Slashdot Mirror


Babylon 5 Creator Pitches Trek

pdawerks writes "According to Sci-Fi Wire, Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski told fans on a B5 Usenet group that he and Dark Skies creator Bryce Zabel have put together an idea for a new Star Trek series, which he said would revive the ailing franchise. 'I got together [with Zabel] and wrote a treatment earlier this year that specified how to save [Star Trek] and develop a series that would restore the series in a big way,' Straczynski wrote. 'I actually think it could be a hell of a show. Whether that ever goes anywhere with Paramount, who knows?'"

57 of 868 comments (clear)

  1. What Star Trek needs by MoxCamel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...is a rest. For about 10 years. I don't say that unkindly...I like Star Trek, but familiarity breeds contempt. Only time can make it fresh at this point. Well that and interesting characters, decent writing, and fewer solutions that involve reversing the polarity of something and shooting it out the deflector. But I digress.

    1. Re:What Star Trek needs by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Interesting
      ...is a rest. For about 10 years. I don't say that unkindly...I like Star Trek, but familiarity breeds contempt. Only time can make it fresh at this point.

      BEEP! Wrong!

      Think back to when ST:TNG came out. It was slick to look at, but the stories were very tame and seemed to dwell heavily on gizmos and soap opera moments. Time did the show no favors. After the first season I gave up on following it regularly, and checking in from time to time found it getting scarcely better (about 20 minutes of material stretched into 1 hour show most of the time.)

      It needs to get back to its roots. Let the characters have flaws, let them make mistakes. Put irony and humor into it in difficult situations. Make the leaders make difficult choices. Make it interesting again with good stories, not practically perfect people and a lot of references to Shakespeare.

      Heck, Klingons were a cold-war type adversary -- make up some nasty race like Al Qaeda and have the characters discuss how the federation got into a mess with them and try to find a way out of it.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. re: what star trek needs by ed.han · · Score: 5, Interesting

      um, i think they tried it on ENT: they're called, coincidentally enough, the suliban: a bunch of not understood hostiles who attack in unpredictable ways, and whose literal physical flexibillity makes them tough adversaries.

      ed

    3. Re:What Star Trek needs by dasmegabyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What you discuss is called "Deep Space 9." Flawed characters, tons of mistakes, terrorist organizations, even a villain who kept reinventing himself.

      Shit, they even did a whole PATRIOT Act thing (years before it was topical), with squads of Star Fleet commandos combing the earth in search of shape changing aliens who could be anybody. Sisko broke down into a quivering mass at one point -- his father, stubborn as he was, refused to have his blood tested and the captain was forced to admit he was in way over his head.

      That was from season 4. It didn't get REALLY good until the beginning of Season 6, when half the station was working for the enemy and trying to subvert it without detection while the other half was leading the war against them. You haven't seen an episode of star trek until you've seen a thousand Romulan, Kilgon and Star Fleet warships, many of them Constitution class, reduced to smoldering rubble by a combined Cardassian and Jemhadar fleet. That's the kind of gripping, "holy shit Star Fleet isn't perfect" TV that can watch again and again.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    4. Re:What Star Trek needs by Randolpho · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is not without irony that the best ST series (DS9) was based upon JMS' pitch for Babylon 5 to the Trek folks.

      Personally, I think JMS should take that Trek idea and run with it in a new Universe, the way they did with Babylon 5. Bab-5 is by far one of the best Sci-Fi series ever produced, and it came from a rejected Star Trek idea pitch.

      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
    5. Re:What Star Trek needs by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IMHO, ST:TNG had one of the best enemies I've seen in a sci-fi series; the Borg- simply because they were more plausibly 'alien' (in a genuine sense) than any other baddies I've seen in a mainstream sci-fi TV series- as opposed to 'different facets of humanity' aliens in other series (yeah, even B5, which I mostly loved at the time).

      So, what did they do with this potentially brilliant enemy?

      They *humanized* them.

      Hugh Borg was bad. But that cretinous film with the Borg Queen in it was worse.

      Man, they really fucked that one up.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:What Star Trek needs by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Funny

      1) "Aww! It's a cute little space alien!!"
      2) "Oh no! It's a Rift!!"
      3) "Oops! We Traveled Through Time!!"

      Does this mean they've stopped doing Holodeck stories? Thank God!

      Good device in TNG, horribly unimaginative by the time they were doing Voyager.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    7. Re:What Star Trek needs by ave19 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To me, you are describing Stargate-SG1. That show is a comedy/drama/scifi with a crew you just gotta love.

      Rick Anderson is fantastic in that show. Amanda Tapping is damn cute. Sometimes they smooch!

      B5 needed better comedic timing, SG1 has it. Anderson brings that, but the writers are actually good, too. See "The Other Guys." Hilarious!

