• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The General Star Trek Thread of Earl Grey Tea, Baseball, and KHHHAAAANNNN

Holtz

Member
Sir Fragula said:
Federation is pretty much the best Star Trek book written. It sets up the discovery of Warp Drive far better than First Contact its Zephram Cochrane isn't annoying as hell. I defy anyone to read Federation and then say First Contact is a better way of handling that period. They manage to bring WW3, first contact, Kirk, the Guardian, Picard,
the Borg and the Romulans
together without being forced or contrived.

Also, Enterprise
destroys a Warbird by cutting it's head off with the Saucer section, and having its crew crushed by the loss of inertial dampening.
Up there with the Adama manuever.
Federation is great indeed. Anything the Stevens write is awesome. Federation, Prime Directive (best TOS book ever imo), Millenium (epic DS9 trilogy), and the eps of the 4th season of Enterprise.
 
Anticitizen One said:
IMO calling Star Trek "XI" is a disservice to it since it doesn't really have anything to do with the old ones and 90% of them sucked anyway.

It would be like calling The Dark Knight "Batman VI"
I, IV, II, VIII, VI didn't suck. That's hardly ninety percent.
 
BorkBork said:
Yeah not a big fan of the fire caves, definitely the weakest part of the series finale. But the first season finale really was good. It's been a while since I've seen it, and it holds up beautifully.

On the flipside, something Ron Moore forgot after doing DS9 is how to have single ending, instead of many stretching well over 20 minutes.

Galactica, I am looking at you!
 
Dax01 said:
I, IV, II, VIII, VI didn't suck. That's hardly ninety percent.

I heard the only good ones are Wraith of Khan, Undiscoverd Country, and First Contact.

Out of those i've only seen Wraith of Khan but sorry the new Star Trek is far superior.

I think more people prefer the new Star Wars/Mass Effect style Star Trek over the "old dudes in stuffy sweaters sitting around talking" star trek.
 
Anticitizen One said:
I heard the only good ones are Wraith of Khan, Undiscoverd Country, and First Contact.

Out of those i've only seen Wraith of Khan but sorry the new Star Trek is far superior.

Generations would probably be seen in a more positive light if the final showdown and its immediate aftermath weren't so silly.
 
Anticitizen One said:
I heard the only good ones are Wraith of Khan, Undiscoverd Country, and First Contact.

Out of those i've only seen Wraith of Khan but sorry the new Star Trek is far superior.
1. LOL at the bolded.
2. The new Star Trek superior? After only one movie? I could find more quality in Voyager. Unless the number of episodes and movie time outweighs those of the Prime universe, there's no way this new Star Trek is better. Not by a country mile.
 
Dax01 said:
1. LOL at the bolded.
2. The new Star Trek superior? Only one movie? I could find more quality in Voyager. Unless the number of episodes and movie time outweighs those of the Prime universe, there's no way this new Star Trek is better. Not by a country mile.

New Star Trek has better action and real aliens (unlike guys dressed up in cheesy halloween costumes lol)

Obviously most people thought old trek sucked otherwise they wouldnt have put a freeze on the franchise for the past 4 years and then decided to start over from scratch.

I'll watch the old stuff but only to pass the time for the real sequel.
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
Anticitizen One said:
New Star Trek has better action and real aliens (unlike guys dressed up in cheesy halloween costumes lol)

Obviously most people thought old trek sucked otherwise they wouldnt have put a freeze on the franchise for the past 4 years and then decided to start over from scratch.
You're in for one helluva argument from Dax, be warned! :lol
 

BorkBork

The Legend of BorkBork: BorkBorkity Borking
Instigator said:
On the flipside, something Ron Moore forgot after doing DS9 is how to have single ending, instead of many stretching well over 20 minutes, none of which were satisfying or make a lick of sense.

Galactica, I am looking at you!

Fixed.
 
Anticitizen One said:
New Star Trek has better action
Action doesn't mean everything. Characters and story are the two most important aspects of a movie, and those can be found in II, VI, and VIII (I, IMO, too). IV has the characters, but the plot is weak, just like Star Trek XI.
and real aliens (unlike guys dressed up in cheesy halloween costumes lol)
What constitutes a real alien? The only alien race that was featured in the movie (at least prominently) were the Vulcans, and they dressed nearly the same, if not identical, to those found in Prime Trek; though I haven't seen the movie in awhile. Correct me if I'm wrong on that one.

