At the beginning he's showing a recording of his previous mission to the planet in the briefing room. Picture.
News coming 8/10?
- Thread starter dinzy
- Start date
I disagree. Lots of people I know didn't give it a chance because they thougt it was silly to believe that Enterprise is supposed to be pre TOS. They didn't even get as far as to judge the story or the writing.
I must say that I am disappointed beyond belief that what we get is yet another prequel. I so much wanted to move forward. Instead we are getting a "been here done that" rehash. Lame!
This time period is...unexpected.Thoughts and speculation:
Well the obvious one for me is no wonder CBS/Paramount had a hard on for Alec Peters. This seems to be close to the same era as Axanar. Not saying they aren't within their rights because I think Alec Peters pushed the envelope a little too much and I think he did infringe on copyright beyond fair use, but this does make me question CBS/Paramounts motives a bit.
Also, I have to say, I am disappointed it is set a mere 10 years prior to TOS. I was hoping it would be set at least 30 years prior, if not more. In fact, I would have liked to see it set at a time where Enterprise cast members could make a cameo.
I suppose it could be seen in flashbacks, but I am also disappointed it won't be set at a time where we could see the Romulan Wars.
I hope Section 31 is not a main focus. That is one of my least favorite elements of Star Trek, ever.
Some of the other things, like female lead and focusing on a LTC instead of Captain is interesting.
I was thinking something like this when I read that tidbit too. If she was an alien agent who had infiltrated Section 31 and as a member of Section 31 assigned to the Discovery, then she could have 3 ranks. (To the Trolls of Discworld, counting goes something like: 1, 2, many, lots
).If the agent was actually a Klingon, it could explain a Klingon Captain being part of the main cast.
Lots of discussion for adhering to the "Cage" era in look and feel or not to.
While I do think it is important to have turtlenecks and lasers I also think a total strict adherence to that ( I mean to literally remake the Cage sets and uniforms EXACTLY) is limiting and probably wouldn't work for a whole season.
I think a balance can be reached where one watching it clearly knows that it comes from Pike's era and yet not expect to have the show break for a speech from Lyndon B. Johnson.
I for one always loved this time period and am looking forward to it- just no bronze colored ships like the teaser showed please..........................
While I do think it is important to have turtlenecks and lasers I also think a total strict adherence to that ( I mean to literally remake the Cage sets and uniforms EXACTLY) is limiting and probably wouldn't work for a whole season.
I think a balance can be reached where one watching it clearly knows that it comes from Pike's era and yet not expect to have the show break for a speech from Lyndon B. Johnson.
I for one always loved this time period and am looking forward to it- just no bronze colored ships like the teaser showed please..........................
I really don't know what is wrong with some people slating it just for being a 'prequel' (aka just a completely new story that happens to be set in the past). For that matter people slating any new Star Trek after 10 years of the worst drought of good space opera in recent TV history? Do you realise that this might only be the beginning of a wider foray into television, that might eventually expand forwards into the future eras? That this is just one possibility/one era being explored? Are you, supposed fans, seriously going to be so self-entitled, that you trash something before you know anything about it's actual themes or basically anything of consequence about the show? I have tried to remain calm and not specifically engage with this kind of comment, these past few weeks, but the levels of judgementalism and ignorance here have become ridiculous - this isn't Rick Berman and company returning for their 4th series - you don't even know the provenance or talent of Bryan Fuller's completely new team yet.
"We wanted something new." - It IS NEW
You havent even SEEN it yet.
Is it even actually a direct prequel? - because a prequel (in book parlance, outside the modern Hollywood definition) generally means it's related to a previous novel directly - i.e. The School Adventures of Sherlock Holmes being a direct prequel to Sherlock Holmes, or some shit - this is probably a completely new and unseen story, which just happens to set in the past - not the young chonicles of teenage Kirk.
That's like saying a story like "The Imitation Game" set during WW2 is a 'prequel' to all literature set after 1945.
It's a new story people.
Then there have been some really weird comments regarding continuity - and how it is supposedly limiting. Really really flat out weird, based on complete misunderstandings of either drama, or of Star Trek canon. I suppose a story set during WW2 is limiting, is it, because you can't have Cold War jets and moon landings yet?
Someone for example suggesting that we can't have Cardassians in a prequel to TOS - as an example of how to show is supposedly in a straight jacket of continuity (despite nobody actually knowing when Cardassian first contact was, with "centuries ago" actually being completely possible, even likely - it's a million times less problematic than the pointless appearance of the Ferengi in ENT). I don't know how people can say "you can't tell a good story if you are limited in your ability to contradict TOS technology" - how does the non-existence existence of replicators, for example, limit drama in anything but a really inconsequential and superficial way?
