Watch The First Trailer For Star Trek: Discovery

[Primetimer]

Then start asking if anyone you know will give you their CBS All Access password.

View the full article

[zxy556575]

Well, balls. I'm only a casual Trek viewer, but this looks FABULOUS!

I will totally put Hulu on hold for three months,  hold my nose, and subscribe to CBS instead.

[blueray]

What is with all the modern stuff, this is suppose to be before Kirk (sets look like the reboot movies). That being said the biggest complaint I had with the trailer is wtf did they do to the klingons? Why change something that is so set in the fandom and beloved by many fans. I feel that is deliberately going pissing people off.

I do plan on watching this show, however the trailer its self was kind of meh. Lets home the actual show is much better, if not I don't see it lasting.

[Charlesman]

Wooden acting and lousy writing full of lame exposition... It's Voyager without the plucky charm

[BBHN]

I still wish this new series was taking place after DS9/Voyager instead.

[questionfear]

15 hours ago, blueray said:

What is with all the modern stuff, this is suppose to be before Kirk (sets look like the reboot movies). That being said the biggest complaint I had with the trailer is wtf did they do to the klingons? Why change something that is so set in the fandom and beloved by many fans. I feel that is deliberately going pissing people off.

I do plan on watching this show, however the trailer its self was kind of meh. Lets home the actual show is much better, if not I don't see it lasting.

The Klingon issue is because the OG series had basically smooth headed Klingons, while TNG onwards had ridged Klingons. Apparently Enterprise had a convoluted explanation involving a virus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klingon#Continuity_issues), but for the sake of canon they should probably be TNG-esque ridges, because otherwise it's implied the species had a whole series of mutations in a very short period of time. 

[jcin617]

I thought the uniforms looked like a logical evolution from Enterprise, but the set and styling looks more like a precursor to Abrams Trek, rather than Original Recipe.  

8 hours ago, BBHN said:

I still wish this new series was taking place after DS9/Voyager instead.

I agree, I would have preferred a post-Voyager story as a prequel limits some of what you can do, especially one set only 10 years before Kirk and Spock.  

[BBHN]

Yeah, especially with the technology factor. Hell, people are already saying the tech on this show looks too advanced for the era it is set in, and that's just from the previews.

[NorthstarATL]

Pretty much hated it. The problem with prequels is that you are (or should be) boxed in by the later version in how far you can go. How can future crews be surprised by something that is apparently old hat in an earlier version. Plus, no eye candy.

[jcin617]

21 minutes ago, BBHN said:

Yeah, especially with the technology factor. Hell, people are already saying the tech on this show looks too advanced for the era it is set in, and that's just from the previews.

I agree, it should look roughly like the tech aboard the USS Kelvin in Abram's Star Trek, seeing as that was the tech when Kirk was born.     

[twinkietwin94]

Was excited to see the trailer, have been waiting for it, watched and am...disappointed. Yeah another prequel. Um WHY? Really does look more like the reboot movies which just doesn't fit. I love TOS, TNG, & DS9, watched some of Voyager and some of Enterprise, from what I saw I preferred Enterprise. I was hoping for a sequel though not a prequel. Maybe bc I was young enough when TNG was on to LOVE Wesley Crusher and was hoping for a way for Wil Wheaton to cameo. I'm not paying to watch this. By the time Mission Log podcast gets to it though it should be on Netflix or DVD and I can see it that way, which is a good thing anyway since I just discovered Mission Log and am only on TOS season 1 with them

[jsbt]

I love Sonequa Martin-Green, but I thought it looked a little low-rent in terms of production value on the bridge and costuming. I don't mind the design, but I minded the lighting. I don't think Bryan Fuller would've made those mistakes (sorry, old habits die hard). Also, that line from the alien was painfully bad.

But I love the concept and I'm behind it. The trailer was a mixed bag for me but I'm in.

[Lugal]

One of my big problems with Abramstrek was it felt more like what a non-fan thinks Star Trek is, rather than what it actually was.  Bryan Fuller was a fan of Star Trek, whereas Alex Kurtzmann worked on Abramstrek, and is now the showrunner.

I like Michelle Yeoh and Doug Jones, and James Frain as Sarek looks awesome, and it could just be the way the trailer was cut, they really didn't grab me here.  The sets are too physically dark and the lens flares reminded me of Abramstrek.  While I don't expect them to go with the minimalist sets of TOS they could have at least tried to make it a little brighter and less cramped, since this is roughly the same time period as "The Cage."  They could have taken the TOS sets and given them an update rather than an Abramstrek look (and as much as I hate those movies, at least the bridge there was bright and somewhat open).

