Yep, although I'll add that when someone like him who's credibly accused of doing the things he's accused of is in charge, CBS had a lot worse problems than someone not liking Trek (and unfortunately his misdeeds didn't come to light until much later instead of being caught and prevented at the time)
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 5x09 - "Lagrange Point"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Bryan Fuller was fired as showrunner for Season 1 before a single shot was even filmed, though he had already committed the show to a lot of expensive mistakes, including tons wasted on pre-production of expensive props/sets and on-location shooting in Jordan for a throwaway scene that could have been filmed in California. They apparently pulped nearly all of Fuller's original vision past the first two episodes, with the new showrunners (his former assistants) being given control because they were the only ones left standing with any pull in the writer's room.
And then it happened again in Season 2, with those former assistants (Berg and Harberts) fired - this time in the middle of Season 2 being filmed, which led to a production pause, reshoots, and (probably) an entirely new plot arc involving Control being constructed to try and salvage the first 5-6 episodes.
I honestly can't think of too many other examples out there where a studio fires three showrunners in two years, though part of that is undoubtedly because in most other cases, they just would have pulped the show and written it off as a tax loss. But CBS was committed to resurrecting Trek, so Kurtzman kept looking around until he found Michelle Paradise in the writer's room, handing the keys to her by the end of Season 2.
I liked a lot of what Chabon was trying in Season 1, and I cannot begrudge him for wanting to move on for the adaptation of his own works to screen. That said, for whatever reason, the show ended up with three showrunners telling starkly different, largely standalone stories in each season, which not only didn't follow one another, but actively undermined what came previously.
To give just one example, Season 2 was about three things - Jean Luc becoming open to a relationship with Laris, the death of Q, and the introduction of a non-antagonistic Borg. Every single one of those choices was undermined by the choices that Matalas made in Season 3. Picard isn't with Laris, Q appears in the end credits, and the Borg Queen is back, baby!
Last edited:
It became even more glaring towards the end of S3 when said non-antagonistic Borg aren't even mentioned as an option to resolve Jack Crusher's dilemma and instead some throwaway line of a Vulcan hospital which probably has no experience in Borg matters is mentioned instead.
I was always under the impression that Chabon was only interested in one season, which is why the ending feels almost definitive. Paramount didn’t want PIC to just be a limited series event but invest in even more seasons, but Chabon only had his heart set for that one storyline in S1.
I think both Chabon and Stewart only really intended to do a single season. Stewart put a hard cap of three from the get-go, but it seems like they only REALLY wanted one.
Paramount convinced everyone to do a second round, and they probably would have a hard time getting the third season done but they filmed them concurrently so it worked out.
I remember being convinced it was limited series event at the time the show premiered, and was very surprised it got more seasons when it was officially confirmed.
For this reason, I think it is best to look at each season of Picard like their own parallel universes. They are 3 distinct standalone stories of Jean-Luc Picard from 3 different parallel universes. In some ways, this is a good thing because it gives different fans, 3 different Picard stories to suit what they like. You might be the fan who likes the more metaphysical exploration of existence that we get in Picard becoming a synth and Data's death in S1. Or you might like time travel stories so you really like S2. Or you like TNG nostalgia so you really like S3. There is something for every ST fan.
I love Rayner's smirk as he (finally) sits in the chair.
Captain Rayner. What a guy.
Captain Rayner. What a guy.
And all three of them fall into the same trap of leaning heavily on nostalgia. I imagine that if given the chance, we'd see the same decline in quality with Matalas as we see with The Mandalorian/Book of Boba Fett, given all the questionable choices he already made with Picard so that he could play with his favorite toys. Big fans can love what they got in childhood too much and not recognize the need to say 'no' to nonstop nostalgia and give new things room to breathe. The parts of the Star Wars franchise that have been the most successful as stories are the ones that were least reliant on the old parts even while mixing them in, like Andor or early Mandalorian before it became weighed down by constant checking in on legacy characters. I've got a lot of hope for The Acolyte because the person in charge is a fan but deliberately chose to have non-fans in the writing room to ensure the story and characters work on their own.
I think the same goes for Star Trek. Disco, Lower Decks, SNW, they've all got some old stuff in there but they're also doing new things, even if they don't always work, and I think the failures are going to hold up better in the long run than most of Picard S3 because it's not reliant on "what if we throw out all the new characters and play with my TNG action figures again?"
Well this felt like an episode of Star Wars: Discovery........ lmao.
Starting the thread now.
Starting the thread now.
Might be really late to the party here, but I don't think there is any context that actually says that was the reason why - only that it happened. Could have been a different choice made in episode 7 that led to that, and nothing to do with the tech.
I really thought they had it figured out with Saru and Book as Michael's Spock and Bones to bounce ideas off of, her logic and emotional centers, and that the three of them would make a mighty fine new trinity. It didn't last long.
I love the connect the dots fannish stuff. Is there a thread detailing all of these possibilities?
Yup. The movie is much more watchable if you watch it through the lens of it being a modern take / live action Adam West Batman movie. I've always wanted to see someone fan-edit a bunch of POWs and BAMS! into it and change up the sound track lol.
The beginning of Season 2 was fantastic and I loved the mystery they were building. Even now, I'm curious and want answers that I will never get, from a storyline that no longer / never existed.
Talking about feelings when having them helps keep post traumatic stress to a minimum
But Kirk, Bones, etc. wouldn't be doing that on the bridge in the middle of a full emergency with a ticking clock.
That scene in "BALANCE OF TERROR", for example, was during the waiting game. Kirk wouldn't be doing that in the middle of an actual battle, like DISCO would constantly do. It's why I can take the officers on TOS seriously... they have a sense of professionalism. I couldn't serve with the DISCO crew.
Put it this way: who would you rather trust your life with, the person who is having an emotional breakdown in the middle of an emergency or the person who focuses on the job and is present in the moment but will later pour emotions out AFTER the emergency is over?
I can work with both and have. The perfectly calm person in a crisis unnerves me.
I can serve with both. They have a sense of professionalism too but not the same.
Burnham succeeded in her last mission solely through this process of knowing herself. I'm not surprised and didn't think Burnham was odd when she took the opportunity in the hallway to speak with Book. If nothing more, the success of the mission could somehow depend upon her doing this.
And the breakdown person has a higher chance of getting people killed because they aren't focused on the job at hand. There's a reason why Starfleet officers go through psych tests... it's not just for their mental health, but it's to make sure that they are good enough so other people don't get killed because they can't focus in an emergency.
Someone who'll wait until later to have a breakdown is a weaker leader than one who processes as much as possible on the bridge. Opening themselves to all their feelings opens their head, gives them access to all their powers and chances of survival are increased.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
