Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
Cronan Thompson
I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
Worlds.
I also think DS9 wouldn't be what it is today if Gene were still alive.
Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
behind.
As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
--
Cronan Thompson
First Officer of
the USS Megadittos AND the USS Antigon
Strange Telephone Calls to make at 3 AM:
"Hello. Is this the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms?"
"Yes Sir."
"Good."
"May I help you?"
"What rifle goes with Burben
and Cuban cigars?"
Any misspellings in the abuve ritings
are halusinasions. Egnore dem!!!
Cronan Thompson <maliki@worldnet.
From: "Cronan Thompson" <mal...@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
Organization: Flames inc. You send em We respond
--
--
| Fidonet: "Cronan Thompson" <maliki@worldnet. 1:300/43
| Internet: "Cronan.Thompson".<maliki_w...@pnet.playcom.com
Rob Rooney
Cronan Thompson <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
<01bbc9e2$f98a4180$b88f92cf@default>...
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
> has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before
TNG
> truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
> be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
> have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
> bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
> Worlds.
>[SNIP}
> --
>
> Cronan Thompson
> First Officer of
> the USS Megadittos AND the USS Antigon
I agree with many of your points here. It would be pretty hard to pin the
blame on any one person, but Rick Berman does have a certain responsibility
to accept any blame based on his position. I mean, he is the final say in
all matters Star Trek at Paramount. He deserves some of the blame but
definitely not all of it.
I think that DS9's current season is on track to be the best season of
Trek ever. But I think that both Voy and DS9's own exec producers probably
have a little more control over the directions that the shows go in. Berman
merely approves all their decisions (or disapproves). Back when it was only
TNG I think that he was more involved on a day-to-day basis but that now he
can't possibly do that. At any given time he is working on both shows and
occasionally a movie.
I think that some of the writers are the cause. The writing on DS9 is
pretty solid, the story for FC is good, but the weak link seems to be
Voyager. The stories just aren't that good overall. You can blame the
actors, but if they have bad material to work with, their performance's may
suffer. One of the things that I don't like about Voyager is that it's
supposed to have all this character conflict in it but it doesn't seem to
have any. Everybody gets along very well. The concept for Voyager is not
that bad, but the execution seems horrible (but may be getting better).
I agree that GR would probably not have approved much of DS9's
inter-character conflicts, but for all his preaching about how everyone in
a Starfleet uniform would get along, TOS had the best inter-character
conflict of all! (Spock-McCoy) I do think that Michael Piller was
responsible for the Best of Both Worlds success as much as Rick Berman. But
Berman isn't totally to blame. And if any one person is to blame for
Voyager's problems, it's probably Jeri Taylor.
-Rob
Joyce Harmon
In article <01bbca0e$89ebb760$2217b8cd@falcon>, rro...@ix.netcom.com
says...
>
>
> I agree with many of your points here. It would be pretty hard to
pin the
>blame on any one person, but Rick Berman does have a certain
responsibility
>to accept any blame based on his position. I mean, he is the final say in
>all matters Star Trek at Paramount. He deserves some of the blame but
>definitely not all of it.
Final say at Paramount, maybe, but not at UPN, which is where I think a lot
of the second-guessing and back-seat driving is coming for Voyager.
> I think that some of the writers are the cause. The writing on DS9 is
>pretty solid, the story for FC is good, but the weak link seems to be
>Voyager. The stories just aren't that good overall. You can blame the
>actors, but if they have bad material to work with, their performance's
may
>suffer. One of the things that I don't like about Voyager is that it's
>supposed to have all this character conflict in it but it doesn't seem to
>have any. Everybody gets along very well. The concept for Voyager is not
>that bad, but the execution seems horrible (but may be getting better).
I agree that for the first two seasons, the writing was definitely a
problem, though there were some excellent exceptions. Also think the
writing is improving, which is why the show is improving.
> I agree that GR would probably not have approved much of DS9's
>inter-character conflicts, but for all his preaching about how everyone in
>a Starfleet uniform would get along, TOS had the best inter-character
>conflict of all! (Spock-McCoy) I do think that Michael Piller was
>responsible for the Best of Both Worlds success as much as Rick Berman.
But
>Berman isn't totally to blame. And if any one person is to blame for
>Voyager's problems, it's probably Jeri Taylor.
