You know, I thought about bringing that up before you did... Can we form a support group?
I just double checked, and Glen and Les Charles returned to write the Cheers finale after several years of not doing teleplays for the show.
Why do people hate Berman & Braga?
- Thread starter Hadrian
- Start date
I just double checked, and Glen and Les Charles returned to write the Cheers finale after several years of not doing teleplays for the show.
I think such a gripe is superfluous, to a degree. Obviously, a series finale is going to be remembered and referenced more than the vast majority of episodes during the show's run. It can , and I suppose many would say, should serve as the capstone of the production, certainly bringing loose ends together (well for the most part historically) and optimally providing a validating and satisfying definition of what the show embodied over time. I can appreciate these threads, but is it really justifiable to severely downgrade the show's worth if the finale diverges from hoped for expectations, is perhaps poorly executed, illogical, or even a total piece of crap? I wouldn't go so far as saying it's just one episode, but is it really so hard to decouple such a disappointment, relative or absolute, from the content of the program's true body and structure of work?
Even if a certain resolution is not presented, or obliquely so, causing significant degrees of general consternation (Sopranos), should an extended run of dedicated work, be so strongly tagged by that choice of a denouement? I really don't think that it should. I would much rather think of the quality, one would hope consistent, that was experienced and processed, and for me at least, represents the legacy and memory of the presentation. Longevity and reputation likely play roles in this perception, as well. I suppose that for a show that had a number of years of very good to excellent production values, acting, plotting, etc.it would be markedly more disheartening for it to wrap on a mediocre or worse finale, especially if it didn't particularly make an attempt to reconcile or even unquestionably recognize and honor essential aspects of the show's history. For a program with a shorter lifespan and more chequered history, that might not be as meaningful. In the case of Enterprise, we are talking about a limited period during which more distinctive and noteworthy elements of production came to the fore, and especially because that positive arc came at the end, not the beginning, I understand bitterness at the determination of how the closer was chosen to be constituted. But for me, it doesn't particularly detract from my view of a program that offered increasingly interesting and well executed stories over the last half of its run, and only was prematurely concluded because of reasons containing not even the slightest reflection or echo of how that capper came to be conceived.
I think Braga probably started out with a pretty good reputation on TNG, with credits including "Cause and Effect," "Birthright, Part I," "Frame of Mind," "Timescape," and "Parallels" as a solo writer, along with collaborations such as "Reunion," "Power Play," and "All Good Things...". It may have been with "Genesis" that people began to associate his name with silly plot ideas, an association later reinforced by "Threshold" on VGR. In late TNG and early VGR, I was starting to get the sense of Braga as someone who liked to tackle ambitiously weird high-concept ideas that sometimes turned out quite interestingly but sometimes were a bit disastrous. Maybe it's unfair that the failures counted more in people's minds than the successes -- since at least he was willing to take big risks. But around the time of "Flashback" and "Macrocosm," I was starting to feel that Braga was better at the high-concept weirdness and technobabble problem-solving than he was with characterization or emotional substance. Although he also wrote some pretty impressive dramatic episodes in partnership with Joe Menosky, including "Remember," "Distant Origin," "Living Witness," and "Latent Image." I ultimately came to the conclusion that he was just inconsistent, that he wasn't quite as solid a writer as the likes of Michael Piller or Ron Moore, and worked best as a collaborator with a more character-oriented writer like Moore or Menosky. Which didn't make him terrible, just more average than the top-notch talent that surrounded him. I didn't think he was a very good showrunner compared to his predecessors, but that didn't mean he couldn't still be a good writer. And it was just his first showrunning experience. He's done a lot of versatile things since then, so I'd say he's grown considerably.
As for Berman, I'm not sure how or when negative opinions began to form about him. After all, he was a constant presence behind TNG-era Trek's successes and failures alike. But I guess that meant that he took the heat as opinions of the franchise in general tended to skew toward the negative in the time of VGR, ENT, and Nemesis.
As for Berman, I'm not sure how or when negative opinions began to form about him. After all, he was a constant presence behind TNG-era Trek's successes and failures alike. But I guess that meant that he took the heat as opinions of the franchise in general tended to skew toward the negative in the time of VGR, ENT, and Nemesis.
