Ron Moore Visits Star Trek Set – Compares Abrams’ Team To Bennett & Meyer March 17, 2008
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
As both the co-creator of the new Battlestar Galactica and a former Star Trek writer/producer, Ron Moore is an expert on Trek and reviving sci-fi franchises. In a new interview with Maureen Ryan of the Chicago Tribune, Moore revealed that he “wrangled a set visit” for the new Star Trek movie. He also drew a parallel between the JJ Abrams team and 80s Trek vets Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer.
Moore on his visit:
I saw the sets and thought the production design was just great. I just really liked the visual of it. And the vibe on the set was incredibly positive and very up. People were feeling good and confident and happy. It was really great for me. It was great to be back at Paramount and to walk into a stage where there was a Federation starship.
Moore on if Paramount did the right thing by “going outside the “Trek” family” (and hiring Abrams):
Absolutely. I think that was a very smart decision. God love all of us that did all the series and the movies during those years, but that’s a long time. There were a lot of tired people. A lot of tired blood. And it’s time to bring in fresh eyes to it all.
“I think it’s akin to when they brought in Harve Bennett to [write the second ‘Star Trek’ movie,] ‘The Wrath of Khan.’ [Creator] Gene [Roddenberry] had lived and breathed ‘Trek’ for a long time. He did [‘Star Trek:] The Motion Picture,’ and ‘The Motion Picture’ is what it is – I certainly went to see it and loved it at the moment, but it was bloated and [had] overruns and there a sense of it not really finding its feet yet.
“Then they brought in [writer] Harve Bennett, who had no connection to the show, and [director Nicholas] Meyer, who had never seen the show, and they reinvented it. They started over. They went at the costumes differently, the storytelling, the vibe of it, the style of story that they were going to do. They rescued the whole franchise. ‘Wrath of Khan’ makes all the subsequent ‘Star Trek’ projects possible.
“And I think that’s where they are with the franchise now. They’ve brought in someone new, someone with no connection to the what’s come before, who cares about it and says, ‘Wipe the slate, let’s make this version.’”
For more Moore, including news on BSG season 4, Caprica, and the fate the Joss Whedon BSG episode checkout Chicago Tribune Blog. Maureen has more on BSG: Season 4 Pics & Season 4 Spoilers.
Loading ...
Comments»
First! Hopefully Ron is correct.
Ron Moore’s vote of confidance? Wow. This project is looking better and better.
Good to hear that Moore has given his stamp, his opinion is informed and developed as such, yet again my hopes for this movie are skyrocketing
There are a just few people who’s opinion matters for me. And both Moore and Nimoy are on that short list. And if they tell me it will be great – it has to be great.
“Absolutely. I think that was a very smart decision. God love all of us that did all the series and the movies during those years, but that’s a long time. There were a lot of tired people. A lot of tired blood. And it’s time to bring in fresh eyes to it all. ”
What a classy statement by Moore. I am completely in agreement with him.
And I will once again say Battlestar Gallactica is the best show on TV. Thanks for that one, Ron Moore. Here’s to Caprica getting the green light from a decent network that shares the same vision as you.
The big difference is TWOK had the original cast & preserved the canon while pushing the Trek timeline forward. This is a whole lot riskier & will sink the franchise for good if it fails.
But the real question is–how many of the cast had huge wavy 80s hair blowing in the wind?
Is it just me or does Ron look like former wrestler Kevin Nash — http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Wrestling/2004/01/09/nash_wcw.jpg
I wonder if Moore would ever be interested in heading a Star Trek series? It says he has some projects ready, but without Battlestar Galactica he would have some open room.
Moogie, the franchise is already sunk. This movie is it’s hope for revival.
Is the glass half empty, or all the way empty for you? Key members of the original cast are dead. Paramount (who owns the rights) have decided this is the way to go. The alternative was to bury it. This is what it is. It doesn’t mean you will like it, but you do have the choice of giving it a chance or dismissing it out of hand without seeing it.
#8 Whoa… he DOES look like him!
Got to give Ron Moore props for this endorsement, this is another big vote of confidence for the Abrams project. It is somewhat difficult to tell if Gene Roddenberry would have signed off on the Abrams Project, because I seem to recall that he took some issue with the Storyline for Wrath of Khan. I think that Roddenberry would have taken a hard look at it but at the very least kept an open mind about the Abrams project.
Moogie, I think JJ will Respect Cannon and also add his own spin to trek…I don’t think that he will violate cannon out right…and you have to give the benfit of the doubt unitl you have seen the movie, None of us have done that yet, so keep an open mind.
Big praise here for the guy that wrote the script that killed Kirk off.
Good thing he redeemed himself with BSG.
The adventure continues…
”They started over. They went at the costumes differently, the storytelling, the vibe of it, the style of story that they were going to do. They rescued the whole franchise. ‘Wrath of Khan’ makes all the subsequent ‘Star Trek’ projects possible.”
lets hope abrams and the team can do this , come on lads you know you can !
Let’s just hope JJ doesn’t take TOS and throw everthing out, except the name of the ship and the name of the characters and start completely over with a total new concept, but still call it Trek. Kinda like Ron Moore did to BSG.
After all those years on Trek and three seasons of Galactica, it’s surprising to me that his first time directing is right now.
He’s absolutely right about Wrath of Khan. Bennett and Meyer made huge changes to the look and feel of Star Trek to make it successful again. Moore made even more drastic changes to Galactica and created a big winner. JJ and friends will do the same. And I think it will be great. Change is good…
That redeeming part is a subject of discussion. I tell you, as a Star Trek fan, that BSG show scares the hell out of me.
But that’s just my opinion.
Well, a simple visit to the sets doesn’t exactly qualify anyone to give the project a “stamp of approval.” Having said that, I’m glad he liked what he saw and a good possitive “vibe” on the set certainly can’t hurt the end result.
Oh my, just wait for the ‘everything must stay exactly the same’ campaign to get hold of his ‘wipe the slate’ quote.
Standby for heated discussion…
there is one thing I think most of can agree on, its that the Star Trek movie Franchise is at a crossroads, it either has to reinvent itself or it ceases to relevant. Now in addtion to the the Abrams Project i would like to see a new series, for example why not base it off some of the books, what about a mckenzie Calhoun series or one dealing with the Klingon ship Gorkon , now that last one would be different, What about a Trek series from that takes place in the Romulan empire, Hey why not a trek series set in the Mirror verse, there are all kinds of other ways that Trek could be revived. i was wondering what any of you think on these ideas?
Ron Moore did a lot of good work for Trek over the years. Although I love both franchises I view BSG as the anti-Trek.
One things for certain, after four seasons of BSG I’ll be ready for a (hopefully) uplifting Trek movie. That poor ragtag fleet can’t catch a break!
I send this message from heaven.
I wish Ron Moore had spent as much energy as he puts into Galactica, into any one of the series that sprang forth from my creative loins.
Love,
G.R.G.
I just wish SOMEONE who visits these sets would give a bit more information. I just want my mind put to rest; someone PLEASE tell me the bridge STILL looks like a Star Trek bridge (center seat, characters in a circle around it). I don’t need a bridge that looks exactly like TOS bridge, but every incarnation of a Star Trek bridge has the same “feel” to it. I just need an assurance that the Enterprise bridge is going to resemble a Star Fleet bridge, not a Star Destroyer bridge. Not much to ask, right?
“Hey why not a trek series set in the Mirror verse, there are all kinds of other ways that Trek could be revived. i was wondering what any of you think on these ideas?”
Garovorkin — I love the Mirror Universe and think that would be a lot of fun. It’s certainly rich enough thanks to all the visits from all the various trek incarnations to stand alone.
And I swear…it’s not jsut cause Mirror Spock set a certain 14-year-old’s heart aflutter way back when.
Ron Moore and his team have made BSG the best show on TV, period. So his opinion counts with me….
Now…. I wonder when we’ll ever get to see the new E? What about cast photos, etc.?
Ron Moore MUST be the 12th Cylon. He has a plan.
I hope JJ is part Cylon. We’ll know in 416 days.
