Alex Kurtzman is the worst thing to ever happen to Star Trek since JJ Abrams.

[Overmind One]

Alex Kurtzman is a hack. We need to make that the opening statement because it is the reason why everything Star Trek he has touched has turned to shit. From his creation of the ridiculously stupid "Kelvin timeline" to the TV series failure of Star Trek Discovery, his hack failwriting goes all the way back into his career:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0476064/

There is NOTHING in his history which shows any ability to write intellectual material. Everything in his writing resume is stuff that is made for average intellects and simpleminded audiences who like action and visual candy, and there is a whole lotta fail in that history. Failed shows, movie flops, and lots of angry fans. Sure, there is an audience for these types of shows, but Star Trek is WAY above his intellectual capabilities. Why CBS or Paramount would hire him to helm one of the most intellectual shows ever created is beyond stupid and may be a fatal blow for the future of Star Trek as a vehicle for intellectual scifi drama. Kurtzman has turned it into yet another fail vehicle like his other stuff (I encourage all who are reading this to click the IMdB link and see what this man has been doing for most of his career). Kurtzman has a long career, no doubt about that. But so did the writers of Sesame Street, The Flintstones and All In The Family. Kurtzman is a fluff writer, not a scifi writer. So why is he the worst thing to happen to Star Trek? It's because he does not understand Star Trek. He is in the same group of people who called all of the science in Star Trek "technobabble", and who always thought that the large viewscreen on the Enterprise 1701 was a window because they just did not watch the show or understand why a viewscreen was chosen by Roddenberry and not a window. Perhaps they should familiarize Kurtzman with modern tanks which do not have windows for the same reason:


Putting such a person in charge of an IP like Star Trek is like having a 15 year old write stories about midlife crises. Alex Kurtzman has damaged the Star Trek IP to such a degree that it will be impossible to repair the damage without somehow wiping away everything he has created since the 2009 reboot movies. That means erasing the "Kelvin timeline" and all of the silly nonsense which took place in it:

• Red matter
• Magic Tribble blood
• A pasty white British Kahn Noonien Singh
• The introduction of tribbles and Gorn references
• Groupie smoochy airhead Uhura and her romance with Spock
• Gay Sulu (Sulu was not gay, George Takei was)
• Emotional Spock
• Bad Boy Kirk
• The Beastie Boys
• Multiple warp cores
• A U.S.S. Enterprise which has been scaled up to double it's original size and has had all manner of lights and scoops and doodads stuck on it
• Many more....

All of that has to be wiped away. Star Trek Discovery is an abomination. It has NOTHING to do with Sonequa Martin-Green being cast as the central character. It has to do with the tone and feel of the show and the stupid writing which is barely worthy of Gilmore Girls or Xena the Warrior Princess....wait, he wrote for that too. There was never a Discovery ship in the TOS timeline, no Michael Burnham, and no there is no connection between STD and TOS through her, or their soy-based Spock which will be making his appearance in Season 2 of that series.

What the fans see is a sad, pathetic attempt by Kurtzman to graft his idiotic show canon into the canon of real Star Trek so that he is able to rewrite canon and move off into a whole new direction that is set up in a way that he can manage with his limited intellect and writing ability.

Never in the history of Star Trek has the fanbase hated their show so much. Never was there such a sucky Star Trek on the air that was so hated that it drove them away from the show and into another show which was actually more Star Trek than Star Trek (hello The Orville!).

As long as Alex Kurtzman is in charge of Star Trek, it is going to suck. This is already the view of fans who know before it is even aired that the new Picard show is going to suck because of him. Yeah, this is an angry rant. But there are hundreds and hundreds of them all over the internet to read and listen to.

CBS/Paramount, PLEASE fire Kurtzman before Star Trek has swirled down the toilet completely.

 

[Overmind One]

Interesting....

 

[Atlantis]

Why didn't you post these topics in the Star trek Discovery topic? You are basically talking about the same thing in a different thread.

