New Star Trek: Discovery Season 3 Trailer And Poster

[JayC]

The new season of "Star Trek: Discovery" premieres October 15, only on CBS All Access. Watch the Official Trailer, which debuted during the "Star Trek: Discovery" panel on Star Trek Day.
 

[Satam]

Put a shirt on.

[JayC]

If the go down this route they better give us specifics on this Burn and how the Federation has taken a turn for the worst. I wonder if they will try and tie this into the Temporal Cold War stuff from the Enterprise series.

[mako]

You know a franchise is in trouble when their big attempt at a show-saving paradigm shift is to rip off the plot of The New Adventures of He-Man.

[JayC]

47 minutes ago, jlavaia said:

how is the franchise in trouble? picard is a huge success. this show is ready to air its 3rd season, and has a very strong following. lower decks is getting lots of views. and a show that may rival picard for flagship status, brave new world, is coming next year. to me it seems like the franchise is thriving, seeing as its been over 20 years since the franchise concurrently ran 3 shows.

Me and my wife tried watching the first episode of Lower Decks but couldn't get past the first 15 minutes.

[mako]

5 hours ago, jlavaia said:

how is the franchise in trouble? picard is a huge success. this show is ready to air its 3rd season, and has a very strong following. lower decks is getting lots of views. and a show that may rival picard for flagship status, brave new world, is coming next year. to me it seems like the franchise is thriving, seeing as its been over 20 years since the franchise concurrently ran 3 shows.

HA! I almost thought you were serious. Good one!

[Satam]

6 hours ago, jlavaia said:

how is the franchise in trouble? picard is a huge success. this show is ready to air its 3rd season, and has a very strong following. lower decks is getting lots of views. and a show that may rival picard for flagship status, brave new world, is coming next year. to me it seems like the franchise is thriving, seeing as its been over 20 years since the franchise concurrently ran 3 shows.

This is the first time Star Trek has ever had more than two new shows at the same time.  DS9 overlapped with TNG and with Voyager, but Voyager didn't air until 1995, a year after TNG ended.

[ghostbogey]

Well.....

I watched a few episode (Discovery and Picard). They don't do anything for me....

Not saying there good or bad. There just ok to me IMHO. You have so many other SF show options

out there to invest your "time" in. It just makes it hard for ST shows when your just ok IMHO.

And yes....I am a ST fan.....

"Raised by Wolves" is just a example of the SF stuff that's out there. That show has my interest

and makes me want to invest some time with them (so far). If your really into Star Trek Discovery and

Picard,  enjoy them. "Live long and prosper"!!!!!....huh, seems like the right thing to say=^)

Edited September 11, 2020 by ghostbogey

[lazrod]

15 hours ago, jlavaia said:

how is the franchise in trouble? picard is a huge success. this show is ready to air its 3rd season, and has a very strong following. lower decks is getting lots of views. and a show that may rival picard for flagship status, brave new world, is coming next year. to me it seems like the franchise is thriving, seeing as its been over 20 years since the franchise concurrently ran 3 shows.

Calling Picard a "huge" success seems a bit much to me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the show and think it is much better than most people seem to, but "huge success"... ? Lets see what season 2 brings....

As for Discovery....it is the shining example for what Star Trek can be but isn't. Look at Picard; a good, possibly great show, then look at Discovery....a dumpster fire. 

Discovery supposedly takes place about 100+ years before Picard correct? Yet the technology on Discovery often looks equal to or more advanced than Picard. Let's not even start on what they did to the Klingons...

Star Trek has always been a franchise as much about characters as story or special effects. We cared about Kirk and Spock, Picard and Data, Sisko and Janeway, etc. Who do we care about on Discovery? The lead character is annoying and not believable. The only characters I cared about on Discovery were Captain Pike and "Number One" and they weren't really part of the main show. I did find the character of Saru interesting, hopefully they don't mess him up.

Bottom line....Star Trek is in less trouble than it was, primarily because of the success of Picard, but if the franchise is relying on Discovery for the long term...... that could be major trouble IMO

[JayC]

As a long time fan IMO so far none of the new Star Trek stuff has been that great to me. Season 1 of Discovery was horrible and totally crapped on established Trek continuity. Season 2 was an improvement and granted was hampered by having to dig themselves out of the hole they created in season 1. I did like Pike, Spock and the Enterprise crew so I will give that new series a try however I always worry with these prequel shows that they will not follow already established continuity.

I will give Discovery season 3 a try but i've not yet seen anything that makes me super excited but at least now that they are in the future and the screwing up continuity problem is less of a factor.

Lower Decks as I previously mentioned was unwatchable.

Picard has parts I liked but wasn't nearly as good as I had hopped.

