Michael Chabon Named ‘Star Trek: Picard’ Showrunner

Today CBS released an announcement that Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon has been named the showrunner of Star Trek: Picard. With others like Kirsten Beyer, Akiva Goldsman, and James Duff also seen in the writers’ room last September it wasn’t clear who was taking the lead. Now we know! The announcement said that Chabon is working closely on the day-to-day production of the series with producers Akiva Goldsman and Alex Kurtzman.

Michael Chabon

Michael Chabon at the Secret Hideout offices

Chabon is quoted as saying:

Star Trek’ has been an important part of my way of thinking about the world, the future, human nature, storytelling and myself since I was ten years old. I come to work every day in a state of joy and awe at having been entrusted with the character and the world of Jean-Luc Picard, with this vibrant strand of the rich, intricate and complex tapestry that is ‘Trek.’

Alex Kurtzman, who oversees the CBS Trek franchise, voiced his support for Chabon:

Daring, lyrical, humane, whimsical, celebrated: words that describe both Jean-Luc Picard and the literary genius of Michael Chabon, despite a laundry list of accomplishments most writers only dream of, Michael shines with the heart and soul of a Trekkie who’s finally found his dream job. We’re so fortunate to have him at the helm as we explore this next chapter in the great captain’s life.

Chabon the TV/Movie writer

While this is Chabon’s first time showrunning and he’s primarily known for his literary works, he’s not a total stranger to Hollywood. Most notable to Trek fans is that he wrote the Short Treks episode “Calypso.” He also wrote a version of Sam Rami’s Spider-Man 2, and the screenplay for Disney’s John Carter. He’s also co-creator and producer on the upcoming Netflix series Unbelievable, which was created by his wife Ayelet Waldman.

Star Trek: Picard is expected to be released in late 2019. It will be available on CBS All Access in the USA. Space and CraveTV in Canada, and on Amazon Prime Video for the rest of the world.

Keep up with all the Star Trek: Picard news at TrekMovie.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The presence of Michael Chabon on the project inspires confidence. The continuing presence of Akiva Goldsman does not. Hopefully the Picard show will live up to its potential.

So the guy who won an Oscar for “A Beautiful Mind” and has been a procucer on “Fringe”, “Titans”, “Hancock”, “I am Legend” and wrote the screenplay for “Cinderella Man” and “Davinci Code” dosen’t inspire you confidence because he wrote a batman movie that didn’t please you early in his career?

Maybe it’s not because he wrote a Batman movie, but because he produced Discovery? ;)

Thing is, he knows nothing about Star Trek, and neither does Kurtzman. Sure, one could argue that Harve Bennett didn’t know anything about Star Trek either; the difference is that Harve Bennett was willing (and able) to learn, while Kurtz&Golds are still working on trial-and-error basis.

I don’t get this argument, Discovery was good so far, and will get better like all Trek does in the third season.

I really am so over the whole I hate Discovery thing

amen… i wish they’d shut up or just leave the fandom… they hate everything why hang around?

Not liking one series =/= hating everything.
Heck, it’s been my experience that people who like discovery tend to hate every other Trek series.

Yeah, people who hate seeing their favorite franchise for fifty years ruined should just shut up, right?

The only place it’s ruined is in your head.

really? do you follow this stuff? trek fanboys hate the new movies… they hate the new series… they hate the trek shorts… that covers the last 10 years… and they pre-hate everything coming up because blah blah kurtzman blah blah goldsan etc… then they hated nemesis… enterprise… insurrection… holy freak man when was the last trek thing that everyone liked? it was first contact 20 years ago. trek fans are miserable people for some reason…

You speak the truth.

I can only speak for myself, but I — who get closer to hating Discovery than loving it — hang around because Star Trek is considerably more than just Discovery. Discovery, in fact, is just a tiny portion of it. I hang around because of the rest, which I’ve been a fan of since the mid-seventies (literally as long as I can remember). I’m not going anywhere because some lousy new show has fans that don’t like hearing about how lousy it is.

I don’t blame anyone for liking (or loving) it; it’s flashy and entertaining and has a great cast. But it’s also got a LOT of problems, and I personally feel no obligation to tread softly for fear of breaking the heart of someone who honestly thinks this is good Star Trek.

“I can only speak for myself, but…”

In this post, you speak for myself as well. Well done.

You also speak for me, Bryant.

You guys should all get a room.

I don’t disagree with you too much Bryant but the show has grown on me more. I don’t feel its AS Star Trek as the others but it made great strides to feel more like classic Trek in season 2 at least. But as much more I like the show, it still has a ton of flaws. But we have to remind ourselves so did most of the shows when they started. And they are doing everything they can to make the show something fans want, now even throwing it 800 years into the future to just be its own thing and not a quasi TOS prequel which I honestly thought we were getting in season 3. Thank god they didn’t go that route even though I really liked Pike and Spock. But Discovery should stand on its own and now they have the chance to do that.

Hopefully next season it will feel like the show many fans still feel its missing but people can’t say they aren’t trying either.

sure. we hate everything… we are fear mongers and propably nazis. Just because we dislike discovery…

Do you know what you are missing?
The grey…

World isnt just black and white!

Well it hasn’t been good for everybody lol. Certainly not for me in its first season. But I do agree most Trek shows improve in time and while season 2 was more mixed for me in the end, I definitely enjoyed most of it and it was infinitely better than season 1 by a mile. Hopefully the show will follow the Star Trek tradition of its third season being its break out season like it was for most of the other shows. With a new premise and setting set for season 3 it gives them a chance to do literally anything they want with it now.

Its so odd. Discovery had, by far, the strongest season 1 of any Trek series since TOS.

Discovery is the best Star Trek I have ever seen.

I wouldn’t go that far right now, but I think that it does have the potential to become the best Star Trek.

Only if you’re talking strongest in terms of body odor.

Come on kmart. You’re better than that.

Hey, I give lengthy responses here all the time that detail my positions; those should buy me an occasional ‘punchline’ reply.

I am wondering why it took this long for him to be named. The first thing I thought was he is the only guy there that Stewart believes in, trusts and/or wants to deal with. And actually that has been my only thought about it.

Oh, god. You’re one of those.
Being decent most of the time doesn’t entitle or buy you any opportunities to be rude and tacky. If you’re going to be that guy, at least don’t be spineless about it. Ugh.

