"Star Trek" No "Galactica"?

At the recent Comics Con in San Diego, the subject was about "Star Trek" and the untimely demise of its most recent TV incarnation.

Was it the writing? Was it the special effects? Was it the bodacious curves of Seven of Nine? No, sorry -- wrong show.

And raging among fandom is the issue of how best to blame Brannon Braga and his boss, Rick Berman, for the "death" of Trek.

From the fantasyland of the gathering of comics fans, a voice breaks through loud and clear: The latest Trek failed, because it wasn't real enough.

It wasn't, in other words, like "Star Trek: Galactica".

I don't agree. There's a place for Das Boot, and there's a place for Trek. But never the twain shall meet, unless, of course, in the person of Galactica. Which ain't Trek.

What we need, it seems to me, is a Trek that is in the spirit of the original series. The one that makes old-timey fans like me say, "Ah, yes. This is the way it used to be."

There's nothing wrong with Star Trek: Enterprise that couldn't have been solved by a little more of the good story-telling we expect from Trek.

Because Galactica is fine, but Trek did come first. And it had its own style. It was -- and is -- unique.

As far as whether Trek sufficiently represents our future -- I guess we'll never know for sure, will we?

Here's hoping.