-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
A Ray of Hope for Trek Fans
- Thread starter ElScorcho
- Start date
vacantlook
Super Moderator
I always wondered what else Harriman Gray got involved in in the B5 universe, like what part, if any he played in the Telepath War. I'd love to see Combs reprise the character if the Telepath War story is ever told.
phoenixrising
Regular
I fell off the Trek bandwagon long ago and never got back on.
TOS and TNG were great shows that raised the bar for much of sci-fi. But even those series had some clunkers, in fact TNG didn't get really good until the third season. That, to me, is when they got out of TOS's shadow, figured out what the hell to do with these great characters they came up with, stopped ripping off TOS and decided to take some chances.
DS9 I tried to watch, but stopped watching it and found myself lost the next time I tuned in.
Voyager? :: sigh :: I have a huge aversion to quest shows unless they have some thing to make them stand apart ( Crusade would have been one of these if given the chance) and Voyager didn't have anything. Quest shows are all about finding something or getting somewhere. If you find it, end of show, so these shows leave me with an empty feeling at the end of each episode. I didn't care about the characters and less about the story. :: yawn ::
I tuned in to one episode of Enterprise and turned it off when I saw the turtle-head Klingons. This show is 100 years before TOS and they have the Klingons with the foreheads? The surest way to lose me as a viewer is to ignore your own history and Enterprise has done this. Bye-bye.
I'll watch TOS and TNG and try to forget the rest ever even happened.
TOS and TNG were great shows that raised the bar for much of sci-fi. But even those series had some clunkers, in fact TNG didn't get really good until the third season. That, to me, is when they got out of TOS's shadow, figured out what the hell to do with these great characters they came up with, stopped ripping off TOS and decided to take some chances.
DS9 I tried to watch, but stopped watching it and found myself lost the next time I tuned in.
Voyager? :: sigh :: I have a huge aversion to quest shows unless they have some thing to make them stand apart ( Crusade would have been one of these if given the chance) and Voyager didn't have anything. Quest shows are all about finding something or getting somewhere. If you find it, end of show, so these shows leave me with an empty feeling at the end of each episode. I didn't care about the characters and less about the story. :: yawn ::
I tuned in to one episode of Enterprise and turned it off when I saw the turtle-head Klingons. This show is 100 years before TOS and they have the Klingons with the foreheads? The surest way to lose me as a viewer is to ignore your own history and Enterprise has done this. Bye-bye.
I'll watch TOS and TNG and try to forget the rest ever even happened.
M
Mike G
Guest
Ok, Enterprise has some continuity problems. But what is it with everyone and the Klingon heads?!
Somone please explain to me why it matters!? Really, explain it to me! I can't comprehend why if your a fan of the show in the past you would be so horibly annoyed by the make-up of MADE UP ALIENS that you don't want to watch the show any more!
GKarsEye
Regular
In the bonus doc of the DS9 DVD set with Trouble with Tribbles, the writer was talking about how they were going to try to explain the forehead difference and they figured that there is no way to do it without insulting the audience. They knew that fans would be cool enough to appreciate that they just didn't have the makeup for it back then.
Well, most fans, I guess.
Well, most fans, I guess.
Elenopa
Regular
They do make reference to the different look for the Klingons in 'Trouble with Tribbles'.
Worf and the other DS9 characters are in the bar and notice the other Klingons. Someone comments on the difference and Worf just says, "We don't talk about it." or something like that.
So the difference is acknowledged and it is implied that something happened that initiated the change, but we are not told what.
I think where most fans take umbrage is that the Trek bosses seem to have forgotten that this issue has been adressed within an episode and so the origional Klingon make up should be used, even if it does look a bit cheap to our eyes.
Worf and the other DS9 characters are in the bar and notice the other Klingons. Someone comments on the difference and Worf just says, "We don't talk about it." or something like that.
So the difference is acknowledged and it is implied that something happened that initiated the change, but we are not told what.
I think where most fans take umbrage is that the Trek bosses seem to have forgotten that this issue has been adressed within an episode and so the origional Klingon make up should be used, even if it does look a bit cheap to our eyes.
colonyearth
Regular
OK. I could go on for days about Trek and how Berman and Company (this most definately includes Braga!) have squandered and ruined a great universe! And yes, as a filmmaker and can tell you it is the show runner's job to make the show and franchise work, and Berman failed miserably. The downward trend started when Gene died. That's when the technobabble and psycobabble started and grew to epidemic proportions.
