Captain’s log:
La-La Land in the early 1960s . . .
“Star Wars” creator George Lucas is still a California teenager when a World War II pilot and ex-Los Angeles cop named Gene Roddenberry has an idea.
Roddenberry has already achieved some success in television as a writer with such shows as “Have Gun, Will Travel” and “Dragnet,” but in an effort to break into the big time he pitches a series to the networks that he dubs “a ‘Wagon Train’ to the stars.”
The idea becomes “Star Trek,” the groundbreaking program that has its debut on NBC in September 1966. “Star Trek,” one of the first serious science-fiction series to be created for television, focuses on the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise and their five-year mission through space.
Despite critical acclaim and a fanatical following, the show finishes 52d in the ratings in its first season–the highest ranking it will ever have. By the summer of 1969, the Star Trek sets–including the original bridge of the Starship Enterprise–are demolished and the series goes off the air, seemingly destined to fade into oblivion.
Captain’s log: The Chicago suburbs 33 years later . . .
Mike Morrow can’t imagine a world without “Star Trek.” The middle-aged Oak Park resident has been a fan since that first “Star Trek” aired in 1966. His enthusiasm grew with reruns of the original series in the 1970s, the feature-length movies that followed, one after another, and then the premiere of the spinoff TV series “Star Trek: The Next Generation” in the late 1980s.
Morrow admits that “Star Trek” is part of his persona. He attends two to three “Star Trek” conventions per year, started a club called Starfleet Command that has 300 members participating in role-playing games, and has various “Star Trek” memorabilia peppered throughout his home.
But something is amiss.
After decades of “Star Trek” devotion, Morrow has noticed a decline of late in his zeal. Whereas in the past he would not have missed a new episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” when that show aired from 1987 to 1994, he admits it’s no big deal if he misses an episode of the latest TV incarnation of the franchise, UPN’s “Enterprise.”
“The new series doesn’t have the appeal of the old shows,” he confesses. Although it is a subtle thing, the evolving outlook of Morrow and his brethren is sending a distinct ripple through the space-time continuum known as “Star Trek.”
Next Friday, Paramount’s action-heavy new film “Star Trek: Nemesis” opens in theaters across the country. The movie reunites the “Next Generation” cast–led by Patrick Stewart as Capt. Jean-Luc Picard–for the fourth time, and includes cameos by Kate Mulgrew and Whoopi Goldberg.
It shakes up the “Star Trek” mix a bit, bringing in some newcomers: director Stuart Baird of “U.S. Marshals” and screenwriter John Logan, who received an Oscar nomination for his “Gladiator” screenplay.
But both the producers and cast have hinted that this, the 10th “Star Trek” film, may be the last.
“It’s all about the economics,” says Brent Spiner, who plays Commander Data, an android who seeks to be as human as possible in the “Next Generation” series. “This is, after all, show biz.”
Yet “Star Trek” legend has it that the even-numbered films always do better critically and at the box office. Acknowledging this, Spiner says, “The reality of it all is that if the film makes good money, we’ll probably be back again.”
Fans have their doubts.
“It’s probably the last movie for the ‘Next Generation’ crew,” says Morrow. “It’s actually getting to the point where it’s ludicrous to keep the franchise going.”
“You’ve got to wonder how much more you can squeeze out of it,” asks Eric “Mancow” Mueller, morning personality at Chicago radio station WKQX-FM. He has been a fan of “Star Trek” since childhood and recently participated in a “Star Trek” charity event with the original star of the series, William Shatner. “It was a wonderful phenomenon and I would hate to see it end, but has it said everything it can say?”
There are other telltale signs of the franchise’s downturn. Dan Madsen, publisher of Star Trek Communicator, the official magazine of “Star Trek,” reports that circulation has tumbled from a peak 150,000 five years ago to 110,000. Membership in the official fan club, meanwhile, has fallen to 50,000 from almost 80,000 seven years ago.
Even Rick Berman, co-creator and executive producer of the various “Star Trek” TV spinoffs and many of the “Star Trek” movies, including “Nemesis,” thinks it may be best for “Star Trek” to take a “hiatus.”
“There are times when I truly believe that the best thing for the franchise would be to stop airing a new ‘Star Trek’ television series for three or four or five years and let the expectation for a new series grow again. Sort of like letting a field lie fallow for seven years.”
It would certainly leave a hole in the popular firmament.
