One of the main reasons that I didn’t like the new movie was because it was essentially a pilot for a new Star Trek television series and wasn’t merited enough to be a film series. Waiting three years between movies set during a five year mission is too long of a gap. With a television series, you can watch it week after week to see the characters develop. This comic book will give us a close example of how that might have been. It’s an interesting touch to have the original series episodes reimaganed, rather than having disappointing new material. The upcoming issue #4 will be an adaptation of The Galileo Seven. It will be interesting if they add Uhura to the landing party, that way we can see more interactions between her and Spock which didn’t really amount to anything in the film, but works in a series like this.
Preview--IDW's Star trek ongoing #1
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
They never actually said anything about a five-year mission in the movie. The narration at the end used the "Her ongoing mission" phrasing from TWOK.
Also, the gap between movies may come out closer to four years.
Except, as a tie-in to an ongoing film series, it won't be allowed to give the characters any significant development. After all, most of the people who see the movies won't read the comic, so any important developments will have to be saved for the screen.
Still, the format in which they set up is better suited for a television show than a feature film series. The Motion Picture has a simular set up, but they went in a different direction by the time the second film came out. I'm willing to bet that the upcoming sequel will pay no attention to the romance started between Uhura and Spock and Kirk's high rise to the captain's chair, judging how the writers handled the progression in the Transformers films. Maybe the writers of the comic will address those issues, for us fans at least. All the mass audiences (and Abrams) want to see is stuff blow up.
No major developments, but with the involvment of JJ and Co. there could be some foreshadowing.
That's very unlikely, and Transformers is a very poor analogy. The thing you need to understand is that, unlike television, writers have essentially no power in feature films unless they're also producing or directing. It's the director and producers who decide what story to tell in a feature film, and writers are treated as hired contractors whose job is simply to write what they're told to write. Since Kurtzman & Orci were only involved with Transformers as writers, nothing more, they weren't responsible for those films' story direction -- particularly on the second film, which Michael Bay outlined during the 2008 writers' strike with no involvement from Kurtzman & Orci (which is why its "plot" is little more than a bunch of action set pieces loosely joined together).
But since Abrams et al. come from television, they employ much more of a "writers' room" process for Star Trek, with the writers also being producers. Kurtzman & Orci were executive producers of the 2009 film, and will be full producers of the sequel. (Another difference between film and TV is that in film, "producer" is apparently a higher rank than "executive producer.") So they're not just hired hands there like they were on Transformers. Also the sequel this time is being co-written by Damon Lindelof, a producer on both films. But still, as director and producer of the ST films, J. J. Abrams is the one most responsible for deciding what the story will be. And nobody would accuse J. J. Abrams of not being interested in developing ongoing character arcs.
Indeed, interviews from the filmmakers have already indicated that they are planning to address issues like Kirk's rapid rise to command.
That's completely untrue. What I found deeply impressive about the 2009 film was that even in the midst of sequences where stuff was blowing up all over the place, Abrams's focus as a director was emphatically on the people and emotions rather than the visual spectacle. Even when the villain was defeated and his ship destroyed, Abrams painted a contemplative, soulful portrait of Nero as a tragic figure grieving for his lost love, made us feel sympathy for Nero at the end rather than painting his destruction as something to be callously cheered for, focused our attention on the man's face and his feelings with the explosions serving merely as the backdrop for a powerful character moment. That's brilliant filmmaking. I'll never understand how anyone can accuse Abrams of being shallow. I'll grant that the film has some plot holes, but its emphasis on characterization is its greatest strength.
Again, the only member of the filmmaking team who's directly involved with the comics is Roberto Orci, and he's only a creative consultant on the ongoing title. Remember, Abrams is a damned busy man. Right now, in addition to the Trek sequel, he's executive producing Fringe and Person of Interest, producing Alcatraz for TV and Mission: Impossible -- Ghost Protocol for film, and beginning development on a Cloverfield sequel. Bryan Burk is doing all of those as well (except he's executive-producing Alcatraz). Damon Lindelof is working on the Trek sequel and is a consulting producer on ABC's new Once Upon a Time. Kurtzman & Orci are executive-producing Hawaii Five-O and Transformers Prime, wrapping up production on a film called Welcome to People which Kurtzman directed, and pre-producing a film called Now You See Me for 2014 release. These guys have a lot on their plates. So it's not like they're devoting their full attention to the comic as well as the movie.
That assumes that the Enterprise has more than one and they seem to imply that Dehner's absence was last minute so they might not have another psychiatrist on board.
I'm sure we've seen interviews with the writers where they say these two elements do get addressed in the sequel.
