Breaking down the statistics: SDN vs SFJ polls.

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:03 am

Cock_Knocker wrote:
Gstone wrote:You clearly have no idea what a TV legacy is. All he did was work on scripts, as a writer and editor and did some voice work for most of his time with Trek. He wasn't ever that big of a guiding hand for Trek.
Clearly, you have no idea what a TV legacy is, or have no idea how to research a topic you're arguing about. David Gerrold not only wrote one of the two most popular episodes of Star Trek ever aired
And which one, the one from TOS or the animated series? Let's see 4 for Gerrold compared to Fontana who wrote...dun dun duuuuuun. 7-fucking-teen. More than Gerrold.
but he is the author of the TNG writer's/director's "bible".
And it's not the only bible. There's been bibles for each series (except TOS which was more making it up as they went along with basically just a few ideas jotted down on paper) and there's been 3 tech 'bibles' that he didn't write. Joseph, Okuda and Sternbach.

The latest thing I know of Fontana doing is working on Star Trek Tactical Assualt that came out fall 06 and Legacy that came out last december. She's even writting for New Voyages, which while I don't like, has gotten Takei and Koenig to work for the series.

Fontana has had greater Trek stamina no question. Show me where Gerrold is working with Trek fans or on Trek video games.
So again, Gerrold was chiefly responsible for what TNG was to begin with.
But, not for when the popularity of Trek for the whole franchise reached its highest peak. That is a greater legacy for Trek. The stories at that time drew far more attention from the fans and got more people interested in Trek than did any tribble. People weren't clamoring around their tellies to watch balls of fur that did nothing but pur, eat and fuck.

He was gone before that happened. And when did that happen? That's right. When Berman was in charge of TNG. Gerrold never got that high in the Trek heirarchy.
And again, Berman was the instrument of Trek's massive decline over the years.
So, let's compare.

Gerrold

Lasted only just under 4 seasons as a script writer/editor (5, if you want to count the animated series).

Berman

Hand picked by Gene to lead Trek, brought it to its highest popularity after Gerrold left. 7 season for TNG, 7 for DS9, 7 for VOY and 4 for ENT.

What's Gerrold's claim to fame in the end: Tribbles.
Also, as one of the two authors of one of the two most popular episodes of Star Trek ever aired (funny how the author of the other one, Harlan Ellison, also has less than positive things to say about Trek), and, an author with over 50 books to his credit and holder of Hugo and the Nebula awards, he has more believability than Brin, who has never worked on Star Trek in any significant way whatsoever.
And still...the guy was so far from being instrumental.
So, when he says:
David Gerrold wrote:"Star Trek’ is the McDonald’s of science fiction; it’s fast food storytelling. Every problem is like every other problem. They all get solved in an hour. Nobody ever gets hurt, and nobody needs to care. You give up an hour of your time, and you don’t really have to get involved. It’s all plastic.”
He would have been high and talking out of his ass. This is applicable to Baywatch. People have actually died in Trek. By their own hand or someone else. Civilians, spies, Starfleet, klingons, jem hadar, vorta, changlings, bajorans, kazon, caretakers, species 8472, borg, artificially intelligent life forms (missles and holograms), ktarians, trills, breen, species 116, cardassians.

The one hour is compressed time and there were often multiple episode stories. But, a lot of the series is deliberately written as an anthology and written so that the viewer doen't have to see the entire series beforehand to get what was happening in that particular episode. This was a deliberate thing. And oh, look at that. What were pretty much every episode of TOS? Why... it was written the same way. Stand alone episodes...at a time when he was a writer and story editor.

That same story style he bitches about now is the one he helped to create every week for year after year. To complain now is childish whining.
...he must know what he's talking about.
Oh, give me a break. He's bitching years after he quit because he didn't like how things were going with Trek; a direction, which lead to the height of the fanchise, regardless of what happened afterwards. Far exceeding what TOS every got and still...the last Trek series had a longer run than TOS did, despite the fact it's referred to as the end/death/endspot downfall of Trek. TOS 3 to ENT's 4.

