ViacomCBS Extends Alex Kurtzman’s Contract As They Map Out Star Trek Universe Future On Paramount+

Three summers ago, CBS announced a five-year deal with Star Trek: Discovery executive producer Alex Kurtzman to expand the Star Trek Universe for their streaming future. Now with five shows in active development, ViacomCBS is doubling down on Kurtzman with more ambitious plans for their Paramount+ streaming service.

Kurtzman’s new 5-year+ mission

In a Sunday New York Times profile, it was first reported that CBS Studios has renegotiated their deal with Alex Kurtzman. The new $160 million deal has now extended his stay for five and a half years, putting him in charge of the Star Trek Universe through at least 2026. The deal was later confirmed via a press release from ViacomCBS, and is also being reported in the Hollywood trades, including Variety, Deadline, and The Hollywood Reporter.

“From the first meeting I had with Alex, it was so obvious to me that he’s our future,” CBS Entertainment Group president George Cheeks told the Times. “The guy can develop for broadcast. He can develop for premium streaming, broad streaming. He understands the business… When you make these investments, you need to know that this talent can actually deliver multiple projects at the same time across multiple platforms.”

Alex Kurtzman (CBS Studios)

Growing Paramount+ to compete in the streaming wars against giants like Amazon, Netflix, and Disney is a particular challenge for ViacomCBS right now, and this deal is seen as part of their plan to expand the service. Kurtzman tells the Times he welcomes the challenge and sees more opportunities in streaming:

I do believe that the line between movies and television is gone now, and that to me is a tremendous opportunity. For me and for showrunners like me, we can tell stories in a new way. We are not limited by the narrow definition of how you tell a story—something must be told in 10 hours, or something must be told in two hours.

This new deal not only shows a confidence in Kurtzman, but an ongoing commitment to the Star Trek franchise as a key component to the future of ViacomCBS, and its Paramount Plus streaming platform.

Sonequa Martin-Green as Captain Burnham in Discovery season four teaser trailer

“Just getting started”… including a Worf comedy?

When Kurtzman signed his deal with CBS in 2018, Star Trek: Discovery had only streamed its first season, and other Star Trek shows were only in the early development stage. Since that time, his Secret Hideout production company has launched Star Trek: Picard featuring the return of Sir Patrick Stewart and Star Trek: Lower Decks, the franchise’s first adult animated comedy. According to the Times report, Discovery and Picard are among the most-watched original series on Paramount+.

John de Lancie as Q in the season 2 Star Trek: Picard teaser

More seasons of Discovery, Picard, and Lower Decks are currently in production, along with the new live-action series Star Trek: Strange New Worlds set on Captain Pike’s USS Enterprise and the kids’ animated series Star Trek: Prodigy, coming this fall. Prodigy in particular has been cited as an important show for ViacomCBS, with CBS Studios president David Stapf telling The Times, “It obviously builds fans at a much younger generation, which helps with consumer products. But it’s also a smart way to look at building an entire universe.” We have already seen evidence of this with the recent announcement of Playmates Toys returning to Star Trek with a new broad license.

Preview image of Star Trek: Prodigy

A couple of Star Trek shows we have heard about before were cited to be “in the works.” The first is the Section 31 series starring Michelle Yeoh, which was first announced in 2019. Since then, a writers’ room was put together; earlier this year Kurtzman cited the global pandemic for keeping it from going into production, saying he still was “very optimistic” about the project. The other show mentioned in the NYT article was one set at Starfleet Academy, aimed at younger audiences. This project was first mentioned in 2018, said to be coming from Stephanie Savage and Josh Schwartz, producers of shows such as The O.C., Gossip Girl, and Marvel’s Runaways. However, there have been no real reports on development in the last three years.

Michelle Yeoh in Star Trek: Discovery

There was also a “weirder” idea mentioned in the Times piece. Kurtzman pointed to a pitch from writer/producer Graham Wagner who wrote the Short Treks episode “The Trouble with Edward” and is best known for his work on The Office, Portlandia, and Silicon Valley. The Wagner pitch “centered on the character of Worf,” and Kurtzman calls the concept “incredibly funny, poignant and touching.” Michael Dorn has actively been seeking a new Worf-centered series for years, but his concept is quite different.

Regarding the future of the franchise, Kurtzman said: “I think we’re just getting started. There’s just so much more to be had.”

Could a Worf comedy be in Michael Dorn’s future?

Pushing the boundaries

During his tenure with Trek, Kurtzman has moved the franchise into new areas, but he tells The Times he has even more ambitious ideas:

If it were up to me only, I would be pushing the boundaries much further than I think most people would want. I think we might get there. Marvel has actually proven that you can. But you have to build a certain foundation in order to get there and we’re still building our foundation.

Anson Mount and Ethan Peck in Short Treks, and returning in 2022 in Strange New Worlds

And it appears he has a willing partner with CBS’ David Stapf, who tells the Times:

Anything goes, as long as it can fit into the ‘Star Trek’ ethos of inspiration, optimism and the general idea that humankind is good. So comedy, adult animation, kids’ animation — you name the genre, and there’s probably a ‘Star Trek’ version of it.

Preview from season two of Star Trek: Lower Decks

Find more on the Star Trek Universe at

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wait a minute!!! Didn’t The Trek Trollers on YouTube say that Kurtzman had been fired???

Wishful thinking.

No, just lying troll thinking.

Your wish, not much thinking.

The wish can always become reality when is come to the racial context of Discovery and the failure to distribute trek o tv.

I have to admit, if I were working in that production office I’d probably “leak” news like that purely to give the finger to the Internet Outrage Machine when the official announcement came through. XD

Yo I think this Fourth season and this next 5th season discovery is going to have to fight for it’s life….no more of that friendly ish……

It can when Star Trek Discovery has a racial element. People support it are clearly blind where it feels like TOS in the 60’s because of Nichelle Nichols. No has to watch Star Trek Discovery because of Black Alert.

All the whiners are looking pretty stupid today…and we all know on this site who they are.

And look at some of them “changing their story now” to explain why Star Trek is successful even though (they think) it’s bad….LOL You are all just WRONG AGAIN, EINSTEINS!

LOL so true

The same ones that claim every other week that Kathleen Kennedy has been fired and Disney is going to remake the sequel trilogy with George Lucas, those people? That lied about their being a Lucas cut or that Disney put Luke in the Mandalorian due to fan hatred of Last Jedi even though it was years in the planning and Mark Hamill had to keep his lips closed tight not to spoil it.

Repeatedly fired. Kurtzman is single-handedly responsible for bankrupting CBS.

I wish they’d find a way to bring Bob back in some capacity (SNW would have been an excellent fit).

Mr. Orci would have to want to return, his own comments suggest that ship has sailed.

Thank goodness.

You guys told me he was a disaster.

He is.

Don’t worry. You’ll always have the comment section.

He isn’t. Trek is flourishing with him in the center seat. It’s absolutely crazy to call it a disaster.

Have you had Covid? Because you seem to have lost your sense of taste.

It’s doing what it needs to for Paramount+ but so is the iCarly reboot which skews younger and pulls in more viewers. Paramount+ series (and other smaller streamers) exist in a bubble based on metrics within the streaming platform in which they exist, making the showrunner and their production company incidental on this particular platform and for this particular franchise. On a platform like Paramount+, Star Trek comes gift wrapped.

There’s no telling what direction Star Trek could have taken had it been given to someone with no prior history with the franchise (Vince Gilligan comes to mind).

The irony is about Paramount with exception of maybe 2 or 3 shows cancelled (which seems to include The Twilight Zone), pretty much every show has been renewed on that site. The Good Fight was literally one of their first shows and it has no problem getting renewed and now in its fifth season. I was shocked to see Women Who Kill get a season 2. I didn’t even know it got renewed until I went on the site and they were advertising the new season.

That is the one advantage when its a new streaming site, you have less content and viewers so EVERY show helps, at least in the first few years. Netflix had shows on for years when it first started. Now, half of them don’t even get a second season. It’s a lot more cut throat once you gain a real audience.

So Star Trek was never going to have problems staying, especially when its probably the most watched show there is, even if the viewership is still relatively low (and I’m not saying it is). Which is again why you try to explain to all the bitter and hateful youtubers this basic logic but they still believe the shows are going to get cancelled any day now.

Oops, the show is called “Why Women Kill”. I can’t even remember the title of most of those shows on that site and I’ve had it for four years now lol. So you know where my priorities are. ;)

He’s not though

Whether something is any good or not ultimately doesn’t matter if you deliver for the studio. A lot of Walking Dead fans hate Fear the Walking Dead but the numbers are there for AMC so they’re happy and the list goes on.

Exactly! I think Kurtzman is doing OK overall quality wise, but he’s liked because he gets things done on time and on budget. And yes, clearly enough people watch his shows, regardless of how much they actually like them. What I find funny (or iconic) is all those people on Youtube moaning about how much they hate Kurtzman and the shows but yet they are all clearly watching them just the same.

As long as they pay the subscription fee to P+ and click on the show every week, that’s ALL that matters. Everything is just noise for a studio. It’s never about quality, it’s about interest. And clearly enough people are interested, even the haters if they spend countless hours how much they hate the shows and want them to die…as they spend the money that keeps them on longer to continue to complain about them. It’s a vicious circle I guess.

I try to be true to my criticisms of shows that I follow and I gave up on Discovery after season 2. The show has always felt like a ship which needed work before it left port with a decision made to make repairs en route.

I got a similar vibe from Picard which started strong, sagged in the middle and fell apart at the end (Riker’s dialogue when he arrives with the cut and paste fleet was a bit cringeworthy). Still, I’m willing to give season 2 a chance.

So it all looks great, it’s delivering on time and on budget and that’s ultimately all Kurtzman really needs to do but Star Trek is currently as generic as other popular franchises such as Law & Order, NCIS and the various Chicago series.

They could deliver a live action Star Trek that knocks it out of the park but we’re not quite there yet.

As do I!

I have zero issues citing when I’m not happy with a show or season and unfortunately NONE of Discovery seasons has won me completely over. And you know my thoughts on Picard are basically similar to yours. It’s a reason why Picard is my least favorite show and Discovery is my second least favorite show…both at the moment anyway.

So you know I don’t have blinders on with these shows and I certainly understand why people don’t like them. For me though, I admit, I’m always going to root for every show in the end because I really really want to like them.

I think your attitude is healthy though, you don’t like the shows and moved on for now. The difference is you don’t spend all your time here hoping they get cancelled tomorrow or making it some odd life mission to see a TV producer out of work like some people oddly do. You just want them to improve and not giving them your money until they do. That’s how you’re suppose to do it. If I was stronger I would maybe do the same, but I am a very weak individual lol.

And I truly believe they have potential to be great. I remember all of my criticisms of Enterprise (and there are definitely true flaws) but I ended up loving it by the end when I gave it another chance years later. I’m hoping it won’t take that long with the new shows, but Enterprise is what made me decide no show should be judged that early. None of them frankly since every spin off had troubles in the beginning.

But if you’re not feeling it, you’re not feeling it. I have my fingers crossed on Picard season 2 as well.

In the end it’s just a show. A show we’re all very passionate about but still just a show.

Maybe you can point to one, but I think if you set the bar for a TV show as “it has to completely win me over” you’re going to be waiting a long time

LOL, maybe!

Wildly enough, there is a recent franchise show that has completely won me over: CW’s Superman and Lois.

I have usually only watched the Arrowverse shows for and with our kids, but this one is so tightly plotted and grounded while genuinely aspirational that I’ve completely bought in.

So, one never knows.

We agree on something! I think Superman is a difficult character to write for for a handful of reasons. But this opening season of Superman & Lois really hit it off well. I do enjoy the Arrowverse but for the most part only Arrow & The Flash have had mostly stellar seasons. Supergirl is cringeworthy and I’m relived this is the final season, Batwoman has just been terrible from the start and Legends, while not really bad just doesn’t speak to me as well as I had hoped. It is helped by the fact that their show is the lightest and most tongue in cheek of all the Arrowverse. But I still find it kinda “meh”. It doesn’t suck. But it’s not that good either.

Black Lightning ended its run recently but it was the best of the above group of lower tiered shows.

Actually I too started watching Superman and Lois and ended up loving it. Unfortunately I didn’t know when it came back after it went on break and I missed those episodes. I decided to just wait for the season to end and binge watch the rest. They will probably all be on HBO Max when its over which I have.

I DVR the show. That way I don’t need to know when it returns. I check my queue to see what is there and there it is. The final two episodes air in a week or two I think….

There is an element of that here. And it seems to be the same in corporate America, too. Kurtzman very likley says what his bosses want to hear and he has met his deadlines for the most part. That is what they want the most. Who cares if the product is sub par?