      It was the first series in a long time that I actually looked forward to seeing.

      (there goes my karma!)

      --
      ...or maybe not.
    8. Re:What Star Trek needs by dtolman · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What you discuss is called "Deep Space 9." Flawed characters, tons of mistakes, terrorist organizations, even a villain who kept reinventing himself.

      Exactly! Star Trek doesn't need another reinvention. It needs the friggin writing team from DS9 to come back!

    9. Re:What Star Trek needs by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, it's Garrick the taylor who performs the murder, but yeah, that's a brilliant episode, especially since it's told from the position of Sisko, confessing everything in his captan's log (which he later deletes).

      How about the one where the Maquis are poisoning Cardassian planets with a chemical that isn't toxic to non-Cardassians...so Sisko poisons THEIR planets. Actually fires missiles full of poison gas onto them, with the whole crew of the Defiant looking at him like "whoa, dude! way out of line!" The look on O'Brian's face...and the fact that Dax actually refuses the order at first...made this an awesome episode, one that changed your opinion of the captain.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    10. Re: what star trek needs by GorillaTest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >still bought too much oil for their 7mpg gas >guzzlers You phrase it in the past tense. I don't see any change on this one.

  2. Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What is so tiring about Star Trek? Well, when I've watched it it's extremely dull in that the stories don't challenge me to think. The original series challenged a lot of commonly held social values, sometimes having a hard time getting past network Standards & Practices censors. If they make the episodes topical to today's world issues they should certainly stir more interest as people either think to themselves 'Yeah, that's right, that is unfair!' or 'No, that's better the way it is, we shouldn't change!' There are hot issues out there and if they take them on and use the set and actors as the method and galaxy as the vehicle, they should have no problem getting people fired up about the series. Viewers become more passionate about a show when there's something they have at stake being bandied about.

    "Captain, it's a planet where they allow men to marry men and women to marry women!"
    "Well, that's something Earth had to recognise as a fundamental human right..."
    "But, Captain, they're doing it in polygamus unions!"
    "WHAT!?!? Helm to starboard! Weapons officer, load all topedo tubes! Raze their capitol!!"

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by zombiestomper · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On the topic of timliness of Trek, I'm reminded of a two-parter DS9 that seemed almost prophetic.

      It's after the Dominion has started to make in-roads to the alpha quadrant that Cisco and Odo go back to earth to head up security.

      During the course of events, it becomes clear that a high-ranking Starfleet official is using the paranoia surronding the possibility of 'changling' terrorist attacks to repeal rights and declare martial law on earth.

      Seeing it on SpikeTV a month or so ago, it really struck a nerve with the current state of affairs and the 'Patriot' Act.

    2. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Informative
      During the course of events, it becomes clear that a high-ranking Starfleet official is using the paranoia surronding the possibility of 'changling' terrorist attacks to repeal rights and declare martial law on earth.

      Similar to one of the Orig. Star Trek movies, the one where effectively a cabal of military and diplomats try to keep the Klingon - Federation rivalry going.

      Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by perlchild · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're raising an interesting issue about how many of the things about B5 that are interesting is the contrast between B5 society, which is far from utopic, and the current "we fixed all of humanity;'s problems" view of the universe in Star Trek(at least from TNG onwards). Roddenberry's idealism inspired him to try to make a sci-fi utopia abd kinda blinded him to the fact that good stories aren't written about happy people who never have problems between themselves. B5 is quite the opposite, being dark and gloomy even during parties, yet it's enjoyable on a different level. We live problems, small and great ones every day, and can identify with such characters better than with Jean-Luc Picard, Captain of the Federation Flagship.

      Not that he was a bad character, I always thought the Picard-Q fight was the brightest point in the series, Picard's humanity being a perfect foil to Q's view of humans as worthless. It's just that there's a whole bunch of humans, and only one Captain(Admiral Selectee) Picard of the Federation Starship Enterprise. Contrast that with the characters on B5, and we're talking doctors, policemen, Ambassadors and Politicians too, but the doctors and soldiers and policemen and "Joe Random Aliens" usually lead the show, with the bigwigs just trying to balance the politics out so war doesn't break out.

      Some of the early movies had great material to start with(the Klingons joining the federation could have been a great movie), yet turned out to be not as good as they could be, mostly to leave more room for special effects and fight scenes. The problem is that the Star Fleet/Federation of Planets gimmick means that fight scenes shouldn't be that common, except for the villain of the week, and few things kill a story as fast as a villain of the week. Q was a great villain, he kept coming back, we could defeat him, but never kill him and he went away only when he wanted to. He kept making humans be as human as they could be, only to prove him wrong, and that usually makes for a great story. Few B5 characters needed help in being more human, except maybe for the Vorlons(and with such help, they were downright interesting), and that's probably a design decision on their part(a good one in fact).

