Who knows? If in 1964 (when Star Trek was being pitched) anyone saying "and the show will still be fondly remembered 50+ years from now..." you'd have been laughed out of the studio production office.
News More on Fuller’s Departure From Discovery
- Thread starter AutoAdmin
- Start date
I kind of saw Bryan as the Russell T. Davies of Star Trek - like Russell and Doctor Who, Bryan seemed to want to bring the show into the twenty first century (as evidenced so far by the gay character, female Asian lead) by having a diverse cast, although nobody cast so far seems particularly young. Maybe Bryan was trying to cast his Rose Tyler - that is, less obvious companion who doesn't wear in slim cut clothing. The everyday girl. Perhaps CBS wanted a poster girl.
You see Rose Tyler as an everyday girl (by which I gather you mean an ordinary-looking one)? I thought Billie Piper was gorgeous.
Really, it's hasty to assume there's anything untoward going on here beyond what we've been told. Bryan Fuller was placed in the position of developing three different TV series at once -- Discovery, American Gods, and the Amazing Stories revival. That's a lot of work. There's nothing suspicious about someone in that position having to step back from active oversight of one show in order to focus on another. Heck, I would've been surprised if he hadn't. People in the industry have to choose between competing projects all the time. Sure, sometimes there's a juicy story about clashes with nasty executives, but often it's just the price of success. Eventually, TV showrunners get to the point where they're overseeing multiple different series at once and can't be hands-on with every one. Joss Whedon and J.J. Abrams have been in that position for quite a while. Alex Kurtzman is in that position. Greg Berlanti is too. And now it looks like Bryan Fuller is getting there.
Billie is very easy on the eyes. But, I refer more to the way they styled her: hoodie, sneakers, not so flattering attire, not make-up heavy and a "chav" accent. Very much a point of view character that the audience can follow.
Yeah, but you were talking about casting, not wardrobe. Billie Piper would have zero trouble being a "poster girl."
Billie Piper went straight to Secret Diary of a Call Girl after Doctor Who, so she kinda is the poster girl for "poster girl"!
Although, now that they are on Netflix, I *have* noticed a surprising amount of my friends (some of whom have never been interested in Trek, or even sci-fi) saying that they are watching DS9 or Voyager, and are really enjoying them. "I know!" I say, " I've been telling you for years!"
I think there's something comforting about being able to stream a show that isn't too dark or requires too much focus, and people are binge-watching them in greater numbers.
She didn't have a 'chav' accent. That would have required her to have a lot more dialect based dialogue. She was basically Ace 2.0.
They are constantly in the now watching and trending section on Netflix. I think reports of their death are being exaggerated somewhat...the fan war that never ends.
I do find it interesting how this show seems to be rushed to get it out where as Lost in Space seems to be taking its time. I wonder which show will be better.
I've never heard of American Gods before now. I'm into sci-fi. How much do you think John Q public has heard of it? I can ask anyone in my office and they have at least heard of Star Trek.
All things being equal he is a fool if he would rather work on American Gods IMO. But I have no idea what went on behind the scenes so maybe it is a more pleasant work experience, he has more control or whatever - impossible to know. What is clear is this is standard positive PR spin put out there to be professional and make everything sound good. In 20or so years we'll get all the real dirt in some Star Trek book someone writes about this.
Ultimately, American Gods is an adaptation, Trek is not. It's also contemporary set. Trek is probably the most demanding of his three assignments, even if it's the one he has most love for. It's also the one least likely to garner praise, as it isn't one of the currently trendy ghettoes like the other two. From his perspective, he also already has Trek on his resume. It's probably the most logical decision and safest to make. (That's aside from the fan reception to DSC and American Gods being polar opposite already.