You know how we know Superman is a great franchise? Because the Man of Steel isn’t battling Hitler anymore. Superman came into its own during WWII. But, it couldn’t just stay there. Trek came into its own in the 1960’s. In the Disco 70’s, it looked odd. In the gung-ho Reaganite 80’s, it found a new life, without abandoning its heart. Now it’s the something-or-other oughts. What will Trek be? It will be Trek with a contemporary vibe. I trust that.
I also believe we’ll be having this conversation again in 30 years — and couldn’t be happier about that.
#26 while i agree that Battlestar is a very good show, best on tv? that is open to debate, but his opinion does carry weight with regard to Trek, His body of work is quite impressive and speaks for itself. What would I like to see Ronald More do after Galactica? I would love to have him and JMS Strazininski work together on a scifi project, that to me would be the ultimate.
Moogy:
What would you have them do? More NeuTrek? It’s obvious that the powers that be has realized that the future of Trek is its past. And the original actors are too old or have passed on so they are not going to be able to do a film series.
So if you do Kirk and Spock, and you can’t totally rely on Shatner and Nimoy. What else can you do?
Truthfully, after what Moore has done to Galactica, an endorsement from him doesn’t carry as much weight as it would have when he was freshly coming off of DS9…or even when he had the guts to walk away from the Pern series when TPTB tried to turn it into something no longer true to the original material.
I respect Moore for much of what he’s done in his career, but I’m a lot more reassured by comments like the one from Simon Pegg that this is a faithful and loving installment in an ongoing mythos.
In fairness to Moore, though, it should be noted that Bennett and Meyer did an excellent job of reinventing without trashing what had come before. Perhaps Moore means that Abrams and the team are doing likewise?
canon schmanon.
I’m sure that’s been said here before.
seriously, it’s not like they’re going back in time and rewriting the 12 million other Star Trek things written before.
“young minds, fresh ideas. be tolerant” God I’m a geek.
#30–”Truthfully, after what Moore has done to Galactica, an endorsement from him doesn’t carry as much weight as it would have when he was freshly coming off of DS9…”
OK, I admit to being a huge BSG fan, both old and new. All Moore did was make BSG even better than the original, which was cheesy and campy-good, but had degenerated by Galactica 1980 into a truly horrible mess. BSG now easily stands shoulder to shoulder with shows like LOST, Six Feet Under, and the Sopranos. Richard Hatch was opposed to BSG at first, but even he was so won over by it that he accepted a role on the show.
Hopefully you can clarify your statement.
I trust Moore, and hope he will one day be involved in Trek again.
#6: “This is a whole lot riskier & will sink the franchise for good if it fails.”
Well then let it.
Better to try something different and fail than to grind on with the same-old/same-old that everyone but a dwindling few has long since had their fill of.
I loved DS9. It wasn’t perfect, but it really captured me a lot of the time. In fact, I believe it has aged better than TNG.
I was at first really positive about BSG, then it quickly lost me. I still watch it most of the time, but I don’t really care about it. Still, I respect his opinion and am glad to hear his praise. I hope he’s right.
I’m quite happy to have new actors recreate these characters, and for a new director to redesign the look. Trek has been so pallid since DS9 went off the air, and the movies were only hit and miss at best. Half of them are still watchable.
I think having Nimoy in the movie is a great hand-off. I look forward to seeing how he plays Spock this time around. With respect to Shatner, Leonard is an excellent actor and has earned the right not to be second banana to Kirk for once.
It would be nice if Nick meyer and Harve Bennet were invited to the set. I’m love 2 c pix of them and JJ. make it so!!!
Hey i want a new trek movie and so does everyone else, but i really would love to see some additional clips from abrams and co, the suspense is killing me! I need to see what things are going to look like. It like Christmans is now 14 months away and that one gift i m dying to unwrap. A peek under the wrappings would be nice.
37. Hey i want a new trek movie and so does everyone else.
I want a new Trek movie too. Not this crap Abrams is making.
38. MattJC – March 17, 2008
“I want a new Trek movie too. Not this crap Abrams is making.”
And what crap is that? You’ve not seen one frame of film, read one page of the script or seen anything more than the rest of this and you call it crap.
Such an informed opinion.
I wonder what TPTB came up with for Old Spock’s characterization.
What’s he like in the 24th century after so many years on Romulus? Is he less emotional or more so? Did he find a nice Romulan girl to settle down with or, at the very least, a reliable Ponn Farr buddy? Still got that laser-beam stare?
Most importantly (and Denise might well agree): Will we see Old Spock finally smile w/o being under the influence of whatever?
These are not rhetorical questions, folks. All thoughts are welcome.
Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|
The point about Wrath Of Khan is as eloquent an argument for the new movie as I’ve heard. Yes, re-casting the iconic roles is the most daring break yet, but safety doesn’t get you a good show. It gets you Voyager.
Moore gets credit for DS9’s engaging storyline and moral ambiguity. It was also the ONLY Trek series where the ensemble’s characters were all fully realized. You could put any two on screen and the scene would seem to write itself.
If anyone in the current Sci-Fi world. Having that vote of confidence from Ron Moore will hopefully bring around some of the lingering pessimists in the crowd.
37.
Most fans seen the same stuff I have and think this movie is going to be great.. I have different opinions then what most fans think.
Kirk = Shatner
Spock = Nimoy
Pine, Quinto and the rest are a bunch of posers.
When I first heard about this movie, I had hoped for a radical departure from previous TREK.
Why is it so important to respect canon?
I keep hearing this and it is one of the many things that makes this movie uninteresting to me–and why the TREK fan base has grown so old: TPTB needed to ignore them. New blood means moving away from what has gone before and breaking away from the old. If new blood is brought in, but the product still looks and feels like old TREK, what’s the point in stating new blood has been brought in and it will make a difference? Abrams and company are not new blood in my opinion because they are too geekish and fan based to produce a really unique take on TREK–unlike Bennet and Meyer who did TWOK, and knew very little if nothing about TREK, so Moore’s comments and comparison make very little sense.
It’s obvious that Paramount needed to look elsewhere to produce another TREK movie, but a possible mistake to look for fan boys to do it.
After seeing the teaser–and seeing the same old looking ship; after getting a slight glimpse of the uniforms (too similar to the 60s TV series from what I’m hearing) and reading about James Cawleys endorsement thereof; I’m not seeing anything new at all: just the same ole TREK with a 150 million dollar budget.
I still think it would have been better to do a small budgeted film with a young, hot, stylistic director, who has proven himself as a director, rather than a big budget film with a one time director who ended a franchise.
42.
Not me.
Moore had his hand in the death of Kirk, and most fans want to put the blame squarely on Berman and Braga.
If you want to criticize those who killed Kirk, then the golden boy Moore should have his share of criticism since he co-written the script.
I like Moore’s comments on this. I am glad he took the time and looked around. I trust his judgment on Trek and add this as another good and Positive reason to look forward to this new movie and not loathe it like some.
He had no vested interest in this that I am aware of other than as a fan of the series.
DS9 is a favorite because they dared step away from the Trek Norm and show the universe with shades of gray, not purely black and white.
43. MattJC – March 17, 2008
“Most fans seen the same stuff I have and think this movie is going to be great.. I have different opinions then what most fans think.
Kirk = Shatner
Spock = Nimoy
Pine, Quinto and the rest are a bunch of posers.”
Then life is simple for you… don’t go to the movie, don’t spend the bucks and see nothing new. Life’s a lot less risky when you don’t accept change.
Glad to hear he liked the look of the sets and the business decision.
Remember, the last film looked for fresh blood in Baird & Logan & the result was NEM. Bennet & Meyer was lightening in a bottle & that’s tough to recapture.
Lets see some photos & take the speculating from there. These mini-quote crumbs offer us zero insight, we here are the core of ST fandom & should at least be offered a Nimoy as Spock image for our devotion.
As someone once said, “no one ever set out to make a bad movie”
Even though it’s an upbeat set, let’s just hope they got it right……..I am cautiously optimistic!
#50: Amen, amen, amen.
Here’s hopin.’
Ronny Mo© just summed this up perfectly. Whoa.
Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer were to The Great Bird as Sir JJ, The OrcSter, and DaiMon Lindeloffagus are to Braga, Berman… and to some degree, Moore.
And… Good to see you back, Harry Ballz.
Great thread. Great comments. Thanks everyone!
BEST!!
=h=
47.
