Why the hate for Alex Kurtzman?

[Farscape One]

You mean The Sisko

You are correct. I stand corrected.

The Sisko.

 

[The Wormhole]

If Strange New Worlds showed them listening to sound in space I'd be bothered by that too!

Were you bothered that time it happened on Enterprise? Specifically, the episode Minefield, while outside on the hull, Reed hears the Romulan ship decloak behind him and reacts to the sound.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Were you bothered that time it happened on Enterprise? Specifically, the episode Minefield, while outside on the hull, Reed hears the Romulan ship decloak behind him and reacts to the sound.

I didn't notice, but now I'll always be bothered by it!

Actually I just checked out of curiosity and the ship's in his peripheral vision when it first appears. Archer and Reed are talking over the radio the whole episode so it'd be weird if that was the story they forgot that sound doesn't travel in space.

 

[Tuskin38]

Imo it is. From the gags to the animation style. I really tried to like it. But it’s not for me. Feel free to disagree.

I've watched the first 3 seasons of R&M, and I disagree completely

 

[trekfan_1]

I am also a fan of Transformers and watched the cartoon as a kid. I thought the first Michael Bay movie was absolutely great. There were just enough characters to follow the story, and the plot was pretty good. However, the rest of the movies were basically what you described.

Problem I had is the movie was told from the humans perspective and not the The Transformers' perspective . I get it. They wanted it to resonate with mainstream audiences. But that really ticked me off and why 80s kidsy cheese not withstanding, I remain a fan of the original cartoon.

 

[Newt]

I've watched the first 3 seasons of R&M, and I disagree completely

That’s fine.
I’ve watched both too and I’ll stand by my opinion

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I think they wanted Lower Decks to be a massive hit like Rick and Morty, even hiring the guy who wrote the 'Szechuan sauce' episode to run it, but the two series have a different energy to them.

Okay sure they're both about a tormented self-destructive genius lead character who deals with high-concept sci-fi rigamarole along with their timid sidekick, but Rick and Morty can be pretty amoral, dark and nihilistic, while Lower Decks doubles down on the 'friendship and science can fix everything' side of TNG. In Lower Decks things actually matter, so they're able to have serious drama and actual peril, and characters continually grow.

I'm not saying that Rick and Morty is a bad show, I think it's very intelligent and well written. But if Lower Decks has anything in common with it, it's that it's very intelligent and well written also.

 

[Birb-of-Prey]

I think they wanted Lower Decks to be a massive hit like Rick and Morty, even hiring the guy who wrote the 'Szechuan sauce' episode to run it, but the two series have a different energy to them.

Okay sure they're both about a tormented self-destructive genius lead character who deals with high-concept sci-fi rigamarole along with their timid sidekick, but Rick and Morty can be pretty amoral, dark and nihilistic, while Lower Decks doubles down on the 'friendship and science can fix everything' side of TNG. In Lower Decks things actually matter, so they're able to have serious drama and actual peril, and characters continually grow.

I'm not saying that Rick and Morty is a bad show, I think it's very intelligent and well written. But if Lower Decks has anything in common with it, it's that it's very intelligent and well written also.

From what I've seen, most people either watched and enjoyed it, or wrote it off on its premise alone.

 

[Danja]

It was Patrick Stewart himself who said "we're not here to have fun." It seems Trek fandom has turned that into a Holy Edict.

Seven of Nine: "Fun will now commence."

 

[Tuskin38]

I think they wanted Lower Decks to be a massive hit like Rick and Morty, even hiring the guy who wrote the 'Szechuan sauce' episode to run it

Mike was brought in to pitch a series because of his TNG Season 8 twitter account and book.

The studio didn't have an idea other than wanting an animated series, Lower Decks was his baby from the start.

Though obviously his prior work on an animated series also contributed.

 

[Birb-of-Prey]

Mike was brought in to pitch a series because of his TNG Season 8 twitter account and book.

The studio didn't have an idea other than wanting an animated series, Lower Decks was his baby from the start.

Though obviously his prior work on an animated series also contributed.

