…since he was the one who, years ago, heavily pushed the notion that the correct direction for “Star Trek” was to go retro and focus on Kirk, Spock et al in their Academy days. This notion was reviled by most fans that I know of, contending that there was no point in taking “the franchise” backwards. Star Trek, like a shark, must constantly be moving forward or it dies. And furthermore, what remote interest was there in watching the adventures of our heroes as teens? It seemed a pathetic and obvious ploy to court teen viewers rather than accommodate the interests of long time fans.
And now it’s years later.
And “Enterprise” took the franchise backwards and knocked it off the air.
And the success of “Smallville” plus other teen-oriented dramas must have registered on Paramount.
And thus do we boldly go backwards. Well…forwards, I guess, since it’s moving forward from “Enterprise.”
Of course, whether this actually makes it to the big screen, JJ Abrams or no, remains debatable. After all, quite a few Superman films by various big-name individuals crashed and burned before the upcoming installment got off the ground (no pun intended.) But if it does make it to screen, Harve Bennett–who was mentioned nowhere in the “Variety” article–is going to have to be wondering why he had to be so darned ahead of his time, in his concept if not his execution (Bob Greenberger swears Bennett’s script was terrible. Then again, who knows? By the dwindling standards of many of today’s moviegoers, it might have been a smash.)
PAD
• 
Not to be a suckup, but I think New Frontiers would make a great series.
I agree…New Frontier would be the way to go. It’s just enough of a contrast from the “older” TNG; it would be the kick in the pants that Star Trek needs. (Not to mention that New Frontier has some of the best Star Trek stories ever…)
Harve may be banging his head against the wall, but if Star Trek XI is made with this concept, and is as much of a failure (in the US box office) as Nemesis was, then he might end up being thankful he wasn’t involved in the first place.
I think, as a concept, Kirk & Spock Academy Days would’ve worked 20 years ago. But now? No, I don’t think it would work.
Even more so because ENT was canned and seems to be more or less considered a failure as a whole.
As I said on the Psiphi boards, this idea comes across as something better suited as a tv pilot rather than a theatrical film.
At this point, I don’t like the concept, but I’m probably in the majority there. 🙂
According to a story in Shatner and Kreski’s Star Trek Movie Memories, Bennett’s idea was quashed when a Paramount executive, who had been out of the loop in the film’s development, learned that “Bill and Leonard are very happy about their cameos”. Apparently he got really ticked and demanded there be an original crew movie.
This might end up being a great film, but I’d rather have an all new Starfleet Academy type show, with new characters (maybe with a couple of familiar faces in recurring roles as teachers/guest lecturers), set a decade or so after TNG/DS9.
That’s just me, though.
Put me on the New Frontier band wagon…NF would be great up on the big screen…especially with PAD screenplays…
I believe PAD once stated that for Paramount to use characters that were not created by them (as several New Fronteir characters aren’t) they would have to pay the creator of those characters. But if they go only with Paramount-owned characters, they don’t have those costs. Therefore, a New Fronteir movie or tv show isn’t likely to happen.
I don’t know. I have to agree with Craig on this one. I think a “Trekville” approach might work for a TV show idea (whether it be a pilot movie, miniseries, series, or whatever), but it doesn’t really scream “Big Screen Blockbuster” to me.
I Still say a post DS9 series is best… Say 20 years after the Dominion War. Or set the series with a broken Federation with a ship named Enterprise tasked with rebuilding Star Fleet.
Enterprise was a failure? In what terms? It lasted one more season than the original. It lasted three more seasons than most TV shows ever get. (My wife still watches her whole run of “Book of Daniel”).
And I’d love to find bootlegs of “Hot L Baltimore”, and am waiting for the DVD release of “Brisco County Jr.” this summer. Sure it didn’t get the seven seasons “TNG” or “Deep Space Babylon 5” got. And was “Voyager” a success because it ran that long?
I fear we are stuck with the thought that only “Trek Classic” made money to (excuse the Bobby Blake moment,) “The Suits” at Paramount.
Having said all that if we get a goof Science Fiction movie out of Abrams, would that be so bad?
I still remember all the hand ringing and wailing when Michael Keaton was named to play Batman in the first movie. Still to my mind the second best Batman movie after “Begins”.
As Peter stated this movie may crash and burn before ever getting made. But then would we be Fans if we didn’t second guess and make up our minds before we ever see the dang thing?
Sometimes I just look at the poster I got from Chuck Jones years ago, it it is a six foot horizontal poster showing the Coyote Chasing the Road Runner and along the way are signs in the vein of the old “Burma Shave” signs. And they state, “A fanatic is somone who redoubles his efforts after he’s forgotten his aim.”
Remember Fan IS short for fanatic.
Bobb
Everyone should go to Userfiendly.org and look at Sunday’s comic.
