Fade In: The Writing of Star Trek: Insurrection

[STR]

Unfortunately, it's all too obvious why Paramount had the book scuttled. Piller's scrupulous honesty doesn't paint Stewart or Spiner in a particularly flattering light, and, even though he's diplomatic about it, the story of his forced departure from Voyager makes several then-current Paramount employees look like a bunch of spoiled brats.

I disagree. Stewart was basically had two goals 1) Have Picard NOT brood for 90 minutes. 2) Keep it "sexy" i.e. not stiff and high on itself 3) Do NOT retread on old episodes.

Spiner just picked off plot-hole after plot hole, and questioned why should anyone care about the stuff that wasn't a hole.

If anything, I think the problem was keeping it as an action movie. ST can cross into other things besides action. Keep the mystery. An "Indiana Jones in space" would've been interesting. Make it a suspense-thriller. It's a big universe, it has room for more than one type of story, just like the real world does.

So if you're going to fault people, I'd lay that at the writer, producer, and a lesser extent, director being unable to go an entirely new direction. Having said that, INS was okay. Better than GEN, at least less boring than GEN (save for the first act).

 

[CaptJack]

Thanks for posting this, DarkHorizon. I'm looking forward to reading it, both as a Star Trek fan and as a B.A. in Screenwriting who hasn't been able to open up Final Draft since I received my degree. Maybe it'll change things...

 

[JarodRussell]

Unless Baird had input into the script and story, he was basically just telling the actors where to go and how to emote. I can't see how his absence could have improved Nemesis that drastically.

Maybe, but I find it hard to belive that a man who has been nominated for 8 different writing awards ( 1 Tony which he won, 2 WGAs one of which he one (I swore I read that he won the Oscar for Gladiator, but apparently not this was for a TV script, 2 Oscars, and 2 BAFTAs) could have actually written something as bad as Nemesis. So I really think that it was a case of a bad director ruining a script. Personally, I actually like the story and alot of the ideas in Nem. it's just that it was so badly executed that I don't like it.

But the script was already bad to begin with. The one thing Baird isn't responsible for is the size of the plot holes and the stupidity of the characters. That's Logan's work.

 

[BillJ]

Maybe, but I find it hard to belive that a man who has been nominated for 8 different writing awards ( 1 Tony which he won, 2 WGAs one of which he one (I swore I read that he won the Oscar for Gladiator, but apparently not this was for a TV script, 2 Oscars, and 2 BAFTAs) could have actually written something as bad as Nemesis. So I really think that it was a case of a bad director ruining a script. Personally, I actually like the story and alot of the ideas in Nem. it's just that it was so badly executed that I don't like it.

If the story on screen is reflective of the script given to Baird... then it was a bad script. Baird didn't have enough "juice" in Hollywood to sit down and do his own re-writes of the script.

So I count this one against Logan, Berman and Spiner.

 

[tmclough]

I just watched Nemesis for the first time a couple of nights ago, and I personally don't see what the problem with it is. While I would not call it the best ST movie to date, I would say that it is arguably the best TNG movie.

Rather than picking nits, I'd rather just enjoy it for what it is. Maybe this mean I'm just not a Star Trek fan/Trekkie/Trekker. Yeah, I think that's what it is.

 

[Agenda]

I just watched Nemesis for the first time a couple of nights ago, and I personally don't see what the problem with it is. While I would not call it the best ST movie to date, I would say that it is arguably the best TNG movie.

Rather than picking nits, I'd rather just enjoy it for what it is. Maybe this mean I'm just not a Star Trek fan/Trekkie/Trekker. Yeah, I think that's what it is.

Well, non-Trekkies didn't enjoy it either. More went to see Maid in Manhattan. That's right. Maid in Manhattan.

 

[Dick Whitman]

I just watched Nemesis for the first time a couple of nights ago, and I personally don't see what the problem with it is. While I would not call it the best ST movie to date, I would say that it is arguably the best TNG movie.

Rather than picking nits, I'd rather just enjoy it for what it is. Maybe this mean I'm just not a Star Trek fan/Trekkie/Trekker. Yeah, I think that's what it is.

Well, non-Trekkies didn't enjoy it either. More went to see Maid in Manhattan. That's right. Maid in Manhattan.

How can they enjoy or not enjoy something they did not see?

 

[JWD75]

I just watched Nemesis for the first time a couple of nights ago, and I personally don't see what the problem with it is. While I would not call it the best ST movie to date, I would say that it is arguably the best TNG movie.

Rather than picking nits, I'd rather just enjoy it for what it is. Maybe this mean I'm just not a Star Trek fan/Trekkie/Trekker. Yeah, I think that's what it is.

You are not alone. I too think that Nemesis is the best of the TNG movies.