Then life is simple for you… don’t go to the movie, don’t spend the bucks and see nothing new
I can accept something new.
It’s something recycled and JJ Abrams passing it off as if he only created Star Trek that bothers me.
It probably bugs him that he has to put Roddenberry’s name in the credits somewhere.
hitch
your support “means more to me than you could know”
but, no, no mindmelds……………..at least, not yet…..
53. MattJC – March 17, 2008
“It’s something recycled and JJ Abrams passing it off as if he only created Star Trek that bothers me.”
What?
Sorry, I disagree with that. Where has he stated or implied that?
You are presenting uninformed opinions as fact. If anything, he and the production staff have been very reverential toward the original show and the people involved with it.
.
MattJC -
Where is Abrams acting like he’s the only one who created Star Trek? He has only expressed respect for what has come before. The time for purism is gone. The Trek actors are dying or dead, the franchise has been dead.
Purists are just like Fundamentalists in any religion. They can’t handle any challenge to their stale way of thinking, and lash out at progressives. Shatner played James Kirk, he isn’t actually Kirk. Same goes for the rest of them. They don’t own the characters, and neither do we. It’s sad when we act like we do.
Pheh!
Ron Moore to giving his sign of approval is so reassuring to me. I am a HUGE Ron Moore fan and totally respect his opinion(s).
#7……..Probably not Picard!!! Muhahahahahahahaha
#32 – Sure… I’ll be straight. I’m often conflicted about Moore’s version of BSG. I see nuBSG as an often very well-written show that as often as not annoys the heck out of me. Leaving aside my hatred of reboots of the type that nuBSG is probably the most well-known example these days, I don’t find the characters to be people I either like or respect most of the time, a stark contrast to how I felt about the characters in Original BSG. There have been more than a few eps of this version at the end of which I have been really rooting for the Cylons to get their act together and just finish the job, because if that’s what’s left of Humanity, better that it be gone.
As was said up-thread a bit, nuBSG really is the anti-Star Trek, bereft of the hope and optimism and good nature that informed Trek, and even bereft of both the hopefulness and the interesting sci-fi elements that the original BSG had.
Watching nuBSG, I sometimes wonder what happened to that guy who was willing to walk away from the Pern series rather than let it become something so foreign to the original material, or who took Star Trek and could make it stronger and deeper than it was with all his amazing work on DS9. And I would cheerfully see this whole incarnation of BSG go away for a shot at Richard Hatch’s “Second Coming”, which is the BSG revival I’d always wanted, and still want.
Well…you asked. ;)
24. Bart – March 17, 2008
I just wish SOMEONE who visits these sets would give a bit more information. I just want my mind put to rest; someone PLEASE tell me the bridge STILL looks like a Star Trek bridge (center seat, characters in a circle around it). I don’t need a bridge that looks exactly like TOS bridge, but every incarnation of a Star Trek bridge has the same “feel” to it. I just need an assurance that the Enterprise bridge is going to resemble a Star Fleet bridge, not a Star Destroyer bridge. Not much to ask, right?
A: Okay, we can at least put your mind to rest about the shape of the bridge and its configuration, except…how do you feel about all of them being upside down the whole time?
MattJC… just stop while you’re ahead please… I don’t think you know what you’re saying.
[big sigh, logs off...]
kg
#44- “Why is it so important to respect canon?”
IMHO, and speaking for no one else… Because one of the things that has made Star Trek unique and special is that for 4 decades and hundreds of stories, it has built a giant, rich, fascinating universe. For me, it’s that universe that defines Star Trek, far more than any individual show or set of characters. And to throw that away would be, again IMHO, criminal.
I don’t have a problem with changing up the style of the storytelling. Star Trek has had a rich history of different styles of storytelling, all still working within the same fictional world. I don’t have a problem with some visual evolutions to recognize the passage of time and the sensibilities of the audience. I don’t even have a problem with recasting, because I’ve seen it demonstrated that different people can capture the spirit of those characters effectively.
I *do* have a problem with jettisoning the fictional world in which it all takes place. A big one. For me, that’s the deal-breaker, especially because it is completely and utterly unnecessary.
#60 Boborci
Up is down and down is up? Are you saying we’re through the Looking Glass?
#59: You may well get your wish re the Cylons. I can’t shake this nagging suspicion that the end of the series amounts to “and the survivors got to Earth in what we call ancient times and what we call the Human race is really [largely or entirely] descended from Cylons! Huzzah!”
I hope I’m wrong, mind you.
Would have loved the movie series more if they’d stuck to the original uniforms and colors, possibly tailored with more breathing room.
#65 – Really, aside from my desire to have this admitted as just a mis-step and the original BSG continuity reasserted (which ain’t gonna happen, I know ;) ), my wish is that these characters recapture the nobility and heroism that defined them in the original BSG. I’m just not sure if that’s the vision that Messrs. Moore and Eick have, or even if it’s possible to get there from where we are now. [shrug]
#60 Boborci
You are such a tease! LOL.
I find it hard to take anyone with hair like that serious…
That guy needs a haircut.
Ron Moore is awesome. BSG will likely still be better even if there is a new series.
RDM is a living god. Having such a brilliant contributor to Star Trek and such a TOS fan must have been a thrill for Abrams and co. Not to mention maybe a little scary?
It’s quite telling that even Moore’s endorsement of XI makes you feel comfortable…
I appreciate Moore’s work in BSG, but I feel that Trek is not the ideal ground for the mood he wants to get.
Do you think they’ll get to show Ol’ Capt Pikey in his Dalek-like bathchair and those blinking lights??……….Just revisited “The Menagarie” on Sunday night and the story is as great as ever..
Peace!!
60 Thanks Bob, that’s definately reassuring, the grav plates on the ceiling – nice idea!
RDM was the guy who thought killing Kirk was a good idea in the first place. He is also the person that decided to make Starbuck a girl and who has never done anything of real significance that didn’t involve taking someone else’s idea and working on it 20-30 years later. I think he is one of the most overrated people in sci-fi who merely was the least offensive of the three (Berman & Braga being the other two). The more power Moore had, the faster Star Trek declined. His opinion means very little. He’s probably just happy that Abrams didn’t do the right thing and fix his mistakes.
#41 Rainbucket- So very true. Also because the actors on DS9 really cared about their characters- because they were so well-written.
BSG is not the best show on TV, it is the best scifi show on TV since Moore’s DS9 and JMS’ Babylon 5 ended. They both were a little bit better than BSG, I think. And I think Lost is also a little bit better. But then BSG comes next as the dark oposite of Star Trek.
Moore made a great job in TNG and especially DS9!
I wished he had overtaken Voyager after DS9 ended, then it would have gotten a great final and not such a….
Moore maybe can’t say anything about the story with just a small visit. But he can say something about the style. And when he says he likes it, I really feel a lot better.
There is no up or down in space!
You rock, Boborci!
To Harry B. :
-What is your description for ‘ a trekkite’…?
deleted
I’ll take Moore’s comparisons with a shuttlebay’s load of salt.
I hope Ron Moore will lurk here and throw in an opinion from time to time. After all his time with Trek, BSG, and listening to his podcasts I would welcome his point of view on any Trek news that unfolds.
Man… tough crowd!
I, for one, have enjoyed many of Mr. Moore’s contributions to the world of Trek. He’s done some great story-telling and, yeah… some less than great story-telling… but such are the exigencies of episodic television.
Was i happy that Berman, Braga & Moore et al. killed Kirk? Hell, no!!! But whaddya’ gonna do? Ya’ can’t go back in time and change things.
Hmmm… wait a minute… I seem to remember they did that once or twice… somethin’ about slingshotting ’round the sun… I wonder if JJ knows anything about this?
Ron Moore knows Trek backwards and while he did own up to killing Kirk *badly* his opinion as a creative genius means a lot to me. I don’t see how BSG is the anti-Trek though?
If you saw Razor, it was new-meets-old BSG in a plausible and well executed way, I think that show is a perfect example of how it can be done and make what is old feel like new again.
Seriously, by the time you’ve seen New Trek Lite Babies: The Movie three or four times, you’ll be convinced that they *always* hung upside down from perches on the bridge…
Anybody remember when Ron Moore was new to Hollywood? He’s changed over the years!
