Why Startrek is Dead (Opinion Thread)

[Vigilance]

It is a fantastic interview with Ron Moore. He talks about Carnivale and BSG, but the best stuff is where you get his dirt on Trek. He was there for 10 years and really knew B&B. It really says alot about why Trek has become so sterile, especially since DS9 signed off.

The biggest wow moment in that whole interview, to me, was when Moore revealed that Berman had been talking to Ira Behr about taking over Enterprise. Pity he didnt take the gig, but I understand him not wanting to try and clean up that mess.

Although I also liked his portrayal of Berman as basically the Dilbert boss: "You cant mention Kirk or Spock no matter what" and then later "Did I ever say that? I dont remember it?"

Chuck

 

[mojo1701]

The biggest wow moment in that whole interview, to me, was when Moore revealed that Berman had been talking to Ira Behr about taking over Enterprise. Pity he didnt take the gig, but I understand him not wanting to try and clean up that mess.

That was one of those Daily Show/Jon Stewart "Whaa?!" moments.

 

[Vigilance]

He's not the only one having problem with the Star Trek franchise's leadership. I can try to google a posted interview from David Gerrold, on his history with Berman.

That interview was obviously done when Moore was still bitter. He rips Voyager right and left. And, I must say, every damn thing he said was right... they're the things that I've also heard hundreds of fans say.

But who needs us?

Chuck

 

[John Crichton]

The biggest wow moment in that whole interview, to me, was when Moore revealed that Berman had been talking to Ira Behr about taking over Enterprise. Pity he didnt take the gig, but I understand him not wanting to try and clean up that mess.

Although I also liked his portrayal of Berman as basically the Dilbert boss: "You cant mention Kirk or Spock no matter what" and then later "Did I ever say that? I dont remember it?"

Chuck

Yeah.

It also seems like Roddenberry had lost "vision" (for lack of a swear word) near the end as well. I never understood why TNG stayed away from referencing TOS so much. Nothing is worse than a showrunner who won't let his writers write actual human roles.

 

[John Crichton]

Actually, I think I can top that. Fandom posted a 7-part interview with Ron D. Moore back in 2000. Of course, the web site is no longer there, but Cinescape was kind enough to archive the lengthy article.

This begins part 1 interview:

http://www2.cinescape.com/0/Editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Television&action=page&obj_id=18708

The introductory article starts off with his goodbye letter dated 1999. Of course, this is all before he did Carnivale and the current Battlestar Galactica.

He's not the only one having problem with the Star Trek franchise's leadership. I can try to google a posted interview from David Gerrold, on his history with Berman.

I'm not so sure about topping it, per se, but that was a good read as well. Had some more emotion and bite to it. It's interesting to see that Moore hasn't changed his story over time, but maybe softened it a tad.

His points about Voyager I agree with. I'm not totally qualified to say that because I've only watched maybe a dozen episodes but most of them really weren't very good at all. But either way, VOY should have been better had they handled it like DS9. People would have been at each other's throats (see Farscape) and there may have actually been some real feeling and impact to the Voyage home. I never felt (with the exception of one ep) that there was a terrible amount of urgency or real conflict about getting home or simply surviving. That show could have really used some quality arc storytelling.

Oh well. It just means that Berman must get da boot. Give the series to me and be done with it. I promise arc plots, references to the good times, lots of space battles and some seriously flawed people. Vote Crichton for Trek Executive Producer in 2005.

 

[Orius]

His points about Voyager I agree with. I'm not totally qualified to say that because I've only watched maybe a dozen episodes but most of them really weren't very good at all. But either way, VOY should have been better had they handled it like DS9. People would have been at each other's throats (see Farscape) and there may have actually been some real feeling and impact to the Voyage home. I never felt (with the exception of one ep) that there was a terrible amount of urgency or real conflict about getting home or simply surviving. That show could have really used some quality arc storytelling.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Voyager always felt like they were just going to end up getting back home at the end of the seventh season, so nothing else the did mattered. And that's exactly what happened. The problem he states with Voyager was exactly the same problem Enterprise suffered through, they were both shows that didn't live up to the premises, because Berman missed doing TNG.

 

[Ranger REG]

The biggest wow moment in that whole interview, to me, was when Moore revealed that Berman had been talking to Ira Behr about taking over Enterprise. Pity he didnt take the gig, but I understand him not wanting to try and clean up that mess.

You think Ira Steven Behr want to deal with Berman again? Hah. Like he needs another hole drilled into his head.

As for the archived Ron D. Moore interview, you're right. It was close to the time when he was forced to resign from his brief employment at VOY, but it was vivid and all too true. Though I am glad that he and Braga have settle their difference aside for the sake of friendship, it does not change the fact that the franchise is still deteriorating under the leadership of Berman and Braga. I can never understand why Paramount are not getting this. Are they so removed from their audience that they lost their own humanities?

Sighs.

 

[Vigilance]

You think Ira Steven Behr want to deal with Berman again? Hah. Like he needs another hole drilled into his head.

I think it was more the state of the show and the network's impatience with it. He knew that whatever he did to turn things around he was going to have one year to really rack up some numbers.

At least, that's the impression I got from what happened to Manny Coto... he was given a year.

As for the archived Ron D. Moore interview, you're right. It was close to the time when he was forced to resign from his brief employment at VOY, but it was vivid and all too true. Though I am glad that he and Braga have settle their difference aside for the sake of friendship, it does not change the fact that the franchise is still deteriorating under the leadership of Berman and Braga. I can never understand why Paramount are not getting this. Are they so removed from their audience that they lost their own humanities?