It's like arguing that Alien the movie, is somehow limited by having a setting in which there are no FTL drives, no teleportation, no replicators. All that setting Discovery prior to TOS does is limit very very superficial things, like holodecks - it does not limit the broadness of thematic vision or expanse of the dramaic canvas at all. The era is still full of what we would regard as technological wonders.
---
ENT didn't fail because it was in a prequel-shaped straight jacket - it failed because the writers never understood how to use the era - made some really obvious and avoidable continuity errors that anyone could have pointed out in furtherance of crap episodes - whilst paradoxically not even using 1% of the actual possibilities (with no canonical problems whatsoever) of the era (making the excuse that they were supposedly limited by canon)! Put it down to the showrunners not even watching TOS. Also it didn't actually suck - but it could have been the Babylon 5 of Star Trek, and wasn't even close.
---
P.S. 'Turnabout Intruder' does not suggest women can't be captains; a throwaway line that had an ambigious meaning to begin with.
"We wanted something new." - It IS NEW
You havent even SEEN it yet.
Is it even actually a direct prequel? - because a prequel (in book parlance, outside the modern Hollywood definition) generally means it's related to a previous novel directly - i.e. The School Adventures of Sherlock Holmes being a direct prequel to Sherlock Holmes, or some shit - this is probably a completely new and unseen story, which just happens to set in the past - not the young chonicles of teenage Kirk.
That's like saying a story like "The Imitation Game" set during WW2 is a 'prequel' to all literature set after 1945.
It's a new story people.
Then there have been some really weird comments regarding continuity - and how it is supposedly limiting. Really really flat out weird, based on complete misunderstandings of either drama, or of Star Trek canon. I suppose a story set during WW2 is limiting, is it, because you can't have Cold War jets and moon landings yet?
Someone for example suggesting that we can't have Cardassians in a prequel to TOS - as an example of how to show is supposedly in a straight jacket of continuity (despite nobody actually knowing when Cardassian first contact was, with "centuries ago" actually being completely possible, even likely - it's a million times less problematic than the pointless appearance of the Ferengi in ENT). I don't know how people can say "you can't tell a good story if you are limited in your ability to contradict TOS technology" - how does the non-existence existence of replicators, for example, limit drama in anything but a really inconsequential and superficial way?
It's like arguing that Alien the movie, is somehow limited by having a setting in which there are no FTL drives, no teleportation, no replicators. All that setting Discovery prior to TOS does is limit very very superficial things, like holodecks - it does not limit the broadness of thematic vision or expanse of the dramaic canvas at all. The era is still full of what we would regard as technological wonders.
---
ENT didn't fail because it was in a prequel-shaped straight jacket - it failed because the writers never understood how to use the era - made some really obvious and avoidable continuity errors that anyone could have pointed out in furtherance of crap episodes - whilst paradoxically not even using 1% of the actual possibilities (with no canonical problems whatsoever) of the era (making the excuse that they were supposedly limited by canon)! Put it down to the showrunners not even watching TOS. Also it didn't actually suck - but it could have been the Babylon 5 of Star Trek, and wasn't even close.
---
P.S. 'Turnabout Intruder' does not suggest women can't be captains; a throwaway line that had an ambigious meaning to begin with.
Last edited:
Personally I'm still excited.
I would have like it if the setting was a little bit closer to Enterprise (would have loved to have seen the Romulan War or the Birth of the Federation), but it's okay. Hopefully, if Discovery is a success and CBS greenlits a second series running at the same time, this second series will be set after Nemesis.
I do care about canon in a sense that I feel they should not re-write history. What has been established as facts and/or history in previous shows and movies should not be made undone. However, I don't care if they change looks for aliens, ships, technology etc. That has got nothing to do with canon, but with 60's budgets and technology. A new series should adapt these things for the modern viewer.
I would have like it if the setting was a little bit closer to Enterprise (would have loved to have seen the Romulan War or the Birth of the Federation), but it's okay. Hopefully, if Discovery is a success and CBS greenlits a second series running at the same time, this second series will be set after Nemesis.
I do care about canon in a sense that I feel they should not re-write history. What has been established as facts and/or history in previous shows and movies should not be made undone. However, I don't care if they change looks for aliens, ships, technology etc. That has got nothing to do with canon, but with 60's budgets and technology. A new series should adapt these things for the modern viewer.