Also if they had to do another prequel, I would have preferred a prequel to TNG.  There's a lot of stories to mine there.

Either way, I won't be paying for CBS All Access, and I'll just wait until it comes out on DVD.

[Kaoteek]

10 minutes ago, Lugal said:

One of my big problems with Abramstrek was it felt more like what a non-fan thinks Star Trek is, rather than what it actually was. 

Can't agree with that, tbh.

If anything, aside from a few concessions to modern times, nuTrek was pretty faithful to TOS, as it should have been (and what it suffered from was having too many cooks in the kitchen : Orci was the hardcore Trek fan, Kurtzman, Abrams & Lindelof, not so much, and they ended up stepping on each other's toes, esp. on STID).

The problem was that it was a big-screen reboot of TOS, aimed at a wide audience, when half of the current Trek fanbase has been raised on TNG, not TOS : there's a real disconnect between what some people think "real Star Trek" is, and what TOS really was.

As for Discovery, Kurtzmann is not the showrunner. Gretchen J. Berg and Aaron Harberts are. Kurtzman serves as ex. producer, and co-wrote the pilot with Fuller when he was still on board.

[SimoneS]

Just horrible. Worse than I thought it would be and I went in with low expectations since it is on CBS. Just Icky. Why on earth did they do a prequel? And AGAIN if Sonequa Martin-Green's character is the lead, why not just make her the captain?

Frankly, I don't know who I feel more disappointed for the Sonequa or Michelle Yeoh. Michelle wins out because she is so talented and has had such an amazing movie career, I would have hoped that her first huge regular role on an American tv show would have been on a better conceived show. 

[jsbt]

4 hours ago, SimoneS said:

 And AGAIN if Sonequa Martin-Green's character is the lead, why not just make her the captain?

Because they were trying to get away from the same old premise where the show follows the captain - they wanted to show the perspective of a different kind of bridge officer.

Also, it's likely her character will rise through the ranks in the story to become a captain.

[adam807]

Into this, but is "I can sense the coming of death" dude even more useless power-wise than Deanna Tori? (I bet he's real fun at parties.)

[ae2]

On 5/20/2017 at 0:48 PM, Kaoteek said:

If anything, aside from a few concessions to modern times, nuTrek was pretty faithful to TOS, as it should have been (and what it suffered from was having too many cooks in the kitchen : Orci was the hardcore Trek fan, Kurtzman, Abrams & Lindelof, not so much, and they ended up stepping on each other's toes, esp. on STID).

The problem was that it was a big-screen reboot of TOS, aimed at a wide audience, when half of the current Trek fanbase has been raised on TNG, not TOS : there's a real disconnect between what some people think "real Star Trek" is, and what TOS really was.

Can you expound upon this? I've never heard anyone make this case before, and I'm not really seeing it at first grasp.

[benteen]

8 hours ago, adam807 said:

Into this, but is "I can sense the coming of death" dude even more useless power-wise than Deanna Tori? (I bet he's real fun at parties.)

That made me laugh.  Well done, sir!

On ‎5‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 6:18 PM, jsbt said:

Because they were trying to get away from the same old premise where the show follows the captain - they wanted to show the perspective of a different kind of bridge officer.

Also, it's likely her character will rise through the ranks in the story to become a captain.

Agreed.  This is actually a refreshing change to the Star Trek formula not to have the captain as the central character.  That doesn't preclude Number One eventually rising to the Captain's chair.  So it's a different kind of journey.

[Lugal]

On 5/20/2017 at 9:48 AM, Kaoteek said:

Can't agree with that, tbh.

If anything, aside from a few concessions to modern times, nuTrek was pretty faithful to TOS, as it should have been (and what it suffered from was having too many cooks in the kitchen : Orci was the hardcore Trek fan, Kurtzman, Abrams & Lindelof, not so much, and they ended up stepping on each other's toes, esp. on STID).

The problem was that it was a big-screen reboot of TOS, aimed at a wide audience, when half of the current Trek fanbase has been raised on TNG, not TOS : there's a real disconnect between what some people think "real Star Trek" is, and what TOS really was.

As for Discovery, Kurtzmann is not the showrunner. Gretchen J. Berg and Aaron Harberts are. Kurtzman serves as ex. producer, and co-wrote the pilot with Fuller when he was still on board.

Agree to disagree I guess.  The Kobayashi Maru scene showed me that they did not get Kirk at all.

Glad Kurtzmann isn't the showrunner, must have misheard that somewhere.  Gretchen Berg and Aaron Harberts seem to have worked with Fuller enough (on Wonderfalls and Pushing Daisies) so hopefully they'll be good.

