# Star Trek: Strange New Worlds



## Aeson (May 15, 2020)

It's HAPPENING!!!!

I actually squeed and clapped as I watched this.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 15, 2020)

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!

Anson Mount is awesome.

He's also a really good Captain Pike.


----------



## Morrus (May 15, 2020)

Very, very excited about this!


----------



## Undrave (May 15, 2020)

Augh... more prequels...


----------



## ccs (May 15, 2020)

CBS seems determined to get my $ yet....


----------



## Morrus (May 15, 2020)

No CBS here, so I assume it’ll be on Netflix like Discovery is.


----------



## Umbran (May 15, 2020)

Given that Anson Mount's take on Captain Pike was the best thing about Discovery?  

And, if they stick with the subtitle _Strange New Worlds_, it suggests a turn towards a bit more classic exploration Trek, which would be nice.


----------



## Nikosandros (May 15, 2020)

Morrus said:


> No CBS here, so I assume it’ll be on Netflix like Discovery is.



In Italy Discovery is streamed by Amazon Prime. I hope we'll get it there or on Netflix.


----------



## Ryujin (May 15, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Given that Anson Mount's take on Captain Pike was the best thing about Discovery?
> 
> And, if they stick with the subtitle _Strange New Worlds_, it suggests a turn towards a bit more classic exploration Trek, which would be nice.




And hopefully we'll be back to the sort of optimistic Star Trek that I love so much, set appropriately in that time.

Wonder who they'll get to play Dr. Boyce?


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Umbran (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Maybe this will be better. Doubtful as it has the same small army of producers that will likely create a giant, muddled mess of a series.




So, they play it like TOS and TNG - not really aiming for a cohesive plot arc - and they can muddle and mess it all they like.


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Umbran (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> If they don't do a season long plot arc and each of the ten* executive producers oversees an episode, it could be great.




"Executlive producer" credits don't tell you what involvement, if any, the person had in the creative or day-to-day aspects of the show  The credit is often used as a sort of honorarium, or sign of past creative involvement that entitles some recognition (and often some money).  Stan Lee had "executive producer" credits on pretty much everything Marvel started before his death, but he didn't actually do work on anything in the MCU, other than his cameos.

.


----------



## Zardnaar (May 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> "Executlive producer" credits don't tell you what involvement, if any, the person had in the creative or day-to-day aspects of the show  The credit is often used as a sort of honorarium, or sign of past creative involvement that entitles some recognition (and often some money).  Stan Lee had "executive producer" credits on pretty much everything Marvel started before his death, but he didn't actually do work on anything in the MCU, other than his cameos.
> 
> .




 Producers often don't have much to do with the story. 

 The writers do that, the director brings it to screen and the producers act as a go between from the studios and director. They can theoretically fire the director. Also they organize the behind the scenes stuff like set locations, logistics etc. 

 But yeah 10 is probably to many. Even if one is in charge.


----------



## wingsandsword (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> And despite being super excited for _Picard_ I only made it halfway through the season before I gave up: it was deeply flawed and more akin to _Farscape_ than _Star Trek_.



Yeah, and given how they ended the first season, even though it's picked up for a second. . .how do you really continue a series called Star Trek: Picard, when the first season ends with .

I'm skeptical about a Pike-based series because it's even more of a prequel and they've already shown a seriously lackadaisical attitude towards continuity.

At this point, I'm wondering if they'll have a young Lieutenant Commander James Kirk show up early in the show and become Pike's protege or something.


----------



## smcc360 (May 16, 2020)

Sounds like a blatant ripoff of _The Orville! _

But I hope they've really decided to focus on what made the original shows so enjoyable. I never watched _Discovery_, but this cast seems great.


----------



## Umbran (May 16, 2020)

Zardnaar said:


> Producers often don't have much to do with the story.




And note that Producer and Executive Producer are not the same thing.


----------



## Umbran (May 16, 2020)

wingsandsword said:


> I'm skeptical about a Pike-based series because it's even more of a prequel and they've already shown a seriously lackadaisical attitude towards continuity.




Continuity and canon have been given too much primacy, such that they have become like the chains of Jacob Marley upon franchises.  I do not care if they violate continuity a bit, so long as the story is good.


----------



## Ryujin (May 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Continuity and canon have been given too much primacy, such that they have become like the chains of Jacob Marley upon franchises.  I do not care if they violate continuity a bit, so long as the story is good.




Depends on how you look at it. Canon and continuity can either be a straitjacket, or they can be an opportunity. An off-hand remark and a one episode character became a compelling story for "Axanar." On the other hand "Enterprise" squandered the possibilities of the founding of The Federation, choosing to follow bizarre story-lines for three seasons, only to really start to pursue it in any real way in the fourth. The numbers were pretty dismal.

The FASA Star Trek RPG days resulted in a Metric Tonne of ideas that could have been used to script multiple new series, but all of that was scrapped from canon.


----------



## Umbran (May 16, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Depends on how you look at it.




I am looking at it from the perspective of someone who just saw a prediction that failure to hold to continuity is a problem.  Pretty clearly a "use continuity as a constraint" situation.

I agree that Enterprise squandered its opportunities until Manny Coto got the reins, but by then it was too late.  That being said... having based its story on something from a FASA game would not have been a better choice.  So, I don't think that claiming third-party story ideas are particularly grand holds here.


----------



## Ryujin (May 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I am looking at it from the perspective of someone who just saw a prediction that failure to hold to continuity is a problem.  Pretty clearly a "use continuity as a constraint" situation.
> 
> I agree that Enterprise squandered its opportunities until Manny Coto got the reins, but by then it was too late.  That being said... having based its story on something from a FASA game would not have been a better choice.  So, I don't think that claiming third-party story ideas are particularly grand holds here.




Thinking more of the history as a backdrop, than strip-mining stories wholesale. The Romulan War. The Four Years War.


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Dire Bare (May 16, 2020)

wingsandsword said:


> Yeah, and given how they ended the first season, even though it's picked up for a second. . .how do you really continue a series called Star Trek: Picard, when the first season ends with .




Did you watch until the end of the episode!?!? Star Trek: Picard is definitely carrying its main character forward into Season 2. With an interesting twist that allows for some interesting storytelling.



wingsandsword said:


> I'm skeptical about a Pike-based series because it's even more of a prequel and they've already shown a seriously lackadaisical attitude towards continuity.




Star Trek and continuity? Hah! Star Trek has never been good at continuity, not the tight continuity some fans obsess over, at least.


----------



## shawnhcorey (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Both seasons of _Discovery_ and _Picard_ had serious tonal problems and seemed to be uncertain what story they were telling or what the point of the show was. It really felt like shows designed by committee with lots of conflicting ideas loosely held together.




Most movies are designed by committee thru a process called story boarding. But I agree: the stories could use more work.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Both seasons of _Discovery_ and _Picard_ had serious tonal problems and seemed to be uncertain what story they were telling or what the point of the show was. It really felt like shows designed by committee with lots of conflicting ideas loosely held together.




I just feel the need to chime in here with the love for ST: Discovery and ST: Picard. While both shows were controversial with fans, I wouldn't characterize them as having tonal problems or story-by-committee problems. The tone isn't a problem, it's deliberate and some folks love it, some don't. I loved both shows. And both shows, IMO, actually had very tight storytelling, the controversial part was the season-long story arcs vs. the more traditional serialized adventure-of-the-week format, which ST: Strange New Worlds seems to be hinting it will use.



> Continuity is a tricky thing, because it tends to be something known by the biggest of fans. Learning and memorizing details of the show is how the engage in the franchise. And when you start ignoring continuity you're telling these fans that what they cared about didn't matter.
> And while the show should be accessible to non-fans and not require a continuity degree from Stanford, if you're not making the show with the fans in mind, who are you making the show for?
> 
> No other show has the canon of Star Trek. Six series now and over a dozen movies. The fact it's only had one reboot, which was also off to the side, is rather impressive. There's nothing else like it in television. So ignoring it's continuity and treating the series like a reboot feels like it's doing a disservice to the series.




I'll push back on the two shows having continuity issues, they really didn't. They made design choices that changed the look and feel of certain classic elements, but these changes were not out of continuity . . . at least not any more or less so than anything else in Star Trek's long history. We got a new look for Klingons (not the first time, obviously) which looked dramatically different in Discovery's first season, but less so when the Klingons grew their hair out in Season 2. The Enterprise got a redesign, but one that was a close homage to the original, both inside and out. We got holographic communications across the galaxy, which was explained as being phased out as a lot of folks (in universe) were uncomfortable with it. And more, of course.

I respect folks who aren't fans of new-Trek, who are unhappy with the tonal changes and redesigned elements. But I think the idea that the new shows disrespect what came before and ignore continuity and what-makes-Trek, Trek are ridiculous.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 16, 2020)

shawnhcorey said:


> Most movies are designed by committee thru a process called story boarding. But I agree: the stories could use more work.




Storyboarding is not design-by-committee, just simply a storytelling tool for cinema regardless of how many hands are involved.


----------



## Ryujin (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Both seasons of _Discovery_ and _Picard_ had serious tonal problems and seemed to be uncertain what story they were telling or what the point of the show was. It really felt like shows designed by committee with lots of conflicting ideas loosely held together.
> 
> While I doubt all the producers are involved in the day-to-day (and it's common for one or two to just be in the background) the more there people involved the more likely you're going to get conflicting ideas.
> 
> ...




It occurs to me that no one needs to have a degree in anything, when there are fan sites out there like Memory Alpha. Want to make a show based on something from a past event, or based on a historic premise? Do a quick and easy search.


----------



## shawnhcorey (May 16, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> It occurs to me that no one needs to have a degree in anything, when there are fan sites out there like Memory Alpha. Want to make a show based on something from a past event, or based on a historic premise? Do a quick and easy search.




Hollywood has yet to discover the internet.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (May 16, 2020)

shawnhcorey said:


> Hollywood has yet to discover the internet.



Well, they did - once - but then they promptly forgot about it:


Spoiler


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Morrus (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Liking it is fine.
> But...
> In my experiences, fans of the show tend to just make excuses for the quality and problems.




That’s ... condescending and insulting.


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Morrus (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> That's my experience. Here. Reddit. Pretty any place I have discussed Trek. Star Wars. Any media really.
> 
> _"I like something... therefore it has NO problems and I will fight to my dying breath how awesome it is from anything that so much as besmirches its honour!!"_
> 
> Because it's not enough just to like it while someone else hates it. The person who hates it has to be proven wrong. As if their dislike will somehow be contagious.




And vice versa.


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Morrus (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> But I've never seen fans of the show do the reverse and agree with a detractor that something was a problem. (That, say, there was issues with the story and massive plot holes.)



Never? Honestly?  You’re reading very selectively then. There aren’t just two types of people — stans and hatewatchers.



> I also didn't initiate. (I purposly avoided replying to anyone who didn't reply to me because I didn't want to start naughty word.)



Language. Remember where you are



> someone popped in to white knight the series with a "nuh-uh, you're wrong for why you don't like the show". And so I retaliated...



This characterisation and mindset is a problem. People can disagree with you without being “white knights” and you having to prove to them they’re wrong to like things they like. I mean, you put that in quote marks, but that’s not a quote of anybody in this thread.

If you feel you need to “retaliate” to something,  maybe step back and ask yourself why you feel you need to do that.


----------



## Jester David (May 16, 2020)

...


----------



## Morrus (May 16, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Of course.
> But casual fans aren't going to reply. Or respond to people replying to them. Or even really engage in a message board discussion of the show to begin with
> So they're not really "seen".



While I’m a mega fan of TOS movies 2-4, I’m a casual fan of other Trek. I haven’t watched Voyager, and think DS9 is just OK. Saw maybe half of Enterprise? I’m no Trek stan, but I generally comment on stuff I like. But stuff I don’t like... I don’t watch it, and therefore can’t really comment on it. Thus hatewatchers. That’s what I don’t get. 

So yeah, people who aren’t stans or hatewatchers exist. They like stuff, and talk about the stuff they like. Criticism is fine, but relentless negativity just makes it not fun to talk about.



> Because I have an compulsion to reply back when people reply to me and get mild anxiety spikes when I don't as it feels like I'm leaving something undone. It slowly nags at me like a spreading itch I just can't scratch.
> And I then repeatedly mentally continue the conversation for the next several hours until I finally break down and reply or managed to finally find something to get the conversation out of my head.




I get that.


----------



## Umbran (May 17, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Liking it is fine.
> But...
> In my experiences, fans of the show tend to just make excuses for the quality and problems.




This is extremely insulting.  

That's kind of enough to make me stop listening to your critique.  Anyone who disagrees with you gets put in a box, and dismissed wholesale?  That's some prime rhetorical nonsense, right there.  

So, thanks for letting me know to not discuss matters of taste with you.


----------



## billd91 (May 17, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Because I have an compulsion to reply back when people reply to me and get mild anxiety spikes when I don't as it feels like I'm leaving something undone. It slowly nags at me like a spreading itch I just can't scratch.
> And I then repeatedly mentally continue the conversation for the next several hours until I finally break down and reply or managed to finally find something to get the conversation out of my head.




That sounds like a *you* problem to me, but you put it on them to make it a *them* problem because they're the ones who triggered you and they're the ones you condescend to.


----------



## Morrus (May 17, 2020)

OK, this is getting a little more personal than I'm comfortable with. I get where Jester David is coming from. No need to pile on.


----------



## Jester David (May 17, 2020)

billd91 said:


> That sounds like a *you* problem to me, but you put it on them to make it a *them* problem because they're the ones who triggered you and they're the ones you condescend to.



I have many of my own problems. Many.

But I also just dislike conversing with people who can’t look critically at media and either reduce it to being the GOAT or the literal worst with no nuance between the extremes. It’s either 10/10 or 0/10. 
Because there’s no conversation. It ends up just the same as “discussing” politics or religion.


----------



## trappedslider (May 17, 2020)

Jester David said:


> Because I have an compulsion to reply back when people reply to me and get mild anxiety spikes when I don't as it feels like I'm leaving something undone. It slowly nags at me like a spreading itch I just can't scratch.
> And I then repeatedly mentally continue the conversation for the next several hours until I finally break down and reply or managed to finally find something to get the conversation out of my head.


----------



## Jester David (May 17, 2020)

...


----------



## Morrus (May 17, 2020)

Jester David said:


> I have been reminded about that comic many times as I frantically type away at my iPad while in bed. There's a reason I left ENWorld and social media for a long time.



