Bryan Fuller Stepping Back From Showrunner Role on ‘Star Trek: Discovery’

[BillJ]

The old guard paced things properly. Had better skills at casting and developing interesting characters. They also had imaginations and creativity which is absent nowadays

You obviously aren't watching the same things the rest of us are. There are many great shows on the air right now.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I wasn't saying all older writers from the 80s/90s were perfect. He's a hack but the old guard weren't caught up in the gimmicky nature of storytelling which has become the norm with overly large casts, too much focus on episode structure, fixation on unwieldy mythologies that fizzle, ridiculously fast pacing and creating series with such a narrow premise that can't sustain more than a season worth of material

The old guard paced things properly. Had better skills at casting and developing interesting characters. They also had imaginations and creativity which is absent nowadays

There have been good and bad writers in every decade. Blanket statements are useless.

 

[Degra1]

You obviously aren't watching the same things the rest of us are. There are many great shows on the air right now.

Oh I am watching the same thing. It's all a mess in one way or another.

Either it's a convoluted poorly written poorly plotted hot mess(once upon a time, quantico, blindspot, true blood, true detective, supernatural the strain, American horror story, how to get away with murder, empire, prison break, heroes, caprica, dark matters, the expanse, dominion , helix, gotham, resurrection, fringe, lost, sleepy hollow etc etc)

Or it's some self important artsy drivel like the walking dead, Hannibal, pushing daisies, game of thrones true detective west world leftovers that's a chore to sit through

Or in the case of comic book inspired tv shows it's only entertaining just seeing characters like reverse flash, grodd etc onscreen because that's the only enjoyable thing about it because the romantic angst, weak plots and weak acting sure ain't

Or you have recycled procedurals like csi NCis major crimes the closer etc

The only decent shows in recent years were bates motel and so far timeless which has more of the 80/90 tv feel to it. Of course neither are great but fair

 

[BillJ]

Oh I am watching the same thing. It's all a mess in one way or another.

Either it's a convoluted poorly written poorly plotted hot mess(once upon a time, quantico, blindspot, true blood, true detective, supernatural the strain, American horror story, how to get away with murder, empire, prison break, heroes, caprica, dark matters, the expanse, dominion , helix, gotham, resurrection, fringe, lost, sleepy hollow etc etc)

Or it's some self important artsy drivel like the walking dead, Hannibal, pushing daisies, game of thrones true detective that's a chore to sit through

Or in the case of comic book inspired tv shows it's only entertaining just seeing characters like reverse flash, grodd etc onscreen because that's the only enjoyable thing about it because the romantic angst, weak plots and weak acting sure ain't

So you're saying that there are zero good TV series now? That's ridiculous horseshit. Every decade has its good and bad TV series.

 

[Degra1]

The past 15 years have been awful I'm just going by my own personal experience. I'm not at all nterested In scripted tv in a way I never was before say 2001

 

[m.lp.ql.m]

These up and comers suck big time. They can't write a script. Tons of plotholes, poor plot logic, poorly drawn characters, lots of gimmicks, dark just to be dark. And they recycle like crazy. Don't have a fresh idea among any of them. From andrew kreisberg, Geoff johns, greg berlanti, jj Abrams, Edward kitsis, mike Kelly, Martin gero, natakie chaidez Jeremy carver and on and on No. Give me an old timer

OK, so we know who you don't like. Can you give us the names of some "old timers" who you do like?

 

[sojourner]

I think he misses Gilligan's Island.

 

[Mudd]

Television in the 60s and 70s was pretty bad...especially the 70s.

 

[eyeresist]

The past 15 years have been awful I'm just going by my own personal experience. I'm not at all nterested In scripted tv in a way I never was before say 2001

I think you have to be wary of nostalgia. A lot of stuff we like when we're young is not that good, but at the time we don't know the difference, and later, when we have more knowledge and more experience and are more critical, those old shows still get a pass because of the positive emotional memories associated with them.

I do agree that most shows attempting serialisation get mixed results, but if the old shows had tried it, the results would probably have been about the same.
(In fact, there are examples from the 90s I can think of: Twin Peaks had a planned story for season 1, then just pulled stories out of its ass for season 2. X-Files hinted at some sort of ongoing story, but again we eventually realised there was no direction or plan.)

 

[Balok's Decoy]

You mean so they can deliver more of the same? No thanks. I'd rather have up-and-comers than continuing to recycle writers.

