There’s a newer TrekMovie piece, just out this afternoon, that cites a new interview with Kurtzman in an industry journal.
It also notes that a large number of of new Paramount senior executives came out for yesterday’s premiere screening.
I’m not sure that it’s entirely accurate that there’s no hints of a renewal for Kurtzman’s and Secret Hideout.
In the recent SFX magazine piece for Starfleet Academy, the Kurtzman quotes hinted vaguely at “Lots more Star Trek TV is in development”.
“There’s quite a few exciting things in the works right now, but I’m not going to say more than that!”
TrekMovie observes that, ‘The SFX article noted Kurtzman was “tight-lipped about future projects,” adding that the interview was done before the announcement that[ Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley are developing a new Star Trek film.’
Thinking back to the last 5-year extension, Kurtzman was asked to map out proposal for Star Trek’s television rollout for 5-7 years forward.
Clearly, he was given clearance by the new ownership to pitch stuff towards another extension. Whether there’s any uptake is to be seen.
I just keep coming back to the previous Paramount+ and streaming heads stripping the schedule back to the point that animation was being eliminated and the live action schedule was dominated by Taylor Sheridan.
Now the new owners have a large and prestigious animation studio and Sheridan refused to renew.
Meanwhile WB is fighting back against Skydance’s takeover effort to go with Netflix’s offer.
If I had to guess, Paramount+ will see more new Star Trek animation and live action as complementary to the darker whatever that the creators of Stranger Things will bring.
Kurtzman may get another but shorter extension until the movie franchise gets off the ground, but will be fenced to the 32nd century, animated shows, and shows from the 23rd and 24th century that won’t write new canon.
This seems to be just one more thing in development that hinges on the decisions David Ellison will make about the next decade for the franchise, or at least the next five years.
Now that some of the new things that Ellison had been counting on to anchor Paramount+’s schedule (i.e. anything new from Taylor Sheridan) are complete nonstarters, perhaps there’s some room for some new Trek.
Also, the relationship between Kurtzman and David Ellison goes back to when Kurtzman was a writer and Ellison was a producer on Into Darkness. There’s no sense of negativity between them.
While Ellison hasn’t hesitated to finally cut the JJ Abrams movie contract that failed to meet deliverables, Kurtzman has delivered what CBS and Paramount wanted on television. There’s no reason to believe that they couldn’t come to a meeting of minds but there may be some of Secret Hideout’s long term EPs that might be let go in the process of a shift in direction.
So, one of our GenZ kids has now watched the trailer a couple of times and asked some questions.
They’re not the Discovery fan among our teens, preferring animation generally. (They liked Lower Decks and Prodigy.). So, I had to fill in on the 32nd century.
They’re not entirely convinced about investing in a live action series but might watch the premiere.
Meanwhile, the one who was previously a Discovery fan has just come off a Picard and TNG watch and isn’t sounding interested. The marketing is not intriguing them the way Disco season 5 did.
All to say that I am not sure that Paramount really understands Zs or marketing to them at all.
I found Paramount’s camera operator’s position on the ground looking up led to a lot of weird angles for the exchanges between Celia and the Starfleet Academy cast.
I also found the sound quality poor given it was their host and set up.
All of these issues made it a pain to watch.
Paramount continues to not run these events well.
I’m more suspicious that the old owners canceled all their animation so as to no be in conflict with Skydance’s animation studio which is top quality.
The law looks back further than Confederation. This was addressed in previous amendments to the Act.
It has to since Canada didn’t have independent citizenship legislation until 1947.
Even if you and others don’t want to get citizenships in place for yourselves, it would be important to get it in place and document time in Canada, as future generations born after December 15, 2025 will have to have parents who spent 1095 in Canada.
You should look further back up your tree, especially if you family had settled in New England or New York State.
There were successful claims based on more than 4 generations back under the Interim measure in place while Parliament was considering legislative changes.
The Interim Measure was put in place, to satisfy the court ruling, based on the proposed legislation.