    4. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by pilkul · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is basically what the Axis did in WWII. It's also cropped up in fictional works like 1984, Aeon Flux, Equilibrium, etc.

      Um, no. Hilter took power in Germany by leveraging nationalist and racist fervor, and working popular anger about unfair WW1 reparations treaties. The Japanese empire was a result of popular imperialist ideals dating from the 19th century, and a desire to prove themselves as a major world power. In the Soviet Union (which 1984 was meant to represent), the totalitarian state was a direct outgrowth of the popular communist revolution. In none of these cases was fear of terrorism at all a factor. (I haven't heard those science fiction books you mention, though.)

      The importance of terrorism in world politics is actually a rather new thing dating from the 90s. In the past, terrorists had neither WMD nor suicide bombing techniques, so they were much less dangerous. The Star Trek writers probably were more inspired by current events than history.

      Side note: what is it with people conflating fascism, stalinism and (the comparatively *extremely* tame) current US rights restrictions as if they were all the same? These are all completely different, both qualitatively and quantitatively! It makes me grind my teeth together whenever somebody uses 1984 as an analogy for a contemporary phenomenon. 1984 is about communism, and communism is dead. It's just not very relevant anymore.

    5. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The importance of terrorism in world politics is actually a rather new thing dating from the 90s
      BZZZT - wrong.

      Q: Which act by an Albanian Arnarchist group started WWI?

      Q: What were the origins of the Mafia?

      Q: What happened at the Munich Olympics?

      Q: What happened in Iran which led to the downfall of Carter, and how many billion did Reagan pay for a ransom?

      Just being not being aware of examples before the 1990's doesn't mean it didn't happen.

      1984 is about communism, and communism is dead
      1984 is about a totalitarian state, and there are still a few of those on earth. Aspects of it also give us an idea of what can happen if things are taken to extremes in other parts of the world which have mostly benevolent regimes.
    6. Re:Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not a scriptwriter! by bprime · · Score: 4, Funny

      Only on slashdot does a Trekker call the captain of DS9 "Cisco" instead of "Sisko". :)

  3. Wil Wheaton is very excited about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    As the series centers around Wesley's travels around the galaxy as a higher being.

    -- Not Wil Wheaton

  4. An idea for the pilot... by D-Cypell · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the writers are reading this I have an idea for the pilot.

    Captain Archer of enterprise saves the life of a crew mate and SUDDENLY disappears in a flash of blue. He awakes to find himself trapped in the past, facing mirror images that are not his own...

    I know what you guys are thinking...

    "OH.... BOY"

  5. I've got an idea to save Trek... by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...have Rick Berman shot, drawn, quartered, and then really hurt. That man has done nothing but ride the noble stallion, passed on by Roddenberry, that was once Star Trek to death, and after the horse died, Berman has been beating the fucker with a stick for a few years.

    --

    --
    I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
    1. Re:I've got an idea to save Trek... by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Do a well-done mini-series on Star Fleet academy

      Great. Star Trek: 90210

  6. Oh Happy Day! by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What irritated me the most about Berman ruining the Star Trek universe was that it had so much great potential. And he just pissed it away. This could be something very, very cool. I really think that these guys, for lacking of a better description, get it.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  7. B5 by CmdrMooCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If he has enough ideas to make another trek show, he might as well spend the time to create another series in the B5 universe - it will be better received.

  8. If anyone can save Star Trek... by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...from Berman, Straczynski can.

  9. change the reference by SethJohnson · · Score: 5, Funny


    To ensure the survival of the Star Trek franchise, please stop referring to it as 'ailing'. Instead, use the word 'beleaguered'. Seems to have worked wonders for Apple.
  10. Crew chemistry to win fan-base by geordi177 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Star Trek TNG was the best series by far. What made it great was the chemistry of the crew. Enterprise has lost ratings, in my opinion, due to the crew simply not having good chemistry...it's just not as believable a show because the interactions of the crew seem contrived at times. The captain, especially, puts too much effort into his acting. Patrick Stewart captured the fans because of his ability to convince the audience he wasn't faking it (like any good actor incidentally) Any new series would really have to focus on crew chemistry to gain a fan base

  11. Why do I have a feeling... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    that this is going to ride the wave and give us:
    Str Trek:CSI
    I really need to sell my TV.

  12. let me try to remember by alphan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Correct me if I am wrong, but here is what I remember :

    Bab5 guy first went to Star Trek guys with the idea of Babylon 5. But they didn't accept the "space station" suggestion at that time, so Bab5 was born independently.

    Later Star Trek guys came up with DS9. (no comments here)

    Now, I wonder what will be different.

