Monday, June 19, 2006

Rebooting Trek

By now all serious and casual Star Trek fans ("Trekkers" and "Trekkies," respectively) are aware that the eleventh Star Trek movie will be produced and directed by J.J. Abrams, of Lost, Alias, and m:i:iii fame. This is, for the most part, great news. Abrams' proven creativity, success, and industry clout might actually make it possible to get the Trek franchise back on track, a feat that has seemed nigh impossible for many years now. It's enough to fill even some of the most cynical among us with a glimmer of hope that Trek XI might actually be a good movie.

But as I look forward to what could be, I also find myself looking back to what might have been. The last time the rumor mill had a "name" attached to a future Trek project, it was J. Michael Straczynski, creator of Babylon 5, the revolutionary science fiction series that many fans described as "Star Trek done right." It seemed natural that if anyone could revive the Trek franchise it would be him, even though it was hard to imagine what anyone could do to breathe life back into the Star Trek universe.

Now that the Abrams announcement has been made, however, we no longer have to imagine. Bryce Zabel has posted the treatment he and Straczynski pitched to Paramount on his blog, For What It's Worth. You can read for yourself what their take on a new Trek series would have been.

The proposal calls for a complete reboot of Star Trek, essentially giving the Original Series from the '60s the same treatment that Ron Moore later gave Battlestar Galactica. Citing Marvel Comics' Ultimate line as an example of what they were striving for, Straczynski and Zabel wanted to take the best elements from Classic Trek (such as the relationship between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy) and give everything a modern update.

This is an idea I endorse whole-heartedly. Star Trek continuity has become so glutted after decades of piling it on that it cries out for a fresh start. However, when I described the pitch to my filmmaking partner Victor on the phone today, he stated unequivocally that Straczynski's idea never stood a chance of being implemented.

"Do you remember the outcry from Battlestar Galactica fans when the new mini-series came out?" he asked. And he had a point. Compared to Star Trek's, BSG's fanbase was practically non-existent (just a frak-tion of the size, as Vic would say), yet they managed to raise quite a stink about the changes that Moore made to their beloved series. Now consider what the reaction from the obsessively -- the disturbingly -- passionate Trek fans would be. There might be riots. Seriously. Because if there's anything that Trekkers are afraid of, it's change.

But it sounds like they've got nothing to fear from Abrams' crew. If anything, it sounds like Trek XI might be the exact opposite of Straczynski's vision.

According to a recent article at Movies Online, everyone involved in the project, including Damon Lindelof, Bryan Burk, Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci (all of whom have worked with Abrams on Lost, Alias, and/or Mission Impossible 3) is not only a long-time fan of Gene Roddenberry's venerable creation, they're also steeped in Star Trek continuity and minutiae. Their knowledge of Trek lore spans not only the decades of movies and television series, but the decades of novels as well.

Someone on Abrams' Trek XI crew is quoted as saying:

"We're very mindful of being totally true to the mythology... and this is not a case of trying to come in and be so clever that you're going to reinvent everything. It's a case of coming in and using the stuff you know is great and you know really works and not violating anything that's come before it." (italics mine)

While some in the Straczynski or Moore camps might criticize this as a slavish devotion to continuity, you've got to admit that creating a new Star Trek movie that doesn't contradict any aspect of Trek's 40 years of (internally inconsistent) continuity is a hell of an undertaking. I admire their dedication, but I don't envy their burden of keeping the obsessive-compulsive legions of Star Trek fans satisfied. That's an impossible mission.

2 Comments:

At 11:14 AM, July 21, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Damn dude,great points. We have a lot of interests and same ideas, it's a little scary-lol. I also agree about the upside down Galactica too. It was the first thing I had a fit about when the book first came out-I was working at Diamond Comics at the time, people were oblivious and I was screaming 'wasn't it obvious?' lol. I also agree with your commentary about the Shazam mmovie- you definitely did an extensive amount of research for the casting. I just wish the producers of the movie would review yours and my commentary at the end of the list. Another annoyance is these guys that either cram 25 yrs of comics into a single movie, and those viewers not quite so familiar view the movie and are turned off...they don't realize the info dump would have been in a two or three parter..like The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Dare Devil was a victim movie to that flaw.
Keep these people on their toes and continue the great work! I'm Tony Thomas and stitch-656@hotmail.com is my address and hopefully what was listed on that Shazam Blog...hmmm

 
At 11:18 AM, July 21, 2007, Blogger Tony Thomas said...

I was the anonamous guy, I hope this google thing works...I just got it seconds ago..

 

Post a Comment

<< Home