• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What do you like better.. Duet or Waltz

What WAS the "alternate" ending of Waltz, anyway?

One place where I read it about it was from an old interview with Jeffrey Combs that can be read here:

http://www.geocities.com/combsfan/nexusinterview.html

Not sure if the Companion says anything about this, since I haven't read the Companion. Would be nice to learn more about The Great Fubaring™ from other sources too.:wtf:

N: I have heard that Marc Alaimo always claimed that Dukat is a good guy deep in his heart. Is there anything like this that is true for Weyoun?
JC: That was an ongoing battle with Marc and Ira. Ira kept saying: C’mon! You’re kidding! I think really that any good actor who has a role whether a villainous role or not, will try to find anything to make the character more multidimensional and not just be one thing. So that’s what Marc was trying to do. What I was trying to do…it’s not so easy to just say he’s bad or he’s good and that’s all. You wanna play all the colors
N: And that’s why “Waltz” was done?
JC: That’s why “Waltz” was done,… right! And they changed the ending of “Waltz”!
N: Ah, how was that?
JC: I don’t recall! But there was an ending shot and then they changed it, to make him less sympathetic.
 
I love both episodes but I gotta take "Duet". I had one of those, "this is why I love this show" moments the first time I saw it. And every other time to be honest.
 
Duest because it was just a naturally flowing episode that didnt try to hard to make its point. Waltz is a little overdramatic and is the last time that they try to portray Dukat, a once duplicitous, fascinating character as pure eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil.

I liked Waltz better. And i do think Duet tried very hard to make it's point, especially at the end. "He's a Cardassian, that's reason enough." "No... it's not..." cue, "The more you know" clip.

infact every scene with that bajoran guy is very heavy handed. "Look! Bajorans really hate Cardassians!"

as for the pure evil bit... i dont mind it knowing why the writers did it. it was because people sympathized with dukat too much. he's a bad guy that has done some good things every now and then, but he's still a bad guy.
 
I don't mind it knowing why the writers did it. it was because people sympathized with Dukat too much. He's a bad guy that has done some good things every now and then, but he's still a bad guy.

Which makes "Waltz" a myopic attempt to spoonfeed fans an opinion. Here's a radical thought: Just present your stories and let people formulate their own take, rather than becoming dismayed at the fact that you've actually written a spectacularly effective villain—until that point the best in Star Trek history—and undoing most if not all the brilliant work you'd put in. Nice goin', guys and dolls. :rolleyes:

From where I sit, "Waltz" was easily one of DS9's worst episodes because of the collateral damage it enabled: Dukat's subsequent decline into caricature was an insult to fans' intelligence, and greatly detracted from the series as a whole. :brickwall:
 
Last edited:
^^
The key is right there in your language, though. "Dukat's subsequent decline," as in, it happened after the episode. Waltz doesn't have anything to do with Dukat being evil. All it does is deal with the fallout of him having a complete and mental breakdown after the death of Ziyal. Dukat certainly didn't have to be portrayed as an evil mustache twirler after this episode, but that's where they went, and it's too bad.
 
Last edited:
"Dukat's subsequent decliene," as in, it happened after the episode.

Or, "Dukat's subsequent decline," referring to the portion of it that occurred after the episode.

"Waltz" doesn't have anything to do with Dukat being evil.

Actually, every episode in which we see him has something to do with him being evil. I found "Dukat as loony tune" as convincing and entertaining as I did "Dukat as avatar of EEEVVVIILL"—that is to say, not at all.

I didn't mean to imply that "Waltz" is exclusively or even predominantly the culprit. This started in "Sacrifice of Angels," continued in "Waltz," and proceeded apace in his next appearance.

All it does is deal with the fallout of him having a complete and mental breakdown after the death of Ziyal.

I consider that something of a questionable development, as well.

Dukat certainly didn't have to be portrayed as an evil mustache twirler after this episode, but that's where they went, and it's too bad.

On that point we're agreed.
 
"Dukat's subsequent decliene," as in, it happened after the episode.

Or, "Dukat's subsequent decline," referring to the portion of it that occurred after the episode.

Why, I don't see what you could possibly be referring to. ;)

My bad, error fixed. Though happened seems to be just as good as occurred to me.

"Waltz" doesn't have anything to do with Dukat being evil.
Actually, every episode in which we see him has something to do with him being evil. I found "Dukat as loony tune" as convincing and entertaining as I did "Dukat as avatar of EEEVVVIILL"—that is to say, not at all.

I didn't mean to imply that "Waltz" is exclusively or even predominantly the culprit. This started in "Sacrifice of Angels," continued in "Waltz," and proceeded apace in his next appearance.
Well, if you're qualm begins with "Sacrifice of Angels," then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

All it does is deal with the fallout of him having a complete and mental breakdown after the death of Ziyal.
I consider that something of a questionable development, as well.
I see where you're coming from, though I'd like to hear more. Considering the bond that had developed between daughter and father since Dukat rescued Ziyal, I'd certainly expect him to be affected in some way. How would you deal with things?

Dukat certainly didn't have to be portrayed as an evil mustache twirler after this episode, but that's where they went, and it's too bad.
On that point we're agreed.
Fair enough. Dukat certainly wasn't consistently characterized, especially at the end, and it's one of the few misgivings I have with the series.
 
I have to agree with the majority here in that "Duet" is a standout episode that is pretty hard to beat. I think mostly because the majority of dialogue in "Duet" is between two characters.

Now, thats not to knock "Waltz" which was great because I love watching people go crazy and pileing multiple personalities on top of that. "Waltz" was much more fun and "Duet" was satisfying on all levels.
 
^you're on to something there. to me, Waltz IS riveting but on a more personal level. it's like watching a trainwreck in the form of a man who used to live by his wits lose them all in one fell swoop (Dukat) -- fascinating and scary and awfully sad in some strange way. but, ultimately, you just want (Sisko) to get out of the way. it's all a bit spoiled, however, with that last "pure evil" scene. yuck. Ira Behr let too much of his personal agenda get in the way of Dukat's characterization in the later seasons, IMO.

Duet, OTOH, *is* a duet in the true sense of the word (these do make a pair, don't they?) its significance, however, is derived not from the personal but the universal. sure, we're watching something VERY personal, very intimate in a way, take place between Kira and her nemesis. but the basic frame of the story is much larger than the two of them. every country, culture, people, and person living under the yoke of somebody else's control will feel the crushing blow this story deals to "romantic" ideas of "freedom fighting" and "justice" and "independence". I tend to want to watch Indiscretion and Return to Grace after I watch this, especially the latter: for the bittersweet pathos of crushed dreams. good stuff.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top