He also wrote the Short Trek "The Escape Artist", which is very similar in tone to Lower Decks.

 

[Alex1066]

From what I've seen, most people either watched and enjoyed it, or wrote it off on its premise alone.

Not in my case. It is currently the only series I have yet to finish, though I intend to at some point (I have this completionist impulse concerning Trek). I dropped off around the midpoint of season 3. There were elements I do like. I liked the Rutherford and Tendi characters in particular. It’s obviously well produced and researched.
Thing about comedy is, it’s so subjective. I can see people who vibe with it adoring the series. The comedic style of this series just didn’t work for me.
Also, my limit for nostalgia and reference humor is admittedly kind of low. If it’s cleverly integrated into the story I can go with it but I felt the show leaned too much into it.

So, yeah, I expect some dismissed it from the premise but I do think that many, like me, who just couldn’t get into it.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

A toy from 1976. Proving?

For some odd reason you assume focusing on younger characters equals "bad." What does the age of cast have to do with "quality"? Just about any Trek story from 1966 onwards can be told with younger characters. (or older characters for that matter). Just about any story could be told in a contemporary or historical setting as well.

I've got to admit, that is the worst piece of merchandise ever made, just as bad as the 1966 'Star Trek' disc gun made by Ray Line Toys.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I think they wanted Lower Decks to be a massive hit like Rick and Morty, even hiring the guy who wrote the 'Szechuan sauce' episode to run it, but the two series have a different energy to them.

Okay sure they're both about a tormented self-destructive genius lead character who deals with high-concept sci-fi rigamarole along with their timid sidekick, but Rick and Morty can be pretty amoral, dark and nihilistic, while Lower Decks doubles down on the 'friendship and science can fix everything' side of TNG. In Lower Decks things actually matter, so they're able to have serious drama and actual peril, and characters continually grow.

I'm not saying that Rick and Morty is a bad show, I think it's very intelligent and well written. But if Lower Decks has anything in common with it, it's that it's very intelligent and well written also.

Lower Decks is much more of a Futurama than Rick and Morty, energy-wise.

 

[Tomalak]

Yeah if they wanted it to be like Rick and Morty they didn't do a great job. Which suggests it wasn't ever the plan.

Mike McMahan was hired because of his "TNG Season 8" stuff and experience in various animated comedy shows, not to make a Rick and Morty clone. I think that comparison was always off from the start, but it was the most high-profile thing he'd done so people just assumed the show would have a similar tone,. But fortunately that turned out to be way off the mark.

 

[bob]

I have to admit that I've never understood the hate certain elements of the fandom have towards Alex Kurtzman.

Yes, Discovery turned out to be a rather controversial show. People either seem to love it or hate it, and that seems to be the number one source of hatred directed at Kurtzman.

The thing is, from what I understand, by most accounts it was Bryan Fuller's ideas that proved to be the most controversial elements of the series. Things like the Klingon redesign, the rule about no cylindrical nacelles, the whole Klingon War, etc. These were supposedly all part of Bryan Fuller's concept for the show, and by the time he left, too much time and money had been spent for them to reverse course.

By season 2, there were clear efforts by Kurtzman to "fix" the series, which was again hindered by more behind the scenes drama by showrunners Berg and Harberts being fired for alleged inappropriate behavior towards the writers.

It was Kurtzman putting Michelle Paradise in charge that finally seemed to put the series on track, and while moving to the distant future had its ups and downs, the next 3 years were decent enough Star Trek.

So there's Discovery out of the way. The show that Kurtzman was heavily involved in but not entirely to blame for how it turned out.

Beyond that, in terms of controversial shows, we have Picard, another show that certainly had a decent enough first season, even if didn't stick the landing. It had a second season that was heavily hindered by Covid 19, and a third season that while I didn't really enjoy, clearly haits s fans.

I also won't pay any mind to the nonsensical notion that the third season was made with virtually zero involvement of Kurtzman. That's not how shows are made, and it certainly wasn't some valiant effort by Terry Matalas to make a series in spite of Alex Kurtzman.

