REVIEW: Chaos on the Bridge

At the last Star Trek convention in Las Vegas (where William Shatner was a featured guest) my sister and I went to one of the sales booths and bought the DVD that Shatner did on the production of Star Trek: The Next Generation, entitled “Chaos on the Bridge.” Shatner both wrote and directed this documentary, which runs an hour long, so one may wish to take it with some grains of salt. For the most part, he lets his subjects, the producers, writers and stars of TNG, do the talking. But Shatner, as he does, comes up with his own arc on a subject, and he sees the development of The Next Generation under original series creator Gene Roddenberry as a study in “the struggle for power.”

Paramount Studios, which owns Star Trek, had wanted to do a new series in that universe, while Roddenberry was in many respects out in the wilderness, not just because of the failure of his post-Trek projects in the early ’70s, but because of the “epic disaster” of Star Trek: The Motion Picture with the original cast. As original series writer David Gerrold puts it, “they gave him this Emeritus status, and he was a has-been.” At the same time, the various executives at Paramount who wanted the new series were simultaneously at odds with Roddenberry and convinced that they needed him to guide the new project. There are a lot of poker metaphors around this process of gamesmanship, which is also a recurring element in Next Generation.

While Shatner doesn’t really go into his Captain Kirk persona, fans of the first series will know that Roddenberry often placed Kirk as a symbol for himself, doing scripts where Kirk was split into his good and evil selves, artificially aged and otherwise forced to deal with internal challenges to his power and command. (Ironic, given that Trek fandom also gave us the phrase ‘Mary Sue.’) There’s a brief bit where someone points out that in his prime, Roddenberry saw himself as a womanizing, man-of-action type, and so made Kirk out to be that figure, but in the late 80s, when Next Generation was made, he saw himself more as the wise guide to his staff, and so made Captain Picard more in that role, the traditional executive who dispatched orders to the away team. This less active tone was a huge challenge to the writing staff in TNG’s first two seasons, as numerous people have pointed out, because without character tensions between flawed human beings (which were a huge feature of the Original Series) there wasn’t much to go on, especially since the violence of the original series was also de-emphasized. Maurice Hurley was brought in from the action-TV genre as a de facto showrunner, and he found Roddenberry’s utopian concept of the new Federation “wackadoodle” but nevertheless saw his job as trying to maintain the show’s loyalty to that vision. It was only when the show started to lean against that formula, and take up character-focused episodes under Rick Berman and Michael Piller, that the quality really started to pick up.

To simply make TNG in the first place, Paramount had to produce it in first-run syndication, which prior to cable and Netflix was the best option for a series independent of the networks. As a result it didn’t get a lot of respect, and a lot of things, and people, fell by the wayside. Denise Crosby has talked about how she ended up quitting the show out of frustration (after negotiations that Patrick Stewart likens to the Israeli-Palestinian talks), but she also amusingly points out that the support staff was so meager that “I used to go steal food off the set of Cheers.” What I didn’t know was that similar conflicts had led to the temporary removal of Gates McFadden as the ship’s doctor and her one-season replacement by Diana Muldaur. But producers pointed out that things didn’t gell with her on the set, and Muldaur, who had been on the original show, tells Shatner, “when I worked with you, we had scenes, it was all actors… by the time you got to Star Trek: The Next Generation, it was a vast technical world that had some characters placed in it.”

Such observations make this a fascinating piece to watch. However, while Shatner confines his study to the first three years of Next Generation, he doesn’t always do so in the most organized manner, and while the one-hour length means that there isn’t too much to process, it also may not be enough in some cases. For instance, Shatner really seems to hit it off with Jonathan Frakes, but he doesn’t appear in the documentary that much. Moreover, the theme of internal power struggle is often suggested but never really elaborated, perhaps because a lot of the participants are alive and agreed to talk. However while they are not explicit, the writers and other collaborators of Gene Roddenberry are quite clear that he was suffering both physical and mental decline in his final years, and prior to Next Generation needed to kick alcohol and other recreational drugs. In this respect, it’s sort of like Shatner’s opinions of other people that he’s worked with in the past and who are no longer here to tell their side of the story.

However, most of the principals of Star Trek: The Next Generation are still here, and their story is still well worth telling. Chaos on the Bridge presents a second act for both Gene Roddenberry and the universe he created, and the drama of the piece is that, with all the things that could have happened differently, it’s amazing that it happened at all.

REVIEW: Star Trek: Discovery

I had already posted my impression of the first preview of Star Trek: Discovery, and having finally gotten to see the pilot episode tonight (Sept. 24) I think that based only on the first show, Discovery is pretty good for what it is.  My problem is with what it is.

