BrainDiarrhea

People who know me are aware of the fact that I am a Trekkie. Maybe not the most loyal one, but since I am generally fond of sci-fi, I was hooked since Star Trek: The Next Generation. I admit, I never seen more than two episode of the Star Trek: Original Series, for which every “real” Trekkie would have my ass … But when I started watching Star Trek in the mid-90′s, the show was simply too outdated to hold my interest.

Now my watching of Star Trek never was regular or religious – in Europe the whole “season” concept the shows live by in the US is lost since the timing and airing of shows differs greatly and you basically never know when the next season’s is going to start. Breaks between “packs” of episodes are random and seemingly without purpose. Therefore I would never claim that I’ve seen all episodes of The Next Generation. However, following my “TV show awakening” in the USA (where I learned to watch and love TV shows like Buffy – The Vampire Slayer and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine) I got really into it and completely taped and watched Deep Space Nine and followed Star Trek: Voyager and Enterprise ’till the bitter end.

To sum it up – yeah, I’ve got the right to bitch and moan about Star Trek and will now publish my thoughts about the “reboot” and “re-invention” of the franchise proposed by J. Michael Straczynski and Bryce Zabel. But first a last, short introduction – I believe I haven’t yet mentioned my undying love of the Babylon 5 series and the incredible respect for its creator, JMS. Babylon 5 was for me like a lighting strike of joy – a complex, action-filled and character-driven sci-fi drama with an unbelievably detailed and comprehensive, 5-year arc. I am a sucker for continuous stories told in multiple episodes when a show rewards you for watching regularly. Babylon 5 is the high-water mark of such shows. The complete story – which existed in JMS’ head long before he was allowed to make the show – is probably the best piece of sci-fi I was every privy to behold and Babylon 5 is, for me, the best sci-fi show of all times.

So, naturally, I was excited when I heard of the failed proposal JMS and this other guy (who created Lois & Clark) to reboot the Star Trek franchise. What else could come from the creator of Babylon 5 except pure genius? The combination of JMS and Star Trek seemed too good to be true. However, after reading the 14-page treatment, I am not so sure that the re-invention would work. Of course the stories would be great – laid out in a 5-year arc (hm, where have I seen this before?) with great writers, etc. I’d have full confidence in the show. Unfortunately, the show’s premise proposes to keep the characters of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but to re-cast them and to confront them with new situations. The show would create a new, “parallel” universe, where the characters we know would have new and old adventures, always with a twist or a change, as to keep new fans interested and reward old fans with a nod or two to other classic episodes.

But therein I see the biggest problem. True, the Star Trek franchise has been declining for some time now (probably since the end of Deep Space Nine), but still we cannot forget the moments of pure genius we’ve seen during the years. Only from my, relatively meager, experience I can name a few episodes I will never forget – be it TNG’s finale All Good Things, the Chain Of Command two-parter, or DS9′s In The Pale Moonlight, Far Beyond The Stars, or Voyager’s Day Of Honor. We, as fans, have enjoyed great moments with the awesome characters of Star Trek and we have these moments – and the characters played by our favorite actors – firmly in our memory. A re-invention would invariably compete with these memories. Even more so when the show runners decide to incorporate old stories into the show with a new twist. Therefore I think that a show with old characters but new actors would anger rather than attract the old fans …

It would seem that Paramount had similar thoughts on the subject because the JMS/Zabel proposal did not get approved. Paramount is content to let the TV show rest for a while and gave J. J. Abrams – the god behind Alias, Lost and now Mission: Impossible III – the reins of the 11th Star Trek movie, rumored to be taking place at the Starfleet Academy, at the time of Kirk and Spock’s first meeting. But my thoughts on that will be provided once we have more information. I think that yes, the Star Trek franchise, in order to survive, needs a good shake-up. The time of the moon landing in the 1960′s, when people were thrilled at the prospect of journeying to the stars and The Original Series could enthrall them with the simple idea of “going boldly where no one has gone before”, is long since passed.

Today’s TV needs action, drama, great characters and an over-arching, complex story. The way to re-invent something is not by trying to jam the old stories into a new show, but to take the characters and have them do something completely different. To see how it’s done I’d refer you to Battlestar Galactica that now kicks some major ass. True, they attempted something similar to our Star Trek reboot, since they have stories from the old series as well, but two things are different:

1. the old show has gone from the air in the 1970′s, and
2. there were no spin-offs and other shows, limiting the re-invention.

Just think about it – Star Trek: The Original Series lay most of the foundations the later shows built upon. Take these foundations “away” or re-imagine them and you are invalidating 4 other shows that followed – shows that aren’t off the air like TOS since the 60′s, but are still vivid in our memory.

I say Star Trek needs to go forward, farther into the future story-wise, but needs to basically destroy all our preconceived notions of the universe. Let there be war, Federation destroyed, other, new fractions emerging. New political and sociological structure would definitely benefit the universe and would open doors for a lot of stories Gene Roddenberry would never tell. DS9 went a long way in this direction and that is what makes it, for me, the best Star Trek show in history. Would it be still Star Trek, if the universe changed so much? I don’t know – it would be up to the writers to determine what the core of Star Trek really is and to preserve it even in these changed settings and surroundings. But I refuse to believe that the stagnant, putrid universe with perfect human beings that make any kind of acting or emotion or drama impossible and was shown in the last two incarnations is what makes Star Trek Star Trek.