posted
Ah, a lucky guy who hasn't seen "Voyager" yet.
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
The short answer? Voyager.
The long answer? The huge plot holes in the stories they pen or greenlight, the inconsistencies of those stories within the Trek framework, the inane technobabble and deus ex machina contrivances that litter them, the lack of character development on the shows they produce, their habit of never venturing beyond safe and recycled material, and their disregard for any and all creative criticism of the way they run things have pretty much alienated a sizable portion of Trek's fanbase from the franchise and left it a stale hollow shell of its former self.
Now, B&B can put out good TV, as some recent ENT episodes have proven. They just don't do it often enough.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You'll find many examples of this sentiment at the TrekBBS. It's one of the many reasons I don't post there.
The thing is, I don't know Berman or Braga personally. Neither, presumably, does anyone else who posts at these boards. For all I know, Rick Berman is the nicest guy in the world, and Brannon Braga is a fun guy to party with. So personally, I find it hard to justify "hating" them.
And "Voyager" really isn't the answer, either. Believe it or not, neither is Enterprise. It's the Internet. When TNG, DS9, & early Voyager was in production, there wasn't an instantaneous way of showing the world your likes & dislikes about a particular episode. Now you can. And let's face it, the current show has some problems. And those problems will only be multiplied with people on the 'net talking about them ad nauseum.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
To put the answer shortly, the people you're talking about blame B&B for the fact that recent Trek ("Voyager" and "Enterprise") suck compared to their predecessors.
[ January 25, 2004, 11:11 PM: Message edited by: TSN ]
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
And the usual counter argument goes that Rick Berman also had pretty much the same role on TNG (essentially). But fans then say "NONONONONO THAT WAS GENE RODDENBERRY!". And if you make a comment about DS9, then we find out that, actually, Ira Behr did everything on DS9 that was good and Berman didn't touch it.
I don't know. Voyager definitly wasn't good. Was that all Rick Berman's fault? Or Brannon Braga's? Or both? Maybe. I'd tend to blame Braga more, and say that his ego got the best of him. He did used to write some really good Trek.
Essentially though, they can and are blamed for anything wrong with the world that Sept 11 isn't blamed for.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Setting aside everyone's hatred of Voyager as a whole, I dont see B&B ruining Enterprise at all.
If stacked against TNG, episode for episode, I'd rather watch Enterprise for the story any time. Sure, there's lots of stuff we'd like to see on the show and many things that we wish has happened diffrently, but can you really say the character's arent ahuge improvment over Voyager's or even TNG's at this point the the series' development?
We're still in season three so there's breathing room for character development: even Mayweather, the mute helmsman's character is more developed than any of the beloved secondary TOS characters.
I've read several interviews with Berman and he seems to understand many of the fan's gripes about the first two seasons and I see many changes have been made on the show already. But you cant expect B&B to second guess everything they do based on us internet fans can you? The show would have "reset" itself four or five times already if that were the case instead of improving into the very good show it's become.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
"You'll find many examples of this sentiment at the TrekBBS."
No, the prevailing sentiment there is actually more along the lines of "B&B SUCK THIER RSEPECTIEV COKCS ADN LIEK TEH BUTTSEXOR!!", whereas people here can still nixpick their work to death intelligently without being mocked or labeled a B&B hater, as far as I know.
But since your grievances seem to be directed at me: I don't hate B&B. Not for who or what they are, and not for their offerings to Trekdom. I don't even hate VOY. I just think that the show as a whole is crap and wasted its potential. But hate? No. Hate is much too strong an emotion for this.
"And those problems will only be multiplied with people on the 'net talking about them ad nauseum."
Or remedied. ENT is warping ahead quality-wise, and I'd like to think fans expressing their "sentiment" had a hand in that.
I don't know, maybe I AM investing too much energy into this, despite the fact that this is my first (well, second) post EVER on the subject. Whatever.
"And the usual counter argument goes that Rick Berman also had pretty much the same role on TNG (essentially)."
And the usual counter-counter argument goes that Berman had Piller above him at the time (to which of course the counter-counter-counter argument goes that Insurrection was Piller's brainchild and First Contact was Braga's and Berman also did, uh, some much-needed DS9 reimaging, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter argument goes that Braga was the genius/madman behind Threshold, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter-counter argument goes that Braga also wrote gems like Timeless, Year of Hell and Living Witness, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter argument goes that TNG never would have soared like it did if Roddenberry hadn't croaked when he did, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter argument goes that Gene would never have approved of DS9's darker tones that made it leader of the Trek pack, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter argument goes that people should just shut the fuck up unless they are producers themselves, to which the counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-COUNTER argument goes that Piller had good episodes and Behr had good episodes and Braga had good episodes and Piller had shit episodes and Behr had shit episodes and Braga had shit episodes and so laying the blame for VOY's demise on B&B alone is wrong and evil but at this point nobody cares anymore which is really too bad because the discussion could have been great FUN!) and was more involved with the creative process than with the production one.
