Should Star Trek Die?

securitas writes "The New York Times Television reporter William S. Kowinski writes about questions of the Star Trek franchise's viability due to overexposure, audience fatigue and creative exhaustion. Star Trek actor and director LeVar Burton (Geordi La Forge) is in favor of a hiatus, and is quoted as saying, 'Star Trek's just not special enough, not anymore.... They need to shut the whole thing down, wait five years, create an interest, an excitement, a hunger for it again.' Also quoted are Leonard Nimoy (Spock) and executive producer Rick Berman. The article is particularly salient given the recent announcement of Star Trek Online, a massively multiplayer online game scheduled to launch in 2007. Remember that Activision sued Viacom over the Star Trek franchise last year, ending the license despite a 10-year licensing agreement that originally expired in 2008. So the question is: Should Star Trek die?"

Comments

Re:yes

[Palshife]

I've seen this post several places on the Internet before, same spelling errors and all. Where'd you get it?

GameDev forums

[T-Kir]

Thanks to the google cache... about two thirds down the page posted by "Jesper T". Had to use the cache because the direct link to my original search came back with a resource denied (original google search text: "Western in space. Kinda campy but did have its moments. Very memorable characters. Fanbase: Big enough to get a few movies going after its cancelation. Noteworthy:").

Re:yes

[meringuoid]

I like the idea of Enterprise. A primitive starship does away with all the ridiculous technological dei ex machinae that plagued Voyager's plots: Enterprise NX-01 doesn't have a tractor beam, it has a harpoon! The low-tech scenario means the writers can't use bullshit physics to resolve a plot quite so often.

I'm not so convinced by the actual implementation of Enterprise... I can't see how Archer's universe is going to become Kirk's universe, and it doesn't feel quite like Trek all the time. But there have been some damn good episodes - I actually like Enterprise a lot better than Voyager.

Re:It died years ago...

[Idarubicin]

... and turned up their smugness factor by 1000. And then forgot to employ any decent writers with original storylines...

I don't know...there were flashes of brilliance. The first season was mostly crud. Once the writers started to get a little more comfortable with the characters--and weren't so afraid of being cancelled--there was some neat stuff. With his classical training, Patrick Stewart is a particularly strong actor, to wit:

"The Inner Light", where Picard lives an entire lifetime on a now-destroyed planet;
"Chain of Command", with its indelibly-etched cry of defiance: 'There are four lights!';
"Tapestry", where Q gives Picard an opportunity to live a life of caution or die on the operating table;
"All Good Things", the final episode, was very well-done, and almost redeems the mess that was "Encounter at Farpoint".

Johnathan Frakes delivered a strong performance as an involuntary insane asylum inmate in "Frame of Mind".

I also remember with fondness the sense of humour in the series. Data was the ultimate straight man, and the episodes with Barclay had their share of priceless moments. (Barclay facing a midget Riker in a holodeck duel was a hoot.)

Is it The Odyssey? Is it Citizen Kane? Nope. But it was good television, with good production values and clean writing--and better than most other things on the tube at the time.