This post, here comes another guess at what some of the crew are thinking...
All Characters are owned by Paramount and "Star Trek"
No Copyright infringement intended or implied.
"I don't know why we had to pick Ten-Forward for the celebration...The holodeck could have taken us anywhere..." said the man with the artificial eyes, in between libations.
"It was neccesary to include everyone...who has sailed an Enterprise..." said the machine serenely, now having well come to terms with his own odd method of rebirth.
The Vulcan and his Captain, at another table, spoke quietly...
"Was it worth it? All the dangers we faced to reopen this connection? to have an impact on their past and future again...? for at least a small bit of time...? Look who we *lost* to get here!" The captain was uncharacteristically morose for a moment, thinking of Scotty lost in the first trial when an entire station working on restoring the connection had blown up, due to the incompetence of one of his underlings that he just had to go in and rework...
"And", softly by the Vulcan, "The good Doctor..."
They both fell silent again for a moment, remembering their good friend, so upset and volatile at the loss of the connection two years back, that he had again dissapeared and not communicated with them for many months. There had been a justifiably prideful communique some small while ago regarding the cures he had been able to create for nearly a third of the population of an entire planet decimated by an immuno-deficiency virus. Then, the grim one that followed a week later confirming his death, executed by a local warlord for treating "the enemy."
The Vulcan continued..."Both of them would have appreciated another attempt to communicate, connect with the past and future. Both would see this as a worthy thing. If they were at this table now, they would be pleased," he said with the certainty that is peculiarly Vulcan.
"You're right, of course, as always," the Captain admitted. "Risk has always been out there."
Suddenly, the Captain's mood shifted, to an irritated stuffy persona he did quite well, that hid a geniuine bit of curiousity..."Don't see why we're going to have to rehash all that business that went on when we were..."
"...Beginning our careers, and exceedingly inexperienced..." the Vulcan said, in that diplomatic mode he had learned at his father's knee...
"Young and and stupid is more likely..."
"Can the two of you please be still? The Frenchman asked in a jovial manner, passing by the table..."There's a bit of time to wait before it begins...and everyone wants to come at this fresh....don't spoil it."
Just under his breath, the Captain groaned...
And the Vulcan raised an eyebrow...
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Resurrection Day
"That green-blooded son-of-a-bitch! It's his revenge for all those arguments he lost..."
---The late DeForrest Kelley, as Dr. Leonard McCoy in "Star Trek III The Search for Spock"
Well, since this place was originally set up to be a "Star Trek" wake...since Trek has been turning endings into beginnings for more than forty years....it follows that a "Star Trek" wake has a bit of a different ending/beginning than your typical wake. I hereby eat my words.
...I knew about the JJ Abrams film due in 2008....but the details of this resurrection are falling into place .
Nimoy is set to reprise Elder Spock for us (wonderful, wonderful yay, yay, happydance yay...I'm actually a bit misty about it, now that I've recovered from fainting dead away at the news, laugh)....and EEEEEE! One of my 'Heroes' favorites will be there too.
And perhaps Denny Crane will make an appearance as well...
---The late DeForrest Kelley, as Dr. Leonard McCoy in "Star Trek III The Search for Spock"
Well, since this place was originally set up to be a "Star Trek" wake...since Trek has been turning endings into beginnings for more than forty years....it follows that a "Star Trek" wake has a bit of a different ending/beginning than your typical wake. I hereby eat my words.
...I knew about the JJ Abrams film due in 2008....but the details of this resurrection are falling into place .
Nimoy is set to reprise Elder Spock for us (wonderful, wonderful yay, yay, happydance yay...I'm actually a bit misty about it, now that I've recovered from fainting dead away at the news, laugh)....and EEEEEE! One of my 'Heroes' favorites will be there too.
And perhaps Denny Crane will make an appearance as well...
Sunday, July 22, 2007
A Flashback of sorts.
Once, I was the wife of a comic fan. I knew nothing about comics except that I scorned them mightily, they not being (my words at the time) 'real books.' We would go to the famed Twilight Book and Game store, a five hour drive away....and he'd head for the comic racks I'd go for the speculative fiction, and our meeting in the middle meant that there *might* be a high end Green Arrow graphic novel that I'd consent to read, and that he would grudgingly purchase for me...
The late husband started out working for Tony Isabella in the late seventies in his comic store...and writing his own mimeographed stuff...blessedly, the late spouse decided remaining on the 'fan' side of the equation was best, and so would haunt local dealers and conventions mostly buying, but sometimes selling, a collection that once filled an entire room of his family home.
In the comic world at the time, my perception was that there were the two camps DC and Marvel (rather like Mac and PC, back in the day) and that 'niver the twain shall meet..'
I confessed shortly after marrying him that I 'had' in fact loved the Spiderman comics (and the rarer Sub-Mariner) when I was a little girl (The 1967 Superman and Spiderman TV cartoons had fostered a hunt for the comics...) This was slightly troubling to him as he was a DC guy all the way....but it wasn't a marriage ender...
Like almost every other comic fan I ever encountered 'brash' and 'opinionated' leading to 'brusque and alienating,' were definitely parts of his emotional soup. But real life changes and growing up had turned these things in another difficult direction....
But before his focus left the world of comics, he did say the single funniest thing I ever heard him say about comics... and it is only funny to comic fans and only pleasing to the ear for that part of comic fandom that agreed with him.
I know I'm going to attract some trolls here. Bear in mind please as you chomp up my comment list....that I'm merely the reporter of what was said...It's in the next paragraph or so that I get nasty.
He said, after reading John Byrnes revamp of Superman in the eighties---which he liked!---
"That John Byrne...Ego, the Living Planet!"
I'm (sacrilige!) a Peter David fan mesel'
Mostly because Peter is on my list of The Only Trek Fiction Writers Worth Ponying up Some of My Paycheck For.
Peter David
Diane Duane
Diane Carey
Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens
Marshak and Culbreath, a real oldie
After my husband's death, I did, in my last attempt *ever* in this lifetime to date anyone... date another comic book fan....a person who was as fiercely in the Marvel Camp as the husband had been in the DC Camp. I was impressed and pleased that one of the minor perks of this connection allowed me to admit to my love of Spidey.
Maybe, I thought, this is some kind of Cosmic Do-Over and this guy won't die soon, and I can perhaps have all of the pieces of a long term relationship that I was denied due to a nasty connection between a childhood ilness and the business practices of BighPharma....It'll work. It'll be okay...I'll just....
But No.
It ended badly. (Very Very Badly)
And thus, my connection to the divisive, talented, bitterly feuding, charming in it's own earnest twisted sort of way, self important world of comics ended...
But, when I need a laugh and need to remember the late husband in a good way, I just rewind the tape in my head and remember..."Ego, the living Planet!'
Bwahahahahahahaahhaahahhaahha.....
Marshak and Culbreath, a real oldie
After my husband's death, I did, in my last attempt *ever* in this lifetime to date anyone... date another comic book fan....a person who was as fiercely in the Marvel Camp as the husband had been in the DC Camp. I was impressed and pleased that one of the minor perks of this connection allowed me to admit to my love of Spidey.
Maybe, I thought, this is some kind of Cosmic Do-Over and this guy won't die soon, and I can perhaps have all of the pieces of a long term relationship that I was denied due to a nasty connection between a childhood ilness and the business practices of BighPharma....It'll work. It'll be okay...I'll just....
But No.
It ended badly. (Very Very Badly)
And thus, my connection to the divisive, talented, bitterly feuding, charming in it's own earnest twisted sort of way, self important world of comics ended...
But, when I need a laugh and need to remember the late husband in a good way, I just rewind the tape in my head and remember..."Ego, the living Planet!'
Bwahahahahahahaahhaahahhaahha.....
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Tangled Webs, Straight Lines
Disclaimer: I am *not* an official Marvel comic book nerd. I know very little of any Marvel character history outside of the films and cartoons. I have no investment in some argument about what is, or should be canon in the Spidey flicks.
*Spoilers Below* so if you haven't seen Spiderman 3 yet, *don't keep reading* if you want to be kept ignorant of plot twists etc.
It is my considered opinion that multiple villain stories are *great* for comics....the day that a reader woolgathered and said to themselves, "How great would it be if Character A and Character B interacted from different universes, different moral sides, even different comicbook makers...Also the multi-hero Justice League thing has some of the same juice...
But.... I've noticed...
For *films* featuring comic book villains and heroes...Meh, not so much.
I wanted this Spiderman flick to be all about the tensions between Harry, Peter, and Mary Jane. The two guys wrestling with their dark sides, or dark parents, and Mary Jane realizing that if she married Peter, it wasn't going to be all goofy love all the time.
I *wanted* Harry to get his licks in with his fights with Peter, because from his perspective he was avenging his father's death, just as Peter went after
Sandman...
But both Sandman, and the wanna-be photographer, distract the viewer and pull attention and time away from the main story.
And the Sandman and the photographer also get shorted because there's not enough movie for them...Sandman in particular isn't a one-note dry cleaned version of Ben Grimm from the Fantastic Four...He's complicated and driven, from the first moments you see him with his daughter, and I wanted to learn the backstory....
Loved the black hero costume, and the total asshat behavior of "Darth Spidey." (right down to the symbiont "acting like" some meteor that fell in "The Seventies," and Peter Parker's patently ridiculous Travolta strut with the 70's funky backround music in the black tailored suit.)
Did anyone else catch the joke of the photographers red hair....reminscent of Toby Maquires red hair in Seabuscuit? They *had* to differentiate them, in part, because IMO the actor who played the photographer looks a lot *like* Toby McGuire in real life from his stint on "That 70's Show..."
Two hours of great cgi, regular stunts and special effects...*should have been spent* on Spiderman,Goblin redux (and satisfyingly 'redeemed...) and the girl having trouble choosing between them.
One last cavil.
Parker bounced back from killing two people just a bit too quickly...one used to be his best friend...
My opinion, of course.
*Spoilers Below* so if you haven't seen Spiderman 3 yet, *don't keep reading* if you want to be kept ignorant of plot twists etc.
It is my considered opinion that multiple villain stories are *great* for comics....the day that a reader woolgathered and said to themselves, "How great would it be if Character A and Character B interacted from different universes, different moral sides, even different comicbook makers...Also the multi-hero Justice League thing has some of the same juice...
But.... I've noticed...
For *films* featuring comic book villains and heroes...Meh, not so much.
I wanted this Spiderman flick to be all about the tensions between Harry, Peter, and Mary Jane. The two guys wrestling with their dark sides, or dark parents, and Mary Jane realizing that if she married Peter, it wasn't going to be all goofy love all the time.
I *wanted* Harry to get his licks in with his fights with Peter, because from his perspective he was avenging his father's death, just as Peter went after
Sandman...
But both Sandman, and the wanna-be photographer, distract the viewer and pull attention and time away from the main story.
And the Sandman and the photographer also get shorted because there's not enough movie for them...Sandman in particular isn't a one-note dry cleaned version of Ben Grimm from the Fantastic Four...He's complicated and driven, from the first moments you see him with his daughter, and I wanted to learn the backstory....
Loved the black hero costume, and the total asshat behavior of "Darth Spidey." (right down to the symbiont "acting like" some meteor that fell in "The Seventies," and Peter Parker's patently ridiculous Travolta strut with the 70's funky backround music in the black tailored suit.)
Did anyone else catch the joke of the photographers red hair....reminscent of Toby Maquires red hair in Seabuscuit? They *had* to differentiate them, in part, because IMO the actor who played the photographer looks a lot *like* Toby McGuire in real life from his stint on "That 70's Show..."
Two hours of great cgi, regular stunts and special effects...*should have been spent* on Spiderman,Goblin redux (and satisfyingly 'redeemed...) and the girl having trouble choosing between them.
One last cavil.
Parker bounced back from killing two people just a bit too quickly...one used to be his best friend...
My opinion, of course.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
"In The Beginning...."
A guest post from my cousin The Journalist:
"OK, by now we've all heard about Matt Damon, Adrian Brody and Gary Sinise possiby being
cast as the big 3 in "Star Trek XI." It sounds like it might be pretty cool, but I'll believe it when I
see Matt Damon on Jay Leno talking about how he's playing Jim Kirk. Frankly this sounds like
something a bunch of Trek geeks - like us, let's face it - would come up with while we're sitting
around thinking, hmmm...who would WE cast as Kirk, Spock & McCoy?That being said, if it
actually happens....This talk among fans about possible damage to continuity and canon has got
to stop. We've got to let it go. Yes, like many fans, I would love to see the movie include
characters like Gary Mitchell, Carol Marcus, Finnegan & Ruth, Sam & Aurelyn Kirk, etc. But
these are pipe dreams on our part. There's no way these people who are new to the franchise
like J.J. Abrams are going to care about continuity and canon. Even longtime Trek heads who
ran "Star Trek Enterprise" made blatant cointiuity errors. For crying out loud, "Voyager" would
flat out contradict things that were going on in "Deep Space Nine" WHEN THE TWO SHOWS
WERE ON THE AIR AT THE SAME TIME! We just need to accept that this new movie will be a
new take on the franchise, and hope it's a good story, and not worry about whether it "fits in"
with what we know from past incarnations of Trek. It will make it much more enjoyable, and
that's the point, right?
Just my two cents..."
"OK, by now we've all heard about Matt Damon, Adrian Brody and Gary Sinise possiby being
cast as the big 3 in "Star Trek XI." It sounds like it might be pretty cool, but I'll believe it when I
see Matt Damon on Jay Leno talking about how he's playing Jim Kirk. Frankly this sounds like
something a bunch of Trek geeks - like us, let's face it - would come up with while we're sitting
around thinking, hmmm...who would WE cast as Kirk, Spock & McCoy?That being said, if it
actually happens....This talk among fans about possible damage to continuity and canon has got
to stop. We've got to let it go. Yes, like many fans, I would love to see the movie include
characters like Gary Mitchell, Carol Marcus, Finnegan & Ruth, Sam & Aurelyn Kirk, etc. But
these are pipe dreams on our part. There's no way these people who are new to the franchise
like J.J. Abrams are going to care about continuity and canon. Even longtime Trek heads who
ran "Star Trek Enterprise" made blatant cointiuity errors. For crying out loud, "Voyager" would
flat out contradict things that were going on in "Deep Space Nine" WHEN THE TWO SHOWS
WERE ON THE AIR AT THE SAME TIME! We just need to accept that this new movie will be a
new take on the franchise, and hope it's a good story, and not worry about whether it "fits in"
with what we know from past incarnations of Trek. It will make it much more enjoyable, and
that's the point, right?
Just my two cents..."
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
RunAmok Time
And, they did it *again!*
The enhanced Trek "Amok Time" did give a wonderful matte type shot of Kirk, Spock and McCoy going to the place of marriage across a rock bridge reminiscent of the Mount Seleya shot from Star Trek III. They showed this matte twice...
But they couldn't resist.
Not only did they cut one of Celia Lovsky's great lines as T'Pau, they actually *cut it in half!"
The Original Original Series has her saying to Spock...
"It is said. Thy Vulcan blood is thin. Art thee Vulcan? Or Art thee Human...?" with as close to contempt as I ever heard any Vulcan admit to.
The Futureized Original Series has her say...
"It is said"/and then immediately cut to another shot or line of dialogue with the rest of the line never recovered...
Am I splitting hairs? Yes, absolutely I am.
But if the point of this was to introduce TOS to a new generation of fans, they need to be aware they are not getting the whole picture...and to carve up one of the best shows of the series? Nuts.