I was waiting for somebody to make reference to it--Kirk makes a dig at Spock for constantly trying strand people on the planet, or something--but no one did.
I'd be astounded if the Spock/Uhura thing wasn't addressed in the sequel, particularly since it's one of the biggest differences from the original timeline. Why go to all that trouble to establish this relationship only to ignore it later? This isn't a David E. Kelley show, after all.
I can see the rapid rise of James T. Kirk having less attention focused on it, though, since "Kirk in command" is sort of most audience members' "default setting" for the character, and they may not want to draw to much attention to the oddity of it. But there could be some interesting story elements coming out of it too, especially if they play up the self-doubt that Kirk evinced in the earliest episodes of the original series.
I liked the issue...and as for Uhura/Spock being addressed...why wouldn't it be? It was the "love story" element in "Star Trek" since Kirk wasn't really given a love interest (unless you count Gaila) so I wouldn't be surprised if they continued the Spock/Uhura relationship since it was one of the most interesting things in the new continuity.
Again, my assumption is based on how they handled the sequel to Transformers. There was many loose-ends at the end of the first film that they completely ignored and/or cheated at in the sequel. Don't say that it's the writer's strike affected it. They did a commentary for the film ans expressed no remorse over their work.
Standalone tie in novels postponed, and comics retelling old stories with only minor differences. I'm starting to really like this new, fresh, exciting, reinvigorated franchise.
And I've explained to you why it makes no sense whatsoever to use Transformers as an analogy. You're assuming that the scriptwriters are exclusively responsible for the content of a feature film. That is a gross misunderstanding of how Hollywood works. The director and producers are the ones who make the creative decisions in feature films. The way Transformers was handled was Michael Bay's decision; Kurtzman & Orci were just the people he hired to put dialogue in between the action scenes he wanted, and even then he had Ehren Kruger rewrite their script. It's profoundly different from the situation on Star Trek, where Kurtzman & Orci are part of a five-person writing-producing team that's headed up by J. J. Abrams. (Well, maybe four-person, since Bryan Burk isn't a writer.) Even though K&O were the only credited screenwriters on ST'09, Abrams was still the one who okayed every decision they made, and who would've done the final polish on the script if the strike had allowed him to do so. As for the sequel, it's written by Kurtzman, Orci, and Damon Lindelof, and with no strike this time, it's sure to be polished by Abrams.
So you couldn't be more wrong in assuming that the Trek situation will be like the Transformers situation just because Kurtzman & Orci are involved with both. They're not the only people involved with either, and their involvement with the TF films is much, much more peripheral than their involvement with Trek.
Hahahahahahahaha.
The vast majority of comics fans just want to read the same things again and again. Look at sales numbers; it's why the biggest selling comics are the "important" event comics or their tie-ins at the big publishers, when the experimental, postmodern, or novel concepts usually barely crack 15,000 an issue when they're lucky.
I'm not saying anything at all about the Star Trek comic here, I'm just saying that in no way do most comic fans want cutting edge stories that push the medium forward.
Picked up my copy of Ongoing #1. I liked it. Yay Keenser! Loved the tease about Dr Dehner! Now I'm wondering if McCoy handles things differently to Dr Piper?
I ended up getting the Cover B (drawn, half Kirk/half Spock), assuming photo montage Cover A will be on the trade reprint collection. I already have the Cover B Starfleet recruiting poster (with Andorian cadet) on pre-order for my issue #2.
I ended up getting the Cover B (drawn, half Kirk/half Spock), assuming photo montage Cover A will be on the trade reprint collection. I already have the Cover B Starfleet recruiting poster (with Andorian cadet) on pre-order for my issue #2.
Wait-- I thought that you were a completist? That you buy everything as long as there is new or unique content? Doesn't that mean that means that you have to buy all of the covers? You're slipping.
Text content.
Well, almost every alternate IDW cover has ended up reprinted in the back of the trade omnibuses. I took a chance on the first batch of multiple variant covers and it's mostly paid off.Doesn't that mean that means that you have to buy all of the covers? You're slipping.
My comic shop actually can't order enough issues for their shelves to guarantee getting in more than one each of some variant covers, so I decided, quite a while ago, that I would favour art covers over photo covers. I did get all the "New Frontier" covers, and all the "Alien Spotlight: Andorian" covers. And the Larry Niven puppeteer cameo on "Frontier Doctor".
Cover A (that "photomontage one") is a painting by Tim Bradstreet. Not a photocover. Just that his paintings approach photo-realistic (see the Garth Ennis PunisherMax series for a good series of examples of that).
Amazing. I didn't examine it too closely, but it is very photorealistic.
