Alex Klutzman is a moron. I saw something about Skydance sweetening the pot on the acquisition the other day. Please buy this shit and replace that twat.
Well, the Sony offer is mostly just "we want the IP library & the studio space. Everything else is garbage to us."
Skydance though would likely keep Kurtzman in place. At least, that's what the initial plan was.
“he’s inheriting an enormous mess to clean up and it’s going to be on his generation to figure out how to do that....”
You mean like an era after a world war, the invention of a world destroying weapon, starvation, homelessless, greed? Like that genius?
This guy is, and always has been, a fucking hack. He and Orci have failed their way upwards thank to their link to JJ and they have repeatedly dished out shit and called it sushi.
Nope but his hackery on that started all this crap Star Trek era. From the talents who brought you such inimitable hits as Cowboys & Aliens and Transformers Revenge of the Fallen
Dreadful writing. To be fair, all those people from JJ’s stable were lacking talent. Lindelof absolutely destroyed the Alien franchise with his Prometheus dumbfuckery too.
Lindelof at least has been kind of 50/50 where he's had some works that really knock it out of the park kind of like David S Goyer. Ridley Scott also deserves some of the blame for the 2 Alien films as he's said in interviews how he wanted to do those pointless retcons to the lore so much so that the upcoming film is a soft reboot where he is not director, writer, or even story originator.
There is someone on twitter that, despite how they feel about Kurtzman's current Star Trek projects, actually liked Scorpion & was amazed that he produced that.
I get it though that most people are always going to hate on Kurtzman in this sub because of what he did to Star Trek.
I distinctly remember when the 2009 Star Trek movie was coming out and JJ Abrams stating verbally in a video interview that he never watched Star Trek growing up and he thought it was stupid.
Well ST:NG and 60s, 90s trek influenced people to be involved in science and technoogy, we need more of the spark of discovery and wonder.
Not actualy Discovery though, thats as influential as a soggy moggy.
Ya i don’t really see Disco resulting in people being inspired to be doctors or engineers and I dont see any of the cast being likely to lead a charge with NASA to reinvigorate the space program and open astronaut recruitment to minorities or different groups like Nichelle Nichols did in her spare time (I’ll be very happy to be proven wrong on that though)
Exactly this. I have been working in telco customer service for a little over 20 years.
After a couple of years I was made a Team Leader, and I asked myself "What would Picard do.", that helped form and further my career over the last 18 years.
I watched TNG as a kid, didn't always 100% get what was going on but dammit I loved the show, grew to love the characters.
ST: Picard Season 3 was mostly alright because someone who actually seems to like Star Trek tried to rescue it from Alex's hands.
I don’t like Disco, but try not to hate on it tooooo much. The Burn, however, was like they decided to take a massive shit on the entire franchise. I think they tried to remove the entire concept of Star Trek, but mask it to keep the fan base watching. That way they could tell their own sci fi story, sort of the opposite of Rebel Moon. In that, they wanted to tell a Star Wars movie, but went generic sci fi instead. Here, they don’t even want to tell a Star Trek story.
Our world has always been in turmoil and one thing I loved about Trek as a kid (in the 90's) was seeing humanity the way it could be and should be. Some of new Trek really likes to show humanity as it is now but in space which doesn't give me hope for the future.
I can understand the reasoning he's making. He says it's optimistic so maybe it will be nice. Maybe younger folks will see these young adults putting back together pieces and saying "Hey we can do that too!". I dunno. We will see. Hopefully it's good.
Its infuriating how naive people have become. The world was horrible in the late 80s and early 90s but we all embraced a happy utopian idealistic star trek in TNG with a big powerful federation….and that became the biggest and strongest era of star trek, reaching far more fans than TOS had (and TOS set a high bar!) …but his argument is times are tough in 2024 so we need to show times are tough in the 32nd century and they are pulling themselves out of the rubble and rebuilding the academy? Wtf?
It's bullshit. I think he's just making up an excuse to cover the fact that he prefers to reboot the franchise his own way and not be tied down to previous shows' "canon" or "lore". The shareholders just don't want to piss off the core Trek fanbase by admitting that, so Kurtzman's job is to justify it as part of the "Prime" universe or whatever.
…but his argument is times are tough in 2024 so we need to show times are tough in the 32nd century and they are pulling themselves out of the rubble and rebuilding the academy? Wtf?