I know I’m sticking my head in the lion’s mouth, but I liked Voyager and Enterprise. Voyager was weak until they introduced Seven of Nine, at which point the show got interesting. Characters could get angry with one another and on a rare occasion act less than honorably without the influence of some mind-controlling-or-altering-whatsis.
Enterprise started out with great potential and then floundered with boring plots and little-or-no character development. But the Xindi war, even with its plot holes and its “affronts” to the self-appointed Defenders of Trek Continuity, changed the show for the better. Again, the characters were allowed to be a little bit flawed, and a little bit passionate about something: defending their world from destruction. For instance, Archer’s decision to steal critical parts from a ship in the Expanse was a compelling episode because it’s something that happens to real leaders during wartime: they face choices about whether or not to cross ethical lines for a perceived “greater good.”
And get out your pitchforks and torches, because I even liked the Enterprise theme song.
I could get into a “young Spock and Kirk” prequel movie, if done well. I don’t think the premise is as important as the execution. I mean, Nemesis was Next Generation all the way, so it should’ve been great, right? But the movie was mediocre at best. I mean, the movie managed to make the death of Data, one of the series’ most popular characters, ho-hum. They ignored his emotion chip, portrayed him exactly as he was always portrayed during the ST:TNG series, added nothing to his character and then… well, sent him off to die in a dud of a death scene. If you’re gonna kill a major character, and you’re not doing it under duress because they’re leaving a T.V. series (like Terry Farrell of DS9), for God’s sake, take the time to say something meaningful with the character before sending them off, y’know?
I think the real problem with the entire Star Trek franchise is that it’s never managed to truly free itself of Roddenberry’s confining philosophy that humanity can be perfected and Star Trek should portray characters who are heroic in every respect. The reason why Star Trek pales in comparison to, say, the new Battlestar Galactica is that BSG portrays real human beings who exhibit the full range of human emotions and qualities.
I don’t understand why “Nemesis” would be such a deterrent from Paramount releasing another Trek movie. The movie didn’t bomb because people had lost interest in the characters or the Trek universe, it bombed because it sucked. It was a poorly written, poorly directed, and came out in (what seemed to me, anyway) a semi-limited and very unheralded release.
Wasn’t it also the case with “Nemesis” that it opened basically the week sandwiched in between the openings of the first “Harry Potter”-movie and “Lord of the Rings”? I mean come ON! That has got to be one of the worst choices of opening day ever. And yet Rick Berman always just goes questionmark as to why the movie flopped. That’s incompetence!
“Enterprise was a failure? In what terms?”
Profitability. Longevity doesn’t equal financial success, and Paramount had been financing Trek back in the early 90s such that an episode was a money loser on first airing, making it up in syndication and reruns. I have no idea if they continued that philosophy with Enterprise but if they did… seen any reruns anywhere?
Having said all that if we get a goof Science Fiction movie out of Abrams, would that be so bad?
Here’s another vote for a goof science fiction movie. I love humor.
I think the “suits” may feel to get a successful Trek film they need to use characters that the general populace are familiar with — not just the fan(atic)s. They feel Kirk and Spock qualify, and since Shatner and Nimoy are too expensive, and likely too old, Young Kirk and Young Spock’s the way to go.
And was “Voyager” a success because it ran that long?
When it comes to the bottom line? Yes.
The notion that ENT only ran as long as it did (ie, they even got a 4th season) to get it near that magic number of episodes for syndication is a good one – the show barely even got a 4th season to begin with.
It wouldn’t have been failure had Berman said that after 4 years, that that was it.
No, the studio pulled the plug on a show with horrible ratings from the start that was costing too much that they also slashed the budget for the 4th season just to be able to make it.
And this doesn’t even get into the issue of whether ENT even added anything useful to Trek as a whole.
So, imo, ENT = total waste + cancelled far later than it should’ve been = failure.
Wasn’t it also the case with “Nemesis” that it opened basically the week sandwiched in between the openings of the first “Harry Potter”-movie and “Lord of the Rings”?
Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, AND the last James Bond movie iirc.
Please make the hurting stop! I just want a good ST movie. ALSO not to sound like a suck up, ST New Frontiers would be a great concept. Its got everything. And I am not being a suckup, just telling my opinion.
I believe PAD once stated that for Paramount to use characters that were not created by them (as several New Fronteir characters aren’t) they would have to pay the creator of those characters. But if they go only with Paramount-owned characters, they don’t have those costs. Therefore, a New Fronteir movie or tv show isn’t likely to happen.
Er, Paramount does own New Frontier, lock, stock, and phaser banks, and it was created under a work-for-hire agreement. I may be wrong about this, but I’m pretty sure that Paramount wouldn’t be under any obligation to pay Peter anything. If they used characters that Peter created for television, that would be a different story, as it would be governed by the Writers Guild rules, but those are for screenwriters, not prose writers.
But I don’t think Paramount would be obligated to pay Peter anything. By the same token, I suspect that most producer-types in Hollywood would rather create their own thing because they get more money if they get a sole “created by” credit. *grin*
—KRAD
Not to throw a bigger wet blanket on the proceedings… But wasn’t it JJ Abrams Superman script– featuring Lex Luthor as a Super-Powered Kryptonian– that stalled that movie’s development?
