across like a lead in to the original series. It was a missed opportunity.

          • That was never gonna happen. They were never gonna make it look like TOS as its not the 1960s any more

          • TIG1701

            I thought Enterprise sucked and didn’t even watch it until a few years ago. That doesn’t mean it should be erased from existence. If you could do that to anything you thought sucked, then I was never married the first time. 😉

            And what if Discovery misses that same opportunity? Its going to be the same shit again sadly. I really wish they went forward but here we are.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Agreed. I can see how some of my past remarks, taken out of context, could lead someone to conclude that I am being hypocritical. I don’t think I am, but I get that perception.

            But, like you are saying Thomas is most definitely being disingenuous in holding me to a higher standard of debate content than he is willing to adhere to. All of his pronouncements and conclusions on DSC are based on an 80-second trailer a some fluff marketing materials/stills that give nearly nothing away about the stories and episode contents. That is most definitely hypocritical. And he keeps trying to spin this away every time I bring this up?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “you always ignore me when I bring up the existence of the newest Aircraft Carrier named Enterprise. Clearly it was never shown in any previous Star Trek incarnation because it didn’t exist yet, but it’s still canon to Star Trek because Star Trek is still set in the future. The same thing applies to the NX-01 because the show it was on didn’t exist yet in the real world, but as a tv show it still takes place in our future, but their past. That’s why it wasn’t shown before, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t canon. If DSC shows the CVN-80, would you dismiss the show as an alternate universe because it was never shown in Trek before?”

            Wow, with all due respect, what a complete load of B.S. The reason I ignored those reamarks on the A/C’s is because they are nonsensical. First, you are mixing and matching know facts from real history with a fictional universe to try to prove your point — that’s pretty silly, and the principle of logic do not allow for that I’ll make a better point for you on this though – what if Les Moonvies, for DSC, said, “you know what, the CVN-80 looks too much like the CVN-65; forget what has been established here; find me Drexler and let’s have him come up with a catamaran design and call it the CX-01 instead — no one will notice!” This sort of hubris and lack of respect for canon established by Roddenberry by Berman is the essential point of what I have been trying to get across here.

            But secondly, apparently you would have us all believe that on Stafleet’s flagship in the 2260’s, in the new display section of the refitted Enterprise, Starfleet simply chose not to include it’s own first Enterprise, the NX-01 prototype, but instead included a prototype XV-330 as the first Starfleet Enterprise? That just makes no sense? This was established in canon, so there was no reason whatsoever, besides hubris and ego, for Berman to depart from that canon which was established in Gene’s seminal re-launch of Star Trek with TMP.

          • DC Forever

            The A/C thing he keeps bringing up is a strawman.

          • Thomas Elkins

            “First, you are mixing and matching known facts from real history with a fictional universe to try to prove your point”

            Actually that’s what you’ve been doing when you keep claiming that the NX-01’s lack of appearance in a previous Star Trek is irrefutable evidence that it never existed in the canon. The NX-01 wasn’t shown on a wall in a movie from 1979? Gasp! No crap Sherlock, ENT as a series wasn’t created until the early 2000s. Of course something created for a show in 2001 wouldn’t magically show up in an older series or film. However, that series was created to be a prequel and therefor they have established that this ship existed before those other series.

            That’s what the Aircraft Carrier example was for. Like the television series Star Trek: Enterprise, CVN-80 did not exist at the time the previous Star Trek series and films were made. Therefor the CVN-80 never made any cameo appearance on those series or films. Based on your logic, that would mean the CVN-80 never existed in Star Trek’s canon, but that’s a dumb way of looking at things. ENT was created after the originals, so the originals will obviously not have included references to it, but future shows like Discovery probably will because they will acknowledge that show’s place in canon. If that bothers you then you might as well dismiss DSC as an alternate universe right now.

            “But secondly, apparently you would have us all believe that on Stafleet’s flagship in the 2260’s, in the new display section of the refitted Enterprise, Starfleet simply chose not to include it’s own first Enterprise, the NX-01 prototype, but instead included a prototype XV-330 as the first Starfleet Enterprise?”

            See, you’re mixing up Star Trek’s fictional universe with the real world again. You know why the NX-01 didn’t appear in Star Trek: The Motion Picture in 1979? Because the NX-01 hadn’t been created yet. Let that sink in. I don’t mean it didn’t exist in canon, I mean it didn’t exist in the REAL WORLD. It was created for a television series in 2001. That’s why it didn’t appear in a film from 1979. Do you get it yet? They didn’t think to put a ship designed in 2001 in the movie they were making in 1979 because they couldn’t see the future. That’s the same reason they never included a reference to the CVN-80. It didn’t exist yet.

            You know, stepping away from the real world and stepping into fiction for a moment, Johnathan Archer also had a display of famous ships named Enterprise. It included a Sailing Ship, CVN-65, the Shuttle and the NX herself. Why did Archer choose the CVN-65 over the CV-6? Maybe it was a personal choice? It’s his office, so he can decorate it any way he wants. CVN-65 is missing from Kirk’s wall on the refit Enterprise as well. Maybe it was a personal choice? He wanted CV-6 instead of CVN-65? The omission of one or the other on each wall in no way infers they didn’t exist. It just means Archer thought the CVN-65 was more famous or more important to him personally than the CV-6. The same thing can be said with Kirk’s wall choices.

            “This was established in canon, so there was no reason whatsoever, besides hubris and ego, for Berman to depart from that canon which was established in Gene’s seminal re-launch of Star Trek with TMP.”

            This is what I find most hypocritical. You’re seriously complaining about canon as established by Gene Roddenberry being changed by Berman, but you don’t care about DSC doing the exact same thing. Gene Roddenberry established a lot of things when he created TOS , including the aesthetics of the universe and a lot of that design appears to be thrown out in DSC. They’ve changed the Klingon’s physiology, the uniforms, the general look of the ships and you don’t seem to care. “The 60s are gone! It’s a new production era!” And so on.

