Star Trek Reboot 1980s Style
Jun. 6th, 2013 10:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
morgandawnI am nearing the end of the Interstat letterzine (13 years of being published every month, an impressive achievement). The year is 1989 and a fan writes to the letterzine to complain:
"I recently received a flyer for a local con, and in with the flyer was a letter urging me to join a letter-writing campaign to Paramount Studios. Apparently, word has leaked out that Paramount plans to make STVI a comedy and set it prior to the original voyages of the Enterprise during "academy days." Furthermore, as rumor goes, they plan to use different actors to play Kirk & company. Now, this letter I received was urging me to protest this possible action. My question is, why should I? ST has far outlasted many, many TV shows and has indeed become a universe of its own....The point is that, ST is so terrific because of its writing. And if a character, since Kirk & co. are all characters, is written well enough, any body can play it. We shouldn't have to rely on Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, etc. to portray those roles because, all else aside, they are not going to be around nearly as long as ST will be. The true test of the integrity of Kirk & co. as fictional characters will be when other actors play them. ...We do not need to fear new actors in old roles. What we need to be very wary of is producers trying to pick up on a little trick that worked in one place and make a whole movie out of it..."
The script that was being floated was the brain child of Star Trek producer Harve Bennett and the final draft was titled "STAR TREK: THE FIRST ADVENTURE." According to Harve, "it dealt with Kirk's return to the Academy and his memories of life, love, and how it all began. It was a beautiful story."
Less than a year later, Harve left the Star Trek franchise and sent a thank you letter to Interstat and the Star Trek fan community. Near the end of the letter he too complains: "My only disappointment after ten years of proving my abilities to you all is that there were some of you who engaged in a letter campaign to destroy a work of art on hearsay evidence. I think I deserved more trust than that."
Twenty years later, Star Trek Reboot (2009) was released.
"I recently received a flyer for a local con, and in with the flyer was a letter urging me to join a letter-writing campaign to Paramount Studios. Apparently, word has leaked out that Paramount plans to make STVI a comedy and set it prior to the original voyages of the Enterprise during "academy days." Furthermore, as rumor goes, they plan to use different actors to play Kirk & company. Now, this letter I received was urging me to protest this possible action. My question is, why should I? ST has far outlasted many, many TV shows and has indeed become a universe of its own....The point is that, ST is so terrific because of its writing. And if a character, since Kirk & co. are all characters, is written well enough, any body can play it. We shouldn't have to rely on Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, etc. to portray those roles because, all else aside, they are not going to be around nearly as long as ST will be. The true test of the integrity of Kirk & co. as fictional characters will be when other actors play them. ...We do not need to fear new actors in old roles. What we need to be very wary of is producers trying to pick up on a little trick that worked in one place and make a whole movie out of it..."
The script that was being floated was the brain child of Star Trek producer Harve Bennett and the final draft was titled "STAR TREK: THE FIRST ADVENTURE." According to Harve, "it dealt with Kirk's return to the Academy and his memories of life, love, and how it all began. It was a beautiful story."
Less than a year later, Harve left the Star Trek franchise and sent a thank you letter to Interstat and the Star Trek fan community. Near the end of the letter he too complains: "My only disappointment after ten years of proving my abilities to you all is that there were some of you who engaged in a letter campaign to destroy a work of art on hearsay evidence. I think I deserved more trust than that."
Twenty years later, Star Trek Reboot (2009) was released.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 12:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 12:37 pm (UTC)As always, thanks for the work you're doing to capture our history. It reminds me of how truly history repeats.
Incidentally, a recent episode of "The Big Bang Theory" used the Zachary Quinto meme, and how Sheldon had been *so sure* it would be horrible without Nimoy. Then he loved Zachary Quinto at least as much. History also self-references. *g*
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 01:51 pm (UTC)AHEM.
Also, I would have liked to see Mr. Bennett's movie. I wonder if a script might someday come to light ...
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 05:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 07:09 pm (UTC)I don't agree with this at all. To say that is to say that Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley brought nothing to the roles. If any person could play any role, the casting of our favourite characters would not be such a fraught subject.
We shouldn't have to rely on Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, etc. to portray those roles because, all else aside, they are not going to be around nearly as long as ST will be.
That's a false dichotomy. TNG and the subsequent 90s Treks proved that Star Trek as a franchise can survive without anybody playing Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. at all. Whether or not we need to fear new actors in old roles, we don't need new actors in old roles for the franchise to live on. Personally, I think if Hollywood had any bravery at all they would build on the past instead of perpetually trying to recreate it.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-07 08:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-08 02:21 pm (UTC)