Theme of “Star Trek: Discovery” is ‘Understand each other’ Says Former Showrunner Bryan Fuller

Bryan Fuller continues to discuss the reasons for his departure from Star Trek: DiscoveryWhile most interviews have rehashed the well-known explanations, he expanded upon a strong theme for the new series in an interview with the Radio Times.

Fuller remains tight-lipped and almost certainly bound to a non-disclosure agreement regarding significant details about Discovery, but he summed up the theme of the new series in three words:

“Understand each other.”

Fuller said that this was the theme of Discovery at the time of his departure, and he noted that he is curious to see how it unfolds. Beyond writing the first two episodes and charting a course for the first season of the series, Fuller also wrote story treatments for other first season episodes. In Fuller’s view, that completes his responsibilities to the show.

Asked how the tone of the series would compare to the recent films and the original series, he continued:

“You know, it’s interesting to ponder, because I won’t have anything to do with the actual production, and I won’t have anything to do with post, which are really places where I dig in and do a lot of work. I know where we were going before I left, but I don’t where they were going to take it after I’ve left.”

Fuller reiterated his willingness to rejoin Discovery, saying “If they need me, they have my number and they can call me, otherwise, I’m ploughing ahead on American Gods.”

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Understand each other? I would prefer the theme to be lets go out there and Kick some Alien Ass, and trekies Wonder why Star Wars us more popular then Star Trek.

No, treKies don’t care about Stars Wars popularity. AND that “let’s fights somebody” attitude is the reason why the human race is the worst species to grace the planet earth. Even your precious Jedi teach against such attitudes.

Yes lots of Trekkies DO care about Star Wars. Don’t be naive or defensive because the better franchise gets more attention, care and love. Accept Trek as it is – the young geeky brother who gets dragged along with the cooler older brother to parties that no one actually wants him at but mom made big brother bring him. Trek is lucky that movies like Star Wars, Guardians of the Galaxy and yes, the JJ movies are bringing a resurgence to sci-fi. Movies like Rogue One HELP Trek to succeed, it makes people interested in the genre again.

Hey actual Trek people at CBS who may actually watch this site – don’t listen to the old school Trek fans who want a show about boardroom meetings and feelings and understanding, make a kick ass action sci-fi show. You wanna make money with this stupid pay per view system? You better make it worth watching for a general audience. Call JJ, he’ll walk you through it. Do you want to listen to the Trek fans stuck in the 60’s or do you want success?

Granted if it weren’t for the success of A New Hope back in ’77, our franchise wouldn’t have celebrated it’s 50th anniversary this year. And admittedly quite a few of us will be paying to see Rogue One when it hits theatres (the idea of an alien samurai battling stormtroopers is so trippy as to be worth the price of admission alone, IMO).
But Star Wars being ‘better’ than Trek? No, don’t think so. Star Wars may generate more box office but Trek arguably has the higher success rate in terms of overall quality. Many, like myself, love TMP and i’m sure there are one or two here who will probably make a case for the likes of TSFS and TFF, but I think we can ALL agree on the list of overall best Trek films: TWOK, TVH, TUC, FC and (for all it’s faults) ST09. Compare that to the list of truly great Star Wars movies: A New Hope and Empire. Jedi is disqualified for having Ewoks in it, The Force Awakens is nothing more than a PC rehash of Hope and the prequels are, well, the prequels. In terms of quality, Trek has had a better batting average. And we aren’t even talking about television (unless you seriously believe that the likes of ‘Droids’ or ‘Star Wars Rebels’ is ‘better’ than any Trek show that has premiered in the last fifty years?).
So no Harry. The secret to the continued success of the franchise, lies not in emulating Star Wars, but in doing exactly what it has been doing for the last fifty years.

Disagree utterly about newhope77, because if Par had gotten its act together (or forced GR to do likewise in a timely manner), the huge pic of 77 or 76 would have been a Trek feature. Trek absolutely primed the SW pump, but then wasn’t there to cash in. Man, I was 16 when SW came out, and that was at a time when Trek was all over the bestseller lists with the tech manaual and the blueprints (called ship plans I think), and they were having 30,000 folks at a convention in Chicago. It wasn’t The BEatles in 64, but for SF it was the equivalent. That’s not looking back through rose-colored glasses, that is the feel AT THE TIME. Even Lucas underestimated how big the SF phenom was (he hoped for 20mil in box office), but at least he saw it was there (which probably explains the occasionsl story indicating he tried to buy TREK as well as FLASH GORDON before settling for his own universe.)

You’re right!


Re: Disagree utterly about newhope77

And I agree with you. Besides, if any film spurred Paramount into a Trek film production at the time it was CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND.

SW77 may have stimulated Paramount to open their purse strings a little more but that was after they already committed to making a Trek motion picture.

Force Awakens – 2 billion dollars. Mike drop.

You can trash the prequels but don’t trash Jedi. The ewoks were great. As a trek fan I actually realized the deeper meaning – that determined individuals banding together can defeat a so-called superior enemy. The ewoks would have made great Trek aliens. Yub nub.

I’m sure not going to agree about TVH or TUC or FC and I rank 09 dead last among all Trek movies ever.

Know your history & facts not Mythology.
Star Wars had NOTHING to do with Star Trek’s success in the 70’s & today.
Paramount was asking Gene for a New series or Movie since like 1972.
The success of close Encounters of the Third kind may have had something to do with Star trek going from a TV series back to a movie again, this all happened way before Star Wars was released.
It was actually the other way around, George Lucas has stated he was inspired by Star trek amoung many other sci-Fi productions & Star Treks phenomenal success in syndication helped Fox see the potential success of a Sci-Fi movie like star Wars, if only in a small way, it helped.
The success of the movie series particuarlly wrath of khan & Voyage home Motivated paramount to try a second TV series & the rest is history.
Star Wars had nothing to do with any of it.

You might want to check facts rather than mythos as well. The then-new series TNG was greenlit BEFORE TVH even came out.
GR didn’t actually check into the Par lot to work on a new version till 1975.
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS came out 5 months AFTER SW, not before, but yeah, even though Eisner decided IN THY was a feature notion before CE3K, it is likely that the big push to get it to bigger budget feature was triggered by CE3K. So far as I know, it was still an 8-10 mil feature to be directed by Bob Collins, and the 15 budget came in when Wise replaced him (though that uprated to 25 mil a week after shooting began. It’s easy to attribute 20 mil to the reshoots and vfx and triple OT disasters, bringing it to 45mil or so.)