            You’re picking and choosing which canon changes/violations you wish to defend or complain about it. And no, the TOS aesthetic wasn’t erased by TMP or something like that. Changes in TMP were explained in canon when they said the Enterprise was being refit. Wesley Crusher had a model of a TOS Constitution class in his room at the Academy and there was a model of an Enterprise Type-F Shuttlecraft aboard the Enterprise-D. Gene didn’t throw it out, but the DSC creators appear to be when they “update” things.

            And no, the ENT crew didn’t throw out the XCV-330. They did replace it, but the XCV-330 is still canon. An image of it appears in the 602 Club and Admiral Forrest’s office and Admiral Marcus had a model of the ship on display in his office. It wasn’t erased. It still exists, so if Kirk wanted one on his wall instead of the NX-01, then that was his prerogative. Picard apparently wanted neither on his wall. That’s just how it is.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “you keep claiming that the NX-01’s lack of appearance in a previous Star Trek is irrefutable evidence that it never existed in the canon”

            Of course, because the first Starfleet Enterprise, the XV-330, is shown in canon – on the Enterprise in TMP. That’s the first Starfleet Enterprise. Established by Rodenberry in TMP. So there was absolutely no good reason to shoe-horn in another prequel Enterprise – it was already established. Contrarily, there is nothing in 605 episodes of Star Trek up until the premier of Enterprise to establish the NX-01. How more clear do I need to make this for you?

            The NX-01 wasn’t shown on a wall in a movie from 1979? Gasp! No crap Sherlock, ENT as a series wasn’t created until the early 2000s. Of course something created for a show in 2001 wouldn’t magically show up in an older series or film. However, that series was created to be a prequel and therefor they have established that this ship existed before those other series.”

            Hey Einstein, YES IT WAS – BUT IT WAS CALLED THE XV-330. It was put on the presentation dais, became canon, and then was included in the accompanying (to TMP) Star Trek Space Flight Chronology reference. All Berman and Drexler had to do was respect what had come before, and at the very, very least, name the ship the XV-330 instead of NX-01. COULDN’T THEY HAVE AT LEAST RESPECTED THE SOURCE MATERIAL ENGOUGH TO TAKE THAT MINOR STEP? I mean, even though I can’t stand the NX-01 design, by naming it correctly they at least it would have shown that they understood Rodenberry’s starships lineage to name it properly. And stop feeding me that crap about how they then showed the XV-330 on Enterprise – LOL, of course they then tried to validate their actions by re-writing canon in the exact show that blew up the canon with the NX-01 nonsense – two wrongs do not make a right!

            “That’s what the Aircraft Carrier example was for. Like the television series Star Trek: Enterprise, CVN-80 did not exist at the time the previous Star Trek series and films were made.”

            The A/C was not a Starfleet starship. We are talking about a Starfleet vessel here, so past non-starships they are not going to feel the need to put in two A/C’s, private Enterprise’s, etc. We are in the 2260’s, on the Federation’s flagship, the refitted USS Enterprise, and you would have us all believe that in the special section of the ship where they show previous Enterprise’s, that they would leave out the first Starfleet Enterprise, crewed by the famous Admiral Archer (possibly even alive still), and instead show what (through canon re-writing when the dissed the XV-330 in Enterprise) Berman would have us now believe was a relatively minor Starfleet experimental starship? That’s ludicrous! But the good news is that the original starship is there – it’s just called the XV-330, and not the NX-01. The NX-01 only exists in an alternate timeline, which may actually be the Kelvin timeline, given Trek 2009 referenced Archer.

            “Based on your logic, that would mean the CVN-80 never existed in Star Trek’s canon, but that’s a dumb way of looking at things.”
            Seriously, dude? LOL We didn’t have Khan in the 90’s. As another poster noted, Humpback whales are overpopulated right now. Again, you are mixing and matching real history and fictional history to try to make some points here. Please stop doing this – that is so lame from a logic perspective.

            “See, you’re mixing up Star Trek’s fictional universe with the real world again. You know why the NX-01 didn’t appear in Star Trek: The Motion Picture in 1979? Because the NX-01 hadn’t been created yet.”

            THERE YOU GO AGAIN. Yes, it was created already. And it was called the XV-330, and it’s rough design was outlined, and reference materials even listed information that showed it being crewed about the time of Enterprise. IT WAS THERE IN CANON AN READ TO BE USED FOR ENTERPRISE. Fact!

            “You know, stepping away from the real world and stepping into fiction for a moment, Johnathan Archer also had a display of famous ships named Enterprise. It included a Sailing Ship, CVN-65, the Shuttle and the NX herself. Why did Archer choose the CVN-65 over the CV-6?”
            LOL – you are using the show who’s creators blatantly disrespected Rodenberry’s starship canon history to try to illustrate a point on Archer’s display. Who would trust one thing to appear on Archer’s starship display given it’s not even placed on a starship that is existing in the prime universe. That’s like placing plastic fruit in fruit tree, and telling people to pick and eat fruit. LOL

            “This is what I find most hypocritical. You’re seriously complaining about canon as established by Gene Roddenberry being changed by Berman, but you don’t care about DSC doing the exact same thing.”

            AND THERE YOU GO….ANOTHER TIME…AGAIN. You have all of these preconceived notions and conclusions about DSC. I am going to wait to watch at least a few episodes, if not half a season, before I pass judgment on the show. I may very well end up having canon issues with DSC, but I don’t know yet. Apparently you are clairvoyant and already KNOW I guess…LOL Seriously, please stop pretending that you can make all of these conclusions about DSC, and more importantly, please stop falsely claiming that you know already what conclusions I am going to draw regarding canon and DSC.

            “And no, the TOS aesthetic wasn’t erased by TMP or something like that. Changes in TMP were explained in canon when they said the Enterprise was being refit.”

            You go right on believing that. I’ve read three major non-fiction books on the making of TMP, including last year’s seminal “Return to Tomorrow,” and I can tell you for a fact that the producers and creative team were out from Day 1 to reimagine and update TOS aesthetic because they finally head the budget, artists and ability to realize Gene’s original vision fully. And if you compare original 1701 and refit from and engineering perspective, there is no way that was a refit…at best, they recycled materials and certain equipment and technologies from the original to assist in making the new ship…which is supported by Decker saying, “this is an almost totally new Enterprise.” But now, I won’t stop you from thinking they reworked the existing structure like a starship version of “This Old House” LOL

            “Wesley Crusher had a model of a TOS Constitution class in his room at the Academy.”

