Discovery Showrunners fired; Kurtzman takes over

[trekfan_1]

You probably shouldn't make claims about 'agenda's' if you can't even bother yourself to defend those assertions with evidence.

Theres is no evidence. I'm not making claims. It's my own speculation. As far as I know speculation and opinion was allowed in a message board. But you know what, your probably right. Probably should choose my words better. I take back what I said. I will just leave it as the show rubs me the wrong way both internally and externally and I'm not a fan of it's direction or writing.

 

[fireproof78]

For all those people who worry about Kurtzman being in charge, just remember in normal work offices, you can have very mediocre bosses, but amazing talented people working for them, which makes all the difference. I at least trust Kurtzman not to do anything monumentally stupid and wrong with Star Trek. Most of Into Darkness' problems were from Abrams and Lindelof. Orci and Kurtzman just kinda had to follow a template they were given and flesh it out. On feature films, writers are often told "write something like this...follow these guidelines" and not told "just come up with something cool." On TV, they can do a little more their own thing.

With Kurtzman in charge, I'm in a "wait and see" mode. I'm not going to write him off yet.

This.

Kurtzman co-created Fringe and that show was great for it's whole run. I'll give him a chance before attacking him for "ruining Star Trek" and other stupid fan shit like that.

Also, this.

ST desperately needs a fresh vision. Star Trek 2009 was a GREAT reboot and won over the general public (Star Trek was finally 'Cool' and mainstream again)....and then they ruined it. It's time for some new blood to take the reigns and do a Post-Voyager series. The STO team, for example, does such a great job with their take on ST, and I could see their work gelling so well with general audiences.

No, definitely not. STO is far to self-referential for its own good.

STD has defined itself based on S1.

Just like TNG did? Oh, wait. I hated that show. Of course, it's just like TNG.

Turnover half-way through a season can't be good for the show, right? I mean the biggest knock on DSC, I think, was it's obvious muddled-ness, going in different directions several different times in the season. Like there were maybe four different mini-seasons, and Burnham's supposed arc is in there, I guess, but hard to see (and I am an English major of long ago, trained to read into things!).

It's not as unusual at Hollywood would like audiences to believe. We just live in the day and age were the information and drama is more readily available.

 

[SolarisOne]

Plus, I love Whedon's writing, but only in Whedon projects. I find his style doesn't really mesh well in existing franchises. He is too distinctive and not all that good at blending in existing styles.

This. I love Whedon, but I don't want him anywhere near Trek.

These days some people classify "not everyone is white, straight and male" as "extreme left politics."

And why should everyone on TV be "white, straight, and male", anyway? We've had that for so long, it's become stultifying. Let's have some variety!

I'd rather have Ira Steven Behr come back.

I'd like to see what he would do with ship-based Trek.

Usually you don't see liberals fighting amongst each other.

If anything, liberals seem to be much more vicious among themselves than conservatives.

Turnover half-way through a season can't be good for the show, right?

Maybe not short-term. But I seem to remember frequent pruning during the first two seasons of TNG bearing great fruit later.

I don't see a sarcasm tag or a smiley, so I guess we can only assume you don't actually know any liberals?...

THIS.

 

[Kane_Steel]

No, definitely not. STO is far to self-referential for its own good.

That's the nature of it being a video game. The point is it isn't afraid to explore races that have barely been touched on before and put familiar and unfamiliar characters in brand new situations.

Just like TNG did? Oh, wait. I hated that show. Of course, it's just like TNG.

LOL.

The TNG comparisons are irrelevant. That was a different era on a different type of network.

If the TNG comparison was relevant, Enterprise having a terrible first season wouldn't have doomed the series... but it did.

In today's world, especially on streaming, shows need to find their footing pretty fast.... especially with an insane 8M per episode budget.

All these internal problems and mismanagement with a show that has a budget this high is not a positive sign. No way you can spin that positively.

 

[Kane_Steel]

It's just way too over the top for my tastes in STD. Thats just my opinion. Not being a fan of the writing/story development doesn't help matters either.

The show does come across like it's written by the same types behind the not-so-subtle CW Supergirl series, and sadly the writing 'talent' behind STD is on par with a CW soap. Maybe that will change with Pepper Dennis' Harberts and Berg fired, but meh.

The fact that they were even hired from the start shows some bad decision making around the creation and development of this show.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think they'd slash the budget for Discovery or scale back on the number of episodes, if they had to, before dropping it. The number of episodes are already scaled back compared to what used to be normal for Star Trek. Netflix has already covered the cost of DSC, and CBSAA's success (or "success") is measured by the number of subscribers. If CBSAA isn't losing money and they notice a fluctuation in their subscriptions when DSC is off-season, then they'll keep renewing it until they have more original programming for All Access and can do without it.

It's why UPN held onto Star Trek for 11 seasons. UPN was a faltering network. If they had more shows that took off, like WB did, then they wouldn't have stuck with Trek for so long. Same deal with CBSAA, just a different platform.