User avatar
Cock_Knocker
Bridge Officer
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:07 am

Post by Cock_Knocker » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:02 am

GStone wrote:And which one, the one from TOS or the animated series?
Feigning ignorance; check.
Let's see 4 for Gerrold compared to Fontana who wrote...dun dun duuuuuun. 7-fucking-teen. More than Gerrold.
Quantity<Quality. "Tribbles" is arguably the most popular Star Trek episode ever written, next to "City On The Edge Of Forever".
but he is the author of the TNG writer's/director's "bible".
And it's not the only bible.
It is the bible TNG is based on, and every backstory originated from. We're not talking about "tech bibles", strawman boy. We were specifically talking about whether Berman or Gerrold was more involved with the genesis of TNG. So you can cease the Sternbach hand-waving, and stay on topic.
Fontana has had greater Trek stamina no question. Show me where Gerrold is working with Trek fans or on Trek video games.
Fortunately, Gerrold's life doesn't revolve around just Trek. However:
It's a wrap! "Blood and Fire" Wraps Principal Photography
“It’s a wrap,” as they say. “Blood and Fire” completed principal photography in New York on Sunday, June 10th, or more accurately early in the morning on Monday, June 11th. Writer / Director David Gerrold called “cut” on the final scene at about 2:00AM. This concluded a 12 day shooting schedule, which saw many 16-hour days to shoot the 100+ page script. Guest stars Denise Crosby and Bill Blair round out the cast and crew from around the country and from around the world. “This was a labor of love for us all,” commented Executive Producer James Cawley, “David had a solid vision of what he wanted and I think we achieved it.” The project moves into post-production with editing, music, visual and sound effects, and other finishing touches ahead. No projected release date has been set and will not likely be set until the post-production work nears completion. (News Release - June 11, 2007)
Care to put your foot further in your mouth?
But, not for when the popularity of Trek for the whole franchise reached its highest peak. That is a greater legacy for Trek. The stories at that time drew far more attention from the fans and got more people interested in Trek than did any tribble. People weren't clamoring around their tellies to watch balls of fur that did nothing but pur, eat and fuck.
Yet that episode is far more memorable to even a passing Trek fan, than the piece of shit, "Cause and Effect", for instance. And Gerrold was the one that gave Kirk his middle name. Did Berman do that? No. Berman killed Kirk in the most heroic way possible: have him fall off a cliff. Yeah, keep praising that idiot.
He was gone before that happened. And when did that happen? That's right. When Berman was in charge of TNG.
Yeah, Berman has lead Trek to his greatest heights, hasn't he? Oh, wait....
Gerrold never got that high in the Trek heirarchy.
Gerrold left after TNG first season (along with 30 others) due to Roddenberry turning everything over to his idiotic lawyer. So its not a matter of how talented you were under Roddenberry; it was an addled old man's whim that moved talentless idiots in, and made talented people leave.

=snip= your inability to read, and more hand waving.
Oh, give me a break. He's bitching years after he quit because he didn't like how things were going with Trek; a direction, which lead to the height of the fanchise, regardless of what happened afterwards. Far exceeding what TOS every got and still...the last Trek series had a longer run than TOS did, despite the fact it's referred to as the end/death/endspot downfall of Trek. TOS 3 to ENT's 4.
Voyager lasted longer than TOS as well. Again Quantity<Quality. There is nothing in TNG, DS9, Voy, or ENT that can ever hope to touch TOS at its height. Guess who was around at that time? Gerrold. Guess who wasn't?

Roondar
Jedi Knight
Posts: 462
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:03 pm

Post by Roondar » Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:46 am

Cock_Knocker wrote: Voyager lasted longer than TOS as well. Again Quantity<Quality. There is nothing in TNG, DS9, Voy, or ENT that can ever hope to touch TOS at its height. Guess who was around at that time? Gerrold. Guess who wasn't?
Let's not try to turn an opinion into fact now, shall we?

