March 6th, 2007
|09:56 am - J.J. Abrams and the new Trek Movie: an open letter|
Larry Carroll, at MTV News, has just posted an open letter to Star Trek (XI) director J.J. Abrams.
I've seen some discussion of this pop up on my flist lately, and thought some of you might be interested to read the advice this Star Trek fan and critic wants to give Abrams. I agree with him wholeheartedly (except that I think Gary Sinese--rumored to be in talks--might actually make a good Dr. McCoy).
I'm sure this won't do much good, even if Abrams somehow winds up reading it...but we can dream. :-)
Current Mood: amused
|Date:||March 6th, 2007 06:36 pm (UTC)|| |
I like his points, although it seems to me Enterprise was essentially already a semi-failed reboot of the Trek mythos.
I suppose you could say that, though I tend to think of Enterprise more as "one major continuity screw-up from beginning to end." And this despite my fondness for Captain Archer and the actor who plays him.
I'm totally in love with this idea.
I know! Unlike some of the other possible/rumored casting, that one resonates. I can just see Sinise getting affronted and saying some variation of "I'm a doctor, not a ___!" He's got the right sort of face and the right sort of voice.
|Date:||March 7th, 2007 12:10 am (UTC)|| |
He would be great, but there is the fact that Sinise at 52 is 6 years older than DeForest Kelley was in the first season of TOS. :-D Which would only be a problem if it's the Starfleet Academy movie. Now, if it were to cover an event in the 2 unshown years of Kirk's first five-year mission...:-)
Yeah, but Sinise doesn't *look* that much older, for one thing, and for another--yeah. I admit that I'm kind of crossing my fingers for a non-Academy setting, as I don't see how that could work without severely violating existing Trek canon. *sigh*
Do you really think they care about canon?
No, but a fan can dream, can't she? :-)
Gary Sinise = perfect McCoy. He could deliver the lines with the kind of acerbic bite that the character needs to.
I also don't know why the author doesn't want Klingons. They haven't been seen for ages in the movies. The Borg, on the other hand--they're a cliche that needs to go away for a long, long time.
And I don't want to see Uhara pull a "Kill Bill." Not only would it be needlessly repetitive of what we've seen in other movies, that doesn't really fit with Roddenberry's mission statement at all.
Other than that, I think the author has excellent points throughout. We definitely don't need more prequels. A Casino Royale approach (which seems more influenced by "24" than by cop films of the 70's) seems like a good route to go. And we don't need another movie that was only created to sell its ancillary video game. We definitely need another sci-fi movie with thought-provoking ideas (and it can still be exciting).
I don't want a Starfleet Academy movie. For that matter, I really don't want a reinvention of Star Trek: TOS at all. I think the originals are too heavily ingrained in people's minds (my love for Sinise notwithstanding). I wish they would pick a time period that hasn't been dealt with yet, such as the 80 years in between TOS and TNG. Or take the story 100 years ahead again, to the 25th century.
If we simply must go in prequel format, why not back to the days of World War III (as mentioned in First Contact)? I don't think we've ever seen that crucial part of Trek history fleshed out.
I had more to say, but my brain just shut off on me. Time for bed. :)
P.S. I recently learned that Gary Sinise is from my childhood hometown--Blue Island, IL. What do we do to people there that makes them all bitter and acerbic? ;)