Since the bill wasn’t amended during the Parliamentary process, legal experts expect that the amended law will be applied/implemented consistent with the Interim Measure.
I would look at the FAQ on finding n documentation in the subreddit.
Family Search and Ancestry will help find Census records, birth certificates and baptismal records (for periods before civil registration which came quite late in several provinces).
Once you know where and when your Canadian ancestors were born, you will be in a good place to get a baptismal record from the appropriate provincial archives.
For this, it’s unlikely that you’ll need a lawyer.
However, if you’re looking for legal expertise, the two most experienced in citizenship by descent (practising in BC and Quebec) were guests on this recent Borderlines Podcast.
The citizenship law looks back before Confederation.
In fact, Canadian citizenship only came into existence in 1947. Canada has the separate constitutional authority from the 1930s but WW II held up the legislation.
Before 1947, Canadians were British subjects domiciled in Canada.
If they had status as British subjects domiciled in Canada pre1947, or domiciled in a predecessor colony before Confederation, that would be considered Canadian.
For example, they could have been born in the colony of Nova Scotia before 1867, or they could have moved from the UK to Nova Scotia and, effectively, become British subjects domiciled in Nova Scotia.
It’s worth the deep dive genealogically if you’re seriously considering applying for a certificate of citizenship.
This is a straightforward case as long as you were adopted when your mother had citizenship status and the adoption took place before December 15, 2025.
Whether your mum was born in Canada or a Canadian citizen by descent, you’ll need go through a two-step process with some help from your mum.
Step 1 - Your mother’s citizenship status needs to be confirmed by IRCC. When this is done, an identifier will be created so you can complete step 2.
Step 2 - your adoption is documented so that IRCC can provide a grant of citizenship.
Here is the page with the forms - they haven’t all been updated yet to say that the first generation limit doesn’t apply to your parent.
BanQ is an official archival database from the province of Quebec.
The subreddit has information in its ‘How to find Documents’ FAQ.
You’ll want to start here for a birth record.
https://www.archives.gov.on.ca/topic/birth-marriage-and-death/
You can claim on the basis of being British subjects officially domiciled in the colonies that joined Confederation.
You will need baptismal certificates rather than birth certificates as Nova Scotia did not begin civil registration of births until 1908 but the provincial archives will lead you to religious archives that can help.
There was a lot of movement back and forth across the border in the northeast.
All the law requires is one Canadian born or naturalized ancestor. This includes those who were actually British subjects domiciled in Canada or its predecessor colonies.
It is automatic, but you have to apply for the certificate of citizenship.
There are related regulations that have just been published in The Canada Gazette that will enable people to have a simplified process for formal renunciation of Canadian citizenship to Canadian authorities if they believe they may be Canadian citizens by descent.
The law is The Citizenship Act with Lost Canadians amendments that came into force on December 15, 2025.
The 2023 Bjorkquist decision on Lost Canadians found the first generation limit on citizenship by descent violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Parliament passed amendments in bill C-3 in early December.
For persons born after December 15, 2025, their new amendments to the Act will require Canadians born outside Canada to meet a 1095 day presence requirement, but the C-3 amendments effectively do away with the first generation limit on citizenship by descent for persons born or adopted before it came into effect.
Given the complete failure to produce and release anything for Star Trek in more than a decade on the cinematic side, I can’t think any reasonable senior executive would think now is the time to let Kurtzman go. All the more, the historic chaos in relaunching the television franchise in the early seasons of both TNG and Discovery have demonstrated that it’s just not possible to launch a new overall franchise runner without running major risks.
Kurtzman’s got a reputation as being good to work with from both the studio/streamer and creative side. They don’t have any evidence to show he won’t adjust to new strategic direction.
The question more will be how far will Kurtzman himself be willing to compromise if the Ellisons give high level direction that would take the franchise in a very different direction for television.
What I do see is that some of the perceived failures will definitely lead to restricted opportunities for some of the EPs that have worked for Kurtzman. For example, Osunsami may not be given run of a project again after the S31 movie. Michelle Paradise won’t likely be asked to run another show in the franchise.