"TV" or "SCIFI" writers?

[RobertScorpio]

Trek shows, all of them, with a few exceptions, seem to have very little real scifi writers. I mean, what did Braga or Moore do before coming to TREK? Do you think a STAR TREK series would be better if it hired established SCIFI writers instead of "TV MINDED" writers?

Rob

 

[sbk1234]

Honestly, all I'm interested in would be GOOD writers. If that isn't there, it doesn't matter if they're TV or Sci-Fi writers.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Honestly, all I'm interested in would be GOOD writers. If that isn't there, it doesn't matter if they're TV or Sci-Fi writers.

But aren't there any GOOD scifi writers? Thats my point. Why not hire some GOOD scifi writers? Why do we get writers who worked on LA LAW?? Where are the scifi writers???

Rob

 

[Nerys Myk]

TOS had writers who worked on Lawyer, Cop and Western shows. These guys were pros who knew how to write a filmable script. Probably more important than being a "sci-fi" writer.

 

[RobertScorpio]

TOS had writers who worked on Lawyer, Cop and Western shows. These guys were pros who knew how to write a filmable script. Probably more important than being a "sci-fi" writer.

Yes...I KNOW this..we all know this....I am asking why scifi writers havent made it to the writing staff of MODERN TREK? There are none worthy??? I think some of the writers on this board (the real ones who write books) would do just fine..and some of them are actually SCIFI writers...

Rob

 

[Nerys Myk]

Different type of writing. Though IIRC some "book writers" have done moderrn trek. The Reeves-Stevens worked on Enterprise. Diane Duane wrote a TNG episode. As did Peter S Beagle. Might be others too.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Different type of writing. Though IIRC some "book writers" have done moderrn trek. The Reeves-Stevens worked on Enterprise. Diane Duane wrote a TNG episode. As did Peter S Beagle. Might be others too.

Great post...they did it. In fact Duane Duanes TNG episode was actually taken from one of her books i think, and it was great. Grex Cox, Christopher, Mack, and the others who are writers who I didn't mention, are all great writers. And I KNOW they could have done better, IMO, than some of the stuff we got on later treks.

if I were to do TREK again, on tv? I would try to give scifi writers a chance to really write some SCIFI trek stuff...not this moralistic mumbo jumbo that has created 600+ hours of material...most of it is good, but that kind of star trek, IMO, was getting old...

Just an opinion...but I want writers can actually write scifi, who can challenge our thoughts about the universe, to do a show...it could fail because it is too smart for average joe blow...but so what..regular 'issue of the week' trek has failed to generate ratings in recent years (and nuBSG failed as well)....so why not give the scifi writers a chance? What do we have to lose that we havent lost already? Ratings? Too late.

Rob

 

[WendellM]

TOS had writers who worked on Lawyer, Cop and Western shows. These guys were pros who knew how to write a filmable script.

I agree that those writers were often good, but TOS also had some real SF writers: Jerome Bixby (Mirror Mirror, Day/Dove, Requiem/Methuselah), Robert Bloch (Little Girls, Wolf/Fold, Catspaw), Harlan Ellison (City/Forever), Richard Matheson (Enemy Within), Normal Spinrad (Doomsday Machine), and Theodore Sturgeon (Shore Leave, Amok Time).

Though Bloch and Matheson were more horror/fantasy writers, they'd also written SF before TOS. However I omit David Gerrold since he was just getting his start with Trouble/Tribbles.

Do you think a STAR TREK series would be better if it hired established SCIFI writers instead of "TV MINDED" writers?

While those episodes weren't all gems and the scripts were reviewed/modified before production, it was still good to have more-literary types bring in different concepts from time to time. So I'd say, "Yes: not exclusively, but some."

 

[Dayton Ward]

Writing prose does not automatically translate to being able to write effectively for film/TV (and vice versa, for that matter). The demands of the different mediums require different skill sets, not all of which are interchangeable. Same with comics. I'd love to write comics (Trek, for example), but I know I don't possess all the necessary skills to do so.

Since Trek, at its core and when it's doing things right, is about the characters with the futuristic setting and toys as a backdrop for exploring said characters, then having "true" SF writers isn't necessarily a requirement for writing good Trek stories. I think the more effective use of such an individual or individuals would be as story consultants when the plots call for heavy SF elements. After all, Gene Coon wasn't an SF writer; neither were Michael Piller or Ronald D. Moore.

Just my $.02.

 

[jamestyler]

I don't care about someones CV as long as they're good at their job.

Though if I were in charge SF would be a setting or situation, the real challenge of writing the script is about how the characters deal with that situation, how they will interact, solve problems etc. I can see those experienced in drama being more adapt to writing in that style and building to a climax.

Titanic, for example, while not SF took something we all knew about and instead of going the easy option of focusing on the event and tragedy, the ship sinking wasn't the story. The story was a love affair gone tits up. It was still a terrible movie - but thats what I like coming out of sci fi. A personal story is always more stimulating to me than a scientific one.

