Visit The Official Star Trek Shop Now!
jump to navigation

Watch: Brannon Braga Talks Original Plan For Enterprise + More From Geek Magazine Star Trek Roundtable February 5, 2013

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Magazine,Merchandise,Star Trek Into Darkness,Trek Franchise,Trek on TV,Viral Video/Mashup/Images , trackback

The recently relaunched Geek Magazine features a cover story in its new issue about Star Trek, including a roundtable discussion with a number of notable Treksperts, including Brannon Braga and David Goodman. The two-hour talk includes a lot of interesting stuff including Braga talking about his original plan for Star Trek Enterprise. Find out more about that and the new issue of Geek below, plus watch the entire roundtable discussion.   

 

 

Watch: Star Trek Roundtable Talk with Braga, Altman, Goodman, Roddenberry

With 2013 being a big year for Star Trek, the newly revived Geek Magazine is featuring Trek on its cover which includes a special free-wheeling two-hour round table discussion with a panel of Treksperts. Moderated by Free Enterprise writer/producer Mark A. Altman, the panelists include "Star Trek: Enterprise" co-creator Brannon Braga, son of Gene Roddenberry, Rod Rodenberry, Access Hollywood chief film critic Scott Mantz and David Goodman who was a producer on Enterprise and wrote the recently released "Federation: The First 150 Years" as well as the classic Star Trek parody for Futurama.

The roundtable is is summarized in the latest issue, here is an interesting excerpt from the article….

DAVID GOODMAN: The format hadn’t changed in a sense since Next Generation because the way we told stories on Enterprise was very much the same show.
BRANNON BRAGA: That was not how we wanted to do it. We wanted to do a show that was set on Earth, and it was about building the first starship, a little like J.J.’s movie. There was going to be the Klingon attack and the urgency to get the ship off the ground, to protect Earth. The end of the first season was going to be the liftoff of the Enterprise.
ROD RODDENBERRY: I love that idea.
BRANNON BRAGA: The network just wanted a ship show. They wanted the format.
MARK A. ALTMAN: Even with the success of the new feature franchise, is the reason there’s still such a hunger for a new TV show is because you can concentrate on characters in a way the movies can’t? Movies inherently have to be about some big event. And when they’re not, say, Insurrection, they’re deemed a failure. Because you have to put Earth in peril; there have to be big stakes for a movie.
BRANNON BRAGA: Going to these conventions, it’s enlightening. People aren’t talking about the movies at all. I’ll get a couple of ‘Oh, I liked First Contact," but all the questions are about the series. That’s how it started. That’s what it is. Some of the movies are great. Some are not. It’s not the same. Star Wars is all movies. Star Trek is TV.

Geek has even released the entire discussion online, you can watch it below…

In addition to featuring a candid and freewheeling conversation about the past, present and future of Star Trek, there are sidebars on Why Wrath of Khan is still the best Star Trek movie, Trek Tech and a commentary on why Mr. Arex should have been in the new movie instead of Chekov. There is also an interview with "Mohawk Guy" at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory who talks about his love for Star Trek that helped inspire the Mars mission.

Says Altman, "What’s fantastic about this article is it brings together so many people who have different interests and opinions across the Trek universe. You have someone like Brannon who worked on Trek for nearly two decades and has unique insight into what goes into making a Trek series and then Rod Roddenberry who’s legacy in the Trek universe is clear. David Goodman has been both a fan and someone who’s worked in the Trek universe and Scott Mantz, although a noted film critic for Access Hollywood, is an uber-fan. I think each person manages to address aspects of the Trek universe that I hadn’t really thought about before, both in terms of why it worked and where it’s going in the future. I think anyone who’s a fan of Star Trek will really enjoy the conversation and hearing the opinions of these noted Trek luminaries on the world in what amounts to one of the greatest convention panels ever."

"For me personally," says Altman, who used to write about Star Trek for such magazines as CInefantastique and Sci-Fi Universe as well as wrote numerous issues of the Star Trek comic book for Malibu and DC Comics, "it was a lot of fun to return to writing about Star Trek for the first time in many, many years after leaving journalism to write, produced and direct movies and television and I really enjoyed the chance to hear everyone’s thoughts about where Star Trek’s going in the future as we speculate on future movies as well as TV incarnations. It’s one of the reasons I founded Geek years ago and am so glad to see the magazine continue to thrive under the editorial stewardship of Dave Williams and his editorial team who are doing such an amazing job with the title. If anything, it makes me that much more excited to see Into Darkness when it comes out in May."

