BREAKING: Bryan Fuller Stepping Down As Showrunner of “Star Trek: Discovery”

fuller-in-front-of-dsc-logo-777x437px

Bryan Fuller will remain an executive producer of Discovery, but will hand off the day-to-day showrunning responsibilities to executive producers Gretchen Berg and Aaron Harberts, with Akiva Goldsman joining the production in a “top creative role”. We’ve also learned more details about casting, which is nearly complete.

UPDATE, 10/26 4:40pm: Bryan’s reasons for stepping down and CBS’s official press release
UPDATE, 10/26 5:33pm: Bryan Fuller endorses Gretchen Berg and Aaron Harberts on twitter
UPDATE, 10/26 7:00pm: Clarifications from sources close to the production on episode budget and confirmation of Fuller’s promised openly gay character

Fuller Steps Back
The decision for Fuller to step down as showrunner was reportedly made late last week, according to Variety. DSC Executive Producers Gretchen Berg and Aaron Harberts will take over day-to-day showrunning duties as Discovery prepares to begin shooting in November. Fuller will remain an executive producer and still be involved in breaking stories, but he will no longer run the show on a daily basis as he juggles American Gods and preps a reboot of Amazing Stories for NBC.

Variety’s sources reported an alleged strain between CBS and Fuller over the production of the show, particularly Fuller’s ability to devote his full attention to the new series:

Fuller has penned the first two scripts for “Discovery” and has hammered out the broader story arc and mythology for the new “Trek” realm. But it became clear that he couldn’t devote the amount of time needed for “Discovery” to make its premiere date and with production scheduled to start in Toronto next month. In September, CBS pushed the Discovery premiere from January in order to give the team more time to work out stories and ensure sufficient time for production of visual effects.

Sources emphasized that CBS execs have been happy with the material that Fuller has developed to date but became increasingly concerned that he had too much on his plate and there was no willingness to delay the premiere date once more. Given that “Star Trek” is one of the Eye’s crown-jewel franchises, there’s no question that CBS has a lot at stake with “Discovery.” The show’s budget is said to be approaching the $9 million $6–7 million per episode range.

(in Variety‘s original article, they quoted a $9 million episode budget, but TrekMovie has confirmed with sources close to the production that the number is actually $6–7 million per episode)

CBS confirmed the news in a press release:

We are extremely happy with the creative direction of Star Trek: Discovery and the strong foundation that Bryan Fuller has helped us create for the series,” producers CBS Television Studios said in a statement. “Due to Bryan’s other projects, he is no longer able to oversee the day-to-day of Star Trek, but he remains an executive producer, and will continue to map out the story arc for the entire season. Alex Kurtzman, co-creator and executive producer, along with Fuller’s producing partners and longtime collaborators, Gretchen Berg and Aaron Harberts, will also continue to oversee the show with the existing writing and producing team. Bryan is a brilliant creative talent and passionate Star Trek fan, who has helped us chart an exciting course for the series. We are all committed to seeing this vision through and look forward to premiering Star Trek: Discovery this coming May 2017.

Akiva Goldsman Joins the Team
Variety is also reporting that writer-director Akiva Goldsman, who is most known for his feature film screenwriting work and his producer role on Fringe, will join Discovery in a “top creative role”. Goldsman is also expected to assist Berg and Harberts in producing Discovery as Fuller and Executive Producer Alex Kurtzman are busy with other obligations:

The new structure was worked out quickly over the weekend in an effort to allow Fuller to remain actively involved albeit not on the day-to-day production level as originally envisioned.

Casting Nearly Complete, Save Lead Role
Variety’s sources report that most of Discovery’s roles have been cast, except that of the lead female lieutenant commander.

There’s also some internal stress at the studio that the lead character, described by Fuller as a female lieutenant commander, has yet to be cast…Although no casting has been announced, sources say most of the other roles on the show have been filled. The lead character has proven a far tougher assignment.

In additional casting news, The Hollywood Reporter has revealed that the following characters will make up part of the U.S.S. Discovery’s crew:

Sources tell THR the rest of the cast also will feature an openly gay actor as one of the male leads (which Fuller confirmed), a female admiral, a male Klingon captain, a male admiral, a male adviser and a British male doctor.

While THR originally reported that the cast of Discovery will feature an openly gay actor, we have confirmed with sources close to the show that one of the male leads will be an openly gay character (the sexual orientation of the actor himself is not known) as confirmed earlier by Bryan Fuller. The other characters listed here are not all entirely confirmed.

We will update this story as we learn more.

Sort by:   newest | oldest

Akiva Goldsman??

Oh, crap.

People point to Fringe as something he was involved with which didn’t suck. But can anyone point out things he genuinely helped improve there?

He helped develop the Bat-Nipples

@Ian. Well, the show got better after he was involved. It was pretty rough the first season.

The same. With the exception of A Beautiful Mind his resume reads like a party of mediocre and flat out bad.

Goldsman?! GEEzusChrist! Now I can legitimately say (for the first time about DISC) that ‘I have a bad feeling about this.’

LOL this show isn’t ever going to happen, is it?

Akiva Goldsman? Dear God. This is the genius who gave us Batman & Robin, that dreadful Childhood’s End adaptation on SyFy and countless other idiot plot movies and shows. I thought this new Trek show was troubled but this takes it to a whole other level.

He also wrote “A Beautiful Mind”, “The Davinci Code”, “Angels & Demons”……maybe you should chill out.

Also, worked on Fringe

Those are adaptations, not originals. Hell, even John Logan couldn’t screw up RKO 281, it was a cutNpaste job (and Logan’s oscar is for a draft that predates what they shot by something like 7 years, a clear case of an award going to somebody whose work is NOT represented on screen.)

I don’t think he ever won an Oscar.

kmart & Nachum,

Re: Logan’s oscar is for a draft that predates what they shot by something like 7 years

Nachum is correct. Logan never won an Oscar. He got a WGA Award for RKO 281.

Fringe was an original, not an adaptation.

HAHA all of those movies were bottomfeeder crap

Nice that somebody here pointed out what I believe are some of the stronger screenplays in Goldman’s resume.

Are those supposed to be good examples? A Beautiful Mind was OK, the other two not so much.

Akiva Goldsman was {is?} head of Skydance’s script brain trust that vetted the scripts for their movies which included STAR TREK BEYOND, TERMINATOR:GENISYS, etc.

Then what are you worried about? Beyond was great. Terminator. . . well that series is doomed no matter what . . . kinda like Trek!

No fate but that we make!