If it's any comfort, most every internet user shares that feeling. Some more than others, but a quick glance at social media will show that it's prevalent.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 17, 2020)

Jester David said:


> But I also just dislike conversing with people who can’t look critically at media and either reduce it to being the GOAT or the literal worst with no nuance between the extremes. It’s either 10/10 or 0/10.
> Because there’s no conversation. It ends up just the same as “discussing” politics or religion.




Because some of us disagree with you on certain points, we can't look critically at media? Okay.

Personally, I'm a pretty big fan of Star Trek, but not to the point where I have an encyclopedic knowledge of the franchise. I've seen all the TV shows and movies, but I'm realizing now (as I have been doing a Next Gen re-watch) that there are tons of episodes I didn't catch when they first aired on TV, and tons more I almost completely forgot about in the decades since seeing it. I'm only now, during the quarantine, beginning to go back and power-stream the series episode-by-episode. I've occasionally read a Star Trek novel or comic, but not many. I have an Eaglemoss model of the U.S.S. Enterprise (Discovery-version) sitting on my shelf, and a more classic Enterprise model kit in my classroom. I just recently got back into Star Trek Online and I'm having a lot of fun with it (a fun, but highly imperfect game). And . . . that's about it. I'm a bigger fan than some, and a much smaller fan than others.

Star Trek is far from perfect. Some of the various episodes are downright awful, some entire seasons and even series are sub-par. Same for the movies. Most of the "prime directive" episodes work me up and piss me off . . . . But taken as a whole, I love it!

I've been really enjoying the new-Trek on CBS All Access including Discovery, Picard, and Short Treks . . . I've never enjoyed Trek more and the new series are my favorites out of the entire franchise so far. In fact, I'm more engaged with the Trek franchise than ever before, I'm going back and re-watching old episodes/movies and playing the online game all due to my excitement over new-Trek. I get that not everybody feels that way, that certain elements of the new series depart from classic Trek in various ways . . . . this really irks some fans, and others (like me) really dig it.

I don't always work hard at taking a critical eye to things that I simply just enjoy, like Star Trek. So? Every piece of media and art has its flaws, and they either bug you or they don't, doesn't mean you can't identify them or put the same importance to them that others do.

The idea that somehow my views and my enjoyment of Star Trek is somehow lesser, invalid, or completely uncritical is . . . well, it's pretty damn arrogant and insulting, quite frankly.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I'm really looking forward to Strange New Worlds and it's (hopeful) return to classic Trek storytelling and themes. No reason why Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, and Strange New Worlds can't all exist and be enjoyed at once and by the same fans. I'm excited about ALL of it!


----------



## Hussar (May 17, 2020)

Yeah, count me in the camp of I don't care too much about canon so long as the story is interesting.  I mean, good grief, Star Trek is a horrible mess of contradictory canon anyway.  Complaining about not following canon in Star Trek is like complaining about ignoring canon in Doctor Who.  

REALLY looking forward to a more upbeat, exploration based Trek series.  Very cool.


----------



## Zardnaar (May 17, 2020)

Umbran said:


> And note that Producer and Executive Producer are not the same thing.




Point.

 That amount of producers looks a bit like to many cooks in kitchen still


----------



## Zardnaar (May 17, 2020)

I'm a casual Trek fan. DS9 is the only series watched in total. That's because my wife also liked it and it was easy to watch.

I also liked TNG movies and some if the show.

Bogged down season one if TNG, Enterprise and Discovery though.

Liked Picard, didn't like STD Season one that much, two was ok to good. Wife also liked Picard.

She's ruthless when it comes to TV. She won't put up with a meh season to get to the good stuff. Season 1. Her idea of good TV is Stargate Atlantis, Gilmore Girls, Justified, Breaking Bad, season 1-4 GoT.

Yes I watched Gilmore Girls


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 17, 2020)

I've considered the All Access stuff as a soft reboot from the very beginning. That was obvious to me watching the pilot for Discovery. My problem is that the references to previous Trek keep distracting me: Klingons don't look and don't act like Klingons, Romulans look like elves and act like samurais. I would have enjoyed Picard way more if they'd used another, new species. Which means that I would have enjoyed it at least a little.
Then there's the character-driven narrative, that in my eyes makes it distinctly non-Star Trek but just about the same as everything else you see on television these days.
I would bet this new series will have a season long arc to find out some big, dark mystical secret, a couple of perfunctory self contained episodes, and that they will introduce young Kirk near the end. That would break canon (that I don't care about) but will give them the opportunity for the story of a young upstart fulfilling his destiny (just the thought makes me yawn). Anyway, I don't think I'll be watching but hey, if you like it like good for you


----------



## Morrus (May 17, 2020)

Ugh. And now he’s deleted his account, and I feel responsible.


----------



## Umbran (May 17, 2020)

Morrus said:


> Ugh. And now he’s deleted his account, and I feel responsible.




Dude, you told folks to _not_ dogpile him.  There is no way in which you are responsible.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 17, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> I've considered the All Access stuff as a soft reboot from the very beginning. That was obvious to me watching the pilot for Discovery. My problem is that the references to previous Trek keep distracting me: Klingons don't look and don't act like Klingons, Romulans look like elves and act like samurais. I would have enjoyed Picard way more if they'd used another, new species. Which means that I would have enjoyed it at least a little.
> Then there's the character-driven narrative, that in my eyes makes it distinctly non-Star Trek but just about the same as everything else you see on television these days.
> I would bet this new series will have a season long arc to find out some big, dark mystical secret, a couple of perfunctory self contained episodes, and that they will introduce young Kirk near the end. That would break canon (that I don't care about) but will give them the opportunity for the story of a young upstart fulfilling his destiny (just the thought makes me yawn). Anyway, I don't think I'll be watching but hey, if you like it like good for you




Love it or not, that's cool, but try to look at some of the changes with a more open mind.

The Klingons from Discovery Season 1 definitely have a new aesthetic and were definitely one of the controversial elements of the show. But, um, it certainly isn't the first time the Klingons got a redesign, and its relatively mild compared to the first one! I would agree that the Klingon's looked different (physicality, costumes, ships), but I feel that they very much acted like Klingons. And in Discovery Season 2, the Klingons all decided to grow their hair back out, and looked pretty darn close to Next Gen Klingons at that point. After some time, the biggest differences were hairstyles (or the lack thereof), clothing styles, and ship designs.

In Picard, we were not really seeing a redesign of the Romulans, but rather corners of Romulan culture we had never seen before. Most of the Romulan fun prior to Picard was Warbirds staffed by angry Romulans with serious shoulder pads, now we are getting a look at Romulan civilian/refugee life, a religious monastery/assassin order, and a secret police within the secret police. The changes were additive, rather than transforming.

And ultimately, that's how I view most, if not all, of the changes in new-Trek so far. They aren't reimaginings or reboots, but expansions on existing lore. Which I love! Of course, reboot or expansion is independent of whether you personally care for the changes or not.

I find it's easier to enjoy new shows based on old franchises if you relax about things being changed, rebooted, expanded, or lacking a tight adherence to the minutiae of continuity. As long as the new show is fun, pushes the franchise in new directions, and respects what came before . . . . which I think new-Trek very much does . . . . I'm happy!


----------



## billd91 (May 17, 2020)

Every time someone does a prequel, they're engaging in some element of redefining and it can conflict with our previously held concept of the material. Discovery is no different. What distracted me most is they picked the most twiddled with target - Spock. He's an iconic character, so apparently nobody can resist messing with him. It's a bit like the Thieves World anthology - Lythande was such an interesting character with an important secret that none of the other authors could resist treading on them and that secret. It's my understanding it got so bad that the author removed her character from being further used in the anthology project.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 17, 2020)

billd91 said:


> Every time someone does a prequel, they're engaging in some element of redefining and it can conflict with our previously held concept of the material. Discovery is no different. What distracted me most is they picked the most twiddled with target - Spock. He's an iconic character, so apparently nobody can resist messing with him. It's a bit like the Thieves World anthology - Lythande was such an interesting character with an important secret that none of the other authors could resist treading on them and that secret. It's my understanding it got so bad that the author removed her character from being further used in the anthology project.




Spock is a fan-favorite, so, yeah. He got pulled into the Next Gen series, the Kelvin-verse movies (a two-fer!), and now Discovery . . . . I've loved every incarnation! Same reason why we keep seeing the Klingons as major antagonists with various degrees of redesign. Strange they haven't updated the look of the Pakleds and made them a major element of a new series . . . .


----------



## billd91 (May 17, 2020)

Yeah, well sometimes it's a bit too much. I hope they avoid too much delving into his background in Strange New Worlds since we've had a lot of that so far and give us a chance to explore another character like Number One, Pike, or introduce someone like Gary Mitchell.


----------



## Ryujin (May 17, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> Love it or not, that's cool, but try to look at some of the changes with a more open mind.
> 
> The Klingons from Discovery Season 1 definitely have a new aesthetic and were definitely one of the controversial elements of the show. But, um, it certainly isn't the first time the Klingons got a redesign, and its relatively mild compared to the first one! I would agree that the Klingon's looked different (physicality, costumes, ships), but I feel that they very much acted like Klingons. And in Discovery Season 2, the Klingons all decided to grow their hair back out, and looked pretty darn close to Next Gen Klingons at that point. After some time, the biggest differences were hairstyles (or the lack thereof), clothing styles, and ship designs.
> 
> ...




Funny thing about the Klingon redesign is that the FASA backgrounders did an excellent job of explaining them, that got tossed out in subsequent stuff. They made Klingons be big on genetic engineering. Dealing with humans and more generally humanoid races on one frontier? You make Klingon-Human hybrids to deal with them. Romulans on another front? Well then you've got Klingon-Romulan hybrids on that side. And the guys with the turtles on their heads? They're pure-blooded Imperial Klingon stock.


----------



## Morrus (May 17, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> Love it or not, that's cool, but try to look at some of the changes with a more open mind.
> 
> The Klingons from Discovery Season 1 definitely have a new aesthetic and were definitely one of the controversial elements of the show. But, um, it certainly isn't the first time the Klingons got a redesign, and its relatively mild compared to the first one!




Indeed. It's the 4th Klingon design.

TOS
TPM/TNG
Abrahms
Disco


----------



## Dire Bare (May 17, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Funny thing about the Klingon redesign is that the FASA backgrounders did an excellent job of explaining them, that got tossed out in subsequent stuff. They made Klingons be big on genetic engineering. Dealing with humans and more generally humanoid races on one frontier? You make Klingon-Human hybrids to deal with them. Romulans on another front? Well then you've got Klingon-Romulan hybrids on that side. And the guys with the turtles on their heads? They're pure-blooded Imperial Klingon stock.




That's a pretty cool idea. I'm sure the Trek "expanded universe" is full of abandoned-but-neat ideas!

I don't know the details and too lazy to seek it out, but I'm fairly sure there is a canon or semi-canon explanation that explains the changes as some sort of genetic virus that swept through Klingon worlds during TOS era changing Klingons to look more human.

Really, it's all too much work!  I like how they treated it in the DS9 episode when our heroes go back in time to Kirk's Enterprise and encounter all sorts of anachronisms, including Klingons who look very different from Worf! His response? "We don't talk about it." 

Lately I've been a bit fascinated by the Trek "expanded universe" of novels and comics. Since none of these are ever considered canon, they often match up with canon when they are first published, but then become out-of-date as TV and movie Trek continues to expand. Newer novels/comics then ignore the elements of older books/comics, only themselves becoming out-of-sync with canon over time. So, if you went and read the thousands of Trek novels and comics that have been published over the decades they would not only be wildly inconsistent with canon, but even with each other! Nothing wrong with that, just interesting!


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 17, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> Love it or not, that's cool, but try to look at some of the changes with a more open mind.
> 
> The Klingons from Discovery Season 1 definitely have a new aesthetic and were definitely one of the controversial elements of the show. But, um, it certainly isn't the first time the Klingons got a redesign, and its relatively mild compared to the first one! I would agree that the Klingon's looked different (physicality, costumes, ships), but I feel that they very much acted like Klingons. And in Discovery Season 2, the Klingons all decided to grow their hair back out, and looked pretty darn close to Next Gen Klingons at that point. After some time, the biggest differences were hairstyles (or the lack thereof), clothing styles, and ship designs.
> 
> In Picard, we were not really seeing a redesign of the Romulans, but rather corners of Romulan culture we had never seen before. Most of the Romulan fun prior to Picard was Warbirds staffed by angry Romulans with serious shoulder pads, now we are getting a look at Romulan civilian/refugee life, a religious monastery/assassin order, and a secret police within the secret police. The changes were additive, rather than transforming.



Eh, not really. The aesthetic changes don't bother me, though I don't love them either. But '90 Trek depicted the Klingons as a violent but functional society. These are fanatics and savages. So much so that that the human (and humane) solution to defeat them is to 



Spoiler



give a weapon of mass destruction to one of them so she can become a dictator and get them off the Federation's back.



Same goes for the Romulans. They are supposed to be a large galactic civilization, but that element was downplayed because the "rescue armada" narrative would not have made sense otherwise. Regarding the samurai nuns, I'm sorry but they make just as much sense as they would in real life. There was melee combat in Star Trek, but never with the assumption that someone good enough with a sword could forfeit modern ranged weapons. Not even Klingons did that. That's a huge tonal shift. And again, that just makes new Trek just more of the same-action-fantasy sci-fi we see these days.


----------



## Morrus (May 17, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> but they make just as much sense as they would in real life.




I mean... make sense in real life? Like _Star Trek_?

Star Trek has always been complete nonsense. We enjoy it nevertheless. But Q, and American 1920s gangster planets, and Roman planets, and Tribbles, and Apollo, and "why does God need a starship?", And Abraham Lincoln vs Ghenghis Khan, and Dr. Crusher falling in love with a ghost, and '_Spock's Brain'_ fergoodnesssake... and, well everything.

None of _Star Trek_ makes sense in real life. I'm curious why your line is somebody in_ Picard _using a sword?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (May 17, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I am looking at it from the perspective of someone who just saw a prediction that failure to hold to continuity is a problem.  Pretty clearly a "use continuity as a constraint" situation.
> 
> I agree that Enterprise squandered its opportunities until Manny Coto got the reins, but by then it was too late.  That being said... having based its story on something from a FASA game would not have been a better choice.  So, I don't think that claiming third-party story ideas are particularly grand holds here.



Seasons 1 and 2 were also excellent, the show had about a single season worth of bad episodes.


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 18, 2020)

Morrus said:


> I mean... make sense in real life? Like _Star Trek_?
> 
> Star Trek has always been complete nonsense. We enjoy it nevertheless. But Q, and American 1920s gangster planets, and Roman planets, and Tribbles, and Apollo, and "why does God need a starship?", And Abraham Lincoln vs Ghenghis Khan, and Dr. Crusher falling in love with a ghost, and '_Spock's Brain'_ fergoodnesssake... and, well everything.
> 
> None of _Star Trek_ makes sense in real life. I'm curious why your line is somebody in_ Picard _using a sword?



