• 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!

Bryan Fuller Stepping Back From Showrunner Role on ‘Star Trek: Discovery’

^^^
Um, FYI - two Kelvin ships are in the STO game as well as the uniforms and the ST:ID Bridge android. :angel::rommie::whistle:;)
My wording was awful, but that was why they were thanked :p I was ridiculously happy they gave it the thumbs up and refuse to change my Kelvin Constitution for anything else!

For all the blind hatred the suits get (shit happens in production, they're the easy scapegoat), they've been quite good with their licensed products! I'm quite looking forward to seeing if STO get any Discovery elements.
 
The JJ Abrams Star Trek film franchise would like a word with you (4th JJ Abrams Universe Star trek film in pre-production too) - as would the TNG Blu-Rays, the TAS Blu Rays, etc.

To be fair, the Kelvin films are from Paramount rather than CBS. By some reports, CBS stood in the way of Abrams' plans to expand beyond the occasional movie.
 
To be fair, the Kelvin films are from Paramount rather than CBS. By some reports, CBS stood in the way of Abrams' plans to expand beyond the occasional movie.
They (CBS and Paramount) cross-promoted the films quite a bit (In fact the Star Trek Online game first used Leonard Nimoy and Zacchary Quinto as Voice Over actors and Paramount paid Zachary Quinto for it and there were tie ins, in the game to the first film, etc) - and Paramount also said 'No' to JJ Abrams merchandisong plans as well.

But the point is: Both CBS and Paramount HAVE shown interest and promoted their part of the Star Trek IP over the past 10 years. Neither have shown "no interest" in the Star Trek IP.
 
I was listening to the excellent if sporadic Transporter Room 3 podcast, and the hosts suggested that the reason for Fuller's departure is because CBS is still "your grandfather's network," meaning it could be they didn't agree with Fuller on elements they may have considered "edgy" or "out there," like the gay character and, if I'm not mistaken, a rumored Muslim character.

I tend to think this is the reason Fuller left and/or was booted. Supergirl has become a show that doesn't hesitate to feature a recurring storyline about the coming out of a main character and a very preachy episode about climate change. CBS owns The CW, but they care far less about the content on the latter than the former. They likely felt Fuller was going "too far" with certain elements and they didn't want to risk anything with their streaming platform's flagship show.

The problem is, they may have very well doomed Discovery to failure by trying to be too careful. Time will tell, but the hope that was restored when we learned this was in the Prime Universe was all but completely eroded when the show got pushed back and when Fuller's departure was announced. I didn't think Fuller was the best guy for the gig or the only guy who could do it (would've preferred Manny Coto or, best of all, Ron Moore) but the creators of Pepper Dennis helming a Star Trek show doesn't give me much hope.

Seems like a long, circuitous assumption for a situation that's much more easily explaned by the simple. obvious reason Fuller himself already gave. He was too overextended and they didn't want to delay the show anymore.

Especially since Supergirl was preachy from the start, on CBS proper. And the whole point of CBS All Access is that it can do things and go places regular CBS can't without worrying too much about ratings.
 
It does sound like a giant leap. For all the "CBS is conservative and wont want this or that!" stuff..... isn't CBS involved in producing the 100?
 
They can say it's in any universe they like, since they'll just change or ignore anything they choose. :)
 
Didn't it have only the one in TMP?

Which of course, means that movie takes place in the same alternate universe as TAS.:p
 
Last edited:
They can say it's in any universe they like, since they'll just change or ignore anything they choose. :)

Bingo. From everything I've read, this appears to be a soft reboot. It won't specifically aim to contradict anything from the Prime timeline, but it won't be beholden to it either. That's the impression I've gathered, anyway.
 
Bingo. From everything I've read, this appears to be a soft reboot. It won't specifically aim to contradict anything from the Prime timeline, but it won't be beholden to it either. That's the impression I've gathered, anyway.


Yep. it's pretty straightforward.
 
Bingo. From everything I've read, this appears to be a soft reboot. It won't specifically aim to contradict anything from the Prime timeline, but it won't be beholden to it either. That's the impression I've gathered, anyway.

I'd say that's exactly how its going to work - primarily because that's exactly how its always worked in the Trek franchise. Which is also why I'm a little confused when people keep insisting on calling it any kind of a reboot. If it folows the path it appears to be set on, it will not be any more of a reboot than DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, etc.
 
TNG was a soft reboot.

TNG is the messy example. It was originally intended as a reboot of sorts, then backed away from that in a lot of ways. To the point that it still repeatedly brought in guest stars from the original show with the clear implication that those characters' backstories were exactly as we had already seen. That's about as beholden to an original as the average straight up spinoff ever gets.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top