  13. JMS doing trek by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    JMS once talked about his doing a trek series. It was back in the hieght of B5 and someone asked him what he would do if Paramount handed him a Trek series. He said something along the lines of (can't find it on Google Groups right now): I'd start by getting away from the federation. Kill off a few people so the fans know that this is not going to be the same-old and then start to tell some interesting stories.

    It was funny because he said that before Voyager and Andromeda (which was originally a Trek series about the fall of the Federation as Rodenbury had pitched it) came out, and the good points of BOTH of those series were exactly that: getting away from the Federation and establishing their own stories. Woefully Voyager just entrenched itself in its own static mythos and Andromeda as plagued by execs that couldn't stand how dark it was.

    Personally I don't see JMS being able to play ball with Paramount. I think he'd last 3-6 months tops before he blew up at them and walked. He's just not enough of a political animial (his detractors would say he's too much of one) to be able to put up with it.

    1. Re:JMS doing trek by ajs · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having read the posting, I would not hold my breath for this. I did find some of the other comments interesting:

      * He was asked to EP Enterprise, but turned it down
      * He is accepting an EP role on *something*
      * He's going to be in the UK for a while
      * It's not Dr. Who

      Those last 3 are all of a set. My theory is that JMS doesn't get this excited about anything from the UK more than Prisoner and Blake's 7... if it's not something new, it just has to be one of those.

      Personally, I just want more Supreme Power, Rising Stars and Amazing Spider Man out of him. Those have been amazingly good (though Spider Man slipped into a sort of slow patch for a bit in the middle). I don't need the big screen or tee-vee, in fact I think JMS does better in comics.

  14. Can we finally have a Star Trek topic icon now? by motown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Come on Malda, this is "News for Nerds"! Trek is large enough to deserve a separate category icon (even dispite of "Star Trek: Enterprise").

    I suggest either a picture of the Original TOS Enterprise (NCC-1701 without any suffix) flying towards the user or a Starfleet Emblem.

    You know it makes sense!

    --
    "Oooh, does that mean we get to kick some puffy white mad zionist butt?"
  15. Trek with a Plot??? by doublem · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fascinating.

    Does that mean he'll solve that pesky "The universe resets at the end of every episode" bug?

    And will be get the "Non-trivial character development" patch?

    Cool.

    My lord, this would be cool. A Trek Series with a plot.

    We haven't seen that in ages.

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  16. Premise by cynic10508 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a totally fresh concept. They're merging Star Trek and Babylon 5. It's Star Trek only with a space station instead of a... oh, nevermind...

  17. Finally! Someone with skill by PierceLabs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unlike others who think that Star Trek needs to go on 'vacation' I don't agree. There is little value to bringing Trek back 10 years from now if its going to be the same as it is today. Berman and Braga are a plague on the Trek franchise that needs to be removed. It is clear that they are too burned out on this franchise do anything useful. For goodness sakes, they have reduced the process of the founding of the Federation into a romp through time. Yeah, creating this massive Federation 'empire' is just too damn boring. I mean all the species, conflicts and technologies that would have to be created would just be too bland to watch.

    The problem is with the writing, not the franchise. Its just not interesting anymore - and this latest travesty (Enterprise) is just adding insult to injury. Blue alien nazis? Someone get these clowns outta here :)

    1. Re:Finally! Someone with skill by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "The problem is with the writing, not the franchise. Its just not interesting anymore - and this latest travesty (Enterprise) is just adding insult to injury. Blue alien nazis? Someone get these clowns outta here :)"

      What's wrong with that? Many people have written that Hitler claimed that he himself was receiving orders from "The Old Ones." And then we have the social anomaly with the Third Reich. Many people speculate that such totalitarian societies should not produce such brilliant scientific breakthroughs (in terms of weaponry for them) as the Nazis did. Look at their helmets from that era and then look at what the US military uses today. Look at the B2 and look back to the Nazi flying wing designs. The Panzer tanks, the V1 and V2 rockets, jet fighters, saucer designed aircraft, and the atom bomb they would've had if their own scientific team didn't sabotage the results. Then you have Hitler's (and many other Nazis) obsession with the occult. So that leads to much speculation for a writer with imagination, with or without a tin foil hat.

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  18. JMS's tolerance... by Faust7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally I don't see JMS being able to play ball with Paramount. I think he'd last 3-6 months tops before he blew up at them and walked.

    Babylon 5 was extraordinary for two reasons:

    (1) An astronomically talented writer
    (2) Said writer having complete creative control over the show

    That is why Babylon 5 was able to be what it was: an utterly fantastic story stretched over five seasons. JMS himself has said that he had the general structure and philosophy of the story laid down from day one.

    I don't see item #2 having a hell's chance of survival at Paramount, do you?