I'm not drawing any line. Stuff in Star Trek is weird, and some is awesome weird and some just bad, like Spock's Brain. But Picard travels to some planet for the sole purpose of hiring muscle for his mission, and that's someone who's good with a sword. In a setting where ray guns are the norm. That's a very different kind of not making sense. There's nothing inventive or weird there, just some pretty lazy writing to get swordplay scenes in the series. And by the way, I actually think that a lot of Star Trek kind of makes sense in real life.


----------



## Morrus (May 18, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> I'm not drawing any line. Stuff in Star Trek is weird, and some is awesome weird and some just bad, like Spock's Brain. But Picard travels to some planet for the sole purpose of hiring muscle for his mission, and that's someone who's good with a sword. In a setting where ray guns are the norm. That's a very different kind of not making sense. There's nothing inventive or weird there, just some pretty lazy writing to get swordplay scenes in the series. And by the way, I actually think that a lot of Star Trek kind of makes sense in real life.



I mean, OK? You just repeated yourself; I understood the first time. You think a guy in _Picard_ using a sword makes no sense, but you're OK with all that other stuff. I mean, I don't know where we go from there, as we don't share any common ground at all. I don't know why, after 50 years of _Star Trek_ not making sense, we suddenly demand it has to make sense?

You can like one and not the other. I have no problem with that (though I might disagree with your taste). But why not just say that, rather than struggling to justify logically how one is different to the other, when -- while they may be different in some ephemeral taste thing that doesn't speak to you -- they're emphatically _not_ different in the ways you say they are? Picking "making sense" as your differentiator is just nonsensical. It never made sense, it still doesn't. It's _Star Trek_.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> The Klingons from Discovery Season 1 definitely have a new aesthetic and were definitely one of the controversial elements of the show. But, um, it certainly isn't the first time the Klingons got a redesign, and its relatively mild compared to the first one!




So, I have an issue with the redesign that is very relevant to it being a TV show, but it isn't just the chosen asethetic.

They have so much prosthetic on that the actors have a very hard time expressing emotion!  On top of this, their choice of language delivery also (to a human ear) removes a lot of emotional content.  Yes, they are aliens, but in a TV show, we need the people to be able to act in whatever they are wearing.  I bet the redesign would have been better accepted if they'd given this higher priority in the design.


----------



## Morrus (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> They have so much prosthetic on that the actors have a very hard time expressing emotion!




That I agree with. They were struggling to speak with the big fake teeth. The rest I didn't mind.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> So, I have an issue with the redesign that is very relevant to it being a TV show, but it isn't just the chosen asethetic.
> 
> They have so much prosthetic on that the actors have a very hard time expressing emotion!  On top of this, their choice of language delivery also (to a human ear) removes a lot of emotional content.  Yes, they are aliens, but in a TV show, we need the people to be able to act in whatever they are wearing.  I bet the redesign would have been better accepted if they'd given this higher priority in the design.




Maybe the producers felt that since they were speaking Klingon anyway, why worry about being able to clearly speak through the prosthetics?  Of course, they should have realized a significant part of the fanbase speaks fluent Klingon!


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> That's a pretty cool idea. I'm sure the Trek "expanded universe" is full of abandoned-but-neat ideas!
> 
> I don't know the details and too lazy to seek it out, but I'm fairly sure there is a canon or semi-canon explanation that explains the changes as some sort of genetic virus that swept through Klingon worlds during TOS era changing Klingons to look more human.
> 
> ...




Another funny thing; the stuff from the FASA games, the Star Trek RPG and the space combat board game, were actually considered to be canon by mutual agreement and licensing. Until that was recently erased.


----------



## Morrus (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Another funny thing; the stuff from the FASA games, the Star Trek RPG and the space combat board game, were actually considered to be canon by mutual agreement and licensing. Until that was recently erased.



I love all that stuff. I have it all on my shelves. I honestly think it's 60% of what 'Star Trek' is to me.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Morrus said:


> Disco




Until we see leisure suits and wide lapels and catch dance fever, please don’t abbreviate Discovery as “Disco”. Some of us are old enough to remember those days and shudder...


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> Maybe the producers felt that since they were speaking Klingon anyway, why worry about being able to clearly speak through the prosthetics?  Of course, they should have realized a significant part of the fanbase speaks fluent Klingon!




Well, I didn't care so much about the Klingon diction.  I wanted more tonal differences in the speech, which they could not deliver in all that stuff.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> Until we see leisure suits and wide lapels and catch dance fever, please don’t abbreviate Discovery as “Disco”.




Dude, they abbreviate it to that on official merch.  That horse has left the barn.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Another funny thing; the stuff from the FASA games, the Star Trek RPG and the space combat board game, were actually considered to be canon by mutual agreement and licensing. Until that was recently erased.




Yeah, well, I kind of think erasing that was appropriate.  Having a whole bunch of cannon that most of the fans has never seen?  Bad idea.


----------



## Hussar (May 18, 2020)

Umm, going with hand to hand weapons isn't really out of place in Star Trek is it?  I mean, Klingons go in with knives and bat-leths (or however you spell that) pretty much every episode that features Klingons.  Granted, fair enough, Romulan ninja is a bit out there, but, not really any further out there than most of the ideas.  

I gotta echo the sentiment of "_that_'s what you find out of place?"


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 18, 2020)

Hussar said:


> Umm, going with hand to hand weapons isn't really out of place in Star Trek is it?  I mean, Klingons go in with knives and bat-leths (or however you spell that) pretty much every episode that features Klingons.  Granted, fair enough, Romulan ninja is a bit out there, but, not really any further out there than most of the ideas.
> 
> I gotta echo the sentiment of "_that_'s what you find out of place?"



I find out of place a whole bunch of things, I don't know why this one got picked on  And again, I have no problems with melee weapons per se. It's the "let's go hire a samurai" idea I don't buy.


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 18, 2020)

Morrus said:


> I mean, OK? You just repeated yourself; I understood the first time. You think a guy in _Picard_ using a sword makes no sense, but you're OK with all that other stuff. I mean, I don't know where we go from there, as we don't share any common ground at all. I don't know why, after 50 years of _Star Trek_ not making sense, we suddenly demand it has to make sense?
> 
> You can like one and not the other. I have no problem with that (though I might disagree with your taste). But why not just say that, rather than struggling to justify logically how one is different to the other, when -- while they may be different in some ephemeral taste thing that doesn't speak to you -- they're emphatically _not_ different in the ways you say they are? Picking "making sense" as your differentiator is just nonsensical. It never made sense, it still doesn't. It's _Star Trek_.



I'm sorry, I thought it was clear I don't like most choices they made in Picard and Disco. And that doesn't help my suspension of disbelief. But can we agree they are _tonal _changes? That Apollo's Temple and samurais for hire are not the same kind of thing? And I don't agree that Star Trek was always a bunch of nonsense. It had a pretty consistent narrative pact, and this is not it. Then of course, if our benchmark is Spock's Brain or Dr Crusher's Ghost Lover, we can never complain of anything ever again, though I believe that most of Kurtzman's stuff is in that ballpark in terms of quality.


----------



## Hussar (May 18, 2020)

"Narrative pact"?  Now, there's a term I'm not familiar with.  What does it mean?


----------



## trappedslider (May 18, 2020)

Hussar said:


> "Narrative pact"?  Now, there's a term I'm not familiar with.  What does it mean?



This what I found via google 
The author wants to tell me a story and I agree to hear it. I agree to suspend my disbelief, and they agree to _be honest with me_ when telling me their story.


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 18, 2020)

Hussar said:


> "Narrative pact"?  Now, there's a term I'm not familiar with.  What does it mean?



Yes, apologies, I just realized the term doesn't have much currency outside my home country. The narrative pact is defined as "an unspoken agreement by which the reader suspends partially and temporarily their critical faculties to accept as true a story they know to be largely fictitious." Basically, the author buys your suspension of disbelief by making a claim for internal consistency and sticking to it. Most times a breach of the narrative pact is what happens when a show "jumps the shark". GoT after season 4. Anything by Steven Moffat after three seasons. Walking Dead with Negan. Star Trek with Klingons as Talibans, casual murdering of villains and, well... samurais. Note that this has very little to do with adherence to canon.


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Yeah, well, I kind of think erasing that was appropriate.  Having a whole bunch of cannon that most of the fans has never seen?  Bad idea.




And I would say that eliminating a whole bunch of canon that was frequently based on references from the original series and TOS movies, that fans could be introduced to, was a massive lost opportunity.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> And I would say that eliminating a whole bunch of canon that was frequently based on references from the original series and TOS movies, that fans could be introduced to, was a massive lost opportunity.




It's also a massive new opportunity because they aren't beholden to those references either.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> And I would say that eliminating a whole bunch of canon that was frequently based on references from the original series and TOS movies, that fans could be introduced to, was a massive lost opportunity.




How?  As if they cannot _re-introduce_ it any time they want?


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> It's also a massive new opportunity because they aren't beholden to those references either.




I agree with you. Canon often acts as a straitjacket to creativity, and can embolden bad fan behavior.

....but. I do understand those that complain when canon is violated. For two reasons:

1. When we talk about a suspension of disbelief, a violation of canon, for those that care about it deeply, often will taken them out of the story. Instead of being able to enjoy the story, they are caught up in why it doesn't make sense. 

2. If someone invests a lot of time and passion into a fictional world and the rules in it, it often ... well, it can feel personal when the investment is invalidated by a new crop of people running the IP. I'm not saying that it's right or correct to feel that way, or that there is that type of ownership, but I can understand why people feel that way.


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> How?  As if they cannot _re-introduce_ it any time they want?




They've already whitewashed over a bunch of major beats from the canon that they expressly invalidated. Would it be any more right to walk all over what they created in the interim? I do think that they learnt a fair bit from the backlash over "Discovery", as they've walked some things back, but they had already lost me by then and may lose the fans who loved the direction that they were going in, then. From where I sit it's better to not screw up (from my point of view) in the first place.

To the point made by @Snarf Zagyg, just tossing out major point from a long running franchise can feel like a slap in the face to the fans, who have followed it through its various incarnations. It's not what I'd call a sense of ownership or entitlement, but rather a belittling of that prior support by the production company.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> They've already whitewashed over a bunch of major beats from the canon that they expressly invalidated.




Not knowing what you're referring to, I can't really decide if I agree with you.

But, let us be clear - we are talking about canon from a game that hasn't been around for 30 years.  I think expecting them to be bound by that is... not reasonable.  



> To the point made by @Snarf Zagyg, just tossing out major point from a long running franchise can feel like a slap in the face to the fans...




I am sorry, but I have so little sympathy for entitled fan behavior at this point that to me this is more an argument in favor of defying continuity, rather than against it.


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> I find out of place a whole bunch of things, I don't know why this one got picked on  And again, I have no problems with melee weapons per se. It's the "let's go hire a samurai" idea I don't buy.




You folks... completely miss the fact that he's not hiring just any old samurai.  He's not even _HIRING_ him - this isn't about money.  He's going to find someone who will completely, totally, and unequivocally have his back.  What weapons he uses are not the primary issue - what matters is this guy knows how to fight in general, and under no circumstances will betray Picard.  

Loyalty is more important than weapon of choice, folks.

And, proof is in the pudding, as this guy doesn't seem to get disintegrated by a disruptor, so....


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I am sorry, but I have so little sympathy for entitled fan behavior at this point that to me this is more an argument in favor of defying continuity, rather than against it.




I'm not sure that's really fair, is it? I think you're confusing toxic fan behavior, which can take many forms, with what people like.

I am quite sure that there are things that they could do to Star Trek that would have you up in arms that fall under "continuity" or "canon" that you don't even think about.

What if they had a show that retconned the Klingon Empire to be a pacifist, hippy race that went around the Galaxy spreading good vibes?

What if they they said that, in fact, Jedi were in Star Trek and that all of Star Trek really took place in a galaxy far far away a long time ago?

What if the whole story about Picard was that he had been secretly molesting all the kids on the Enterprise, and that this was just a show about his trial?


...the whole thing about certain IP, from Star Trek to Buffy to anything, really, is that part of the appeal of the IP is the comfort, the continuity, and the canon that it represents.

There will always be a push/pull between innovating new things and respect/continuity with the old. Because if you have no respect at all for that which came before, you might as well not be using that IP at all. If you don't care about the canon or continuity of Star Trek at all, why bother making it a Star Trek show?

In short, this is dangerously close to William Shatner's "Get A Life" speech from SNL, except without any of the humor.


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Not knowing what you're referring to, I can't really decide if I agree with you.
> 
> But, let us be clear - we are talking about canon from a game that hasn't been around for 30 years.  I think expecting them to be bound by that is... not reasonable.




Two, off the top of my head; The Four Years' War (Klingons) and the Romulan War.



> I am sorry, but I have so little sympathy for entitled fan behavior at this point that to me this is more an argument in favor of defying continuity, rather than against it.




Have as little sympathy as you like. Not all fans who feel put out by this are entitled, nor toxic.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Dude, they abbreviate it to that on official merch.  That horse has left the barn.



They use that abbreviation in the show, in-universe! There are a few scenes with Burnham and Tilly jogging around the ship, wearing "DISCO" t-shirts!


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You folks... completely miss the fact that he's not hiring just any old samurai.  He's not even _HIRING_ him - this isn't about money.  He's going to find someone who will completely, totally, and unequivocally have his back.  What weapons he uses are not the primary issue - what matters is this guy knows how to fight in general, and under no circumstances will betray Picard.
> 
> Loyalty is more important than weapon of choice, folks.
> 
> And, proof is in the pudding, as this guy doesn't seem to get disintegrated by a disruptor, so....



Actually, unless I completely misremember the episode, it's the other way around. Picard goes to that planet to hire a samurai nun, because they're the best fighters in the galaxy, and finds out the kid has not been adopted but instead trained to be a male nun samurai. Cue the absent father storyline. And by the way Picard has plenty of people who would never betray him and can fire a weapon.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> There will always be a push/pull between innovating new things and respect/continuity with the old. Because if you have no respect at all for that which came before, you might as well not be using that IP at all. If you don't care about the canon or continuity of Star Trek at all, why bother making it a Star Trek show?
> 
> In short, this is dangerously close to William Shatner's "Get A Life" speech from SNL, except without any of the humor.