Then how would you explain the improvement in the show in 3rd season, now
that she's pretty much in charge on her own? I've been given to understand
that a lot of the problems with Voyager were - well, perhaps not Michael
Piller's fault, but a conflict between Piller and Taylor over what they
wanted to do with the show. Since I believe all the Kazon stuff was his
baby, I'm rooting for Taylor at this point.
Joyce
Rob Rooney
You may be right about UPN doing the back-seat driving for Voyager. I'm
not really sure how the Rick Berman-UPN interface works.
I also agree that Voyager is getting better and the writing has
picked
up on that show. It's really hard to judge how this season will come out
once all the shows have aired. My opinions are mainly based on the first
two seasons. And some of the problems may have been a Piller-Taylor
power struggle of sorts. I do think that Taylor is more responsible in
the sense that she is basically in charge as the exec prod. But as I
said, the show is getting better, and she would also deserve the lion's
share of the credit for the positive changes.
To be honest, I think that most of Trek's problems, and I don't
really
think that there are that many, are on Voyager. I think that they should
have waited at least another year before the show came out. For better
or worse, Voyager is the UPN flagship title, so I think they are trying
to appeal to a broader audience than the usual Trek fans and trying to
get the general public. In some ways I think that they have alienated
some fans from the show. This may be why the show is not nearly as
well-liked as DS9. I still think that DS9 is a superior tv show, but in
a year or two, Voyager may prove me wrong.
I do hope the show continues to get better. I'm not a Voyager hater
at
all. I watch the show every week, and some I have really liked, and some
I did not. It's just that I have liked less of Voyager than DS9, that's
all. I'm also not a Taylor-basher, but I do think that whether it
originates from her or not, she is the one person most responsible for
Voyager.
One person I don't like on Voyager is Brannon Braga. His TNG stuff
was
good, but I just don't like his Voyager stuff at all!
-Rob
Joyce Harmon <jlha...@mail.crosslink.net> wrote in article
<55k1qq$svn$1...@kronos.crosslink.net>...
> In article <01bbca0e$89ebb760$2217b8cd@falcon>, rro...@ix.netcom.com
> says...
> >
[SNIP]
Warbird
"Cronan Thompson" <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
>has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
>truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
>be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
>have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
>bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
>Worlds.
>Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
>Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
>was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
>behind.
> As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
>would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
>so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
>token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
>originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
>none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
>is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
>might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
>
>
make it a habit) to some degree here. We can't blame Berman for all our
complaints about what we don't like in DS9 and Voyager. Is Trek perfect?
No, but Berman isn't the only one working on the series. Berman is the
one who made Trek what it is today. And I'm sure that like Roddenberry
before him, he's not as actively involved in the day to day production of
the series. He has enough to do by overseeing two TV series and a major
motion picture. That is alot of work to do.
By the way, I still disagree with Cronan's blatant hatred for Voyager. I
like both shows, even if DS9 is better, IMHO. I will, however, continue
to watch Voyager to the end, because its better than a lot of other TV
shows that I could watch.
Warbird_
Vote for your favorite captain/first officer at:
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/8459/index.html
-
Micheal Keane
In article <01bbc9e2$f98a4180$b88f92cf@default>,
Cronan Thompson <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
>has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
>truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
>be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
>have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
>bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
>Worlds.
Actually, from what I've heard, Berman/Piller had control of TNG starting
around 3rd season. Roddenberry wasn't doing much by the time he died.
Berman decided that TNG should be about the characters and not people on
some planet no one cares about(or something like that =-).
> I also think DS9 wouldn't be what it is today if Gene were still alive.
>Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
>Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
>was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
>behind.
Definitely.
> As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
>would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
>so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
>token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
Personally, I think Voyager's sole problem is the writing. Pretty much
everything else is fine. The actors and actresses do pretty well when they
have material to work with. WHen they don't, they do the best they can. I
don't have any problems with the production values and the direction. The
writing is what is so wrong with Voyager... It's capable of doing
fantasticly but it's so damn inconsistant...
>originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
>none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
>is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
>might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
Right now, Piller, and Taylor don't seem to be grasping why
Voyager isn't doing too well. Fortuantely, Piller is no longer in
control(he though the 2nd season was peachy keen) so maybe Taylor can
turns things around and so far this season she seems to be doing fairly
well. It's shades of TNG in a way. Poor writing the first two seasons but
everything starts to click the 3rd...
