Spoilers, The Final Frontier: Spoilers & Spoiler Discussion

[Kromm]

Post spoilers. Discuss Spoilers. 

Use the normal speculation topic otherwise (if it doesn't include, or leverage, spoilers)

[Kromm]

Star Trek: Discovery: 'Prime' Setting, Gay Character, Heavy Alien Presence and 11 More Spoilers About CBS Reboot

Quote

Set phasers to scoop!

Star Trek: Discovery executive producer Bryan Fuller closed out CBS’ portion of the Television Critics Association summer press tour with a panel previewing his anticipated reboot. Herewith are the 10 newsiest bits:

* As we reported, the show’s lead character will be female. Fuller elaborated that she will be human but not a captain. She is a “Lieutenant Commander — with caveats.”

* On the main story driving the 13-episode first season: “There’s an incident, an event in Star Trek history in the history of Starfleet that had been talked about but never fully explored. [We’re telling] that story through a character who is on a journey that is going to teach her how to get along with others in the galaxy.”

* Fuller confirmed that the aforementioned series-opening event is not Kobayashi Maru, nor the Romulan War and it won’t involve Black Ops Section 31 (aka Starfleet’s black-ops arm). Fuller later spilled that said event was referenced during the original series and diehard fans “should be very happy. It’s something I want to see.”

* “We’ll probably have a few more aliens than you normally do in a Star Trek cast,” Fuller revealed. “We’re going to have new exciting aliens and also re-imaginings of existing aliens.” (One of the original aliens is named Saru.)

* Fuller said the new series will be set in the prime universe — aka the universe of the TV series, not the one of the J.J. Abrams movies — and will “bridge the gap between Enterprise and the original series,” which puts it “about 10 years before Kirk” and his five-year mission.

* “There will be robots.”

* “We’re absolutely having a gay character,” Fuller said, recalling how, during his time on the Deep Space Nine writing staff, fans sent hate mail protesting a rumor that Jeri Ryan’s character Seven of Nine was going to be gay. He added that he kept a file folder of the vitriolic mail in his garage, solely to remind him of the importance of including gay characters if he ever got his own Trek series.

* Fuller strongly hinted that Amanda Grayson (aka Spock’s mother) would figure into the series. “I love that character. I loved Winona Ryder’s portrayal of her [in the 2009 movie] and it’s a great character. It would be fun in some iteration of this show to incorporate her and her storyline she’s not a central part of the show but we love that character.”

* Fuller made light of the series’ acronym — STD — and said that sex and profanity likely will have a place on the show. “There will probably be slightly more graphic content,” Fuller said. “We discuss every day about language… Is it appropriate to have a bridge blow up and have somebody say, ‘Oh, s—t?'”

* The series’ opening scene is “not set on Earth, and not on a planet,” Fuller divulged.

* The show will feature “about seven” lead characters. Fuller, meanwhile, agreed “wholeheartedly” that Pushing Daisies‘ Lee Pace would be a nice add.

Star Trek: Discovery episodes will unspool weekly on CBS All Access after initially launching with a two-hour episode on CBS network in January 2017.

EDIT - TVLine ain't so smart. Their article left some juicy bits out. Boo!

IGN adds:

Quote

Fuller is also open to bringing in other familiar characters, including members of the classic show's bridge crew in guest roles (such as, say, a younger Dr. McCoy), but he wants to establish his main cast first.

A conclusion I ponder below (in another post) is confirmed in the IGN piece:  The Lt. Commander is the show lead but not the SHIP leader.

Quote

Fuller hasn’t made it specific in the writing whether the (non-lead) captain is male or female, so that's still to be determined, as casting has not happened yet.

Some articles on this out there are already talking about how Time Travel is part of this show (I've seen it in several published today). Fuller's own statements really don't say that.

Quote

Another question was regarding whether or not there would be time travel on the show. Fuller wouldn't give a specific answer, but the impression he gave was that it didn't seem to be something planned for early on anyway.