Re: CE3K

Paramount’s vacillations on TV show, TV movie, motion picture were the things of legend even back then and I clearly recall there were no feelings of a guarantee of that commitment to a motion picture even with the Eisner decision among fans. SW77 was still in the theaters when CE3K came out. I’m fairly certain CE3K convinced Eisner that SW was no fluke and that he had to strike while the iron was hot as SF Blockbusters had arrived. I’m also fairly certain that’s when Paramount came to believe that they were going to have to up their FX commitment significantly or risk having their Trek film laughed out of theaters — even with that it didn’t stop them rolling the dice trying to get cutting edge at bargain basement prices and we all know how that turned out for them.

Well, I’m going off the phase 2 book info (the official one, which does have errors about some tech matters but had access to info that Ed Gross didn’t when he did his book years earlier), which states pretty categorically — and I think right at the start of the book — that Eisner made this call at the start of August 77, before much work had even been done on the set for the series. But the info was held at the top, so the studio kept spending tons of money building sets and writing scripts the folks at the top KNEW would not be used. It sounds mega-stupid to have GR and Eisner knowing it was going to be a feature while Povill and HL were slaving away with joe Jennings and Minor and Cole to get something ready that was already dead.
The Eisner making this call about TMP story was not new to me, but his making it in summer 77 blew my mind! The VFX issue of escalating didn’t really come about till the end of the year, when Abel was coming on or negotiating to come on. Up till that point, I think they were thinking of using Magicam for VFX as well as models, and probably splitting the VFX among various houses like they had on the series. I threw my copy of the P2 book away a long time back because of the mistakes in it, but the info that seems confirmable might be of use to you.


Re: …money building sets and writing scripts the folks at the top KNEW would not be used.

Possibly because a decision made at that stage by Eisner was him thinking of something along the lines of the LOGAN’S RUN movie production budget including sets and FX. And if I recall correctly didn’t LR’s TV series spinoff recycle all the movie’s sets, props. costumes. etc.?

But what you are saying is Eisner less than a month after announcing:,2385839&dq=paramount+television+service&hl=en

the new Paramount Network took an action that waffled Trek back to a movie and would have guaranteed that network’s failure if news of his decision got out? Maybe that’s why he kept the TV production on the books…?

That’s the starting point in the Phase 2 book as I recall, yes.

HP, don’t you mean fans stuck in the 80s/90s, whek Trek (non DS9 trek) became so pedantic? Your younger bro analogy doesn’t work either, because TOS was there first, so get your dates right. I’ve never given a hoot about why SW is more popular (am more concerned about why there were never any PRINCESS BRIDE conventions, since that at least exploited the Campbellian mythology in a better way than SW ever did), just figured it was two different things, often pushing different buttons.

Like most diehards, given the choice i’d likely watch bad Trek over good Star Wars any day of the week. That’s just where most of us live. But one can’t deny the contribution that A New Hope made to Star Trek’s enduring legacy-however painful it may be for some of us to admit it.
Remember, by the late seventies Paramount had nixed the proposed feature in favour of a new series. The execs believed the grand space opera was dead. Then Star Wars comes out, breaks every box office record going-and what do you know? The Paramount bigwigs have a change of heart. ‘In Thy Image’ becomes TMP, and we have the beginnings of a Star Trek movie franchise. Sure, it doesn’t truly become successful until we get to Khan, but you don’t get the second movie without the first, right?
By the way, in your response to HP the issue of chronology is irrelevant. Star Trek may have gotten there ‘first’ but it didn’t become successful until the early eighties. A direct result of Paramount bigwigs jumping on the Star Wars bandwagon.

@Tobeornottobe2… “Remember, by the late seventies Paramount had nixed the proposed feature in favour of a new series. The execs believed the grand space opera was dead.”

That had a lot more to do with Paramount’s longstanding dream of launching a fourth TV network. So it actually shows Paramount’s faith in Star Trek in that they were confident it would be strong enough to serve as the cornerstone of a new TV network, it doesn’t suggest Paramount thought a Star Trek movie wouldn’t work. Paramount eventually did get its fourth (by then, fifth) network, the short-lived UPN in 1995, and again Star Trek was its cornerstone.

Yes, they had faith in the idea of a series as the cornerstone of a new network. But what we’re discussing here is Star Trek escaping the trappings of it’s cult status to become a worldwide phenomenon. I think we can both agree-given we’ve read all of the synopses-that Phase 2 probably wouldn’t have made that happen. And though they did have faith in the idea of Trek as a movie, the bigwigs weren’t taken enough with any of their available concepts to greenlight one. But then, a couple of years later, TMP hits the big screen. Paramount’s frankly bonkers decision to rejig a TV pilot script as a major motion picture screenplay smacked of desperation-not just to spare their blushes over the failure of their network, but also to jump on the space opera bandwagon created by the massive box office success of Star Wars. And that desire to capitalise on the new trend (and remember, every studio wanted a piece of the action-think Corman’s shop with Battle Beyond The Stars, Fox with Alien, Hell even United Artists with Moonraker) resulted in the creation of a successful movie series that subsequently spawned a TV sequel and multiple spin offs.
So back to the original point-yes, undoubtedly Star Wars had a significant part to play in the enduring legacy of our beloved franchise.

@Tobeornottobe2… “Paramount’s frankly bonkers decision to rejig a TV pilot script as a major motion picture screenplay smacked of desperation-not just to spare their blushes over the failure of their network, but also to jump on the space opera bandwagon created by the massive box office success of Star Wars.”

Starting with “In Thy Image” was the only way to get ST:TMP onto the big screen in a reasonable timeframe, and also allowed them to recoup a big part of the investment they’d already sunk into “Phase II”. That in itself isn’t bonkers, it was pretty smart. They could just as easily have gone the TV route even without Paramount Network. That’s what Universal did, selling Battlestar Galactica to ABC as four TV movies (the elevation to weekly series happened late in development.) So Paramount must have liked In Thy Image enough to green-light it for the big screen. There really isn’t anything disastrously wrong with “In Thy Image” except for its similarity to “The Changeling” (using a very familiar story didn’t hurt “The Force Awakens” one bit). It was the execution (terrible uniforms, wooden acting) and rush to theaters (important scenes left on the cutting room floor due to no time for effects, character moments cut due to not enough time for a good re-editing, which Wise eventually did with the grealy superior Director’s Edition) that really hurt it.

I’m not attacking TMP. I grew up on that picture and I like it despite it’s many obvious flaws. And the ‘In Thy Image’ script is a fascinating read (though yeah, i’m amazed John Meredyth Lucas didn’t raise an eyebrow). But you’ve kind of proven the point re: the Star Wars effect with the statement ‘within a reasonable timeframe’. Yes Paramount wanted to get a Trek movie out as quickly as possible (and hence did not invest time and money in developing a new concept)-to capitalise on the success of A New Hope. Wise didn’t get to finish the edit satisfactorily, partly because Paramount execs wanted a space hit ASAP.
Incidentally I agree with you regarding Wise’s Directors Cut. I recently purchased the TMP anniversary steelbook (finally), and though it’s a ‘fine’ version of the movie, I missed all of the extra material from the Directors Cut dvd. A shame we can never have a DC on blu ray.