            LOL. Yea, OK. Wesley Crusher!!! LOL

            “And no, the ENT crew didn’t throw out the XCV-330. They did replace it, but the XCV-330 is still canon. An image of it appears in the 602 Club and Admiral Forrest’s office and Admiral Marcus had a model of the ship on display in his office.

            I covered this already – the people that botched canon then tried to shoe-horn in their re-write of something that should never have happened in Star Trek. “History is always written by the winners.” – Dan Brown

          • Thomas Elkins

            “Canon is what is on-screen, period!”

            “was included in the accompanying (to TMP) Star Trek Space Flight Chronology reference.”

            “reference materials even listed information that showed it being crewed about the time of Enterprise.”

            “’I’ve read three major non-fiction books on the making of TMP, including last year’s seminal “Return to Tomorrow,” and I can tell you for a fact that the producers and creative team were out from Day 1 to reimagine and update TOS aesthetic because they finally head the budget, artists and ability to realize Gene’s original vision fully.”

            For someone who says canon is what is on-screen period, you sure do like to use non-canon, behind the scenes reference materials to prove your point. I don’t care what the producers said behind the scenes. What’s on screen is canon and what was said on screen does not cement the XCV-330 in 22nd Century canon.

            “Of course, because the first Starfleet Enterprise, the XV-330, is shown in canon”

            Where in canon was this said? I know it appears on the display and is a canon ship, it also appears in ENT and STID so that’s not in contention. What is in contention is your claim that this was the defacto Starfleet Enterprise of the 22nd Century. Nowhere in that film does it establish that the XCV-330 was the immediate predecessor of the 1701. Did it come before the 1701? Yes it did, but where do they say, IN CANON, it was a Starfleet vessel or the last vessel named Enterprise before the 1701? Captain Decker’s line in that scene is “All of these vessels were called Enterprise”. That’s it. That’s what he said on screen. Nothing more, nothing less.

            “You go right on believing that.”

            I will because it’s true. “Admiral, we have just spent eighteen months redesigning and refitting the Enterprise.” That’s what was said on screen; it’s canon. Not your behind the scenes reference materials.

            “LOL. Yea, OK. Wesley Crusher!!! LOL”

            I don’t get this point. Yes, a TOS Constitution appears on screen in an episode of TNG, as does the old shuttlecraft, which makes it canon. Images of both the classic and refit Enterprise are also shown in the Enterprise-D’s computer. That series was created by Gene Roddenberry and was created post-TMP so the continued on screen appearance of the TOS aesthetic means it still exists.

            You tell us canon is what’s on screen period and then when on screen canon is referenced, you counter with a bunch of behind the scenes reference books. I’m getting tired of your hypocrisy and I won’t bother repeating myself if you’re just going to dismiss it with even more hypocrisy. Good day.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e745a9808a27350bae058ddb92f0944485b989911fae2590b5f956162aa6cae5.jpg
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16d078b5b2d68be9d94172ee433b1654e4a5fd4400f081509b91addb038d6195.jpg
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f56676a102e82d7c032959e5be41cce65896d8482b5d801e400aa71bc3be8f02.jpg

          • DC Forever

            Elkins, what is funny about your response is that at least in canon, a predecessor Enterprise was established. In contrast, in over 600 episodes of Trek up until Enterprise, that is was no establishment in canon whatsoever of the Enterprise NX-01.

            Which is why I think it’s hilariously dubious for you to bring this up, as Oracle is going to clean your clock on this point every time. You just pitched him a slow ball right over the plate. LOL

          • Thomas Elkins

            “Oracle is going to clean your clock”

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/18b75dab9d8c18be98126caa7bb85dd0042e2a4a9b3a3c0a48170760017bbe87.gif

            Yes, I’m using gifs. It’s because I’m done with this conversation and your hypocrisy. If you’re egotistical enough to believe you’ve “won” because I’m not responding anymore, then so be it. I hope it helps you sleep better at night.

          • DC Forever

            More of the fake rage and silly persecution process? Seriously?

            Whatever! Yea, you lost the battle of ideas here. All you have now are lazy photos and fake outrage.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yeah but Enterprise wasn’t made like 30 years ago.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “Will you feel the same way if DSC brings the TOS Klingons onto the show and acknowledges ENT as canon?”

            If that happens, then it’s in an alternate timeline. That doesn’t bother me if I have to come to that conclusion.

          • TUP

            Well no. Enterprise is Prime. Period.

          • TUP

            Come on, there was definitely a sense of much greater technology being visualized in TMP than in TOS. This is understandable as it was a decade later at a time of great advancement in SFX and a bigger budget.

            And you know what, those are also great reasons for the difference in visuals in Discovery too!

          • Thomas Elkins

            I’m sure having a bigger budget and ILM to make more detailed models did play a factor in the change to the universe. The thing is though, they didn’t just retcon the original stuff out of existence. The change to the Enterprise didn’t retcon the original Constitution-class, because it was established in the movie that the Enterprise was finishing a refit.

          • TIG1701

            Thats exactly why changes work for sequels, but rarely for prequels.

            In sequels, we just recognize things change in time. Even if its still out of sync with what came before you can find some way to make the leap to those changes. The humongous changes in prequels like Discovery feels more like a curb ball because someone is trying to convince you this some how was suppose to exist in an era we already seen but we have, like, eyes. TNG was easy to get, it was far in the future from TOS. Discovery looks like it belongs in the future as well only they are telling us its all suppose to be older. Most of it doesn’t look like it ever existed in the TOS era at all, much less look like it fits the timeline its supposedly set in.

          • DC Forever

            Khan from the 1990’s just called to say, “hello?”

            That pretty much takes away your theory here, given TOS and WOK were not prequels.