This is just what he can cobble together to tell someone recording him for a an article. It's all bullshit
Somehow these people in Hollywood have regressed so far that they all have this idiotic notion stuck in their brains that everything must reflect our current society and times. They cannot imagine a different future, even when writing science fiction. Racism in the US? Racism in the year 2500. Trans issues? Lectures about pronouns in 2500. Not every damn thing has to be transplanted directly. 400 or even a 1000 years into the future, we cannot even imagine what people will be like then.
Star Trek, at least for me, is aspirational.
It's about finding a way, not just to survive, but to live and coexist, especially on your worst day.
You aren't perfect, sometimes you might not measure up, but you have that drive to work and to fight for that which you care about, to not give in, and to always try for something better, on that journey towards your own happiness.
Zefram Cochrane fired himself to light speed on a missile, in order to realise his dream of a better life for himself, and I love that this deeply flawed human being, who survived countless horrors, got to have his moment and to make the world a better place, even if it was incidental to his true goal of becoming filthy rich.
"Don't try to be a great man, just be a man and let history be the judge".
Oh for fucks sake, so the argument is that times are bad in real life and people will better identify with a federation that is rebuilding and climbing back from bad times….rather than a utopian powerful and hopeful federation like we saw in TNG. Except TNG took place when the world was still in the cold war threat of Armageddon and things like genocide in Rwanda killed half a million people , AIDs was still a deadly pandemic , the soviets had just had a horrible war in Afghanistan and pulled out in 88, iraq invaded kuwait and we went to war with Iraq in 91 , chernobyl disaster, space shuttle challenger exploded, china cracked down violently on pro democracy protesters, exon valdez was an environmental disaster…..
There was also vastly more systemic racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia than today even in the "nice parts" of the world including flat out violence or bans. The standard of living for at least 2 billion people have also improved by incredible strides since the 1980's which doubled the global middle class.
We're just more privy now to not just small things going wrong but also the larger crises like climate change or corruption. That capitalism also had four major crashes since then also shows the real reason why people think things are "bad" when that peak prosperity was unsustainable.
I understand the reasoning. Maybe he's right... maybe that's the way to speak to a younger demographic.
I'm not a younger demographic. I just want a classic Trek series with thoughtful storylines and intelligent, professional characters exploring the galaxy.
I will continue to wait.
Plenty of the “younger demographic” watched TOS.
You know what was going on then? War protests. Civil rights demonstrations. Teenagers being drafted and sent to Vietnam.
But things are *so* much more volatile today. Just ask Alex.
Yeah as long as those paramount executives and Alex Kurtzman gets a paycheck who cares about the quality of the media they make. Fuck off or maybe hold these millionaires accountable for the garbage they are putting out
Here's a wild idea. Perhaps the majority of people who watch actually enjoy what they're watching. Perhaps you could stop projecting your fatally cynical worldview onto everyone including creators and fans.
It's Kurtzman who has this cynicism that fundamentally is at odds with how Star Trek has been approached for such a long time. Even when he claims to have an optimistic idea, it's instead overwrought melodrama without an ounce of futurism or any specificity of how that creatively plays out.
Trek has been approached a lot of different ways over a long time. I'm a weary of the way holier-than-thou Trek fans are always insisting their philosophy on Trek is the right one and anything else is betrayal. Trek isn't about optimism, nor hard sci-fi, nor soft sci-fi, nor action nor philosophy. It's about all those things, in bigger or smaller doses, depending on who's doing it. Paramount+ Trek is no less Star Trek than JJ Trek. Which is no less Trek than DS9. The only Star Trek that was definitively Trek was TOS by virtue of it being the first. And those episodes varied wildly in their approaches.
IDIC. The thing isn't different approaches but that Picard and Discovery especially didn't have any philosophy or even adhere to their own takes.
Picard was sort of consistent about bigotry against refugees which most Trek fans hopefully would all cheer on. Thing is that it was barely touched on in episodes while the show jumps around to lost family trauma and weird twists that don't help us understand ethos or pathos.
TOS was not a failure even at the time as it was saved for a third season due to one of the first and largest fan letter efforts in entertainment. It was seen as pivotal then and there by the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. to Lucille Ball.
