Star Trek Discovery – Trailers and Fan Movie Issues

So late September (24th here) Star Trek Discovery comes out on “CBS All Access” in the USA, Netflix in the rest of the world (as explained to me by my Niece The Trekker). Before discussion, here’s the short trailer:

“First Look” trailer 2:10 (from a month or so ago)

Now there are two timelines in Trekdom TV & Movies. The original and the “post changing history” movie time line. These have names (who knew?). The original is “Prime” while post the Abrams movie is called “Kelvin”. I think. More than you want to know about Star Trek timelines here:

Fans of J.J. Abrams’ filmography know that the director loves to pay tribute to his grandfather Henry Kelvin by mentioning him in his movies. Last year’s Star Wars: The Force Awakens included “Kelvin ridge,” and Star Trek Into Darkness featured an image of the Kelvin Memorial Archive. In the 2009 Star Trek reboot, the Kelvin Easter egg came in the very beginning; the ship George Kirk commanded as he heroically saved lives was the U.S.S. Kelvin.

Since it was the Kelvin that encountered Nero and the Romulans, it played an integral part in the modern iteration of Star Trek, essentially launching the alternate timeline in which the new movies take place. Now, the name Kelvin has a far greater distinction than being just one of the Federation’s vehicles. It is the official title of this part of Star Trek history.

OK, so I guess it’s pretty well confirmed as Kelvin…

While Discovery is supposed to be in the prime timeline:

Star Trek: Discovery Officially Takes Place in the Prime Universe

Katharine Trendacosta
7/23/16 7:52pmFiled to: STAR TREK

In a packed panel during San Diego Comic-Con, the name of the new Star Trek series—which, in the grand tradition of Star Trek, is also the name of the ship—was revealed. In a press conference after the panel, executive producers Bryan Fuller and Heather Kadin gave just a few more details about the show.

First off, Fuller answered the question of whether the Discovery, just revealed, was based on Ralph McQuarrie’s ‘70s designs for the Enterprise. Fuller said it was, but “to a point that we can’t legally comment on it until [our legal team] figures out some things.”

Kadin was asked about being a woman working behind the scenes of the show and what that meant, and she answered that she takes inspiring women seriously and that Fuller does, too. “As a female, you’ll see, when you start to hear more about the series, that that’s a big part of it,” she added.

Fuller put to rest the speculation about which universe the show was set in, saying “It is in the prime timeline.” He couldn’t say exactly when in the timeline would be set, however.

Turns out there’s a bit of controversy, as the Star Trek Discovery show (DON’T abbreviate it to S.T.D… no matter how tempting…) is claimed to be in the original time line, but has “production values” from the latest movies. We’ve got “Yet Another Klingon” look (can’t they stop screwing around with the Klingons?) and uniforms that are way more modern than the original and even in some ways beyond TNG. Special Effects look really really good (as you would expect given 50 years of computer improvement in that department). Then, there are aliens and plot lines that are not in the original nor in the movie time line. So some folks are calling this yet another “reboot” timeline…

This comes back, down below, when looking at Fan Movies. Seems the fans are sometimes fanatical about keeping all the details tidy and don’t like it when the writers and directors make up stuff that isn’t in some way able to fit into the known “facts”… So some of them made their own amateur movies, which look to be quite good, and Paramount has their panties in a bunch over that. One could make comments about fans and amateurs making a Star Trek movie more true to the original than the “professionals”, but I won’t. For now.

Then similar short one at 2:40

So I’m liking the special effects, and I’m liking the characters being shown. But clearly this is way more “Abrams like” and Kelvin and not really much at all like The Original, Enterprise, or TNG. Supposedly set in between Enterprise and The Original, it has tech and special effects way past TNG. OK, “reboot” it is. Would I really want a movie with cheap costumes and wooden panel sliding doors moved by a stage hand and medical gear made by shopping for salt shakers at Walmart? No, not really…

But it would be nice if they kept some of the timeline and characters more consistent and especially nice if the “creative” department didn’t keep “reinventing” the Klingons as yet again some other alien species… They HAVE a defined type (or ought to). They don’t keep screwing around with the Vulcans, after all.