Akiva Goldsman was last heading up Paramount’s Transformer’s franchise… another “cinematic universe”. With him in the mix, this Trek will be mass consumption, churned out studio drek, influenced not by ideas but by focus groups and audience algorithms.
http://deadline.com/2015/06/transformers-akiva-goldsman-writers-room-michael-bay-paramount-1201438017/

Tarkov2009,

Re:Akiva Goldsman was last heading up Paramount’s Transformer’s franchise

Nope. He was last heading up Paramount’s G.I. JOE and MICRONAUTS franchise.

http://deadline.com/2015/12/paramount-hasbro-g-i-joe-writers-room-micronauts-1201667334/

“Goldsman was pulled off plans to script the next Transformers in order to supervise the G.I. Joe and Micronauts projects, a direct result of the writers room collective that the studio, Michael Bay, Steven Spielberg and Lorenzo di Bonaventura engaged in earlier this year to hammer out film plotlines and set writers to script them.” — ‘Paramount, Hasbro Confirm ‘G.I. Joe’ Writers Room, Future Branded Movie Projects’ | by Mike Fleming Jr | DEADLINE | December 15, 2015 9:29am

Disinvited,
Thanks for the correction… my bad. Still doesn’t give me much faith or hope. To quote Nick Meyer “Art is not made by committee” And the sense I get from all this is that Trek will/is devolving into just another brand the studio seeks to exploit to it’s fullest.

Art IS made by committee in the writer’s room. The quote to which you refer was Meyer talking about directing. When you’re in the director’s chair, or you’ve penned a script, you are the dictator of how that art will turn out. Right now we have the following people carrying on Fuller’s vision:

Gretchen Berg
Aaron Harberts
Nicholas Meyer
Joe Menosky
Jesse Alexander
Kevin Lafferty
Aron Eli Coleite
Kirsten Beyer
Akiva Goldsman

“… this Trek will be mass consumption, churned out studio drek,
influenced not by ideas but by focus groups and audience algorithms.”

Probably THE best & truest thing ever said about “Star Trek” ever since
Abrams was unwantingly inserted into our beloved franchise.

If anyone brings the same sensibilities to Disc as they did to Beyond, it wont be good. it might be occasionally decent. But that’s the standard Enterprise set and its not good enough.

Keep in mind that he’s not the new showrunner, nor is he the only writer in the room.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Schumacher is as much to blame or more-so for Batman and Robin. As director he had final say as director. I blame him for Batman Forever as well…

I imagine he’s being brought in due to his experience with big budgets and big productions, to make sure the kiddies stay on point, to be the go-to guy with the studio. But Im talking out my ass here.

Childhood’s End was quite good, if a bit troubled, and Batman&Robin was acceptable for what it was. Remember, the 90s (much like the 60s) were a different era…

Hey, ‘Childhood’s End’ was awesome. I’m with you on ‘Batman & Robin’ though.

This poor show just can’t seem to gain traction. Maybe it will all come together in spite of all the setbacks but I can’t say I’ve had a good feeling about this show.

Lots of people said that about Beyond and that turned out to be wonderful.

It was wonderful. Just not wonderful in the box office.
That didn’t work well.

I think there is a definate civil war between marketing (market says we want exciting TOS Wagon Train to the stars with strategic starship usage), the old TNG crowd (hey we made bland Trek for 20 years look at that experience even if we ran her to the ground and had a network audience), the initial reboot team that almost made it with ST 2009 but screwed up with STID; (sorry we spent millions setting up the ultimate Trek and a Connie vs D7 and real mean Kahn fight only to whip out with poor Kahn used by George Bush, we missed our TNG,), the new Beyond folks (hey we did it!!! Over budget but we got it back and would have made cash if STID had not wrecked the audience) and the idea that a whole new team is needed. The only one that can save the day is Nicholas Meyer if he remembers his Horatio Hornblower analog.

And yes there is some irony –
Nick Meyer had to save Trek in the 80s after a bland Trek movie that forgot Wagon Train to the Stars; that being said TNG, VOY and peace with the Klingons transporters ENT made STTMP an action adventure extraordinare. Welcome to the Undiscovered country. May fortune favor the foolish. Warp speed on the best script you can write in three months or were all dead!!!

“The only one that can save the day is Nicholas Meyer if he remembers his Horatio Hornblower analog.”

Meyer’s analogy? Hell, It was Roddenberry’s analogy for the original series…before he became “enlightened” …and boring (like his latter Treks)…in the 70’s.

Indeed.

I’ll say Gene Roddenbery had “wagon train to the stars” with a UFP that’s more like NATO, the Federation having to mine, the Enterprise the only ship in the sector, the Enterprise is a crusier in space, phasers are guns, Klingons are Soviets, rescuing miners and colonies out there in the middle of nowhere while Nicholas Meyer had “Horatio Hornblower” with the ST II uniforms (the best I think), a more formal Starfleet, one ship deciding the fate of a sector, etc. Both analogs work for me…… Gene throwing out “wagon train to the stars” for utopia TNG to take his place as a prophet is ultimately what gave us Bland Trek which cratered the series. Probably would have happened earlier with ST:TMP had Meyer not stepped in and have us ST:TWOK. I always wish Meyer had been allowed to do a TNG with Saavick, David Marcus, Sulu, etc the next generation – maybe not even in Starfleet!

Meyer gave Star Trek a much-needed identity. Let’s hope he’s bringing that to Disc. it should be easier since its a prequel but keeping in mind Star fleet is military, which Meyer used to give it its identity in the TOS films, that should be evidence in DISC. From the casting, it sounds like it is.

What an epic disappointment Bryan Fuller has been. A pure detriment to Star Trek. I suggest Manny Coto. He is a true Star Trek fan with a proven record.

Fuller has not been a disappointmeant at all and he is still involved.

Disappointment .
Sorry about mangling that word.

I tend to agree with Yob.

@Gary. Exactly. Yeah, I don’t see how he’s been a disappointment. Or a detriment. Unless Yob’s referring to the gay character thing – and I don’t understand why that bothers some here so much. Have they *seen* Star Trek?

We haven’t seen the show yet, how can we know whether it’s disappointing?

Fuller is also a true Star Trek fan with a proven record. Coto, however, is busy running 24: Legacy.

Well we will have to wait and see. This is still Fuller’s vision coming to the small screen. They cant change much now. Interesting, its not the first time Fuller created a vision and then was replaced. We’ll see what happens.

I’d be thrilled if Coto was brought on board though.

Hear, hear!

Oh dear oh dear oh dear…

I have to echo the sentiments made by many here and say that this show just does not seem to be headed in the right direction and actually seems to be going knowhere but grinding to a halt.

My problem is this: money.

Both CBS and Paramount have been guilty of trying to milk this poor cow for all it’s worth. Paramount since 2009 have desperately tried to make Star Trek into this billion dollar movie juggernaut. CBS are now wanting the same; cashing in with Discovery on the Kirk/Spock era if not the characters themselves.

I so badly want their to be another Star Trek TV series. A show that reminds me why I am a Star Trek fan. Something that makes me remember watching Star Trek at a time when it was on top of it’s game.

The reality is though, I can’t shake the feeling that perhaps the best thing for Star Trek to do now is to have a break. Be rested for 5/10 years and then like Doctor Who, come back with a new Enterprise, a new crew, a new century beyond the 24th Century and for it to live again.

Discovery just seems to me to be headed in all kinds of wrong directions.

Regardless of all of this: I’d rather see someone like Ira Behr, Many Coto or Ron D Moore take over from Fuller.

I am thinking this will be as good as Jason of Star Command.

I doubt they’ll use dimensional stop motion like JASON did. And Doohan is not available …

hahahaha!!!!!! ….I remember that show well….

Disney is certainly milking Star Wars vigorously.
If you have a great franchise, you don’t hide it under a bushel.

Star Trek will never be Star Wars. The two aren’t even comparable. Nothing will be Star Wars, except maybe Harry Potter (and even then). It’s like complaining that Battlestar Galactica isn’t as big as Star Wars.

The problem is that we’ve not had anything any further into the future since the last whackjob tried to cash in on Kirk with a prequel with Enterprise. Since then we’ve had another cash cow via Paramount, and now another prequel.

I imagine that somewhere deep in the offices of CBS and Paramount someone comes in and says BLANK BLANK KIRK BLANK and the cash starts rolling in to production.

Well CBS and Paramount, your audience have told you time and again BLANK BLANK KIRK BLANK.

Can you fill in the missing words?

All three aren’t available. Ron Moore is the showrunner on Outlander, Ira Behr is an Executive Producer on it, and Manny Coto is heading 24: Legacy.

Grinding to a halt? Casting is proceeding. Shooting is scheduled to begin next month. We don’t need an additional 10 year break for Star Trek to return home to TV. I too am nervous about Fuller’s replacements but am taking a wait and see approach. However, I am in complete agreement with you in preferring Behr, Coto or especially Ron Moore to step into the showrunner role.

I can’t see Fuller choosing to leave on his own to do those other shows he runs. I think Paramount didn’t like what he was doing and not doing the work fast enough and let him go as showrunner. Suffice to say I do think this does not sound good for the show at all

Yeah, this seems unlikely. He’s a huge fan and really seemed to jump at the chance to restart the franchise on its natural home. Something tells me CBS wasn’t too pleased with the slow progress. They already had to push the show 4 months and they still haven’t case the lead. Yikes.

I know it’s partly because of how further along American Gods is, but pretty much all of his tweets related to his work are about American Gods, so it’s definitely a show he is passionate about.

American Gods just wrapped on shooting its first season recently, so only now was Fuller able to devote his complete attention to Discovery. I think that CBS looked at his commitment to both shows, saw that they had to delay the launch date once already, and decided it wasn’t worth moving forward with Fuller when the possibility existed for more conflicts in the future. They’re pouring a lot of money into this series, so it’s understandable that they’d want someone 100% devoted to Discovery at the helm.

Yeah I was shocked when I read that Fuller now has ANOTHER show on NBC in the works, Amazing Stories.

Its nothing wrong to be wanted lol but same time I think trying to run all these various shows divides your time like crazy and yeah I think if you are running Star Trek you should be all in. I mean it would seem odd if all the past show runners of various Trek shows from TNG to Enterprise were running those but had multiple other shows. Now true those shows also had a lot more episodes a year, normally 26 episodes a year so they literally had no time but to do anything else. Discovery is only 13 episodes its first year so thats a lot more of a breather but we also know the hardest time to run a show is the first season of the show and this guy is running three brand new shows in the same year. Thats pretty crazy.

So end of the day probably for the best to give to people who is going to be there 100% of the time and not 35% of the time.

Bryan announces that he’s leaving the show due to other commitments.
CBS and Bryan announce others to take the role.
CBS announces an extra 4 months until air date.

Place these statements in to the correct order.

I think he had to choose between this and American Gods and he chose American Gods. I think Paramount want this show shooting ASAP and Fuller was just too busy with everything else. I mean they should’ve announced the cast awhile ago now. Hopefully we’ll hear something soon but this show may go through some more growing pains first.

Oh, dear. Bryan Fuller sounded like a really great choice for showrunner, and I’m sorry to hear that he’ll be less involved in the future. Still, when Gene Roddenberry brought Gene Coon on board to serve as producer, that was a positive development for TOS, so we’ll hope that Fuller’s picks for showrunners will work out.

I think it’s strange and unwelcome news that the lead hasn’t yet been cast. Shouldn’t the other characters be cast partly because of the chemistry they have with the lead? I remember reading that the actors being considered for Kirk in the reboot movies had to read with Zachary Quinto, so Abrams could make sure the chemistry was there. And whatever the faults of the reboot movies, Quinto and Pine DO have chemistry.

Shoulda’ hired ME!

I like Fuller, but he is as bad as Abrams when it comes to taking his eye off the ball. Give Trek someone who will put Star Trek first, not fourth on his to-do list.

I don’t think he’s as bad as Abrams. Star Trek was on his priority list, but his commitment to American Gods meant that he couldn’t be in the writers room every day as the first season of American Gods was in production. CBS was certainly not happy to have to push back the launch date of DSC from January to May, especially given that it’s the flagship series of CBS All Access. Unfortunately, American Gods didn’t wrap up shooting on its first season until recently, which is dangerously close to the start of principle photography on DSC. If I were CBS, I’d be concerned if my showrunner had two commitments, that we already pushed back the start date of the show to accommodate him, and the situation likely wasn’t looking better weeks before shooting was to begin.

Not just American Gods. Amazing Stories, too.

David Alexander Harrison

This is going about as well as that SpaceX launch a few weeks back… 😑

Just hope the new showrunners focus a little less on reimagining and a little more on honoring the existing canon and visual continuity. I realize they have to make it with modern production values, but Fuller was making me nervous with some of his comments.

I agree. Fans want their Star Trek back. Prime Universe, and part of that rich tapestry we enjoyed for 50 years. If they insist on another prequel then so be it, but no re-invisioning please!!!

Agreed. I HATE the prequel but if they are going to do it keep it consistent with Enterprise at least. Whats the point of putting it back in the prime timeline if it all looks too different? Just make yet another universe then.

@Danno. I’m happy with reimagining. Which pretty much every Trek project has done.

LOL, when it slipped from January to May I said this show WOULD NEVER LAUNCH.

Man, I have a Star Trek spidey-sense.

WE WILL NEVER SEE this show.

USS Pesimism,

We’ll see something. Like the old Paramount that new CBS was for STAR TREK — THE MOTION PICTURE both productions got all their money upfront before principal photography and it is doubtful CBS is going to be any more willing to lose those in hand funds than they were for TMP. So we’ll see something. Whether it manages to coalesce into a TV series of some sort or peters out its development as Roddenberry’s GENESIS II/PLANET EARTH/STRANGE NEW WORLD did, remains to be seen.

@Disinvited

My hunch was that the tension between CBS and Fuller is what led to Fuller likely being forced to step down. CBS has invested a lot of money in DSC already, and it’s shaping up to be quite the profitable series before a single scene has been shot. Given that it’s the flagship show for All Access, I doubt CBS was thrilled to push back the series to May. Any further delays were likely a deal breaker for CBS, who want to get this show running and need a showrunner that will devote 100% of their time to the series.

Do we really think that loosing Fuller will make Star Trek Discovery more appealing? Of course not. If this is the case and CBS asked him to step down then they’ve shot their own foot. They should of given him more time to develop this series in the first place and launched it on star trek’s 51st anniversary.

What we’ve got now is a whole lot of pissed off fans who weren’t 100% sold on this show tonbegin with, even less sold on it now.

Fuller and/or CBS have made a huge mistake and they’ll pay for it come May when no one has signed up to All Access.

Why is it no one seems to really know what to do with Star Trek or want to make Star Trek into their only passion?

I miss Rick Berman.

That last sentence is the saddest and dumbest thing on the net today.

I agree.
We will see something,

I like the word “coalesce” ’cause that’s exactly what’s going to happen, for good or ill.

The way it is shaping up, I hope not.

Hopefully as they need a new concept
a leutenat’s singular story under a Klingon Captain on a Klingon/Starfleet vessel.
This is not Star Trek.

You assume that the alleged Klingon captain will be in the center seat of the Discovery, when in fact he could be captain of a Klingon ship who is part of the regular cast.

“This is not Star Trek.”

Which somebody says for every new iteration/idea. I remember folks complaining about DS9 not being Star Trek.

Akiva ‘Ice to see you’ Goldsman? Nooooooo!!

LOL who’s surprised? Not me. Glad Kelvin Trek will continue. It’s far superior anyway to anything this gimpy show will come up with.

How does this mean Kelvin Trek will continue though? Beyond still bombed.

Yes, let’s judge a television show that we’ve not seen anything of against a movie franchise which underwent a successful reboot seven years ago.

Okay.

I nominate Alec Peters for showrunner. That fellow has gumption.

Each episode gets its own studio!

LOL Best post of the thread…:)

Well, at least now we have a pretty good idea as to why the show was delayed. Bryan Fuller just wasn’t willing to make Trek his number 1 priority.

Exactly. And to be fair to him, he was already making another show when he was asked to do it so they clearly knew. I think what happened was Fuller got offered the dream of a life time to do Star Trek again but he already made other commitments but instead of turning Trek down he just told himself he could do both. We all do that and do extra things we know we shouldnt but in Fuller’s case the problem was trying to make two first year shows is already tough getting one show out. And then later the guy took another show on top of these two. So yeah you have to know your limits, especially when CBS has sold this show all over the world already and its their big platform for their new streaming site. This isn’t just another show they are adding to the fall schedule they are using it to launch a new medium and platform along with hoping it brings attention to all the other shows in that platform.

A lot is more is riding on this and I think they should’ve gotten someone whose entire energy would just be getting this show on.

“Sources tell THR the rest of the cast also will feature an openly gay actor as one of the male leads”

Is this supposed to be groundbreaking? Trek has already had gay actors (George Takei, Zachary Quinto) in leading or supporting roles. I thought the idea was to have a gay *character*.

Maybe they’re just trying to get us guessing about who it is?

That’s what it sounds like to me. I think maybe we’re all supposed to say, “OMG, does that mean Zachary Quinto will be in it?” Or something like that. :-)

What THR reported wasn’t true. We confirmed with our own sources close to the production that the aim is for the show to feature a homosexual main character.

Thanks for the clarification, John!

Unexpected, but whatever moves this project along is fine with me! I can’t WAIT for this series…I have a feeling it’s gonna be epic, and at 9 million an episode, it has a bigger budget than Game of Thrones! What?!?!

Where’d you grab that number? For 9 mil an hour, you should be able to get FOUR hours.

kmart-

The $9 million figure was initially reported by the trades. We got word from a source close to the show that the figure is actually $6-7 million, which is still a nice chunk of change.

Spending like that right out of the gate? Somebody must be deliriously optimistic.

It’s proof from CBS that they’re serious about bringing quality Star Trek back to television.

Variety says “approaching the $6-7 million per episode range.”

That’s still great though! Most shows is between $4-5 million.

Good. It was just a fanboy getting the keys to the family car. Example of why a prequel of a 1960’s vision of the future was ultimately doomed to fail, and completely incompatible with today’s expectation of future tech: https://youtu.be/BzMLA8YIgG0?t=1m6s And this is 2016, today. Literally today. You think you can shoehorn today’s tech into pre-Kirk without getting your ass handed to you? There’s a very clear reason why TNG was set 100 years in to the established future. He was destined to make a nostalgic prequel but failed to realise that’s what he wants, not what his audience wants. Enough of prequels, reboots, BattleTrek Spectacular and stupid ship designs based on nothing more than Pythagoras theorem. Inspire the future, don’t rewrite the past for nostalgic reasons. Glad he saw sense, hopefully without too much damage to the franchise, and how fortunate that there’s a production extension from Feb to May. Obviously it was seen coming, didn’t want it to be raised during Beyond’s outing, and completely expectant for alternative plans to already be in place after “today’s” announcement. I’m sure most of the stories written can and will be adapted to a time much further in to the established timeline, because it’s so blatantly the reason why he’s stepped aside in the face of such massive backlash by the majority of fans. Fans who have been labelled “haters”. Well, our ship just came in. Get the franchise back on track by inspiring a future and quit leaching from already… Read more »

It’s so sad that you’ve taken to posting pretty much this on two Trek fan sites.

LOL yeah. Some people live in their own fantasy world I guess.

@Cap\’n Er, what?

I guess I missed the vote on this. I’m totally fine with a prequel. I see no need for ass handing.

Bryan Fuller is just like the other flakes (Orci included) who have tried to head up a new Star Trek initiative, whether it be TV show or movie. These people have such a huge ego they insist on being allowed to cultivate several other projects while TPTB rightly expect them to devote their full efforts to the Star Trek project. I like the way these spoiled brats think they can just “phone it in” while expecting a huge paycheque for what SHOULD BE a full time effort!

Exactly. I have no doubt that Fuller could do an incredible job if he gave Star Trek his full focus, but Star Trek really needs a showrunner who isn’t distracted with a million less important projects. Hopefully, with him no longer the showrunner, we can have the best of both worlds. He can still give creative input, and perhaps write some episodes, but the show can be run by somebody who can spend their time running the show.

Again people got on Rick Berman’s case but that guy lived, eat and breathed Star Trek, including all the people he hired. There life was just to this franchise. Then when he left you had people like JJ Abrams who directed the first film but I never understand why people considered him some kind of new ‘gate keeper’ to Star Trek? He basically directed a film between all the other stuff he had going on. Thats why STID took so long to b made because they had to wait for Abrams to finish making Super 8 while producing TWO new shows on top of that. I’m not getting on his case for having a career I’m saying if people want Star Trek to really flourish again they need someone who is going to be eat live and breath it again. Look at all the Disney properties like Marvel, Star Wars and Pixar. You got Lasseter at Pixar, Kennedy at Star Wars and Feige at Marvel and then you have people who run other divisions inside those divisions full time like the Marvel TV shows and Star Wars novels/comic books. There is no great overseer for Star Trek anymore. ALL the Bad Robot guys it was just a job between all their other jobs they had going on. They would get together and spit out a movie but then don’t think about it again. I will give Orci credit in the sense he at least tried to be committed to all… Read more »

I agree one hundred percent. I would love it if they could get someone like Nicholas Meyer or maybe Jonathan Frakes to do it. Someone who has a history with the franchise but also could bring new vision to the series

I’m disappointed to hear this news.

comment image

Aaron (Naysayers are gonna nay)

Clearly they don’t want to appeal to the large section of the country that are Christians… let alone Russia and China.