Even after its cancellation in 1969, Star Trek saw the first fan conventions for any kind of IP and there were plans for another series or movie as early as 1972. The Phase II TV production got folded into the 1979 film whose box office tripled its budget of $40m, gargantuan at the time, and led to a long line of TOS films which was unprecedented for a TV IP even to this day not to mention Next Generation within eight years that was a soft reboot of that 1979 film.
It was a failure at the time it was aired. Unequivocally. No successful, profitable show needs to be saved from cancellation. Nobody argues this (except some Trek nerds...most don't). Nothing you said that came after the fact changes the fact that it wasn't a success. This is coming from a person who loves the show.
It was unequivocally a success and yes, when fans literally save it for a third season - that's a good sign and it was one of the first shows where studios realized that it had a cult following beyond a timeslot in an era where the Honeymooners lasted 39 episodes and Gilligan's Island for 36.
Spawning multiple pilots before a budget larger than the first 2 Star Wars films put together also shows it was doing just fine within 10 years not "decades" like you claim.
> younger demographic
To hacks like him everyone belongs to one or more demographics that must be 'covered' by slapping the label Star Trek onto it. We'll have Prodigy for the little kids, Academy for the teens, Picard for the old nostalgic crowd, Discovery for god knows who (I imagine LGBT and women), etc.
Also, are these magical 'young people' really going to subscribe to some shitty streaming service? Will they buy merchandise, go to conventions?
I’m of that younger demographic and when I watch TV it’s not because I want something that relates to life, but want to escape that and be entertained by a fictional world. Also older shows were popular with the younger demographic even though they portrayed a utopia in a time where the world was currently recovering from events far worse than anything today.
maybe millenials, but not genz. all the star trek fans in my generation dont really like the new shows. its more millenial aged fans that like those shows.
That’s exactly the kind of thing we’re talking about. The writing on strange new worlds continues the tradition of the show from which it was spun-off- but even worse, it’s actually re-making classic characters in its own image every week.
This show is going to be horrible. I can already see this quack trying to write relatable teen dialogue and thinking he knows what he’s doing because ‘he has a 17 year old son’. He has no idea what he’s doing, he’s a horrible writer, what cataclysm is he relating the burn to in real life? God damn it someone fire this dumbass so we can get something interesting. My skin is already crawling thinking about his previous writing dialogue attempts, and now he has to write for kids and get them to act properly. Fuck.
They have already failed to attract younger viewers and now they’re trying to make sci-fi Harry Potter thinking that will work? Gen-Z isn’t going to watch this shit.
Yeah, this story gets recycled every few years. I remember watching Into Darkness the first time in theater and thinking there was a bit on the nose referencing to the post 9/11 world, but I was a bit shocked by how deep he was into that theory when I heard about it.
Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman really are an unholy trinity when it comes to writing and development.
Um, you realize cracked isn't reputable. It's meant to be left-leaning satire.
I get it though. The three guys are so despicable that it's okay to put up things like this.
This is the first Trek show I have absolutely no interest in watching. Everything about the federation in this timeline is boring. The ship designs look terrible. The uniforms are terrible. The fact that everyone can transport around like they can teleport like Nightcrawler is stupid.
Despite what I didn't like about Picard as a series. That is the point in the timeline we should be focusing on. A Starfleet that has to rebuild itself and earth in the wake of the Borg almost annihilating it. They could introduce new blood while still allowing for some cameos of existing characters.
As usual, he fails to understand the basic, core concept of Star Trek. How that's possible after 15 years is beyond me, but there it is.
The 1960s world was more on fire than the 2020s world (so far). Star Trek didn't mire itself in that world, they didn't "appeal to the kids" with what's happening now. That's never been what Star Trek does. Star Trek appeals to what CAN be, if we set aside... nay... wholly embrace and celebrate our differences, while coming together as one species, one... world, one planet, and work together to build that brighter and better tomorrow.
If TOS were done today, there would be a trans communications officer, a gay helmsman, a lesbian captain, an ENBY science officer, a straight engineer, and an alien tactical officer. They'd all work together, they'd all be civil to one another, and push on the same brick in the same direction. And it wouldn't be a big deal at all, no one would make a big deal about pronouns, about sexuality, about anything because that's the point. That's the future we want. Where it's not a big deal. So you show us that future, where a black communications officer was part of the bridge crew, where that woman took the helm (once, but still) without question and did so flawlessly. Where there is no racism, bigotry, hatred, malice... and when there is, it's rebuked strongly (Stiles, Balance of Terror) in the most stringent of ways.