  19. Perhaps just a total re-engineering... by sterno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you might be right, but if anybody could salvage Star Trek, it's Straczynski. Babylon 5 is truly one of the best though out sci-fi programs to have aired on television. His focus on a defined and limited story arc really gave the show a sense of purpose from week to week that I think is totally lacking in most of the Star Trek spinoffs.

    The biggest problem, I believe, with Star Trek is that they've tended to let the show ride on random events rather than running plots. The times when they have gone to more of a story arc they have made the shows far more worthwhile.

    Enterprise has done this to some extent over the last season, tracking down the Xindi and it really helped give the show some energy. Deep Space nine had the same sort of thing happen when they had the shape shifter backed armada coming to wipe out their part of the galaxy. ST:TNG has the Borg and a few other running threads.

    But overall, with Star Trek, these runing plots have always felt kinda tacked on. Something to drive a season finale, etc. I think starting a new series with a defined story arc over a fixed period like they did with Babylon 5 would really do well.

    For example, perhaps do a series that's entirely focussed on the events that take place during the creation of a peace accord with the Klingons. Pick some key moment in federation history and depict it's course over a period of time. Project star trek out into the future and have some run in with a new species perhaps? What about a major civil war with the federation? There's a lot that can be done with this that could really make for an interesting show.

    But anyhow, if they want to go that direction and really freshen the show, I think they can. If they try to crank out yet another bland spinoff, it's going to fail. So if they don't want to try something truly new with it, they need to mothball it for like 20 years. Then they can go back and do the same tired old concept again.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Perhaps just a total re-engineering... by mondoterrifico · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Babylon 5 is/was so superior to anything in the StarTrek universe that comparisons are meaningless.
      Easily the best 5 years of SCI FI on television ever. Ok maybe 4, season one was iffy.

    2. Re:Perhaps just a total re-engineering... by sterno · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Problem with that is much of the cool sci-fi concepts have been explored by its progenitors. Though... here's a though. Think "The Outer Limits" but set in the Star Trek universe. So like get a bunch of people to do weekly stories that all take place in the Star Trek universe, but are completely different each week.

      Somehow I don't think you'd have trouble digging up writers and actors that would be willing to do one cool episode of star trek.

      --
      This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  20. Star Trek need more what? by Timesprout · · Score: 5, Funny

    When the Enterprise is facing yet another crisis and someone suggests rerouting the coffee machine output through a highly focused baryeon ray and then reverse polarizing it through the deflector dish, instead of the usual "Yes that might just work" whats really needed is for more of the other crew members to adopt completely bemused expessions and ask "What the Fuck are you babbling about????", "Is this another one of your loon ideas that involves writing a subroutine in less than 3 seconds with your left hand?", or "through the what dish?, will that affect Sky Sports reception?". Why does no one ever says "what?" on Star Trek, no matter how preposterous the proposed solution, enquiring minds want to know.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  21. Roddenberry should get some of the blame by Badam · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, there's a limit to how much I'm going to build up the myth of Roddenberry. After all, his insistence that there were no sane villians or informed disagreements -- Roddenberry insisted all conflict was caused by insanity or ignorance -- meant that Next Generation was pretty dull in the first two seasons.

    This belief of his is also why Star Trek is chock full of evil madmen, but has few interesting large scale conflicts.

    It was only as Roddenberry gave up control of the series that the show became more dramatic. Roddenberry was deeply uncomfortable with the idea of the Borg, and presumably he would have hated the way Deep Space Nine went once the Dominion War began.

    I've always thought it would be great if there were a Federation Civil War. After all, the Federation appears to have an incredibly weak central government (that Prime Directive has actually been invoked to describe why the central government can't interfere with a member planet) and the Federation is spread over a large area, with only slow travel between the edges (apparently, it would take years to cross the Federation).

    But because of Roddenberry's guiding principles, that'll probably never happen. "Enlightened people of the future will never fight each other."

    Yawn.

    --

    Check out my blog: My Galaxy is Milky Way Adjacent
    1. Re:Roddenberry should get some of the blame by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I've always thought it would be great if there were a Federation Civil War.
      But because of Roddenberry's guiding principles, that'll probably never happen. "Enlightened people of the future will never fight each other."

      Andromeda was originally intended to be a 'Star Trek: Fall of the Federation' series. Wasn't a bad series, until Kevin Sorbo turned it into Hercules In Space, firing that writer from DS9.

      But an actual series dealing with the fall, rather than the results, would be good. Easy enough to do, too; two member factions get in a fight, the Federation Council tries to intervene, doesn't work, Starfleet is sent in to 'keep the peace,' there's an incident, the Vulcans walk in protest, people draw up sides, and the Federation turns, over the space of a few years, into, say, about six to ten separate groups.

