After a recent conversation with Barry Miller at the recent Battlezone event, and seeing a post by the always wonderfully minded Obsolete Toaster on GBBS, I’ve decided to re-evaluate something I evaluated here before. The Treks. Arguably it’s one of the most successful franchise and one that’s survived several incarnations.

But, while I’m a trek fan – the new name of this site should be a clue – I can still see the bad as well as the good and with the discussion coming up more than once lately, I decided I was bored enough to take another bash at looking back on the franchise.

The 1960′s show was, obviously, the show that started it all, a colourful science fiction drama with a bold captain, a cold alien scientist and a grumpy old country doctor. I do view this through rose tinted glasses and I do forgive some flaws as it was a style of the time thing. You can’t bitch at Citizen Kane for not being in HD. But this show was built around that trio, had some good supporting characters and was very exciting and imaginative for it’s time.

As I said, it was imaginative. Sure, there wer ebudget restraints and looking back it’s cheap and cheesy. But even with those labels it’s still appealing, it’s still good. The science and the look might be dated but the shows speak volumes. A lot of people like to remember it for having strong messages, sometimes it did, but for me the key was giving a bright and hopeful idea of the future wrapped up as an adventure story with all the drama and silliness thrown in.

Sometimes the siliness worked, Tribbles are still good fun and worked a charm in DS9′s re-visiting the episode in an anniversary special. But sometimes there was Spocks Brain. And that wasn’t so good.

The discussion with Barry was interesting. He’s no big Star Trek fan, but he liked Voyager as he said ‘it had a purpose’. We both talked about that problem with TNG – there is no point. Exploring strange new worlds? No they don’t, they go around, have a chat with world’s they’ve known for years and drink tea. Deep Space Nine (my favourite of the lot) to him was a bunch of people sitting around. I get that too, partly.

Voyager had a twist, it had purpose. But as has been mentioned, they didn’t follow through with that purpose. They mentioned their dilemma for several years, tossed in the word ‘rations’ and we even saw them do deals to buy supplies and weapons we never saw again. Supposedly they had little supplies, yet rebuilding the two or three shuttles they had was fine and when they needed to, they built the Delta Flyer. Where did those resources come from?

The Borg… they seemed boring and I got fed up of them. The obvious casting of Jeri ‘doesn’t she look hot in this tight lycra’ Ryan and her taking on the role of not evolving and being very cliche was just dull. It felt as if it became all about her at times and with each Borg appearance, they seemed to become less of a threat.

Add to that Janeway… one week she’d be a by the book captain enforcing the law, the next she’d be changing her mind and being a rebel. Why not just stick with the Starfleet/Maquis command split and have Chakotay push the rebellious, out of the box actions and have Janeway try to stick by the book. That conflict alone adds more story conflict, shows both sides being strong and weak depending on the story, it shows vulnrability and all sorts of new doors could have been opened that, throughout the show, were closed leaving Chakotay being left as a calm, boring and unseen character who could have been so much more, and Janeway comes off as somewhat of a mental.

Then there was Enterprise… there were many factors against it.

Timing. Star Trek had been running solidly on TV in one shape or another since 1987, for seven years there were two on at the same time. The TNG movies, bar one, weren’t doing that well. The product was becoming stale and uninteresting and instead of giving it time, putting it on the shelf for a while and letting it rest – Star trek came back! Again. There just wasn’t enough time to let the audience rest and build interest in the name again.

Casting. I’m sure many people love the memories of Quantum Leap and Scott Bakula has been moderately good in a few TV movies I’ve seen. His interpenetration of Archer ws so bland and so dull, I felt like he may as well have skipped learning the lines and just read from the script on camera. It felt as if there was nothing in that performance, no interest, no passion – just say the words and go to the bank at the end of the week.

Characters. The blatant attempt to revive the TOS trio was awful. Other characters which could have had interesting personas were put aside and there were attempts to spice them up that didn’t make sense.

Writing. It was awful. Sure, there are some episodes I enjoy just like there are some with Voyager. Some are better in retrospect, others are better with lowered expectations. Re-watching the Xindi arc, that was better than remembered (still not great) and just like Voyager it felt like all the challenges made in the plot were swept aside.

When Barry said to me DS9 was just people sitting around, although I could see that (they rarely do any actual work) it was a character driven show, with involvement, that had a story line that wasn’t interesting – so they changed it and brought on the war which was interesting. But it stemmed from that initial plot.

Like anything, there were flaws – but seeing interesting characters, a good cast, good stories and arcs that seem gripping despite knowing the Federation would never lose the war… it just seemed to have the flow, story logic, development and characters that Enterprise and Voyager were scared to do.

I see DS9 as having a new beginning in it’s fourth season with the third building to it. The Bajoran stuff was good, but it wasn’t interesting enough to carry a show and there are only so many times you can write about aliens coming through the wormhole – part of Voyagers problem was ‘how many variations of bumpy forehead can we do?’ – so they rebooted and focused on one mighty civilization, the threat they posed and how that changed everything. With Voyager far away, DS9 had control of the Federation and how it would evolve.

Maybe it will be the show with people sitting around or not doing their actual jobs, I watched one the other day where Dax seemed to be pissed at having to do some actual work, and maybe Voyager and Enterprise had a plot closer to the original one that got everyone interested.

But both for me were a whole heap of undiscovered potential. Voyager in particular was trumped by the BSG re-imagining where, despite having more resources than Voyager, did run into problems. Hell, the entire fleet ate recycled goop because there was nothing else to eat and everyone felt the effects of losing their home and being trapped in their jobs.

With such let downs, is it any surprise the new movie went back to Star Treks roots?

Or have I just put undue pressure on a concept and hoped for more?

Related posts:

1. ListGame… Voyager's best moments.
2. I can’t stop picking on Enterprise (because it’s shit)
3. The geeky list thing gets geekier; Sci-Fi’s best captains.
4. The Science of Fiction; Reality versus Fantasy
5. Galaxy Quest (1999)

Tags: bsg, fandom, geek, movies, sci fi, star trek, telebox