Last edited:
I think that they'd both been working pretty constantly on Star Trek since TNG, so it was all one big continuous whole to them, and they were looking at the end of that journey, so they wanted to look back on it and pay tribute to the whole. And that got in the way of recognizing that the idea they came up with didn't serve the specific series they were doing. And I think the fact that the show was cancelled earlier than they'd intended meant that they had to rush the finale and make some decisions in haste that didn't turn out well, like Trip's tacked-on and poorly justified death.
It's just the nature of series TV that you have to try things out on the fly and hope they work. Sometimes they work brilliantly, often they're just kind of okay, and sometimes they fail. It was ill fortune that the big failure in season 4 happened to be the finale of the whole thing.
Finales are hard to get right in any case. I'm not that fond of any of the planned series finales, really. "All Good Things..." is supposed to be Q teaching Picard some deep lesson about existence, but it's just a bunch of nonsensical time hijinks and technobabble and the grand puzzle is ridiculously easy to solve. "What You Leave Behind" is an okay ending to the Dominion War, but they should've ended the war much sooner and devoted some time to the aftermath and recovery; and the whole climax of the Winn-Dukat-Sisko thing is dreadfully clumsy and ridiculous. And "Endgame" is just weak. It flirts with going somewhere meaningful when Harry and the crew realize that the journey is more important than the destination, but then tosses that moral -- and its own plot logic -- out the window when Janeway decides there's a way to defeat the Borg and get home at the same time, even though the situation had been set up to make those mutually incompatible goals. And it just ends too abruptly with no real resolution.
I would agree that "These Are the Voyages" is the worst of the four, but none of the intentional series finales are all that good, frankly. For that matter, even the unintentional finales -- "Turnabout Intruder" and "The Counter-Clock Incident" -- were among the worst their respective series had to offer. Star Trek just doesn't have much luck with endings.
I don't hate them, and I don't think that they ruined anything.
I didn't know,but I'm only a Trek newbie (having only watched 4 seasons of TNG with some episodes skipped and several episodes of DS9) so I beg for your forgiveness
I tend to agree, though Internet rancor tends to be very hyperbolic. This is one thing that grates at me is the knee jerk reactions to anything, especially films that are not as bad as the hyperbole paints them to be. And, I'm sorry, the excuse of "it's the Internet" is starting to wear quite thin.
That being said, there are episodes of Trek that I don't watch, mostly because I don't find them entertaining. But, I won't begrudge anyone for not liking them. But, "hate" is an emotional investment I can't make.
Very good point.
Of course they didn't ruin Star Trek.
There was a definite arc from 1987 forward- where people were really excited and supportive of new Trek on TV (everyone wanted TNG to succeed and watched it loyally),...
... to being spoiled by all the incarnations of Trek with DS9, VOY, ENT and turning on those creations and being overly critical of them in ways they never were in the early years of TNG. The fans got spoiled and overly critical.
For example: "Voyager" is a damn fine show- well acted, produced, written-; that is a quality sci-fi series.
Period.
But you read all the criticisms out in the www. world, or ajenda review sites like "Jammers Reviews"- and you would think "Voyager" was 1000x worse than the worst of "The Starlost", or "Small Wonder". Or people online try their best to create a consensus that DS9 puts the other shows to shame by slamming the other Treks. Or the comments of Ron Moore because his ego couldnt handle the dynamics of Voyager coming off DS9.YOU KNOW WHAT? ALL TREK IS PRETTY DARN GOOD.
Berman & Braga are responsible for quality series and stories and left a legacy that holds up. Just look at what JJ Abrham did to Trek, or better yet look at the Beastie Boys motorbike trailer for "Beyond". In other hands, see how bad it could have gone off the rails??
Berman & Braga did a great job respecting Trek, protecting it, and creating an unequaled legacy. Not everything they did was awesome, but not everything you or I do on a daily basis is awesome either.
Berman & Braga are on the same level as Gene Coon as far as making Trek what it is and I thank them.