I’ve seen plenty of people reach levels they have no business being in. We’ve all had terrible bosses who only got the job because they said what the higher ups want to hear. Even though they are terrible at their jobs.

Kurtzman my buddy, I want a Seven of Nine show. Thanks, bye.

It’s called Picard.

Nope. She should be the star of her own show: Seven of Nine and the Fenris Rangers.

“Feisty Forging Ferris Rangers”

Somehow made me think of the NYPD rangers in ELF. Jeri Ryan in the top of a Santa outfit sounds impressive, even though she is not my type (don’t prefer implants, borg or otherwise.)

Yep! Would love a Seven of Nine show! Make it happen Kurtzman!

She might get her own show after Picard ends. Keep your fingers crossed. I would love to see that show too.

I personally think that is the case – and yes, she will be the queen in it ;)

the STCU Begins

I note that the executive who said they there would be no more Trek series greenlighted until one wrapped up has moved on, but Kurtzman carries on.

I’m leaning to the idea of the STEU myself – even if the acronym gets pronounced as “stew.”

But if we’re talking a cinematic universe where more than one continuity can be developed at once, it could be cool.

Just putting it here – as I always do – that there’s incredible IP in the relaunch litverse that ought to be exploited onscreen. The Destiny trilogy, the Vanguard series and others are just waiting to get on some screens, probably streaming would be best.

If they’re building out the universe, writers and actors egos should be set aside to put the best Trek up there. Recast the TNG era characters and give us Destiny, the Alpha and Omega Borg three season thriller. Move into the post-TOS colonial expansion era of Starfleet in the 2260s with Vanguard.

Agreed on your idea to adapt some Trek literature on screen! It’s about time!

But I have to disagree to your multiverse idea. We do have the MU and the KU but I don’t want any more of those extra timelines. The MCU does a much better job than the DCEU… DC has been a major disaster with continuity. Trek needs to go the MCU route, not the DCEU farce.

What a lousy start to my weekend, I shoulda stood in bed. I thought Berman was horrible and that JJ alone was a disaster, but this guy is seriously murder on Trek.

Forget about cloning Gene Coon, I’d settle for a John Meredyth Lucas on TREK at this point. Or somebody actually alive and talented running the shows that I have been watching and rewatching in recent years. I’ve never experienced a golden age of genre on the tube firsthand (though DS9 and B5 got things going in the right direction), and am beginning to think I never will.

Sounds like he is going to push for one of those hokey grand unified universe things instead of hiring folks who can just tell good stories and execute them without the seriously weak crutches of lens flares and obnoxiously non-photoreal CGI.

I have to agree; I have a very sinking, Han Solo-esque feeling that ten years from now, we may look back on this so-called “golden age of Trek” as the moment when the franchise jumped the shark.

Seriously, between Section 31, sitcommy Worf, and Starfleet Academy, it’s as if this guy wants to resurrect, Frankenstein-like, every demonstrably idiotic idea that Paramount rightly rejected in the past. I’d love to think that MIchael Dorn has enough respect for his wonderful character that he’d turn this idea down, but who knows?

And yes, this idea of “building a universe” at the expense of Gene’s vision and quality is a prescription for disaster. Frankly, we don’t even know it’s going to work for Marvel in the post-Iron Man/Captain America era. Endgame was overrated because it had too many characters. BLACK WIDOW was somewhat disappointing at the box office. The only unabashed success recently was BLACK PANTHER, and it remains to be seen how that corner of the Marvelverse will do without Chadwick Boseman. The lackluster Star Wars episode 9 also augers against this approach.

Discovery isn’t awful, but it’s hit-or-miss, and I think the problem is that a highly serialized format needs a high ratio of hits to misses. An awful lot, much more than is generally appreciated, is riding on STRANGE NEW WORLDS and Anson Mount at this point. He was one of the best things about Discovery so far, but we need to keep fingers crossed that he has good chemistry with the rest of the newly-announced cast.

That’ right.

“ Discovery isn’t awful, but it’s hit-or-miss, and I think the problem is that a highly serialized format needs a high ratio of hits to misses.”

I think this gets the current situation with Trek pretty right, and without all the pearl-clutching hyperbole. In terms of individual moments Discovery’s output overall isn’t bad, but that’s just an insufficient bar for serialized storytelling. More to the point, you’re only as good as your tale’s conclusion, and so far the season finales on both Discovery and Picard have been notable disappointments, to the extent that this lifetime Trekker cut the cord to CBS over a year ago. It’ll take some really enthusiastic feedback on Strange New Worlds to bring me back at this point.

I don’t see much evidence that Kurtzman is trying to create a Marvel-style universe with crossovers and some Grand Unified Theory of Star Trek. I think he’s trying to make room for lots of different flavors of Star Trek: Discovery as a whiz-bang adventure, Picard as a more meditative drama, Lower Decks as a fast-paced comedy, Prodigy for the kids, and Strange New Worlds for the old-school fans. Now, you can question how well each of those has hit its target, but at least he’s been willing to try different things, and even adjust course when things aren’t working quite right (see Discovery).

That’s the only thing I think he got right. It actually was a great idea to go for different tones and different styles. The problem is every show shares producers. No single show really has its own voice. The incestuous crossover of production people means the shows are more similar that different. Even IF they are going for their own tone. Alex would be better off to not allow ANY person to work on more than one show. And hire different people to be at the helm of all of them. He only needs to coordinate from the top. I run a department and I have different people working different aspects of it. I manage overall but I also don’t interfere with someone working on their aspect of things so long as the work is good and completed. I know it’s not the same but it’s similar enough that I feel like it ought to be done that way.

Well, the folks in a position to actually know disagree with you. That they extended his contract, and you’re here on a fan forum page bitching about it is all anyone really needs to know.

So anybody complaining about product from a corporation is immediately consigned to some lower status in your mind, just because? Class act, Phil, get your head up out of the wet sand before you smother from ingesting the wrong materials.

Phil is apparently unaware of the existence equity analysts who actually track the performance of publicly traded companies — these are folks whose recommendations actually move markets, even if they’re not part of executive management. Ditto with strategy consultants and buy-side investment firms. (This is before we even get to movie critics and influencers. Seriously, do you think that the people who run fashion houses get to dismiss Anna Wintour because “she’s not part of out executive management”?)

In Hollywood, nothing succeeds like success. “The folks in a position to actually know” are only as good as their most recent track record — indeed, this arguably makes Hollywood overly risk averse. Sherry Lansing and Les Moonves were once “in the know,” too.

You’re 100% right Phil. Kurtzman has been the shot in the arm Trek has needed for years.

You mean to churn out undistinguished slop that squeezes out whatever profits are left from a 55-year-old franchise? (with the exception of Lower Decks which not coincidentally has the least creative input from AK.)

Don’t hold back…tell us how you really feel? ;D

Wow this is really upsetting people. But you can’t be all that surprised. The shows keep getting renewed right? People said plenty about Berman too and he stayed on for the same reasons, the shows kept getting renewed and the movies made money. Surprise surprise it wasn’t until Nemesis bombed and Enterprise being the first show to be prematurely cancelled since TOS that they finally stopped renewing his contract. And he was there for 18 years.

Until these shows start to get cancelled, I suspect Kurtzman will be there at least until then. Maybe not 18 years but probably awhile.

Nah, it’s only upsetting the people who you’d expect to be upset.
In any franchise, there will be disappointments. There will be more Marvel and Star Wars content, even though Solo and Black Widow were disappointments. In my estimation, it wasn’t so much that Nemesis and Enterprise were disappointments that did in Berman, but his inability to depart from Trek formula. Kurtzman doesn’t seem to be making that mistake – while the idea of a Worf comedy (maybe sci-fi dramedy is a better description) may be just talk, what he is doing is laying down the expectation that Trek will be exploring creative new frontiers. And there will be hits and misses. I’m okay with that…

But that’s the other irony, people are saying Kurtzman Trek is generic , mediocre or lacks real vision. Well mediocre is a valid argument but I don’t understand how people can believe he lacks vision or generic when he’s the one that is doing things in Star Trek that has literally never been done? And yet it’s being repeated on multiple boards including this one of course. But yes I guess how people define ‘vision’ is the issue.

I mean you just pointed out the Worf comedy idea (which doesn’t seem to be one people are loving lol) but it proves he’s willing to take chances and think outside the box others weren’t before him. It doesn’t mean it will be good, but it sounds like anything is on the table. I love Lower Decks because it’s both conventional and unconventional Star Trek at the same time. It oddly feels ‘formulaic’ in terms of its story telling but it’s so zany and off the wall that it feels totally fresh and different. I understand how that will divide people but I love it because it IS radical, at least for Star Trek.

So yeah, it’s just how people can look at the same thing and see something totally different. I think Kurtzman is trying to push Star Trek in areas that it has never gone before. I think that’s a great thing. I really enjoy seeing that. But as I said in my OP which I don’t know you read or not, it does still come down to how its all executed and if the story is simply good or not. And yes even for me, a lot of the content has been questionable to say the least. I like a lot of it, but I don’t know if I like most of it, which I certainly did in the Berman days and still watch constantly 20 years later. That’s the main issue for me with the new shows, will they have a lasting quality? The jury is still out but at the moment its a big NO for me, at least the way I compare it to the classic shows. Even as much as I’m loving Lower Decks now, I wonder will that show feel more dated in a few years?

But I have said this, this is how I always wanted to see Trek shown. I didn’t really have an issue with Berman’s vision at all frankly but yeah there were clearly areas he never wanted to go in Kurtzman feels comfortable doing, the biggest just going beyond the 24th century. I don’t know if Berman would’ve taken Trek into a farther future. Although the irony is we now have the same number of 24th century shows with Kurtzman (LDS, PIC and PRO) as Berman did lol. I guess the 24th century just feels very comfortable for them to keep exploring.

I’m OK with hits and misses as well. The problem is in 5 seasons so far there hasn’t been a single hit. At best he’s made contact perhaps once or twice but the other three AB’s have been whiffs.

Sometimes you get an unscrewable pooch. At least for a while. That seems to be the position Alex is in. I feel like given the niche nature of streaming and there are enough people like us out there to buy the service even though many think it is below average, he will keep getting his contract extended.

@Phil 100% agree.


Clone me Gene Coon AND Dorothy Fontana AND Bob Justman AND Leonard Nimoy … we were so lucky that a team of geniuses was assembled for TOS, but I think that’s a once-in-a-hundred-years kind of event. :-)

Each and every one of those geniuses was capable of producing bad work, and did. It may be that even without the network interference and budget cuts TOS still would have peaked in its first year. We’ll never know.

yeah, but bad work like SPOCK’S BRAIN was at least fun in spots. But in support of your point, I do have to say that it isn’t to anybody’s credit that THE ALTERNATIVE FACTOR even exists. I mean, it is ROYALE or NIGHT TERRORS or THAW level bad (I’d include LOUD AS A WHISPER but have never gotten all the way through it … there are probably 15 TNGs I’ve never finished, and I still haven’t seen half of VOYAGER and 3/4 of ENTERPRISE.)

Honestly, I think that if networks interfered with shows to the degree they have this century, that GR would have been forced out in favor of Coon running things, even if the latter would have been tough on them and called them on their BS.

Dang, dude. “The Thaw” is great!

I have to agree. These were great writers but they produced stinkers on that show too. I think we get caught up in the nostalgia and after decades of fawning over them that they can do no wrong when we know that’s not really true. And you can say that for a lot of the Trek writers over the years of course. Some of the writers who produced some of the best of Star Trek also the worst. Brannon Braga was responsible for now iconic stories like All Good Things, First Contact and Timeless. He’s also the one who was responsible for Threshold and These Are The Voyages. And sadly a lot of his detractors seem to only remember the bad stuff to the point he’s almost treated like a villain to some of them (and ironically the same for Kurtzman today).

And then of course the other issue is they were writers for their time. TV is a very different medium today, who knows how well they would be able to write or produce a show in today’s landscape. Nic Meyer is a perfect example. There was so much hype over him coming back to Star Trek when Discovery was announced but he didn’t seem to make any lasting impact on TPTB because he was there a whole year and didn’t have a single writing credit and then was just let go after the first season and that was that. You would think they would keep him around for PR reasons alone, but nope. But it’s telling that maybe either his ideas didn’t gel with what they wanted OR he just presented bad ideas. We’ll never know either way.

And then he was rumored to be doing a Khan mini-series (ugh) that went nowhere thankfully and then pitched them a Star Trek movie that was DOA the second he left the lot because they moved on to several other movie projects that had nothing to do with him. And yet people here still talk about him like a god because they liked some of the movies he made, which are still great, but all were made over 30 years ago as well.