The idiocy of Paramount was that they already had a feature trek in development and cancelled it the month STAR WARS came out, thinking they had blown their chance. I agree that IN THY IMAGE was not a feature concept, but when the studio head Eisner says, ‘THIS is a feature script,’ presumably folks jump. You can blame Eisner for that movie you got, because they could have written a whole new one twice over in the time they prepped and band-aided IN THY IMAGE into TMP.

“Remember, by the late seventies Paramount had nixed the proposed feature in favour of a new series. The execs believed the grand space opera was dead.”

Beg your pardon. There WAS no grand space opera genre prior to Star Wars!?! Unless you credit the old Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers serials as such. But seriously… Star Wars was the very reason the entire genre came into being as we know it today! There would be no Star Trek franchise…no cinematic Middle-earth account, no comicbook movies, no nothing. People would still be watching mediocre westerns and historical epics ad nauseum… Bond would be around, maybe King Kong… but overall, it was Star Wars that invented modern-day blockbusters and franchise-building.

As for the late 70s / early 80s struggles to revive the Star Trek brand… it doesn’t matter what decision they would have made without Star Wars… Star Trek would have ended up like Knight Rider… several destined-to-fail attempts at continuing the legacy… Knight Rider, mark my words, would have been our destiny…

And yeah, I’m NOT talking about the success of ANH77 alone… The very foundation of modern SFX was ILM… no ILM, no modern SFX… ILM is the very foundation everything in our genre is built on. It’s like the first computer, the moon landing, the human genome decoding… ILM is modern day cinema… no Star Wars, no ILM, no nothing… void, conundrum, oblivion…

Nuh-uh, ILM is an outgrowth of what Trumbull was building in terms of a lot of personnel and technique — and I oughta know, I’ve interviewed at least a couple hundred ILMers, and wrote a 26,000 word piece just on the formation of ILM for STAR WARS over 20 years back — but done in more of an assembly-line way than a craftsman process.

I think you got MORE vfx shows because ILM was big enough back then to take on multiple shows, but more does not equal better. And artistically ILM designwise in the 80s was pretty bad, they damned near ruined TREK with their SFS design sense for Starfleet/Fed.

They’re a large part of history, but you’re overstating the case massively.

Incidentally, forget even/odd – all of the good trek movies have had ILM involved.

Boy, that’s a howler. SFS? Really? It had heart, but it also had terrible ILM designs polluting the Trekverse — they didn’t design the ships or props in TWOK, they just executed Par’s designs — as well as Bennet’s plotting that makes the sw prequels look almost smart by comparison.

TVH is a one-time joy, restoftime grind, with the loathsome tootsie roll — didn’t they see DUNE and realize cylinders don’t make for great cinematic spaceships? — from ILM.

Between its gross character assassinations of Kirk & Spock, TUC does have its moments, but I’ve never considered GEN or FC to be good movies, so your ILM equals good movie thing doesn’t float (or hover) for me AT ALL.

Have never bought into the odd/even thing either, as the only ones I really like are 1, 2 & 5 anyway.


Re: There WAS no grand space opera genre prior to Star Wars!?!

There was the PLANET OF THE APES’ franchise which started with a spacflight and whose leads were Astronauts.

Characterizing Planet of the Apes as a space opera is stretching it a little. I think that was more of an Earth based racism allegory. Obviously, sci-fi movies were produced prior to ’77, but with the exceptions of Dark Star and Silent Running they tended to be Earth based genre pictures that commented on aspects of the human condition (Rollerball, Logan’s Run etc). I think we can argue that due to their small scale, they had what we would probably describe today as an almost indie sensibility to them. Hollywood producers certainly weren’t producing space sagas that were also ‘event’ movies. They obviously considered such stuff as B movie filler material. Then A New Hope came out and everything changed.


Re: Planet of the Apes as a space opera is stretching

Stretch or no, POA showed that SF sequels could form a lucrative franchise just as the Bond films had done, and this BEFORE SW gave any indication that it could. And TMP was promoted aa a sequel to the series.

Star wars fans love Mythology. They even create it themselves when trying to give Star Wars Credit for Star Treks Success, it was huge in the 70’s & bigger in the late 80’s & 90’s. nothing to do with Star wars.

In an interview from the mid-’70s published where I don’t recall, a journalist asked Edmund North (screenwriter of THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL and PATTON among others) what he thought of STAR WARS. North’s response was a smile and one word: “Kinderspiel.”

Ben Bova was the editor of ANALOG at the time STAR WARS came out (and a pretty good writer in his own right) and I think he was so disappointed with it he gave the mag’s SF film of the year to THE SPY WHO LOVED ME.

And I remember William Goldman writing about going to see STAR WARS on its first reissue, and how the theater was just filled with uneasy rustling and no laughs the whole time, like the audience (which must not have been of the sci-fi sycophant variety) was embarrassed with itself for having made such a big deal about the film just a couple years earlier. So while SW has a continuing effect, it is my no means one that sticks with everybody or works on everybody in the same way.

Living in Pittsburgh at that time, I went to the first show on the first day of SW with my best friend, a fellow filmmaker. The moment the SW end credits started rolling, he jumped up and said, “That’s the best best G**D**** movie I’ve ever seen!” I just sat there and wondered why I bothered paying to watch such a turd of a film. Luckily, CE3K was only months away to give me something I would find a hell of a lot more satisfying.

umm…Harry, sorry, but that would be “fans stuck in the 90’s, thank you very much. TOS had hand-held camera filmed, down and dirty, rip your tunic, throw sand in your face fist-fights all the time. Not a damn thing wrong with excitement, especially when it’s placed in the right moment of the story. Give me any action fight scene of TNG that was even remotely close to the knock-down, drag out, tied at the wrist, fight to the death between Kirk and Ron Tracy. I’m 100% with you Harry, but don’t drag TOS into the mix. TNG and it’s spin-offs were the guilty party when it came to talky, yawn-inducing board meetings, relentless pretentous preaching and nonsensical technobabbly pay-offs.

Yes TNG did really get into the boardroom drama a bit too much, despite it being my favorite Trek series, it has a lot of bad episodes and story arcs too.

Not better, just more popular. Just like a Big Mac is more popular than a meal from a 5 star restaurant. Star Wars is just lowest common denominator trash. You’ve completely misunderstood what is going on.

come on ziplock “lowest common denominator trash” is a little extreme. The themes in “Wars” are universal, which is why it touches so many. Lucas, for all the crap I give him for the prequels, did have some great ideas with the original trilogy.

Well Said.
The reason we are still having this Argument 40 years later is Star Wars only fans are too stupid to understand the argument.

Yeah call JJ! He made Star Trek action movies that barely made anything compared to Star Wars.


