How much network influence do you think CBS has with "Discovery?"

[Jayson1]

I know people might want to blame the writers for some of the shows mistakes but I always wonder how much blame or even how much credit CBS should have for the show. I wonder if the show has a RIck Berman type that kind of controls everything but isn't someone who is a writer but more of a bean counter type. Does anyone really trust CBS to have faith in the writers enough to have real control over the show? If these people were willing to fire Fuller I can only assume that they like to pull rank alot on the show and we might have another UPN situation.

Jason

 

[Vger23]

Since the dawn of the franchise it's been "us against the network / studio."

I could give a vole's ass. Just make the show good and don't cut it short.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think DIS probably has the least interference from any network or studio since the days of TNG and DS9. Sure, there's probably a mandate from the mountain to keep every episode within budget and finished on time like every TV show gets (which may have been why Fuller left), but this show probably has more freedom as far as content than previous Trek shows, IMO.

 

[Mudd]

I think a lot of this mess was driven by the suits. who were concerned primarily with how this show fit into their streaming business model and who by several accounts interfered on all levels with STD.

 

[BillJ]

...but this show probably has more freedom as far as content than previous Trek shows, IMO.

Not at nearly nine million dollars per episode, and CBS hanging their streaming strategy on it. I'd bet they were micromanaged to an insane degree.

 

[Galaxy]

Not at nearly nine million dollars per episode, and CBS hanging their streaming strategy on it. I'd bet they were micromanaged to an insane degree.

I am starting to question the $ 9 Million per episode that was quoted a year or so ago, Maybe the first 2 Episodes.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I always took it that Kurtzman is the Berman equivalent in the sense of running the production side of things, while Berg & Harberts showrun. CBS is more or less what Paramount was.

How much influence CBS has creatively is speculation. Looking at Fuller's tendency to jump ship on shows besides Discovery, I'm suspecting CBS had a valid reason for parting ways with him rather than the "big bad studio oppressing the artist" narrative fans took.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Not at nearly nine million dollars per episode, and CBS hanging their streaming strategy on it. I'd bet they were micromanaged to an insane degree.

That's what the show's producers are there for. They are the ones that report to the studio and ensure that they use the studio's money wisely. Studios really don't get involved in the day-to-day operations of a show unless it's having serious production problems (running over budget, running behind schedule, or has had to stop production). They may also get involved if the show isn't pulling in the audience numbers it wants.

 

[shapeshifter]

Apparently no information regarding the OP question is available so I cannot say for sure but, I'd like to think the owners butted out, trusted the team without micromanaging.

I am starting to question the $ 9 Million per episode that was quoted a year or so ago, Maybe the first 2 Episodes.

I suspect that number is the season one total budget, (including all production start up) divided by the number of episodes produced.

 

[Prax]

Kurtzman is in the same role as Berman was. "CBS Television studios" is "Paramount TV." It was renamed after the merger.

The only Trek series to have a lot of studio(attempted) tinkering was Enterprise, and even then, it wasn't until the second or third season, and most of it was ignored. Of the 4 previous series, Berman was both overseer and protector.

Anyways, I'd imagine Discovery had a lot of micromanaging, simply because of the Bryan Fuller issues, budgets and schedules, etc. When a series with so much riding on it, with multiple invested parties is having backstage issues, you can be sure the suits will have that show on probation.

 

[C.E. Evans]

^^^
That really wouldn't be so much micromanaging as it would be stepping in to get things finally moving forward after multiple delays.

 

[Jayson1]

I think one thing is certain. A great behind the scenes book about the show is going to happen someday. Maybe the people from Midnight Edge can help write it.

Jason

 

[fireproof78]

Anyways, I'd imagine Discovery had a lot of micromanaging, simply because of the Bryan Fuller issues, budgets and schedules, etc. When a series with so much riding on it, with multiple invested parties is having backstage issues, you can be sure the suits will have that show on probation.

No, that's when you get an executive producer is used to working with your studio and can be a bit of a "Yes Man" when necessary.

 

[Prax]

Do you have an example? If the producer is already doing what the studio wants, then the studio wouldn't have anything to "fix."

Edit: This might go a long way in answering OP's question:
https://screenrant.com/star-trek-discovery-bryan-fuller-departure-explained/amp/

 

[fireproof78]

Do you have an example? If the producer is already doing what the studio wants, then the studio wouldn't have anything to "fix."

Edit: This might go a long way in answering OP's question:
https://screenrant.com/star-trek-discovery-bryan-fuller-departure-explained/amp/

Studios always have things to "fix." That's what the guidelines they issue are for based upon what the studio receives. After all, it's their money.

 

[Lord Garth]

I hate to say this but in this scenario of comparing who everyone is to who they were during Old Trek, that makes Bryan Fuller like Gene Roddenberry. He created the series, is more of an idea man, doesn't really cut it as a Producer (if we're being honest with ourselves) and ended up quitting or "quitting".

Gene Roddenberry walked away from TOS in everything but title after the first two seasons, had control of the films taken away from him after TMP, and (even without considering poor health) Rick Berman and Michael Piller gradually eased him away from control of TNG administratively and creatively. The Roddenberry Box became The Piller Box.

 

[guyute03]

I don't know, but I do know this, I am ecstatic that if there is a Rick Berman type on Discovery, it is NOT Brannon Braga.

I will never forget the pile of feces Braga threw at Trek with the gdamn Space Nazis, and the worst Star Trek episode of all time, 'These Are The Voyages'.

If these people do still exist for Discovery they need to go lock themselves in a padded room somewhere and let the show go on without them.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think we're more likely to get an Ira Steven Behr since DSC is effectively the new DS9.

 

[fireproof78]

The Roddenberry Box became The Piller Box.

It's really now just the "Star Trek box" since change is considered such an anathema.

 

[Prax]

I really don't care for Fuller, or his work. I like some of his Voyager episodes...

The point is, in reference to OP's question, is that he was likely let go for creative differences. CBS announced that he had to step down over scheduling concerns. Fuller later explained that the studio kept disagreeing with him over creative choices. They wanted different directors, different looks, etc.

If all true, that's indicative of "Yes, the studio does have a will and influence on Discovery" and answers the query.