What was the greatest waste in all of Star Trek?

Sonnenburg · Post by **Sonnenburg** » 2006-02-11 11:00am

A variation on the old "never ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity" saying I'd use is "never ascribe as a rip off what is simply narrative necessity."
Here's the list of items from the Wiki article.

1. Both series premiered in 1993, and were set aboard space stations that were hubs of interstellar trade and politics.
That's a pretty strong similarity, and it wouldn't be surprising if that had come down from Paramount.

2. Both stations were located beside portals to distant places. (B5 guarded a hyperspace "jumpgate"; DS9 guarded the mouth of a wormhole.)
True again. However, couldn't this be considered a case where the survival of the series depended on such a situation? With DS9 being the first and only series with a fixed setting, it would mean that the adventures would have to come to them (or be in their neighborhood) for it to be worth watching. By putting it at a gateway to a wormhole you'd have both Starfleet and civilian ships passing through, whereas if it were simply a deep space station you'd get more of the former that were pushing out into the frontier.

3. Both series originally had a shapeshifter as a main character; however, Babylon 5 dropped that element before filming.
That's a very damning bit there.

4. The person in command of each station lost his wife when he confronted a powerful enemy.
Yes, but I think the difference is that Sisko had a son to raise on the station. Killing his wife, while obviously playing a small role in a few episodes including the pilot, seemed mostly to exist so that Sisko would have to serve as a single parent, rather than as simply a widower. The dynamic of a family having to adjust to this situation extended beyond Sisko to Chief O'Brien as well and his established relationship with Keiko from TNG. A wife for Sisko would have made storylines around an established character redundant, and Molly was simply far too young to serve in the same capacity as Jake.

5. Both commanders had a girlfriend who was a freighter captain, Carolyn Sykes for Commander Sinclair and Kasidy Yates for Captain Sisko.
But don't forget, Kassidy Yates was also knocking boots with David Palmer.
This is a could be, but maybe not kind of thing. TNG had already run the romance among shipmates thing into the ground, so having Sisko involved with another officer on the station would just be more of the same. A Bajoran officer could perhaps have made things interesting from a story point of view, but there's also a great deal of safety in choosing a freighter captain. The character can be around when needed and shunted off when she's not, and if she just isn't needed or liked you send her on her way.

6. The commander of each station eventually became a religious figure, advised by enigmatic aliens who were regarded as spiritual beings.
Heh, hard to argue with that one.

7. The second-in-command of each station was a woman with a hot temper who had lost a family member in a war.
Well we know that the character was originally supposed to be Ro Laren, so the real question is whether or not the TNG character was created specifically to join this series.

8. Central to each series were two alien races, one of which had until recently occupied and oppressed the home planet of the other. Furthermore:(1. The oppressed race was a deeply religious one. 2. The oppressors in both series were later manipulated by a powerful alien race to achieve its goals. 3. The plot of each series eventually centered around a war against the oppressors and those who manipulated them. 4. These wars resulted in the devastations of the former-oppressors' homeworlds.)
The Cardassian-Bajoran stuff was established in TNG, which again raises the question of whether this was there to pave the way. It's not something to dismiss out of hand; I'd say that the existence of DS9's Maquis was primarily motivated to set-up the woefully untapped situation that Voyager found itself in.
However, for the latter points, I don't think DS9 was created with the idea of having a war down the line. I think the war simply was a development used to stimulate ratings for the show which didn't have the luxury of network support like Voyager and Enterprise would have.

9. Each series added a small, tough starship, each the first of its kind, during the third season: DS9's Defiant and B5's White Star.
As the site linked points out, the Defiant and the White Star served far different purposes. I'm also pretty sure I read waaaaay back when DS9 S3 was about to start that one of the reasons for the Defiant showing up was because the static nature of the station didn't seem to be working, and that the crew needed to get off the station more in something better than a runabout or shuttle.

10. Each series includes a sinister organization working within the humans' government: DS9's Section 31 and B5's Psi Corps and Bureau 13.
That was very late in the series, though, and it comes across more as a) a plot device to cure Odo, and b) a chance to show that the Federation's hands weren't as clean as they liked to think. DS9 seemed to be the only Trek series to really be willing to do that.

11. Each series had a male character named "Dukat" (though B5's is spelt "Dukhat") and each series had a female character named "Lyta" (although DS9's is spelt "Leeta").
Ouch. That's hard to argue with.