I wasn’t being rude/tacky, I was just taking the low road for a change, living down to the post I was addressing. Feel free to do likewise if it fills you w/ cheer.

“Its so odd. Discovery had, by far, the strongest season 1 of any Trek series since TOS.”

Legate Damar, this is what we call an opinion. No offense, but it is no way in hell for me Discovery first season was the best since TOS lol. In fact its at the BOTTOM of my list as one of the worst Star Trek shows first season. The ONLY shows I thought were worse was TNG and ENT and its basically tied with Enterprise if I’m being honest. The Klingon war was sooooooooo boring!!! And all those subtitles and speaking like they are reading off of cue cards, MAKE IT STOP!!!!

I didn’t like ANYBODY outside of Lorca, Saru and Georgiou and we know what happened to two of them. Stamets grew on me by the end though. I was starting to like Culbert and then. I actually DID like Tyler at first and then. I didn’t hate Michael like others but she wasn’t my favorite either. And it just didn’t feel like Star Trek to me. It felt like some BSG hybrid of Star Trek. I won’t get into how it looked like nothing like the 23rd century, thats been talked about a lot.

You know how I know I didn’t like season 1 much? Because I never rewatched it. I’ve had AA the entire time too. I never cancelled since I got it back in early 2017. DS9 season 1 wasn’t great but I’ve seen that season over and over again anyway, just a few months ago in fact for my rewatch. DIS I’ve seen only three episodes more than twice. Only three. I have no interest, NONE, to watch season 1 again as a whole and it was only 15 episodes. I had planned to before season 2. I literally could NOT motivate myself to do it. So I rewatched the finale again and it was reminder of much the first season sucked for me.

Now it doesn’t mean it can’t change but believe it or not, many fans really had a lot issues with this show. So much so season 2 was basically a reboot of season 1 which tells you they KNEW many fans had an issue with the show. And improved a lot in my eyes but still not perfect.

And now season 3 looks to be an even BIGGER reboot which no Trek show has ever gotten. DS9 is probably the other show that got a big overhaul but they didn’t throw the station in the gamma quadrant or send it back in time. It was still the same show, they just added a war story line to it.

Hopefully season 3 will improve on the first two seasons with whatever they have planned. Most Trek shows do get better as they go so I’m really hoping next season is where I fall in love with it. I wish it was post Nemesis on day one, but it was no guarantee we would’ve gotten a better show and its still not now.

I would agree that Discovery was the best season one since TOS.

That’s subjective really. I’d argue Discovery was particularly poor in really establishing characters for the first season especially (still an issue S2 as well).

Discovery S1 is not re-watchable for me (not yet anyway), or it’s not a show I’m in a hurry to go back too that’s for sure.
Sure TNG had a crappy (or campy!) first season, but it had some really fun and interesting stuff early on, and the characters all felt defined by the time S2 started. Same goes for DS9 and VOY IMO. Discovery is trying to be something different for modern viewers and I get that.
I want the show to do well like anyway one else. Hopefully the Post-TOS Star Trek S3 renaissance tradition continues for Discovery.

Discovery is an entertaining show, but it isn’t good *Star Trek*. That is the issue people have. It is trying to appeal to a broader audience, which is fine for the bottom line, but probably just shooting itself in the foot in the long run.

If AK “knows nothing about Star Trek” after so many years writing alongside Bob Orci and being immersed in those films + 2 years of DISCO and all these new projects, then I must be missing something. I don’t think Rick Berman came running in from the Federation Trading Post with his ears on either. It’s people like Chabon that need to be on payroll so that canon and the Roddenberry ideal are kept in the forefront when they craft concepts and stories, show what they look like, and cast the actors who perform in them.

Oh, boy! Is this trope getting old…..

>> the difference is that Harve Bennett was willing (and able) to learn, while Kurtz&Golds are still working on trial-and-error basis.<<

New century, same old whining. This is some of the same blather that was said about Rick Berman and Brannon Braga. Berman who only produced about 500% more Trek than Roddenberry, and Braga who was RDM's writing partner and fellow fanboy – and produced around 10 years of Trek.


Re: 500% more

More, in and of itself, does not equate to better – check your prescription medicine cabinet for the numerous problems associated with partaking of too much.


Re: Harve Bennett didn’t know anything about Star Trek either

Actually Harve was dating a Trekkie prior to being asked to do STAR TREK. He later married then divorced her. After the divorce, he didn’t seem much interested in relating the part of the story where he jumped at the chance to do STAR TREK because of what he knew it would do for his wooing, or that he endured her watching episodes ad infinitum prior to being asked, and would question why they were watching a particular episode, again, by its title when she knew all the lines by heart.

Other than Fringe, none of the projects you list were particularly good. Fringe does inspire some confidence.

According to whom?

“According to whom?”

This is just a guess but I would say…. According to Just Another Salt Vampire?

Oh good. I thought it might be according to some Gospel or any other dogmatic source. Much relieved. Perhaps next time Just Another Salt Vampire could preface his comment with “I think that,” so that everyone sees clearly he is stating an opinion, not a fact.

OR, maybe the reader can recognize things that are obviously opinion so writers can just speak their mind without having to add disclaimers that state the amazingly obvious?

Just a thought.

Having anything to do with The DaVinci Code should not inspire any confidence.

He wrote hancock? Dear Lord we are dommed!
Hancock is such a terrible, terrible movie! Mostly because of the story…
Also Dvinci Code… urg. I am Legends… urg…

TyanaZai’s post pretending that Akiva Goldsman is Shakespeare reincarnated is hilarious. I am amused how he tries to hide the fact that Goldsman also wrote Batman & Robin (Metascore: 28/100), Rings (Metascore: 25/100), Lost in Space (Metascore: 42/100), Transformers: The Last Knight (Metascore: 27/100), The 5th Wave (Metascore: 33/100), Batman Forever (Metascore: 51/100), The Dark Tower (Metascore: 34/100), Silent Fall (Metascore: 22/100), Insurgent (Metascore: 42/100), Winter’s Tale (Metascore: 31/100), and a ton of other terrible films panned by critics.

