The author or co author of several books on pop culture subjects ranging from Doctor Who to zombie movies, he is no stranger to Star Trek. A nearly lifelong fan of the franchise, he spent a couple seasons as a pitching writer for Star Trek: Voyager, along with fellow writer Mark Haynes and Scoop’s J.C, Vaughn, who conducted this interview.

Scoop: When people discuss Star Trek, one of the subjects that seems to come up these days -- as opposed to even 10 years ago -- is how many of the things in the original series that were considered science fiction are now reality. Will you be touching on that in your discussion?
Dr. Arnold T. Blumberg (ATB): Absolutely. As with all good science fiction, Star Trek offered a vision of the future that inspired generations. The amazing thing about Trek is how many people were directly influenced by their love for the show to pursue careers in science, medicine, exploration, and by virtue of their fandom seek out ways to make reality out of fantasy. So many of the advancements we enjoy today - and even recent experiments in making transportation at least a scientific possibility – only came about because of Star Trek and the way it encouraged people to chase their dreams.

Scoop: Star Trek fans have had a lot of impact. The first time they got organized they earned the original series its third season. Then they got the first space shuttle named Enterprise. Would you say that in some sense they have pioneered the way for other organized groups of fans or is that reading too much into it?
ATB: No, I think there’s a lot of credit due the early organized Trek fandom for setting the bar at a level that many other areas of fandom has frequently aspired to reach. Of course, it doesn’t always have as big an impact but that’s because Trek is a pretty special thing in its own right.

Just about every sci-fi or fantasy TV show that comes along and gets cancelled has had its fan base organize to “save” their show, but how often does that really happen, and how often should it? The point though is that it made people on both sides of the production equation aware of how important and how powerful fans can be in the process.

Scoop: The franchise's first steps into the world of theatrical films wasn't so hot. We've heard it said that Star Trek: The Motion Picture didn't have much Star Trek or much motion (we've also heard it called Star Trek: The Motionless Picture and Spockalypse Now, but we're digressing). It came a decade after the series ended. What was wrong with it?
ATB: So much time has passed though that I think TMP is enjoying quite a bit of positive re-evaluation even from fans that had all but disowned it. Say what you want about the choice of story, the sterile design, the tempered performances, but it may still be the only Trek movie (to date anyway) that genuinely had the sound and look and feel of a cinematic event, an actual feature film rather than a jumped-up though attractive TV movie.

Goldsmith’s sweeping and evocative score has still rarely been matched, the Enterprise never looked more majestic – even if we had to stare at her for what seemed like hours at a time – and the themes explored in the film are a bit headier than just battling an old foe or meeting your evil twin. I think I’ve warmed to TMP over the years, but let’s stick to the Extended Cut – more character moments.

Scoop: On the flip side for many fans of the original series was Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. What did it get right that the first film didn't?
ATB: I’d have to write a whole article about this, but TWOK is still the gold standard for classic Trek films, and that’s because it rediscovered all the warmth, all the character interaction, all the sense of heart and spirit that TMP lacked.

The shift in the color palette didn’t hurt either, nor did linking it back to a well remembered and exciting original series episode, and with Khan, Ricardo Montalban gave us one of the great movie antagonists of all time. Notice I couldn’t bring myself to say “villain” – after all, wasn’t Kirk really as much to blame as Khan suggested?

Scoop: As the film series progressed, there were various highs and lows. What are some of the points you might find yourself talking about during your discussion?
ATB: Well we might discuss the really solid continuous story-telling of the classic film series’ glory days from II-IV, the sad and yet intriguing misstep of V and the significant and moody recovery of the full classic cast’s swan song, Star Trek VI. And then there’s Generations, but…maybe we’ll just spend a moment or two on that one.

Scoop: The new Star Trek film seems to be basically a reboot of the entire franchise. Do you think it will alienate existing fans in favor of new ones or will they find a way to appeal to both groups?
ATB: You’re never going to satisfy everyone, and I do feel this is the end of the Star Trek I grew up with. It was inevitable that one day, however they decided to do it, we would face basically a reboot of the saga, and here we are. I’m sure some old fans will be pleased by the nods to the past, but it will probably polarize fandom for years to come.

And that’s how it goes really. I’ll be sitting in the theater opening weekend, waiting to see what I think. But I predict my ultimate reaction, whether the film is good or bad, will be “Well, my Trek is gone.” I’m not going to lose sleep over it, but there it is.

Scoop: From what you've seen in previews and promotional materials, what appeals to you about the new movie?
ATB: Frankly not a lot. It looks very much like a reinvention of Trek for an audience that appreciates a faster-paced, more action-driven spectacle with less emphasis on longer form exploration of character. I don’t know that I’m right, and I’ll see what happens when I’m in that theater. But the decision to try to both recapture the past style and yet change so much of it visually right at the outset doesn’t suggest to me that I’ll be especially enamored with the final product. But like I said, I can’t worry about it; it’s a Trek for a new era.

Scoop: Okay, we thought about your comments from last time. What don't you like about Star Trek: Enterprise? We think that if its final season (produced by Manny Coto) had been its first season, it would still be on the air and it would be pretty highly rated by now. What makes you disagree?
ATB: Enterprise was a massive misfire until the “too little, too late” recovery of a generally very good final season. That’s where it should have started, I agree. If you’re going to commit to a prequel series, do it right. And remember, this is before any idea of a reinvention or reboot.

Classic Trek happens after Enterprise, so why shy away from designing the past to look like it could genuinely lead into that 23rd century era? The ship and technology clearly looked like post-24th century design, and of course it did since the show was being made by people that had been working on Trek non-stop since The Next Generation debuted in 1987. Casting wasn’t 100%, character was weak, stories were hackneyed or all too familiar.

And I’ve always felt it’s a terrible excuse to say you can’t be faithful to the look and continuity of the past and still write a solid story. That’s the challenge of writing, not to jettison what you don’t like because it isn’t convenient. That fourth season was starting to get it right, but it was well worth ending anyway.

Scoop: What are you hoping some other Star Trek fans will want to discuss?
ATB: As little about “And the Children Shall Lead” as possible.

Scoop: What should attendees be ready for?
ATB: Lots of spirited discussion and the possibilities of serious disagreements. Fans can rarely agree about anything for too long. But I think the prevailing mood will be one of love for all things Star Trek, which is as it should be.

To learn more about Geppi’s Entertainment Museum, visit their website or call (410) 625-7060. GEM is located at 301 W. Camden Street, Baltimore, MD 21201. The "Coffee with the Curator" discussion groups are regularly held on the third Wednesday of each month.