Tell me more about this Christianity of yours. Are all of its adherents as close-minded as you seem to be? Asking for a friend.

What the hell does Fuller leaving have to do with Christians? Are you one of these dolts who think being Christian means being anti-gay? If so, YOU ARE DOING CHRISTIANITY WRONG. If it’s something else, please enlighten us.

Yuk. We are back to the old homophobia argument again. Christ mentioned homosexuality exactly zero times and Paul was discussing in context of the Roman Pagan congregation he was converting to a new following of the Way of Jesus. Back then he was dealing with the embarrassing practice that some of his early church’s wanted to continue the practice of temple prostitutes and even forced rape of men as an initiation to the church. This is the type of immoral sexual activity that Paul was warning against. He also told women to cover and not speak in church NOT as a rule from God but because at the time the women in the congregation we’re so uneducated and rude from their Pegan history they were causing a distraction in the new church congregation. As for Abortion since we are hitting every hot issue in one post. I do agree that from my personal view it is wrong from a religious point of view. But I don’t want my government involved in religion or trying to legislate from their interpretation of religion. And at this point any justification of Trumps comments is about as insane as justification of Hitler’s comments.

So you mean you can’t have other people who have a different lifestyle than you and you consider it ‘anti-Christian’? This is why some of us are thankful to be NON-religious. I don’t judge people who are different from me. I judge them by just being decent people. That’s more the American creed I guess.

I know you’re trying to help – but I don’t think of my life and who I love as a “lifestyle.”

Well I wasn’t just talking about any ONE particular lifestyle. I’m speaking about ANYONE that is defined as different than someone else in their attitude, belief system and upbringing, not merely sexuality.Being Muslim for example can be a very different lifestyle than being Christian. I never said the word gay and for a reason.

@ Aaron (Naysayers are gonna nay): Where have you’ve been these past few decades? STAR TREK has always had a pro-secular, humanist bent. Secondly, the franchise has NEVER been “anti-religion”; it has been “anti-blind faith”, but it has done a lot to maintain the IDIC philosophy even while challenging conventional norms. And just because the franchise has decided to acknowledge the existence the LGBTQ+ community recently, that doesn’t take away anything that has come before. So, you are either a troll (most likely), or you are really not a “fan” of ‘Trek.

Yuk. We are back to the old homophobia argument again. Christ mentioned homosexuality exactly zero times and Paul was discussing in context of the Roman Pagan congregation he was converting to a new following of the Way of Jesus. Back then he was dealing with the embarrassing practice that some of his early church’s wanted to continue the practice of temple prostitutes and even forced rape of men as an initiation to the church. This is the type of immoral sexual activity that Paul was warning against. He also told women to cover and not speak in church NOT as a rule from God but because at the time the women in the congregation we’re so uneducated and rude from their Pegan history they were causing a distraction in the new church congregation. As for Abortion since we are hitting every hot issue in one post. I do agree that from my personal view it is wrong from a religious point of view. But I don’t want my government involved in religion or trying to legislate from their interpretation of religion. And at this point any justification of Trumps comments is about as insane as justification of Hitler’s comments.

I’m going to quote Akiva Goldsmith’s other great sci-fi film adaptation here…..

“Danger Will Robinson”

This is like any job with any boss. You might be a creative and talented guy, but if you can’t deliver on schedule and within budget, you’ll get replaced.

Say what you want about Rick Berman and his lack of creative vision and writing ability, but he stayed within budget and schedule, and delivered the show (at times, two shows) and four movies. Sometimes that’s half the battle.

Berman gets so much slack lol. Yeah he did that AND produced a Trek film every few years. Producing one show is nuts, to do two at the same time and produce films on top of it, yeah thats crazy commitment. I miss Berman, I don’t care what anyone thinks.

I miss Berman.

Doing a half-assed job is still half-assed, no matter how many hats you’re wearing. Do one right instead. Making the trains run on time is a job for Hitlers, although Berman DID seem well suited for that part of the job.

A Klingon captain on some hybrid section 31 ship.

Is this now to be a parody of Star Trek?
My excitement for this production went from 100 to 30 some time back. Since then several percentage points have been lost, a few given back, but unfortunately now at well below -10%.

I’ll torrent it.

. . . and I was wondering about that Klingon too. . . Would he or wouldn’t he have ridges?

On a side note. . . What actor would want to fill Dorn’s shoes when it comes to being a Starfleet Klingon? He wrote the book on it, if you ask me!

I’ve no interest in Klingons whatsoever. I find every Klingon story to be boring pontificating and predictable.
Give the choice of completely changing that perception by rebooting them, or to avoid them altogether, guess which one I’d pick?

Worf was amazing. I wouldve loved to have seen a Worf show but that was always a pipe dream.

What makes you think the Klingon Captain will sit in the center seat of the U.S.S. Discovery, and not on a Klingon ship?

Sounds pretty tragic & Not Star Trek. Trying hard Not to be star trek

And so it begins the down fall as predicted.

I wonder how Nick Meyer would be as showrunner. . . .

Please, please, please… let him even move it to the movie era if he wants to.

Nick Meyer has zero experience running a tv show, and at his age I highly doubt he would be interested in the 18 hour days the job can require.

Brian Drew October 26, 2016 9:33 pm

(sigh) Yup. But, a fella can dream. . . .

Brian Drew,

Re: Nick Meyer has zero experience running a tv show

I’m fairly sure he walked away from THE DAY AFTER with more than a nodding acquaintance with the concept. I wouldn’t exactly consider that crash course in dealing with a major US network “zero experience”.

I would. There’s no equivalence between directing a tv movie over 30 years ago and showrunning a modern day ongoing series.

@Brian Drew. Exactly.

I’d argue that the same goes for people wanting Meyer or Jonathan Frakes direct the next Star Trek feature. Things have changed.

