• 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!

Alex Kurtzman on streaming movies and the future of Trek

If we were all the same, life would quickly get boring.
Considering my experiences in blisteringly hot porta-potties, I'll have to disagree on this lone point big guy.

Also I'm sure Kurtzman will kick back once he's long gone from his position, crack open a cold one, and just laugh about it all, for that time he at least had the wings of a great big bird. Or something like that, I just know somehow the money rolls in and we should be thankful for that.
 
Don't worry, this is the showrunner with Kurtzman for Starfleet Academy!


Another Star Trek Discovery spin off with this level of talent will be a sure fire hit, just like the last one.
Was attached to a show that ran four seasons. What’s the down side?
 
He's not involved with the day to day which is why it is good. A bit like Lower Decks. Or as soon as he fucked off from Picard.
You know that pretty much the only time he had to get heavily involved in the day to day operation of a series, was Discovery, right? And that was only after he had to fire the showrunners. Beyond that and co-writing a few episodes, he's been pretty willing to let his showrunners have a pretty long leash.
Kevin Fiege thinking "man, I think I should try to get the guy in charge of this show for one of my shows".
Just curious what you think of shows like She-Hulk, Secret Invasion, Moon-Knight, etc. Shows that didn't get the greatest receptions. You know Fiege hired those showrunners too.
Even YouTube channels that are set up to hate on stuff liked it.
Yeah, exclusive access has a funny way of changing someones opinion.
But the lads on here who think that having a show feel like and sound like Star Trek for once is bad.
They all feel like Star Trek in one way or another. Even Discovery. Even Section 31, in its own certain way.
Who would ever have thought setting your show on a Starfleet ship with the usual Star Trek tropes,
You just described pretty much every series.
with a crew of likeable new characters who work together
Or in the case of Picard season 3, ditching half the new and likeable characters in favour of returning geriatrics. Some of which were already dead. Twice.
and rousing music
Mostly taken from other films and series.
Which one is more STAR TREK to you


or


Is it one with the weird musical number in the 21st Century or the starship leaving stardock to a traditional Star Trek score
Because Star Trek had never done time travel before, right?
 
Who would ever have thought setting your show on a Starfleet ship with the usual Star Trek tropes, with a crew of likeable new characters who work together and rousing music would have people insist it feels like Star Trek.

You will watch your space Hitler redemption arc and subsequent movie you will like it.
So... strange New Worlds?

And Season 3 has a Federation ending threat, surprise family member of a main character, and a character who was a jerk for no reason.

We clearly watched different seasons.
 
He's not involved with the day to day which is why it is good. A bit like Lower Decks. Or as soon as he fucked off from Picard.
With the exception of Disco S2, Kurtzman was not involved with the day to day of any of the shows.
Which one is more STAR TREK to you


or


Is it one with the weird musical number in the 21st Century or the starship leaving stardock to a traditional Star Trek score
The musical number is the scene I liked better and found to be more unique and memorable.
 
God forbid Star Trek can’t evolve. It must be the exact same shape as it was in 1987. Or else we boycott!!!

Yeah, I think if it can’t evolve, it will be lost. Section 31 was a huge misfire. No doubt about that. But that doesn’t mean that if hasn’t been successful in some changes made over the years.
 
How long was Section 31 as an entertainment vehicle?

What percentage does that represent of Star Trek content? When under Kurtzman?

Please do your work and tell me how this is the end of all Trek or somehow harms the franchise. Do people watch Star Trek less because of it?

And I don't agree with everything Kurtzman has greenlit but that doesn't translate to harm. There's not a single installment of Trek I think bats 100%.

Not a single one.

Despite my reservations I have not called for past producers to loose their jobs. Call me an old softie I guess.
 
God forbid Star Trek can’t evolve. It must be the exact same shape as it was in 1987. Or else we boycott!!!

Yeah, I think if it can’t evolve, it will be lost. Section 31 was a huge misfire. No doubt about that. But that doesn’t mean that if hasn’t been successful in some changes made over the years.

1) Ripping-off "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" is not "evolving Star Trek" and is not "change".