Sometimes you can’t always go home again.

Nic Meyer isn’t a household name. He has no impact in Trek today.

The situation with Nick Meyer I think was that he was basically not in the zeitgeist anymore. He is much more in the mold of guys like Tarantino or Scorsese, a guy who doesn’t take any BS from anyone and openly says his opinions and I have a feeling some of his opinions didn’t get with the producers of Discovery so he left. I would actually love to hear this whole story from Meyer’s mouth, but I highly doubt he will tell it because of professional integrity.

That could be true too. But the difference being as you said Tarantino and Scorsese are still heavy hitters and make plenty of movies now, most that makes money. Meyer really hasn’t done much in the last several decades. And he’s obviously rich enough so he doesn’t have to grovel to get or keep a job I guess.

And I would love to hear what happened with him on Discovery too. It’s been 3 years and all he said was they never called him back for season 2. That’s been the extent of it, but clearly it’s much more than that lol. I just assume these guys either sign NDAs and they can’t tell their side or they just choose to be polite about it. Discovery lost 3 show runners in two seasons and none of them ever gave their side of the story in that either so maybe it does have something to do with an NDA and they simply can’t talk about it.

The Irishmen was a colossal failure it made less than ten million dollars on an 150 million dollars or more budget. It was a critical success but made no money whatsoever.

Didn’t Nettflix buy up The Irishman and release it directly on their service in most markets?
For myself, the topic of the movie doesn’t really interest me. And the runtime of 3 1/2 hours has certainly kept me from checking it out just out of curiosity.

That went to Netflix though where the majority of people (including me) saw it. It was in the theaters for about a week I think. And my only point is Scorsese is still a huge power player in Hollywood, Meyer isn’t. When was the last time Meyer was nominated for an academy award for anything? When was the last time he was even invited to one?

I’m not trying to knock Meyer, I’m making the point like it or not, the people who will be making Trek content are not people of the past because Star Trek has changed for today’s audience for both the TV and film side. It needs the type of writers, directors and producers who truly gets how its done today. Meyer himself said he could never direct something like a Kelvin movie. I think he even said he didn’t understand STID. But to be fair to him, a lot of people said that about STID. ;)

They did try to bring him back and for whatever reason it just didn’t work out.

The Irishman was a Netflix movie. It was designed to get new subscribers and keep/engage existing ones. Releasing it in theaters was done more as a favor for Scorsese than anything.

We will never know exactly how successful the film was for Netflix because their metrics are different and opaque compared to traditional theatrical releases with budget data and box office reporting. But Netflix has not gotten out of the big budget film game and got into a bidding war with Apple to finance Scorsese’s next $200 million epic, so I think that speaks volumes.

Releasing it to theaters was just so it would qualify for the Oscars. If they didn’t, it would be up for Emmys.

Yup for every COTEOF there is a Spock’s Brain or the horrific Turnabout Intruder – for every First Contact, there is also Nemesis and the episode I refuse to ever watch again… These are the Voyages!

Nick Meyer was hired to generate some buzz with legacy fans.
They sent him off to write something and it most likely was interesting but here is the problem: We know what happens to Khan and Co at the end of Trek 2. How do we create any peril or dramatic tension for them? (Thus the ideas for the Kelvinverse) Also, Nick Meyer probably didn’t need the gig. When Par+ put the brakes on his project, he may have just walked away, happy with the extra dump truck of money…

How does he make his money, though? Unless IMDB is incomplete, he doesn’t seem to have a lot of gigs ongoing.

They have produced bad stuff, yes. But this brings up the tremendous disadvantage that short season story arcs have. You have a full season story arc and basically you have one shot to get a good story. If it doesn’t work, the entire season is crap. A short season that is stand alones stands a better chance. The thing is, the longer the season (under normal circumstances I have my doubts this is true with Secret Hideout) has the better chance of getting more memorable episodes in a single season. TOS was a bit unusual in that the ratio of good to bad episodes in the first two seasons were freakishly high. The 3rd season was actually more normal. TNG’s ratio of good to bad episodes was pretty low too. But they had some 26 episodes a season. So there were a number of good ones. Enough for us to think back fondly of the show.

I don’t disagree too much and that’s exactly why the shows are so repeatable because you have SO many episodes there are tons of great ones to find, even in the ‘bad’ seasons. Thats what my grand rewatch is teaching me. I was originally afraid to watch the first seasons of TNG and DS9 but they were actually mostly fine because there were still a lot of good ones. You trudge through the bad ones but then you perk up knowing the next one was pretty decent. TNG and DS9 so far has the highest frequency of good to bad episodes for me so far and I have now rewarched every show at least a little bit minus LDS and PIC. I guess that’s why they are my two favorites shows. ;)

I’m definitely finding that out in Voyager lol. I’m at the very end of season 3 now, heading into season 4 tomorrow. And yes definitely some truly awful ones, but most of them have been fine. Three have been so many I have literally forgotten about and they just been fun to watch because I literally don’t remember them. When you have SO many episodes you do have options.

Its very different from say Picard, where yeah its only 10 and they are connected and you all know where its going. There is just no feeling of surprise once you watched it, even if you forget the specifics later because its all building up to one story.

But with (mostly) 26 different stories, it’s just a lot more fun to watch these shows because sometimes you really have no idea what the next one is about.

When I did my rewatch of DS9 and TNG, there were many episodes I had literally forgotten about. That can happen after a more than 20 year gap. Funny thing, most of the TNG shows I forgot existed once I started watching them the memory banks kicked in and I found myself thinking, “I think I recall how this turns out…” But that didn’t happen with the DS9 episodes I had forgotten about. Weird.

This is the most successful period — financially and creatively — in the entire history of Star Trek. If anyone is bummed out by today’s news, then it’s clear that today’s modern, successful and unimpeachable Trek just isn’t for them, and that’s okay. Not everything is made for everybody.

Boy, if that isn’t the most debatable post in the entire history of Star Trek, I’m not sure what is. Pretty much anything that is unimpeachable is in fact impeachable.

No, Tiberius is correct.

Well… partly. I think financially, he’s surely right; while I don’t profess to know all the nitty-gritty particulars of the balance sheets, I think it’s safe to say they wouldn’t be renewing AK’s contract for 5+ years and paying him a whopping $160 million (or for that matter, adding one show after another to the catalog, so that we’re about to have at least five Trek shows running simultaneously) if the franchise were losing money.

That said, whether this is the most successful period creatively is very much up for debate. Opinions on all the new shows is pretty mixed. Acknowledged that some of the fan criticism comes with a certain level of toxicity that IMO makes it frankly unworthy of consideration, but even tuning that stuff out, there’s pretty significant (and reasonable) fan debate on the merits of the new shows.

Deals like this don’t necessarily reflect the financial success of a series. Paramount+ won’t be profitable for years but they want to retain the talent that they have and that means throwing an obscene amount of cash at Kurtzman for delivering a consistent product on time and on budget, the likes of which Gene Roddenberry and Rick Berman never saw when they produced Star Trek.

ViacomCBS raised $2.6 billion in capitol to invest in original series and Kurtzman’s getting a $160 million of that. He’s the Dick Wolf of Star Trek.

Nice to see such detailed and informative support for a position. 25 words or less only counts if they’re the right words, not just lemming-like approval.

What isn’t debatable is that not everything is made for everybody.

That is incorrect. The 90s era of 52 episodes per year, on mainstream television and merchandise including children’s toys was the most successful period. TNG was a well known mainstream series.

The merch guys at CBS say the TNG gear makes the most $$

Netflix didn’t start turning a profit until they reached over $200 million subscribers in 2020. Discovery and Picard are loss leaders for Paramount+ (as is Paramount+ as a whole for ViacomCBS). Lots of money is going out the door to drive subscriptions for a service that currently reaches 36 million subscribers compared to Disney’s 100 million and the aforementioned 200 million for Netflix. Disney is basically printing cash at this point with the ability to generate a ton of revenue from merchandise stemming from those MCU and Star Wars series airing on Disney+ to offset their investment in Disney+.

I would argue that the early to mid-90s presented the most creative and financially successful period of Star Trek. The final seasons of TNG, the premieres of DS9 and Voyager, Star Trek VI, Generations and First Contact all happened between 1991 and 1996. During that period of time Star Trek was generating revenue and ratings across the board.

LOL, even a writer-producer of the much ballyhooed Picard admitted it was “creatively” flawed and not properly planned out. And “unimpeachable”- is your thesaurus set to random?

I would have to guess (Only a guess) that the era of TNG, at the height of its popularity, with the TOS films wrapping up then DS9 starting up and being on the air concurrently with TNG for awhile, was the height of Trek’s financial success.

Including reruns of TOS and TNG running nightly in many markets at that time, plus the merchandising at the time was huge (I remember buying a lot of Trek toys then). When TNG wrapped, they went to the big screen with mixed results but the first couple of films did well. DS9 and then VOY were on the air new, and TNG reruns remained big. The 90s really were Trek’s peak.

The AbramsTrek films, while I was not a fan, did huge business at first. But the (Deserved) backlash to the second film seemed to have hurt the third one and even though we keep hearing about more movies, it’s hard to say where that’s going,

While there are many Trek shows happening right now, with (Again) mixed results, I don’t see how this is their “most successful period.” Most of these shows are on Paramount + (In the States) and there just aren’t many people paying for that. These shows don’t have the reach TNG, DS9 and VOY did. Those were Trek’s “glory days.”

Gee, you know I never considered that.

Not once in all these years, even when I was writing lengthy detailed critiques that offered alternatives.

Not when I wrote a spec that got me in to pitch at TNG, or a couple months later, when a critique I sent to Nicholas Meyer about the state of Trek got posted on the office wall in the Hart Building and it looked (for about five minutes) like I might actually get offered an assistant-to-the-assistant position on TUC.

You offer me so much food for ‘thought’ that I might actually choke on it.

I don’t think people really understand the BUSINESS part of Show Business and the business of Star Trek.
Yes, Kurtzman got his contract renewed because he delivered on the business end of Trek. Get shows made on time and on budget. Why do you think GR got relegated to “executive consultant” for the TOS films? He really couldn’t merge show and business together.
Us legacy fans will be thrown a bone here and there, but there aren’t enough of us to sustain a profitable business model. TOS was groundbreaking TV in the 60’s, it was easy to stand out against Green Acres and the Beverly Hillbillies.
Trek today, has to compete with a more sophisticated viewer in a 500+ channel universe.
It has to compete with Outlander, The Expanse and the MCEU, Disney+ you name it.
Par+ wants THOSE eyeballs on Trek.
I mean look at us, we can’t agree on what Trek is or isn’t. Or my favorite, they’re incensed at having to access it thru a paywall that’s $6.00 a month…*smh* When an episode cost’s $6 to $8 million dollars? I expect to have to pay for it.

Whoah, whoah, whoah, take a swipe at the Henning schmaltz of PETTICOAT JUNCTION and THE BEVERLY HILLBILLIES all you want, but GREEN ACRES was a thing apart. A comedy breakthrough more along the lines of THE ADDAMS FAMILY or LAUGH-IN, not deserving of being slumped together with examples of schlock that you attempted to cite.

Green Acres was far ahead of its time, but for those of us who grew up with it on syndicated reruns, it’s easy to lump it in with others that were less innovative.

It’s time to do that “Assignment: Earth” current-day comedy that Gene Roddenberry wanted to develop as a spin-off. So many ways to update the premise to the 2020’s. In any case, it’s a good bet, not all of these will be sure-fire hits, but it’s pretty exciting nonetheless. Hopefully, SNW will get some of the crankier “where’s the optimism?” fans something to chew on while we move onto bigger and better things.

Absolutely AJinMoscow.

Assignment Earth, a regular commitment to Short Treks, a one hour anthology series, made-for-streaming movies and all the other wild ideas that we’ve been speculating about on the Chat all now seem possible.

And I’m still looking for some grounded aspirational slice of life and romances.

Hallmark is making a killing in the underserved aspirational romance television movie market. CBS tried some crossovers with Hallmark in the past. Some classic Trek love stories would be a real hit.

But authentic family life has a place too. If Superman and Lois can be incredibly successful grounding the greatest superhero ever with teenagers, there’s definitely a market for something like this. It just takes the right writers and Showrunners. That is people who actually know what it’s like to live in a family with working parents and kids.

“And I’m still looking for some grounded aspirational slice of life and romances.”

