• 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!

Why the hate for Alex Kurtzman?

bob said:
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.
Click to expand...
Is that you, Robert Meyer Burnett?
 
I've been a Star Trek fan for over 50 years. I've seen every piece of canon Star Trek ever made. And it's all been Star Trek. Has it all been the same? No, thank God. Have I liked all of it? Hell, no. But it's all been Star Trek.

Frankly, the last people in all the universe whose opinion on Star Trek I would ever take seriously in the slightest are the gatekeepers who make these kinds of blanket statements intended to impose their opinion over reality.
 
Last edited:
bob said:
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.
Click to expand...

IMG_6030.png
 
bob said:
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.
Click to expand...

Bless. Haha.

Welcome to the forum. I’m sure you’ll do great here.
 
Turtletrekker said:
I've been a Star Trek fan for over 50 years. I've seen every piece of canon Star Trek ever made. And it's all been Star Trek. Has it all been the same? No, thank God. Have I liked all of it? Hell, no. But it's all been Star Trek.

Frankly, the last people in all the universe whose opinion on Star Trek I would ever take seriously in the slightest are the gatekeepers who make these kinds of blanket statements intended to impose their opinion over reality.
Click to expand...
Only a Sith deals in absolutes
 
I would guess that nothing is going to be officially confirmed until the sale is done. Because whoever ends up buying Paramount Global can change anything they want.
 
HotRod said:
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?
Click to expand...
Season Two was supposed to "fix" "Discovery"? I find that so difficult to accept, considering I regard that season, along with Seasons Three to Five, as inferior to the series' first season, the only one I had truly enjoyed.

Don't get me wrong. I liked the show's Season Two, if Pike and Spock had not hung around so damn long . . . and if Discovery and it's crew had not traveled to the future. What an unnecessary plot decision.
 
Dee1891 said:
Season Two was supposed to "fix" "Discovery"? I find that so difficult to accept, considering I regard that season, along with Seasons Three to Five, as inferior to the series' first season, the only one I had truly enjoyed.

Don't get me wrong. I liked the show's Season Two, if Pike and Spock had not hung around so damn long . . . and if Discovery and it's crew had not traveled to the future. What an unnecessary plot decision.
Click to expand...
Season 2 of Disco was very much a reaction to fan complaints and criticisms of the first season. Klingons look weird and different? The look was refined in S2 to bring them more in line with their "traditional" look from TMP onwards and they start flying around in ships which we've seen before. Captain Lorca was an unlikeable jerk? Uniforms look too different from "traditional" Star Trek? Well, here's a variation on the TOS uniforms. Well here comes Captain Pike who is personable, charming and friendly. Bridge crew are neglected? Well, now they engage in banter and attend the briefing room scenes. What's the point in Michael being related to Spock if we never see Spock? Well, now we see Spock. Things don't align with previous canon? Well, they go to the future and the events from the first two seasons are erased from the official record ala The Principal and the Pauper.
 
Dee1891 said:
Season Two was supposed to "fix" "Discovery"?
Click to expand...
Yes, there was a pretty clear effort to change the tone of the series in season 2. Pike brought a great deal of levity to the series, that much was obvious. But there was also a significant shift in the storytelling style and even the way the series was filmed. So yes, season 2 was a pretty clear effort to course-correct after a divisive first season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Danja
Alex Kurtzman on streaming movies and the future of Trek
14 15 16
Replies
314
Views
15K
Tuskin38
T
Beyerstein
Kurtzman intentionally killed Legacy?
41 42 43
Replies
851
Views
53K
cooleddie74
cooleddie74
B
Certain similarities between Star Trek: Prodigy and Star Wars: Ahsoka (and why Prodigy did it better).
Replies
2
Views
394
BohandiAnsoid
B
Admiral Jean-Luc Picard
When did you feel each show found its footing?
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
Lord Hierarch
L
Ray Hardgrit
What has the new series done to ruin Star Trek this time?
35 36 37
Replies
722
Views
44K
ScottJ85
ScottJ85
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top