In a matter of a few decades, “Star Trek” has become one of the most powerful pop cultural forces of our time, rivaling the Beatles, Batman and “Star Wars” and permeating every form of media, from film to books to computer games. It has spawned a theme park of sorts in Las Vegas and more Web sites than the government. It has even manifested itself as a set of Hallmark Christmas tree ornaments.
“Star Trek” films have generated more than $1 billion at the box office, according to Paramount officials. Merchandising revenues have more than tripled that. A “Star Trek” book is said to be sold every six seconds. Phrases like “Beam me up, Scotty” and “Phasers on stun” have become part of the country’s lexicon and the word “Klingon” is appearing in the new short edition of the Oxford English Dictionary.
“I think the success of ‘Star Trek’ has to do with the basic storytelling that started around the campfire and flourished with Greek drama and the hero antagonist,” speculates Shatner, who played Capt. James T. Kirk in the original. “Those irrefutable rules of dramaturgy are there in the best of ‘Star Trek.’ “
Whatever the formula, it created generations of fans. “I grew up playing Captain Kirk in my back yard,” says Mueller. “Every kid wanted to be Kirk. We all wanted to save the galaxy.”
Eric Kirsammer, the owner of Chicago Comics on North Clark Street, says, “The depth of the fan base is amazing. It [has] become the basis for people’s lives.”
Spiner also professes amazement at the durability of the show’s appeal over 36 years. “I have no idea why it’s there. It beats me.”
But it’s no mystery to some. “What Gene Roddenberry was able to do was capture what’s going on with our identities and reflect that back to ourselves,” says Pauline Viviano, an associate professor of theology at Loyola University. “What has made the show so endearing and made it part of our lexicon–there are people out there who are translating the Bible into the Klingon language–is that it lays out hope for the future, that all these problems we have now, we solve. For example, in the ‘Star Trek’ universe, no one is poor. There are replicators to give you anything you need.”
Berman agrees.
“Roddenberry’s idea of the future was that it was a better place. It was a place where humanity was free of war and pestilence and hunger and diseases,” he says. “It was a world where man could devote himself to exploring and finding a better quality of life. Most science fiction doesn’t have a positive, uplifting feeling about the future.”
But “Star Trek” as a cultural force seemed to reach its zenith in the mid-1990s. In 1994 fans had numerous choices: “Star Trek: The Next Generation” was still pulling in stellar ratings despite reaching the end of its seven-year run; “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” was in the thick of its successful journey; and “Star Trek: Voyager” was waiting in the wings for “The Next Generation” to finish its course.
That same year, Paramount released “Star Trek: Generations,” in which the original movie cast led by Shatner passed the film torch to Stewart and the crew from “The Next Generation.” It was Trekkie nirvana.
But flash forward a few years.
After releasing the “Next Generation” film “Star Trek: Insurrection” in late 1998, Paramount seemed in no hurry to shoot another. Meanwhile, “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” went off the air and Paramount, to virtually no one’s surprise and little fanfare, finally brought the crew of “Star Trek: Voyager” home after seven years of being lost in space. One would think “Star Trek” was running low on dilithium crystals.
Last year, Paramount unveiled “Enterprise,” a rather different “Star Trek” product. It doesn’t have “Star Trek” in the title and is set more than 100 years before the adventures of Kirk and crew (although slick special effects make it look like it occurs centuries after the original series). Its setting will make it more difficult for “Enterprise” to interact with the other “Star Trek” properties. Characters from “The Next Generation,” “Deep Space Nine,” “Voyager” and even the original series often intermingled.
Viviano thinks the franchise has long been going downhill creatively and that fans are aware of it. “You can tell the absence of Roddenberry in shows such as ‘Deep Space Nine’ and ‘Voyager,’ ” she says. “That has shifted the popularity of the franchise.”
Berman admits it has been hard to keep fans engaged. “We’ve done a total of five TV series and have produced, not counting the original series in the 1960s, close to 600 hours,” he says. ” ‘The X-Files’ produced about 125 hours. Even with classics such as ‘I Love Lucy’ and ‘Bonanza,’ people lost interest. It’s a big challenge for us to keep people interested in the franchise.”
He’s also unsure where “Star Trek” will go cinematically. “There are elements of [“Nemesis”] that have a finality to them,” he says. “There are things in this movie that give one the definite impression that it’s the last ‘Next Generation’ movie.”