There are more prime roles for women, and it looks from the trailer like there’s a Chinese “hook” what with a ship with a Chinese sounding name and a captain with a Chinese accent. OK, looking to crack that big China market eh? (Odd how you don’t get a lot of Latvian or Kenyan captains…)

Long Trailer “Extended Comic Con” 6:10

Star Trek Discovery Trailer 2 “extended” 4:12

Note the Netflix branding on the trailer. This is the ROW branding. Note, too, the 25th date, that’s the UK date and the UK gets to wait an extra day…

OK, so that’s the trailers. We will most likely buy CBS All Access come September. (Ether that, or I figure out how to “unlocalize” my Netflix enough and with enough bandwidth to get it from the UK ;-) We are a Trekkie household. No, not going with “Trekker”. That can be for young kids. I’m as labeled in the ’60s and not changing now. As true Trekkies, we’ll be watching it at first offering.

Will we keep CBS First Access after the series ends? Probably not. Time will tell. (Hey, CBS: HINT HINT HINT – keep a Star Trek on every single year or take an earnings and stock price tumble…)

This may be a ‘reboot’ that is impure in storyline, costumes, characters, whatever. I don’t really care. I like the high production values in the trailers and if that’s in the shows, I’m going to be glued to the set. I’m not as hard core about it all as others and just want a good Trek Show.

The Fan Movies & Controversies

Seems that some folks have decided to poke a bit of fun at all things Trek, so have a spoof being made. This isn’t a Fan Movie, it’s a series. It is getting more “chatter” among fandom than Discovery, which has CBS / Paramount all fuming… It is named The Orville. From the trailer for it, I’m definitly going to be watching this one:

That it has a ‘look’ more in line with the original / TNG (while still avoiding copyright issues) than does Discovery is all the more delicious and is adding to some of the Fan Base chatter.

Now prior to last night, I had no idea “Fan Movies” of Trek were in existence. Seems there’s like a 1/2 dozen of them. One has / had a $Million budget (crowd sourced I think) and done very well. This resulted in Paramount issuing a set of requirements for Fan Movies that basically says you can film your kid in a costume you bought from Paramount as long as it doesn’t run over 15 minutes and isn’t done with any professionals. No, honest. That’s what it says… Some fans who love their Fan Movies (often an homage or with a ‘walk on’ by a classic / TNG star) are incensed, and want to boycott Discovery. OK, I’m up for that. I’ll join in on that boycott thing for the reruns, OK?

You may want to turn the volume down for this. On my TV the startup music is loud:

Love it, just love what Fans can do…

These folks explore the rumors about chaos on the set of Discovery, changes and rechanges, and then explores some of what Axanar set on fire.

Looking for the full Axanar movie on line gave a “can’t post it see my website” video from one guy, others complaining. No idea what the actual status is, but I’m interested in seeing it (so more more exploring, maybe after dinner, on the cards).

Did find this one, though. Star Trek Horizon:

Then Renegades that looks to be a series:

Here’s Of Gods and Men, see if you recognize anyone from the opening…

So it looks to me like there’s a whole ‘nother world of “Open Source” Trek out there for me to discover… to Boldly Go where thousands have gone before… Which begs the question: Can you “dig” in space and can a “Dig Here!” happen? Looks like I’m going to find out.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Arts and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Star Trek Discovery – Trailers and Fan Movie Issues

  1. philjourdan says:

    Another reboot. It cannot be anything else. In DS9 (season 5, episode 6), Worf noted the lack of ridges and told the other crew members that it was due to a virus in the 22nd century (long before Discovery OR the first reboot diverged). In Enterprise (season 4, episode 15 & 16), they explained how the virus came about and how it almost wiped out the Klingon race.