[Kaoteek]

4 hours ago, ae2 said:

Can you expound upon this? I've never heard anyone make this case before, and I'm not really seeing it at first grasp.

Well, TOS has always been more action, adventure, and character-oriented show of the TOS/TNG combo. TOS had great concepts & writers, but TOS also had a fair balance of good & awful episodes, TOS had brawls, TOS had humor, TOS had gratuitously sexy girls, and TOS had a very strong core of three characters that were both friends and colleagues... the show was pretty much a product of its time &, more importantly, it was also light-hearted when it needed to.

TNG was always the "colder" and more "intellectual" show of the two : those were serious professionals doing their jobs, aboard a cool, somewhat clinical-looking ship, they all got along well (due to Gene's no conflict policy) but weren't really friends, and everything was really mission-oriented, with a heavy focus on space exploration, on big philosophical ideas, on pseudo-science, on techno-babble, on world building, and so on...

So nuTrek comes along : lighthearted blockbuster movies full of action, humor, sexy girls, with dynamic characters, and a likeable cast that manage to recapture the feeling of the original crew (even though the way they pushed Uhura to the forefront still feels awkward to me). And half of the fanbase suddenly starts complaining that it's not "real Star Trek", that it's not deep or smart enough, that it's too actiony, too gratuitously sexy, that there's not enough space exploration, not enough big ideas, not enough science verisimilitude, not enough technobabble.

In short, that it was too much like an episode of TOS, and not enough like the Star Trek they grew up with, be it TNG or VGR.
 

1 hour ago, Lugal said:

Agree to disagree I guess.  The Kobayashi Maru scene showed me that they did not get Kirk at all.

I haven't watched Trek 09 in a while, but what bothered you with the Kobayashi Maru as presented in the movie ?

[Lugal]

2 hours ago, Kaoteek said:

I haven't watched Trek 09 in a while, but what bothered you with the Kobayashi Maru as presented in the movie ?

Kirk reprogrammed the simulation so that the Klingon shields just drop as Kirk sits there eating an apple, like an entitled frat boy.  I liked the scenario in the novel Kobayashi Maru where Kirk programmed the simulation so that the Klingons don't want to cross The Captain Kirk.

Which is why it felt like what non-fans think of Star Trek.  In pop culture, Kirk is thought of as a cocky womanizer.  Not saying Kirk couldn't be cocky, but he was clever enough to back it up.  And he usually had a girl every episode (since Roddenberry bowed to network pressure, and it was the 60s) but that wasn't all he was. He was the 'stack of books with legs' Gary Mitchell described.  Kirk was driven.  He graduated in the top of his academy class and became the youngest captain in the fleet.

In Trek 09 everything is just handed to him.  Kirk gets expelled from the academy and then after helping save the earth is made captain of the Enterprise.

[BBHN]

Quote

but weren't really friends

I'd have to disagree on that.

Quote

Well, TOS has always been more action, adventure, and character-oriented show of the TOS/TNG combo

But even still, TOS still had plenty of allegories and symbolism and what not...sometimes more heavy handed in some episodes than others. Even TOS had big ideas occasionally, even if it was never as cerebral overall as TNG.

Quote

In short, that it was too much like an episode of TOS

It was too much like the style of TOS, and none of the substance.

[Kaoteek]

But then again, if that elusive substance and those big ideas were synonymous with quality, then Star Trek V would be a masterpiece. Heck, half of the TOS movies didn't have much substance, when boiled down to their core, and if anything, Star Trek movies have been action-centered for the past 25 years or so : that's why I just don't get why that criticism has been applied to Abrams-Trek as if that was a dealbreaker, when it was probably more pertinent there than in any of the Next Gen movies.

(also, i'd be tempted to argue that despite its faults, not the least being a victim of the "too many cooks" syndrome, STID had substance, and things to - awkwardly - say about the past 15 years of american foreign policy, or about doing what's right vs what's expected of you, amongst other things. However, I've died on that hill before, and I don't really care enough about the movie to get into this again)

2 hours ago, BBHN said:

I'd have to disagree on that.

Don't get me wrong, some of the characters ended up becoming more than just colleagues, the poker nights were nice, and the Geordi/Data duo is still a favorite of mine... but overall, it took a while for the crew to feel anything like a close-knit family or tight friends, and for the longest time, they were just work buddies that sometimes spent an evening playing cards. The Enterprise D always felt very formal, there was always a distance between some members of the crew (Picard, more than others) and that never left much room for warmth or Kirk/Spock/McCoy-type banter.