*cough* Rick Berman *cough*

 

[Griffeytrek]

Television in the 60s and 70s was pretty bad...especially the 70s.

Nah! There was some great stuff in the 70's. It just feels a bit dated today. Yeah 70's sitcoms were either pretentious social commentary or simply awful. But the cop and crime genre really came of age with some darkly enjoyable stuff. Streets of San Francisco, Baretta, etc. Granted 70's TV scifi was... exceptionally bad for the most part. I think the high points were Space 1999 and watching Steve Austin fight Bigfoot.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I think the high points were Space 1999 and watching Steve Austin fight Bigfoot.

Ouch!

 

[Griffeytrek]

Ouch!

You can't imagine what was the nightmare of the 70's TV rush to capitalize on Star Wars. These days you all only remember the really really good stuff. Like the original Battlestar Galactica (yes that is the GOOD stuff). If you want to see how bad it was hunt down any non burned copies of "Quark". (Qwark? maybe?)

 

[Griffeytrek]

I think you have to be wary of nostalgia. A lot of stuff we like when we're young is not that good, but at the time we don't know the difference, and later, when we have more knowledge and more experience and are more critical, those old shows still get a pass because of the positive emotional memories associated with them.

I do agree that most shows attempting serialisation get mixed results, but if the old shows had tried it, the results would probably have been about the same.
(In fact, there are examples from the 90s I can think of: Twin Peaks had a planned story for season 1, then just pulled stories out of its ass for season 2. X-Files hinted at some sort of ongoing story, but again we eventually realised there was no direction or plan.)

I forget, but wasn't Babylon 5 really the first time that a showrunner (for a US show) sat down and planned out the ending of a show, at the start, and then spent the time writing stories to get there?

 

[fireproof78]

Like Akiva Goldsman?

Or Nicholas Meyer.

I wasn't saying all older writers from the 80s/90s were perfect. Just look at the x files reboot last year. All old x files writers like chris carter and it sucked So not saying every old school writer was great or still is as great as they once were. but the old guard weren't caught up in the gimmicky nature of storytelling which has become the norm with overly large casts, too much focus on episode structure, fixation on unwieldy mythologies that fizzle, ridiculously fast pacing and creating series with such a narrow premise that can't sustain more than a season worth of material

The old guard paced things properly. Had better skills at casting and developing interesting characters. They also had imaginations and creativity which is absent nowadays. I just think writers should get back to basics. And not throw everything including the kitchen sink into a script. Television and film has never been as bad as it has been in last 15 years to the point it's absolutely unwatchable

Not always. I've tried watching some older TV shows and there is sometimes information being spoon fed to the audience, or it is as rote as current TV.

Also, have you tried watching Netflix? Or even NCIS?

 

[Nerys Myk]

You can't imagine what was the nightmare of the 70's TV rush to capitalize on Star Wars. These days you all only remember the really really good stuff. Like the original Battlestar Galactica (yes that is the GOOD stuff). If you want to see how bad it was hunt down any non burned copies of "Quark". (Qwark? maybe?)

Oh, I don't have to imagine. I was there. We'd all get all excited seeing stuff in Starlog and other places and then crash once the shows hit the airwaves.

 

[Degra1]

OK, so we know who you don't like. Can you give us the names of some "old timers" who you do like?

Michael Piller did a great job with Star Trek after he took over and got great writing out of his staff. I know he isn't as great as he once was but I thought especially on Star Trek TNG brannon braga was fantastic and even on voyager he did the more entertaining scripts. To this day I wonder if he wasn't saddled with Rick Berman on nearly every ENT script what he may have been able to do. I. thought when it came to the larger picture storylines on DS9 Ira Behr was great. He sucked at romance--second sight, fascination, let he who is without sin, his way for instance--and the comedy schlock with the ferengi but world building stuff like the circle trilogy on da9 were great

I thought overall Ron Moore was a good solid writer for TNG and somewhat on DS9. Didn't much care for nu BSG since it wasn't well plotted and amounted more or less to a bunch of darkness for darkness sake

Frank south Charles Pratt jr carol Mendelsohn Steven bochco j Michael strazynski glen Morgan Darin Morgan James Wong chris carter. Leonard katzman Robert zemeckis Norma stafford vela Danny Jacobson Frank mancuso jr on Friday the 13th the series. Some of the writers aren't as good as they once were but in their heyday they were great and IMO better than writers nowadays

 

[Degra1]

I do agree that most shows attempting serialisation get mixed results, but if the old shows had tried it, the results would probably have been about the same.
(In fact, there are examples from the 90s I can think of: Twin Peaks had a planned story for season 1, then just pulled stories out of its ass for season 2. X-Files hinted at some sort of ongoing story, but again we eventually realised there was no direction or plan.)

