Why was it so vital that "Generations" be a "bridge" movie.

One of my biggest problems with Generations is the idea that "Kirk Must Die!" There was no reason for it. Passing the torch has never required the death or destruction of the original. Imagine if each torch bearer in the Olympic torch relay around the world was killed after handing it off. The idea is ridiculous. No, Kirk was killed so certain TNG folk could say "We're the only ones you've got, now. Get used to it." And that has since come around to bite them on the ass.

 

According to the TNG Companion, they wanted to do a story dealing with Picard confronting mortality, and they considered killing off one of the TNG cast, but when it occurred to them that Kirk could be the one to die, it felt right to them.

 

I thought that was the reason they killed his brother and nephew.

 

I thought Generations did a pretty good job of introducing the TNG characters to new viewers without feeling blatantly or awkwardly introductory, feeling sufficiently introductory but also and more like a continuation.

It could have been interesting to start the 24th section with an action scene but I hardly think that was essential, it already followed an action scene and the promotion scene instead suggested that the dynamics of the new generation were pretty different.

 

I guess I was the kind of viewer the "bridge" concept was aimed at, as I watched all the movies but never got into TNG. I had no problem with Worf's promotion or Data's emotion chip, as there was no need to know these were continuity references. I did have a problem, in retrospect, with the interest I was supposed to take in Picard's family life, and also the significance that was supposedly imbued in Guinan.

And I guess GEN as "bridge" did work for me, as I enjoy all the TNG movies (except INS) but still don't get much joy from the TV show. (And why does Troi have that weird accent?)

Regarding the "bridge" concept, remember that Paramount actually commissioned two film scripts, one a TOS crossover and one a standalone. (This and much more info is on the B&B audio commentary)

 

This is a great point and maybe it isn't so much that, looking back, it seemed to those in charge that Generations HAD to be a bridge film, but that the idea of "Kirk must die!!!!" was seemingly something they seemed hell bent on doing to pass the torch.

If you were going to have him in the film and kill him then HAVE HIM IN THE FILM. Don't stick him is some 10 minute set up scene at the beginning and then for 20 minutes at the end where he forms no real bond with Picard or anyone so when he dies it's like "Well that's really too bad, but we stopped Soran, thanks for the help RIP Jim Kirk"

Create a scenario where he's with the Enterprise-D crew, especially Picard, for most of the film so they get to know him, see what a legend and person he is and create a bond so that, when he does die the characters, again especially Picard, feel a genuine sense of loss and sorrow. Not Picard feeling kinda sad and everyone else probably having no real sorrow when Picard tells them the story.

And if you can't say that's possible over a 2 hr film, go back and watch Unification again. Spock formed real relationships with both Picard and Data so that by the end of the episode Picard genuinely felt a bond with Spock and greatly respected him, even if it wasn't pure friendship......and they did it in roughly 90 minutes of TV time.

And if the TNG actors had a problem if Shatner had been in most of the film....tough, get over it. Without him and Nimoy and Kelley most of you would be probably doing guest appearances for all your careers.

 

Be careful. That a particular actor or actress landed a role on Star Trek doesn't mean they'd have been collecting food stamps had said role not been offered to them. As it stands, I'm fine with the way Kirk's appearance in Generations was handled. I'd have actually preferred a film that didn't include him at all, but that may have affected the film's ability to draw in non-Trek audiences.

--Sran

 

^ My problem with Kirk in Generations is that, really, he isn't integrated into the script as well as he could be. His presence in the movie feels arbitary, almost like an after-thought.

Interesting. As I mentioned elsewhere, one thing I do think was properly reintroduced was Data's emotion chip, because to any unfamiliar audience members he clearly chooses to use it after many years not using it, and they don't need to necessarily understand how he came to be in possession of it. But you've hit upon other issues, like Picard's family, where I definitely think a lack of investment in the character pre-Generations means there's nothing there in the movie itself for new audiences to 'latch onto' if they aren't already invested in the TNG characters.

The El-Aurians are another one of the mysteries. We're shown that Guinan and Soren obviously don't age like other characters do, but the fact that Picard has got a long held respect and admiration for Guinan is missing from the movie, so that innate character connection between them is lost unless you're already a TNG series junkie and have followed their relationship through.

 

You're right. I can't say with total authority that the cast members might not have found another successful role at some point. I'm just going with what the odds would say. Stewart was a successful stage actor, so odds are he'd have been fine. I guess LeVar Burton was known for "Reading Rainbow"

But Hollywood is a totally kill or be killed environment so to speak. I never acted but one of my best friends went out there and for a while he actually landed some guest roles on some pretty popular shows and even got a recurring role on a ABC show and it honestly looked like, even if he wasn't going to be the next Tom Hanks, he was going to be able to make a career out of it.

Well the ABC show wrote him out after a season and since then he's been doing whatever he can to make ends meet for the past 5 years......I have no idea what would of happened to Frakes, Spiner, Dorn.....etc.

All I do know is that Hollywood is a brutal environment that chews up and spits out aspiring actor by the boatload and if TOS had faded away then the odds of TNG cast having successful careers, let alone the ones they did have, would decreased dramatically. Look at Denise Crosby.

As far as Kirk I guess I'm an everything or nothing guy (Which is what EON, the studio Cubby Brocolli started for the Bond films stands for BTW....just a little trivia) and I just feel that if you're going to do a TNG film with Kirk, then have him be a large part of the film on screen or don't do it at all. I understand you're fine with what he did do, and so are others. I just see it differently.

