Straczynski on Trek

[DaveMage]

I'd love to see JMS give trek a go.

Any new show, though, needs to take place after the events in "Nemesis."

No more of this prequel business.

Let's go forward.

 

[mojo1701]

I'd love to see JMS give trek a go.

Any new show, though, needs to take place after the events in "Nemesis."

No more of this prequel business.

Let's go forward.

Let's boldly go.. where no one has gone before.





...Sorry, I had to say it.

 

[Rackhir]

This has bothered me and stuck with me since I first saw this episode. I had to be in high school when I saw it but it has always bothered me. Picard simply waves away the fact that he has a headache and deals with it (ended up being a Fernegi mind control device), as we would do today. Then Crusher says well since we have eliminated headaches this is unusual. WHY DIDN'T PICARD THINK IT WAS UNUSUAL? The way Crusher acted this should have caused all kinds of alarms for Picard yet he dealt with it as a normal occurence. Needed to get that out as this has bugged me for over a decade!

Well obviously, he was being mind controlled not to notice that it wasn't a normal occurance.

(And you only experienced that problem with the new Treks? Not only did the TOS hammer you over the head, for added emphasis they often had a shirtless Kirk literally hammer the opposing point of view into a bloody pulp...)

TOS had its stupid episodes, it had its bad episodes, but I never felt that my intelligence was being insulted in the way that TNG+ has. Let's take as an example the most blatant example of preaching in TOS, the Black/White Episode. It was blatant preaching, it was as subtle as a Mac Truck, but it made the point in a simple and elegent way that made perfect sense. Our treatment of people with different skin colors and features, differentiates on nothing more more significant than what was being shown in that episode.

True. JMS would hammer you over the head with his frequently inept attempts at everyday dialogue and humor...

I do not believe that JMS is infalible or perfect. B5 and his other productions have had their share of bad scripts, stupid ideas and plot holes. But again I never felt that my intelligence was being insulted by the way that they were trying to make their point.

 

[Ranger REG]

JMS as long as he has full control and backing. I think there are a number of people that could do wonders with ST but you got to get rid of Berman and Braga, which I do not think are fans of the myth that is Star Trek but more of the franchise of Star Trek.

"Full control"? No way. After seeing what Berman and Braga did, it only reaffirms that absolutely power corrupts absolutely.

JMS must learn to collaborate with his writing staff, not dictate them with an iron fist. Ron D. Moore left briefly after he was hired on the VOY writing staff due to an uncomfortable workplace environment under Braga's leadership. He sent his grievance to Berman but Rick sided with Braga, so Ron left.

Come to think of it, what does he mean by "reboot"? He's not going to ignore TOS and produce his own version of TOS. This is not Battlestar Galactica.

 

[Umbran]

The more backstory there is, the harder it is to do new storylines.

If they don't do a reboot, I'd want this to be another generation or 100 years forward.

When you've got the whole galaxy to play with, you don't need to completely reboot, or move to the distant future, to do new storylines.

Take, for example, Peter David's "New Frontier" books. They are what you get when you allow a competent (if not stellar) writer to work in a new part of space. Posit a region on the border of Federation space that has not been interesting or important until now, and give it a good reason to become important.

All of a sudden, you've got new planets, new races, new storylines, while still having access to older elements if you want them. For David it generated some of the better Trek fiction in print. For DS9 it yilded some of teh best Trek TV around.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Exactly. Just look at long running comic titles.

There's been written many, many more issues of Spider-Man than there have been
episodes of Trek. It's had it's bad years (a whole decade in the 90s) but all it needed
was some good writers and to get the editors to loosen their grip a little and now
we're getting great stuff from guys like Millar and JMS himself.


ENT had the right idea. Not in doing a prequal, but in trying to distance itself from the
other series. Making it it's own thing. They failed horribly at it, of course, but the
concept was gold. But I don't mean that as only in setting, but in tone and execution
as well. This is why DS9 worked but VOY didn't. DS9 became it's own entity seperate
from TNG, just like TNG had released themselves from TOS's bounds earlier.

Toys don't go stale, but the one who plays with them.

 

[Chun-tzu]

Based on everything Star Trek has thrown at us so far, I find your arguments... uncompelling.

Based on the single sentence of your reply, I find it difficult to respond other than to ask for some elaboration. Your reply doesn't give me any idea of what you disagree with, what you want from Trek, or where I should elaborate.

 

[Chun-tzu]

There's been written many, many more issues of Spider-Man than there have been
episodes of Trek. It's had it's bad years (a whole decade in the 90s) but all it needed
was some good writers and to get the editors to loosen their grip a little and now
we're getting great stuff from guys like Millar and JMS himself.

I hear what you and Umbran are saying. A complete reboot isn't necessary. And I'd agree with that, as well.

However, I think in many cases a reboot does more good than staying with the current continuity. Both Superman and Batman have effectively been rebooted many times, not just in the comics, but in the movies, TV shows, animation, and so on. Reboots allow for different elements to come through, that often add a significant element to the overall mythology. For example, keeping Ma and Pa Kent alive, instead of killing them off when Clark reached adulthood, was a good thing, and added a significant element to his supporting cast. Reboots also reach out to a wider audience. Given the poor performance of the Star Trek movies, I'd argue Trek is in need of new fans, as well as keeping the old ones.

I think time passed isn't the most significant factor in deciding on whether or not to reboot a franchise. It's a question of vision. What is the creator's vision of the series? Sometimes, creating a new continuity can do a lot for bringing that vision to life. I really like Mark Waid's new vision of the Legion of Super-Heroes, for example, which is something that necessitated a reboot. Personally, I'd trust in JMS' vision, and that he would still be able to draw upon elements of Star Trek history to satisfy the fans, rather than just throwing everything out and starting from scratch.

 

[Chun-tzu]

It is bizarre... but Roddenberry's Trek was never SF in the extrapalotory vein. It was primarily a highly romanticized, humanist, capital-L liberal fairytale about humanity's future.

I always thought that was part of its charm.

Then again, I started watching TOS when I four. That probably colors my view...

But that's no longer what Star Trek is. If a new series were to go in that direction, then great. But Star Trek heroes are no longer James T. Kirks. And in chosing to make social commentary with so many episodes, the shows have become a completely different animal. Just like the technology, I say pick a direction and go with it. Ignore the unrealistic aspects and just do a fantasy show in space, or else make it more realistic. Star Trek is in need of change, that much is clear. They've gone to the same well too many times. I think either direction could work great.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I remember reading something that according to Roddenbery he envisioned the humans of the 24th century wouldn't have personal conflicts...

Which sounds like the most unrealistic idea ever thought up. And it makes for boring TV.