I can definitely see that. A lot comes down to where to draw the line between major elements of the continuity and nitpicks or unnecessary minutiae. I can see people being ticked off if a Star Trek species were significantly changed - like Klingons becoming pacifists or Orions becoming a force for law and order in space. That's a pretty big shift. But adding an order of Romulan warrior nuns who work to oppose a clandestine cabal within Romulan politics? That's pretty minor and, arguably, added texture rather than a major transformation and should be treated accordingly. Not ever deviation from old canon is a slap in the face.

One aspect of telling stories, particularly in an IP that's been around a while and may have a lot of fan baggage attached to it, is that stories may challenge the fans and their understanding of the IP. To use a cross-IP example, some of the latest Star Wars films have been doing that - and you see it in a lot of fan complaints that the heroism of the original trilogy is all undone because things didn't turn out all that great 40 years later or that the Rebel Alliance should never have been willing to send snipers to take out significant Imperial personnel as in *Rogue One* or have some hard and gritty edges. Both of those challenge what people assumed about the Star Wars saga but there was no real basis for making those assumption in the first place given what we know about history and military and insurgency expediencies. In the case of Picard, you see echoes of the same sentiments - that the behavior of Star Fleet in Picard is incompatible with the optimism of Star Trek.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> I can definitely see that. A lot comes down to where to draw the line between major elements of the continuity and nitpicks or unnecessary minutiae. I can see people being ticked off if a Star Trek species were significantly changed - like Klingons becoming pacifists or Orions becoming a force for law and order in space. That's a pretty big shift. But adding an order of Romulan warrior nuns who work to oppose a clandestine cabal within Romulan politics? That's pretty minor and, arguably, added texture rather than a major transformation and should be treated accordingly. Not ever deviation from old canon is a slap in the face.
> 
> One aspect of telling stories, particularly in an IP that's been around a while and may have a lot of fan baggage attached to it, is that stories may challenge the fans and their understanding of the IP. To use a cross-IP example, some of the latest Star Wars films have been doing that - and you see it in a lot of fan complaints that the heroism of the original trilogy is all undone because things didn't turn out all that great 40 years later or that the Rebel Alliance should never have been willing to send snipers to take out significant Imperial personnel as in *Rogue One* or have some hard and gritty edges. Both of those challenge what people assumed about the Star Wars saga but there was no real basis for making those assumption in the first place given what we know about history and military and insurgency expediencies. In the case of Picard, you see echoes of the same sentiments - that the behavior of Star Fleet in Picard is incompatible with the optimism of Star Trek.




Again, we agree completely!

It's a delicate balance. Part of it is that what makes challenging conventions (or subverting expectations) so rewarding and enjoyable when it works, is that there has to be conventions and expectations to challenge.

In other words, you need to be careful when you're knocking out those bricks in the wall, because it took a long time to build up that wall. I am reminded of something I read recently about James Bond and Austin Powers (it's not quite the same, but it's kind on-point). In essence, Austin Powers killed off the old style of James Bond because it was so good at parodying it; you couldn't do the old Roger Moore style, slightly campy James Bond anymore even if you wanted to. 

I'm sure that there's a way to segue into Galaxy Quest somehow!


----------



## FitzTheRuke (May 18, 2020)

One idea I liked that they used in Disco2 and Picard (that I personally feel is ingenious and much better an idea than bothering with continuity-fixing episodes, even as good as that DS9 one was...) is the use of multiple make-up takes on their Klingons and Romulans. 

Disco1 redesigned Klingons AGAIN and took a lot of flak for it. In season 2, not only did they "grow their hair" to show that their Klingons weren't quite as weird as they looked, but they also had "other clans" appear that held elements of things like Star Trek 6 (Christopher Plummer's Klingon) and other Klingon designs. 

Picard had Romulans that looked like Nero from Kelvinverse Star Trek, along with dead-ringers for NextGen Romulans, and others.

On top of THAT, they used more real-world diversity in hiring human actors. One of my complaints about Star Trek when I was a kid was "All Star Trek aliens look like good-looking (Hollywood) white people with facial bumps or patterns. There's weirder-looking HUMANS ON EARTH than aliens in Star Trek!" (This was an argument I made as a kid, so please forgive that it's not 100% true and that I may have described human ethnicities as 'weird-looking'.)

At any rate, in my mind they are finally using what I would call the best excuse for alien designs changing over time: 

... Not all Klingons and Romulans look the same.

Using that, they are free to change, tweak, and play with the designs of all their races, all the time. As long as we can tell who they are (which I agree Disco1 Klingons may have gone too far form), in my mind, go ahead and make them look different.


----------



## Mallus (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Well, I didn't care so much about the Klingon diction.  I wanted more tonal differences in the speech, which they could not deliver in all that stuff.



It's especially bad if you think back to performances like Andreas Katsulas as G'Kar in B5, where impressive prosthetics that didn't get in the way of incredible acting.


----------



## Mallus (May 18, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> But can we agree they are _tonal _changes?



Can  we agree there are significant tonal changes between TOS, TNG, and DS9 (to name the three best series in the franchise currently)?

Bonus question: can we agree there are significant tonal changes between individual _episodes_ of the original series. For example, "City on the Edge of Forever", "A Piece of the Action", "Mirror, Mirror", "Balance of Terror", "The Trouble with Tribbles", "Devil in the Dark".



> And I don't agree that Star Trek was always a bunch of nonsense. It had a pretty consistent narrative pact, and this is not it.



How would you define Star Trek's 'narrative pact'?

It would have to cover --and waive -- a lot, wouldn't it, given all the manner of weird, impossible, and delightful stuff in the franchise?


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> I can definitely see that. A lot comes down to where to draw the line between major elements of the continuity and nitpicks or unnecessary minutiae. I can see people being ticked off if a Star Trek species were significantly changed - like Klingons becoming pacifists or Orions becoming a force for law and order in space. That's a pretty big shift. But adding an order of Romulan warrior nuns who work to oppose a clandestine cabal within Romulan politics? That's pretty minor and, arguably, added texture rather than a major transformation and should be treated accordingly. Not ever deviation from old canon is a slap in the face.
> 
> One aspect of telling stories, particularly in an IP that's been around a while and may have a lot of fan baggage attached to it, is that stories may challenge the fans and their understanding of the IP. To use a cross-IP example, some of the latest Star Wars films have been doing that - and you see it in a lot of fan complaints that the heroism of the original trilogy is all undone because things didn't turn out all that great 40 years later or that the Rebel Alliance should never have been willing to send snipers to take out significant Imperial personnel as in *Rogue One* or have some hard and gritty edges. Both of those challenge what people assumed about the Star Wars saga but there was no real basis for making those assumption in the first place given what we know about history and military and insurgency expediencies. In the case of Picard, you see echoes of the same sentiments - that the behavior of Star Fleet in Picard is incompatible with the optimism of Star Trek.




I think that it comes down to being additive, rather than transformative. You can add to the depth and breadth of a storytelling universe without having to break it down, first. We've seen little of the Romular Star Empire in previous incarnations of Star Trek, except for the military and the governing bodies. The revelation of a group of warrior nuns, who only take on hopeless causes, adds the depth of our understanding, of the Romulan people.

Similarly, we haven't seen a lot of the run-of-the-mill Federation citizen's life. I didn't expect that a tramp freighter captain's life would look anything like the spit & polish life of a Star Fleet officer, even if that captain was formerly a member of Star Fleet. We're seeing deeper into a culture.

And when it comes to Star Wars, not all rebels get to drop land speeders on the enemy as a mere effort of will. We finally got to see how those simple soldiers, who Vader tosses into wall with a mental shrug, do their jobs on the daily. More that's additive to the universe, rather than transformative.


----------



## Mallus (May 18, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> And by the way Picard has plenty of people who would never betray him and can fire a weapon.



But he deliberately _does not ask_ those people to accompany him. It's in the dialog, even. Picard chooses people who mean less to him -- or even "hate" him, like Raffi.

Like Khan said, it is very cold in space.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Mallus said:


> But he deliberately _does not ask_ those people to accompany him. It's in the dialog, even. Picard chooses people who mean less to him -- or even "hate" him, like Raffi.
> 
> Like Khan said, it is very cold in space.




I think that's not exactly the right take on this. It's not that these people mean less *to him*, but he means less *to them*. He doesn't want to ask his former crew members because they'd join him out of a sense of personal loyalty, even love, regardless of the merit of the mission. He doesn't want that since it could get them all killed. He ultimately wants people he can convince this mission is a worthwhile thing to do in and of itself, not because of their personal sentiment for him.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> On top of THAT, they used more real-world diversity in hiring human actors. One of my complaints about Star Trek when I was a kid was "All Star Trek aliens look like good-looking (Hollywood) white people with facial bumps or patterns. There's weirder-looking HUMANS ON EARTH than aliens in Star Trek!" (This was an argument I made as a kid, so please forgive that it's not 100% true and that I may have described human ethnicities as 'weird-looking'.)




You were right. They did look mainly like good-looking white people with little facial bumps and patterns. And the reason had a lot more to do with budget than any intention of how to portray aliens. It's why the Star Trek: The Animated Series was finally able to have non-human crew members (other than Spock) like Lieutenants M'Ress and Arex. With animation, the special effects budget isn't a burden.

One of the nice things about improvements in technology and better budgets is better aliens.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> And when it comes to Star Wars, not all rebels get to drop land speeders on the enemy as a mere effort of will. We finally got to see how those simple soldiers, who Vader tosses into wall with a mental shrug, do their jobs on the daily. More that's additive to the universe, rather than transformative.




With some of these issues, like the Federation's behavior in *Picard* or rougher aspects of the Rebel Alliance in *Rogue One*, there are fans who do consider them transformative. I think we both disagree with that, but there are plenty of fans who are characterizing those things as slaps in the face (to more or less use your term). So where do we draw the lines on what really are slaps in the face and what aren't?


----------



## Umbran (May 18, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> I'm not sure that's really fair, is it? I think you're confusing toxic fan behavior, which can take many forms, with what people like.




No, I am not confusing things.  I have just seen so much ill will generated over the years by canon-angst that I have come to classify it as toxic in and of itself.

I have come to view canon and continuity like the rules and grammar of language - you follow it in general, but when it gets in the way, you violate it for sake of having a good piece.


----------



## MarkB (May 18, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> Actually, unless I completely misremember the episode, it's the other way around. Picard goes to that planet to hire a samurai nun, because they're the best fighters in the galaxy, and finds out the kid has not been adopted but instead trained to be a male nun samurai. Cue the absent father storyline. And by the way Picard has plenty of people who would never betray him and can fire a weapon.



You may have missed some of the subtext. That's the reason that Picard gave to Raffi. It may even be what he was telling himself. But it was pretty clear that one of the major reasons he went back there was because he'd essentially abandoned a young boy who he'd befriended, and was looking for closure.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> No, I am not confusing things.  I have just seen so much ill will generated over the years by canon-angst that I have come to classify it as toxic in and of itself.
> 
> I have come to view canon and continuity like the rules and grammar of language - you follow it in general, but when it gets in the way, you violate it for sake of having a good piece.




I think you're confusing cause and effect; the symptom and the disease.

People who have unsavory or toxic opinions will often retreat into neutral-seeming criteria.

"It's not that I'm an elitist; I just believe in proper English."
"It's not that I hate the poor; I just believe in table manners."
"It's not that I dislike women; I just want proper decorum to be shown at Augusta."


...and so on. The toxicity doesn't come from people that love canon; it is coming from something else.

But that doesn't mean that canon and continuity are worthless. In fact, quite the opposite. Entire empires of IP are built on it. Books, guides, encyclopedias. It is rather ungenerous to ask that people devote their time and their money to really delving into understanding something, and then, after they do, say ... "Ha! Sucker. Only nerds and stupid people care about canon."

Like I said. It's ungenerous.


----------



## billd91 (May 18, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I am sorry, but I have so little sympathy for entitled fan behavior at this point that to me this is more an argument in favor of defying continuity, rather than against it.




If we want to unpack this a bit more, it's not  merely ungenerous. It's spiteful.


----------



## Ryujin (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> With some of these issues, like the Federation's behavior in *Picard* or rougher aspects of the Rebel Alliance in *Rogue One*, there are fans who do consider them transformative. I think we both disagree with that, but there are plenty of fans who are characterizing those things as slaps in the face (to more or less use your term). So where do we draw the lines on what really are slaps in the face and what aren't?




Sometimes it's easy to see what's a bridge too far. Other times, not so much.

The Federation has been infiltrated before. Hell, sometimes I think that they have no internal security at all. I think that if the Federation doesn't rebound from the Zhat Vash infiltration and become more the organization that we recognize, as a result, then I would say that's a bridge too far. I suppose we find it in the destination, rather than the journey.


----------



## Mallus (May 18, 2020)

billd91 said:


> I think that's not exactly the right take on this. It's not that these people mean less *to him*, but he means less *to them*. He doesn't want to ask his former crew members because they'd join him out of a sense of personal loyalty, even love, regardless of the merit of the mission. He doesn't want that since it could get them all killed. He ultimately wants people he can convince this mission is a worthwhile thing to do in and of itself, not because of their personal sentiment for him.



You're absolutely right, I should have mentioned that side of it, too. But I still think both things are true. 

Picard is willing to risk Raffi Musiker's life and not the Riker-Troi's. And while Raffii has more than one reason for going along, like the chance to prove the Romulan conspiracy is real, she also goes out of love for Picard. Which is openly stated in the final episode, but kinda obvious throughout. And Picard knows this. A big part of the show is Picard wrestling with the idea of how or even if he can still be the man that has this effect on people.

I really like the idea the show was saying old age makes people, even good people, a little ruthless & manipulative, out of necessity. It seems pretty honest.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 19, 2020)

billd91 said:


> You were right. They did look mainly like good-looking white people with little facial bumps and patterns. And the reason had a lot more to do with budget than any intention of how to portray aliens. It's why the Star Trek: The Animated Series was finally able to have non-human crew members (other than Spock) like Lieutenants M'Ress and Arex. With animation, the special effects budget isn't a burden.
> 
> One of the nice things about improvements in technology and better budgets is better aliens.




What, white actors were cheaper to hire than people-of-color? Most of the "rubber forehead" aliens in Star Trek's long history have been portrayed by white actors. That's got nothing to do with budget.

My view is, that as progressive as Star Trek has always been, casting has been very "white" with token diversity. Especially when casting ventured beyond the bridge officers to supporting characters, human and alien. Casting with diversity, with the leads and supporting actors, has gotten better and better with each series, and Discovery and Picard stepped it up even more. So we are making good progress.

It represents an institutional bias in Hollywood. It's not cheaper to hire white actors, but it is often easier. Effort was made to make the main cast diverse in each series, but the supporting cast less so.