Obviously most people thought old trek sucked otherwise they wouldnt have put a freeze on the franchise for the past 4 years and then decided to start over from scratch.
There were several factors that contributed to the cancellation of Enterprise and no movies being put our for four years. It wasn't that people thought old Trek sucked (hardly), it's just the last two series (especially Enterprise) didn't live up to the quality of the first three; nowhere near, in fact. That, plus two movies that bombed at the box office and you have a franchise that ran out of steam.
 
Dax01 said:
Action doesn't mean everything. Characters and story are the two most important aspects of a movie, and those can be found in II, VI, and VIII (I, IMO, too). IV has the characters, but the plot is weak, just like Star Trek XI.

I feal that ST does a better job with charecters and story than those old movies

What constitutes a real alien? The only alien race that was featured in the movie (at least prominently) were the Vulcans, and they dressed nearly the same, if not identical, to those found in Prime Trek; though I haven't seen the movie in awhile. Correct me if I'm wrong on that one.

Both the Vulcans and Romulans were featured prominently. But there were also a variety of aliens walking around in the background scenes, in the cantina, on the ship bridge, etc.


There were several factors that contributed to the cancellation of Enterprise and no movies being put our for four years. It wasn't that people thought old Trek sucked (hardly), it's just the last two series (especially Enterprise) didn't live up to the quality of the first three; nowhere near, in fact. That, plus two movies that bombed at the box office and you have a franchise that ran out of steam.

I would also argue that old Trek in general just wasn't as appealing to my generation (kids born in the 80s) for the most part especially considering we had much more action packed sci-fi like Star Wars, Terminator, Aliens, etc. and I know alot of people (including myself) who felt that star trek was cheesy and boring.

Rebooting the series and making it more like Star Wars/Mass Effect (and I guess taking it back to its roots as well) made it much more appealing
 
Anticitizen One said:
I feal that ST does a better job with charecters and story than those old movies.

In what ways? You've only seen one movie.
Both the Vulcans and Romulans were featured prominently. But there were also a variety of aliens walking around in the background scenes, in the cantina, on the ship bridge, etc.

How were those any different from those featured in the other movies, then? Other than it being a different era (the first movie coming out in the 70's for example), what aliens featured in the other movie make them more real than those in XI?

I would also argue that old Trek in general just wasn't as appealing to my generation (kids born in the 80s) for the most part especially considering we had much more action packed sci-fi like Star Wars, Terminator, Aliens, etc. and I know alot of people (including myself) who felt that star trek was cheesy and boring.
Fair enough, but there's no really no way to measure that sort of thing (what about kids who grew up with the shows in the '90s? Like me?) Those are movies, for one, which did have more action, but that doesn't mean it sucked. And, sure, early TNG was pretty freakin' cheesy, but once they got those updated uniforms (the non-spandex ones), cheesy doesn't begin to describe it. And what about later on? How were the other shows cheesy?

I'm not going to argue generational differences and the like, but for the movies you mentioned...

Star Trek III grossed higher, domestically, than The Terminator.

And Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home grossed higher, domestically, than Aliens.
 
Dax01 said:
How were those any different from those featured in the other movies, then? Other than it being a different era (the first movie coming out in the 70's for example), what aliens featured in the other movie make them more real than those in XI?

Did the other movies have aliens of different shapes and sizes? Like that silent alien on the U.S.S. Kelvin or that wierd looking guy sitting in the bar when Kirk is flirting with Uhura?

I only remember humanoid aliens in the old ones
 

Acid08

Banned
The new Star Trek movie was my first foray into Trek. I always was an obsessive Star Wars fan. I've been watching TOS on Youtube in HD though and man I like it a lot. I love how it's about characters for the most part and their interaction with others. Also I think the cheesiness of it is amazing.
 
Anticitizen One said:
Did the other movies have aliens of different shapes and sizes?
Sure. I remember seeing them, but most of those that are featured in the movies go unnamed or I don't remember. Among the most prominent are: Klingons, Andorians, Telarites, all three are humanoid and all three are featured in the shows which is probably why I mainly remember them. There's a scene in IV that shows the Federation Council room, and there's a whole lot of aliens in there. Here's a picture of that scene. For other reasons, there was a race, called the Evora, featured in Insurrection, that I remember.