If Abrams brings the same wreckless sensibility to a ST:TOS movie pre-quel that he did to his Superman script… I can’t even imagine the die-hard fan uproar that would follow.
But if he goes for the funny… I want Matt Damon as Kirk and Ben Affleck as Mr. Spock!
Abrams may be receiving early high marks for his Mission Impossible film– but whatever “The Suits” do… I hope they don’t let him make a sequel. If ALIAS is any indication, it will just be the same thing over and over and over and over…
Don asked about _Enterprise_: “seen any reruns anywhere?”
Actually, yes. Channel 7 in Detroit shows two back-to-back episodes at 12:30 a.m. on Sundays (recently bumped up to 1 a.m.). One weird thing is that the second hour one week is rerun as the first hour the following week.
The other weird thing is that about two months after showing a series of episodes involving Archer carrying Surak’s Katra; the Romulan’s behind-the-scenes efforts to sabotage negotiations between the Tellarites and the Andorians; and the “Earth First” plot that rounded out the series, they showed these same episodes _again_. Yeah, that makes sense.
On the matter of _Nemesis_, I’ve never seen it. It remains the only _Trek_ movie I never saw. And I used to go to the first matinee showing on opening day.
Except for _Star Trek the Motion Picture_, which I vaguely recall was an evening show.
As to any proposed new movie and/or TV series and/or live performance with sock puppets and/or any other conceivable form in which _Star Trek_ might return, I’ll take a wait-and-see stance.
Right now, I don’t have any emotional investment in whether _Trek_ returns in any form.
Rick
Is there any indication that James Kirk had ever even met Spock prior to their service together on the Enterprise? Certainly, I don’t know of any precedence for the idea that they went to Star Fleet Academy together (or am I being too anal retentive). I’m not sure about this idea as a movie, but at least it works better in this context than as a series (although a ST: Star Fleet Academy series not involving young Kirk & Spock could work either live or animated).
I’ll add my vote to the idea of a series of ST: New Frontier mini-series!
“As I said on the Psiphi boards, this idea comes across as something better suited as a tv pilot rather than a theatrical film.”
What makes you think it’s not both? The term is “back door pilot.” They get to build sets, costumes, etc., on a motion picture budget. If the film’s a success, they can roll straight into series. The fact that they went to an accomplished TV hand makes me think that’s what they’re eyeing.
“I believe PAD once stated that for Paramount to use characters that were not created by them (as several New Fronteir characters aren’t) they would have to pay the creator of those characters. But if they go only with Paramount-owned characters, they don’t have those costs.”
No, that’s not what I said. Fans would routinely asked why Berman and Pillar, when creating a new Trek TV series, didn’t use “New Frontier.” Among the various reasons was the simple observation that whoever has the “created by” credit of a new series gets money every single time that credit appears on the screen. So why in the world would B&P want to have it say, “Created by John Ordover and Peter David” and have us get some or all of that significant amount of money when it can say “Created by B&P” and THEY get all the money. It made no economic sense for B&P to be making that money when they could be.
PAD
Posted by Don at April 25, 2006 01:42 PM
“Enterprise was a failure? In what terms?”
Profitability. Longevity doesn’t equal financial success, and Paramount had been financing Trek back in the early 90s such that an episode was a money loser on first airing, making it up in syndication and reruns. I have no idea if they continued that philosophy with Enterprise but if they did… seen any reruns anywhere?
Yup. The Fox affiliate in Rochester, N.Y., has been showing the re-runs in syndication.
Also, Paramount’s strategy with regards to Trek series’ is a bit more far-reaching than just making it up in syndication and reruns. Keeping Trek on the air, and therefore in people’s minds, generates DVD sales; revenue from tie-ins in other media, like books; and sales of Trek-related merchandise. Not an unsound strategy. In fact, I read that may be one of the reasons they re-upped Enterprise for a fourth season: not only because four seasons would be enough to let them put the show in syndication, but also because it’s one more DVD collection to sell, and one more year of Trek to generate interest in related merchandise.
No, that’s not what I said. Fans would routinely asked why Berman and Pillar, when creating a new Trek TV series, didn’t use “New Frontier.” Among the various reasons was the simple observation that whoever has the “created by” credit of a new series gets money every single time that credit appears on the screen.
Ahh. It’s funny how memory works. I remembered that money was involved somehow.
PAD –
What makes you think it’s not both?
I never said it couldn’t end up being both, I merely said I think it’s a bad plot for a theatrical film.
However, I’m also of the opinion that I don’t think they should be using a theatrical movie to jumpstart a new show. 🙂
Bill Myers –
Yup. The Fox affiliate in Rochester, N.Y., has been showing the re-runs in syndication.
Do you have a UPN or WB affiliate in your area?
