Akiva Goldsman kinda craps on Discovery...

[eschaton]

Hey guys,

I was listening to the latest Ready Room. Wil Wheaton interviewed Akiva Goldsman. There was an exchange they had where Akiva contrasted Picard and Discovery which seemed really...odd...considering he was involved in Discovery. I'm going to attempt to transcribe:

Look, in your show like the Original Series you got to - had to - jump genres. You jump around within sci-fi. You do sci-fi action, you do sci-fi meditation, you do drama, you do romance, you do speculative fiction you do comedy - same with TOS. We are not afforded that opportunity, nor is it our outcome/goal. For us because we're serialized it's almost like each season is an episode. So our tone is sci-fi drama. Discovery is sci-fi action adventure. Gonna be a lot of things blowing up. Less things blow up on our show. Our show is more - performance based. We like to be writing based. We want people to play scenes you would expect to see in a drama - but the context be otherworldly or modern and speculative.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Goldsman might not have meant it to come out this way, but his compare/contrast between Discovery and Picard made it sound like he doesn't believe Discovery is a "serious show" and isn't about the quality of performances - or the writing level - just about action and "things blowing up."

 

[Alan Roi]

Hey guys,

I was listening to the latest Ready Room. Wil Wheaton interviewed Akiva Goldsman. There was an exchange they had where Akiva contrasted Picard and Discovery which seemed really...odd...considering he was involved in Discovery. I'm going to attempt to transcribe:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Goldsman might not have meant it to come out this way, but his compare/contrast between Discovery and Picard made it sound like he doesn't believe Discovery is a "serious show" and isn't about the quality of performances - or the writing level - just about action and "things blowing up."

And yet, in both episodes, he's had things and people blowing up. Dahj gets blown up episode 1. Mars gets blown up episode 2. What, i wonder is getting blown up in episode 3. Sounds like his show is kind of crapping on his own argument.

 

[Vger23]

I don't think that's crapping on anything. Sure, people who think that less explosions somehow equates to higher intellectual value might feel that way. But, ultimately, all he was saying was that DSC is an action/adventure show (which somehow becomes a bad thing?) and PIC is not.

Seems pretty benign to me. It's also true.

 

[Alan Roi]

I don't think that's crapping on anything. Sure, people who think that less explosions somehow equates to higher intellectual value might feel that way. But, ultimately, all he was saying was that DSC is an action/adventure show (which somehow becomes a bad thing?) and PIC is not.

Seems pretty benign to me. It's also true.

Things getting blown up seem like a pretty important part of Picard, though. Do actually less things blow up on Picard, so far?

 

[eschaton]

I don't think that's crapping on anything. Sure, people who think that less explosions somehow equates to higher intellectual value might feel that way. But, ultimately, all he was saying was that DSC is an action/adventure show (which somehow becomes a bad thing?) and PIC is not.

Seems pretty benign to me. It's also true.

I mean, I agree about the "things blowing up" comments. But saying Picard is "writing based" means he doesn't think Discovery is writing based, since he's comparing and contrasting. And it's hard for me to figure out how he - as a writer - takes the show seriously that he doesn't think has good writing. It's also an asinine comment since he's been at least partially responsible for the writing of three episodes.

 

[Vger23]

Things getting blown up seem like a pretty important part of Picard, though. Do actually less things blow up on Picard, so far?

I'm not going to even bother doing the math, because I'm not one to say that action is stupid and drama is smart.

Both shows are different. That alone makes me happy, because the franchise needs diversity to stay viable.

 

[starfleettanner]

Not crapping at all, in fact its a perfect contrast and lets be honest: TOS was action oriented scifi, whilst TNG was drama based scifi. So its a perfect fit that DSC is action while PICARD is drama. In fact, its too perfectly logical!

 

[Alan Roi]

Not crapping at all, in fact its a perfect contrast and lets be honest: TOS was action oriented scifi, whilst TNG was drama based scifi. So its a perfect fit that DSC is action while PICARD is drama. In fact, its too perfectly logical!

