• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Are Rian Johnson and Alex Kurtzman the fathers of modern science fiction?

Infern0

Fleet Captain
Fleet Captain
I saw a post in Facebook star trek group discussing this.

They said that Kurtzman and Johnson created the best versions of Trek and Wars and referred to Gene "Rotten berry" and George "Doofus" as overrated.
 
Someone needs to challenge them to a debate, film it, and DESTROY them on youtube.;)
Once that happens, we will definitively say that the original assertion is not true, because the only way to prove something definitively is via YouTube video.
 
I saw a post in Facebook star trek group discussing this.

They said that Kurtzman and Johnson created the best versions of Trek and Wars and referred to Gene "Rotten berry" and George "Doofus" as overrated.

People who talk like that to express their opinions need to continue their education. Why bother with them?

"Rotten berry"? Really?
 
Last edited:
OK, first of all the answer to the thread's title question is a definite no.
Rian Johnson only has two SFF credits to his name, The Last Jedi and Looper, and I don't know if I'd really count TLJ in this conversation since it's part of a bigger franchise he didn't create. Looper was good, but I really don't think it was popular or influential enough to really make him as a "father of modern sci-fi".
Alex Kurtzman on the other hand, does have a much more extensive list of SFF projects in his filmography, but the majority of them have been in preexisting franchises he didn't create. Even the ones that weren't, like The Island, Eagle Eye, and Fringe, I don't really see being influential enough to make him one either.
For me to consider someone to be a "father of modern science fiction" they have to done multiple works, that have been really popular and had a huge influence on the genre as a whole, people like Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov, Ray Bradburry, or yes even Gene Rodenberry and George Lucas.
 
Another point I forgot to mention in my other post is, what exactly would be the definition of modern? How far back we go before it isn't modern? 1950s? '60s? 1800s? 2000?
EDIT: Oops, Crookeddy beat me to it.
 
Another point I forgot to mention in my other post is, what exactly would be the definition of modern? How far back we go before it isn't modern? 1950s? '60s? 1800s? 2000?
I think we can talk about what modern means in this context after we decide what science fiction is. For example if you exclude superheroes, do you also exclude guardians of the galaxy? If so, do you also exclude star wars?
 
I saw a post in Facebook star trek group discussing this.

They said that Kurtzman and Johnson created the best versions of Trek and Wars and referred to Gene "Rotten berry" and George "Doofus" as overrated.
Nope.
But then, Rodenberry and Lucas probably aren't "the fathers of modern science fiction" either. There's a lot more to science fiction than movies and television.
 
  1. No, they are not the fathers of modern sci fi and really any suggestion of that is ridiculous.
  2. YouTube, while having some useful functions, as it relates to fandoms is just a place for people to have a podium to spout their opinions. The issue is when people start utilizing the opinions suggested in the videos as fact. That happens quite a bit.
 
This is a really thin excuse for a topic.

"I read two people on Facebook saying some stuff that you will find both annoying and incredibly dumb. Let me summarize it here so that we can get all excited and ticked off that people on Facebook say questionable things."

A remarkable lack of specifics, too, other than some grade-school namecalling.

Really, really unnecessary and hard to justify.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top