 

(we're off topic, aren't we ?)

Edited May 23, 2017 by Kaoteek

[DarkRaichu]

What's with pre-quels after pre-quels?  MOVE FORWARD damn it.  Even Star Wars franchise moved forward in their timeline.  

Also, the trailer made a point that #2 was ready for a command of her own ship, but we all know there is only 1 ship in this series AND #2 is going to be a vital character.  To me it meant there is a big chance Michelle Yeoh character is going to be killed / captured / removed from the series by the end of episode 2.  If that is the case, I am not even going to check out the pilot :P   

[ottoDbusdriver]

5 hours ago, DarkRaichu said:

What's with pre-quels after pre-quels?  MOVE FORWARD damn it.  Even Star Wars franchise moved forward in their timeline.  

Also, the trailer made a point that #2 was ready for a command of her own ship, but we all know there is only 1 ship in this series AND #2 is going to be a vital character.  To me it meant there is a big chance Michelle Yeoh character is going to be killed / captured / removed from the series by the end of episode 2.  If that is the case, I am not even going to check out the pilot :P   

I'm also onboard that it makes you think Michelle Yeoh's captain character will die, and SNQ's character (Michael -- really ?) will become captain of USS Discovery.

Kind of like how Robert Patrick was in the first two episodes of Stargate Atlantis, but was killed off only for the #2 military guy (John Sheppard) to step into the lead role.

[starri]

34 minutes ago, ottoDbusdriver said:

I'm also onboard that it makes you think Michelle Yeoh's captain character will die, and SNQ's character (Michael -- really ?) will become captain of USS Discovery.

They've already cast Jason Isaacs as the Discovery's captain.

[ottoDbusdriver]

1 hour ago, starri said:

They've already cast Jason Isaacs as the Discovery's captain.

Did not know that -- thanks @starri.  Then the Discovery's captain is noticeably absent from the trailer.

[BBHN]

So Michelle Yeoh isn't long for this show? Once less reason to watch, I suppose.

[Lugal]

From what I heard, Michelle Yeoh was the captain of a different ship and a recurring character. Unless that's been changed too.

[feverfew]

I'm guessing Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) is an officer aboard USS Shenzhou when something happens to the ship - probably something to do with what they're doing "out there on the edge of space". She probably gets transfered to USS Discovery at some point early on in the show. So I'm already tempering my attactment to any characters onboard Shenzhou....

[Adira]

I'm sorry, but I just can't get past the new stupid-looking Klingons.  Even their outfits look completely different!  If they wanted to do something so radical, why not set the series into the future and explain why the Klingons look different now?  Or better yet, just make a new species altogether.  Whoever decided to do this must not care about Trek fans at all...

[paigow]

Burnham already appears to be "Number One" in the trailer and ends up being "Number One" or lower on the Discovery....

[SmithW6079]

On 5/30/2017 at 7:20 AM, Adira said:

I'm sorry, but I just can't get past the new stupid-looking Klingons.  Even their outfits look completely different!  If they wanted to do something so radical, why not set the series into the future and explain why the Klingons look different now?  Or better yet, just make a new species altogether.  Whoever decided to do this must not care about Trek fans at all...

That would be the suits at CBS who think Trek fans will watch anything that has "Trek" in the title.

[KnotsLanding]

I'm wondering if the actual Discovery will line up more with TOS in terms of uniforms and ship design? I notice they left that out of the trailer. Overall though I found it entertaining and it looks beautiful, but it clearly is a Kelvin show not Prime. I'd be fine with that so they can do crossovers with the movies, but don't lie and act like it's Prime when it clearly isn't. I also hate how the Klingons look. TNG, VOY, etc. look is what I would've stuck with forever for the Klingons. People will complain about fans nitpicking the difference between this show and TOS, but thats what happens when you do a prequel to a dated show from the 60s. They should've done a regular sequel series so they could do whatever they wanted or set it in Kelvin.

[johnar]

On 5/18/2017 at 10:26 PM, Charlesman said:

Wooden acting and lousy writing full of lame exposition... It's Voyager without the plucky charm

Agreed. All that it appears to have going for it (from what little is drizzled out to the public) is that it's new... 

"we need a star to steer by"  PEW.

"we are bred to sense death..." PEW.

"Two to transport." ← I don't believe the actor (unconvincing performance).

Reminds me of William Windom whose performance in TOS Doomsday Machine was superb (except for the scene where he assumed command of the Enterprise and gave a series of orders that he seemed to be unfamiliar with)...

Discovery is being watched with a very critical eye. Especially if they want money to watch it.

Edited September 9, 2017 by johnar