Other features in the magazine includes coverage of Beautiful Creatures, Star Wars, Life in Antarctica and much, much more. The issue is available now on newsstands everywhere. Excerpts from the roundtable will also be available at www.geekexchange.com.


Cover for new Star Trek issue of Geek

An enhanced version is available for download on iTunes through Apple Newsstand.


Enhanced version of latest issue of Geek on iPad

 

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
February 6, 2013 12:30 am

Just to contribute with something more worthwhile… interesting vid!

summoner2100
February 6, 2013 12:34 am

A first season Star Trek show set on Earth? Just one more reason that Brannon Braga is a frigging idiot who ruined Trek on tv..

njdss4
February 6, 2013 12:44 am

I’m watching the roundtable right now and it’s fantastic. Thanks for posting this!

long-live-the-king
February 6, 2013 12:50 am

lol@#1
typical stagnant Trek fan; a new format instantly shot down when it doesn’t comply with “the standard”.

long-live-the-king
February 6, 2013 12:51 am

correction, #2

Trekkie626
February 6, 2013 12:52 am

@2

it’s that sort of mindset that ran Star Trek into the ground.

MJ
February 6, 2013 1:12 am

Great, another member of the failed Enterprise person passing the buck. I have yet to hear anyone interviewed from Enterprise that will take any small measure of responsibility for the failure of the show. It’s always somebody else’s fault; its’s always “if only they had listened to me.”

Enough!!! I’m tired of the bullshit excuses and the passing of the buck. The people involved in Enterprise need to show at least some accountability. They are all collectively responsive for a crappy product.

MJ Kelly
February 6, 2013 1:43 am
7 the show was not a failure creatively. It was stuck on a network that never had more than 75 or 80 percent coverage in the country. people who were able to watch it cause it aired in their area, stuck with it and really enjoyed it. by the 3rd and 4th season the show really came into its own.(about the same season as TNG and DS9 came into their own as well) And don’t forget it lasted a season longer than TOS. we get it you didnt like enterprise, but just cause you didn’t doesnt mean there weren’t millions… Read more »
DiscoSpock
February 6, 2013 1:54 am

MJ Kelly,

Enterprise was horrid. “Millions” is really stretching it. I have at least 50 Trek fan friends, and maybe 3 of them liked it.

Yea, it became “watchable” by Season 4, but its a strawman argument because it deceivingly looked better because the first couple of seasons were just so horrible.

You can’t rewrite history.

MJ
February 6, 2013 1:59 am
@8. I’m not debating whether you or a small set of fans may have liked the show or not. The point of my post is that here another in a long series of articles with the production or actors on Enterprise who are once again blaming others and passing the blame for the quality and cancellation of the show. Absolutely no one who worked on that show will take any accountability for it….which, when you think about it, is likely while it failed — the people involved had little integrity and were just their to get a paycheck and do… Read more »
MJ
February 6, 2013 2:01 am

@9 “Yea, it became “watchable” by Season 4, but its a strawman argument because it deceivingly looked better because the first couple of seasons were just so horrible.”

Exactly. The first seasons were so bad that they had nowhere to go but up, and hence the final seasons give a false impression of a somewhat better product.

Romulus
February 6, 2013 2:04 am

Even if the first series was about the building and launch of the NX01 the rest of Enterprise would have been the same, bland TV and rehashed plots. The producers refuse to take any responsibility about that and instead take the easy out by blaming the studio, at least Ron Moore had the balls to walk away.

UKTrek
February 6, 2013 2:12 am

MJ, i agree with you.. I really liked Ent from start to end… it’s subjective (taste).. ok Disco you only had 3 friends that liked it.. well all my Trek liking friends liked it.. it’s not a cometition, we all have a different opinion.

For me.. it’s the picking, picking, picking that is the bit of “Trek” that I can’t stand… I just sit back and “allow” myself to enjoy it all for what it is.. a good yarn, with a rich history, and long may it last.

UKTrek
February 6, 2013 2:13 am

OOps should read “not a competition”… not “cometition”, appoligies.

Jack
February 6, 2013 2:24 am

I like the idea of starting out on Earth and the whole space race-ish hing… Hmmm.

Vulcan Soul
February 6, 2013 2:24 am

Think about Braga what you want, but what he says makes alot of sense here. I’ll certainly take him over Abrams pyrotechnics show any day. That is not Trek.

Mark L
February 6, 2013 2:28 am

Star Trek was on cruise control since TNG. DS9 was decent, but other shows like Babylon 5 showed you could do so much more in science fiction if you wanted. Paramount just wanted to stick to the same formula. Both Voyager and Enterprise were awful. I’ve never had any desire to re watch either show.

