ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Rick Berman Interview on STARTREK.COM

Trekwolf164

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 32043

Report this Feb. 17 2011, 8:05 am

Berman seems to be a finger pointer .


Things would have been better but so and so.


100 years before Kirk but we don't know who that is


 

The1701

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10

Report this Feb. 18 2011, 7:13 am

Hi, I'm new to the Star Trek forum but came to love Star Trek with The Next Generation. 


I admire Rick Berman for steering Star Trek: The Next Generation into the vastly popular series it became but felt he was too hung up on "Gene's Vision" for Star Trek's own good as TNG ended and the franchise moved on - I felt it kinda stagnated. 


He also stayed around for too long. When TNG had ended he should have stepped aside and let someone like Ron Moore or Ira Behr come in and take the reigns with DS and subsequent series. The thing's that went wrong with Star Trek within Voyager and Enterprise and the movies is that it stuck too close to this "Gene's Vision" concept which I just think was a bit ridiculous since I feel Roddenberry would have been the first to congratulate people like Ron Moore and Ira Behr for taking Star Trek and giving it some relevancy to new generations as we entered the 00's 


When you look how colourful and rich a universe JJ Abrams created within 2 hours, I can't help but feel a bit of resentment towards Rick Berman for staying around long after he should have passed the torch. 


However, we've now got a Star Trek that is how Star Trek should have been done ages ago and I hope for more exciting stories, relevant and entertaining to a new generation just as I was once excited by TNG... 

Trekwolf164

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 32043

Report this Feb. 18 2011, 7:26 am

Welcome to the boards JJ Abrams

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Feb. 19 2011, 3:26 pm

[quote]


Hi, I'm new to the Star Trek forum but came to love Star Trek with The Next Generation.


[/quote]


Welcome!


>> I admire Rick Berman for steering Star Trek: The Next Generation into the vastly popular series it became but felt he was too hung up on "Gene's Vision" for Star Trek's own good as TNG ended and the franchise moved on - I felt it kinda stagnated.


I thnk it stagnated too with VOY and maybe ENT.


>> He also stayed around for too long. When TNG had ended he should have stepped aside and let someone like Ron Moore or Ira Behr come in and take the reigns with DS and subsequent series.


Well, Ira Behr was running DS9 from season 3 to the end, which explains why it didn't pull any punches.  I agree with you that both VOY and ENT would've been better with someone besides Berman and Braga at the helm.  Ron Moore had a slew of ideas to make VOY better when he came to that show after DS9 wrapped.  He said Braga was interested before he came over, but when he did, they didn't want to make any changes.  They didn't want to take any risks, so Moore quit and applied some of those concepts to the new BSG (i.e. tight resources, conflict between different factions of the crew).


So why did Berman and Braga stay, since Berman admitted they stayed too long?  My guess is money.  Why not ride the horse out until it dies?


>> The thing's that went wrong with Star Trek within Voyager and Enterprise and the movies is that it stuck too close to this "Gene's Vision" concept which I just think was a bit ridiculous since I feel Roddenberry would have been the first to congratulate people like Ron Moore and Ira Behr for taking Star Trek and giving it some relevancy to new generations as we entered the 00's


I don't think GR would've been crazy about the Dominion War on DS9, as Berman indicated.  At the time of TNG, GR was too much of a utopian, believing in perfect people and that all conflicts can be solved with words and diplomacy.  But, yeah, I agree with you, VOY stuck too close to "Gene's Vision" for TNG.  It had many elements that could've made it significantly different, but Berman and Paramount didn't want that.  They wanted to stay close to the TNG formula for fear of alienating TNG fans and in hope of getting the ones back who didn't take to DS9.  It's clear from VOY's (and ENT's) Nielsen ratings that they failed.  The franchise shows a steady, almost linear, decrease from DS9 to the end of ENT.


 >> When you look how colourful and rich a universe JJ Abrams created within 2 hours, I can't help but feel a bit of resentment towards Rick Berman for staying around long after he should have passed the torch.


I feel the same way on both counts.  Abrams film was a long-needed breath of fresh air.  He took TOS and breathed new life into it.  He but the focus back on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, which was what "Star Trek" was originally about.  Unlike Berman, Abrams and company appreciated TOS and understood why it worked and were willing to take risks in recasting iconic roles, diverging from established canon, and updating the look of "Star Trek."  Their vision paid off.  What was old is now new again. 


>> However, we've now got a Star Trek that is how Star Trek should have been done ages ago and I hope for more exciting stories, relevant and entertaining to a new generation just as I was once excited by TNG...


Word! 

Ghostmojo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1826

Report this Feb. 20 2011, 3:14 am

I think this Gene's Vision argument is a bit of a red herring. It is being used by various acolytes to try and excuse their own lack of vision. There is obviously an element of truth to it, but it shouldn't have stifled creativity.


Berman did a reasonably good job steering TNG but perhaps should have departed after that. It is one thing being a junior co-pilot - and quite another to becoming the actual helmsman. Although to be fair to Berman, Braga, Piller and Taylor - it is not only the director/producers who were at fault with the later Treks - it was the poor choice of actors and character development. There were no actors as engaging as Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Stewart or Spiner.


Star Trek as a concept is an absolute gift to any director or producer. The fact that this gift has been squandered in the way it has since the early 1990s is to me quite unbelieveable. They should perhaps have brought in George Lucas or J. Michael Straczynski.


JJ Abrams has at least partly realised what it was that made ST tick. He has gone back to basics. OK - there is much about the new film I don't like, far too many liberties taken with established storylines and timeframes - but he has injected a certain energy into the proceedings. I'm not mad keen on the fact that it doesn't even look like ST and that the central character is a mockery of what our favourite captain should be - but there is no doubt that the slightly chaotic mess that STXI was, did at least have pace and action, vitality and verve.


Perhaps it has made people care about Star Trek once again ...


to boldy go where no man has gone before

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum