Hopefully Star Trek knows that an upset fan doesn't equal a toxic one

Alex Kurtzman doesn't listen to "toxic fans" but who does he consider toxic?
"Star Trek: Discovery" | SXSW Featured Session | The Trailblazing Journey To The Fifth And Final
"Star Trek: Discovery" | SXSW Featured Session | The Trailblazing Journey To The Fifth And Final / Daniel Boczarski/GettyImages

Star Trek's leading voice is Alex Kurtzman. He's one of the most notable names in the world of Star Trek right now, and he's also one of the biggest reasons the franchise has stumbled out of the gates. For over seven years, he's wasted time and money catering to passion projects that seemingly exclude the core fan base. It's only been recently with more broader shows in Prodigy and Strange New Worlds that he's started to realize he needed to make changes.

Gone were the 'grimdark' show, edgy for the sake of being edgy, and in were more classic Star Trek shows that followed more of the othos that Gene Roddenberry set out to see in the world. The change wasn't just because he thought Discovery was a bad show and they needed to do better, the chance was the ratings. Discovery had bad ratings, and people weren't happy.

So unhappy that they did the one thing they didn't really want to do and listened to the fans who were unhappy. The many, many unhappy fans.

Kurtzman told Variety he did just that, but he ignored those pesky "toxic" fans, saying;

"“We listened to a lot of it (fan complaints). I think I’ve been able to separate the toxic fandom from really true fans who love ‘Star Trek’ and want you to hear what they have to say about what they would like to see.”"

What makes a toxic fan? I think we can all agree that harassing people on social media or in person (or any other way) is wrong. But what about pointing out that fans largely don't like the new shows? Not for race or creed, but because the writing is bad or because it targets a very niche audience?

It's a bit concerning to hear Kurtzman talk about listening to fans but dismissing the ones who may be "toxic" because he doesn't really describe what to him is a toxic fan. Are the reviewers on Rotten Tomatoes toxic for calling a show that doesn't feel, look, or sound like a Star Trek show bad? He may think so, and that's not a good thing, because they're right.

They're upset that a show they watched for decades is being marred by bad writing and even worse direction. They're not toxic for pointing that out. They would be if they didn't like it for the reasons of race, creed or what have you.

But most of us don't like a majority of the new Star Trek because it isn't Star Trek in our eyes. It's not that it's new, it's that it's not what we expect from Star Trek. It's like ordering a pizza and you get steak tacos instead. Still a delicious item to eat, but not what we ordered.

When you force Star Trek to be more Ricky and Morty than it is Star Trek, you fail. Pointing that out isn't toxic. Hopefully, he knows this, because he's the man running the ship for better or worse and he has to be able to figure out what does and doesn't work and why.

Going too far from the core concept of the show will anger the fandom, and they have a right to be angry. We know what the franchise should do, it's why we're here. We're just hoping that pointing out that we want classic Trek back isn't going to be seen as "toxic" because it's not.

Ignoring what the fans want, however, is very toxic.