New writers speak

[F. King Daniel]

Part 1 of a TrekCore interview with Patrick McKay and JD Payne.

Fascinating hints toward a possibly a villain-less ST3. To be honest though, I'm a little bit nervous about their TNG love (my least favourite Trek). But the STIII/IV love makes me happy!

 

[Devon]

They seem like genuinely nice guys. However, I literally know nothing about their work though outside of their time in the 80s pop group "The Proclaimers."

 

[BigJake]

I like them.

 

[SPCTRE]

The TNG episode names he rattled off from the top of his head certainly made a good impression, I like all of them quite a bit

 

[YellowSubmarine]

You know what Kirk needs to really grow up? Discovering The Inner Light probe.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

You know what Kirk needs to really grow up? Discovering The Inner Light probe.

***barrage of tomatoes***

 

[SPCTRE]

 

[Ryan8bit]

I'm a little bit nervous about their TNG love (my least favourite Trek)

Well, TNG is Orci's favorite Trek, so maybe don't freak out?

 

[Mudd]

I enjoyed them referring to Star Wars and Indiana Jones as "all those chestnuts from the period."

I don't see anything there to suggest that the plan for Star Trek 3 is to go villainless.

 

[mos6507]

I don't see anything there to suggest that the plan for Star Trek 3 is to go villainless.

They are pretty clear that they aren't ruling that option out, which is something I wouldn't expect from JJ Trek.

 

[Mudd]

I don't see anything there to suggest that the plan for Star Trek 3 is to go villainless.

They are pretty clear that they aren't ruling that option out...

Which means absolutely nothing because ultimately they don't rule things in and out. Everything that they do on this movie, at every point in development, will be guided and have to be approved by producers and more importantly by the studio that's going to fund it. "You know what was cool on TNG" from the new writers doesn't actually provide a clue to what Paramount wants and will greenlight - but a look at their other successful recent summer blockbusters does.

 

[M'Sharak]

I don't see anything there to suggest that the plan for Star Trek 3 is to go villainless.

They are pretty clear that they aren't ruling that option out, which is something I wouldn't expect from JJ Trek.

You may recall that the writers weren't ruling it out in interviews following the 2009 movie, either:

If you watched my “Star Trek” video blog with Peter from Slashfilm, we discussed what we wanted to see in a sequel. I brought up what we talked about and asked Bob [Orci] and Alex [Kurtzman] what kind of villain we’d get in the sequel. I also asked if they’d set anything up in part two that might pay off in another film. They say they’re debating between “the exploration sci-fi plot where the unknown and nature itself is somehow an adversary or the villain model. That’s an active discussion we’re having right now. In terms of thinking about more than one movie, we want the movie to be self-contained in a way, but we’re discussing the idea of having a couple of threads where if the second movie works, you could pick up into a cohesive whole.

At this early stage, everything is still up in the air.

 

[Mudd]

Exactly so.

 

[Franklin]

McKay wasn't a teenager when TNG first aired? YOU KIDS GET OFF OF MY TREK!

Actually, I am very pleased, again.

When I hear those involved talk about how they like the character relationships (like in TSFS and TVH), I believe there's a high probability that they "get it" when it comes to Trek.

After the next movie, we might be saying, "J.J. who?"

 

[The Colonel]

Do you think that the modern, “action movie” style of Trek film is a necessity to draw in today’s movie-going audience, or could a more intangible threat – like V’GER from The Motion Picture, or the “save the whales” time travel mission from Star Trek IV – still succeed in 2014?

Patrick McKay: I'd sure like to think so!

I'd like to think so too... Hopefully they'll take their time a little bit and tell a good story. Since the TNG films we've been getting cliche action movies with Star Trek themes and characters. Picard, Kirk or Spock have to beam to a planet or ship and punch a cartoonish villain at the end. The new movies weren't bad mostly because they were well cast and a had great production design and special effects...but Star Trek can be so much more than that. There is a whole universe that can be explored.

I'm holding out for a new TV series. With the movie industry dominated by big budget formulaic CGI fests that have to play it safe to make back their enormous budgets, TV has become the superior medium for story telling.

 

[Tosk]

The TNG episode names he rattled off from the top of his head certainly made a good impression, I like all of them quite a bit

Just a pity that naming good episodes is not an indicator of the ability to write a good script.

 

[StarMan]

From a marketing standpoint, I think Paramount will insist on an adversary of some sort.

 

[SPCTRE]

The TNG episode names he rattled off from the top of his head certainly made a good impression, I like all of them quite a bit

Just a pity that naming good episodes is not an indicator of the ability to write a good script.

It certainly is an indicator for my ability to instantly like these guys. As for everything else, I'd look at their earlier work, as Dennis said.

 

[Set Harth]

Especially since it may well take two additional decades to determine what, if anything, was cool on TNG.

I really don't get the severity of the TNG backlash.

 

[mos6507]

From a marketing standpoint, I think Paramount will insist on an adversary of some sort.

Over-the-top villains like Khan are nice to have, but are not necessary for every film unless you insist on conforming the franchise to the superhero comic-book mold.

V'Ger was technically the adversary in TMP, but V'Ger didn't rug-chew the way a traditional hate-driven villain does. It created plenty of death and destruction as a byproduct of its cosmic identity crisis.

The trick was to setup events in such a way that the Enterprise crew tries to _understand_ the adversary and not merely conquer it via phasers and fisticuffs.

It's unfortunate that How to Train your Dragon 2 is not doing as well as the studio hoped, but that's the whole premise of that universe, that Hiccup represents engagement and peacemaking. I think there's a direct connection between how Hiccup tries to resolve conflict and how Trek (TNG especially) tried to resolve conflict.

The problem is, culturally, we'd rather have a thrill-ride with cardboard cutout villains that can be knocked down like a videogame than to really think.