Discovery Showrunners fired; Kurtzman takes over

[Terok Nor]

5 seasons isn't considered long? It's two years longer than TOS and one year longer than Enterprise. I thought TV shows had to sink or swim fast in this day and age.

What I mean is it won't go to 7 seasons and obviously there will be a lot fewer episodes than the other spin offs since the seasons are shorter. Discovery doesnt as yet appear to be a show with legs. It seems to be dependent on Burnham's journey rather than being an ensemble or an action/science fiction drama like the other spin offs. That's more restricting than any amount of established canon could ever be. At the very least canon can be worked around. Having such a dull and unlikeable (in my opinion) focal point as the main draw can't.

 

[mos6507]

How is the franchise in any more of a transitional stage now than it has been for the past 15 years?

Who said it has to be any different? Should I use another term? Rudderless maybe?

If it were in trouble, we would not have a series and two movies at various stages in the development phase.

That's called doubling down. Something that happens a lot in Hollywood when they have no new ideas.

There was a LONG gap between the end of Beyond and the greenlight of another movie and the stars were sort of trying to dodge the questions about more movies. At one point they thought they might show up in Tarantino's movie. So I really see this last Kelvin movie as almost an afterthought rather than some vote of confidence on the part of Paramount. They're trying to wring the last drop of return out of their sunk investment.

Paramount has to make Star Trek product as a default because they have so few other franchises in their arsenal. If they are low in inspiration they will make a Trek movie anyway.

 

[Phaser Two]

"Has to?"

Yup. I know from your previous posts that you like DISC and I'm glad for you but honestly, except for the Mudd episode it was highly disappointing. But individual tastes aside, the people doing Star Trek have got to stop acting like there's a federal law preventing them from doing new stories in the future of what we've seen before. This goes all the way back to Enterprise (which I admittedly liked) and includes the AbramsTrek, so this has been going on for about 17 years now. In other words, there are young people about to go to college who were not yet born the last time someone tried a Star Trek production that postdated the established timeline. The AbramsTrek movies have gone fully off the rails and DISC is a behind-the-scenes catastrophe that sure doesn't seem like any enormous ratings sensation either, so MAYBE, JUST MAYBE it's time to do some forward world-building and set something 10 years after Voyager. Radical, crazy idea instead of trying to shoehorn a bunch of stories ten years before the events of one of the greatest TV series of all time, to be sure, but hey . . . let's be nuts and just give it a go.

 

[Vger23]

Why? How much research into TOS did new viewers need to enjoy TNG? Just set it long enough after the TNG era that a clean slate is available. It's pretty easy to sum up stuff like the Dominion War in one sentence if somewhere down the line the Jem'Hadar show up and decide to slaughter everyone in sight. The first real TOS cross over apart from Bones' cameo in the pilot didn't happen until near the end of Season 3 with Sarek and that didn't require much explanation nor indeed did Spock and Scotty's guest appearances. Their whole back story was rolled out before the opening credits began.

TNG liberally used the Klingons, Romulans and Vulcans and no one went scrambling back into the vaults of TOS to understand who and what they were. They were simply alien races from Star Trek who had history with the Federation/Starfleet. Same as it would be if the Borg, the Cardassians or the Ferengi showed up.

It pains me that we still have people pining for a post Voyager series. You all have to recognize that the timeframe of the series is set in has nothing particularly to do with storytelling choices or the studio executive's view of what the Fanbase wants.

It's all about marketing the show. TOS is culturally iconic, and the Kelvinverse films are still fresh in the publics mind, or at least more fresh than anything that came out of the TNG era. It's marketing 101. Nobody gives a shit about the marketing tagline "Set 10 years after the adventures of Harry Kim and Neelix!"

That may frustrate a whole lot of you who want your series that talks about the aftermath of the alpha quadrant and the Dominion war, with guest appearances by all of your favorite secondary characters, but it just ain't going to happen anytime soon. I think the sooner we all get our heads wrapped around that cold hard fact of how the studio believes the franchise needs to be marketed, the better off we will all be.

