Can Star Trek Be Saved?

[Droid]

I think this is the article JediTricks was referencing about Berman not liking the original series:

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/199...rek/print.html

Very interesting stuff. Really reinforces my views on Generations and Kirk's death.

[Phantom-like Menace]

Thanks, Droid. Nimoy put my thoughts into words pretty well when he talked about the fertile grounds for stories in the sixties, but I still hold the more ambiguous problems we face today lend a subtlety to the sequels that works just as well for them.

It's interesting to note that the Nimoy article and the article Droid linked to in the Was Nemesis That Bad? thread were both written after Trek started to fizzle (though the Nimoy article was a mere five years after TNG). It would only be expected that some people would be whistful for TOS, but far fewer would have written an article about how Trek needs to be more like TOS back in '93 when TNG was big. Trek doesn't need to harken back--that's not boldy going; it quite simply needs not to suck. It's that straight forward. Not sucking > sucking.

And I'm curious what everyone else thinks, but shouldn't Shatner be blamed for accepting the part that killed Kirk? If he had said no, there would have been no death. I mean he's just as much the keeper of that legacy as anyone else, but I don't hear people complain about his part.

I'd never read about Berman's hating classic Star Trek, but I can partially understand it (cue angry mob). I tend to look at the first season of TNG as being too much like TOS and not enough like its own show. The second season was a little better but it wasn't until the third season that the show really began to stand on its own. TOS was campy and--as I've complained--too in your face. Plus there's the fact that as much as everyone talks about the casting, it was almost all Shatner's ego with Nimoy only really getting any play because he was such a popular character (Bones riding on his coat tails). Now what I disagree with is focusing on all of those negatives. If you hate the bad, that doesn't bother me, but there was a lot of good stuff that came from TOS. If my first exposure to Trek had been seasons 1 & 2 of TNG, I probably never would have become a fan. As it is, I started with TOS which sold me fairly easily. Once TNG came along, it took me those first two seasons to warm up to it (which isn't too surprising since I think it took those first two seasons to warm up).

I don't want to come off as a TOS basher. I loved that series and always will. I just see more improvements from TOS to TNG than I see failings. Though I think TOS's black and white contrast isn't as interesting as TNG and the sequels' gray, I can accept them as different flavors of the same basic idea.

I have to force these things, I too have forgotten a lot of the material after years of letting it wane, so I either try to force my brain to recall information or go through a few minutes of research to track down what I can't remember. I'm not sure if I wish I was a walking Trek encyclopedia or if I'm grateful I'm not more of one. (On the other hand, I did actually remember "Patterns of Force" & "Bread & Circuses" for the next part of my post like it was written on my eyelids or something. )

I was particularly proud of myself (Proud? God, I'm a geek!) for remembering a couple of years ago the name of the actress who played Ensign Sito on TNG.

Look at the drama there too, the story creates the situational human drama and it works perfectly, even Spock understands how troubling it must be for his comrades to let Edith Keeler die - then you look at TNG's Time's Arrow or DS9's Past Tense or Voyager's Future's End and it's all "safe" by comparison, everybody has a relatively easy time doing what needs to be done, and there's no sense of weight to anything they do.

Well, if we're just comparing time travel episodes, at least compare the best DS9 time travel episode: The Visitor. Tell me there wasn't any weight to that episode.

There's also moments where everything's going wrong and the music will lighten up for a second and Scotty will go off to get drunk instead of doing his job - granted, it's a cheap stereotype joke, but it also balances things a little from all the heavy stuff going on up on the bridge.

Well, as a person of Scottish heritage (many generations removed) I approve for what little that means.

[JediTricks]

I think this is the article JediTricks was referencing about Berman not liking the original series:

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/199...rek/print.html

Very interesting stuff. Really reinforces my views on Generations and Kirk's death.

Been so long that I don't even remember where it first came out.

Love that part about Kirk's death being "tragic and humiliating"! Spot-on. Even sadder is that they had to go back and reshoot it because the original version they wrote and shot was even more worthless.