I ask because Fox has mostly been the one to air both Voyager and Enterprise in areas where UPN wasn’t around when those shows were on their initial runs. And, at the announcement of the combining of UPN and WB, there was still a decent chunk of the country that didn’t even have a UPN affiliate.
We have both UPN and WB here in Denver, although it’s interesting to see that it’s WB showing the ENT reruns, not UPN.
But with the two networks combining, it’s hard to say what is going to happen with a number of on-going and syndicated shows, including Enterprise.
And the success of “Smallville” plus other teen-oriented dramas must have registered on Paramount.
And other fans. For that, blame Aaron Spelling.
When Harve was trying to pitch his Starfleet Academy idea, the response from some intense fans was ‘nineohtwooneoh’, floowed by fingers in the ears and eyes closed. Any further effort to extend the conversation was greeted with a louder chanting of ‘NINEOHTWOONEOH! NINEOHTWOONEOH! NINEOHTWOONEOH!’
Yeah, we had Roswell and Buffy. But we had to get The OC to pushed ‘nineohtwooneoh’ out of the conscious of the fanboy/girl mind.
So, you got Smallville, and Supernatural, even Veronica Mars.
And suddenly, you can have a young Kirk and Spock at the Academy.
And Finnegan.
Heck, you can even have the cute blond lab tech.
It was about time.
I’d much rather see the franchise move forward in time rather than backwards. There’s nothing wrong with prequels per se — the journey can still be interesting even when the final destination is known in advance — but there are so many things in the 24th century I’d like to see addressed that I feel as if this idea is potentially an exercise in wheel-spinning.
(And nothing against Harve, but the man greenlit ST5. For that I think a great many people would like to bang his head against a wall. 🙂
Enterprise was a failure? In what terms?
Critical, IMO. Part of it was a big “let’s muck around with history because we can” festival, and the characters by and large were ones I found exceptionally bland.
The Xindi war, which Bill mentions as a highlight, really did very little for me except maybe towards the end. Frankly, while the potential for tons of great conflict was there, I feel as though the series mostly decided, “hey, let’s have Archer play Dubya”. Hence the torture. Hence the “we’re going to do rotten things and say it’s for a good end.”
Now, that COULD have been extraordinarily interesting, had the characters actually discussed it and raised some moral questions about where to go from here. But, like Voyager before it, The Captain Was Right, Period. There were the occasional sidelong glances, but that’s about it. As such, I found the third season profoundly unpleasant most of the time. (I’ve heard that the final season is much better, but have yet to see any of it.)
Filmed Trek in the post-DS9 era seemed to decide that the best way to keep viewers was (a) lots of skin (cf. Jeri Ryan and/or Jolene Blalock, with others on occasion), and (b) create a great deal of the illusion of conflict without ever letting any of the real stuff mess up their premises.
(Bill, if you want to see lead characters behave less-than-honorably and raise moral questions in the process, try DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”. One of the best hours of modern Trek ever made, IMO.)
That said … as I’ve not watched “Alias” or “Lost”, it’s hard for me to really evaluate what J.J. Abrams is going to bring to the mix. I’m hoping this is a success .. but as was said above, I’m not bringing a lot of emotional investment to the question. I saw “Nemesis” and enjoyed it, but not so much that I’m in agony over the drought — and some of the published Trek work, such as New Frontier and especially (sorry, Peter) the post-series DS9 novels, are keeping my interest in that universe alive quite nicely on their own.
Whew. Sorry, that turned into quite an essay there.
TWL
everyone busting on Enterprise is forgetting the “In A Mirror, Darkly…” 2 parter that was all kinds of awesome. Seriously, opens with a great twist on “First Contact”, Mirror Archer going flat out buggo, guest apperance by The Gorn & classic TOS sets. It was 2 hours of TV gold. Fanboy wankfest, sure, but a hellova lota fun.
As for Abrams, yeah, nobody really likes Star Trek: Academy idea. But its Abrams, so me’s give it a shot. But doing a prequel always gets Trek continuity geeks knickers in a twist.
Personally, I think they should do Star Trek set 100s of years after TNG where there’s only, like, a half-beaten up Consitution class ship, manned by a Klingon, a Ferengi, a human, a hologram, a pet hamster, and the rest of the galaxy is full of Borg. Fun, fun, fun!
Posted by Craig J. Ries at April 25, 2006 03:35 PM
Do you have a UPN or WB affiliate in your area?
Yeah, we have both.
I noticed that the local Fox affiliate has only been showing about maybe 15 or 20 episodes, over and over and over. Does anyone know if that’s the way Enterprise is being syndicated everywhere?
Posted by: Tim Lynch at April 25, 2006 03:50 PM
The Xindi war, which Bill mentions as a highlight, really did very little for me except maybe towards the end. Frankly, while the potential for tons of great conflict was there, I feel as though the series mostly decided, “hey, let’s have Archer play Dubya”. Hence the torture. Hence the “we’re going to do rotten things and say it’s for a good end.”