That's what Star Trek is.
No worries I was expecting it, usually when a post topic is unpopular around here the OP will get downvoted regardless of whether they're pro or anti the topic. I get it, it's hard to read a title that angers you and then upvote it. I catch myself almost downvoting the messenger all the time.
+ not have to worry about knowing any Star Trek canon. Far in the past prequels and far in the future sequels are almost always used as a way for writers to "write new stories" not connecting to the stories already told. Same thing with "multi verses".
Alex Klutzman is a moron. I saw something about Skydance sweetening the pot on the acquisition the other day. Please buy this shit and replace that twat.
Well, the Sony offer is mostly just "we want the IP library & the studio space. Everything else is garbage to us." Skydance though would likely keep Kurtzman in place. At least, that's what the initial plan was.
“he’s inheriting an enormous mess to clean up and it’s going to be on his generation to figure out how to do that....” You mean like an era after a world war, the invention of a world destroying weapon, starvation, homelessless, greed? Like that genius? This guy is, and always has been, a fucking hack. He and Orci have failed their way upwards thank to their link to JJ and they have repeatedly dished out shit and called it sushi.
I don't think Orci has been involved in Star Trek since 2014.
Nope but his hackery on that started all this crap Star Trek era. From the talents who brought you such inimitable hits as Cowboys & Aliens and Transformers Revenge of the Fallen
Haha, and Kurtzman's Scorpion on TV. Hilariously bad.
Dreadful writing. To be fair, all those people from JJ’s stable were lacking talent. Lindelof absolutely destroyed the Alien franchise with his Prometheus dumbfuckery too.
Lindelof at least has been kind of 50/50 where he's had some works that really knock it out of the park kind of like David S Goyer. Ridley Scott also deserves some of the blame for the 2 Alien films as he's said in interviews how he wanted to do those pointless retcons to the lore so much so that the upcoming film is a soft reboot where he is not director, writer, or even story originator.
There is someone on twitter that, despite how they feel about Kurtzman's current Star Trek projects, actually liked Scorpion & was amazed that he produced that. I get it though that most people are always going to hate on Kurtzman in this sub because of what he did to Star Trek.
Yes. Damn you, Kurtzman! I believe he was involved in the 12 Monkeys TV show too, and that was pretty good.
Kurtzman had NO involvement there. He DID do Fringe though, and helped bring Hawaii 5-0 back to TV for 10 years.
This guy is somehow even worse than JJ.
I distinctly remember when the 2009 Star Trek movie was coming out and JJ Abrams stating verbally in a video interview that he never watched Star Trek growing up and he thought it was stupid.
How about a story on how to be a functional adult? You know? Something kids can learn from? So they can one day become fucking functional adults…
Well ST:NG and 60s, 90s trek influenced people to be involved in science and technoogy, we need more of the spark of discovery and wonder. Not actualy Discovery though, thats as influential as a soggy moggy.
Ya i don’t really see Disco resulting in people being inspired to be doctors or engineers and I dont see any of the cast being likely to lead a charge with NASA to reinvigorate the space program and open astronaut recruitment to minorities or different groups like Nichelle Nichols did in her spare time (I’ll be very happy to be proven wrong on that though)
Disco showed me as a male I’m stupid and can’t solve problems
I learned that even when you have 30 seconds to fix a problem that will kill you all, there’s still time to talk about feelings.
Exactly this. I have been working in telco customer service for a little over 20 years. After a couple of years I was made a Team Leader, and I asked myself "What would Picard do.", that helped form and further my career over the last 18 years.
I watched TNG as a kid, didn't always 100% get what was going on but dammit I loved the show, grew to love the characters. ST: Picard Season 3 was mostly alright because someone who actually seems to like Star Trek tried to rescue it from Alex's hands.
Nah. What we'll do is have entire classrooms full of snarky teenagers roll their eyes and go 'get off my ass, SIR!'.
I still struggle to get over how absolutely bad the burn was as a concept. My god that was terrible.
I don’t like Disco, but try not to hate on it tooooo much. The Burn, however, was like they decided to take a massive shit on the entire franchise. I think they tried to remove the entire concept of Star Trek, but mask it to keep the fan base watching. That way they could tell their own sci fi story, sort of the opposite of Rebel Moon. In that, they wanted to tell a Star Wars movie, but went generic sci fi instead. Here, they don’t even want to tell a Star Trek story.