          • TIG1701

            I’m sorry I don’t understand your point. I know TOS and WOK were not prequels. I’m sorry I’m really not following.

          • DC Forever

            The 1990’s came and went, and there were no Eugenics wars and no Khan. So that brings up the same timeline problems as your prequel critique, yet the Khan TOS episode and WOK movie were not sequels.

            I could also bring up that the current population of Humpback whales is the largest in recorded history, and some scientists are concerned it’s too large — hardly heading towards extinction as ST4 says.

          • TIG1701

            Uh, OK. That really has nothing to with what I’m talking about. Yes real life didn’t confirm to a fictional future. I’m not sure what that has to do with making a prequel.

            You do realize I’m talking about the fictional stories. No one can control what happens in real life.

          • TUP

            For sure. That was the in universe reason for the new look enterprise. Which was appropriate given it was a movie based on the original series. They had to have the enterprise but it had to look better. It was ten years later. With many of the same creative people involved it was going to largely look the same but with better effects and budget.

          • DC Forever

            That’s a fan pleasing explanation. Have you ever compared at a detailed level the original and the refit? There is no way they did not make the new ship from scratch. At best, they could have recycled the raw materials from the original and used them in the refit.

          • DC Forever

            Of course!

          • DC Forever

            That is just wrong. EVERYTHING LOOKED DIFFERENT in TMP. They re-vamped everything because the had a huge budget and could afford to do it the way GR had always intended.

            You can’t explain that away by some canon references. That’s just laughable!

          • Thomas Elkins
          • DC Forever

            That has to be the laziest response to any post I have seen on Trekcore this year. You can’t really provide a legitimate respone to why EVERYTHING changed in terms of “the look of Star Trek” in TMP, so you fall back on some lame photo montage of Captains in Trek being dismissive. That’s just pathetic.

            Epic Fail, Elkins! Your reseponse is intellectually bankrupt and infers that you are conceding this point to me.

          • Thomas Elkins

            I concede nothing, it’s just that your post was so incredibly asinine that I didn’t think anything else needed to be said. Do you even read what you’ve written before posting it? This entire conversation has been about canon and Oracle has openly said that canon is what’s on screen. He’s right too because Star Trek has been that way for a very long time; What’s shown in a movie or tv series is what’s canon. No novels, reference books, comic books, video games, etc. Just the films and shows. Period.

            And yet you both quote me behind the scenes info from reference materials or word of mouth from the producers and treat it as canon, despite the fact that what’s said was NOT said on screen. That’s what’s laughable about your argument. You’re telling me that what’s canon is on screen and then when I reference what was said on screen you tell me I can’t dismiss your non-canon references with canon dialog that was spoken on screen? What?! You were actually being series when you wrote that?

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e82fbd4a6a814b40efd79c828dc21be45c1696485fc0eb059c67f2964ee943e9.gif

          • DC Forever

            Your ‘the best defense is a good offense” attack mode is utterly non-complelling, as is your labeling of me as “assinine” and “laughable.”

            You have noting left to say here, so you resort to this “fake outrage” post.

            Yep, you lost the battle of ideas here; hence the fake rage.

          • TUP

            Not only the modern evolution of visuals but TNG was a different scenario. It grabbed people differently because it was the return to TV of Star Trek. There was never going to be a “been there, done that” feel regardless of what the visuals looked like.

            Even if Discovery seems awesome, cool, fresh etc to some of us, its still the sixth live action series. For some, there will always be a ho hum feeling. And thats not specifically bad – some people want to see the good before they get excited (or disappointed).

            And yes, some of these people who are, almost shockingly, still complaining about the visuals (you cant change them, folks) DO want it to be Star Trek Continues.

          • TIG1701

            You’re a BIG hypocrite man.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’ve said this before a couple of times but what Discovery has promoted itself with in terms of style hasn’t grabbed me like TNG did when that started.

          • He is basing it off a single scene from TMP. All because a movie from 1979 did not mention the NX

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            At least I have that one-scene canon basis. There is no basis, not even one scene or reference, in the 605 episodes before Enterprise that ever even mentions in the smallest reference the NX-01 or the famous Captain Archer who led the first Enterprise.

          • So? This is a minor thing, welcome to the world of retcons.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            LOL. 605 episodes is minor. OK, whatever.

          • Yep, tiny. Its like cliaming a race never mentioned cant exist

          • TUP

            Yeah, thats true. They’ve retconned a bit, where there were two references (I think) to planets named after Archer. But really, that was one issue with Enterprise.

            I actually disliked that they presented Archer as they huge historical figure. It seemed so forced.

            James Kirk as an historical figure was partially that he was the first and we all loved the character but they showed us the respect and success. With Archer, he really seemed ill-equipped for his role and the way Enterprise presented federation politics, I just didnt buy it.

            But, that was the creative choice so we have to accept it. In my mind, the easy answer as to why no other series mentioned Archer was simply that, despite being historically important, he was just one of many important people in the history of Star Fleet and the Federation.

          • TIG1701

            But how is that any more forced than retconning the Spock family and suddenly giving the guy an adopted sister out of nowhere?

            This is exactly why so many hate prequels. They shoehorn everything in after the fact. Oh right, Archer was this big figurehead to forming the Federation, then how come we are just hearing about this dude? Oh right Sarek raised a human girl since she was a baby and counselled her through her adult life. Funny how that never seemed to come up with any conversations with Spock. Prequels retcon the shit out of stuff sadly.

          • TUP

            What I meant by retcon in the case of archer was that the references were already there. It’s just that retroactively they’ve come to be recognition of a character that, at the time of the references, didn’t exist.

            Burnham is different. It’s not a retcon because it doesn’t violate any established canon

          • TIG1701

            Sorry but that’s a cop out. Spock never mentioned anything about a sister. Sarek never mentioned anything about a sister. We never even seen him hint at having another sibling, even if just an adopted one. Its still a retcon. All retcon is just adding in plot lines to old story lines. Giving him a sister out of nowhere is the definition of a retcon. It doesn’t have to just ‘violate’ canon to be considered a retcon, simply change what we knew before or what we thought we knew.