--
Micheal Keane(ae...@u.washington.edu) Join the Church of Last Thursday!
Sending unsolicited commercial email this address implies that you wish
to use my free service to kill you at an unspecified time, place and manner.
Joyce@pnet.playcom.com (jlharmon@mail.crosslink.net (Joyce )
From: jlha...@mail.crosslink.net (Joyce Harmon)
Subject: Re: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
Organization: crosslink.net
In article <01bbca0e$89ebb760$2217b8cd@falcon>, rro...@ix.netcom.com
says...
>
>
>Berman isn't totally to blame. And if any one person is to blame for
>Voyager's problems, it's probably Jeri Taylor.
Then how would you explain the improvement in the show in 3rd season, now
that she's pretty much in charge on her own? I've been given to understand
that a lot of the problems with Voyager were - well, perhaps not Michael
Piller's fault, but a conflict between Piller and Taylor over what they
wanted to do with the show. Since I believe all the Kazon stuff was his
baby, I'm rooting for Taylor at this point.
Joyce
--
| Fidonet: jlha...@mail.crosslink.net (Joyce 1:300/43
| Internet: jlharmon_mail_crosslink_net.(Jo...@pnet.playcom.com
Warbird <warbird@postoffice.worldne
From: Warbird <war...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
"Cronan Thompson" <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
>has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
>truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
>be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
>have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
>bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
>Worlds.
> I also think DS9 wouldn't be what it is today if Gene were still alive.
>Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
>Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
>was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
>behind.
> As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
>would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
>so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
>token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
>originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
>none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
>is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
>might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
>
>
I agree with Cronan (there's a first time for everything--I'll try not to
make it a habit) to some degree here. We can't blame Berman for all our
complaints about what we don't like in DS9 and Voyager. Is Trek perfect?
No, but Berman isn't the only one working on the series. Berman is the
one who made Trek what it is today. And I'm sure that like Roddenberry
before him, he's not as actively involved in the day to day production of
the series. He has enough to do by overseeing two TV series and a major
motion picture. That is alot of work to do.
By the way, I still disagree with Cronan's blatant hatred for Voyager. I
like both shows, even if DS9 is better, IMHO. I will, however, continue
to watch Voyager to the end, because its better than a lot of other TV
shows that I could watch.
Warbird_
Vote for your favorite captain/first officer at:
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/8459/index.html
-
--
| Fidonet: Warbird <war...@postoffice.worldne 1:300/43
| Internet: Warbird.<warbird_posto...@pnet.playcom.com
Rob Rooney <rrooney@ix.netcom.com
From: "Rob Rooney" <rro...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
Cronan Thompson <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
<01bbc9e2$f98a4180$b88f92cf@default>...
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
> has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before
TNG
> truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
> be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
> have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
> bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
> Worlds.
>[SNIP}
> --
>
> Cronan Thompson
> First Officer of
> the USS Megadittos AND the USS Antigon
I agree with many of your points here. It would be pretty hard to pin the
blame on any one person, but Rick Berman does have a certain responsibility
to accept any blame based on his position. I mean, he is the final say in
all matters Star Trek at Paramount. He deserves some of the blame but
definitely not all of it.
I think that DS9's current season is on track to be the best season of
Trek ever. But I think that both Voy and DS9's own exec producers probably
have a little more control over the directions that the shows go in. Berman
merely approves all their decisions (or disapproves). Back when it was only
TNG I think that he was more involved on a day-to-day basis but that now he
can't possibly do that. At any given time he is working on both shows and
occasionally a movie.
I think that some of the writers are the cause. The writing on DS9 is
pretty solid, the story for FC is good, but the weak link seems to be
Voyager. The stories just aren't that good overall. You can blame the
actors, but if they have bad material to work with, their performance's may
suffer. One of the things that I don't like about Voyager is that it's
supposed to have all this character conflict in it but it doesn't seem to
have any. Everybody gets along very well. The concept for Voyager is not
that bad, but the execution seems horrible (but may be getting better).
I agree that GR would probably not have approved much of DS9's
inter-character conflicts, but for all his preaching about how everyone in
a Starfleet uniform would get along, TOS had the best inter-character
conflict of all! (Spock-McCoy) I do think that Michael Piller was
responsible for the Best of Both Worlds success as much as Rick Berman. But
Berman isn't totally to blame. And if any one person is to blame for
Voyager's problems, it's probably Jeri Taylor.