As for being the most watched on CBS access, well no duh. Probably 90% of the people who pay for that streaming service are doing so for Star Trek, so even if they dont like what has aired or dont think its great, they will probably continue to watch and hope things improve which is kinda where I am at. Im not saying everyone hates the new stuff but there are def a lot who do. Also shows like Discovery which was the streamers flagship show, there was no way they would cancel it due to the image it would have projected and as streaming services go I dont think it is rating to high compared to it's competitors. They are churning out a lot of Trek right now but I would say the franchise is no where near as popular as it was in its golden years during the late 80s and early 90s.

[Satam]

19 hours ago, jlavaia said:

brave new world is the future of the franchise. i really cant see picard being a long term show. discovery can actual stay around for a few more seasons now that its in the future too, but brave new world is where things are going. it has star power, classic characters, new characters, and the enterprise. 

You mean Strange New Worlds.  Brave New World is a book by Aldous Huxley.

5 hours ago, jlavaia said:

what continuity was crapped on? nothing canon has ever been made from that time period and nothing in the show made something that came later not have happened. 

Jay probably has other examples that bug him, but here are the two that bug me the most:
-Section 31 goes from being a clandestine rogue organization in the 22nd century to a pretty open official Starfleet intelligence organization in Discovery's 23rd century and then back to a super-secret and unsanctioned organization in the 24th century.
-Discovery took Harry Mudd, a relatively harmless and somewhat buffoonish conman and rogue, and turned him into a dangerous psychotic murderer, but it totally doesn't dump on canon because all that happened in a time loop.
 

[Satam]

2 hours ago, jlavaia said:

- so wheres the issue with canon? if you finish watching season 2 of discovery you'll see why it couldnt operate openly any longer and once again returned to doing "unsanctioned" black ops. all the show did was expand upon what was briefly put on screen in enterprise and ds9. it didnt alter canon. 

- the harry mudd episodes were fantastic, dwight was amazing as the character. again, expanded characterization showing the character when he was younger. and it was an amusing and cool way to actually show all of lorcas "trophies". in the time loop episode youre referring to. his short trek episode was one of the best too. they could give him his own spinoff show. we have no way of knowing what harry mudd was like during this time, they didnt alter canon they added to it. just like with sarek, pike, and spock. 

 

No one ever said it altered the canon, just that it "crapped on continuity." You see this stuff as adding to canon. Technically it does that, sure. But others here don't appreciate it screwing with continuity only to have it somehow conveniently rectified/connect offscreen by the time other series take place.  Established Trek continuity (ignoring JJ's movies) can be viewed as generally a straight line between points.  Looking closer and allowing for time in between, there's inevitably some zigs and zags.  I won't speak for Jay, but the zigs that Discovery has taken make it difficult for me to fathom where and how things zig back to what I already knew.
I actually like Rainn Wilson's Harry Mudd, but I like him a lot more when I pretend he's a different character, because aside from his name, he is.  Something huge and lifechanging (offscreen, presumably) needs to happen for the DSC Mudd to become the TOS Mudd. That's not at all implausible in a span of ten years or so, just very convenient.
Section 31 is a bigger issue to me.  Assuming Starfleet shuts it down after the incident with Control and/or that its operatives are forced back into the shadows the way they used to be, and let's say Starfleet intelligence proper removes all records of its existence, and let's say that people were sworn to secrecy, and lets also assume that the only people who remember it by the 2370s are all very old. Well, 120 years is plenty of time to try to eliminate information, but it's also a lot of time for rumors to swirl. People talk. A lot. I find it very hard to believe Sisko wouldn't have at least heard rumors, especially while doing a purposeful hunt for information on Section 31. He tells Bashir, he "came up empty handed," not "I heard some rumors, but nothing panned out."  I suppose one could say that's exactly what happened, and he just chose different words, but again, it's just too convenient for me. Further, I'll add that like Boba Fett or Ridley Scott's Aliens, I found Section 31 interesting in no small part because of it's mystery. The more gaps people try to fill in, the less mysterious it is, and the less interesting I find it.

[mako]

On 9/8/2020 at 11:50 PM, Satam said:

This is the first time Star Trek has ever had more than two new shows at the same time.  DS9 overlapped with TNG and with Voyager, but Voyager didn't air until 1995, a year after TNG ended.

That's because THOSE shows were Star Trek. They didn't need any more than that. 

[Satam]

7 minutes ago, mako said:

That's because THOSE shows were Star Trek. They didn't need any more than that. 

Yeah, I'm definitely not a fan of the dump as much crap as possible into the Star Trek boat until it completely sinks approach.

[Satam]

11 hours ago, jlavaia said:

as for section 31and sisko, if you remember ds9, sisko was never really up on anything and didnt have alot of contact with anyone outside the show. who would he ask for information?