      The Federation: Earth, Andoria, and a few other 'core' members, they attempt to cling to the original tenents.

      Vulcan, and others; view the Federation as a good idea ruined by bad species; they revert back to isolationism; not all Vulcans agree, though.

      Antagonist A and Antagonist B, and assorted hangers-on; obviously, they're at war. One side invites in the Klingons to help out, the other side invites in the Romulans, and it all goes to pot.

      Several other 'balkanized' areas which revert to sectoral or species lines, rejecting the Federation as being ultimately ineffective. Think League of Nations at this point. Others reject the Federation for trying at all to intercede, or blame the 'incident' on official Policy, rather than Shit Happens.

      The next thing you know, some of these groups are attacking the core worlds, because they want Starfleet technology and knowledge that was withdrawn when they broke away from the Federation, there are old grudges flaring up, the Klingons and Romulans are nibbling at the edges, gleefully taking advantage of the Chaos, Starfleet are trying to maintain their principles and dignity while their ideals are collapsing around them, and so on.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  22. If there's a problem ... by kitzilla · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ... with the Star Trek franchise, it's probably the format.

    How many stories are there, really, that will fit into a one-hour TV slot? The universe may or may not be finite, but plot possibilities certainly are.

    Which is why new shows seem like such dreadful, bloodless retreads of old ones. We've seen all the characters and pretty much every idea you could ever squeeze onto the deck of a starship.

    There's nothing really *wrong* with ST. It's just played-out.

    If ST could learn one thing from Babylon 5, it would be plot and character development. In the original series, the fact that Kirk and the others were flying through space was somewhat incidental. We might have enjoyed it just as much if the same actors had been set in a western.

    Perhaps ST could move toward the sort of long-term plot arcs we saw in Babylon 5, and have come to expect from series like the Sopranos. Freed from the format of episodic drama -- and the crushing weight of our expectations -- Star Trek might be free to again explore the Undiscovered Country.

    That would be kinda nice.

    --
    This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
  23. Just the fans by cubicledrone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As wonderful as it might be to have a new Star Trek series, there is one axiom about this process: It is absolutely impossible for a creative person to efficiently obtain approval for a new project from a large company.

    Proof:

    Disney turned down Lord of the Rings

    Sony turned down Everquest

    Electronic Arts tried to cancel the Sims three times

    MGM turned down Gone with the Wind

    Now, if they don't mind spending $10,000 a day from the moment they make the first phone call, great. Otherwise, find a way to do it without conference rooms, or it's going to be nothing but anguish.

    --
    Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
  24. Best idea for a new Star Trek. by kid+zeus · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Have it be about a shipful of smugglers and people on the run from the authorities, focus on the characterizations and the stories rather than the dumb-ass tech that's supposed to be so whiz-bang, and set it in a system with an old West feel to it.

    Just don't let Fox have the rights to air it.

  25. BORG Species 000 by mrnick · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think a great movie, if not series, would be all about the Borg. How the first nanobytes took control of the first specieis (species 001) and how the collective was created. No Federeation, no Vulcans, etc.. just BORG.

    Nick Powers

    --

    Encryption: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to encrypt it...
  26. Open Letter to Rick Berman... by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
    > I think you might be right, but if anybody could salvage Star Trek, it's Straczynski.

    (Opening comm channel to the UPN Flagship Berman...)

    "Captain Berman, First Officer Braga. Only one man - J. M. Straczynski - has done battle with broadcast studio executives while being able to produce five years of good science fiction television. He is behind me. You are front of me. If your employer values the deep-space franchise, be somewhere else!"

  27. Benny by Inexile2002 · · Score: 5, Funny
    My brother and I have a theory about a guy named Benny that works for the current crop of Star Trek writers. Benny is a security guard or maybe a janitor or something, but once a day, at exactly 4:15PM he runs into the room where the writers are working and shouts:
    I've got it! Time travel!
    The writers sit up suddenly energized and with a burst of creative enthusiasm finish the episode they're working on. I think they need to fire Benny.
  28. The underlying problem... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    is that Gene Roddenberry's idea is revered too highly. His idea was that man is an evolving species that eventually reaches a state of perfection, where all war and poverty on Earth have been eliminated, where humans never even argue with other humans.

    I remember cringing at some of the earlier TNG episodes that ended with Riker making some inane remark and Picard saying "Agreed!" * YAWN *

    I find it very hard to believe that this state of utopia will ever be reached, because every improvement in society brings its own drawbacks. For example, the richest country in the world today has still not managed to find happiness, look at the sheer size of the shrink and self-help industry. The nation with the highest car-ownership in the world has brought with it an epidemic of obesity and enormous environmental problems. Bottom line, for every problem you solve in society, another is created. This is something that's missing from the humans in the Trek universe.

