Lower Decks

Hey, so by the impossible coincidence that my sister ends up choosing this column to discover that I write a lot of crap for the Internet, I’m going to spoil one of her Christmas gifts right now: Hey, Danielle, I got you ‘Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.’ (It’s the recent DVD version, which was part of a series of releases Paramount did for some of the more recent converts to the franchise, including new slimcases for set releases of the six original Kirk films, a special collection of just the ‘Wrath of Khan’/‘Search for Spock’/‘Voyage Home’ trilogy, and the four ‘Next Generation’ flicks, and then separate editions for ‘Khan,’ ‘Voyage Home,’ ‘The Undiscovered Country,’ and ‘First Contact.) I got you ‘Khan’ because it’s generally considered the best of the original Kirk films, and because you loved ‘Star Trek’ (2009) so much, I thought you’d like a peak at that sort of thing.

(Okay, the rest of this column is for anyone. It’s still about the original ten Star Trek films, which is funny, because I’ve already written ‘The Motion Picture’ in #23, ‘The Final Frontier’ in #24, and ‘Khan’ in a Supplemental back in July, but what can I say? I’m gregarious. Um, with the keyboard.)

I wrote a few weeks back (#60, for the record!) about Star Wars and how my family loved to get the new versions of the original video releases. Any excuse the studio had, we had to buy into. The last time I participated in that game was when the original trilogy was finally released on DVD, back in 2004. I have skipped out on the releases for each individual film because the only lure possible is that they include the original versions, which I don’t really find all that important. I figure, George Lucas ended up with what he liked, and whatever my memories were of the original versions are still memories. I’ll enjoy them as Lucas ended up intending them. But with these recent Star Trek releases, man, I gotta say I feel tempted. The ‘Wrath of Khan’ release includes commentary from ‘Star Trek: Enterprise’ writer Manny Coto, and others feature some of the creators behind the new film, making it a kind of history game. What did Damon Lindelof really think of ‘First Contact’? Well, now you can find out. It’s not validation, really, for those who were fans of the films before recasting became a part of the franchise, but it’s nice to know that even old Star Trek can still play a part in the new playground. We’re still in a period where, now that we know it’s generally okay that someone has washed over the beach and started over, everything’s fine. Old Star Trek, new Star Trek, it’s all the same, but it makes everything sort of new again. There is now a whole generation of fans out there who won’t identify with William Shatner or Patrick Stewart as the caption of the ‘Enterprise,’ but rather Chris Pine. Never mind Avery Brooks, Kate Mulgrew, or Scott Bakula. Never mind if you got fed up and stopped watching, if you believed in the odd film curse, or felt that the last two weren’t worth remembering regardless of their numbers (which, conveniently, haven’t been included for the past five ones now).

Since it’s a lot easier to stock films than it is expensive seasons of TV shows, that new generation of fans will have much readier access to the ten previous films than they will to the hundreds of hours of episodic adventures. Pocket Books released ‘Star Trek 101,’ a new version of the encyclopedia, last year, but bookstores still haven’t bothered to make it available to casual consumers. That makes it that much more likely that a franchise that was created for television and launched six series there, three of which lasted for seven seasons, two other combined for as many, and yes, a quasi-canon cartoon (subject: next week’s HYGOTS) might become known as a film series after all. When the previous version of Star Trek collapsed in 2005, it was as much to do with fatigue from a constant stream of TV iterations as it did an apparent necessity to release a new film at least every three years, a tradition that started in 1979 and lasted until 2002. Only James Bond can compare, but not in the consistency of the star players, which only switched casts once. That Shatner and his co-stars lasted for over a decade starring well past what anyone would consider their Hollywood prime was impressive enough. That Stewart and his co-stars managed to extend it another decade was almost inconceivable. I doubt anyone really looked at it that way.

Instead, most people have analyzed the films themselves to death. And by “people,” I mean the fans. Casual film fans might know ‘Wrath of Khan,’ ‘The Voyage Home,’ and ‘First Contact,’ but I doubt they’d have any idea why Star Trek fans hate ‘Final Frontier’ so much. They didn’t know what to make of ‘Generations,’ even though it was kind of a big deal (that only pissed off about half the same persnickety Star Trek fans because of the way, or perhaps because at all, Kirk died), made the cover of ‘Time’ magazine and everything.

Star Trek fans will remember the anticipation for the first film, and how bitterly disappointed they ended up being by ‘The Motion Picture.’ They’ll remember ‘Wrath of Khan’ forever, and most of them will believe to the end, no matter what follows, that it will always be the best one. They’ll consider ‘Search for Spock’ a mild disappointment. They’ll think of ‘The Voyage Home’ as a real crowd-pleaser, but probably not serious enough. They’ll forever scoff at ‘Final Frontier.’ They’ll fondly recall ‘The Undiscovered Country’ as a dignified send-off. They’ll gloss over ‘Generations.’ They’ll wonder how ‘First Contact’ ended up being the only Picard film worth remembering, when it hardly reflects the captain they came to know. They’ll still think of ‘Insurrection’ as a glorified TV episode. They’ll consider ‘Nemesis’ among the final nails in the coffin, one pale imitation of their beloved ‘Khan’ too many.

Anyway. IDW’s ‘Star Trek: Countdown’ prequel comic to the new film admittedly bridges the gap between ‘Nemesis’ and ‘Star Trek’ (2009). Picard, Data, Worf, and La Forge are all present. Data, yes, and not B4, with only a cursory wash over what might have transpired to bring the android back, assuming only that his memories were enough to countermand his brother’s existence. I mentioned last column how ‘Next Generation’ ended up losing all of the support it once used to bring the franchise its greatest popularity (until, perhaps, now, when it can be called an unqualified box office sensation, for the first time ever), and I never quite understood that. There’s many things I didn’t end up understanding in recent years, but the failure, the enormous failure of ‘Nemesis’ was perhaps the one I understood least. Even if the fans were beyond fatigued at that point, might a little love for this final ‘Next Generation’ flick really have hurt them? Would it really have only come off as encouragement for the studio to make more of the product they didn’t actually like?

Well, like I said, it almost doesn’t matter at this point. Ironically, ‘Nemesis’ is one of ten things a new fan has to consider when choosing what to see next, from all that came before. There’s a lot of commitment involved in becoming a Star Trek fan, but right now, it’s easiest to go back and see what might actually have caused all the problems in the first place. (Think, if you will, what might have happened if ’The Voyage Home’ was the last film, that the franchise skipped right to ‘Next Generation’ and maybe just the rest of the three remaining TV shows. Would the new Star Trek film have even been made, at least as it was? And they say there’s nothing left to talk about with the franchise.)

If one considers, at the moment, only the films, what does one really have? A chance to reconsider a lot of Star Trek history, or to reiterate everything that’s already been said? What if we get another film before we get another show? Does this franchise serve a better chance at continued success only with one, or can it branch back out again? These are things worth thinking about. Here at HYGOTS, Star Trek’s still a hot topic, both the old and the new: the franchise.