The ST XI Screenwriters Speak
TrekWeb posted an excerpt from an MTV interview with the screenwriters for ST XI. The TrekWeb article can be found here.
Here's some highlights:
"The challenge of the movie is to be 100 percent true to the fanbase but also to bring in a whole new group of people who've never seen 'Trek' before," Kurtzman said.
>My comment: Isn't that what they've all said before? And how well did it work? Of course, this one just might do it. Maybe.
Orci and Kurtzman also confirmed that the film is not in any way a prequel but a reimagining of the franchise. Whether that means a whole new look for Star Trek remains in question. "We're not going to start totally from scratch," Orci said. "We want it to feel like it's updated and of the now. That's actually the discussions we're having now: how to keep the look of the universe yet have it not look like nothing's new. It's tricky."
>My comment: Reimagining is so cliche. And usually doesn't do well at the box office. Batman Begins may be the exception to that, however. Someone ought to check on that.
Orci recalled. "We've been watching [Star Trek] all our lives. I've even read the books. It was all about, what have I always wanted to see in Trek?'Trek,' more than anything, has always been about the human interactions. It's all about the human soul."
>My comment: So this is another fanboy movie? I remember all the uproar about the writer of Nemesis (who essentially ripped-off Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire to make Gladiator) being a fan, and how that was going to make everything all better. Yeah, sure, right.
At least they got the part about the human experience right. That's something B&B lost sight of along the way.
Here's some highlights:
"The challenge of the movie is to be 100 percent true to the fanbase but also to bring in a whole new group of people who've never seen 'Trek' before," Kurtzman said.
>My comment: Isn't that what they've all said before? And how well did it work? Of course, this one just might do it. Maybe.
Orci and Kurtzman also confirmed that the film is not in any way a prequel but a reimagining of the franchise. Whether that means a whole new look for Star Trek remains in question. "We're not going to start totally from scratch," Orci said. "We want it to feel like it's updated and of the now. That's actually the discussions we're having now: how to keep the look of the universe yet have it not look like nothing's new. It's tricky."
>My comment: Reimagining is so cliche. And usually doesn't do well at the box office. Batman Begins may be the exception to that, however. Someone ought to check on that.
Orci recalled. "We've been watching [Star Trek] all our lives. I've even read the books. It was all about, what have I always wanted to see in Trek?'Trek,' more than anything, has always been about the human interactions. It's all about the human soul."
>My comment: So this is another fanboy movie? I remember all the uproar about the writer of Nemesis (who essentially ripped-off Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire to make Gladiator) being a fan, and how that was going to make everything all better. Yeah, sure, right.
At least they got the part about the human experience right. That's something B&B lost sight of along the way.
Comments
Long version: If they do name the movie "Star Trek" with no reference to anything before or after--no number, no numeral, no title, just "This is Star Trek in a little box!" I will be annoyed. If they make it primarily an action movie, I will be extremely frustrated. If "reimagining" means they chuck the current Star Trek Universe out the window and make up their own continuity, I will cry tears of sorrow, and it will be pathetic.