    So the Klingons between Enterprise (22nd century) and Star Trek (the original, 23rd century) would not have had the ridges. Discovery is early 23rd century. So it cannot be the original. Yet the reboot did not diverge from the original until the 23rd century (with the introduction of Nero’s Ship), so the virus would still have wrecked havoc on the Klingons (indeed even in the reboot, Kahn is still a genetically engineered person – where the Klingon virus came from).

    Since Roddenberry’s death, the whole franchise has gone to hell. A shame Majel Barrett could not control it better.

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    Just finished “Of God’s and Men”. LOTS of cameos. About as good as many of The Original episodes, IMHO. About the same resolution (480) and production values too ;-)

    It really is amazing to me just how far video has come. What is today basically “high end home movies” is as good as Pro-TV from then. (though in HD 16:9 format).

    The sound has “the usual” tendency for soft sounds to be too soft and loud bits too loud. Had to fiddle with the volume control too much to be able to understand all the conversations and not vibrate my ears to ringing… (mine ring easier than most due to that whole explosive rearrangement thing…)

    Frankly, though, I liked it as much as Beyond for many things, and more for the parade of familiars in cameos. That’s the one thing that bothers me the most about what Paramount / CBS has regularly done. Not having any continuity of characters / actors. One ‘rumor’ says the reason Tuvak wasn’t returned in Discovery was that they offered him 1/10 th his prior salary. Just Dumb. They could have had 5 times as much revenue from years of various Star Trek shows had they paid up for the established characters and actors to create bridges. Part of what helped DS9 was the TNG crossovers. Oh Well.

    FWIW, I’m really happy to have discovered, and I hope christened, “Open Source Movies”.

    Hmmm….. Paramount Group has a market cap about $4 Billion (as of a random top link on a web search, not current) so if we can get 4 Million fans, to each pitch in $1000, we can do a Cash Buyout and make it Fan Run… I’d toss in $1000 without even thinking. $2000 with the spouse.

    Oh Dear… “Open Source Buy Outs”?… Could it be that simple? Get a “finance guy” to do the set up paper work, a Trekkie Lawyer to handle docs, run the promotion at Trek fairs and comic cons… Heck, even a “Go Fund Me” would likely pop 4 million fans with some bucks.

    Is it time for Trekkies and Trekkers of the world to just buy out the Suits of Trek? Just squash that whole “Piss on the fans and fan movies” thing by a nerve pinch to their wallet? Oh My, I think I need a moment…

  3. Zeke says:

    I really loved Axanar. That is not my genre but that was just gorgeous and the characters were incredibly engaging!

    But I think the vulcan in the first trailer, “Discovery,” is the bad guy.

  4. Larry Geiger says:

    The original Star Trek is ingrained within me. Captain Kirk is the man. We were in front of the TV every Thursday for three years. Well, if we weren’t watching Neil Armstrong landing on the moon or something.

    I was a freshman in college when 2001 Space Odyssey came out. Rode my bicycle down to the theater on 13th street (US441) in Gainesville to see it 2 or 3 times. Blew us away. Then they made a Star Trek movie that looked like that. Every time they fly up to the space dock and the Enterprise moves out and zips into warp drive I still get a little tight in the throat.

    I guess that some of us thought that we might actually be starting to develop some of that stuff by now. Well, not in my lifetime I suppose. Oh well. Spending all of our research money on “Climate Change”.

  5. cdquarles says:

    I love the original, probably because of the hokey special effects. TNG was okay. DS9 was marginal. Since then, I can’t stand it any more. The same thing happened with the feature films. The first one was decent. As time went on, they got worse. I can’t stand the last few.

    This seems to be a common occurrence in any kind of performing art that is a drama. A slight exception, in my opinion, is the Stargate SG-1 series and Babylon 5. Those were not particularly good at first (especially the movie that was the pilot of a sort for SG-1), but it got better and it grew on me. Stargate Atlantis and the subsequent one, whose name escapes me at the moment (Universe?) were not as good as SG-1 and Universe (?) wasn’t as good as Atlantis.

