Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Date: 7/16/97 00:49:11
<< I wonder if they will have a special episode on either or both shows this
year in tribute to TNG's 10th anniversary.>>
There are no plans for a TNG anniversary salute on either show. Ten years
seems like an awfully short time for anniversary salutes in my opinion.
<<Mr. Moore, can we get a clarification? Is it just the Ent-E that is exiled
to movie-Trek, or is it the entire Sovereign-class? Will we ever see a
Sovereign-class ship on DS9?>>
The Sovereign-class will probably not be making an appearance on DS9. The
ship and its class are definitely part of the feature franchise and not
available for series work.
<<The plot development of the Dominion becoming an ally of Cardassia was
somewhat surprising given the "female" changeling's statement to Garak last
season that Cardassia was doomed because of the ill-fated attack on the
changeling homeworld. Is this still a viable foreshadowing for the new
alliance, or a line now best forgotten?>>
We haven't forgotten the line. Our thinking is that the Founders think and
plan for the looooong term. The fate of Cardassia has been probably been
sealed as far as their concerned, but the final moves may not play themselves
out for quite some time.
<<will wee see any more of that fine Klingon crew from "Soliders of the
Empire"? I think they deserve a follow up story.>>
We will see the Rotarran again, but not with the same crew. The reason is
budgetary. It costs $$$ to use speaking roles in any episode and unless
there was some story-driven reason to use those actors again, we would fill
the bridge with non-speaking extras (or "background") in a show that took
place on the Rotarran, but did not require the appearance of those specific
characters in the drama. It's unfortunate, but it's just one of many
concessions that are made in producing an elaborate and expensive show like
<< I have never seen a picture of you-- what do you look like?>>
Tom Cruise, except completely different.
<<And what does the "D" stand for?>>
You'll never guess. It's an old family name (Irish, I believe).
<<Any chance we'll be seeing Dr. Giger again at some point in the future,
trying out some other scheme?>>
No plans at the moment.
<<Any chance we'll ever learn a bit about Leeta other than her history as a
<<is it true about colm wanting out of his contract early, or is this just
another rumor being started in this file?>>
All I can say is that Colm was at work, on the set, on Friday and is still a
part of the cast.
Date: 7/16/97 01:10:09
<<[The Enterprise is] the most important ship in the fleet. It would be at
the biggest battle with hundreds of amassed ships.>>
Well, no, not really. First of all, while the Enterprise is certainly a
great ship with a proud lineage and has one of the finest crew in the fleet,
saying she's *the* most important vessel is taking things a bit too far. In
our view, the Enterprise is one of many ships in Starfleet, all of them
crewed by the cream of the Federation and all representing the ideals of
Gene's universe. I've always opposed the "deification" of the Enterprise
(A,B,C,D,E, and the original) as some sort of quasi-mystical ship. (This has
nothing to do with the "flagship" designation, by the way -- that's more of
an honorific with Starfleet than anything else and is an acknowledgement of
the proud tradition of ships named Enterprise in Starfleet.) The Enterprise
is special to US, the viewers, and WE can view it as the most important ship,
but extending that to the way it's treated in the series (any of the series)
would be a mistake. It's confusing the audience's identification with the
ship and characters with the reality being created on screen. Yes, it's
clearly famous and yes, it's certainly a plum assignment. But if the
Enterprise started being treated as *the* most important vessel in SF, then
it would cease to get the dangerous missions and would probably start being
treated as more of a "showboat" than a real workhorse -- you don't send *the*
most important ship in the Federation out to do hum-drum missions like patrol
the border, catalog odd subspace readings or any of the other many things we
sent the Big-E out to go do. I find that saying that the Enterprise is only
one of many actually increases my respect for her and her crew in a funny
<<Is Odo and Lwaxana's marriage officially over?>>
<<What does Dax say to Worf in "The Way of the Warrior" that makes him
respond, "I suppose so"? Dax later says, "It loses something in the
translation." I don't care, what did she say?>>
Worf: Curzon's name is an honored one among my people.
Dax: (in Klingon) Yeah, but I'm a lot better looking than he was.
