More Stories
	The Deeper Side of Trek: Dogs of War
	The Deeper Side of Trek: Technobabble
	The Deeper Side of Trek: Galaxy of the Elite?
	The Deeper Side of Trek: The Movies
	Multimedia
	Wrath of Khan: DVD Review
	Related Links
	Star Trek

In syndication, TNG and DS9 had the advantage of full, guaranteed first seasons (and all-but-guaranteed beyond that), unlike the traditional networks, where a series can be pulled after just a few unsuccessful air dates. This gave both shows a chance to establish an audience -- and in the case of TNG, an audience that would continue to grow throughout its run.

But such groundbreaking trends, like the stock market until early this year, do not continue forever. This is particularly true in television, where the continued multiplication of channels and viewer options has led to the continued fragmenting of the audience.

Now, as we head into 2001, a new situation of uncertainty seems to be emerging. It’s a very different situation, but it might be the closest thing to a crossroads that Star Trek has seen since TNG set the "second generation" of the franchise (which would later include Deep Space Nine and Voyager) in motion.

Running on dilithium fumes

Voyager, now in its final season, will be the last of the Trek series to emerge from those glory days of TNG. From the looks of things, interest in the Star Trek franchise has diminished substantially over the past five years. I get frequent e-mail from readers voicing their displeasure over the recent direction of the franchise; some say they’ve bailed on Voyager -- and perhaps all of Trek -- never to return. Just how widespread are such feelings?

It’s hard to say, because gauging an audience based on Internet opinion fails to get the whole story, or even most of it. Again we go back to the ratings game, where we see a general downward slide in the numbers in the past five years. But isn’t that to be expected? After all, everyone’s ratings are down, simply because there are more choices.

So, with all this information and probably more, current Trek masterminds Rick Berman and Brannon Braga have promised us a fifth Trek series -- commonly referred to as "Series V" -- planned to debut in fall 2001.

This essentially means a new show will immediately replace Voyager when the old show goes off the air next spring. We will not get a "breather" from Trek, which many, myself included, have argued might be a good thing for the franchise. A longer period of down time makes it easier to build anticipation; even one year could be helpful.

No matter, because that doesn’t seem likely. Berman and Braga have for months distanced themselves from their daily involvement with Voyager to work on development of Series V, which has seemingly become the most ominously secret Trek project of all time, much to the frustration of some fans.

And here’s where we come to the crossroads.

Next page: burnout is irrelevant

~

Is Star Trek (not to mention the people bringing it to us) currently at a stage of burnout? If it is and the studio isn’t going to have a cool-off period before jumping into a new series, then the question becomes what can make Trek seem new again.

Because I’ll tell you right off: Voyager is feeling kinda old right now. And since Voyager currently speaks for the franchise, that’s how the franchise more or less seems. Old.

It’s a little perplexing, in this age of rampant information, that so little information is available about a series that has been announced and supposedly under development for nearly a year now. Compare this to the recent launch of Gene Roddenberry’s Andromeda, a series discussed on the Internet for what seemed an eternity before its premiere last month. True, maybe it’s still too early to talk about concrete Series V facts at the moment — after all, we’re talking nearly a year before the proposed premiere date.

But it’s also somewhat strange that Berman and Braga have gone on record so many times for so long with the same sound bite, which roughly goes like this:

"We’re currently working on the storyline for the pilot. This is a series we want to be dramatically different from the last three Star Trek series, but at the same time be true to the ideals and spirit of Star Trek."

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read that same quote, repeated in different interviews. It’s already become the cliché for Series V.

Tired of guessing

Rumors have said Series V will take place in a time frame earlier than the previous Trek series; some have dubbed it the "Birth of the Federation" series. Is this true? I don’t know.

Paramount sources have been incredibly tight-lipped, promising to release information about the show "soon." Every subsequent interview, however, reads just like the last. Has Paramount even approved a pilot premise? Everyone seems to be tap-dancing around specifics in favor of vague promises that seem to read, "We don’t know what it is yet, but it’s gonna be great!"

So what’s the deal? Are we being hooked for a huge surprise? Are there conceptual problems that have led to ideas being thrown out over and over again? Is there a working premise or not?

Ultimately, at this moment in time, it’s irrelevant. But it seems that the trust between the fan base and the people running the franchise has eroded. Personally -- and I doubt I’m alone -- my feelings on the matter of Series V are "I’ll believe it when I see it" -- and I’m talking merely about the existence of such a series, not even the question of whether it will be fresh enough to justify a premiere immediately after Voyager goes away.

The Viacom problem

So assuming we get it, new questions arise. Where it will air? Will people be receptive? Trek’s shakier popularity of late brings up the question of whether a new series will be met with a good reception or a mediocre one. I tend to doubt Paramount is going to want a series that only performs up to the level of Voyager’s current standards. They’re going to want a brand-new show to earn killer ratings.

Then there’s this whole conglomerate mess with Paramount, UPN, and CBS. Viacom now owns all these mentioned parties. So will Paramount try to put Series V on CBS, or will it go to UPN?

The notion of Trek on CBS is interesting -- and perilous. On a real network, as opposed to UPN, where Voyager is an anchor show and is largely untouchable, cancellation is a more likely threat. Putting Series V on CBS might reveal just how interested the masses are (or aren’t) in Trek, and the results could even mean the show could fail, forcing Trek into retirement -- something that would have been unthinkable a decade ago.

Then there’s always the status quo: Series V in traditional Trek markets, either UPN (or whatever it will be called a year from now, assuming it’s still around) or syndication. Both options are perfectly viable -- logic suggests that a new series in such an environment wouldn’t have a hard time surviving for the now-standard seven-year Star Trek term -- but don't imply new or larger audiences.

Meanwhile, creatively, there must be something very different about Series V that sends Trek in a new direction, or it’ll be a waste of our time. If all the vague quotes and stalling for the press mean that Berman, Braga, and the studio are thinking very carefully about their next move, then that’s probably a good sign. If it’s just spin for the media, that’s a bad sign.

In any case, the next 12 months should be very interesting indeed for the franchise.