cornholio1980
24.03.2004, 22:19
Hi!
Hab gerade wieder mal bei AICN reingeschaut, und was muss ich dort lesen? Da berichtet Moriarty doch tatsächlich von verrückt klingenden Plänen, die Paramount angeblich bez. des ST-Franchises hegt. Aber lest selbst:
Paramount is a studio that seems to be scrambling to figure out just what its identity is. For the last five years, it seems like they’ve been the home of stalled, desperately un-hip franchises, Ashley-Judd-in-peril movies, and weak Billy Friedkin pity gigs. They seem to be working to change that, though, with films like SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW and A PRINCESS OF MARS in the pipeline. I want to believe that Paramount can turn it around.
But when I hear about their plans for STAR TREK, I have to wonder. Are they unable to tell a good idea from a bad one where this particular franchise is concerned? I’m not the world’s biggest fan of TREK in any flavor, but I sympathize with TREK fans. You guys have it rough. And it’s about to get rougher.
First, the good news. No Berman. No Braga. Instead, Jordan Kerner (SNOW DOGS, INSPECTOR GADGET, THE MIGHTY DUCKS and D2 and D3) is being brought in to produce. Right now, he’s in the early stages of developing a prequel trilogy. First question, obviously, is “a prequel to what?” After all, the various TV shows have played all sorts of tricks with the timeline. When I hear “prequel trilogy,” it sounds to me like we’re going to see young Kirk and young Spock and young McCoy. It sounds to me like we’re talking about Starfleet Academy.
Instead, we’re looking at films that sound like they’re all about big intergalactic events, but which don’t appear to be about any characters, which is what Gene Roddenberry’s original vision was ALWAYS about. Characters. Don’t just try to tell some big budget spectacle story. I hear the first film’s about a civil war, the second film’s devoted largely to the galactic switch-over from a fission standard to fusion, and then there’s a third film where we’ll finally see an Ensign Kirk show up for all of about the last 20 minutes. Just Kirk. Nobody else. And no ENTERPRISE.
And that notion they’re discussing in hushed and excited tones about putting William Shatner’s head on a younger actor’s body? Easily the goofiest bad idea I’ve heard since Lex Luthor, flying Kryptonian. It almost makes me want to see them do it, just for the laugh value.
You’re still really early in this process, Paramount, so please... allow me to offer a little bit of constructive criticism. You need to listen to your fans. And I’m not saying listen to me. Read the message boards that are out there. Cast as wide a net as you can across fandom and let the fans remind you just what it is that made TREK so important to them in the first place. Reach out and take the time to get it right. Don’t just chase STAR WARS and LORD OF THE RINGS, and don’t throw money at it just to make STAR TREK into something it never was.
Quelle (http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/display.cgi?id=17250)
Es klingt zwar irgendwie sehr nach einem verfrühten Aprilscherz, und es ist natürlich jederzeit möglich, dass Paramount, selbst wenn eine derartige Trilogie einmal angedacht war, diese Pläne jederzeit verwirft... andererseits traue ich Paramount was Star Trek betrifft mittlerweile irgendwie alles zu. Mal sehen...
HAVE A NICE DAY
cornholio1980
Hab gerade wieder mal bei AICN reingeschaut, und was muss ich dort lesen? Da berichtet Moriarty doch tatsächlich von verrückt klingenden Plänen, die Paramount angeblich bez. des ST-Franchises hegt. Aber lest selbst:
Paramount is a studio that seems to be scrambling to figure out just what its identity is. For the last five years, it seems like they’ve been the home of stalled, desperately un-hip franchises, Ashley-Judd-in-peril movies, and weak Billy Friedkin pity gigs. They seem to be working to change that, though, with films like SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW and A PRINCESS OF MARS in the pipeline. I want to believe that Paramount can turn it around.
But when I hear about their plans for STAR TREK, I have to wonder. Are they unable to tell a good idea from a bad one where this particular franchise is concerned? I’m not the world’s biggest fan of TREK in any flavor, but I sympathize with TREK fans. You guys have it rough. And it’s about to get rougher.
First, the good news. No Berman. No Braga. Instead, Jordan Kerner (SNOW DOGS, INSPECTOR GADGET, THE MIGHTY DUCKS and D2 and D3) is being brought in to produce. Right now, he’s in the early stages of developing a prequel trilogy. First question, obviously, is “a prequel to what?” After all, the various TV shows have played all sorts of tricks with the timeline. When I hear “prequel trilogy,” it sounds to me like we’re going to see young Kirk and young Spock and young McCoy. It sounds to me like we’re talking about Starfleet Academy.
Instead, we’re looking at films that sound like they’re all about big intergalactic events, but which don’t appear to be about any characters, which is what Gene Roddenberry’s original vision was ALWAYS about. Characters. Don’t just try to tell some big budget spectacle story. I hear the first film’s about a civil war, the second film’s devoted largely to the galactic switch-over from a fission standard to fusion, and then there’s a third film where we’ll finally see an Ensign Kirk show up for all of about the last 20 minutes. Just Kirk. Nobody else. And no ENTERPRISE.
And that notion they’re discussing in hushed and excited tones about putting William Shatner’s head on a younger actor’s body? Easily the goofiest bad idea I’ve heard since Lex Luthor, flying Kryptonian. It almost makes me want to see them do it, just for the laugh value.
You’re still really early in this process, Paramount, so please... allow me to offer a little bit of constructive criticism. You need to listen to your fans. And I’m not saying listen to me. Read the message boards that are out there. Cast as wide a net as you can across fandom and let the fans remind you just what it is that made TREK so important to them in the first place. Reach out and take the time to get it right. Don’t just chase STAR WARS and LORD OF THE RINGS, and don’t throw money at it just to make STAR TREK into something it never was.
Quelle (http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/display.cgi?id=17250)
Es klingt zwar irgendwie sehr nach einem verfrühten Aprilscherz, und es ist natürlich jederzeit möglich, dass Paramount, selbst wenn eine derartige Trilogie einmal angedacht war, diese Pläne jederzeit verwirft... andererseits traue ich Paramount was Star Trek betrifft mittlerweile irgendwie alles zu. Mal sehen...
HAVE A NICE DAY
cornholio1980