J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Problems

[drt]

Re: JJ Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Proble

“I didn’t want to enter into making a movie where we didn’t really own our story. I feel like I’ve done that a couple of times in my career,” Abrams told Wired. “

"Didn't really own our story." WTF does that even mean. How much more can you "own the story" of a freaking movie than being its director and producer? That makes no sense. (I mean yes, double-J, it's obvious enough that you were a hired gun and didn't feel any real connection with the material. You don't have to keep dancing around it.)

I've always been under the impression that the inclusion of Khan was mandated by the studio, which is maybe what he's getting at here. Since Bad Robot still works with Paramount on nuTrek and other projects, he's not going to explicitly point fingers.

 

[tomalak301]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

And these problems would have been fixed had you left Peter Weller has the main villian and kept Khan kind of the Season 2-5 Gul Dukat character and not ripped off WOK. It seemed like these problems were easily fixable.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Re: JJ Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Proble

Kylo is a new character, I'm pretty sure he isn't Lando in disguise. Or is he? What a twist

The fact that he wears a mask means something, or he obviously wouldn't be wearing it.

Looking at one for the screen caps from a trailer aka this

http://41.media.tumblr.com/44ff382c272248685b28d78d0942374b/tumblr_inline_nwivekK1jk1ttbgov_500.jpg

it looks like its part of the Knights of Ren's overall look.

 

[Sparky]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

And these problems would have been fixed had you left Peter Weller has the main villian and kept Khan kind of the Season 2-5 Gul Dukat character and not ripped off WOK. It seemed like these problems were easily fixable.

While I agree somewhat with this idea, the problem is that the studio wants Khan, but you never intended to have Khan. What do you do now? You can't have Khan be second fiddle. Khan takes a back seat to no one.

 

[The Wormhole]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Huh? TFA premieres in one month, and we still don't know who Kylo Ren is. How is that any different than the identity of Cumberbatch's character?

A few reasons:
-Fandom wasn't aware of Kylo Ren or that there was a mystery surrounding him until a few months back. Cumberbatch's casting was one of the first official news announcements made about STID over a year and a half prior to its release.

-Fandom hasn't figured out who Kylo Ren can be yet, while everyone knew Cumberbatch was Khan even when others involved in the movie denied he was Khan or tried to say he was Gary Mitchell.

-We knew literally nothing about who Cumberbatch was playing other than he was probably Starfleet based on his black Starfleet uniform undershirt. We know Kylo Ren is a student of Sith teachings, he idolizes Darth Vader and apparently is in a position of power over the Imperial Remnant known as the First Order. And his lightsabre has a cross guard.

And these problems would have been fixed had you left Peter Weller has the main villian and kept Khan kind of the Season 2-5 Gul Dukat character and not ripped off WOK. It seemed like these problems were easily fixable.

While I agree somewhat with this idea, the problem is that the studio wants Khan, but you never intended to have Khan. What do you do now? You can't have Khan be second fiddle. Khan takes a back seat to no one.

It was in fact Lindelof who wanted Khan, and even requested he be inserted in the movie even after completion of the first draft of the script which did not include him. The villain was originally intended to be John Harrison, renegade Starfleet officer turned terrorist. Although, it is worth noting that doing a sequel about Khan was on the table while Trek XI was being made, to the point that a post-credits scene featuring the Botany Bay was storyboarded.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

A little OT, but holy shit does my iPad hate Wired's website. There's just endless stretches of black space between questions, presumably due to pictures or videos not loading.

Anyone know if that was the entire interview? A few of the magazines I read tend to have extended versions of the interviews in the magazine itself. But then again, they usually indicate that at the bottom of the webpage.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

A little OT, but holy shit does my iPad hate Wired's website. There's just endless stretches of black space between questions, presumably due to pictures or videos not loading.

Anyone know if that was the entire interview? A few of the magazines I read tend to have extended versions of the interviews in the magazine itself. But then again, they usually indicate that at the bottom of the webpage.

I believe the Wired link does have the entire interview; no link to any other version, at any rate. There are indeed several (5?) large images breaking up sections of the text. I keep coming to what seems like an abrupt end, only to scroll-scroll-scroll down and find still more interview. It's a formatting / style thing they do, and it's kind of annoying.

 

[JWPlatt]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

I've always been under the impression that the inclusion of Khan was mandated by the studio...

...the problem is that the studio wants Khan, but you never intended to have Khan...

It was in fact Lindelof who wanted Khan, and even requested he be inserted in the movie even after completion of the first draft of the script which did not include him. The villain was originally intended to be John Harrison, renegade Starfleet officer turned terrorist. Although, it is worth noting that doing a sequel about Khan was on the table while Trek XI was being made, to the point that a post-credits scene featuring the Botany Bay was storyboarded.