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue234/interview.html
To the BSG & reboot haters – Not the best show?? When did Lost, Bab-5 or any Trek win a Peabody award? None. but Moore and Co.did…as well as a Hugo, and various Emmy Noms.
But awards are only one thing.
The re-boot BSG is far more closer to TOS Trek in relations to how it’s stories relate to the present world.
(But I will agree it is the anti-trek when it comes to “tech-speak”..but i digress..) TOS Trek touched on civil / equal rights and a hope for peace during the turbulent 60’s and BSG today has touched on similar comparisons of current events.
It’s a thought provoking show, and I hope that JJ is able to have this new film do the same.
Given how Ron Moore manage to screw BSG I don’t find his words very reassuaring
Ron Moore! worthy praise indeed!
I agree with #88! BSG is the best sci fi show of the past 20 years!
He’d better be right. Because blood’s gonna fly if they screw it up.
#38 Matt aren’t you being a little premature on this one? A film you haven’t yet seen and your calling it crap? See the film first then decide.
Moore has never shown any sign of regretting killing Kirk–only that Generations didn’t work. Thirteen plus years of scorn may actually help get him the clue that the idea was really dumb. But more important, the guy has never done anything significant that wasn’t based on something someone else created decades before. Star Trek, Mission Impossible, and BSG. And BSG can’t touch Farscape when it comes to originality and entertainment. It’s just not as impressive when a writer takes a known success like Trek, Mission Impossible or BSG and does something with it.
Farscape: I watched about six episodes of that at the behest of a mate. Just couldn’t take it seriously, what tosh.
BSG is a wonderfully constructed piece of work with fascinating and complex characters fused with a great, unpredictable plotting. It is entertaining and it has something to say about the world in which we live. Like Star Trek before it, that makes it art.
#93— “Moore has never shown any sign of regretting killing Kirk–only that Generations didn’t work.”
STV didn’t work either, yet you don’t crucify Shatner for it.
Moore did a good job with DS9. It is the only TNG-era spinoff I can stomach watching in reruns. So he made a bad movie. Even Martin Scorsese made “New York, New York”.
“the guy has never done anything significant that wasn’t based on something someone else created decades before”.
Maybe, but JJ Abrams has. This film is the work of Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, and JJ Abrams. This article only points out that Moore liked what he saw after visiting the set. We got the same opinion from James Cawley, and anyone else who has been there for one reason or another.
Bennet and Meyer were new to Trek when they did TWOK, and they made the greatest of all ST films, and the movie that Abrams aspires to reach the standards of. If Abrams and co. make a movie half as good as that, it will be better than anything we have seen out of Trek in twenty-two years.
Still waiting for [a larger portion of the] people to notice that he only commented on the pleasure of the set-visit and a business decision. He made no endorsement of the film itself, explicitly didn’t ask about the plot or the script, and basically had nothing to say about the movie.
So whether you think he’s the Second Coming of Sci-Fi or something icky to scrape off your shoe, it doesn’t matter because he didn’t actually comment on the film, one way or the other. He didn’t give it a thumbs up, a thumbs down, or a thumb to his nose. He said approximately diddly, divided by squat.
Yeah I asked his wife once (on a forum) what he though of Abrams taking over ad she said that he still adored Star Trek like nothing else, as a fan and as a professional, and that he would deliberately avoid any and all spoilers or “insider info”. She said he thought Abrams was really talented and a good choice but like all fans, he was still cautious.
She also said that having met Abrams several times, he was a “class act”.
#96 He thought bringing in Abrams was good Idea, so that is a an endorsement of sort, and he does like the production designs, you could make a case that this is an endorsement albiet indirectly. One could also argue that out his way not to say the wrong things either.
one further point Everyone is ready to anoint Galactica as the best series of all time, and while it is a very good series, its simply not , The best scif series would have be Babylon 5, then Ds9, the nThe New Galactica icould put that about third maybe 4th on the list. Ron Moore is a great Writer Producer no question Ds9 is the best of all the Trek series ever written and its one of the top scif shows of all time but from a writing and conceptual standpoint b5 tops Galactica.
Garovorkin, IMHO TOS is the best SciFi series of ALL time & Doctor Who (Hartnell-Tom Baker & Eccleston-Tennant) is the best SciFi series IN any time!
#99—”no question Ds9 is the best of all the Trek series ever written…”
I can’t agree with that. Not every TOS episode was fantastic, but neither was every episode of DS9. I would say that it was the best of the TNG-era spinoffs, but has to remain below TOS in the “best of all time” category. There are at least 20 episodes of TOS which I would have to rank above the best 20 that DS9 had to offer. Having said that, I like the show very much, but to say that there is “no question” is a bit much…
#98 sez: “He thought bringing in Abrams was good Idea [...]”
That does seem to be the popular inference, yeah. :)
Listen everyone,
If Kirk didn’t die in Generations, he would be in the new movie. I bet my entire Star Trek collection on it.
For that, it’s unfortunate. But even William Shatner had input into the character’s death. He obviously regretted it, what based on all the novels after that where Kirk was brought back from the dead.
Kirk’s death = fan hate.
Star Trek XI = fan hate if Spock is killed.
Again, I bet my entire Star Trek collection on it.
# 100 Moogie while those were terrific shows there no way that that any of them are in the same class as b5. This was the first scif show with a bona fide continuing story arc, it was like reading a great scif novel, the story unfolded over a five year time frame. You had charter development that Tos and the Next gen never even came close to, even Ds9 which approached B5 never quite matched it. you had epic space battles and political intrigue where the good guys didn’t always come out on top, main characters could be killed of, thats something trek and those other series tended to avoid, and please don’t bring up Tasha Yar or Dax those don’t count. Also tsome actor from trek did some work on the sho, Notably Walter Koenig, Magel Barrent Roddenberry, Mark Ansara. and others.
#102 and your point is?
#105: in an earlier post :)
A B5 actor was on the 3rd greatest SciFi show of all time: Billy Mumy in Lost in Space. Season One, a handful of Season 2 & the 1st half of Season 3 rocked! Will, Dr Smith & the Robot were right up there with Kirk, Spock & McCoy.
I like DS9 more than TNG/VOY & ENT but I tend to view it as a stand alone show & not as a spin-off. Plus Terry Farrell was mouth watering yummy, especially when she smooched her ‘widow’. I did have issues with the Quark based episodes & the way too many holodeck nightclub stories towards the end. It’s ironic the best post-ST series is the one Berman disliked & had the least to do with.
Decloaking . . .
Ron D. Moore, Star Trek’s greatest writer. He’s responsible for more of the greatest Trek eps of all time than anyone else. I say that as a huge Gene Roddenberry and Harlen Ellison fan.
# 104 Garovorkin. On Bab 5 ITA. Love it. But, I don’t remember M.B.R.
Also, the red head foxy telepath (can’t remember her name) was a security officer on at least one Next Gen ep.
Ron Moore’s vote of confidence is huge to me!
Recloaking.
#93
Actually, if you read any of the interviews with Moore at the time (1994), you’ll see that writing the scene where Kirk dies was extremely emotional for him (I seem to recall him mentioning a tear in his eye). You have to remember that out of the three people more or less in charge – Berman, Braga, Moore – he was the only one that was a fan of TOS & Trek in general. I think he regrets it far more than you’re allowing him to.
In terms of “never [doing] anything significant that wasn’t based on something someone else created decades before”, that criticism can just as easily be levelled at someone like Nick Meyer (whom I am a fan of, by the way). He earned his fame reworking HG Wells, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle & one Gene Rodenberry (who himself borrowed key ideas from others) . That doesn’t mean he wasn’t a creative force on his own. In fact, I think it’s far more difficult – IMHO – to take someone else’s work and be restricted by its’ core elements while still leaving your own, unmistakeable creative imprint on it. It is something Nick Meyer did quite well, and something I hope JJ can do.
As for BSG, let’s face it – the original was a crap show with good ideas and hamtastic acting. Moore took the good, ditched the bad and there you have the facts of li…er, whoops. I got sidetracked there. The point being, he took a really silly show and made an intense, emotional drama that contains an incredibly diverse cast of characters.
