• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Kurtzman gets 5 1/2 year deal with 3 new shows in the works

As a long-time fan who only knew Pike from The Menagerie/The Cage, I wouldn't say he was "pre-sold". Anson Mount's performance sold me on the character. :hugegrin:

It doesn’t matter because people still wanted to see more of Pike, Number One and the others as they are an Enterprise crew from another era. It’s intriguing and exciting enough to distract from DSC’s original crew, who don’t need anyone looking elsewhere if these characters are to become the next Picard, Data, Worf…
 
Because they're guidelines not rules; hard to write thinking about those things, best for the showrunners and story editors work and polish the piece as they read the 1st draft.
'Kay. But one of the more heavily criticized aspects of the Berman era was the overuse of technobabble, which definitely goes against "Guideline" II.
But why weren’t the new characters popular enough in Season 1 so that nobody could’ve cared less if Enterprise didn’t appear in the finale? Why weren’t the producers confident enough to focus on them further?
When Fuller was in charge, he didn't want the Enterprise, Pike or Spock to be on the show. It's why they were all featured in Disco's first tie-in novel instead. After Fuller was fired, Akiva Goldsman insisted to the writers that they had to include Pike on the show somehow, saying "what's the point of being in this era if Pike never shows up?" That's why Pike was added to the second season. Then Anson Mount's popularity led to SNW happening.
 
Last edited:
When Fuller was in charge, he didn't want the Enterprise, Pike or Spock to be on the show. It's why they were all featured in Disco's first tie-in novel instead. After Fuller was fired, Akiva Goldsman insisted to the writers that they had to include Pike on the show somehow, saying "what's the point of being in this era of Pike never shows up?" That's why Pike was added to the second season. Then Anson Mount's popularity led to SNW happening.
Yeah, I put that on the BTS BS not fan demand. Once Mount showed it was viable then they pushed further.
 
It’s WEIRD that Fuller wanted to introduce an adopted sister of Spock and NEVER do anything with Spock. I think the writers were correct to bring him in for the second season, as if to try justifying why she was made into Spock’s sister in the first place. Once that was dealt with, they moved the entire show to the next millennium which might as well be a soft reboot with no more direct TOS ties.
 
It doesn’t matter because people still wanted to see more of Pike, Number One and the others as they are an Enterprise crew from another era. It’s intriguing and exciting enough to distract from DSC’s original crew, who don’t need anyone looking elsewhere if these characters are to become the next Picard, Data, Worf…
There were also fans who wanted to see more if Lorca, L'Rell and Cornwell. And we have fans yearning for more Vance and Kovich, currently.
 
What's weird is that they introduced an adopted sister of Spock but never did anything with it. Changing Burnham's familiar stats would have very little effect on the story, in the long run. It's like someone picked up Chekhov's gun in the second act, waved it around a bit and put it back on the table.
 
It was more about being Sarek's daughter.
Except "Lethe", which is actually one of my favorites of the first season, goes out of its way to shed more light into Sarek's relationship with Spock. It partly shows you why Sarek has such a troubled relationship with his son, as he rejected his adopted daughter's application in order to give Spock a chance to attend the Vulcan Science Academy, only to see him turn it down, thus make Sarek's rejection of Michael's application all for nothing.

If Spock was originally NEVER going to factor into the show, why not just have Burnham's Vulcan adoptive father be a brand new character with no ties to TOS? "Lethe" is pretty great, but if that's ALL Fuller was ever going to do as far as Michael's relationship with Spock goes (especially since he originally conceived Disco as a one off season), it's still a weird choice IMO.

I wasn't initially a fan of the idea of introducing an adoptive sister we never heard of, but was willing to give it a chance providing they had a great story behind it that made it worth it. When they announced that Spock would appear in S2, I thought: "Good, let's address the elephant in the room and make a good story out of that". Ultimately, I thought it was merely okay, but I admire that they gave it a crack instead of just ignoring that aspect of Michael's familial connection altogether.
 
It was more about being Sarek's daughter.
Except that that doesn't work either. Because nothing about Sarek being Sarek adds anything to the story that random Vulcan #6 couldn't also fill. Here's the thing though, if they did put some thought into it and did want to be fan-servicey there is a much better option: T'Pol.

The entire show is draped in matriarchal themes and imagery. Burnham's entire arc over the first three seasons can be summed up as searching of a motherly figure to coming to terms with her actual mother to ultimately becoming a mother figure herself. It's a nice and steady thematic through-line.

But strictly speaking to the first season, it creates a nice thematic triangle. On one end, you have the pragmatic adoptive mother. On the other end, is the sentimental and passionate surrogate mother. And in the middle is the dark bastardization of both. Burnham takes the advice of each in turn, and it always leads to failure until she realizes she needs to take what she's learned from all three and carver her own path. In the process she defeats two evil patriarchs, installing a new Klingon leader who they call "Mother."