  6. cdquarles says:

    Heh, I guess we are letting the young’uns know how old we are, aren’t we, EMS ;).

  7. cdquarles says:

    Oh, someone mentioned AC Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (if I’m remembering the name correctly). Another classic film, same as Michael Cricton’s Andromeda Strain. The subsequent Space Odyssey ones are okay. The last one, still, was a bit lame, to me.

  8. cdquarles says:

    Speaking of parodies of Big Name films, to this day I ROFL watching Space Balls ;).

  9. Another Ian says:


    O/T somewhat

    Peer reviewed literature scores again

    “Predatory Journals Hit By ‘Star Wars’ Sting”

  10. Ralph B says:

    What I liked about TOS vs TNG is the crew was more sailor-like. Being a former submariner I jive with that. TNG was mostly snowflake crewed, same with all the newer series.

    The last good space movie I have seen would have to be Galaxyquest…we have been in quite the drought

  11. philjourdan says:

    @Ralph B – I think Voyager recaptured the submariner feeling. It kind of had to as it was stranded across the galaxy, so they could not bring in humans (although they did sneak in a few – the 37s and the Equinox). The others did not have it however. TNG was the worse. If I see Patrick Stewart in his PJs one more time, I will break the TV.

  12. Power Grab says:

    Larry Geiger says:
    25 July 2017 at 3:17 pm
    “The original Star Trek is ingrained within me. Captain Kirk is the man. We were in front of the TV every Thursday for three years.”

    LOL! But did you sing with the opening theme song? ;-)

  13. Larry Geiger says:

    Aaaaaaaaaaaah, Ahhh, Ahhh, Ahhh…

  14. Larry Ledwick says:

    I always called it “Star Truck” and envisioned a cheezy spin off involving a warp drive interstellar garbage truck and its crew picking up trash through out the galaxy.

    Kirk the compactor is full – – – she just cannah take any more trash!

  15. philjourdan says:

    @Larry – re: Star Truck – would that star Stockard Channing? LOL! (See the Big Bus)

  16. Ed Forbes says:

    “Looking for the full Axanar movie on line gave a “can’t post it see my website” video from one guy, others complaining. No idea what the actual status is, but I’m interested in seeing it”

    Law problems with CBS over rights. Projected 90 min movie was forced by CBS down to two 15min segments. They are said to be in production now and to be released “soon”.

  17. R. de Haan says:

    I finally found the time to watch a few of the Star Trek video’s and really loved them. While skimming the youtube list of scifi series I stumbled on an Australian production that was launched in 1999 under the title FarScape. Almost all the sequals are available including two complete movies. I was really surprised by the quality of these productions, the intelligent story plot, the actors and the incredible costumes and special effects. Just start with sequel one and start bench watching if you can find the time. I really think this series is better than Star Trek.

  18. E.M.Smith says:

    Farscape was fun. A bit too “artsy’ for my tastes ( I’m more Sci-Fi and less Fantasy…) but still liked it. Watched a lot of it when it first came out.

  19. R. de Haan says:

    Totally missed this series. Don’t understand the decission to stop the series prematurely. They had a massive audience. For the production team and the actors the decission came as a shock. Why slaughter the goose that delivers the golden eggs? A very bad management decission which reminds of the fact that inferior management in the news,media and entertainment board rooms has become the new standard. What are those people thinking. Watching the cable today has become some kind of torture because of all the BS programs and the news… Forget about the news. I think I throw out the lot and follow your example. This week I watched the new movie about Dunkerk. Just like the production of the Enigma Encoding machine it had nothing to do with what happened in reality. This mutulation of historic facts has become a total embarrassment. I really wonder if this is done on purpose or because of a total incompetent research team. Anyhow, productions like that make me feel like an alien on my own planet.