Edited August 11, 2016 by Kromm

[Kromm]

Okay, from what we've been given we ought to be able to figure out what this "event" is.  

It's also worth noting that a Lieutenant Commander CAN run a (presumably smaller) ship. It is an interesting bit of protocol whether or not they would call this person "Captain" for the position, even if the military rank was Lieutenant Commander.  Various navies have differed on that tradition, I believe. Of course it is also possible that the lead character isn't the person running the ship. It could be a concept to have the ship Captain be a supporting player and have the stories center around a specific department.  Other non-Trek shows do this all of the time (where the boss is not the central character).  EDIT - IGN confirms my second conclusion is the proper one. The Lt. Commander is not leading a ship, but is a character who is the show lead and who has a Captain who is a boss (who is not the show lead).

Seven main/lead characters is too much IMO. Hopefully this is just being overstated and it just means seven regulars.

A big yay for Robots. I understand why Trek has avoided them by and large, but its time. Especially if we roll with some idea that maybe there's a specific reason we don't see robots that often (until we later get androids like Mr. Data). 

An alien-heavier main cast is cool, but could be a mixed blessing. They have to get the makeup right so that these are aliens who can convey human-like expressions properly. Certainly Trek has experience with this, but if they want to go really radical with alien designs they could risk losing this.

Edited August 11, 2016 by Kromm

[ae2]

2 hours ago, Kromm said:

It's also worth noting that a Lieutenant Commander CAN run a (presumably smaller) ship. It is an interesting bit of protocol whether or not they would call this person "Captain" for the position, even if the military rank was Lieutenant Commander.

In an episode of DS9 it's explicitly pointed out to Nog that the person in command of the ship is referred to as captain. Obviously this is a moot point, and it might not be tradition in the time period this show takes place in, but I recently watched that episode so I had to bring it up :)

[ae2]

Okay, events about ten years before TOS.

The massacre on Tarsus IV? http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Tarsus_IV 

That gives an easy lead in to show Kirk, but it feels like a relatively small event in Federation history.

Something to do with the Klingon war?

The Borg destroying Guinan's homeworld? Not likely, since he mentioned TOS and this would likely involve some major retcon. 

The original launch of the Enterprise? Or the Constellation?

Edited August 11, 2016 by ae2

[Kromm]

In the media thread someone asked how exactly this thing with the main character not being the Captain was going to work (and used the example of Next Generation where the idea of at least co-leads kind of failed since Riker was such a non-entity most of the time). 

I think overall this is going to use the point of view of not really seeing most of the action across the whole ship. I'm guessing for example, that this Lt. Cmdr. character won't even work on the bridge.  It's a rank where someone would be a department head, but although most of the Trek shows blinded us to this, there's no way the Department heads all work on the Bridge.  Security/Tactical team perhaps?  Trek has bounced around on when (and if) that person magically doubles as a Tactical officer on the bridge, but really that's nonsense. And if its Security/Tactical that means the show could even modernize a bit by bringing a few "procedural show" elements into the structure (they would after all be the "Space Cops"). Not too many, or it would suck, but just enough to feed the part of the audience that's so used to that with modern shows.

And I think WHICH important Trek/Federation event this comes down to showing might be important to this specific issue.  Is it one where we are getting a the point of view of the actual person responsible, or is this a kind of "look from below" thing?  Narratively either could be interesting. 

Quote

Okay, events about ten years before TOS.

I think we have to be a bit fluid here and assume that a lot of things mentioned in passing in TOS might not actually be the dates assumed by various books/online databases etc.

That said, Kirk allegedly (according to the Memory Alpha site) takes over Enterprise in 2265.  Exactly ten years before, in 2255, is The Treaty of Armens. It includes a nice brief war and an underexplored alien race (the Sheliak).  The problem?  Although sourcing from ten years before TOS, this only became part of Trek in a Next Gen episode. Fuller seemed to be indicating that this event is something people will know from TOS itself.

