"Star Trek" Universe in "Decay"? (1 Viewer)

[Ray Gutnick]

Activision is suing Viacom over their treatment of the Star Trek franchise:

Link

 

[Jason Seaver]

And yet, I'll bet nobody at Paramount thinks that maybe Rick Berman and Brannon Braga have been in charge long enough. Indeed, because of whatever mind-controlling abilities these guys have, whoever's in charge of Paramount TV is right now saying something about how their long track record of having a long track record means that they are the right people to have at the helm to revitalize the franchise.

I wonder how many other licensees are feeling the same way. I know WildStorm still has the comic rights but has basically stopped publishing Trek comics (but that may have something to do with now being owned by AOL Time Warner), and Trek is a huge part of Art Asylum's toy business.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Though this has popped up in the "directions" thread in Movies, it deserves its own thread in the section devoted to the medium where Star Trek began (and achieved its greatest heights): Television.

Prognosis: Post #2 is probably close to the truth. How else to explain the two people in question still remaining on the payroll?

 

[Rob Gardiner]

It seems like Paramount has been satisfied with mediocrity for some time. I remember a comment (was it from Berman himself?) around the time of NEMESIS's release that even #5 The Final Frontier was profitable for the studio after video, etc. and that pretty much ANY Star Trek movie would end up being profitable for them. It appears B&B have been held to no higher standard than this. What incentive do they have to excel, when they're only asked to meet or exceed the WORST in the series? [And the truly sad part is that they have failed to meet even this pitifully low standard!!]

I think Berman & Braga have a vague idea of what it was that made Star Trek great. The sweeps episode COGENITOR was a TNG-ish story with a DS9-ish ending, done blandly.

TNG attempted to challenge our assumptions from time to time. For example, Picard believed that all life forms have the right to exist, even those that are dangerous to humans and other living things. We came to understand and have sympathy for our enemies the Klingons, the Romulans, even the Borg. DS9 took this even further. The whole show is based on moral ambiguity and things not being what they seem. One of the main characters was a former terrorist who was not proud to have killed innocent Cardassian civilians. I understand Worf has a line in an upcoming episode, "on the Enterprise, I knew who my enemies were." I can't wait to see what situation causes him such frustration.

However, ENTERPRISE, going into its third season, looks like it will be the least morally ambiguous Star Trek yet. "No more of that non-interference crap. We'll do whatever it takes." Yawn. Other than the deconstruction of the early Vulcan-Human relationship, I can't think of a single significant idea Berman & Braga have tried to put forth in order to expand upon Gene Roddenberry's universe.


Sorry to hear the bad news about the video games. ELITE FORCE was quite a bit of fun.

Pocket Books announced a few months ago that they had no more future plans to publish Star Trek reference books, such as tech manuals and episode guides, due to poor sales. However, the fiction is still thriving, as far as I know.


Now that TWILIGHT ZONE is off the air, I don't suppose there's any chance of getting Ira Steven Behr back, is there???

 

[Glenn Overholt]

OMG, give me a break! How dare anyone tell any writers that they are writing crap!

I can just imagine someone telling GL that his 6 stories need rewriting next, because their sales of their (whatever) didn't sell $$XX zillions because the story was all screwed up.

Have we no respet for authors/writers at all?

Glenn

 

[Chris Beveridge]

Rob,

Enterprise is simply a reflection of society today. Whether they realize it or not is another matter.

 

[BrianB]

Have we no respet for authors/writers at all?

Yet that's not what Activision are doing. They're saying Viacom/Paramount's management of the franchise has run it aground as a commercial entity & hasn't the same "appeal" it had when Activision signed their longterm deal.

And personally, I think it's 100% reasonable to respect a writer yet still consider their work bad.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Exactly. Berman's incompetence has led the Trek franchise into a neutral zone of interest, where only the diehards and mindless SpockEar Wearing Trekkies follow and still declare it to be genius.