Sighs.

I think Paramount probably handles Trek about the way Hasbro handles D&D. They don't understand it, all they know is it makes them money. When it makes them LESS, they talk to the guy who (in their eyes) understands it, and that's Berman.

Judging from what I've heard him say, he's telling them the solution is that the franchise needs to "lie fallow" for a bit.

Chances are he is NOT telling them the REASON it needs to lie fallow is because he has tried to remake TNG 3 times (TNG, Voy, Ent) only each time with less substance, more action and more sex, and that he has driven off the once-loyal fanbase.

Something Manny Coto said that really shows how out of touch Berman is, Manny wanted to do shows that tied into TOS. Berman said no because "there are only 3 fans of the old show left".

When Coto told him that the New Voyages fan film based TOS was downloaded 12 MILLION times, his jaw hit the floor, and Coto got to do his TOS tie-ins.

Combine that with his "no references to Kirk or Spock EVER" edict and you have a man who clearly knows nothing about trek, who tries in vain to capture the ratings of TNG by trying to turn the franchise into Miami Vice in space.

Chuck

 

[mojo1701]

When Coto told him that the New Voyages fan film based TOS was downloaded 12 MILLION times, his jaw hit the floor, and Coto got to do his TOS tie-ins.

I can see why.

 

[WizarDru]

My .02:

Enterprise failed (if a show lasting 4 seasons could be considered a failure...many Fox shows would LOVE to have failed by that definition) because it tried to be too many things to too many people, and ended up pleasing virtually none of them.

In 1987, there was a drought of SF shows on TV. You had, what, "Beauty and the Beast" and ST:TNG? Maybe you could include "The Storyteller". So when TNG came on, we watched it with hungry desperation. I remember very, very clearly watching each episode and thinking "Well....that could have been worse, I guess." We were very forgiving when we saw episodes that seemed to be BLATANT rip-offs of the TOS episodes....and of stories that were ungodly weak. Anyone remember the TNG episode where they rescue some 20th century people who were in cyrogenic suspension? [SHUDDER]

I don't think it coincidental that as Roddenberry fell away from the day-to-day work that the shows scripts and quality improved (even if the overused titles called "The X" (Such as The Call, The Hunted, the Price, The Defector...in the third season, they had a big string of 'The' shows). The show took some risks, and the stakes got more personal. Cliffhanger season enders got trite after a while, but "Best of Both Worlds" was a summertime stunner. Episodes like "Family", "Darmok" and quite possibly the best trek Ever, "The Inner Light" all made the series worth watching. That these shows hung solidly around Stewart probably isn't an accident, but episodes like "Brothers", where Spiner was given lots of room to shine, stand out as well.

DS9 started out strong out of the gate, but lost me by the third season. As someone else mentioned above, it didn't follow through on it's original premise. The intial conflict between the Bajorans and Cardassians was excellent, and whenever characters like Garak were given air-time, it was golden. However, many episodes felt very Trek formulaic, so when the many shifts started happening (the addition of Worf, the Dominion War) they felt forced to me, and I gradually lost interest. When I tried to come back, I'd found that the doctor had become a super-genius ("All those times we nearly died in the past? I was just pretending! Guys? ...Guys?") and they'd cycled a few actors. I just found it kind of forced. Some solid plots, but for various reasons, I dropped out. Biggest missed opportunity, to me? When Cisco and Quark are held prisoner by the Jem'hadar, Quark berates Cisco for the Federation's snide attitude about the Ferengi, hastening to point out how his race may be greedy and calculating...but they've never had genocidal wars, either. It was a great thread that could have been followed, making the Ferengi more than just comic relief, but it was never followed.

Voyager. Hmmm.....yeah, Voyager. Well, let's see. I gave it a chance, honest. B5 had raised the bar in terms of story, for me, so Voyager started out on a poor footing. I liked the continuation of the Maquis concept from TNG, and the initial concept had lots of promise. Implementation was AWFUL. What are the first two episodes following the premiere? The ship falls into a quantum singularity and a TIME episode. Compare that with the new BSG's first two episodes, "33" and "Water". Voyager's plots barely scratched the surface of their premise, while BSG's episodes give it a big, fat, wet kiss. Every time I returned to the Voyager well, I felt bad for doing so, as the show seemed to get worse each time. I WANTED to like Voyager...but it just kept making me dislike it. And don't even get me started on the pandering that was Jeri Ryan. I mean, really now...could you try and confirm non-fans worst images any more than that?

Enterprise had potential, but it just never clicked. It was boring, predictable and only had little snippets of what I had hoped for. I mean, they had holodeck technology shown by what, the third episode? It just felt forced, to me. The complete rewriting of canon was fine...if it were used to the show's advantage. It didn't feel like it was, however, and more felt like an excuse to re-use old concepts from the ground floor, rather than actually redefine them.

So what does Trek need? A rest is one thing that might work. Fresh talent and a new eye is certainly another. Trek gradually got away from the elements, story-wise, that made it so popular in the first place, IMHO. Being afraid or unable to change things over time except at season enders became a major stumbling block, for me. I don't need massive change every episode, but if I have to choke down on disbelief from the lack of continuity from one episode to another, why am I even watching? Trek needs to refocus, and remember that it's not the F/X that is making BSG popular, but the characters and the story.

Science Fiction doesn't have to be about big budgets....but about good stories, well told. Seven of Nine fighting in an intergalactic bloodsport against The Rock is not one of those.