February 6, 2013 2:30 am

Set on earth trying to get a ship into space would have been great

February 6, 2013 2:32 am

Abrams Trek is more Star Trek than most of the other treks after next gen and far more than all of the next gen movies.

Not to mention that almost all of the movies had explosions and chases, were they not trek either.

DisgruntledTrekkie
February 6, 2013 2:32 am

16. I agree.

DisgruntledTrekkie
February 6, 2013 2:34 am

19.
True, some of the other movies did have explosions, but Jar Jar Trek was just one long explosion and I’m sure his next one will be more of the same.

Jack
February 6, 2013 2:37 am

The thing is — to the ‘Star Trek belongs on TV’ people — maybe it does, but look at the ratio of good episodes to mediocre/bad episodes (looking at all 28 seasons… did Ent. last 4 seasons?). Nearly all the post TOS series each took 1 or 2 entire seasons for the shows to start working (and I’d argue that Voyager always ran smoothly, but it never really worked as Star Trek).

Telling good Trek stories is tricky.

Jack
February 6, 2013 2:39 am

16. All of the Trek movies Braga was involved in had plenty of pyrotechnics.

Jack
February 6, 2013 2:41 am

Watch Red Letter Media’s Trek reviews for a good breakdown on why/how the TNG movies were terrible and full of mostly pointless action.

DisgruntledTrekkie
February 6, 2013 2:43 am

24 No thanks.
I’d rather think for myself.

Bob Mack
February 6, 2013 3:46 am

22 – I agree with that assessment. And you can say the same thing for the movies, some are good, some are not. To your point, telling good Trek stories is tricky. Back to post #2, an earthbound “Enterprise” might have stunk, might have been good. Just being earthbound wouldn’t have been the deciding factor.

Digginjim
February 6, 2013 4:01 am

Saucer of milk for 25.

Carlos
February 6, 2013 4:50 am
Who cares for space in these days ? Kids don’t get impressed by Shuttles, Rockets, etc. Science fiction outside games and books is basically dead. pWhen Star Wars cpmes out after 2017 it will take all the remaining spots reserved for this kind of genre for a long, long time… Star Trek ? It will have a crappy random Animation series for the 50th Anniversary set on the Abramsverse. Maybe a Third movie that no one will give a F. After that ST will be dead as Lost in Space. Maybe it will be revived when NASA rolls out a… Read more »
Captain Dunsel
February 6, 2013 4:52 am

Just my opinion, but I don’t think “Insurrection” failed because it was character driven instead of about a “big event”. I think it failed because the characters were un-involving.

February 6, 2013 5:16 am

I enjoy the really loud people who hate Star Trek ’09 for not being the same, and hate Enterprise for not being different.

Bamasi
February 6, 2013 5:36 am

30 – Well said, sir. Well said.

Jack
February 6, 2013 5:41 am

30. Yep.

Jack
February 6, 2013 5:44 am

28. “Face it. Outside our beloved fandom no single person talks about the Reboot. There’s no marketing. It is just another movie. No difference to what Braga did at all.”

What?

February 6, 2013 5:46 am

Enterprise was far under-rated. However, now with the new JJ movies, it’s firmly entrenched as fundamental Trek history.

With the timeline so drastically altered, it’s very unlikely TNG, DS9 & VOY will ever exist.

As far as DS9 & VOY are concerned, I say worth it.

Michael Hall
February 6, 2013 5:57 am

“Telling good Star Trek stories is hard.”

The truest words ever written on a Trekmovie forum.

“I enjoy the really loud people who hate Star Trek ’09 for not being the same, and hate Enterprise for not being different.”

Warp-driven strawmen.

CmdrR
February 6, 2013 6:21 am

I liked that aspect of Enterprise that showed us explorers who did NOT have all the tools they needed yet.
I think the show tried too hard to be another TOS. They should have ditched the transporter all together.
Also, prequels were burned out by then… and Ent shows why. Stop trying to connect the dots with another project… and just tell stories.

Mad Mann
February 6, 2013 6:25 am

Here’s hoping the next Trek series will be space station-based like DS9 and not another ship show.

Maybe it can be Deep Space Station K-7!