I guess TyanaZai must be living in a parallel universe where Goldsman is considered Earth’s greatest living author and where his screenplays are revered by aliens on distant planets who mistakenly assume they are clever satire.

What’s your beef with Akiva? Not an Akiva fan or anything, I’m just curious, because I am not aware of any demonstrable/objective incidents in DSC development that would justify singling him out. Dude is as hardcore and knowledgeable a professional Star Trek fan as anyone in the industry. I respect that.

Akiva probably cut him off in traffic once.

Probably that he’s affiliated with Kurtzman. That’s plenty, for some people….and just a touch on the irrational, unfortunately.

He was there, he saw what’s happening and he did nothing to fix it. Discovery isn’t just bad Star Trek, it’s bad storytelling – and he did nothing to make it good. Isn’t that quite enough?

One show that you irrationally dislike? No, that’s not enough.

Says who, by any chance the most recognized storytelling specialist in the world? I’d say Akiva’s resume puts him over you on who’s a storytelling specialist, but that’s just a wild guess, of course. :-P

I often wonder if some of the more…. vocal detractors (in general, not necessarily on here, although some have close) of the show and this new era simply write it off because of Mr. Kurtzman’s involvement.

Exactly. He directed two episodes and wrote the screenplay for a grand total of 1 episode…the pilot, with Bryan Fuller. Sure he was a producer, but he wasn’t the showrunner.

What a bunch of nonsense — he’s an Oscar winner and done ton’s of great movies, etc. Weird comment???

He’s also done tons of lousy movies.

You are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. The movie he won the Oscar for is considered by many critics to be a bad movie. He is responsible for Batman and Robin and the 1998 Lost in Space, among many other cinematic atrocities. No Oscar will absolve him of that.

On the plus side he did some good work on Fringe.

Batman and Robin is the fault of the studio and it’s director. Schumacher has repeatedly apologized for not understanding the characters beyond the Adam West show and the studio’s toy driven demands; including on the director’s commentary for both of his films.

John Logan has an Oscar too, though it was for a film he stopped working on something like 7 years before it came out, so the specifics of how much of his material was in the film are suspect. And the list of brilliant artists who don’t have Oscars, either for political reasons or just silly oversight, pretty nearly overshadows those who have won. I’m seriously tired of winning an oscar being the measure of success — it’s nearly as poor a call as basing everything on box office.

The question is, why the hell did the studio execs release the film at all? Did they watch it? What the hell were they thinking, that the film deserved to be put out to the public!?

Just another SALTY Vampire is more like it.

I’m watching my sodium intake, so not TOO salty.

Based on your comments i’d say you’re failing at it.

Picard has always been my least favorite captain. Started rewatching TNG on Netflix. Now, I don’t think he is so bad. Riker is still a *hole, and Data should never allowed on the bridge

This is a…. unique opinion. But it’s just that. An opinion.

is it really nescecary to say: “This is your Oppinion” / “This is my Oppinion” and all that after every .. opinnion? We know that! at least we should!

maybe to differentiate himself from those with single-p Opinions?

I tend to agree. Some posters get all bent out of shape when someone writes something like, “tomatoes are terrible!” It is obvious to all this is a subjective comment and there no need to announce it as such. The common foolish response is, “you present your opinions as if they are facts.” (eyeroll)

I think it is really important to state whether it is an opinion or a fact.

Here are some facts to back it up:

Here are some facts to back it up:

I don’t feel the need to write “DISCLAIMER: OPINIONS AHEAD” on everything I write because some ignorant people can’t distinguish between fact and opinion, according to THE NATIONAL REVIEW.



Well the nightshade family of plants ARE quite notorious – don’t cha know?

Interesting. For me, Picard is down there with Archer as the least interesting captain. Which is weird because Picard is played by arguably the best actor to ever lead a Trek show. I wouldn’t say Riker is an A-hole but he sure is nearly as dull as his captain. And I was never fascinated with Data. The entire concept of Data was a head scratcher from day one. And I felt the show really hit its low point when they went all Days of Our Lives on us and threw in Data’s evil twin.

Well ML31, this entire thread seems rationale enough for Kurtzman’s strategy of moving away from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to Trek.

Not all Trek fans like the same things or value the same aspects of the franchise.

This certainly doesn’t seem like it should be a novel concept give the 50 year history of Trek fandom and all the vehemently held differences in opinions.

But it seems that a lot of us can’t seem to get past the ‘there should be only one – and it’s the one I want most’ point of view.

I wouldn’t disagree with much of that. Although I don’t really see it as a reply to my post since there doesn’t seem to be anything to connect it to what I said.

“But it seems that a lot of us can’t seem to get past the ‘there should be only one – and it’s the one I want most’ point of view.”

I wouldn’t say a lot. But there are some. I really think most are totally fine with the more than one type of Trek concept.

Totally agree with this, and think it’s the right approach for Trek. Disney keeps CLAIMING they’re going to make all different kinds of Star Wars movies, but they all wind up feeling the same.

But I definitely think there’s room for a flashy/action Trek, a dark drama, a thoughtful character piece, an animated adult comedy, and a kids cartoon. I’d love to also see them launch a family-friendly (but not kids-oriented) series– which sounds perfect for Pike’s 1701!

I also STILL would love to see Archer return and lead a Romulan War series, even if it’s just a single season one-and-done kind of thing. They were clearly building up to it, and having it take place 15 years after “Terra Prime” would work perfectly.

Would love to see Archer back in the midst of the Romulan! Even if its just a mini-series. The biggest missed opportunity Enterprise did was not build to that from the beginning.


Interesting indeed…

Completely respect your opinion, of course, each to their own.

TNG was my introduction to Star Trek so I’ve always held it in really high regard. Not saying it doesn’t have its flaws, but I suspect it will probably always be my personal favourite.

Without a doubt, Picard is my favourite Captain of the lot. Aside from Patrick Stewart’s incredible performance; he was that aspirational figure (a bit like Superman, dare I say) and almost like a father figure for the crew, yet showed some real vulnerability at times too.

Probably one of the finest examples of a man of principle in ANY drama (imho). Plus, on a lighter note, I always enjoyed his socially-awkward ‘straight man’ in some of the more comic scenes.

I should clarify this all by saying that I do really like the characters of Kirk, Sisko and Janeway too. Archer took a little longer to grow on me.

