Discovery Showrunners fired; Kurtzman takes over

[Vger23]

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.

It's an opinion I happen to disagree with. I think it is a compelling, well written, and well performed character. Sounds like I got a pretty good deal out of this whole thing!

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.

See my previous post. Comparing the current state of the franchise to where it was back in the 80s and 90s or to Star Wars is absolutely inane. I'm not voicing my opinion at all, which seems to be something that is flying 30,000 feet over your head. I am simply telling you that all the evidence and everything we've heard anyone in charge say and do since 2009 suggests that these are in fact the opinions and attitudes of the people who are in charge of the franchise currently.

I wish you would understand that I'm not trying to tell anybody what to think or what to like. I am simply telling you that this is how it is, and our inability to get beyond bitching and moaning about it is causing a lot of people negative emotions and feelings that I believe are clouding our ability to just sit back and do what the show is intended to do in the first place- which is enjoy it and have some escapist fun.

 

[guyute03]

Still stunned this happened and really hope it has not stopped whatever plans there are for OTHER spinoffs, or for Discovery continuing unabated.

 

[Phaser Two]

It's an opinion I happen to disagree with. I think it is a compelling, well written, and well performed character. Sounds like I got a pretty good deal out of this whole thing!



See my previous post. Comparing the current state of the franchise to where it was back in the 80s and 90s or to Star Wars is absolutely inane. I'm not voicing my opinion at all, which seems to be something that is flying 30,000 feet over your head. I am simply telling you that all the evidence and everything we've heard anyone in charge say and do since 2009 suggests that these are in fact the opinions and attitudes of the people who are in charge of the franchise currently.

I wish you would understand that I'm not trying to tell anybody what to think or what to like. I am simply telling you that this is how it is, and our inability to get beyond bitching and moaning about it is causing a lot of people negative emotions and feelings that I believe are clouding our ability to just sit back and do what the show is intended to do in the first place- which is enjoy it and have some escapist fun.

Points well taken, but . . . DISC wasn't enjoyable! Although by the end I certainly wanted to escape, all right.

 

[Terok Nor]

It's an opinion I happen to disagree with. I think it is a compelling, well written, and well performed character. Sounds like I got a pretty good deal out of this whole thing!



See my previous post. Comparing the current state of the franchise to where it was back in the 80s and 90s or to Star Wars is absolutely inane. I'm not voicing my opinion at all, which seems to be something that is flying 30,000 feet over your head. I am simply telling you that all the evidence and everything we've heard anyone in charge say and do since 2009 suggests that these are in fact the opinions and attitudes of the people who are in charge of the franchise currently.

I wish you would understand that I'm not trying to tell anybody what to think or what to like. I am simply telling you that this is how it is, and our inability to get beyond bitching and moaning about it is causing a lot of people negative emotions and feelings that I believe are clouding our ability to just sit back and do what the show is intended to do in the first place- which is enjoy it and have some escapist fun.

I can't enjoy something that doesn't entertain me but I accept we have vastly different views about Burnham and Discovery and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm glad to and others have something you love.

The evidence does seem to point to the big wigs not being willing to move forward but I think eventually they will be forced to because fans can make or break a franchise and these prequels are clearly rubbing quite a few fans the wrong way. Clearly the general public simply don't care enough about Trek to be passionate and outspoken so I'm against placing them at the top of the list of viewers who need to be catered to.

 

[Vger23]

Remember when nobody cared about timelines, visual aesthetics, multi-verses, or settings, and simply sat down once a week to enjoy a smart fun space adventure and see where the show would take us? Remember it being OK to have good seasons and bad seasons, good episodes and bad episodes, or good movies and bad movies, and not lose our collective minds about the state of the franchise and feel personally attacked and disappointed by the people in charge of the franchise?

That's how I want to feel. And since I know that my attitudes will create my experience, I'm not inclined to bitch and moan about things that simply don't matter. I'm going to watch each and every episode or movie that gets put out until I am given a clear reason not to. And it sure as hell is not going to have anything to do with some of these other things that don't matter in the grand scheme of simply enjoying a story.

 

[Jadeb]

I don't think the setting really matters that much. A well-done Trek show could work in any period, though I agree with Vger that the TOS era is the most easily marketable to the general public in the wake of the Abrams movies. That said, I don't think non-fans are the target audience for Discovery. CBS is just using the existing fan base to prop up their streaming service. And that does give me pause -- they're relegating Trek to a niche pay service, sacrificing the franchise's long-term well-being for the greater good of All Access. That's a smart decision from a business perspective, maybe, but it's a terrible way to bring new folks into Star Trek. I think that adds to the perception Trek is on the decline. We've gone from the huge, mainstream blockbuster that was the first Abrams movie to an uncertain future for the films and a TV show on a backwater streaming service most people haven't heard of.

Frankly, I would think Discovery was poor even if it were set 500 years after TNG. The problem, for me, is the writing, not the period or the trappings.

