Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 5x10 - "Life, Itself"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
It's not that simple.
Like I said, on paper Fuller seemed like a good choice. But his ideas were not workable.
But on the other hand, Paradise took the show in a direction many, many people disliked.
Everything is a judgment call. But I think it's safe to say that it's a lot riskier to bring in people who know nothing about the franchise or even the genre than the opposite. For every Nick Meyer, you have people like John Logan, Michelle Paradise, and Stuart Baird.
Would I want Trek to be like BSG? No. But I'd trust Ron Moore to not just copy/paste from one to the other. And it's important to see if they've had success elsewhere, because you don't just want a one-trick pony. Because innovation is key to continue success. That's where Paradise failed. She would have been fine as a staff writer, but once she was in charge, ask she could really do was a remix of the CW-styled material she'd cut her on teeth on previously.
Thank you. Well articulated.
Hey, I have an idea...
Let's bring back Berman and Braga!
...
...
I'll show myself out...
Let's bring back Berman and Braga!
...
...I'll show myself out...
Hey, I have an idea...
Let's bring back Berman and Braga!
...
I'll show myself out...
Hey, I have an idea...
Let's bring back Berman and Braga!
...
I'll show myself out...
Well, running with that idea:
Showrunner:
Ron Moore
Writer's room:
Brannon Braga
Terry Matalas
Davy Perez
Sean Cochran
Kirsten Beyer
Cindy Appel
Erin McNamara
Kathryn Lyn
Ben Waller
It seems worth noting that Fuller's resume, even before the flame-out, wasn't stellar as a showrunner:
- On the first show he was showrunner (Dead Like Me) he quit early in the first season due to some conflict with MGM (show only lasted two seasons).
- Wonderfalls was canceled after one season (only four aired on live TV, with the rest DVD release only).
- Pushing Daisies was canceled after two seasons.
- Hannibal was canceled after three seasons.
In contrast, RDM and Naran Shankar have both produced shows which were, while airing, Syfy's most popular shows. Both of them also ended on their own terms. Admittedly, The Expanse was poached by Amazon, but my understanding is that had more to do with the unusual method under which it was produced (with a third-party studio developing it, rather than an in-house Syfy production) than anything.
One hundred percent agree, but that success doesn't automatically make one the best fit for Star Trek, does it?
Again, not trying to be difficult but I don't really want us to get mired in armchair quaterbacking of showrunning with us fans looking at someone and saying, "Yup, they're the best fit" like so much fantasy league football drafting. But, I want to know the "Why" people are picking these people, and is it the best fit with Star Trek, which is treated as far more precious in the sense that it needs a more delicate touch from the showrunner.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but when there is this demand that a Star Trek show "feel right" then I am always drawn to the question what does that mean?
IMHO, when looking for a potential showrunner for a Trek series with past experience, you have to consider the following:
- If they wrote Star Trek episodes in the past, were the episodes good?
- Have they been able to successfully showrun reasonably popular series which ended on its own terms (rather than be canceled prematurely)?
- Do they have experience with showrunning a sci-fi series?
- Do they have experience showrunning a series with long-form story and character arcs?
In contrast, RDM and Naren Shankar have showrun very grounded series, in terms of their attention to the details of science. Obviously, Trek is not something that needs to be hard sci-fi, but the various lapses in terms of technobabble (people freezing almost immediately in space, light traveling faster than light, etc.) wouldn't have happened under them. So I do think the outcomes would have been better. Though both were tied up with other things when Discovery was being greenlit.
Note, though, that I don't think Trek experience is needed. For example, Henry Alonso Myers is one of the co-showrunners of SNW. As soon as I heard he was involved, I knew the show would probably be good, as his work as a writer and EP on The Magicians was fantastic. It's a very different show, but the attention to long-form character arcs and the degree to which it makes you feel for the characters is palpable. Not to mention both have musical episodes.
Thank you for a well articulated response. Again, I don't agreed Moore or Shankar out of hand, so hearing people articulate their thoughts behind it is helpful. I would not trust Moore very far with Trek, but his record as a showrunner speaks for itself.
I do not know Shankar's work as well. It's interesting to look at the list of work and consider possibilities.
Good point about Myers. I think that's my biggest struggle when people say, "oh, it must be this person!" and give not credence as to why.
To be honest, the degree to which he flubbed the end of BSG would concern me, if it wasn't for the fact that he's done a lot since then. And he's made a few comments in the past (like hating replicators and post-scarcity economies, because it takes away a lot of the potential for drama) that make me feel like a Trek under his helm would upset a lot of folks. So it's not an unqualified yes, but I do think he'd do a decent job (better than Fuller's flame out, and better than the nostalgia-fest Matalas gave us)
He was the odd man out when TNG ended. RDM and Rene Echevarria went to DS9, while Braga and Menosky followed Jeri Taylor to Voyager. He was left without a job for a while, floating into writing for shows like SeaQuest DSV, Farscape, and The Outer Limits. His science background managed to land him a job with CSI, where he served as a head writer for eight years. He wanted to get back into sci-fi, though. After a failed attempt with Almost Human (a Fox drama starring Karl Urban who has to work alongside android cops), he showran The Expanse. Since it wrapped up, he moved to working on For All Mankind with RDM.