I don't know, but I've always wondered . . . . if there was ever a fear of casting POC as aliens and generating a backlash from minority groups. I'm not saying there would have been a backlash, just wondering if the casting directors had that worry . . . .


----------



## Dire Bare (May 19, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Sometimes it's easy to see what's a bridge too far. Other times, not so much.
> 
> The Federation has been infiltrated before. Hell, sometimes I think that they have no internal security at all. I think that if the Federation doesn't rebound from the Zhat Vash infiltration and become more the organization that we recognize, as a result, then I would say that's a bridge too far. I suppose we find it in the destination, rather than the journey.




Yeah, when fans started crying about the evil Federation in both ST: Discovery and ST: Picard, my thought was, "Have you ever watched Next Gen or DS9?!?!" 

I just finished a Next Gen re-watch, and every time somebody showed up in an admiral's uniform I got suspicious they were corrupt, incompetent, uncaring about civilians, or at least big ol' jerks.

I think a major difference is that in Next Gen, the corrupt admiral was gone and dealt with by the episode's end. In new-Trek, they remain foils and antagonists for an entire season!


----------



## Dire Bare (May 19, 2020)

Mallus said:


> You're absolutely right, I should have mentioned that side of it, too. But I still think both things are true.
> 
> Picard is willing to risk Raffi Musiker's life and not the Riker-Troi's. And while Raffii has more than one reason for going along, like the chance to prove the Romulan conspiracy is real, she also goes out of love for Picard. Which is openly stated in the final episode, but kinda obvious throughout. And Picard knows this. A big part of the show is Picard wrestling with the idea of how or even if he can still be the man that has this effect on people.
> 
> I really like the idea the show was saying old age makes people, even good people, a little ruthless & manipulative, out of necessity. It seems pretty honest.




The "new" old Picard is better than the "old" old Picard from the Season 7 finale. That old Picard was super-crotchety and very manipulative of his friends because he knew he was _right_, despite the fact he was suffering from a degenerative brain disorder. And of course, by episode's end, he was proven right all along . . . .


----------



## MarkB (May 19, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> I don't know, but I've always wondered . . . . if there was ever a fear of casting POC as aliens and generating a backlash from minority groups. I'm not saying there would have been a backlash, just wondering if the casting directors had that worry . . . .



More likely, they were worried that it might be confusing for their cultural/racial-stereotype-of-the-week alien to actually be played by someone of another culture or race. How would their audience know which stereotype to assume for that character?


----------



## Umbran (May 19, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> I think you're confusing cause and effect; the symptom and the disease.




I am not interested in a conversation in which you repeatedly treat me like a person who has not bothered to examine their own position.


----------



## Umbran (May 19, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> I don't know, but I've always wondered . . . . if there was ever a fear of casting POC as aliens and generating a backlash from minority groups. I'm not saying there would have been a backlash, just wondering if the casting directors had that worry . . . .




I heard (but have not seen direct examples) of Armin Shimmerman having to have some... delicate conversations about being a Jewish actor playing a greedy alien.


----------



## Dire Bare (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I heard (but have not seen direct examples) of Armin Shimmerman having to have some... delicate conversations about being a Jewish actor playing a greedy alien.




I love Armin Shimmerman and what he did with the character of Quark . . . . but the Ferengi have always made me cringe, especially with the casting. DS9 did a lot to redeem some awful writing and casting choices of Next Gen with that alien species . . . .


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I am not interested in a conversation in which you repeatedly treat me like a person who has not bothered to examine their own position.




Okay. It is ended.

But I was trying to treat you like an intelligent person who was accidentally being ungenerous, and not a spiteful person who was being intolerant.


----------



## Aeson (May 19, 2020)

Actor Jeffrey Combs Responds To Fan Clamor For Him To Play Dr. Boyce On ‘Star Trek: Strange New Worlds’
					

Trekkies are already doing their own fantasy casting for the new series.




					trekmovie.com
				




I would love for Jeffery Combs to be a regular.


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 19, 2020)

MarkB said:


> You may have missed some of the subtext. That's the reason that Picard gave to Raffi. It may even be what he was telling himself. But it was pretty clear that one of the major reasons he went back there was because he'd essentially abandoned a young boy who he'd befriended, and was looking for closure.



No, I did get that. But I was replying to another comment to say that Picard did not go to the planet to hire the kid nor did he hire him due to the kid’s devotion to him.


----------



## Ryujin (May 19, 2020)

Aeson said:


> Actor Jeffrey Combs Responds To Fan Clamor For Him To Play Dr. Boyce On ‘Star Trek: Strange New Worlds’
> 
> 
> Trekkies are already doing their own fantasy casting for the new series.
> ...




And that's a great answer to the question that I asked back on page 1. I'd be up for that


----------



## MrZeddaPiras (May 19, 2020)

Dire Bare said:


> Yeah, when fans started crying about the evil Federation in both ST: Discovery and ST: Picard, my thought was, "Have you ever watched Next Gen or DS9?!?!"




I don't think the Federation was ever portrayed as evil, in new Trek or old. They used to be portrayed as an effective, rational and enlightened organization. Now they're kind of... moody, I guess.



Dire Bare said:


> I just finished a Next Gen re-watch, and every time somebody showed up in an admiral's uniform I got suspicious they were corrupt, incompetent, uncaring about civilians, or at least big ol' jerks.
> 
> I think a major difference is that in Next Gen, the corrupt admiral was gone and dealt with by the episode's end. In new-Trek, they remain foils and antagonists for an entire season!




That's a common narrative convention of Star Trek: the captain's chair is where a person can really make a difference, and higher-ups are politicians and bureaucrats that needs to be reminded the values Star Fleet uphold. Note that there are a number of situations where the opposite is true, and admirals need to remind captains that they're there to do a job and not to philosophy.


----------



## Umbran (May 19, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> That's a common narrative convention of Star Trek: the captain's chair is where a person can really make a difference, and higher-ups are politicians and bureaucrats that needs to be reminded the values Star Fleet uphold.




Interestingly, we wind up jumping straight over the period where Picard was himself an admiral...

I have to wonder if someone could work that out as an interesting novel or TV show - Star Trek: Admirals.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (May 19, 2020)

Hussar said:


> Umm, going with hand to hand weapons isn't really out of place in Star Trek is it?  I mean, Klingons go in with knives and bat-leths (or however you spell that) pretty much every episode that features Klingons.  Granted, fair enough, Romulan ninja is a bit out there, but, not really any further out there than most of the ideas.
> 
> I gotta echo the sentiment of "_that_'s what you find out of place?"



Also, a stronger faster person with enough training absolutely can destroy someone with a gun as long as they start within quick sprinting difference. 

So, Romulan assassins with melee weapons make sense. They aren’t as practical as snipers, but practicality has never actually been what primarily determined whether people do stuff.


----------



## Janx (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I heard (but have not seen direct examples) of Armin Shimmerman having to have some... delicate conversations about being a Jewish actor playing a greedy alien.



I hadn't heard that, but I did see an interview with the actor who played Rom who mentioned that the Ferengi actors felt isolated from the rest of the cast and that Armin did have some strong feelings about that.

So it wouldn't surprise me that there's more to the story.


----------



## Umbran (May 19, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> They aren’t as practical as snipers




In the Trek Universe, the Enterprise could detect small-arms phaser fire _from orbit_.  For paranoid Romulans, scans for weapons fire or energy sources would be commonplace, no?  Getting a sniper in place may not be clearly practical in many cases.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> In the Trek Universe, the Enterprise could detect small-arms phaser fire _from orbit_.  For paranoid Romulans, scans for weapons fire or energy sources would be commonplace, no?  Getting a sniper in place may not be clearly practical in many cases.




That's a good point. Ultimately, people in the Star Trek setting get into so many hand-to-hand combats that I find samurai Romulans to be pretty reasonable. I find if far harder to suspend my disbelief that the two-handed "Kirk-punch" is an effective fighting technique or that the Klingon Bat'leth  is an effective weapon.

(Though in my own head-cannon I joke that the Klingons designed the Bat'leth to be a crappy weapon ON PURPOSE as a way to handicap their warriors to make fighting more challenging. "If you can kill someone with a Bat'leth, you are a true warrior! It's a terrible weapon!")


----------



## Aeson (May 19, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> And that's a great answer to the question that I asked back on page 1. I'd be up for that



I should have known how this thread would have gone, I had hoped for just a conversation about the show. 

Someone mentioned Armin Shimmerman (for another reason). He would be good also.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 19, 2020)

Aeson said:


> I should have known how this thread would have gone, I had hoped for just a conversation about the show.




Well, I will reiterate what I said on the first page- I am IN on anything with Anson Mount, and double-in on his portrayal of Captain Pike!

Honestly, the casting of him, Peck, and Romijn is brilliant- they were all great in Disco season 2.

I think that the idea of prior actors (Combs, Shimmerman) undertaking new roles in the series is ... well, unlikely.

My favorite bit so far-


_We’re going to try to harken back to some classical ‘Trek’ values, to be optimistic, and to be more episodic. Obviously, we will take advantage of the serialized nature of character and story building. But I think our plots will be more closed-ended than you’ve seen in either ‘Discovery’ or ‘Picard.’ I imagine it to be closer to the original series than even ‘DS9. We can really tell closed-ended stories. We can find ourselves in episodes that are tonally of a piece._

-Akiva Goldsman

I like some of the "prestige," serialized aspects of Discovery and Picard, but I am so excited for some TOS/TNG "planet of the week" episodes!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## doctorbadwolf (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> In the Trek Universe, the Enterprise could detect small-arms phaser fire _from orbit_.  For paranoid Romulans, scans for weapons fire or energy sources would be commonplace, no?  Getting a sniper in place may not be clearly practical in many cases.



Very true.


----------



## Umbran (May 19, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> I think that the idea of prior actors (Combs, Shimmerman) undertaking new roles in the series is ... well, unlikely.




Any particular reason?  If nothing else, classic Trek had lots of places for cameo spots.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 19, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Any particular reason?  If nothing else, classic Trek had lots of places for cameo spots.





A cameo? Definitely! But not a new role. I think Combs had a tweet basically throwing cold water on the idea.

it will also be hard (but not impossible - time travel, etc.) to shoehorn in TNG actors given the timeframe.


----------



## Morrus (May 19, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> A cameo? Definitely! But not a new role. I think Combs had a tweet basically throwing cold water on the idea.
> 
> it will also be hard (but not impossible - time travel, etc.) to shoehorn in TNG actors given the timeframe.



Doctor Who does it all the time!


----------



## Ryujin (May 20, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> A cameo? Definitely! But not a new role. I think Combs had a tweet basically throwing cold water on the idea.
> 
> it will also be hard (but not impossible - time travel, etc.) to shoehorn in TNG actors given the timeframe.




I lost count of the number of times that I saw the same Redshirt, played by David L. Ross, die on a mission. Armin Shimerman played several aliens, with different appliances on his face, in Next Generation. Combs already played two different characters in DS9, Inspector Brunt (FCA) and Weyoun. Suzie Plakson played a doctor, a Vulcan science officer, a Q, and the half Klingon K'Ehleyr in TNG alone. Reusing actors, with different rubber bits, is a Star Trek tradition


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 20, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> I lost count of the number of times that I saw the same Redshirt, played by David L. Ross, die on a mission. Armin Shimmerman played several aliens, with different appliances on his face, in Next Generation. Combs already played two different characters in DS9, Inspector Brunt (FCA) and Weyoun. Suzie Plakson played a doctor, a Vulcan science officer, a Q, and the half Klingon K'Ehleyr in TNG alone. Reusing actors, with different rubber bits, is a Star Trek tradition




Not so much in major roles across series, which is what has been suggested.

I can’t think of it happening in any CBS Access show yet - am I wrong?


----------



## FitzTheRuke (May 20, 2020)

Aeson said:


> I should have known how this thread would have gone, I had hoped for just a conversation about the show.




I normally don't like recasting old characters. I'm SO much more interested in NEW characters in the same setting.

That said, I so absolutely loved Pike, Spock, and No.1 in Disco2. They did everything right that I felt was wrong in Disco1 (while keeping things that I liked about it).

The very idea that we could have that cast, plus add some new faces... love it. Even that title... Solid Gold. 

Strange New Worlds? YES PLEASE.


----------



## Hussar (May 20, 2020)

MrZeddaPiras said:


> /snip
> Star Trek with Klingons as Talibans, casual murdering of villains and, well... samurais. Note that this has very little to do with adherence to canon.




Whoa.  Wait... what?


----------



## Hussar (May 20, 2020)

Just to go back to the notion of canon for a second.

My issue with canon is two fold.  One, if the justification for something is solely based on "It's what came before" and not anything else, then that justification needs to be shown the door.  If the concept cannot stand on its own two legs without someone shouting "TRADITION!!", then that idea isn't worth anything.

The second issue with canon is that it basically becomes a blunt club to shut down any creativity.  If we are not allowed to change ideas over time, then what's the point of continuing any IP?  And the blunt club is so obviously tied into the person's own personal preference.  "I hate this old idea and this new idea is FANTASTIC, but, we can't do it because of canon" is an argument you will never, ever hear uttered.

It's ALWAYS, "This idea steps on my feelings about how the IP should be, so, because it's new and different, CANON!!!!  Burn the new idea".

So, yeah, count me in the same group as @Umbran of being completely and utterly dismissive of any canon arguments.


----------



## Ryujin (May 20, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I heard (but have not seen direct examples) of Armin Shimmerman having to have some... delicate conversations about being a Jewish actor playing a greedy alien.




I did a little searching on this and could only find one real reference, t a statement made at Star Trek: Mission New York.

_“In America, people ask ‘Do the Ferengi represent Jews?’ In England, they ask ‘Do the Ferengi represent the Irish?’ In Australia, they ask if the Ferengi represent the Chinese,” Shimerman said. “The Ferengi represent the outcast… it’s the person who lives among us that we don’t fully understand.” 

Editied to add source









						Are Ferengi Jewish? 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine' Actor Armin Shimerman Answers
					

The Ferengi, who first appeared in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' have often been accused of being pernicious "Space Jew" stereotypes. Armin Shimerman, who played Quark on 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine,' has a different take, which he offered up during the 'DS9' cast reunion at 'Star Trek...




					www.player.one
				



_


----------



## Umbran (May 20, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> A cameo? Definitely! But not a new role. I think Combs had a tweet basically throwing cold water on the idea.




