Jump to content

Star Trek recipe for soaps?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I’ve just bumped onto this:

A New Direction for 'Star Trek'

by Matt McDaniel

Director J.J. Abrams put himself in a perilous position when he agreed to direct a new movie version of "Star Trek." On one side, he had the fans. They had embraced a short-lived science fiction television show from the 1960s and, through sheer affection and determination, turned it into a worldwide institution. But in addition to being fiercely loyal, Trekkies can be finicky (for example, if you call them that, rather than "Trekkers"). The television shows, movies, books, graphic novels and video games have weaved together a dense history, or canon, and the hardcore fans reject any attempt to violate the already established continuity.

On the other side of the equation, Abrams had a public that had grown increasingly disinterested in the "Trek" universe. The last movie, 2002's "Star Trek: Nemesis," was the least successful of the 10-film series, bringing in only $43 million in the U.S. And with the cancellation of "Star Trek: Enterprise" in 2005, TV screens were without an ongoing series for the first time in nearly 20 years.

For Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (who also wrote "Transformers"), the goal was to find that elusive middle ground that would bring a mass audience to "Star Trek" without offending the faithful. And it was a big bet, too, with a budget estimated at $150 million -- about one-and-a-half times the gross of the most successful of the previous films. So to create a blockbuster from the franchise that had basically defined the term "cult classic," the creators of this new movie knew they had to shake up the formula of what went into a "Trek" movie. Here are five things they did differently than previous "Star Trek" adventures.

1. Start at the Beginning

The first episode of "Star Trek" that aired on TV already had the chain of command aboard the USS Enterprise pretty well established. Kirk was captain, Spock was his number two, and their friendship was already firm. The writers decided that the untold story of how the crew came together could not only show fans something they haven't seen before, but give audiences who were unfamiliar with "Trek" a fresh starting point.

2. Skew younger

William Shatner was 35 years old when he first sat in the captain's chair on the original series. But that made him 48 when he returned to the role in the first movie, and 63 during his final appearance in "Star Trek: Generations." Chris Pine, the new Captain Kirk, is only 28. Along with the other younger actors (except for John Cho, who is actually older than George Takei was when he first played Sulu), this cast brings a freshness and vitality that the movies never had.

Star Trek

3. Pick up the pace

Following the pattern of the original show, the "Trek" movies often had long stretches of dialogue and discussion between action scenes. In fact, the first movie was derisively called "Star Trek: The Slow-Motion Picture" by some critics. Abrams says that as a kid he was more a fan of "Star Wars," and he credits the faster and more intense tempo of that series as the reason. So for his version, he has taken the space battles, fist fights, and even slapstick moments that have been part of "Trek" from the beginning, but speeds them up and packs them together to make his film a more thrilling ride.

Star Trek

4. Update the look

For the new film, the exterior of the Enterprise looks very familiar, albeit rendered in the most advanced digital special effects available. But inside, everything has been updated. From the bridge to the engine room, the ship is bright, sleek, and modern. The transporter and the viewscreen have been enhanced (though many of the classic sound effects can still be heard). Moreover, the visual texture of the movie is different. The camera sweeps and shakes to create a greater sense of immediacy, putting you right in the action.

5. Break away from the past

With all these changes, it seemed like Abrams and company were setting themselves up to be hated by the original fans. But with a bit of storytelling sleight-of-hand, they've been able to chart their own course without violating the series' long and well-documented history. How? The same way Kirk and Spock saved the Earth in "Star Trek IV" -- time travel. When the Romulan villain Nero, played by Eric Bana, is accidentally thrust backwards in time, he resets the past. By shifting the course of time, events play out in new and unexpected ways. Rather than the standard prequel, where the audience knows how the story turns out, this movie creates its own history without violating the established one the fans have loved.

What's important to note, though, is one element from Gene Roddenberry's original creation that still carries through into J.J. Abrams' new vision. And that is a sense of optimism for the future. So many science fiction epics take place in dystopian wastelands where technology only leads to destruction. "Star Trek" envisions a better outcome for humanity, where the Earth has united to explore the final frontier. And that's a dream that is as important to embrace and celebrate now as it's ever been.

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/need-to-know-star-trek-new-direction.html

And I pretty much think that in one way or the other all of these can be done, in a kind of totally fictional, never-going-to-happen universe, which annoys the hell out of some fans around here with its “what if” scenarios. Probably many would object to “Skew younger” part and some might not see how “Start at the Beginning” might apply (perhaps the new beginning might be a gradual introducting of a new family and a shift in stories from some of the current, worn out veterans to new ones... something Lemay e.g. did in the 70s — killing Steve Frame off, killing the matriarch etc. and introducing Iris, reinventing Rachel and inventing Steve Frame’s never before seen family from rural US).