Main reason for this post though; I absolutely LOVED Lore as a character. He’s up there with my all-time favourite villains!! I always looked forward to any appearance by him.

That sinister twist on such a pleasant character (Data). His cruel, mocking joviality, coupled with a perpetual jealousy and ruthless ambition. Plus, a bit of a tragic backstory which made him…not sympathetic, but relatable perhaps. Always got the impression that Brent Spiner relished performing the role too.

For me, I don’t think I’d have enjoyed TNG as much without those two characters being exactly the way they were (oh, and John de Lancie’s Q too).

Anyway, just thought that was worth sharing…

Keeping up with the Cardassians,

TNG was my introduction to Roddenberry taking his denied GENESIS II and THE QUESTOR TAPES pilots and redressing them in updated Trek trappings, which I had to respect because he had successfully done it before, but I never felt a strong connection to TOS because of that. Especially when it was abundantly clear Berman was threatened by TOS’ success which caused him to most often unnecessarily deprecate it when fans would bring up the prior work.

Fair enough, Keeping up.

Although I am surprised ad your admiration of Lore. To me it was nothing but a daytime soap cliche and felt like the writers had hit a huge wall when they went there. (Maybe I found the contraction thing too unbelievable) But to each his own.

Yeah, I do see where you’re coming from here. The whole:

Data; that unique, one-of-a-kind android, suddenly has a TWIN BROTHER!! And he just so happens to be…EVIL!!

…is ridiculously melodramatic (and worthy of the worst soap opera) when looked at like that.

It was the character himself though (Spiner’s performance) which really drew me in, rather than the story setup.

That said; I always thought the idea of Lore being something of a failed prototype, whose instability led directly to his ‘brother’s’ creation, as a pretty clever backstory which totally explained Lore’s attitude & resentments perfectly.

Whenever I would think of my favourite villains; the likes of Hannibal Lecter, Darth Vader, The Joker, Mr Burns, Saruman, Pennywise, Moriarty and the Wicked Witch (Oz), I would always think of Lore somewhere among them.

I liked him THAT much!

I do struggle to think of any Lore scenes I didn’t enjoy. Plus, he was always used sparingly throughout the series and so never felt overexposed (to me).

I guess I just always assumed that he was a popular character in general.

I’m genuinely curious now as to which of us is in the minority on this (probably me) or whether Lore is a character who has always split fan opinion.

This is wonderful news on just about every level I can imagine. If you ever wanted to see a writer of proven ability put in charge of a Trek show, this is it. While he’s only written one novel that could properly be called SF (THE YIDDISH POLICEMAN’S UNION), and one of sword-and-sorcery fantasy, his love of science and the genre of the fantastic comes through in everything he writes, most notably the Pulitzer-winning THE AMAZING ADVENTURES OF KAVALIER AND CLAY.

The only possible downside is that showrunning is a full-time gig that will take time away from producing novels, which is really what Chabon was put on this earth to do. But Trek fans won, and won big time, with this announcement.

It’s a book aimed at middle schoolers, but I would recommend his Summerland. An interesting fantasy mixture of baseball and Pacific Northwest Native American mythology, crossed with the child travels to a magical land trope.

Great news! Let Michael Chabon and Kirsten Beyer guide this show. And please don’t let a single episode have anything to do with Section 31.

God I hope Section 31 shows up in the Picard show. That would rock.

What if S31 was somehow involved in the destruction of Romulus? As in, they knew it would happen and did nothing, or worse, were actively involved in helping it happen, as a way of eliminating a major foreign power.

That said, it might be too close to other Trek episodes and movies, like TUC, Insurrection, etc.

Last time we saw Section 31 interacting with Romulus, they seemed content just to put a spy on the Confinuuing Comittee.

Content? Or just the best they could do at the time?

I always wondered if that supernova was a natural event. I don’t think S31 would do that though.

OR as many suspected about Pearl Harbor, they found out it was going to happen, and didn’t try to stop it. Or worse, actively sabotaged Spock’s attempt to stop the supernova.

Beyer has been listed as supervising producer…

Although there have also been references of a continuing role keeping track of continuity and canon for the Discovery writers room.

The expression in “takes the REINS”. You’re welcome. :-)

The expression is “the expression is.”


Nomad has made an error and now must self-sterilize … with rubbing alcohol.

As a college instructor myself, when I provide feedback to a student regarding typos, wording, and other sentence-level issues on their draft, I *always* proofread my comments extensively, for exactly this reason.

This is why I’m not a teacher. :-)

Duh. :-P

Right on…looking forward to the depth and quality of writing I’m very hopeful this show will demonstrate.

I thought Chabon’s use of the word “tapestry” was a nice nod to fans.

Glad I’m not the only one who caught that….

On that tapestry note … keep fingers crossed, might be getting to interview Ron Moore next month. Met him briefly during a pitch session in 1990, seemed a genuinely nice guy who was passionate about his storytelling choices.

Good thing or bad thing ?

Time will tell?

Presumably, good. His work was among the better aspects of Discovery. At the very least, he knows how to write good characters.

I don’t know why people are so in love with this guy. Calypso was indeed the best of the 4 Short Treks. But that is not enough for me to think the show is in fantastic hands. Put me in the “wait and see” category. This Picard show still has the potential to be anywhere from great trek to Colossal failure. And I am not prepared to say that Mr. Chabon’s presence is enough to change those odds.

A question I do have is… Was he the show runner all along and it was made public just now or did the show have no leader and they decided they needed one?

Don’t worry they will be calling him the devil soon enough. Star Trek fans are weird.

As for your last question. I always assumed that he was the showrunner. I guess this is just the first time they have officially announced it.

Maybe his having won a Pulitzer and having written a score of great novels besides has something to do with our enthusiasm. No guarantee that “Picard” will be a great show, of course — Trek legend is rife with SF novelists like A.E. Van Vogt who ultimately were unable to produce workable teleplays— but it bodes incredibly well for the quality of the writing we may get to see regardless.

Harlan Ellison wrote a great Trek script that won a Hugo, too. But I don’t think I would have him running any shows.

Look, I don’t really know this guy from Adam. But it feels odd that everyone is loving his addition. People thought having Fuller on board was a good idea, too. Look how THAT turned out….