    Lastly, from a drama point of view, people happily getting along makes for unbelievably boring TV. Remember the Itchy & Scratchy episodes where they became best friends? All the kids in Springfield started switching off their TVs and went out to play. We demand TV that keeps us indoors!!!

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  29. Garfield by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There was a recent article I read about the creator of Garfield (think the link is on pvponline) and how he carefully manages the property so as not to over saturate the market. Garfied he says is carefully designed not to become so popular that it becomes "cool" to hate. You know like how everyone hates Shatners way of speaking (he rarely does it for real in the st episodes).

    ST has become fashionable to hate. It used to be just a geek thing but now even geeks are trying to be hip by saying they don't like it.

    If you look at the recent ST series I think the fault is that they tried to be too popular. Instead of aiming at their main audience they tried to broaden it and managed to loose both their old audience and not aquire a new one.

    ST:TNG was too softly and soapy (it even had the evil twin sister kinda stuff), Deep Space 9 became a true soap, going away from the 1 hour episodes into an neverending story with returning cast members. Dynasty in space. Voyager never stopped whining. Enterprise is so bad I didn't even watch past ep3. And I am very forgiving to ST.

    Any new series needs to go back to the roots. 1 hour episodes of a small crew exploring the universe. No whining, no soul searching. Just doing things. Focus on the old fans, they kept the franchise going for decades, we are ready to be milked more. Just don't insult us anymore.

    Oh and shoot the person that came up with the holochamber idea. These guys are out exploring space and the best they can do for excitement is do fantasy games indoors? Losers.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  30. Sorry - rest of the comment by pherris · · Score: 5, Insightful
    IMO the submit button is too close to the preview one. =)

    I think DS9 started off slow but improved and had some great episodes like "The Vistor" #75 (many fathers appreciated it). They introduced the "runabout" (cool ride, kinda like the winnebago of the 24th century) and the "Defiant" (one very bad ass, greatly overweaponed ship). The wormhole allowed for someone interesting plot additions. They showed us how a lot of different species lived, many more than any other ST series.

    Not to be forgotten, the "Ferengi Rules of Acquisition" gave interesting insite to greed.

    34 - War is good for business.

    35 - Peace is good for business.

    239 - Never be afraid to mislabel a product.

    261 - A wealthy man can afford anything except a conscience.

    Morals were well tested. A "former terrorist", Major Kira, became a respected leader while still having a few terrorist traits; interesting when one thinks of the use of the word "terrorist" today. Some "Black and White" morals were shown to have acceptable shades of grey. To many DS9 was as good as TNG. I think the exploration into the psychology of people make it a good show. Different for TNG, but still good science fiction. And yes, the long lesbian kiss.

    Imagine what Straczynski and Zabel could done with it though. There's a lot of life left in the ST franchise.

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
  31. JMS did this already by n0wak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This was a strong theme running through Babylon 5 Seasons Two and Three, which culminated in the secession of Babylon 5 from Earth.

    Seriously, all the good aspects that people rave about in DS9, B5 did first. DS9 was just a Paramount copy of B5, quite frankly -- almost to the point of lawsuit.

  32. I dunno about this... by NulDevice · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't think JMS and trek would be a good combination. One of the things that's hrting trek now is that Berman/Braga and their cabal of writers are locked in and running the whole show. Part of the reason TNG and DS(, and even TOS suceeded is that they had a multitude of writers with different styles.

    Meanwhile, JMS wrote nearly all of b5. And that was in fact one of the things that I felt worked to its detriment. The wrtier's flaws quickly become the show's flaws, and that's one of the things killing trek right now. ...and depsite the holy reverence that many scifi fans place on b5, it was not without its flaws. The overall story arc was very ambitious and well thought-out, but many parts of the story - the dialogue was heavy-handed, foreshadowing (no pun intended) was overused as a plot device and frankly dind't always need a riddle-talking alien to be accomplished, etc. b5 was good TV, and certainly surpasses Voyager and most of TNG in quality, but I can't really see JMS helming a show whose canon, universe, and fanbase he can't entirely control. Nor can I see his particular philosophy working especially well with the established continuity. If JMS were going to "Save" trek he'd have to let go of some of teh creative control to allow people to fill in where he's weak, and his track record on such things isn't the best.

    --

    ----
    "I used to listen to Null Device before they sold out."

  33. Why B5 is cool by martinflack · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Babylon 5 is an absolutely amazing piece of science fiction but only when you realize that the 5 seasons are really one 80-hour long movie.

    When I saw it aired on TV, I thought it was contrived because I didn't understand all the constant references to prophecies, councils, past wars, Valen, etc. I thought that they were doing what Star Trek writers do - reference cool sounding things just to enhance the illusion of the future, but those things are not existant in the actual plot. B5 is completely different; almost all their references are to cool stories in other episodes (both forward and backward) including some mind-blowing plot twists (some that make you giggle when you watch earlier season episodes because you know some *huge* secrets revealed later). It's important to realize that the B5 plot was fully written before filming, something that Star Trek never benefited from.