Moving beyond the controversial series, we have shows like Strange New Worlds, Lower Decks and Prodigy. Three series with seemingly near universal praise. Granted, two of those three have ended, with Lower Decks getting five years and Prodigy getting two. Some seem to blame Kurtzman for the shows getting the axe, but I believe that decision was made far above his head.

Can't judge Section 31 or Academy yet as I haven't seen them, but Academy has certainly assembled one of the most star studded cast we've seen in a Trek production. Hopefully that bodes well.

So yeah, why the intense vitriol directed towards Kurtzman? And yes I do remember that it's pretty much a Trekkie tradition to always hate the people in charge, but this still feels like it goes beyond that.

Not a single month goes by that you don't hear wishful rumors of him being fired. There are countless podcast put out by some of the more negative elements of the fandom that rather disgustingly wish him harm or even death.

I don't understand it. Especially when his track record hasn't been especially bad, at least in my opinion. Yes a couple shows have been controversial. But some shows have been genuinely excellent. I personally put Strange New Worlds as being some of the best Star Trek ever made, and I have Alex Kurtzman to thank for that as he was the one who brought in Akiva Goldsman. Same for all those fans of Picard season 3. Was it not Kurtzman who hired Terry Matalas?

I actually kind of think he's done an all right job and I hope he stays in charge for many years to come.

Thoughts?

I can't believe your double talk. You acknowledge that he is in charge and was responsible for things not going right, and yet you say this this not his fault? May I remind you that the the good old days McCoy would visit a very unhappy, tortured Captain Kirk and try to tell him that things were not his fault, to which Kirk (our hero) replied, "I am the Captain. That makes it my fault." This is called taking responsibility for your actions and accepting responsibility for your command. Is Kurtzman in charge or not? If he isn't then it is not his fault any more than it is my fault- I have no power over anything in Star Trek except my opinion. Well, Kurtzman IS in charge and if Star Trek is a mess it IS his fault. The difference between Kirk and Kurtzman is thaty Kirk is not real, but also Kirk was out there facing unknowns that challenged the human imagination. Kurtzman has let Star Trek go to hell because he is incompetent. Nobody loves Star Trek any more because it is NOT STAR TREK ANYMORE. Is this Disneyland where everyone gets a free pass for screwing up? Star Trek is dead because the show runners have killed it. What is so hard to understand about that?

I don't know why I bother. If you have not figured this out already you never will. And that is just too bad.

 

[Tomalak]

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Firebird]

I can't believe your double talk. You acknowledge that he is in charge and was responsible for things not going right, and yet you say this this not his fault? May I remind you that the the good old days McCoy would visit a very unhappy, tortured Captain Kirk and try to tell him that things were not his fault, to which Kirk (our hero) replied, "I am the Captain. That makes it my fault." This is called taking responsibility for your actions and accepting responsibility for your command. Is Kurtzman in charge or not? If he isn't then it is not his fault any more than it is my fault- I have no power over anything in Star Trek except my opinion. Well, Kurtzman IS in charge and if Star Trek is a mess it IS his fault. The difference between Kirk and Kurtzman is thaty Kirk is not real, but also Kirk was out there facing unknowns that challenged the human imagination. Kurtzman has let Star Trek go to hell because he is incompetent. Nobody loves Star Trek any more because it is NOT STAR TREK ANYMORE. Is this Disneyland where everyone gets a free pass for screwing up? Star Trek is dead because the show runners have killed it. What is so hard to understand about that?

I don't know why I bother. If you have not figured this out already you never will. And that is just too bad.

A) That's an awfully aggressive first post in the forum.
B) It's just a TV show.
C) Star Trek is still Star Trek, it's just not being made for you.

 

[fireproof78]

It's nice to be called nobodies this time of day. Really brings a.smile to this old man's face. Reminds of my halcyon days of youth when my TNG fan friends told me I wasn't a real fan because of liking TOS.

Ah, the good ole days.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek is dead because the show runners have killed it. What is so hard to understand about that?

By everything I’ve seen, the franchise isn’t dead.