No, just no.
I chose this life as a Trekkie to avoid any regular contact with that sort of life. I’m not interested in watching people having something that I rejected to become a full-blown geek. I’m married to the Enterprise, my oath of celebacy is in my Starfleet records.
I love colors, shapes, uniforms, starship designs, make-ups, skin colors, musical scores, planetary SFX… but I don’t care for romance and relationships outsode the absolute necessary…

I don’t know why, but Garth’s comment here truly makes me smile. And that scares me and makes me happy at the same time.

@Garth, you realize you make up the smallest percentage of fans? A grounded Trek series with characters that have real life romances, family issues would bring a new type of fan? More eyeballs on Trek?

Yes, I stand apart. Just like your Vulcan science officer.

Oh, come on, it has to been done if Paramount+ is to have any hope of taking back the ornament merchandizing.

Hi TG,

You have used that Hallmark analogy before and I agree. I am not a Kurtz man, myself and I don’t agree with many aspects of his strategy. But he is right from a pure business perspective to boldly try to find and convert as many diverse and previously un-touched demographics as possible to the Star Trek brand. This ensures the brand’s future lives longer… and more broadly…. and more profitably… by spreading Trek across more people than just the narrow group of us highly opinionated Trek purists.

From a business perspective, Kurtz is right. But I agree with what Blondie-wan said… whether this is the most successful period creatively is very much up for debate. Opinions on all the new shows is pretty mixed.  Creatively, I find Kurtzman to be a conundrum of disappointment. But I watch what he puts out because it is the only source of new Trek on TV and because every few episodes I find something in his productions that makes say, “Now that is good”. Is that called Hate Watching? So, my begrudged Hate Watching pumps up his Nielsen ratings which then justifies him getting re-upped for $160M. Sorry.

Oh, I’ve digressed… I am even more sorry.

Hallmark is a great example of milking the brand and growing their audience. It’s every genre of romance, valentines and Christmas movie that can be imagined, all year long and for every imaginable demographic. Not that I watch any of that stuff or whatever. Harrumph!!

For me, personally, I just want a serious Star Trek CSI show!!!! That could rock. And I want a West Wing style show called “The Federation” that dives deep into the politics, corruption, and daily runnings of The Fed with its many galactic species and factions all jockeying for power.

P+, please give me those two shows. Please?!?!

Can’t say I’d go for a procedural beyond the odd Trek universe made-for-streaming movie, but I can’t deny that there could be a market for it.

In the Litverse, there was a Bureau of Temporal Investigations series that was popular, and a Starfleet Core of Engineers series as well.

The point is that there are fans that sincerely would be thrilled to see the Trek Universe built out beyond Starfleet and starships. And there might be new folks for whom something very different might be their accessible entry point into the franchise.

Yes, the base concept of the planet of the week or other weird thing needs to be in the mix of offerings, but that’s not the only thing that defined Star Trek. Star Trek doesn’t need to be limited to that.

It’s the optimism for an aspirational society in the face of challenging times that is the most enduring difference between Trek and pretty much everything else.

In terms of the hate watching phenomenon, it’s best to keep in mind that hatewatchers rarely replay an episode multiple times.

Just keep in mind that almost all of the top ten most watched Trek episodes on Netflix are from Voyager, and consider who was cast Prodigy and Picard, and then you’ll understand that the suits actually pay attention to what people actually watch again and again rather than what some vocal people say is popular.

@ Tarnwood You win TrekMovie today! Best thought out comment I’ve read in this thread..

“Hopefully, SNW will get some of the crankier “where’s the optimism?” fans something to chew on while we move onto bigger and better things.”

If SNW is what it’s supposed to be I can hardly imagine “bigger and better things”… The original Enterprise on a five.year-mission exploring the galaxy with top-snotch SFX… There is no bigger and better beyond that :-)

Seriously, the only two options I’d consider out-Trekking a well done SNW would be an immersive time travel show covering all of history and a show going to other galaxies…

Remember they literally had a set of TOS movies that people over a decade ago felt was going to be the be all and end all to a new future of Star Trek…and we saw how that worked out.

And the first two written by the guy now making all these new shows including SNW. And I’ll be honest, after all the buildup and then let down of Picard season one, I’m not going to get overly excited about ANY show until they start first while certainly still excited over the idea of it and very hopeful they will get it right.

The thing that makes me hopeful is that Kurtzman seems to excel at attracting smart creatives who bring him interesting ideas and letting them run with it.

Both Discovery and Picard have suffer from top much executive meddling on one hand and creatives who didn’t get the era they were writing in on the other.

But some of the Short Treks, Lower Decks and Prodigy all seem to have been very innovative and successful.

I’m hoping that allowing the multiverse to be built out will enable more creative energy and surprises.

I agree. I think where DIS and PIC suffered from is too many cooks in the kitchen. And I understand why, these two were the first two Star Trek shows in over a decade and each of them had a lot of hype going in, even if for different reasons. So there are a lot of people constantly trying to shape them, but it got to the point it loses its cohesion by the end.

Even if you don’t like Lower Decks, the great thing about it is it’s clearly behind one solid voice which is Mike McMahan. He seems to have all the creative control but also probably because that show didn’t have the same priority as the others. Oddly that can be a very good thing.

And you know my feelings with Discovery’s third season. Still lots of issues but it didn’t feel nearly as messy as the first two seasons. And you can probably credit that with the new show runner too and things sound like they ran much more smoothly.

I don’t know if I will EVER like these shows like the classic shows. The jury is still waaaay out on that one, but they all still have potential. I just know, for me, what makes the older shows better is that they just have heart in a way the new shows don’t seem to have yet…not counting LDS which has tons of heart and another reason I like so much so quickly. But watching an episode of TOS, DS9 or VOY is just a very different experience than watching DIS and PIC, because 20 years later I can still watch the classic shows over and over again (as I’m watching a DS9 episode as I type this ;)).

I think one of the things SNW has going for it is a lead whose enthusiasm for this project has been on display since day 1 of shooting. The man is genuinely excited about the show they’re bringing to fans.

That’s true. You certainly didn’t feel that with Chris Pine lol. I mean he was certainly grateful to have the role, but it seem much more about doing a big Hollywood film with JJ Abrams than anything. Mount really do seem to love the franchise in general and has said he watched all of it before getting the job.

Mount’s enthusiasm for SNW matches that of Brandon Routh with Superman. Brandon Routh really knows that character inside and out and when he had the chance to play it again last year that enthusiasm and excitement was apparent on screen.

Anson Mount can’t wait for fans to see SNW and I find that very encouraging.

It’s a sad day.

…for trolls, non-fans and idiots. Yes, it is.

The way YOU are responding in this thread sure seems like trolling to me, because you’re striking the same note of attack or denial without providing a lot of new info to justify the volume of posts.

No personal attack was intended, just a generalization about people who spend too much time complaining about Star Trek and not enough time enjoying it. If it came off as personal, that was not my goal. My apologies.

…for haters with closed minds.

Seriously, most of the people who are unhappy about this seem to have decided “Kurtzman bad” and have refused to consider anything Secret Hideout has released in the past two years. Discovery has reinvented itself, and Picard and Lower Decks are both solid (in very different ways).

By all accounts, SNW is going to be the episodic, old-school Trek some folks have been missing. Each of the other shows has a different target audience.

Maybe none of the current Treks is for you. That’s a pity. Maybe Strange New Worlds will be; give it a try. And let the folks who do enjoy the other shows enjoy them.

re: your last sentence: how is offering criticism about something in any way keeping folks who like the shows from enjoying them? I’m not breaking your TV aerial or cutting off your cable box from the wall or screwing with your bluetooth.

That’s fair.

By all accounts, SNW is going to be the episodic, old-school Trek some folks have been missing. Each of the other shows has a different target audience.”

Then again, they’ve told us there will be “character arcs” and “lots of two-part episodes.” Which sounds an awful lot like DS9 and, especially, the superb season for of ENT. So who knows. At this point, I’d ignore the spin and wait to see what they actually produce.

Frankly I think SNW is going to be set up like Enterprise season 4 as well. Basically a lot of mini-arcs but they are all ‘separate’ stories, but in reality still telling a running story line, just not as connected as we saw the Xindi one. Frankly that would be great if they can do that. It worked out amazing for Enterprise and wish they went that way in season one.

“Forget the Red Shirts”

Starfleet Acamedy has Worf teaching at the Academy (in the Henry Winkler role) as guest speaker Wesley returns traumatized by the universe (in the Bill Hader role) and unable to…. Stop… Killing… young nubile student lifeguards (in the Pamela Anderson role).

A Worf comedy? Why not just do a puppet show at this point and call it cannon?

There is no roadmap. Throwing everything at the wall that could possibly exist is not a roadmap. It’s a desperate cry of somebody who is flailing around trying to find something that will stick. At the expense of Star Trek. What a joke.

Queue the gatekeeping attitudes…


I guess that given both TNG and DS9 received the same negativity, it seems we can call this a franchise tradition.

I really feel like a contrarian here sometimes given that I’m someone who saw TOS in first run as a primary school child, but am always excited to see what new Trek is on offer.

I hope Tiger2 joins me in the “Did we ever dare hope to have so much more new Star Trek?” cheer on this board.

TNG and DS9 may have both had their critics, but they were at least serious dramas pitched at adults — not kiddie fare, not comedies.

Kurtzman has clearly made a strategic decision to expand the nature of what constitutes “Star Trek,” which by and large seems to be based on merchandising. While I could be wrong, I argue that from a business standpoint, he has made the wrong bet.

Do you consider DIS or PIC ‘kiddie fare’?

Man, I can see how much the animated shows bother you, but, and I’m just being honest here, some fans are just too narrow minded at times. You can certainly not like them, but maybe, just maybe its OK to say they are not meant for you and move on, right?

They are developing five shows. When have we EVER gotten five shows at once? Never obviously, but they are doing that for a reason, to try and appeal to different demographics. To get others on board who may not like what the more ‘serious’ Star Trek approach. Or maybe get them with the lighter fare and they eventually try the other stuff.

When it was just ONE show on, I understood why people had an issue, that’s all they had. Same with the Kelvin movies. It was all that there was and it was one movie every 3-4 years. That really sucks in terms of output and if you didn’t like them, then basically there was no other options for you.

But in a year’s time, there is going to be more Star Trek than any of us thought would see and a lot of diversified choices. I think that’s a good strategy and I would LIKE to think eventually there will be something for everyone. But you don’t have to like everything either. Even if you don’t like it all, it’s probably more than you liked in the last decade at least. ;)

While I don’t really wish a dissertation on it, I really think that somewhere there’s a good essay to be written about why some (mainly American) fans are so deeply offended by the idea of animation.

As someone who was thrilled to get my 22 episodes of TAS when TOS was gone (and before there was any hope that syndicated reruns would be a thing), my gut reaction is still pretty much the same 50 years later:

“How dare you say that I shouldn’t get more Trek just because it’s not the your ideal?” especially when your ideal didn’t get enough ratings to stay in production.

Live action snobbery just seems so over the top, especially when so much of the vfx are hardly different from animation if less stylized.

I remember we had this conversation before and to be fair we don’t even know The River Temarc is American, unless he mentioned it somewhere previously.

And honestly I just don’t agree that this is an American issue since all the Americans *I* know love animation shows. My own brother watches everything from South Park to Archer. And they seem pretty popular today. I just think this is more of a Star Trek fan issue than anything. I mean look at the Star Wars fanbase, you rarely see any of them complaining about the Star Wars cartoons (or am I wrong). In fact it seems to be the opposite and they are very welcoming of them. And last time I checked, the majority of SW fans are American too.

But that’s also because The Clone Wars has been around since 2008 and its regarded as a very quality show so they had a long time to really adapt to it being just as part of the franchise as the live action stuff. Now they are literally turning the animated characters (from TCW and Rebels) into live action ones, which proves how popular they become. Ashoka is just as popular as Luke Walker is today.

So why do SW fans don’t seem to have an issue with animation and ST fans do? And even then that is obviously a bit generalized since many ST fans here DON’T have an issue with it. It just seems the ones that do are (very) vocal about it.

But I’ll also be honest, if I have to choose between a live action show and an animated one, I will probably choose the live action show….they are usually an hour long so that alone gives them an advantage. ;)

Like Rick in CASABLANCA, The River Temarc is American but a citizen of the world.

Hi TG,

You are in Canada, correct? This may be why I love that you have the clarity and perspective to make this statement… and to make it with such concise authority:

“How dare you say that I shouldn’t get more Trek just because it’s not your ideal?” especially when your ideal didn’t get enough ratings to stay in production.

Live action snobbery just seems so over the top….

You are spot-on in your insight and criticism. It applies all too effectively to more than just Star Trek and this thread. Just change the topic from Trek to any contemporaneous issue and it still applies.