    My roommate got the DVDs for all the seasons and we started watching them one by one. I'm a few episodes from finishing the last season. B5 is a trememdous story, not just out of science fiction, but of any type of story I've ever watched or read. It's one of those real works of art you only see once every few years. Of course I take issue with some scientific points, like their premise of the "first ones" (first race in the galaxy) living for indefinite lifetimes and such, but they are just quibbles.

    It's also worth noting that besides the brilliant story weaving, B5 also fantastically avoided the concept of "good guys" and "bad guys". I'm impressed to no end how they side-stepped that oh-so-common trapping and actually made several alien races really come to life with politics, emotions, and goals of their own. Very cool.

    The third great thing about B5 is that the problems are solved with character solutions. The tech is there to enhance the experience, but unlike Star Trek where they can reconfigure the primary deflector to do the dishes and take out the dog, in B5 they actually work out the problems using more traditional methods, and the interesting tech is for there for the viewer's enjoyment as backdrop, not primary focus.

    If you're a Star Trek fan but have never watched B5, do yourself a favor and start with Season 1. Watch them in order, and P.S. there is an extra prequel movie, but don't watch it until after you get into Season 5 because it gives a few things from the middle away.

    It makes me curious as to how they'd give Star Trek the B5 treatment, but I'd have to guess that the first step would be to write out a cohesive plot that can cover the first few years of the show before they start filming.

  34. Re:but alien nazis? by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey, they're "fresh" and "creative."

    And alien nazis (just say it out loud, with a smile in your voice--and remember that, by the 'trek cronology, we're all slaves to Khan right about now)

    Where was I? Oh, yes.

    The alien nazi (singluar, remember) is a great example of the subtle fact that Enterprise brings into the central focus a topic that goes hand-in-hand with FTL travel and has been only tangentially mentioned in previous Star Treks: Time Travel.

    Enterprise is ALL about time travel--it's not set "before Kirk", it's set long after Janeway, after the Federation has won and perfected time travel. It's just told from the story of a ship that blew up in the history that Kirk knew, and only launched because of an incident that never happened to Kirk's historical Johnathan Archer.

  35. Straczynski could do it, but will Paramount? by dmccunney · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm of the "Star Trek needs a good long rest" persuasion, myself, but if anyone can revitalize and ailing franchise, it's probably Joe. He has the talent, the background, and the credentials.

    It's ironic, though. When Joe first came up with Babylon 5, he pitched it to Paramount. Paramount turned thumbs down on it. Joe pitched elsewhere. What does Paramount come up with next? Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, a show about a space station located on the borders of several competing interstellar powers. Coincidence?

    Joe reportdly hit the roof, but was careful *not* to blame Rick Berman and the other folks directly involved in ST production. Paramount wished to protect the Trek franchise at all costs, and wasn't about to compete with itself by backing a non-Trek SF show. Whether it decided to sucker punch a possible competitor by bringing out the same idea first remains unknowable.

    The problem is that Paramount got a successful franchise largely by accident. Star Trek: TOS was originally cancelled part way through, and brought back through fan pressure. It seems likely that Paramount never really understood *why* it was popular, so successive Star Trek: Whatever's have trod the same old ground, in apparent fear that any actual new ideas would kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.

    Personally, I was around when the original series was being aired. It was the best SF on TV at the time, but hasn't aged terribly well.

    ST:TNG had some good moments, especially when it worked through the backlog of unproduced scripts bought for the original series and started buying new material. There was at least some attempt to deal with adult themes, even if there were embarassing clunkers.

    DS9 had moments as well, especially when they introduced the war with the Dominion. Trek always had a schizophrenic attitude toward Star Fleet. Pointing out that the Enterprise was a capital ship, and if there *was* a war, Star Fleet would fight it produced hand-waving and denial from a lot of folks.

    Voyager was simply excreble. I think I managed to watch one episode before giving up in disgust.

    I had hopes for Enterprise. A show set early in the chronolgy of the series, detailing the early days of the Federation had promise. Promise that, unsurprisingly, has not been fulfilled. I've avoided it, too.

    I have a problem with television that makes an implicit assumption that I'm dumb, and that any show with a few SF tropes and some FX will get me to watch. Dramatic story lines, meaningful characters, interesting plots, good writing? Who needs them? It's got the Trek name on it. It will sell...

    Well, not to me, buddy.

    Joe might actually be able to create a Trek series worth watching again. I'd love to see it. I'd lay long odds against Paramount saying yes.
    ______
    Dennis