See, I sort of feel the opposite. To me, going back to the TNG era would be a "been here done that". Not in the rehash way, but in the way that it's hard for me to picture something truly new being done with the timeframe rather than going back to the Berman era of things. It just feels very concrete, although I'm sure something like Discovery could be done with it, it doesn't really excite me TNG's been everywhere for so long, and the aesthetics haven't reached the point where they're charmingly zeerust the way TOS is. I love a lot of what TNG has, but the thought of seeing more of it doesn't really interest me. The only reason I really think of Enterprise as a rehash has more to do with the fact that its stories were essentially Voyager Season 8 rather than anything really new. The aesthetics of the series were alright, I'd rather they leaned heavier on the future NASA side of things than they did, but outside a few things that seemed to belong more to the TNG era it didn't seem half bad.
The idea that a prequel is, in and itself, a rehash seems fallacious. Star Wars for example has been doing a lot with prequels in the form of the Clone Wars and Rebels, and Better Call Saul has been phenomenal. It's no different than historical series really. We all know what's going to happen in the big picture yes, but the series should be about the characters, and how much we care about them. The setting beyond that is merely a backdrop.
I wonder if having a non-captain as lead means we'll avoid the "captain leading the landing party" problem. (It would be funny if, in the first ep, the captain insists on leading the landing party, despite our main character's objections, and is then instantly vaporised.) If this new character has other assignments besides the bridge, this could be a way to explore the workings of the ship without just jumping between a bunch of unconnected characters.
Look, when Fuller talks about "establishing a universe", he's talking about giving the show its own identity, which is what a good show has and arguably what the later Berman shows lacked.
Star Trek elements have to be reimagined because making a modern show with 60s materials and techniques would look poor, and because the alternative to "reimagining" is slavish replication, which is not creative.
Based on the look of the new ship, I think this new show will avoid treading directly on any continuity toes. It will be its own thing in its own space, with the Enterprise no more than a cameo appearance, at most.
There is no "need" for anything in Star Trek.
We'll follow her career through the show? Though if she's already lieutenant commander, maybe in the form of flashbacks. Or (crazy/ unlikely solution) she's a spy who adopts different ranks as part of her different cover identities.
Because they (we) don't care. Exacting continuity is not what makes Star Trek good.
Look, when Fuller talks about "establishing a universe", he's talking about giving the show its own identity, which is what a good show has and arguably what the later Berman shows lacked.
Star Trek elements have to be reimagined because making a modern show with 60s materials and techniques would look poor, and because the alternative to "reimagining" is slavish replication, which is not creative.
Based on the look of the new ship, I think this new show will avoid treading directly on any continuity toes. It will be its own thing in its own space, with the Enterprise no more than a cameo appearance, at most.
See the radically different uniforms in TOS, TMP and TWOK.
Trek has been disrupting its own continuity since the beginning. That's a loooooooooootta poop.
The problem wasn't that it was a Ferengi episode, the problem was that it was not a good episode.
There is no "need" for anything in Star Trek.
This is always in response to rants by continuity obsessives. In a more reasonable conversation, the responses would be more reasonable, and people like BillJ and Dennis would admit they enjoy callbacks and clever nods as well.
I dunno why people expected a post-DS9 series to begin with BTW.
It has been signposted that this would be a prequel really obviously from the get-go, down to Fuller saying the registry number was a 'clue to the era'. You can't get much more specific. They are not going to write a false registry on the ship in a piece of test footage just as a red herring, ffs people.
It has been signposted that this would be a prequel really obviously from the get-go, down to Fuller saying the registry number was a 'clue to the era'. You can't get much more specific. They are not going to write a false registry on the ship in a piece of test footage just as a red herring, ffs people.
Last edited:
Oh dude, That would be SO awesome. I loved Crew. Really well written stories about Number One. Byrne did such a great job. For those not in the know, it did show her on several ships with different ranks, working her way up to being a lieutenant on The Enterprise.
So... 10 years before Kirk and Spock. Female lead. The Captain and crew of the Discovery. A couple admirals. A character who happens to be gay. A Klingon Captain. (Someone suggested that their may be a competition of some sort to find "a something..." That's reminds me vaguely of "The Chase" from TNG... Which was also somewhat the basis of the JMS reboot pitch of Star Trek from 2004.) The possibility of S31 being involved somehow. Something Trek fans would know, but that has never been directly seen on screen. Episodic story telling with developing story over all.
It all sounds good to me.