 

Yes Hollywood is a tough town, but if there's been a lack of work, then that's because the effort hasn't been put it, either by the actor or more importantly the agent. They may also have failed to capitalise on the momentum of those early roles.

Ultimately, being an actor is a tough business. Sometimes that means a life of sporadic roles, constant auditions, and a day job driving taxis between guest spots as "witness to crime" in an episode of Law & Order. It ain't glamorous, but there it is.

 

Makes you wonder how anyone can put themselves through it. Must be an absolute nightmare

 

double post

 

Which is why I'm saying I find it a bit bothersome when TNG members seem to be upset that "Their" first big screen adventure was supposedly upstaged by including Shatner, and some people would have been even more possibly upset if he'd had a bigger role when what Shatner and co. did in the 60's helped them so succeed in a industry where very few do on that level.

I admit I don't know who felt what or was pissed at what, I just hear the rumors like others so I'm not going to point the finger and say "Brent Spiner is an ungrateful jerk if he resented Shatner in generations" But they had a 7 year run on TV where they all had episodes with them as the central character....So if Shatner, a main reason TNG even made it to TV, takes away some time in the first TNG film, I guess that kind of sucks but really isn't that bad in the grand scheme.

Again I don't know what the cast would have done if TNG had never made it. Hell for all I know Frakes could of beat out George Clooney for the role in ER.

I'm just saying, if you're a betting man, the odds aren't good of most, if any, of them ever landing a gig like they did on TNG.

 

It's really down to advertising.

When you're an actor, or any kind of performance artist for that matter, you simply have to keep putting yourself out there. Because if you don't, your career will suffer. People in 'the Biz' will forget you.

Unless the Trek actors royally pissed off somebody in the industry, then chances are they'd have been fine to use their Trek credits as a spring-board for other things. But they (or, rather, their agents) have to *make* that happen. People aren't going to come knocking on your door with jobs, you have to knock on theirs. Just like any other line of work, you have to keep going out there and applying for them.

 

There's a reason that drug and alcohol abuse is pretty high in the acting community from what I've heard.

It's also the reason why most actors will take almost any part, regardless of how small or low paying, because it's either that or nothing and unless you're connected you just pray someone notices you.

Think if you had trained for a job all your life and someone says "OK you're hired for 3 days work at basically minimum wage" I don't think you'd see many aspiring doctors, teachers, cops, engineers and most other professions jump at that opportunity.

Yet post that position in Hollywood and you'll have people out the door trying to get that job.

 

These are understatements. Patrick Stewart was not only a respected 20-year veteran of the Royal Shakespeare Company at that point, but he had an active movie career as well, with significant roles in films like Dune and Lifeforce. LeVar Burton was already famous from Roots long before Reading Rainbow came along; indeed, he was arguably the most famous cast member pre-TNG, at least for American audiences. Brent Spiner was an active stage and screen performer; he'd been part of the original Broadway cast of Sunday in the Park with George, and he had a recurring role on Night Court at the time he was cast in TNG. (In fact, his character on that show, Bob Wheeler, had been set up in a semi-regular role at the end of the '86-'87 season, and then disappeared without explanation once Spiner got the TNG gig.) Jonathan Frakes was a busy TV actor at the time, having a prominent role in the miniseries North and South and recurring appearances in various other shows (including Terry Farrell's first series, Paper Dolls).

 

I dunno about the TNG cast not wanting Shatner as it'd have been such a big deal/boost to their movie. (Stewart says as much in the DVD extras docs at the time) However if any did I don't think they'd be thinking if it wasn't for original trek and Shatners excellent portrayal of Kirk I wouldn't be here as really TNG succeeded in spite of TOS


As for what the cast would've done had there been no TNG or they'd never been cast - Wild speculation. Stewart would've focused on stage work with an occasional bit part in a movie as hed been doing (Space Vampires, Dune), maybe ending up as elder brit thespian star in stuff like LOTR like McKellan (Ben Kingsley would've been Prof X though) Frakes would've ended up in some other TV show possibly as a lead actor like Tom Selleck if he was lucky, Spiner dunno maybe a career in Broadway musicals? Dorn maybe hed have got lucky as a heavy in action movies? Burton more TV work as a respectable actor, maybe some movie work? Sirtis maybe headed back to UK (as she said she was about to go home when she got TNG) and ended up in Eastenders? Gates - wasn't she like a puppeteer? Maybe gone back to that unless shed got lucky with movies (she was in Red October) Wil Wheaton maybe TNG wasn't so good for him, abit type cast as a silly kid and also missing out on further film roles (as he's said) maybe he might've become quite a big star like a Keanu Reeves? (probably best to look at IMDB to get an idea of what they were doing pre TNG to get some idea of where they were heading but who knows really)

EDIT - writing that I felt very Q like (i.e. that ep that showed what would've become of Picard if he hadn't been stabbed)

 

Or sitcoms, building on his Night Court success.

The majority of Michael Dorn's career outside of Trek -- heck, even including Trek -- has been in animation voice work. It's possible that he wouldn't have gotten that career if his role in TNG hadn't given him reason to refine his vocal skills so that he could handle the show's elaborate dialogue better, but given what a powerful voice he intrinsically has, he might've gone that route even without TNG, and would've still become one of the most in-demand voice actors.

Choreographer. You must be thinking of her work in that capacity in Labyrinth.