Rick Berman & Brannon Braga vs Joseph Mallozzi & Pau

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:18 am

When it comes to these individuals as writers for their respective franchises ST and SG. Which ones have done a better job?

I know a lot of people are not happy at all with the job Rick Berman & Brannon Braga did for Star Trek, do you feel that Joseph Mallozzi & Paul Mullie have done a better job and could have thus done a better job when it comes to the ST franchise had they written for it instead or you think they are all just as bad? What?

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:25 pm

They're all best when they first start out, but when the franchises run out of ideas and they repeat and the repeat is not that good or as good, they're bad.

On their own, without the worry of any repeats, I'd say they're all good equally.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:46 pm

GStone wrote:They're all best when they first start out, but when the franchises run out of ideas and they repeat and the repeat is not that good or as good, they're bad.

On their own, without the worry of any repeats, I'd say they're all good equally.

Well yes I suppose they all have their weaknesses and strengths for example one thing Berman and Braga have never been very good at is writing ground combat scenes but then again it was not until Enterprise that they even though of consulting the military for such a thing. While SG consistenly relied on the advice of the Military to keep the battle scenes as grounded as possible.

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:31 pm

PunkMaister wrote: example one thing Berman and Braga have never been very good at is writing ground combat scenes .

When have either Berman or Braga written "ground combat scenes" exactly that required a military advisor? In SG, the main characters are U.S. military, and so the expense of retaining advisors is justified.
-Mike

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:16 pm

I don't know much about Trek, but the SG club ran out of good ideas very very quickly, and gave their best when they could still exploit the crown of SG-1's first years.
During those years, the military was not necessarily presented as the absolutely super perfect defense force that it's supposed to be if you watch your random American TV show.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:53 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:I don't know much about Trek, but the SG club ran out of good ideas very very quickly, and gave their best when they could still exploit the crown of SG-1's first years.
During those years, the military was not necessarily presented as the absolutely super perfect defense force that it's supposed to be if you watch your random American TV show.

Umm... Super perfect defense force? I'm sorry but I do not recall the armed forces being presented as being such at any point in the show. They have always shown the military in a good light but never as a super perfect defense force. Again I do not recall such a thing...

Mike DiCenso wrote:When have either Berman or Braga written "ground combat scenes" exactly that required a military advisor? In SG, the main characters are U.S. military, and so the expense of retaining advisors is justified.
-Mike

Even if it's set in the future it is good to get at least some advice on the do's and dont's of ground combat from someone that knows rather than out of one's arse which is what Braga and Berman did.

Flectarn · Post by **Flectarn** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:26 pm

PunkMaister wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:I don't know much about Trek, but the SG club ran out of good ideas very very quickly, and gave their best when they could still exploit the crown of SG-1's first years.
During those years, the military was not necessarily presented as the absolutely super perfect defense force that it's supposed to be if you watch your random American TV show.
Umm... Super perfect defense force? I'm sorry but I do not recall the armed forces being presented as being such at any point in the show. They have always shown the military in a good light but never as a super perfect defense force. Again I do not recall such a thing...

Mike DiCenso wrote:When have either Berman or Braga written "ground combat scenes" exactly that required a military advisor? In SG, the main characters are U.S. military, and so the expense of retaining advisors is justified.

He meant other shows hence

"If you watch any random American TV show"
-Mike
Even if it's set in the future it is good to get at least some advice on the do's and dont's of ground combat from someone that knows rather than out of one's arse which is what Braga and Berman did.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:37 pm

Were you trying to say something Flectarn?

Flectarn · Post by **Flectarn** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:29 am

yeah... that weird

any way, Oragahn was saying that it's in the random average american tv show that that the us military is portrayed as a super perfect defense force, and that Stargate didn't follow this model. at least that was my interpretation

although re-reading it i suppose he as only referring to the first few seasons *shrug*

Flectarn · Post by **Flectarn** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:37 am

yeah... that weird

any way, Oragahn was saying that it's in the random average american tv show that that the us military is portrayed as a super perfect defense force, and that Stargate didn't follow this model. at least that was my interpretation

although re-reading it i suppose he as only referring to the first few seasons *shrug*

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:55 am

Flectarn wrote:yeah... that weird

any way, Oragahn was saying that it's in the random average american tv show that that the us military is portrayed as a super perfect defense force, and that Stargate didn't follow this model. at least that was my interpretation

although re-reading it i suppose he as only referring to the first few seasons *shrug*

That's just it, I do not recall it being portrayed as a perfect defense force at any point. And what show depicted it that way? JAG? Hardly!

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:35 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:When have either Berman or Braga written "ground combat scenes" exactly that required a military advisor? In SG, the main characters are U.S. military, and so the expense of retaining advisors is justified.
-Mike

PunkMaister wrote:Even if it's set in the future it is good to get at least some advice on the do's and dont's of ground combat from someone that knows rather than out of one's arse which is what Braga and Berman did.

You seem a bit fixated on B&B. And you still haven't answered the question; when have either or both of them written a ground combat scene?
-Mike

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:27 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:You seem a bit fixated on B&B. And you still haven't answered the question; when have either or both of them written a ground combat scene?
-Mike

More like Spaceship/Building corridors than outdoors but still "ground combat" none the less.

ILikeDeathNote · Post by **ILikeDeathNote** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:06 am

GStone wrote:They're all best when they first start out

I'll even give Brannon Braga credit, but this simply does not apply to Rick Berman. Star Trek has been his sole real creative credit; prior to being picked by Paramount to be the head of the franchise, he had mostly done documentary-related work. And even then, he had largely used what was already laid out for him, or mostly relied on Braga, Moore, Piller and other actual scriptwriters. He refused to touch DS 9 and when he actually had to exercise a creative bone for Voyager and Enterprise, his true apathy really showed.

Once again I can at least understand Braga given his credentials and what he can do, but given Berman's credentials it just amazes me that Paramount picked him.

PunkMaister · Post by **PunkMaister** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:30 am

ILikeDeathNote wrote:
GStone wrote:They're all best when they first start out
I'll even give Brannon Braga credit, but this simply does not apply to Rick Berman. Star Trek has been his sole real creative credit; prior to being picked by Paramount to be the head of the franchise, he had mostly done documentary-related work. And even then, he had largely used what was already laid out for him, or mostly relied on Braga, Moore, Piller and other actual scriptwriters. He refused to touch DS 9 and when he actually had to exercise a creative bone for Voyager and Enterprise, his true apathy really showed.

Once again I can at least understand Braga given his credentials and what he can do, but given Berman's credentials it just amazes me that Paramount picked him.

Do you think Mallozi would have been a better bet then? :D