Exclusive Interview: Ron Moore Talks Movies (Past and Future) | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive Interview: Ron Moore Talks Movies (Past and Future) June 24, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Feature Films (TMP-NEM),Interview,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

In the third and final part of our retrospective interview with Ron Moore, the veteran writer talks about the two Trek feature films he co-wrote with Brannon Braga. We also discuss JJ Abrams new Star Trek feature, including Moore’s visit to the set. Lastly Moore talks about his new non-Trek movie projects.
[AUDIO + Transcript below]

 

LISTEN: Ron Moore TrekMovie.com Interview – Part 3 Moore on Star Trek Feature films

 

TRANSCRIPT

 

TrekMovie.com: Lets switch to the features…I am not sure if you said it or if Rick [Berman] said it, but upon reflection some people thought a better first TNG movie would have been "Yesterday’s Enterprise" instead of Generations. Was that you?

Ron Moore: I think it was Rick who said that.

TrekMovie.com: What do you think of that notion?

Ron Moore: I think that is probably a valid point. If you listen to the commentary track on the Generations DVD, Brannon [Braga] and I talk pretty openly about  our dissatisfaction with Generations and the reasons why it went south and the reasons we are not happy with it.  I kind of feel it was a missed opportunity and a movie that just didn’t come together. "Yesterday’s Enterprise" would have been a great movie. You could certainly have done a fairly significant major motion picture out of it. It would have had a startling dark–I surprised Rick [Berman] cottoned to it, because the alternate Enterprise was so dark and so war-like and a completely different Federation and starship. It would have been a much edgier and rougher feeling on the big screen. You would have had to expand that idea of what it meant to be on the Enterprise at war for most, if not all of the movie would have been that idea. That would have been great. So sure, I could have seen "Yesterday’s Enterprise" as being the first feature.  


Moore’s "Yesterday’s Enterprise" would have made for a darker first TNG film

TrekMovie.com: Leonard Nimoy said he really didn’t like the script from Generations and he felt that  he didn’t want to direct it, he didn’t like the Spock role, so he denied that, and he felt the Kirk death was "gratuitous." So, do you think that… 

Ron Moore: Well, I knew that. Leonard turned down the script, turned down the director’s chair on the film and I knew he didn’t like the script. It is hard to say at this point he was wrong. I think that Kirk’s death in our minds was integral to the film because it was a movie about death. It was a movie about mortality. It was a movie about Picard reaching a certain age and realizing there are more days behind him than were in front of him. His brother had died, the Enterprise herself died, and this mythic hero would ultimately have a mortal ending as well. Despite realizing we are mortal, you still move on and you still live your life and you still try and the make the most of it. That is what the movie was trying to be about. I think–Brannon and I were not ready to write that movie at that point in our careers. Our reach exceeded our grasp. We didn’t have the maturity and the seasoning as writers, and probably as human beings, to tackle something that grand and marry it to an action-adventure Star Trek film. So Leonard’s instincts were right. He clearly put his finger — I didn’t meet with him, but I remember after he met with Rick, Rick conveyed to us his reservations and why he didn’t like it. He put his finger on the right problems. The Nexus was a problem. The Nexus was a difficult concept that we were never able to crack and Kirk’s death didn’t pay off the themes in the way we wanted it to pay off. At the time we were doing our best and we thought it would work. We believed in the project and were trying to make it happen, but we were also writing the TV series at the same time. In retrospect it is easy to look back and say ‘here are all the problems and here is where you went south’ but at the moment we were all dedicated to trying to do the best movie that we could and we thought we had a good movie on our hands.   

TrekMovie.com: Kirk dying in Generations is the public and, from what I understand much of the reason why William Shatner is not in the new movie. How do you resurrect someone and have it only be a cameo? There is a big call to resurrect Kirk and bring him back to life, to reverse what you did. What do you think of that thought?

Ron Moore: I think they are doing…as far as I am concerned they are doing Kirk, they are doing Spock. I don’t know. I like Bill. I have nothing against Bill, but I don’t know that there is a need to get beyond Generations in terms of Bill and bring him back in some thing. I don’t know. I don’t quite get it on some level why there is such a hew and cry to do that or not do that. It seems besides the point. They are going back to the beginning and starting over. They are bringing Leonard in and I sort of understand the desire to establish a tie between old Trek and new, but to me it just feels like a great opportunity to start over. I think the new movie will be more about the new Kirk and new Spock and the new McCoy than it is about ties to old.