@Acid08: glad you're enjoying TOS. What episode/season are you on?
 

Acid08

Banned
Dax01 said:
@Acid08: glad you're enjoying TOS. What episode/season are you on?
I just finished Mudd's Women. I'm sure it just gets better from here.

Also Evil Kirk episode was so awesome.
 
I hope the next movie features a prominent Andorian. Preferably Jeffrey Coombs again (Shran was the best part of Enterprise).

In fact I want more prominent alien characters that we haven't seen before. I liked DS9 because the Cardassians and Ferengi were a nice change from the samey Vulcans and Romulans and Klingons.
 
Anticitizen One said:
ah I see. For some reason I thought First Contact was released in between seasons.
Quick rundown:
Series 1987-1994
Generations 1994
First Contact 1996
Insurrection 1998
Nemesis 2002

During all of these there were seasons of other Trek shows going on, though. Only makes a bit of difference for First Contact and Insurrection since Worf was a DS9 regular and they always found some reason to put him back with the TNG crew for a bit, but it wasn't something they really even needed to mention on DS9.
Anticitizen One said:
IMO calling Star Trek "XI" is a disservice to it since it doesn't really have anything to do with the old ones and 90% of them sucked anyway.

It would be like calling Batman Begins "Batman 5"
Well, maybe if Val Kilmer's version of Alfred came back in time and kept telling Bruce Wayne he needed to become Batman.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
I'm (slowly) continuing my trek (ha!) through the Star Trek movies; I hadn't seen any but Khan in many a year. I'll eventually get to Nemesis, Insurrection and the new one, which I've skipped out on so far.

Watched the Motion Picture Director's Cut a few weeks ago, and The Search for Spock tonight. I'd forgotten much of the former, including just how much of the movie consisted of footage of the Enterprise cruising around (or ships cruising around it): probably about 30-40%. Still, it features what I wish more Trek featured: something alien and unusual being discovered in space. It still irks me that for all of Trek's mentions of "seeking new life and new civilizations" they spend so much screen time with time travel, not galactic discovery. There's a great sense of mystery and awe in TMP that's lacking most Trek.

The Search for Spock holds up MUCH better than I remembered, and I was rather fond of it before. I do think it cheapens Spock's (brutal) death in the second film, but the death of Kirk's son and the destruction of the Enterprise both packed their own emotional punch, and compensated. And the closing line, "Jim. Your name, was Jim," was more effective than I remember. As a resurrection story, it was pretty excellent all around. It also had a great atmosphere and general sense of dread over most of the movie (the comedy during the theft of the Enterprise aside). I don't understand how this is considered a bad Trek film. And Shatner proves again that he can act pretty damn well given the right script and director.
 
GhaleonEB said:
Watched the Motion Picture Director's Cut a few weeks ago, and The Search for Spock tonight. I'd forgotten much of the former, including just how much of the movie consisted of footage of the Enterprise cruising around (or ships cruising around it): probably about 30-40%. Still, it features what I wish more Trek featured: something alien and unusual being discovered in space. It still irks me that for all of Trek's mentions of "seeking new life and new civilizations" they spend so much screen time with time travel, not galactic discovery. There's a great sense of mystery and awe in TMP that's lacking most Trek.
Yes. I quite appreciate that while I and IV still feature some great danger for them to overcome, it's not in the form of a villain character. Though the series feature plenty of "bad guys", rarely do they focus so much on a villain as do most of the Trek movies.
I don't understand how this is considered a bad Trek film. And Shatner proves again that he can act pretty damn well given the right script and director.
Probably some combination of people not wanting to revise the "odd=bad" rule, and that since II-III-IV directly link up, it's directly linked up to two that people enjoy more.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
JoshuaJSlone said:
Probably some combination of people not wanting to revise the "odd=bad" rule, and that since II-III-IV directly link up, it's directly linked up to two that people enjoy more.
Yeah, that makes sense. I'll see IV next, which I haven't watched in a good ten years; I remember it fondly. But I do remember thinking of III as the weakest in the "trilogy". Still, pretty far from bad Trek, and boy is there bad Trek available for reference. (NOT looking forward to revisiting V.)
 