In my youth, I heard these statements ALL THE TIME in high school from teachers trying to teach us younglings how to think and how to understand American civics: I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right and freedom to say it. We stand on respect for, protection of, and encouragement of a diversity of opinions, thoughts, and robust debate.

Not so today.

Many have this philosophy: I respect your opinion when it aligns with mine. But if your opinion differs from mine, then your opinion is wrong on its face, you deserve a beat-down, and your right to speak needs to be taken away.

TG – There are times when I like reading your opinions because I agree with them. There are times when I don’t want to read your opinions at all. There are times when I read your opinions for an education. There are times when I read your opinions to learn how to deliver a point more effectively. But I really am glad I ran across you on this site. You have the courtesy, knowledge and the presence of mind to deliver points effectively for both education and for impact. Most of the time, we don’t see when your Canadian kindness has concealed the fact that you just slammed us over the head with a 20 pound sledgehammer. Which means that I am often left thinking, “Dang. That’s good stuff right there. I don’t even feel pain from the impact crater above my temple.” That’s American for “Bob’s your uncle.”

Thanks for the recognition Tarnwood, even if as you say, we don’t always agree.

I believe that I’ve mentioned previously on this board that I spent my grad school years in the United States.

Sounds like I actually did learn how to get my point across to Americans without being totally annoying in that particular Canadian way. So that’s a win. 😉

( I actually had a colleague who came back from doing 6 weeks in Canada doing field research one summer who told me in all sincerity that there really is an entire country of people who talk like me north of the border. Not having had much contact with Canadians, they had thought it was an affectation.)

How dare you say that I shouldn’t get more Trek just because it’s not your ideal?

It’s called “literary criticism”; or, for the Ferengish amongst us, being a stockholder of Paramount Group, Inc. (NYSE: PGRE).

Hi River T,

I got the cut of your jib.

Even so, I like the Ferengish remark.

That’s why friendly disagreement can be cool and should be promoted. Things don’t always need to be raised to the level personal attacks and scorched earth replies.

Seriously and still very sarcastically, the Ferengi remark reminds me of a comment I made some time ago where I sarcastically talked about the merits of certain rules of acquisition in relation to a Trek Movie article. I was quite proud of that bit of snark.

But you’ve made me think of a new show idea: I said earlier in this thread that I would love to see a Star Trek CSI show and a West Wing style Federation show. I am serious about those.

Jokingly, I think it might also be cool to see a Ferengi-Apprentice style show. The goal would be to apply the rules of acquisition better than and more profitably than your opponents… or die. That might be a cool faux-reality show within the Star Trek universe. As a faux-reality show within the ST universe, it would be a Ferenginar-based show for the Ferengi people and maybe for a few Ferengi-allied worlds.

Or maybe it’s not a good idea. But I have to say that I like the brainstorm of that idea more than I do an ST musical.

From a business standpoint he’s driven primarily by business. Viacom is desperate to broaden the fanbase of Star Trek and have it skew younger and that means an animated series geared toward kids, another animated series primarily toward the 18 – 34 crowd and the rest essentially for those who skew older and the traditional fan base. What they are hoping to accomplish is what The Mandalorian, WandaVision, Falcon and the Winter Soldier and Loki have accomplished for Disney+. I’m just not sure if Star Trek is the right vehicle to make it happen because I can guarantee you that the same crowd watching every other Star Trek series will be watching “Star Trek: Prodigy”, not the intended target audience.

“On the Enterprise I was considered to be quite amusing.”

“I don’t understand their humor either.”
“nice planet.”
(in response to hearing he is drinking prune juice): A warrior’s drink.

Worf is often funny, but it is in that on-occasion way, not as a going concern. A Worf comedy — without some interesting approach/texture — would be like turning THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO into a comedy just because the leads had entertaining chemistry.

Why not just do a puppet show at this point and call it cannon?

Don’t give them ideas.

If it’s not Muppets but Farscape, sign me on :-)

You seem unaware that those aliens in Farscape are MUPPETS. Jim Henson’s Creature Shop is responsible for them.

I absolutely do know that… but it’s nothing like The Muppet Show, it’s great creative sci-fi. And I wouldn’t mind a Trek show coming to life through that sort of puppetry…

I’m glad Kurtzman stays. He is by far not that incompetent some people color him to be…

Out of the three teased new shows, Starfleet Academy is the one I’m most interested in. This concept has been floating around since the late 80s and was briefly included in ST09, but I guess it has to happen some day and I actually want it to happen…

The Worf comedy… ugh… that one catches me unprepared. Worf had his funny moments but an entire comedy show based on this particular characters sounds a tad off.

Section 31… well, I’m not excited but there is nothing I could do. Hopefully it’s more Bond than John Wick in execution…

I still hope for a time travel show for Trek… So much potential… One week you could explore dinosaurs, the next week Kahless, the week after that visit an old Trek episode like in Trials and Tribbleations… Klingon Shakespeare, T’Kon Empire, the far away future, Surak on Vulcan, the origin of the Borg or the Dominion, Vikings fending off aliens in the early middle-ages, parallel universe history, the possibilities are endless, unlimited…

I think too may people see “comedy” and think of slaptstick or absurdity or comedy of errors. Worf had basically been a joke since 1987, a fish out of water, a cranky contrarian in a dramatic setting. The square peg in the round hole. A comedy with Worf doesn’t necessarily indicate a sitcom or an absurdist setting like Lower Decks. Life itself is a drama filled with ironic twists, and I think Worf is the perfect sort of “I’ve had just about enough of this shit for today” kind of character to make a show like that work. Michael Dorn is a consummate straight man. I’d love to see that show.

This works — if you think Kurtzman is Tom Stoppard and can turn Worf into ROSENCRANZ & GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD. I’m not, shall we say, holding my breath.

Of course I don’t expect them to do a LDS style Worf sitcom… But some sort of TV-MA dark comedy that plays out like those zombie comedies that aren’t actually funny… But that makes me even more skeptical since I HATE to laugh at bloodshed and brutality.

Actually on TNG I think Data was the fish out of water. He’s the one who did not understand colloquialisms. The use of metaphors. Or other such every day humanoid behaviors. When things went over his head it was mostly done for comedic effect. Worf did have a couple of funny moments… (the Robin Hood Q episode) But other than that he really wasn’t that funny a character. But he was the most interesting character on the E-D.

Until very recently, the biggest problem with that idea was budget. If you’re in a new time and location every week, you can’t amortize costs for design, sets, and costumes across the season. (Doctor Who manages, but with somewhat lower production values than American TV generally expects.)

But now that we have this VR technology that can convincingly create new locations, maybe the time for a time-traveling Trek series has arrived.

Agreed. The AR stage wall is a major advantage for such a show. Although I have to say that NuWho did an awesome job. The old show was cheep beyond belief, especially in the 80s, but since 2005, NuWho has been doing quite well. Of course you cannot do an epic T’Kon homeworld episode each week. There would have do be bottled shows about some witchhunt in the woods or Surak in a monastery.

Kurtzman is more than competent but lacks a voice or vision of his own, much like JJ Abrams.

Like many other streamers, Paramount+ is still waiting for an original breakout series that isn’t tied into an existing franchise or IP.

I’m not crying, the YouTubers are crying! The writers are crying! The cast members are crying! Right there on the bridge, until the villain stops being mean to them!

I sense a disturbance in the troll force as if millions of whiny voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

But somehow your voice survived?

If there’s a Worf-centric comedy it should be three cameras in front of a live studio audience. Worf and Q are two single men who share an apartment and drive each other crazy.


The Bickering Rozhenkos, with Worf and Dr. Sehlar?

gets my vote

Bring it on. 😍

Well, I guess the Star Trek franchise is now dead. Kurtzman has been the worst thing to ever happen to it, and this article proves the studios have learned nothing from the string of disasters he’d produced. Star Trek has been one of my greatest lifelong passions, but I guess I will have to content myself with The Orville from now on.

Enjoy your last season! :-)

It’s not about quantity, it is about quality. And intention.

The carpet-bombing of comments you’ve inflicted on this post indicates otherwise.

There were plenty of good novels — and a few great ones — and at least 100 or so episodes produced in the 20th century that bear rewatching, too. You can give up this particular ship without giving up the whole history of the entire navy — just don’t stop complaining about what we get now, because it is like bad politicians, they’ll just keep amassing.

People need to learn the difference between “I don’t like this current stuff” and “the franchise is dead.” A dead franchise does not have five shows in active production and more in development.

You don’t like them? You think they betray Gene Roddenberry’s vision? That’s a valid and defensible opinion — one with which I disagree, but one that at least makes sense. But if you say “Star Trek is dead,” while there are five Star Trek shows in active production, you are talking nonsense. You can say “Star Trek is dead to me,” or “My Star Trek is dead.” But please, recognize that the world does not revolve around you.

 A dead franchise does not have five shows in active production and more in development.

Where to begin: AFTERMASH and MASH goes to Maine. Stargate Universe, Atlantis, and Origins, plus multiple movies…and a dead franchise.

In most any industry, there’s a lag time before bad decisions become apparent.

But even if you accept that Star Trek is doomed, it’s silly to say “dead” when we have five series in production.

Even if we accept this “lag time” analogy, the worst that you could reasonably argue is “mortally wounded.” “Dead” is so hyperbolic that it drowns out any potentially valid argument.

I liked Atlantis at first, but there was definitely franchise fatigue setting in.

He signed a 5-year contract worth millions. They pretty much guarantees production’s going forward until at least 2025 because they’d have to pay down his contract you’d think, if terminated early plus any further compensation depending on what’s in the contract he signed.
Seems healthy to me that they have him on that contract.

Aftermash was a TV series (one of three, plus a pilot) and Mash Goes to Maine was a novel which was followed by over a dozen more.

Aftermash didn’t last long (Trapper John did), but they really weren’t trying for a franchise in any event. Friends isn’t a failure because Joey barely lasted. Seinfeld had no spinoffs at all.

Stargate died at least as a film franchise because its fate was linked with Independence Day Resurgence. Which failed in a big way. First it was going to be a direct sequel with Kurt Russel and James Spader which i would have loved. Then it was going to follow their original plans and be a trilogy but start out with a remake of the original film, which sounds awful. I’m so sick of remakes and fake reboot sequels that aren’t sequels but passing of the torch movies. They did it with Disney Star Wars, probably will do it with Indiana Jones, did it with Jurassic Park and it will happen with Ghostbusters Afterlife.

Totally agreed. I may not like some aspects about Kurtzman Trek either (LDS humor, TV-MA graphics) but the franchise is FAR from dead. It is now bigger than ever even if it has moved away from hardcore purists’ expectations.

It is only fair to criticize some aspects but most of these aspects are ripple effects of our day and age, general tastes and the success of certain changes in the movie and TV industry, especially the adultification of once family-friendly brands and genres.

I may be too old in mind and inflexible to embrace all of those changes without second thought and yes, I don’t want Star Trek to stylistically incorporate The Simpsons, Tarantino or Game of Thrones… But I am not the (future) fanbase. I only have a very tiny little small say in this and I WANT to like most new Trek as well as possible. It wouldn’t be my place to declare this franchise “dead”…

If anything, it’s a lot more like my (fictional) grown-up kids who choose their own lifestyle that I wanted to protect them from, getting tattoos, smoking, working as strippers or in adult industry… you name it. I may not like what they do but unfortunately, they’d be old enough not to care anymore…

LDS humor is Star Trek IV. :-)

And what graphics? Did I miss some nudity somewhere?

Not bad for a guy who’s been fired more times then Donald’s grabbed the cat. Congratulations!!

This was not the news I was looking for

Take THAT, all the idiot trolls who keep claiming he’s been fired.

Cue the melodramatic “I hate Kurtzman” crybaby trolls in 3… 2… 1…

Can’t say I’m surprised by this. Kurtzman is an effective manager of content, delivering his shows on schedule, and in the corporate views of things that’s all that really matters now. Get a mediocre product out the door and on time and demonstrate you can bring in viewers and grow the product line of content. Content. Content. Content. Remember that word.

All we can hope for now is some quiet corner of the Trekverse where a ‘boldly going’ show or movie might fly under the radar and be allowed to do something of quality. It happened with DS9 when Trek was all over the place in the 90s. It COULD, theoretically, happen again. Fingers crossed.

But don’t be too upset about this news. If it weren’t Kurtzman, it would be someone else delivering roughly the same quality. This is CBS/Paramount, folks. This might as well be news from the middle management at General Mills. They make the Cheerios of shows there.

Exactly! You want art? Go to a museum. This is a FRANCHISE, like it or not.