This is not just a problem with Section 31. This is a long-standing problem with NuTrek.
Discovery season 1: Mass Effect, Tardigrade game.
Picard season 1: Mass Effect 3
Discovery season 4: Arrival, StarCraft.

NuTrek is either nostalgia bait (SNW, PIC S3, LD, PRO) or it rips-off things from (relative) recent pop culture or other things from the recent Zeitgeist (TED talks Discovery season 1).


2) Stop excusing bad writing.

If Section 31 had at least been a good rip-off of "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" with a clever script, we wouldn't have this discussion.

What we got with Section 31 is not even a good rip-off, or even a mediocre rip-off. It's abysmal (Same goes for NuTrek shows too).
Way too often arguments for "evolving" or "change" or "different" or "moving forward" are excuses for bad writing.
 
Last edited:
1) Ripping-off "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" is not "evolving Star Trek" and is not "change".

This is not just a problem with Section 31. This is a long-standing problem with NuTrek.
Discovery season 1: Mass Effect, Tardigrade game.
Picard season 1: Mass Effect 3
Discovery season 4: Arrival, StarCraft.

NuTrek is either nostalgia bait (SNW, LD, PRO) or it rips-off things from (relative) recent pop culture or other things from the recent Zeitgeist (TED talks Discovery season 1).


2) Stop excusing bad writing.

If Section 31 had at least been a good rip-off of "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" with a clever script, we wouldn't have this discussion.

What we got with Section 31 is not even a good rip-off, or even a mediocre rip-off. It's abysmal (Same goes for NuTrek shows too).
Way too often arguments for "evolving" or "change" or "different" or "moving forward" are excuses for bad writing.
Star Trek has been ripping off other properties since 1964. It wouldn't exist with out what came before and what came after.

7BNgIAz.jpg


Whose excusing bad writing? @Campe even calls it a "misfire".
 
1) Ripping-off "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" is not "evolving Star Trek" and is not "change".
I see nothing wrong with Trek trying out different styles of story.
This is not just a problem with Section 31. This is a long-standing problem with NuTrek.
Discovery season 1: Mass Effect, Tardigrade game.
Picard season 1: Mass Effect 3
Discovery season 4: Arrival, StarCraft.
Speaking as a Mass Effect fan, these comparisons are reaching.
NuTrek is either nostalgia bait (SNW, LD, PRO) or it rips-off things from (relative) recent pop culture or other things from the recent Zeitgeist (TED talks Discovery season 1).
The Enemy Below was less than 10 years old when Balance of Terror was filmed, so I guess ripping off thing from recent pop-culture is just something Trek has always done.
If Section 31 had at least been a good rip-off of "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" with a clever script, we wouldn't have this discussion.
Nah, you'd hate it.
What we got with Section 31 is not even a good rip-off,
Ok.
or even a mediocre rip-off
Ok.
It's abysmal
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions....
(Same goes for NuTrek shows too).
Even wrong ones like this...
 
1) Ripping-off "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" is not "evolving Star Trek" and is not "change".

This is not just a problem with Section 31. This is a long-standing problem with NuTrek.
Discovery season 1: Mass Effect, Tardigrade game.
Picard season 1: Mass Effect 3
Discovery season 4: Arrival, StarCraft.

NuTrek is either nostalgia bait (SNW, PIC S3, LD, PRO) or it rips-off things from (relative) recent pop culture or other things from the recent Zeitgeist (TED talks Discovery season 1).


2) Stop excusing bad writing.

If Section 31 had at least been a good rip-off of "Suicide Squad" / "Guardians of the Galaxy" / "Mission: Impossible" / "Ocean's Eleven" with a clever script, we wouldn't have this discussion.

What we got with Section 31 is not even a good rip-off, or even a mediocre rip-off. It's abysmal (Same goes for NuTrek shows too).
Way too often arguments for "evolving" or "change" or "different" or "moving forward" are excuses for bad writing.

Yawn. Wow, your rant could have been avoided had you read that I called Section 31 a huge misfire.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top