 

[fireproof78]

All these internal problems and mismanagement with a show that has a budget this high is not a positive sign. No way you can spin that positively.

It's still being produced. That's a positive.

That's the nature of it being a video game. The point is it isn't afraid to explore races that have barely been touched on before and put familiar and unfamiliar characters in brand new situations.

That is the video game world. There is a reason why video game films fail so miserably. The essence of a video game is the ability to make choices and explore smaller details. A TV show cannot explore that in the same way. It's not possible nor is it marketable to a larger audience than a niche, and self-referential isn't a good thing to bring in new audience members.

 

[ITDUDE]

Eh by now most the episodes are probably mostly written, I doubt it will effect much.

Think mess of Season 1 after Fuller exit, duplicated for Season 2. Yeah, we won't see a difference, because we already saw it play out once already.

 

[Tuskin38]

Think mess of Season 1 after Fuller exit, duplicated for Season 2. Yeah, we won't see a difference, because we already saw it play out once already.

This would be even less of a mess IMO.

Fuller left before the show had even started filming, while this is midway through the season.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

The show does come across like it's written by the same types behind the not-so-subtle CW Supergirl series, and sadly the writing 'talent' behind STD is on par with a CW soap. Maybe that will change with Pepper Dennis' Harberts and Berg fired, but meh.

The fact that they were even hired from the start shows some bad decision making around the creation and development of this show.

As I recall, they were handpicked by Bryan Fuller, so fling the blame in his direction, I guess. They were only kept on because they had been with Fuller from day one and it probably made sense to promote existing people wth knowledge of the product.

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

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

This is the best recap of Disco Season One I've seen anywhere. Thank you.

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

To those debating the merits of Kurtzman, Groppler Larry believes Alex will hire a new showrunner "pronto."

 

[cultcross]

Here's hoping it's not someone from Trek's history, but someone with experience of running a modern serialised TV show.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

I reckon he will promote from the existing writing staff, most likely Ted Sullivan

 

[Terok Nor]

I hope it goes back to being episodic with some loose serialization. Burnham is boring as hell. She drags the series down even further with her crap monologues. The story arcs for Season 1 were extremely poor and unsatisfying. The best episode was probably the one where Mudd killed Lorca over and over. It actually felt like a Star Trek episode and was quite lighthearted with good roles for all the cast members.

 

[AaronMorse]

This is not good news. Turmoil in the writing staff doesn't create great results. It is kind of like early seasons of TNG.

Goldsman is not a big loss, they may be better off without him.

I was neutral about Harberts & Berg. I liked them in interviews but didn't see any great writing from them.

Kurtzman is OK but not great.

What is Manny Coto doing these days?

Manny Coto! There's the answer!!!!!!! And Garfield and Judith Reeves-Stevens!!!

 

[Visitor1982]

I still don't get the 2019 release date for season 2. I know there is a lot of post-production, but filming started in April and will continue until October/November. Season 1 finished shooting in October as well... I don't understand why we can 't have 4 to 6 episodes from November onwards and then part 2 in February/March.

 

[mos6507]

I don't know. "Fear of the Walking Dead" rebooted and became a whole new thing in 6 episodes. Bring in new uniforms.

The original idea of making it a season-by-season anthology was a good one. It would have allowed them to fail and launch a new show while making it appear as if it was all planned that way from the start.

I think trying to pump life into a show that, while financially successful enough to continue, has significantly underwhelmed, is probably a bad idea.

I also think those starting to feel that Bad Robot's continuing influence on the Trek franchise is long in the tooth are spot on. Discovery smacked of trying to ride on what was left of the Kelvin-verse coat-tails, at least stylistically.

Paramount greenlighting two Trek films, for instance, one of which is likely to be the last of the Kelvin-verse films, indicates a sort of lack of courage on their part to find a new way forward.

The net effect is a franchise seeming to be running on fumes.

So really, it's Kurtzman who needs to go.

 

[BillJ]

I think trying to pump life into a show that, while financially successful enough to continue...

This is all that matters to everyone involved.

 

[Vger23]

The original idea of making it a season-by-season anthology was a good one. It would have allowed them to fail and launch a new show while making it appear as if it was all planned that way from the start.

I think trying to pump life into a show that, while financially successful enough to continue, has significantly underwhelmed, is probably a bad idea.

I also think those starting to feel that Bad Robot's continuing influence on the Trek franchise is long in the tooth are spot on. Discovery smacked of trying to ride on what was left of the Kelvin-verse coat-tails, at least stylistically.

Paramount greenlighting two Trek films, for instance, one of which is likely to be the last of the Kelvin-verse films, indicates a sort of lack of courage on their part to find a new way forward.

The net effect is a franchise seeming to be running on fumes.

So really, it's Kurtzman who needs to go.

"Significantly underwhelmed"...source please?

"Franchise running on fumes "… Please elaborate. I don't remember the last time we had a series running with two movies in the works.

I think people need to separate their own personal disappointment with the direction of the franchise versus the actual success and state of it. They are both very different things