            Darth Vader inventing C-3P0 didn’t violate canon either but it sure as hell was a retcon.

          • TUP

            Well we can agree to disagree. I don’t love the Spock connection here but I’m willing to wait until I see it unfold.

            Generally I like “world building”. The connection and depth that is created with these character connections. But this one does seem forced on its face.

            But again, we don’t know context and we don’t know the story they’re telling.

            But there is certainly nothing shown to contradict it. In fact everything about Spock tells us he’d never discuss her unless directly asked or there was reason to

            Kirk didn’t know sarek was his father. Didn’t know he had a brother. And kirks sort of odd line in 5 “I know for a fact you don’t know a brother” could easily have continued with “because I know you have a sister”.

            Regardless we shall see how it turns out.

          • TIG1701

            Alright fine. I’m giving it a chance too but what bothers me about this show so far is the reek of desperation of ‘TOS fanboys please like our show. Look, we can’t have Spock on every week because that would just feel lazy so now we give you his sister instead, only black and human so it feels different.’

            And as I said I didn’t say it violates canon but of course its a retcon. The character never had a sister until someone put her on this show but then tries to tell us she actually has been there all along for the last 50 years. Thats exactly what a retcon is, pretending something was always done when it wasn’t. It would be one thing if Spocck discovered he had a sister at some point. Its another to simply say he had one but never mentioned her. He didn’t mention her because there WAS no sister until a writer decided there was. Again, thats what a retcon does.

            But I cool to see how they handle it.

          • TUP

            I dismiss the “ToS fanboy” thing. Because in a way, to be snarky about that means you have to ignore marketing. This series is very expensive. If they feel that having some connection to TOS will help attract viewers, then so be it. This is a business. They have to do what they have to do.

          • TIG1701

            Who else would care about Spock newly adopted sister unless you are a TOS fan? They are not doing it for newbies, right? And I’m not getting on the TOS fanboys case or fans in general. I’m talking about the writers who feel they have to throw in fan service to even get them to watch it. Thats how we got Khan in STID and the silly WOK ending in that movie in the first place.

            I will give the hardcore bunch more credit and say most will give it a chance regardless and will watch if its good. Its the people who write this crap that doesn’t give the fan base enough credit and why we now have another prequel.

            But the fanbase proved a long damn time ago they will watch Trek without all the silly fan service or trotting out old characters if you give them a quality product. I know Discovery is actually trying to do something new and I was OK with having people like Sarek and Mudd on. But we don’t need the everyone is related shtick lazy fan fiction to get people to watch, thats all.

          • TUP

            There are two possibilities. And they don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Either the “fan servicing” is simply part of the story they want to tell or the big brains feel it helps market the series.

            Yes Trek fans will watch. To a degree. But they want more than that. And TOS remains the most widely known aspect of the franchise.

          • TIG1701

            That just sounds like a cop out. Star Trek has had 5 shows on. Count them, five. The three that were actually the most successful didn’t take place in the 23rd century. The two that were cancelled prematurely happened in the 22nd and 23rd century. Of course I’m not saying thats why they were cancelled and TOS was the first so its different. I’m only saying they have proved decades ago they will have no problem attracting new fans regardless. Enterprise was the first show that tried to connect to the TOS era. It failed.

            Discovery is clearly much closer connection but as I only being seeing, people have been bitching about it because it looks nothing like TOS…but yet its only a decade away from the show. It doesn’t look or feel like TOS in any way, who are you trying to market this too? Certainly not TOS fans because for most of them it just feeling like the JJ movies again, just for TV this time.

            Maybe instead of all these stupid prequels trying to capture an aging fan base who is more than likely going to reject this show like they did Enterprise and the Kelvin movies since its TOS in name only and very little else, just make a good Star Trek show doing its own thing. That seem to have worked quite a few times in the past. And by doing their own thing people judged them on their own (well TNG eventually) and not just compare to that show from the 60s.

            I have a feeling Discovery is just going to be another Enterprise in that since and maybe worse judging by the reaction so far. But maybe I’ll be proven wrong. I hope so because if this show fails we won’t get a really unique show like we got with DS9 again.

          • TUP

            The most successful films as far as revenue were the jj films.

            I don’t think their intent is to capture an aging fan base. I think the majority of people on the street would be most able to identify tos elements.

            But they would be things like Kirk, Spock, Enterprise. Which has no bearing on discovery.

            I think the creative folks here just had an idea for this period and went with it.

          • Spock never mentioned a brother either.

          • TIG1701

            And that’s the point. It felt stupid then. It doesn’t feel any less stupid now.

          • Its common in tv shows for friends and family never mentioned to show up. Trek does this all the time

          • TIG1701

            No its common to find out later they may have a relative, its something else to just suddenly have a relative….50 years later.

            I mean c’mon, this isn’t the same thing. Finding out Troi had a sister who died is one thing, but it makes sense in the story. Here, its just a lazy fan wink so the writers can desperately tie this show to TOS. No one talked about Spock having a sister until a month ago when this idiotic story line was revealed. And as Sybok was in TFF, it actually was to develop Spock the character. This is just lazy fan service to get old TOS fans aboard the show, nothing more.

            I think Roddenberry is waaaaaaaaay over rated in what he did for Trek as Shatner himself recently noted but one of the things I will give him credit for when he made TNG, he really tried to make it its own thing. He could’ve went the lazy fan route and given us Kirk’s great grand son or some shit being in charge of the Enterprise. He could’ve made Riker Scotty’s cousin, he avoided all of that. He wanted a show that can live on its own and did that and then some.

            Thats someone who knew he had a popular characters but rolled the dice knowing its not the characters that the franchise lived on, it was the ideals of Star Trek.

            And I recognize Discovery is trying to do its own thing in a way. I give it credit for doing things un-Star Trek but this lazy tired fan winking is just no necessary. I’m not a nostalgia guy. If I want to watch TOS, I will click on Netflix. I hope Discovery gets over this crap quickly and go on to tell its own stories and the Spock sibling angle is just background.