True Jack! When Jonathan Frakes offered to direct Beyond after Orci left I knew it would be no chance of that because Frakes has never made these kinds of movies. Yes he knows Trek but he doesn’t know this version of Trek, on a production level I mean. There is a reason why they got the Fast and Furious guy to follow Abrams because Abrams films are close to the same hyper action, fast cut, meteoric pace those films were already, it was a perfect fit and it told you exactly the film Paramount wanted. The films that Fakes and Meyer made are nothing like the films of today. Even Nick Meyer said about STID it was too confusing for him. Well when you’re nearly 70 I guess it would be. But for a 16 year old they are right at home and thats who these films are for. As for Meyer and running the show, the guy is 70 years old and havent been in charge of a big production in a long time. I think being writer and consultant is enough. And besides all the praise that guy gets now would go out the window the minute he turns in an awful season of the show. It happens all the time, the internet lifts you up and then knocks you down the minute it isn’t great anymore. YOu gone from an artist to a hack over night. Meyer should spare himself the pain, these are Star Trek fans… Read more »

“Even Nick Meyer said about STID it was too confusing for him.”
LOL Seriously?
Oh My…

Brian Drew, Re: There’s no equivalence between directing a tv movie over 30 years ago and showrunning a modern day ongoing series. True but then again there’s no equivalence between those two things and resurrecting a major franchise OTA iconic series for a new pay streaming with commercials video delivery service either, and whose unknowns are probably another factor contributing to the delays. But that wasn’t my point anyway, only that he’s had a smidgen more than absolute zero experience. I definitely understand your contention that it might not be enough, but I just wanted to get it out that he’s done something in the medium that’s given him more than zero experience in dealing with the likes of Les Moonves who might be heralding in this new modern thing but is, himself, definitely from the mindset that Meyer had to deal with in getting his historic TV movie made and aired. Again, it might not be enough for what passes for normal in these modern days but I wouldn’t totally write-off the old boy’s chances of possibly pulling off a Colonel Harlan Saunders in his dotage. I mean successfully transitioning STAR TREK from a series of tales in one medium to a series of tales in another radically different one is definitely in his wheelhouse, and arguably he’s had the most experience in contributing to film Trek transition’s continuing success than anyone else that comes to mind. But I must confess, that you have piqued my curiosity about what… Read more »

All Meyer learned was to stay away from TV. When he saw the abbreviated schedule, he asked what happens if I get behind? you get fired. (and Meyer was a replacement on DAY AFTER – coincidentally enough, the original director was THE CAGE director Robert Butler, who had to bow out due to contractual REMINGTON STEELE obligation.)

kmart,

Re: All Meyer learned was to stay away from TV

He felt that way going in. It was more a confirmation; although he did learn getting the Network to agree not to censor him wasn’t the same as them agreeing not to edit him.

In light of this recent news, I can’t wait to see my copy of STAR TREK BEYOND. ;-)

The show needs to be scrapped and they need to start completely from scratch. I’m glad that Fuller won’t be showrunner but I’m still pissed that he’s still involved and that they’re still taking it in his direction. It has been nothing but bad news about this show, the only positives were being set in the prime timeline and having Star Trek alum like Nicholas Meyer on board, but that’s pretty much it. The show should not be a “re-imagining” or prequel, it should be set after all the shows to allow for maximum creative freedom and not contradicting canon. Star Trek Online has done a great job of that and it’s only a video game.

Yeah it sounds like its still going to be his direction which I’m NOT happy about. We already two prequels, Enterprise and the KT. Enterprise got cancelled and Beyond bombed. Lets go boldly again to something new and exciting.

Beyond brought in $340-million and counting. And, domestically, it’s still in the top 14 of all 700+ movies released in the last 365 days. It ain’t The Force Awakens. But it certainly didn’t bomb.

It didn’t earn its money back, thats a bomb. I’m not saying a huge one, it can probably still earn a profit down the line, but yes it flopped in theaters. Do you think they want to rush out and make another one when this one brought in $130 million less than the previous film with the nearly the same budget?

And domestically each film makes less than the other one. In fact Beyond made $100 million less in America than the first film in 2009 and $70 million less than STID. Thats not something people see as good if every sequel brings in less by 10s of millions in America.

“Gauging the financial success of a film is difficult, and because there is no reliable definition, what makes a box-office bomb can be very subjective. Not all films that fail to earn back their estimated costs during their theatrical runs are bombs, and the label is generally applied to films that miss earnings projections by a wide margin, particularly when they are very expensive to produce, and sometimes in conjunction with middling or poor reviews (though critical reception has an imperfect connection to box office performance).”

– Wikipedia

Beyond was not a bomb. It did not flop. Was it a success? No, but there is a distinct middle ground between success and bomb. It is the opposite of calling a movie that made a modest profit a ‘blockbuster’.

Beyond flopped., We can spin it until Sunday but if you spend $185 million to make it and another $120 million to market it which comes to a total of $305 million but your entire revenue (not profit) is only $340 million yeah its a flop.You are 10s of millions of dollars in the hole even if you give the film the best rate of return from the theaters. Again it doesn’t mean it won’t earn back its money in the long term, I personally think it will, but as far as the theaters it flopped.

Yes thats the middle ground its possible it can still earn money but UNTIL that happens, yes its a flop. As long as it stays in the red thats what it is.

Thorny,

Re: It is the opposite of calling a movie that made a modest profit a ‘blockbuster’.

True but Brad Grey’s Paramount’s been quite clear, the purpose of Bad Robot’s STAR TREK franchise was to make it a blockbuster, and it those regards, STAR TREK BEYOND is perceived by them as every bit a failure as TERMINATOR: GENISYS.

I view Beyond as sort of a sacrificial lamb so to speak. It was by far the best out of the reboot films and the one truest to the core of Star Trek, so it’s sad that it didn’t do as well as the others at the box office but at the same time it may be a blessing since it might’ve finally put an end to the reboot films.

Yes, STB did earn its money back, but there is not as much left over as there was with other films.

That is good to read. I am sad that STB was not as successful as the first two (BR) ST films, but that’s OK. I must get down to the Warehouse (NZ’s Walmart) and see if Beyond (on DVD) is available yet…:)

I completely agree. Beyond flopped. The JJ-verse doesn’t have the support of the majority of fans who followed TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY. Just a focus few who fan-bash. We miss our prime universe and NOT a prequel. This should have been an event. A new Enterprise. Cameos from older TNG era actors. Moving forward, but with a modern television feel. A re-invisioned prequel makes me want to puke.

Thank goodness.

Anyone who believed this was going smoothly, you have been kidding yourselves. I know there will be many who will still insist all is well. But in my opinion, Akiva Goldsman is the kiss of death. Whatever this could have been, its not going to be. This is now going to be something else. And I really believe whatever expectations CBS had for CBS ALL ACCESS, they are going to be greatly disappointed. There is nothing about this that creates momentum or demand. In an ecosystem of continuous world building for properties like Star Wars, this is continually feeling like two steps back all the while in a perpetual game of catch up. I keep seeing Nicholas Meyer saying, “everybody should lower their expectations”. Well I’m not expecting anything.

I don’t know – I thought Fringe was great when he was involved. And again, talking about the ecosystem of continuous world-building, Star Trek is not Star Wars – or Marvel – and won’t be. It did pretty well in the 90s (multiple series and movies), though.

