Oh thank GOD JMS isn't getting Trek. Speaking as a recovering B5-aholic JMS is a *hack*. He created this cult of personality around himself but he's really a horrible writer of dialog and interpersonal relations. Keep Trek away from this man.
Sorry about that double post.
JMS 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"
Ok. See... I just dunno about that. A lot of these comments about how the stories are about 'THE PEOPLE' seem to consider Trek (or sci-fi) just an interesting setting to execute the same tired cliche stories of human behavior.
I mean, I know all about Rodenberry's 'Wagon Train To The Stars' idea........ and the same formula was used time and time again for television programs for decades after (and continues today)....
How many times have you seen, for example, the story of the creative yet quirky young (boy/girl) forced to raise herself because her single (mom/dad) works too hard to make ends meet and doesn't spend time with the kid but suddenly an intervention by our traveling hero (Quantum Leap / Incredible Hulk / stranded Trek crew member / bionic man / Michael Knight and talking Trans-Am / etc) restores the parent-child relationship and all is well in the end..........
TNG was a good show, yes. But it had obvious moments of "Let's do Die Hard.... in space!" or "Let's have the entire crew hopelessly de-evolve to their primitive forms".... always to end with "Captains Log: After restoring the crew to normal........"
I thought DS9 was just stellar, yet I caught them doing "HEY! Let's do The Shining....... in space!"
TNG was good but does this ring a bell? "Eyes....... in the dark........."
I'm just saying that I am somewhat tired of sci-fi being a vehicle for 'futuristic' versions of the same tired old crap that TV churns out.
"People' can do 'people' stories in any setting you can cram 'people' into. Yes, Trek has given us a rich slate of characters. But the argument can also be made, especially with Rodenberry's efforts, that you have not characters but avatars for various cultures and stereotypes.
In TOS - we had the Scottish guy, the oriental, the black chick, the alien (who was half human, at least), the redneck southerner.......
I'm sorry that sci-fi has to be safe. I'm sorry that it can't delve into the rich tapestry that has been the advances of science over the decades that Trek has existed and instead opts out on empty 'techno babble'. JMS may be a hero to some - I wasn't a B5 fan myself. But his criticism of Trek, I think, is way off.
But, it's over for us for now anyway, and my opinion doesn't mean the tiniest turd.
JMS 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"
Ok. See... I just dunno about that. A lot of these comments about how the stories are about 'THE PEOPLE' seem to consider Trek (or sci-fi) just an interesting setting to execute the same tired cliche stories of human behavior.
I mean, I know all about Rodenberry's 'Wagon Train To The Stars' idea........ and the same formula was used time and time again for television programs for decades after (and continues today)....
How many times have you seen, for example, the story of the creative yet quirky young (boy/girl) forced to raise herself because her single (mom/dad) works too hard to make ends meet and doesn't spend time with the kid but suddenly an intervention by our traveling hero (Quantum Leap / Incredible Hulk / stranded Trek crew member / bionic man / Michael Knight and talking Trans-Am / etc) restores the parent-child relationship and all is well in the end..........
TNG was a good show, yes. But it had obvious moments of "Let's do Die Hard.... in space!" or "Let's have the entire crew hopelessly de-evolve to their primitive forms".... always to end with "Captains Log: After restoring the crew to normal........"
I thought DS9 was just stellar, yet I caught them doing "HEY! Let's do The Shining....... in space!"
TNG was good but does this ring a bell? "Eyes....... in the dark........."
I'm just saying that I am somewhat tired of sci-fi being a vehicle for 'futuristic' versions of the same tired old crap that TV churns out.
"People' can do 'people' stories in any setting you can cram 'people' into. Yes, Trek has given us a rich slate of characters. But the argument can also be made, especially with Rodenberry's efforts, that you have not characters but avatars for various cultures and stereotypes.
In TOS - we had the Scottish guy, the oriental, the black chick, the alien (who was half human, at least), the redneck southerner.......
I'm sorry that sci-fi has to be safe. I'm sorry that it can't delve into the rich tapestry that has been the advances of science over the decades that Trek has existed and instead opts out on empty 'techno babble'. JMS may be a hero to some - I wasn't a B5 fan myself. But his criticism of Trek, I think, is way off.
But, it's over for us for now anyway, and my opinion doesn't mean the tiniest turd.
I don't even think that whis was real JMS...
just too goofy
--------
"That is the exploration that awaits you: Not mapping the stars and studying nebulae, but charting the unknown possiblities of existence." - Q, All Good Things...
He did "The Real Ghostbusters"? Dude, I loved that show! But did he create it?
--------
Yesterday, February 2, 2005 - a date which will live in infamy - the great show of Star Trek: Enterprise was suddenly and deliberately cancelled by greedy and power hungry forces of the Market Empire of Viacom.
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
-General George S. Patton Jr.
While I am a big believer in JMS, I do have to say I don't agree with his assesment that only TOS and TNG are Trek done right. If he'd snoop around Trek sites such as this, he'd see DS9 is considered by many to be at the top of the Trek ladder.
I'm always reluctant to suggest any new person to come in and do Trek. It will carry over that persons mindset, and since I dislike most television, there aren't many people I would trust with a Star Trek series. I think Manny & team got the season 4 working very well, also in terms of characters - they were more consistent than ever, on that show - and began to develop nicely. Everything developed nicely.
I'm not saying, I am against JMS since I can't possibly be against somone, whose shows I haven't seen and personally don't know. I'm just careful. His initiative is welcome, and his enthusiasm to expand on new ideas are welcome however they need to be balanced with other people, such as (better close your eyes for a sec) Rick Berman.
I can't think of anyone better in whom to trust the next Star Trek series, because, technically speaking, we've already seen it: Crusade. Sure, it's steeped within the Bablyon 5 universe and the overall arc bears more than a passing resemblance to Star Blazers, but think of it: a strong, dynamic captain who's a hit with the ladies (Gideon/Kirk); a reserved but highly competent XO who's telepathic (Matheson/Spock); a dedicated, emotional doctor (Chambers/some of McCoy); an irracible but undeniably brilliant archeologist (Eillerson/the rest of McCoy); and an alien hottie (Dureena/some of Spock). Dunno how Galen fits into the mix, but hey, it wouldn't be as fun if you could fit all the pieces in neatly! And though the mission is fairly clear-cut, what was Excalibur doing but exploring strange new world and seeking out new life and new civilizations? The mission was even set for five years!
Putting Crusade aside (which I'm loath to do, 'cause even today I'd like to see more of it!), this is one brilliant S.O.B., and in Babylon 5, he wrote almost single-handedly the best science fiction show since the Original Star Trek. No one's perfect, of course, but for my money, the man nailed everything any Star Trek fan would want to see in a new show: dense, cohesive plotting that reaches epic proportions; rich characterizations that can change radically over the course of the series; and, yes, sparkling dialogue! [YMMV] Compared to the vast majority of Next Gen and DS9, and all of Voyager and Enterprise, Joe outwrites the lot of them.
The only aspect of his letter that gives me pause, aside from the "let's go!/no, wait!" thing, is his professed respect for Next Gen. Not that it was wholly without merit, but by and large what Berman and Braga didn't screw up on that show, the Great Bird of the Galaxy did personally. Though I wasn't blown away by the premiere, I thought it started with a great deal of promise. That was all but completely destroyed by the very next episode! [Even to this day, the words "The Naked Now" give me the willies!] Thereafter for the first two seasons, we got stale, P.C. re-hashes of episodes that were done best on the Original Star Trek. The swift departures of Original Star Trek leading lights Robert Justman, D.C. Fontana and David Gerrold were by no means coincidental: Gene wanted his way with the series and there would be no other, which unfortunately meant a dumbed-down voyage meekly going where we'd all been before.
Thus I hope that any series that JMS would participate in would hew more to the Original Star Trek and less to Next Gen. But given his brilliant work on B5, Crusade, and even his great comic books like Midnight Nation and Supreme Power, I can't think of anyone in a position to do so that I'd sooner trust the future of the franchise that has meant so much to me in my life. I don't know if JMS is the last hope for good Star Trek in the future, but I think he's surely the best hope!
As much as I like JMS to do a Star Trek series, I personally don't think that doing an extended Babylon 5-like arc for Star Trek may not work a second time. I'd rather he'd write self-contained Trek episodes like TOS and TNG, if he wants Trek to be like Trek again. B5 was written the way it was because it was a fresh take on the sci-fi genre: a huge sci-fi novel for TV (even some written sci-fi novels have this kind of structure).
Besides, Straczynski wrote and produced episodes of "Murder, She Wrote", so he knows a thing or two about episodic television, and not just big, sprawling story arcs. ;)
basically he amounts to "oops, nevermind". Great post, genius.
--------
An elephant never forgets . . .TO KILL!
look for JMS to sue them based on claims they stole his ideas for star trek... that's all this really is, an attempt to get publicity and eventually money
--------
"Every terrorist is at war with civilization, and every group or nation that aids them is equally responsible for the murders that the terrorists commit. They kill without mercy. They kill without shame. And they count their victories in the death of the innocent...They have declared war on the civilized world -- and war is what they got."
President Bush
he's got three cancelled scifi series under his belt and his main connection to star trek has been relentlessly bashing it non-stop...
how can we possible pass up this oppurtunity????
--------
"Every terrorist is at war with civilization, and every group or nation that aids them is equally responsible for the murders that the terrorists commit. They kill without mercy. They kill without shame. And they count their victories in the death of the innocent...They have declared war on the civilized world -- and war is what they got."
President Bush
That would finally be a Trek that's worth watching.
What do you think? When Archer enters the bridge, viewers think about what he will do next to solve the problem he has at the moment. Nothing more.
Whith JMS writing the same scene people will also think about what the character may feel or think at the same time! They will know about the characters past, his wishes, his fears.
And character-driven stories is what I miss the most in Trek since Voyager.
--------
living in darkness / sleeping in light
This guy's ego was totally drippiong off his posts. He really thinks that the fanboys are gonna knock themselves out on his behalf. I watched this show B5 when it was new, and it didn't grab me. It seemed like still another Trek wannabe. So why would I want the maker of the "no-name store brand" to be put in charge of the original article? What a jerk!
--------
GET A LIFE, will you people? I mean, for crying out loud, it's just a TV show!.... You've turned an enjoyable little job, that I did as a lark for a few years, into a COLOSSAL WASTE OF TIME! -- William Shatner on Saturday Night Live (1986)
Trek is in hibernation for 5-10 years atleast. I think JMS knows about this and hence just trying to get some fan support behind his so-called pitch. If enough fans ralies behind him maybe whenver Trek would come back it might be in the capable hand of JMS.
Its just a PR thing on part of JMS in my view..I am all for it since I think if JMS can do anything with Trek like he did B5 epic arcs Trek revival will be sure at hand.
Alas...its not gonna happen for a long time
What a dick! :)
Ok seriously I think TPTB should let JMS do a trek series in a few years. I say tone the costs down and develop it for SciFi, SpikeTv or some other non network channel and concentrate on characters and good stories. I am definately all for having the whole show planned out beforehand.
My God, that was TERRIBLE! ACK! Just ack! Keep him the hell away from the Trek franchise, just based on that!
--------
An elephant never forgets . . .TO KILL!
Now I have been to this website several times to look around, but I have never joined. Never really saw a reason to. That was until I read that article about JMS wanting to do a new fresh Star Trek. Now I am a huge, huge, HUGE B5 fan, I was obessioned w/ that show.
JMS did a excellent job of writing B5. He wrote B5 knowing how it was going to end before the first episode even aired. Granted the first season was a little weak, it did get better though. The first season is for character setup and stuff like that. With B5, every character played a important role, we cared about what happen to the characters. None of them were just "oh hey im here to just say this and thats it, see you guys later". They all had a role to play. A part that was vitual to the plot.
What made B5 such a great show was bec/ it was all arched. Everything fits together like a puzzle. It wasn't written as the show went along. It is one huge novel, every season a volume.
I always made sure that I wasn't going to miss one show. If I had to do something during the commerical break, then I ran to do that as fast as I could so I wouldn't miss a thing.