It's a shame that Pillar's last big contribution to the franchise is considered such a failure after he had done so much to improve the quality of storytelling on TNG and co-creating DS9 which is arguably the best of all the series. It's like a student who got A's and B's all year flunking his final exam. I do think that there was a seed of a good movie in his original treatment and that it could have been cultivated to greatness if it had been taken in the right direction.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

There is a profound passage from Piller in the final pages of the book when he's summing up his experiences and what he's learned from his career:

"There’s a new kind of action writing in Hollywood that I simply don’t know how to do. It begins - even before a word is put down on paper - with identifying “set pieces”, big self-contained action moments that are thrilling and memorable, and then finding some way to string all your set pieces into a coherent narrative. The theory is that audiences are really coming for the “eye candy” -- to see how we’ve filled the screen with awesome visuals and special effects. Set pieces sound great in pitches and make for good coming attractions but in my opinion, this approach almost never results in a good movie because it abandons the fundamental demands of story-telling."

Reading this makes me even more sad that Piller is gone... perhaps he could have continued pushing Hollywood to focus on stories "about something" as opposed to all the drek we get now. Then again, maybe it's better that he didn't live to see what mainstream, big budget movies have quickly become... and I wonder, based on his feelings above, what he would have thought about JJ's Star Trek...

Unfortunately, it sounds like he's talking about Star Trek 2009. I'm ashamed to admit it, after the new movie, I started missing Berman and Piller and Braga and Hurly and Behr and Coto.

Maybe Coto, but with the others....their idea of Star Trek is a non-Roddenberry future...i.e. the aliens in 'Insurrection' (and much of TNG being majority Caucasian)...an opening for ENT that only showcases America and not a multi-racial world coming together...(not too mention the unbalanced cast of ENT)....and other things.

Granted, for some, that may be their idea of Trek.

And even aside from that, they made Trek seem routine, when there used to be (at least for me) anticipation for upcoming films and Trek itself.

Of course, I've never had so much anticipated (Trek-related) until Abrams' film started to generate buzz; and it delivered not only to Trek fans who appreciated the film, but to many who were never even into Trek to begin with.

 

[BillJ]

Maybe Coto, but with the others....their idea of Star Trek is a non-Roddenberry future...i.e. the aliens in 'Insurrection' (and much of TNG being majority Caucasian)...an opening for ENT that only showcases America and not a multi-racial world coming together...(not too mention the unbalanced cast of ENT)....and other things.

Roddenberry was the creator of TNG and had a hand in casting. Berman and Piller gave us the first African-American commander (as a series regular) in Deep Space Nine then Berman, Piller and Jeri Taylor gave us our first female commander (as a series regular) in Voyager.

Might want to double-check your Trek history.

As far as the Enterprise opening goes... it was a show designed for an AMERICAN audience.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Maybe Coto, but with the others....their idea of Star Trek is a non-Roddenberry future...i.e. the aliens in 'Insurrection' (and much of TNG being majority Caucasian)...an opening for ENT that only showcases America and not a multi-racial world coming together...(not too mention the unbalanced cast of ENT)....and other things.

Roddenberry was the creator of TNG and had a hand in casting. Berman and Piller gave us the first African-American commander (as a series regular) in Deep Space Nine then Berman, Piller and Jeri Taylor gave us our first female commander (as a series regular) in Voyager.

Might want to double-check your Trek history.

As far as the Enterprise opening goes... it was a show designed for an AMERICAN audience.

^^

Oh, it's double-checked.

Like Lucas, apparently Roddenberry lost touch with his initial idea...

And ENT was a show, a STAR TREK show, about a multi-racial society. Not America. (Hence, not following Roddenbery's aforementioned initial idea).

And, very true, DS9 did give us our first black commander (although, it took 2 seasons for him to become Captain; and we had to call attention to him being 'black').

As for VOY; well, it wasn't exactly a solid show...and we've had many discussions of how Janeway was written. (True, she was our first major female captain, but....again, we point to the many discussions on how the character was handled).

Give me Abrams Trek, anyday...

 

[BillJ]

Give me Abrams Trek, anyday...

Might as well give me a kick in the nuts... I'd get as much pleasure from that as I do AbramsTrek.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Give me Abrams Trek, anyday...

Might as well give me a kick in the nuts... I'd get as much pleasure from that as I do AbramsTrek.

Each to his or her own opinion...

 

[Turtletrekker]

Maybe, but I find it hard to belive that a man who has been nominated for 8 different writing awards ( 1 Tony which he won, 2 WGAs one of which he one (I swore I read that he won the Oscar for Gladiator, but apparently not this was for a TV script, 2 Oscars, and 2 BAFTAs) could have actually written something as bad as Nemesis. So I really think that it was a case of a bad director ruining a script. Personally, I actually like the story and alot of the ideas in Nem. it's just that it was so badly executed that I don't like it.