The only way to get them to change will be a class action by all their licensees and/or one by the fans

Ira Behr, Michael Piller, we need you lads!

 

[Mike Broadman]

Before you guys turn this into another "Star Trek now sucks" thread (seriously, haven't there been enough by now? We all know that Berman and Braga are so evil that they eat children for breakfast as they plot the demise of Trek), the article says that Activision isn't complaining about the quality of Trek but the sheer amount of it, or lack thereof. They're claiming that they should crank out more Trek films and series and even that they "let" DS9 and Voyager "die."

I hope we can all at least agree that the answer isn't to let a series run until it's exhaustively tiresome (7 years is more than enough for any show) or to just produce more mediocre things so that Activision can make more video games.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

We all know that Berman and Braga are so evil that they eat children for breakfast as they plot the demise of Trek),

See, that's the problem. If they were actively planning the death of the franchise they'd be doing a lot more to piss us off. It's the apathetic mediocrity that's killing it

 

[Rob Gardiner]

I seem to remember, back in the late 70s or early 80s, a question asked of the readers of STARLOG or another similar magazine. The question was: would you prefer Star Trek to continue as a series of films, or as a TV series. Many fans replied that they would love a new series, but only if a high level of quality could be maintained.

I think Star Trek has run its course for now and should be put on a long term hiatus. There is no "craving" for new Trek, especially now that everything is coming out on DVD. Who remembers the exciting atmosphere in the fall of 87 when TNG went on the air?

A peek at the IMDB indicates that Rick Berman has NO credits outside of Star Trek. I have no idea what his value is to Paramount. I understand Paramount was very careful to keep Roddenberry around and place give him a screen credit, even on the films he had little to do with, because the fans consider him so very important and would not accept any Star Trek without his input. But at this point, Rick Berman is not held in high regard by many fans. Taking him out of the loop would be an asset rather than a liability.

Do the folks at Paramount have any idea what they are doing wrong? Or do they honstly believe that NEMESIS and ENTERPRISE represent a bold, new approach?

Enterprise is simply a reflection of society today. Whether they realize it or not is another matter.

Chris,

I'm sure the powers that be realize exactly what they are doing. I'm not criticizing the show for drawing upon current events or reflecting the time period in which it is created; all the Treks have done that. My complaint is that it isn't being done in an intelligent, creative, or thoughtful manner.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Activision isn't complaining about the quality of Trek but the sheer amount of it, or lack thereof. They're claiming that they should crank out more Trek films and series and even that they "let" DS9 and Voyager "die."

The two go hand-in-hand, though. Up until the end of DS9, Paramount had enough different people working on Trek that they were able to get more Trek produced and there was a broader variety. The crew that was working on the Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley movies wasn't the same crew working on TNG; DS9 and Voyager had seperate teams, even if Berman's name appeared on both. Even if not all Trek appealed to you, a certain amount might.

Now, though, the B-team is it, and they're only putting out one mediocre series. With Nemesis looking like the end of TNG, if you're not into Enterprise, Trek falls off the radar for you. Which is bad for Paramount, Activision, etc.

It seems counter-intuitive, but adding a second Trek Team to Paramount could work. It would have to have minimal overlap with Berman's group, and a clear mission - make something that appeals to TNG's audience but which is not like Enterprise.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I can understand where Activision is coming from.
It Paramount and Braga Berman had cared more about the franchise and its quality and didnt just keep churning out product, Activision would still have movies and TV shows to base video games on.

Paramount oversaturated the airwaves with show after show and mediocre movies and the franchise suffered because of it.
Greed!

I used to be one of the Biggest Trek fans around but it got to the point where I just didnt want to watch anymore. Evidently allot of the fans share my view because Enterprise is tanking Up against Smallville should be the nail in the coffin.

I've recently discovered B5 on DVD and also a fairly new viewer to Farscape and these should be examples to Paramount and B&B of what Good Sci Fi should be.