I'll freely note that this goes both ways. However, that won't change the fact that even the best literary critic is just giving his opinion on what he saw. Nothing more. It's definitely not science and definitely not black and white.

Besides, it's not as if SF movies/TV in general score so highly with critics to begin with. Sure, you have some good stuff in the drek (SW ep IV, SW ep V, ST 2) but most of it is just not that great in the mind of the critic.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:19 pm

Cock_Knocker wrote:Quantity<Quality. "Tribbles" is arguably the most popular Star Trek episode ever written, next to "City On The Edge Of Forever".
It's not arguable when the height of the entire franchise's popularity was during TNG.
It is the bible TNG is based on, and every backstory originated from.
Not every backstory because there are backstories in TNG that came about after the start of the series.
We're not talking about "tech bibles", strawman boy.
I was pointing out that there is more than one type of bible that's been used to 'base' trek stories on and he didn't have a hand in those.
We were specifically talking about whether Berman or Gerrold was more involved with the genesis of TNG.
Not genesis, you started talking about Trek's legacy. A show's legacy doen't start and end with just how it's created.
So you can cease the Sternbach hand-waving, and stay on topic.
A show's legacy doesn't start and end with how the show is created. This is why I brought up additional 'bibles', which Gerrold wasn't involved in.
Fortunately, Gerrold's life doesn't revolve around just Trek.
You're avoiding the point. He couldn't stay with Trek as long as Fontana or Berman.
However:
It's a wrap! "Blood and Fire" Wraps Principal Photography
“It’s a wrap,” as they say. “Blood and Fire” completed principal photography in New York on Sunday, June 10th, or more accurately early in the morning on Monday, June 11th. Writer / Director David Gerrold called “cut” on the final scene at about 2:00AM. This concluded a 12 day shooting schedule, which saw many 16-hour days to shoot the 100+ page script. Guest stars Denise Crosby and Bill Blair round out the cast and crew from around the country and from around the world. “This was a labor of love for us all,” commented Executive Producer James Cawley, “David had a solid vision of what he wanted and I think we achieved it.” The project moves into post-production with editing, music, visual and sound effects, and other finishing touches ahead. No projected release date has been set and will not likely be set until the post-production work nears completion. (News Release - June 11, 2007)
Care to put your foot further in your mouth?
Ooooooooooooooo. And in the end, he still leaves because he can't play well with those that disagree with him. He jumps ship before Trek reaches its highest popularity.
Yet that episode is far more memorable to even a passing Trek fan, than the piece of shit, "Cause and Effect", for instance.
Maybe not, but both parts of Best of Both Worlds is far more prominent in the minds of fans and nonfans. They even made a movie about the Borg, which is one of the most successful Trek movies. Have we seen a movie called 'Attack of the Tribbles'?
And Gerrold was the one that gave Kirk his middle name. Did Berman do that? No. Berman killed Kirk in the most heroic way possible: have him fall off a cliff. Yeah, keep praising that idiot.
A middle name? Tha's also part of this legacy building that you attribute to Gerrold? Kirk is referenced far more often by 'James (Jim) Kirk or 'James T. Kirk' than 'James Tiberius Kirk'.
Yeah, Berman has lead Trek to his greatest heights, hasn't he? Oh, wait....
It doesn't matter how much you want to ignore it. Trek was at its height during TNG (not TOS) and with Berman at the helm (not Gerrold).
Gerrold left after TNG first season (along with 30 others) due to Roddenberry turning everything over to his idiotic lawyer. So its not a matter of how talented you were under Roddenberry; it was an addled old man's whim that moved talentless idiots in, and made talented people leave.
He still made the choice to leave. You can't absolve him of personal responsibility of his actions.
=snip= your inability to read, and more hand waving.
Did you even see any of Baywatch? The amount of people that died on Baywatch is nothing compared to the amount of people that regularly die on Trek. The point of the phaser effect was so that death on TV was bloodless. Gerrold didn't want to stay and now he bitches from the sidelines.
Voyager lasted longer than TOS as well. Again Quantity<Quality. There is nothing in TNG, DS9, Voy, or ENT that can ever hope to touch TOS at its height. Guess who was around at that time? Gerrold. Guess who wasn't?
The ratings say you're wrong. As does the fact there is no Tribbles movie. Khan made it into a movie, but a tribble didn't.