<<Will you have any involvement in Star Trek IX?>>
<<And finally, do you ever have people looking over your shoulder as you
write these answers?>>
I've never looked... oh, my god!
<<When a Star Trek box set is released, who decides which episodes make the
cut? Is this something you guys (the writers/producers) decide, or does
We have nothing to do with this. The video releases are up to Paramount Home
Video and they have never solicited our opinions about anything.
<<I read on the MANIA Home Page that Dax is going to change hosts next year.
<<Where can I get more info on the WGA and Academy of TV Arts and Sciences
The WGA is here in Los Angeles and the TV Academy is in North Hollywood.
They're both listed and you can call them for information (sorry, but I
don't have the numbers at my fingertips.)
<<About the Nexus, Guinan told Picard he could come out of the Nexus and into
our reality at any point in time he wished. If this is true, why on earth did
he and Kirk decide to go back at a time when their lives would be in danger?
How about going back when Sauron was in ten forward stargazing and just have
worf toss him in the brig?>>
Our reasoning (and it's admittedly thin) is that Picard didn't want to go
back any further in time than absolutely necessary since he knows the extreme
dangers of unexpected results from any tampering with the timeline. Okay,
it's not much, but there it is.
Date: 7/16/97 01:37:37
<<Will we ever see the following on DS9:
1. Dabo boys
2. A gorgeous, sexy male in love with a female that's physically comparable
to a Ferengi
3. Exploration of the sexuality of one of the regular male characters
Or are the sexual appetites of your male audience the only ones worthy of
your attention? Or, is it that the all-male writing staff on DS9 is
incapable of conceiving scripts that consider sexuality as a human province,
and not just a male province?>>
1. Dabo boys ain't gonna be hired by Quark, that's just a Ferengi fact of
2. Sexy male in love with a (to us) ugly female is an interesting idea and is
certainly possible. 3. Exploration of the sexuality of a male character
seems to imply discovering that one of our regulars is bi or gay and we have
no plans to do so, chiefly because dealing with one's sexual orientation in
Gene's 24th century is kinda simple: "Hey, Captain, I think I might be gay."
"Okay. Now get back to fixing those transtators." It's not really an issue
to these people, so "exploring" it doesn't hold much promise. I liked
"Rejoined" precisely because it did *not* explore Dax's sexuality, it simply
presented it in the context of a love story and let the viewer deal with
their own feelings about it.
You could argue that we *should* do more stories in this vein and that maybe
more tales about homosexuality in the 24th century would be a good thing, and
I wouldn't argue with you. But it's not something that we're *interested* in
at the moment. That's our prerogative -- we're TV writers, not social
engineers. We don't have a defined list of "goals" or "causes" that must be
advocated or explored as part of our mandate. We write about what interests
*us* and yes, you can say that we're influenced by our own tastes and our own
sometimes limited perspectives. But that also means that we have a *passion*
for what we do end up writing.
That, to me, is much more important -- that the writing reflect my very best
work and that it say what I want it to say. There are many things I *could*
say -- many important and worthy causes I could choose to advance or ills I
could choose to condemn -- but there are only so many episodes and so many
opportunities. Choices have to be made. So what I'm saying to you is not
that I'm opposed to the idea of gay-themed shows or issues of sexual
orientation being explored on the show, but it's not one of my personal
passions and therefore is not likely to end up in my work. "Rejoined"
engaged me, it moved me, and I had a passion to tell that tale. If I hear or
think of another story that deals with any of the themes you're concerned
about that engages me in a similar way, I'd fight for it. That's the best I
can offer you.
<<what of the rumor of McCoy appearing this season on DS9?>>
No truth to this one.
<<do you get overwhelmed with Garak ideas?- and are any so wacky that they
get thrown out for being too 'off'? or do ideas get thrown out because they
will tend to establish a pattern for Garak? >>
Garak's a tricky character to write for, and yes there are many notions
tossed around that are ultimately abandoned.
<< Lastly, as part of the pathetic attention to the minute that Trek nerds
tend to show-- Just how big is the Defiant? >>
According to the schematic diagram on my wall, the Defiant has four decks.