Now, that COULD have been extraordinarily interesting, had the characters actually discussed it and raised some moral questions about where to go from here. But, like Voyager before it, The Captain Was Right, Period. There were the occasional sidelong glances, but that’s about it. As such, I found the third season profoundly unpleasant most of the time. (I’ve heard that the final season is much better, but have yet to see any of it.)
Actually, one of the things I find frustrating about Star Trek is the tendency of characters to pontificate rather than to act from the gut as humans sometimes do. I’ll never forget Picard’s speech during part one of the ST:TNG episode, “The Best of Both Worlds,” where Picard is talking with Guinan and wonders if the Borg will be the end of the Federation.
“This is just another chapter in history. Turn the page,” Picard says with inhuman evenness. My God, the mighty Federation was facing an enemy against which their every weapon has failed! Even a man like Picard would have some doubts and fears to express. And it seems believable that he’d express them to Guinan, whom he trusts deeply and for whom he has no need to put on a brave front.
Frankly, I didn’t mind the episode in Enterprise where Archer crippled another ship to repair his vessel and just moved on. It allowed us, the viewers, to ask the questions, rather than having them spoon-fed to us in speeches.
That said, I’m not telling you that you’re wrong. You and I have different opinions, but the world’s big enough for both of us — and billions of others.
Filmed Trek in the post-DS9 era seemed to decide that the best way to keep viewers was (a) lots of skin (cf. Jeri Ryan and/or Jolene Blalock, with others on occasion), and (b) create a great deal of the illusion of conflict without ever letting any of the real stuff mess up their premises.
(Bill, if you want to see lead characters behave less-than-honorably and raise moral questions in the process, try DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”. One of the best hours of modern Trek ever made, IMO.)
I’ve seen almost every episode of DS9. Was that the one where Sisko tricked the Romulans into joining the war against the Dominion? If so, I’d agree with you on all counts. Great conflict, great moral ambiguity, great episode.
Still, those things tend to be the exception that proves the rule in the Trek franchise. DS9 provided characters that were more complex and allowed for more interpersonal conflict than, say, TNG or Voyager (although I think you’re underrating Voyager in that regard — Janeway got the job done, but I don’t know that she was always necessarily “right”). But that’s not saying much, in my view, because the “baseline” for the emotional richness of Trek’s characters was set fairly low by the original and the Next Generation, IMHO.
As an aside, that’s why I love the character of Mackenzie Calhoun. There’s a complex, emotionally compelling character for you.
Anyway, that’s the reason I contrasted Trek with the new Battlestar Galactica: the characters in BSG get to be human. Sometimes they do the wrong thing, not for the “greater good,” but simply because they’re selfish, imperfect humans, like the rest of us. For example, Tigh’s drinking problem isn’t in any way heroic; but it’s very human.
Whew. Sorry, that turned into quite an essay there.
Why are you sorry? While you and I have different tastes, I thought your post was well-written and worth reading. It’s always interesting to see things from someone else’s perspective, even if it’s one I don’t ultimately share.
Following on PAD’s comments re: B&P would want something that has them on the creator line, and not say PAD and Johnny O….could they, for example, make Star Trek: Next Frontier, featuring Captain Jackenzi Malhoun and crew in wild rule breaking adventures?
What kind of …intelectual? protection would PAD and co have?
Craig wrote: “I think, as a concept, Kirk & Spock Academy Days would’ve worked 20 years ago. But now? No, I don’t think it would work.”
Oh, I don’t know. Remember, it’s not the basic premise itself that usually fails in popular culture — it is the story and execution.
In 1976, if a bunch of people were sitting around a major studio conference table and I walked in and said, “I want to make a space opera film — one that evokes the excitement of old serials, war movies and ‘B’ westerns,” they would have laughed at me. But a year later, after Lucas shocked the world with a wildly successful “Star Wars” film that drew copiously from all three genres, the mood would have been much more receptive, I’ll bet.
But, like I said, it isn’t the premise (or formula) — it’s the execution. The terrible “Flash Gordon” film released in 1980 — undoubtedly trying to ride the success coattails of “Star Wars” — bombed not because it aped the blockbusters premise, but because the people executing the latter film (quite literally, I guess) just didn’t get it.
Actually, I can think of a bunch of interesting scenarios a couple of space academy cadets could get themselves into — some, in my opinion, quite riveting. I think it will entirely depend on the production talent whether this new starship explores the galaxy or slides headfirst into a black hole on its maiden voyage.
With all due respect to Mr. Bennett, I think a series centered around Starfleet Academy is an obvious one that any number of people could come up with. I myself thought an Next-Gen era Academy series set concurrently with DS9, which would deepen Nog’s character, and explore what life is like on Earth in the 24th century, including for civilians, and their reactions to a mostly far away war, would have been interesting. Berman and Braga pretty much ran the franchise into the ground with their total lack of value for good writing, and the Enterprise finale was pretty much the epitome of that.