Never assume that your own knowledge base is universal. A couple of decades ago, I flew out to LA to pitch to Deep Space Nine and stayed with my cousin, who'd been working in Hollywood for decades (he ran a company that provided bike, skateboard, and roller-skate stunts to Hollywood productions). At one point, I was talking to him about how I hoped I could parlay my DS9 pitch into an opportunity to pitch for Voyager -- and it came out that he was unfamiliar with both shows and had no idea they were both part of the Star Trek franchise. I'd just assumed he had to know about the various Trek series, that it was basic common knowledge, but he didn't have a clue, despite actually working in the industry.
Besides, Neil Gaiman is a very well-known name, an accomplished novelist, comic book author, and screenwriter with a ridiculously long list of awards and honors to his name. Productions adapted from his books and comics include Stardust, Coraline, and the current Lucifer TV series, and American Gods is just one of several Gaiman-based projects that are in development for film or TV adaptation right now. He's written for Doctor Who several times, and he's written screenplays including Beowulf, Mirrormask, and the English dub of Princess Mononoke. He's probably more famous than anyone involved with Star Trek: Discovery is, quite frankly. Just as a rough comparison, Gaiman's name gets 23.9 million Google hits, while Fuller's gets only 9.2 million, Nicholas Meyer gets 19 million, Alex Kurtzman gets a bit over half a million, and even Michelle Yeoh gets less than a million. American Gods gets 13 million hits, while Star Trek Discovery gets barely a million. Granted, a lot of that would be false positives, but even so, it's safe to say that American Gods is not some obscure, unknown thing in the SF/fantasy community. It's a major, prestigious project.
Ask anyone into Comics or Graphic Novels - and you'll find it's well know in those circles and highly regarded.
He's a professional and made his decision based upon his interests. It's hard to declare him "a fool" when we don't have all the information he was privileged to.
Given what @Christopher wrote up about "American Gods" and Neil Gaiman I would say that there is more to the project than John Q. Public knows. Star Trek simply isn't the household name like it was before and is no guarantee of success.
Compare that to a project that might be more prestigious, as well as more risk taking, and I can see many reasons for Fuller taking "American Gods." I. personally, am unfamiliar with work, but the brief write ups I've seen around here certainly are enough to pique my interest.
We're talking about the reconcilability of the two franchises. You guys keep quoting how unrecognizable DS9 and VOY are then trying to say how American Gods will be more recognizable? Sorry if the average person doesn't remember DS9 or Voy then they won't remember American Gods a few years later either - which is my point. Comic/graphic novel fans are a small niche, a tiny fraction of the population, which is exactly my point.
American Gods is a prose novel, not a comic book. I already told you that. It's one of the most famous, acclaimed, award-winning fantasy novels of the past two decades, by one of the most famous and admired fantasy writers of the age. It's really rather astonishing that you've never heard of it.
But dozens of the most successful movies of the past two decades have been based on comics. Or on prose novels, which is what we're actually talking about here. You've heard of Harry Potter, right? Lord of the Rings? A Game of Thrones? The Hunger Games? Those are all hugely successful screen franchises based on fantasy or SF novels. American Gods is a fantasy novel. Is it really so impossible for you to believe it could be the basis of a successful television series?
Besides, you're ignoring what I said the other day -- writers don't pick projects based solely on popularity. That's a shallow and petty standard of worth. They follow their inspiration and their passion. Anyone who's at all familiar with Bryan Fuller's career can see that he's never chosen his projects based on what would be conventionally popular.
And honestly, overall - Star Trek fans are an even SMALLER niche (Yes, we are).
Everytime Mavel/DC release a Superhero film it brings in anywhere from 500 million to 1 Billion+ in worldwide box office receipts. The most recent (even if I include the TNG films) Star Trek outings haven't even broken 500 million worldwide.
There's also currently 5 superhero comic book based TV series on the air with several more in the works and right now there's 3 Netfix streaming series based on various Marvel comics characters.
Do you really want to argue between Star Trek and 'Comic Book' fandom, which one is more niche? Because overall the evidence is pretty clear.
You're confusing comic book Movie Watchers with comic book Readers. Not even 1/10 of those who watched Avengers or BvS have picked up and read a single comic book in their lives.
Similar threads
- Locked
