-------- Subj: Answers Date: 10/1/97 6:54:00 PM From: RonDMoore <<All I know whatever anyone says is that the E-E should be in that episode, its just crap on the part of the writers.>> It's a big galaxy and a big war. The Enterprise-E is fighting, but not around DS9. << I kinda' got to thinking about what would happen if the Borg & The Dominion were to go head to head. How would a shapeshifter be assimilated? Imagine a Borgified Jem-Hadar.. Has there been any talk of this kind of thing? >> We've pretty much decided to keep away from the Borg on DS9 and Voyager deal with them exclusively. <<Why does he not answer any quetions related to the Borg. I tell you why, its because he is afraid as is everyone else at Paramount that the Borg have already been messed up to the point in which there is nothing left. Yo ronnie, admit it or not, YOU KNOW that I, Borg and Descent screwed up the Borg....The Borg were the most exciting, dangerous, and powerful villian ever. Q was excellant, but the Romulans fell behind the Dominion/Cardassions - who along with Species 8472, are a complete joke.... Unity was boring, Scorpian (which was exciting), I Borg, and Descent all made the Borg looked like sissies when realistically, they are the most exciting and dangerous enemy within the Star Trek Universe. That's exactly why Ron does not answer my questions about the Borg - he and Paramount are lost, lost, lost.... Mark my words, Star Trek 9 will not be as successful as First Contact, and to Mr. Moore and his buddies at Paramount - RESISTANCE IS, REPEAT, IS FUTILE.>> "What happened to your stutter?" "I've been giving myself electroshock treatments." "Up the voltage." -- Real Genius, 1985 << < Again, this was a very important part of the Trek universe to Gene and we have tried not to violate it regardless of how we may personally feel about this view.> Do you do this with all of the views Gene regarded as important?>> We certainly try. We're all conscious of Gene's legacy and of the Trek universe he created and we try to remain faithful to it. That's not to say that we haven't done some things that he wouldn't have approved of were he still with us. For example, Gene did not want conflict between the regular characters on TNG. This began to hamstring the series and led to many, many problems. To put it bluntly, this wasn't a very good idea. But rather than jettison it completely, we tried to remain true to the spirit of a better future where the conflicts between our characters did not show them to be petty or selfish or simply an extension of 20th century mores. Gene's vision is what started it all and we owe it to him to carry on the show in a way that he would be proud, but we also have to do what we believe is in the best interests of the show. If there's a conflict between the two needs, we have to rely on our own judgement and on our own consciences to resolve it. <<Do you still have the shoulder length hair?>> No. My hair length tends to go up and down over the course of the year. It's starting to dip down below my ears again. <<do you have much input into how the characters look? If, for instance, you'd dreamed up a wild two-headed look for Dr. Geiger in "In The Cards" could you make it stick or would the makeup people tell you to get a life?>> If the writer has a specific idea for the look of a character, the makeup and wardrobe departments will try very hard to deliver it unless there are practical considerations (like two heads) that make it virtually impossible to accomplish. <<Any chance for an episode having the Romulan cavalry showing up and saving the day?>> I doubt it. <<have you ever given any consideration to having Worf mention his grandfather, Col. Worf, Kirk and McCoy's "public defender" from ST6?>> We've thought about it, but haven't found a place to throw it in. It could still happen. -------- Subj: Answers Date: 10/1/97 7:14:55 PM From: RonDMoore <<What happened to the runabouts at the end of A Call to Arms? I didn't see them leave with the Defiant but I can't see Sisko and crew leaving the Rio Grande (and the other runabouts) behind.>> I think they ended up on Bajor when the Bajorans were all evacuated from the station. <<What happened to the *other* half of Jake's family? Here we are, watching Jake spending time with Papa Sisko, but no mention of his other grandparents?>> It's a good question and I don't know the answer. It's something I'll try to keep in mind so we can fill out the done with the character and does not want to portray it again. We did look into having Spock appear once on DS9, but were told that he was not interested. <<How much in advance of typing do you have a script finished? Or at least an in-stone idea. Also, at that point do you tell the actor involved in a big character revelation about this revelation in advancce so that they can play it.