Indeed, characters move on with their lives and a major character is killed off in the latest film–although there’s a sense of deja vu: Leonard Nimoy’s Spock character was killed off in the second “Star Trek” film only to be reborn in the third. As Berman points out: “Anyone who knows ‘Star Trek’ knows anything can happen.”
If this indeed is the last “Next Generation” film, Berman says fans shouldn’t expect a “Deep Space Nine” or “Voyager” movie. Nothing is waiting in the wings.
“I think more likely than that, we’ll find characters from those shows and other shows involved in future films,” he says.
What is mostly happening with “Star Trek,” say many insiders, is that the franchise is running in place.
Paramount is methodically releasing episodes from each of the series on DVD. Meanwhile, the shows still run in syndication and on the Sci-Fi Channel. The movies, starting with 1979’s “Star Trek: The Motion Picture,” have also been re-released in enhanced versions, with restored footage and upgraded special effects, thanks to digital technology.
And although Capt. Kirk has been dead technically for eight years (actually, he dies 369 years from now in the year 2371), Shatner and Paramount have kept the character alive and in front of fans in a number of ways.
Along with co-authors Garfield Reeves-Stevens and Judith E. Garfield, Shatner has written a series of novels that continue the adventures of Kirk and most of the original crew–who, in fact, join forces with “The Next Generation’s” Picard and crew. He has also undertaken tie-in projects that relate to the “Star Trek” universe: “Mind Meld” is a DVD released last year in which Shatner interviews Leonard Nimoy and vice versa. “Star Trek: I’m Working On That” is a book in which Shatner interviews scientists who were influenced by “Star Trek.” And even the actor’s horse shows in California make a nod to the show. “It’s ‘Star Trek’ goes Western,” says Shatner.
His latest “Star Trek”-flavored endeavor is a pay-per-view event and DVD video release that boldly goes where no “Star Trek” production has ever gone, to say the least. It chronicles his adventures in Joliet last August, when he led “the forces of Earth in the largest paintball battle ever.”
“William Shatner’s Spplat Attack” (premiering today on pay-per-view and Tuesday on DVD) chronicles the battle between the actor, who heads up a Federation paintball team; the Klingons, led by Mueller; and the Borg, headed by renowned paintball figure Tom Kaye. The event benefited Shatner’s charity, the Hollywood Charity Horse Show.
Although many feel that “Star Trek” has run its course, everyone has a suggestion on how to make it live on as a cultural phenomenon. Most focus on a return to the philosophy of Roddenberry, whose ashes were scattered in space after he died in 1991.
“[The franchise] has sort of forgotten the vision of Roddenberry,” says Mueller. “Like many of our cultural forces, it’s been replaced by political correctness. Shatner was the first actor to kiss a black girl and a green girl on television. They’ve lost that. It’s become sort of safe and boring.”
“What ‘Star Trek’ needs to resurrect is a fresh, creative look at the verities that it had in the beginning,” agrees Shatner. “With the original show, Roddenberry and company had created a bible of what the characters should be doing and saying, and how the show should go. And what would be most creative for ‘Star Trek’ to continue is a vivid rereading of that bible. You need a hero, the hero’s dilemma and you need action.”
Spiner suggests another change of scenery. “I’d take it into the future–100 years past the ‘Next Generation,’ ” he says. “Roddenberry had this idea that space is an infinite place as far as the ideas and stories out there. I’d go into the future to look at those stories.”
If “Star Trek” is indeed coming to an end, it doesn’t seem to be fazing the fans as much as the stereotypes about them would lead you to believe. “I’m 50,” Morrow says. “I was a teenager when it started. Now I’ve moved on, and truthfully I don’t have as much time as I once did for it.”
“Star Trek” may fade, but don’t expect it to ever completely disappear, say those who know the franchise.
“It will go on forever,” Madsen says. “Even if it takes a break, 10 to 15 years from now people will say, ‘Let’s revisit “Star Trek.” ‘ It’s the crown jewel of Paramount. There are few franchises that have lasted this long and have made this much money.”
Spiner concurs. “I’m in the mindset that there’s never going to be a time where there’s not ‘Star Trek,’ ” he says. “It may go on hiatus but it will always come back. It’s an American phenomenon.”
But Berman seems to vacillate on the question.
“I don’t know where I would like to go next,” he says. “I would like to do another film or two and do seven good years on ‘Enterprise.’ And then perhaps I’d like to do a show where people drive in cars and wear sneakers.”