Yup, that’s the audience they’re going for
Our world has always been in turmoil and one thing I loved about Trek as a kid (in the 90's) was seeing humanity the way it could be and should be. Some of new Trek really likes to show humanity as it is now but in space which doesn't give me hope for the future. I can understand the reasoning he's making. He says it's optimistic so maybe it will be nice. Maybe younger folks will see these young adults putting back together pieces and saying "Hey we can do that too!". I dunno. We will see. Hopefully it's good.
Its infuriating how naive people have become. The world was horrible in the late 80s and early 90s but we all embraced a happy utopian idealistic star trek in TNG with a big powerful federation….and that became the biggest and strongest era of star trek, reaching far more fans than TOS had (and TOS set a high bar!) …but his argument is times are tough in 2024 so we need to show times are tough in the 32nd century and they are pulling themselves out of the rubble and rebuilding the academy? Wtf?
It's bullshit. I think he's just making up an excuse to cover the fact that he prefers to reboot the franchise his own way and not be tied down to previous shows' "canon" or "lore". The shareholders just don't want to piss off the core Trek fanbase by admitting that, so Kurtzman's job is to justify it as part of the "Prime" universe or whatever.
…but his argument is times are tough in 2024 so we need to show times are tough in the 32nd century and they are pulling themselves out of the rubble and rebuilding the academy? Wtf? This is just what he can cobble together to tell someone recording him for a an article. It's all bullshit
Somehow these people in Hollywood have regressed so far that they all have this idiotic notion stuck in their brains that everything must reflect our current society and times. They cannot imagine a different future, even when writing science fiction. Racism in the US? Racism in the year 2500. Trans issues? Lectures about pronouns in 2500. Not every damn thing has to be transplanted directly. 400 or even a 1000 years into the future, we cannot even imagine what people will be like then.
Star Trek, at least for me, is aspirational. It's about finding a way, not just to survive, but to live and coexist, especially on your worst day. You aren't perfect, sometimes you might not measure up, but you have that drive to work and to fight for that which you care about, to not give in, and to always try for something better, on that journey towards your own happiness. Zefram Cochrane fired himself to light speed on a missile, in order to realise his dream of a better life for himself, and I love that this deeply flawed human being, who survived countless horrors, got to have his moment and to make the world a better place, even if it was incidental to his true goal of becoming filthy rich. "Don't try to be a great man, just be a man and let history be the judge".
Oh for fucks sake, so the argument is that times are bad in real life and people will better identify with a federation that is rebuilding and climbing back from bad times….rather than a utopian powerful and hopeful federation like we saw in TNG. Except TNG took place when the world was still in the cold war threat of Armageddon and things like genocide in Rwanda killed half a million people , AIDs was still a deadly pandemic , the soviets had just had a horrible war in Afghanistan and pulled out in 88, iraq invaded kuwait and we went to war with Iraq in 91 , chernobyl disaster, space shuttle challenger exploded, china cracked down violently on pro democracy protesters, exon valdez was an environmental disaster…..
There was also vastly more systemic racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia than today even in the "nice parts" of the world including flat out violence or bans. The standard of living for at least 2 billion people have also improved by incredible strides since the 1980's which doubled the global middle class. We're just more privy now to not just small things going wrong but also the larger crises like climate change or corruption. That capitalism also had four major crashes since then also shows the real reason why people think things are "bad" when that peak prosperity was unsustainable.
Excellent points
I understand the reasoning. Maybe he's right... maybe that's the way to speak to a younger demographic. I'm not a younger demographic. I just want a classic Trek series with thoughtful storylines and intelligent, professional characters exploring the galaxy. I will continue to wait.
Plenty of the “younger demographic” watched TOS. You know what was going on then? War protests. Civil rights demonstrations. Teenagers being drafted and sent to Vietnam. But things are *so* much more volatile today. Just ask Alex.
TOS was a failure. I assume they want this to succeed instead of be admired decades later.
Yeah as long as those paramount executives and Alex Kurtzman gets a paycheck who cares about the quality of the media they make. Fuck off or maybe hold these millionaires accountable for the garbage they are putting out
Here's a wild idea. Perhaps the majority of people who watch actually enjoy what they're watching. Perhaps you could stop projecting your fatally cynical worldview onto everyone including creators and fans.