BorkBork

The Legend of BorkBork: BorkBorkity Borking
GhaleonEB said:
Yeah, that makes sense. I'll see IV next, which I haven't watched in a good ten years; I remember it fondly. But I do remember thinking of III as the weakest in the "trilogy". Still, pretty far from bad Trek, and boy is there bad Trek available for reference. (NOT looking forward to revisiting V.)

Row row row your boat...
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
BorkBork said:
Row row row your boat...
Sybok.jpg
 

G-Fex

Member
Best funny part was the fact that kirk fought the cat lady stripper and picked her up with amazing super strength and threw her into some water.
 

laserbeam

Banned
Always enjoyed the campfire scenes because it was an actual moment where the friendship is on display outside of the usual ship chats etc.

Dr McCoy: All that time in space, getting on each other's nerves. And what do we do when shore leave comes along? We spend it together. Other people have families.
Kirk: Other people, Bones. Not us.

The book also went into detail on why spock called them marshmelons etc all because McCoy sabotaged the databanks cause he knew spock would research camping
 

Hilbert

Deep into his 30th decade
Anticitizen One said:
Did the other movies have aliens of different shapes and sizes? Like that silent alien on the U.S.S. Kelvin or that wierd looking guy sitting in the bar when Kirk is flirting with Uhura?

I only remember humanoid aliens in the old ones

You know, better action and more non-humanoid aliens don't by themselves make better sci fi. Some of the best Star Trek episodes feature minimum aliens and nearly no space scenes. The Drumhead and Lower Decks come to mind.
 

kamikaze

Member
lalalalalalalala!!!

there was no fifth star trek movie! they just jumped from iv to vi...paramount thought if they did a star trek v, people would think it was a weird crossover of star trek and the v (mini) series....spock never had a sibling...uhara never took off her clothes..and god never needed a starship!
 

JdFoX187

Banned
Wish they'd announce a Blu-Ray release date soon :( I got to see the movie twice in theaters and they took it away fairly quickly here. Have an itching to see it agian.
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
BlackClouds said:
I have to say, after reading through this thread, that DAX01 knows what the fuck he/she is talking about.
You should read through the Rottenwatch ST thread to complete the "experience." ;)
 

Ripclawe

Banned
Mayor Cory Booker of Newark NJ is a huge trek fan and twits this tidbit.

To all my fellow Trekkers who want to know my opinion on Captains: Picard always drank tea. Kirk always drank coffee. Any questions?
 

teiresias

Member
Since someone mentioned the book "Federation" I just have to chime in that an adapation of that novel would have run absolute circles around Generations. Obviously, the story would have needed some tweaking - maybe have the TOS-era stuff actually take place as the Enterprise is returning from the Kitomer (sp?) conference after the events of STVI, and the Cochrane stuff would have resulted in a different First Contact, but oh well.

I don't remember the particulars about the storyline - I should read it again actually - but I read it prior to Generations being released and thinking it sucked it wasn't adapted as I was leaving the theater after seeing Generations. Sure, the two crews and captains never actually meet, but I think it would have been a far better film, and with the right director and writers the movement of the different timelines toward the resolution of the story could have been awesome.

Anyway - my two cents.
 

Kokaku

Banned
I've watched every star wars series (gave up on enterprise though), and all of the movies. I think I'll be at home in this thread (unless this is a new star trek mouth breather gathering).
 
teiresias said:
I don't remember the particulars about the storyline - I should read it again actually - but I read it prior to Generations being released and thinking it sucked it wasn't adapted as I was leaving the theater after seeing Generations. Sure, the two crews and captains never actually meet, but I think it would have been a far better film, and with the right director and writers the movement of the different timelines toward the resolution of the story could have been awesome.
Just a comment, but spoilering for those who'd want to read the book fresh:
Yeah, it's probably been a dozen years since I read it, but it definitely made for a more satisfying TOS/TNG crossover. Both crews had their part of the story, and rather than an overimportant "meeting of the captains", they just ran into each other in a weird time anomaly and couldn't even really communicate--they just had to trust that the other ship was filled with smarties, too, so they could both pull off the maneuvers necessary to escape alive.