Moore:  Kirk’s Generations death didn’t work but leave it be

TrekMovie.com: Switching to First Contact, most people would say that both financially and review-wise that was the last big successful Star Trek movie. It was a hit and the fans liked it. That makes you an expert in making a good Star Trek movie…

Ron Moore: because I have a fifty-fifty track record [laughs]

TrekMovie.com: As an expert witness, what do you think the key elements are to a great Star Trek movie? What would you have told JJ [Abrams] two years ago when they just started. What are the key elements if anything?

Ron Moore: That’s hard because First Contact was done in a very specific time and place and the context of Trek where it was at that point. And at that point in time the gold standard was Wrath of Khan and everyone wanted to do Wrath of Khan by some other name. Even in Generations we were talking about Wrath of Khan. Wrath of Khan says ‘here is how you do a Star Trek movie.’ It’s action-adventure. You’ve got a big villain. You’ve got themes of aging and great little character moments, small moments of humor interspersed throughout. It embraces all the characters. You laugh with them, you cry with them. It ends on a bittersweet but hopeful note. It is just a great movie and it really stands up. First Contact hits a lot of those chords too, but it was done on a restricted budget. Paramount just didn’t want to spend much money on Trek movies. So the action quotient was kind of tame. If you really look at the action sequences they are not that exciting really. We were sitting production meetings counting phaser shots and trading dollars, it was an absurd sort of way of doing a movie like that. You were dealing with a lot of themes of time travel and what it meant to be human and reaching for the stars and so on, and it was a great little piece.


Moore: First Contact more about the character moments than action

Ron Moore: (continuing) If JJ and all would have asked me, I don’t know that I would have given them a lot of advice about Trek movies. I think I would have been more concerned with trying to capture the spirit of the Original Series. I am more interested as a fan of that. Going back and capturing that feeling of being on the frontier and being on the edge of something that was something that was part and parcel to the Original Series. I have been showing The Original Series to my kids now because they are getting old enough to watch it, and I am always struck by how out there by themselves Kirk, Spock and McCoy felt. The Enterprise was always a long way away from Starbases. Messages would take a long time to go back and forth. There was really a sense of them being out there on their own, with no one to turn to for help. There was a great sense of the frontier and the unknown and not knowing what is around the corner and only having themselves to fall back on. I think we kind of got away from that with the subsequent series. We started dealing with the Federation a lot. There were other starships involved a lot. Starfleet Command was never that far away. Even in First Contact you are going all the way back to Earth. There was a big battle with a lot of other starships involved. When you are thrown back in time you are on your own, but it is all within the context of a very populated Trek universe where there lots of other people around and lots of things going on. There is something great about Hornblower and his sailing ship out on the Pacific all alone far removed from the Admiralty and having to face down these ships that would loom out of nowhere. The wits of Hornblower and the strength of courage of his men manning the guns, I would have said that is the spirit I would try and capture for the movie.


Moore: Abrams Trek should recapture TOS sense of frontier

TrekMovie.com: You had a chance to visit the set. How much did they tell you about the script and the plot?

Ron Moore: Virtually nothing…and I didn’t really ask. I didn’t want to know and it was the first time in a long time that I could approach one of these Trek things as a fan and I just wanted to preserve that. I sort of avoided looking at the teaser trailer for a long time and finally broke down and watched the teaser trailer. I was just there to walk onto a Federation Starship again after a long time and just enjoy the thrill of not knowing what the scene was and not knowing who that character in the corner was. I just wanted to be a fan again for a moment and not know too much on the inside.

TrekMovie.com: What did you think – where you on the Enterprise set?

Ron Moore: I saw it. I liked it. I liked the aesthetic. I liked the production design. I was very pleased with the visual of it…I think they have a lot of faith in what they are doing. There is a lot of confidence in the production. It is a very happy set. They all seem really committed to what they are doing. I think it is going to work.


