• 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 are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

I'm several pages late to the discussion of the casting of Terry Farrell, but I think it's worth noting that Berman himself says he was involved in the casting of Farrell. In his interview with the Archive of American Television, he also states several times his belief that women are either beautiful or good actresses, but rarely both. Which gives an interesting insight into that misogynistic streak that Farrell talked about. The relevant section of his interview begins at 5:30 in this video, which I've linked to:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
The problems with "Genesis" began with its script. We can blame Braga for that. No one could have polished that turd!
Probably true. Though I have always found aspects of "Genesis" to be interesting. I'm probably in the minority on that.

I'm also quite negative on actors directing in general. Jonathan Frakes has turned out to be an awesome director, IMHO, but as a general rule I think it's a bad idea for actors to get pretty much any level of creative control over the properties they are acting in. I even include Leonard Nimoy in that. Not a huge fan of him as a Trek director, though I think he did better on non-Trek projects like "Three Men and a Baby."
 
I'm also quite negative on actors directing in general. Jonathan Frakes has turned out to be an awesome director, IMHO, but as a general rule I think it's a bad idea for actors to get pretty much any level of creative control over the properties they are acting in.

I’m pretty sure during the Berman years that directors had little to no say as to what was going on.
 
Probably true. Though I have always found aspects of "Genesis" to be interesting. I'm probably in the minority on that.

I'm also quite negative on actors directing in general. Jonathan Frakes has turned out to be an awesome director, IMHO, but as a general rule I think it's a bad idea for actors to get pretty much any level of creative control over the properties they are acting in. I even include Leonard Nimoy in that. Not a huge fan of him as a Trek director, though I think he did better on non-Trek projects like "Three Men and a Baby."
Roxann Dawson has done fantastic work as a director.
 
he also states several times his belief that women are either beautiful or good actresses, but rarely both.

No.

What he observes - and it's well-taken, IMO - is that actresses who were both were in such demand that it was difficult to sign one to a syndicated series. IOW, rare in the off-network casting pool rather than an especially rare combination in a performer.

Star Trek or not, first-run syndication was considered lesser exposure than network and the pay rates for everyone involved - actors, writers, etc. - were lower. If I'm not misremembering, residual rates were also less generous. So if you were given a budget to cast a series, and you were spending a good chunk of it on folks like Brooks and Auberjenois, the challenges of getting everything you wanted when casting supporting parts were greater.

Farrell was virtually unknown, with very limited prior credits - almost a decade earlier, she'd played a model on an ABC series which was canceled after thirteen episodes, a few one-offs on other series and appeared in a few films (Hellraiser III would be the most notable; it hadn't been released at the time DS9 went into production. That is probably why they could afford her.

I suppose Berman was putting it a little cynically when he said that if you were both talented and beautiful you got "the Monopoly card" - that would be the "Get Out of Jail" card, presumably - that meant you didn't have to do off-network TV.
 
Last edited:
No.

What he observes - and it's well-taken, IMO - is that actresses who were both were in such demand that it was difficult to sign one to a syndicated series.

Star Trek or not, first-run syndication was considered lesser exposure than network and the pay rates for everyone involved - actors, writers, etc. - were lower. If I'm not misremembering, residual rates were also less generous. So if you were given a budget to cast a series, and you were spending a good chunk of it on folks like Brooks and Auberjenois, the challenges of getting everything you wanted when casting supporting parts were greater.
First off, yes. He clearly says what I said. He said that actresses who are beautiful and talented actresses both are a rarity. I mean, he literally says those words. He doesn't say they don't exist, but he says it is a rare combination.

Second, I'm not saying you're wrong about the challenges of casting a syndicated series. You're clearly correct, and that's part of what he's saying. However, if you watch the entire interview, and not just that one section, you will see a consistent theme throughout his discussion of the female actresses. Watch him talk about casting Kate Mulgrew or Jeri Ryan or Jolene Blalock and you'll see quite a bit of talk about women's appearances and how it correlates to their abilities as an actress.
 
No.

What he observes - and it's well-taken, IMO - is that actresses who were both were in such demand that it was difficult to sign one to a syndicated series.

Star Trek or not, first-run syndication was considered lesser exposure than network and the pay rates for everyone involved - actors, writers, etc. - were lower. If I'm not misremembering, residual rates were also less generous. So if you were given a budget to cast a series, and you were spending a good chunk of it on folks like Brooks and Auberjenois, the challenges of getting everything you wanted when casting supporting parts were greater.

I understand where you're coming from. Though Berman comes across as pretty slimy there, just the vibes. I don't know him, he could be a great person in real life. He just doesn't come across well there.

Plus, this should put to rest that Behr had big plans for the character. He knew, probably midway through season six, they were losing Farrell.
 
I understand where you're coming from. Though Berman comes across as pretty slimy there, just the vibes. I don't know him, he could be a great person in real life. He just doesn't come across well there.

Plus, this should put to rest that Behr had big plans for the character. He knew, probably midway through season six, they were losing Farrell.
I agree. I've watched Berman's entire 3+ hour interview and, quite frankly, he just doesn't come across as having much respect for the women in his employ. However, as you say, I don't know the man personally nor have I ever worked for him, so I could be wrong.

That being said, I also agree with you about Behr's supposed big plans for the character. As an aside, I don't like the fact that everything people like about the TNG/DS9/VOY era gets attributed to someone else (e.g., Piller, Behr, etc.) while everything people disllike about that era gets attributed to Berman. I think that is unfair.
 
I'm also quite negative on actors directing in general. Jonathan Frakes has turned out to be an awesome director, IMHO, but as a general rule I think it's a bad idea for actors to get pretty much any level of creative control over the properties they are acting in. I even include Leonard Nimoy in that. Not a huge fan of him as a Trek director, though I think he did better on non-Trek projects like "Three Men and a Baby."
Looking at episode ratings, it seems like Star Trek actors often did a great job as directors.
  • For TNG, Jonathan Frakes did Reunion, The Drumhead and The Offspring, LeVar Burton did The Pegasus, Patrick Stewart did Preemptive Strike.
  • Avery Brooks gave us DS9's Improbable Cause, while Rene Auberjonois did The Quickening and Michael Dorn did Inquisition.
  • Voyager's Timeless was by LeVar Burton.
  • On Enterprise, LeVar Burton did Similitude, Robert McNeill did Twilight and Roxann Dawson did Dead Stop.
And then Frakes continued onto the modern shows.
 
Last edited:
Starfleet wanted to go back to the more simplified division colors, after the Monster Maroons, but decided red was the better color for command officers.
Oh, I definitely believe that was the reasoning for the TNG Era colors. The poster was talking about the period from ENT to TOS.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top