Personally, I'll be happy if they replace "The Apple," "And the Children Shall Lead" "Spectre of the Gun" and "The Way to Eden" with a buncha cool special effects and eviscerated dialogue...and if they can surgically remove most of the women's lines from "Spock's Brain"
"I put upon my head the Teacher..." Gaah. I'll thank the adapters of this new version of TOS
But *not* the best of it. Not "Amok Time."
What's next? Journey to Babel deprived of "Tellarites do not argue for reasons. They simply argue."
City On the Edge of Forever without: "...Do as your heart tells you to do...and millions will die who did not die before."
"Balance of Terror" without: "You and I are of a kind...in a different reality, I could have called you friend..."
"Errand of Mercy" altered minus Kor's lament, "It would have been glorious."
...
The enhanced Trek "Amok Time" did give a wonderful matte type shot of Kirk, Spock and McCoy going to the place of marriage across a rock bridge reminiscent of the Mount Seleya shot from Star Trek III. They showed this matte twice...
But they couldn't resist.
Not only did they cut one of Celia Lovsky's great lines as T'Pau, they actually *cut it in half!"
The Original Original Series has her saying to Spock...
"It is said. Thy Vulcan blood is thin. Art thee Vulcan? Or Art thee Human...?" with as close to contempt as I ever heard any Vulcan admit to.
The Futureized Original Series has her say...
"It is said"/and then immediately cut to another shot or line of dialogue with the rest of the line never recovered...
Am I splitting hairs? Yes, absolutely I am.
But if the point of this was to introduce TOS to a new generation of fans, they need to be aware they are not getting the whole picture...and to carve up one of the best shows of the series? Nuts.
Personally, I'll be happy if they replace "The Apple," "And the Children Shall Lead" "Spectre of the Gun" and "The Way to Eden" with a buncha cool special effects and eviscerated dialogue...and if they can surgically remove most of the women's lines from "Spock's Brain"
"I put upon my head the Teacher..." Gaah. I'll thank the adapters of this new version of TOS
But *not* the best of it. Not "Amok Time."
What's next? Journey to Babel deprived of "Tellarites do not argue for reasons. They simply argue."
City On the Edge of Forever without: "...Do as your heart tells you to do...and millions will die who did not die before."
"Balance of Terror" without: "You and I are of a kind...in a different reality, I could have called you friend..."
"Errand of Mercy" altered minus Kor's lament, "It would have been glorious."
...
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Count me now in the "These Suck" Column
Regarding the "Futureized" Trek.
Because...
Well, first let's back up....
Anyone who is a TOS fan, pay attention.
Saw "The Doomsday Machine" last evening.
And, they put in an amazing first shot of the decimated Constellation, roiling in space with asterroid chunks flying in erratic trajectories all round... as well as cool semi maneuvering scenes by Decker's shuttle.
Not to mention that the Planet Killer is now about forty times scarier, which is fantastic...
So, if I *like* that stuff, what's my beef?
While they left in....
Decker, full of crazed snark, to Spock: "I don't recognize your authority to relieve me..."
They took *out*...
Decker, cagey : "You're bluffing."
Spock at his most certain and assured: "Vulcans..never..bluff."
And they also cut about five seconds out of the nerve jangling countdown at the end.
*Who* said that TOS would bring in a new generation of fans if they glitzed it up, but cut dialogue and altered thematic impact as shamelessly as any syndicator in the 1970's who "stripped" it ever did.
I love the new FX, but the episodes are diminished without every beloved line.
Because...
Well, first let's back up....
Anyone who is a TOS fan, pay attention.
Saw "The Doomsday Machine" last evening.
And, they put in an amazing first shot of the decimated Constellation, roiling in space with asterroid chunks flying in erratic trajectories all round... as well as cool semi maneuvering scenes by Decker's shuttle.
Not to mention that the Planet Killer is now about forty times scarier, which is fantastic...
So, if I *like* that stuff, what's my beef?
While they left in....
Decker, full of crazed snark, to Spock: "I don't recognize your authority to relieve me..."
They took *out*...
Decker, cagey : "You're bluffing."
Spock at his most certain and assured: "Vulcans..never..bluff."
And they also cut about five seconds out of the nerve jangling countdown at the end.
*Who* said that TOS would bring in a new generation of fans if they glitzed it up, but cut dialogue and altered thematic impact as shamelessly as any syndicator in the 1970's who "stripped" it ever did.
I love the new FX, but the episodes are diminished without every beloved line.
Monday, December 25, 2006
A "Fantasy" sort of Christmas
Sometimes, circumstances mean you spend "time off" with fictional characters, rather than people.
So a shout out to a long list of very fictional persons.
First, the seasonally appropriate:
Whoville
Christmastown...
And that good man Charlie Brown...
Or the rest:
Anyone in Rod Serling's "Twilight Zone."
The crews of all the "Enterprise's"
As well as the Millenium Falcon
Monty Python's bunch.
Jim West and Artemis Gordon (and Miguelito Loveless)
Everyone from Collinwood.
Or Narnia
Or Middle-Earth
Or 34th Street...
Or Sherwood Forest
Or The Emerald City
Places to go when circumstances circumscribe seasonal celebraton in the real world...
So a shout out to a long list of very fictional persons.
First, the seasonally appropriate:
Whoville
Christmastown...
And that good man Charlie Brown...
Or the rest:
Anyone in Rod Serling's "Twilight Zone."
The crews of all the "Enterprise's"
As well as the Millenium Falcon
Monty Python's bunch.
Jim West and Artemis Gordon (and Miguelito Loveless)
Everyone from Collinwood.
Or Narnia
Or Middle-Earth
Or 34th Street...
Or Sherwood Forest
Or The Emerald City
Places to go when circumstances circumscribe seasonal celebraton in the real world...
Friday, September 08, 2006
40th Anniversary The First 20 years
Myself and my cousin The Journalist, well, we just love this stuff: So, without further ado we present, a tribute in two acts, on the occasion of Trek's 40th.
Star Trek: In September 1966, something happened. The first, the original, *without which there would have been no others* “Star Trek” premiered on NBC TV. A series that did not insult viewers’ intelligence, but acknowledged it and pushed the folks on the couch to puzzle, think, and understand as they watched. I’m not comfortable with the disrespect given this lovely prize by fans who only celebrate the spinoffs.
It’s important to remember Star Trek fans got a jump on something BIG.
The future.
The show itself took an incredible leap forward by representing humanity. I don’t permit the “it’s so dated” type of remarks. If you weren’t there, perhaps there is no effective way to explain to you how much of a risk Roddenberry took by just having different races and sexes and nationalities up there on the bridge.
In a time before personal computers, we knew about shipboard systems that held vast amounts of information. And its crew had personal models that they carried around with them.
In a time before cell phones, we knew about just such things. They were handheld “walkie-talkies” with astonishing range.
Diagnostic medical beds, aerosol medication delivery, wireless headsets. But *none* of this tech junk even begins to tell us what, or who, were the most important parts of the story.
The *characters.*
Star Trek is our mythos. The place where larger than life heroes showed us an idea that is currently on very dangerous ground. The idea that humanity *does* get to a point of not just *peaceful* coexistence, but an *interesting peace* peace without many borders, or much boredom…an enthusiastic merry band of warrior/diplomats that keep their society in line while being mindful of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, and the Prime Directive. (Yes, Kirk used it like a rubber band. But without the *concept* the whole Federation would have been one large “brush war.”) Now, for those who expect a bit of Shatner bashing…go somewhere else for that. Pull out your DVD of first season Trek and watch Kirk. Before there was any parody of anything at all. Watch “Balance of Terror,” where we get both Kirk the master, restrained, *careful,* intense, *underplayed* strategist, and a sweet bit of the endlessly compassionate McCoy. Or the second pilot, where Kirk is all about stopping a nutcase, not out in front hamming. “Court Martial,” where there are pretty evenhanded doses of Kirk the tomcat, and Kirk the unjustly accused truthful defendant.
