"Star Trek: Discovery" News & Discussion Thread

  • We have upgraded to Xenforo 2. We've decided to open the forums back up while we configure the theme and plugins. Thanks for your patience.

Latest News

MDawg

Nerfariously planning
Aug 26, 2001
16,561
Ratings
807 4
83
36
Not of your damn business
www.zimed.net
#2
I don't watch CBS as it is outside of Colbert. I'm sure as hell not gonna pay to get a crappy CBS digital service to watch one thing that would interest me.

Official PR statement

This bit seems to make things interesting:
The new television series is not related to the upcoming feature film Star Trek Beyond which is scheduled to be distributed by Paramount Pictures in summer 2016.
I wonder if this could mean Worf is getting his show that Michael Dorn has been advocating for or at least something not set in the all-running, all the time reboot-universe.
 

wonderfly

Shaking things up a bit
Staff member
Administrator
Mar 22, 2002
18,369
Ratings
831 14
83
42
Springfield, MO
#3
Dangit, CBS, get with the program and join Hulu!!

Too early to tell just what's going on here...at MDawg said: is it in the "new" timeline? The "old" timeline? Next Generation era? The Captain Kirk era?

$6 is pretty cheap...I wonder if they'll dump all episodes online at once, like Netflix, or spread them out? I'd like to pay $6 and watch the entire season, and then cancel the service...
 

Mandouga

Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2007
8,856
Ratings
296 14
48
Newington, CT, USA
#6
This has made me wonder if streaming services are starting to become a "dumping ground" of sorts for shows that the networks (terrestrial or cable) either aren't willing to take a chance on or otherwise don't (or no longer) want to deal with (on a related note, Power Rangers is moving to Netflix in 2017), but goes (far) beyond the scope of this thread.

Suffice it to say, I will agree with one thing: CBS is making a mistake by making this show; the first in the soon-to-be 50 year franchise since Enterprise exclusive to their (paid) streaming service. Also consider this:

ABC has Watch ABC, NBC has their streaming app, Fox has Fox Now, and PBS has their streaming app. Okay, so the first three are free (with a cable subscription; for PBS, I think they need your e-mail address...well for the Roku version, anyway), but still, I hope this doesn't mark the beginning of a possible trend...
 

Goldstar Neo

Good Morning!
Jun 4, 2007
21,146
Ratings
352
48
49
Cartoonsville
animationnation.proboards20.com
#7
More and more people are abandoning the broadcast networks in favor of watching their favorite shows on the internet, and the network execs know this. And then you have the "cord cutters" who just watch the internet and don't bother with broadcast TV or cable at all. Network streaming services are hardly a "trend". It's the future. In another decade or so, I predict that the line between network, cable and the internet will be very blurred.

If Syfy were a true science fiction channel, then the new Star Trek series could air there.
 
Last edited:

Goldstar Neo

Good Morning!
Jun 4, 2007
21,146
Ratings
352
48
49
Cartoonsville
animationnation.proboards20.com
#9
Not to get too off track, but doesn't that make the old "you can't buy cable channels individually" argument for the cable companies useless then?
Probably, but that won't stop the cable companies from continuing to charge their customers for channels by the package, I'd wager. There are a lot of channels that they know people wouldn't pay for if they had the option to skip them.

This is too big a franchise to be taking a gamble on. Look what happened with Enterprise and UPN.
Like I said before, Syfy could have aired the series, if science fiction were more of a priority for the channel.
 

wonderfly

Shaking things up a bit
Staff member
Administrator
Mar 22, 2002
18,369
Ratings
831 14
83
42
Springfield, MO
#11
Like I said before, Syfy could have aired the series, if science fiction were more of a priority for the channel.
I could be misunderstanding, but Syfy is owned by NBC, and Star Trek is co-owned by CBS/Paramount, therefore: No, Syfy channel would not be a fit for airing a brand new Star Trek series.

defunctzombie said:
Not to get too off track, but doesn't that make the old "you can't buy cable channels individually" argument for the cable companies useless then?
It's heading that way fast. See the "leaving cable behind" thread on the Entertainment forum, but that's the future, and CBS is banking on that, it seems...
 

Yojimbo

Yes, have some.
Staff member
Moderator
Reporter
Jul 13, 2003
33,062
Ratings
11,006 21
113
Shahdaroba
www.dcauresource.com
#17
2 rumors about the continuity about the series have surfaced.

The series, according to unnamed sources, will be set in the original continuity of the other TV shows, not the continuity of the new films, as rebooted by JJ Abrams. It's also said that the show will take place between the Star Trek: The Original Series and Star Trek: The Next Generation time-frames (or more specifically, post- Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country, the last of the stand-alone films featuring the original series cast.
This sounds like something all Trekkies could get behind.

Another source said the show will be an anthology, with virtually any time-frame in the Star Trek world being open in future seasons.
I suppose think Legends of Tomorrow on CW.
 

wonderfly

Shaking things up a bit
Staff member
Administrator
Mar 22, 2002
18,369
Ratings
831 14
83
42
Springfield, MO
#19
Perhaps an anthology series like "American Horror Story" - a new setting each season?

So something like:

Season 1: Set between "TOS" and "TNG"?
Season 2: Set in the rebooted/altered new movie-verse?

I'd be down with that.
 

Gatomon41

Tactical Easter Action
Apr 3, 2005
20,763
Ratings
235
63
34
Deo confidimus, Sic me Deus adiuvet
twitter.com
#20
A few rules for any new Star Trek:

1. Do not let Brannon Braga write anything dealing with evolution.
2. Do not let Brannon Braga write anything.
3. No Hippies.
4. No children.
5. Get a science consultant.
6. Listen to science consultant.
7. Do no use anymore subatomic technobabble that makes no sense.
8. If technobabble has to be used, at least use it correctly. Get a issue of Scientific American to see how it is done.
 

Similar threads