Argh. On second thought I go back to the first suggestion. I think whatever this triggering incident is, it will be one where we previously had no good idea when it actually happened.  So it won't BE in something like Memory Alpha (at least in the right place). 

Edited August 11, 2016 by Kromm

[starri]

On 8/11/2016 at 6:26 PM, ae2 said:

Okay, events about ten years before TOS.

It almost has to be the Battle of Axanar.

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, starri said:

It almost has to be the Battle of Axanar.

Is the timeline right for this?  And is Axanar even totally "canon"?

But if it is and that's the subject here, this is not gonna go over well with the fans. A well publicized fan project about Axanar was forcibly shut down by CBS. Enough of the fandom is angry about this that it would be seen as thumbing their noses at them.

[ae2]

9 hours ago, starri said:

It almost has to be the Battle of Axanar.

Sites are reporting that Fuller specifically said it's not Axanar. (I didn't search through the original source to find the quote though.)

If it was Axanar that would explain why CBS worked so hard to shut down that fan project.

[starri]

7 hours ago, Kromm said:

Is the timeline right for this?  And is Axanar even totally "canon"?

It's canon because we know that Garth of Izar was a great hero of the campaign, and that Kirk was decorated for something he did during it.  Also, the Axanar themselves appeared in an episode of ENT.

 

15 minutes ago, ae2 said:

If it was Axanar that would explain why CBS worked so hard to shut down that fan project.

CBS went after that project because the people behind it were using it as an attempt to make money, not for any other reason.  It's disingenuous to call it a fan project.

[paigow]

5 hours ago, starri said:

 and that Kirk was decorated for something he did during it. 

No evidence of this...Kirk studied Garth and Axanar while attending Starfleet Academy. Kirk could cheat simulators, but not get himself a medal for combat while an earthbound cadet....

[starri]

When Kirk's list of commendations were read in "Court Martial" one of them was something called the Palm Leaf of Axanar Peace Mission.

[Kromm]

5 hours ago, starri said:

When Kirk's list of commendations were read in "Court Martial" one of them was something called the Palm Leaf of Axanar Peace Mission.

Axanar is a place, so it follows that Kirk could have received a medal for a later event there.  In fact, the name of the award suggests some kind of summit following up the battle rather than the battle itself (which in no way would be spun as a "peace mission" I think). 

[starri]

Quote

The Axanar Peace Mission was a diplomatic operation at the planet Axanar in the mid-23rd century, in which Starfleet took part. It was designed to bring peaceful resolution to a conflict involving the Federation, with Garth of Izar winning a major victory in the Battle of Axanar.

Future Enterprise Captain James T. Kirk participated in the Axanar Peace Mission as a "new-fledged cadet". For his work during the mission, he was awarded the Palm Leaf of Axanar Peace Mission.

[paigow]

The same Memory Alpha entry confirms that the Peace Mission followed the Battle.

[starri]

On 8/13/2016 at 9:12 PM, paigow said:

The same Memory Alpha entry confirms that the Peace Mission followed the Battle.

My point remains that Kirk was involved in whatever the incident was (and clearly it wasn't just one isolated event).

Moving on, here's a boilerplate article...except for this paragraph:

Quote

Sources tell THR the rest of the cast also will feature an openly gay actor as one of the male leads (which Fuller confirmed), a female admiral, a male Klingon captain, a male admiral, a male adviser and a British male doctor.

I'm assuming the admiral characters are going to be recurring, not leads.  I'm very curious who the actor is.

[DavidJSnyder]

Here is a bit of the transcript where Axanar comes up.  When asked "Is it Axanar?", Fuller answers "I actually don't know what the history of Axanar is."  Which if you squint is not quite a denial, I guess.

I think it's probably something else, but I don't have a solid theory.