>> If you mean "filming" instead of "typing", then the answer is that it varies. Sometimes a script is still undergoing heavy rewrites while its being shot, other times the script is virtually locked a week or so beforehand. If we're making major character changes, we'll usually give the actor a heads-up at some point before the script is done -- like Worf & Dax getting married for example. << I betcha that not too long from now, old Worfie is a captain, and then he's going to be said to outrank Kira all together, and they'll find some trumped up excuse why he can command the station and she has to follow his orders. >> I'll take that bet. <<Will Cardassia's ancient culture ever be mentioned or explored?>> I think so, but there's nothing on the board right now. -------- Subj: Answers Date: 10/1/97 7:32:15 PM From: RonDMoore <<When you start knowingly contradicting that continuity, you essentially are lying to the audience. Whether it's a big lie or a little lie, the result is basically the same. False information has been presented as the truth.....The original show got letters back in the '60s when the transporter pad flashed three times in one episode, twice in another, and four times in yet another, from fans wanting an explanation. This was in the pre-VCR days, my friend. Today, the standard is higher. There are more of us, we've seen the old episodes countless times, can quote them verbatim, sometimes have them on tape, know some of the characters better than our own families....and we're told when something doesn't mesh that it's irrelevant!?! And you wonder why we get upset?>> This is rapidly moving into the dead horse category, but I'll try one more time. Continuity is important. We like continuity. We try very hard to keep it consistant. But tracking transporter flashes from show to show is not and will not be our number one priority. There's a lot of detail in the Trek universe and if you're not careful, it can be a trap. Yes, the story is more important to us. That's just the way it is. If you want to look at any continuity error as a "lie" that's up to you, but I don't look at it that way and no one else around here does either. Shows evolve and change, and some things are discarded along the way. There's important backstory that's vital to the series and then there's stuff that's just trivia (like a transporter flash, for crying out loud). I've had many talks with Mike and Denise Okuda (Mr. & Mrs. Continuity) over the years and we all agree on this point. If there's a way to bend and twist the backstory a bit to get where we want to go, we'll do it, but we try not to flat out break the continuity of the series. For instance, Sisko never *said* his father was dead, he simply implied it. So we bent the backstory a little. We didn't want Sisko's grandfather, we wanted his father (because the father/son dynamic is obviously different than grandfather/grandson). The Trill were not supposed to go through transporters and we slid by it (like the original Trill makeup). Spot's sex change was easily avoided and we should've done better. The only way to address the Scotty/Relics issue in Generations was not to have Scotty in the movie at all. I wasn't willing to make that trade for the sake of a single line that can easily be rationalized away by saying "Scotty was momentarily confused." I still wouldn't do it. Focusing on the minutiae of continuity problems in a series that has such an incredibly tight and consistant storyline spread over the course of 30 years is a classic example of not seeing the forest for the trees. <<Do you know if Majel Barrett Roddenbery was upset at being passed over during a Star Trek 30 year anniversary production put on last year (where casts of all shows went on stage and received flags flown on space shuttles, and lots of applause)? I know this was a really glitzy show-biz production, so one mustn't have high expectations, but I was very, very disappointed they would forget her. Do people in charge not like her for some odd reason? Why did they not mention her?>> I don't know why they didn't mention her (she was there) or what her feelings were about it. I thought it was odd. << How about Kira getting a little step up in rank? Like that special rank of Navoc that they invented for the big hero-who-wasn't, Li Nalas? Kira's worked hard...what do you think, Ron dear?>> I don't know... maybe. I'll think about it. (Only because you called me "dear.") <<How many production assistants work on a show such as yours and what exactly do they do?>> I think there are two PA's assigned to each show and they do a wide variety of tasks for little money and over the course of long hours. Everything from distributing call sheets to grabbing a cup of coffee to dealing with fan mail. --------
|Previous chat||Chat index||Next chat|
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.