BTW, the article's wrong about this:

Then again, "Star Trek" fans are like Van Halen fans: It's either Dave or Sammy, Kirk or Picard. Never both.

Not only do I like Kirk and Picard, I also even tolerate Hagar the Horrible.

One source says that Playmates, the company that has manufactured "Star Trek" dolls since 1992, will let its licensing agreement with Paramount expire in December. (A publicist at Playmates won't confirm or deny this.)

Wow, has it really been that long ago?

The article's take on Paramount's DVDing of Trek is so funny because Salon didn't know that Robert Wise was special editioning TMP and there was an explosion of DVD right on their heels.

Where does the "Star Trek" franchise go from here? There has long been speculation about a series set at Starfleet Academy, perhaps even as a prequel to the first series. Cynics have long dismissed the notion, brushing it aside as "Dawson's Trek." And Rick Berman, in the October issue of the sci-fi fetishist Starlog magazine, all but quashes any further discussion of a Starfleet Academy series.

"The fact is that I have never been involved in a single discussion about a Starfleet Academy film with anybody at the studio," Berman said. "A Starfleet Academy show would have to be earthbound, to some degree, which I see little value in. And putting young people in jeopardy and having young people dealing with conflict with aliens on a regular basis is not the idea that Gene [Roddenberry] would have been interested in doing. Nor is it a direction I'm interested in going in."

What a liar Berman is, we now know that he had several revisions written for a Starfleet Academy prequel to TOS, one that nearly a decade later has morphed into the upcoming JJ Abrams film.

Thanks, Droid. Nimoy put my thoughts into words pretty well when he talked about the fertile grounds for stories in the sixties, but I still hold the more ambiguous problems we face today lend a subtlety to the sequels that works just as well for them.

So true, but unfortunately, the reality of the franchise ends your sentence in the words "... in theory" because nobody at Paramount seems to understand how, much less be willing to, really tackle those issues in engaging and fresh ways.

it quite simply needs not to suck. It's that straight forward.

That would indeed be a damned good start! But of course studios are run by corporations and suckups who have no clue what is and isn't good.

And I'm curious what everyone else thinks, but shouldn't Shatner be blamed for accepting the part that killed Kirk? If he had said no, there would have been no death. I mean he's just as much the keeper of that legacy as anyone else, but I don't hear people complain about his part.

My guess is that Shatner saw something he wanted to be in there when he read the part, and when it didn't translate on-screen, he simply wrote a sequel where it paid off the way he expected. To be fair, they also probably threw gobs of money at him, and Kirk had a lot of screentime compared to the dreck they were to have Spock and McCoy do.

I tend to look at the first season of TNG as being too much like TOS and not enough like its own show.

TNG began mainly as Roddenberry's second attempt at ST:Phase II, and while Phase II was perfect for the '70s, it was too directly dependent on TOS to work later - hell, the first episode after the pilot was "The Naked Now", a direct retread of TOS's "The Naked Time". By the middle of season 1 though, they had more writers who weren't just established via TOS and the show started getting more interesting.

The second season was a little better but it wasn't until the third season that the show really began to stand on its own.

The same is true of all the sequel series - the 3rd season is where they really show what kind of person they've become, and either they've become mature adults who are unique and capable and self-expanding, or like Enterprise and Voyager, they become sloppy and lazy and stagnant.


I started with the films of the early '80s, then TOS reruns (which I didn't really care for all that much at the time), then TNG which is where I really went ga-ga.

I was particularly proud of myself (Proud? God, I'm a geek!) for remembering a couple of years ago the name of the actress who played Ensign Sito on TNG.

Wow, that's pretty detailed stuff. I really disliked her too, so I can't imagine anybody WANTING to remember that.

Well, if we're just comparing time travel episodes, at least compare the best DS9 time travel episode: The Visitor. Tell me there wasn't any weight to that episode.

Yes yes yes, everybody points to that one as how great Trek could really be, all emotional weighty and such, and it was nominated for a Hugo and named by TV Guide as the best Trek ep ever. I still say Jake lives too damned long before he offs himself to really give weight to the story, but yeah, that one is emotionally powerful. However, I will point out that the ep's author, Michael Taylor, had not written for Trek before, it took an outsider to make this powerful post-TNG ep.