A franchise does not have to mean mediocrity. it is possible to deliver for fans and exceed their expectations (as has been proven by “The Mandalorian” and the MCU series on Disney+) but you need people who have a genuine understanding of the franchise and the expectations of fans.

Harvey, my friend, you nailed it.

Well said!

VIACOMCBS is in a tough spot since their relatively recent merger and need to further compete in the streaming wars with Paramount+. To think that a change of the main showrunner of their most prized IP ‘Star Trek’ can turn it into Marvel is way too risky at this time and wishful fantasizing. They (VIACOMCBS) must think there have been improvements and developments in the ‘Star Trek Universe’ franchise and have already invested heavily in the Kurtzman Trek series. Grass is $greener$ on the other side with another Trek ‘showrunner head’ is not guaranteed and likely would be way more costly with bad PR, enormous time delays, and it would feel like 2017 all over again much like how DISCO S1 got up and stumbling start which is how Kurtzman took over. Time is very limited at this stage within the streaming wars with content being king….Star Trek is VIACOMCBS’s golden IP goose for the Paramount+ king which may be needed when they merge or get bought out in the future to further compete against the major streaming kings.

I’ve tried telling myself this before, but some mediocrity goes down easier than other slices of bleh. There’s so much cringe and daftness with AK- take the big, insipid reveal of THE BURN which is supposed to be the payoff of the season- so I think AK is closer to sub-mediocre than average as far as bosses of major franchises go.

Agreed about the Burn, it was a really really bad explanation, so much so I can’t believe they thought that was a good way to explain it and I mostly liked third season. It was out of the box thinking which they should get some credit for but it was still dumb. I felt like I got burned with the Burn.


Possible trek for 5 years plus! Sign me up! I love it. I welcome new ideas and experimentation in trek!

In fairness to the trolls (those lying YouTubers and generally whiny babies), Secret Hideout has yet to produce a Star Trek show that can stand wholly on its own without any ties to canon. That’s the mark of originality within a franchise or brand. Can you introduce a new PRODUCT LINE that’s not just a new logo. With 5.5 more years and the blank check to crank out a new Trek show whenever he feels like it, seems like we’ll have a broken clock situation where originality will happen even by accident one of these days.

But at the end of the day, Kurtzman still won. And big. He is the face of Trek for all time now and the most successful (by way of being prolific) film & TV producer of the 21st century. Indisputable.

Prolific, yes. Successful: how so? Dramatically? He doesn’t hold a candle to Vince Gilligan or Joseph Wiseberg or David Chase.

You’re missing the point altogether for the age we live in. How many Star Wars products are 100% original, since Disney has acquired it? Now ask them if they care… Franchises have value BECAUSE of their earlier incarnations, not in spite of.

You’re right about that — and I understand that. It’s just that Star Trek’s added value IN THE PAST came from TNG, DS9, and VOY doing their own thing that at least attempted to stand on its own and moving forward, away from what had already been explored/developed/presented. There’s value in new things, but I get that in an uncertain world with nothing but pain and suffering, the only thing fans want are things that are familiar and repetitious of beloved things from the past. That’s just a limitation of the human brain where emotions are concerned — fear drives us back to the familiar.

In any case, nobody knows anything in this business, except that Alex Kurtzman is one of the most financially successfully and creatively prolific writer-producers in the history of Hollywood.

Or you can do both right?

I understand your feelings and why I was NOT happy when I heard Discovery was going to be a prequel to TOS and the main character would be a sibling of Spock. It was almost eye rolling in some ways because it just sounded like an excuse to fill in stuff to TOS and find a way to connect one of the most iconic characters in the franchise to a new character JUST to get TOS fans to watch. Of course I was still hoping to like the show but yeah the set up just told me it was going to be a show about nostalgia mostly.

Like you I wanted to go forward again because I just wanted to see new ideas, characters and concepts again. And not just ‘fill in’ to stuff that happened over 100 years before Voyager ended. I was a little afraid that all Kurtzman was going to do was give us endless TOS spin off shows (with known TOS characters) and I was NOT looking forward to it. Now I would’ve watched all of them religiously (and it’s still TOS ;)) but not excited about it.

But Kurtzman proved me wrong, VERY wrong. He wasn’t the one who came up with Discovery’s premise, Bryan Fuller did. Kurtzman has proven that he can at least think outside of the box a little. Maybe not as much as some fans want but to me, he is trying to shake things up. Putting Discovery so far in the future when he DIDN’T have to do it at all told me he really does wants to expand the franchise, literally.

I know what you’re saying, three of the five shows all have known iconic characters leading it: Picard, Pike and now Janeway. But I also think this is just part of a mandate from CBS as well. We like to think these people have total control but they have a boss too (in Kurtzman case, one that pays well ;)) and I’m certain they have certain ‘suggestions’ of what they like to see and it’s probably just a lot easier to market shows when an iconic character is leading a new show. They kept telling us we wouldn’t even SEE Spock, and then one season later, not only does the guy show up, he’s in half the season. And now he has his own show lol. But my guess is they probably DIDN’T expect to have Spock, but then some CBS executive probably thought ‘you know more people will probably sign up if you bring him back’ and here we are.

When Berman ran Trek, things were different, the biggest being all the shows were free (at least in America). So it was easy for a Trek fan to at least watch a show for awhile even if they hated it when you’re not paying anything for it. Today it takes a real commitment to watch these shows. Not a big one, but still more than the past. So they have to find a way to get Trek fans more excited. Yes we the hardcore bunch will watch whatever. But there are still tons of casual fans out there who probably wouldn’t bother until they heard names like ‘Spock’, ‘Picard’, ‘Seven’ or ‘Janeway’ in the mix.

I mean I was going to watch Prodigy no matter what, but the second I heard Janeway was in it (who clearly DOESN’T need to be in it) my interest jump from 50-100 over night. So we do have to remember that, it’s just very different today. That said I HOPE we will get future shows with all new characters and yes going forward in the future (post-Picard I mean). I really love we are getting the Pike show, but I wouldn’t be happy if we got a Number One spin off two years later. ;)

“It’s just that Star Trek’s added value IN THE PAST came from TNG, DS9, and VOY doing their own thing that at least attempted to stand on its own and moving forward,”

The only series that did its own thing was DS9 and this is why I could never fully embrace itr the way so many others do. TNG evolved from the Phase II concept / TMP: Riker/Decker, Ilia/Troi, Xon/Data, TMP theme tune. And VOY was a variation on a theme: basically traditional Star Trek with an underlyimg Wizard of Oz plotline..

But that’s exactly what I want them to do… a starship exploring space..

“There’s value in new things, but I get that in an uncertain world with nothing but pain and suffering, the only thing fans want are things that are familiar and repetitious of beloved things from the past.”

Most TV shows are doing pain and suffering, blood and guts ad nauseum, ad nausicaaneum :-) This is why going back to the roots of Trek à la Orville is truly what I want… SNW and to some extent future DSC seasons should deliver upon that…

The real world is only painted bleak… It used to be far worse factually… In the 60s, WWII and a massive holocaust had only been 20 years in the past… The Korea War in active memory and Vietnam War still raging on… The Cold War, the Cuban Crisis, gloom and doom upon us all… and yet we got I Love Lucy, Giligans Island, Batman ’66, Bonanza and Star Trek…

What happened? Why is it we make GoT or TWD so successful, why The Boys, why Westworld? I dunno. I don’t understand current sensibilities at all. I’m getting old… I love rewatching stuff like Space 1999, original BSG, 80s Buck Rogers, SeaQuest DSV… those shows were so campy, so innocent… a lot better than any TV-MA show of the last 20 years… This “Golden Age” of TV, I just don’t get it…

That said, I am more than willing to give every new Trek a chance or two, but yes, I PREFER it the old way (on new FX)…

I think he just means the other shows explored new things without using old characters to do it with. Every show will always have the concept of what Star Trek is mostly (starships with crews exploring the galaxy) although as you said DS9 was the only show to buck that trend. Mostly every show or film before and after are all Starfleet officers on a ship. Picard and PRO have somewhat gotten away from that though.

Yes, this is what I meant by original.

Discovery sort of tried to forge ahead by jumping into the 50th century or whatever, but even then, tied themselves to the Orions, the Mirror Universe, and the Guardian of Forever. Sorry — Carl.

Lower Decks would have zero jokes or reason to exist if it could not reference every other series in the franchise. And now it’s basically made Riker recurring.

Up until DISCO – Season Three, Picard was the farthest point of Trek’s future (I think; maybe I’m wrong about that) and even then it tied itself STRICTLY to events of Trek’s past (the Hobus supernova, Seven of Nine/The Borg/Picard’s assimilation, Data’s death; and now season two will feature Q and time travel/remixing Trek history).

Prodigy has shoehorned Janeway into it and basically set itself (perhaps) in the Voyager time period that we’ve already explored.

Strange New Worlds is based on a failed pilot that’s still part of Trek history (through The Menagerie) yet still gets to use iconography like the Enterprise and Spock (because I guess, for some reason, people have decided that James T. Kirk is too problematic for the 21st century) and once again traverses Trek history suggested or covered in TOS and DISCO.

Section 31 is based on a really bad idea that Deep Space Nine should’ve never done. But again, not Secret Hideout’s idea. Nor is a Starfleet Academy teen drama. Nor a Captain Worf show (even if it’s done like The Office or whatever).

Indeed, the ballsiest move right now (and it’s not even that ballsy) would be to simply crew up the Enterprise-G (in a post-Picard part of the history of the future) and give us a trans Captain (Elliot Page?) and planets of the week / new aliens who reflect our 21st century people & conflicts. And that’s not even a monumentally different idea than Strange New Worlds, but it would give us a leader who has no ties to canon, something the Paramount regime has chosen to avoid at all costs for some reason (killing off Michelle Yeoh in the premiere remains one of the worst creative decisions in the history of Hollywood).

Yeah, you can tell great stories within any confines, but we have many seasons and three films’ worth of the new creatives to know — with almost absolute certainty — that rather than tell an original story set within the universe or even cynically and insightfully deconstruct the Trek formula, they’re going to do lazily (and still cynically!) fan service schlock that “test pattern Trekkies” will watch no matter what and rely on Trek references to land unearned punchlines and/or dramatic beats and use Trek proper nouns to dress up generic fantasy/scifi conflict and characters we’ve already seen (not just in Trek, but every run of the mill fantasy or sci-fi show of the past 30 years) because that’s easier.

But, look, even if we give the trolls this point about originality, the trolls have still lost the war. Kurtzman has won. Kurtzman is king. Trek is his, now and forever.

Well first of all, I admit I like the shows waaaaay more than you do lol. And I also admit I been on both sides of the fence with this. Part of me ALWAYS want to see new things and characters as well. I mean I have fallen in love with basically every classic Trek show at this point because those characters eventually won a lot of us over. So that’s how I feel too, if new characters became popular through the fanbase before, they will again. Fans have NO issues with new characters or we wouldn’t have had four spin off shows after TOS (and three of them successful ;)).

But same time, I’m still a fanboy at heart. When I heard Picard was coming back to Star Trek I wanted to see EVERYONE from TNG back lol. I didn’t really care who, whoever they could persuade with enough money or blackmail, I was just happy to see anyone return to the family after sooo many years. I was so giddy to see Seven, Hugh, Data and the Riker’s back. Most of my favorite episodes or scenes from that show involved most of them in it in some way.

But that’s also the double edge sword. As fans we will watch ANYTHING with the word Star Trek in it. They clearly know that by now. But they also know a show just gets waaaaay more buzz by sticking people we know and love in it. I mean look at Picard season 2. Most people seemed pretty ho hum on it until Q showed up and suddenly people became super excited over the show again. Even if people DIDN’T want Q there, his presence still elicits a response than not having him there at all. And the bonus for CBS all the people who claim they are sick of Q, he’s played out, they don’t want him back will still be watching every.single.episode just the same! That’s why fandom is so weird lol. They got our money when we love something, they got it when we hate something. And when it’s characters we already know, the hype train just gets bigger.

Look at how people responded with Picard and Pike coming back. You can’t earn that kind of buzz with new characters no matter how much you try. And thats also why I say I don’t think its Kurtzman alone who is throwing all these known characters in. I have NOTHING to base this on, but I do think the network itself is responsible for a lot of that as well because they want to get as many subscribers as possible. When Picard was announced, there was an executive from CBS who said they wanted someone from the TNG cast back or even the entire cast to be on one of the new shows because as an executive why wouldn’t you?? They don’t care about expanding the franchise or opening up other avenues, they just want fans to keep subscribing, none of it matters how they get there.