You don’t know him from Adam — meaning, literally, you’re unfamiliar with the work he’s done, yet you chide the rest of us who may be familiar with his work for being excited about his hire. Yeah, that makes sense.

As to Harlan Ellison: he wrote, in the opinion of everyone involved in Trek’s first season, a brilliant teleplay that was nevertheless not consistent with the characterizations of the Trek principals and not filmable on a television budget. That script went on to win the Writer’s Guild award. Steve Carabatsos, D.C. Fontana, Gene Coon, and Gene Roddenberry re-wrote the script into the version that aired, and went on to win the Hugo. Trek would have been lucky indeed to have Ellison as a showrunner, though the end result would surely have been vastly different than the series we remember. Some of Fuller’s ideas for Discovery I really liked; others not so much. Since he was let go when the show was still in pre-production it’s very difficult to say if his version would have been better or worse. Who knows?

Again, no one is saying that Chabon’s hire means that “Picard” is a slam-dunk. (I doubt that Chabon, who is notoriously self-effacing in spite of his literary bona fides, would make such a claim himself.) But it certainly bodes well for the series; better, certainly, than if Akiva Goldsman had gotten the gig instead. This seems to be a pretty inarguable point; but then, you just love to argue about everything.

I’m not “chiding” anyone. That’s your own low self esteem talking there. I only said I don’t understand where the confidence comes from. If you feel that’s an assault I can’t help you.

It’s only inarguable if everyone agreed that everything Gabon touches turns to gold. That has definitely NOT been the case. And don’t dance around the facts. The vast majority of the problems with Discovery seemed to be traced straight back to Fuller. The very same person a lot of people, myself included, felt would be a solid rudder for the new show. I can freely admit how wrong I was on that one. But yes, many are pretty much saying Chabon being the show runner makes Picard as close to a slam dunk as a new show can get. I’m not seeing it. I don’t know the guy but after looking at his resume I’m not prepared to feel nearly as confident as many here, including yourself seem to be. But then, you love your arrogance so I’m not surprised at the tone of your response.

As somebody who is impartial in this debate- your tone could easily be taken as chiding, especially since you state you know nothing about the man and are potentially attacking those that do. Of course, it’s quite easy in a written format to misunderstand the tone with which you wanted to convey your message.

What I will say however is taking pot shots at somebody’s potentially self esteem issues is incredibly low. Mental health issues- real or otherwise- should never be used as a weapon to attack somebody.

Georgiou’s Sass… I have a tendency to respond to someone in the same tone that I receive. Mr. Hall took a smarmy tone to me that was distasteful and felt like some where attacked when it was perfectly clear there was no attack. Your response needed to be aimed squarely at him for being the instigator. If you must rip on me, rip on me for taking part. Nothing more.

I disagree with you. MH commented that you don’t the first thing about Mr. Chabon (you don’t- you’ve actually admitted that). You’re response was to take low blow and cast aspersions about somebody’s mental health and used them to attack somebody. That alone deserves to be called out. It’s toxic and frankly despicable behaviour.

Georgiou’s Sass, MH was the one who took the lowbrow route to begin with, my friend. If he hadn’t I would not have responded in kind. As I said, I tend to respond in the same tone I get. It can be a bit of a flaw and one I am working on. But make no mistake. MH was the one who went down that hole first. I was only guilty of responding in kind.

ml31, when you charge a combination of arrogance and low self-esteem, you should apply that to somebody who merits that kind of reaming, like 45. Going after Hall that way is so utterly wrongheaded that it boggles my mind.

It might seem like jumping from his previous position to showrunner without a substantial career in this specific industry is insane and laughable (like going from cadet to Captain), but Piller made a pretty good sized jump from occasional non-trek producer and then Trek freelancer … going right to co-showrunner on TNG with a single not-so-great script.

Then again, Piller might have been the only ship in the quadrant.

In the case of Chabon, you’ve got a Whoopi-sized talent with interest in this specific subject matter, so a producer would have to be seven kinds of fool (not that there’s anything unique about producers being seven kinds of fool) not to take advantage of that (and remember, it took Berman a full year to take her up on her offer, or even to take it seriously.)

I applied to to someone who earned the titles. Someone who felt attacked when there was absolutely none to be found is definitely a symptom of having a low self esteem. And then turning around and being smarmy to the person who made this invisible attack was uncalled for.

Comparing his talent to Whoopi might be appropriate. Her involvement in something would certainly not make me think it has greater potential to be good. She just isn’t talented enough to think that. She can get by but she is hardly a huge talent. And looking at Chabon’s resume, he would seem to be in the same category.

‘Calypso’ is the high watermark for me with CBSAA Trek so far. He might not work out, but the idea of a proven, critically acclaimed writer, whose also a genuine lifelong Trekkie, getting his shot makes me very happy. He didn’t need Trek for his career, but this is clearly the creative opportunity he wanted. I’m optimistic.

A legitimate argument can be made that Calypso was certainly among the best things done in the last couple of years Trek wise. That being said, writing one good Trek short does not = a brilliant Trek show runner. I need more before I start claiming him the savior of CBSAA Trek shows. Again, not saying he won’t be a positive influence. Just saying his resume does not sway my opinion that the quality of the show is still just as likely to be garbage as it does being brilliance.

That’s fair. I would never anoint him a savior. In fact, some rumors seem to suggest this move might actually spell behind the scenes trouble with Picard as much as anything else. I’m just explaining why I’m genuinely excited and optimistic about this.

At the very least I’m hoping they learned all their mistakes from Discovery and have a much better first season. I have never read any of his work although I have seen a few of the films he’s written. I loved Calypso but I’m in the wait and see category too if I’m being honest. But they seem to have a lot of faith in someone who never ran a TV show before so thats a good thing I guess. And he says all the right things every time he discusses the show.

There *is* a disconnect between his literary and film/TV output. Part of my optimism is rooted in the idea that: 1) he has more creative control, and 2) this is not just something he’s doing for a quick payday.

No I understand. I’m not getting on his case that the movies weren’t that great. I just don’t know anything about him writing wise. I did like Calypso, but a 15 minute short isn’t the same as managing an entire show. But it does prove he can write and write for Star Trek. That short had something nearly the entire first season of the show had: heart! That’s what had been missing in DIS among other things. It did get it back in season 2 though. I’m hoping Picard has it from the start.