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:28 pm

Roondar wrote:
Let's not try to turn an opinion into fact now, shall we?

I'll freely note that this goes both ways. However, that won't change the fact that even the best literary critic is just giving his opinion on what he saw. Nothing more. It's definitely not science and definitely not black and white.

Besides, it's not as if SF movies/TV in general score so highly with critics to begin with. Sure, you have some good stuff in the drek (SW ep IV, SW ep V, ST 2) but most of it is just not that great in the mind of the critic.
Who gives a shit whether the critics like it? The only thing that matters is if it makes money and if the average guy likes it.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:24 pm

If DS9 is fast food, then it will be the first time I'll openly defend fast food.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:26 pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
Roondar wrote:
Let's not try to turn an opinion into fact now, shall we?

I'll freely note that this goes both ways. However, that won't change the fact that even the best literary critic is just giving his opinion on what he saw. Nothing more. It's definitely not science and definitely not black and white.

Besides, it's not as if SF movies/TV in general score so highly with critics to begin with. Sure, you have some good stuff in the drek (SW ep IV, SW ep V, ST 2) but most of it is just not that great in the mind of the critic.
Who gives a shit whether the critics like it? The only thing that matters is if it makes money and if the average guy likes it.
Asking "who gives" if it's good or bad is a bit daft when the thread has largely been dealing with the good or bad input of certain producers and writers regarding what should be understood as the "Legacy of Trek" (epic words woah).

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:37 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote: Asking "who gives" if it's good or bad is a bit daft when the thread has largely been dealing with the good or bad input of certain producers and writers regarding what should be understood as the "Legacy of Trek" (epic words woah).
Yes but he actually stated that critics don't like Sci-Fi movies. Yet many of them that get poor reviews make a shitload of money, which translates into people liking them. The prequels (and IIRC the OT) for SW got shit reviews but made a ton of money. I can't recall if TWOK was widely dismissed by critics but it was probably the most successful Trek movie and loved by the public.

I agree that the fault for a shit movie lies with the production staff but that's largely a moot point when the critics dismiss an entire genre despite commercial success.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:44 am

If anything, this discussion reminds me of Spacebattles' Big 3 discussions, and the standards used to gauge the popularity of a given franchise.

In the end, it swings between casual viewer and geek/fan. Which one to pick between the two of them?

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:57 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:If anything, this discussion reminds me of Spacebattles' Big 3 discussions, and the standards used to gauge the popularity of a given franchise.

In the end, it swings between casual viewer and geek/fan. Which one to pick between the two of them?
You mean who do the producers pick to cater the movie to?

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:37 am

Cpl Kendall wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:If anything, this discussion reminds me of Spacebattles' Big 3 discussions, and the standards used to gauge the popularity of a given franchise.

In the end, it swings between casual viewer and geek/fan. Which one to pick between the two of them?
You mean who do the producers pick to cater the movie to?
Well, that could be a way to look at it, for sure.
But I was thinking in terms of which population "sample" you use to determine how succesful a given show is/was.
Fans from the first hour aren't necessarily going to be pleased with everything.
For example, I've see some Trek fans applaude everything safe DS9, which was too dark, gritty, etc.
Or I saw people not give that much important to Trek, and thus like the spin-offs and films which have the more action and effects.
I could see Stone and Poe argue for eternity, mainly because the standards they rely on are a tad too narrow.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:30 pm

Cock_Knocker wrote:Gerrold left after TNG first season (along with 30 others) due to Roddenberry turning everything over to his idiotic lawyer.
Can't say I've ever heard the lawyer one before. Where'd that come from?