Wow BIG news I guess. I don’t know if this will change the idea of it being a prequel (doubtful if they already casting for it) but interested to see what happens next.

This show is starting to scare me. Come on CBS — for the love of Kahless, get this right.

Yay!

trekking through the stars

I guess I’m among the minority here, but I’m devastated by this news. I’m firmly in the camp of thinking that Bryan Fuller is a TV visionary and his departure takes away some of the sparkle I had when thinking of Star Trek DSC. his fearlessness in pushing the envelope would have been refreshing for this generation’s Star Trek

I still find it hard to believe there are people here who are so hateful towards queer people. there are times where I want to have a reasonable conversation and tell them that, like on Kirk’s bridge, there’s no room for bigotry here

and then there’s times, like now, where I’m spiteful enough to hope there’s a gay sex scene in DSC that has them clutching for their pearls

I agree with you. Although, weirdly (since I’m normally pretty pervy), I don’t particularly want to see sex of any kind in Trek. That bubble bath scene in Insurrection still haunts me.

trekking through the stars

sir, I believe we are ALL still haunted by that scene *shivers*

Uh he hasn’t left. He’s still producing the show along with the people who has helped him make his other shows. He’s just not going to be the show runner but he’ll still have lots of input.

trekking through the stars

I should’ve clarified that I meant I was devastated by him not being the showrunner because I still believe it would look different with him at the helm everyday rather than just as a producer and writer. apologies

OK I gotcha. No worries.

So basically, Fuller has screwed Discovery by having his creative fingers in too many pies! One would have thought the honour & importance of heading up a new Trek series would have meant he’d be 100% focussed upon Discover ONLY?! Very disappointing news indeed! Perhaps Meyer can step in and save this show before it gets turned into a corporate by the numbers action ‘brain on hold’ NuTrek like endeavor… This much pre-shiw turbulence doesn’t bode well. You need a strong non-faltering hand behind the rudder especially throughout the first season of the show!

You know what? Scrap the prequel nature of the show, have it set post TNG, tweak the scripts and sets etc. accordingly. Get the show off to a much better start, and thereby allowing new writers far more creative leeway to do something new, while honouring the 60s Trek ideals of optimism and cooperation and exploration. And relatable, interesting and characters who are FUN to watch and we care for. Prequels are always problematic. Trek should be about moving forwards!

THIS.

This news isn’t entirely surprising, because Fuller has been tweeting much more about American Gods.

Replacement showrunner? Ideally Christopher Nolan, but Manny Coto or Ron D Moore would probably be more feasible.

Sounds like casting the lead actress is turning out to be tricky. Not a good sign, since shooting for DSC is supposed to start in November. It would be better if they postponed shooting until they’ve got the very best person for the role, rather than rushing to meet the start deadline and just casting whoever happens to be available right now.

If they really are looking for a non-white actress in the lead role, Shivani Ghai was by far the most charismatic person on “Dominion”; she also turned out to be an extremely good actress, and proved she can easily portray someone assertive, morally ambiguous and with “leadership presence”. But if ethnicity isn’t a factor, they should also consider Rachel Nichols or Tricia Helfer. Rachel was surprisingly good as the lead on “Continuum”, she showed she can do conflicted/sensitive/tough, and she was great in realistic fight scenes. Tricia was brilliant on BSG and obviously needs no further explanation.

Also, the alleged budget for DSC is on a par with Game of Thrones. That would make DSC one of the most expensive TV shows ever made.

You never know, they may have several actresses under serious consideration, and may just be trying to work out scheduling and commitment issues.

Also, as you say, they will want the very best person for the role.

Akiva Goldsman

writer of

Batman & Robin
Transformers
Paranormal Activity
The 1990s ‘reboot’ of Lost in Space

Is this The Best we can do? Is this really somebody we want on a new and hopefully successful Star Trek show? Really?

What’s happened to genuine sci-fi writers of merit? It ALL starts with the ideas amd the scripts. NOT with hacks like this!

Wondering if it was actually Fuller who realised CBS was pushing this show into a NuTrek type direction, and got cold feet?

I really hope Meyer can ground this series and act as a foil to any stupidity from others involved…

And that bastardized film version of Asimov’s “I, Robot”

Akiva Goldsman had absolutely nothing to do with writing the film, PARANORMAL ACTIVITY. That was Oren Peli.

Goldsman is an Oscar and Golden Globe winner for the screenplay to A BEAUTIFUL MIND.

Yeah, lets just leave the screenplay that won The Oscar off the list.

God, that’s really awful. Transformers? Batman ad Robin?

No hacks, please. We had that disaster already with the so called Star Trek reboot movies.

I am normally incredibly defensive of these sorts of moves while fans decry it the end of the project. But even I am a bit miffed, as I thought Fuller was the big highlight for the project.

Still, if there’s a defense to be made, look no further than Daredevil. Even before Season 1 entered production they lost their showrunner, Drew Goddard. Many online were flipping out and losing hope, but his replacement Steven DeKnight proved so good that when he stepped down for the second season fans once again thought it meant the end of the quality series. But his replacement(s) were more than up to the task, and S2 was praised universally, particularly for the Punisher storyline.

Maybe Fuller’s kickstart of the project is all he really needed to be a part of to get it going in quality fashion, and I’m still taking a “wait and see” approach, but I can’t deny i’m a little worried now.

I LOVED season 2 of Daredevil. Yeah I think that season helped make it my favorite Marvel show at least. And I loved both Punisher and Electra. I liked season one of DD as well but I always felt the second half just dragged too much for me vs season 2 where I was enthralled from beginning to end.

Agree, the Elektra stuff dragged a bit, but the bigger point is how even with a replaced showrunner, things turned out ok. And even the showrunner from S1 wasn’t the original guy– people quickly forget that Drew Goddard was the showrunner first announced. Go read the comments on this story too, many proclaiming his departure was “the beginning of the end” of the show or even the end of “the marvel empire.”

http://screenrant.com/marvel-daredevil-netflix-series-new-showrunner/

All that matters is that they don’t start a THIRD timeline. If CBS thinks that us 35-60 group is going to pay money to watch a Star Trek that is taken out of our existing 50 years of Trek history they are making the largest mistake possible for this franchise. We love are current Star Trek in all the forms so far, but with the exception of the JJ Abrams reboot, Star Trek tells one very long story from now to the 23rd century. We know that TOS can look slightly out of date by today’s standards but the stories are so amazingly good that we can ignore the slightly out of date computers and campy uniforms. CBS if you really need to tell the Discovery story in 2255 you must play in that universe as we have seen it. That means that the 10 year old Enterprise is currently under command by Christopher Pike with Spock as science officer. You can make some slight changes like ignoring the first draft of the communicators that were clear with 1960’s transistors exposed. Or change that Captains have 2 1/.2 stripes and not 1 like was done in the Cage for budgetary reasons but you can not change the existing Star Fleet Universe we know and love and expect us to pay for the show. This is not Battlestar Galactica or Star Wars. Star Trek has “cannon” history that we take seriously. CBS should remember that the 35-60 year olds are the… Read more »

Well said! And I would be open to some continuity changes if they aren’t radical and there is a rational reason that fits within the existing canon. I want this show to look visually stunning with modern effects. But I still want it to honor the universe we love. And, from what I have seen so far with Rogue One previews, it looks like Star Wars is very much honoring the 1970s era continuity, even the hairstyles!