And before someone points me to the truly underappreciated “A Piece of the Action,” [“Captain you make an excellent starship commander, but as a taxi driver you leave much to be desired.”] or “I Mudd” or “The Trouble with Tribbles.” [“Why Mr. Baris they like *you!* But there’s no accounting for taste.”] This was *comedy.* If I remember correctly everyone got to ham it up a bit in those episodes.
Kirk’s my favorite “tin plated overbearing dictator with delusions of godhood…” So there.
Spock, the cool analytical risk taker in “Gallileo 7,” the anguished son in “Naked Time,” or restrained, but no less anguished officer in “Journey to Babel.”
The writers and Nimoy managed to create such a believable “other,” that an eyebrow made sense, that the subtlest change in stance, movement, tone, cadence or nuance was full of meaning whether the story was drama or comedy. They made us love Vulcans so much we asked for more! We got Sarek, T’Pring,T’Pau T’lar Stonn (poor fool!) Spock’s sniping at McCoy became a further window into his grudging respect and admiration for the doctor and his unwavering loyalty to his commander….so human, really.
McCoy. He was, I think, the first character who saw all the way in to the entire Spock. Kirk, did also, but I think McCoy “got it” first. Understood him. And did him and his cultural sensitivities the favor of bringing it out through the acceptable back door of an argument. Spock wouldn’t be so beloved if McCoy hadn’t been a window into his nature. It’s difficult to write about the character now, because the man who gave him life has left the planet. But DeForest Kelley and the writers infused this doctor with such caring, expertise and concern…that by the time McCoy did meet with a ladylove [“For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched The Sky”] I was cheering that for once the nice guy did not finish last, whatever the merits of the episode.
For De, and James Doohan both…who didn’t make it to this anniversary… The word has been given, and I’ve no doubt they’re at warp speed.
Scotty who was the *only* one who *truly* loved that ship. Without his miracles, Kirk might have expired mid series…the beam of smile and certainty that was Sulu at the helm, who we loved best when he was out of character and sometimes even out of uniform. Uhura, a smart tough lady the guardian of the ships “communication tether” back to settled space a songbird, and a sexy Mata Hari full of bravado when trying to escape Mirror space…writing at the time gave the character little room for growth, but thankfully much written Trek tells us she is an academic, a student of language and communication…so much more than “hailing frequencies open, sir.” Chekov, the studious, earnest Russian product of a more open society that we had *no idea* was coming in 1967. Not to mention the best screamer in the bunch.
Even the some of the villains get amazingly respectful treatment. Mark Lenard’s resigned, bitter complex Romulan Commander, the merrily authoritarian Kor, of John Colicos…they ring just as ‘true’ and multifaceted as the “good guys.” I credit Colicos’ performance alone with giving the writers of the spinoffs the idea that there had to be more to this race than its aggressions.
Okay, I’ll admit to the third season….but in my recent review of the episodes I remembered that, the *second* season had its fair share of turkeys too… (The *Apple?*) But, bear with me. The turkeys *hurt* so much because we *know* the fineness of these stories, these performances, this vision of the future….
If you’re going to try to explain to a non-fan what’s great about the original Star Trek, you already know that using “Spock’s Brain,” “Spectre of the Gun,” “The Way to Eden” “Plato’s Stepchildren” or “Turnabout Intruder,” probably won’t make them ask for more, but, could, in fact, send them shrieking out into the night begging for some “Fabulous Thunderbirds” DVD’s. And, the cool episodes of Trek would not have “The Enterprise Incident” or “The Empath” in their midst if we hadn’t had a Season Three.
But the fact of the matter is that when Roddenberry left the show, even after the fans wrote in and saved it (Wrote in? Another unheard of thing.), the show’s days were numbered. And, then, when it was cancelled….*another crazy thing happened.*
The show, the idea, ended, was in danger of fading away….and the fans said: NO! This is too good, too interesting, too hopeful, too *important* of a possibility to give up. And they wrote, and wrote and wrote. (the writing has never stopped and continues to this day. I’m personally incredibly fond of the written Trek of Marshak and Culbreath, Diane Duane, A.C. Crispin, Margaret Wander Bonnano, and Peter David. Go get it. It’s consistently as good and sometimes even better than the show. I know, I know, I hear the squawks of “Treason!” for miles. Too Bad.) Blish recaptured the original stories. Fans wrote stories just to write them, and they gathered three years later to celebrate what they loved. Paramount was astounded… but somebody was smart enough to greenlight more adventures for Kirk and Co. via animation. (On DVD soon!) The actual animation is poor, but the writing of a few was incredible, and the voices of almost all the original actors were used…the animated shows are best “seen” with the eyes closed, I’ve found.
So the writing and congregating, and art and ideas went on and on. Amazingly we got our wish…and then the man who’d created this vision and helped it along for so long…stumbled. When we saw Kirk, a strangely cold, not just cool, Spock, and a bearded snarky McCoy…we were exhilarated as only one who has pined for a long anticipated reunion can get. But the first film is an oddly static story, color washed out of the writing and the uniforms, a still, overblown piece where adoring shots of the Enterprise newly lovely couldn’t make up for the missing heart in the writing about the people who fly in her. It made money, not because of what it was, but because of what we hoped for.
I forget the behind the scenes machinations that allowed for a second Trek film, but I thank the studio gods (whomever they may be) that a second film was shot. “Wrath of Khan,” is a true extension of the best series episodes, a bigger story, a more powerful score, a riveting return of a powerful villan and Kirk, McCoy and more than ever Spock…doing what they did best, and doing it well. Camaraderie, investigation, strategy, humor (“a difficult concept.”), Kirk finally being held to some sort of account for at least one of his affairs, (heh) and, heroic self sacrifice….I’m a softie….. even now when I *know* the ultimate answer is reunion…
When Spock stands to attention in front of his Captain and straightens his tunic, the horrific damage from radiation clear on his face and hands…. “I…never took…the Kobiashi Maru test…’til now….what do you think… of my solution?”
I can’t help but cry.
But of course there’s that odd little ‘gift’ he left McCoy…and there we go into the third film…with Nimoy directing the “Search for Spock,” and the band of brothers and sisters shows just what they will do: [“Oh I’ll have Mister Adventure eating out of my hand, sir…” “I’m glad you’re on *our* side!” “How many fingers am I holding up?” “That green blooded son-of-a-bitch! It’s his revenge for all those arguments he lost.” And my *favorite!* “Don’t call me Tiny!”]
What they will risk, or give up to save a comrade. Because, after all…Risk was their business. That was the twentieth anniversary…and the world is much changed….
I have to journey into the personal for just a moment. For those who know me offline and have known me, they know that I never would have met my other half without the Star Trek we both loved…it’s what brought us together…he had a great wish to stand on the NCC 1701’s (“No bloody A, B, C, or D!”) bridge…to sit in a particular Captain’s chair…but was too ill by the time we made it to the Smithsonian to be comfortable with anyone taking his picture. But he saw the exhibit of the sets and the costumes of the original series in 1992, and drank it all in with a purposeful intensity committing it to loving detailed memory, so that in his last eight months he could mentally take it out and polish it and remember…because he knew he had a long journey yet to go… He didn’t make it to this anniversary…but "There are always possibilities"...
The last part of this will be the one ‘speech’ from TOS Trek that still makes me want to freakin’ *stand and salute* when I hear it, and I’m a cynic. To me it’s not overblown, hokey, or false. It rings true. I’ve bracketed in one small alteration for sense. ---Imfunnytoo.
"The illogic of waste, Mr. Spock...the waste of lives, potential, resources, time.
I submit to you that your Empire is illogical because it cannot endure.
I submit that *you* are illogical to be a willing part of it.
If change is inevitable, predictable, beneficial,doesn't logic demand that you be a part of it?" "One man cannot summon the future."
"But one man can change the present.
Be the captain of this Enterprise, Mr. Spock!
Find a logical reason for saving the Halkans [doing right?] ,and make it stick.