The characters are all two dimensional, and uninteresting; this goes for most characters from DS9 through ENT., although I will give you that out of the post TNG series I've found the most number of likeable characters to be from DS9).
Berman and Braga both have repeatedly thumbed their collective noses at the fans (which is why there aren't many watching anymore) and at the continuity of the Star Trek Universe. Without a stable history there is no story...how else can things grow and evolve? Oh wait! They don't in TREK anymore. Berman is also living in the 70's and early 80's when it comes to TV series. Every show on today is at least 50% arced, and yet Berman has been quoted as saying he hates continous stories and doesn't believe in them...he only did the Xindi thing under pressure. How many times does he have to completey contradict Trek history?
No, Berman and Braga are the devils in the dark...they must go or Trek will die for good. They need someone with vision and passion to take the reigns...a JMS or even someone like Aaron Sorkin (West Wing). Someone who understands that you have to have great characters that people actually care about, three dimensional that people can relate to, and you have to have a story and arc that carries your audience and characters so they can grow together.
I can talk more later...gotta run for now though.
Your humble realization person.
Tony
The characters are all two dimensional, and uninteresting; this goes for most characters from DS9 through ENT., although I will give you that out of the post TNG series I've found the most number of likeable characters to be from DS9).
Berman and Braga both have repeatedly thumbed their collective noses at the fans (which is why there aren't many watching anymore) and at the continuity of the Star Trek Universe. Without a stable history there is no story...how else can things grow and evolve? Oh wait! They don't in TREK anymore. Berman is also living in the 70's and early 80's when it comes to TV series. Every show on today is at least 50% arced, and yet Berman has been quoted as saying he hates continous stories and doesn't believe in them...he only did the Xindi thing under pressure. How many times does he have to completey contradict Trek history?
No, Berman and Braga are the devils in the dark...they must go or Trek will die for good. They need someone with vision and passion to take the reigns...a JMS or even someone like Aaron Sorkin (West Wing). Someone who understands that you have to have great characters that people actually care about, three dimensional that people can relate to, and you have to have a story and arc that carries your audience and characters so they can grow together.
I can talk more later...gotta run for now though.
Your humble realization person.
Tony
admiraldave
Regular
I do think that Enterprise has improved this season, but it's still not what I'd consider a particularly good series. While it's technically well-executed, with production values worthy of motion pictures, the show still lacks anything approaching life.
The Xindi arc has managed to (barely) address my earlier concerns about the directionless nature of the show. Back in first and second season, it seemed like the crew would stumble upon some "adventure" that would interrupt their extended pleasure cruise.
I definitely think Berman and Braga have to go, and I think Bakula should too. Watching the show, I wonder if Scott Bakula managed to have his acting abilities surgically removed. Between him and the writers, they have managed to do what I thought was impossible, make me look back fondly to the days of psycho Janeway. Archer alternates between insufferable prick and incompetent wooden block, and I enjoy episodes more when he isn't trying to be in charge.
The Xindi arc has managed to (barely) address my earlier concerns about the directionless nature of the show. Back in first and second season, it seemed like the crew would stumble upon some "adventure" that would interrupt their extended pleasure cruise.
I definitely think Berman and Braga have to go, and I think Bakula should too. Watching the show, I wonder if Scott Bakula managed to have his acting abilities surgically removed. Between him and the writers, they have managed to do what I thought was impossible, make me look back fondly to the days of psycho Janeway. Archer alternates between insufferable prick and incompetent wooden block, and I enjoy episodes more when he isn't trying to be in charge.
colonyearth
Regular
Some good observations, but I wouldn't necessarily blame Bakula any more than I blamed Hayden Christianson and Natalie Portman for how bad the Star Wars prequels have been. An actor can only do so much with a character or situation, depending on the writing (which in Trek's case has been lackluster to awful to mundane), the director (again diddo only let me add to both unimaginative), etc. I'm sure Bakula is as frustrated with the situation as anyone, given that he has no creative control in this show and is under contract. He's stuck, and often times when an actor is stuck in a show or film they find out or know is bad or empty, they simply give a portion of what they're capable. It's like trying to win an unwinable battle, eventually you get tired of fighting.
