News flash! Despite persistent reports and rumors to the contrary, Star Trek is not dead. True, Trek is currently stricken with a potentially fatal ailment, but death is still a long way off and wholly preventable. What is this dreadful illness Star Trek suffers from? It's called "a lack of vision."
We miss you, Gene, but...
Star Trek's creator, Gene Roddenberry, is dead, but the show(s) must go on.
Sadly, no one has come forward to pick up the creative reins of Trek and take it into the future. As a result, present-day Trek has no vision, no direction and no sense of purpose. It's too easy to stick a bunch of people into Starfleet uniforms, put them on a starship, shoot them off into space and slap a Star Trek tag on the title.
However, there's got to be someone behind the camera whose entire purpose of being is to ask a series of questions. Who are these people? Why are these people wearing Starfleet uniforms? Why are they on that starship? Where are they going? Why is this show worthy of a Star Trek label?
Otherwise, the show risks losing its soul. Every ship needs a captain to keep her on course, and so does every TV show. The Trek franchise has been warping along without a captain for far too long.
We need someone not just to sit in the center seat, but to truly fill the chair -- someone who can both chart and maintain a steady course -- before the mighty ship of Star Trek is accidentally flown into a black hole.
Vision, vision, who's got the vision?
Star Trek's current caretaker, Rick Berman, is not the visionary the franchise needs to guide it into its next reincarnation.
This is not a call for fans to form a posse to storm the Paramount lot and string Berman up by his toenails. In all fairness, Berman is a good television producer and a good businessman. He's kept Trek going for the past dozen years, and can conceivably oversee the franchise for many years to come.
As long as Berman is doing his job as a producer and businessman, it's better to keep him, but let someone else be Trek's guiding creative light.
Trek needs someone who can bring a new and strong vision not only to the Star Trek universe, but to the conventions of science fiction as well. Unfortunately, no one currently working in the franchise seems able to achieve this goal. It's past time Paramount brought in fresh creative leadership to shake Trek out of its complacency and save its audience from drowning in mediocrity.
Anyone got a map?
Why can't Berman do the job of seeing Trek into the new millennium? After all, he is the man who has overseen three Trek shows, from midway through the run of Next Generation to Voyager, isn't he?
However, to put it simply, Berman can't, or won't, go boldly anywhere Star Trek hasn't already gone. The whole idea behind Voyager was take Trek "back to its roots" -- a nostalgic way for the Paramount powers that be to say, "we're going to rehash everything the original series and Next Generation already did."
Star Trek doesn't need to go backwards in time, it desperately needs to take a leap forward. The original series was bold and innovative for its day, but what worked in the '60s doesn't hold water in today's competitive television market, particularly in the SF arena. Respecting history is one thing, but repeating it over and over again is a fast way to sink a franchise.
A dose of this, a dose of that
Will the addition of one creative person solve all of Trek's ills? No.
The man or woman who saves Star Trek is going to need help ushering the franchise into the future. He or she will need an extraordinary team of writers -- fresh writers who understand, and can write for, both Star Trek and the more general science fiction audience. These writers will have to be able to create strong and vivid characters.
Sadly, these are all skills that the current breed of Trek writers lack. The original series had scripts written by such SF giants as Robert Bloch, Jerome Bixby, D.C. Fontana and Harlan Ellison -- why not allow future shows to benefit from similarly knowledgeable and talented people?
Formula? Trek don't need no stinkin' formula!
Most importantly, Star Trek needs creative minds who are willing to fight Paramount for the creative freedom to do whatever it takes to guide the franchise where it needs to go -- even if that means permanently changing the Trek universe.
There seems to be a tremendous fear within the Star Trek ranks of doing anything to rock the boat. Any daring plans since Berman took the helm have hit the end of the studio's short leash and have been quickly reined in.
Think about it. Have the Federation or Starfleet changed significantly and permanently over the last twenty seasons of Next Generation, Deep Space Nine and Voyager?
Even Deep Space Nine, easily the best and most innovative of all of Berman's franchise efforts, was forced to put all the toys back in their proper places by the end of its run. The long-running war with the Dominion ended and the Federation was saved, and the end of DS 9 marked a return to the status quo.
Why is the Star Trek universe not allowed to change and evolve? What's wrong with shaking things up every now and then?
Everything changes. It's called progress and it should be encouraged, not stifled. New ideas are always emerging while old ones fade. Things that remain stagnant for too long will eventually wither away and die.
Does anyone truly believe that the entire Star Trek franchise would collapse in on itself if the United Federation of Planets hit the occasional rough patch? Life is like that, always in a state of upheaval.
And Trek could use a nice big infusion of life right about now. If Paramount doesn't want to allow the Trek universe, and especially the Federation -- which has remained virtually static for almost a hundred years now in Trek time -- to develop and grow, then they are not giving fans enough credit. Letting the Federation have some growing pains isn't nearly enough to drive the audience away. It won't damage the investment.
The undiscovered country
No one knows what the future has in store for Star Trek -- not me, not the fans, not Paramount, not even Berman.
Will there be another movie? Will the next series revitalize the franchise? Will Berman ever bring in a brilliant and talented visionary -- and hopefully a slew of new writers -- to breathe new life into new series?
Fans can hope the answer to all of these questions will be "yes," but we can only wait and see what occurs. One thing is for certain -- while countless other flash-in-the-pan fads have since passed into history, Star Trek remains a viable, familiar part of our culture. If its keepers would allow it to maximize its potential, to grow with its audience, it has the potential to remain a part of modern culture for countless years to come. Is that so much to ask?
advertisement