Upon someone tweeting him about the concept of his playing Dr. Boyce, he replied, "Thank you. Nice thought, but the chasm between what fans want and what the studios want make the chances of it happening slim to none.... and Slim left town. "

I'll admit that this seems a little strange, given that I strongly expect that Strange New Worlds exists on the basis of fan response to these characters on Discovery.  The issue may be as much one of budget as anything else - any recognizable actor from Trek working on more Trek would be asking more money, and their three headliners are not cheap.



> it will also be hard (but not impossible - time travel, etc.) to shoehorn in TNG actors given the timeframe.




I would not expect Councellor Troi-Ryker or Commnder Data to show up, no.  On the other hand, Frakes is already in the stable of directors for the CBS All Access Trek shows.  You can probably bet good money he'll be working on Strange New Worlds - I expect it'll be right up his alley, and he has a predilection in some of his other work for drawing in actors he's worked with before.  

Of course, that may mean that we see Librarians or Leverage cast on SNW...


----------



## Umbran (May 20, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Not so much in major roles across series, which is what has been suggested.




With respect, both major and minor roles have been suggested.



> I can’t think of it happening in any CBS Access show yet - am I wrong?




Well, Picard has a nice stack of returns, and will likely have more in its second season.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (May 20, 2020)

Umbran said:


> With respect, both major and minor roles have been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Picard has a nice stack of returns, and will likely have more in its second season.




I apologize if I was unclear; I don't think we have seen any prior actors return to significant _new_ roles in the new series (such as Combs playing Dr. Boyce); of course _Picard _has had actors reprising past roles.


----------



## GreyLord (May 23, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Interestingly, we wind up jumping straight over the period where Picard was himself an admiral...
> 
> I have to wonder if someone could work that out as an interesting novel or TV show - Star Trek: Admirals.




I'm not sure I'd be interested in a show about Admiral Picard.  I'm not sure they could do more evolution of his character than they have done with ST: Picard.  I actually found it an interesting advancement in regards to him and his life as portrayed, and I think they did a good job with the short brief of showing how he was as an admiral.

I think I'd be more interested with Riker getting a promotion and seeing a show on Admiral Riker (or with an Admiral LaForge...I'd love to see an update to Laforge).

That idea of course could still be incorporated into a show that is called Star Trek: Admirals, I suppose.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (May 23, 2020)

GreyLord said:


> Admiral LaForge...I'd love to see an update to Laforge).




I suspect we will see LeVar in Picard Season 2.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 9, 2020)

The YouTube channel has a lot of Trek videos today for Star Trek Day.


----------



## Mallus (Sep 9, 2020)

Ethan Peck describing how he read a whole bunch of philosophy classics to prepare for playing Spock is the most Star Trek thing imaginable - outside of fighting a guy in a terrible lizard suit at the Vasquez Rocks with the fight music blaring.. 

I am so, so ready for Strange New Worlds.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2020)

Mallus said:


> I am so, so ready for Strange New Worlds.




Yeah.  The notes on forward optimism are a big thing.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2020)

I'm interested, but wish they would continue to advance the timeline - perhaps a show concurrent with Picard, but on the Enterprise (still E? Not a fan of F).


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2020)

Mercurius said:


> I'm interested, but wish they would continue to advance the timeline - perhaps a show concurrent with Picard, but on the Enterprise (still E? Not a fan of F).




Jumping 900 years into the future on ST: Disco isn't enough advancement of the timeline for you?


----------



## Morrus (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Jumping 900 years into the future on ST: Disco isn't enough advancement of the timeline for you?



For me, that takes it so far away from the setting I identify as_ Star Trek_ that it's not really_ Star Trek _to me any more. For me personally, the optimistic setting, the Federation, Starfleet _are_ _Star Trek_.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Jumping 900 years into the future on ST: Disco isn't enough advancement of the timeline for you?




I only watched the first half season of _Discovery, _but may get back to it. I found it somewhat irking, maybe because it seemed more centered in contemporary social-cultural ideas, rather than the idealism of Roddenberry. But it deserves more of a chance, I think.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2020)

Mercurius said:


> ...it seemed more centered in contemporary social-cultural ideas, rather than the idealism of Roddenberry.




You realize that Roddenberry's idealism was not independent from the contemporary social-cultural ideas of his time?

Trek, has social commentary as part of its lifeblood.  You want it to be focused on ideas from 50 years ago instead?


----------



## Vael (Sep 9, 2020)

I missed Star Trek Day, have these videos been put anywhere that isn't geo-locked?

I'm stoked for Strange New Worlds, thought the other Enterprise crew was solid.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2020)

Morrus said:


> For me, that takes it so far away from the setting I identify as_ Star Trek_ that it's not really_ Star Trek _to me any more.




Trek Edition War!!1!  

I'm going to guess this is like... most superhero franchises.  You periodically see a story in which the hero's powers are removed or weakened, so you can see what kind of person lies beneath.  Is Clark Kent still Superman when he can't fly or lift mountains, and isn't bulletproof?  Are the Federation and Starfleet really that awesome when they aren't the 800-lb gorilla?

I think it is a valuable question to ask, and a worthy story to tell.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You realize that Roddenberry's idealism was not independent from the contemporary social-cultural ideas of his time?
> 
> Trek, has social commentary as part of its lifeblood.  You want it to be focused on ideas from 50 years ago instead?




Yes, Star Trek has traditionally been about social commentary. it has, however, been via the lens of an advanced and equanimical culture. It has provided example, rather than counter-example, through the Federation. I have least (or not) enjoyed it when they forget that model.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> I have least (or not) enjoyed it when they forget that model.




I don't think they have ever _forgotten_ that model.  They have, at times, questioned, critiqued, and given contrast to that model.

And, with good reason.  That model is the "upper-middle-class model".  It is the model of speaking about others from a position of relative wealth, peace, and comfort, which often isn't a great look.


----------



## Janx (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Trek Edition War!!1!
> 
> I'm going to guess this is like... most superhero franchises.  You periodically see a story in which the hero's powers are removed or weakened, so you can see what kind of person lies beneath.  Is Clark Kent still Superman when he can't fly or lift mountains, and isn't bulletproof?  Are the Federation and Starfleet really that awesome when they aren't the 800-lb gorilla?
> 
> I think it is a valuable question to ask, and a worthy story to tell.



How do you pick yourself up after a fall?  Somebody has to remind us what it is to stand for something.

That's season 3 of Discovery.  Seems like a timely subject to me.


----------



## Mercurius (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You realize that Roddenberry's idealism was not independent from the contemporary social-cultural ideas of his time?
> 
> Trek, has social commentary as part of its lifeblood.  You want it to be focused on ideas from 50 years ago instead?




That's not what I'm saying. As Ryujin said, Trek has always depicted a future in which current social problems have (largely) been transcended. Now of course science fiction is usually about the present projected into the future, but I think the charm of Trek has been _how _it comments on the present, by depicting a more evolved alternative.


----------



## trappedslider (Sep 9, 2020)

Mercurius said:


> by depicting a more evolved alternative.



Unless you're outside Earth and the core of the Federation.....my favorite trek other than time travel stories has been DS9.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 9, 2020)

trappedslider said:


> Unless you're outside Earth and the Federation.....my favorite trek other than time travel stories has been DS9.



How is DS9 not the Federation?


----------



## trappedslider (Sep 9, 2020)

Morrus said:


> How is DS9 not the Federation?



Left out the word "core"


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I don't think they have ever _forgotten_ that model.  They have, at times, questioned, critiqued, and given contrast to that model.
> 
> And, with good reason.  That model is the "upper-middle-class model".  It is the model of speaking about others from a position of relative wealth, peace, and comfort, which often isn't a great look.




I disagree. When your entire society is effectively upper middle class, it's a great look.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I don't think they have ever _forgotten_ that model.  They have, at times, questioned, critiqued, and given contrast to that model.
> 
> And, with good reason.  That model is the "upper-middle-class model".  It is the model of speaking about others from a position of relative wealth, peace, and comfort, which often isn't a great look.



I think the idea is an optimistic future which depicts a society where poverty and (internal) conflict has been eradicated. All our problems are external to our society.

(It doesn't always portray that consistently, but that's what Roddenberry was aiming at).


----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2020)

Vael said:


> I missed Star Trek Day, have these videos been put anywhere that isn't geo-locked?
> 
> I'm stoked for Strange New Worlds, thought the other Enterprise crew was solid.



You're not able to view the videos? That's a shame.  I don't know of another place to view them. Perhaps using TOR might help?


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2020)

Aeson said:


> You're not able to view the videos? That's a shame.  I don't know of another place to view them. Perhaps using TOR might help?



That's what about half the internet looks like for us non-Americans.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2020)

Morrus said:


> That's what about half the internet looks like for us non-Americans.



We're #1? We're #1? We're #1? USA? USA?


----------



## Imaculata (Sep 10, 2020)

I'm pretty excited for this. So far it looks to be aiming for a blend of TOR and TNG, which no doubt will make a lot of fans happy. I was never a fan of the Star Treks that came after TNG. DS9 was alright, but a blatant Babylon 5 rip off, and it was missing that spark of hope and optimism that the older shows always had.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 10, 2020)

Morrus said:


> How is DS9 not the Federation?




Bajor isn't a member of the Federation - they are merely allies.  Neither are the Cardassians or Ferengi.  So, like half the cast are not Federation citizens.

Heck, the station itself isn't actually owned by the Federation - the Bajorans ask the Federation to come in and help administer it, but it is technically Bajoran territory, iirc.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 10, 2020)

Morrus said:


> I think the idea is an optimistic future which depicts a society where poverty and (internal) conflict has been eradicated. All our problems are external to our society.
> 
> (It doesn't always portray that consistently, but that's what Roddenberry was aiming at).




Yes.  And as we have learned since Roddenberry's day, looking at the issues of the world strictly from a position of wealth, power, and relative safety (dare I say, privilege) has its problems.


----------



## Zardnaar (Sep 10, 2020)

STD season 3 have to what for execution. 

 Hell there might be no federation. Very few government's last 800 years.


----------



## wingsandsword (Sep 11, 2020)

Morrus said:


> For me, that takes it so far away from the setting I identify as_ Star Trek_ that it's not really_ Star Trek _to me any more. For me personally, the optimistic setting, the Federation, Starfleet _are_ _Star Trek_.



Well, hopefully that plot arc ends with that entire series of events being stricken from the timeline.

It's just hard to accept that after they established there is literally a Temporal Cold War in the future about fighting for things like preserving the Federation, and that by the 29th century Starfleet operates a fleet of Timeships that patrols the timeline looking for threats, that anything so sweeping as the fall of the Federation could plausibly happen. . .and if it did, it would take a 23rd century ship and crew to undo it.


----------



## Dire Bare (Sep 12, 2020)

Vael said:


> I missed Star Trek Day, have these videos been put anywhere that isn't geo-locked?
> 
> I'm stoked for Strange New Worlds, thought the other Enterprise crew was solid.




Not sure about being geo-locked, but . . . .

You can find them on CBS All Access, the app, the website, and the YouTube channel.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2020)

wingsandsword said:


> It's just hard to accept that after they established there is literally a Temporal Cold War...




So, the Temporal Cold War was a closed causal loop.   Vosk jumps back in time to 1944, and works with Nazi Germany to create a new temporal portal to get back to his own time.  This sets off an temporal arms race, leading to the Temporal Cold War.  At the height of that conflict, in an emergency in the future, Vosk jumped back in time to 1944...

Except, Captain Archer _stops_ that jump.  Vosk didn't go to 1944.  He doesn't work with Nazis, there is no temporal arms race, and no Temporal Cold War.  Archer's intervention probably means that those powers in the Temporal Cold War... never developed, and do not exist in the timeline of ST: Disco. 

This still leaves the some Federation timeships unaccounted for - like the _Aeon-_type and the Wells-class _USS Relativity_, seen in ST: Voyager.  But they are from the 29th century, and ST: Disco season 3 takes place in the 32nd century.  They have hundreds of years in which to work out the fall of the Federation.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 12, 2020)

wingsandsword said:


> Well, hopefully that plot arc ends with that entire series of events being stricken from the timeline.



I really hope not. The idea of a timeline being so bleak, so utterly doomed, that the people who grew up in it are willing to essentially work towards the erasure of themselves and everyone they've ever known in order to 'correct' it, has never sat well with me. It maybe works for the length of a movie, or a two-parter episode, but I don't want to spend an entire season in a setting that grim.

And if it's anything less than unremittingly bleak, if there isn't some universe-ending threat that needs to be prevented from existing, if there are worlds out there where people are living happy lives, then nobody has the right to undo that timeline simply because their own tiny corner of one little galaxy didn't turn out as cushy as they were hoping it would.


----------



## Imaculata (Sep 12, 2020)

The teaser for this new show implies that they are going back to the optimistic world view of classic trek, with a captain that tries to solve problems through diplomacy and intellect rather than firepower. I really hope that is what it turns out to be.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2020)

MarkB said:


> And if it's anything less than unremittingly bleak, if there isn't some universe-ending threat that needs to be prevented from existing, if there are worlds out there where people are living happy lives, then nobody has the right to undo that timeline simply because their own tiny corner of one little galaxy didn't turn out as cushy as they were hoping it would.




At the moment, I'm expecting one of a couple possibilities.

1) This is the end of Discovery's time travel.  They are in the future (well, one future, which could again be rewritten by something else) and they aren't undoing or coming back.

2) The future they see is due to Discovery's departure from th 23rd century.  And, while they may angst over how some people may have some semblance of "happy" in the future, in the balance what they've done created pain and misery for many billions over centuries, and "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" kicks in.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 9, 2021)

Introducing the cast.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> Introducing the cast.



"Video unavailable." Maybe a regional thing?


----------



## Aeson (Sep 9, 2021)

Sorry about that. Morrus mentioned a lot of stuff is unavailable outside of US. ☹ I don't know if I can find an alternate source.

The cast of Star Trek: Strange New Worlds has been revealed. Joining *Anson Mount* (Captain Christopher Pike), *Rebecca Romijn* (Una Chin-Riley/Number One) and *Ethan Peck* (Spock), will be *Babs Olusanmokun* as Dr. M’Benga, *Christina Chong* as La’an Noonien Singh, *Celia Rose Gooding* as Cadet Nyota Uhura, *Jess Bush* as Nurse Christine Chapel, *Melissa Navia* as Lt. Erica Ortegas, and *Bruce Horak* as Hemmer.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2021)

MarkB said:


> "Video unavailable." Maybe a regional thing?




Probably, as I could see it just fine.

Brigning back Uhura, Nurse Chapel, and Dr. M'benga is cool.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> Introducing the cast.



Very cool. Gonna have to brush up on my Trek timeline so I know what changes!


