Re: *SPOILER* Re: Paramount Agrees To Two More Trek Movies

Anybody wrote:

> If they actually had any real creativity in Hollyweird these days they
> could make NEW shows instead of just ruining all the old franchises
> with idiotic "remakes" / "reboots".  :-(

I'll say this:  Star Trek has proven to be a very tough act to follow.

None of the subsequent attempts at space shows, like Space: 1999 and 
Babylon 5, ever achieved quite the lasting popularity that Trek did.  By 
now, FORTY YEARS worth of Trek stories have fleshed out the Star Trek 
universe tremendously--not only more than any other science-fiction TV 
show, but perhaps more than any other science fiction ever.

Any other writers hoping to create a new space show from scratch, have a 
huge job to create a concept with a comparably vast but significantly 
different scope than Trek.

In science fiction, how many other believable "universes" have there 
been, which encompass so many diverse stories, novels, etc.?  Larry 
Niven's "Known Space," Asimov's "Foundation," Herbert's "Dune," are 
probably the most famous.  (Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings," if you want 
to include fantasy too.)   But such sub-genres aren't that common even 
in written SF.  It takes a huge amount of research to flesh out a 
believable but exotic SF universe, as opposed to just writing one story 
or one novel.  That Roddenberry not only did it, but did it within the 
funding and schedule constraints of an American TV series, is quite 
remarkable.  And very rare.


-- 
Steven L.
Email:  sdlitvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 the NOSPAM before replying to me.