In fact, those characters are what it’s all about. Moore knows how to treat an ensemble (something he proved on DS9), and no one gets left behind. You won’t find any one-dimensional portrayals on BSG. In fact, I commend him for the fact that the ‘villain’ of the piece – Baltar – is so often someone I sympathize with, and that the ‘hero’ – Starbuck – is frequently on my s*&tlist for what she does. These characters are REAL. They do stupid things. What would any of us do under the crushing knowledge that our entire species was wiped out and that every day seemed to bring us closer to the same fate?
Some people hate the show for those same reasons, so to each their own. But honestly, Ron Moore has so completely transformed the concept that I think it’s almost unfair to even compare it to the 70’s version – in fact, such a comparison seems far more unflattering to the original than Ron’s BSG.
#105 sorry john rash comment on my part no offense intended, but you have to admit it is a sort of endorsement but not in the way you define it.
But yeah we may be reading to much into it.
#107 Moogie B5 Third Greatest? iI would say no to that Im sorry lost in space an Irwin Allen production not in the same category as B5 or Trek, but season one of lost in space would qualify as decent science fiction, i did have a fondness for that all of his other shows . B5 was superior to trek in every conceivable measure, but considering that B5 is a newer show it might not be a fair comparison, I will say this, without Trek Babylon 5 might never have happened. The existence of all science fiction shows that have come and gone and all currently on television owe a debt to Trek for paving the way on that, there is no dispute.
#108 Commodore Lurker Mrs Roddenberry Did a guest appearrance on B5 to reduce the acrimony between Trek and B5 fans she played the part of A Centari seer , whom Londo Milari wanted to tell his future. The red headed telepath was named Lyta Alexander and she was played by Patricia Tallman. I don’t remeber her on the Next gen,
#89
Stupidest thing said so far. We are all dumber for reading it.
I expect to be warned, but it had to be said.
Garovorkin: You do know this is a TREK site don’t ya? LOL! That being said, B5 is nowhere near the top of my list. Several of my friends enjoyed it and sing its praises but I trudged through two to three seasons of the turgid mess and gave up on it. I liked certain bits. Like J’kar and Londo. And Linear. But those weren’t enough to carry me. Indeed, that I think is the worst thing that TNG wrought, even outside of Trek. The ensemble cast. Nice idea on paper but if most of the cast do not engage you on any level, well you get a lot of scenes you could care less about. The one Mod Trek show that did not have that problem was DS9. Indeed it had some supporting/recurring characters that were a joy. Especially Garrack.
No, TOS, Dr. Who, LIS, and other shows top them all. However as to not give the impression that I dismiss all newer shows in favor of older ones.
I think Farscape blows all of its competition away. It is simply put one of the greatest Sci Fi shows of all time. Witty, imaginative, colorful, sexy, exciting and has great characters.
And Firefly and Earth 2 had enormous potential. I would have traded more episodes of those for all of B5, Andromeda, Stargate, or most of Mod Trek.
Just my .02.
I Love My Moogie: Why does it not surprise me that you had issues with the Quark episodes with your sense of humor? Kidding, kidding. :)
Also, did you see my post above addressing an earlier post by you? I am genuinely interested in your response.
I need to give Farscape another look I guess. It just did not hook me like ST, BSG, or B5.
Not sure why….
#122 Morg your right, sorry i sometimes go off on these scif tangents, Ron Mooreand His going toTrek set regardless of what we all might read into it, does ring as a vote of confidence, Maybe Paramount felt that his coming here would generated some kind of positive pr for the Abrams Project, its obvious that he has a tremendous respect for what he has done with Lost and Alias and what he could bring to trek. He’s saying positive things even if they are not specifics. Ron Moore did great work on trek and took a Star Wars wanna be Galactica ad made it in to good show, you could use the same, comparison that Abrams is taking an otherwise tired trek franchise and attempting to revive its fortunes.
I think there are things we cannot agree on, B5 fot one. And Earth 2 was in my mind a bad show. and i will leave the unrelated chatter at that, the rest of the way.
“It’s just not as impressive when a writer takes a known success like Trek, Mission Impossible or BSG and does something with it.”
What a pointless attitude. That would make all of Star Trek from TMP on unimpressive.
And I’d hardly call the original BSG a known success. It lasted one season. Galactica 1980 was abominable. A faithful revival with the same language and characters would have appealed to no one outside a few diehard basement dwellers.
wait wait wait… baltar’s the villain?
Great stuff. Here’s to saving the franchise.
115. Garovorkin: Moore’s report is just one more thing that is making me feel more and more excited about this movie. A feeling I haven’t had since the early 90s.
And it’s more than fine to disagree with me about B5. My friends certainly do. LOL. Indeed I haven’t met a single person offhand who agrees with me. Just didn’t scratch my itch. I suppose we could come up with some sociological or psychological study as to why B5 resonated with you and Earth 2 tripped my trigger. But honestly I would say we just liked what each offered better than the other. :)
But in the end, its Star Trek as tops all the way for me. And by that I mean TOS. :)
#119 Morg when I first head about Abrams doing trek I admit in the very beginings i had a lot of Misgivings about the project but as i have come Abrams work I began to ask myself, What could Abrams bring to Star TreK?
The same thing Ron Moore Brought to Trek and Galactica a whole new vision of the franchise. Keep aspects of the past but don’t be wedded to it, I think that willl be the kind of movie we get. Consider the enerey and story telling drive in Lost ,Alias, Mission impossible and Cloverfied and I thi k I begin to get a picture of the type of film that we might be getting . And tell me the the redesigned Enterprise doesn’t impress, Its reimagined, but its brilliant nod to the past so it works nicely. So will the movie, Purists or Cannon people ,but its not just for them its for all of us. By the way Ido agree with you on firefly and Farscape those shows did resonate with me.
But back to the main topic. I have not liked a trek film since first contact, after that the movie franchise died, it needs to be revived and they made the best possible choice to achieve this goal
Re: #107. I Love My Moogie
“Will, Dr Smith & the Robot were right up there with Kirk, Spock & McCoy.”
Moogie, please tell me that you’re joking.
When I was a kid, I loved “Lost in Space”. When, as an adult, I found the re-runs back on TV I was ecstatic. However, after a few minutes of watching it, I couldn’t turn the channel fast enough. Dr. Smith was so IRRITATING!! Couldn’t believe the difference. To this day if I try watching him, it leaves me exasperated. I somewhat agreed with the opinion of the late Guy Williams and Mark Goddard (“Prof. John Robinson” and “Major Don West”) when they expressed disappointment over the shifting focus of the producers. I thought it was abysmal!!
There are few shows that have a character that bothers me so much that I can’t watch it, even though I enjoy the show.
Dr. Smith (Jonathan Harris) on Lost In Space
Ted Baxter (Ted Knight) on The Mary Tyler Moore Show
Jar-Jar Binks (Ahmed Best) in Star Wars: Ep. I – The Phantom Menace
Oscar LeRoy/Leroy (Eric Peterson) in Corner Gas
Can’t think of any others at the moment. Funny, but there aren’t any characters irritating enough in Star Trek to stop me from watching it. Neelix nearly accomplished that feat but they made him a little less grating and he eventually won me over.
So, Moogie, we’ll just have to agree to differ. Enjoy your show. Wish I could but find it too hard to ignore.
kg
Garovorkin, I totally agree with what you are saying. And I am with you on the last decent Trek film being First Contact. I have hoped that more people would come to the realization that this movie isn’t going to be TOS. It has to be something different in order for it to move forward. If it’s well done, then I think ALMOST everyones misgivings about it will be put to rest. Of course, there are always going to be those around here that will play the part of the wet blanket. Nothing would make them happy outside of recreating TOS in it’s original form. But then it would only appeal to a small portion of the population. And besides, we already have the original series. Time for new.
Katie, I very serious about Dr Smith, a great character brilliantly played by Jonathan Harris. Oh dear…oh dear…the pain, the pain!
PS: I love Ted Baxter on MTM : )
For irrating characters on great shows, Janice Rand wins in my book.
#122: “we already have the original series. Time for new”
Well said.
#110 I agree that it’s a very upbeat interview as far as it goes, and the part I find cheering, in particular, is about the positive mood on-set. Whether the film turns out awesome or … less than awesome … I think it always shines through when the crew are having a good time making a movie; I think it always lends an energy to the film.
