B5 creator writes new Trek treatment.... (1 Viewer)

[Wayne Bundrick]

It seems certain that this is not his big announcement. If you'll read Nigel's post #14 of what JMS said in his own words, he just mentioned nonchalantly that he and Bryce Zabel wrote a treatment for Star Trek. That's all.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

It seems certain that this is not his big announcement. If you'll read Nigel's post #14 of what JMS said in his own words, he just mentioned nonchalantly that he and Bryce Zabel wrote a treatment for Star Trek. That's all.

 

[Nigel McN]

And the playing it up was precisely what I was refering to it appears to have gotten back to JMS because he posted a follow to clarify:

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-17119


and this doesn't have anything to do with The Memory of Shadows (TMoS) which we still know next to nothing about.

 

[Nigel McN]

And the playing it up was precisely what I was refering to it appears to have gotten back to JMS because he posted a follow to clarify:

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-17119


and this doesn't have anything to do with The Memory of Shadows (TMoS) which we still know next to nothing about.

 

[Kevin Grey]

I thought JMS has gone on the record before that he would never do anything less than show-runner for another series. If JMS were to become involved in Trek then I would expect him to be showrunner in order to make sure that his vision was presereved.

 

[Kevin Grey]

I thought JMS has gone on the record before that he would never do anything less than show-runner for another series. If JMS were to become involved in Trek then I would expect him to be showrunner in order to make sure that his vision was presereved.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

If you're meaning the discussion in the (closed) RUMOR: Possible "regime change" for Star Trek thread, that is probably what he was talking about.

Otherwise, you're probably thinking about the big B5 theatrical movie, The Memory Of Shadows, that JMS has more or less confirmed is going to happen. Which really is big news.

 

[Blu]

If Trek could be moved into the future and focus on exploration again, almost like Voyager attempted to do I think Trek could be huge again.

Am I the only one who is not really liking all of the prequel stuff?
I like to see stories go forward not backward so to speak.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I don't see why that matters. I mean, I can enjoy a World War II story even though I know how it ends. Besides, I think TNG basically pushed Trek too far into the future; life in the Federation was too idyllic, and technology on the Enterprise was so advanced that the technical talk wound up sounding like gibberish. The concepts had to become too abstract to for the audience to be any kind of threat.

The thing I really liked about Enterprise was that it took place in the familiar universe's formative years. You got Vulcans, Klingons, and the like, but you also had spacesuits, ships tethering to each other, people nervous about the transporter, friction and wariness between nations who would later become staunch allies. It was a neat intersection of science fiction and historical fiction.

 

[JonZ]

A agree with those who say a new series should go ahead,further into the future

I want to know whaats happened the the characters we've loved.

I want to know what the fate is of the characters we're familiar with,the consequences of thw Dominion war, what happned to Martok,Riker,Odo,Kurn,etc

Maybe instead of a series they should go a few 2 hour TV films a year like Babylon 5 did.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

Jason,


Consider that DS9 took place in the same 24th century era, yet they relied on character conflict rather than technobabble (or spatial anomalies) as the source of drama. Unfortunately, Voyager reversed this trend. :frowning:

 

[Joshua_W]

DS9 ended five years ago, didn't it?

So as far as I'm concerned, it has been away for five years.

 

[Sam Favate]

Agreed. It has been that long since good Trek has been seen, IMO.

I'd be willing to give anything JMS writes for Trek a try.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Well, two things: DS9 was set on a somewhat broken down station which didn't have the resources of a Federation ship (and I imagine Series VI will be a traditional itinerant spaceship show), and I'm not all sure that "relying on character conflict as the source of drama" is necessarily the best thing for a sci-fi show to do. Yes, I want good characters, but I can get that on Law & Order or Gilmore Girls, y'know? For my science fiction, I want the outer-space and/or future setting to be important, while still being recognizable.

As much as I love DS9, I think they sometimes concentrated too much on writing war stories and character stories and not enough on "hey, here's something about living in space, let's explore it." As much as Ron Moore and Ira Behr are given a lot of the credit for modern Trek's best period, I think Robert H. Wolfe was the guy who really got the gee-whiz portion the best. Heck, look what he did with Andromeda: It was frequently silly and the budget often couldn't catch up to his imagination, but the guy enjoyed the science aspects as much as the fiction.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Here are my suggestions:

Cheers-esque sitcom set in the Star Trek Universe. Maybe a San Francisco bar popular with Star Fleet officers.

Gilligan's Island situation. I think Gilligan's Island would have been even funnier with a Klingon and a Vulcan. This could prove it.

Star Fleet Academy: You coudl go for a Parker Lewis can't lose approach or Freaks & Geeks. I think either would work.

A commercial vessel in the Star Trek Universe.

 

[Jeff Jacobson]

I heard that at one point (pre-DS9) a sitcom about Troi's mother was being considered. (I don't know if that is true, though.)

 

[Yee-Ming]

Doesn't have to be Cheers-esque, although that seems the simplest set-up (welcome to Quark's!), but any sort of sitcom in a sci-fi setting? That would be very interesting. Hasn't really been done yet, has it? Or for that matter, any sort of sitcom in a non-standard environment (fantasy? period?)? Perhaps the closest is the Simpsons, but even then they are more-or-less contemporary Americana, like all other sitcoms.

Come to think of it, Greg The Bunny? Sort-of sitcom like, with the "fantastic" element being "Muppets" living side-by-side with humans.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

That particular plot element was done away with after the first few episodes of Season 1. Still, even when the problem was technical in nature, such as in CIVIL DEFENSE, the writers never relied on abstract technobabble: the problem was easy for a 20th century person to relate to.

Contrast that episode with any Voyager scene in which B'Ellana Torres gets worked up about "warp plasma manifolds" or whatever. I'm a life-long Star Trek fan, and even I get a glazed look in my eyes when she starts laying the technobabble on thick.

And is Law & Order a character drama now? Back in its golden age (seasons 1-5) it set itself apart from virtually every crime show in the history of TV (except DRAGNET) by focusing solely on the facts of the case, and totally ignoring superfluous matters like sexual affairs between the attorneys.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

There have been many sci and fantasty sitcoms (My favorite Martian, Mork & Mindy, Sabrina the Teenage Witch, most Disney Channel shows), but all the ones I can think of were in a contemporary setting. There are some animated examples like Futurama and the Flinstaones.

For fantasy settings and live action, all I can think of is Dinosaurs, and as no human actors were visible, that barely qualifies as live action.

For period, there's the incredibly short-lived The Secret Diary of Desmond Pfeiffer, but this is an incredibly undertapped area.

 

[Yee-Ming]

Hmmm, hadn't thought of those since I didn't really follow any of them, but you're right in that they don't come to mind precisely because they are still set in contemporary America.

Having said that, it would seem a rather difficult sell, do you play up the sci-fi element, or simply that it's a sitcom? Just how do you market something like this? And in a sense, what's the point? Why set, for instance, Cheers, in Quark's Bar if you're playing it as a regular sitcom and not exploring typical sci-fi-type plots? Especially considering the added expense. On the other hand, would making it "funny" detract from sci-fi-type plots?