John Carter is an under appreciated classic.

Discovery has no mistakes.

NH4, I thought we agreed you ignore my posts and I won’t call you out. Seriously you were BANNED!!! For this kind of troll bait in the first place. You add nothing here dude other than bitterness.

Cut it out dude, your beef is with someone else. Quit harassing people or I’ll report you.

You’re the one harassing and trolling. You sound just insecure and snarky when you were NH4. I told you, simply ignore my posts with your trolling, you won’t have to worry about me calling you out. Pretty simple.

I respectfully disagree. In the first season it spent too many of its early episodes dithering about with no clear aims, the war arc was rushed and I often imagine it was written in a few hours or on set and it took them EIGHT EPISODES to get around to a planet-based episode (the desert planet notwithstanding) and the war was wrapped up in an abysmal fashion.

With that said however, I 100% respect your opinion even as I may disagree on it. What we do agree is that Season 2 was an incredible tour de force. It revived my interest in the show and I became such a fan of Sonequa. Such a fantastic actress!

He’s trolling. Ignore it.

I just love the show. It made me a Star Trek fan again.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say Discovery has no mistakes. But I thought it was a brilliant first season, and if Picard has a better first season, that will make it the best first season in Trek history. I’m optimistic Chabon and Co. just may make it so.

Your blind worship of Discovery is just as ridiculous as Midnight’s Edge’s blind hatred.

I think the positive attitude also comes from the previous successes of literary figures writing for Star Trek TOS, names like Robert Bloch, Jerome Bixby and of course most famously Harlan Ellison. I think Star Trek needed to have that literary aspect back into its stories, this was something lacking in the TNG era Star Trek.

Awesome. Tons of talent in this guy. #MakeItSo

Suprised CBS didn’t clean house when they fired Kurtzman. Maybe security has just been a bit late escorting the lot of them out of the building….

I hope that’s sarcasm

It is.

I noticed that the press release from StarTrek . com said “Chabon’s screenplays and teleplays include John Carter, Spider-Man 2, and the Star Trek: Short Treks episodes “Calypso” and “Q&A.” So, I guess we know the name of another one of the second batch of Short Treks, since “Q&A” was not in the first set.

I didn’t pick up on that. Good catch! It begs the question: could the “Q” in “Q&A” be Q?

God, I hope not. Can we please get through a few iterations of Trek without a supreme being hanging around?

Q never showed up on Enterprise.

We haven’t seen Q in 18 years. It would be amazing if he came back, even if its only for twenty minutes. That being said, I’m not holding my breath. So far, these Short Treks have been based around Discovery, so bringing in a character who hasn’t been seen since Voyager would be unexpected.

Arguably members of the Q continuum appeared in TOS, so it’s not inconceivable…

More to the point, trying to change the outcome of a fixed point in the part-time continuum would be just the thing to attract the attention and interference of the Q.

If, in all possible futures, Control is only defeated/foiled once, it would be hard to see why Q wouldn’t stick his oar in.

A Short Trek with a Q calling Spock to account for assisting his sister’s leap forward in time might be very amusing… And a good foundation for Q interventions when Discovery arrives in the late 32nd century.

If you mean Trelane, he wasn’t a Q. The Q don’t need magic mirrors.

Otherwise, you might have a point. It could work as a setup for Q to appear in season 3.

Or, more likely, on “Picard.”

Anybody know what John deLancie has been up to lately?

Delancie has been voicing the character Discord on My Little Pony (the modern, not so cute version).

The creator reportedly based the trickster character Discord on Q…and then found out Delancie himself might be available and willing to take it on.

I thought I recognized the voice when our kids were in the My Little Pony phase…

Who knew that it was also a good lead in to Trek?

Legate Damar,

Re: The Q don’t need magic mirrors.

If you watched THE SQUIRE OF GOTHOS, neither did Trelane. Perhaps you meant: The Q don’t find the convenience offered by Magic Mirrors useful?

Wow I would love a Q and Spock meet up! It would go something like this:


I would’ve loved to have seen these two guys in a real story together.

That just seems like something you would only see on a YouTube Star Trek fan video. I don’t think Alex would do allow that for his Star Trek. Thank goodness.

I think it might be a mistake to assume the Short Treks will relate to DSC. I think the reason they did that was to promote the then-upcoming season. Given these ST’s will probably stream/air shortly before Picard, they could very well relate to that series.

I am hoping the Spock/No.1 episode ends with the title card “Star Trek: 1701, Coming Fall 2020”

Someone asked me how Q would appear, as they are ageless, and DeLancie is even more noticeably older than he was from TNG->VOY. I have it in my head that if he were to reappear, Picard would ask him “why do you look so old? Aren’t the Q ageless?” And Q would look back condescendingly at Jean-Luc’s aged exterior and retort “just thought i’d be polite.”

If we must have Q, I like your idea, Afterburn!


I thought Q would say “It’s the children. They age one so.”

Isn’t that a Star Trek staple? That would be like Babylon 5 without Kosh appearing every few episodes to whisper something cryptic and move clunkily (so?) around the station!

Didi you not finish the run? (spoiler alert) Vorlons aren’t even in the galaxy for the last season and a half!

I would normally agree, but if it’s a “Short Trek” i’d be ok with it.

I have been wondering if the new series of Trek Shorts would relate to Picard, and the title of “Q&A” would lead me to believe that at least some of them will.

How do they announce a showrunner when they are already 1/3 done with the season? So who was show runner on the first several eps?

Maybe they hadn’t formally decided on one before. The show was co-developed by a group of people (including Chabon, I think). Or maybe they always intended it to be Chabon but only announced him now.

That is probably it. It was a commitee overseen by Kurtzman given the sensitivity of the project. Now that things are under way, Kurtzman put Chabon in charge.

That’s the way I was seeing it too.

Especially, as Patrick Stewart has some production authority.

Given the showrunner issues on the Discovery, it was likely necessary to confirm things were working before making an announcement. Not to mention that Chabon may have needed a few more episode credits before he could be confirmed in that role.

I hope Stewart was reigned in a little. Actors aren’t necessarily the best judges of their characters (see: Insurrection, Nemesis).

