News Kurtzman: Discovery: The Finale And The Future

[TrickyDickie]

How about the universe for all time, past and future, such that the universe never existed? Hmmm, maybe yes. That could work.

That sounds like Douglas Adams!

 

[JohnR]

It can be good when done as a joke.

 

[drt]

I'm not sure we should be too worried about Discovery being hopelessly outclassed in the future. In the Trek universe most races seem to top out technology-wise not too far from what is present in the 23rd/24th century - for instance, the Borg and Dominion were one to two thousand years older, respectively, and our heroes managed to hold their own in those cases.

 

[Jayson1]

I think one of the things that Kurtzman and others considered is they can have the best of both worlds of sending the ship into the distant future. On one hand you still get your more modern style characters before they become all Roddenberry vision like yet now you get to explore what amounts to a blank slate were you can do anything with the existing aliens and universe. You can even move away from Starfleet and Federation stuff if you want.

I have a feeling next year is going to be like something in "Guardians of the Galaxy" or "Star Wars" Lots of weird alien stuff like creatures and planets only our crew all gets to be Starlord with his earth based past. Which I guess I should also toss "Farscape" into those examples as well. I think we are going to be seeing tons of really mind blowing weird stuff next season.

Jason

 

[Rahul]

I think my biggest problem and greatest disappointment with this interview is this whole part:

“We love playing within canon. It’s a delight and a privilege. It’s fun to explore nooks and crannies of the universe that people haven’t fully explored yet. That being said, we felt strongly that we wanted to give ourselves an entirely new energy for season three with a whole new set of problems. We’re farther than any Trek show has ever gone. I also had experience working on the [J.J. Abrams] films where we were stuck with canonical problems. We knew how Kirk had died, and we wondered how we could put him in jeopardy to make it feel real. That’s what led us to go with an alternate timeline; suddenly we could tell the story in a very unpredictable way. That’s the same thought process that went into jumping nine hundred-and-fifty years into the future. We’re now completely free of canon, and we have a whole new universe to explore.”

It sure looks like "canon concerns" were the reason for to revamp the entire show. Not "a good story" they liked to tell.

A good writer should be able to create a situation where you feel tense for a character, even if you canonically know he will survive. Not everything has to be Game of Thrones - Stuff from "James Bond" to most MARVEL movies (where the character already appears in the trailers for the follow-up movie) all very much work with the restrainment that the main character is not going to die. And yet we still identify with them when they're in great peril anyway.

 

[JohnR]

You're not kidding. I watched the end of Free Solo* with my hands over my eyes, and I knew (duh) that he lived.

* Nope, that's not the second Hans Solo movie. One was more than enough.

 

[BillJ]

I'm not sure we should be too worried about Discovery being hopelessly outclassed in the future. In the Trek universe most races seem to top out technology-wise not too far from what is present in the 23rd/24th century - for instance, the Borg and Dominion were one to two thousand years older, respectively, and our heroes managed to hold their own in those cases.

That has to do more with the imaginations of the people involved. It'll be disappointing for Discovery to go to the 33rd century and not be totally outclassed by pretty much every species, including the Pakleds. Unless the galaxy has fallen into a dark age of some kind.

 

[Jayson1]

I think my biggest problem and greatest disappointment with this interview is this whole part:


It sure looks like "canon concerns" were the reason for to revamp the entire show. Not "a good story" they liked to tell.

A good writer should be able to create a situation where you feel tense for a character, even if you canonically know he will survive. Not everything has to be Game of Thrones - Stuff from "James Bond" to most MARVEL movies (where the character already appears in the trailers for the follow-up movie) all very much work with the restrainment that the main character is not going to die. And yet we still identify with them when they're in great peril anyway.

Maybe but they might also just be pandering to people with the canon reasons. When promoting a show I think they will tell the fans often just what they want to hear.

Jason