But as far as one with Kirk and Spock, well, I’m not sure. I kinda get the sense that Kirk and Spock did not know each other at the Academy, even if they’ve never explicitly established it. Then again, they did explicitly establish that Kirk’s Enterprise was the first ship named Enterprise, and I was able to put that continuity glitch aside. I could forgive lots in the way of continuity contradictions if executed well by someone like Abrams, Whedon, etc.
And not that this is the first time I said this, but yeah, I’d give my left nut for a New Frontier series.
Okay, maybe not my left nut, but lots of stuff I value. My sketchbooks, my drawing board, my photo collection, my cat, Elsa…
Okay, maybe not Elsa…
Bobb Waller: Enterprise was a failure? In what terms? It lasted one more season than the original. It lasted three more seasons than most TV shows ever get…
Luigi Novi: While Enterprise should be commended for getting much closer to 100 episodes than the original series or many other series have, and while it did fix a lot of the problems that plagued Voyager, and deserves kudos for some valiant attempts that ongoing continuity, it still suffered many of the problems handed down from Voyager, including lack of clear plans for many of its characters, and episodes marred by bad, prosaically written, and derivative stories. I can’t speak for Craig, but perhaps some consider it a failure by virtue of comparison to the previous four series that went a full seven seasons.
Tim Lynch: Filmed Trek in the post-DS9 era seemed to decide that the best way to keep viewers was (a) lots of skin (cf. Jeri Ryan and/or Jolene Blalock, with others on occasion)…
Luigi Novi: Seven of Nine appeared in Voyager’s fourth season premiere, which means she was present during DS9’s sixth and seventh seasons. I don’t say this to nitpick, but to underscore how the problems faces by the last two Trek shows IIUC, had more to do with UPN’s control over them versus what the prior ones could do in syndication, rather than simply where in the production timeline they were produced.
Bill Myers: Actually, one of the things I find frustrating about Star Trek is the tendency of characters to pontificate rather than to act from the gut as humans sometimes do. I’ll never forget Picard’s speech during part one of the ST:TNG episode, “The Best of Both Worlds,” where Picard is talking with Guinan and wonders if the Borg will be the end of the Federation. “This is just another chapter in history. Turn the page,” Picard says with inhuman evenness. My God, the mighty Federation was facing an enemy against which their every weapon has failed! Even a man like Picard would have some doubts and fears to express. And it seems believable that he’d express them to Guinan, whom he trusts deeply and for whom he has no need to put on a brave front.
Luigi Novi: I don’t see why putting on such a front is only something you do with those with whom you don’t have as strong a rapport. Even in such times, people will still have a sense of resolve, faith, or optimism. To each his own, though. 🙂
My idea for a great STAR TREK series: Star Fleet Intelligence. How does the noble, direct Federation uphold its principles for people working covertly and in the shadows? What happens when the Prime Directive interferes with intelligence gathering? Or when actions have to be taken against Federation members?
I appreciate what ENTERPRISE tried to do — show the events leading to the creation and laws of the Federation — but it usually went in a silly route. (“Reed alert”?) And the Xindi War just transformed the third season into an extended episode of 24. (Aliens are coming for Earth, and it’s up to one courageous crew to stop them — before it’s too late!) They also had truly gratituous t&a (Hoshi gets topless! T’Pal’s sleep therapy involves lots of nudity and touching!) and some technology that went well too advanced for its pre-Federation time. (I’m mainly thinking of the Vulcan Marauder, the ship that could holographically transform itself into many ships, be operated by a single individual from light years away, and repair massive damage to itself.) The one thing I really liked about ENTERPISE was the contrast between Andorians and Vulcans: a race largely ruled by emotions in conflict with a race ruled by logic. (And Jeffrey Combs was awesome as Shran!)
D’oh, if y’all want a gander a a script review of Harve Bennett’s Star Trek: The Academy Years script, (not much review-age going on, just basically a detailed summary) head on over to AICN’s post here:
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=22789
Spock helps Kirk to cheat on an exam by mind-melding. Ick.
Posted by: Luigi Novi at April 25, 2006 06:11 PM
Bill Myers: Actually, one of the things I find frustrating about Star Trek is the tendency of characters to pontificate rather than to act from the gut as humans sometimes do. I’ll never forget Picard’s speech during part one of the ST:TNG episode, “The Best of Both Worlds,” where Picard is talking with Guinan and wonders if the Borg will be the end of the Federation. “This is just another chapter in history. Turn the page,” Picard says with inhuman evenness. My God, the mighty Federation was facing an enemy against which their every weapon has failed! Even a man like Picard would have some doubts and fears to express. And it seems believable that he’d express them to Guinan, whom he trusts deeply and for whom he has no need to put on a brave front.