Edited August 18, 2016 by DavidJSnyder

[DavidJSnyder]

The female lead character will be referred to as Number One.  Which may just mean she's the ship's First Officer and be a symbolic connection  to Majel Barrett's character rather than anything more concrete.

[millennium]

2 hours ago, DavidJSnyder said:

The female lead character will be referred to as Number One.  Which may just mean she's the ship's First Officer and be a symbolic connection  to Majel Barrett's character rather than anything more concrete.

This piece:

Star Trek: Discovery: Have we already met the main character?

does a good job of speculating that this Number One is THE Number One from The Cage/Menagerie.

[Kromm]

7 hours ago, DavidJSnyder said:

The female lead character will be referred to as Number One.  Which may just mean she's the ship's First Officer and be a symbolic connection  to Majel Barrett's character rather than anything more concrete.

I will say this is surprising to me. Oh not that it could be that (underutilized) character, but that I'd have expected another rank down if they were really going to do the "view from below" thing where the Captain is like the Boss in an office sitcom or procedural, where you mainly only see them when the lower downs bring something to him or her.  A First Officer breaks that paradigm a bit because they're still usually mostly hands off, so it's not ideal positioning to interact with both ends of things.  Think of the Captain as the President of a company, and the First Officer as the Senior VP. A department head would have worked better, presuming it was one like Security that would be involved almost constantly with everything, because it's the same person talking to both the Grunts AND the "executive level" of the Captain and the First Officer. 

4 hours ago, millennium said:

This piece:

Star Trek: Discovery: Have we already met the main character?

does a good job of speculating that this Number One is THE Number One from The Cage/Menagerie.

Perhaps. But it outright contradicts what Fuller said (in the Ain't It Cool piece):

Quote

showrunner Bryan Fuller told me during a radio chat late Saturday.  "When we introduce our protagonist, she is called 'Number One' in honor of Majel Barrett's character in the original pilot ["The Cage," which starred Jeffrey Hunter as Capt. Christopher Pike].

"In honor of Majel Barrett's character" sounds pretty specific.  As in "not that character" or the phrasing would be different, IMO.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Kromm

[millennium]

58 minutes ago, Kromm said:

I will say this is surprising to me. Oh not that it could be that (underutilized) character, but that I'd have expected another rank down if they were really going to do the "view from below" thing where the Captain is like the Boss in an office sitcom or procedural, where you mainly only see them when the lower downs bring something to him or her.  A First Officer breaks that paradigm a bit because they're still usually mostly hands off, so it's not ideal positioning to interact with both ends of things.  Think of the Captain as the President of a company, and the First Officer as the Senior VP. A department head would have worked better, presuming it was one like Security that would be involved almost constantly with everything, because it's the same person talking to both the Grunts AND the "executive level" of the Captain and the First Officer. 

Perhaps. But it outright contradicts what Fuller said (in the Ain't It Cool piece):

"In honor of Majel Barrett's character" sounds pretty specific.  As in "not that character" or the phrasing would be different, IMO.

I wouldn't say it outright contradicts it.   The character could be the original Number One played by a different actress (obviously) and be considered an homage to Barrett.   IMO, "in honor of" has sufficient flexibility to keep the possibility in play.

[Kromm]

5 minutes ago, millennium said:

I wouldn't say it outright contradicts it.   The character could be the original Number One played by a different actress (obviously) and be considered an homage to Barrett.   IMO, "in honor of" has sufficient flexibility to keep the possibility in play.

But he didn't say in honor of the actress. He said in honor of the character. 

Quote

in honor of Majel Barrett's character

not

Quote

in honor of Majel Barrett

[millennium]

6 minutes ago, Kromm said:

But he didn't say in honor of the actress. He said in honor of the character. 

not

My bad.  But same potential for ambiguity, IMO.   