B5 was brillant to me, it ended in a way that made me happy. When X-Files ended I remember I was mad, cuz to me it ended crappy. It didn't solve anything, but not B5. The ending to that was perfect to me. It ended and we knew what happen to every character. We knew what happen in the story universe. It ended and I was like "now that was a ending."
I believe w/ JMS writing a new Star Trek series, it would be great again. That it will be what it is suppose to be. When JMS says a "re-boot" he doesn't mean re-writiing the star trek universe, just give it a fresh look. Every star trek series is always new w/ characters and stories, so it's not like it's gonna kill people to learn about new characters. We do that every time a new star trek series comes out. With Enterprise right now, it seems to only focus to Archer, Trip, and T'Pul. It seems like everyone else is there to just fill a seat. We hardly see anything done w/ Mayweather or Hoshi half the time or Reed. It's like every once in awhile they break free and do something. Other than that, it's like "oh hey, im here to just fill up this seat."
With DS9, every character had a breakground. Stories were devoted to them. If one of them died, I would be like "NOOOOO!!!!". If Hoshi died, I would be like "ohhh ok". You are suppose to care about every character and what happens to them, not just the main ones. These characters are suppose to have depth to them, hidden things that come out in the open. None of them have to have a happy past. Some could have painful pasts. That is what makes the character interesting. That is what keeps them real. That is what draws you in, keeps you on your seat.
I usually go to Wizard World during the summer time and one year JMS was the guest of honor. I got his autograph and I sat in and listened to him speak about B5. Not one time while he was speaking did I get the impression that he has a huge ego. I don't think he does. JMS is a good writer. He writes other stuff such as other tv shows and comics. He knows what he is doing and the fact that he and Bryce Zabel sat down and wrote out and planned a 5 year arch on their own time, shows that he is a star trek fan. I mean what non-star trek fan sits down and decided to write out a 5 year arch of star trek if they don't like it?
Maybe having Star Trek off the air for some time will do the star trek fans some good. It will give star trek fans time to heal from Enterprise being cancelled. I like Enterprise but it could been a lot better. There could had been more depth there.
So I give mad props to JMS for wanting to write a new star trek. I belive w/ JMS writing star trek he will hold true to what Gene created. He doesn't want to change it, he wants to make it to what Gene wanted it to be. I hope he does it bec/ I'm guessing it will breath new life into the series and will be better. I'm excited and if I have to wait a year or two then thats fine w/ me, bec/ if JMS is writing then the wait is worth it.
I would put my confidence in someone with both vision -and- an ear for dialogue. 'Babylon 5' episodes still sound as stiff as Trek.
Straczinski sound sincere and passsionate about Trek, and most of all, holds it in reverance.
I have never watched BABYLON 5 but I have heard great things about it.
This man I would support 100% to take over the franchise.The fact that he voluntarily applied to spearhead and re-energize what was once a respected cash cow for Paramount and a wonderful passion for fans, should be commended.
From what he wrote, JMS could've started a new trek letter campaign ten times larger than any ENT revival campaign. Now it's, "Oh nevermind. Sorry."
Just because Paramount said no new series for a couple of years doesn't mean it's set in stone. I got pretty excited reading his diatribe, thinking "hmmm, maybe he (with Manny) can save Trek and get us a fascinating new series by '06." I believed like many others that old Trek needs a rest, but a reboot might be really cool, maybe even necessary.
He got everybody's hands down their pants then walked out the door. Thanks a bunch.
--------
"Well, today's Valentine's Day. Or for you Star Trek fans--February 14th." -- Jimmy Kimmel
Here's how I would describe Babylon 5:
Imagine 5 science fiction novels. Each novel is a volume in a larger story which is told when all the novels are read together. But, each novel can be read individually because they have a beginning, middle, and end to them. Later on, as the story is more developed, some novels end on a cliffhanger, making you anxious to read the next one. By the end of the 5th novel, the story has been told, and you can put it down and go, "that was a great story."