This is the clearest and truest thing written in this forum. Respect our canon. As an original Trekker from 1966 who would pay for CBS All Access, if it feels odd, and too off the mark, I’d wouldn’t buy in.

Your logic is impeccable. Impeccably flawed. Numerous companies, franchises, shows and movies have proven you can start a new “universe” and still hold on to the audience. If it’s good, it’s good, and what universe it’s in doesn’t matter.

The reason Trek09 failed to capture the classic Trek audience is because IT WASN’T FOR THEM. It was trying to capture a NEW audience. Sadly, it failed at that too, but that’s not the fault of the approach, but the execution.

I don’t think Trek 09 failed. I think part of the problem was subsequently trying to placate the classic Trek audience. It became a cabaret act of greatest hits.

@ Jack,
Also the delay of four years before STID, because, um, JJ Abrams had “other commitments”

Also remember, most of the audience of the original show is now approaching or over 70 years old. The bulk of the baby boomers are either dying off or no longer have large discretionary incomes. I’m 35 and grew up on TNG, but i’m also willing to accept new things, as long as they are of high quality.

Exactly. I think some folks are very dug in in their particular position regarding canon.

If they maintain the prequel idea, “Enterprise” had a lot of challenges dealing with years and years of canon. They probably needed a continuity book of enormous proportions.

Torchwood,

Re:Also remember, most of the audience of the original show is now approaching or over 70 years old

This contention of yours makes me smile because:

A) I was there and I am not near 70 or over it.

B) I remember when NBC put STAR TREK on Friday nights to kill it because they believed that only boys were watching at that point, and nobody could sell anything to them because “they have no discretionary funds or say in expenditures by others that do.”

“We’re not. We’re not. We’re not done…”

It’s not just a contention it’s the truth. Even if you were 10 in 1966, you’d be 60 now. If you discovered it in reruns in the 70s, you’re still likely over 50. That is not the core demo for any big franchise, and I don’t think they should go out of their way to placate grumpy old men, as the OP suggests.

Torchwood

Re: It’s not just a contention…

You are darn tootin’ it’s not even a contention. It’s a blatant hyperbolic falsehood as there is absolutely no non-scalar base ten math where 60 rounds up to 70 or over. To be near 70 or over one has to be 65 or older.

You’ve jumped the gun. Get back to us in five.

I said “approaching or over 70.” A fan at 16 yo when Trek premiered is now at least 66 years old (as my father was), will likely be 67 when Discovery premieres. I win. Try again.

Torchwood,

And I pointed out TPTB said they had hard numbers that majority of the audience were boys who were younger than that. I was one of them, now 62. One father does not a most make.

And nobody wins when the young think the lessons of history can be discarded simply because it’s “old.”

Sorry, can’t respond with my mouth full of all the words you shoved into it.

Akivaverse.

don’t panic.
just go to yellow alert for now.

We’re waiting for Riker to scream: “Red alert!”

Trek fans bring hand wringing to unprecedented levels.

God.

Chill out everyone.

This.

This to the nth degree.

so in other words cbs screwed up, and star trek should of been given creative control to netflix… thats basically the reason

Akiva Goldsman:
comment image

Well, he did write the 1998 Lost in Space movie …

Regards.

Now we seem to be lost in Trek space…

Good bye Mr. Obnoxious!

It seemed everyone wasn’t happy when he became showrunner. Now they spell gloom and doom because he won’t be.

For god’s sake Jim I’m a Doctor, not a 40 something drone with a Kirk fixation.

Good grief, one change and Trek has run its course?

“Star Trek has run its course. It’s dead.”

Sadly, at this point I have to agree. As a product of a more idealistic (if tumultuous) era it’s probably not much suited to our current moment anyway. Too bad.

Gods are not real. Just like Santa, Bigfoot and the Easter Bunny. Grow up.

trekking through the stars

hate to break it to you buddy but the universe you’re here talking about was created by a man who was outrageously liberal (even by today’s standards) and was also, indeed, very godless

now go drink a hot toddy and go to bed

How smug to be so sure, oh omniscient one.

Well, you don’t have to be all-knowing to know the Easter bunny is conceived by the human mind, and therefore exists within the human mind.

Let’s be real here, rabid Star Trek fans are the worst. Anything they don’t like, they scream about it from one end of the internet to the other and ruin it for others.

Michael Hall, I would say that it is better suited to the current era than ever, especially when you have demagogues like Trump picking up votes.

The problem is that CBS clearly doesn’t have a clue about what to do with it or who to involve.

Michael,
I disagree. I think there’s a lot to be said metaphorically about our present obsessions with celebrity, propaganda, how history is “told,” the divisions in American politics, US maintenance of security in the international sphere, internet spying, and so on. Plenty of conflicts to be updated.

Maria and El Chup,

Agreed, but that’s not the point I was making. Sure, there’s lots of incredible, topical material these days for a new Trek series to sink its metaphorical teeth into, and with much-reduced network interference and long-form storytelling a new series can go places that the makers of TOS could only dream of. But Trek was also about appealing to our best selves with the idea that a better world was possible. Now, in the age of Trump, who believes that anymore?

Sorry, Marja. Autocorrect blues.

I’d agree with you on TNG Roddenbery but complete disagreement on TOS Roddenbery. That Roddenbery was quite conservative. The TOS Enterprise had a chapel, needed dilithium crystals, helped miners way out there struggling to make coin, was pro Vietnam fighting the Soviets and even witnessed a culture meeting the “son of God”. Kirk beat the Koms with the US Constitution literally. Protecting individual rights not group think seemed paramount in TOS where every Federation bureaucrat was pretty much incompetent. I’m not saying that’s good or bad, I’m just saying two totally different stages of the man led to two totally different universes (one of which I think is more exciting than the other). Those uncomfortable with that can continue to try to mitigate, rewrite or ignore TOS at their leisure.

Uh — well sureifyousayso fella. Whatever. I could go on for paragraphs about the kind of selective reading of TOS that would allow someone like you to see it as “conservative” — and in fact I have done so in threads on this very site not all that long ago — but the truth is that my life gets shorter by the minute and I’m just profoundly weary of the whole subject. So by all means, believe that Gene Roddenberry suddenly morphed from being a conservative in 1968 to a hippy-dippy peacenik liberal when I saw him give those college lectures in 1975, if it makes you happy. It certainly makes no difference to me at this point. Because whatever our hopes may have been back then, Trek did not manage to change the world for the better, to the extent that its fans can’t even agree on what it all meant fifty years after the fact. Thanks for proving my point.

wpDiscuz