Kirsten Beyer is heavily involved and give that she's arguably spent as much time and effort writing 7 of 9 as anyone I'm glad she's helping develop the character.
Spoilers Star Trek biggest problem is Alex Kurtzman
- Thread starter Dales
- Start date
Kirsten Beyer is heavily involved and give that she's arguably spent as much time and effort writing 7 of 9 as anyone I'm glad she's helping develop the character.
DS9 used serialization differently than Discovery and Picard, but the series did not have lots of "stand-alones," as you have claimed. Most episodes referenced what happened earlier in the season as well as in previous seasons. At least Discovery's stories mostly wrap up by the end of the season.
Kurtzman is the walking definition of white male privilege. He fails up. He killed two huge franchises in a row. Spider-Man for Sony and Dark Universe for Universal. So what happens? He gets the keys to Star Trek and this is where we are.
The 2017 Mummy movie should have been a career ender.
The 2017 Mummy movie should have been a career ender.
Agreed! I trust her judgment, and I'm also impressed by the thoughtfulness of Chabon's IG responses. Which isn't to say I don't appreciate Kurtzman, which seems like a necessary disclaimer give this thread's focus; clearly, the man has a vision that seems to be successfully expanding Star Trek in a way we haven't seen before.
Lol. Wow.
Dark Universe was a huge franchise?
Sure the Universal monsters were big back in their time, those films started 100 years ago.
Dark Universe which already failed to start with Dracula Untold was sadly just a non starter.
Sony along with Disney are still making Spiderman movies.
Sony had to get into that Disney partnership because The Amazing Spider-Man 2, co-written and co-produced by Kurtzman, underperformed. Before that, Disney had nothing to do with the Spider-Man films.
Universal had huge plans for the Dark Universe, with stars lined up for their movies in their own "cinematic universe". It died with the first movie, which was co-written, co-produced and directed by Alex Kurtzman.
So yes, two huge franchises in a row. He trashed them, walked away and got "Star Trek".
That's simply not true.
Disney bought the MCU and Dark Universe was never a huge franchise.
It started with JJ Trek. JJ Abrams made a Star Wars movie and called it Star Trek. Abrams was admittedly never a Star Trek fan. He fundamentally misunderstood the franchise. The film happened to make a lot of money because it has Star Trek in the title.
I don't think I am willing to watch that many Doomcock videos to start to make sense of this.
Last edited:
There is infamously a shitload of leaked Sony emails that contradict your alternative facts. Not that facts matter to half this fandom.
I always thought CBS brought Kurtzman on because they are a conservative as fuck company that were likely going to pull the plug on Discovery after the disaster that was its pre-production. They wanted somebody from the recent films to salvage it, and whilst it took 1 and a half seasons, Kurtzman managed it. So they pay him well.
I only have energy for three points, because I really don't give a damn...
Sure that isn't CBS, and Kurtzman is following the directions of his bosses?
From everything I've read, Kirsten Beyer came up with the Picard concept and Michael Chabon is the head writer. Kurtzman would have input, but he isn't the only one. The Discovery concept and characters were mainly created by Bryan Fuller.
I don't think CBS cares about whether these shows are critically panned, they care about if they are driving subscriptions to their service.
Sure that isn't CBS, and Kurtzman is following the directions of his bosses?
From everything I've read, Kirsten Beyer came up with the Picard concept and Michael Chabon is the head writer. Kurtzman would have input, but he isn't the only one. The Discovery concept and characters were mainly created by Bryan Fuller.
I don't think CBS cares about whether these shows are critically panned, they care about if they are driving subscriptions to their service.
You're right, Disney bought the MCU. However, the MCU does not include "Spider-Man" as Marvel sold the screen rights to the character years ago to Sony. Every "Spider-Man" film has been a Columbia/Sony film. Sony now shares the character with Disney as a result of the underperforming "Amazing Spider-Man 2". However, Sony still makes their own standalone Spider-Man films without Disney ("Venom" and "Into The Spider-Verse" for instance).
Dark Universe was supposed to be a big thing. I admit it may not have been the best plan, but the idea was to have their own cinematic universe. They even created their own Dark Universe logo. You can see it on one movie, The Mummy.
In thinking about this further, perhaps Kurtzman is doing TV now because these projects ended his feature career.
Learn faster. Pretend you're taking the crash course in learning how to let go.
If I thought it sucked (and I don't), I'd want this incarnation to end, wait until it does (and not watch it in the meantime), and then I'd wait to see what the next incarnation would bring.
But I like what they're doing now. So I want it to continue until it eventually runs its course. Until it really runs its course. Not when you, one person, decided you were sick of it so you selfishly wanted it to end for everyone else too.
The universe does not cater to your whims and your whims alone. Sorry if this shatters any preconceptions you might've had.
Last edited:
We're mainly on the same page, but...
If $709 million dollars is underperforming, Sony may have had unrealistic expectations to begin with. As a sequel, it only did $50 million dollars less than the first movie.
If $709 million dollars is underperforming, Sony may have had unrealistic expectations to begin with. As a sequel, it only did $50 million dollars less than the first movie.
Kurtzman doesn’t have enough hours in the day to do his actual job, much less all the extra stuff alleged in this thread. For a fan base that once prided itself for its intelligence...
Their own logo? No way! That absolutely means its big!
Seriously, it was an ambitious plan that failed. They added another film, Dracula Untold, to the equation after the fact. That move didn't do great. Perhaps they should have taken it a little more slowly than jumping in to the deep end with the thing. I never saw Dracula Untold or The Mummy. Frankly, I was a little monster-ed out. Putting this in the forefront and making promises they shouldn't have has enough blame to put around. Can you blame Kurtzman for a disappointing Mummy? Sure. Why not? Can you put the failure of the entire franchise solely on him? Fuck no.
ETA: To add to this, looking at his credits, while he had some disappointing creative endeavors in film, he also had some box office successes, including both Amazing Spider-Man movies. He also has been a known quantity in television, producing some pretty big hits. He hasn't done anything in film since The Mummy, but he currently EP's Hawaii 5-0, along with both Trek series and is working to develop a Clarice Starling series. Some people just have better luck in one medium rather than another.
Last edited:
I believe it was more about them not being creatively assed to continue the story. That does partly fall on Kurtzman’s lap, but the film was a financial success. That’s a fact.
Similar threads