Horatio
February 6, 2013 6:29 am
Throwing in my two cents…. I *still* think that the premise for Enterprise was valid. There is a lot of backstory in the Trek universe that would make great television. I was totally disillusioned with how the show started off. If just felt like more of TNG or Voyager. Season 4 is how the series should have started but it was by then too late. I blamed Braga and Berman for f’ing up what should have been a great Trek renaissance. I do find Braga’s comment about UPN wanting to stick with “the formula” interesting. I can believe this as… Read more »
kev
February 6, 2013 6:36 am
summoner2100 – you have it wrong, that was rick berman, not him, he’s a good writer for certain types of stories and he was just stretched too far in his capabilities and dragged through the mud with him just look up the news story on here they had a few years ago with Garrett Wang if you dont believe me, its pretty clear its bermans fault, actually here it is: http://trekmovie.com/2011/06/22/garrett-wang-talks-clashes-with-brannon-braga-rick-berman-lost-opportunity-for-star-trek-voyager-movie/ and I remember reading doug drexler had to fight with them, namely Berman to make the NX 01 look older, they had planned to straight use the akira class… Read more »
February 6, 2013 7:24 am

If any show about the first Enterprise were going to be done, it should have been the real first one with Captain April. It would have been great, and more accepted, at least by me. I never bought into the premise of the show as done. Never.

Exverlobter
February 6, 2013 7:28 am

Ah, the “Enterprise sucks!” discussion again.
Ok, i admit, the first 3 seasons were awful. But remeber guys, the first 3 seasons of TNG were crappy as well.
However that show is considered one of the greatest Sci-Fi shows ever made. And just because of Season 4-7 which saved its reputation.
If they had not cancelled Enterprise prematurely, it would have had a chance to become the next TNG.
And i think it would have worked, because season 4 under Manny Cotos rule was great, and a step in the right direction.

Jim
February 6, 2013 7:30 am

The idea of the Earth struggling to just launch the NX-01 sounds AWESOME, which they had gone with that over the TCW.

James
February 6, 2013 7:31 am

I rate Ron Moore and Ira Steven Behr as the best writers of modern Trek.

In the buildup to the release of Star Trek: Into Darkness, I am reviewing all the previous Trek movies. I have just uploaded my review for ST:III

http://ryesofthegeek.wordpress.com/

February 6, 2013 7:36 am

The What-If scenario for Season 1 is facinating I’m sure, but the promise shown in Season 4 – laying the seeds of a proper roadmap, tying it into the later series (the original in particular) is what could’ve redeemed Star Trek: Enterprise – that’s the greater shame.

February 6, 2013 7:41 am

So when can I expect to Seasons 5-7 of Enterprise? With the Romulan War and a political drama dealing with the Birth of the Federation? What’s the hell is keeping ya? ;)

Exverlobter
February 6, 2013 7:50 am

@Chris Roberts

Yeah. THere is plenty of discussion about Trek coming back to TV since Abrams revitalised the Franchise.
However i don’t think that Chris Pine and Co would work on TV because that whole crew is all about the spectacle and would probably lose its appeal on the small screen.

My suggestion. Bring back Enterprise. Called
Star Trek Enterprise Phase 2.
Its basically Season 5-7 and tells the story of the Romulan War and the birth of the Federation.
Under Manny Cotos rule. That would be great.

Smike
February 6, 2013 8:03 am
ENT was neither bad nor awesome…it was lukewarm, mediocre…with a less than weak start but a badass ending… Seasons 1 and 2 were basically bland rehashes of TNG and VOY episodes, but unlike VOY, I at least liked the characters and cared for them…Seasons 3 and 4 were the best Trek to date (minus the Nazi two-parter), but at the end of the day, the overall impression of the show was mediocrity… F, F, B, A makes C or D in the end… As far as that “Trek belongs on TV” notion is concerned: I have to disagree… yes, I… Read more »
Smike
February 6, 2013 8:13 am
One of the inherent problems of Trek on TV was the superfluous “full season” format with 22 or 26 episodes… Series like New Doctor Who or Game of Thrones have proven that the 13 episode format is much more applicable for high budget genre shows… less fillers and stinkers, more focus on quality… that way you keep people turning in weekly…and you’ve got a quality product throughout that is worth rewatching for decades… That can’t be said for ANY whole season of Trek. We’ve got 28 seasons with about 5-10 episodes really worthwile each season…That’s about 200 out of 700+… Read more »
USSEXETER
February 6, 2013 8:20 am

To me and I remember thinking it at the time, when Enterprise debuted Star Trek was over saturated. It was too much of a good thing with series overlapping each other as well as series overlapping the movies. To much of a good thing was not good for the franchise. Still would love to see Trek return to tv focusing on the Enterprise B and or C.

NuFan
February 6, 2013 8:20 am

I am offended by the title of this magazine. I say we spend the rest of our lives complaining about it on the internet.

wpDiscuz
TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.