You know… if you don’t like it you could always “check out”. (TOTALLY NOT SERIOUS!)

Such a cynical view of humanity, though. You must be terribly miserable. I’m really sorry, I feel bad for you.

But thas NOT Star Trek man. There is a reason Star Fleet is an exploration organization and not a military one. Star Trek is about searching the unknown and understanding others who look nothing like us (although on Star Trek they look quite like like us pretty often ;)).

Yeah when we HAVE to we kick alien ass but thats not the point of the show.


Your synopsis of what Starfleet is does not jive with the realities of the show. Starfleet takes ALL of its traditions from Maritime services, but mostly from the USN.

Starfleet has a rank structure and combat is an active part of the training of a Starfleet officer. Military academies teach things other than combat tactics and warfare, the teach physics mathematics, biology etc, just like Starfleet Academy. The degrees awarded by the military academies ARE liberal arts degrees!

Finally, and most importantly, Starfleet FIGHTS the wars that the Federation is involved in. That is, by it’s very definition a military organization.

Can we stop the hair splitting. End of the day its about Star fleet was formed with the idea of EXPLORATION, thats all thats being said. For petes sakes thats the title of the show. Its called Star TREK, not Star WARS for a reason. Beyond actually made this point super clear.

Yes of course there is conflict and wars, its been part of the show from the beginning, no one is denying that but the point is the premise is about them exploring the galaxy trying to meet and understand alien cultures first and foremost. It wasn’t designed to be a military operation. I can’t believe we are even arguing about it???


Re: Starfleet takes ALL of its traditions from Maritime services, but mostly from the USN.

While I think Roddenberry definitely borrowed the USN organizational structure, I don’t believe Captain Kirk acted like any Navy Captain that I ever met. More like the fictional McHale of MCHALE’S NAVY, and in that respect I’d say Starfleet therefore seemed more like the United States Merchant Marines to me in that Kirk was involved in a lot of trade and transport of cargo and passengers as well as military activity.


Yea that’s a weird way to describe the show. Sounds like the ship will be a safe space for special Starfleet snowflakes to express their feelings without those horrible opposing views to deal with.

Wow, I think you hit ALL the cliches in one sentence! Good job!

Thats the very reason WHY we prefer Star Trek over ‘Wars. Any franchise can go pew pew and’kick ass, it’s just dumb.

You’re wring about most franchises. None of the existing blockbuster franchises minus Transformers are “just” about going “pew pew and kick ass”… not Star Wars, not the comic book movies, not Harry Potter, not even James Bond. There is some sort deeper meaning to all of them. They are all part of a bigger picture… a realtively liberal view of the world in which enemies can become friends to “fight” a greater evil. You know… all major mythologies of Hollywood, be it Star Trek, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Middle-earth, even 007, share one ideological core: yes, you have to resist “evil” by disarming the enemy but you don’t build superweapons on your own! That’s the very plot of EVERY blockbuster movie of the last 20 years… Kirk and Picard destroy super weapons but don’t have their own ones. The Rebels destroy the Death Star but don’t build their own one. Harry Potter destroys Horcruxes but doesn’t abuse his magic… The Ring must be destroyed but not used… Bond shoots (bad) people but he doesn’t create the ultimate doomsday weapon… Same for the CB heroes. ALL OF THIS IS IMPORTANT. Every franchise is one! All of this is V’ger!

Well said Smike, well said!

Even looking at the Marvel films Infinity War is coming where another heavy villain wants to use powerful stones to control the universe and yet every film revolving around these stones are the good guys going ‘how can we keep these out of the wrong hands and make sure they are contained?’ It is funny how no one wants to use the stones for their own power its always about just trying to stop the other guy from using them.

Yes at all these films and shows core is about trying to do the right thing at the end of the day and not just ‘kick ass’. The conflict comes in how do you do go about doing that?

You are exactly, absolutely, 100%,couldn’t-be-more wrong about all that Star Trek is.

One thing that makes Star Trek what it is, and is carried through to the Kelvin timeline, is how they work together despite their differences. And through working together, are we really that different?

Why do I do this? It’s who I am. Why do you do that? It’s what you are. And there they find many commonalities. We see who they are and what drives them.

Spock being the most iconic of that, especially since I was recently watching For The Love Of Spock on Netflix.

Data and Worf, Federation and Bajorans, Starfleet and Maquis, Humans and Vulcans, and of course back to Kirk and Spock.

Even if the “dumb down” Kelvin timeline only grazes the surface, it still allows you, repeat YOU, to see what’s underneath, to “Understand each other”. Where one picture is worth a thousand words.

“Kick some Alien Ass”

Sorry, but it seems that you don’t understand neither Star Trek nor Star Wars.

Star Trek had a lot of “ass kicking” in the last 5+ movies and it didn’t get us anywhere important, neither content-wise nor popularity-related. Star Trek is about the human condition, and the sense of wonder that is space travelling and exploration but it’s not about blowing things up for the sake of it.

Star Wars on the other hand, while lacking the humanist approach of Trek, is also NOT primarily about blowing things up, no matter what it might appear on the outside. It’s a deeply spiritual journey on the verge between “good” and “evil”, an esotheric take on the nature of the universe. “The Force” is basically a modern concept of God.

Explosions may occur in both franchises, but it’s never about the fight in space but about the struggle within. The rest is eyecandy. Both franchises have FAR MORE to offer than explosions and “ass kicking”… if you don’t subscribe to that notion, you shouldn’t call yourself “DS9 is King”… DS9, despite all its shortcomings, was basically a perfect blend of Trek and Wars but it was never about “kicking ass” but about the struggle to do right in desperate times.

I like my sci-fi slow and dull, and i like my action fast and awesome. Star Trek is sci-fi, Star Wars is action.

DS9 isn’t Star Trek & Trekies are proiud people like you don’t get Star Trek.
Star Wars is more popular because it caters to the lowest common denominator & is so simple a child can get it.
Not everyone can understand Star Trek so it’s never gunna be as successful as Star Wars & I’m proud of that.

Star Trek needs to be Star Trek and not turn itself into something it isn’t just to grab more $$$$ – It won’t work anyway when Star Wars does Star Wars better than Star Trek ever could.

We need to finish kicking bad human ass before we start exporting any brand of justice offplanet. Unfortunately, the baddies seem to own most of the steel-capped shoes.

Why can’t we all just get along?


So basically we’ll be getting the same old rehashed Star Trek being Star Wars with the usual lets become friends thing in the end.