          • While I have no issue with it, I agree it is lazy. It is not a deal breaker for me and I find it to be an non issue. But I would have much rather she be linked to a new Vulcan rather than the TOS links.

          • TIG1701

            And its not for me either. I was just giving my opinion on it. And look, I don’t think anyone who thinks its stupid will be a deal breaker for them either. In fact, I will admit for even people like me we are curious to see how they will handle it. Kurtzman said it will make sense in the story so I’m giving him benefit of the doubt. He also thought white Khan was a good idea, so that benefit doesn’t go too far.;)

            But if they handle it well, then thats fine. But like you I didn’t mind the Vulcan angle. I thought that was cool and something different to see. That excited me in fact. I could even get behind Sarek being a mentor to her at the Vulcan academy if they have to have some connection. But they had to take it a bit too far.

          • Can not disagree with any of that.

      • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

        Well said, amazing to see the amount of people saying this, I almost wonder if they are CBS shills.

      • TIG1701

        Thank you. I didn’t love any of the prequel stuff, Enterprise or the shitty JJ verse but its all canon people. At least with JJ verse it literally takes place in another universe so its easy to forget but it still happened. Of course whats funny is Beyond seem to be most people’s favorite and the entire story is based on canon from Enterprise. And my guess is Discovery is only going to take more stuff from Enterprise because thats the only show truly canon to Discovery.

        This is what happens when you set everything back to TOS time now. They now have 100 episodes of a prequel show that sets up the entire universe even if it did it poorly in some cases. But you can’t pretend like it didn’t exist either.

    • Is this a unilateral decision you’ve made? Pretty sure all evidence available says you’re wrong.

    • DC Forever

      That explanation works for me. Enterprise never came across to me like what a prequel to TOS should have been like. It was an epic failure, and if there is a logical set of even limited evidence to show it may not be in the prime timeline, sign me the F up!

    • TIG1701

      God, old nerds. Its canon, get over it.

    • TUP

      Thats the dumbest thing I’ve read on here today. But Im going to choose to believe your post exists only in an alternate universe. And in OUR universe your post was actually more sensible.

  • Virginiatpontiff

    Alert116g

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
    On tuesday I got a Smart 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
    !sq76:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash366HomeAlert/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!sq76l..,..

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      Do you know the Pope?

  • Vger64

    I am ready for this new Trek! This show sure looks like it’s going to be great.

  • Discovery tosses overboard the consistency that was created in ENT: “Affliction / Divergence”. Why should the series reference something in a story that it visually unmistakably denies? Any speculation to that end doesn’t make any sense. It’s just wishful thinking that a consistent Star Trek Universe still exists.

    • A_Warrior_of_Marley

      Bernd, I really do love some of the work you do on your fansite, but please, I can just imagine if this was 1979 and The Motion Picture was just released how you’d be reacting to the ridge-headed Klingons and the hyper-detailed K’Tingas.

      • A lot has changed since 1979. We have a well established canon and an iconic look of Klingons in some 500 episodes. We even have a reconciliation of the old and the new look in the form of a great ENT story. Discovery throws it all away just because Fuller thought it would be cool.

        • A_Warrior_of_Marley

          A lot has changed, but one thing has remained as constant as the Northern Star… budgets. The reason we kept seeing the same damn Klingon outfits and look since Star Trek 3 is because they were there, sitting in the prop and wardrobe departments for years on end and saved the TV production crew a bundle. And yes, they are the same costumes from TMP and ST 3!

          I for one like this because it gives us another facet to the Klingon culture instead of the monoculture we have almost always been exposed to.

          • Not a new facet but a totally new culture that has almost nothing in common with what we know so far. Because of its very concept the series needs established looks concepts in order to tell its stories, otherwise it should invent a new species in a setting in the far future. And since you mention the budget, I suppose it would have been budget saving to show us Klingons we can relate to.

          • A_Warrior_of_Marley

            Except that like with TMP, we now have a budget that allows for a major overhaul and expansion of the Klingons.

  • Nyssa of Traken

    One of my favourite Klingon stories of all is DS9’s Blood Oath which reunited 3 classic-era Klingons but with new TNG-era knobbly foreheads and big hair, something which was never explained in the episode. I like to think that after the Augment storyline in Enterprise, in the timeline between TOS and TNG, the Empire found a ‘cure’ for the ‘disfigurement’ which many Klingons embraced as a means to return themselves to their ‘true’ forms and something which distinguished warriors like Kang, Koloth and Kor would leap on to restore their heritage.

    • To me, this was proof zero explination was needed. Before the joke wveryone in universe simply acted like klingons had always looked like that.

      • TUP

        Yup

        • Yeah, I mean Kirk and the gang never took a second look at the klingons. Zero confusion at the total cultural and visual change. No one ever seemed to even acknowlage the look change , just as no one acknowlage the trill change

  • Ajakferreira

    One110a

    Yahoo! is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
    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
    !sw90d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://YahooFinancialJobsCash380TopOne/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!sw90l..,..

  • Melindardavis

    Technology146j

    Yahoo! is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!!!
    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
    !ql166:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://YahooFinancialJobsCash166HomeMax/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!ql166t..,.

  • Peter Deluka

    I would personally poop my pants if they were to actually show Data’s butthole, its been a dream of mine for a long time.

  • Eric Cheung

    I see no reason to take the phrase “remain Klingon” to be taken, one way or another, as a continuation of the Augment virus storyline. It’s more likely to be a statement about racial and cultural purity from not wanting interbreeding with other species or assimilation into the cultural norms of the great Alpha and Beta Quadrants.

    This is like the statement last year of Star Trek VI being used as a touchstone being interpreted as meaning that the show would somehow take place between TUC and TNG. I assumed then, as I assume now about this statement, that the statement was more abstract and tonal in nature.

    But if it is a continuation of that storyline, cool. Let’s see how they execute it.

  • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

    SYFY has a good article about how Trek keeps making prequels now and not going into the future , world checking out as it makes some good points.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      From the network that changed SciFi to SYFY so that they could move away from us sf fans as their audience, they are the last “voice” I would trust to assess Star Trek.

