Es una gran noticia que se produzca movimiento tras conocer que la productora ha cancelado la quinta temporada de Star Trek: Enterprise.
La gente se está organizando, uniendo sus fuerzas. Se han creado bastantes páginas para reivindicar la permanencia de la serie y hace poco han reunido fondos para publicar un anuncio el día 21 de Febrero a toda página y bien posicionado en la edición impresa de Los Angeles Times, gracias en parte a un fan de la serie que trabaja en el periódico.
Es muy difícil asumir el fin de una serie que se lleva emitiendo de forma continua 39 años, durante cinco décadas, que ha generado cientos de episodios, algunas películas, y el mayor y más numeroso grupo de fans del mundo.
Bryce Zabel (recently the head of the Television Academy and creator/executive producer of Dark Skies) and I share one thing in common. We are both long-time Trek fans, from the earliest days, who felt that the later iterations were not up to the standards set by the original series. (I'm exempting TNG because that one worked nicely, and was in many ways the truest to the original series because Gene was still around to shepherd its creation and execution.)
Over time, Trek was treated like a porsche that's kept in the garage all the time, for fear of scratching the finish. 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 Majel appear on B5, to send a message: that I believe in what Gene created.
Because left to its own devices, allowed to go as far as it could, telling the same kind of challenging stories Trek was always known for, it could blow the doors off science fiction television. Think of it for a moment, a series with a forty year solid name, guaranteed markets...can you think of a better time when you take chances and can tell daring, imaginative, challenging stories? Why play it safe?
When Enterprise went down, those involved shrugged and wrote it off to "franchise fatigue," their phrase, not mine.
I don't believe that for a second. Neither does Bryce. There's a tremendous hunger for Trek out there. It just has to be Trek done *right*.
Last year, Bryce and I sat down and, on our own, out of a sheer love of Trek as it was and should be, wrote a series bible/treatment for a return to the roots of Trek. To re-boot the Trek universe. Understand: writer/producers in TV just don't do that sort of thing on their own, everybody always insists on doing it for vast sums of oney. We did it entirely on our own, setting aside other, paying deadlines out of our passion for the series. We set out a full five-year arc.
But when it came time to bring it to Paramount, despite my track record and Bryce's enormous and skillful record as a writer/producer, the effort stalled out because of "political considerations," which was explained to us as not wishing to offend the powers that be.
So on behalf of myself and Bryce, I'm taking the unusual step of going right to the source...right to you guys, 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% of that figure called for a jms take on Trek (The other choices polled at about 18% or thereabouts).
See, if somebody doesn't like a story, doesn't want to buy it, that's all well and good, that's terrific, that's the way it's supposed to be. But when "political considerations" are the basis...that just doesn't parse.
So here's the deal, folks. 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% 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.
I don't need the work, I have plenty of stuff on my plate through 2007 in TV, film and comics, so that's not an issue. But I'd set it all aside for one shot at doing Trek right, and I know Bryce feels the same.
If you want this to happen...it's up to the Trek and B5 fans to make it so.
The rest I leave to the quiet turning of your considered conscience.
J. Michael Straczynski
Comparto totalmente su opinión, desde La Nueva Generación, ya nada ha sido lo mismo en el Universo Star Trek. La verdadera fuerza de la serie original, los guiones y los personajes, ya no me enganchan.
Me ha encantado especialmente una de sus apuestas: Correr riesgos. En sus origenes Star Trek tuvo éxito por mostrar cosas distintas, por llegar más allá. Precisamente por la base sólida que tiene ahora, es el momento de volver a ser verdaderamente originales.
Me gustó el trabajo de JMS en Babylon 5, y conoce perfectamente el universo trekkie. Puede ser el único que relance Star Trek con éxito. ¿Qué pensáis vosotros? ¿Confiará la Paramount en JMS? ¿Haría bien en hacerlo?