 

[Phaser Two]

A Post-Voyager series would be even less popular, as it would require new viewers to do research.

Best bet would be an entirely new universe/timeline

Research? I don't think so. I mean, it's going to be a Star Trek series, so there has to be some frame of reference for those of us who are established fans. It just doesn't have to be a prequel series, for crying out loud. Meanwhile, as far as attracting new viewers, I have a radical idea. Just make it good. The freedom to do anything would certainly help with that.

 

[Vger23]

Who said it has to be any different? Should I use another term? Rudderless maybe?



That's called doubling down. Something that happens a lot in Hollywood when they have no new ideas.

There was a LONG gap between the end of Beyond and the greenlight of another movie and the stars were sort of trying to dodge the questions about more movies. At one point they thought they might show up in Tarantino's movie. So I really see this last Kelvin movie as almost an afterthought rather than some vote of confidence on the part of Paramount. They're trying to wring the last drop of return out of their sunk investment.

Paramount has to make Star Trek product as a default because they have so few other franchises in their arsenal. If they are low in inspiration they will make a Trek movie anyway.

You can feel free to use whatever term makes you happy. It's not going to change my ingrained perception that your irritation is due to your personal dismay at the choices that have been made with the franchise, not with the Actual health of the franchise. Relatively speaking, this is the most play the franchise has gotten since the glory days of the mid to late 90s. That doesn't strike me as a rudderless or in decline. Again, it's unfortunate that maybe choices are being made that you personally don't approve of, but that doesn't mean that it is unsuccessful and dying a slow death. If anything, this is the greatest revitalization I've seen since TMP or TNG

 

[Vger23]

Yup. I know from your previous posts that you like DISC and I'm glad for you but honestly, except for the Mudd episode it was highly disappointing. But individual tastes aside, the people doing Star Trek have got to stop acting like there's a federal law preventing them from doing new stories in the future of what we've seen before. This goes all the way back to Enterprise (which I admittedly liked) and includes the AbramsTrek, so this has been going on for about 17 years now. In other words, there are young people about to go to college who were not yet born the last time someone tried a Star Trek production that postdated the established timeline. The AbramsTrek movies have gone fully off the rails and DISC is a behind-the-scenes catastrophe that sure doesn't seem like any enormous ratings sensation either, so MAYBE, JUST MAYBE it's time to do some forward world-building and set something 10 years after Voyager. Radical, crazy idea instead of trying to shoehorn a bunch of stories ten years before the events of one of the greatest TV series of all time, to be sure, but hey . . . let's be nuts and just give it a go.

I honestly don't think this opinion is correct. But I also don't think the opinion of the studio thinking that they must set the shows around the TOS era is correct either. The only factor that is real in the current circumstance is that the stories must be good and appeal to a broader variety of people then what is represented on boards like this

The actual timeframe that the show is set in doesn't make a fuck all of difference to anybody but people like us. To 95% of the population, an adventure story about outer space is an adventure story about outerspace. Nobody really cares what part of the convoluted and over-hyped "Trek timeline " things fall into

EDIT: so all things being equal, you set it in a place where you can have a marketing hook that will appeal to more people in the broader audience. That's why you continue to see the franchise go back to the one place that resonates the most with the general public. It may be frustrating, but this ain't rocket science folks. It makes absolutely perfect sense.

 

[Phaser Two]

It pains me that we still have people pining for a post Voyager series. You all have to recognize that the timeframe of the series is set in has nothing particularly to do with storytelling choices or the studio executive's view of what the Fanbase wants.

It's all about marketing the show. TOS is culturally iconic, and the Kelvinverse films are still fresh in the publics mind, or at least more fresh than anything that came out of the TNG era. It's marketing 101. Nobody gives a shit about the marketing tagline "Set 10 years after the adventures of Harry Kim and Neelix!"