"And if you make a comment about DS9, then we find out that, actually, Ira Behr did everything on DS9 that was good and Berman didn't touch it."
Yes, because Behr had free reign after season two (to which the counter-argument goes that he permitted such excretal extravaganzas as Let He Who Is Without Sin and Profit and Lace to fill the airwaves, to which the counter-counter argument goes that... oh, forget it).
"Essentially though, they can and are blamed for anything wrong with the world that Sept 11 isn't blamed for."
And THAT sentiment is what gets the people who DO have legitimate gripes so infernally pissed.
Anyway, I'm bowing out of this one, lest Mike slap me around with his deceased equine pic again.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
We're all just jealous that Braga was diddling Jeri Ryan. The argument being, 'how can you be a true Star Trek fan with a hottie like that on your arm?'
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I hate neither Berman nor Braga. I just think they produce more crappy Star Trek now (and did so with Voyager) than what others (or they themselves) did in the past with DS9 and TNG.
I just don't enjoy watching the "newer" series (ENT and VOY). I try to keep at it for more than ten minutes, but I am usually put off by all the BS that I see in that amount of time - and turn off the TV.
-------------------- Lister: Don't give me the "Star Trek" crap! It's too early in the morning. - Red Dwarf "The Last Day"
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Cartman: I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I was referring to you or your post. I wasn't doing that in the least. I was actually just responding to the original post.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
No, my bad. I was a bit snippy.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I happen to have liked Voyager. It was more entertaining than most of DS9 (up until they got the Defiant, before that they couldn't even go anywhere, except in that FUGLY SUV Runabout! Honest to God, what does it look like if not the 24th century version of an Escalade?)
I mean, where is the "Trek" in DS9? They weren't trekking anywhere, it seems too derivative of B5 for my tastes. The action happened on a station over 1500 meters in diameter, and we saw not much more of it than the Enterprise D! I think the producers of DS9 were afraid that fans wouldn't watch it, that's why they stuck O'Brien on there, to try to get some of the TNG fans onboard.
As for inane technobabble: how does one distinguish from well-done technobabble and that of the inane variety. I happen to like technobabble. If I'm watching a courtroom drama, I expect to hear legalese. If I'm watching a WWII film, I expect to hear period babble. By the same token, if I am watching a futuristic sci-fi movie or show, I expect to hear technobabble. If it's done well, it will explain itself during the course of the show. I never had a problem with Voyager's technobabble.
Cartman, dude, you need to get laid, man, damn. Inconsistencies within the Trek plotline? Hell, we find that within TOS itself. It's not biblical, why expect coherence from it?
I just wanna know on whom I can place blame for all the damn time-travel in Trek. That shit is waaaaaaaaaaaay overdone.
-------------------- This is just fun...it's not life...keep this in mind and we'll all enjoy it much more
Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, if you want to place blame for time travel in Star Trek, you may as well blame everyone involved in Star Trek period.
However, I'm going out on a limb here & guessing that by "time travel," you're referring to the Temporal Cold War. If that's the case, then it's Brannon Braga you can hate, for all the good it will do.
The thing is, whether people like it or hate it, Enterprise is the only Star Trek we've got. And once it ends or gets cancelled (especially if it gets cancelled), I'm guessing that there will be no more Trek after that, at least for a very long time. Most of the complainers over at Trekbbs don't seem to understand that.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
I'm not specifically referring to the TCW. I'm mostly thinking of ST IV, ST: FC, alllllllllllllllll the alternative timelines in TNG, DS9, and Voyager. I've got no interest in seeing the time travel thing. If they want to tell the story of the Cochran flight, then tell it as it happened without feeling the need to shoehorn in the TNG cast. It's pedestrian, predictable and booooooooring. Whom can I blame for that, Dukhat??
Enterprise didn't get off on the right foot with me by bringing up the TCW. However, they've effectively ignored it enough for me to forgive them of late.
If they want to tell a compelling story in the TNG universe, then tell me a story of a rift in Vulcan society, something that could convincingly tie together the "Unification" storylines and perhaps something to do with the emotionalism of Sybock. I want to see the Vulcans fucking losing it. A rift in the Federation that could tear the polite society of Starfleet apart.
-------------------- This is just fun...it's not life...keep this in mind and we'll all enjoy it much more
Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
