If there was a Series 6... (After Enterprise)

[dvo47p]

BABYLON 5 & DARK SKIES creators asked to save STAR TREK

BABYLON 5 & DARK SKIES creators asked to save STAR TREK

Dateline: Friday, June 18, 2004
http://cinescape.com/0/editorial.as...tion=page&type_id=&cat_id=270355&obj_id=41863

By: PATRICK SAURIOL (Languatron’s new buddy?)
By: News Editor
Source: Usenet, JMSNews

Perhaps the brass at Paramount are thinking that the best way to plot the future course of STAR TREK is to hire outside their universe's box.

In a recent post made to the BABYLON 5 Usenet group (and archived at JMSNews), series creator J. Michael Straczynski surprised his fans by revealing that he and DARK SKIES creator Bryce Zabel wrote a treatment earlier this year for a new STAR TREK television series. Straczynski felt that the new premise "would restore the series in a big way. I actually think it could be a hell of a show. Whether that ever goes anywhere with Paramount, who knows?"

Apart from this tantalizing admission from the writer/producer/showrunner, no further details about the premise of Straczynski and Zabel's TREK show were mentioned. It's the first indication that someone from outside of the current STAR TREK creative team of Rick Berman and Brannon Braga had been asked by Paramount to develop an idea for Gene Roddenberry's universe. Braga has mentioned that he is stepping back from the showrunning of ENTERPRISE's fourth season, and that he and Berman are working on a new sci-fi series that isn't STAR TREK. Could Paramount really be considering a changing of the guard for their long-running franchise?

For his part, Straczynski spoke positively over the introduction of ODYSSEY 5 creator Manny Coto into ENTERPRISE's production. Coto joined the series last year and wrote four episodes; for the forthcoming season, he will be stepping up his duties and showrunning the series. "Left to his own devices, I think he could be a big help over there without the other powers that be impeding the process," Straczynski said.

 

[ray gower]

Some thoughts come to mind here.

1/ ST is a flagship product for Paramount. They will not want to see it shrivel up and die while it is still one of their largest selling programmes. The problem is who would make it.

2/ Rumours claim: Berman is making noises about the ST XI film. Braga is (being?) moving to pastures new.

3/The use of Straczynski to add creative direction to ST has been suggested before. Wonder if PTB read the message boards?

4/ From elsewhere the title of Starfleet Command as a non-Star Trek based ST series has appeared on the rumour horizon.

It could be that PTB have decided/realised that ST needs a new direction. That the B2's are played out, leaving Enterprise series 3 (and 4) as their swansong .

adding this to the other rumours

 

[Dave]

Actually, Berman has said (Star Trek Magazine, June/July 2004) that as well as working on a prequel movie, he is working on a new series with other producers.

While it could be all rumour and speculation, it does seem to fit together. I've heard Bryce Zabel's name mentioned before and JMS must be p***ed at they way Jeremiah has been treated.

 

[Jax]

Just to clarify one point. The article about JMS (Babylon5 creator) is a bit misleading.

Berman and Braga aproached JMS quite a while back to become EP on Enterprise. He said no. He has also indicated that although a big fan of the original Trek ideals, he would not be able to work under the present powers that be (ie Berman and Braga)

What he also said was that he and Bryce Zabel (from Dark Skies) had written a treatment for a 'new' Trek series which was totally seperate from Enterprise. As far as I know it was submitted to Paramount and thats as far as it got (for now)

To be honest, JMS would be perfect for Trek. Babylon 5 was specifically planned out from the beginning to be a five year story with multiple story arcs running simultaneously through each episode. The end result was a tv series that played out like a novel which, once you were hooked, became compelling. Precisely what Trek needs.

In short, really well thought out writing. The style of writing was so successful that DS9 introduced the Dominion war arc to try and simulate it, with sporadic results.

The big problem is I think Trek has missed its chance to get JMS because he has at least two new B5 projects in the pipeline, one being a big budget feature film. If the Babylon 5 dvd sales are anything to go by, B + B will have their work cut out competing with a Babylon 5 film.

Forgive me, but this post has more to do with Season 6 than Star Trek XI so I've moved it here- Ray

 

[ray gower]

Thanks for the clarification, Jax.

It makes sense.

JMS has shown he is a methodical Director/Writer, which the B3's are not, hence the reason for the continuous fall back on the infinite monkey typing pool for many of the episodes.

The question after that of course is there going to be enough of Star Trek left after Enterprise for P/Mount to want to risk a 5-6 year story?