And exactly why my guess is they are mulling over a Worf comedy show out of all things (sigh). But I certainly hear you. I would naturally prefer something new as well. I have NO issues with seeing older characters, none at all, but the franchise can live on without them as well. I too would love to see an Enterprise G with a fully new crew or something in the 25th century. Maybe do something different and have it be a generational ship exploring the Andromeda galaxy or something, the first Federation ship to explore a new galaxy. Do something more fresh with it. Start with the basics but completely new at the same time, ala TNG back in 1987!

I’m just not sure that’s ever going to happen anymore looking at the line up we have now. I’m still betting Discovery will try and find a way to get Riker on that show lol. I’m joking. but…..

I think you’re almost damning with faint praise. Alex Kurtzman is arguably the most successful human being, by any measure, of the 21st century. Future historians will likely refer to our era as The Age of Alex.


Phlox optimism, dear Star Trek Fans! Be grateful new movies and shows are currently in production! :P


Ditto that!

Glad Alex Kurtzman will continue to steer the Star Trek franchise.

I’m not sure I am, personally, but I liked some of what both he and David Stapf had to say; maybe together they can help steer things further in the right direction.

Ok I need to get this out. You know this has come as kind of a shock to me tbh. Nobody can deny that there are probably as many people who dislike new Star Trek as there are people who like it. And those that dislike it, really dislike it. And those that like it, really like it. Yes, there are a lot of viewers who are not as passionate either way, but they’re not the ones expressing their opinions online. This discourse, the like and dislike, is evident in every discussion forum, on every new Trek content youtube message section, on every message board, on every official instagram comment section, on reddit etc. etc. etc. The fanbase has never been so divided and torn IMO. More so for Discovery, but also for Picard. (I won’t include Lower Decks in this op as it seems like Mike McMahon is the true puppet master behind the storytelling and production there – thankfully). I, for one, am not a fan of what Kurtzman has done on the whole. So hear me out. We are in a time where we are well and truly in the deep midsts of the “Golden era of Television”, where small-screen excellence is the norm, and expected from viewers. We’ve had Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, Mad Men and The Wire show us how TV can be home to the best kind of compelling and important storytelling. We’ve also had genre shows like Game Of Thrones, Battlestar Galactica, West World and the recent WandaVision/Loki show us that TV is the best place to build complex worlds and where boundaries can really be pushed in terms of the technical, visual and creative aspects of production.  And indeed, I don’t want to be too negative so I will say that I think new Trek is top tier in terms of visual effects, production design, costuming, make-up, sound, editing, camera work, music – you name it; on the technical/ creative front new Trek is an absolute feast for the senses. And all credit to Kurtzman and the creative teams involved. It’s really inspiring, and boundary-pushing work.  However, Discovery seasons 1-3 and Picard season 1 were not well written. I’m sorry, but nobody can seriously defend the storytelling and writing of these seasons of television, and at this point it has gone from baffling to frustrating to inexcusable. They have literally every resource available at their disposal and yet Kurtzman & co. keep telling stories, poorly, with no logical character development, convenient plot devices popping up and not one sense of anything ever being earned for anyone. Leading to no payoffs, no real stakes, no sense of investment. Our characters just seem to go from one disaster to the next, most of them in the background looking on as one or two characters get focus. And on, and on.  This is more of a personal gripe with the story choices, but the fact that it also doesn’t seem like a very hopeful future anymore is also, to me, a huge departure from one core element to tick-off in terms of Trek brand recognition. And it HAS to be a conscious decision at this point, especially for Picard. Would any one of us actually like to be in the world of Discovery or Picard? In a broken Federation, isolated and without any possibility of space exploration or… Trek… because of no warp-drive in Disc, in a future that’s less progressive than the past? Or in a universe marred with xenophobia, and again…. isolationism and seemingly devoid of any mental health resources like Picard? I actually think I’d be able to accept all of those things if I could buy into the characters and invest in the story if it all felt authentic and well-crafted and considered. However I can’t do that because of the writing. I’m simply a spectator to the events, I honestly do not care what happens. When Picard died, the most shocking thing for me was that I didn’t really care. I was just more confused by the fact that the Romulans were actually right all along, but were still being portrayed as the enemy for some reason. And that is a character I’ve literally watched all my life! I was more upset watching Neelix stay behind at the end of VOY tbh, and that’s saying something! All of this is to say that I think this is the main reason for the discourse within the fandom. The writing and storyline is where it falls apart for people. And this divide just seems to be growing. That is why the decision has shocked me. But perhaps this discourse is part of the plan? For instance, having lunatics pop up on Youtube saying that Trek is being cancelled every second Tuesday, passionate… Read more »

Whew, can’t agree with much, but you’re absolutely right that the execs at ViacomCBS don’t care if you hate watch, they just care that you watch.

So If you really don’t like it, or parts of it, don’t give it your eyeball votes.

Television production isn’t a democracy. No one is running polls and sending Kurtzman the stats so he can adjust policy. Paramount looks at the viewership, the costs, and the as revenue. If it passes an $x threshold of profitability, he gets a pat on the head and a raise.

Perfect ❤️


Well, Trump had support too so…

But Kurtzman, frankly, is a hack. How did he get this job in the first place?!

His most high prolific writing was JJtrek and the terrible Bay Transformers movies.

Talk about failing upwards.

It is pretty hard to fathom, but ViacomCBS surely aren’t in the business of chucking money away. To you and me, sure, we’re watching the new shows in amazement that they’ve been picked up for another season but that CBS must have been making a strategic loss. However, if this news is accurate, we’ve got to hold our hands up and say “yup somehow, there is an audience for this and it’s generating revenue”.

To paraphrase a great Star Trek captain from well written and thought out Trek (somewhat grudgingly!): this franchise is now the care of another group. To them and their posterity will we commit our future. They will continue the voyages we have begun, and journey to all the undiscovered countries, boldly going where no *one* has gone before.

I agree, DataLore. There is so much GOOD writing talent around, every episode should be a “”Yesterday’s Enterprise or “The Inner Light”. Fire the mentally deficient and get talent in the door!

Ability to restrain his gag reflex on the casting couch.

As someone who has always supported Kurtzman but same time understand why he seem so divided in the fanbase, this is mostly great news. The most important thing for me is hearing we have at least five more years of Star Trek coming lol!

I wasn’t really shocked at the news. How could anyone be that surprised? Not one of his shows has been cancelled yet. Not only that, they all been renewed multiple times already. This is just basic Vulcan logic, the shows are clearly making money, they credit the guy of making them for that success and feels his strategy is working, so he stays on. Why would you rock the boat now???

We know it has zip to do with quality and more to do with numbers. But that’s ALL that matters at the end of the day, for every producer, director and writer out there. It’s why Michael Bay gets tons of work and money to boot: results!

And I have said for years now, I honestly LOVE the direction Kurtzman is taking the franchise. He is doing things I been begging to see Trek do for years. It excites me to see different Trek shows in multiple eras. Its fun to see everything from Short Treks to animated shows like LDS (and all canon to boot). I love seeing everyone from Spock to Seven back BUT also creating new characters. It’s a really fun mix of old and new, continuing nostalgia with stuff like SNW and PIC but also going beyond anything we know with DIS in the 32nd century while doing something radically different with LDS.

Now the issue is the execution, ie, if any of it is good or not. That’s where it seems to get into trouble for a lot of fans. I don’t think fans truly care what century the show takes place, who stars in it, etc, because as long as ‘Star Trek’ is in the title, we’re watching it. We still want it to be good though and even as someone who likes where he’s taking a lot of it, I’m in that boat too a lot of times.

But it’s Star Trek, it all has time to improve (clearly now ;)). I’m hoping the next five years gives us better shows and they think outside the box more creatively as we go. I would love to see shows about time travel, shows set in the 26th or 27th century, set on a colony or even shows in another universe.

It’s Star Trek, sky is the limit!

They need a showrunner for the movie series. They don’t have a Leonard Nimoy, A Harve Bennett, or Nicholas Meyer. They don’t even have JJ Abrams except for a glorified producer credit but he has clearly moved on. They don’t have Alex Kurtzman or Bob Orci. What do they have? Paramount has no idea what they are doing. The TV side seems to have things well in hand except when it comes to writing scripts. The studio seems to want Star Trek to be like Star Wars or Marvel or they don’t know what to do with it or how to market it.

Yeah we fully agree about the movie issue. I’m still doubtful the last big ‘this is really happening’ announcement we got a month ago will ever happen. ;)

I’m crossing my fingers though but it’s amazing how the TV side is developing at warp speed in ways we never gotten shows this fast or many before while it feels like it may be five more years before another movie show up.

But this also proves why Star Trek will always just be a much better fit on TV than movies. That will always be its true home.

Great news

A Worf-centric comedy?

The title of the show will be………………………………”Take My Worf, Please!”

Congrats to Alex Kurtzman for reviving Star Trek in a huge way!

Alex, well done!

A Word Comedy would be an insult to the development this character had made on DS9.

Fantastic news! I am soooooo happy that Alex Kurtzman will continue helming the Star Trek universe! He is doing a fantastic job and I am looking forward to the next years with lots of Star Trek! This is the golden age of Trek and the big deal underlines how sucessfull it is so we are up for a great future! Star Trek lives! :-)

Alex is right on with that quote- who wants to sit thru a two-hour bad movie when you could sit through a ten-hour bad movie spread out over 3 months?! And so many possibilities are opened up with this contract extension- think of the potential for busting open the confines of the fictional universe as it has existed so far. LOTS of cool potential for corporate synergy, just think what Alex could do with a Trek-Ninja Turtles crossover, just for starters…

He wrote a mediocre Transformers movie. Then he killed the “Amazing Spiderman” Franchise, went on to somewhat successfull reboot the Star Trek Movie Franchise but pretty much killed it off with a dismal second movie that distracted everyone from the third entry. Then he killed the “Dark Universe” Franchise with the very first movie.

After that he went on to TV where he took over Star Trek from Bryan Fuller und developed a show that alienated half the fanbase, developed a second and third season, that did nothing to reconcile that AND devolped a Picard show where Amazon had to downright force him to at least make it somewhat resemble a Star Trek show. And while all that was going on, he developed yet another Show based on a preexisting IP, that was critically panned and noone really watched.

He pretty much killed or massively devaluated 3-5 former lucrative Franchises (depending on how you count).

Does he have some secret Jeffrey Epsein tapes or something? How does that man keep getting work?!

Let’s just for a moment entertain the hypothesis that all or almost all of your statements of fact are false. Doesn’t that look a bit more consistent with reality? Food for thought…

The Transformers movies he and Bob Orci did were the best ones except for Bumblebee which they didn’t do. The worst film in the series the Last Knight wasn’t written by Bob and Alex. The second Amazing movie was ruined by last minute changes and the film being hacked up, and studio meddling. The third was canceled not due to Alex but because the lead actor was fired. The most successful Star Trek reboot was into darkness. Beyond cratered the movie series and put it into an early grave. The only thing i’d criticize him for was that bad Mummy reboot with Tom Cruise literally one of the worst films i’ve ever seen. He and Bob also did the best Transformers cartoon since the original Transformers Prime. The Star Trek reboots also were ruined by Studio meddling as well they said Bob Orci’s script was too Star Trekkie, and we probably will never know why he didn’t direct that movie.

Well I like the third Transformers best, but non of them are Masterpieces. And they pretty much only worked because of Bays direction. The two K&O wrote should have hardly qualified them for higher pusuits. As for the studio meddeling. Thats allways an easy excuse. And normally I wouldn’t blame the writer anyways. Max Landis – asshole that he is – put it pretty well: “you write script, not a movie”. However that isn’t true for Kurtzmann … apart from Transformers he was Producer or Executive Producer on all those projects. He has to take the blame, if those projects suck.

As for Beyond. It was an okay movie. It’s what the second one should have been. Instead we got that 9/11 Truther/Wrath of Kahn Mashup. It made the Studio some Money (though not that much given the enourmos cost) but it put fans of the brand. And the Problem with those movies was no single movie. It’s the very thing Kurtzman now got hired for again: the direction of the franchis. You can’t go in blowing up planets, making starships obsolete and cure death. There isn’t anywhere to go after that.

And that is exactly the Problem with Kurtzman. He isn’t a great writer to begin with but he is the worst person on this planet when it comes to franchises. Amazing Spiderman sucked mainly because of all the set up but also the story itself hadn’t really any place to go anymore. Same with Star Trek (the movies) und same with the mumy. And then he did it again with Trek on TV. In Discovery Season 1 the whole Federation is almost destroyed (well it pretty much is, they just forget it by Season 2) und in Seasons 2 and 3 and Picard Season 1 the Galaxy and all Live in the Universe are at Stake respectively. The big picture is, what doesn’t work here and that is on Kurtzman. Even if he were a good writer, which he certanly isn’t.