How to Write a New Star Trek Series:
Ship, Station, Base, fill in name here:
Captain, fill in name here:
First officer, fill in name here:
Communication officer, fill in name here:
Chief of security, fill in name here:
Doctor, fill in name here:
Engineer, fill in name here:
list of other required crew positions,fill in here:
List of dysfunctional quirks that shouldn’t be allowed on a starship but are of major characters:
Assorted red shirts/dispensable characters, fill in names here:
New threatening Alien race, fill in name here:
Old threatening alien race, fill in name here:
Vulcan character(s) here:
New super weapon with boring descriptions of how it works and what it does, fill in here:
*note 10 to 20 page description will be required.
Reasons that are better then Star Wars for having massive space battles:
List sudo abstract political/religious reasons for conflicts:
Create new dictionary of techno mumbo jumbo that bogs down every story:
List of historical facts show is based on but will not ever tamper with in a direct way:

Feel free to add or subtract from the list.

So, if I can get your drift through all the sarcasm, you don’t want more re-hash of the same-old? Well, there’s always Season 2 of “The Expanse,” or reruns of “Petticoat Junction.”

Michael Hall,

Re: “Petticoat Junction.”

I always just miss the LOST IN SPACE episode where Wil reactivates the alien matter transfer device and sends his mom to the cornfields there. ;-)

Cant’ you just hear the robot bleating to Will, ‘that’s a GOOD thing you did, Will Robinson!’

actually I’ve always thought the JUNCTION, in the hands of David Lynch, could have been an awesomely subversive reboot. The crop duster knocks up ALL the girls, the Uncle is a lecherous perv, the older lady is kind of a secret Madam, and we learn the expression ‘pulling a train’ came from what the crew of the Cannonball do to people who sneak aboard without paying.And since PETTICOAT JUNCTION existed in the same universe as GREEN ACRES (and I think the BEVERLY HILLBILLIES as well), you could have had Eva Gabor find a dead girl floating in the water barrel tank seen during the credits each show – “she’s dead, Oliver – wrapped in plastic.”

Yep. The McDonalds of sci-fi!

You have an true, but unfortunate point.

I’m curious what kind of direction you would rather see?

Ugh. So if you’re not a fan of Kirk era or Klingons you’re basically screwed. I always found the Klingon episodes to be the most boring filler episodes possible, I had no interest in them.

With Bryan being pushed out there was some hope we’ll finally get some post TNG continuation, but instead it’s yet more bad news to those of us who have had nothing but bad news from day one. Just when I think it can’t get any worse, it’s pre undiscovered country crap on the cards.

I’m done with this project. It sucks beyond all expectations.

Wow, just wow… you’ve done it! Congrats! You’ve just discredited everything that is Star Trek and everything we love about Star Trek with your post… So it’s not okay to have a generic crew aboard a starship.
Rather have a band of mercs? Farscape, Dark Matter, Firefly, Killjoys… you name it… all of these already exist. Do we need a “crew” like that on Trek? Really?
What else? A lone space traveler without a crew… a Doctor maybe?
A band of rebels? Rogue One anyone?
A darker version of the Trekverse? Babylon 5? Stargate?

Seriously, you’re not just fed up with traditional Trek, you’re fed up with life… Every movie, TV show or miniseries has got more or less generic characters you’ve somewhat seen before. EVERY FREAKING ONE OF IT!

List your alternatives but don’t trample on our beloved way of perceiving Trek! Yes, I want a new crew like that… Captain, Doctor, Engineer, Helmsman, Fungus Expert…d’oh!

Still looking forward to the new show.

I wonder if Fuller crossed a line with one of the bigwigs at CBS Television, and was sanctioned.
Might they be changing the premise, and/or going in a different direction all together?
Should we forget all the tid bits we heard so far?

Seemed strange to me that Nicholas Meyer, director of ST:II, and VI, was taking a step down to be a writer for Discovery. Not to mention Eugene taking an honorary role. The whole thing seemed strange to me from the start.
Can’t wait to see some real progress.

Well, it’s conceivable Moonves embarrassed Fuller with that ‘begging’ comment a few months back. There may have been bad blood there.
As for Meyer ‘slumming’ it in a lowlier position-if that’s what some people care to call it-so what? The guy has come out of retirement to do Trek again. Three cheers, as far as most of us are concerned…

What is this ‘Understand each other’ stupidity? Trek is about exploring space and discovering new species and the situations/conflicts that come with that all while meshing current situations albeit political or whatever into provocative thought provoking stories. This really makes me worry about this show.

What part of all that doesn’t involve having to understand each other?

Star trek is coming back after almost 12 years off the air. That’s all that matters.

Sounds like Fuller wanted the new show to be a bridge (sorry) between man’s current inhumanity to man and how society gets to the “age of enlightenment” seen in other Trek productions.

Who the hell wants to pay good money to see that??!!

Me as it happens. Stop trolling.

That’s not trolling. That is simply stating an honest opinion. If I said anyone who would like to see that is a crayon-chewing bedwetter…….THAT would be trolling.

I haven’t posted on trekbbs in years, but from what I recall, your ‘crayon-chewing’ line would be considered flaming, not trolling. It was the incessant repeating of the same line of thought without new substance to back it up that was considered trolling.

In fact, now that I think of it, I’m pretty sure one time I quit that forum was over this issue, when a moderator cited me for trolling (which I don’t do) when I flamed somebody (which I was quite conscious of and freely admitted.)

@Harry Ballz

Didnt you know? If your opinion runs contrary to another’s opinion, its called trolling.

I’d like to see it too, if done well. But I don’t expect Discovery to succeed, especially if it’s done well, because the optimism and generosity of spirit that so infused the old show were a distinct product of its time and utterly foreign to ours, as evidenced by many of the comments on this very board. The world may need a great, reinvigorated Trek franchise now more than ever, but I’ve come to think we don’t deserve it.

The 60s weren’t exactly a time of enlightenment either. What made the original Star Trek work so well was that it was delivering exactly the message that people needed to hear. Hopefully Discovery will do the same.

I actually would consider the mid to late 60s to be a period of enlightenment and seeing of possibilities, with the cynicism that overtook it going full flower only in the post-Kent State years, when it seemed to sink in that no matter how you protested, the game was going to stay rigged and the toys were mostly going to stay in the big kids’ playpens.

Enterprise kind of did that. Demons/Terra Prime is a good example.

@Harry… “bridge (sorry) between man’s current inhumanity to man and how society gets to the “age of enlightenment””

If this is 10 years before Kirk & Co., the setting is much too late for that. Most of that was gone a century earlier, at least, as seen on Enterprise. Even in Enterprise, we didn’t ‘man’s inhumanity to man’, we saw ‘man fearing alien influences’ in the distrust of the Vulcans and the later Terra Prime storyline. Earth was already all kumbaya.

I think understanding eachother has always been what Star Trek is really about.

True that!

Yeah if you look at TOS most episodes was about trying to understand the other side, their attitudes, motives, etc. Thats always been the franchise as a whole.

I’d prefer: ‘Explore, have fun, learn.’ Space exploration is dangerous, but going where no man has gone before should be something thrilling.