Right. In fact, the other writers said they resisted but that it made sense when Lindelof made his case. Oh well. Lindelof must be a lot more impressive in person than from my ignorant point of view of his work.

 

[Malaika]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Notice he didn't include the first movie (which doesn't contraddict Orci saying JJ accepted to direct it only after he read the script and liked it)

On one hand, it seems to be a bit convenient that NOW that Orci&co aren't the creative team anymore, they, first Pegg and then JJ, admit they had issues with stid
But that said, I find nothing wrong in what JJ said. I kind of assumed he always feels that way because he starts as first foremost a writer and storyteller so, of course, I can imagine it's different (and in many ways frustating) for him when he doesn't write the script too. Imagine how James Cameron would feel...
People always say the director has the control and final say...yes, he does but if he isn't the writer he'll still need to follow someone's script even if he is allowed to make some changes ..and like some pointed up already, he maybe did that with stid too that's why he said 'when we started filming'

I know for example that he added the bar scene between Pike and Kirk because he felt the movie lacked scenes that would further make us understand Kirk's reaction when Pike dies, the fact that he kind of was a father figure to him.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

"That’s not to say I’m not proud of my work,"

You did good, JJ.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Some artists are never completely satisfied with their work.

 

[Gepard]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

^I'd much rather have that than "We're all very pleased."

 

[Jedi_Master]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

^I'd much rather have that than "We're all very pleased."

Yep. I wonder how many folks behind the numerous Trek fan productions would be willing to engage in such a frank self analysis?

 

[Trekkin]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Some artists are never completely satisfied with their work.

Including Nick Meyer apparently. This morning I was reading an old interview he did with SciFiNow, and he described how he'd sometimes had to fight the urge to hide in his care whenever he was on the TVH set and watching his material being performed and filmed.

 

[BigJake]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

People always say the director has the control and final say...yes, he does but if he isn't the writer he'll still need to follow someone's script even if he is allowed to make some changes

If he has any problems with the script really worth talking about (or mentioning afterwards) he can always just send it back to rewrites, though. It's not like this would have broken the kind of budget they were working with.

 

[BillJ]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

If he has any problems with the script really worth talking about (or mentioning afterwards) he can always just send it back to rewrites, though. It's not like this would have broken the kind of budget they were working with.

But rewriting on the fly can be messy business. At some point, he was committed to shooting the movie whether he was happy with the script or not.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Didn't think there was much in the way of problems with the story, but he definitely should've made sure Javier Bardem or BDT (or even a pumped up Antoino Banderas with shoe lifts) was locked for Khan. Also that it came out summer 2012

 

[drt]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

I've always been under the impression that the inclusion of Khan was mandated by the studio...

...the problem is that the studio wants Khan, but you never intended to have Khan...

It was in fact Lindelof who wanted Khan, and even requested he be inserted in the movie even after completion of the first draft of the script which did not include him. The villain was originally intended to be John Harrison, renegade Starfleet officer turned terrorist. Although, it is worth noting that doing a sequel about Khan was on the table while Trek XI was being made, to the point that a post-credits scene featuring the Botany Bay was storyboarded.

Right. In fact, the other writers said they resisted but that it made sense when Lindelof made his case. Oh well. Lindelof must be a lot more impressive in person than from my ignorant point of view of his work.

I know the story about Lindelhof changing Harrison to Khan, I'm just not sure if it's the full truth of the situation.

 

[Franklin]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

I don't know how Lindelhof made his case, but the reasoning for me was always that Kirk came across Khan at a pivotal point in his life in TWOK, and the conflict rejuvenated him at a low point and gave him a greater appreciation of his own weaknesses. In STID, it was pretty much the same thing. The conflict with Khan exposed Kirk to his weaknesses and matured and reformed his leadership style. The Kirk of Nimbus wouldn't have lasted another year in the captain's chair.

Kind of a nice parallel.

 

[Kor]

Re: J.J. Abrams: 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Had 'Fundamental Story Prob

Some artists are never completely satisfied with their work.

And so they keep releasing edited, extra-special editions of their movies years after the fact, and you aren't even able to obtain the original any more.

welcome to world of JJ Abrams and his secrects. sometimes the mystery box is usually empty. the bigger secrecy is how we have not even seen Luke at all.

Hmm, Luke and Kylo Ren are never seen together. Kylo Ren's face is never seen at all. Kylo Ren venerates Vader's helmet. Coincidence?

^I'd much rather have that than "We're all very pleased."

Yep. I wonder how many folks behind the numerous Trek fan productions would be willing to engage in such a frank self analysis?

How did you make this connection? "We're all very pleased" is something that Rick Berman said about some professionally-produced yet mediocre Trek work back when he was still in charge.

Kor