More Thoughts On Star Trek

The other day, I posted some thoughts about the state of the Star Trek franchise, along with a link to a Ron Moore interview. I've got some follow-ups today.

The last part of the Ron More interview is up. He talks a bit more about the Trek establishment and repeats his thoughts that conservatism and fear run the show. His solution is one you often hear, to take the show away for a while and let anticipation for a new one rebuild. He'd also completely wipe the slate as far as crew and production goes, opening all options. That's what he did with Battlestar Galactica, which he also talks about at some length.

I'd like to add to my comments in that post by saying that, if they go to my movie-a-month idea they should open the franchise to new directors as well, and their unique views of the Star Trek universe. Don't be afraid to let someone try something completely personal or off the wall. It can't be worse than what's happening now.

I also meant to point out just how timid the producers still are. Supposedly, the newest episodes this season are some of the best the show has done. I wouldn't really know, as I've missed a few and only partly watched others. It's not bad, but still means nothing.

For example, the episode with the Trip clone. When T'Pol kisses him, it's the fulfillment of the storyline they've been working on between Trip and T'Pol, but it doesn't mean a thing since it isn't Trip. Nothing between them is changed, since Trip doesn't know and it didn't happen to him. Neither did anyone have to do the killing of sim-Trip, he volunteered to die. Sure, Archer got to act tough, but he didn't have to follow through, so how tough is that? Lots of words, no actions; no effects for the future. It all continues as before.

That's been a Trek problem since Next Generation, using the "reset button." That's the magic device that makes it all not happen, or have any effect. Usually it's a temporal anomaly or some kind of wormhole. Voyager was especially bad about that, having all kinds of terrible things happen, only to make it all disappear at the end. Remember "Timeless?" Where Chakotay and Harry Kim were the only survivors of a disastrouts wreck of the ship? Kim was a whole different guy, a great interesting character because of it. The ending took it all away (while giving Kim his greatest moment when he yells "Yes!" as the trick works) because time was "reset" to change the course of history. Hell, Voyager ended on a "reset button."

It's a coward's way. Not changing anything while pandering to the viewers. Some series can do both, like NYPD Blue say, while others stick rigidly to formula and rely on other elements to bring the difference, like the Law & Order franchises.

Let's face it. Dramatically, Deep Space Nine was the superior series. They had a plethora of story lines and stories to choose from, more than they could manage. But it's a hard path, as viewers supposedly don't join in shows in progress that have continuing story lines. It's believed that the show is too complex for newbies to pick up, as though reruns and the Internet don't exist. I don't know what numbers support that, as Buffy and Angel both seem to have disproved it by becoming more and more popular as they went along, even with the continuing dramatic arcs.

Last point: Enterprise, according to rumor may be facing the end. It might get moved to Friday nights, usually a sign of a show being written off, and might have a shortened season, preparatory to next year being its last. All this is rumor, of course, and I'll post more as I learn it.