Is there hope for a TREK future? Yes, certainly, but only as long as Paramount gets its head out of it's collective ass and takes charge again, booting Berman and Co. to BFE and getting someone with talent and vision to take the reigns. Then do a media marketing blitz of a campaign, "STAR TREK now under new management!"
That is all for now.
Just keep in mind what JMS said and says repeatedly, "Faith Manages."
--
Is there hope for a TREK future? Yes, certainly, but only as long as Paramount gets its head out of it's collective ass and takes charge again, booting Berman and Co. to BFE and getting someone with talent and vision to take the reigns. Then do a media marketing blitz of a campaign, "STAR TREK now under new management!"
That is all for now.
Just keep in mind what JMS said and says repeatedly, "Faith Manages."
--
Elenopa
Regular
I didn't say that I considered it cannon. I'm not a trekkie. I was just pointing out how some fans might consider it part of Trek history as it was actually clearly mentioned in an episode.
I'm watching Enterprise, but the reset button and the very abrupt endings with no final scene resolution are getting very annoying.
Capt. Neville
Regular
Ok, I just *have* to...
A newt??
He got better...
Anyway, Voyager I think had *lots* of potential, and my personal gripe overall is that they did nothing *with* it, or at least very little. The concept of a Federation ship in the Delta Quadrant, cut off, half of its crew *hating* the Federation...you could've had some amazing stories grow from that, from the tension, the conflict, the fact that they *have* no base to turn to, no resources to draw from...and from the end of the pilot onward, it was a standard (modern) Trek everything-is-happy-go-lucky-what-internal-conflict? setting.
It had potential. Lots of it. And they squandered it. Enterprise, similarly, while I think personally the idea of the prequel series was meant more as a gimmic than the cool idea it could've been, has just squandered its potential as well.
And Bragda *has* gone on record to say he basically ignores continuity (will have to dig that quote up somewhere...) If I had any respect left for the man, it was gone with that statement. Why even *bother* creating a series set in the Trek universe if you're going to ignore the very concepts that make up that universe? Why not just start anew?
*sigh* OK, done venting.
Cheers,
-mcn
A newt??
He got better...
Anyway, Voyager I think had *lots* of potential, and my personal gripe overall is that they did nothing *with* it, or at least very little. The concept of a Federation ship in the Delta Quadrant, cut off, half of its crew *hating* the Federation...you could've had some amazing stories grow from that, from the tension, the conflict, the fact that they *have* no base to turn to, no resources to draw from...and from the end of the pilot onward, it was a standard (modern) Trek everything-is-happy-go-lucky-what-internal-conflict? setting.
It had potential. Lots of it. And they squandered it. Enterprise, similarly, while I think personally the idea of the prequel series was meant more as a gimmic than the cool idea it could've been, has just squandered its potential as well.
And Bragda *has* gone on record to say he basically ignores continuity (will have to dig that quote up somewhere...) If I had any respect left for the man, it was gone with that statement. Why even *bother* creating a series set in the Trek universe if you're going to ignore the very concepts that make up that universe? Why not just start anew?
*sigh* OK, done venting.
Cheers,
-mcn
KoshN
Super Moderator
If I'd read that quote earlier, I'd have quit watching Enterprise at that very moment.
Aside: (I haven't been paying much attention to Enterprise for, well, since it's been on. Though I've recorded 'em all, there are quite a few I haven't watched yet, from all of the seasons. Unlike B5, there is no "driving compulsion" for me to watch all of the episodes of Enterprise. It's like I can never find the time, yet I've found the time to watch all of B5 at least 6 times over.)
What's the matter? Is continuity too much for poor Brannon? Perhaps he should write for Sorbocoles' Andromeduh. :devil:
colonyearth
Regular
Berman and Braga have both repeatedly stated that they do not believe they should have to answer to the continuity of the Trek Universe. As for just starting anew...what do you think they've done...I mean does this even remotely resemble the Trek Gene gave us? NOPE, didn't think so.
Oh, and Braga is also the one who called fans stupid in an interview, and said that you can't make a film based on one episode of a series...(Guess he missed that whole WRATH OF KHAN thing...and who are you calling stupid Mr. Braga?)
No, the reason why Trek's numbers have been on a rapid decline ever since Berman and Co. have taken the reigns (and yes that is fact, the numbers have been slipping ever since Ricky boy was put in full charge after Gene's death), is because Berman and Co. have repeatedly honked off the fans with just such stunts so now, the fans have simply, overall, given up or been hurt so badly by the treatment both they and the TOS cast have been given by the current regime that they've vowed not to return until he is gone.
There comes a time when you have to cut the cancer from the patient...Berman and Co. are the cancer...but can Trek be saved? YES, resoundingly yes! If Paramount will find the right man with vision and passion to take the helm.
Oh, and Braga is also the one who called fans stupid in an interview, and said that you can't make a film based on one episode of a series...(Guess he missed that whole WRATH OF KHAN thing...and who are you calling stupid Mr. Braga?)
No, the reason why Trek's numbers have been on a rapid decline ever since Berman and Co. have taken the reigns (and yes that is fact, the numbers have been slipping ever since Ricky boy was put in full charge after Gene's death), is because Berman and Co. have repeatedly honked off the fans with just such stunts so now, the fans have simply, overall, given up or been hurt so badly by the treatment both they and the TOS cast have been given by the current regime that they've vowed not to return until he is gone.
There comes a time when you have to cut the cancer from the patient...Berman and Co. are the cancer...but can Trek be saved? YES, resoundingly yes! If Paramount will find the right man with vision and passion to take the helm.
KoshN
Super Moderator
Actually, I'd have been happy with just the same level of quality as TNG after Gene was gone, and Enterprise does have "some" continuity. Hell, the Andorians still have two antennae. Well, wrt Enterprise, I just haven't been paying much attention. Sure, Enterprise screws up the math, playing fast and loose with distances, but compared to B5, I just don't expect the same level of continuity in Enterprise, or indeed any Trek show. Yeah, it discrimination. B5's just raised the bar, and Trek no longer measures up. This makes it harder on the B5 people, because I expect more of a B5 show, but I'm about 100 times more likely to watch a B5 show than a Trek show, and 1000 times more likely to watch a B5-universe episode more than once.
Look at the DVDs:
Guess how many Trek (any version) DVDs sets or episodes I've bought.
Answer: none.
Guess how many B5 Laserdiscs and DVD sets or episodes I've bought.
Answer: Every one that's been available.
colonyearth
Regular
I agree whole-heartedly, B5 raised the standard. The problem is Berman didn't get that...he was sick that day I suppose...he still believes in episodic television in a time when NO ONE is doing episodic TV. Ridiculous. At least, when Gene was alive, he tried to make cannon stick and be true to the history and continuity. If you pay attention, they were being very careful during TNG to stay true to what we knew came before. It wasn't until B&B went, well I don't know power hungry or something, that the proverbial S@$t hit the sub-space bubble.
Maybe if he had tried to invert it? Or slap some bio-memedic gell on it....or fire off a few tachyons at it? Oh wait, that is what he did...my bad.
That is all.
Maybe if he had tried to invert it? Or slap some bio-memedic gell on it....or fire off a few tachyons at it? Oh wait, that is what he did...my bad.
That is all.
Capt. Neville
Regular
Of course not, but yet they still try to slap a Trek name on it. Hell, originally they even dropped "Star Trek" from the name, even tho it was obviously trying to be Trek, and now that they've added it back, it only highlights that fact. It isn't Trek; it's trying to be passed off as Trek.
And yeah, I forgot that whole Bragda calling the fans stupid thing. *sigh*
Oh well, just gimme my B5 and I'll be happy
-mcn
colonyearth
Regular
Thanks Capt. seems we might see many things eye to eye. You should come over to the JMS latest discussion and help back me up....they're vicious over there. At least two other people other than me who've proferred ideas different than theirs have been jumped...then there's little ole me...I can take it though....I can think for myself...
Besides...no one really knows what's gonna happen...we'll see.
Tony
Besides...no one really knows what's gonna happen...we'll see.
Tony
