For the next would-be Roddenberry or Straczynski...

[thatcrazycajun]

 THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF CREATING A STAR TREK-STYLE SCIENCE-FICTION TELEVISION SERIES:

1. Thou shalt not insult the intelligence of thy viewers...especially the fans!
2. Thou shalt keep thy stories firmly grounded in real science (or at least plausible extrapolation therefrom) and not ignore the laws of physics for the sake of a desired storyline or plot twist.
3. Thou shalt NOT send thy starship captains into dangerous off-ship situations when subordinates are available to do the job (AKA the David Gerrold "No More Kirks" rule).
4. Thou shalt make thy characters fully realized and believable, rather than just cardboard caricatures.
5. Thou shalt NOT resort to time-travel, parallel-universe or alternate-history stories more than once per season. (Cue filkertom's "Time Plot"...)
6. Thou shalt not depict entire planets' societies as global monocultures.
7. Thou shalt not make thy storylines excessively serialized, self-referential and/or convoluted, lest thy new viewers be utterly bewildered and change the channel in disgust. (Xena, New Galactica and Farscape writers, I'm looking at YOU.)
8. Thou shalt include women, gay and lesbian, transgender and minority characters in thy stories in a coequal, non-exploitive and respectful manner.
9. Thou shalt strive mightily to strike a fair balance between action for excitement's sake and thoughtful dialogue, and seek reasoned solutions to conflict wherever possible.
10. Above all, thou shalt NOT write boring or pretentious stories!

And for TV network executives: Thou shalt give thy series a fair chance to find its audience and promote it adequately before moving its time slot or cancelling it. (Fox suits, I'm looking at YOU; you still aren't forgiven for the Firefly debacle.)

Comments

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

Or, for #6, as global monoecologies. (I'm looking at you, George Lucas!)

I don't understand

[maverick-weirdo.livejournal.com]

How can you make a group of "Star Trek Commandments" based on rules that Star Trek didn't follow?

Re: I don't understand

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

That's sort of the point - Trek DIDN'T follow these rules, which is why the next one needs to.

Re: I don't understand

[maverick-weirdo.livejournal.com]

But if the show follows rules that Star Trek didn't then it wouldn't be a "STAR TREK-STYLE SCIENCE-FICTION TELEVISION SERIES"

It's like saying make a Perry Mason Style drama without all that courtroom/legal stuff.

[kayshapero]

To 7 add "Unless you're doing a novel for television and you tell the rest of us up front that's what you're doing." (OK, I'm a Babylon 5 fan...)

And to TV executives: Thou shalt NOT backseat drive.

[ericavdg.livejournal.com]

Well said, my good man, well said! To #4 I would add the phrase "with flaws." Otherwise, you've created a great set of rules that would do wonders if Hollywood suits would only read and follow them.

[archiver-tim.livejournal.com]

For JMS: Spaceships move at the speed of plot. However, do keep track of what your show has already established, it can't be 48 hours one episode then 2 weeks another.
Similar for communication, if you have instant 'radio' over great distances, it can't suddenly not work or be out of range.
Okay, I'll give you that whatever world you visit it seems to be 1 earth gravity and 1 earth atmosphere (or 1g and need for breathers/spacesuits). Don't have that plot where things are suddenly different on asteroid, tiny moon, earth's moon or Mars. With that, if artifical gravity on ship still works after engine is off-line or destroyed in one episode, don't make a plot point in another.
Why do you have to run to get in a time-machine to go back in time? For instance, when their is no danger to yourself or the machine?
Transporters are there to move along the plot to get you from here to there. Don't make them the center of the plot by being able to cure alien diseases or death. Or have that one-time where materialization occurs several feet off the ground (be it for comedic effect or plot effect).
Planet-sized, planet-destroying machines machines operated by captain and crew of 12 should not wander the universe for long without some space-fleet being ready to destroy it or take it away.

Now, have I taken all the fun away?

[archiver-tim.livejournal.com]

How many rarest elements/minerals/alloys can there be? Okay, make it rare, but is it really the only source for substance 'x' in the galaxy? Well, maybe what comes out of one planet's sandworms can be rare, or another planet's spiders can produce a subtance better than botox for looking young.

No more aliens that come to Earth to steal our water. Unless you have some 6th grader point out to them how daft that is, considering all those iceballs they passed on the edge of our solar system...along with the iceballs of methane they can use for energy to melt it. And they don't have to lift it off a 1g planet to get it to their spaceship.

Why is it that the trained opponent army/police/gaurds can't shoot for heck, yet when those being fired at can pick one up and hit one of them with those weapons on the first shot?

[sodyera.livejournal.com]

I'll put my John Hancock to the above guidelines, and as a wannabe-filthy pro shall Endeavour (pun intended) to remain consistent to them. Unless I get a better offer.

[magicwoman.livejournal.com]

Happy belated birthday!

Susan