[DavidJSnyder]

I agree that it's ambiguous. The interviewer brought up the theory and Fuller could have explicitly said "It's the same character from The Cage" or "It's not the same character from The Cage" but he didn't do either.

[DavidJSnyder]

I don't know if "touchstone" and his previous"close" to the Romulan War means it involves the Romulans somehow (like the Klingon/Romulan technology exchange) or if he's talking about the attitude here which is very militaristic.  "Balance of Terror" is basically an old submarine movie filmed as a Star Trek episode. 

[kassygreene]

Said movie being The Enemy Below, starring Robert Mitchum and Curd Jurgens.  I saw parts of it years ago, but I now see that Amazon Prime has this movie for free, so it is now on my watchlist.  Nevertheless, good episode, good movie.

[SVNBob]

They do appear to be a step between the uniforms as seen in the two TOS pilots and the rest of TOS.  Good eye for detail.  Well done.

[Maverick]

 They appear to be from the Kohl's fall collection, circa any time from 1950 to now.

[paigow]

3 hours ago, Maverick said:

 They appear to be from the Kohl's fall collection, circa any time from 1950 to now.

Capt. James C. Penney of the Starship Outlet... a 5 year mission to rollback prices across the galaxy...to boldly save like no one has saved before!

[KnotsLanding]

I do like that the uniforms look similar to the original pilot, which makes sense considering the time period. Makes me hopeful they're at least try to go for the retro look moreso than the movies. Considering it's set in the same universe as the shows they should aim to make the show as close to TOS as possible look/technology wise.

[starri]

Michelle Yeoh is indeed part of the show.  She is not playing one of Discovery's crew, but is instead be Captain Han Bo of the USS Shenzhou.

[jsbt]

Michelle Yeoh is a god among women and one of the best Bond Girls ever.

She also screams out as a Bryan Fuller choice, which makes me hold out hope that he will remain involved/come back. Never have things gone from the sublime to the horrific so fast as that bit of news in October(?).

[Helena Dax]

I read a post (without its source) which said that it's going to be about Tarsus IV. The fact that Rapp's character is going to be an astromycologist and a fungus expert seems to support that info. If that's true, I so want to see at least a glimpse of 14 years old Kirk there...

[starri]

If that's true, we might also see an aged Hoshi.  Per a graphic in the ENT episode "In a Mirror, Darkly," she and her husband were among those culled.

Or maybe they want to pretend it doesn't exist.  But, oddly, I hope not.

[Helena Dax]

Seeing Hoshi would be great too.

[DavidJSnyder]

From the media thread, Harry Mudd is not an original series characters I'd have guessed they'd being back.

Edited April 1, 2017 by DavidJSnyder

[starri]

I don't really want any spoilers, so I'm not entirely sure why I'm dropping this here, but Jonathan Frakes (who directed at least one episode) let it slip that Discovery is going to be spending an episode in the Mirror Universe.

I can't wait to see how Michelle Yeoh looks with a goatee.

[legaleagle53]

7 hours ago, starri said:

I don't really want any spoilers, so I'm not entirely sure why I'm dropping this here, but Jonathan Frakes (who directed at least one episode) let it slip that Discovery is going to be spending an episode in the Mirror Universe.

I can't wait to see how Michelle Yeoh looks with a goatee.

Oh, that will be interesting, considering that it's ten years before the Federation even learned of the Mirror Universe's existence.  I wonder whether this is how the show plans to tie itself into Enterprise by showing us what happened since Mirror!Hoshi's time.

Edited September 20, 2017 by legaleagle53

[Maverick]

 It may be like Enterprise's "visit" to the mirror universe and be set entirely there.  I hope so, because I hated how Enterprise kept twisting itself into knots to bring species like the Borg and Ferengi centuries before they should.  

[Lokiberry]

Bumping this thread in case anybody wants to talk about the Voq is Ash fan theory without spoiler warnings. I hope it's true.

[Charlesman]

41 minutes ago, Lokiberry said:

Bumping this thread in case anybody wants to talk about the Voq is Ash fan theory without spoiler warnings. I hope it's true.

I first saw it here: https://io9.gizmodo.com/and-now-star-trek-discovery-has-lost-its-soul-1819493876

Quote

To the audience Tyler is so obviously a spy that Lorca’s not just callous, he’s a fucking moron. Tyler is played by Shazad Latif, who also plays the albino Klingon Voq. (Edited, 11:05: At some point between writing this and publishing this, the line that Latif had a dual role vanished from Wikipedia. But this theory has been floating around for a while, based on the name given to Voq being attached to an actor with no other credits and Latif’s birth last name being the same as the credited actor.) 

 

So it was on Wikipedia that Shazad Latif had a dual role. 

The 'actor' credited with being Voq is Javid Iqbal and has no other acting credits.

The actor who plays Tyler is Shazad Latif, who's birth name is Shazad Khaliq Iqbal.

[MissLucas]

Tyler as a Klingon spy doesn't interest me in the least. Tyler as the victim of sexual assault and how he (and the show) handles that has much more story-potential.

Voq as Ash also makes no sense with regards to the time-line and everything we know about the Klingons. Voq has been stranded on his (or rather T'Kuvma's) ship for six months per last episode. Ash says he's been on the Klingon ship for 7 months - so we know that roughly one month has passed between L'Rell's promise to Voq to help him win the war and this episode. In other words L'Rell managed to bring Voq to the matriarchs, to convince the matriarchs he was the Kwisatz Haderach (you just know there are some nasty tests involved), then to convince at least one other Klingon captain to play along and set the trap for Lorca (which also means getting access to Klingon intel) all within a month and despite being considered an outcast herself. Girl sure knows how to get s*** done.

[Lokiberry]

38 minutes ago, Charlesman said:

I first saw it here: https://io9.gizmodo.com/and-now-star-trek-discovery-has-lost-its-soul-1819493876

 

So it was on Wikipedia that Shazad Latif had a dual role. 

The 'actor' credited with being Voq is Javid Iqbal and has no other acting credits.

The actor who plays Tyler is Shazad Latif, who's birth name is Shazad Khaliq Iqbal.

This is all so awesome! I had no idea until I came into this forum and read it. I wonder what the plan is? Will he lurk around suspiciously, or strike up friendships with the crew? Will he become friends with Burnham?

Star Trek, at it's best, isn't about weapons. It's about ideas, the chief of those being  infinite diversity in infinite combinations. Burnham and Voq have both lost so much at the at hands of the other's species. Could they makes peace with each other, and that peace spread out and end the war? That would be very classic Star Trek.

[Irishmaple]

It's kind of odd that Voq is shown on IMBD in character. I really hope Tyler and Voq are not the same character. That means I've watched two shows that introduced a male rape victim and then stepped away from it.

[starri]

Some other grist from Fan Theory Tuesday:

-The spores cause Paul to eventually become the Traveler.

-Lorca is actually from the Mirror Universe.

Of the three (counting the Ash/Voq one), the last one is perhaps the most plausible.

[Charlesman]

The last time we saw Voq, he was told he would have to "sacrifice everything" in order to gain victory.

And, apparently the actor who plays Tyler, Shazad Latif, has been credited as a series regular since the beginning, even though Tyler doesn't show up until episode 5, the first episode without Voq...

Edited October 18, 2017 by Charlesman

[that one guy]

Ever since I saw Rekha Sharma show up, I have suspected/assumed that someone would secretly be a Cylon Klingon, because every time any of the Cylon actors show up anywhere, I point at the screen and yell "s/he's really a Cylon" because I'm a dork like that. But then I was like, "nope, she's really a Klingon. That would be awesome." Star Trek accidentally set up this whole thing with "Trials and Tribble-ations." Before the DS9 team went back in time and visited "Trouble with Tribbles," the audience just assumed that Klingons always looked like aliens, and you didn't see that when watching TOS because it was a low budget 60's TV show that couldn't even afford uniforms that fit and recycled the Romulan war bird model as a Klingon bird of prey. I'm from before the CGI era, I don't need stuff to look the same, I just need it to look cool. I don't mind at all when a character is played by a different actor, as long as the actor is good, I don't need an on-screen explanation etc. I see live theater all the time, stuff doesn't look "real," and it doesn't matter. 

But "Trials" had the DS9 characters see and interact with TOS Klingons, and ask what's up with that, and Worf says "We don't like to talk about it." Which was obviously intended as a throwaway line and a joke, but now the can of worms is open. So, now we have the prequel series, and the Klingons look like aliens and we don't see any who look human. Some "fans" are yelling about this on the Internet saying this is a mistake. I don't get where they're coming from, at all. Obviously it's a plot point, not a mistake. There are Klingons who look like humans, we don't see them and Starfleet doesn't appear to know this. Obviously SOMEONE is going to secretly be a Klingon. How could you put together a prequel series and not use that? You could not. I mean I guess you could, but you'd be very bad at your job. It is totally obvious that the changing appearance of Klingons will be a plot point, and that until Starfleet is aware of what's up, the human-looking Klingons will be spies. Going all the way back to "Trouble with Tribbles," there was a human character who ended up being a Klingon in disguise. And Kirk was not surprised at all, because they'd done this sort of thing before. Yet in Discovery, they aren't conducting a witch hunt for Klingon spies yet. So that will inevitably be a plot development. The only question is how and when. There is absolutely zero chance, nada, zip, none, no chance at all, that the show will not feature a human-looking Klingon in disguise spying on Starfleet. That will 100% certainly happen. It's not a question. The origin of the whole Klingon story in Star Trek is cold war paranoia. This is how it works, this is how  you write stories, this is how you make TV shows. There is going to be a spy, it's a Chekhov's gun kind of thing.

The only question is, "is it Ash Tyler?" I don't know that for certain. But Javid Iqbal doesn't seem to exist. Iqbal is Shazad Latif's birth surname, "Latif" is a stage name. Iqbal means "luck" or "good fortune" in Farsi. Javed means "eternal." "Eternal Luck" can kinda be paraphrased as "Live long and prosper." Which, if it's really a fake-out, is pretty funny. So I'd be willing to bet a shiny nickel it's him.

Plus, I mean, the whole prison ship thing is obviously a set-up. Nobody's been on that ship for seven months. We just saw L'Rell last episode, she has been trapped with Voq on the sarcophagus ship for six months, but last episode she had a plan to escape back to her people - the shifty spy clan no less. Now, a few weeks later, she's captain of a prison ship? And Ash says he's been on board for seven months? It's obviously a lie. Which means the whole Prison Ship thing is staged, it was just thrown together to run an op on Lorca. They knew what Discovery can do, they knew there would be a rescue attempt. And they let him get away, to send a spy to infiltrate the ship. My theory? Since a rival clan has now stolen the cloaking device, L'Rell's people want the blink spore drive to even the scales.

And she just about told us last week. Her people are spies. There's a way Voq can win the war, but he has to give up "everything." He's stranded on a derelict ship to die! What else does he have to give up? What does he want most? "Remain Klingon." To give up everything means he doesn't get to remain Klingon, see? That's why that slogan exists on the show! Why would you be all "Remain Klingon" unless, you know, it was an open question and not a done deal. Somebody Klingon is not going to remain Klingon. Chekhov's Slogan. Most of all, Voq wants to not be assimilated into the broader universal culture being pushed by Starfleet. So he's going to have to assimilate into Starfleet. It's just the most interesting thing you could possibly force that character to do.

So there you have it. Pure speculation? Absolutely. But they've left all these pieces around and this is how they go together. If they don't pick them up and use them, then narratively they've left these pieces lying around like a bunch of Legos to be stepped on.

[tv echo]

Star Trek: Discovery EPs tease the future of the Federation—and the show
Danette Chavez   January 6, 2018
https://www.avclub.com/star-trek-discovery-eps-tease-the-future-of-the-federa-1821843339

Quote

Berg advised fans to “buckle up,” because the show is “introducing a huge new development.” “It’ll be fun for Trek fans,” Harberts chimed in, teasing a “nice nod to stuff from [The Original Series]. This back half—what happens tomorrow night firmly anchors the back half to the season. It’s definitely again a war story, as far as how it’ll play out, but our characters find themselves in a place where their identities are challenged. It’s an emotionally wrought back half. Very intense. The cast has done some amazing work.”

As far as what thematic arc we can expect from the Trek series that the EPs and network have regularly touted for its more serialized storytelling, Berg invoked the “discovery and self-discovery” themes that have been a part of Burnham’s story this season. “She had a big hole to climb out of emotionally, spiritually, and how she feels she fits in the world. [This second half] is about getting her back to a place we saw her in in the beginning.”

“Redemption’s a huge theme,” Harberts adds, which is something the show’s producers and writers are probably hoping for after the first half of season one was deemed not quite Trek enough by some viewers. “The other thing that’s a huge theme for us is taking the Federation from the darkness into the light. Everybody wants this optimistic version of Star Trek right out of the gate. And I feel that our show has a lot of hope in it from episode to episode, depending on storyline we’re tracking.” So if you’ve found the show somewhat grim (this particular writer hasn’t), stay tuned, because Harberts says “by season’s end, people will see the Federation they’ve come to know and love from TOS on.”
*  *  *
When The A.V. Club asked Berg and Harberts about Georgiou’s sudden departure, the EPs pointed to the upcoming episode. Berg calls the relationship between Georgiou and Burnham “such a core relationship for the entire spine. Our goal was always to keep Captain Georgiou alive on the show.” Cutting herself off to avoid revealing too much, Berg then says, “The joy is in the journey. I’d say, keep watching, because Georgiou is such a huge part of the heart who was Michael Burnham. If that’s something you’re invested in, keep watching because I think you hopefully will enjoy what we’re going to do.” “Once you watch episode 10, you’ll see the context that we’re playing in,” Harberts adds. “Another theme for the back half is second chances. As people are consuming the back half, keep that in mind.”

As for what we can expect from the back half of season one, the war story will continue, but there will be less Klingon and subtitles. “We still stand behind that decision,” Berg says, because it made sense for the story of the nativist Klingons. But Harberts also indicates there will be “a little less reading involved” going forward.

Berg and Harberts also shared some light details on season two, which CBS ordered last October. Harberts pushes the more traditional Trek angle as something the duo “wants to explore more” in the new season, which they just started working last month. He acknowledges the “well-documented” embattled season-one production, but enthuses that “This year, we have a fantastic creative team in place, everybody knows each other. But we also have time this year—we have time to do things like more away missions, newer planets. These are stories that might fall a little bit more into a framework of allegory that people love to get from Trek. But we will always continue to have that overarching serialized thread.” And as for the themes or potential storylines, Harberts teased an exploration of faith and “science versus faith.” And again, there will be much more of the TOS canon that will at least be nodded to in the new episodes, which should temporarily please some sticklers.

Star Trek: Discovery returns Sunday at 8:30 p.m. ET with “Despite Yourself,” which was directed by Jonathan Frakes.

Edited January 7, 2018 by tv echo

[starri]

While I love Captain Saru, Cornwell in the Big Chair is just awesome.

...does Mary Chieffo 'ship Cornwell/L'Rell?

[BruceAE]

So Doug Jones has just been cast in a new pilot (a What we do in the Shadows tv remake) - given how busy he is with movie roles as well, I’m not sure how this bodes for Saru in the next episode.