The good part is that the lead character, Michael Burnham, is very good and very well-played by Sonequa Martin-Green.  At the series start she is actually the first officer aboard the USS Shenzhou but is supposed to be transferring to the ship in the show’s title.  First however, the Shenzhou has to survive a confrontation with a particularly fanatical sect of Klingons.  And apparently Burnham was raised by Spock’s father Sarek after her parents were killed by Klingons, so this may be a bit personal for her.  In the course of the episode, Burnham’s relationships with other bridge crew including Science Officer Saru (Doug Jones) and her captain, Phillipa Georgiou (Michelle Yeoh) are established, and another strong point of this show is the chemistry between the crew that is obvious even at this point.  Said chemistry helps to heighten the tension when Burnham attempts a pre-emptive strike on the Klingons and everyone else (especially the captain) is warning her against it.

As I said in my other post, I like the relationship between the Burnham and Georgiou characters.  But I have problems.  If I could boil them down to one point, it would be that the producers are trying to make their own material with a tangential connection to Star Trek, without even resembling it as much as the retro-Trek of JJ Abrams’ movies.  This is especially important given that this show, like Enterprise, is supposed to be set in the main timeline (specifically, ten years before the Original Series).  And yet, the overall look, from the blue suit uniforms, to the darkened bridge, to the heavy use of lens flare, makes the show resemble AbramsTrek (specifically the scene on the USS Kelvin) more than the deliberately old-school Enterprise.

To quote the relevant part of my last piece, “Continuity is always an issue when you’re using established intellectual property, because while it defeats the purpose of creating something new if you don’t go off in a new direction, it defeats the purpose of saying that X is X when the new thing departs from the setting of X to begin with. It would be less irritating if Star Trek: Discovery had simply taken the parallel-universe of the J.J. Abrams series, or set the show within the past of that timeline. But the implication is that this is the universe of the original series, which already has quite enough problems with “retcon.” It’s not quite so bad with comic book properties, where a superhero series gets rebooted from scratch every decade or so and nobody questions this.. But even then, continuity matters. You can say that your Superman has no continuity with the Christopher Reeve Superman, but if you want to say that he IS Superman, don’t act surprised when people wonder why he needs to kill somebody.”

So again, given that this is supposed to be the same setting as Enterprise and TOS, you have stuff like Abrams lens-flare scenes, and you have the Klingons who have been retconned to look more alien YET again.  Continuity in Doctor Who is easier to keep track of.  And then it turns out that the scenes with Sarek were not with a younger Spock but with a child Burnham (the relationship between the two not being clear in the previews).  The use of Sarek seems gratuitous; it’s not as though another Vulcan elder couldn’t have been substituted without giving this character the baggage of being associated with Mark Lenard’s character.  Because he isn’t.  He’s played by James Frain.  And when you’re playing a Vulcan, there’s a difference between “unemotional” and “creepy.”  When I think of James Frain, I think “creepy.”

As a side note, I am thinking there might be a practical reason that future episodes of this show are only going to be accessible on the CBS All Access streaming site.  A practical reason other than greed, that is.  Streaming services like Netflix allow the production of original programming with “adult” language and concepts that wouldn’t be possible on a broadcast TV show.   The pilot of Discovery doesn’t have anything that I would see as “mature” or objectionable.  However the publicity for this show has had a lot of articles in liberal outlets like Vox making much of the fact that this is the first show in the Trek franchise to have a regular character (played by Broadway star Anthony Rapp) who is openly gay and in a committed relationship with another crewman.  However, these characters were not in this pilot, presumably because they’re on the Discovery and not the Shenzhou.  It could be that some people at CBS, especially its Standards and Practices department, thought that such a concept might damage people’s fragile eggshell minds.  This is my speculation.  But again, I don’t see much reason why this program needs to be on a premium source outside broadcast TV.  Besides greed, that is.

Of course given that CBS All Access is a streaming service, Star Trek: Discovery doesn’t really have to worry about ratings.  But as much as this show intrigues me, I’m not sure if I’d shell out $5.99 a month just to see how it develops.  Which is another point of ironic contrast between this show and The Orville, a broadcast series on Fox, which is notoriously fickle about SF shows.  The Orville is basically old-school Trek with the serial numbers filed off, but despite having to be different for copyright purposes, it “feels” like the same spirit.  Star Trek: Discovery is official Trek product- and again, pretty good for what it is- but what it is goes out of its way to NOT feel like Trek.