12. Each Station was under the control of a earth based government but not in that government's territory.
Eh, maybe, but it's superficial at best. Obviously it was going to be a Federation station no matter what JMS suggested. Whether or not it was actually in Federation space really wasn't much of a factor in the series.

Another point that was brought up in the article but isn't on the list is the use of story arcs. Behr commented on the DS9 disks that the powers that be didn't like the story arcs, that they had to fight to get them and in some cases just kind of do it under the radar because Berman was off playing with Voyager. So that similarity was one that took place in spite of management rather than because of it.

For me the best part of DS9 was the stuff that wasn't on the list. Garak leaps immediately to mind, and the way Quark came off. Odo, not the fact that he was a shapeshifter, but merely his entire outlook, and the fact that he seemed to slide easily from Cardassian authority to Bajoran authority as if he were someone separated from it. The way the mix was being tampered with, like throwing in conflicts with Klingons. The relationship that developed over the years between O'Brien and Bashir from O'Brien's loathing to a close friendship (one of my favorite moments is the sight of the two singing while thoroughly drunk and Bashir revealing his brilliant idea: "We should go down to Quark's... and sing for everybody!"). When it had the guts to poke fun at the smug superiority of the Federation, such as Quark pointing out that humans despise the Ferengi because they're too much of a reminder of how they used to be, or Jake delivering the "we seek to better ourselves" speech only to have the fact presented that if that were true then he wouldn't be begging for money. So while I don't argue that some things have definitely been lifted from B5, I think the best of what DS9 was was original.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 11:18am

When your looking with the benefit of hind sight you can find similarties between a LOT of things.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 11:22am

Sonnenburg wrote:Another point that was brought up in the article but isn't on the list is the use of story arcs. Behr commented on the DS9 disks that the powers that be didn't like the story arcs, that they had to fight to get them and in some cases just kind of do it under the radar because Berman was off playing with Voyager. So that similarity was one that took place in spite of management rather than because of it.

And the argument that DS9 rips B5 hinges on Paramount management giving Behr the B5 scripts before the B5 plot elements themselves aired. This is in itself evidence that no such conspiracy to rip B5 existed. How does Behr get the B5 notes when Paramount was actively fighting what Behr was doing and would no way in hell give them to Behr?

So while I don't argue that some things have definitely been lifted from B5, I think the best of what DS9 was was original.

Thats where I view things as well. There are similarties enough between the series to indicate some ideas got copied, but ultimately both series are original. On the surface there are similartities, but the paths taken are different.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2006-02-11 04:45pm

Alyeska wrote:I did read that link. And I noted that the link even admits DS9 came first and aired several of the similarities well before B5 ever did.

First in airdate != First in production, conception, story, etc.

Well I asked for proof that JMS magicaly had the B5 scripts and plots 90% finished before DS9 even left the drawing board and the DS9 writers faithfuly ripped the ideas. You provided none.

You're right, the proof was in that link provided from someone else. Of course, I did point not only that link out, but the two links inside that further elaborated on the subject. Here is one of them for you, since you are incapable of following my explicit directions.

Who is the fanboy here. Furthermore, you aren't seeing me proclaim DS9 to be the second comming. But apparently because I am defending DS9 on the charge of being a rip of B5, I must be a DS9 fanboy. You on the other hand won't stop ragging DS9 and didn't back up requests for evidence.

You're either dishonest or stupid. EDIT: And I'm going with stupid because you still contest that you are in any way qualified to comment on how much DS9 resembled (or didn't) Babylon 5 without actually having seen Babylon 5.

I posted my proof pointing out that DS9 got their first in several areas and was built on a foundation that existed well before DS9. I've yet to see anyone prove the DS9 writers had massively ripped B5 thanks to Paramount giving them every piece of material JMS proposed.

You posted airdates, which mean little. You have yet to see proof because no one has led you by the hand to it, foolishly expecting some effort or exertion on your part to click a link. But here I am to hold that hand.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-02-11 05:20pm

Alyeska wrote:And the argument that DS9 rips B5 hinges on Paramount management giving Behr the B5 scripts before the B5 plot elements themselves aired. This is in itself evidence that no such conspiracy to rip B5 existed. How does Behr get the B5 notes when Paramount was actively fighting what Behr was doing and would no way in hell give them to Behr?