That may frustrate a whole lot of you who want your series that talks about the aftermath of the alpha quadrant and the Dominion war, with guest appearances by all of your favorite secondary characters, but it just ain't going to happen anytime soon. I think the sooner we all get our heads wrapped around that cold hard fact of how the studio believes the franchise needs to be marketed, the better off we will all be.

Glad to see you weigh in as you're someone whose opinions I know and respect from the TOS board.
I'm not eager for a series dealing with the aftermath of the Dominion War at all. In fact, although I loved DS9 as a whole, Voyager actually resonates more with me today. I don't need to see the further adventures of Neelix (LOL), but it sure would be nice to have a series set on a Starfleet ship about 10 years after Nemesis, which would be free of the ridiculously unnecessary pressures of trying to make a prequel series fit with established canon. As a bonus, they could - but wouldn't have to - have Stewart or Spiner or Frakes or Mulgrew or Ryan on in a guest spot or two. McNeill and Dawson and Frakes could direct when their schedules permitted. It would be fun. And if they hired good writers, they could attract tons of viewers with imaginative stories and interesting action and mysteries set against a well-established background of which they could use as little or as much as they wanted. To me, it's just sort of obvious and I simply don't get why they won't do it.

 

[Terok Nor]

It pains me that we still have people pining for a post Voyager series. You all have to recognize that the timeframe of the series is set in has nothing particularly to do with storytelling choices or the studio executive's view of what the Fanbase wants.

It's all about marketing the show. TOS is culturally iconic, and the Kelvinverse films are still fresh in the publics mind, or at least more fresh than anything that came out of the TNG era. It's marketing 101. Nobody gives a shit about the marketing tagline "Set 10 years after the adventures of Harry Kim and Neelix!"

That may frustrate a whole lot of you who want your series that talks about the aftermath of the alpha quadrant and the Dominion war, with guest appearances by all of your favorite secondary characters, but it just ain't going to happen anytime soon. I think the sooner we all get our heads wrapped around that cold hard fact of how the studio believes the franchise needs to be marketed, the better off we will all be.

Wanting a series set after Voyager doesn't mean anyone is clamouring for guest appearances from Harry Kim, Neelix or anyone else. It simply means they want a clean slate free from the continuity landmines of a prequel. Nothing in TOS prevented TNG from building its own world and nothing post the TNG era would be prevented from doing so either. The established continuity can be used as little or as much as necessary just like TNG used TOS continuity. 178 episodes and only a handful even featured TOS characters or references. The reason TNG/DS9/VOY were so self referential is because they were all set in the same timeframe. That wouldn't happen with a brand new show set 50 or 100 years later. Not unless they do spin offs that air alongside it which is unlikely now.

You have no know just how absurd it is that you think people would expect a tagline about a show being set after the adventures of Neelix. It would clearly be tagged as 200 years after Kirk, 100 years after Picard if such a thing were proposed

 

[Vger23]

What I mean is it won't go to 7 seasons and obviously there will be a lot fewer episodes than the other spin offs since the seasons are shorter. Discovery doesnt as yet appear to be a show with legs. It seems to be dependent on Burnham's journey rather than being an ensemble or an action/science fiction drama like the other spin offs. That's more restricting than any amount of established canon could ever be. At the very least canon can be worked around. Having such a dull and unlikeable (in my opinion) focal point as the main draw can't.

I have a feeling that there are a lot of women and people of color who would disagree with your assessment about Michael Burnham and her appeal within the franchise

 

[Vger23]

Wanting a series set after Voyager doesn't mean anyone is clamouring for guest appearances from Harry Kim, Neelix or anyone else. It simply means they want a clean slate free from the continuity landmines of a prequel. Nothing in TOS prevented TNG from building its own world and nothing post the TNG era would be prevented from doing so either. The established continuity can be used as little or as much as necessary just like TNG used TOS continuity. 178 episodes and only a handful even featured TOS characters or references. The reason TNG/DS9/VOY were so self referential is because they were all set in the same timeframe. That wouldn't happen with a brand new show set 50 or 100 years later. Not unless they do spin offs that air alongside it which is unlikely now.