There was a definite arc from 1987 forward- where people were really excited and supportive of new Trek on TV (everyone wanted TNG to succeed and watched it loyally),...
... to being spoiled by all the incarnations of Trek with DS9, VOY, ENT and turning on those creations and being overly critical of them in ways they never were in the early years of TNG. The fans got spoiled and overly critical.
For example: "Voyager" is a damn fine show- well acted, produced, written-; that is a quality sci-fi series.
Period.
But you read all the criticisms out in the www. world, or ajenda review sites like "Jammers Reviews"- and you would think "Voyager" was 1000x worse than the worst of "The Starlost", or "Small Wonder". Or people online try their best to create a consensus that DS9 puts the other shows to shame by slamming the other Treks. Or the comments of Ron Moore because his ego couldnt handle the dynamics of Voyager coming off DS9.YOU KNOW WHAT? ALL TREK IS PRETTY DARN GOOD.
Berman & Braga are responsible for quality series and stories and left a legacy that holds up. Just look at what JJ Abrham did to Trek, or better yet look at the Beastie Boys motorbike trailer for "Beyond". In other hands, see how bad it could have gone off the rails??
Berman & Braga did a great job respecting Trek, protecting it, and creating an unequaled legacy. Not everything they did was awesome, but not everything you or I do on a daily basis is awesome either.
Berman & Braga are on the same level as Gene Coon as far as making Trek what it is and I thank them.
The teaser trailer is not the movie. Trailers are made by marketing firms, not by the filmmakers, and every movie these days has a series of multiple trailers that each present the film differently in hopes of attracting a different segment of the audience. The initial teaser trailer, which is all we so far have for Beyond, is usually the one that gives the poorest impression of what the movie as a whole will be like, since after all it's just a very brief glimpse and reveals very little of the actual plot.
So "better yet?" No. That's a really terrible example. No matter what movie you were talking about, any assessment based solely on the teaser trailer would be a terrible example.
^^Indeed, both Simon Pegg and Justin Lin have expressed their disapproval of the trailer and how it completely misrepresents the movie.
While I agree broadly speaking that Voyager is a better show than many give it credit for, some of the criticisms levelled against it over the years are pretty legitimate. Without pointing fingers or placing blame, the show, as entertaining as it was, definitely had some squandered potential.
I think it's fair to say that Voyager and Enterprise were good compared to a lot of other TV, but fell short compared to TNG, DS9, and TOS at its best.
For the most part, I agree. Although Enterprise really did get dire during its second season. The first season wasn't all that great either, but first seasons rarely are and it did seem to be improving towards the end. But, that second season really was one of the weaker seasons of Trek overall.
While there's a lot of squandered potential with ENT, I agree that Jammer's reviews really aren't that good. Many of them say "there was no substance" but I never get how he came to that conclusion. And he gave TATV a better rating than Bound and Precious Cargo? Also, he said there was no evidence Paxton's goons knew of Trip and T'Pol's relationship, which clearly shows he didn't pay attention.
Last edited:
I agree with this overall sentiment. I know that TV production is a long and arduous process and the ability to place the blame for a show's failure on one specific person is nice, I don't think Berman and Braga deserve the brunt of the punishment.
As for VOY, I personally don't care for it and don't find it as entertaining as other SF shows that I was watching at the time. But, again, I don't hold that against Berman or Braga.
It definitely picked up in the last 3rd.
Voyager was just a regurgitated TNG. It had a great cast but was let down by the writing pretty much every single week.
[QUOTE="T'Arwen, post: 11514876, member: 68605] And he gave TATV a better rating than Bound and Precious Cargo? [/QUOTE]
In all honesty, I'd probably give TATV a better rating than Precious Cargo. Precious Cargo was horrible. I've literally only watched that episode twice, when it aired and when I got the DVD set. TATV I've watched five times.
In all honesty, I'd probably give TATV a better rating than Precious Cargo. Precious Cargo was horrible. I've literally only watched that episode twice, when it aired and when I got the DVD set. TATV I've watched five times.
Because all Trek threads must inevitably turn into passive aggressive Abrams bashing.