Luigi Novi: I don’t see why putting on such a front is only something you do with those with whom you don’t have as strong a rapport. Even in such times, people will still have a sense of resolve, faith, or optimism. To each his own, though. 🙂
I don’t entirely disagree. You could make a strong case that he’d put on a brave front even during a private moment with Guinan. On the other hand, even the bravest of people, when faced with the possibility that their bravery may not be enough to prevent their entire civilization from being completely wiped out, would have doubts, fears, whatever. And since T.V. is a visual medium, the only way to show that is through their behavior. I simply thought Guinan would be the person to whom Picard would most likely show that side of himself. I’m sure there would be other ways to get the same point across, though.
That said, I understand that there are people who like the unrelenting heroism of ST:TNG’s characters. I used to be one of them.
I remember being livid about the ending of the two-part ST:TNG episode, “Chain of Command.” The Cardassian torturing Picard wanted him to say there were five lights above him when there were only four. At the end, Picard confessed to Troi that just before he was released he was ready to say there were five lights, and in fact believed that’s how many lights he saw. I now look back on that as one of the best episodes of TNG.
I passionately disagree with the people who like the stiff-upper-lip heroism of most of Trek’s characters, but as you said, to each their own. Or IDIC. 🙂
Besides, I still like Trek, even if I think it’s flawed.
I … don’t know. I suppose it COULD work. It does not contradict any known continuity. I’d even say it would explain Spock’s presence on the Enterprise as Kirk, knowing him from Academy days, might have requested his being assigned there … except that he was already there, long before Kirk.
One problem being, which version of Spock would they go with? The almost happy, smiling version from THE CAGE? The less cheerful one from the second pilot? Or the positively reserved one of the regular season?
Too, those were different days in the Federation. The political correctness of later shows wouldn’t exist yet. Kirk’s Starfleet was much more of a “shoot first and ask questions later” mindset than the “we’ll talk things over” of later series. Consider, for example, the SURVIVOR episode of TNG where the Enterprise-D is being fired upon by an obviously hostile alien vessel. Picard orders a WARNING shot! (“Let’s raise our voice a little, shall we, Number One?”) Kirk would simply have ordered the ship be blasted. Or at least damaged enough to stop shooting. A different philosophy back then. Or will they rewrite history – again?
Still, if it brings the possibility of seeing the old uniforms again, it can’t be all bad. ;-)~
As to those wishing for a NEW FRONTIER series, I concur, but Mr. David has already shot that down as he insists he has no interest in moving out West, something which would probably be a requirement if he were to be meaningfully involved in such a project. As he should be with his brainchild up on screen.
Y’know, I remember having this idea for a Star Trek show years ago. Mind you, not with Kirk and Spock, but with new characters. However, I also read an Entertainment Weekly article that suggested the possibility and they said Paramount’s response was “Star Trek is not about putting young people in dangerous situations.” So, who knows.
I have no idea if they continued that philosophy with Enterprise but if they did… seen any reruns anywhere?
Yep. Seattle, UPN, Saturdays at 7pm. They appear to be airing the series in order, beginning to end. And I’ve got to admit, aside from the godawful song and some questionable “haven’t I already seen this stor-oh, okay, that was a twist” plots, I’m kind of enjoying it.
I’m enjoying it a lot more than I did Voyager, anyways.
I reserve all comments and judgments about a new movie until it’s cast.
There are reruns of ENTERPRISE on weekends — Saturday or Sunday, I forget which — late at night on channel 4 in New York. There are also reruns of DEEP SPACE NINE from noon to 2 on Spike TV. There were reruns of VOYAGER on UPN, but with that network merging with the WB I don’t know if they’ll keep any TREK on.
I was very excited when I heard the news of JJ Abrams doing a new ST movie. Of course, it helped I just read a great review on AICN of MI3 that said JJ was able to go back to what made MI great.
Initially I was not comfortable going back simply because the Original Series ST ship seemed to have computers slower than my laptop. The show Enterprise showed one way they could go backwards and honor the original series without insulting our intelligence (or being like a retro Flash Gordon episode).
Bottom line, ST Nemesis was not a great movie. It was, in my opinion, almost a reimagining of Wrath of Kahn, complete with the noble sacrifice at the end. I didn’t hate it, but there is a reason it bombed.
I don’t care when the next one is set. And honestly, I think it would be harder to write a Trek set farther in the future. A TV show? Yes. But a movie would prove to be too distracting. It would be far better to set it in an already established time period.
With the right script, the movie stands a chance. I mean come on, the Star Wars Episodes 1-3 were nothing to write home about and even they seemed to make money because people wanted to know the story of Vader. If JJ Abrams does it right, this would tap into a character the general public has heard of. They know he becomes the captain of Enterprise. How he got there could be very entertaining (as some of the many Pocket Books that deal with this issue has shown — it is not a guarantee of success but it has real potential).
Iowa Jim
1I think it’s time to kill the idea of the sci-fic prequel. Why you ask? I’m glad you did: Ok, Star Wars was MEANT to have prequel’s because Lucas had PLAINED to make them, (Please reserve debates on his excicutions for another time)The idea of Star Trek prequel’s should come under the heading; if everyone else jumped off a bridge….
