Could we Trekkers have saved the Trek XI script? [SPOILERS]

[Tuxedo Dragon]

amaninspired wrote:

---

These are the traps that were, largely, avoided by Batman Begins and Casino Royale, but they were traps that were fallen into to an extent by Quantum of Solace and spectacularly by The Dark Knight. Will film historians be debating the brilliance of these films in 40 years, or will they still be talking about 2001: A Space Odyssey?

There is nothing wrong with action, but there has to be meaning there, or what's the point? The Dark Knight in particular rushed its action from one plot hole to another in a valiant effort to cover its inadequacies...it still failed. Whilst the reviews were generally rave, I agreed with Mark Kermode [film critic for BBC radio and TV in the UK]...it was nothing special. A disappointing sequel to Batman Begins, which had more substance, better cinematography and a much more coherent plot and characters.

You lost me here. Dark Knight has been heavily praised by critics. And almost made Begins an afterthought. Not to mention that it grossed tons of money. Any attempt to call it a dissapointment seems far fetched.

Dark Knight had a great story and was far from just an action flick.. It was a multi layered crime drama. And will be considered one of the best movies of this decade, at the very least. Its arguably the best comic book movie ever. And diffinitly the best Batman movie.

[Anticitizen]

DFScott, do you write professionally? You have a good wit and quite a way with words.

I agree with everything you said. I think the film's weaknesses could have been resolved fairly easily without gutting its strengths.

The first thing I'd change is Kirk's ridiculously convenient run-in with Old Spock. Have Kirk find the outpost first, and Spock's already there. That would at least make a LITTLE sense.

[Joker]

"Trekkers" should not be allowed near any Star Trek production, ever, unless it's to watch it.

[Sky]

I think the original poster has excellent points. Of course he will be ridiculed here (anything critical of the film will), but I do hope there is room for discussion in the midst of all the eyerolling and jeering.

[urbandk]

Yes, we fans of the new movie are all mindless sheep following holy JJ.

[dkehler]

I think a couple more rewrites would have possibly improved the storyline while keeping the better parts (the characterizations, action and special effects).

As much as I hate agreeing with Dennis, I think he's right that at least Orci probably realized many of the problems that especially Star Trek fans would have with the film, but they made some choices that I would not have made and what's done is done.

I just hope that the next movie doesn't force me to suspend my disbelief quite as much as this one did.

[Messianni]

elton wrote:

---

"Trekkers" should not be allowed near any Star Trek production, ever, unless it's to watch it.

Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof are dyed-in-the-wool Trekkies.

Difference being they were on a team that included people who'd never experienced Trek, or very little, so it provided for a good balance between the two points of view. One would stop the other from doing something that would probably piss off a great deal of Trek fans and likewise one party would stop the other from doing something that would put off the general audience.

I like the new production team aka "Supreme Court". With Lindelof working with Kurtzman and Orci on the sequel script, I'm sure a few of these issues with plot and pacing will be addressed nicely.

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Yeah sorry I don't think the script needed any "saving". Much less from "Trekkers" here. A few tweaks would be nice, but as it is it was a great movie.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Messianni wrote:

---

Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof are dyed-in-the-wool Trekkies.

Difference being they were on a team that included people who'd never experienced Trek, or very little, so it provided for a good balance between the two points of view.

Another big difference is that Orci and Lindelof have the professional skills, judgment and experience doing this kind of work not to let their fandom push them off-kilter.

Saying that they are Trekkies in response to Elton's point that fans shouldn't be participating in making the movie is somewhat akin to responding to someone who doesn't think the average football fan should be an NFL coach by pointing out that John Madden is a football fan, too.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Sky wrote:

---

I think the original poster has excellent points. Of course he will be ridiculed here (anything critical of the film will), but I do hope there is room for discussion in the midst of all the eyerolling and jeering.

Your problem here is that you seem to think that people who enjoy the movie and have no complaints with it should be eager to engage in discussions based on the premise that there is this-or-that major flaw in the movie, and since we don't agree there's no reason that should be the case.

[J. Allen]

Dennis wrote:

---

Your problem here is that you seem to think that people who enjoy the movie and have no complaints with it should be eager to engage in discussions based on the premise that there is this-or-that major flaw in the movie, and since we don't agree there's no reason that should be the case.

Also, saying that anyone who is critical of the movie will be ridiculed is a fast way to setup a persecution complex.

J.

[bullethead]

Keeping in mind that the movie was filmed during the writers' strike, which prevented Orci and Kurtzman from doing revisions during filming, this is what I would do to improve the film.

-Slow down the dramatic cutting during the action sequences and allow the audience to get a better sense of what's going on.
-Retain the scene with Kirk's stepdad that goes before the car chase, since it helps humanize Kirk.
-Don't have Uhura strip when she walks in on Kirk and Gaila making out; considering the fact that she heard him breathing, she should've kept her clothes on to screw with Kirk.
-Don't make Kirk's cheating on the Kobayashi Maru so obvious. Having the Klingons' cloaks (or one of them at least) malfunction a bit and Kirk just spamming all weapons at them (while eating the apple) works far better.
-Let Kirk get a commendation for beating the test, then have Spock (a Lieutenant Commander this time, to make the end work a bit better) go to the head of the Academy with proof that Kirk cheated, only to get lectured about how life and combat don't have rules. This would make Spock antagonistic towards Kirk for breaking the rules and not only getting away with it, but being praised for it.
-Have the head of the Academy declare that Kirk's class has graduated before they leave; Kirk and McCoy are both assigned to the Enterprise instead of McCoy sneaking Kirk aboard.
-Get rid of the ice monsters and have Kirk seek shelter from an ice storm, which happens to be Spock Prime's cave.
-Have Romulus be destroyed by something other than a supernova, but still requires turning something into a black hole to stop.
-When Nero and Pike talk, have Nero mention that he already dealt with the problem that destroys Romulus in the future.
-Have Kirk send off a message to Earth after he takes command of the Enterprise, warning them that Nero is coming and that they should evacuate.
-When the Enterprise shows up at the end to save the Jellyfish, let the Enterprise and Narada duke it out a little more, with the Enterprise taking some hits but staying together
-During the destruction of the Narada at the end, have Nero give the "I've waited for this day my entire life... this day of reckoning" line from the 3rd trailer as a bookend for the character.
-Have a time skip of a few years between the Enterprise returning to Earth after the battle with the Narada and Kirk getting command of the Enterprise, with Spock Prime showing up to see Kirk off before going to the Vulcan colony.

[urbandk]

The answer to the OP's question is NO, because it's great the way it is.

-UDK

[amaninspired]

Tuxedo Dragon wrote:

---

You lost me here. Dark Knight has been heavily praised by critics. And almost made Begins an afterthought. Not to mention that it grossed tons of money. Any attempt to call it a dissapointment seems far fetched.

Dark Knight had a great story and was far from just an action flick.. It was a multi layered crime drama. And will be considered one of the best movies of this decade, at the very least. Its arguably the best comic book movie ever. And diffinitly the best Batman movie.

As you might have guessed, we're not going to agree on this point! Any such comment is a matter of opinion, but I couldn't get around the gaping plot holes in The Dark Knight. I wasn't alone; Mark Kermode being one critic who agreed with my take on the film.

Having said that, Kermode was very complimentary about the new Trek film. My problem is that certain blockbusters, and I think that history will place both The Dark Knight and Star Trek in this category, are of their time. They will not age gracefully.

Whilst Batman Begins and Casino Royale transcended their own era by adopting and adapting the slightly more considered style of the classic action or thriller blockbuster for the modern age, I can't say that Star Trek does the same. It doesn't even adapt early Star Trek for the modern age.

I will watch the film again at some stage and my views may soften, but no-one can suggest that this was a real character film and Trek, at both its best and worst, has always been more about characters and relationships than action.

Everything was too convenient. Spock being riled by Kirk within seconds of his return to the Enterprise. Spock ejecting Kirk from the Enterprise in the first place, which was a completely illogical thing for anyone to do! They lost an escape pod and presumably had to drop out of warp to eject it.

I did like the Star Trek IV reference where old Spock explains to Scotty that he hasn't invented the transporter technology yet, but it was all too convenient. The characters simply slotted into the story, without the story fitting how one might imagine the characters (either in their original or re-imagined versions) would behave.

Independence Day had generally positive reviews and made wads of cash. Thirteen years later, it's generally acknowledged as being disposable entertainment that was of its time and, with hindsight, a pretty mediocre film. I fear that this is the fate awaiting Star Trek 2009.

[Messianni]

Dennis wrote:

---

Another big difference is that Orci and Lindelof have the professional skills, judgment and experience doing this kind of work not to let their fandom push them off-kilter.

Saying that they are Trekkies in response to Elton's point that fans shouldn't be participating in making the movie is somewhat akin to responding to someone who doesn't think the average football fan should be an NFL coach by pointing out that John Madden is a football fan, too.

Fair enough, but it still invalidates the point of, "Trekkies should never ever ever be allowed to make a Trek film". You're right, though, that these people are professionals. Much more than can be said for the armchair "screenwriters" around here.