So far, I'm not seeing any deeper a character study in Picard than I've seen in Discovery. And perhaps Picard might not have as many things blowing up, but the story still revolves around such blowing up of things. IMO, Picard is an adventure story, it just moves a little slower, which is what you'd expect when your lead is 79.

 

[Terok Nor]

He's not wrong though.

 

[Vger23]

He's not wrong though.

No, it's absolutely the truth. But to say he's crapping on it is clearly incorrect. He's just pointing out the intentional differences in their approach with each series.

 

[Terok Nor]

No, it's absolutely the truth. But to say he's crapping on it is clearly incorrect. He's just pointing out the intentional differences in their approach with each series.

Exactly. All the Treks have their own flavor. Even if he was crapping on it it's his prerogative. Makes no difference to anyone else.

 

[Alan Roi]

He's not wrong though.

If his show is concentrating on drama, then it's going to have to a fair bit further to impress me in that area. There's been a whole lot of very solid scifi drama of late and Picard still seems to also want to be an adventure series more so than other recent scifi dramas.

 

[NCC-73515]

The writing on PIC so far is much better than the writing on Disco, while the action in Disco is better than in PIC. I suppose the silly fun factor will be higher in Lower Decks and Prodigy... all makes sense.

 

[The Wormhole]

Not really sure how Goldsman is crapping on anything here. Disco is more of an action show, and Picard is more of a character-oriented drama. Or is this the standard Trek fans think all Trek is something with higher purpose or something and to call any Star Trek an "action show" is an insult to both the franchise and Gene Himself?

Despite the fact Gene Himself called TOS an action show.

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

Since PIC reuses characters from the past whom we already know in-depth, it's hard to gauge whether PIC really is going more in-depth than DSC. So far, for pretty much all the new characters in PIC, I can't say they're any more developed than DSC characters when it was 2 episodes in.

 

[KennyB]

Not really sure how Goldsman is crapping on anything here. Disco is more of an action show, and Picard is more of a character-oriented drama. Or is this the standard Trek fans think all Trek is something with higher purpose or something and to call any Star Trek an "action show" is an insult to both the franchise and Gene Himself?

Despite the fact Gene Himself called TOS an action show.

Agreed. Amazed at how someone could walk away from that and thing he's crapping on Discovery. He's giving the ol' apples and oranges metaphor. You really can't say ANYTHING these days without someone getting bent outta shape. Even stranger to think that since he works on Discovery as well.............

 

[fireproof78]

Not really sure how Goldsman is crapping on anything here. Disco is more of an action show, and Picard is more of a character-oriented drama. Or is this the standard Trek fans think all Trek is something with higher purpose or something and to call any Star Trek an "action show" is an insult to both the franchise and Gene Himself?

Despite the fact Gene Himself called TOS an action show.

Yeah, not seeing the insult. It's a matter of focus of the show. As you stated, TOS was sold as an action/adventure show, and filmed and treated as such. TNG certainly was a lot more different, more focused on the dialog, than TOS. TNG's famous conference room scenes spring immediately to mind.

 

[mdtauk]

Sounds to me like he is outright saying that Discovery was designed to those new fans who enjoyed the JJ Films (hence the setting being before Kirk and Spock, and the visual tone to the show)

And Picard is more tailored to those who came to Star Trek following TNG, Voyager, Deep Space Nine etc.

 

[F. King Daniel]

They're planning or making a half-dozen shows. They'd better have very different tones or everyone's gonna get very bored very quickly.

 

[Amasov]

I disagree completely. He's just describing the differences in the two shows. He doesn't offer an opinion on what he thinks.

Sounds to me like he is outright saying that Discovery was designed to those new fans who enjoyed the JJ Films (hence the setting being before Kirk and Spock, and the visual tone to the show)

And Picard is more tailored to those who came to Star Trek following TNG, Voyager, Deep Space Nine etc.

Which is fine, if true.

The writing on PIC so far is much better than the writing on Disco, while the action in Disco is better than in PIC. I suppose the silly fun factor will be higher in Lower Decks and Prodigy... all makes sense.

Two episodes vs. two seasons is hardly a fair comparison.