Premise Is Irrelevant

[FalTorPan]

I often see people mention ideas for a new Trek series, and it's all too common only to see little more than a premise. More detailed ideas often include a short list of characters described by rank, species, and gender, but very little else. The premise seems to be its own raisson d'être.

In my opinion a Trek series' premise is almost irrelevant. It doesn't matter if a show takes place in the 22nd century, 23rd century, 24th century, or 1,701th century. It doesn't matter if the story takes place on a spaceship, on a space station, or on an uncharted desert isle. It doesn't matter if the lead character is male or female, white or black, human, Klingon, animal, vegetable or mineral.

What matters most to me are the stories. A premise's relative merit is based on how much it helps to inspire the creation of entertaining stories. If a premise inspires a series' creator to come up with, say, a dozen basic story outlines, then the premise is good; if not, then the premise is bad.

Thoughts?

 

[Biggshow]

I generally agree. I think any of the rumored premises mentioned pre-ENT could have worked if done well (engrossing characters, compelling stories, etc.). Beyond that, include the central ST idea of humans working together to overcome personal and sociological problems with win-win scenarios as much as possible. Without that, it's not ST; it's something that superficially resembles ST but has no soul.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Yeah, the premise is probably the least important element in coming up with a new Trek show. What Abrams says in my signature is what the next series needs. It needs a sense of fun and grand adventure with interesting human characters we can relate to...people more like us.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think the more complicated the premise is, the less effective it is. If isn't something that can be summed up in a single sentence, you probably immediately lose most casual viewers which generally comprises most audiences. You can probably do a lot with less "clutter" in the way.

But I think that interesting characters are just as important as stories. I feel that you really need both to make a good show. I think a new Trek series needs characters that the average audience can really give a damn about and want to tune in each week to see what happens to them. That would involve having characters that aren't really "locked permanantly in" with the series like in previous shows. I think we need to have characters that not only change and evolve as the series progresses, but also can come and go--including the captain...

 

[Admiral2]

I often see people mention ideas for a new Trek series, and it's all too common only to see little more than a premise. More detailed ideas often include a short list of characters described by rank, species, and gender, but very little else. The premise seems to be its own raisson d'être.

In my opinion a Trek series' premise is almost irrelevant. It doesn't matter if a show takes place in the 22nd century, 23rd century, 24th century, or 1,701th century. It doesn't matter if the story takes place on a spaceship, on a space station, or on an uncharted desert isle. It doesn't matter if the lead character is male or female, white or black, human, Klingon, animal, vegetable or mineral.

What matters most to me are the stories. A premise's relative merit is based on how much it helps to inspire the creation of entertaining stories. If a premise inspires a series' creator to come up with, say, a dozen basic story outlines, then the premise is good; if not, then the premise is bad.

Thoughts?

You won't know either way unless some kind of premise is put forward. The writers have to have some kind of idea where their stories are going, and that's what the premise tells them. That makes the premise you start with vital, not "irrelevant." What the hell are you talking about?

Is it because none of the premises you've seen here would inspire you to write a good story? Fine. That's you. It doesn't automatically follow that no writers could find a way to make them work as a series. It just seems nonsensical that you would sit here and say that you just want good stories but the one thing that every story ever written, good or bad, is based on - a premise - "doesn't matter."

Do ya maybe wanna rephrase that?

 

[FalTorPan]

Do ya maybe wanna rephrase that?

No, thanks.

 

[tobindax]

no, i like to see the future, the further the better. 1 billion a.d. good. e.g. babylon5 went to 10trilion a.d. or something and showed entities that had evolved from humans. that was good. i like that.

 

[Count Zero]

Well, you'd need some premise, of course, and preferably one that doesn't fall apart after thinking about it for more than 2 minutes, but apart from that, it's not really that important. The storytelling and the characters is what counts. I hate to bring it up again and again but I think a good example for this is the new Doctor Who. The premise itself (a nearly immortal guy travels through space and time) isn't very original and a bit silly, but it's one of the best shows I've ever seen. Because it has great stories, interesting ideas, witty dialogue and compelling characters (and great actors).
I was alss easily able to look beyond the somewhat unrealistic (at least to me) premise of Jericho because the show was well done.
On the other side Voyager had a great premise but I stopped watching it at some point because I thought it was boring.