[Droid]

My guess is that Shatner saw something he wanted to be in there when he read the part, and when it didn't translate on-screen, he simply wrote a sequel where it paid off the way he expected. To be fair, they also probably threw gobs of money at him, and Kirk had a lot of screentime compared to the dreck they were to have Spock and McCoy do.

I seem to remember something about Shatner insisting that Kirk had to ride a horse. So I guess it was worth killing Kirk for that moment of cinematic magic (that we also got in Star Trek V).

[Phantom-like Menace]

My guess is that Shatner saw something he wanted to be in there when he read the part, and when it didn't translate on-screen, he simply wrote a sequel where it paid off the way he expected. To be fair, they also probably threw gobs of money at him, and Kirk had a lot of screentime compared to the dreck they were to have Spock and McCoy do.

Wow, Shatner's (Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens's) sequel novels. Now that crap insulted Kirk's memory. I read The Return and hated it more than I hated Enterprise. They really seemed to be trying hard to make me hate it too.

The same is true of all the sequel series - the 3rd season is where they really show what kind of person they've become, and either they've become mature adults who are unique and capable and self-expanding, or like Enterprise and Voyager, they become sloppy and lazy and stagnant.

I'm trying to even remember what happened in Voyager's third season.

I started with the films of the early '80s, then TOS reruns (which I didn't really care for all that much at the time), then TNG which is where I really went ga-ga.

Pretty much the same here, but the TOS reruns came before the movies.

Wow, that's pretty detailed stuff. I really disliked her too, so I can't imagine anybody WANTING to remember that.

Well, she didn't do much in the first episode, but I always liked Lower Decks (TNG episode titles are still largely retained), and the actress was a bit of a cutie.

Yes yes yes, everybody points to that one as how great Trek could really be, all emotional weighty and such, and it was nominated for a Hugo and named by TV Guide as the best Trek ep ever. I still say Jake lives too damned long before he offs himself to really give weight to the story, but yeah, that one is emotionally powerful. However, I will point out that the ep's author, Michael Taylor, had not written for Trek before, it took an outsider to make this powerful post-TNG ep.

Everybody points to it yet it slipped your mind when you were comparing episodes. Tsk, tsk In all seriousness, though, while I loved that episode, I really can't say it was the best episode of Star Trek ever. Best episode of DS9, maybe, but I really liked the much darker, way less kid friendly "In the Pale Moonlight." That was fairly amazing that Trek would deal with moral ambiguity in that way, and Avery Brooks really made the face to face with the camera work. I'm sure a lot of fans would be divided on that episode because that was quite a turn from the way previous Treks would have handled that. The concept that a Starfleet officer would be an accomplice to premeditated murder and consider it justified to save trillions of lives? That was intense.

[Droid]

I think the best television episodes in Star Trek would probably be the Best of Both Worlds, but I'm not sure that is fair in ranking since it is a two-parter. I don't think either part on its own is the best episode of Star Trek ever.

[JON9000]

That's exactly it, that was the advantage Roddenberry saw in a sequel set a century in the future from TOS, and it made life in TNG's era a tad too homogeneous to be as interesting as its progenitor - BIG WORD ATTACK!!! The challenges of life in Starfleet and the Federation was at the perfect level for immediate drama in TOS, they were still exploring a few of the rough edges of life in outer space, whereas by the time TNG came around life in space had become so safe that they could bring their kids onboard military vessels - the better writers and producers of the TNG era used these advantages of 24th century life to examine issues that TOS couldn't imagine, but there were a lot of instances where post-TNG didn't live up to that.

Remember, also, that TOS set up many themes for TNG to explore without having to delve into a great deal of incidental exposition. Indeed, the real world phenomenon of Star Trek and its "mary-sue" fandom created my favorite TNG episode, "Hollow Pursuits", which had the gall to send a rather pointed message to the more fascinated fans of the series.