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 9, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Probably, as I could see it just fine.
> 
> Brigning back Uhura, Nurse Chapel, and Dr. M'benga is cool.



And seeing basically the crew that was first imagined for TOS, but with even more diversity on a ship that was already quite diverse, and a blue alien like Spock was originally!  

Rad as hell!


----------



## MarkB (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> Sorry about that. Morrus mentioned a lot of stuff is unavailable outside of US. ☹ I don't know if I can find an alternate source.



This one does provide the major highlights.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> and a blue alien like Spock was originally!
> 
> Rad as hell!




Red as hell, actually.

As I know the story, Spock was originally going to have red skin (and be from Mars, the Vulcan concept came later).  However, in the late 1960s, black and white TV sets were still common, and the makeup would have looked like dark-grey or black - as if Nimoy were wearing blackface - which nobody wanted.

So, they decided to mix up was a yellowish-greenish hue (which is still sold by RCMA as L-N #1, as in 'Leonard Nimoy #1').  This is a bit of a subtle color, so that for the first few episodes, the network's color technicians, who weren't told he was supposed to be different from the rest of the crew, corrected him back to normal human skin tone.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 9, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Red as hell, actually.
> 
> As I know the story, Spock was originally going to have red skin (and be from Mars, the Vulcan concept came later).  However, in the late 1960s, black and white TV sets were still common, and the makeup would have looked like dark-grey or black - as if Nimoy were wearing blackface - which nobody wanted.
> 
> So, they decided to mix up was a yellowish-greenish hue (which is still sold by RCMA as L-N #1, as in 'Leonard Nimoy #1').  This is a bit of a subtle color, so that for the first few episodes, the network's color technicians, who weren't told he was supposed to be different from the rest of the crew, corrected him back to normal human skin tone.



Shoot you’re right, I’d miser called and thought it was an Easter egg of sorts to have an Andorian on the crew, since they’re blue skinned, but yeah I remember the “it looks like blackface” issue. (I’m no lore guy, I learned that first on an episode of Um, Actually on Dropout)


----------



## Morrus (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> Sorry about that. Morrus mentioned a lot of stuff is unavailable outside of US. ☹ I don't know if I can find an alternate source.



I can see it fine.


----------



## Nikosandros (Sep 9, 2021)

Morrus said:


> I can see it fine.



I can't. Maybe it's not available in the EU?


----------



## ART! (Sep 9, 2021)

I was not expecting Chapel, M'Benga, and Uhura, so I am now even _more_ excited for this, if that's possible.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 9, 2021)

I wonder if Brent Spiner will make an appearance. One of the new characters has the name Noonien Singh. Maybe Kahn will return?


----------



## billd91 (Sep 9, 2021)

There have been a lot of really good things about the Discovery series for Star Trek and I'm really excited about the new spinoff, but one aspect of this announcement does hit on its big problem - continuity issues with the original series. 

I'm not thrilled by the idea of a Noonien Singh on the crew so openly. It flies in the face of the records about Khan being so fragmentary due to war chaos and destruction in TOS. Yeah, I get it, the new generation of writers want to hit on the high points of the original series. But it's better to dance a bit farther around them so you don't flat out invalidate previous stories. The trick about StarFleet vowing to "not talk about the Discovery" or any of its crew or missions is a fairly lame cop-out to dodge one of the few black marks against the Discovery series.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> One of the new characters has the name Noonien Singh. Maybe Kahn will return?



I hope not. It's not Star Wars. Everybody doesn't have to be related.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> I wonder if Brent Spiner will make an appearance. One of the new characters has the name Noonien Singh. Maybe Kahn will return?



I kinda hope no Khan. Singh is a very very common name, after all.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 9, 2021)

billd91 said:


> There have been a lot of really good things about the Discovery series for Star Trek and I'm really excited about the new spinoff, but one aspect of this announcement does hit on its big problem - continuity issues with the original series.
> 
> I'm not thrilled by the idea of a Noonien Singh on the crew so openly. It flies in the face of the records about Khan being so fragmentary due to war chaos and destruction in TOS. Yeah, I get it, the new generation of writers want to hit on the high points of the original series. But it's better to dance a bit farther around them so you don't flat out invalidate previous stories. The trick about StarFleet vowing to "not talk about the Discovery" or any of its crew or missions is a fairly lame cop-out to dodge one of the few black marks against the Discovery series.



In my new DS9 headcannon, there is at least one angry speech from Sisko about Discovery, now… 

But other than that I just don’t think they should worry even as much as they do about canon.


----------



## ART! (Sep 9, 2021)

Aeson said:


> I wonder if Brent Spiner will make an appearance. One of the new characters has the name Noonien Singh. Maybe Kahn will return?






billd91 said:


> There have been a lot of really good things about the Discovery series for Star Trek and I'm really excited about the new spinoff, but one aspect of this announcement does hit on its big problem - continuity issues with the original series.
> 
> I'm not thrilled by the idea of a Noonien Singh on the crew so openly. It flies in the face of the records about Khan being so fragmentary due to war chaos and destruction in TOS. Yeah, I get it, the new generation of writers want to hit on the high points of the original series. But it's better to dance a bit farther around them so you don't flat out invalidate previous stories. The trick about StarFleet vowing to "not talk about the Discovery" or any of its crew or missions is a fairly lame cop-out to dodge one of the few black marks against the Discovery series.



"Singh" is a common name in various South Asian languages. I think among Sikhs, all or many men use the Singh name. The Noonien part is also a name, but not very common, AFAICT. 

That said, in ST, Noonien Singh means one thing and one thing only, so it's an...interesting choice? I'll wait to see what they do with it.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I kinda hope no Khan. Singh is a very very common name, after all.




There is very little chance that, with an old villain named "Kahn Noonien Singh", that a new character named "La'an Noonien Singh" will not be somehow related.

I would not expect Kahn to _appear_, but the history will be referenced.

The name Kahn Noonian Singh and Dr. Noonian Soong are similar, as they both reference to the real-world person Kim Noonien Singh, a friend of Gene Roddenberry's from WWII.  Roddenberry used the name in hopes that his old friend would see it, and try to reach out to him.  And Roddenberry just liked reusing names.


----------



## Zaukrie (Sep 9, 2021)

We decided to watch Ep 1 of DS9 last night for some reason ..... my wife remembered every crew member, but not Sisko!

I will likely re-watch the whole thing, I don't remember much of it....

Some of the writing around the aliens behind the prophet....was....not great. They didn't understand loss or death, but wanted to kill Sisko because he would destroy them? 

Anyway, I don't have Paramount, so I haven't seen any of the new Trek, and I'm not sure if I need to (as much as I love Trek).


----------



## Umbran (Sep 9, 2021)

Umbran said:


> I would not expect Kahn to _appear_, but the history will be referenced.




Hm.  You know, there's a chance that they're recycling one of Roddenberry's ideas here...

Anyone watch _Andromeda_, back in 2000-2005?  Remember the character Tyr Anasazi?



Spoiler: some bits about Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda



This was originally a Roddenberry concept, re-adapted by Robert Hewitt Wolfe, and produced by Majel Barrett.  In it, there's "The Commonwealth", a generally beneficent interstellar union, that is brought down by treachery.  One of the ships of the Commonwealth Navy, the titular Andromeda Ascendant (which is sentient) and her captain Dylan Hunt, wind up launched into the future, to awaken to a fallen Commonwealth, which they then proceed to try to revive.

Now, much of this we have seen on Discovery - launched into the future to find a fallen Federation, a ship becoming sentient, and trying to rebuild.  

But, we can also look back to how the Commonwealth fell - at the hands of a eugenics-minded, genetically engineered people (originally of human stock) called the Nietzscheans, who are really a continuation of the concepts introduced to us in Space Seed and Kahn Noonian Singh.

So, like they are reusing some of Roddenberry's ideas in Discover, they may be using others in Strange New Worlds, where La'an is playing the same basic role as foil for Captain Pike...


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 10, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Hm.  You know, there's a chance that they're recycling one of Roddenberry's ideas here...
> 
> Anyone watch _Andromeda_, back in 2000-2005?  Remember the character Tyr Anasazi?
> 
> ...



Had a similar thought, myself. We do know from DS9 that the practice of genetic manipulation did extend, underground, into later times.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 10, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Hm.  You know, there's a chance that they're recycling one of Roddenberry's ideas here...
> 
> Anyone watch _Andromeda_, back in 2000-2005?  Remember the character Tyr Anasazi?
> 
> ...



I loved that show. Always felt like it didn't get the attention it deserved. 

Btw I really need to watch Disco I guess. I had no idea that was the plot!


----------



## ART! (Sep 10, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I loved that show. Always felt like it didn't get the attention it deserved.
> 
> Btw I really need to watch Disco I guess. I had no idea that was the plot!



To be more precise, each season has it's own major arc, and that was the 3rd season's. Possibly the 4th's, too? Season 2 leads up to it, among other things.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 10, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I loved that show. Always felt like it didn't get the attention it deserved.




Um, that's because Kevin Sorbo ruined it (IMHO).  Details available upon request.



doctorbadwolf said:


> Btw I really need to watch Disco I guess. I had no idea that was the plot!




It is really a development in the third season.  I suspect the 4th season to deal with it rather more.


----------



## Mallus (Sep 10, 2021)

I admit to some mixed feelings about a crew member with the surname "Noonien Singh". Didn't see it coming, not sure what to make of it. I will say it gives the show a chance to modernize Trek's approach to transhumanism, to move it away from the aftermath of the Eugenics Wars and do something less, hmmm, old-fashioned with it (as they did with Bashir).


----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2021)

Is it stereotyping to suspect Melissa Navia Lt. Ortegas will be part of the security team?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 10, 2021)

Mallus said:


> Didn't see it coming, not sure what to make of it.




If we were sure what to make of it, it would not be intriguing!


----------



## turnip_farmer (Sep 10, 2021)

Morrus said:


> I can see it fine.



Video seems to be restricted to only display with a US IP address.

(Disclaimer: I obviously did not try 200 different IP addresses, but it wouldn't display with the UK one I tried)


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 10, 2021)

ART! said:


> "Singh" is a common name in various South Asian languages. I think among Sikhs, all or many men use the Singh name. The Noonien part is also a name, but not very common, AFAICT.
> 
> That said, in ST, Noonien Singh means one thing and one thing only, so it's an...interesting choice? I'll wait to see what they do with it.



IIRC Singh means king/lion and is an adopted surname taken by Khalsa Sikhs. There's an honour and duty connotation to it.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2021)

turnip_farmer said:


> Video seems to be restricted to only display with a US IP address.
> 
> (Disclaimer: I obviously did not try 200 different IP addresses, but it wouldn't display with the UK one I tried)



I dunno what to tell you other than that I can see it here in the U.K.


----------



## turnip_farmer (Sep 10, 2021)

Morrus said:


> I dunno what to tell you other than that I can see it here in the U.K.



Paramount built in an exception for Morrus, obviously. You're probably allowed to jump the queue at exclusive nightclubs too.


----------



## Aeson (Sep 10, 2021)

turnip_farmer said:


> Paramount built in an exception for Morrus, obviously. You're probably allowed to jump the queue at exclusive nightclubs too.



He brings his own velvet rope so they can open it just for him.


----------



## CapnZapp (Sep 10, 2021)

MarkB said:


> "Video unavailable."



Unavailable for me as well.


----------



## MarkB (Sep 10, 2021)

Morrus said:


> I dunno what to tell you other than that I can see it here in the U.K.



Do you use a VPN?


----------



## Morrus (Sep 10, 2021)

MarkB said:


> Do you use a VPN?



I wasn't suggesting we undertake a CSI investigation. But no, I don't.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 11, 2021)

Ryujin said:


> IIRC Singh means king/lion and is an adopted surname taken by Khalsa Sikhs. There's an honour and duty connotation to it.



It’s also just very common. It’s the full name that makes me suspect that there will be a connection.


----------



## wingsandsword (Sep 11, 2021)

Aeson said:


> I wonder if Brent Spiner will make an appearance. One of the new characters has the name Noonien Singh. Maybe Kahn will return?




Since this is supposed to be in the same continuity as TOS, it's not so much that Khan will return, because he hasn't been defrosted yet.

Strange New Worlds is supposed to take place starting circa 2257/2258, shortly after the end of Season 2  of Discovery (when Discovery takes it's one-way trip to the 32nd century).

Kirk takes command in 2265, so this is about ~7 years before (presumably a "normal" seven year run for a Trek series would run up to the change of command with Kirk taking over around the series finale).

. . .and Khan and the Botany Bay was discovered in 2266 in the 1st season of TOS, about 9 years in the future from the start of Strange New Worlds.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 11, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> It’s also just very common. It’s the full name that makes me suspect that there will be a connection.



They‘re not so much foreshadowing a connection as much as pasting it up on giant billboards in all directions.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 11, 2021)

billd91 said:


> They‘re not so much foreshadowing a connection as much as pasting it up on giant billboards in all directions.



Okay?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 11, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Okay?




He's reacting to "suspect", I think.  When the most charismatic villain ever in the history of Trek, who got what is often considered the best Trek movie ever has their name come up... there _WILL BE_ a connection.  We pretty much _know_ it, because nobody writing for Trek would choose that name accidentally, and choosing it and not having a connection would cheese people off to no end.


----------



## Mallus (Sep 11, 2021)

Umbran said:


> If we were sure what to make of it, it would not be intriguing!



True. The new series have done the one thing I didn’t think they could: surprise me (as a lifelong Trekkie).

Can’t wait for the new seasons to start, but at least there’s Foundation coming next week on Apple. And Lower Decks, if I break down and re-sub before Discovery’s premier in November.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 11, 2021)

Umbran said:


> He's reacting to "suspect".  When the most charismatic villain ever in the history of Trek, who got what is often considered the best Trek movie ever has their name come up... there _WILL BE_ a connection.



Most definitely, though I'm thinking that it's going to be something like what I've read previously (either in this thread or elsewhere) about how a significant percentage of modern people can trace their lineage back to Gengis Khan and one of his hundreds of children. (... 8 percent of men across 16 different ethnic populations in Asia ..." - Source: Genghis Khan DNA & Descendants)


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 12, 2021)

Ryujin said:


> Most definitely, though I'm thinking that it's going to be something like what I've read previously (either in this thread or elsewhere) about how a significant percentage of modern people can trace their lineage back to Gengis Khan and one of his hundreds of children. (... 8 percent of men across 16 different ethnic populations in Asia ..." - Source: Genghis Khan DNA & Descendants)



Could be that, could be mildly stronger connection, like they're a direct descendant rather than distant, could be something surprising, could be a red herring.


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> ... could be a red herring.