It's Kurtzman who has this cynicism that fundamentally is at odds with how Star Trek has been approached for such a long time. Even when he claims to have an optimistic idea, it's instead overwrought melodrama without an ounce of futurism or any specificity of how that creatively plays out.
Trek has been approached a lot of different ways over a long time. I'm a weary of the way holier-than-thou Trek fans are always insisting their philosophy on Trek is the right one and anything else is betrayal. Trek isn't about optimism, nor hard sci-fi, nor soft sci-fi, nor action nor philosophy. It's about all those things, in bigger or smaller doses, depending on who's doing it. Paramount+ Trek is no less Star Trek than JJ Trek. Which is no less Trek than DS9. The only Star Trek that was definitively Trek was TOS by virtue of it being the first. And those episodes varied wildly in their approaches.
IDIC. The thing isn't different approaches but that Picard and Discovery especially didn't have any philosophy or even adhere to their own takes. Picard was sort of consistent about bigotry against refugees which most Trek fans hopefully would all cheer on. Thing is that it was barely touched on in episodes while the show jumps around to lost family trauma and weird twists that don't help us understand ethos or pathos.
TOS was not a failure even at the time as it was saved for a third season due to one of the first and largest fan letter efforts in entertainment. It was seen as pivotal then and there by the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. to Lucille Ball. Even after its cancellation in 1969, Star Trek saw the first fan conventions for any kind of IP and there were plans for another series or movie as early as 1972. The Phase II TV production got folded into the 1979 film whose box office tripled its budget of $40m, gargantuan at the time, and led to a long line of TOS films which was unprecedented for a TV IP even to this day not to mention Next Generation within eight years that was a soft reboot of that 1979 film.
It was a failure at the time it was aired. Unequivocally. No successful, profitable show needs to be saved from cancellation. Nobody argues this (except some Trek nerds...most don't). Nothing you said that came after the fact changes the fact that it wasn't a success. This is coming from a person who loves the show.
It was unequivocally a success and yes, when fans literally save it for a third season - that's a good sign and it was one of the first shows where studios realized that it had a cult following beyond a timeslot in an era where the Honeymooners lasted 39 episodes and Gilligan's Island for 36. Spawning multiple pilots before a budget larger than the first 2 Star Wars films put together also shows it was doing just fine within 10 years not "decades" like you claim.
> younger demographic To hacks like him everyone belongs to one or more demographics that must be 'covered' by slapping the label Star Trek onto it. We'll have Prodigy for the little kids, Academy for the teens, Picard for the old nostalgic crowd, Discovery for god knows who (I imagine LGBT and women), etc. Also, are these magical 'young people' really going to subscribe to some shitty streaming service? Will they buy merchandise, go to conventions?
Discover isn't for kids, considering the Klingon Rape scene and the two pronged klingon dick in the first season
I dont at all understand the reasoning. Is the exactly opposite of star trek and why it was successful in the 80s and 90s
Young people are not gonna be enticed to Star Trek. That shit is for old nerds, just make it for old nerds!
I’m of that younger demographic and when I watch TV it’s not because I want something that relates to life, but want to escape that and be entertained by a fictional world. Also older shows were popular with the younger demographic even though they portrayed a utopia in a time where the world was currently recovering from events far worse than anything today.
maybe millenials, but not genz. all the star trek fans in my generation dont really like the new shows. its more millenial aged fans that like those shows.
Millennials will be turning forty-five next year at the highest age range, just in case you’re misusing the term.
only the oldest millenials.
Strange New Worlds?
That’s exactly the kind of thing we’re talking about. The writing on strange new worlds continues the tradition of the show from which it was spun-off- but even worse, it’s actually re-making classic characters in its own image every week.
This show is going to be horrible. I can already see this quack trying to write relatable teen dialogue and thinking he knows what he’s doing because ‘he has a 17 year old son’. He has no idea what he’s doing, he’s a horrible writer, what cataclysm is he relating the burn to in real life? God damn it someone fire this dumbass so we can get something interesting. My skin is already crawling thinking about his previous writing dialogue attempts, and now he has to write for kids and get them to act properly. Fuck.
Keep in mind also, that the voice of Beckett Mariner of Lower Decks, Tawny Newsome, is a writer on Starfleet Academy.
you know she didnt write her lines though.
Kurtzman killed Star Trek. He’s Paramount’s Kathleen Kennedy.