That's Babylon 5. Each novel is a season. You can't judge the series on one episode, because that's like reading one chapter of a novel and condemning the whole thing. And you lose a lot of the story if you start watching it in the middle of season 3 or something like that. If you have the opportunity, grab the DVDs, start at episode 1 of season 1 and watch the entire first season. Don't stop after 3 or 4 episodes (because honestly, some of the first season is pretty weak). Watch the whole thing. Keep in the back of your mind that this season is just the beginning, and the story gets really amped up later on. If you enjoy the first season, even a little, you'll love what comes later. If you can't bear to watch another episode, Babylon 5 isn't for you. But you can't make that judgement after one or two episodes because that series isn't set up that way.
Straczynski is probably a bit of a fanboy. But Straczynski has proven himself with what he can do. By almost sheer force of will sometimes he made sure Babylon 5 was told in it's entire 5 year story. Straczynski also puts the characters before the story. It's hard to explain if you've never seen Babylon 5, but the characters came first. Then the story. At the same time, he wasn't above killing off or transferring a character if that's what needed to happen to move the story forward.
From what he said, it sounds like he has a 5 year story all planned for Star Trek. Imagine a Star Trek story where the ending is planned before the first episode airs. The writers have a clear direction they are going in and taking the characters. Imagine a Star Trek series where it's not a guarantee that the crew is coming out of the latest adventure all alive and well. The captain could be killed or transferred (he's done it before) and the actors don't have 5 or 7 year contracts signed. Imagine a Star Trek episode and series that would have a message, would be about something, like TOS and many TNG and DS9 episodes were. Not just space battles and alien of the week stuff. It would be closer to the idea Roddenberry envisioned with TOS and TNG than anything Berman and Braga have done since.
If Paramount wants to wait two years or so, that's fine. When Star Trek does come back, I really hope Straczynski is in charge of it, because it would be something special to watch.
As for this constant Moore bashing, I don't get it. What people don't understand is in his comments about the current Trek, he's not bashing Star Trek, he's bashing the people running it. His comments about aliens of the week and so on are comments aimed at Berman and Braga, not at Star Trek. Don't forget (I seem to be reminding people of this a lot) he was on Deep Space Nine, the one Star Trek series done after TNG that didn't have Berman and Braga's influence on. They were allowed to be creative, look at things out of the box, and experiement. They held true to Roddenberry's ideals for the most part, but experimented with stories and characters in an effort to tell a really good story. I'd put almost any episode of DS9 against any episode of Berman & Braga's Voyager or Enterprise. DS9 would outshine Berman & Braga's Trek any day of the week. When that series ended, Moore even tried to go over to Voyager and write for them. I'm not sure exactly what happened, but I think his ideas were too radical for Berman & Braga. I'm talking ideas like maybe having some friction among the Maquis and Starfleet people, fleshing out some of the second level characters (like Kim, Neelix, Paris, etc.), and so on. He was spoiled by not having to deal with B&B for 7 years of DS9, and there was a bit of bad blood between them when they wouldn't listen to his ideas. So now, he's got a hit sci-fi series that is doing everything Star Trek should've done, and he's proud of where he is. You know what? If I'd worked somewhere, done great work, and then been told by my bosses that it wasn't good enough, and then went somewhere else and did my own thing and became successful, I'd rub it in Berman and Braga's face too. That's all he's doing in his comments. He's not rubbing it in Star Trek or the Star Trek fans' faces, it's a stab at Berman and Braga. Moore could maybe run Star Trek, but I'm sure BSG will be around for a few years at least, so he's going to be busy. And honestly, Straczynski would be a better pick than Moore. Either would be better than Berman and Braga, but JMS would be the best pick.
don't know if JMS is the right person for this. I enjoyed B5 as much as the next guy, but this man has an ego of epic proportions and it is always "all about JMS". I'd rather someone come in and focus on Star Trek and not "JMS's Star Trek (tm)". (Heck, a lot of the principals from Season 4 of ENT - Coto, Reeves-Stevens, etc. would do a great job at this without having to "re-make" the entire universe, provided Paramount jettisons the two B's up at the top.)