 

[Dave]

BB and the new series

In the latest 'Star Trek Magazine' Aug/Sept 2004, Rick Berman says that Brannon Braga's comments about pulling back a little from his executive producer chores have been "somewhat misunderstood".

RB: "Brannon hopefully is going to be continuing as an executive producer on [Enterprise]."

He goes on to say more about the new series they are developing together...

RB: "Both Brannon and I are involved in developing one and possibly two other non-Star Trek series and we are both going to be handing over a bit more responsibility to Manny Coto next season [4]. But neither of us is stepping away from the show."

Specifically asked about the new shows...

RB: "The first show I would not call a sci-fi show. It's a show that has some sci-fi overtones to it, but it takes place in contemporary USA."

So, these are definitely NOT Star Trek series ideas, not even sci-fi, more the mixture of action/contemporary drama/scifi that seems to be more popular on TV in the last few years (such as 'Alias'.)

And if, as Jax says, Trek has missed its chance to get JMS, there are no current plans for a series 6.

 

[ray gower]

There has been an assumption that the next Trek ought to be a darker serial, but after watching Voyage Home, I wonder?

At its best TOS always played with a certain level of tongue in cheek, being as much to do with the relationship between Kirk, Bones, Spock and Scotty. It is certainly prevalent in the films.

So is Trek trying to take itself too seriously?
Not saying make it into a raucous comedy, but it could stand a higher degree of satire?

 

[Dave]

'The Voyage Home' worked so well partly because the actors knew their characters so well that the humour came naturally. I think you get the same familiarity in some of the TNG films too.

That is one kind of humour that seems to be a natural development of the characters familiarity. 'Enterprise' has tried humour and it often didn't work that well -- Reed and Trip on the pleasure planet -- it seemed more forced to me.

Also, 'The Voyage Home' made fun of '80's Earth technology and culture, it didn't try to spoof 'Star Trek' itself. The jokes were actually on us -- the Mac computer, the 20th century medicine, navy security guards, the punk rocker.

I'm not saying that a parody like 'Galaxy Quest' isn't funny, but it you couldn't keep doing it every week without diluting the thing you were parodying.

 

[ray gower]

Don't think we need to go as far as Trek sending itself up in parody. It would descend into rapid-fire standup routines That would be at least as bad as what we have. :dead:

But there is a big gap between emotional heartstring tweaking and rolling around the isles. Perhaps the difference between Doctor Who and Babylon 5. Both are good in their own right, but approach the goal from different directions.

At the moment they are trying to make Trek into serious drama, but the target is being missed. The scripts are not up to it and the most interesting character aboard Enterprise is Porthos!

If they stopped trying to be so straight laced and let people enjoy themselves, then it will brighten up. And I could wait for the episode where Porthos does a pee in the wrong place?

Season 1 of Enterprise did start off in this general direction (first half dozen episodes). By and large it felt fresher and there were fewer complaints. Then they tried to become dramatic, everybody tightened up and now we wait hopefully for the day that they are blown clean from the sky.

'The Voyage Home' worked so well partly because the actors knew their characters so well that the humour came naturally.

Surely the Enterprise actors should know their characters by now! It has lasted longer than TOS!
Then each one has been given so many different characters by the monkey pool, the poor lambs are probably confused?

 

[Coops]

If they did do a planet-based series it would need a mechanism to jump from place to place and time to time. Given the industry's love of re-doing things that have worked in the past, you might see a small elite group of starfleet personnel on the planet of the "portal" from TOS "City on the Edge of Forever".
Think of the precedence.
Time tunnel, Stargate SG1, Sliders, Quantum Jump ,the benign but fickle and unyeilding voice of the portal throughout.
Star Trek: Portal Patrol!

 

[Status]

Interesting concept, I enjoyed watching all but Time Tunnel, and a few of Sliders. I’m hoping your Quantum Jump and Quantum Leap are the same as I’ve not heard of the first.

Star Trek: Portal Patrol? Would sound an appropriate name for such a series, but not sure I would be enthused by that type as the mention of going to the past to change things makes me cringe. The repercussions of such a task is staggering to the mind. (but that is another thread). Think I might just get past my fear of trying to sound intelligent and work something up to post in that thread on my “I’m my own grandpa†theory, thanks to your post, Coops.

Still, your idea has some interesting qualities.

Oh, yeah! Welcome to AsciFi, Coops, hope to see a lot of your posting here. :wave:

 

[Coops]

Yes, Quantum Leap. It's been a while but I should know that esp. with Bakula playing the lead.
Thanks for the welcome.

I think if they did the series it would be about protecting the present and future from malicious or inadvertant temporal tampering. Recreating the pathos of having Kirk prevent McCoy from saving Joan Collins to save history would be a weekly event.
They could have a rogue agent enter the portal and cause havok maybe with good intentions, The present is changed but the patrol is in a protective temporal bubble, the portal refuses to help, heroes go back and un-rewrite history, rogue gets lost in time to do more damage.
I could almost write the pilot myself.
One thing about the portal is that they could go to other places within the galaxy or into other realities as well as back in time. The script ideas are limitless but predictable. The fickleness of the portal overmind is such that tension is created over the safety of each mission. They could even leave in subtle but unavoidable changes to the timeline which are evident only from observing visitors from outside the bubble. This could account for inconsistancies in the Star Trek universe that are unaccounted for as yet. ie. why Kilingons look different from TOS to TNG.
Hey, if they do this I want a cut.

 

[ray gower]

Does make it sound very much like Quantum Freak and Time Cop.
It is quite bad enough now with Enterprise

 

[McHorde-Trooper]

> If there was a Series 6... (After Enterprise)

Hmm . . I would like a new series to be darker with a some
believable drama, but ray gower also makes a good point.
Some of the good Trek stuff is more light hearted.

But that's a tough balance.

Star Trek is more of an episodic, adventure with a little bit of
science fiction and a few story arch’s and two parters that
make the Trek Universe a richer tapestry.

I think the problem with Enterprise is that they didn't really
make the drama elements that believable. Maybe it's a combination
of writing and acting problems.

Another key factor in Trek is adventure. I think the continuity
issue really drags down the adventure aspect of Trek.
Right now Trek is a pool of continuity. Rich continuity can be
a good thing and it can be a bad thing.

If the continuity is blatantly ignored it will taint the story.
Star Trek Nemesis is a great example of that.
I liked that movie. It was well crafted and Entertaining.
It was almost the kind of high adventure that Q had promised
at the end of All Good Things. But I kept thinking in the
back of my mind what about Lore Data's brother? They totally
ignored that continuity. And Riker and Diana? The first two
or three seasons they seemed like they could become a couple
again, but there really weren’t any sparks their.

Those continuity issues really distracted me from fully enjoying
the movie.

And being a total slave to continuity really drags stuff down
the tubes. It's really hard to be fresh and original. New and
exiting if you keep looking at what's been done already and
saying okay we have to do this and this first because it's a
logical extension from previous continuity.

Established continuity can lead to some high adventure, but
too much re-hashing . . i.e. Continuity-Slavery sucks all the
adventure out of a story.

 

[gravityvaliance]

well you know Star Treck has a great quantity of idealism so if a new series were to be created say for the "new century"

It should have a sense of adventure,and strange encounters beyond what a simple starship like a voyager or earlier enterprise or DS9 was about,but more over take the aspects of new races and different sort of premises about encounters to a new all time interest:while not breaking a serious character found written series like the well done originals,with aliens and humans etc playing a FORTUOTIOUS example that made the interaction
quite interesting.

Maybe a new series of crafts with 3 major runners of 10 go to a new 10 sections of space rather than 1 Delta area,and after 5 or 10 episodes only 1 remains wether returned or destroyed...

 

[Dave]

I'm just resurrecting this thread again, because Enterprise was pronounced Dead today.

I'm sure that there will be a series 6, Star Trek is too big a money-spinner, and too big a canvas, not to have a series being made. I think a rest is in order, but it will be the first time in 18 years of the franchise that a Trek series was not in production. And I believe that the contract with the Games manufacturers stipulates that a series must be in production.

So, given that a new series will be made:

What time period should it be set in?
Who should write and produce it?
Starship, planet or spacestation?

Apologies if I've said this before, but my own idea would be to have a series of shorter ministries rather than seasons, (spending a little more money and a lot more thought than a weekly episode) and each focusing on a particular event in the history of the Star Trek universe.

I'd like to see, for instance:

The Earth-Romulan War.
The Formation of the UFP.
Spock's childhood (animated series ep)
Spock, Kirk and Finnegan at Starfleet Academy.
The Khitomer Massacre.
The Cardassian occupation of Bajor.
The Tomed Incident.
The Cardassian attack on Setlik III.

 

[ray gower]

You are thinking of taking a leaf from BSG?

And I agree, 13 episodes is a lot easier to fill with a comprehensible story. All of the ideas are potentially sound and would fir nicely into a short season.

Perhaps they ought to take another leaf and rely upon just one or two writers working in cooperation to create the series as well, then they can manage consistency too?