You have no know just how absurd it is that you think people would expect a tagline about a show being set after the adventures of Neelix. It would clearly be tagged as 200 years after Kirk, 100 years after Picard if such a thing were proposed

I'm not saying I think people would expect anything! I'm simply telling you how studios think when they market franchises like Star Trek. My point is that if we can't accept this and learn to deal with it as reality, then we're going to continue to be frustrated by things that at the end of the day aren't really that important, and frankly I believe that that frustration leads us to looking at modern products of the franchise through a tainted lens.

 

[Phaser Two]

Wanting a series set after Voyager doesn't mean anyone is clamouring for guest appearances from Harry Kim, Neelix or anyone else. It simply means they want a clean slate free from the continuity landmines of a prequel. Nothing in TOS prevented TNG from building its own world and nothing post the TNG era would be prevented from doing so either. The established continuity can be used as little or as much as necessary just like TNG used TOS continuity. 178 episodes and only a handful even featured TOS characters or references. The reason TNG/DS9/VOY were so self referential is because they were all set in the same timeframe. That wouldn't happen with a brand new show set 50 or 100 years later. Not unless they do spin offs that air alongside it which is unlikely now.

You have no know just how absurd it is that you think people would expect a tagline about a show being set after the adventures of Neelix. It would clearly be tagged as 200 years after Kirk, 100 years after Picard if such a thing were proposed

EXACTLY

Could not agree or like this post more.

 

[Vger23]

Glad to see you weigh in as you're someone whose opinions I know and respect from the TOS board.
I'm not eager for a series dealing with the aftermath of the Dominion War at all. In fact, although I loved DS9 as a whole, Voyager actually resonates more with me today. I don't need to see the further adventures of Neelix (LOL), but it sure would be nice to have a series set on a Starfleet ship about 10 years after Nemesis, which would be free of the ridiculously unnecessary pressures of trying to make a prequel series fit with established canon. As a bonus, they could - but wouldn't have to - have Stewart or Spiner or Frakes or Mulgrew or Ryan on in a guest spot or two. McNeill and Dawson and Frakes could direct when their schedules permitted. It would be fun. And if they hired good writers, they could attract tons of viewers with imaginative stories and interesting action and mysteries set against a well-established background of which they could use as little or as much as they wanted. To me, it's just sort of obvious and I simply don't get why they won't do it.

I honestly think that the perception, regardless of whether it is true or not, is that the TNG era of the franchise is an exhausted fatigued failure. Besides the marketing elements I have pointed out, I honestly think they are just trying to stay as far away from that stigma as possible.

Again I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with that. I'm just saying I really think these are the business rationales for what we are seeing.

Thank you for the kind words as well, I engaged you very easily having the same thoughts about some of our exchanges we've had in other forms here!

 

[Tuskin38]

I'd rather a reboot then post-Voyager.

There is really nothing left to do, they have all this super tech that would solve any problem, the writers would nee to write excuses every episode for why the ablative armour wouldn't work, or why the transphasic torpdoes are not OP.

 

[Phaser Two]

I'm not saying I think people would expect anything! I'm simply telling you how studios think when they market franchises like Star Trek. My point is that if we can't accept this and learn to deal with it as reality, then we're going to continue to be frustrated by things that at the end of the day aren't really that important, and frankly I believe that that frustration leads us to looking at modern products of the franchise through a tainted lens.

I don't think you're correct about studios if you're contending that everything must be a prequel. How did TNG, DS9 and VOY, with 21 seasons between them, ever get made? Even the SW folks are moving forward with new stories in the future of their own timeline. It can be done!

 

[Terok Nor]

I have a feeling that there are a lot of women and people of color who would disagree with your assessment about Michael Burnham and her appeal within the franchise

I don't doubt it but I'm afraid a character who ticks multiple representation boxes isn't enough to entertain me. If Burnham were an interesting, well written character played by a good actress my view of her would be vastly different.