Most of ST:P will be Picard driving around in a dune buggy singing light opera.

Ha. Whilst doing the mambo and kissing Donna Murphy.

OK, I can buy that. Thanks

I presume nobody wants to hear about Kurtzman being replaced by falling up?

You’re still here?

Kurtzman had to take over Discovery after CBS fired the showrunners, then he managed to secure Patrick Stewart followed by building a writer’s room with a number of respected people. He made CBS happy and he was promoted for his efforts. Who do you think made Chabon the showrunner?

The “Kurtzman has been fired” stuff is hilarious. He’s the new Rick Berman, for better or ill. Hopefully, Paradise becomes Piller and Chabon Ira Behr (or vice versa).

Not to sure how Kurtzman gets fired from his own production company. CBS exec: Alex, we’d like you to shut down Secret Hideout, but because we don’t have the balls to call it a firing, we’re going to ahead and give you 30MM anyway, give you a spiffy title, and just lock you away in Les Moonves old office for the next five years, if that’s okay with you?

Makes perfect sense….if you’re stoned.

You missed Alex’s response.
– Sure! Will you let me out once a month to give interviews on the projects I’m not supposed to work on anymore?

Well, if Kurtzman doesn’t want to take that deal, I’m available. 😁

You joke, but I actually do know someone, at a very high level, was fired from his own company, that even was named after him (he swore never to name a company after himself again, as that one continued with his name for years, without him).

That’s not what happened here, but it CAN happen.

That’s pretty much what happened with Will Vinton Studios up here in Portland, thanks to the tennis shoe guys that bought in and then took over, since renaming the place Laika.

Laika has done some good work, but I’m still bummed about Vinton’s fate. I had some talks after moving here about doing a coffee table book on the original company in 2002, but a couple months later the whole upheaval happened and that went up in smoke.

Doomkitty is already spinning this as somehow confirming his BS “insider source”.

Even if they had real inside information, by the time they’d warped it to fit their own narrative, it would be dissociated from reality.

Michael, hire me!

What a pity he’s got a problem with my religion and my country. Well, here’s hoping he doesn’t sneak that into the show.

I’m not that familiar with Chabon. What religion and country?

Last year he delivered an address at the graduation of the LA branch of Hebrew Union College in which he attacked Jews, Judaism, and Israel. (Chabon is Jewish himself,of course.) It was all pretty depressing.

Okay. I mean, Star Trek hasn’t exactly steered clear of being critical of religion either. And a lot of other aspects of society.

“This is my charge to you, class of 2018, Jewish leaders of the future: Knock down the walls. Abolish the checkpoints. Find room in the Jewish community for all those who want to share in our traditions. Inscribe the protective circle of your teachings around all those people whose very otherness demands that we honor our avowed commitments to peace and justice and lovingkindness. Seize every opportunity to strengthen and enrich our cultural genome by embracing the inevitable variation and change that result from increased diversity. And if—no, let’s say when—the Jews of the future find that, under your leadership, they can longer tolerate the occupation being undertaken in their name, when they have repudiated the purity tests and the separation barriers and all the rhetoric and instrumentalities of dehumanization, let it be because you have taught them to throw open the sanctuary gates of their own best idea of themselves, and to make room at their tables, and in their families, and in their lands, for all who are truly hungry—like the book says—to come and partake.”


That’s it? That’s the controversy? This sounds like a speech a Starfleet captain might deliver.

Religious ideology is usually counter to logical thought and change.

Nah, it’s a broader problem than that. This falls under people taking some things too seriously and being overly sensitive. Something that could be said of Star Trek fans as well.

Works for me too.

This is a beautiful speech, and proof that Nachjm is both a fool, and a fearmonger.

Doesn’t sound like he is another denier of Israel’s deliberate and sustained attack on the US spy vessel LIBERTY in int’l waters in 1967, so I’d say I’m on his side of this issue. (Then again, my favorite faction in 24th century is The Maquis.)

There it is!

Nachum, you can defend Israel at all costs, and get depressed people can’t see how great it is when it is. But the test of your spiritual and political acumen will be whether you can expand your experience to better understand ALL the innocent people caught in the middle of your “depression” and the hard liners from all sides making no difference in the search for workable peaceful solutions. If you don’t find that strength you will be just a small cog, chugging along, depressed and hopelessly destroying the worldwide community of Jews. You noted this yourself: Chabon’s statement was made at a Jewish institution. That alone is a powerful reason to celebrate diversity of thought, opinion, and purpose.

Patrick Stewart hates tRUMP BTW. :)

So does everyone.

Except for everyone who doesn’t. Never met one? Wow.

Clarification: so does everyone with taste and/or a functioning ethical subroutine.

Must be nice not to have to concern yourself with other points of view. Some of us don’t have that luxury.

Political POV’s aside, the dude is an unread moron who lies all the time, is surrounded by corrupt sycophants, and continually disrespects the U.S. Constitution — these are observational facts that are not debatable.

The world can’t afford that luxury, but don’t let that small detail derail your take on me, bub.

Trump is a complete joke and con artist at best, a criminal at worst. It’s sad this clown has turned the presidency into a reality show. How can someone lie as much as he does on a DAILY basis but want to come off credible?

It’s the tale of the emperor’s clothes, manifesting sad flabby flesh. Mix that with John Huston in CHINATOWN ‘you gotta be rich to kill somebody and get away with it’ and the vile formula is ready to ferment (and foment.)

He also thinks Brexit would rob younger generations in the UK of the benefits of European identity.

That, if nothing else, convinced him that the rational and reasoning character of Picard needed to be brought forward to reflect a new reality.

As opposed to being robbed of their own British identity, something Stewart, ironically, embodies.

Actors can have any silly political views they want. Most do.


Re: Actors can have any silly political views

And why not? Most politicians have at least one real hoot!

Not surprised, as Trumpism is the complete opposite of everything Roddenbery.

Yeah, Roddenberry had a good reputation with the ladies.

Well great news I guess although I’m wondering why it took so long to announce it? The show is now filming. We usually know who the show runner is when the show is still in pre-production. Not a big deal obviously, just curious. It’s still crazy knowing we are getting a post-Nemesis show with Picard himself so I’m on board for anything they do and Chabon seems like he really gets Star Trek. That doesn’t mean he knows how to run a show however but he has tons of pros around him.

