With September almost here, and no new Star Trek to entertain us, it's inevitable that fans are focusing their attention on the only aspect of Star Trek that right now has some life: the next movie.

Yes, we've all heard about the over saturation of Star Trek, and how it seems that Paramount is continuing to try and squeeze blood from a turnip. But does that mean that Star Trek should just shrivel up and die?

If it means we are going to get the same old tired thing, then yes, it should at least go into a coma. But if someone comes in with some fresh ideas, a fresh perspective, and a storyline that would blow fans away ... why not give him a chance to do it?

Erik Jendresen, whose extensive resume includes an Emmy win as a writer on HBO's "Band of Brothers," will be the first to tell you that before signing on to Star Trek XI, he was not a big fan of Star Trek. That is a hard pill for some of us to swallow, considering how many hundreds of hours of Star Trek there are available, and how much canon there is to deal with. But does that mean we should dismiss him before he is even given a chance?

The last two Star Trek films flopped, as well as the last series ... does that mean we shouldn't give Jendresen a chance?

Jendresen has said that we are moving away from the simple starship/crew concept, and trying to explore new territory in a prequel setting. Does that mean we shouldn't give him a chance?

You know, I understand the reluctance of fans to buy into something new, or something continuing. We have been burned a lot in recent years, but we can't blame those that are involved in the film project now. We have to look at it as the past. And while we should approach anything with reservation, making outright judgments on something we haven't seen and know very little of is not the best thing to do.

I frequent some of the message boards, and actually post on a few of them. There, I have seen a lot of reaction to the new film, especially after recent comments Jendresen made to DreamWatch magazine. And sure, I see it with a slight advantage. I had a chance to talk to Jendresen a few months ago, and if you could hear his voice, if you could hear his enthusiasm, you can't help but be stoked.

The next Star Trek movie is not just another job for Jendresen. This is something that he is very excited about, and wants to make good. He is not some fanboy writing about how he can get Capt. Picard and Dr. Crusher to finally make love, or Reed and Trip to find love between each other. He wants to help realize the true potential of what Star Trek is, and understands what the true concept of Gene Roddenberry's vision is.

Do you know what that true concept is? Seriously, grab a sheet of paper and start writing down what you think are the key elements of Roddenberry's vision. Is it having a starship? Is it having the Enterprise? Is it a young captain, with a Vulcan science officer, and an engineer with a Scottish accent? Is it the planet of the week?

No, while those are elements that have been used in Star Trek, they are not part of Roddenberry's vision of what Star Trek is.

So, what is Star Trek? I can sum it up in a single word: Exploration.

That's right. Exploration. But not the kind of exploration you're thinking. It's not the planet of the week. It's not some crazy bumpy-head aliens. It's the exploration within ourselves. It's exploring who we are, what makes us unique, what is our true potential.

I know the final episode of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" aired more than 10 years ago, but how can anyone forget John de Lancie's Q talking about the real exploration of mankind? It wasn't until he said those words, about how exploration is more than plotting comets and flying through nebulas, that it hit me what the true idea of Star Trek is.

When the original series aired, sure, we remember the elements of the story like Capt. Kirk and Mr. Spock, but what we forget is how the show forced us to explore ourselves. To look at things like racism, war, annihilation. How we treat others, how we look to others, how we treat ourselves, how we look to ourselves.

Star Trek has gotten lost. Rick Berman and Brannon Braga for some reason forgot what true Star Trek was, and went simply with a glorification of the elements ... the ship, the captain, hell, even the Vulcan. You want to know why Star Trek got stale? Because while it tried to explore other planets and other cultures, it stopped it's main exploration: the exploration of ourselves.

Jendresen wasn't familiar with Star Trek before taking on the project? So what. John Logan was a professed Star Trek expert, and look at what we got in return, something called "Star Trek: Nemesis." On the other hand, Nicholas Meyer was not really a fan of Star Trek, and we ended up with a great film like "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." You don't need to be an expert in something to support it, to help it grow, to help resuscitate it.

Go ahead, roll your eyes at what Jendresen is doing, before you know what it is. Treat him as if he's unwelcome in the Star Trek community. Dismiss him before you even have a chance to explore what it is that he is doing and what he brings to the table.

But if you want to join true fandom, then you will sit back and say, "Well, I've been burned in the past, so I have some concerns. But I'm going to wait and see before I start judging this new project."

Why don't we do that? Why not just wait and see? Why not just reserve judgment? Didn't we learn ANYTHING from Star Trek? Let's not judge something we don't know ... instead, let's get to know it first, and then go from there.

That's what exploration is, and exploration is what Star Trek is all about.

Michael Hinman is the founder of Airlock Alpha. He writes out of Tampa, Fla., and can be reached at michael@airlockalpha.com.