I remember Deep Space Nine very well. Do you? Sisko isn't Neelix. He was a Starfleet captain with a career spanning over twenty years, less than seven of which were spent on the station. He could talk to people he knew from Starfleet Academy, people he served with at his first posting in New Berlin on the moon, people he served with on the USS Livingston, people he served with on the USS Okinawa, other survivors from the USS Saratoga, people he served with at the Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards, people he knew at Starfleet headquarters,  diplomats he surely met through his friendship with Curzon Dax, civilian contacts he would have on Earth (friends and family), multiple friends and acquaintances mentioned serving as commanders and captains on other Starfleet ships, people he met at multiple conferences and stuff, etc.

[Satam]

10 minutes ago, jlavaia said:

exactly, and not one of those of people is even remotely high up in the command chain of starfleet and definitely not high enough up to have the kind of clearance necessary to know about section 31, especially after what happened in discovery. the highest ranking person he couldve gone to wouldve been admiral ross and he was involved with section 31 so he wouldve lied to him. which is something else your not thinking of. youre assuming that everyone sisko contacted was truthful with him. and sisko was not a high ranking or fast rising officer. he was only a captain for what, maybe 4 years. he definitely didnt have the types of contacts that would have the knowledge of section 31 he was looking for.

Remember what I said about rumors?  No? Screw it.  This is starting to go in circles.

[Satam]

20 minutes ago, jlavaia said:

why do you assume that low ranking officers and diplomats would hear rumors about a secret branch of starfleet that operates behind the scenes at the highest levels? and now knowing what we know from discovery makes it even less likely that the secret would get out. 

we also dont know that sisko didnt hear of any rumors. we only know what he told julian. in your mind you have what you assume to have occured off screen as fact and unfortunately if it didnt happen on screen it didnt actually occur with regards to the canon of this franchise.

I don't assume anything at all, necessarily.  All of it works better had they not been operating in the open, even as far back as 120 years earlier.  That's what I said before.  Again.  Circles.  BTW,  you should reread the last sentence of your first and second paragraphs there. Also other captains are not "low ranking officers." Done with this now.

[Satam]

28 minutes ago, jlavaia said:

they werent really operating in the open either. lets be real here, one ship and starfleet high command knew about them and they had authority only cause starfleet was at war and this comes from section 31 appearance in enterprise. remember discovery the ship was highly classified itself and basically worked under section 31. 

and dont see the issues with my 2 questions there. 1st sentence is asking why you assume a newly promoted captain would have access to the types of contacts associated with the most classified department of starfleet. the 2nd is stating that you have no clue what occured off screen. no one does. we can guess and theorize but we just dont know and probaly never will know. and thats the whole thing, youre saying that discovery "crapped on continuity" cause it went against what you perceive occured off screen.

I've tried very hard to be civil and never insulting, despite little jabs from you here and there, but I have to say that you have some serious issues with reading comprehension.

[mako]

11 minutes ago, jlavaia said:

is there a book or manual you clowns get this stuff from cause you all post it the same way?

I was just about to ask you the same thing.

[JayC]

On 9/10/2020 at 12:45 PM, jlavaia said:

what continuity was crapped on? nothing canon has ever been made from that time period and nothing in the show made something that came later not have happened. 

There is to much to try and explain it all. There has been plenty of cannon established before and after Discovery that Discovery just crapped on IMO. Just off the top of my head having holodecks, holographic communications and the big one, being able to traverse anywhere in the universe in a blink of an eye. The bridge of Discovery looks like it's bigger than a 24th century Galaxy Glass ship as do their quarters. Kilingons having cloaking technology which didnt happen until they traded their ship designs with the Romulans during TOS. The looks of the Kilingons. Like I say they manage to do some damage control in season 2 to try and gloss over the crap that was season 1 but sending them into the distant future was probably the best thing they could do for that show.

[JayC]

Also keep it on topic. I don't care who started it, if you can't have a discussion without attacking someone then refrain from posting. If you like the new shows, great if you don't also great. Either way your likely not going to change someone's mind on the subject. We each watch these things with different perspectives, viewpoints and expectations or perhaps some with no expectations at all.

[JayC]

Getting back on subject, Enterprise wasn't perfect and I actually ended up enjoying it far more when I went back an rewatched the entire series recently on Netflix than I did when it originally aired, but they respected for the most part what had come before. They made sure the technology within reason didnt look like it came from the 24th century or beyond. They designed the ship so it felt more like a cramped submarine and not bigger than the Constitution Class ships let alone a Galaxy class starship. They used things like shuttle pods because the transporters were still new. In other words they went to great lengths to fit the time period the show was supposed to have taken place in. Discovery didn't do that. You can have modern FX without making things look more futuristic than the time period it's supposed to take place in. At least with the Chris Pine movies they were smart enough to make it an alternate universe so they could have more freedom and not be bound so much by continuity. That was not the case with Discovery. Again putting them in the distant future was the best thing they could have done with the show. I don't know if they will be able to do anything with it but at least now going forward they can do their own thing.