It's not that I dislike JMS, its just that with his whole "cult of personality" thing and delusions of Gene-hood (insisting everone call him the "Great Maker" in a vain attempt to be Roddenberrian aka "the Great Bird), I think he is more about self promotion than anything else.
--------
"I don't believe in the 'no-win scenario' " - James T. Kirk
If you go to the link, you'll see "jmsatb5@aol.com" as the arthor of the post. I'm curious if that is actually JMS's sn or the sn of the guy who just posted the letter online. does anybody know?
--------
Yesterday, February 2, 2005 - a date which will live in infamy - the great show of Star Trek: Enterprise was suddenly and deliberately cancelled by greedy and power hungry forces of the Market Empire of Viacom.
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
-General George S. Patton Jr.
I think some folks are going a little too far there... When JMS says reboot the franchise, he doesnt mean re-invisioning the original series. He would NEVER do that because he is a fan of Genes work and TOS. Again, thats why he asked Majel Barrett to come do an episode of B5.
To answer other questions. B5 was great, and if JMS wants to do a Trek show, I would get behind him all the way. He could breath life into what is now just the smoking enders of the Trek story.
And its not so much ego as it is gumption. You have to understand what he did and how he did it, and then you can understand how he is. I got the pleasure of meeting him quite a while ago, and he talked about trying to get B5 on the air. He went to every studio imaginalbe and was basically laughed off the lot saying the only scifi that could last on TV as Star Trek. This was TNG's heyday remember. Of all the people that laughed at him and told him his little story was worthless and would never be told, he pulled it off, and told one of the greatest Science fictions stories to ever unfold on television. Thats where the gumption comes in.
You also have to understand, that JMS doesnt do single episodes. When JMS writes for a show, the show has a PREDEFINED ARC. Meaning, he knows how it will end before you see how it begins. Thats part of the allure and disgust of B5. Fans saw it for what it was, a Novel spread out on Television where ever episode is a chapter in the novel. These little mini-arcs that Enterprise is Just starting to have, are nothing compared to how he writes. Bashers saw B5 as a mess of episodes so intertwined that if you missed one you couldnt follow the story. Ill admit, they are kind of right, if you missed stuff, you missed out.
Anyways, thats just the perspective of a Babylon 5 fan.
--------
Only Nixon could go to China
...As far as the ego issue is concerned, any producer worth his salt has a healthy ego (myself included, and I only do corporate stuff). That's not a bad thing. A producer has to believe in himself and his product in order to be able to sell it.
But as to the question of whether JMS could do Star Trek...for me, that's a tough call. Let's face it: Unless somebody resurrects Gene Roddenberry (or "Rod" Jr. channels his father's spirit), somebody sometime will wind up re-doing the show. It may be sooner than later. But whatever happens, the show will be different than the original series. Is that a good thing? A bad thing? I think those questions are moot.
Any new Star Trek show will be a different animal than the original. That's a given. Now, let's decide just how "different" we want it to be. The original series purists will scream bloody murder if anyone other than William Shatner plays Capt. James T. Kirk. There will be those who believe a reboot is a good thing (a la the RDM Battlestar Galactica fans). And there will be many who fall somewhere in the middle.
Regardless of who does it, if stories can be told that give us characters we can care about, in dramatic situations that are believable (even in a sci-fi universe), then Star Trek can live long and prosper (sorry). If, however, we get more "aliens of the week" and space battles that have no purpose except to show off somebody's CGI prowess, then forget it.
Having said all that, I don't think JMS can sell Paramount on a new Star Trek series this soon after Enterprise's cancellation. Give it some time for the wounds to heal, then let's see what happens.
--------
"Pain is temporary. Quitting lasts forever." - Lance Armstrong
"Remind me to write an article on the compulsive reading of news. The theme will be that most neuroses can be traced to the unhealthy habit of wallowing in the troubles of five billion strangers." -- Robert Heinlein
falcon
JMS posted another update:
> The rest I leave to the quiet turning of your considered conscience.
> J. Michael Straczynski
Actually...belay everything I just said.
In the 24 hours between the time I composed the prior note, and sent
it, and it made its way through the moderation software, two things
happened:
1) I heard from a trusted source that Paramount is giving the Trek TV
world a rest for maybe one to two years, depending on circumstances, no
matter who would come along to run it. So it's not right to have folks
putting in time doing something that ultimately would be pointless, I
don't think that's a proper use of anybody's time.
2) At the same time as the above, an offer came in to run a new TV
series for fall of '06, and since there's no way anything Trek can
happen in the interim, I've said yes (now we have to negotiate the
deal, but that should be fairly straightforward).
So on two counts, the whole thing is kind of moot.
I've seen all things Trek and consider myself a big fan of TOS, TNG, and DS9. However, I've not seen one minute of Babylon 5. Honestly, how good was this show? Does this guy deserve to have the bloated ego he appears to have? If anyone can shed any light, I'd appreciate it.
I know there has been a mini parade of folks cycling through Paramount of late - JMS, then Behr, and now JMS again.
In a way, it's good to know there is still some interest in the franchise by those in the genre community.
--------
"I think the show talked to people through the characters. They're stories that speak to the heart. They talk about love, they talk about friendship, they talk about loyalty, they talk about patriotism, exploration, curiosity, reaching out... And I think all those things still touch people. Even when you look at a 30-year old show, it still has something to say." - D.C. Fontana, Sci Fi Channel Special Edition TOS 1998
----
"If the season finale involves the re-built USS Reliant coming back in time to the 21st Century crewed by Moogie, Dr. Selar, Morn, Transporter Chief Kyle, and the Salt Vampire, then we'll know that Coto has gone too far." - tomba1701
...but I'm considering dashing off an email to TPTB in support of this idea, even though it probably won't do much good.
I think JMS could do OUTSTANDING Trek. Trek that I'd look forward to again. Trek that I'd hustle back in from the commercials for so I didn't miss a minute. Trek viewing that wasn't complete for me until I saw the previews for next week.
Trek with action, of course but with people I knew and cared about (which B5 did well) and not cardboard stand ups who act like schizophrenics and that do nothing but service hackneyed plots and come up with technobabble solutions.
I haven't had that in a long time. And it's worth a letter to maybe...just maybe...get back
--------
"No, no 'however'. Just be wrong. Just stand there in your wrongness and be wrong and get used to it."--President Josiah Bartlet, The West Wing
I didn't realize JMS was such a Trekkie?! I always looked at him as more of a independent sci-fi guy who taps into the darker side of mankind, like RDM. But he sounds pretty excited about it, and I like that kind of excitement. If he brings in Coto and Sussman, than I'm all for it.
Quote:
We set out a full five-year arc.
...Yep, that sounds like the JMS I know!
--------
Trekweb Comics #1 #2 #3
DS9 was twice the series Babylon 5 was, I loved his series Jeremiah and would love to see his Star Trek series, but less of his ego.
--------
Dr. Lucas: Go suck my principle Quantum Number, asshole.
Soong: That language is unbecoming of a man of science.
'Cold Station 12'
RE: DS9
by cooper2000 @ 11:42:16 on Feb 15
RE: DS9
by Mr. Xindi @ 11:46:31 on Feb 15
RE: DS9
by Chris Pike @ 11:36:04 on Feb 15
RE: DS9
by Mr. Xindi @ 11:39:23 on Feb 15
RE: DS9
by Chris Pike @ 15:50:47 on Feb 15
With JMS at the helm a new series could be on the air by the fall of 2006.
The man has a lot of passion (and an ego to match) and I think he could pull it off -- with Coto as the showrunner.
I would personally like to see JMS replace Berman and join forces with Manny Coto for another season of Enterprise...
Just think of the possibilities...
The last thing needed right now is yet another cast and even more characters with zero history...
A lot of fans slag off Enterprise for lack of characterization but they were even more woodern in Babylon 5.
I don't see him offering a take-over bid for the current series. He would simply want to start all over again and that would be a bad move...
"To re-boot the Trek universe."
Yeah baby!
--------
"The autumn days swung soft around me, like cotton on my skin, but as the embers of the summer lost their breath and disappeared...my heart went cold and only hollow rhythms resounded from within."
(5)
| 