Furthermore, I’m sure there are tons of articles on other successful re-inventions (Batman, James Bond, Superman...).

Just thought some might be interested. Keep it civilised if possible at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I tend to prefer the Russell Davies method of revival. He loved Doctor Who and took much of the show's best while getting rid of some of the worst. He revived a show that had not been anything mainstream in about 25 years, and made it into one of the hottest shows on British TV, home to several popular spinoffs.

Abrams doesn't care about Trek, and much of the praise for the film seems to be some weird undertone that we should applaud his genius because he deigns to lower himself to work on a Trek film. It's based on him, not on the actual Trek name (unless open contempt towards the name counts), and hyping something based solely on the producer or director's name can have very short-term benefits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not sure why JJ's getting all this hype. He's doing a prequel that (hopefully) respects what's established. Any fan of any show (not just a Trekker or a soap fan) hates when the history of that show is ignored.

Getting to play with bigger better special effects? Hardly revolutionary. Even doing a prequal has been done before. It's not reinventing the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And then came Steven Moffat who obliterated him into oblivion and showed how Russell T. Davies had only one hit. If that. Russell’s pretty much done.

I’ve never heard of the undertone. And I’m actually not at all interested in Star Trek and its incarnations, I find it possibly the worst show on Earth ever, just awful. The only thing I’m interested in is how Abrams is playing with various stuff. What matters is that he makes things clever and commercially successful. Which is what soaps need (not to be dumb as hell and producing no revenue).

And BTW this is not a thread about J. J. Abrams, his life and works.

I knew Alvin doesn’t like him, that’s not surprising at all. :P

Once again: not a J. J. Abrams thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can't say he obliterated Russell, because the one hit Russell had was bringing back a show that had been written off long ago, and making it a powerhouse again. I still give him credit for reviving a dormant and often mocked show, which is in line with what your thread is about.

That's part of why I think pushing a revival based solely on the name of the director or producer is a bad idea. People are interested in him, not in what he creates, so when he goes, or when he starts to make mistakes, then the show or the film will fall apart.

I like Star Trek, or at least what Star Trek used to be before Braga and the other guy, so a lot of the writeups I've seen for the film over the past year, which usually amount to, "Isn't this old fossil so lucky that hip JJ Abrams/hip Sylar from Heroes are around to prop them up", don't fill me with confidence.

Star Trek, like soaps, have a long history, some good, some bad. If Star Trek, or soaps, are treated like refuse to be saved by the latest golden girl or golden boy, then the product itself will never find an audience. It's just the movie version of Guza, or Sheffer, or a slew of other past and present headwriters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Simply put, he just doesn’t write your type of shows. I mean, sure, his shows have relationships and all about them, but it’s in a totally different style from those Herskovitz and Zwick shows you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Russell is just awful and Doctor Who, for me anyways, kind of sucked every since he brought it back. Until Moffat came. All those awful sets, those crappy effects, that terrible photography, then those scripts and stories... Russell is, and not J. J. Abrams, precisely the example of people hyping someon.

But yes, I am exactly interested in how he creates. I.e. how he takes something and re-creates it. That's what I'm saying.

And the wigs is a terrible reduction of a show. Plus, later on he wasn't the show runner. Which is also true for Lost: he wrote the bible, co-wrote the pilot and then left. So pretty much ever since season 1 Damon Lindelof later joined by Carlton Cuse ran that show And not J. J. Abrams, which now doesn't even know what's going on in there. Abrams was sometimes consulted. Later invented the Hatch. But he didn't craft the arcs.

And yes, the show didn't fall apart. :D

Awful show in every possible way. And a cheap rip-off, too.

