Why I'm afraid of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek
You can't be a SciFi fan and not know it's coming. May 8th is rapidly approaching and the publicity machine has been working hard for quite some time. I was skeptical at the start. Slowly, with the release of each new trailer, I've slowly been won over.

And what's not to like? Space. Explosions. Sex! Drama! It looks like everything we want a great SciFi popcorn blockbuster flick to be. So, why am I still worried?

Star Trek is the 800lb gorilla when it comes to franchises. Star Wars and James Bond are the only ones that come close, and they are still distant seconds. For a TV show that was canceled in its third season, Star Trek has spun off an animated series, a dozen films, 4 other TV series, books, comic books, and countless pieces of fan fiction. Star Trek has inspired scientist to create new technologies. And has encouraged people to be better than they are. It is hard to appreciate its impact on our global culture.

Gene Roddenberry conceived the show as "Wagon Train to the stars". But that doesn't tell you much about why Star Trek has had such longevity. We can laugh at the acting and effects in the original series (TOS), but if you step back, many of those stories still stand the test of time. Star Trek won people over through its hopeful portrayal of the future. That was a rare sentiment during the Cold War. You need only watch Watchmen for a more cynical take on a Cold War future. The Next Generation (TNG) kept true to that hopeful future, but successive TV installments struggled. There were grumblings that it was hard to tell dramatic stories if humanity was too goody-goody.

And now we are here. J.J. Abrams' version of Star Trek is coming soon to a theater near you. This is the guy behind "Cloverfield", "Lost", "Fringe", "Alias", and "Armageddon". He knows how to create exciting shows. He knows how to make big-budget popcorn flicks. Can he stay true to Roddenberry's vision? Does that even matter?

Paramount would probably say no. The Star Trek franchise has withered. A reboot could make Star Trek more appealing to new audiences, and Abrams is a great choice to do that. He can get people excited to see this movie. Just look at the trailers! Given what I know about his version, he is even trying to stay partially true to canon. It all sounds so promising.

But popcorn flick blockbusters don't stand the test of time. They rarely last past the obligatory trilogy. They really aren't franchises when compared to Star Trek. It has lasted this long because it inspires people. And that's where I'm worried. I have a hard time believing that Abrams can create a movie that inspires people. He hasn't made anything like that in the past. Perhaps I'm overselling Star Trek and underselling Abrams. Maybe I'm too attached to what Star Trek was and not what it could be. But if Star Trek becomes just another blockbuster then that really does defeat what Roddenberry accomplished. And that will be a great loss, in my opinion.