Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Star Trek: Discovery' Gets September Premiere Date On CBS & CBS All Access, Season 1 Split In Two (deadline.com)

Posted by msmash on from the cool-beans dept.

Nellie Andreeva, writing for Deadline: Star Trek: Discovery will debut Sunday, September 24, with a special broadcast premiere on the CBS TV network airing 8:30-9:30 PM. The first as well as the second episode of the sci-fi series will be available on-demand on CBS All Access immediately following the broadcast premiere, with subsequent new episodes released on All Access each Sunday. Originally slated for a January 2017 premiere, Star Trek: Discovery's debut was first pushed to May and then to fall 2017. At CBS' upfront presentation, the company announced that Star Trek: Discovery's first-season order had been increased from 13 to 15 episodes. The expanded season now will be split into two. The first eight episodes will run Sundays from September 24 through November 5. The season then will resume with the second chapter in January 2018. The break also will allow the show more time for postproduction on latter episodes.

13 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. As a lifelong Star Trek fan by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a lifelong Star Trek fan I could give two shits. DSN was plenty of ST for one lifetime, and BSG pretty much put a bullet in the idea of Star Trek as the best ship-based SciFi franchise.

    1. Re:As a lifelong Star Trek fan by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Informative

      When BSG was airing, Ron Moore routinely did a pod cast on each episode - he makes it painfully clear in those pod casts that the "Final Five" were not a thing at all until the writers noticed that the fan base had cottoned onto these missing five humanoid cylons and started writing them into the core of the story.

      Thats why they had to fudge it at the end to account for the screwed up numbering (we had numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 named early on - of course they had set apart the five so it would make no sense to slot them in as 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12, so they slotted "Daniel" in as 7 and all of a sudden we went from 12 models to 13).

      That right there ruined BSG for me - it became obvious that there was no overall story arc planned out, it was being made up as they went.

  2. I'll reserve judgement, but... by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Desgrassi Jr. High cast (sans the kid in the wheelchair) is not exactly filling me with confidence. Are they making a show to tell a good story--or to advance a very specific political/social agenda?

    But I'll reserve judgement, out of respect for the Battlestar Galactica reboot, which I also expected to suck but which turned out great.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re: I'll reserve judgement, but... by sexconker · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Now the new stuff coming out has been great! Arrival, Interstellar, Passenger, I'm forgetting a couple of others were written by real science fiction writers - Rodenberry wasn't.

      You can't see it, but I'm shaking my head left and right.

      Arrival was fucking stupid. We start with aliens and some interesting premise about communicating with them, but we end up with political bullshit that gets solved with time travel, telepathy, and essentially magic. The whole premise is shot when that shit happens because: Why couldn't the aliens use their time travel telepathy bullshit to help themselves? Why couldn't the aliens see / prevent the bomb? Or even more to the point, why couldn't the aliens see learning our language and then just communicate with us in out language? The whole fucking time they're sitting behind their glass barrier and watching Pam from The Office (I know it's not her) pantomime shit. The only thing missing was a Speak and Say toy. The aliens didn't do a damned thing to communicate with us, despite it being revealed that they'll need our help one day.

      Interstellar? Are you fucking kidding me? It devolves into time travel and spiritual/magical wankery so fucking quickly. And the first half is more about the fucking dust bowl than it is about sci-fi. As with any time travel movie, there are plot holes out the ass. But it doesn't fucking matter, I guess, because the movie is focused on a couple of people and how they are sad and dumb. The final scenes are like they watched 2001's LSD trip and decided to try and make something that makes even less sense.

      Passengers? Well that started out with some potential, at least. But it ended up being a romance/drama movie more than a sci-fi movie. I get that the dude struggled with the idea of opening someone's capsule up and all that. But once the decision was made to open one up, why did he have to choose a useless lady? I don't even remember her credentials. Oh wait - I do. She had none. She was writing a book. Maybe next time when you're browsing through all the records you'll pick a mechanic, a machinist, a tech, a security officer, or anyone who can help you fix shit. He had three problems.

      1) Why did I wake up early / what's wrong with the ship?
      2) How can I go back to sleep in a pod so I don't die alone?
      3) How can I get through the security door?

      He chose to solve problem 4 - I'm sad and lonely and haven't gotten laid in a long time.

      I'm not saying problem 4 wasn't a problem that needed solving. But he could've also solved problems 1, 2, and 3 had he picked the right person (or people) to wake up. There's a lot of the hemming and hawing about not wanting to wake even a single person up because it would doom them to die on the ship and (nearly) alone. But you've got trouble in River City, son. Trouble with with a capital T. Every fucking day he spent enjoying the bar from The Shining and not working on the problem was irresponsible and, more importantly, stupid.

      He had access to everyone's records. He could have found a few people with skills / clearance to help him repair/reset the pods, fix the ship, or get past the security door to wake up people with more clearance / skills to repair/reset the pods and fix the ship.