 

[Overmind One]

Why didn't you post these topics in the Star trek Discovery topic? You are basically talking about the same thing in a different thread.

I am not just talking about Discovery. I am talking about the whole of Star Trek here in this thread. Kurtzman is at the center of the whole reboot arc, and is at the core of everything wrong with Star Trek on the screen and on Discovery for TV.

 

[Overmind One]

The 2009 movie went off the rails as soon as we saw the very first product placement piece for Nokia in Kirk's father's vintage Stingray. Product placement in Star Trek? Then the Beastie Boys playing on the stereo, then seeing the Enterprise being built on the ground, then Uhura getting drinks for her friends in a bar, it was all wrong from the getgo. But the cast they chose was spot on. Great choice for actors and for Uhura. The scripts are what killed it. More of the same for Into Darkness and Beyond. Those films made more than all the other Treks, but they destroyed the canon and did irreversible damage to the IP.

 

[Lord Ba'al]

The 2009 movie went off the rails as soon as we saw the very first product placement piece for Nokia in Kirk's father's vintage Stingray. Product placement in Star Trek? Then the Beastie Boys playing on the stereo, then seeing the Enterprise being built on the ground, then Uhura getting drinks for her friends in a bar, it was all wrong from the getgo. But the cast they chose was spot on. Great choice for actors and for Uhura. The scripts are what killed it. More of the same for Into Darkness and Beyond. Those films made more than all the other Treks, but they destroyed the canon and did irreversible damage to the IP.

Perhaps you should dig through the forums to find the posts you wrote initially after having seen 2009. It'll be an interesting experiment for comparison and self reflection.

 

[Overmind One]

Perhaps you should dig through the forums to find the posts you wrote initially after having seen 2009. It'll be an interesting experiment for comparison and self reflection.

I have. I liked the movie when it came out. I raved about how well they did the casting, and said nice things about it. But that was because I was starving for new Trek. You can also find here, that I lamented the new direction taken which was defined by Into Darkness, and I have said how it retroactively made me hate the 2009 movie. Beyond was complete trash. But I am unflinching in my feeling about NuTrek and especially Kurtzman and JJ Abrams being nothing but hack.

 

[Joelist]

Just one way we all are different, which is part of what makes this place special. Me, if I like a film but despise its sequel I don't then change on the first film. And yes Into Darkness is just trash. It and The Last Jedi are peas of a pod.

 

[Overmind One]

Just one way we all are different, which is part of what makes this place special. Me, if I like a film but despise its sequel I don't then change on the first film. And yes Into Darkness is just trash. It and The Last Jedi are peas of a pod.

Yep, and I agree with that. For me, Star Trek is all about it's continuity. I liked the 2009 movie when it came out because it was new, and still very familiar after so many years without any new Star Trek. But I had some reservations about the way they were portraying Uhura and Kirk. I also thought they didn't get Spock right, although McCoy and Chekhov and Sulu were ok from the start. That movie alone would not reveal the trajectory of what JJ and Kurtzman were going to take with Trek, but Into Darkness gave us two points to use to plot the trajectory of NuTrek and for me that direction was directly into Left Field. This is why I came to loathe the 2009 movie. Beyond just proved that the show was deeply into Left Field and headed into the parking lot. It's like going out with a girl and liking how different she is, enjoying just how out of the box she thinks, and how different she is from the other girls you have dated. That is, until she pulls out a plastic bag from her purse with the index finger of her last boyfriend in it. Then you realize she is different because she is INSANE.

 

[Overmind One]

I found this post from myself.

https://www.gatefans.net/gforums/threads/star-trek-movie-2009.22854/#post-730533

I love how they were able to warp us back to the original era without stepping on TOS! My only regret is that we will have to wait 3 or so years for a sequel instead of having a series come out of this.

I watched it in the theater and I have since watched it at home and it strikes me that this is what's missing from scifi in general and from SGU specifically:

Maturity. Sure, sex is fun and a part of (especially) young people's lives but it has it's place along with a myriad of things like responsibility, self discovery, duty, honor, camaraderie & humor. Oh, this sort of sounds like SG1 or SGA, doesn't it? And these are things that are sorely lacking in SGU.

I don't get how mature that is to be guided by your loins but that pretty much defines SGU. Star Trek, the new movie, however presents a whole new galaxy of possibility. I only wish they were going to make a series out of this! We sooooo need it especially when I think so many of us were wanting/needing/hoping for it (and did not get it) in SGU!

Then I actually said this:

I love the new movie too! I thought they did a great reboot and covered the rolling back to this new timeline very well. I have been a Trek fan since the original series which (Im aging myself), I watched LIVE. As quiet as its kept, TOS was the shortest lived Star Trek series ever to air (3 yrs). I have to wait more than 10 years for the movie Star Trek (the first reboot).

This new crew is PERFECT for the new Trek. But because of who they are, I dont think they would be open to serializing the show with this crew. I think a series would work as long as it was a different crew on a different ship in the new timeline. I doubt that Chris Pine or Zoe Saldana and especially not Zachary Quinto would do a TV series. Their careers are on an upswing in the movies (especially Saldana), and TV would be a step down for them.

Boy was I mistaken about that! Perhaps the Prophets misunderstood our wishes and allowed STD to happen to us? But this was before there was an Into Darkness and Beyond.

I also said this in the same thread:

Thats where they could stumble (and break their necks)



And the bolded would be the BIGGEST mistake they could make. I totally agree that we will not have the excellent cast that they picked for Star Trek 2009. The characterizations, the appearances, the extreme attention to detail, it just could not carry into a TV series with new actors. Especially with the second movie coming out soon with the same cast from the first one. The new cast IS Star Trek for the 21st Century. I dont see how they are going to do this in a TV series. But I can see a way out for them....

They could create a NEW series with a new cast, a la Voyager, DS9, Enterprise, TNG, but set it in the same universe as the new movies as well as use some of the footage and the same CGI models for continuity. Create a different ship and have a new crew on it. They could release movies on a regular basis to continue the present new cast in the movies, and leave the knockoffs/alternates for the TV series, whilst maintaining the new canon.

And that is exactly what they did (black bolded). They rebooted the universe, and I liked it at first. I suggested they create a new ship with a new crew and set it in the "new timeline" (aka Kelvin). At that time, the silliest stuff was red matter, transwarp beaming, Scotty's tribble, the destruction of Vulcan and Romulus, and the beer brewery engine room. There was also the window on the bridge, lensflares, etc etc etc. Considering what a Trek nerd I am, I can see I was completely off my mind when I wrote that! . I was starving for Star Trek, and it showed. Into Darkness broke that spell, and Beyond was awful.

 

[Lord Ba'al]

I found this post from myself.

https://www.gatefans.net/gforums/threads/star-trek-movie-2009.22854/#post-730533



Then I actually said this:



Boy was I mistaken about that! Perhaps the Prophets misunderstood our wishes and allowed STD to happen to us? But this was before there was an Into Darkness and Beyond.

I also said this in the same thread:



And that is exactly what they did (black bolded). They rebooted the universe, and I liked it at first. I suggested they create a new ship with a new crew and set it in the "new timeline" (aka Kelvin). At that time, the silliest stuff was red matter, transwarp beaming, Scotty's tribble, the destruction of Vulcan and Romulus, and the beer brewery engine room. There was also the window on the bridge, lensflares, etc etc etc. Considering what a Trek nerd I am, I can see I was completely off my mind when I wrote that! . I was starving for Star Trek, and it showed. Into Darkness broke that spell, and Beyond was awful.

Sounds like you're the one who gave them all their ideas.

Time to sharpen my pitchfork...

 

[The Great Gazoo]

 

[The Great Gazoo]