Reasons for sanitized TNG Companion vs. honest DS9 Companion?
- Thread starter Navaros
- Start date
Some writers' quite bitter accounts of dealing with Gene Roddenberry on TMP for starters, I suspect.
Richard Arnold came out here for a convention a couple of years ago, and said that she was flat-out fired originally, and that there were plans to hire a third doctor when Berman got rid of Muldaur. However, when Roddenberry returned from holidays, he was so incensed at the Muldaur's firing (being a friend/fan of hers), he ordered the re-hiring of McFadden to punish Berman.
It's a bit of a convoluted story, but I've learned that few things are too far-fetched when it comes to office politics.
This story is completely contradicted by the story that McFadden herself told at Trek Expo a few years ago, where she indicated (she didn't name names, but there was little doubt) that it was Maurice Hurley who didn't like her and had her fired, and when he departed after the second season ended, she was hired back.
I don't know which account is true, or if either is, but if it's a choice between believing Richard Arnold and believing Gates McFadden, I'll go with McFadden. (Then again, if it's a choice between believing Richard Arnold and believing Tommy Flanagan, I'll believe Tommy.....)
Isn't part of the problem with a 'warts and all' Companion, that you ask five people their memories of an event and you will probably get five different stories. The DS9 Companion works because the writers say they don't like what they wrote in a particular episode but they never say they hated a particular person.
^
I find it fascinating how in the Companion Behr talks about their original plans for Nog's legs and simply says it was "too much for Star Trek", whereas Moore makes the exact same point in his interview with IGN Film Force by reaping the whirlwind on Berman.
Personally, I prefer the fully-honest interview style of Moore, and I think the DS9 Companion would have been even better if the writers had the liberty to talk like that in it.
I find it fascinating how in the Companion Behr talks about their original plans for Nog's legs and simply says it was "too much for Star Trek", whereas Moore makes the exact same point in his interview with IGN Film Force by reaping the whirlwind on Berman.
Personally, I prefer the fully-honest interview style of Moore, and I think the DS9 Companion would have been even better if the writers had the liberty to talk like that in it.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
While we're talking "warts and all", does anybody remember if it was Ron Moore or Ira Behr that said in an interview that they were present at a meeting with Berman where he openly TOLD them "[DS9] will never be allowed to be the "torch carrier" for Trek"?
Berman also axed the original finale for DS9, where the Alpha Alliance LOST the war, insisting that the show end on a "happy note". Of course, in context with the above, it also meant that Berman closed off a logical follow on series premise in favor of "Enterprise".
Berman also axed the original finale for DS9, where the Alpha Alliance LOST the war, insisting that the show end on a "happy note". Of course, in context with the above, it also meant that Berman closed off a logical follow on series premise in favor of "Enterprise".
Here you go. It's a really good interview, and for Galactica fans, it's especially interesting because it comes between the mini-series and the first season, so you can really get a feel for where his mind was at the time...
Here you go. It's a really good interview, and for Galactica fans, it's especially interesting because it comes between the mini-series and the first season, so you can really get a feel for where his mind was at the time...
No problem - I remember reading that interview when it first came out, and found it fascinating back then. Very interesting, some of things about the production of the show that he mentions, and the omissions are intriguing as well. I find it kind of touching how Moore goes out of his way to not diss Brannon Braga - I thought it was very fair-minded of him, and for all that I've never liked Braga, Moore's comments do serve as a reminder that Braga was probably in an untenable situation.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
The story of how Year of Hell was meant to be a full season is fairly well-known, but I don't think it has ever appeared in a published novel. I wonder how many other stories from the modern series haven't made their way around, and could appear in a book like the Logs.
That Captain's Logs book is amazing. I was astounded to read that Roddenberry hated some aspects of Wrath of Khan, including Kirk shooting the Ceti eels. Roddenberry felt Kirk should have tried to communicate with them! 
That Captain's Logs book is amazing. I was astounded to read that Roddenberry hated some aspects of Wrath of Khan, including Kirk shooting the Ceti eels. Roddenberry felt Kirk should have tried to communicate with them!
Oh, yeah. I saw Roddenberry do one of his lectures back around 1983, and he made his dislike for ST II in general and that scene in particular very clear. Can't say the audience was with him on that, though.
One thing to keep in mind -- Roddenberry didn't like any of the post-ST:TMP movies. He tolerated them at best, but they weren't his. Paramount had shown him the door after ST:TMP. He wasn't the producer anymore. He wasn't the writer anymore. The studio called him a consultant, to keep him from going rogue on the franchise, but he went rogue on the franchise anyway, talking down the films and spoiling plot points at conventions so he could protect his own turf.That Captain's Logs book is amazing. I was astounded to read that Roddenberry hated some aspects of Wrath of Khan, including Kirk shooting the Ceti eels. Roddenberry felt Kirk should have tried to communicate with them!
Yeah... reading that Moore interview, I'm rethinking a number of things about Braga, realizing that a number of things might not have been his doing so much as him succumbing to pressure from Berman and/or not being happy or inspired to work on Trek anymore. For instance, "All Good Things..." annoys me because it's so heavily about technobabble and anti-time gibberish rather than really being about exploring new potentials of humanity as Q claims. I always figured the character stuff came from Moore and the technobabble stuff came from Braga, but according to Moore, he and Braga both wanted to focus on character but Berman insisted on the technobabble crisis.
Man, it didn't take long for this to become a "Berman SUCCKKKS" thread. Yawns.
^You miss the point. I'm merely describing what Ron Moore said. And there's a difference between acknowledging that a creator made questionable decisions and being some moronic fanboy who attacks that creator on a personal level. I think Rick Berman did a lot of impressive and admirable things for Star Trek from a production standpoint, but I also think that a lot of his creative choices left much to be desired.