Push till it gives!
What will it be?
Past or future?
Tyranny or freedom?
It's up to you.”
”It is time.”
”In every revolution, there's one man with a vision...."
"Captain Kirk, I shall consider it." *
*From “Mirror Mirror” by Jerome Bixby. All Star Trek material copyright Paramount Pictures, no copyright infringement intended or implied.
Star Trek: In September 1966, something happened. The first, the original, *without which there would have been no others* “Star Trek” premiered on NBC TV. A series that did not insult viewers’ intelligence, but acknowledged it and pushed the folks on the couch to puzzle, think, and understand as they watched. I’m not comfortable with the disrespect given this lovely prize by fans who only celebrate the spinoffs.
It’s important to remember Star Trek fans got a jump on something BIG.
The future.
The show itself took an incredible leap forward by representing humanity. I don’t permit the “it’s so dated” type of remarks. If you weren’t there, perhaps there is no effective way to explain to you how much of a risk Roddenberry took by just having different races and sexes and nationalities up there on the bridge.
In a time before personal computers, we knew about shipboard systems that held vast amounts of information. And its crew had personal models that they carried around with them.
In a time before cell phones, we knew about just such things. They were handheld “walkie-talkies” with astonishing range.
Diagnostic medical beds, aerosol medication delivery, wireless headsets. But *none* of this tech junk even begins to tell us what, or who, were the most important parts of the story.
The *characters.*
Star Trek is our mythos. The place where larger than life heroes showed us an idea that is currently on very dangerous ground. The idea that humanity *does* get to a point of not just *peaceful* coexistence, but an *interesting peace* peace without many borders, or much boredom…an enthusiastic merry band of warrior/diplomats that keep their society in line while being mindful of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, and the Prime Directive. (Yes, Kirk used it like a rubber band. But without the *concept* the whole Federation would have been one large “brush war.”) Now, for those who expect a bit of Shatner bashing…go somewhere else for that. Pull out your DVD of first season Trek and watch Kirk. Before there was any parody of anything at all. Watch “Balance of Terror,” where we get both Kirk the master, restrained, *careful,* intense, *underplayed* strategist, and a sweet bit of the endlessly compassionate McCoy. Or the second pilot, where Kirk is all about stopping a nutcase, not out in front hamming. “Court Martial,” where there are pretty evenhanded doses of Kirk the tomcat, and Kirk the unjustly accused truthful defendant.
And before someone points me to the truly underappreciated “A Piece of the Action,” [“Captain you make an excellent starship commander, but as a taxi driver you leave much to be desired.”] or “I Mudd” or “The Trouble with Tribbles.” [“Why Mr. Baris they like *you!* But there’s no accounting for taste.”] This was *comedy.* If I remember correctly everyone got to ham it up a bit in those episodes.
Kirk’s my favorite “tin plated overbearing dictator with delusions of godhood…” So there.
Spock, the cool analytical risk taker in “Gallileo 7,” the anguished son in “Naked Time,” or restrained, but no less anguished officer in “Journey to Babel.”
The writers and Nimoy managed to create such a believable “other,” that an eyebrow made sense, that the subtlest change in stance, movement, tone, cadence or nuance was full of meaning whether the story was drama or comedy. They made us love Vulcans so much we asked for more! We got Sarek, T’Pring,T’Pau T’lar Stonn (poor fool!) Spock’s sniping at McCoy became a further window into his grudging respect and admiration for the doctor and his unwavering loyalty to his commander….so human, really.
McCoy. He was, I think, the first character who saw all the way in to the entire Spock. Kirk, did also, but I think McCoy “got it” first. Understood him. And did him and his cultural sensitivities the favor of bringing it out through the acceptable back door of an argument. Spock wouldn’t be so beloved if McCoy hadn’t been a window into his nature. It’s difficult to write about the character now, because the man who gave him life has left the planet. But DeForest Kelley and the writers infused this doctor with such caring, expertise and concern…that by the time McCoy did meet with a ladylove [“For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched The Sky”] I was cheering that for once the nice guy did not finish last, whatever the merits of the episode.
For De, and James Doohan both…who didn’t make it to this anniversary… The word has been given, and I’ve no doubt they’re at warp speed.
Scotty who was the *only* one who *truly* loved that ship. Without his miracles, Kirk might have expired mid series…the beam of smile and certainty that was Sulu at the helm, who we loved best when he was out of character and sometimes even out of uniform. Uhura, a smart tough lady the guardian of the ships “communication tether” back to settled space a songbird, and a sexy Mata Hari full of bravado when trying to escape Mirror space…writing at the time gave the character little room for growth, but thankfully much written Trek tells us she is an academic, a student of language and communication…so much more than “hailing frequencies open, sir.” Chekov, the studious, earnest Russian product of a more open society that we had *no idea* was coming in 1967. Not to mention the best screamer in the bunch.
Even the some of the villains get amazingly respectful treatment. Mark Lenard’s resigned, bitter complex Romulan Commander, the merrily authoritarian Kor, of John Colicos…they ring just as ‘true’ and multifaceted as the “good guys.” I credit Colicos’ performance alone with giving the writers of the spinoffs the idea that there had to be more to this race than its aggressions.
Okay, I’ll admit to the third season….but in my recent review of the episodes I remembered that, the *second* season had its fair share of turkeys too… (The *Apple?*) But, bear with me. The turkeys *hurt* so much because we *know* the fineness of these stories, these performances, this vision of the future….
If you’re going to try to explain to a non-fan what’s great about the original Star Trek, you already know that using “Spock’s Brain,” “Spectre of the Gun,” “The Way to Eden” “Plato’s Stepchildren” or “Turnabout Intruder,” probably won’t make them ask for more, but, could, in fact, send them shrieking out into the night begging for some “Fabulous Thunderbirds” DVD’s. And, the cool episodes of Trek would not have “The Enterprise Incident” or “The Empath” in their midst if we hadn’t had a Season Three.
But the fact of the matter is that when Roddenberry left the show, even after the fans wrote in and saved it (Wrote in? Another unheard of thing.), the show’s days were numbered. And, then, when it was cancelled….*another crazy thing happened.*
The show, the idea, ended, was in danger of fading away….and the fans said: NO! This is too good, too interesting, too hopeful, too *important* of a possibility to give up. And they wrote, and wrote and wrote. (the writing has never stopped and continues to this day. I’m personally incredibly fond of the written Trek of Marshak and Culbreath, Diane Duane, A.C. Crispin, Margaret Wander Bonnano, and Peter David. Go get it. It’s consistently as good and sometimes even better than the show. I know, I know, I hear the squawks of “Treason!” for miles. Too Bad.) Blish recaptured the original stories. Fans wrote stories just to write them, and they gathered three years later to celebrate what they loved. Paramount was astounded… but somebody was smart enough to greenlight more adventures for Kirk and Co. via animation. (On DVD soon!) The actual animation is poor, but the writing of a few was incredible, and the voices of almost all the original actors were used…the animated shows are best “seen” with the eyes closed, I’ve found.
So the writing and congregating, and art and ideas went on and on. Amazingly we got our wish…and then the man who’d created this vision and helped it along for so long…stumbled. When we saw Kirk, a strangely cold, not just cool, Spock, and a bearded snarky McCoy…we were exhilarated as only one who has pined for a long anticipated reunion can get. But the first film is an oddly static story, color washed out of the writing and the uniforms, a still, overblown piece where adoring shots of the Enterprise newly lovely couldn’t make up for the missing heart in the writing about the people who fly in her. It made money, not because of what it was, but because of what we hoped for.