Had they made a movie like it they'd have needed to change things like from it being an "early TOS" setting to "post-VI movie era", but that could've even been better in a way. We know that they wanted to get rid of the Enterprise-D in the first movie so they could go on to something new; how much would they have loved being able to wreck both the -D and the about-to-be-decommissioned-anyway-A from the very same event?
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
This is neat. A 3 hour interview made in 2006 with Rick Berman. Talks about all sorts of things. Personal life, and Trek. He has an arrogance about a few things, but it's still interesting stuff for the Trek fans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9HcSB9WDTQ

Highlights (courtesy of trekmovie.com) http://trekmovie.com/2009/08/26/rick-berman-talks-18-years-of-trek-in-extensive-oral-history/ (there's also some more of these lengthy interviews with other Trek Actors.

Berman on TNG [19:30 - 1:17:15]

* Gene Roddenberry hired Berman partially because he liked that Berman had never seen any Star Trek before
* TNG syndicated because it could "make more money"and because "Paramount felt proprietary over the Star Trek franchise."
* TNG casting tidbits
* Final audition for Picard was between Patrick Stewart and Stephen Macht
* At Roddenberry’s insistence Stewart auditioned with wig, Paramount exec John Pike said "go with the English guy, but lose the wig"
* Berman wanted James Avery for Worf, Roddenberry wanted younger actor so Michael Dorn was chosen (only four years younger)
* Billy Campbell cast as Riker, but Pike didn’t feel he had command presence, so went with 2nd choice
* Gates McFadden fired at end of first season because head writer Maurice Hurley "he had a real bone to pick" with Gates and din’t like her acting, Berman brought Gates back for 3rd season after Hurley left
* Whoopi Goldberg initially wanted to replace Gates McFadden as ships doctor for Season 2, but it was felt she wasn’t right for that role so they created new "Yoda-like" character of Guinan
* Berman says both Denise Crosby and Wil Wheaton regretted leaving TNG "within less than a year"
* Berman "proud" of the actor-turned-directors from Trek like Jonathan Frakes, Robert Duncan McNeill, and Roxann Dawson, but others "turned out to be stinkers" (wouldn’t name who)
* Nick Meyer came to Berman with idea of tying Star Trek VI to TNG, resulting in "Unification"
* Roddenberry’s 24th century vision with no conflict between core characters "hardest rule for writing staff"
* Ending TNG after 7 years was "financial’ due to increasing costs and that Paramount motion picture headSherry Lansing wanted a Next Generation movie

Berman on DS9 [1:17:15 - 1:43:10]


* Berman "never got a chance" to talk to Gene Roddenberry about DS9, but feels it "stayed true" with Roddenberry’s vision
* Paramount chief Brandon Tartikoff (sp?) first broached idea for another Trek series to coincide with TNG
* Tartikoff suggested "The Rifleman in Space" with father and son righting wrongs, kept idea of father and son, but not much else
* Because show to run along with TNG "we really couldn’t plop another seven people on a space ship…had to do something different"
* Using Bajorans and Cardiassians to create conflict allowed them to stay within the Gene rules of no conflict between the Starfleet people
* Co-creator Michael Piller suggested idea of black Captain, resulting casting of Avery Brooks
* DS9 was meant to be "darker and edgier", partially in response to critique that TNG was "too soft and too white bread"
* Berman notes that veterans feel Sisko is "the most believable" as a military commander of the Star Trek captains
* Berman calls Colm Meaney his "favorite actor on Earth" and named character Miles O’Brien after his nephew
* Alexander Siddig initially considered for Sisko, but too young
* Dax hardest to cast because it is hard to find actresses who are beautiful and can act who will do television
* Michael Dorn’s Worf brought over in the fourth season because "ratings were slipping", but he isn’t sure it made a difference in the ratings except maybe "a little"
* Berman sometimes questioned if Roddenberry would have gone along with spiritual elements of the show, but felt it had enough of a sci-fi element
* For "Trials and Tribble-ations" they could only do half of the "Forest Gump" type shots mixing DS9 and TOS characters
* Paramount execs loved to show off the Promenade sets when visitors came to the lot
* DS9 (and VOY) was created to run 7 seasons

Berman on Voyager [1:43:10 - 2:08:20]