Again, I have seen no sign they disrespect the fans so much as to make a red herring.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Sep 12, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Again, I have seen no sign they disrespect the fans so much as to make a red herring.



A red herring isn’t disrespectful.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 12, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> A red herring isn’t disrespectful.



A red herring that blatant kinda would be. Coming as a casting decision announcement, to *NOT* have some relevance to Khan would be worse than a red herring - it would be a bait and switch.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Sep 12, 2021)

Umbran said:


> Red as hell, actually.
> 
> As I know the story, Spock was originally going to have red skin (and be from Mars, the Vulcan concept came later).  However, in the late 1960s, black and white TV sets were still common, and the makeup would have looked like dark-grey or black - as if Nimoy were wearing blackface - which nobody wanted.
> 
> So, they decided to mix up was a yellowish-greenish hue (which is still sold by RCMA as L-N #1, as in 'Leonard Nimoy #1').  This is a bit of a subtle color, so that for the first few episodes, the network's color technicians, who weren't told he was supposed to be different from the rest of the crew, corrected him back to normal human skin tone.



As a small side trek (pun intended): One of the things that can be amazing if we look at "modern" (60s is modern?) technology is that even the most simple seeming things - like broadcasting a show that was already filmed, cut, edited and what not,t here is still yet another layer you didn't think, anticipate or know about until someone tells you about it. Everything is a giant pipeline of things that remain invisible to end customers - unless someone screwed up.
Heck, even when I was working for our "Abizeitung" (a magazine/newspaper style production for those graduating the German A-Levels or whatever equivalent) there were surprises like that. Like that "In the Mirror" poem we put into the magazine that we deliberely mirrored... which the printing guys considered as an error and repaired it so our little mirror gag never made it to print, and the mirror-poem remains unmirrored.  
[/tangent]

Are we there yet?


----------



## Umbran (Sep 12, 2021)

doctorbadwolf said:


> A red herring isn’t disrespectful.




_That_ as a red herring would be.  Whether tools are good or bad is generally situational.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 12, 2021)

I could certainly stand a little deep dive fan service by naming a character Jonathan Richard Raintree. If we're going back to just prior to TOS, might as well.


----------



## ART! (Sep 12, 2021)

Ryujin said:


> Most definitely, though I'm thinking that it's going to be something like what I've read previously (either in this thread or elsewhere) about how a significant percentage of modern people can trace their lineage back to Gengis Khan and one of his hundreds of children. (... 8 percent of men across 16 different ethnic populations in Asia ..." - Source: Genghis Khan DNA & Descendants)



Yeah, for now I'm assuming La'an _is_ a descendent of Khan, and has had to deal with and overcome people's reactions to that her whole life. It's not _their_ fault their ancestors were eugenic superhumans. 

I figure La'an will have one or more enhanced abilities, but probably not intelligence?, since we have Spock and Number One in the "walking computer" department. There are other kinds of intelligence, of course, and it would be neat to see that played up - like being great at "reading" people, for instance. There's room there to explore neurodivergence, but that exists with Spock and Una, too, I guess.


----------



## Morrus (Sep 12, 2021)

ART! said:


> Yeah, for now I'm assuming La'an _is_ a descendent of Khan, and has had to deal with and overcome people's reactions to that her whole life.



Trying to remember the Khan TOS episode -- was he well known, or did they have to research who he was?


----------



## ART! (Sep 12, 2021)

Morrus said:


> Trying to remember the Khan TOS episode -- was he well known, or did they have to research who he was?



I think once they confirmed his identity from historical records, everyone was like "oh, _that_ guy!"


----------



## MarkB (Sep 12, 2021)

Morrus said:


> Trying to remember the Khan TOS episode -- was he well known, or did they have to research who he was?



As I recall, they knew about the Eugenics wars in general, but had to have one of the history specialists on the crew provide the specifics.

And then she turned out to have a romanticised view of the time period, and was easily seduced to Khan's side, aiding in his takeover of the ship. Though to be fair, the seduction seems to have been two-way, as he ended up marrying her.

I seem to recall there being an Enterprise episode or two about other enhanced humans. I can't remember the details, but I think it starred Brent Spiner, and may have drawn some link between the Noonian Singh and Noonian Soong lineages. Time to dig up some episodes on Netflix.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 12, 2021)

ART! said:


> I think once they confirmed his identity from historical records, everyone was like "oh, _that_ guy!"



I seem to recall they said that records were pretty scarce from the time during and just after The Eugenics Wars, so not a lot of specific information was known. They had some records, however, it wasn't the sort of thing that was exactly common knowledge. The comments about how "several dozen of these supermen had gone missing" at the end of The Eugenics War hints that there wasn't a lot of information about the individuals, apart from the usual cursory historical mention.


----------



## Ryujin (Sep 12, 2021)

MarkB said:


> As I recall, they knew about the Eugenics wars in general, but had to have one of the history specialists on the crew provide the specifics.
> 
> And then she turned out to have a romanticised view of the time period, and was easily seduced to Khan's side, aiding in his takeover of the ship. Though to be fair, the seduction seems to have been two-way, as he ended up marrying her.
> 
> I seem to recall there being an Enterprise episode or two about other enhanced humans. I can't remember the details, but I think it starred Brent Spiner, and may have drawn some link between the Noonian Singh and Noonian Soong lineages. Time to dig up some episodes on Netflix.



A group of episodes. They used it to try and explain the altered looks of the Klingons, as well as introducing a group of Eugenics War embryos, that Soong had raised to maturity. At the end of the last episode Soong started talking about changing his line of research to cybernetics.


----------



## Aeson (Jan 21, 2022)

May 5th is the premiere date. Mark your calendars. They also announced there will be a 2nd season. Paramount is going all in on Star Trek. All of the Trek shows were renewed for another season. Picard's 2nd season hasn't premiered yet, and it's been renewed for a 3rd.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 21, 2022)

Aeson said:


> Paramount is going all in on Star Trek.




So far, the quality on them has been pretty good, so I can hardly fault that decision.


----------



## Vael (Jan 21, 2022)

I haven't been this happy to be a Trek fan since DS9 was on the air. So much Trek!


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jan 21, 2022)

Umbran said:


> So far, the quality on them has been pretty good, so I can hardly fault that decision.




Star Trek is the _only_ reason so far to get Paramount+. But there's a lot of it, and it's really good. Heck, _Lower Decks _alone was awesome- and that's animated! 

...eh, I hear that _Evil _is good? Haven't watched it yet.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 21, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Star Trek is the _only_ reason so far to get Paramount+. But there's a lot of it, and it's really good. Heck, _Lower Decks _alone was awesome- and that's animated!




There'll be a trick to not flooding the market and over-saturating the viewers.  However, with modern short seasons, it is probably a managable trick.  I suspect the fanbase will tolerate something like a long average of one show a week for indefinite periods.



Snarf Zagyg said:


> ...eh, I hear that _Evil _is good? Haven't watched it yet.




_Evil_ is pretty good. Not perfect, but I've enjoyed it.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 21, 2022)

I keep forgetting to check out Evil.

I give the new series a lot of credit for updating Trek in ways that I didn't expect, especially now that they've settled on a showrunner for Discovery whose two seasons feel pretty coherent. And bringing Jean-Luc back to tell a story about regret, refugees and a Romulan samurai kid was sheer nutty sci-fi genius. 

Also, the announcement of a second season of Strange New Worlds made my day.


----------



## ART! (Jan 21, 2022)

A SNW trailer can't be too far off, can it? When have we been getting our first trailers for new shows and seasons in this P+ era?


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jan 21, 2022)

ART! said:


> A SNW trailer can't be too far off, can it? When have we been getting our first trailers for new shows and seasons in this P+ era?




Honestly, I could probably just use three minutes of Anson Mount looking pensively in the distance.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 21, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Honestly, I could probably just use three minutes of Anson Mount looking pensively in the distance.



Anson looking pensive and _wholesome_.

Also, the full trailer for Picard S02 is out. Can confirm a certain bartender hanging out on 21st Earth...


----------



## GreyLord (Jan 21, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Star Trek is the _only_ reason so far to get Paramount+. But there's a lot of it, and it's really good. Heck, _Lower Decks _alone was awesome- and that's animated!
> 
> ...eh, I hear that _Evil _is good? Haven't watched it yet.




No, that would be Magnum P.I.

Best show on the channel.


----------



## ART! (Jan 21, 2022)

Picard season 2 full trailer: 



Spoiler


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jan 21, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Star Trek is the _only_ reason so far to get Paramount+. But there's a lot of it, and it's really good. Heck, _Lower Decks _alone was awesome- and that's animated!
> 
> ...eh, I hear that _Evil _is good? Haven't watched it yet.




If you can get on its very weird, horror-comedy wavelength, Evil is seriously, seriously great. It simultaneously takes itself very seriously and not seriously at all. I think some people confuse its tone and approach with SyFy shows like Warehouse 13, but it's doing something much meaner and more subversive.

ETA: Forgot to add that it's a rare show that seems to "get" how internet culture works, and rarely embarrasses itself while digging into that kind of material.


----------



## Aeson (Jan 21, 2022)

GreyLord said:


> No, that would be Magnum P.I.
> 
> Best show on the channel.



The original or the remake? Cuz there's one of each.  

I will say, the new Higgins is way hotter than the old one.


----------



## GreyLord (Jan 22, 2022)

ART! said:


>



Looks awesome


----------



## Morrus (Jan 22, 2022)

ART! said:


>



Companies who geolock trailers have a level of hell reserved for them.


----------



## Aeson (Jan 22, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Companies who geolock trailers have a level of hell reserved for them.



That makes no sense. More views = more interest.


----------



## Ixal (Jan 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Companies who geolock trailers have a level of hell reserved for them.



Trailers find a way


Spoiler: Spoiler because the preview picture is kinda spoilery


----------



## MarkB (Jan 24, 2022)

Something that occurred to me while re-watching the 2009 Star Trek: During the time period of _Strange New Worlds_ George Kirk is a serving officer. I doubt they could get Chris Hemsworth, but it'd be fun if they managed to work in an appearance for the character, and maybe even the USS Kelvin as well.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 24, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Something that occurred to me while re-watching the 2009 Star Trek: During the time period of _Strange New Worlds_ George Kirk is a serving officer. I doubt they could get Chris Hemsworth, but it'd be fun if they managed to work in an appearance for the character, and maybe even the USS Kelvin as well.




Little is clearly canonical about George Kirk, as most of what we do know comes from an alternate timeline.  But, in the Kelvin Timeline, he's already a Lieutenant Commander, and first officer of the Kelvin, in 2233.  Strange New Worlds takes place in the 2250s.  By the time of SNW, if he's still on active duty, George Kirk would be a 20+ year career officer, unlikely to be serving on that same ship.


----------



## Paul Farquhar (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> But, in the Kelvin Timeline, he's already a Lieutenant Commander, and first officer of the Kelvin, in 2233.



This is would be in both timelines, since it's the situation before the event that causes the divergence.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 25, 2022)

Paul Farquhar said:


> This is would be in both timelines, since it's the situation before the event that causes the divergence.




Probably, which is why I used it.  However, I don't count on writers holding to assumed continuity, so I note the distinction.


----------



## MarkB (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Little is clearly canonical about George Kirk, as most of what we do know comes from an alternate timeline.  But, in the Kelvin Timeline, he's already a Lieutenant Commander, and first officer of the Kelvin, in 2233.  Strange New Worlds takes place in the 2250s.  By the time of SNW, if he's still on active duty, George Kirk would be a 20+ year career officer, unlikely to be serving on that same ship.



True. Then again, his son wound up captaining the Enterprise for a similar period.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 25, 2022)

MarkB said:


> True. Then again, his son wound up captaining the Enterprise for a similar period.




Nope.  James T Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise in 2265.  He had his 5-year mission, became super-famous, and was promoted to Rear-Admiral, posted as Chief of Starfleet Operations, in 2270.  He recommends Will Decker to become his replacement.  V'ger shows up in the mid 2270s (Star Trek: The Motion Picture).  Kirk reassumes command of the Enterprise in the mid-to-late 2270s, but then retires.  He eventually returns to the Admiralty to suppervise Command track cadets in 2284, and then steals the Enterprise to deal with Khan (Star Trek II).


----------



## MarkB (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Nope.  James T Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise in 2265.  He had his 5-year mission, became super-famous, and was promoted to Rear-Admiral, posted as Chief of Starfleet Operations, in 2270.  He recommends Will Decker to become his replacement.  V'ger shows up in the mid 2270s (Star Trek: The Motion Picture).  Kirk reassumes command of the Enterprise in the mid-to-late 2270s, but then retires.  He eventually returns to the Admiralty to suppervise Command track cadets in 2284, and then steals the Enterprise to deal with Khan (Star Trek II).



Still captaining the Enterprise.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 25, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Still captaining the Enterprise.




For more like 7 to 10 years, rather than 15+, is the point.


----------



## MarkB (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> For more like 7 to 10 years, rather than 15+, is the point.



But he did get a new captaincy afterwards, albeit of a different ship with the same name.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 25, 2022)

MarkB said:


> But he did get a new captaincy afterwards, albeit of a different ship with the same name.




What's your argument or evidence that this is common enough in Starfleet to expect that his father did the same thing?


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> What's your argument or evidence that this is common enough in Starfleet to expect that his father did the same thing?



I would think it rather unlikely, given that Kirk's new "captaincy" was the result of a court martial.


----------



## ART! (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Nope.  James T Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise in 2265.  He had his 5-year mission, became super-famous, and was promoted to Rear-Admiral, posted as Chief of Starfleet Operations, in 2270.  He recommends Will Decker to become his replacement.  V'ger shows up in the mid 2270s (Star Trek: The Motion Picture).  Kirk reassumes command of the Enterprise in the mid-to-late 2270s, but then retires.  He eventually returns to the Admiralty to suppervise Command track cadets in 2284, and then steals the Enterprise to deal with Khan (Star Trek II).



My nerd brain insists I correct you: Spock hands over the reigns to Kirk during the Khan situation (2285?), then Kirk steals the Enterprise not long after, as seen in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.


----------



## MarkB (Jan 25, 2022)

Umbran said:


> What's your argument or evidence that this is common enough in Starfleet to expect that his father did the same thing?



Merely that it's not utterly unprecedented.

Edit: Or would that be unantecedented in this case?


----------



## Aeson (Feb 16, 2022)

See Star Trek's New Enterprise Bridge In Detail
					

We've got preview shots from the bridge of the new Enterprise! See how they match up to shots from the original Star Trek!




					www.giantfreakinrobot.com
				




Some pictures of the bridge. They also show pictures of the bridge from TOS.


----------