As for reading into it: May as well, really. Slow news day otherwise (in Trekspace anyway) and we’ve still got more than a year to go …
…did someone mention that lazy, shifty eyed, robot insulting, sell-his-mother-to-get-a-ride back to earth no account Zachary Smith?
Love him! Jonathan Harris was truly one of a kind.
Lost In Space lost me with giant carrots. Sir Lawrence Olivier could have played Dr. Smith and it would not have removed the veggie tray from my mind.
And I think you are quoting me out of context, Moogie.
First of all, the new BSG is such a vast improvement from the orginial, it ain’t even funny. The whole fleet running from genocide portrayed as laid-back swingers just flirting and playing poker across the galaxy with hardly a moment of inner conflict or trauma from the destruction of their whole civilization- what crap.
Ron Moore gives us an honest vision- with all the complicated emotional and social mess dysfunction and the fatigue of constant fear and regret seeping from every frame they have filmed. Pure genius.
Second- every hero dies. Sure, Kirk’s death could have been more poetic- but the whole premise of Generations was flimsy and the studio should have never forced a film with both crews. There should have been a final movie w/ just the old crew giving their farewell and then a fresh start for the TNG flicks. I can’t blame any one person for the way that shook out.
Third- an exact replica of 60s Trek w/ as much continuity as possible would suck hard. Gene did great work w/ TOS- but our culture and our expectations of the future have shifted- to say nothing of the gap in budget and production values between then and now.
Forth- “reboot” is not a dirty word. If you want TOS, go watch TOS. It is there on lovely DVD waiting for you. It isn’t going anywhere. Nothing JJ does or doesn’t do will alter one nanosecond of the 79 episodes or the subsequent films and shows. JJ can’t kill the franchise. Not possible. It is all preserved for you and nothing is going to undo it. Relax. It’s just a show. If you don’t like the new, just re-watch the old. The new can’t hurt you.
#44- “Why is it so important to respect canon?”
Because if you don’t, you no longer have a show with any kind of integrity or intelligence.
You show that you have forgotten Roddenberry’s most important directive to his staff: There is an intelligent life form out on the other side of that television tube! Disrespect canon, and you disrespect that audience member who chose your show to watch instead of the other guy.
What you get is a cartoon. A mindless kidvid blow’em up good cartoon that doesn’t require you to have any kind of emotional investment in the characters or the situation.
You reduce Star Trek to Lost in Space.
THAT IS WHY IT IS SO GORRAM IMPORTANT TO RESPECT FRELLING CANON!!!!!
Thus endeth the lesson.
#109 and #128 — well-said about my favorite show, BSG.
It’s exciting to hear Ron’s reaction to his Trek movie tour — he is a terrific writer, and many of the best Star Trek stories have come from his mind & keyboard. The new Battlestar is his masterpiece, and we’re counting down to Season 4 on 4/4 . . .
“There should have been a final movie w/ just the old crew giving their farewell…”
They did.
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.
Pay special attention to the signatures at the end. They were signing off on the work and calling it a day. That was the reason De Kelley passed on Generations; the cast had already said it’s goodbyes with TUC.
#128 captain I agree for the most part with you on BSG Killing off a major character for the good of the story is good drama and constantly bring back a character after he or she dies reduces death to nothing more then a dramatic pause . Kirk is dead so leave him that way,
#129 please read #128. Nobody is removing TOS from history. I once watched West Side Story. What a violation of canon that was!
I agree with the Harve Bennet comment he made and I can deffinitely see the link between that and Abrams. I know he actually is a fan of the show but he hasn’t been involved in the shows at any stage. A fresh pair of eyes will benefit the project!
It’s gotta be tough being a canonist. I’m a huge trek fan and even I think you guys are ridiculous.
Nice that good old Moore was on the set and liked the design he saw so far.
I for myself think that Moore was the best writer Trek had in all these years and I like also BSG a lot so far.
My Sci-Fi-Show ranking would be:
1. Firefly
2. Farscape
3. Battlestar Galactica (new)
4. Babylon 5
5. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
#129 Captain even Gene didn’t follow the Cannon either. Explain to me why you think a Trek movie made in the 21 century should adhere to a Cannon for lack of a better word , that was created in the 1960’s a lot has changed in the world both historically and socially and to expecting the movie by Abrams to adhere to that is very unrealistic. to say the least
Some things must remain the same, other things… not so much. It is true that the Trek actors are getting up there in age. They don’t have much more time to live long and prosper. If Trek is ever to continue on, it needs fresh blood, quite literally.
While I like all the oldies, it is time for something…. new. Everything will be new soon enough: This movie, the next president, my chronically blue-screened computer… the likes.
Trek is OLD. Old does not mean bad by any extent. Age can be something that defines and shapes a person. It gives wisdom and learning. It gives the experience that is drastically needed for a new movie. Though, that doesn’t mean that change can’t happen. It is that wonderful fusion of Experience and Change that would make an excellent dreamteam. Now, it’s a matter of that DreamTeam coming true or not that remains a question.
This next Trek CANNOT be a flop! Enterprise and Nemesis have put Trek on the chopping block. If this one is… then the entire franchise may be over for quite some time. Maybe it would come back later, but there would be no guarantees. But since so many movie experts have given it the OK, I’m cautiously optomistic.
77. Shatner4TrekXI – March 18, 2008
#77 and #93
We saw your flames the first time, no need to repeat.
Dr. Smith is one of the greatest characters in TV history. And he was meant to be frustrating, irritating and maddening. :) Major Don West certainly thought so.
And its important to separate the seasons of LIS. The first season was more straight forward space adventure. The second was outright farcical fantasy. The third still had a lot of the farce and fantasy in it but also some wild sci fi.
All of them executed their styles wonderfully.
So thats why I can enjoy Stanley Adam’s as Tybo the giant carrot as much as his Cyrano Jones. :)
55. Xai – March 17, 2008 – Yet again we find each other on the same side. JJ and his team have shown nothing but respect to Gene, TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT, aka the ENTIRE franchise. And while I may not be the biggest fan of JJ’s other work, MI:III eg, he has never from what I have read, been anything less than generous and gracious in sharing glory and fame.
Vulcanista#40- Will “classic” Spock at last take his true love, Denise , in his arms and say, “Denise, will you pon farr with me?” he..he..
Mr. Bob#60- Three questions:
1) Are you out of Michael Bay jail?
2) Would the Enterprise being “upside down” have any effect on port and/or starboard?
3) Are you Hat Rick?
60- Thanks for putting my mind to ease, Bob. Upside down is fine as long as they spend the whole movie eating their meat and potatoes through a straw. (Running to tell all my geek friends that BobOrci answered my post. YAY!!!!! )
I was hoping the bridge looked more like the ship on the old (and short-lived) Richard Benjamin show, Quark…
#140 Morg I loved Dr Smith it was fun watching him go from villian to beloved character, Ironic that his mission was destroy the Robinsons, but he ended up loving them any they loving him back .Of all Irwin Allen’s shows, this one for all of its flaws had a heart and sometimes thats enough. Irwin Allen will never be remembered in the same vain as Gene Roddenberry, his shows did not have that level of writing , but he was never dull, he gave the audience thrills spills and unforgettable adventureon the small screen and the big screen and on that score he deserves to be remembered
in a positive light.
146. Garovorkin: Well said and amen. I once said on an internet poll that when I was a kid I wanted to be Will Robinson. In fact I still do. That or Captain Kirk. :)
I think the reason I don’t like Gaius Baltar on BSG is the same reason I didn’t like Dr. Smith on Lost in Space – they are both too whiney and sniveling for me. Even as a little kid I couldn’t stand Dr. Smith’s voice and his whole cowardly manner.
I loved the show. Very fun, but I wanted Robot to smack the Doctor down once and for all, just like I want BSG to “space” Dr. Baltar. Interesting, that they are both doctors. I wonder if Moore planned this or if it’s just a coincidence.
I can’t stand Gaius either, but I love John Colicos’s sinister, over the top portrayal of the same character. Just another illustration of how important an actor is in creating a role.
