posted
Thanks for the replies everyone! And Anduril, congratulations on the new baby! Boy or girl?
I have to agree that the starship death scenes we've seen since haven't had the same scope and intensity of emotion that the original Enterprise's death had. I don't think it's so much that the idea is overused, I think that's just the execution has been handled very poorly.
The Enterprise-D destruction sequence was continually interrupted by segues to Picard on the planet surface. You'd get a few seconds of what's happening to the Enterprise followed by a few seconds of what's happening on the planet. It was a bit jarring. In The Search for Spock, the Enterprise's death sequence was not interrupted until she fell towards the planet. Then she get the reflection of the crew on Kirk's decision.
Another thing lacking with the death of the Enterprise-D is emotionless. In The Search for Spock, we see the Enterprise die. We see her bridge module explode. We see the outer hull of the saucer section collapse in on itself revealing the fiery torment going on inside. Then the saucer shatters in a gigantic explosion that propels her into Genesis' atmosphere, where she eventually burns up. Generations had none of that. The stardrive section blew up very quickly and then the saucer crashed. It was cold, in my opinion. The crew didn't really reflect on her death.
As for the Defiant, that sequence had some emotion in it. Sisko's reluctance to leave his ship, and O'Brien finally convinces him to leave. We see the agonizing death as the Defiant is slowly ripped apart by the Dominion's weapons. The Defiant herself shows some hints of humanity as she turns over on her back. It seems like she's almost protecting her crew as they eject in the escape pods. Then we get the agonizing final shot which splits her in half and kills her.
The Defiant's death was emotional but no where near the same level as the original Enterprise's death. With the original Enterprise, so many adventures took place on her and (for many fans who started on Trek in the 1960s) she was all there they had ever known. Her death really was the death of a family member. The Defiant we only knew for a short four years before she died. I for one know that I didn't form the same sort of bond with her as I did the original Enterprise.
Going off on another tangent, has anyone else noticed how truly dark The Wrath of Khan and The Search for Spock were? I mean, they were really dark and serious films. The recurring themes through them were sacrifice, friendship, death, and changes. We saw a lot of death and destruction, but it served a purpose. We saw the power of friendship as the aging friends considered their past and their future. This dark quality to these two films is what makes them exciting to me.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
posted
It seems to me that comparing the destruction of the two ships is somewhat hampered by the vastly different set of circumstances they were in. I think much of the power of the ST III sequence comes from the intentional nature of that ship's end. The Enterprise was sacrificed, while the Enterprise D hit a spot of really bad luck.
As for the Defiant, I got the impression that this was forming a nice link with the pilot and the destruction of the Saratoga. Only this time Sisko had more of his life off the ship than on it. If that makes any sense.
posted
I my opinion I think Berman and Braga love blowing up ships. If you watch the DS9 battles all ships except for ones that have the main and supporting characters blow up or disengrate in boring way. Though I did like where the two Mirandas blew up.
With them if they want to crash the saucer despite making it seem cold and boring they'll do it. Why? Because they have power and we don't, all that matters to them is that the initial shock of a important ship going to be destroyed. Examples:
Enterprise-D: People went to go to see Kirk die and the E-D be destroyed.
Defiant: People tuned in to see the Defiant get destroyed. (I have to admit the scene was better than the E-D)
DeltaFlyer: Didn't really help ratings just more explosions that's all. The ship reappeared a few episodes later.
As Braga once said during the filming of 'Cause and Effect' "I got to blow up the Enterprise many times. It was alot of fun" (or something like that.)
posted
Of course, "Cause and Effect" is generally a well liked episode of TNG. I'd put it as one of my favourites actually, for sheer fun.
[ August 08, 2001: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
-------------------- 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
Berman too, seemed to generally leave things to Ira Behr, so I doubt he had much influence.
-------------------- 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
Actually, Liam, that's one little assumption that I'm not entirely sure is rock-solid. Both The Making of DS9 and The DS9 Compendium certainly imply Berman had plenty to do with the show (admitted the former example was of pre-Voyager DS9). The temptation to make Voyager "Berman and Braga's show" and DS9 "Behr's show" is one little thing that rubs me the wrong way.
But Braga was indeed never a member of the DS9 creative staff.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
Ya want a good destruction of a Galaxy Class ship? Try the destruction of the Oddysey. Really, a pride and joy of the Federation wiped out in spectacular fashion by the Jem Hed'ar.
As O'Brien said, there was no need to destroy the Oddysey as the Feds were retrieving. But Sisko would hit it right in the button in order to prove what the Jem Hed'ar were capable of doing.
