BERMAN;THE FINAL GRADE
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
WHoa! Whooaa you sure showed me.
Something to be noted about DS9 and Berman. One of the reasons that so many like DS9 is the fact that the studio didn't come in and tell the writers to dumb stuff down, make it more actiony, tell it to give it more sex and T&A.
Why was that? Berman was shielding the writers from the studio's demands. If it were not for him, DS9 could have been very, very different. Given the personality that Behr presents himself with, when the studio would have come saying to "do this, ditch that", he probably would have said no and subsequently been shown his walking papers.
--
Also, there is no such grade as a "F-".
Lets not overreact now...
Why was that? Berman was shielding the writers from the studio's demands. If it were not for him, DS9 could have been very, very different. Given the personality that Behr presents himself with, when the studio would have come saying to "do this, ditch that", he probably would have said no and subsequently been shown his walking papers.
--
Also, there is no such grade as a "F-".
Lets not overreact now...
L
Lord Garth
Guest
C
He was able to consistently produce Star Trek for 18 years. A little too consistently. It's hard to believe that VOY ran as late as 2001 and ENT doesn't feel like it's almost contemporary with nBSG. ENT's third season was the only time Berman-era Star Trek stepped out of the 90's and it only did so under the threat of cancellation, "Shape up or else!"
Overall, there was the variable quality, ranging the entire spectrum. As consistently as Star Trek was produced under Rick Berman, the writing was uneven when looking over that entire span. There were great episodes, so-so episodes, embarassing episodes, good seasons, bad seasons, you name it.
There was also ambition but not always being able to deliver on the ambition due to a variety of factors. TNG didn't translate well into movies, VOY wasn't strong enough to anchor the theoratical network, and ENT was not "not your father's Star Trek". Never once did I say ENT should be like TOS but, at the same time, it shouldn't have been so much like TNG, DS9, and VOY. Times weren't only different in Star Trek universe, they were different in real life and it now falls to JJ Abrams' Star Trek (2008) to make sure ST is adjusted enough.
Finally, Rick Berman said he was trying to preserve Gene Roddenberry's vision, and that's a great thing, but I think it's better to have your own vision that coincides with the notion of what his was than to uphold that same vision even though it's not yours and merely update it as you need to. While similar they're not quite the same thing, in the former you're working from your own thoughts and in the latter you're working from your interpretation and application of someone else's. It's good to maintain a "vision" but sometimes you have to stop and think, "why am I maintaining this vision?" and come up with an answer for yourself.
He was able to consistently produce Star Trek for 18 years. A little too consistently. It's hard to believe that VOY ran as late as 2001 and ENT doesn't feel like it's almost contemporary with nBSG. ENT's third season was the only time Berman-era Star Trek stepped out of the 90's and it only did so under the threat of cancellation, "Shape up or else!"
Overall, there was the variable quality, ranging the entire spectrum. As consistently as Star Trek was produced under Rick Berman, the writing was uneven when looking over that entire span. There were great episodes, so-so episodes, embarassing episodes, good seasons, bad seasons, you name it.
There was also ambition but not always being able to deliver on the ambition due to a variety of factors. TNG didn't translate well into movies, VOY wasn't strong enough to anchor the theoratical network, and ENT was not "not your father's Star Trek". Never once did I say ENT should be like TOS but, at the same time, it shouldn't have been so much like TNG, DS9, and VOY. Times weren't only different in Star Trek universe, they were different in real life and it now falls to JJ Abrams' Star Trek (2008) to make sure ST is adjusted enough.
Finally, Rick Berman said he was trying to preserve Gene Roddenberry's vision, and that's a great thing, but I think it's better to have your own vision that coincides with the notion of what his was than to uphold that same vision even though it's not yours and merely update it as you need to. While similar they're not quite the same thing, in the former you're working from your own thoughts and in the latter you're working from your interpretation and application of someone else's. It's good to maintain a "vision" but sometimes you have to stop and think, "why am I maintaining this vision?" and come up with an answer for yourself.
Yes, but that doesn't mean fans will get the whole story. Generally when people write books after the fact, they minimize their own complaints and exaggerate their contributions.
Just read Shatner's Star Trek Memories, or Movie Memories, where he single-handedly comes up with the ending for TMP.
Then read Jimmy Doohan's autobiography, that gives a different perspective on Shatner.
I think Berman's biggest problems came from him not really being involved in many solo projects. I won't say he has no visions, but since he never had his own show he wasn't used to expressing his own ideas on the screen. His idea was basicly to try to follow what had gone before. Instead of the WWJD braclet like Christians have, Berman's read "What would Roddenbery do?". It's not a bad idea -- if you gotta copy, copy somebody good. The trouble is that it went no farther. It was a bad copy. And as the spinoffs went on, it was a copy of a copy of a copy.
I'd give him a B+ for effort, and a D- on execution. so, I think he gets a C, though I'd probably write a note to his mother about "not living up to his potential", but I'm a tough teacher.
I'd give him a B+ for effort, and a D- on execution. so, I think he gets a C, though I'd probably write a note to his mother about "not living up to his potential", but I'm a tough teacher.
TremblingBluStar said:
Yes, but that doesn't mean fans will get the whole story. Generally when people write books after the fact, they minimize their own complaints and exaggerate their contributions.
Just read Shatner's Star Trek Memories, or Movie Memories, where he single-handedly comes up with the ending for TMP.
Then read Jimmy Doohan's autobiography, that gives a different perspective on Shatner.
Piller also wrote a book before he died, I'm not sure if his family is planning on releasing it anytime though.
And Berman's release may be a good thing: If any of the other Trek guys think he didn't give the whole story it'll get them to come out and speak their minds as well.
B+
Oh, but there are so many reasons for the grade...
L
Lord Garth
Guest
^ You two don't like bashers, but you're also bashers, just bashers of a different type. Some people bash series, you bash fans. The bottom line is the same, you're still bashing -- often as much as the people you're complaining about.
I think we should get back to talking about Rick Berman's work. Yes, his work, because believe it or not there are those of us around here who can seperate the person from the work.
I think we should get back to talking about Rick Berman's work. Yes, his work, because believe it or not there are those of us around here who can seperate the person from the work.
We're All Very Pleased: The Rick Berman Biography
Written By Rick Berman & Brannon Braga
Based Upon a Story by Rick Berman & Brannon Braga & John Logan & Brent Spiner
Similar threads