Rogue One is poised to be an incredible movie. Hey – people in charge of Trek – pay attention to how Disney handles a property properly. Don’t create a bunch of politically correct garbage about understanding and feelings. God if I hear just one Starfleet officer demand everyone use his pronouns I’m gonna scream.

I dont know Harry, I think Hollywood can create more than one genre and more than one story. Im not sure every movie and TV show should be like Star Wars.

If they’re lucky they’re like Star Wars. Hey don’t get me wrong I love Trek. I don’t come here to troll. Everything I say about Trek I believe. I want this show to succeed and I don’t see that happening if they stay “traditional” The biggest thing I can compare it to is the Battlestar Galactica remake. Take a classic franchise and make it for modern audiences. I hope Discovery does this, however they do it. I have some doubts but I’m trying to be optimistic.

I do agree that Disney is handling SW (and the Marvel Universe) much better than Paramount is handling Star Trek. Why can’t Paramount keep giving us a Kelvin Timeline movie every three or four years, but in the meantime give us a standalone product? How about an Earth-Romulan War movie or a post-Kirk / Enterprise-B / Captain Saavik movie a Captain Worf/Klingon movie while were waiting for Bad Robot to find time in its crowded schedule for us? These don’t have to be $150 million budget tentpole films. “First Contact” was better than any of the BR movies with far less than half that budget.

Good morning crew of the Discovery. Today your captain wishes to be addressed and/or referred to by gender-neutral pronouns. Stay tuned to additional crew announcements as this situation is fluid. Please return to your safe spaces and have a micro-agression free day. That is all.

I am constantly amazed by how so many folks here seem to take one line or one description, without ever having seen a moment of the actual production, and deem it unworthy. Judgement passes at the speed of light.

Thank goodness for NDA’s! I would rather hear from the folks who are currently involved in the production. I’m still looking forward to the new show being Trek-worthy.

Sounds great! It sounds more timely now than ever. If ever we needed a show that challenged our own preconceived notions about ourselves and each other, it’s now. I hope this show can live up to that promise.

What’s the news here? Star Trek has always been about understanding ourselves —- even if its through exploring alien cultures.

…they have his number? Sounds like he was rode out on a rail. No doubt clashes and creative differences led to lots of indigestion, ulcers and, eventually, an escort out the back door. Like I said before, too many cooks in this kitchen. Not expecting much from this series…sounds like it will be heavy in latter day Roddenberry’s pie-in-the-sky Utopia. Hope not, but sure sounds like it. At least Simon Pegg is hinting at Trek 4’s development with his latest pic of him confering with co-writer Jung. That’s a little something to look forward to.

Well I believe it was GOING to be the Utopia series you mention but not now. Ironic that Fuller’s dismissal was right after he penned a couple episodes. I’m guessing CBS wants more action then what Fuller wanted to provide.

There is absolutely nothing that proves the guy was let go because of what he wrote. If THAT was the case they would’ve pulled a Bob Orci by firing him and then bring in people to completely changed his story to something totally different.

That didnt happen. NOTHING in the actual production changed. He said it himself the scripts he wrote are still being filmed. Everyone who was hired to follow his vision is still there. So I have no idea why you believe that? I dont know why its so hard to believe he left because he couldn’t give his full attention to the show, hence why its coming in May now instead of January. If anything if they dramatically changed what he did it would get delayed longer.

I always find it weird people act like all the later Roddenberry shows were just we are all one family stories when we got villains like the Borg, Dominion even Xindi. There was constant conflict in all these shows from the Maquis to even breaking off a peace treaty with the Klingons. One of the ironies about TOS is we never seen an actual war. It was a lot of cold war type stuff where war could break out but it never happened versus TNG and DS9 where war did break out. Even Voyager had constant battles with numerous groups all the time.

ALL these shows were in a state of constant conflict, the only difference Roddenberry wanted was that humans themselves would be more civil to each other and that was broken too with the Maquis and Section 31. Its not like every show were people holding hands at the end the galaxy itself was still a really mean and nasty place when it had to be, all he was suggesting was Earth would be more enlightened which it would have to be to even get to space.

Understand Each Other is a classic and grand Trek theme going back to “The Cage” and “Encounter at Farpoint” and even “The Visitor.” When Trek fandom rises above the post-9/11 obsession with special ops men and petty bickering about the Machiavellian schemes of dudes with forehead ridges they will see this.

“Understand each other”

This might be the worst pitch for any TV series (or movie) that I’ve ever seen.

I can think of more boring, less exciting, three-word pitches—paint a mailbox—but, “Understand each other” isn’t too far behind them.

Whatever the reasons for Fuller’s departure from DSC, his salesmanship style, as here recounted, does not lead me to regret his departure in the slightest. I’m sure he’s a lovely guy, but his mindset every step of the way has not seemed in tune with what this series needs in order to be successful.

I’ll take “understand each other” over good vs. evil any day of the week.

One Missing Neuron

I’ll take “understand each other” over good vs. evil any day of the week.

And I’ll take them both over painting a mailbox, but couldn’t he offer up something deeper, more pointed, less generic and more intriguing than “understand each other”?

Cygnus-X1, You sound like a very frustrated creator. You should create something other than an endless string of negative comments.

One Missing Neuron

Yes, my endless string of negative comments. From here to Rigel.

it’s going to be diplomatic in nature between the Feds and the Klingons. I’m sure skirmishes will continue etc

Everything has to boil down to some esoteric platitude or else the Hollywood PC brownshirts will attack.

Some people here may be jumping to conclusions. Fuller actually explained the specific reasons he left DSC in the full Radio Times interview:

“I couldn’t do what needed to be done in the time that they needed it done,” Fuller explained to us when we caught up with him recently. “And I felt like there was so much responsibility happening with American Gods, that it seemed like the cleanest approach to the problem.”

Hmm… A former show runner telling us what the theme of the show is bugs me. If he feels that is something he has to tell us then it is possible he fears that message will get lost on the audience. I have always felt it’s up to the viewer to decide what the theme is. That is part of art. We shall see….

LOL this is why the internet can be frustrating. The guy was asked what the show was about, he gave a VERY vague answer. He’s not fearing the message would be ‘lost’ he’s simply telling you something about it since there hasn’t been so much as a frame of the show shot yet. And I find it funny ‘understanding each other’ is now some new idea since its been part of Star Trek since day one and was at the very heart of DS9 and Voyager. Enterprise third season incorporated this theme of seeing the Xindi strictly as the enemy but in the end realize its not so black and white.

Trekmovie is throwing out 5 Undiscovered Country articles a day and that film’s theme was the very heart of trying to understand each other and maybe not a surprise why Fuller said the show would take elements from TUC in the first place.