    • TIG1701

      Yeah I read it. Great article. Most fans seem to want Trek to go forward again. Going backward feels lazy and tired.

  • Pedro Ferreira

    Wow, wow, wow, Trekcore, are you implying that those events actually occurred? I thought amongst the Enterprise haters here those episodes never happened? Sorry, my sarcasm is pretty obvious here.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      As someone who uses sarcasm a lot, I have to give you props for this post, even if I do not agree with it!

      • Pedro Ferreira

        You know I don’t like what Discovery has presented right? I’m supposed to be positive about Discovery and not like anything from Enterprise because even in Season 4 it is apparently seen by you as the nadir of the franchise. Yet when Trekcore posts an article that hints elements of Enterprise will be taken into account, thereby making me interested in this series as it might fix some issues with it, the pro-Discovery fans are quick to go into denial and hope it’s not true. I just find that really funny as it’s ironic.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Putting myself in your shoes, I get that!

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I just find for all the telling off some of us get here for disliking Discovery, or not being open minded, the pro-Discovery fans are being close minded to stuff from Enterprise which they pretend never happened but might be included in the new series. Ha, ha!

          • DC Forever

            But we know that Enterprise sucks, because we have 4 seasons of crap to wade through.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Well I hope they include tons of references and story from Season 4 of Enterprise in Discovery just to annoy you. Ha, ha!

          • Your Worst Nightmare

            For the record, Enterprise wasn’t my favorite series but to me, it does exist in timeline. Just like Discovery will.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Cool that’s good.

          • mr joyce

            not everyone on these boards who is pro-discovery dislikes enterprise, such as i. i like enterprise, and i hope im going to like discovery. i mean, how can anyone be either way on discovery? weve all seen a few snippets, but its not enough to go on and say either way, whether it will be amazing, or sh*t

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I will be looking forward to seeing the Enterprise explanation in Discovery.

          • TUP

            So if they do, you’ll complain. And if they dont, you’ll complain. There is nothing to indicate Discovery will use any storyline from Enterprise and yet here you are discussing it like its so. Thats why people dismiss you.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            They might as the above article suggests so I’ll be happy. Got to look forward to something eh?

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Very well said , spot on

          • Pedro Ferreira

            It works both ways.

          • TUP

            From what I have seen, most of the time when people are dismissive of your opinions its with merit. Most of your complaining about Discovery is irrational or shallow.

            A lot of us have had wonderful discussions and debates. I disliked STID a lot and engaged in great debates with people. Ive even had my opinion changed by people.

            It seems to only be a very few people (yourself included) where the discussions seem personal and you get so bitter about it.

            If you frame your opinions in a more rational way, you’d probably have more interesting discussions with people.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You mean if I agreed with you you wouldn’t be so dismissive of me? That’s what you’re implying essentially.

          • TUP

            No. If you agreed with me it would mean you recognize a rational perspective. However, as I stated many times, there are plenty of us here who disagree and enjoy a great discussion with each other. You’re just not one of them usually. And you dont seem able to figure out why, even when its explained to you.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “No. If you agreed with me it would mean you recognize a rational perspective.” No, if you agreed with me it would mean you recognize a rational perspective. See, from my point of view I can say that as well.

          • TUP

            Nope. We’ve been down this road before and many people have explained it to you but you ignore it. You’d prefer to play the victim card. So be it. Feel belittled. Cry about it. No one cares. We’ve tried. The rest of us can discuss, debate and argue in a mature way. There is only a very few of you that can’t. And at least a couple of you seem to no longer be here…

          • Pedro Ferreira

            TUP it’s so easy to point at someone and say they’re wrong and you’re right. Perhaps try to understand where people are coming from before criticising those that disagree with you.

          • TUP

            Nah, facts are generally black or white. You refuse to comprehend this when people tell you. I dont know you and I dont care where you’re coming from. You have often been rude, immature and offensive to people with different perspectives.

            Many of us have explained to you why people are dismissive of your posts. But its like you blank out when reading. Its not about different opinions at all. Opinions are not facts. You present irrational opinions as if they are facts. Thats why people dismiss your posts.

            You seem like a reasonably intelligent person which makes your inability to understand this rather perplexing. and also disappointing because I bet you’d contribute some interesting dialogue if you stopped seeing everything through your narrow, negative bias.

            Thats all! 🙂

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’m not seeing everything with a narrow, negative bias. I’d be happy if the above article is true! All the criticisms you’re levelling at me I could level at you easily especially with the rudeness. Your ‘opinions’ are not facts either. Everyone is entitled to deliver their opinion, if it clashes with your ‘opinion’ then that’s your problem, no one elses.

          • TUP

            You really dont get it, even when multiple people have explained it to you. Thats fine. Be obtuse. Just don’t complain when people are dismissive of your posts or dont respect your opinion. There is a reason why the rest of us can discuss differing opinions without feeling the way you have expressed on numerous occasions. If you can’t figure it out, that’s your loss. But means nothing to me. Good day!

          • Pedro Ferreira
        • TUP

          What are you talking about? What pro-Discovery fans are upset about any connection to Enterprise? That makes no sense.

          And the fact you’d separate people into pro and anti Discovery fans is odd too. Arent we all pro-Star Trek?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Oh yeah I’m sure you guys love the idea of mixing the Klingon story from Enterprise into Discovery. I know Shannon loves the idea. Ha, ha!

          • TUP

            Why do you make assumptions? You’re hardly insightful enough to do that with any kind of positive success rate. And laughing because someone disagree with you is immature.

            I would have no issue with it.

          • I would love to see it die, but you wanna make a bet if I or He whines more if they are wrong? I would lay money he and some of the others will gash teeth if it turns out this fan theory is wrong. I on the other hand will just shrug my shoulders and live with it. No biggy

          • TUP

            Its transparent on his fault. He sees a potential storyline that some fans dont like and he hopes it happens because he wants to feel better about his own irrational dislike of Discovery./

            The difference is, if Discovery presents creative that I dislike, I will say so. He will take pleasure in that because he wants to feel vindicated. Which is really weird. He’s betting his personal pride on Discovery not being good. If it is good, it wont matter to him because he will keep being irrational to support his preconceived narrative.