Moore likes Star Trek’s new aesthetic

 

LISTEN: Ron Moore TrekMovie.com Interview – Part 4: Moore on his upcoming movie projects

TRANSCRIPT

TrekMovie.com: Let’s talk about the latest announcements quickly, you just signed a deal with UA to do a sci-fi trilogy. Is that an original idea from you?

Ron Moore: Yeah, I had a meeting with UA a while back and we started talking about the potential for a film franchise and doing a trilogy and there was an idea that came up in the room that was sort of a combination of things and was an arena they were interested in and things I was interested in. The more we talked we realized there was a great opportunity to do something. And we went from there.

TrekMovie.com: Is this a big sci-fi space, tent pole kind of stuff?

Ron Moore: Ya, but that all I can probably say about it at this point. The idea is to do a big epic sci-fi franchise.

TrekMovie.com: The other thing is this Fox project, Virtuality. There is a brief description and most people are going ‘that sounds a hell of a lot like a giant holodeck ship’ or something like that. Is that a fair description?

Ron Moore: Not really. It is not a holodeck ship at all. It is a ship on an extended voyage and the astronauts on the voyage have these virtual reality modules that were given to them to essentially alleviate the boredom and to give them rest and recreation on the way. It is a very very long mission — I think we are talking about a ten year mission in total — the ship is essentially going in a straight line for a very long time. So it is not like the ship is going to have all these adventures and things to do so it will mostly be maintenance. So NASA and a private consortium gave them, invented these modules, which at this point is technology that was available to people back on Earth. And it allows them to sort of insert themselves into virtual reality worlds that are three dimensional and photo real and they go off and can sort of do things to pass them time. And something sort of starts to occur within the realities of those worlds which leads them to believe something is going on here. But it is not like a holodeck where you walk into a holodeck and a physical reality is created around you. There is not a room on the ship where you experience these things. Essentially you go into this virtual reality.

TrekMovie.com: From a practical point of view you will be shooting scenes where they are in this virtual world…

Ron Moore: Ya

TrekMovie.com: So you can use location shooting and have it be in the virtual world

Ron Moore: Or it might be CG or a combination of both. We are still working out all the parameters of how we work out the parameters of that.

TrekMovie.com: But it doesn’t take place entirely in that…so there will be ship sets and such…

Ron Moore: Oh yah. Absolutely.


Moores new “Virtuality” not about a holodeck ship
(image from "Our Man Bashir" Moore’s sole ‘holodeck malfunction’ episode )

Read (or listen) to the first two parts of the TrekMovie.com interview with Ron Moore
Part 1: Breaking Out Of The Box (on changes at TNG and dealing wtih continuity)
Part 2: Fighting the cliches (on doing different episodes, DS9, VOY and BSG)

Comments

1. jimj - June 24, 2008

I always kinda liked him, but can’t get past what they did to Kirk in Generations!

2. ety3 - June 24, 2008

Great interviews with him and I can’t find a single thought of his I disagree with.

I’m glad he’s willing to be critical of his own work, particularly “Generations.”

3. Orb of the Emissary - June 24, 2008

Pleeeease let there be more TNG movies! (And a few characters from DS9 and/or VOY).

4. Trekmatt - June 24, 2008

Sounds promising. I like Moore and i like his version of BSG. I’m glad he liked the new Ent, gives some hope :)

5. OneBuckFilms - June 24, 2008

#1 – I can. And I love James T. Kirk.

6. Prologic9 - June 24, 2008

I totally agree with him about Kirk being dead. Why bring him back? What is the point of that? Do people think that if Shatner shows up in a cameo in Star Trek 11 he’ll suddenly be the lead in Star Trek 12? Do people realize Shatner will likely be dead in a few years time?

If all you need is a more “grand” death scene then by all means read Shatner’s books, he does as good a job as anyone resurrecting Kirk.

7. Dennis Bailey - June 24, 2008

“There was really a sense of them being out there on their own, with no one to turn to for help. There was a great sense of the frontier and the unknown and not knowing what is around the corner and only having themselves to fall back on. I think we kind of got away from that with the subsequent series. We started dealing with the Federation a lot. There were other starships involved a lot. Starfleet Command was never that far away.”

Bingo!

Right on!