There's also the destruction of the Valiant, brought down by a group of snotty brats and their self-centredness.
Sure, the destruction of famed starships is supposed to generate ratings. All of them were, even the E-nil. But what really matters is how they go down and the shock value that is left behind.
E-nil: Sadness indeed, watching her fry in the atmosphere. Oddysey: Shocking. Shows us how much trouble the Feds are in. Valiant: Disappointment. Destroyed due to poor leadership and self-centredness in a group of brats. Defiant: Shocking too, but two things bother me. First, is the ressurrection of the EXACT SAME Defiant eps later. Second, the destruction of the Defiant is supposed to demonstrate how things have turned bad for the Feds, and yet, eps later, Feds whip some Dommie ass. Enterprise: Hushed. Too fast. Captain Picard never even saw the ship go down. The way I see it, the only reason they destroyed the E-D was to give some superb graphics over the Saucer Crash Scene.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
posted
Fair enough Tom, although I wasn't actually saying that DS9 was Behr's show and Voyager was B&B's show, so much as saying that Berman probably didn't have as much of a direct influence on both shows as Behr and Braga respectively. Oh, I'm sure he had a lot to do with bringing in both Worf and Seven, for ratings, but I doubt he had much to do with the Defiant's destruction, as ratings were a bit of a moot point by then, and it was more a story thing that anything else.
-------------------- 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
The Odyssey's destruction was pretty potent in the shock value. The Valiant's destruction was pretty gruesome with the lifeboats being shot down trying to escape.
Then, there's Voyager's destruction in "Year of Hell", but they just had to push the reset button at the end, so nothing mattered. One other ship destroyed prominently was the Saratoga. Pretty well done with Sisko seeing the destruction from a lifeboat with his wife's corpse still on the ship.
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
I always thought that the E-D would have been much more potent if we saw some long static shots of engineering/sickbay/transporter room/hallway looking exactly like they did during the series. Just like three seconds each. Similar to the E-nil but to a greater effect (to make up for the lack of shock value that E-nil had and E-D did not).
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The destruction of the Enterprise wasn’t exactly emotional for me. Nor was the Ent-D, or the Defiant. It was a ship that was blowing up. Perhaps it was a bit saddening to see it go, but nothing worth pointing out. The Enterprise-D was destroyed because it was time for a new Enterprise. The Ent-D had more screen time then any other Trek ship, and although the design was a good one, it was time for a new, longer and sleeker version to take advantage of the wide screen, which is where all of the adventures of the new enterprise would take place.
The Ent-E is my favorite ship, not because it can 'kick the crap out of those other ones' but because I truly like the design. The longer nacelles and sleeker two tone saucer is very nice looking, IMO. Perhaps when its destroyed the current apparent favorite sci fi design elements will be added to the next Enterprise.
posted
What I meant about the E-D being Roddenberry's Enterprise was that it was closer to his idea of Star Trek. The E-D I think, in my opinion, symbolized the Federation; large, powerful, and dedicated towards exploration. However, since then you have small ships covered with phaser arrays and torpedo launchers such as the Akira-class with it's 15 launchers. It's as if everything has to be a gunship now. Personally I love the design of the Galaxy-class and Excelsior-class. The Sovereign is cool looking, but that's about it. The Prometheus...I think is ugly.
The Sovereign and Akira-class ships are meant to appeal more to the fan boys. Sure I thought all the Dominion War battle scenes were cool, but when it comes to Star Trek itself it should more than just explosions. When I think of Star Trek, I think of adventure and exploration, ships like the Defiant and Akira seem be only geared towards battle. With the Enterprise-D though, I think the designed pulled it off perfectly.
-------------------- I'm slightly annoyed at Hobbes' rather rude decision to be much more attractive than me though. That's just rude. - PsyLiam, Oct 27, 2005.
posted
HOW exactly is the Sovereign class mean to appeal towards the fanboys who want the TPYEXXXIIII phazors!!???
I can understand lumping the Defiant in there, it has Big Scary Cannons. And the Akira with it's 5 million torpedo launchers. But what exactly does the Sovereign have that then Ent-D doesn't? Quantum torps? Whoop-bloody pee.
Ships in Star Trek have always got more powerful. Refit Constitution saucer has 6 pairs of phaser banks. The Excelsior had 10, and a read torpedo launcher. The Galaxy is faily overloaded with phaser arrays.
I just don't see the Enterprise-E=big gunship thing. Sorry.
-------------------- 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.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