I forget the behind the scenes machinations that allowed for a second Trek film, but I thank the studio gods (whomever they may be) that a second film was shot. “Wrath of Khan,” is a true extension of the best series episodes, a bigger story, a more powerful score, a riveting return of a powerful villan and Kirk, McCoy and more than ever Spock…doing what they did best, and doing it well. Camaraderie, investigation, strategy, humor (“a difficult concept.”), Kirk finally being held to some sort of account for at least one of his affairs, (heh) and, heroic self sacrifice….I’m a softie….. even now when I *know* the ultimate answer is reunion…
When Spock stands to attention in front of his Captain and straightens his tunic, the horrific damage from radiation clear on his face and hands…. “I…never took…the Kobiashi Maru test…’til now….what do you think… of my solution?”
I can’t help but cry.
But of course there’s that odd little ‘gift’ he left McCoy…and there we go into the third film…with Nimoy directing the “Search for Spock,” and the band of brothers and sisters shows just what they will do: [“Oh I’ll have Mister Adventure eating out of my hand, sir…” “I’m glad you’re on *our* side!” “How many fingers am I holding up?” “That green blooded son-of-a-bitch! It’s his revenge for all those arguments he lost.” And my *favorite!* “Don’t call me Tiny!”]
What they will risk, or give up to save a comrade. Because, after all…Risk was their business. That was the twentieth anniversary…and the world is much changed….
I have to journey into the personal for just a moment. For those who know me offline and have known me, they know that I never would have met my other half without the Star Trek we both loved…it’s what brought us together…he had a great wish to stand on the NCC 1701’s (“No bloody A, B, C, or D!”) bridge…to sit in a particular Captain’s chair…but was too ill by the time we made it to the Smithsonian to be comfortable with anyone taking his picture. But he saw the exhibit of the sets and the costumes of the original series in 1992, and drank it all in with a purposeful intensity committing it to loving detailed memory, so that in his last eight months he could mentally take it out and polish it and remember…because he knew he had a long journey yet to go… He didn’t make it to this anniversary…but "There are always possibilities"...
The last part of this will be the one ‘speech’ from TOS Trek that still makes me want to freakin’ *stand and salute* when I hear it, and I’m a cynic. To me it’s not overblown, hokey, or false. It rings true. I’ve bracketed in one small alteration for sense. ---Imfunnytoo.
"The illogic of waste, Mr. Spock...the waste of lives, potential, resources, time.
I submit to you that your Empire is illogical because it cannot endure.
I submit that *you* are illogical to be a willing part of it.
If change is inevitable, predictable, beneficial,doesn't logic demand that you be a part of it?" "One man cannot summon the future."
"But one man can change the present.
Be the captain of this Enterprise, Mr. Spock!
Find a logical reason for saving the Halkans [doing right?] ,and make it stick.
Push till it gives!
What will it be?
Past or future?
Tyranny or freedom?
It's up to you.”
”It is time.”
”In every revolution, there's one man with a vision...."
"Captain Kirk, I shall consider it." *
*From “Mirror Mirror” by Jerome Bixby. All Star Trek material copyright Paramount Pictures, no copyright infringement intended or implied.
40th Anniversary The Last 20 years
Yes, the failure/resurgence of the original Trek series was an amazing success story, one that has never been equaled.
Yes, the first United States space shuttle was named after the ship on the show.
Yes, the 70s and early 80s were a memorable time for fans of the series.
But nothing - Nothing - prepared the world for The Voyage Home.
It's not the best Trek movie. You will find very few hardcore fans who think it's even the second best. But as far as the rest of the world was concerned, Star Trek IV was the true Trek crossover.
Everyone saw this movie. Everyone. Didn't matter if you were a Trek fan or not. Everything Paramount always says when there's a new Trek movie coming out, that PR bullsh!t about how "This movie will appeal to you even if you don't know the difference between a Borg and a tribble?!" Well, this is the only one of the 10 Trek movies that lived up to that.
And Star Trek IV remains, 20 years later, an absolute joy to watch. It's a great story, it celebrates what's great about each of the main seven original Trek characters, and the laughs are uncountable. In the vein of classic shows like "The Trouble with Tribbles" and "A Piece of the Action," the humor is never forced, it seems natural and grows out of the story and characters. It returned Spock to us - though the previous film had been the physical search for the character, "Voyage Home" was the character's search to rediscover himself, and it was both hysterical and moving. And the movie contains perhaps the best Chekov story ever - and maybe his best of many screams.
The syndication renaissance in the 70s had turned Kirk, Spock & co. into pop culture icons. The early movies turned them into commodities. But Voyage Home was what turned them into STARS.
So it was no surprise that shortly after that movie hit, Paramount announced big plans for Trek. Really big. Not just another movie - that was inevitable. Another TV show. The biggest gamble in Trek history That's what The Next Generation was. A new Trek show, with no characters from the first series? With Klingons as good guys? With a bald British guy playing a French captain? Roddenberry was taking a big chance here---messing with the very core of what he'd created, and he was risking alienating his legions of fans. Would anyone accept this new show? There was no way to know. Of course, we all know the answer to that question now, and it seems obvious in hindsight. TNG was the best thing on TV, and when looked at now, a dozen years after it went off the air, it's lost none of its power. Why the stupendous success of TNG? Why did it surpass Paramount's wildest expectations? First of all, it was constructed in the same spirit that the first series had been: it was powerful allegorical drama disguised as sci-fi. But even with the purest of intentions, the best that could remotely have been hoped for was to come close to equaling the original show in popularity, right? The best they could do was not lose the current fans, right? Not so, it turned out; TNG did the impossible: it became its own animal. It carved out its own niche. It had its own fans. It brought new devotees to Trek. Think about it: Would it ever have occurred to you in a million years, when you were watching that TNG pilot in 1987, that in the not-too-distant future, there would be serious debates about whether Patrick Stewart, who at that time seemed crusty and unheroic, was actually a BETTER captain than Jim Kirk?! Which leads us to 1989----what I call the turning point in Trek history. The year that the new generation truly took the Trek mantle from our original characters. That year, the original series stumbled for the first time in many many years, by depositing the disappointing "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" (an overblown and conceptually flawed film that sobered us all up to the fact that Trek was indeed fallible) in theaters. That was the same year that TNG's third season began. And despite the success of the first two seasons, 1989-90 was the true breakthrough year in terms of defining the show; it was TNG's "Goldfinger," and it cemented the style, quality and insane popularity of Jean-Luc Picard and his crew which remains to this day. So TNG was no longer in Kirk & Company's shadow. It was now, in fact, the flagship of the franchise. That year saw such modern Trek classics as "Yesterday's Enterprise," "The Offspring," and of course, "The Best of Both Worlds" cliffhanger. Its cast became beloved. Its writers took what were novelty ideas deposited into the show in season 1 and took them to their highest potential: You give us an unemotional android? We'll turn him into one of the most intriguing characters in history, who makes us laugh and cry at the same time. You give us a Klingon on the bridge who starts off with lots of makeup and barely any personality? We'll give you a full-blown Shakespearean storyline exploring Worf's family and his entire heritage. By the time the fourth season began, Picard may have been De-Borgified, but the entire Trek fan base had been assimilated. TNG was a juggernaut that could not be stopped.There was sadness on the horizon, though---Gene Roddenberry's health was failing. He died in the midst of what was perhaps Trek's biggest year to that date---its 25th anniversary. TNG was stronger than ever, with Leonard Nimoy making a seminal appearance as Spock. The final original series film- "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country" - would amend for the debacle of the previous movie and end the Kirk-era stories on a high note. And plans were gestating for a second spin-off series (more on that in a moment). Roddenberry's passing signaled the official beginning of the Rick Berman years of Trek. One of Gene's top guys since the start of TNG, he would lead the franchise for 14 more years, up until the end of "Star Trek: Enterprise" in 2005. And he would not let Trek rest on its laurels. Within three years of Roddenberry's death, he had spearheaded two new Trek shows, and relaunched the movie franchise with the TNG crew as its stars. And while his accomplishments and his contributions to Star Trek have been debated over the years, there's no denying that he was the guiding force behind everything that was good about the franchise since Roddenberry's death. Unfortunately for his legacy, he's equally to blame for the shitty stuff.
The Berman era The great "Deep Space Nine" (1993-99) is the misunderstood stepchild of Roddenberry's original vision - and the boldest, most audacious, rich series the franchise ever gave us. It was a look at Star Trek's universe from a different, more complex angle; instead of the flagship of the mighty Federation on a ship of Starfleet's finest, the DS9 gang was a diverse mix of archetypes, most of whom saw Starfleet from an outside perspective. Over the course of seven years, DS9 shook up the Trek universe, and through its willingness to break the rules that had been established for it, showed us how it was even more cool than we thought it was. The show managed to weave together a knock-down drag-out two-year war, an oppressed spiritual race, political intrigue, and a singing, self-aware hologram in a Vegas gin joint. Pretty amazing. And it's too bad the show never received the true crossover acceptance that TNG did, but the true fans know how damn good it is.Meanwhile, the first TNG film, "Generations," usually is ranked as one of the lesser movie series entries by the fans, and despite its box office success, it was not seen as viable evidence that Picard and his gang were movie stars. The presence of original series elements in that flick - most notably a high-energy scene-stealing supporting performance from the future Denny Crane - fueled the perception that the TNG crew might not be true successors to the celluloid Trek throne.But all that changed with the 1996 release of "First Contact," which, in Trek's 30th anniversary year, managed to become the second most financially lucrative Trek film ever, despite what some saw as an oversaturation of the franchise at the time, with two series on the tube every week. Undeniably the best TNG movie, "First Contact" put to rest any debate over who was truly the king of modern-day Trek: it was Jean-Luc Picard. He had been a superstar on the TV show, without a doubt, but after a more subtle, quiet performance in "Generations," the second TNG movie let Stewart truly let loose, and show us a Picard we'd never seen before, both heroic and angry. (Ten years after the release of that movie, his legendary status in the sci-fi genre has only strengthened with his subsequent role in the blockbuster X-Men series.) No longer was there any question that TNG could hold its own on the big screen.
On the small screen, however, things were a bit shakier. While "First Contact" was burning up the box office, the UPN network's pride and joy, "Star Trek: Voyager" seemed to be experiencing a measurable ratings drop with every episode. "Voyager" was born around the same time the Internet was exponentially spreading its wings, and while Trek and the Net are often thought of as symbiotic, "Voyager" took hits like no other Trek series ever had as a result of online fans complaints. And a lot of the buzz was bad. To be fair, many of the complaints were justified. The show had a great setup and very little follow through. While DS9 benefited from its unique take on the Trek universe, Voyager was hindered by its conceptual similarity to TNG. For a show which was set 70,000 years from the Federation, the stories and aliens we met seemed pretty familiar. Precisely the wrong approach was taken---the more the show stumbled the more Berman tried to make it like TNG. What he should have done was push the envelope and give the show its own voice. Never happened. Despite creative bursts here and there - and a brief resurgence in attention to the show with the addition of Borg-in-a-catsuit Jeri Ryan in Season 4, the show was creatively stunted for most of its run. Voyager lasted for seven years, but it had worn out its welcome long before then.
I won't say much about "Star Trek: Enterprise" because unfortunately its story pretty much mirrors Voyager's. Bold beginning, interesting concept---it was even the first Trek series to cast a semi-well-known "star" as its captain- Scott Bakula, who had headlined the popular "Quantum Leap." But for the most part, it didn't deliver. It was seen as the same old stuff, and Trek fans were getting bored. The strongest evidence that Paramount had lost confidence in the show was when the moniker "Star Trek" was added in the third season (for the first two years the title was simply the more ballsy "Enterprise," which seemed to indicate a later-abandoned break with the formula). The seven-year Trek series life established by TNG was over; Enterprise had to fight for even a fourth---and final---year. (Ironically, the last season of Enterprise was its best. It started to truly tie in Captain Archer's stories with the "future" series' chronicles. If the fourth season had been the first, the show might actually have lasted longer.)The Berman era was clearly in a rut. The two most recent Trek feature films, "Insurrection" and "Nemesis," each dropped off measurably at the box office from the previous installment.
For the first time in 18 years, there is no Trek show on the tube.But that's probably a good thing. Trek is too perennial and too much a part of popular culture to be gone forever, but it needs a rest. On this, the 40th year of what Roddenberry wrought, we need time to step back and enjoy what we we've been given. We need to watch our DVDs of the original, TNG, DS9, and the good Trek movies, and revel in how good they are, and just be happy that we will always have them. The future So it's with decidedly mixed feelings and hesitant anticipation that I greet the recent announcement of an 11th Trek movie planned for 2008---this one spearheaded by "Lost" and "Alias" guru J.J. Abrams with nary a Berman or Brannon Braga in sight. New blood? Yes, it's a good idea. And if Abrams can guide the tired "Mission Impossible" film series, featuring a star whose popularity is on the outs, to $140 million, maybe he can reboot Star Trek, which (sorry MI fans) is clearly a much better series, both on TV and celluloid. But has Trek had enough time off? My instinct says not even close. How much time does it need? Think about the title of the second show. Maybe Trek needs to wait for the next generation---pun absolutely intended---until its next rebirth, when the world can see it with fresh eyes and welcome it with open arms, with all the baggage of Trek-spinoff-overload long since shed.
That being said, I'm a Trekaholic, and I'll be there opening night for whatever the hell the next installment ends up being. I just hope it proves itself worthy of its 40-year legacy. ---The Journalist.
Yes, the first United States space shuttle was named after the ship on the show.
Yes, the 70s and early 80s were a memorable time for fans of the series.
But nothing - Nothing - prepared the world for The Voyage Home.
It's not the best Trek movie. You will find very few hardcore fans who think it's even the second best. But as far as the rest of the world was concerned, Star Trek IV was the true Trek crossover.
Everyone saw this movie. Everyone. Didn't matter if you were a Trek fan or not. Everything Paramount always says when there's a new Trek movie coming out, that PR bullsh!t about how "This movie will appeal to you even if you don't know the difference between a Borg and a tribble?!" Well, this is the only one of the 10 Trek movies that lived up to that.
And Star Trek IV remains, 20 years later, an absolute joy to watch. It's a great story, it celebrates what's great about each of the main seven original Trek characters, and the laughs are uncountable. In the vein of classic shows like "The Trouble with Tribbles" and "A Piece of the Action," the humor is never forced, it seems natural and grows out of the story and characters. It returned Spock to us - though the previous film had been the physical search for the character, "Voyage Home" was the character's search to rediscover himself, and it was both hysterical and moving. And the movie contains perhaps the best Chekov story ever - and maybe his best of many screams.
The syndication renaissance in the 70s had turned Kirk, Spock & co. into pop culture icons. The early movies turned them into commodities. But Voyage Home was what turned them into STARS.
So it was no surprise that shortly after that movie hit, Paramount announced big plans for Trek. Really big. Not just another movie - that was inevitable. Another TV show. The biggest gamble in Trek history That's what The Next Generation was. A new Trek show, with no characters from the first series? With Klingons as good guys? With a bald British guy playing a French captain? Roddenberry was taking a big chance here---messing with the very core of what he'd created, and he was risking alienating his legions of fans. Would anyone accept this new show? There was no way to know. Of course, we all know the answer to that question now, and it seems obvious in hindsight. TNG was the best thing on TV, and when looked at now, a dozen years after it went off the air, it's lost none of its power. Why the stupendous success of TNG? Why did it surpass Paramount's wildest expectations? First of all, it was constructed in the same spirit that the first series had been: it was powerful allegorical drama disguised as sci-fi. But even with the purest of intentions, the best that could remotely have been hoped for was to come close to equaling the original show in popularity, right? The best they could do was not lose the current fans, right? Not so, it turned out; TNG did the impossible: it became its own animal. It carved out its own niche. It had its own fans. It brought new devotees to Trek. Think about it: Would it ever have occurred to you in a million years, when you were watching that TNG pilot in 1987, that in the not-too-distant future, there would be serious debates about whether Patrick Stewart, who at that time seemed crusty and unheroic, was actually a BETTER captain than Jim Kirk?! Which leads us to 1989----what I call the turning point in Trek history. The year that the new generation truly took the Trek mantle from our original characters. That year, the original series stumbled for the first time in many many years, by depositing the disappointing "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" (an overblown and conceptually flawed film that sobered us all up to the fact that Trek was indeed fallible) in theaters. That was the same year that TNG's third season began. And despite the success of the first two seasons, 1989-90 was the true breakthrough year in terms of defining the show; it was TNG's "Goldfinger," and it cemented the style, quality and insane popularity of Jean-Luc Picard and his crew which remains to this day. So TNG was no longer in Kirk & Company's shadow. It was now, in fact, the flagship of the franchise. That year saw such modern Trek classics as "Yesterday's Enterprise," "The Offspring," and of course, "The Best of Both Worlds" cliffhanger. Its cast became beloved. Its writers took what were novelty ideas deposited into the show in season 1 and took them to their highest potential: You give us an unemotional android? We'll turn him into one of the most intriguing characters in history, who makes us laugh and cry at the same time. You give us a Klingon on the bridge who starts off with lots of makeup and barely any personality? We'll give you a full-blown Shakespearean storyline exploring Worf's family and his entire heritage. By the time the fourth season began, Picard may have been De-Borgified, but the entire Trek fan base had been assimilated. TNG was a juggernaut that could not be stopped.There was sadness on the horizon, though---Gene Roddenberry's health was failing. He died in the midst of what was perhaps Trek's biggest year to that date---its 25th anniversary. TNG was stronger than ever, with Leonard Nimoy making a seminal appearance as Spock. The final original series film- "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country" - would amend for the debacle of the previous movie and end the Kirk-era stories on a high note. And plans were gestating for a second spin-off series (more on that in a moment). Roddenberry's passing signaled the official beginning of the Rick Berman years of Trek. One of Gene's top guys since the start of TNG, he would lead the franchise for 14 more years, up until the end of "Star Trek: Enterprise" in 2005. And he would not let Trek rest on its laurels. Within three years of Roddenberry's death, he had spearheaded two new Trek shows, and relaunched the movie franchise with the TNG crew as its stars. And while his accomplishments and his contributions to Star Trek have been debated over the years, there's no denying that he was the guiding force behind everything that was good about the franchise since Roddenberry's death. Unfortunately for his legacy, he's equally to blame for the shitty stuff.
The Berman era The great "Deep Space Nine" (1993-99) is the misunderstood stepchild of Roddenberry's original vision - and the boldest, most audacious, rich series the franchise ever gave us. It was a look at Star Trek's universe from a different, more complex angle; instead of the flagship of the mighty Federation on a ship of Starfleet's finest, the DS9 gang was a diverse mix of archetypes, most of whom saw Starfleet from an outside perspective. Over the course of seven years, DS9 shook up the Trek universe, and through its willingness to break the rules that had been established for it, showed us how it was even more cool than we thought it was. The show managed to weave together a knock-down drag-out two-year war, an oppressed spiritual race, political intrigue, and a singing, self-aware hologram in a Vegas gin joint. Pretty amazing. And it's too bad the show never received the true crossover acceptance that TNG did, but the true fans know how damn good it is.Meanwhile, the first TNG film, "Generations," usually is ranked as one of the lesser movie series entries by the fans, and despite its box office success, it was not seen as viable evidence that Picard and his gang were movie stars. The presence of original series elements in that flick - most notably a high-energy scene-stealing supporting performance from the future Denny Crane - fueled the perception that the TNG crew might not be true successors to the celluloid Trek throne.But all that changed with the 1996 release of "First Contact," which, in Trek's 30th anniversary year, managed to become the second most financially lucrative Trek film ever, despite what some saw as an oversaturation of the franchise at the time, with two series on the tube every week. Undeniably the best TNG movie, "First Contact" put to rest any debate over who was truly the king of modern-day Trek: it was Jean-Luc Picard. He had been a superstar on the TV show, without a doubt, but after a more subtle, quiet performance in "Generations," the second TNG movie let Stewart truly let loose, and show us a Picard we'd never seen before, both heroic and angry. (Ten years after the release of that movie, his legendary status in the sci-fi genre has only strengthened with his subsequent role in the blockbuster X-Men series.) No longer was there any question that TNG could hold its own on the big screen.
On the small screen, however, things were a bit shakier. While "First Contact" was burning up the box office, the UPN network's pride and joy, "Star Trek: Voyager" seemed to be experiencing a measurable ratings drop with every episode. "Voyager" was born around the same time the Internet was exponentially spreading its wings, and while Trek and the Net are often thought of as symbiotic, "Voyager" took hits like no other Trek series ever had as a result of online fans complaints. And a lot of the buzz was bad. To be fair, many of the complaints were justified. The show had a great setup and very little follow through. While DS9 benefited from its unique take on the Trek universe, Voyager was hindered by its conceptual similarity to TNG. For a show which was set 70,000 years from the Federation, the stories and aliens we met seemed pretty familiar. Precisely the wrong approach was taken---the more the show stumbled the more Berman tried to make it like TNG. What he should have done was push the envelope and give the show its own voice. Never happened. Despite creative bursts here and there - and a brief resurgence in attention to the show with the addition of Borg-in-a-catsuit Jeri Ryan in Season 4, the show was creatively stunted for most of its run. Voyager lasted for seven years, but it had worn out its welcome long before then.
I won't say much about "Star Trek: Enterprise" because unfortunately its story pretty much mirrors Voyager's. Bold beginning, interesting concept---it was even the first Trek series to cast a semi-well-known "star" as its captain- Scott Bakula, who had headlined the popular "Quantum Leap." But for the most part, it didn't deliver. It was seen as the same old stuff, and Trek fans were getting bored. The strongest evidence that Paramount had lost confidence in the show was when the moniker "Star Trek" was added in the third season (for the first two years the title was simply the more ballsy "Enterprise," which seemed to indicate a later-abandoned break with the formula). The seven-year Trek series life established by TNG was over; Enterprise had to fight for even a fourth---and final---year. (Ironically, the last season of Enterprise was its best. It started to truly tie in Captain Archer's stories with the "future" series' chronicles. If the fourth season had been the first, the show might actually have lasted longer.)The Berman era was clearly in a rut. The two most recent Trek feature films, "Insurrection" and "Nemesis," each dropped off measurably at the box office from the previous installment.
For the first time in 18 years, there is no Trek show on the tube.But that's probably a good thing. Trek is too perennial and too much a part of popular culture to be gone forever, but it needs a rest. On this, the 40th year of what Roddenberry wrought, we need time to step back and enjoy what we we've been given. We need to watch our DVDs of the original, TNG, DS9, and the good Trek movies, and revel in how good they are, and just be happy that we will always have them. The future So it's with decidedly mixed feelings and hesitant anticipation that I greet the recent announcement of an 11th Trek movie planned for 2008---this one spearheaded by "Lost" and "Alias" guru J.J. Abrams with nary a Berman or Brannon Braga in sight. New blood? Yes, it's a good idea. And if Abrams can guide the tired "Mission Impossible" film series, featuring a star whose popularity is on the outs, to $140 million, maybe he can reboot Star Trek, which (sorry MI fans) is clearly a much better series, both on TV and celluloid. But has Trek had enough time off? My instinct says not even close. How much time does it need? Think about the title of the second show. Maybe Trek needs to wait for the next generation---pun absolutely intended---until its next rebirth, when the world can see it with fresh eyes and welcome it with open arms, with all the baggage of Trek-spinoff-overload long since shed.
That being said, I'm a Trekaholic, and I'll be there opening night for whatever the hell the next installment ends up being. I just hope it proves itself worthy of its 40-year legacy. ---The Journalist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)