  20. E.M.Smith says:

    @R. de Haan:

    IMHO it is all collateral damage from the USA decision to move to “infotainment”. Once “straight news” is mandated to entertain and draw audience first, be accurate later; what hope does a ‘popular movie’ have?

    It is all just gross fiction now. Unfortunately.

    As per “bad management”:

    It is endemic, and not just to media. At Apple, I was on a project that would have gotten them ALL of the market share eventually taken by Silicon Graphics and a large part of what would have been Sun Microsystems sales. We were about $200 Million (rough guess) into the project, had demonstrated ALL the technology. We needed to only “reduce to silicon”. That is, compute the best actual wires and traces for the die to be produced for the processor. That required a roughly $1 Million chunk of scalar processing, the job being totally unsuited to vector processing on our Cray Supercomputer. Instead, they killed the project. It was a million too far for someone….

    Now the person who did the chopping was Al Alcorn. At that time an “Apple Fellow”. How he got to be that is beyond me. His only claims to fame are that he invented Pong, and when at HP rejected the two Steves and the Apple I machine (thus demonstrating a complete failure to ‘get it’ about future technology trends…). He was assigned to “evaluate our project” and like everything else he ever evaluated said it wasn’t needed… Sigh. But he had political skill, even if a bit daft on technology, really.

    FWIW, the chipset went on to be the core of the PowerPC chips after, IIRC, IBM and some others got a slice of the pie. It was reduced in ability (ours was 4 cores parallel processing) and years later (ours was about 1/2 decade ahead of when it reached market), but it was still pretty hot when it finally reached daylight.

    Oh Well. They also killed off some various projects that would have given them ALL of the pocket computing market a decade earlier. “Magic Crystal” was basically the cell phone of today. That was in about 1990… Can you say 1/4 Century competitive advantage?…

    Well, at least eventually the ideas showed up in the iPhone, even if decades later…

    I could go on, but it’s too depressing and I only have so much Tequila in the house ;-)

    The essential problem is central authority has not the information flow to make fully informed decisions, has not the technical merit to ‘get it’ about new things, and so depends on “political skill” to make decisions. That, IMHO, is also why Steve Jobs did so well at disruptive tech. He did get it about the technical side and was able to choose the right path more often than not (though even he made some boo-boos). So, of course, the Board fired him… and the company tanked… until he came back. Most of the bad decisions noted above being made during his absence.

    Now we have AlGore at Apple… I grieve for their future…

  21. R. de Haan says:

    Thanks for the insights. We desperately need new management structures A policy of less management (like less Government) and a way to identify and integrate those “who get it” into the management structure. I think corporatism is to blame for the long term decline of corporate management. In Europe traditionally Liberal parties (which is the right from a political view here) suck up the board room positions, the “advisor” and commisioners jobs. The left traditionally suck up the positions with UN, NGO’s and Unions. This concept is now destroying us from within. Business now has become politics and this will put us all in a tight spot that makes it extremely difficult to recover from. Very destructive. As for Apple, I have used their products for decades but no more. I have written a letter to the board of directors a few years ago when their latest iMac was hammered software problems and crashes and users were showerd with arrogant responses instead of solutions.Never received any response from them. When Gore showed up with Apple, I knew something was very wrong with the business and I never looked back again. Stay away from any busness linked with the Wolrd Economic Forum and avoid any business with politicians in their board.

  22. Larry Ledwick says:

    a way to identify and integrate those “who get it” into the management structure.

    We already have that, but we decided to throw it away. Remember when the manager of IT was always someone like E.M. who grew up through the ranks and had been there done that?

    They tossed that all out when there was a general cultural decision that managers should be MBA’s or some similar business specialty and not folks skilled in the technology they were managing.

    Instead of finding managers who have clue, we need to go back to making managers out of folks who already have clue about their area of specialty. Much easier to make an electronics tech into a manager than to get some technologically incompetent MBA to understand the fine points of technology.

    Apprenticeship and hiring within are how those old managers were created internal to the company (or a related company).

Comments are closed.