Lets just be honest, we want some news on the show, so we are going to over analyze ever piece of it no matter how little or vague. He gave a pretty Star Trek like answer which every Star Trek producer has gave at one point and people are jumping on it as if he’s redefinig the franchise. It sounds exactly like the franchise I been watching for decades now.

“Understanding each other” sounds quite Trek-like to me. Think about “The Devil in the Dark”, or “Darmok”, or about a ton of other episodes in which this was at least one aspect of the plot!

Could this explain the divided shield in the logo? Perhaps one side of the Federation needs to teach somthing to the other side?

“Understanding each other” is the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THEME in the entire franchise!!!!

If you’re only going to get one thing out of watching any of the shows, that’s it! How can people be complaining about that is a complete mystery to me. On top of that, the show hasn’t even FILMED yet and you’re all decrying it already. There isn’t anything to complain about yet!

I have been reading this website since they announced ST09. I feel like I need to find a new site to read because these comments are getting seriously out of hand.

Ugh. So if you’re not a fan of Kirk era or Klingons you’re basically screwed. I always found the Klingon episodes to be the most boring filler episodes possible, I had no interest in them.

With Bryan being pushed out there was some hope we’ll finally get some post TNG continuation, but instead it’s yet more bad news to those of us who have had nothing but bad news from day one. Just when I think it can’t get any worse, it’s pre undiscovered country crap on the cards.

I’m done with this project. It sucks beyond all expectations.


Agree with you re: the Klingon episodes. Klingons, the Borg, any recurring and/or vengeance-seeking bad guys. It’s the constant dumbing-down of storytelling to fall back time after time on somebody with a grudge as the villain of the piece. Just boring and stupid. Pffft!

Understand each other (as long as the other isn’t a white straight Christian Conservative male, they aren’t welcome). That seems to be the case with the far left liberals and progressives now running most TV shows these days.

Understand each other…as long as the other believes everything I do. That seems to be the case with the far left liberals and progressives running most TV shows these days.

Believe whatever you want – it’s when people think that their beliefs should become law for everyone (make it legal to fire gays or limit travel based on religion) that the problems start.

Equal rights and protections under the law should be for everyone, period. People disagreeing with your views on the internet doesn’t violate any rights or affect you life, family or livelihood.

I thought the theme was “make all the main strong prominent characters female and the one white male human gay”.

No thats just your silly paranoia on anyone who isn’t white or a man. Its really hard to believe some of you are Star Trek fans.

Jumping the gun a little, bleating about a majority female DISC when we haven’t yet had a complete cast list.

I think the point of Discovery is to allow all the bigots and homophones within the Trek fandom to identify themselves so we can ignore them.

1. ‘Discovery’ is about a never before seen event mentioned in TOS.
2. ‘I am fascinated Amanda Grayson’s character.’
3. Them is “Understand each other.”

Jefferies Tuber:
Discovery is about development of the Universal Translator.

It can kind of be all those things. The first two are just plot and character possibilities. The third one is the general theme of the show. This isn’t hard, he’s simply stating different aspects of the show.

What might fascinate him about Amanda is the fact this clearly intelligent and thoughtful human fell in love with a cold and foreign alien at a time when there was clearly bigotry.

Fuller could be hinting at exploring the differences in species (and thus the differences in humanity) by understanding why Amanda did that and what she faced/sacrificed in doing so.

Hoshi Sato invented the universal translator and it pretty much worked flawlessly by the end of Enterprise.

Man, that’s disappointing. I wasn’t aware ENT had done the UT.

“Understand each other” reminds me of the SEINFELD TV show premise, “A show about nothing.” Saying that the show is about understand[ing] each other is barely one step advanced from saying that the show is about people interacting with each other and doing things. It’s like the Pakleds wrote the premise for the show: We make shows. Shows about people doing things.

He gave a simple theme you people are being ridiculous. Brent Spiner once said TNG was about family does that mean its JUST about family, of course not, but it was a theme that became stronger as time went on. Its amazing how people can take something so innocent and vague and make it sound like its the thing ever said. Relax, moan when the actual show comes.


Brent Spiner once said TNG was about family…

But, that was AFTER the show was on the air. He wasn’t the head creative of the show pitching it to an audience that knows absolutely nothing else about what the show is going to be like. Fuller should be trying to intrigue and excite people about the show. And “understand each other” ain’t doing it. At least, not for this prospective viewer.

You are missing my point. Do you honestly believe after 7 seasons and multiple films Spiner thinks TNG is JUST about family??? Of course not, its about many things he was simply throwing out one answer he felt about it. No one got on the guy’s case about it it was simply his personal feeling with a pap answer.

All Fuller said was that was a theme of the show he never claimed it was the ONLY theme nor did he say thats what the entire show would be about, he’s talking about the first season. And Fuller doesn’t have to ‘intrigue’ and ‘excite’ anyone, when the actual promotion of the show happens, ie, trailers and characters that will hopefully do tat. The guy was just there to basically say why he isn’t on the show anymore. That was the main point to even having the discussion. Look you’re watching it regardless why don’t you wait to see footage before you decide its the worst thing ever?

And you want to know whats crazy? I don’t even like the premise of Discovery. I think the prequel idea may back fire on it with Enterprise and the ship look like a joke and YET I’m oddly here defending it. Why? Because regardless of my personal feelings I’m not going to write off a show until I actually WATCH it. Yes I’m concerned too but I don’t judge anything until there is actually something to judge. And something as vague as ‘understand each other’ that every Trek show has highlighted hundreds of times by now gives me hope they are sticking to formula about what Star Trek is ultimately about for anyone whose been paying attention.


And Fuller doesn’t have to ‘intrigue’ and ‘excite’ anyone, when the actual promotion of the show happens, ie, trailers and characters that will hopefully do tat.

No, you’re missing my point, if you think that the creator of a TV series giving a lame, unintriguing pitch about his show doesn’t matter. Fuller’s comment does not intrigue or excite me about the show. That’s all there is to it.

This isn’t the ‘pitch’ man, he made it a month ago when he broke down what the show is about. This is just telling you what the basic theme would be.

Jesus I can’t get Trek fans, you guys are some of the most annoying nitpicky people on the planet and I AM a Trek fan. When was the last time you were happy with anything in Star Trek? If you say DS9, TNG or TOS why are you still bothering with Star Trek??? That was decades ago, why are you still discussing it at all?

NOTHING is going to make people like you happy and yet here you are, daily, talking about Star Trek. It boggles the mind. You have already determined the show probably won’t be worth your time over 3 words. Forget you haven’t seen a frame of the show yet. They haven’t showed us the whole cast or what the conflict is. But you sound like you already made up your mind. Yes thats all there is to it.

It boggles the mind ANYONE keeps trying to make Star Trek at this rate. Nothing pleases most fans it seems.

And then we wonder why there isn’t more Trek on or why it took 11 years just to get another show.

Take your meds.