Contrary to what people think serialized storytelling happened in the 80s and 90s. Lots of dramas told nothing but serialized stories. Like Dallas hill street blues falcon crest knots landing melrose place to great effect and most did it without a grand plan which I can take or leave as long as the final product is involving. Even a sitcom like Roseanne did a few arcs. Plus ds nine's final chapter made for some riveting and entertaining material leading it's final season to be the best final season of a tv show I can think of. Plus daytime soaps were pretty good at arcs and payoff back then. So judging twin peaks or the x files mythology really isn't fair to real arc storytelling done well back then. And thankfully x files didn't go all in on mythology the way most shows do now. Otherwise x files would have been just as abysmal as heroes, lost, flash forward, the event, revolution, zero hour, surface, invasion, life on Mars, helix,

The problem with the way arcs are approached nowadays is they are fixated on playing games with the audience and doling out pieces of story like pieces of a puzzle. Old school serialized storytelling just took a modest ensemble and broke them down Into a handful of parallel linear arcs that weren't drug out forever because the series premise was wide open and not limited the way so any shows are these days So once an arc played itself out the writers could jump to the next one back then. With shows like lost or based on lost format you have to keep stringing everybody along or the shows over.

I think you have to be wary of nostalgia. A lot of stuff we like when we're young is not that good, but at the time we don't know the difference, and later, when we have more knowledge and more experience and are more critical, those old shows still get a pass because of the positive emotional memories associated with them.

I do agree that most shows attempting serialisation get mixed results, but if the old shows had tried it, the results would probably have been about the same.
(In fact, there are examples from the 90s I can think of: Twin Peaks

 

[Trekkin]

...did you just hold up Dallas and Melsrose Place as shows that were better written than the major modern serialised dramas? For eg. compared to House of Cards?

Because...no. Just no. Especially not when some of the metric provided for 'bad' television includes: arcs being introduced and thrown away on a whim, 'clues' being slowly doled out weeks on end, too much Serious Business (TM), and the whole series just generally lacking long term planning and proper endings.

I'm saying this as somone who owns the whole damn series of Dallas (plus Tv-movies and reboot) on DVD. Who but a fan would remember that one of the big, totally planned 'developments' in the series (Ray being revealed as a Ewing), meant that Ray's big plot in the first season (having an affair with Lucy without getting caught by Jock) retroactively became all about sneakily fucking his underage niece?

 

[eyeresist]

Contrary to what people think serialized storytelling happened in the 80s and 90s. Lots of dramas told nothing but serialized stories. Like Dallas hill street blues falcon crest knots landing melrose place to great effect and most did it without a grand plan which I can take or leave as long as the final product is involving. Even a sitcom like Roseanne did a few arcs. Plus ds nine's final chapter made for some riveting and entertaining material leading it's final season to be the best final season of a tv show I can think of. Plus daytime soaps were pretty good at arcs and payoff back then. ...
The problem with the way arcs are approached nowadays is they are fixated on playing games with the audience and doling out pieces of story like pieces of a puzzle. Old school serialized storytelling just took a modest ensemble and broke them down Into a handful of parallel linear arcs that weren't drug out forever because the series premise was wide open and not limited the way so any shows are these days So once an arc played itself out the writers could jump to the next one back then. With shows like lost or based on lost format you have to keep stringing everybody along or the shows over.

There are many ways to screw up serialised story-telling. One is what I call "churn", in which characters are arbitrarily swapped around into different relationships and given "issues", in order to endlessly extend the show long after its initial premise or theme has died. Another is to have multiple plot strands that barely relate to each other, so that episodes will often seem to depict a collection of unrelated events. Yet another is to proceed with no plan, just saying "How about...?" each time it comes to write a new episode, so you get a show with some ideas, but little sense of direction, or consistency of theme and focus.

A lot of contemporary shows are guilty of these, but I think a lot of the "great" writing you are praising did exactly the same things.