(Just wondering. There are a large number of poorly-sourced anti-Roddenberry tales out there, like the anti-TNG guy who said Roddenberry was on smack during the 80's and all sorts of other things. Roddenberry is far too highly revered by some, yes, but if all the tales were true he would've been a druggie Satanist Stalinist eater of firstborns, the way some people talk about him.)

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:49 pm

2046 wrote: Can't say I've ever heard the lawyer one before. Where'd that come from?

(Just wondering. There are a large number of poorly-sourced anti-Roddenberry tales out there, like the anti-TNG guy who said Roddenberry was on smack during the 80's and all sorts of other things. Roddenberry is far too highly revered by some, yes, but if all the tales were true he would've been a druggie Satanist Stalinist eater of firstborns, the way some people talk about him.)
I've never heard the smack but from some of the episodes in early TNG, I do wonder if he or someone in the staff was on something.

User avatar
Cock_Knocker
Bridge Officer
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:07 am

Post by Cock_Knocker » Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:36 am

2046 wrote:
Cock_Knocker wrote:Gerrold left after TNG first season (along with 30 others) due to Roddenberry turning everything over to his idiotic lawyer.
Can't say I've ever heard the lawyer one before. Where'd that come from?
There's several legitimate sources about Roddenberry's lawyer screwing things up and having free reign due to Roddenberry's deteriorating mental condition. The Susan Sackett book (his personal secretary since 1976) details much of it.

Gerrold's interview regarding the same lawyer can be found here:

http://www.startrekanimated.com/tas_david_gerrold.html
Gerrold: I left Next-Gen because Gene Roddenberry's lawyer made the working conditions untenable. Gene's health was failing and the lawyer told him not to trust his own staff. Over thirty other people left the show that first year (a television record) because of the office politics. Even today, if you mention the lawyer's name on the lot, people roll their eyes and say, "We don't mention him." (Like what? Is that going to whitewash something?)
He also has interesting things to say on Trek canon, especially regarding TAS:
Gerrold: Arguments about "canon" are silly. I always felt that Star Trek Animated was part of Star Trek because Gene Roddenberry accepted the paycheck for it and put his name on the credits. And DC Fontana -- and all the other writers involved -- busted their butts to make it the best Star Trek they could.

But this whole business of "canon" really originated with Gene's errand boy. Gene liked giving people titles instead of raises, so the errand boy got named "archivist" and apparently it went to his head. Gene handed him the responsibility of answering all fan questions, silly or otherwise, and he apparently let that go to his head.

User avatar
SailorSaturn13
Bridge Officer
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:45 am

Post by SailorSaturn13 » Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:01 am

Gerrold: Arguments about "canon" are silly. I always felt that Star Trek Animated was part of Star Trek because Gene Roddenberry accepted the paycheck for it and put his name on the credits. And DC Fontana -- and all the other writers involved -- busted their butts to make it the best Star Trek they could.

But this whole business of "canon" really originated with Gene's errand boy. Gene liked giving people titles instead of raises, so the errand boy got named "archivist" and apparently it went to his head. Gene handed him the responsibility of answering all fan questions, silly or otherwise, and he apparently let that go to his head.

Well, since, Ronedberry, not Gerrold, invented Trek, his word holds.

But the question of canon ultimately lies in the hands of copyright owners, and the policy is that live material binds.


And for most people whom I know, Real Trek is Next-Gen-Trek, not TOS, which was nothing but proof of concept. The simply fact that TOS was cancelled but THREE series from NextGen were completed already means NG is the true Trek.


Brin, just so you know, discusses purely the films and leaves lower canon aside, which is legitimate as 99% of film viewers haven't watched or rread anything else from SW.

Oh and in SW every problem is ALSO solved within a hour and by the same means: fly a small ship to a big thing, shoot and make a big KABOOM.

Show me where Karen Traviss has proven Wong's or Saxton's conclusions are incorrect.
Show me where Karen Traviss has proven Wong's or Saxton's conclusions are incorrect.
By stating there were 1200000 Clonetroopers?

Post Reply