To Boldly Go Where Two Men Have Gone Before

I’m a Trekkie. If you’ve read my blog, you know this. So the following missive will come as no surprise to you.

It was reported across the Intarweb this week that the Star Trek franchise is due to make a comeback in 2008, with Alias/Lost guru J. J. Abrams at the helm. The film is said to be based around a young James T. Kirk meeting Spock for the first time, at some point before they begain their landmark five-year mission.

And therein lies the rub.

I realize prequels are all the rage lately. Star Wars did it. Batman did it (sorta). Superman is apparently doing it. Major franchises have had no small success lately reinventing their main characters and setting films somewhere before (or maybe as a different take on) hugely successful movies that have gone before.

There are, however, a couple factors that may prevent such a formula from working for Trek.

First, they kind of did it already. Enterprise, the least commercially successful Trek series since the original, was a prequel. Its lifespan was cut short after four seasons. I didn’t care for the show, although my coworker Bruce Ferguson enjoyed it and has bought the whole thing on DVD. I will say that the Enterprise episode included on the Borg collection was pretty well done, so maybe I should have given the show more of a chance. You have to work pretty hard to make a bad Borg episode, though.

But that’s not the main challenge the new film faces. See, Batman and Superman are franchises based off comic book characters. Hundreds of different artists have drawn them, each giving the characters a slightly different look. At least a half-dozen actors have played each role, providing not only a different look, but a different style of performance. It wasn’t a stretch for us to buy Christian Bayle as Batman, because it was his talent that made the part his own.

Kirk and Spock, though, originated on a TV show. Only one actor has played each role (I may be forgetting some kind of childhood flashback sequence, but if so, that really doesn’t count). See, Kirk and Spock aren’t just Kirk and Spock; they’re every bit as much William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy. Those two actors embody the roles, not just from my perspective but in the hearts and minds of multiple generations of Trekkies. Paramount is not only messing with history, but playing around with icons.

I don’t envy the actors who win those roles. They won’t just be playing Kirk and Spock; on some level, they’re going to have to play Shatner and Nimoy without coming across as a parody. That’s going to be one hell of a balancing act.

The thing that gives me hope in all this is Abrams. He has demonstrated an ability to make compelling television, and from the look the trailers for Mission: Impossible III (which he wrote and directed), he shows great promise for film. There aren’t many writers/directors I’d give the benefit of the doubt to on a project like this, but he’s one of them.

It will be a couple years before the film is actually released, and the project (as well as the people involved) may change significantly during that time. For now I shall remain cautiously optimistic that the new Trek regime will make smarter decisions than the old one did at the end. But Star Trek may not be able to sustain another major hit to its credibility before being seen in the mainstream as an ailing franchise, just like a certain video game company has claimed.

And don’t worry, Mr. Shatner. No matter who gets cast in the part, you’ll always be Captain Kirk to me.