News Meyer: Star Trek: Discovery Is Self-Examination

[AutoAdmin]

A new news article has been published at TrekToday:

Star Trek director/writer Nick Meyer spoke recently about his hopes for Star Trek: Discovery. Meyer was “enormously flattered to be invited back,”...

Continue reading...

 

[Longinus]

Good stuff. This is exactly the sort of things I want to see in Star Trek.

 

[BillJ]

If its not fun, I'm going to grow tired of Discovery pretty quick.

 

[Noname Given]

If its not fun, I'm going to grow tired of Discovery pretty quick.

Amen. I think many people over-hype the aspect of Star Trek "using science fiction to deal with current social topics" in that Yes, while the original series did do that from time to time - it didn't ALWAYS do that (and IMO the TNG era shows did TOO MUCH of it for my taste.)

My point: I have always liked the straight up action, adventure and outright science fiction elements of Star Trek <-- And THAT should be included too (and no, I'm sure as hell not talking about TNG's 'technobabble or their last minute 'Particle of the Week' resolutions as I often hated that about TNG.)

Star Trek often managed to do some rather interesting and occasionally high concept science fiction stories WITHOUT resorting to 10 minutes of nonsense technobabble. If they want to do 99% social commentary, I wish they would set this show post ST: Nemesis because hell, mankind will be so Utopian and perfect, and the tech so advanced, they should be able to wave their hands and make issues go away.

Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't do social commentary when a plot allows it, but DON'T ignore the other aspects of Star Trek (especially if you are setting it in the TOS or near TOS era) that many did enjoy about that particular series.

 

[mdtauk]

I think as a lead writer, and guiding hand - the other sci-fi elements, world building, can be handled by others, whilst Meyer can keep his eye on the politics, the intrigue, and the human elements.

Also the social commentary, I am sure, will question humanity's progress, and some of our darker nature, and less than perfect attributes, will play out in this.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

I agree with Noname Given and BillJ, in that episodes week after week of hitting you over the head and lecturing will grow stale very fast. To me, it will be insulting and condescending.

One quote that I always play in my head is from Nichelle Nichols on Good Morning America in 1986 for the 20th Anniversary, when she said, "Oh, we were going out there in peaceful exploration, but there was always high adventure."

I think the TNG style has cast too much of a shadow over what people want in Star Trek in all it's forms, in the aspect of being too preachy and standing on a soap box too much. To me, TOS has always had it right, as far as the balance between adventure and storytelling. If DSC follows that template, they're golden.

 

[Jedman67]

DS9 did a lot of exploring of social issues. Wasn't perfect by any means, but it definitely accomplished in that sense.

 

[137th Gebirg]

My point: I have always liked the straight up action, adventure and outright science fiction elements of Star Trek <-- And THAT should be included too (and no, I'm sure as hell not talking about TNG's 'technobabble or their last minute 'Particle of the Week' resolutions as I often hated that about TNG.)

Totally agree 100% with everything you said, although while TNG opened the door with the technobabble, it could be argued that Voyager blew through the door with a mass-driver.

 

[Mudd]

I have no idea from what I've read so far how much Meyer has to do on the show or what it is. He's written a script, right? And he's up to direct an episode?

Glad to read that he's had second thoughts over the years about TUC. It's not much of a movie and certainly no model.

 

[kirk55555]

I'd hope for a good balance between "self examination" stuff and adventure. I think that TNG (post Season 2) balanced that fairly well, and probably better then the other seasons.

 

[Longinus]

Glad to read that he's had second thoughts over the years about TUC. It's not much of a movie and certainly no model.

It is easily the second best Trek film right after Wrath of Khan.

Though his insight on it is good. It is obviously a film from a different era, but it was hella poignant when it was released.

 

[Greg Cox]

It is easily the second best Trek film right after Wrath of Khan..

I rate it third, after KHAN and the whale movie, both of which Meyer also had a hand in.

 

[Number One]

There are alot of variations on what fans like in Trek, it's hard to please them all. I'd go with all-encompasing to a good standard degree, but they have to decide, what "Star Trek is" for them primarily cause that's we'll be seeing. Very rarely people can produce good materials on anything if they're not a fan of what they're doing(which doesn't guarantee concrete success either, but it's a start).

 

[Longinus]

I rate it third, after KHAN and the whale movie, both of which Meyer also had a hand in.

That one is really good too. I'm very glad that Meyer is back doing Trek.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Agreed.

And before any pro-Meyer "true fans" start to lambast other younger/newer show-runners for having little-or-no experience with the property to which they've been assigned, I quote (or at least paraphrase) Nick Meyer's thoughts (from "The View From the Bridge") when he was first asked to get involved with Trek: "This show...with the guy with the ears?"

"Young minds, fresh ideas", an' all that...

 

[Greg Cox]

There are alot of variations on what fans like in Trek, it's hard to please them all. I'd go with all-encompasing to a good standard degree, but they have to decide, what "Star Trek is" for them primarily cause that's we'll be seeing. Very rarely people can produce good materials on anything if they're not a fan of what they're doing(which doesn't guarantee concrete success either, but it's a start).

And yet both Meyer and Harve Bennett were Trek virgins, as opposed to long-time fans, when they did KHAN, which suggests that you don't have to be a lifelong fan of a property to do right by it. You just have to do your homework and figure out what makes it tick.

(Meanwhile, John Logan was reputedly a huge Trek fan, and well-versed in the lore, but that didn't save NEMESIS.)

 

[Mudd]

I rate it third, after KHAN and the whale movie, both of which Meyer also had a hand in.

As far as I'm concerned the only TOS-based film that's worse than TUC is TFF...and the latter did have the advantage of being fun.

 

[Number One]

And yet both Meyer and Harve Bennett were Trek virgins, as opposed to long-time fans, when they did KHAN, which suggests that you don't have to be a lifelong fan of a property to do right by it. You just have to do your homework and figure out what makes it tick.

(Meanwhile, John Logan was reputedly a huge Trek fan, and well-versed in the lore, but that didn't save NEMESIS.)

I'm saying that you have to be a fan of the work you are producing, whatever that may be. As in actually like it passionatelly. I don't know how it derives off of that, that I said they have to be long time fans of Star Trek. After all, even Gene Roddenberry wasn't a long-time fan when he started creating it, cause it wasn't there to begin with. But, he was very passionate about it and most certainly the biggest fan of his work. Of course this isn't always the guarantee to success, he could have failed for various reasons.

I think people are so conditioned against each other and categorising each other to a side in a theoritical intra-trek battlefield, that make a lot of assumptions based on what could be said if you read what's written a certain way, always thinking they say something with ill intentions. That has been always a problem of mine with Trek fans. Which given the premise especially of the original show(improved humanity) I still consider out of place and try not to really participate when seeing.

We are supposed to be better than that, after all.

 

[Greg Cox]

I'm saying that you have to be a fan of the work you are producing, whatever that may be. As in actually like it passionatelly. I don't know how it derives off of that, that I said they have to be long time fans of Star Trek. .

Oops. I may misinterpreted you there. Lord knows people have frequently argued that long-time Trek fans make better Trek than newcomers. (Remember people trashing Bannon Braga because he admitted that he wasn't a TOS fan?) So I guess I jumped the gun there and figured you were making the same old argument. Sorry about that.

And, yes, you certainly want to take pride in your work and be passionate about it, regardless of whether you're working on STAR TREK or any other project.

 

[TrekMD]

Well, we can certainly hope that this is what the show is about. After all, that is what Star Trek is really supposed to be.