Some of the fears in here remind me greatly of patrolling the New Voyages boards back in the Enterprise days... By that I mean, some of the fears seem to be muscle memory from that era. Enterprise failed because the series as a whole had run out of steam. It was boxed into a very rigid way of thinking about things, and it was afraid to truly take risks. As a result many many many great storytelling opportunities were lost. The same exact kinds of stories we had seen before in each series. The same technology with different colors. Roughly the same cast configuration. Virtually no attempt to take advantage of the era they were set in and do something with it. There were lot's of great things they could have done dramatically that they just didn't. Show us more EVA repair on the ship because things need more up keep, come up with new (old) defenses because we don't have phasers and shields, show us the crew going a little stir crazy because of the travel times. Hell, you could have some McCoy-esque snark about how fast we can go and still how long it takes to get anywhere. More emphasis on being deep space explorers and character relationships, and less emphasis on bumpy-alien foreheads of the week. None of the Enterprise premise was limiting. As someone pointed out, it could have been the Babylon 5 of Trek if it really wanted to... But alas.
Forget about whether Discovery looks like TOS or The Cage, that's not even an issue, really. It will not look like a 1960s TV show. I love TOS. That is my favorite series of Star Trek, but I would not want it to try and be an emulation of that look in 2017. That would be laughable in so many ways. Even TNG to a certain extent would not hold up with Today's audience because in a lot of ways we have surpassed that in today's world.
As Doug Drexler pointed out in an interview, whatever the new Trek show is, it has to do things that people haven't seen before, are just only beginning to think about, or are just coming into being. TNG did that with the holodeck, with LCARs, with PADDS. Showing us a computerized world with artificial intelligence walking around, and the ability to generate 3D simulations in real time. So from a technical standpoint I hope Discovery does not try to limit and emulate TOS in those regards. Push it as far as you can. Show us some crazy future tech. Inspire the next generation of Steve Jobs' Bill Gates and Elon Musks to make the world of Trek a little more real. RAZZLE DAZZLE. ...That does not mean I don't want them to pay homage to TOS/The Cage, but... Ya know, the general idea of the uniforms, some flashes of color. Give it that same spirit, but go... Go new. Go fresh. Bring it.
Look at a fan production like Pacific 201. I'm not saying that's the exact way to go, but I think the creative leader of that production (his name escapes me at the time of writing) spoke about the idea of canon/continuity and the visual way it is expressed as being creatively loose. It's not bit-for-bit every fleck and mark exactly right. It's up to the creators interpretation, as long as the broad strokes fit. 201 as a result looks like something you could find on modern TV, and not some lost TOS episode. I love Star Trek Continues, but that's for us. The fans. That's not for a new audience, really.
So far the only thing that bothers me is the same thing that bothers BillJ. CBS All Access. So I only have seven days to watch an episode, eh? Okay... So I pay for the thing, but I don't have unlimited access. What if i don't get a chance to watch for a week because my work schedule keeps me from doing so? Well, there goes my money wasted, I guess.
Who says they didn't? They hint at that in the episode itself, and we know that at least three Klingons did indeed get their ridges restored. Kor, Kang, and Koloth.
Demand was high, some people had to wait a while for their turn.
Very interesting indeed. Not sure DSC would want to limit itself that way, though.
I don't think they'd go specifically with the stories of "crew" but a general source of inspiration, or just a similar starting point. It's certainly proof that having a character that isn't the captain being the central focus works very nicely. In fact, in the last issue of that series is kinda nice to see young Spock just kinda there in the background doing stuff and not being anything more than another member of the crew. Not that I want Spock to show up in Discovery, of course.
More clues from Fuller:
The stuff about establishing a look for Trek beyond this series suggests they are hoping this is the start of an "era" in the same way Berman oversaw an "era" of Trek.
When he says "different timelines", I suspect he just means different periods in the timeline.
The stuff about establishing a look for Trek beyond this series suggests they are hoping this is the start of an "era" in the same way Berman oversaw an "era" of Trek.
Another interesting about having the audience one step behind the Captain's POV - means that any secret orders from Admirals or higher ups, will be a surprise for us, and the lead character. This is an interesting dramatic device.
It also can lead to some level of mistrust, which could be important for the story which is planned over the 13 chapters.
It also can lead to some level of mistrust, which could be important for the story which is planned over the 13 chapters.
The Berman team, with Mike Okuda etc defined an aesthetic for TNG and the earlier ships that featured from ST4 onward. This will give the new team a chance to put their own production techniques into practice. I do hope there will be nods to established canon. Constitution class starships with their distinct styles should they feature. But a variation of that and maybe the odd nod to Enterprise with older vessels etc.