* After end of TNG Paramount felt two shows running concurrently worked and wanted a replacement, but Beman an Piller felt they "were pushing it" with too much Trek (along with feature films currently in development)
* Paramount "was adamant" especially about using Trek as anchor for new UPN
* Without TNG the "could go back to a ship" but wanted woman captain and new setting (Delta quadrant) to "do something we hadn’t done yet"
* Co-creators Michael Piller and Jeri Taylor "adored" Geneviève Bujold, originally cast as Capt. Janeway, but Berman felt ”there was something funny…that didn’t seem right" with her and her ability to deal with episodic TV
* They told Bujold about "how horrible" it was to work on episode TV and "painted a very dark picture" but she still wanted to do it, then quit by 2nd day, which he feels "was a wonderful sense of vindication" that he was right about Bujold, as Mulgrew was his first choice as she was "perfect for the part"
* Kate Mulgrew had "most number of hair issues" of all of Trek (due to others wanting to change her look, not the actress)
* Berman on Robert Beltran "he grew a little bit frustrated that his part never got quite as big as he hoped it would, but he did a good job"
* Tim Russ was second choice for Geordi and so Berman was anxious to hire him
* Berman on character of Kes "it just didn’t work, her character became superfluous" so she was written out
* Bringing on Jeri Ryan as 7 of 9 in response to studio concern about ratings slippage and requirement to "spice things up"
* Success of Jeri Ryan "did cause problems" with Kate Mulgrew and there "was a little antagonism" between the actresses
* High use of Holodeck on Voyager was somewhat due to writers being "anxious" to use again device after DS9, where Quark’s holosuites were "whorehouses" with "nasty purposes"
* For final episode they "considered everything" including not returning to Earth, 7 of 9 dying, Janeway dying and more
* Berman’s final assessment on if the "ship headed home" premise was right one to do: "It was difficult. I think it was a good idea to go in that direction, but there is something about venturing outward and trying to get back home that are dramatically different from one another. And I think Star Trek, by and large, is a show about exploration, and Star Trek is about going forth and not trying to find your way home, so it did hold us back in certain areas…but I think it was the best of both worlds"

Berman on Enterprise [2:08:20 - 2:39:15]

* Impetus for Enterprise again came from studio as Voyager was ending, and Berman "begged them to let it have a few years rest"
* Studio wanted Enterprise to start before Voyager ended, but Berman got them to wait until Voyager ended
* Berman felt prequel best as going forward after TNG era "didn’t offer that much" because it was just slicker space suits and shinier space suits
* Berman disagrees with fans who felt he and co-creator Brannon Braga ignored Star Trek canon and continuity, noting "we absolutely didn’t, we tried to pay great attention to it"
* Dealing with some science and technology was "frustrating" because modern day tech is more advanced than shown in TNG or Voyager (like laptops being more advanced that Picard’s desk computer or cell phones seeming more advanced than TOS communicators)
* Wanted Enterprise cast to be "young" and they wanted audiences to relate to them "more than they could with the other shows"
* Scott Bakula brought in by studio, but they were "blown away" by him as he was "perfect fit" for Archer, and he was "just a mensch"
* Jolene Blalock "was another case of another beautiful woman who can act"
* Conner Trinneer was only actor in all four Trek series Berman "had to fight for", studio wanted a "typical Hollywood pretty-boy types"
* Dominic Keating was found auditioning for Season 7 Voyager role
* Berman and Braga went on board a submarine at the San Diego Naval Base to get that kind of feel for the NX-01, later had to fight studio who wanted "color, color, color" on the ship
* Berman calls choice of the contemporary "Faith of the Heart" for the Enterprise theme song "another example of my being stubborn, right or wrong", but notes "the fans hated it"
* Berman’s reasoning for initially having "Star Trek" in the title thought it would make it "more embrace-able", after show’s ratings flagged CBS suggested putting Star Trek back into the title
* Season-long arc for Season 3 was response to studio/network concern over ratings, Berman felt it helped ratings and "allowed Archer to become a tougher character"
* Paramount talked UPN fourth season to help get close to the magic 100 episodes by lowering license fee
* Berman wonders if finale "These are the Voyages" finale was "a mistake", acknowledging that some found it "disrespectful"
* Cites Manny Coto and ties to TOS for critical success of fourth season and felt "isn’t any doubt we could have gone on for another three [seasons] if we had been given the chance"

Berman on TNG era movies [2:39:15 - 2:43:40]