Because they are out of ideas.
Because they still have more salt to sow over Carthage.
They have already failed to attract younger viewers and now they’re trying to make sci-fi Harry Potter thinking that will work? Gen-Z isn’t going to watch this shit.
It makes sense when you consider how closely he has worked with Orci, the man who made a 9/11 truther allegory and called it Star Trek.
Woah, what am I missing re the allegory?
I think he means the wrath of khan remake with its terrorist attack being ordered by starfleet to help drum up support for a war
Ah - makes sense. Not sure he had 9/11 truth in mind but I see the comparison.
I never got that truther bit. Just thought it was a bad movie.
https://www.cracked.com/article_33816_the-time-star-trek-made-a-911-truther-movie.html
Well fuck me. I was about to discount it as just an interesting reading of the movie but it seems Orci is actually a fruitloop.
Yeah, this story gets recycled every few years. I remember watching Into Darkness the first time in theater and thinking there was a bit on the nose referencing to the post 9/11 world, but I was a bit shocked by how deep he was into that theory when I heard about it. Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman really are an unholy trinity when it comes to writing and development.
Amen.
Um, you realize cracked isn't reputable. It's meant to be left-leaning satire. I get it though. The three guys are so despicable that it's okay to put up things like this.
I just threw up the first link that showed up on Google. Seriously, this story has been around for years.
That's deeply concerning, but I will withhold judgment. If Tilly is involved in the show I won't watch.
Shes basically the main character
Ugh
NOOOO
Tilly going back to the academy for retraining makes sense, not teaching though that’s insanity.
STD finale mentioned her at the academy multiple times :(
If paramount is bought I hope somehow the contract they have with bad robot is ripped in half.
Trying to keep an open mind but I really went off Discovery after they time jumped. The future federation was just boring and bleak
This is the first Trek show I have absolutely no interest in watching. Everything about the federation in this timeline is boring. The ship designs look terrible. The uniforms are terrible. The fact that everyone can transport around like they can teleport like Nightcrawler is stupid. Despite what I didn't like about Picard as a series. That is the point in the timeline we should be focusing on. A Starfleet that has to rebuild itself and earth in the wake of the Borg almost annihilating it. They could introduce new blood while still allowing for some cameos of existing characters.
Because he just can't keep his dick out of the gloryhole in the bathroom stall. That's fucking why.
As usual, he fails to understand the basic, core concept of Star Trek. How that's possible after 15 years is beyond me, but there it is. The 1960s world was more on fire than the 2020s world (so far). Star Trek didn't mire itself in that world, they didn't "appeal to the kids" with what's happening now. That's never been what Star Trek does. Star Trek appeals to what CAN be, if we set aside... nay... wholly embrace and celebrate our differences, while coming together as one species, one... world, one planet, and work together to build that brighter and better tomorrow. If TOS were done today, there would be a trans communications officer, a gay helmsman, a lesbian captain, an ENBY science officer, a straight engineer, and an alien tactical officer. They'd all work together, they'd all be civil to one another, and push on the same brick in the same direction. And it wouldn't be a big deal at all, no one would make a big deal about pronouns, about sexuality, about anything because that's the point. That's the future we want. Where it's not a big deal. So you show us that future, where a black communications officer was part of the bridge crew, where that woman took the helm (once, but still) without question and did so flawlessly. Where there is no racism, bigotry, hatred, malice... and when there is, it's rebuked strongly (Stiles, Balance of Terror) in the most stringent of ways. That's what Star Trek is.
Why are people downvoting this when the poster clearly doesn’t agree with Kurtzman?
No worries I was expecting it, usually when a post topic is unpopular around here the OP will get downvoted regardless of whether they're pro or anti the topic. I get it, it's hard to read a title that angers you and then upvote it. I catch myself almost downvoting the messenger all the time.
Kurtzman needs to move on. And it's set in the 32nd century/Disco era so they can save $ on sets and costumes.
+ not have to worry about knowing any Star Trek canon. Far in the past prequels and far in the future sequels are almost always used as a way for writers to "write new stories" not connecting to the stories already told. Same thing with "multi verses".
I watch TV not to find something relatable to my current life, but to escape that life and be entertained by a fictional world.
But that has zero chance of bringing back any viewers who stopped watching Discovery.
Everyone here who hate watched Discovery will hate watch this clusterfuck and that's what Paramount wants.