Enterprise was a corperate idea, not a creative one like DS9 or evne to a point Next Gen.
Ok, I agree Next Gen would never have left space dock if not for the success of the first four movies. But if you look at what Gene created vs what the suits at Paramount wanted, you’ll see it ended up being a creative idea.
R. Maheras –
Oh, I don’t know. Remember, it’s not the basic premise itself that usually fails in popular culture — it is the story and execution.
Yeah, I know. But it just strikes me as a concept that is really hard to pull off, and isn’t going to add anything useful to the franchise/Trek universe.
When you get down to it, the last few Trek films really have been made for Trek fans. And there are fewer Trek fans than in years past – or at least fewer who are willing to watch new stuff as it airs, whether it was Nemesis or Enterprise.
The next Trek film will probably have to appeal to all audiences, and that in itself is going to be hard to do since I’ve never considered Trek to be a concept that can appeal to everybody.
And even the notion of making a all-audiences Trek film will probably piss the rest of us off in the process. 🙂
Luigi Novi –
I can’t speak for Craig, but perhaps some consider it a failure by virtue of comparison to the previous four series that went a full seven seasons.
Well, actually, it was three previous series that went 7 years, but who’s counting? 🙂
But yes, that would be one aspect of many as to why I consider ENT to be a failure.
The expectation that the series would run 7 years was there, whether it was fair or not. It was lucky to make it past year three.
JamesLynch –
There were reruns of VOYAGER on UPN, but with that network merging with the WB I don’t know if they’ll keep any TREK on.
I think SpikeTV is supposed to get the rights to Voyager here in the next year or two anyways, since they got them along with TNG and DS9.
So, yeah, let’s try this again then:
A couple of sites have news out now that Abrams is debunking the Star Trek situation… at least a bit. He makes it sounds like everything is still up in the air in terms of what the story will be, or whether he’ll even direct.
When I read first read (here, yesterday) the idea of “Kirk and Spock at the Academy,” I was thinking that I’d read something that would contradict that concept. Well, I just found, to my mild surprise, that the novel which I was thinking of was indeed on my current bookshelves, and my half-recollection of it was correct.
Vonda N. McIntyre’s _Enterprise: The First Adventure_ establishes Spock and Kirk’s first meeting as being on the bridge of the Enterprise, when Kirk took over the captaincy from Pike. Now, of course, when it comes to movies/television series and the novels which are inspired by them, the core material is the true canon; and considering that I – certainly not a huge, die-hard Trekker – am the first person to have brought up McIntyre’s work, I think they could probalby get away with contradicting the novel without too much of an outcry being raised….
Since Voyager has come up, I feel like chiming in that I liked that series pretty well, honestly. I haven’t seen much of the first couple seasons; and, especially in retrospect, it’s clear how derivative or underachieving the plots sometimes were; but still, overall I’d take many of those characters over their TNG counterparts. The Doctor started out as the Spock/Data character, I suppose (well, at the very beginning, I guess he was just more of a crank); but, while Seven of Nine assumed that role (outsider connecting with their humanity, not crank), the Doctor became, IMHO, an interesting and unusual character in his own right. I don’t dislike any of the TNG characters (well, even Wil Wheaton hates Wesley 🙂 ), but I personally find the Voyager characters to be more likeable. And that may be a reflection of the coldness issue raised above; I think generally the Voyager crew was a little warmer and more human.
This is not to deny that Voyager did have a lot of missed potential, or that TNG had some excellent and compelling episodes (especially after they escaped that first season or two) (aaa, beardless Riker!;) ); or, to deny that Deep Space Nine, with great characters and often excellent plots, is the best Star Trek show 🙂
Is there any indication that James Kirk had ever even met Spock prior to their service together on the Enterprise?
cannon wise spock and kirk did not meet until they met on the enterpise. however………..star fleet/the federation never met the borg or the ferengi until the 24th century and the first meeting of humans and kligons ended in war. also mind melds were never a disgraceful things for a vulcan. just be glad Q didn’t show up!
“Ok, Star Wars was MEANT to have prequel’s because Lucas had PLAINED to make them, (Please reserve debates on his excicutions for another time).”
Um . . . bullplop.
He didn’t plan the prequels. He planned the sequels because he started writing Star Wars and it turned into a big, long endless movie as he was writing. However, he didn’t plan on the prequels. The only “proof” that he did was that “A New Hope” was labelled as episode four in the story crawl. The reason he did that was because he was modelling it after an old sci-fi serial and the good stuff always seemed to happen in the middle. So, he made it seem like people were coming into the middle of one.
Now you may go back to the Trek talk.
Lucas talked about the prequels in at least one interview before Empire Strikes Back. He didn’t have them written, but there was a general plan of what they would be.
As for Star Trek, wasn’t Spock already a Science Officer when Kirk was at the academy?