 

[Wowbagger]

OP is correct.

Premise is important in guiding a show, but one will do about as good as another, for the most part.

IMHO.

However: what else would this forum do except bat around premises? If you accept "ship in space, folks explore" as the premise of any new Trek, then there's not much to do in here. So premise discussion remains the hobby of choice.

 

[Kegek]

The premise isn't irrelevant. It's a vital building block for a series. However, the only way one can judge a series is by witnessing the product itself.

In other words, unless one is going to go off and film a Star Trek series, a premise is about all one can offer in this forum. A premise with a little more - say, written material - is just more of the building blocks, showing part but not all of the execution. Good material can be ruined by poor performances and mediocre material can be elevated by good performances, not to mention direction, editing, set design, SFX, composition, yadda, yadda, yadda.

So, what can we do in this forum? We can discuss whether or not premises sound interesting. That's not whether or not the series is good - it doesn't exist. Just whether or not the idea is a good one. I might think a Klingon soap opera is a good idea. You may be disagree. And so it goes.

 

[Dayton3]

I had a series premise once with an entire 8 season story arc laid out with a number of story ideas for each season.

 

[tenmei]

And what happened to it, Dayton?

 

[Dayton3]

And what happened to it, Dayton?

Still in a file somewhere.

It begins with the rescue of the man who becomes the Enterprise captain from a Jem'hadar base.

 

[tenmei]

Sounds, from that, like it could have been interesting. A former POW commanding the flagship of the Federation!?

 

[Dayton3]

Sounds, from that, like it could have been interesting. A former POW commanding the flagship of the Federation!?

He was a very young admiral at the time he was kidnapped by a changeling.

He was presumed dead for most of the next two years, then rescued after it was revealed he was alive.

Another year and a half of recovery goes by (unseen onscreen) before he requests and is granted a reduction in rank and restoration to starship command.

 

[sidious618]

I kind of agree with the OP. Even if I'm not wild about the premise I may still greatly enjoy the story. For example, DS9 is my favorite series but having everything happen on a space station sounds like a really boring stereotype. The execution is what made it work.

 

[tenmei]

The OP almost invalidates his own argument in his first post - by saying that a good premise can stimulate writers and a bad premise cannot. Then surely the premise IS important !?

 

[FalTorPan]

The OP almost invalidates his own argument in his first post - by saying that a good premise can stimulate writers and a bad premise cannot. Then surely the premise IS important !?

No, I don't.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

A good premise does stimulate writers nonetheless. If I come up with a series about clowns hired by Starfleet, the writers might not take it seriously and probably won't give it their own. But if I give them the premise to Voyager (And make sure UPN doesn't crush me under an iron boot) then the writers may well do their best.

 

[Eric Cheung]

More detailed ideas often include a short list of characters described by rank, species, and gender, but very little else. The premise seems to be its own raisson d'être.

In my opinion a Trek series' premise is almost irrelevant.

What matters most to me are the stories. A premise's relative merit is based on how much it helps to inspire the creation of entertaining stories. If a premise inspires a series' creator to come up with, say, a dozen basic story outlines, then the premise is good; if not, then the premise is bad.

Thoughts?

I agree. And I think a point missed by most that have replied is the operative word I highlighted above, that it's almost irrelevent. The premise is a good litmus test for the tone, format, and passion into which its creator thought to inject. It demonstrates the potential for a show, but once the show is up and running the only relevence a premise has is that its writers commit to it. If someone wants to do a show about clowns on a starship it could work as a comedy or drama or political thriller as long as

But I'll go one further. Ultimately the stories aren't even important so much as the execution of those stories, as sidious618 said.