No, the argument hinges on just how many plot-elements are copied from the one by the other, and it's all too obvious that a suspiciously large number of Babylon 5 elements wound up in the framework for Deep Space Nine. And let's have an end to this first-airdate nonsense, shall we? It really does not bear examination nor provides a valid defence for Paramount on the matter.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 05:26pm

And the link given kills the argument once and for all. JMS himself states the worst possible thing is that Paramount required some similarties, and thats it. The DS9 writers themselves did not have access to the scripts and its obvious the shows lead in different directions. Straight from the horses mouth.

All JMS claims is that Paramount tried to kill his program. Of course Paramount is not necessarily Trek itself, Berman is. And Berman never liked the DS9 concept to begin with.

So once again the conspiracy theories smack in the face of reality.

At worst, the series had intentional similarties, surface similarities. This is something I already acknowledged. But burrowing from another concept does not make the one an intentional rip. DS9 ran a very different course and was written by writers who did not have access to B5 scripts.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-02-11 06:11pm

Alyeska wrote:All JMS claims is that Paramount tried to kill his program. Of course Paramount is not necessarily Trek itself, Berman is. And Berman never liked the DS9 concept to begin with.

They had a copy of his theme bible, and Paramount 'tried' to kill it. How does Paramount kill it except with Trek, exactly? Do elite Paramount hit-squads go after B5? NO! They produce a show with an already known license, using a lot of the same concepts. And rush it out.

Don't look down, because you've run out of ground to tread on.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 06:19pm

I already admitted that similartities exist. And the level of surface similarities are too many to be conincidental. But that is where it ends. They exist only on the surface.

Think of it like this.

Star Trek and the Alternate Universe. Strikingly similar, and yet so very different.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2006-02-11 06:47pm

Alyeska wrote:I already admitted that similartities exist. And the level of surface similarities are too many to be conincidental. But that is where it ends. They exist only on the surface.

Actually, anyone reading over the thread can see you wavered between ignoramus and petulant child...

You wrote:Well for those of us who never saw B5, DS9 wasn't a copy of B5 and was quoite enjoyable in that sense.

You wrote:
Vympel wrote:Nope. By the time I heard how good B5 was, no stations I had access to aired it. Besides, if I saw B5 I am liable to call it a pitiful copy of DS9. Turnabout is fair play.
Nope. By the time I heard how good B5 was, no stations I had access to aired it. Besides, if I saw B5 I am liable to call it a pitiful copy of DS9. Turnabout is fair play.

You wrote:From my perspective it would appear as such. Whatever you see first colors what you see next.

...until you finally committed to petulant ignoramus with the airdate argument:

You wrote:Whats funny from reading some of the similarties, B5 actualy copied things from DS9.

Both series added a "tough little ship" in their 3rd seasons. Except DS9s 3rd season was a year before B5s.

And that is what I responded to. You accused the producers of Babylon 5 to be the plagarists, don't bitch when the exact opposite is revealed not only to be plausable but likely.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 07:16pm

I never once accused the B5 writers of being plagarists. DS9 writers got accused of plagarism and I asked how they could have done that given they aired their stuff a year in advance. And now even JMS himself says the DS9 writers never plagarized.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2006-02-11 07:38pm

Alyeska wrote:I never once accused the B5 writers of being plagarists.

You wrote:Whats funny from reading some of the similarties, B5 actualy copied things from DS9.

Both series added a "tough little ship" in their 3rd seasons. Except DS9s 3rd season was a year before B5s.

DS9 writers got accused of plagarism and I asked how they could have done that given they aired their stuff a year in advance. And now even JMS himself says the DS9 writers never plagarized.

And you were answered, but you don't like the answer of Paramount possessing a Babylon 5 writers' bible. Tough shit.

You wrote:All JMS claims is that Paramount tried to kill his program. Of course Paramount is not necessarily Trek itself, Berman is. And Berman never liked the DS9 concept to begin with.

So once again the conspiracy theories smack in the face of reality.

Whose desires are more paramount? Berman or Paramount?

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-02-11 07:47pm

Alyeska wrote:And the link given kills the argument once and for all. JMS himself states the worst possible thing is that Paramount required some similarties, and thats it. The DS9 writers themselves did not have access to the scripts and its obvious the shows lead in different directions. Straight from the horses mouth.

All JMS claims is that Paramount tried to kill his program. Of course Paramount is not necessarily Trek itself, Berman is. And Berman never liked the DS9 concept to begin with.

So once again the conspiracy theories smack in the face of reality.