Wow, dear Lord... :huh: No one's talking about refuse, golden girls or boys... You people all fail to talk about those 5 points. What's a movie version of Guza? :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Some country club revelation thoughts from a casual watcher no one asked for. The Great: Daphnee Duplaix gave the best performance we've seen yet. Nicole's dialogue was also well thought out and felt character specific. TJ Maxx Ted was also pretty good. Trisha Mann-Grant steals every scene she's in. Often without even trying. Carrying multiple episodes worth of exposition heavy soap dialogue with starts and stops and recapping and drama and humor is no small feat and she nailed. Vernon telling Lesliana to STFU.  The Bad: So much of the dialogue for the rest of the cast was overly written. Martin said "You are a vile human being with a hole in your heart!". Marty, what are we doing? It's SO dramatic and sounds so silly coming from this grown man. Do Bill and Hayley do anything but talk about the Duprees? And the nerve of her to get so excited to find out Ted is a cheater when she and her husband are too. There should be a hint of shame mixed in with your glee, ma'am. The Questionable: Coffee and a rendition of Amazing Grace after finding out Nicole was betrayed by her husband. The Duprees are an odd bunch. The stinger of one segment had Anita prepared to lambast Lesliana, when we came back someone else was talking. When Anita eventually said something to Wig, it was a lukewarm at best. And then of course she thought singing a song about something that should absolutely not be extended to her son-in-law. The entire family allowing this deranged woman to speech at them in their own was...nuts. I know she said something about what would the neighbors say but my GOD. Is she just going to be allowed to trespass whenever she feels like it now? The focus on Leslie and her wig usage as an oddity is...odd. I think Chelsea said something like "and she wears wigs!" (while wearing a buss down middle part). Okay? It's just not that odd for a black woman to change up her hair. It's the different names that's the problem. I know it's meant to be humorous, in a throwback soap kind of way, but it fell flat for me.  I'm sorry I find the whole family to be WEIRD. It's like they want us to see them as ruthless yet benevolent, open yet furtive, snobbish yet tooth achingly sweet all at the same time. I cannot get a lock on the family dynamics. Everyone is just there.  I'm gonna cry if this show doesn't start giving us ages (or close to it!) for these characters. Because if Eva is 21-22 then Martin was being given crayons, a soda pop and blinders when he was 15-17 years old. Martin had to have been under 8 for me to buy this story, which would make Eva and Kat late 20s (Martin is at least 35 since he wants to run for president), which I don't think they're meant to be. It's honestly minor but it bothers me. I've mentioned this to @Vee but I think the optics on opening the show with both sisters discovering their husbands of over 30 years are cheaters should've been considered. I doubt there was any intention behind it, no one's rubbing their hands together as they scheme to say the married black men can't stay loyal but how does it look? Maybe it's just me. Honestly it's probably just me!
    • Thank you very much!!!! I really appreciate it!!! I also have read the GH coffee table book from the 90s!!!
    • For a homeless woman, June sure has nice teeth. I agree Ted didn't bring the power in the fallout scenes but to can him and leave Tomas, Martin and Derek onscreen? i'm not looking forward to Martin's secret being revealed and have him flail in the spotlight scenes. Yes, he's got a little better, but... When someone like Timon delivers with every line reading, you wonder how some other casting decisions were made. And I need sunglasses every time characters are at Uptown-is that green paint left over from GL's Cedars Hospital makeover? And for the cliffhanger, instead of the Door dash nonsense, simply have Leslie encounter Vanessa on her way out and push past her to enter. As there is no front door have Leslie barge into the living room, with Vanessa following.  Then Nicole can tell Vanessa- it's OK she can leave them alone.
    • My question was basically is Dani the only character to have a bedroom? And then the response was Jacob and Naomi ONLY have a bedroom as their set .
    • Our next installment of Love of Life 1976 Before leaving San Francisco, Cal phones her Aunt Van to set up a family gathering. Van arranges it, and upon their return, Cal and Rick announce that they are engaged. In the shocked silence that follows the announcement, Meg steps in to offer her congratulations, and also to pay for the wedding. But the family members still don’t respond happily. They fear that Rick isn’t good enough for Cal, and are surprised by Meg’s offer. Rick and Jamie visit Meg and ask whether, in light of her acceptance of his marrying her daughter, she |will drop the lawsuit. She replies that she will if he returns as her partner in Beaver Ridge. Rick reminds her that this has been settled; he can’t do that. So Meg, pretending largesse, says she’ll drop the suit, but in fact she asks her attorney to put the suit in abeyance, so it can be reopened at any time. Rick gives Cal a lovely diamond-and-sapphire engagement ring, and Betsy, who has promised to be Cal’s honor attendant, gives ‘her the dress she wore when she married Ben, saying that a bride who really is a bride should have it. Cal speaks privately to each member of the family, hoping to convince them that she and Rick are right for each other and will be happy. Jamie, after accepting Rick’s request that he be best man, checks to see if Meg has dropped the action, as promised. Finding out that it’s only in abeyance, Jamie asks if she is planning to sue her son-in-law in the future. Meg insists that she has acted on her attorney’s advice. Meg convinces Cal to give her two weeks to plans a lovely wedding, but after several days Cal discovers that Meg has done nothing in preparation. She therefore informs her mother that she and Rick will be married this weekend at the chapel. Betsy goes into labor and has her daughter by the natural-childbirth method. Cal