I'm not encouraged by the news either. With him already writing, I wanted someone more experienced to direct (or alternatively he could have directed another person's script, however we've known for some time that the screenplay was him plus two newbies). Naturally I do the only thing I can, which is shrug my shoulders and hope for the best.
My hope at this point is that Orci will try to develop a style (or whatever you call it when it's your first picture) apart from JJ's. I (generally) dislike continuity for its own sake, especially when it's reinforced by mere virtue of assumption (there are exceptions).
I remember the forbes link, and the observation that almost every fan's 'dream' ST series already existed as DS9. I even remember several of us agreeing with that.
So here are some rhetorical questions I want to bounce off the wall:
Suppose this is it for ST. This next movie and then nothing else ever again.
Would you be fine with that? Could you look at all the DVDs on your shelf and say "You know what, this was already more than enough." How long would it take to re-watch all those DVDs anyway? Or even one-third of them, if you figure that each series so far has about 30-50% re-watchability?
(On a side note -and I know some of you probably thought this was where I was primarily going- suppose they kept on making ST but it was never again something you were able to connect with? Would this really be any different, practically speaking, then the scenario above?)
How much more ST do we actually need? And is there really anything left that hasn't been done on ST before? (and if you say Star Trek The 'Next' Next Generation, as the forbes blogger did upfront in the first of his three proposals, I promise I'll fall asleep)
Let's go back to DS9, arguably the most ambitious of the STs. Could it be redone, only better? For my own money, two other shows already out-DS9ed DS9. They are B5 and BSG (and even then it's an either/or tradeoff between which has better setup/payoff and which has more consistent quality dialogue/performances/production value). Could ST come back and do it better than they did?
Then there's Joss Whedon, whom the blogger quoted somebody mentioning as an instructive model. I bring him up because I think he did a better job than ST of managing two simultaneous shows and of handling crossovers between the two in an indirect or casual (and sometimes discreet) manner. Does ST need to come back and prove it can do it to it better?
If it did, so what? What would be the point, what would be the relevance? What would be the inspiration besides "Let's make the ultimate space opera, whatever that is"? What would be the justification?
Should whoever's at the helm be challenged to have an answer? (I don't have one).
For myself, I like the 10-13 episodes-per-season idea. Ever since The Sopranos I've believed it was time for the next 'big' sci-fi show to implement that format (which makes it now about 15 years too late). It's not just the production that has limits, but also the imagination. For one season I thought that BSG was listening.
I don't 'dislike' the blogger's three ideas, although I think his West Wing and S31 concepts are really different aspects of the same show.
I don't dislike the idea of a starship show having a season-long arc to it, since I think VOY already seemed out of touch (with then-contemporary television) for not having something like that.
I wouldn't know how to make ST relevant again. I think you would have to step WAY back to see how it's been influenced by the '60s, the '80s, or the '90s, versus at what point did it start being more heavily influenced by its own past traditions/cliches/whatever. As a fan, I wouldn't know how to do that.
Idealism vs pragmatism: I wouldn't claim to know what balance of the two would attract audiences today. But I wonder if ST could keep its idealism, but dial it back (so as to not seem verbally explicit or self-aggrandizing about it) without being accused of abandoning it altogether.
Finally, I love movies. I can maybe write off a whole season (or whole series) if it's bland enough. But I can't ignore a ST movie, even a bad one (The Final Frontier, anybody?). I wonder 'why' ST can't become more relevant on the movie front. Tradition argues against it. But contemplative or 'smart' film franchises occasionally happen. Is it not really a question of who is doing it? (And I agree that it's not going to happen this time out, which I suppose brings me full circle in closing: Love ST, do we need more ST, and is there any unexplored territory left for ST)
I've had the Rolling Stones' "It's Only Rock-n-Roll But I Like It" stuck in my head through most of this...
Last edited by samwiseb : 05-14-2014 at 08:05 PM.