 

[Todd Hostettler]

As a fan, I'm just wondering if I can join Activision in some sort of a "class action" thing.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

I think it is important that every new series or sequel should have a purpose. The movie series avoided becoming solely a retread of the original show by wisely showing the characters affected by the passage of time.

TNG expanded upon and improved upon the original idea by correcting some of the deficiencies of the original series (such as the absurdity of the captain beaming into a dangerous situation all the time) and incorporating and reflecting the social changes that had occurred since the original show went off the air (end of the cold war = Klingons).

DS9 expanded the Trek universe further by eliminating the self-contained, all-Starfleet crew of the other shows and giving us a cast made up of 2 different crews, with different values and agendas. The purpose was to see how Roddenberry's utopian future holds up when placed in contrast to the rest of the universe, and I think they did marvelously. Roddenberry's philosophies were questioned and viewed with a critical eye without being betrayed. Think Sisko's comments re: the Maquis "it's easy to be a saint when you live in paradise" or Quark's deconstruction of the Federation preaching tolerance and understanding, but only for those species who share the same values.

I haven't watched enough Voyager to know this myself, but Ron Moore indicates that the show has no "idea" it is trying to communicate to the audience and I think ENTERPRISE has the same problem. These episodes, for the most part, could have been rejected scripts from earlier series. I don't see what "purpose" Enterprise serves, other than to keep Star Trek on the air.

To give Berman some credit, he mentioned in an interview that when the idea for Voyager came about, he worried that it might have been too much, with TNG going off the air, DS9 still going, and the feature films starting up. He also acknowledged that the biggest mistake with Voyager was pointing the ship in the wrong direction. Star Trek is supposed to be about exploring the unknown, not running home.

Todd,

I know how you feel! I feel personally betrayed. They just had to run the series into the ground. They just had to keep putting out mediocre films until they made one worse than number 5. I resent the fact that my favorite character from my favorite TV show has been killed off in such a way that I don't even CARE.

 

[DeathStar1]

Nemesis would have been soo much better if Lore had been behind everything. For some reason, I just love Spiners performance of Lore. There's a hint of care, maniacy(is that a word?), and genuine anger in the character that makes him fun to watch. So much more than the annoying B4.

Leave the Picard story alone as a B plot, and make the Lore version an A plot, and I think you would have had a much more interesting movie.

As far as Nemesis goes, it's just a bit too boring. Nothing really.... HAPPENS.... in an episode that really makes you think except for a few handfull of ones. At least I managed to keep my intrest goign all throughout Voyager as it was the first Trek series I stuck through from start to finish, not really so with Enterprise.


I really hope that this lawsuit, and the supoprt the fans give it finally opens some minds at Paramount, and they make some chagnes. Berman and Braga have done some great work for Trek, but now it's time they bow out and give someone fresh and new a chance. I still say letting Stewart and Spiner, or any other former TREK cast member a chance at the helm would be a good choice.

Especially if this rumored 'Captain Riker' Series is true.

We're can we send our media supoprt for Activisions lawsuit, anyway?

 

[DeathStar1]

The only way to get them to change will be a class action by all their licensees and/or one by the fans>>>

Where do I sign up? . Actually, maby we could get Activision to help us out with a Variety add saying that it's a time for a Trek Change to Paramount. Could get some publicity that way at least .

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Rob Gardiner wrote (post #15):

") This all seems like a bunch of duelling press releases. Really, how can you find it in your heart to trust one group of greedy bastards more than an opposing group of greedy bastards?

We may not agree with this purpose, but it is the purpose.

 

[Nick Graham]

Unlike some, Stewart isn't fed up with the franchise, just the public's failure to embrace Nemesis. "I think we're a little disappointed , we're a trifle bitter, because there are a group of us who think it's the best of the Star Trek films," Stewart said, per WENN.

I love Patrick Stewart, but has he seen any Star Trek films other than the ones he's starred in?

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Rob Gardiner wrote (post #4):

[COLOR=]Here[/color], for example.