            The rest of us arent like that. We’ll be honest. He’s betting on our honesty to cherry pick elements to support his biased negative narrative. Its weird.

          • I agree, its just strange and sounds unhealthy.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Some of you have an issue with it and it’s hypocritical.

          • TUP

            What do you mean “some of you”? How does someone else disagree have anything to do with me? Your weird effort to group people you dislike together is transparent and sad. And hinders your own argument.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            My argument unlike your ones make sense. I’ve been pretty accurate I feel in describing the reaction to the above article.

          • TUP

            You dont have to always be so petty and rude.

            Enterprise was not very good. It certainly is reasonable that many fans would bristle at the suggestion elements of that series would be explored in Discovery.

            And its certainly the case of any news or analysis article that we will debate the finer points.

            You’re still wrong to use the verbiage you did in my direction and looked a bit silly since I did fall into the category you were seemingly lumping all you “enemies”. Maybe try not to have enemies. lol Geeez

          • Pedro Ferreira

            “I did fall into the category you were seemingly lumping all you “enemies”. Maybe try not to have enemies.” Well perhaps some of us wouldn’t feel put off if people who dislike the new series were respected as much as those who do like the new series? Yeah I’m sure there are people who don’t want any part of Enterprise in Discovery but I find it ironic those people are complaining. Not saying you are but you’ve been so for the new series I wouldn’t imagine you to accept the above article. Some here don’t seem to want to anyway.

            Alo if you feel I’m being rude it’s only in response to your confrontational attitude. It’s off putting to anyone with a different opinion.

          • TUP

            if you feel disrespected where others are respected, perhaps you should ask yourself why that is? Because its funny how many of us can disagree and engage in debates and still be perfectly friendly and respectful. There are very few of you that cant seem to figure it out.

            It has nothing to do with “not liking” Discovery. Give it some thought.

          • DC Forever

            I agree. Please see my response to him above.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Really? I haven’t heard one of you guys not tell off or belittle someone who doesn’t like Discovery so what does that say about you guys?

          • TUP

            It says you’re a liar because that’s not true. Oh well

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Like you’re doing right now eh?

          • TUP

            Huh?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You may not think you don’t belittle people here but you do.

          • TUP

            No i dont. if you feel belittled its probably because I make relevant arguments against your usual irrational schtick. Im sure if I routinely belittled people, I would not be here. Several people publicly stated they reported posts of mine and I dont believe I’ve ever had a post deleted and Ive certainly never been booted off the forum. But others have…havent they?

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I don’t know why your posts haven’t been deleted but it’s quite telling you’re posts have been reported. You remind me of another guy called Richardless over on the Ghostbusters Fans forum.

          • Tom Cruise Never Phones It IN

            Maybe they work for CBS? The extent they go to to defend Discovery, while complaining about the other shows, is odd.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Not all. Some are just obsessed fans that really want something to succeed even if it’s crap.

            There was a guy on Ghostbusters Fans by the name of Alpha who was in love with the idea of the reboot, it was the only part of the forum he commented on. Since you’re not allowed to dislike the reboot there he was given a free pass and even got me temp banned last year because he didn’t like me seeing the new movie online. This crazy Dutch guy is a huge Paul Feig fan and referred to his movies as avant-garde. Guess who got kicked off the site permanently? Let me help you, it wasn’t him.

          • TUP

            I’m optimistic about Discovery. I don’t complain about the other shows. I’m not sure I’ve seen anyone here that fits your description. Anyone that dislikes the other shows universally would be odd actually.

          • DC Forever

            It’s all of your pre-judgement on a series we haven’t even seen one episode yet that rubs people the wrong way. You make all of the big negative conclusions about a show none of us have seen yet. So of course some people are going to think you are behaving like an ass.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Yeah it surprises me because I’m not allowed to dislike something on what I’ve seen so far. Every single decision on Discovery so far has been rubbish. The above article is the most exciting thing I’ve heard so far.

          • TUP

            Your opinion is not fact.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            But TUP by that logic you can’t say I’m wrong either.

          • TUP

            When you conflate opinion with fact you’re always wrong.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I have been using facts though.

          • TUP

            Statements like “every decision on Discovery has been rubbish” is not fact. It’s hyperbole and irrational opinion presented as fact. Which undermines any sensible perspective you might have and probably contributes to your aggravation at people who are so dismissive of you.

            Why wouldn’t they be dismissive when you write things like that? It’s silly.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You are right about that as it’s just my opinion.

          • I find that to be the stupidest story arc in all of star trek, yep. And that is saying something as it beat out VOY and Threshold. But I am an ENT fan, I rate it above TOS.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Well I hope it happens.

  • Karl

    Looks like they didn’t get their wish..

  • Barak Aslani

    I’m really happy they’re giving us a series about Klingons and sandwiching the timeframe between eras we’ve already seen! It would have been completely utterly stupid to have produced an optimistic Star Trek series exploring new worlds and showing a better future for humanity, exploring the wonders of space. Better to change the way the Klingons look and tell us Spock had an angry adopted sister. Then you might have had to have called the series Discovery or something. I’m so happy they went with ANGRYFARTYPREACHYLIBERALHOLLYWOODPATRONIZINGfartinmymouth.

    • TUP

      You need a new schtick.

    • DC Forever

      With that name-calling, I’m forced to report you to the mods. Sorry.

    • M33

      Sometimes you make fair points, but insulting folks, especially in a juvenile way, will never win you any arguments or help anyone be willing to hear your points through.

  • Ian Fleming

    This development will only really be worth something if we get to see smooth-headed Klingons. As we saw on TOS there should be whole armadas of ships full of them.

    • M33

      Could be part of this internal civil war of the Klingon houses.

      • Thomas Elkins

        I really want to see a civil rights movement Klingon style. Kor and Kol can be arguing about control of the House when Kor tosses a table, pulls out a blade and shouts “I am Klingon! If you doubt that, a demonstration can be arranged!”

        That alone would make me more excited for Discovery.