 

[Phaser Two]

Remember when nobody cared about timelines, visual aesthetics, multi-verses, or settings, and simply sat down once a week to enjoy a smart funny space adventure and see where the show would take us? Remember it being OK to have good seasons and bad seasons, good episodes and bad episodes, or good movies and bad movies, and not lose our collective minds about the state of the franchise and feel personally attacked and disappointed by the people in charge of the franchise?

That's how I want to feel. And since I know that my attitudes will create my experience, I'm not inclined to bitch and moan about things that simply don't matter. I'm going to watch each and every episode or movie that gets put out until I am given a clear reason not to. And it sure as hell is not going to have anything to do with some of these other things that don't matter in the grand scheme of simply enjoying a story.

Vger, I think I'm honing in on your POV. You want good stories and don't care where they're set. TerokNor and I and apparently a few others also want good stories but think that the prequel format is interfering with that effort. So . . . doesn't it make sense to try a post-Voyager series with good stories?

 

[Vger23]

I can't enjoy something that doesn't entertain me but I accept we have vastly different views about Burnham and Discovery and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm glad to and others have something you love.

The evidence does seem to point to the big wigs not being willing to move forward but I think eventually they will be forced to because fans can make or break a franchise and these prequels are clearly rubbing quite a few fans the wrong way. Clearly the general public simply don't care enough about Trek to be passionate and outspoken so I'm against placing them at the top of the list of viewers who need to be catered to.

Well I certainly appreciate that, and of course there is no reason for you or anyone to watch something that doesn't entertain, regardless of what the title of the show is!

That said, I do think it is inaccurate to say that many of the fans are being rubbed the wrong way. In fact, even on message boards like this filled with crazy hard-core fans, the ratings for each individual episode of DSC were generally skewed very very positively.I think there is an extremely vocal minority online who gets a lot of attention because negativity breeds more negativity. I do not, however, buy into the idea that most fans do not like the direction of the franchise. My experience is that most casual to moderate level fans ( which are far greater in number, by the way, then fans like us who frequent boards like this! ) love the new movies and really are enjoying Discovery.

And, as was a hot topic of debate back in 2009, the studios are of the strong opinion that they must grow the audiences in order to continue on successfully. That is, of course, why we see the leaning towards what the general audiences may or may not like

 

[fireproof78]

The AbramsTrek movies have gone fully off the rails

How so? They are perfectly enjoy Star Trek to me.

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.

Ok, so do we abandon the books going forward? What about technology being able to solve everything? Post-VOY comes with its own set of problems and isn't a guarantee success.

Personally, I would rather a reboot like Lost IN space has done and just move on. Unpopular opinion, I know, but the constant infighting about what technology is appropriate for what time period among fans points to the fact that no one is going to be happy.

Remember when nobody cared about timelines, visual aesthetics, multi-verses, or settings, and simply sat down once a week to enjoy a smart funny space adventure and see where the show would take us? Remember it being OK to have good seasons and bad seasons, good episodes and bad episodes, or good movies and bad movies, and not lose our collective minds about the state of the franchise and feel personally attacked and disappointed by the people in charge of the franchise?

That's how I want to feel. And since I know that my attitudes will create my experience, I'm not inclined to bitch and moan about things that simply don't matter. I'm going to watch each and every episode or movie that gets put out until I am given a clear reason not to. And it sure as hell is not going to have anything to do with some of these other things that don't matter in the grand scheme of simply enjoying a story.

Precisely so. Carrying on about what Star Trek "should" be is an exercise in futility. Otherwise, in my mind, post TNG isn't Star Trek. It just isn't. It's doesn't "feel" like Star Trek. But, it is, and I engage it on its own terms, not my preconceived notions.

 

[Lord Garth]

Shaka when the walls fell at Tenagra.

 

[Vger23]

How so? They are perfectly enjoy Star Trek to me.

Ok, so do we abandon the books going forward? What about technology being able to solve everything? Post-VOY comes with its own set of problems and isn't a guarantee success.

Personally, I would rather a reboot like Lost IN space has done and just move on. Unpopular opinion, I know, but the constant infighting about what technology is appropriate for what time period among fans points to the fact that no one is going to be happy.

Precisely so. Carrying on about what Star Trek "should" be is an exercise in futility. Otherwise, in my mind, post TNG isn't Star Trek. It just isn't. It's doesn't "feel" like Star Trek. But, it is, and I engage it on its own terms, not my preconceived notions.

I've actually come to realize that I truly enjoyed being challenged by Star Trek! I think it's one of the reasons why I don't resonate very well with The Orville. It's a cute little show on its own, and it is certainly relatively entertaining, but is just so much of the same of what we've had for the past 50 years, that there is nothing about it that insights passion or interest from me beyond the surface level

I would feel no differently about a Star Trek franchise product that simply went back to telling the same stories in the same format and manner that we've seen 700 times before.