 

[Dave]

Originally posted by ray gower
You are thinking of taking a leaf from BSG?

I wasn't really, though I thought the style of the recent 4 hour-long BSG and Farscape Ministries worked well.

I was thinking how most UK produced drama (apart from soaps) seem to be based on either a 6 episode, or a 13 episode design. For example, the new Dr Who series is 13 episodes long. I don't know how they manage to write these 22 or 24 episode series that are more common with scifi shows from the US, and to not have trouble with creativity and continuity.

As you rightly say, far better to plan a 13 episode series from the beginning as a single whole story with a couple of writers (like the BSG series) than the kind of brainstorming session with a huge team that seems to be more common for Star Trek and Stargate.

 

[Mariel]

there is a poll on scifi wire...
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/index.php

- Be in the 23rd century

-Be in the 24th century

-Be in Starfleet Academy

-Have new characters

- Be by J. Michael Straczynski.

I enjoy most things by Straczynski, so I wouldn't mind seeing something by him.
:blpaw:

 

[Dave]

Re: BABYLON 5 & DARK SKIES creators asked to save STAR TREK

Originally posted by dvo47p
BABYLON 5 & DARK SKIES creators asked to save STAR TREK

Dateline: Friday, June 18, 2004

He's back...

from Scifi Wire

Straczynski Wants To Reboot Trek

Inspired by a recent SCI FI Wire poll, Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski posted a message to a newsgroup urging fans to write to Paramount, owner of the rights to the Star Trek franchise, in support of a new Trek series that he and Bryce Zabel (Dark Skies) developed last year.

Although the studio originally passed on the treatment due to "political considerations," Straczynski feels that they might reconsider if they knew that fans were eager for such an idea. "I'm taking the unusual step of going right to the source ... right to you guys," Straczynski said in the message. "Fueled in part by a number of recent articles and polls, including one at www.scifi.com/scifiwire in which nearly 18,000 fans voted their preference for a new Trek series, and 48 percent of that figure called for a [J. Michael Straczynski] take on Trek."

Straczynski said that he and Zabel share an affection for the original Star Trek series, and a disappointment in the later iterations of the series. Together, they created a new treatment and a five-year story arc with the intention of returning to the roots of the world created by Gene Roddenberry. "If you want to see a new Trek series that's true to Gene's original creation, helmed by myself and Bryce, with challenging stories, contemporary themes, solid extrapolation, and the infusion of some of our best and brightest SF prose writers, then you need to let the folks at Paramount know that. If the 48 percent of the 18,000 folks who voted at SciFi.com sent those sentiments to Paramount, there'd be a new series in the works tomorrow," Straczynski said.

Straczynski added that he felt that the current stewards of the series have been too cautious in their stories, and the franchise has suffered as a result. "Over time, Trek was treated like a Porsche that's kept in the garage all the time, for fear of scratching the finish," Straczynski said. "The stories were, for the most part, safe, more about technology than what William Faulkner described as 'the human heart in conflict with itself.' Yes, there were always exceptions, but in general that trend became more and more apparent with the passage of years. Which was why so often I came down on the later stories, which I did openly, because I didn't feel they lined up with what Trek was created to be. I don't apologize for it, because that was what I felt as a fan of Trek. That's why I had [Roddenberry's widow Majel Barrett] appear on B5, to send a message that I believe in what Gene created."

A couple of things spring to my mind concerning this...

1/ Am I the only one who thinks this is a little patronising to Trek fans? Isn't he really just self-serving?

The fans that think writing to cable TV stations will get 'Enterprise' continued are deluding themselves. And is he not deluding them too if he thinks that Paramount cares a jot about them?

2/ I'm not sure exactly what he means about them being "too cautious" with the stories. If he means being a slave to continuity, then I think that is iimportant, and on the whole they have done right.

On the "more about technology" point he is correct, but then all scifi has become more technological. I don't think you can remake that Original Series kind of scifi today. But 'The Next Generation' had both technological-based and great human stories, with huge character arcs, 'Deep Space Nine' was very character driven, almost completely so, 'Voyager' was too.

I guess that it is in 'Enterprise' where his comments ring most true.

3/ Straczynski is someone who is not afraid to speak his mind. That is good, though unlikely to ingratiate with the people he would like to employ him in the future.

Also, everyone who ever had any bit part on Trek is coming out this week with a view on Trek's future. Why is Straczynski getting this prominance? Wouldn't the views of someone with a history in Trek, say Ron Moore or Ira Stephen Behr, be more important?

And why should we as fans trust Straczynski over one of them?