With the Sareks out of the way, the entire focus of season two shifts to Burnham and her relationship with her actual mother. She has to come to terms with the false idolized image she had as a child and realize her mother is also prone to major fuck-ups. And that's okay because we learn from them and grow. It's what separates us from artificial superintelligences.

Then season three shows Burnham realizing she needs to take everything she's learned and take up the mantle of surrogate mother of the lost crew herself - realizing in the process she can't just be the big sister anymore. For one, she has inadvertently and unintentionally stunted Tilly's growth by not being the grown-up.

Because what I think this show is really meant to be about is exploring and defining what it means for women to be leaders in a franchise dominated by men (And do so to a degree Voyager never came close to matching.) And for that T'Pol has a significant ready-made advantage over any rando. The problem is those is that since t's been so haphazardly slapped together with such little care given to the bigger picture that I'm not even entirely sure this is true. I mean I genuinely don't know if the choice for Orions/Osyraa was a deliberate choice because they're a matriarchal society serving as a thematic foil or because they're green.
 
It’s WEIRD that Fuller wanted to introduce an adopted sister of Spock and NEVER do anything with Spock. I think the writers were correct to bring him in for the second season, as if to try justifying why she was made into Spock’s sister in the first place. Once that was dealt with, they moved the entire show to the next millennium which might as well be a soft reboot with no more direct TOS ties.

Do we really know that was what Fuller wanted? I mean, the original conception of Michael may have been to be a human raised by Vulcans, with the whole Spock's sister thing only added later, because those at CBS thought it would be a good idea.

FWIW, all of the scenes in the opening two-parter with Sarek seem very, very clearly to be added in post-production. The whole "Sarek force ghost" thing doesn't make much sense in general, and everything he tells her is superfluous. I mean, note that what she tells Georgiou after talking to Sarek is not actually what Sarek said at all - just sort of tangentially related. And she didn't actually need Sarek's help to get out of that half-exploded holding cell.
 
Sarek as played by James Frain bears little to no resemblance to the Sarek played by Mark Lenard. Just like how Spock as played by Ethan Peck bears little to no resemblance to the Spock played by Leonard Nimoy (or Zachary Quinto for that matter, who resembles Nimoy's character far more than Peck does.) It's one thing to decide to play a character a bit different than the original actor; it's another thing entirely to completely change that character from what the audience has been used to for the last 50 years. At that point it just becomes name recognition in an effort to get more people to watch your show. If the characters were, say, Ambassador Sumac and his son Sipak, then the question becomes, will the viewers tune in regularly to watch the adventures of new characters that they may not have a vested interest in, or old beloved characters in a new setting?

Obviously, with the advent of the Abrams films, CBS realized that they'd attract more viewers by focusing on the latter, but really only in a superficial, paper-thin way. DSC is really a reboot, IMHO, and I think these characters will only drift apart even more over time from their original incarnations, rather than any attempt to 'return them to their TOS roots,' or whatnot.

Mind you, I'm not saying that any of this is a bad thing. All I'm saying is that these characters simply have very little in common with their original versions because the intent was never to do that; it was to create essentially new characters with the same names and tell different stories about them. And that, my friends, is the definition of a reboot.
 
I have to disagree with you Dukhat. We've never seen the characters in this time period before (other than Spock in 'The Cage'). We don't know how they acted. People can change.

We're still several years out from their appearances in TOS.
 
Last edited:
Here's my opinion regarding Sarek and Discovery. One, Discovery is a visual reboot in terms of tech. Which is fine because I find some aspects of TOS extremely unbelievable in terms of the application of tech.

However, from a character point of view I think that Michael was connected with to do what prequels are to do-highlight a different aspect of what we think know about a character. Sarek, as presented in TOS, was very standoffish, with a very distant relationship with his son for apparently superficial reasons. In that episode, and later films, we are on Spock's side. We never really see Sarek's side. With Michael we have an opportunity to see he wasn't always this way and his attitude towards Spock has much pain and personal investment then even how it comes across in past iterations. So, we see a Sarek who is trying to navigate two worlds, something he clearly believed strongly in and ended up needing to make some changes because he alienated some Vulcans. So, now we have different picture of Sarek than before. And it's one that may not line up with preconceptions around the character but that's why I have enjoyed both Michael and Sarek and that connection.
 
My main issue with how Sarek and Amanda were used is that it was very CW-ish...we have a hero character who has to routinely call Mom and Dad for advice to do her job. I think that undermines Michael's strength as a lead.

Also, for the convenience of having Sarek around a lot, he was suddenly very invested in Starfleet matters (personally picking what captain his daughter would serve under; being consulted on how to conduct the Klingon war), when TOS-era Sarek was clearly not. He literally took two decades to admit that Spock's Starfleet companions were people of good character.

I laughed out loud in one Season 1 episode when Sarek and/or Amanda came aboard and said that it had been a long time since they'd seen Michael, when it had only been two episodes since they'd last appeared. They appeared more in Disco S1 than they did in all of TOS, TAS, and the TOS films combined.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top