It appears I'm expected to embrace her simply because of what she looks like and represents rather than because she's good. Not happening. Sorry. This is a tv show not a political soapbox. All the other shows represented women and people of color to the best to their abilities during their eras and managed to entertain while doing do. Discovery hasn't done that in my opinion.

 

[Vger23]

I'd rather a reboot then post-Voyager.

There is really nothing left to do, they have all this super tech that would solve any problem, the writers would nee to write excuses every episode for why the ablative armour wouldn't work, or why the transphasic torpdoes are not OP.

In a way, I do agree with this, although I think there are probably ways that a creative writer could get around some of this.

I guess my perception of the franchise is just very different than other fans. It seems a lot of people are really into Star Trek being this broad and interwoven story that takes place over the course of many centuries in our future. I don't see it that way at all! To me, Star Trek is more like the James Bond franchise. It has essential elements ( like phasers, transporters, space travel, dilithium crystals, etc.) and essential thematics ( like diversity, a positive future for humanity, exploration of the galaxy, etc. ) and that's really all it needs. I'm not interested in some grand story that everybody thinks Star Trek is. I'm just interested in Star Trek

 

[Terok Nor]

I'm not saying I think people would expect anything! I'm simply telling you how studios think when they market franchises like Star Trek. My point is that if we can't accept this and learn to deal with it as reality, then we're going to continue to be frustrated by things that at the end of the day aren't really that important, and frankly I believe that that frustration leads us to looking at modern products of the franchise through a tainted lens.

I don't accept that at all. If that were the case TNG/DS9/VOY would not exist. Neither would the Star Wars sequels. This is your opinion that you're passing off as fact. You should accept that.

 

[Vger23]

I don't think you're correct about studios if you're contending that everything must be a prequel. How did TNG, DS9 and VOY, with 21 seasons between them, ever get made? Even the SW folks are moving forward with new stories in the future of their own timeline. It can be done!

I don't understand how anything I said would lead you to believe that my position is that everything must be a prequel. I am simply saying, at least for the third time now, that this is the studios current view of how the franchise and it's particular current state must be marketed to be successful.

Star Wars is a very different franchise than our beloved Star Trek! That is not a fair comparison by any longshot. And again, the Star Trek television series you are referring to were all made in a different era in a totally different medium of television And again, quite frankly, each of those products continued to decline drastically in their popularity as they wore on. That creates the perception of staleness.

Don't shoot me guys, I'm just the messenger for what the reality is. As hopefully have illustrated, I could give a shit about what they do as long as I'm entertained. I do have a perception though, that a lot of you are not the same way. There are a lot of fans who are inclined to reacted very negatively and therefore have negative preconceptions if they are not getting something that they want out of the franchise. It doesn't have as much to do with quality storytelling as it does to do with things like the setting and timeline and universe and so forth. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, I'm simply saying that I don't care and most people in the general audience do not as well

 

[Phaser Two]

I honestly think that the perception, regardless of whether it is true or not, is that the TNG era of the franchise is an exhausted fatigued failure. Besides the marketing elements I have pointed out, I honestly think they are just trying to stay as far away from that stigma as possible.

Again I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with that. I'm just saying I really think these are the business rationales for what we are seeing.

Thank you for the kind words as well, I engaged you very easily having the same thoughts about some of our exchanges we've had in other forms here!

Definitely!

I think there was TNG-era fatigue, indeed, after 21 seasons and 3.75 movies set in that era. But that was a long, long time ago now. The prequel/reboot avenue isn't working. So you default to the norm, which is making new stories that postdate, in-universe, what came before. Just sitting here tired on a Saturday morning I can think of about a dozen ideas for a new series (solving some of the TNG-fatigue) as can you and anyone else posting here I'm sure. TBTP: please try this already. I have a strong feeling it would immediately be more popular, successful, and satisfying than DISC.