Well, I did enjoy Seaquest (a lot) and Farscape (a whole hell of a lot). Outer Limits is straight up and down case by case. Some are downright unsettling.
For All Mankind is an eventual watch. I use to be in to alternate history but that has faded.
I wish we'd gotten to see more of what he had in mind. There were tantalizing hints that it wasn't just a police procedural with sci-fi trappings.
B&B have a better average than Kurtzman...
Rene Echevarria is another one who should be in ideal new showrunner contention, granted MEDIUM and CARNIVAL ROW don't match THE EXPANSE or BSG.
Joe Menosky is an odd one in that he really comes and goes from the industry, and never became a creator or showrunner in his own right.
I sense a changedotorg petition starting upB&B have a better average than Kurtzman...
I don't like this as a qualifier because it often has nothing to do with the talent involved. Garbage shows last for 10 seasons while brilliant shows don't last one. Plus I appreciate Fuller more for attempting shows that are more creative than safe. Unfortunately it seems he has faults that are less appealing, but I'm just speaking of the work itself. Hannibal, for example, was too good for for any network, even NBC.
Yeah, I quite liked Season 1 of Carnival Row. I admit I got bored and DNFed Season 2, but he was no longer involved.
Menosky was about ten years older than the others, IIRC. He probably rose about as high as he could. He did get one writing credit for Discovery Season 1, and wrote for The Orville and For All Mankind, so it shows his old friends keep throwing him bones.
I'd be interested to see what Michael Taylor could accomplish if he came back to Trek. He did some great work I thought on Defiance, and while I haven't seen Pantheon, it's been getting rave reviews.
Always shocked Robert Hewitt Wolfe had such a career implosion after his ill-fated attempt with Andromeda.
This is kind of a small thing but I noticed that they mentioned STARFLEET headquarters at the end. They didn't say FEDERATION headquarters.
I wonder if this means that it's back to being a normal Pax-class starship (the USS Federation) and the actual headquarterses of the Federation and of Starfleet are now planetside again?
Also I'm fairly sure this is the first time we see more than one Pax-class ship at the same time.
I wonder if this means that it's back to being a normal Pax-class starship (the USS Federation) and the actual headquarterses of the Federation and of Starfleet are now planetside again?
Also I'm fairly sure this is the first time we see more than one Pax-class ship at the same time.
Initial thoughts
was happy that they couldn't ressurect the dead. they could do exactly what was already done, a copy with no memories, like Spock on the Genesis planet.
We finally got a "I'm a Doctor not a...!" from Culber.
NIce galactic barrier reference, although I'm not sure why it would take them ten years to get back.
Happy ending for Michael and Book, and she got to be a regular person with a life. Nice.
Unsure on how I feel about it being a found technology, and not the Progenitors themselves. God is still out there. Does this mean that the technology could make very non-humanoid life too, depending on how you program it? Should life from other galaxies be so completely different and never humanoid? TOS teased that, actually.
REALLY disliked the predictable ending. What if the Borg/Control/Kaylons wipe out all biological life in the universe again? Might be a technology you would want to access at some point..... don't throw it away!!! But then, thats my hoarding/archival tendencies coming out. I felt the same way about the library archive and the sphere data lol.
So was Kovich/Daniels Future Guy the whole time? Did he live out his life to that point, or get trapped in the future after the time travel ban during a mission?
Raynor and the spore drive's moment at the end was bad ass. Had me actually pumped up and excited, like fuck yeah.
I like connect-the-dots, but damn the Calypso ending felt forced. Should have left it with Michael and her family.
was happy that they couldn't ressurect the dead. they could do exactly what was already done, a copy with no memories, like Spock on the Genesis planet.
We finally got a "I'm a Doctor not a...!" from Culber.
NIce galactic barrier reference, although I'm not sure why it would take them ten years to get back.
Happy ending for Michael and Book, and she got to be a regular person with a life. Nice.
Unsure on how I feel about it being a found technology, and not the Progenitors themselves. God is still out there. Does this mean that the technology could make very non-humanoid life too, depending on how you program it? Should life from other galaxies be so completely different and never humanoid? TOS teased that, actually.
REALLY disliked the predictable ending. What if the Borg/Control/Kaylons wipe out all biological life in the universe again? Might be a technology you would want to access at some point..... don't throw it away!!! But then, thats my hoarding/archival tendencies coming out. I felt the same way about the library archive and the sphere data lol.
So was Kovich/Daniels Future Guy the whole time? Did he live out his life to that point, or get trapped in the future after the time travel ban during a mission?
Raynor and the spore drive's moment at the end was bad ass. Had me actually pumped up and excited, like fuck yeah.
I like connect-the-dots, but damn the Calypso ending felt forced. Should have left it with Michael and her family.
Last edited:
Me too, they only promised the "Creation of Life", never the transference of a (souls/life essence) between bodies.
Those are related, but very different lines of research.
And the Progenitors delivered on having access to tech to "Create Life" with almost limitless details on the Genetic Level.
That being said, they never made any promises on Transfering Life or Resurrection of Life.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll