Rumours, news and general speculation

Discovery
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Graham Kennedy »

You might remember these guys from previous postings of mine - they have proved quite reliable in the past. They came to my attention in the run up to the Fantastic Four debacle, and they called the Ghostbusters fiasco long before the movie was released.

So there are no guarantees, of course, but here's what they've heard.

Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

Was coming to post that, Graham. I am now at the part where Les Moonves is being a micromanager.

Edit: That was depressing.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Summary of my thoughts :

Exactly what I said it would be. Show makers who very obviously didn't care about the show they were making, and wanted to make "their own thing" instead, but with the Star Trek name to try and con viewers into watching it.

Not surprised at all to hear about Fuller being fired. The whole "too busy... concentrating on other projects" thing was obvious BS.

I thought the temporal cold war was bad. Now we're going to have the trans dimensional universe, which sounds worse. MUCH worse.

Actors want out, whole departments are being fired. Honestly at this point I'd be pretty happy if the series did implode and never made it to TV at all.

I'm not at all surprised that merchandisers are hesitant to touch this show or that Netflix are furious. It sounds like it's going to be an all-time shitshow.


Bastards. Sometimes I hate being right.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

The most damning part was them repeating the things Bryan Fuller has said about wanting to run a Star Trek show, and then he is suddenly too busy to run it.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

Les Moonves was compared to Tom Rothman. If you want to understand that reference, here is another video from those guys which is about Deadpool and how Tom Rothman almost fucked that up.



Highlights, or low-lights depending on how you look at it, include Rothman voting against Titanic and Avatar being made.

I hope Moonves isn't that bad when it comes to creativity. THe thing I know about Moonves is that he was Head of NBC when they put out Friends and ER.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Just for funsies, Rothman is also the man who cancelled Firefly. And was dead against X Men being made because he thought it was as stupid idea.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
DarkMoineau
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 407
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:03 am

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by DarkMoineau »

Graham Kennedy wrote:Just for funsies, Rothman is also the man who cancelled Firefly. And was dead against X Men being made because he thought it was as stupid idea.
I just don't get why he was not fired then.
If you want to ask me, this avatar is a resized version of "The War Come Home" by Davemetlesits found on DeviantArt
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

DarkMoineau wrote:
Graham Kennedy wrote:Just for funsies, Rothman is also the man who cancelled Firefly. And was dead against X Men being made because he thought it was as stupid idea.
I just don't get why he was not fired then.
Because during his tenure as boss, 20th Century Fox didn't really experience losses. It's only with the Marvel Studios mega-boom that it was felt that Rothman wasn't getting the most out of these properties, like Marvel did. Plus his reputation of driving away directors like Bryan Singer, and CEO's like Jeffrey Katzenberg of Dreamworks was detrimental to business. Studios need to attract talent, and this guy's reputation for clashing with directors was getting too public. At that point he was more trouble than he was worth.
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6244
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by McAvoy »

I can get behind this. He always played a dick though.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Graham Kennedy »

Does anybody else have the reaction that as far as they're concerned the Captain is the star of the show and all this "the First Officer is the real star" is just nonsense?

They can emphasise whatsername as much as they like... as far as I'm concerned it's the Captain that ultimately matters.

I wonder if it might turn out like The West Wing. Rob Lowe was supposed to be the star of that, with the President only appearing a handful of times per season. That idea lasted until fans saw Martin Sheen's first scene and said in unison "I want to see more of that guy!"
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Mikey »

I think it could be made to have the XO be the focus... but it would require the sort of care and attention which have already been demonstrated not to be present.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 11561
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Graham Kennedy »

I don't doubt that they will try to make the XO the main character. Kind of making every episode a "lower decks" type of thing.

What I'm saying is that I care more about the Captain than the XO. No matter how few scenes he's in per episode, I still regard him as the more interesting one.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Bryan Moore
Captain
Captain
Posts: 2729
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:39 am
Location: Perpetual Summer Camp
Contact:

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Bryan Moore »

Graham Kennedy wrote:I don't doubt that they will try to make the XO the main character. Kind of making every episode a "lower decks" type of thing.

What I'm saying is that I care more about the Captain than the XO. No matter how few scenes he's in per episode, I still regard him as the more interesting one.
I think a lot of people will share this particular mindset. No matter how great Riker or Spock were, those were Picard and Kirk's shows, and rightfully so. The one-off "Lower Decks" is great when used properly, but I have no desire to watch a full series about Robin, Alfred, or the guy who does Bruce Wayne's taxes.

If I were going to try to do something without the captain as a focus, I would almost want to write a season with the events of the same day all through the eyes of different members of the crew - 10 or 12 one-hour-long episodes that take place in real time, but each one of them filmed from a different perspective, eventually tying in at the end. That's just me, though.
Don't you hear my call, though you're many years away, don't you hear me calling you?
User avatar
Nutso
2 Star Admiral
2 Star Admiral
Posts: 9637
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Rumours, news and general speculation

Post by Nutso »

Star Trek: Discovery casts Office alum Rainn Wilson as classic villain
Rainn Wilson’s first big-screen role was an alien fanboy in Galaxy Quest, a movie spoof of cultish sci-fi series like Star Trek. Now, he’s getting a taste of the real thing: On Friday, CBS announced the Office funny guy has landed a role in the forthcoming Star Trek: Discovery, playing someone fans of the original 1960s series will know well.

Wilson will suit up as Harry Mudd, the eccentric space pirate first played by the late Roger C. Carmel in the sixth episode of season 1, dubbed “Mudd’s Women,” which aired in 1966. Mudd’s list of offenses include smuggling, transportation of stolen goods, and using counterfeit currency. The character would later appear elsewhere in the franchise, including the Star Trek animated series and novels.

Not much is known about Wilson’s take on the character beyond the brief descriptor of a “charismatic conman and intergalactic criminal.”
"Bible, Wrath of Khan, what's the difference?"
Stan - South Park
Post Reply