      But no, he waits months (or years) to just choose Katniss Everdeen, who provides no help on the whole "shit's on fire, yo" front. And when they do get a 3rd person, the whole thing about "Oh no, they woke up and now they're doomed to die here." is still focused on Katniss instead of the new dude who is actively dying a painful, drawn out death.

      I can look past the generic reactor core shit, and the ship is broke but it don't know it's broke setup. But the movie as a whole had so very little to do with sci-fi and much too much to do with romance.

      As for ol' Gene Rberry, I agree. He wasn't really a sci-fi writer.

  3. Re:Yet another trek by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The question for me is, why would I want to pay $6/month just to watch a few episodes of Star Trek: Discovery?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  4. Re:Yet another trek by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People have been asking "have all the good stories already been told" for centuries, yet new ground continues to be broken.

    "Star Trek" is merely a starting point - and a limited one at that given that this is a brand new series. I'm sure they've got plenty of opportunity for good stores. That doesn't mean they'll deliver - it could be crap - but the chance is there.

    Then again I've always been of the opinion that even bad sci-fi can still be worth watching. I actually mildly enjoyed watching Andromeda . . .

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  5. Re:Yet another trek by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Yeah...

    I wish CBS would get on the ball and put their channel On Demand stuff like the rest of the networks like ABC, NBC have, on the existing streaming services like Playstation VUE...Sling, DirectTVNOW...etc

    I"m certainly NOT going to pay extra $6 just to get them on there, not worth it.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  6. Want to check a great StarTrek series? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    See subject & Star Trek Continues https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJf2ovQtI6w/ - this episode's outstanding (titled "The Fairest of them all")

    * "In every revolution, there's 1 man w/ a vision" & "Who told you that?" + "YOU did..."

    (These guys have REAL potential...)

    APK

    P.S.=> It continues (pun intended) after the StarTrek TOS episode "MIRROR, mirror" (bearded Spock & all)... apk

  7. CBS? What about Netflix? by GNious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who cares when it releases on obscure channel in a single country - Proper question is, when does it release world-wide on Netflix?

  8. Re:Yet another trek by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I rewatched Enterprise (or rather rewatched the first two and a half seasons and the rest of season 3 and 4 that I had simply abandoned), I found, quite sadly, that there were some rather good episodes, and some of the best came in the last season after the production team and writers clearly knew the show was dead. But it's always about two things; does the crew jive with the audience, and is there enough good stories to outweigh the bad ones?

    Obviously there are going to be rehashings, that's sort of inevitable consider the sheer volume of Trek episodes and movies out there, but if they can find a new angle then even a rehashed story can become interesting.

    I'll say this about it. Star Trek Continues has demonstrated how good writing and a love for the source material can produce some outstanding SciFi, so if some fans working with fundraised cash can put together some pretty goddamned good science fiction episodes, surely a big studio can do the same if it wants to.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  9. Re:Yet another trek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The abrams movies weren't star trek, they were just shitty action movies with star trek character names and branding. they litterally through all of star trek in the garbage to create that steaming pile.

  10. Re:After what corporations did to... by MightyMartian · · Score: 3

    The problem was that Enterprise was utterly botched. They had the whole pre-Federation story to tell, and wasted an entire season on the stupid Xindi thing, and had the idiotic Temporal War meta-arc throughout the first three seasons, actually right into the fourth. It wasn't until the fourth, with the series' already on the chopping block that they finally decided to show how the Federation was founded.

    Enterprise actually had quite a few good episodes, and I actually thought Tucker, in particular, was an outstanding character who invoked the Montgomery Scott style of "Don't fuck with my ship!" attitude. But Enterprise squandered so many opportunities because Berman and Braga just couldn't get themselves out of the DS9-Voyager headspace, and littered what should have been a new start with the storytelling refuse of the two previous series.

    A proper Enterprise would have avoided big multi-episode story arcs for the most part, modeling itself more on TOS and TNG. I get that you cannot reasonably have every episode about the Vulcans, Andorians, Tellerites, etc., but I finally abandoned the whole thing somewhere in the middle of Season 3 because it seemed to be suffering the same kind nonsensical storytelling that I found so grating in Voyager. But by that point Berman and Braga had developed their cookie-cutter approach to scripts and story arcs, and they were going to stick with it come hell or high water.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  11. Re:'Streaming only', and other complaints by ZenShadow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Okay, wow.

    1: Star Trek Continues has never, to the best of my knowledge, been sued by CBS. In fact, they apparently have a pretty good relationship from what I've heard.

    2: Axanar was probably a scam. Do some research on the guy behind it, and then ask yourself: where did the million bucks go? They had pro-bono representation, so it's doubtful they spent anywhere near that on their short-lived defense. They produced only a few minutes of video. And they were so flagrant about violating Trek IP that they were single-handedly responsible for CBS deciding they had to clamp down on fan productions -- and CBS could have done far, far worse than they did.

    You can hate on CBS for a lot of things, but at least do it for something they deserve to be hated on for... Axanar is not so clear cut, and I have no clue where you came up with the supposed ST:C lawsuit.

    --
    -- sigs cause cancer.