-Rob
--
| Fidonet: "Rob Rooney" <rro...@ix.netcom.com 1:300/43
| Internet: "Rob.Rooney".<rrooney_ix...@pnet.playcom.com
Rob Rooney <rrooney@ix.netcom.com
From: "Rob Rooney" <rro...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
Organization: Netcom
You may be right about UPN doing the back-seat driving for Voyager. I'm
-Rob
> In article <01bbca0e$89ebb760$2217b8cd@falcon>, rro...@ix.netcom.com
> says...
> >
[SNIP]
> >> >Berman isn't totally to blame. And if any one person is to blame for
> >Voyager's problems, it's probably Jeri Taylor.
>
> Then how would you explain the improvement in the show in 3rd season, now
> that she's pretty much in charge on her own? I've been given to
understand
> that a lot of the problems with Voyager were - well, perhaps not Michael
> Piller's fault, but a conflict between Piller and Taylor over what they
> wanted to do with the show. Since I believe all the Kazon stuff was his
> baby, I'm rooting for Taylor at this point.
>
> Joyce
>
>
--
Micheal.Kea@pnet.playcom.com (aexia@u.washington.edu (Micheal Kea)
From: ae...@u.washington.edu (Micheal Keane)
Subject: Re: Is Rick Berman really to blame for Trek's problems?
In article <01bbc9e2$f98a4180$b88f92cf@default>,
Cronan Thompson <mal...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
>has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
>truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
>be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
>have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
>bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
>Worlds.
Actually, from what I've heard, Berman/Piller had control of TNG starting
around 3rd season. Roddenberry wasn't doing much by the time he died.
Berman decided that TNG should be about the characters and not people on
some planet no one cares about(or something like that =-).
> I also think DS9 wouldn't be what it is today if Gene were still alive.
>Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
>Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
>was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
>behind.
Definitely.
> As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
>would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
>so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
>token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
Personally, I think Voyager's sole problem is the writing. Pretty much
everything else is fine. The actors and actresses do pretty well when they
have material to work with. WHen they don't, they do the best they can. I
don't have any problems with the production values and the direction. The
writing is what is so wrong with Voyager... It's capable of doing
fantasticly but it's so damn inconsistant...
>originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
>none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
>is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
>might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
Right now, Piller, and Taylor don't seem to be grasping why
Voyager isn't doing too well. Fortuantely, Piller is no longer in
control(he though the 2nd season was peachy keen) so maybe Taylor can
turns things around and so far this season she seems to be doing fairly
well. It's shades of TNG in a way. Poor writing the first two seasons but
everything starts to click the 3rd...
--
Micheal Keane(ae...@u.washington.edu) Join the Church of Last Thursday!
Sending unsolicited commercial email this address implies that you wish
to use my free service to kill you at an unspecified time, place and manner.
--
| Fidonet: ae...@u.washington.edu (Micheal Kea 1:300/43
| Internet: aexia_u_washington_edu.(Miche...@pnet.playcom.com
James Southall
Cronan Thompson wrote:
>
> I don't think that he is. I think that since Gene Roddenberry's death he
> has taken Trek, and DS9 in particular, to new heights. Gene died before TNG
> truly hit its stride. I think that his narrow view of what Trek should
> be(particularly his views on religion and human behavior) might actually
> have hindered TNG for the first couple of seasons. Rick Berman did help
> bring us one of the all time most popular trek episodes: Best of Both
> Worlds.
> Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
> Gene's original Trek vision. No offense to the Great Bird and all but he
> was ahead of his time back in TOS's day but in the ninties he his kinda
> behind.
Sure. Though there *was* a limit of conflict in TOS, most of it was
done light-heartedly (eg Bones/Spock), and there was virtually no real
crew conflict. There was even less in TNG.
The two Roddenberry years of TNG were the first two - which were, in all
honesty, as bad as the first two seasons of Voyager. The Berman years
of TNG were far, far better than the Roddenberry years.
> As for Voyager's mediocrity, it cannot be blamed on any one individual. It
> would seem more of a cluster fuck. Everything from the casting, which was
> so PC they had to pass over better actors and actress so they could get
> token characters to the writing, which also is overly PC and lacking in
> originality. I am not saying that Berman is a peach of a guy who shares
> none of the blame in Voyager and Ds9's faults and failings but I think it
> is somewhat unfair to blame him for Voyager's faults and anything else that
> might go wrong and not see see his good work on DS9 and (hopefully) FC.