Stop posting about the Roddenberry Vault already. We all seen it.

By your command:

Sorry, but this is the ‘2nd coming’ for the original fans.


PS – It will also be the fans who will do the most interesting edits incorporating the new footage variations etc into the old.

And still nobody cares.

That’s right you don’t.

I will say its a consensus at this point.


I have no issue with what Fuller said especially within the confines of not revealing anything. He could probably have given a better answer if he wasnt cognizant of saying NOTHING that revealed anything whatsoever.

And realistically, its an idea that makes sense within our current world. One could guess, now that we know more, that perhaps the Klingons and Starfleet are unified to fight a greater good and have to work together.

Hopefully they dont ignore canon, especially that which is to come in this timeline.

You could have the kling and fed leads come together in a peaceful way, only to have politco types above them sabotage the perfect moment. If you’ve ever seen WORLD WAR III, a Reagan-era miniseries with Rock Hudson and David Soul (no, don’t walk away yet, it actually has a great ending, Brian Keith and Jeroen Krabbe more than make up for Cathy Lee Crosby as a CIA agent), that would be an interesting model for DISCOVERY, because it has this utterly-TREK like moment right BEFORE the end, which then goes in another direction altogether.

at any rate, you could do something like that for DISCOVERY and still have them on the verge of war in time for Organia.

@TUP “And realistically, it’s an idea that makes sense within our current world”

Exactly. We seem more divided than ever.


This isn’t the ‘pitch’ man, he made it a month ago when he broke down what the show is about. This is just telling you what the basic theme would be.

It doesn’t matter when he said it. It is a pitch. This is all promotion for the show. Why the hell do you think that Fuller is giving interviews and speaking publicly about a show that he created by contract for CBS—for his health? It’s all to promote the show, which is supposed to be aimed at getting people EXCITED about the show. You follow? Motivating those CBS All Access subscriptions, see? That’s how commerce works, and more specifically, microeconomics. Fuller tries to give consumers a reason to choose to spend their hard-earned quatloos on CBS All Access instead of on something else. I keep regular office hours if there’s any further information you might need on marketing, economic and strategic communications issues. My door’s wide open. The tea I can provide, perhaps even the milk. Low fat.

Cygnus-X1, Why don’t you create something original and get it published rather than spending your time bashing things that don’t even exist yet? That’s what I do, and I don’t find myself angry and frustrated at things I don’t like. I try to find things I do enjoy. I don’t waste my time going to sites of things I don’t like and complaining about them.

One Missing Neuron

Firstly, what I want is to be excited about DSC, and for it to be a great show. If you’ve read my criticism, you should know that I’m not bashing the show—which would be impossible, being that no one has yet seen it—but rather the way in which the show is being promoted. I strongly suspect (jeez, I hope!) that DSC is more intriguing and exciting than simply “understanding each other.” Fuller’s is a very generic, nondescript, non-pointed, uncompelling way of pitching the theme of the show to a prospective audience that knows next to nothing about it. The goal is to get people EXCITED about the show. DSC might well be about “understanding each other,” but it most likely (jeez, I hope!) goes into more specific detail, purpose and meaning than Fuller’s comment makes it seem. DSC likely delves deeper than the rather milquetoast summary of Fuller’s comment. That is the nature and purpose of my criticism. And I don’t write fiction, but best of luck to you in your fiction-writing endeavors. And I appreciate your taking such an interest in my well-being.


Love reading all the knee jerk reactions to a show before a single story has been revealed, nor a single frame shot.

understand each other
i like the idea of that, from a culture , individual perspective,wars and conflict break out because we do not understand each way of life

Apparently some basic definition of terms is required in this thread.

There’s a difference between the content of a show and the promotion of that show.

Being that DSC has not yet been seen by anyone, it is impossible to criticize the content of that show. This article and the interview that it covers are related to the the promotion of DSC.

Hopefully that clears things up, and I thank you for your support.

Hey Cyg, did you get around to watching Beyond? I might have missed your review on another thread…

Y’know, I think ‘understand each other’ wouldn’t have turned into such a thing if Fuller had just phrased it differently. There’s the old adage that goes something like this, “‘the king died, then the queen died’ is a statement, but ‘the king died, because the queen died,’ is a plot.” If Fuller had said “understand each other – or suffer the consequences,” it might still sound simplistic, but have a context that reads as dramatic.

It sounds fine exactly as he said it.

If it had, you and cyg wouldn’t have wasted a day going back and forth over it – CYG is way too sharp to waste that much text on a non-starter of a notion.

Cyg will be watching the show as you will be. The only thing wasted is stating the obvious.

I just went through your other posts in this thread. Your heart may be in the right place about TREK, but I don’t want to hazard a guess about where-up-yours you keep your head.

And that’s pretty highhanded of you to say that we’ll be watching like it is a foregone conclusion. CYG told everybody he’d skip BEYOND in theaters and he did. I promised him I wouldn’t see it theatrically till after a few weeks passed, and I did (surprisingly, twice, as I skipped 09 happily and only saw ID in cinemas because my wife likes Cumberbatch.) I’ll be watching the first free ep on CBS because I’ll almost certainly be writing about the cinematography and/or VFX, for International Cinematographers Guild magazine or whatever HD VIDEO PRO winds up calling itself next year. As for further episodes … that’s by no means a done deal, or even a likely one.

Yeah and CYG will be watching too. No he didn’t see Beyond because he already saw the others and knew what he was getting in the final product. Thats fine and reasonable. I don’t love the KT films either btw but I actually supported him NOT to watch it when we talked here months ago. I doubt he remembers but we did. I had zero issues about that.

But listening to you people whine over the smallest things are just sad. Sorry, truly sad.

WATCH the first episode to judge. Or hell at least wait for a freakin review of the episode and judge. Thats again is reasonable. If what you see or hear is not to your liking, quit, you gave it a fair chance. I’m not getting on anyone’s case if they don’t love it, I quit Enterprise by episode 7 (although went back years later…love it now lol).

But MOANING about some quickie interview over three words, Jesus freakin Christ! Trek fans can be an embarrassment. Even the Star Wars fans are not this anal and they are pretty anal.

Anyway fine its just always so eye rolling beyond belief.


BTW,I started watching that “Special Bulletin” docu-drama that you recommended, on YouTube. I can see why you were so captivated by it. Haven’t finished it yet, but am curious how it resolves.

Wow, it is on youtube? I’m caught in a snow day here, think I might treat myself.


Cyg will be watching the show as you will be. The only thing wasted is stating the obvious.

Just who are you disputing here? I never said that I wasn’t going to give the show a chance. But, I want to be EXCITED about watching it. I don’t want it to be just another thing on my to-do list that I eventually get around to. And I want the show to sound exciting to audiences generally.

Where does “make great science fiction” come into play there?

It doesn’t.