People often argue that, like Hamlet, anyone can play a written character and make it their own. It’s been maintained time and time again with the recast of TOS. And I agree, anyone can play any character to various degrees of success. But the fact is, some classic characters just can’t be so easily replaced. Who else could play Dr. Smith and pull it off? Is there anyone out there that would dare step into the role of Barney Fife?? Jim Kirk is unique and popular because of what Shatner brought to the table to bring those words to life. I don’t envy Pine and the inevitable comparrisons when that movie opens.
…and while the robot never smacked Dr. Smith, he often gave as good as he got…infuriating the good Doctor which was always loads of fun to watch.
Didn’t TNG episode The Long Goodbye win a Peabody award?
#129—-The “canon” argument is an imaginary house built of equally imaginary straw.
TOS did not maintain any coherent canon from one episode to another, nor did the original films in comparison to TOS… or each other. Why is STXI expected to adhere to a standard that no other ever lived up to?
If what you say is true, then Star Trek was never an intelligent show. I refuse to believe that, as I know it not to be true…
#150—-Why? I have no idea.
the vulcanian expedition? sybok’s mother was a Vulcan “princess?” the united earth space probe agency? the Earth ship Enterprise? Kirk’s sleeves shorter in some episodes because the uniforms shrank when they were cleaned. Continuity problems galore! because they were making it up as they went along trying to write and film a weekly TV SHOW.
although, frankly, I’d always hoped a prequel would have the blue/gold uniforms and pants for women… like in the pilots… and not the red. Just liked the look.
ps. I thought Gary Oldman’s Dr. Smith was awesome.
I just keep coming here because I’m a set/prop geek hoping to see a photo of like a .5 inch section of the corner of Uhura’s new chair or something. Not interested in spoilers. Or lamenting the fact that they’re even making this movie… like so many people seem to.
#153—”sybok’s mother was a Vulcan “princess?”
Oh no. Not the Great Trek Turd (aka STV). NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
You forgot to mention the indecisive TOS timeline
the “Klingon” ships painted like Birds of Prey which was a “Romulan” traditon in TOS
Khan’s line about being on Earth, “200 years ago” in TWOK
James R. Kirk
Spock becoming “giddy”, upon seeing a flower on Talos IV
The “intervention” of the Organians, and subsequent disappearance from affairs along the Federation-Klingon border
The fluxuating threshold the Enterprise has for tolerating certain speeds
The inference that 100 years prior to TOS, Earth ships are still travelling at sub light speeds and deploying “atomic” weapons against the Romulans
We could go on and on.
#155
The novel for Trek VI actually discusses the ‘mysterious disappearance’ of the Organians, and the increasing hostilities between the Klingons & Federation are at least partly attributed to their sudden absence.
I know that’s not canon and wasn’t your point, but I always thought it was kind of interesting.
#155 I seem to recall that in the episode Balance of terror it was either Spock or scotty who pointed out the the bird of prey’s engines were simple impulse engines, now base on what has been established, Impulse engines are sublight engines, which begs the question, How could the Romulans run a galactic emipre if they don’t have either warp of ftl drive of any kind. and as you mention if 100 prior earth didn’t either then other then sleeper ships how could they have explored the galaxy? hell how would there have been a Earth Romulan war in the first place beaause lack of speed would have made interstella travel and warfare an impossibility. If the Romulans had sublight Engines How come the Enterprise had such difficultyt over taking them in the first place even with their cloak on.?
#156—Not unlike the Saavik “backstory” and the notion that she becomes pregnant with Spock’s child as a result of their “encounter” on the Genesis planet—also found in the movie novelizations.
Someone else mentioned the TMP novelization, in regards to the adoption of the Delta insignia by all of Starfleet at the end of the 5 year mission of the Constitution Class Enterprise.
As you pointed out, it isn’t canon, but it is interesting indeed…
were back to cannon and technical inconsistancies again. between the movies and tv series its become muddle as to what is and what not cannon, problem is, that as time goes foward and new series and movies are made trying reconcile the present with the past becomes all the more impossible.
#159—It just seems that those who spout “canon” this, and “canon” that, put themselves under the illusion that there is an integrity there to protect. The truth is, it wasn’t just lost long ago—it was never there at all. Sure, the movies and later incarnations tried valiantly to keep some continuity, but that was never the point of the original series. Those who fear violations of imaginary “canon” in Trek XI are putting an unfair burden on the film. It has never been done before, so why should it be done now?
#161 I remember some years ago someone published a history time line of trek and when I looked at this book i thought to my self, well this will useless as soon as someone does a new series or movie, i agree and i ve stated this many times,movies and even series should not be burned with trying to be faithful to the pseudo history, when I use cannon examples in criticism of an episode, its just point out story contradictions thats all, its no big deal, its just to show that even the produces and writers did not follow a strict guide line.I know that when the movie comes out there will be the inevitable cannon criticism, and that the way it is with some fans
#160
I do have to hand it to some of the ‘keepers of the flame’ and their attempts to have some sense of cohesion within the show. I always thought that set the original series apart from many of its SciFi contemporaries. Lost In Space, for example, had little-to-no attempt at maintaining continuity between episodes. Events in one show were rarely (if ever) referred to again. Whereas Trek did find ways to sneak in references here and there – like last week’s ‘That Which Survives’, and Sulu’s references to ‘Devil in the Dark’.
I’m with you though, all these ‘continuity hounds’ will simply drive themselves crazy obsessing over minutae like Finnegan’s shirt or Uhura’s brand of pantyhose.
#162 Sean some of these fans just drive me crazy with some of their comments and notions about faithfulness to what is in the past. I feel sorry for the actors that are doing the film and JJ Abrams, they have to jump thought all of these hoops and face scrutiny and comparison from all these foolish fans. It just not fair
[ insert cliqued and "oh-so-enlightened" rhetoric, gushing, and/or swooning regarding new film ]
I’m not passing judgement on the film until I see it, but from what little I have seen of it’s constituent parts, I can’t say I’m entirely impressed.
I really can’t figure out why people act as if TWOK was “OMG THE BEST TRECK EVARRR.” I never really liked the changes that Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer made to Trek as I think they deviated from Roddenberry’s vision a little too far in some areas.
I could elaborate, but that’s for an essay paper, not for the comments sections of a Trek blog!!
#164 well now Purist that statement tells me that you already have passed judgement on the film. why not see it in its entirety before you either praise or condemn it? As to Wrath of Khan deviating from Genes vision, again it was a sequel to the original episode Space seed, yes gene was in full control of this movie but it still come from his vision. Tell me the whole genesis concept was not something that fits into the philosophy of trek. remember when McCoy questioned the whether man was ready for such a power as Genesis, technology and its ramiifications that is classic trek making you think about these issue. The Kobahsi Mauru and personal responsibility for ones actions which Kirk learns to his sorrow. that is trek as well whether you think so or not. Also spock sacrificing his life to save the crew self sacrifice again a theme that is classic trek . How we live is as important as how we die, did you forget that one as well?
#164 typo Gene was not in control
TWOK is ST perfection because Bennett & Meyer ignore the by then ‘New Age’ Roddenberry’s obsessions (eg: Troi the shrink sitting next to Picard).
Coon & Fontana created ST as we know it and Bennett & Meyer built on that foundation, beinging Trek to it’s highest level.
As for Ron Moore, Kirk’s blood is on his keyboard. He should have refused Rick Berman’s order to kill Kirk, even at the cost of his job. Both Moore & Berman belong on Rua Pente for what they did to James T. Kirk.
# Moogie Roddenberry still had vision in the beginning. His coronation as public visionary emerged in the 70s with the conventions and the college lecture circut, he did take credit for work not his. Walt Disney another visionary did the same thing. In the visionary business you alway take credit for other accomplishment,s it comes with the territory.. And Gene Roddenberry was human. It really doesn’t matter who was instrumental in building up Roddenberry’s Legacy in the end its all ascribed to him and no one else. It not to take away from Gene completely, the man did envision a better tomorrow and many of his observations on the human condition and people were right on the money.
167- Neither Moore or Berman could have done what they did if Shatner had forbid it. Kirk’s blood is on William Shatner’s hands. He should have not allowed the character to be killed off. I NEVER wanted to know how Kirk died. Of course I assumed he was gone by TNG era, but I didn’t want to see it. It was a meaningless death to boot and the person with the most stake…the most love for the character….the actor who created him…should have refused to do it.