Personally, I thought that the script for Nemesis was just a bad re-hash of the story for Star Trek II without the emotional impact. I even occasionally refer to the movie as "The Wrath of Clone".

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Maybe, but I find it hard to belive that a man who has been nominated for 8 different writing awards ( 1 Tony which he won, 2 WGAs one of which he one (I swore I read that he won the Oscar for Gladiator, but apparently not this was for a TV script, 2 Oscars, and 2 BAFTAs) could have actually written something as bad as Nemesis. So I really think that it was a case of a bad director ruining a script. Personally, I actually like the story and alot of the ideas in Nem. it's just that it was so badly executed that I don't like it.

Personally, I thought that the script for Nemesis was just a bad re-hash of the story for Star Trek II without the emotional impact.

 

[TheAlmanac]

...even though he's diplomatic about it, the story of his forced departure from Voyager makes several then-current Paramount employees look like a bunch of spoiled brats.

I wonder what episodes those staff writers were so desperate to put together that it necessitated Piller's departure? It doesn't seem as if the series took such a sharp left turn after he left...

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I just watched Nemesis for the first time a couple of nights ago, and I personally don't see what the problem with it is.

I don't think it's as bad as its reputation. Of the four TNG films, I think Nemesis is the most successful creatively. Generations is a muddled film narratively, First Contact is extraordinarily superficial, Insurrection is too lightweight. Nemesis has the ambition to be something more than its predecessors and to transcend its source material. I find Nemesis an immensely enjoyable film.

If the story on screen is reflective of the script given to Baird... then it was a bad script. Baird didn't have enough "juice" in Hollywood to sit down and do his own re-writes of the script.

Actually, Baird is highly regarded in Hollywood for his ability to salvage troubled productions in the editing room. Directing Nemesis was his reward for making something of Simon West's debacle on the Tomb Raider film. Given Baird's track record in Hollywood and his strengths in post, his hiring suggests some interesting conclusions.

Personally, I thought that the script for Nemesis was just a bad re-hash of the story for Star Trek II without the emotional impact.

I think the comparisons to Star Trek II are superficial at best. The beloved inhuman character dies, there's a battle in a nebula, and that's about it. The plot beats are entirely different, the character relationships are entirely different.

 

[Christopher]

Actually, Baird is highly regarded in Hollywood for his ability to salvage troubled productions in the editing room. Directing Nemesis was his reward for making something of Simon West's debacle on the Tomb Raider film. Given Baird's track record in Hollywood and his strengths in post, his hiring suggests some interesting conclusions.

Stuart Baird edited Superman: The Movie. I'd say that's a pretty respectable credit, at least from the genre geek's point of view.

Personally I think the pacing was NEM's main problem, but I blame it less on the film's editor or director than on this bizarre editorial philosophy dominating Hollywood that every film must have a relentless pace that never slows down. As a result of that "pace above all" mentality, a dramatically vital scene between Picard and Data was left out because it was "too slow" and a totally pointless, overly long chase sequence was left in because the film "needed action." Swap those out -- restore the Picard/Data scene that supplies the context for Data's later sacrifice and dump the gratuitous buggy chase -- and I think NEM would be better received.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Actually, Baird is highly regarded in Hollywood for his ability to salvage troubled productions in the editing room. Directing Nemesis was his reward for making something of Simon West's debacle on the Tomb Raider film. Given Baird's track record in Hollywood and his strengths in post, his hiring suggests some interesting conclusions.

Stuart Baird edited Superman: The Movie. I'd say that's a pretty respectable credit, at least from the genre geek's point of view.

Personally I think the pacing was NEM's main problem, but I blame it less on the film's editor or director than on this bizarre editorial philosophy dominating Hollywood that every film must have a relentless pace that never slows down. As a result of that "pace above all" mentality, a dramatically vital scene between Picard and Data was left out because it was "too slow" and a totally pointless, overly long chase sequence was left in because the film "needed action." Swap those out -- restore the Picard/Data scene that supplies the context for Data's later sacrifice and dump the gratuitous buggy chase -- and I think NEM would be better received.

Lucas had that idea of 'pace above all' which dates back to the original SW trilogy. Of course, (as has been said numerous times) we see what happened with the prequels, with no one to watch over him.

Still, I agree with changes that could have made Nemesis good; the pacing for FC actually threw me off (ex: one scene on Earth is for comic relief, then we cut to a scene on the ENT that is dramatic...and vice-versa).

 

[JWD75]

I agree with Christopher that Nemesis would have been much improved with the inclusion of the deleted Picard/Data scene. When I watched the scene on DVD I couldn't believe that they felt it neccessary to cut it out of the movie.

A couple of years ago I heard a rumor that Rick Berman was writing a book about his behind the scenes experiences. I hope the rumor is true. Considering how often Berman has been villified in the fan community, I would be interested to see things from his perspective.