tries to reach Ben, to tell him he’s a father, but has to be content with leaving a message. An ecstatic Ben sends flowers and a card to his wife and daughter Suzanne. Meg, in desperation at being unable to stop the wedding, has been drinking heavily. When she tells Carrie she can’t sleep and that’s why she can’t get herself together, Carrie sympathetically gives her some tranquilizers which Tom had given her. At the wedding rehearsal Meg tries once again to “reason” with Rick, but he makes it clear that he and Cal are getting married as planned. Meg then faints, upsetting Cal, who declares that her mother’s health is more important than the wedding. This gives Meg an idea. On the afternoon of the wedding, as the bride’s party waits at the chapel for Meg, she takes some of the pills, then calls Rick and tells him what she has done. When he doesn’t believe her, Meg becomes even more upset and takes more pills. When Rick informs | the wedding party of Meg’s call, they don’t believe she’d do anything that foolish, but Cal and Rick realize they can’t take the chance and go to her home. Finding her unconscious, they rush her to the hospital.Meg is treated for overdose complicated by alcohol and eventually regains consciousness.Van and Bruce offer to take Meg to their, home to recuperate, but Cal, worried because Joe raises the concern that Meg could try it again, allows her mother ‘to convince her to take her home with her. Meg is pleased with herself for having managed to come between Cal and Rick, and begs Cal not to let Rick come to the apartment, as she can’t bear to have him see her like this. Meg then works on Cal’s conscience by pitifully admitting that she loves Rick and can’t live without him. Van tries,- without success, to make Meg see that Cal and Rick are in love and can make each other happy, but Meg won’t give up and suddenly begins to have “headaches.” Even Betsy overcomes her bitterness at Meg and brings baby Suzanne to see her,trying to get Meg interested in living again. But Meg insists she can’t do anything because of her delicate | condition and has no interest in Beaver Ridge at all. .Rick has to go to New York on business and asks Cal to go with him. She replies that she can’t; she’s afraid to leave Meg. Cal, with Hank, sees Rick off at the airport, and just before he boards, he gives her a letter to read later. She reads it at home that evening; -it’s a plea from Rick to join him in New York and get married immediately. He tells her that their love and their being together are the only things that matter.Cal puts the letter in her handbag and goes to shower.Meg has seen the letter and reads it. Upset that Cal might do what Rick asks, she goes to Joe at the clinic, claiming she’s sleeping badly, and asks for sleeping pills. Joe, of course, refuses to give them to her, and, as she has hoped, he calls Cal to warn her. Cal now redoubles her efforts to keep an eye on her - mother. Meg, complaining of another headache, asks for water to take aspirin and takes four tablets from abottle, which she holds so Cal can see the label has been removed. When Cal snatches it and demandsto know what she’s taking and where she got them,Meg “confesses” that she went to a new doctor for sleeping pills because Joe wouldn’t give her any. Seeing she’s got Cal where she wants her, Meg presses Cal to promise she’ll be there as long as she needs her. Rick’s New York trip comes to nothing when he discovers the prospective backers want almost complete control of the project. Jamie suggests that Rick talk to Meg again about dropping the suit, as every cent Rick has is being tied up by this litigation. Rick insists that Meg won’t do any favors for him, and he isconvinced that her suicide attempt and subsequent emotional instability are just a scheme to tie Cal to her. But he realizes Cal won’t be able to see it this way. Rick sees only one more possibility to his financial problem: Ray Slater promised to help him if hearranged a meeting between Ray and Jamie, which Rick did. As a result of that meeting, Ray informed Ian Russell that he might be able to get Beaver Ridge for him but will require a piece of the action if it works out. Rick arrives home to find a distraught Cal, who informs him that she was warned by Joe to watch out for Meg and, sure enough, she discovered her trying to pass sleeping pills off as aspirin. But Rick insists on knowing the name of the doctor Meg got the pills from, and when he attempts to call him, Meg backs down and admits there was no doctor and no sleeping pills—the bottle contained her allergy medication. Cal is horrified that she allowed herself to be taken in again by Meg in spite of knowing firsthand what her mother is like and warnings from the entire family. Rick insists that she get away from Meg now and go visit Betsy until he gets things settled. As soon as Cal has gone, Rick insists that Meg come out of the bedroom where she has barricaded herself, and tells her he knows her too well to believe she would ever take her own life. He tells her he admires her and would like them to come out of this as friends. Meg makes it clear that friendship isn’t what she wants from him. But when Rick picks up Cal, who now wants to get married right away, and | returns to her apartment, they find a note from her “loving mother” saying she and Rick are now friends and they should call her after they are married.  
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • As always, really interesting to get your impressions! I was only watching sporadically during this period (whereas I was transfixed during the Marian storyline), but if I remember correctly 1996 was a pretty rough transitional year. It came at a period where P&G was playing musical chairs with its executive producers--ATWT was hit especially hard by this. The current executive producer, Michael Laibson, is out in November 1996, replaced by Paul Rauch, who stays for nearly 6 years. While Rauch has a few really bad ideas that cause long-term damage to the show, those don't really kick in until 1999, and his first couple of years are very strong. So once you get to 1997, you should see the show rebound significantly. 
    • Haha love a little drunk posting

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy