Pegg updates on script

[M'Sharak]

wasn't one of the drafts of star trek 2009 written back in 2007? (and the movie is pretty much like that script)

There's this, which is dated "November 2007". Bear in mind, though, that 7th November 2007 is also when principal photography for that movie began (concluding 27 March 2008.) The writers' strike began on the 5th, so the script linked above could well be the final version as written, with most differences between it and the finished film being a result of scenes not filmed, editing/scenes filmed but deleted, and a couple of on-set ad libs.

 

[shapeshifter]

This film better get made otherwise I'm boycotting.

 

[JWPlatt]

This film better get made otherwise I'm boycotting.

Uh... that doesn't compute... uh wait uh... you're under arrest.

 

[fireproof78]

This film better get made otherwise I'm boycotting.

Uh... that doesn't compute... uh wait uh... you're under arrest.

 

[Firebird]

wasn't one of the drafts of star trek 2009 written back in 2007? (and the movie is pretty much like that script)

There's this, which is dated "November 2007". Bear in mind, though, that 7th November 2007 is also when principal photography for that movie began (concluding 27 March 2008.) The writers' strike began on the 5th, so the script linked above could well be the final version as written, with most differences between it and the finished film being a result of scenes not filmed, editing/scenes filmed but deleted, and a couple of on-set ad libs.

Yes, that is the final shooting script of the film, initially locked into a "white" draft on October 9th, 2007, with two rounds of normal revisions on 10/22 and 11/2, and the last-minute revisions taking place on November 5th. The major difference between the shooting script and the final film is the third act. There was some significant restructuring and uncredited rewriting going on.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

"No script! No budget! This film will never get made!" etcetera etcetera

I'm sure they'll come up with the goods.

Hey now, someone on that TrekCore's comments section claimed their "contacts at CBS" told them the film is likely to be cancelled.

I'm sure CBS might like that, but Paramount wouldn't allow it.

 

[eyeresist]

^ Good grief.

 

[martok2112]

^ Good grief.

Why did I suddenly get a mental picture of Lucy yanking the football out from Charlie Brown as he tried to punt the football?

Oh, wait...that would be :

AUUUUUGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! (THUD!)

Never mind.

 

[eyeresist]

^ I'm thinking of that as a metaphor for the relationship between Star Trek producers and fans, but I'm not sure who is Lucy and who is Charlie. It could work either way...

 

[martok2112]

^ I'm thinking of that as a metaphor for the relationship between Star Trek producers and fans, but I'm not sure who is Lucy and who is Charlie. It could work either way...

I guess it depends on who's holding the football.

 

[Malaika]

"No script! No budget! This film will never get made!" etcetera etcetera

I'm sure they'll come up with the goods.

Hey now, someone on that TrekCore's comments section claimed their "contacts at CBS" told them the film is likely to be cancelled.

I'm sure CBS might like that, but Paramount wouldn't allow it.

at this point I think that even when we will get the movie and we are waiting for the first official trailer, some people will claim that they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who works at paramount who told them that it's all a conspiracy and there is no movie.

 

[Nerys Myk]

"No script! No budget! This film will never get made!" etcetera etcetera

I'm sure they'll come up with the goods.

Hey now, someone on that TrekCore's comments section claimed their "contacts at CBS" told them the film is likely to be cancelled.

I'm sure CBS might like that, but Paramount wouldn't allow it.

at this point I think that even when we will get the movie and we are waiting for the first official trailer, some people will claim that they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who works at paramount who told them that it's all a conspiracy and there is no movie.

Come on, you'll be sitting in the theater and the person next you will saying there is no movie!

 

[fireproof78]

Hey now, someone on that TrekCore's comments section claimed their "contacts at CBS" told them the film is likely to be cancelled.

I'm sure CBS might like that, but Paramount wouldn't allow it.

at this point I think that even when we will get the movie and we are waiting for the first official trailer, some people will claim that they know someone who knows someone who knows someone who works at paramount who told them that it's all a conspiracy and there is no movie.

Come on, you'll be sitting in the theater and the person next you will saying there is no movie!

 

[eyeresist]

An audience staring at a screen which is actually a great hole in the wall... the future is NOW.

 

[HIjol]

Seems Simon confirmed that he was not a StormTrooper, but that Daniel Craig was. Probably everybody knows this, but just in case...

source:

The Kahleej Times
May 18, 2015
"City Times" Section

 

[Khan 2.0]

Interesting comments from Pegg on the dumbing down of modern day blockbusters, and what it could mean from Trek 3

During an interview with Radio Times, the 45-year-old ‘Star Trek’ actor revealed that he thinks modern cinema is dumbing down… and he seems to blame it all on ‘Star Wars’.

“Before Star Wars, the films that were box-office hits were The Godfather, Taxi Driver, Bonnie And Clyde and The French Connection – gritty, amoral art movies,” he said. “Then suddenly the onus switched over to spectacle and everything changed … I don’t know if that is a good thing.”

“Obviously I’m very much a self-confessed fan of science fiction and genre cinema but part of me looks at society as it is now and just thinks we’ve been infantilised by our own taste. Now we’re essentially all consuming very childish things – comic books, superheroes. Adults are watching this stuff, and taking it seriously.”

But that’s not all… he also goes on to seemingly slam ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’.

“It is a kind of dumbing down, in a way, because it’s taking our focus away from real-world issues,” he added. “Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys or moral questions that might make you walk away and re-evaluate how you felt about … whatever. Now we’re walking out of the cinema really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”

Obviously, his new attitude against the geekier side of cinema raises a lot of questions. I mean, whatever happened to the man who slammed the ‘Star Wars’ prequels? Wasn’t he taking it a bit too seriously back then?

It certainly seems as though he’s started to buy into the notion that genre cinema isn’t lofty enough for a true cinema connoisseur. But you only have to look at… oh, I don’t know, ‘Star Trek’ itself to see that sci-fi and genre film can deal with some pretty heavyweight issues.

Perhaps even more worryingly, he goes on to explain that he was hired to rewrite the upcoming ‘Star Trek 3’ script as the original version was “a little bit too Star Trek-y.”

His solution? To make a more mainstream film – such as a Western or a thriller or a heist movie – and then populate that film with ‘Star Trek’ characters, in an attempt to reach an audience outside of the usual genre crowd.

Does this mean we’ll see a far more mainstream ‘Star Trek 3’? For now, we’ll have to wait and see. But I hope Simon Pegg tries to remember what he used to love about science fiction.

Star Trek 3 heads to cinemas on 8 July 2016.

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/star-treks-simon-pegg-thinks-sci-fi-is-making-us-119348861764.html

Sounds like Orci's script might've been like a DOFP thing with Shatner/timelines etc, and Peggs is going more 'Voyage Homey' mainstream? (no doubt we'll see what Orci was going to do via IDW)

 

[BeatleJWOL]

His solution? To make a more mainstream film – such as a Western or a thriller or a heist movie – and then populate that film with ‘Star Trek’ characters, in an attempt to reach an audience outside of the usual genre crowd.

Waiting patiently for the "this isn't Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek" crowd to tackle THIS.

 

[eyeresist]

he goes on to explain that he was hired to rewrite the upcoming ‘Star Trek 3’ script as the original version was “a little bit too Star Trek-y.”

His solution? To make a more mainstream film – such as a Western or a thriller or a heist movie – and then populate that film with ‘Star Trek’ characters, in an attempt to reach an audience outside of the usual genre crowd.

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/star-treks-simon-pegg-thinks-sci-fi-is-making-us-119348861764.html

Interesting indeed - but why does the part about "his solution" not include any direct quotes? Are these just the article writer's assumptions?

Also interesting to think what the studio might have meant by something being "too Star Trek-y". It could mean almost anything. It could have the obvious negative meaning, but it could also mean that they didn't want another Khan 2.0 (no offense!), or a standard species which non-fans could dismiss as "same old Star Trek". Or another movie like Insurrection. Given that this board seems united in wanting something new, that would seem the right call.

What Pegg says about modern genre movies being too mindless does give hope that STB will have intrigue and weighty themes, without retreading old ground.

 

[Khan 2.0]

another better version of the interview
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/may/19/simon-pegg-criticises-dumbing-down-of-cinema

He said he had been asked to make the new Star Trek film “more inclusive”.

“They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y,” he said of the original draft.

“Avengers Assemble, which is a pretty nerdy, comic-book, supposedly niche thing, made $1.5bn dollars. Star Trek: Into Darkness made half a billion, which is still brilliant.

“But it means that, according to the studio, there’s still $1bn worth of box office that don’t go and see Star Trek. And they want to know why.”

He added: “People don’t see it being a fun, brightly coloured, Saturday night entertainment like the Avengers,” adding that the solution was to “make a Western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent”.

 

[eyeresist]

^ Thanks for that - I think "more inclusive" goes with what I was saying in my previous post.