I guess I actually enjoyed the controversial and challenging nature of things they have done lately to attempt to move the franchise forward. That's exciting! I find it a hell of a lot more interesting than just staying in the safe zone yet again. I'd rather they fail gloriously then succeed cautiously.

 

[Jadeb]

I *want* to be challenged by Star Trek but did not feel Discovery managed that at all. Everything was pre-ordained by the Trek orthodoxy, from the freeing of the Tardigrade to the "We're better than that!" speech at the end. I was really excited that Lorca might be a complex character making hard choices, but, nope, he has to be revealed as a cartoon villain because he's not a traditional Trek white hat. Hugely, hugely disappointing.

That's the sort of baggage that is killing Trek for me, not canon junk about the Klingons.

 

[Scargate]

With how badly written the first season of Discovery was, these showrunners being let go 5 episodes in, instead of before the season even began filming, is worrisome indeed. But from what we have seen in some preview shots, it seems they are at least attempting to bring the visuals more in line with the reality of the timeline they decided to unfortunately set the series in.

Pigeonholing themselves to have to adhere to such a vast and rich canon, instead of rebooting, or setting it after Voyager is still inconceivable. If the writing was at least good, it wouldn't matter too much. But with the writing being what its been, the Klingons looking how they look, the telegraphing instead of foreshadowing, the pointless nature of the two Klingon main characters and that storyline, the way things wrapped up so stupidly... kill her in her sleep and she's disarmed, war continues. There's about 20 more instances like this in the writing throughout the season. Why set the show amidst a war, and rarely show the effects of it, of it in general, how the characters are responding. And when they jumped out of the Mirror Universe and went 10 months into the future, killing all hope of all the other paths they could've taken, come on. I literally was laughing. Of course the MU Discovery was destroyed 5 minutes after arriving. Why make that interesting at all.

 

[BillJ]

In my opinion, the show is timid with no vision beyond picking the bones of TOS. Hopefully that will now change.

 

[Jadeb]

In my opinion, the show is timid with no vision beyond picking the bones of TOS. Hopefully that will now change.

But they said the f-word and showed a Klingon nipple!

 

[BillJ]

But they said the f-word and showed a Klingon nipple!

Edgy stuff when you're twelve!

 

[Phaser Two]

With how badly written the first season of Discovery was, these showrunners being let go 5 episodes in, instead of before the season even began filming, is worrisome indeed. But from what we have seen in some preview shots, it seems they are at least attempting to bring the visuals more in line with the reality of the timeline they decided to unfortunately set the series in.

Pigeonholing themselves to have to adhere to such a vast and rich canon, instead of rebooting, or setting it after Voyager is still inconceivable. If the writing was at least good, it wouldn't matter too much. But with the writing being what its been, the Klingons looking how they look, the telegraphing instead of foreshadowing, the pointless nature of the two Klingon main characters and that storyline, the way things wrapped up so stupidly... kill her in her sleep and she's disarmed, war continues. There's about 20 more instances like this in the writing throughout the season. Why set the show amidst a war, and rarely show the effects of it, of it in general, how the characters are responding. And when they jumped out of the Mirror Universe and went 10 months into the future, killing all hope of all the other paths they could've taken, come on. I literally was laughing. Of course the MU Discovery was destroyed 5 minutes after arriving. Why make that interesting at all.

Good post. It really was a dog's breakfast except for the Mudd ep, which was the only one that felt like a Star Trek episode. I'm still laughing at them hastily changing the decals on the Discovery to pass as an ISS vessel. And Lorca . . . what a waste. I had actually managed to forget the L'RELL HAZ BOMB! "resolution." Then there was the near-constant cannibalism. Oh, head hurts all over again. I mentioned once before that Frain and Mia Kirshner (who was heartbreakingly perfect) were the MVPs of the season. How about rebooting the show with just Amanda as the focus?

In sum, there were two problems. First, with the box in which they imprisoned themselves unnecessarily, they needed outstanding writing. Second, the writing was horrid.

 

[Lord Garth]

Controversial in the Trump Era is a double-edged sword, as he's creating the most controversy.

 

[Tuskin38]

Then there was the near-constant cannibalism.

It isn't cannibalism.

Edgy stuff when you're twelve!

I don't see how it's edgy at all.

 

[BillJ]

Good post. It really was a dog's breakfast except for the Mudd ep, which was the only one that felt like a Star Trek episode. I'm still laughing at them hastily changing the decals on the Discovery to pass as an ISS vessel. And Lorca . . . what a waste. I had actually managed to forget the L'RELL HAZ BOMB! "resolution." Then there was the near-constant cannibalism. Oh, head hurts all over again. I mentioned once before that Frain and Mia Kirshner (who was heartbreakingly perfect) were the MVPs of the season. How about rebooting the show with just Amanda as the focus?

In sum, there were two problems. First, with the box in which they imprisoned themselves unnecessarily, they needed outstanding writing. Second, the writing was horrid.

If we're going to be forced to watch them jerk off to canon, give me a Captain Killy series!