Of course, he now has very little to do with the tv series. In an
interview with the most recent UK "Star Trek Monthly", it was said that
all he basically does is approve the scripts, and all his day-to-day
work is to do with the films.
However, we must remember that he did help to create Voyager (though as
part of a threesome, sure), and was hugely responsible for the God-awful
Generations.
James
Daniel Hugh Nexon
I also think it is a strech to blame any single individual for ST's current
woes or lack thereof. I do have to disagree with the "PC" comments of the
original post, but I think that's well-worn ground we don't want to go down.
Basically, I'm concerned that the ST formulas worn itself out. I have to admit,
that I actually enjoyed "The Assignment," if only because they so quickly
dispensed with the standard solution to the possession problem, because
Rosalind Chao's acting was so impressive, and because the plot was more
coherent than most of what we've seen of this season (I actually think
the resolution to the Klingons was unsatisfactory and represented a prime
case of the ST reset button). I also, for the first time, enjoyed tonight's
Voyager episode -- but again, old-ground, just done well.
But, given the familiar "reset" button problem coupled with the apparent
exhaustion of any substantive innovation, I'm starting to question the
whole format. I don't want to dredge up the whole ST vs. Babylon-5 argument,
but I think the following is indicative:
When Star Trek is done well (DS9's premier last seasons, "Starship Down,"
"Shattered Mirror," etc.) I think "wow, the acting and scripting is just *so*
superior to Babylon-5, how could I ever think Babylon-5 blows DS9 out of the
water?" But when it's done poorly, such as, well, virtually every Voyager ep.
I return to loving the plotline, intense universe development, and cliffhangers
of Babylon-5. For me, the solution is obvious, ST needs to move into a coherent
narrative if it cannot come up with new and intrigueing situations (frankly,
I don't know why this isn't possible. . . with the exception of the faltering
treatment of the Borg, ST:TNG had some fairly interesting and reasonably
innovative plots).
Regards, Dan | Department of Political Science, Columbia U.
"I want to say that wonderful ideas can come from anywhere. Sometimes you
make a mistake, or break something, or lose a hat, and the next thing you
know, you get a great idea. My idea was to eat." -- Max Makes a Million
Max C. Strini
Per Jacobsen wrote:
> No, he was so far ahead that many people where unable to grasp it, not
> entirely surprising for en audience weaned on a television system whos
> only goal is to make money. The notion that "Everybody gets along very
> well" was unthinkable for so many. No, quite thinkable if the current
> population weren't so neurotic, and quite likely if the future evolved in
> the way it has in treks world.
It may be 'thinkable/likely' but it does *not* make for good drama.
------
Conflict ------ Drama. And frankly, I don't think I'd even like to
*live*
------ in a world where 'everyone gets along quite
well.' A world where people resolve, or suspend their differences
without resorting to violence, yes. But not a world without conflict.
The regular characters in ST and TNG might as well all be one
character. In fact, I believe I've seen a quote from one of their
writers to that effect - 'the ensemble is a character' or somesuch. And
any 'vision' of this sort is meaningless without showing the struggle to
achieve it. It's easy to just say "Well, all our problems are solved" -
but what sort of 'vision' is that? Contrast this with B5 (yes, I know,
off-topic) and the best of DS9, which actually shows people *struggling*
to achieve this, and doesn't just say "Everything's fine now."
> It's likely that FC will be slam bam action in outerspace, the HOPE is
> that it won't destroy anything in the universe or be too unfaithfull
> what it should be. That it should actually be faithfull to it is
> something which is relegated to the miracle department.
Spelling. "faithful", "unfaithful."
--
-dar4.
Razon Ido
Per Jacobsen <per...@inet.uni-c.dk> wrote:
> > I also think DS9 wouldn't be what it is today if Gene were still alive.
> > Alot of the conflict and personalities we see are almost the opposite of
> > Gene's original Trek vision.