As for TOS, it is a 60's show, and it is a product of its time. It is almost impossible for the modern mind to emulate the mindset of 1967. Kirk and Uhura shared a kiss. The only equivalent I can think of in the late 80's would have been a man-man kiss during the Reagan-Bush era.

I happen to enjoy the artifacts of the period that show up, such as the light-hearted laugh-in at the end of each show, the over-the-top big-band music... all of that stuff is delightfully Star Trek, and I would never want that stuff changed in an effort to modernize the series.

I think this is the article JediTricks was referencing about Berman not liking the original series:

http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/199...rek/print.html

Very interesting stuff. Really reinforces my views on Generations and Kirk's death.

That was a really good article. It completely sums up how I felt about Generations, which was really the end of it for me:

"Three years later, under Rick Berman, Captain Kirk would come out of retirement one last time in "Generations." This time, his would be a tragic and humiliating farewell. Quite simply, Captain Kirk -- the man who cheated death a million times, who saved the universe a thousand more -- fell off a bridge and landed on some rocks. So much for going out with honor."

Also, incidentally, that's the moment Star Trek films began to be scored by the television guy, which further lent a boring tv episode feel to everything.

[JediTricks]

Wow, Shatner's (Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens's) sequel novels. Now that crap insulted Kirk's memory. I read The Return and hated it more than I hated Enterprise. They really seemed to be trying hard to make me hate it too.

Wow, I really was impressed with The Return, I was totally feeling the Trek in that book - it tied together the Borg, Romulans, V'ger, the remaining TOS characters who were alive at that time, DS9, even a Defiant-class!

I'm trying to even remember what happened in Voyager's third season.

Season 3 starts with Voyager taken by another crew but taken back by the Doctor and Suder, then a couple of Trek throwbacks - the Excelsior, the trapped Ferengi - the crew go back to 20th century earth, Q visits, Chakotay gets saved by some rogue Borg, and then Voyager teams up with the Borg to face species 8472, and they gain a new crewmember, 7 of 9. There were a LOT of lame episodes throughout.

Pretty much the same here, but the TOS reruns came before the movies.

You're in your mid-30s? That'd fit, I'm in my early 30s.

Well, she didn't do much in the first episode, but I always liked Lower Decks (TNG episode titles are still largely retained), and the actress was a bit of a cutie.

That Riker wannabe talking about Canada with Riker was painful.

Everybody points to it yet it slipped your mind when you were comparing episodes. Tsk, tsk

It only slipped my mind because it's not the same kind of episode, the only thing riding on Jake's shoulders is his father, and it's not much actual Trek going on.

Best episode of DS9, maybe, but I really liked the much darker, way less kid friendly "In the Pale Moonlight." That was fairly amazing that Trek would deal with moral ambiguity in that way, and Avery Brooks really made the face to face with the camera work. I'm sure a lot of fans would be divided on that episode because that was quite a turn from the way previous Treks would have handled that. The concept that a Starfleet officer would be an accomplice to premeditated murder and consider it justified to save trillions of lives? That was intense.

ANOTHER ep written by Michael Taylor! It's true, that was another of the 4 eps he wrote for the series. I liked the ep, but I think that while he does a good job challenging what the Federation is supposed to stand for, he does a poor job answering it - effective though Garak and Sisko's machinations may be.

I think the best television episodes in Star Trek would probably be the Best of Both Worlds, but I'm not sure that is fair in ranking since it is a two-parter. I don't think either part on its own is the best episode of Star Trek ever.

Oh man, I anguished so hard over that 2 parter, I didn't have TV guide and didn't understand the season break so I watched every single rerun that summer waiting for part 2. It's definitely up there around the top.

Remember, also, that TOS set up many themes for TNG to explore without having to delve into a great deal of incidental exposition. Indeed, the real world phenomenon of Star Trek and its "mary-sue" fandom created my favorite TNG episode, "Hollow Pursuits", which had the gall to send a rather pointed message to the more fascinated fans of the series.

I don't think Trek should ever get so compliant that they can stop discussing what happens in the situations they encounter, it shouldn't be a gab-fest but I think they always should be able to converse on a subject's pros and cons and all sides rather than just act like it's solved logic.

Hollow Pursuits is good fun, poor Barclay, how does the holodeck not have a friggin' lock???

As for TOS, it is a 60's show, and it is a product of its time. It is almost impossible for the modern mind to emulate the mindset of 1967. Kirk and Uhura shared a kiss. The only equivalent I can think of in the late 80's would have been a man-man kiss during the Reagan-Bush era.

I happen to enjoy the artifacts of the period that show up, such as the light-hearted laugh-in at the end of each show, the over-the-top big-band music... all of that stuff is delightfully Star Trek, and I would never want that stuff changed in an effort to modernize the series.

Watching TOS again, I see so much in it that is as true today as it was in the '60s, we still worry about the end of the world, megalomaniacal dictators, equality, and how we affect the universe around us. Sure, some is stuck in the '60s - space hippies are so awful it's hard to even consider their existence - but a lot more of their themes are far ahead of their time.

I think you mean something other than "big band" btw.

[Phantom-like Menace]

Wow, I really was impressed with The Return, I was totally feeling the Trek in that book - it tied together the Borg, Romulans, V'ger, the remaining TOS characters who were alive at that time, DS9, even a Defiant-class!

It tied everything together in a much less satisfying way than the prequels tied everything Star Wars together, that is to say with even more situations relying on too many coincidences. It's been years so almost all I can remember is the ridiculous fight between Kirk and Worf. "Kirk executed the Fat Balding Dragon, Fourth Form. That it was Fourth Form was an insult to Worf's paternity, bladder control, and brand of toothpaste. Worf responded with a flawless Why The Hell Would The Borg Teach You To Sword Fight, Third Form. That it was third form implied that the Borg would have absolutely no reason to teach Kirk to sword fight." The actual fight was funnier though.

Season 3 starts with Voyager taken by another crew but taken back by the Doctor and Suder, then a couple of Trek throwbacks - the Excelsior

I really liked the Sulu episode, if not just because I've always favored the Sulu character and was extremely pleased to see him get command of Excelsior to begin with. That was one reason I was glad Takei turned down Generations since he was inexplicably supposed to do exactly what the Demora Sulu character did despite the fact he was supposed to be out commanding starships.

You're in your mid-30s? That'd fit, I'm in my early 30s.

I turn thirty in October. Star Treks I, II, and III had been out for years before I got hooked on reruns of the series. I've always liked Star Trek IV and really only appreciated II after watching more of the series. Before that, I was always a fan of Star Wars, don't even remember the first time I fell in love with A New Hope. There's a picture of me when I was very young in a barely remembered moment when I was at the mall and a guy dressed like Darth Vader had picked me up and my eyes were huge as I stared face-to-face with the villain himself. My mother swears that was the moment I fell hard for Star Wars.

That Riker wannabe talking about Canada with Riker was painful.

No argument there.

ANOTHER ep written by Michael Taylor! It's true, that was another of the 4 eps he wrote for the series. I liked the ep, but I think that while he does a good job challenging what the Federation is supposed to stand for, he does a poor job answering it - effective though Garak and Sisko's machinations may be.

Glad you liked it. I've been meaning to show it to a friend for years now, but haven't gotten around to getting the DVD. Trek DVDs are prices way out of my budget what with clones, clones, clones, food, rent, and clones.

Oh man, I anguished so hard over that 2 parter, I didn't have TV guide and didn't understand the season break so I watched every single rerun that summer waiting for part 2. It's definitely up there around the top.

"Mr. Worf . . . fire." That was quite a moment. That was the first episode they started doing the season cliffhangers on wasn't it? None of the rest of them came close though, just imitating.

[Droid]

"Mr. Worf . . . fire." That was quite a moment. That was the first episode they started doing the season cliffhangers on wasn't it? None of the rest of them came close though, just imitating.

That was back when I never read about shows I watched so I had no idea what was happening next. I thought maybe Patrick Stewart was leaving the show, would be killed in the blast, and that Riker would be in command from then on out with Shelby as his first officer.