At worst, the series had intentional similarties, surface similarities. This is something I already acknowledged. But burrowing from another concept does not make the one an intentional rip. DS9 ran a very different course and was written by writers who did not have access to B5 scripts.

That doesn't wash: you're attempting to suggest that Rick Berman had more say in the matter than his bosses at Paramount, who actually own Star Trek lock, stock, and dilithium chamber and not Rick Berman. Even more ludicrous is the attempt to argue that "requring some similarities" to Babylon 5 in the Deep Space Nine plotline/background somehow doesn't constitute an attempt at plagarism (particularly as requiring them makes it a conscious action) to reduce or kill the former.

You're also being quite disingenuous in cherry-picking through what's quoted on that link: you don't get to handwave away the point about Paramount's corporate involvement in the creation of Deep Space Nine.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-11 08:44pm

Look at it this way. Paramount owns Trek, but the most senior guy in Paramount involved in Trek is Berman. Who over Bermans head would be interested?

The only valid explination is JMS really pissed someone off senior in Paramount who merely used DS9 as a hammer and anvil to try and kill of B5 because of a personal vendetta against JMS. And strangely, I can believe that. Paramount execs aren't known for their maturity.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-02-11 08:50pm

Alyeska wrote:I never once accused the B5 writers of being plagarists. DS9 writers got accused of plagarism and I asked how they could have done that given they aired their stuff a year in advance. And now even JMS himself says the DS9 writers never plagarized.

You are being extremely dishonest here. The fact that they did not plagiarize individual scripts does not mean they did not have an overall structure that was dictated by people cribbing out of somebody else's work.

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2006-02-11 09:17pm

Alyeska wrote:Look at it this way. Paramount owns Trek, but the most senior guy in Paramount involved in Trek is Berman. Who over Bermans head would be interested?

People who want Star Trek to make money by crushing the only serious competition?

The only valid explination is JMS really pissed someone off senior in Paramount who merely used DS9 as a hammer and anvil to try and kill of B5 because of a personal vendetta against JMS. And strangely, I can believe that. Paramount execs aren't known for their maturity.

What is wrong with you, Alyeska? Are you ignorant of how television companies make money? Do you think you can make up a whole backstory about JMS that doesn't exist? Are you an idiot? Do you think we're idiots enough to accept whatever you want to believe to be fact as fact?

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-02-11 10:05pm

Alyeska wrote:The only valid explination is JMS really pissed someone off senior in Paramount who merely used DS9 as a hammer and anvil to try and kill of B5 because of a personal vendetta against JMS. And strangely, I can believe that. Paramount execs aren't known for their maturity.

The only valid explanation? In what universe? Certainly not this one.

And you will kindly present your evidence backing this "personal vendetta" motive on the part of the Paramount execs you allege, if you would be so kind...

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2006-02-13 08:29am

Look at it this way. Paramount owns Trek, but the most senior guy in Paramount involved in Trek is Berman. Who over Bermans head would be interested?

How about the Paramount exec who asked Berman to make a show about a space station?

It it helps clear this up, I present the following from Babylon 5: The Scripts of J. Michael Straczynski Volume 1

Ironically, one of the places that did understand what we were doing was Paramount Television, which made overtures to us about picking up the project after reading the spec movie and the series bible and the treatment...only to suddenly change their minds at the last moment, no explanation given

That was in 1990.

There was, however, one last obstacle waiting to beam itself onto the road ahead of us.

As background, you must understand that during ths period, Warner Brs. and Paramount were engaged in a heated battle to launch the first studio-owned network...

After Warner Bros. formally announced to the TV and film industry trade magazines in November of 1991 that Babylon 5 was going into production, we began prep immediately, and I began revising the pilot script that appears in this volume. The process was going well when, about a month later, right around Christmas Eve, I recieved a call from Walter Koenig, a friend, who had just come from dinner with Trek consultant Richard Arnold. "Have you heard what the new Star Trek is going to be about?" he asked. When I said no, he continued with, "It's about a space station that's a port of call, next to a kind of jumpgate, with nightclubs and diplomats and smugglers and a big war story."

Not long afterward, Paramount Television, to whom we had pitched Babylon 5, made the official announcement that this was, indeed, the premise for their new series, Deep Space Nine...and came within inches of killing Babylon 5 before it ever got off the ground. WB was already worried that the market couldn't support two space science fiction series at the same time, and did we really think it could sustain two science fiction series about space stations? And given the choice of two such shows, what station manager in his right mind wouldn't pick one with the Trek brand name over some series they'd never heard of before?