Maybe he should try a little more directing. The Season 2 Pilot of Discovery was terrible but hat some pretty nice images.

Discovery and Picard have very good actors and fairly good acting. And with Patrick Stewart acting that is sublime. But the writing is where the shows have suffered, especially discovery. The casts are lovely and wonderful and the showrunners seem like good people. Fix the lackluster uninspired writing and plots, and you will have a Star Trek that will live long and prosper.

Agreed. I don’t have a problem with (most) of the actors and have loved pretty much every cast of every show. But it usually does come down to the writing and both DIS and PIC has been bad in a LOT of places and why I don’t love either show so far.

Me three.

The casts are pretty much the strongest ever, and match if not surpass the depth and breadth of the DS9 ensemble.

The writing is the problem though, and a modus operendi that assumes that lack of decision-making in the writing can be covered up by editing and special effects.

I challenge every writer and showrunner in the Secret Hideout Star Trek group to watch the first season of Superman and Lois!

I never would have believed that a comic-based show could be written with such discipline and coherence.

Every episode lays pipe for future plot and character development. We are shown, not told.

There are no plot holes whatsoever (although there are clearly a few reviewers who don’t pay attention and then can’t recall when a reveal was set up three episodes previously).

And the special effects are generally glorious if used parsimoniously. Budget is well spent and not squandered on indulging unresolved creative differences by just producing everything and seeing what works.

Perhaps the casting for Picard, sure. But the casting for Discovery, apart from Jones, has been uninspired. I’m not sure if it is the bad writing, the terribly developed characters or the actors inability to overcome those handicaps. But I think all three play a hand in it.

So we now have two Worf shows (allegedly) pitched. It seems we may well be seeing some more of most people’s favourite Klingon at some point.

I know the word ‘comedy’ is mentioned in relation to this latest pitch, but I don’t think that necessarily means something laugh-out-loud or slapstick. If it was a more gentle approach, or even something bittersweet, or dark, or surreal, it may well work. It all depends on the premise.

Some of these kinds of comedy work really well, especially when approaching themes which may be serious or upsetting. See Ricky Gervais’ After Life as an example. I’m interested in learning more about this Worf idea.

Like many here, I have a great nostalgia for the original source material which I was introduced to earlier in my life. But like numerous properties which end up being ‘expanded’ in different ways, some of these ‘additions’ are more to my liking than others. And the STAR TREK franchise is no different.

I’m aware that some will defend *anything* with the ST name on it, and some will love more elements of it than I do. That’s fine, as everyone has different tastes to each other.

But these days I would only consider re-watching a product that I’ve really enjoyed the first time around, so that excludes DISCOVERY and PICARD for me unfortunately….although I will certainly be tuning in on the next seasons of both out of pure curiosity to see how they are progressed. I just won’t be watching these particular shows ever again, sadly.

However, I have high hopes that one of the many shows thrown at the wall will make a bigger impression on me eventually, with the new ‘Pike’ show and it’s more individual storyline episodes being something I’m really looking forward to.

These days I’ll only consider re-watching the segments of various ‘franchises’ that I really enjoyed the first time, and just ignore about the rest that I didn’t – (unless I like it enough to just imagine it as being an ‘alternate universe’ – set alternative take) That goes for every ‘franchise’ going, whether it’s STAR TREK, STAR WARS, the MARVEL and DC universes, or whatever. There’s only one JAWS movie in the franchise that I’ll ever re-watch for instance, as it’s sequels REALLY jumped the shark after that.

Oh, and whenever I re-watch the TOS show these days, I miss out the odd episode here and there that I don’t care for, and stick on a different finale for the end of the 3rd season. ;)

But I’m always hopeful for a hit amongst the misses, as these projects continue ever on, and really hope that I can add STRANGE NEW WORLDS to those that enthuse me personally. So I’m rooting for Alex Kurtzman on that one, no matter what.

I agree with you on Jaws but the score by John Williams on Jaws 2 is really very good. Not so much the film which is a retread not directed by Spielberg. It isn’t a bad film per se just not necessary and very tv movie like. from III to IV though they obviously should not have made those.

@ skyjedi – Agreed on all points. And Roy Scheider is always watchable of course. But even Williams’ great scoring on the likes of that and the SW prequels and sequels couldn’t make me watch those again.

Not when there’s so much good stuff still to catch up with, or re-watch.

Cervantes, you’ve summed up my position perfectly.

All the major franchises have their ups and downs in quality as well as mixed results in these attempts to build out their multiverses to appeal to different audiences.

I love Trek enough that I’ll watch it all at least once, but feel no pressure to rewatch what doesn’t interest me any longer. So, it’s fair to say that it’s been most successful in holding my engagement as a fan. Kurtzman’s era hasn’t dulled that (even if I’m still grieving the end of the Relaunch Litverse that kept me going for years when there was nothing new on screen.)

My SW interest died with the prequels, Marvel is pretty limited to X-Men, I like the optimistic side of DC but pretty much ran out of interest in the darker stuff with the second Burton movie etc.

So, let’s keep it in perspective and be glad that the owners of the IP are keeping it alive and trying new things and making new content.

There are some many tendencies in the CBM multiverses I dislike but I have never been a huge comic fan to begin with. I dislike the semi-dark bloody comedy stuff (Deadpool, BoP, TSS) and the shere amount of TV series I am not able to keep up with.

Being a completist and collector, I kept up with collecting Blu-Rays until they started not releasing shows on Blu_Ray at all, which made it easy for me to abandoning that genre, or rather the goal of owning it all, which I can’t do anyway. So there is that… I will handle that realm selectively…

As for ST and SW: if my interest in those two franchises should ever die, I will probably die along with it. I cannot imagine completely ignoring anything official coming from those IPs… even if it’s just available in streaming and even if it’s R-Rated comedy… LDS is giving me a hard time but who am I to argue with destiny?

Being more of a completist, I’ve long refused to be that selective. Only the shere amount of material in the Marvel and DC multiverses have sort of forced me to finally be selective. But I limit that selectivity to the CBM realm that had always been my least favourite subgenre in the sci-fi/fantasy line-up.

As for ST and SW… Here I will never be that selective, even if they give us tenfold the material :-)

The only issue that might force me into ignoring some incarnations would be an ongoing R-ratification…

We can fix this. We’re going to attempt….time travel. We’re setting our trajectory….at this t-i-i-i-m-m-m-m-m-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e……..

I will wait to see how SNW is before I judge this move. His Trek has been hit or miss, with a lot more miss, but the things that have landed (like Pike and Spock and some of the less dark stuff) has landed VERY well.

For all the detractors – plain and simply CBS is happy and know the future is bright with the current shows and it’s future with Streaming (and maybe even a CBS/CW/PMN) Trek Series!

You don’t keep someone who’s not doing something right – it’s not like the mess Chris Chibnall did with DOCTOR WHO – and he’s the one leaving – not being pushed out.

Right now P+ only really has going for itself long term are the Trek shows, The Good Fight (Which just got renewed), and iCarly 2.0 – different demographics – plus the “Yellowstone” spin-off project.

…and am I the only one who wishes that LD was live-action? (Especially since “The Orville” is becoming even more like TNG, with touches of later-M*A*S*H in it’s 3td year)

I believe, the question is, WHY they’re happy with him. Those shows aren’t all that creative. It’s the most obvious things you can Do. You could have put pretty much any writer/producer in charge of Trek and he would have come up with something like that. Maybe he’s great at organizing things in the background, I don’t know. But from a creative standpoint I just don’t get it.

Well let’s be honest with ourselves: platforms like CBS, Netflix, Disney, etc only care about views and subscriptions. They do not care about reviews or critics. If Trek shows are getting watched (and they can tell) and are getting them subscriptions (they can accurately surmise) then we’ll keep getting more.

So if 10,000,000 people are watching Trek we’ll keep getting more, even if nearly every single one of those viewers hates it, and half of them hate it so much they bash it online and make youtube videos about how much it sucks.

At the end of the day they are a business. Do they care if the money comes from people who hate it? No. The answer is no, they do not care.

I don’t hate Discovery or Picard, but I don’t love them, either. I’m hoping Picard Season 2 (which I think looks very interesting) and Strange New Worlds ramp things up, quality-wise, but from what I’ve seen of Secret Hideout Trek to date, I’m not sure they’re up to it.

I do wonder what CBS/Viacom/Paramount see in Kurtzman. He hasn’t exactly set the world on fire with his Star Trek Universe.

He manages to keep quite a lot of people hate-watching the shows. That’s talent too, I guess. Look at Doctor who which also noticably dipped in quality after the last showrunner change. But over there people just left.

Whew, lad.

Talking about that Worf comedy.

Let’s call it RED WORF…

Worf is stranded on a small red La Sirena class starship with only the Mark II EMH once again played by Andy Dick, a humanoid mutation of Spot played by Brent Spiner and a Ruk type android named Trychon… and he doesn’t like it…

Best show ever. Don’t forget the depressed ship computer…

She would be voiced by Rebecca Romijn now I take it :-)

Trychon should be played by Carel Struycken…

Maybe Kosinski from Where No One Has Gone Before TNG S1 had a daughter named Kristine :-)

So he wants to do the The Orville starring Worf.

They’re both scifi comedies. Other than that, we don’t know enough about this Worf pitch to know if they have anything at all in common.

Correction…. Orville WAS a sci-fi comedy. The 2nd season they nearly abandoned all the comedy and decided to be a TNG clone. Some comedy remained but while the first season was perhaps 35-40% comedy the 2nd season was more like 5% comedy.

The thing is: apart from some odd-ones-out scenes (peeing down the ravine, eating your napkin), The Orville is a very generic, serious sci-fi show. The only reason these comedic elements are in there is to “cloak” it as a spoof of Trek while actually making unofficial real Trek.

If “Worf” is anything like that it would be the TNG Redux show I’ve been waiting for since 1994…

I wouldn’t say generic. More like a little too derivative at times. But they learned from that in season 2. Even the humor is way better integrated in the scripts. And when they did an allready existing concept like the holdeck love story they actually managed to make it better.

Still … the show is far from the hights TNG reached from it’s third season on.

After the Worf comedy fails, Kurtzman will be heard muttering (over his third scotch), “worf! what a mistake!”

You mean like after season 5 when you and others here keep saying it’s a failed series? LOL

“failed series”? What, you mean like with Discovery? I never said it was a failed series. I said it was PURE CRAP, but morons keep tuning in, so they keep bringing it back!

They’re purging our side now, Harry.
On Sunday they eliminated at least eight of my posts after giving me a final warning (without me seeing any earlier ones.)

Yes, kmart. It would seem that if someone posts a positive comment, they are embraced and supported. If someone is critical of ANYTHING, they get hammered over the head about it. So much for a fair and BALANCED forum.

I’m just amazed that this post didn’t get pulled. Going by all the stuff of mine that got taken down before, I figured that nothing I wrote would ever again show up here. I mean, they even pulled a very heartfelt and upbeat response to MIU’s great missive as well as a couple that were pure content, plus (as expected) my snappy comebacks to some of the folks on the other side.

But it doesn’t really matter anymore; I’m just not up for spending my time here walking on eggshells while the other side can loosen earthquakes without consequence, so I’m checking out.

I’m still posting on occasion at under TREVANIAN and on under kmart. If one of the good guys here needs to reach me about some bit of making-of trivia, they can probably get my email from Michael Hall. Best of health to a fair number of you, and to all a goodbye.

kmart, I really wish you would reconsider. Your insightful posts are one of the best parts about visiting this site.

I wont miss the spontaneous and out of place political injections. (Too many do that, sadly.) But the other aspects that Kmart brings will be missed.


I second Harry’s motion.

Sorry to hear it has come to this, for you.

At least, it’s was a fun run, for the most part, while it lasted, and by that, I mean a BIG part of that fun was you.

I wish TPTB could find some way to allow your voice to be heard. Because, it is going to be a smaller space of ideas with you gone.

Godspeed and safe journeys, my friend.


That sounds more like the usual Brannon Braga self-flagellation interview where he derides himself LOL

I wonder if any sort of regrets were going through Bob Orci’s mind when he read this today?

One might argue that 6 -7 years ago Orci would have seemed a more likely candidate than Kurtzman to get the Trek CBS gig given his Trek credentials seemed to top AK’s — and now this has turned into a $100M+ paycheck for AK. Perhaps if he had been willing to play the studio game and drop all of his wack-job conspiracy theory stuff, he could have either been AK’s partner on this, or got the whole gig for himself?

Worf in lower decks would work for comedy. Standalone show, desperate and clutching at straws come to mind