* First Contact is "undoubtedly" Berman’s favorite TNG film, feels "it really worked" and "was the most fun to do"
* On demise of Kirk in Generations: "this was a character was long dead when Next Generation took place, but we were perceived as killing Capt. Kirk"
* Generations "did better than the studio expected, but we learned a lot of lessons from it"
* Insurrection was meant to be a "softer story" — Piller wanted a change after FC which was a "go get em action movie"
* Berman feels INS "had some amazing stuff in it, but didn’t do quite as well as First Contact"
* Berman considers Nemesis a "classic Star Trek movie" in the vein of the Nick Meyer movies, but acknowledged "it was not well received at all"
* Does not believe release date (close to LOTR) was factor, but admits "I don’t know what went wrong" except possibly "franchise fatigue"

Final wrap-up, favorites, etc [2:43:30 - end]

* Favorite show was TNG, because it was the show he "cut his teeth on"
* Still friends with most of the TNG cast and crew
* 2nd choice is Enterprise, because he was so involved with creation and writing
* Favorite guest star was Stephen Hawking
* Time travel episodes are faves, notably "Yesterday’s Enterprise", but "Best of Both Worlds" his total favorite
* Berman believes that greatest legacy of Trek is Roddenberry’s "uplifting vision" of the future "depicting a culture of man ,more evolved in the best of all ways" unlike other dark sci-fi
* Career highlight working as PA on film Fly being able to hang out with John Lennon

On Franchise Fatigue

Jon Dulgen, who was the chairman of all of Paramount at the time, used the phrase to me "franchise fatigue" which I think was one of the best explanations of what was going wrong. Because at the same time we made a movie with one of the top screenwriters in Hollywood [John Logan] called Star Trek: Nemesis and it just died, and simultaneously there were problems going on with Enterprise. Nemesis was a good movie. It was not a problematic movie at all. I think it really had to do with a sense of franchise fatigue and the fact that there had been so much Star Trek. As I said before we ended up after the fourth season of Enterprise, producing 624 hours of these four television series, which is unprecedented.

Future Of Trek (remember, interview was in 2006)

Well, there is word that JJ Abrams, who is one of the hot directors in both television and film, is going to star work on developing a kind of re-invention Star Trek film. That could be very exciting. I think that if there is, not if, when there is another television series, it will probably come out of that. I think that TV-wise it needs a rest. It has only been off the air for a year at this point. I think it needs a little bit more of a rest. I think Star Trek will go on for a long time. There is hardly a person on this planet who does not know what warp speed means of what "beam me up, Scotty" means, or what a photon torpedo is. I think Star Trek, in one for or another, will go on for a long time. As far as the TV end goes, I think it is good for a rest for a number of years.

On Criticism and Legacy

have taken a lot of the criticism to heart. I don’t believe that any of the people who are involved in the websites think that we read them, but in fact we do. And I think that a lot of the criticism that has been directed at us by hardcore Internet people is that we ignore their wishes and we ignore the chronology of Star Trek and the canon of Star Trek. It makes us said because it’s not true. I wish there had been some way to communicate with these people over the years in a little bit more of a believable fashion. I once got on the Internet and told people who I was and they didn’t believe me, so I got off.

_______________________

At the risk of sounding hokey, I would love to be remembered as somebody who took Gene Roddenberry’s vision of what Star Trek was all about — people felt he didn’t have it in him to do another show and it was so heartwarming to see how pleased he was with the reaction that Next Generation got after so many years of not producing TV shows. I would like to be remembered as somebody who took his vision of the future and idea of what Star Trek was supposed to be and tried to keep these four series and four movies that we have done, to keep it true to his ideals. I wonder whether that will be the case in the future. I would like to think that was something that I managed to achieve.

Wonder he thought didn't make for good Directors.
 
DrForester said:
* Does not believe release date (close to LOTR) was factor, but admits "I don’t know what went wrong" except possibly "franchise fatigue"
That's funny because here he says otherwise.

Also, guy seems like a total douchebag. Enterprise was his favorite series after TNG? Nemesis was a very good classic ST movie? Its like he's trying way to hard to justify the most horrible things he helped create and kill the old franchise with.
 
DrForester said:
* Berman wonders if finale "These are the Voyages" finale was "a mistake", acknowledging that some found it "disrespectful"

There was only ever one way to end Enterprise - with a Quantum Leap tie-in. Oh yes. Archer IS Sam Beckket, in his most important Leap yet! He must put right what once went wrong by forming the Federation.
 
Top Bottom