It is to their credit that...WB let us go into production. But for years, Trek would continue to be an albatross around our neck: TV stations were told that if they purchased B5 they couldn't buy DS9, directors were pressured by Paramount not to work on our series, actors recieved equal intimidation, buyers of commercial time were advised to stay away because B5 would look cheap and terrible...it was about three years of constant trench warfare before we were finally left alone...

...there was going to be considerable confusion in the marketplace...Both had commanders in charge, a female second in command, bars, diplomats, traders, smugglers, a religious destiny for its lead character, a shape-changer (in the B5 pilot, until we ditched ours), a wormhole or jumpgate that allowed transit, a promenade or zocalo style bazaar, a regular character named Leeta in their show and Lyta in ours, and a title that consisted of a name and a number. Given all that, we had to be distinct and different right out of the box.

So to clarify...Behr and Berman aren't plagarists. Berman in particular would have wanted the show to be as little like B5 as possible. But the Paramount execs who had read the series bible and had a vested interest in shutting Warner Bros.' network down had significant impact on the premise of DS9.[/quote]

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2006-02-13 02:31pm

Are you planning to respond to any of this, Alyeska? It's been over a day.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-13 07:46pm

Piss off. It's gotten to the point that anything I say is attacked, but if I someone else says the same thing, they are ignored. I am getting singled out, and I do not willfuly participate in such things.

I have no reason to continue in this thread. Furthermore, I have NOT given a concession. Leave it at that.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2006-02-13 10:30pm

Piss off. It's gotten to the point that anything I say is attacked, but if I someone else says the same thing, they are ignored.

Example?

If so, perhaps it's your tone.

I have no reason to continue in this thread. Furthermore, I have NOT given a concession. Leave it at that.

I'm pretty new around here. If I had given such an answer (refusing to continue yet also refusing to concede) to a thread in which I had stubbornly defended an untenable position, I would have recieved physical blisters from the response by the veterans.

But more importantly, I recommend that you try to see B5 sometime and form a qualified opinion. It can't be that hard to find to rent or borrow, can it? If you don't like it, you don't like it, but at the least we have provided some historical perspective on the matter.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-13 10:43pm

I've wanted to see B5 for some time. I downloaded their two best movies and enjoyed them both. But I am unwilling to spend my own dime to see the series and risk getting burned in wasting both time AND money.

If and when it airs on TV I will see it. Sadly, Scifi channel has ceased airing B5 regularly and only airs the odd episode when they need to fill scheduel.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » 2006-02-13 11:09pm

Ah. Yes, the Sci-Fi Channel has made some rather dubious choices.

I think it would be damn cool if Spike TV picked it up and gave it the treatment that Next Gen and DS9 got. Probably not likely.

If it helps (it probably doesn't) I've seen the season sets in stores used for as much as $40 off the MSRP. That's still buying, though, unfortunately. Apparently Netflix isn't a viable solution for you, but that's how I got into Stargate, plus finally seeing the whole five years of B5.

Which two movies did you see, by the way?

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-02-13 11:13pm

Into the Fire (If thats the Minbari war one, thats what I saw) and Third Space.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-02-14 12:02am

Those movies were horrible. They go from average (Thirdspace) to utterly, mindbendingly stupid (the magical soul one).

kaikatsu · Post by **kaikatsu** » 2006-02-14 01:01am

*looks up at B5 vs DS9 debate*
*Has not seen B5*
*Has interest in original post and hasn't been around here for a while...*

I'd just like to pop some affirmation in on the borg being one of the biggest wastes ever. NON-CENTRALIZED SYSTEM! Goddamn Borg Queens. They were supposed to be a scary monolith. First Contact was bad... Voyager just finished the fucking.

Generally, I hate the fact that so many episodes have really interesting implications, and never get used. "There's a machine that can send us to any time, any place?" Or, for example, "We accidentally made a PERFECT clone of someone?"

This might be a point of contention, but I tend to dislike one episode wonders. The original Star Trek had a lot of that -- an interesting new idea or planet that is ignored for all future episodes. I mean, the Dyson Sphere. The DYSON SPHERE! There could have been an entire SERIES based on the exploration of the Dyson Sphere, trying to unlock its secrets, or find out who made it. (Ringworld comes to mind.)

Oh man, I could rant for pages on this... I'll stop now.