Bart, Both Leonard Nimoy & Denise Crosby allowed their characters to die, later regretted it & their characters were revived (though with Yar it was twice in alternate timelines).
Are they being held to different standards?
#164
Who is swooning? Half the thread has been about BSG & Lost In Space!
#170
I think the biggest difference there is neither Nimoy nor Crosby waited 14 years to revive their respective characters. And honestly, aren’t you holding Shatner to a different standard than BB&M? If they deserve to go to Rura Penthe for their ‘crimes’, doesn’t Shatner deserve a cell next door for being an enthusiastic participant in the process at the time?
“To the BSG & reboot haters – Not the best show?? When did Lost, Bab-5 or any Trek win a Peabody award? None. but Moore and Co.did…as well as a Hugo, and various Emmy Noms.”
Just winning something means nothing.
B5 and also DS9 almost weren’t recognized in their times, coz they were scifi. BSG isn’t scifi in its central aspects, there it is rather like a character drama.
In my opinion I haven’t seen anything on TV that could compete with babylon 5 until now.
Alright, Ron Moore drew a parallel between the JJ Abrams team and 80s Trek Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer.
Big deal. I am not sure this is a good news. I personally feel Harve & Nick are overpraised. They did deviated from Roddenberry’s Utopian vision and made Star Trek more militaristic and too nautical.
#170—Correction, Moogie. Nimoy only came back for TWOK “because” Spock had been written to die in the script, and he felt he owed it to the fans to play him one last time. It was not he who regretted it, but the studio. Remember that at that particular time, the original cast was 25 years younger, and the franchise was at an all-time high in popularity. They had quite a bit left in them. When asked to return, Nimoy agreed only to do so if he were allowed to direct, and the rest is history.
These are not different standards, but different circumstances. TPTB asked for Nimoy to return as Spock. The next script was written to resurrect him.
This time, it is not a story about resurrecting Kirk. It was Shatner who “regretted” his character’s death. The surviving members of the original cast are in their 60’s and 70’s, and the franchise is at an all-time low.
Big differences, but nice try…
Satisfying Shatner’s regrets is not the responsibility of this production team. Paramount already rejected ideas of bringing back Shatner’s Kirk in another film, including a script submitted by Bill himself. They instead chose to approve this script, and this director.
Either give it a chance…or don’t. Beating a dead horse won’t change their minds.
#173 considering the nature of some of the original series episode,How do come to that conclusion? Have you forgotten such episodes as:
A taste of Armageddon
Balance of terror
The Ultimate Computer
Errand of Mercy
Arena
Star fleet primarily does exploration but by the same token they are a military organization. remember one thing even if we achieve utopia and its not a given that we will, there will still be a need for guns. Benet and Nicholas Myer and Harve Bennett did not deviate significantly from treks original intent. rather they kept much of it.
#175—I think what #173 is referring to is the lack of “exploration” themes in the movies. You do cite some memorable episodes which deal with the military aspect of Starfleet, but I think we can agree that the overwhelming majority of episodes dealt with Starfleet’s primary mission of exploration and scientific discovery.
#173—I don’t think that means they are “overpraised”. TWOK is a great film, and by far, the most “popular” Star Trek movie. While I agree that the movies tend to forget about Starfleet’s primary mission in Roddenberry’s universe, Bennett and Meyer told a great story derived from a classic TOS backstory, and could never have too much credit for it.
TWOK—USS Reliant is participating in a scientific endeavor, led by civilians
TSFS—USS Grissom is researching the effects of the Genesis device on the Genesis planet
TUC—USS Excelsior is studying “gaseous anomalies(?)”
It is not “completely” forgotten about in the films.
its very true how Ron compares wrath of kahn to the new movie…i just hope this movie follows suit then. :D
Sorry, but every time I come to this thread and see that picture of Moore, I think he looks like one of the Doobie Brothers and I lose my train of thought!
Shatner tried pitching the idea of Kirk’s return while they were reshooting the ending for Generations. Shatner deserves a lot of the blame for killing off Kirk, and he has readily accepted it, but Berman deserves the lion’s share of the blame for KEEPING Kirk dead.
Thank the gods for the novels. For those of us who actually read a book on occasion, Kirk was only dead for a relatively short time.
As for Spock, there were a few factors at play.
1) Nimoy realized that he was having too much fun with the gang, so he began to have some thoughts regarding a resurrection of some sort, so just to throw out a few breadcrumbs, they cooked up the mind meld with McCoy, “Remember”, (prompting De Kelley to ask Nimoy, “You sonuvabitch, you’re coming back, aren’t you?”), not really having any idea what any of it meant at the time, but what the hell, they’ll figure something out later, in the event Nimoy actually wants to come back.
2) The initial test screenings of TWOK didn’t have the shots of Spock’s casket. For all the audience knew, it burned up in the atmosphere of Genesis, and that was it, Spock was dead, dead, dead. And the audience left like they were leaving a funeral. Harve Bennett knew that if this went out as is, there wasn’t gonna be any repeat business for this film, and the Star Trek movie franchise was gonna be as dead as Spock if they didn’t throw the audience some sort of bone indicating that Spock was coming back in the next one (the benefit of having a television guy running the thing — he was able to look at what was good for the series, not just the current film, which is where Nick Meyer’s blind spot was, and still is to a certain extent). So, with the addition of some second unit stuff of the photon tube sitting amongst the foilage, and voila! anticipation for a sequel is created, and the future of the franchise is assured, at least for one more picture.
And no, it was never a condition of Nimoy’s contract that Spock die.
#179
Do you really enjoy the novels? The first two were pretty entertaining (Ashes of Eden, The Return) but they quickly turned into convoluted nonsense for me. I try not to think of it as pure ego, but the way Bill makes the entire universe literally revolve around his character is just a bit much. It’s kind of like if every single episode of TOS had just been about Kirk. Back in the day we at least got a few McCoy & Spock episodes thrown in the mix.
It would be more forgiveable if the James T Kirk in those novels resembled my childhood hero. Or if he didn’t write every other character as a stubborn fool. Of course, I guess that blame can rest equally with the Reeves-Stevens, who probably write the majority of the non-Kirk dialogue, and should darn well know better.
Also, where did you hear he pitched the idea of Kirk’s survival during Generations? I don’t recall reading about that in Movie Memories, and he discusses Generations in great detail in there.
#181—Who said it was a condition of his contract? I must have missed that comment.
I listened to Nimoy say that he only chose to come back for TWOK because Spock was going to die and that it was a well-written death scene.
Test audiences flipped out at Spock’s death, and the “mind-meld scene” was edited in to leave the door open. After the overwhelming success of TWOK, Nimoy says he had a change of heart over audiences’ love for the character, and the opprotunity to direct.
But Grace Lee Whitney’s coming back as Rand for this flick. No? Hubba hubba. I hope it’s PG-13!
#146: Irwin Allen mostly gave us a lot of groans.
All of his series started off great, but then rapidly degenerated into childish, silly romps that mocked the tenants of believability… and he knew it but didn’t care.
#185 but he was never dull and he did entertain
Harve Bennett rescued the Trek franchise because he based his imagining of the films based on the mythology of the original series.
As long as everyone keeps to the spirit of the original Star Trek, everything is fine. And that’s why NOTHING was fine with Voyager, Enterprise and Deep Space Nine. The latter was acceptable, if only in the last few seasons. But it had little to do with what Star Trek is all about. It was a very nice sci-fi show. But it wasn’t Star Trek. And as far as the Next Generation is concerned, my favorite season was the first season. That’s right – the first season. It all went down hill after that, and became a soap opera in space, when all the characters ever did was talk, talk, talk, talk.
The wonder of the original series was never seen beyond itself until nor since the Wrath of Kahn.
That all said, I agree with Moore and his assessment of a fresh star for the franchise.
Herbie J Pilato
http://spywise.net/bionicwoman.html
rmxvnpo4nz3b5d3q
It certainly isa good thing he isn’t involved, or it would be another yawn-fest just like post-Roddenberry ST-TNG, DS9, ST-V, Galactica and Bionic Woman. Why is this guy allowed to make Television programs and movies? His work is NOT very good.