[ ... ]
> No, he was so far ahead that many people where unable to grasp it, not
> entirely surprising for en audience weaned on a television system whos
> only goal is to make money. The notion that "Everybody gets along very
> well" was unthinkable for so many. No, quite thinkable if the current
Not in my opinion. I acknowledge that Gene's vision was unmatched during
the sixties, and very likely even during the nineties; however and
unfortunately, Star Trek is not just a vision, it's a television show (no
kidding :) ), and in fact a drama show. And it just so happens that drama
is based on conflict, and eliminating all conflicts between the
crewmembers (except when they're possessed by aliens, which is probably
why that happened SO many times on TNG...) seriously limited the extents
of Star Trek's drama during Gene's living years. A story like DS9 "The
Maquis, part I" (I'm intentionally ignoring part II, which broke the magic
of part I by making the Federation, and only the Federation, right and
just) would not be possible on TNG, because of Gene's vision of
perfection. (In fact, if you think about it, Sisko's words in part 2,
about "You look out the window of Starfleet headquarters and you see
*paradise*; but the Maquis do not live in Paradise" can be interpreted as
a subtle text against Roddenberry's vision.)
All that, of course, is not to undermine Gene's work and times; he had an
unmatched vision and the ability to exploit it into what is now probably
the most popular series of shows in the world. But, unfortunately, vision
isn't everything, and TV is not `just' a TV show, it's MAINLY a TV show.
- Ido
Mad Max
In article <55s060$r...@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
dh...@namaste.cc.columbia.edu (Daniel Hugh Nexon) wrote:
>I also think it is a strech to blame any single individual for ST's current
>woes or lack thereof. I do have to disagree with the "PC" comments of the
>original post, but I think that's well-worn ground we don't want to go down.
I think the characters are blah because that's the way they're written and,
unfortunately, the actors aren't exactly of the highest grade. I impressed by
all of the actors who play on DS9, even Worf; the only two worth watching on
Voyager are the people who play Kes and the Doctor. The rest of Voyager's
crew can put me to sleep in seconds.
Of course, the scripts for Voyager are so horribly bad that it does make it
hard to judge the actual abilities of the actors...Michael Piller needs to be
'retired', and fast.
>
>Basically, I'm concerned that the ST formulas worn itself out. I have to
admit,
>that I actually enjoyed "The Assignment," if only because they so quickly
>dispensed with the standard solution to the possession problem, because
>Rosalind Chao's acting was so impressive,
Yes! Finally she got more than a snippet of airtime.
and because the plot was more
>coherent than most of what we've seen of this season (I actually think
>the resolution to the Klingons was unsatisfactory and represented a prime
>case of the ST reset button). I also, for the first time, enjoyed tonight's
>Voyager episode -- but again, old-ground, just done well.
The sudden end of the war in a truce, a war that had virtually no effect on
DS9 or Bajor, a war that we hardly ever hear about or see the effects of, was
entirely disappointing. I was hoping that the war would last the entire year,
and spawn a whole series of interrelated episodes with some sort of common
theme (sadly lacking even in DS9). No such luck.
>
>But, given the familiar "reset" button problem coupled with the apparent
>exhaustion of any substantive innovation, I'm starting to question the
>whole format. I don't want to dredge up the whole ST vs. Babylon-5 argument,
>but I think the following is indicative:
>
>When Star Trek is done well (DS9's premier last seasons, "Starship Down,"
>"Shattered Mirror," etc.) I think "wow, the acting and scripting is just *so*
>superior to Babylon-5, how could I ever think Babylon-5 blows DS9 out of the
>water?" But when it's done poorly, such as, well, virtually every Voyager ep.
>I return to loving the plotline, intense universe development, and
cliffhangers
>of Babylon-5. For me, the solution is obvious, ST needs to move into a
coherent
>narrative if it cannot come up with new and intrigueing situations (frankly,
>I don't know why this isn't possible. . . with the exception of the faltering
>treatment of the Borg, ST:TNG had some fairly interesting and reasonably
>innovative plots).
I want connected episodes, where things done this week will have effects next
week, or the week after that, or a year down the road. Where the characters
actually seem to have some effect on the universe, large or small, that we,
the viewers, will see later on. As is, the DS9 crew is essentially
regenerated from show to show, entirely fresh and utterly free of the past.
Serial Trek? What a thought....
Max
"Get thee to a nunnery! Oh, and while you're at it,
take me with you - I've always had a thing for nuns."
- Mad Max, shortly before being ejected from a
Catholics convention in San Diego.