Arguably most of the world wants the personal story. If I was spending money making a show, I'd want to make sure it appealed to a mass audience and would put forth the best writers for that task... and any SF elements would be backed up by consultants or researchers.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Writing prose does not automatically translate to being able to write effectively for film/TV (and vice versa, for that matter). The demands of the different mediums require different skill sets, not all of which are interchangeable. Same with comics. I'd love to write comics (Trek, for example), but I know I don't possess all the necessary skills to do so.

Since Trek, at its core and when it's doing things right, is about the characters with the futuristic setting and toys as a backdrop for exploring said characters, then having "true" SF writers isn't necessarily a requirement for writing good Trek stories. I think the more effective use of such an individual or individuals would be as story consultants when the plots call for heavy SF elements. After all, Gene Coon wasn't an SF writer; neither were Michael Piller or Ronald D. Moore.

Just my $.02.

Again..I know that trek is riddled with great writers (COON and RDM) who were not scifi writers. Fair enough. But TOS did have them, as the earlier poster pointed out. But none of the later shows, with an exception here and there, did. Perhaps that is why the new TREKS are not resonating with the general public. They turned STAR TREK into a soap opera (Klingons arcs...data arcs...Sisko arcs) that are, I agree, all done well.

But in terms of wonder and awe, which TOS inspired in the 60s, was always lacking, IMO from the modern treks. And that is where not having SCIFI writers can help.

So yes...modern TREK has had good writers. But not one modern-scifi writer was worthy because BERMAN wanted "TV GROOMED" writers because writing scripts and writing scifi books are not the same thing.

And yet TOS managed to find writers, scifi writers even, who could do both. Harlan Elison, Sturgeon, and all the others that managed to contribute to a show (TOS) that will, IMO, always be leaps and bounds, ahead of the other TREK shows.....

Rob

 

[Jaespol]

I think they should just hire some crazy fans to look over the scripts and tell them what conflicts with canon/continuity etc.

 

[Anwar]

Listening to the fans rarely, if ever, works out. The fans themselves can't agree on anything.

 

[Jaespol]

Listening to the fans rarely, if ever, works out. The fans themselves can't agree on anything.

Why do you think that?
I'm just saying, they should have some people who genuinely know about Star Trek on the side to deal with major conflicts.
For example Troi saying that she had never kissed Riker with a beard before in Insurrection, a fan would realise that was wrong immediately.

 

[Anwar]

I'm sure they have editors and actual continuity types on staff to deal with something like that. Of course if they don't do their job that's another thing...

 

[Jaespol]

I'm sure they have editors and actual continuity types on staff to deal with something like that. Of course if they don't do their job that's another thing...

Fans would have be guaranteed to have an interest in all this stuff because we're crazy, picky types!

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I noticed that the Reese-Stevensons' stories on ENT were good; they seemed to give a holistic sense of reality to their episodes, and didn't have the problem of seeming thin, and like there is nothing to the Trekverse beyond ther range of the camera. I wonder if is it because Trek novelists are used to filling in all the details of a story when they write, and can't depend on directors, costumers, stage designers, special effects people, etc for any help.

I think they should just hire some crazy fans to look over the scripts and tell them what conflicts with canon/continuity etc.

Or hire anyone, really. Lost has a guy on staff whose job is to ensure continuity - he wasn't hired as a Lost fan because there was no Lost to be a fan of. All it takes is someone with attention to detail. The paycheck will motivated them to do a good job. It's probably better if they aren't a fan, then they won't let fanon influence them.

 

[lonesomechild]

I think a writer who can avoid excessive moralizing is desperately needed. Or at the very least a writer skilled and talented at folding the moralizing more eloquently into individual episodes. Although the "soap opera in space" mode is IMO a bit of a betrayal of the genre, the "sermon in space" is just irritating. If I wanted a sermon, I would go to shul. It's okay (even good) to have a little bit of a moral to an episode, because honestly, in all probability most of the population of "enlightened" civilization is getting their morals and values from TV, and there are worse shows than Trek from which to build a value system. But a little more grace would be appreciated (as in, "hmmm, wonder if this is an allegory of the Arab/Israeli conflict...).

 

[Anwar]

Sometimes they do get a moral across in a fairly well done and subtle way, but it ends up so subtle that they get the wrong idea. Case in point, the episode "Hollow Pursuits" with Barclay and his holo-addiction.

Some folks here thought that episode was making fun of Trek fans by having Barclay be the stereotypical "anti-social geek" and found it offensive. The deal is that the thing is just supposed to be becoming so addicted to fantasies and stuff that your real life suffers from it. It could as easily apply to "World of Warcraft" addicts as anyone else.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Sometimes they do get a moral across in a fairly well done and subtle way, but it ends up so subtle that they get the wrong idea. Case in point, the episode "Hollow Pursuits" with Barclay and his holo-addiction.

Some folks here thought that episode was making fun of Trek fans by having Barclay be the stereotypical "anti-social geek" and found it offensive. The deal is that the thing is just supposed to be becoming so addicted to fantasies and stuff that your real life suffers from it. It could as easily apply to "World of Warcraft" addicts as anyone else.

And it does...where I work there are several navy guys into WOW. They come in and discuss their raids and all that, and its clear they spent the entire weekend do this...its okay, I think its great..but one of them just takes it too seriously to where it may be affecting his marriage...

Hollow Pursuits is a great episode...

Rob