The opposite is true. Berman was constantly annoying the writers by sticking to "Gene's vision", insisting that they stick to his rules after he was gone.
Last edited:
Why didn't Berman and Braga think that Ent-D looked good on the big screen?
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
I apologize. I was given false information. No harm meant to Berman nor his reputation.
The tone of Trek did change overall, though, and more conflict was added (as well as a Future Galaxy with three warp engines (setting aside the argument that each nacelle had two coils) which was a clear diversion from Roddenberry's wishes).
The tone of Trek did change overall, though, and more conflict was added (as well as a Future Galaxy with three warp engines (setting aside the argument that each nacelle had two coils) which was a clear diversion from Roddenberry's wishes).
Always lumping Berman and Braga together isn't as bad as that time somebody kept complaining about "Brannon and Braga."
Kor
The only thing that makes me happier more than a good "fan" rant about "BERMAN AND BRAGA ARE TEH SUX!!1!!11!" is reading anything about JJ "Abrahams" and his Apple Store bridge and lens flares.
Oh those whacky Trek message board guys...always good for a hearty chuckle with their creative and unique insights on the franchise.
I agree that they should have stayed with the Enterprise D because I got to admit I didn't care for the E. I do think it would have been okay to go with new sets for the ship. I would have only kept the wood panel tatical that Worf was stationed at. To me that is one of the more memorable design elements to the Enterprise D. I wonder if that thing still exists in the world or if it was destroyed over time?
Jason
Jason
It was more a matter of practicality. Voyager was on the horizon and all the old TNG sets were going to be redressed and redesigned for the Intrepid class, so they wouldn't be able to set any future features on the Enterprise-D anymore. They needed an in-universe reason for the ship to look different and decided that a new model was the solution.
That wasn't really the reason, though. They wanted to make the saucer crash-landing scene that they were never able to do on a television budget, and that required that the ship get destroyed. That, and that they simply felt that they'd seen enough of the D and wanted a new ship. Plus, the D model was very difficult to film. A longer, flatter design (like the E) was easier for the VFX department (which is why the original plan in STIV was to have the TMP Connie replaced with the Excelsior model.)
The destruction of the D actually goes back to the sixth season of TNG. Ron Moore and Brannon Braga (mainly Moore, if I remember correctly) were intrigued by the section in the TNG Technical Manual about the Galaxy-class saucer making a planetary landing, to they pitched an idea for the sixth season finale (provisionally titled "All Good Things..." showing that writers always recycle stuff) that would have had the Enterprise saucer crash on some sort of diplomatic mission. Saucer crash, fade to black...
But there was no way that the television production could have afforded the FX to make it work, so Moore and Braga shelved the idea. Then when they were invited to pitch ideas for the seventh Star Trek film, crashing the Enterprise saucer was one of the ideas they brought out since a film would have the budget to do it justice, and Berman agreed.
A new ship let the films have their own "hero ship" and visual identity, with Generations as a transitional piece. But that's really an after-the-fact justification. In the moment, when Generations was being plotted, the D's destruction was simply because it was something they could achieve on a movie budget that they never could have done on a television budget.
And I should have flipped over to Page 2 of the thread, because I'd have seen that Dukhat had already covered this. Not trying to steal your thunder!
But there was no way that the television production could have afforded the FX to make it work, so Moore and Braga shelved the idea. Then when they were invited to pitch ideas for the seventh Star Trek film, crashing the Enterprise saucer was one of the ideas they brought out since a film would have the budget to do it justice, and Berman agreed.
A new ship let the films have their own "hero ship" and visual identity, with Generations as a transitional piece. But that's really an after-the-fact justification. In the moment, when Generations was being plotted, the D's destruction was simply because it was something they could achieve on a movie budget that they never could have done on a television budget.
And I should have flipped over to Page 2 of the thread, because I'd have seen that Dukhat had already covered this. Not trying to steal your thunder!
I definitely would've preferred the Ent-D surviving on into the movies.
They didn't know how to shoot it. The cinematography overall was lackluster in GEN.
WARNING: Rant Ahead: Looking at the flattened, stretched, and dimmed "Porsche battleship" they came up with for FC, they weren't interested in making it work. The Galaxy Class is a work of art. Look at that shot in the Veridian sun. It's an adult ship for adult ideas, not a Hollywood "second wife" to appeal to adolescent ones.
WARNING: Rant Ahead: Looking at the flattened, stretched, and dimmed "Porsche battleship" they came up with for FC, they weren't interested in making it work. The Galaxy Class is a work of art. Look at that shot in the Veridian sun. It's an adult ship for adult ideas, not a Hollywood "second wife" to appeal to adolescent ones.
Captain Kirk had a TV ship and a Movies ship. Same exact thing with Captain Picard. I don't see anyone "trophy-wife"-shaming the TMP/TVH Enterprises.
The entire reason for the Movie Enterprise (Refit) was that they wanted it to be more detailed for the big screen. The Ent-D was, itself, detailed enough already.
Your point may be valid, though, because they were redesigning the Enterprise for TV for Phase II before there ever was a movie.
However, though it may have been easier to film, the Sovereign was far from an improvement in a lot of fan's eyes (including mine).
Your point may be valid, though, because they were redesigning the Enterprise for TV for Phase II before there ever was a movie.
However, though it may have been easier to film, the Sovereign was far from an improvement in a lot of fan's eyes (including mine).
I think maybe it was more the interior sets that they wanted to make more detailed for the big screen, not the ship miniature. And, as discussed above, they'd wanted to crash the saucer as the 6th-season finale cliffhanger, but couldn't afford to do it until the movie.
And once they decided to make it a movie, they made changes to the sets to add more detail, as well as starting over with new miniatures and costumes.
Everytime this topic comes up, I always feel glad because it reminds me of @Flux Capacitor's fantastic artwork in which he put the Enterprise-D into scenes from First Contact: https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/the-photoshop-trek-thread-is-back.33308/page-2#post-906629
The D was magnificent. And it's a travesty that she was destroyed only to appeal to the writers' adolescent desire to destroy her. The battle didn't even further the plot. Meaningless sacrifice.
The D was magnificent. And it's a travesty that she was destroyed only to appeal to the writers' adolescent desire to destroy her. The battle didn't even further the plot. Meaningless sacrifice.
The USS Enterprise-E could have been another Galaxy-class ship following "Generations", but when production started for "First Contact", they decided to make it a new ship class instead.
I like the Sovereign-class. The long nacelles appeal to me more than the Galaxy-class's short ones.
I like the Sovereign-class. The long nacelles appeal to me more than the Galaxy-class's short ones.
Similar threads
- Poll