The announcement was likely just a formality at this point.

Maybe I’m misremembering but I think Ira Steven Behr wasn’t named show runner on DS9 until season 3.

It was Michael Piller wasn’t it?
He went off to work on Voyager after Season 2.

Yes but we knew Michael Piller would be the first show runner when the show was being developed.

Right now I’m reading Chambon’s The Final Solution. It’s a Sherlock Holmes novel not so much in disguise. My softcover also includes an NPR interview with Chambon. They discuss his feelings about genre. Has anyone read any of these?

I’ve read the final solution. Really enjoyed the older retired version of Holmes and the fact that it’s a concise, good story. I also read Chabon’s Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, which is a really terrific, epic novel.

Yes. It’s cool. And word by word fun to read.

I go into each new Trek show WANTING to like it. And for the most part, I’ve enjoyed all of them.
I’m not a slave to canon, and I understand (a little bit) about the creative process and how it collides with the biz side of things. For a lot of fans, Trek feeds our spirits, emotions, etc. The reality is it’s show business. “Show me the money!!!!” is all the suits say,ever.
People who create things want to put their touch on it or they’re RECREATING a thing and it almost never measures up to the original. Whose ever seen a tribute band/artist be as good as the original? I ain’t heard it yet. So creative people rightfully balk at recreating and deservedly so. Hopefully, the source material is respected and it inspires them to get the “feels” and the “looks” right. It’s an incredibly tough balancing act. In DSC, for myself, when I saw the phasers and communicators? I was excited. The props and gadgets were what captured my 10 year old imagination. As I got older, I discovered it was the relationships and ideals of TOS. I think DSC sort of got that right in S1 and got much better in S2 with Pike and company.

Now, the creative team always clashes with the business or money side. They have to stick to budgets, deadlines and incessant notes from the suits. You win some battles and lose some.

Now, TNG faced incredible pushback in 87, people were upset that it wasn’t Kirk and company. It did OK and to varying degrees the other shows found their fan base. I guess Trek is like pizza. Everybody likes theirs a little different.

The editor of Starlog suggested that we all embrace TNG as it aired as we hadn’t seen Trek on TV since 1969. (TAS notwithstanding) It was good advice then, and it’s good advice today.

So, I’ll embrace what’s coming. It’s great to have Trek on TV again.

I know that Discovery is not everyone’s cup of tea but 100 percent of my Trek fan friends look at it just as you so aptly stated above – NOT one of those I know who have watched TOS and everything since despise Discovery – ZERO. No it is not perfect and far from a recreation of TOS, but the creators seem to be striving to live up the the ideals of TOS BUT also all its various and diverse iterations since. That is not an easy task. All done while working within the confines of the studio and business realities that the show needs to for it to exist. I hope the studio sees that many (maybe even most) Trek fans are like myself and just because we don’t go on social media to say how much we like it, I trust the numbers that really count (viewership) are driving the show in a positive direction. Btw listening to some of the constructive critiques posted on sites like Trekmovie.com is one way for Kurtzman and the show runners to stay in tune with Star Trek fans. Even the hater video sites occasionally may have something important to contribute – as long as you can sort through the minutia and sad vitriol.

Great comment dennycranium.

Nice balanced overview. What you said about the creative aspect is probably one of the best ways that I personally have seen of expressing it.

Most things in life are about finding a compromise of some sort, making a sci-fi show being no different.

On any show; the final product was probably no one person’s ultimate ‘vision’ for how it would have finished up had they had total control of everything, but instead was the compromise arrived at by taking into account the various (often conflicting) interests that you mentioned.

Haven’t seen DSC yet myself, (still mid-DS9 re-watch) but am definitely intrigued by it. First Trek on TV in a new era and all that.

Like yourself, I always try to go into anything new with an open mind, hoping to really enjoy it.

Wherever DSC ultimately ranks for me, I’m simply pleased to be in an era where Trek is back on TV and with multiple series heading our way too.

The best early TNG was far worse than the worst of Discovery.

That said, it was a good idea for TNG to mostly avoid TOS characters and aliens (the Klingons excepted).

Discovery has been too beholden to what came before.

(BTW, Discovery is also far better than Season 3 TOS, most of Voyager and nearly all of Enterprise).

“The best early TNG was far worse than the worst of Discovery.”

Yes. Oh my god yes. Conspiracy is probably the best episode of that season and it is so poorly written, and lamely acted.

Haha regarding Conspiracy, I can still remember my father sitting down in the family room while my brother and I were watching a rerun of that episode and he walked out of the room shaking his head asking how we could watch “that garbage”. This was the first time he had ever seen TNG and we tried to convince him that this was just a bad episode, but to no avail.


I’m forced to disagree. It’s a bit tough to compare the two because Discovery is essentially one GIANT episode. But overall, that one episode, while it did have one good moment, was worse than the entire first season of TNG. TNG episodes were indeed pedestrian and poorly thought out. But that season 1 of Discovery took that to a higher level. There is a litany of mistakes in Discovery’s first season (many addressed in season/episode 2). But the difference was in TNG’s season 1 there were signs that things could improve that were absent in Discovery’s.

It really is remarkable that TNG got 7 seasons, given how utterly atrocious that first season, and much of the second was. I mean, it was pretty bad even for its time, and outside of a handful of episodes (out of an ungodly 26) are completely unwatchable today.

Very well said. The series subsequent to TNG also all had strong detractors. DS9 was “just sitting there” and not the Enterprise; it was the best of all the Treks. VOY…well, wasn’t as terrible as some said it would be. At times it was great. (I remember watching the first episode with a group in college; at the end, one friend stood up and said, “Well, TNG took a while to get good too.”) There were people who refused to accept ENT as canon. It was pretty good much of the time.

Discovery isn’t TNG or DS9, but it’s pretty good so far.

Sounds good in theory. I just hope writing good books translates into knowing how to produce good TV.

Tons of great writers turned into excellent producers/directors/showrunners. It’s not that uncommon. The uncommon thing here is that he’s so well known as a novelist first– which is mostly because he won a pulitzer. If it weren’t for that, he’d probably be an unheralded journeyman author/script-writer-turned-producer/showrunner.

Worf must return!