8. That One Guy - June 24, 2008

6,

It’s sad, but true. Shatner is not long for this world. Neither is Nimoy. We’ve already witnessed several Trek cast deaths thus far, God rest their souls. They may have provided the world with an immortal show that has changed everything we know today, but the actors themselves are still mortal.

Note: Bill Gates mentioned that one of his inspirations was the user-friendly interface of the Enterprise. Now we have Vista….

There would be little point to resurrecting Kirk. Sure, I’d like to see it, but…. it just wouldn’t be logical. In this case, we have to be more like Vulcans and less like humans. Trying to do something absurd to bring back Kirk just wouldn’t work. Let the man rest in peace.

9. SPB - June 24, 2008

“Despite realizing we are mortal, you still move on and you still live your life and you still try and the make the most of it. That is what the movie was trying to be about. I think–Brannon and I were not ready to write that movie at that point in our careers. Our reach exceeded our grasp. We didn’t have the maturity and the seasoning as writers, and probably as human beings, to tackle something that grand and marry it to an action-adventure Star Trek film. So Leonard’s instincts were right.”

Probably one of the most frank and honest admissions from a writer that I’ve EVER heard. It’s kind of refreshing to hear someone admit to their mistakes in such a way. You don’t get that very often from Hollywood-types, where your own ego can eat you alive!

10. CmdrR - June 24, 2008

Generations plays like a studio boardroom meeting:

Kirk and Picard in the same scene? Check.

Get some other TOS actors in there somehow. I don’t care who; two oughta do it. Check.

Euro bad guy? Check.

Give ‘em “new” uniforms, but don’t spend too much. See what we’ve got in stock.

Kill off characters we’ll never miss in later stories? Check.

Big explosions, and if we run over budget on the big explosions just reuse a big explosion from the last movie. Check.

Generations lacks a certain organic sense. OK, I’m not running a studio, but it seems to me the best stories arise from the existing lives of the characters… not anomolies and 2D villains.

Here’s to hoping Paramount let’s JJ do it better…

11. epyon - June 24, 2008

I have always enjoyed RDM’s work and what he has done with both Star Trek and BSG. I have also noticed how a lot of people would like to see another TNG movie with elements of DS9/Voyager thrown in.

To me, the most logical way to remedy this would be to produce a two-hour television movie or mini-series event that would focus on Captain Riker and the Titan as they begin to explore the Gamma Quadrant following the Dominion War and the rebuilding of Cardassia. You could incorporate DS9 and have characters from that show as well as TNG and Voyager aboard.

RDM, I hope you’re reading this…and if you’re looking for writers, well…

12. steve623 - June 24, 2008

“First Contact hits a lot of those chords too, but it was done on a restricted budget.”

A restricted budget, really? “Wrath of Khan” was made completely on the cheap, for 10 or 12 million dollars and anything that could be scrounged and salvaged from STTMP. Even adjusted for inflation, “First Contact” had a much bigger budget, the benefit of a whole production that had been in place and running for nearly a decade, a warehouse full of props and costumes and set pieces that were essentially free production value. “First Contact” benefited from a lot more studio support than “Wrath of Khan”. Nick Meyer and Harve Bennett just made a better movie, plain and simple.

13. DIGINON - June 24, 2008

@ 11 epyon: I’m not sure Ron would be interested in revisiting Star Trek at all or at least the TNG era. He’s made it pretty clear that he didn’t like some of the restrictions (like the no conflict between Starfleet people rule) and would have liked to take Star Trek in different directions. Also, he apparently finds the 500+ episodes already done in that era to be a burden creatively.
From what I’ve read he seems to keep busy with other projects (TV and movies) so I wouldn’t hold my breath to see a new ST story from him any time soon.

14. Izbot - June 24, 2008

Anthony, could you guys please start spelling it “yeah” instead of “ya”? I’m pretty sure “ya” is not canon.

And could everyone please just get over the “make more TNG movies” thing?

And personally I’m glad they killed off Kirk when they did. Shatner’s just too old to do action scenes with any degree of believabilty anymore. Love the Shatman but yeah, don’t bring him back.

See? The “yeah” in that last sentence looks all right.

15. Izbot - June 24, 2008

Oh yeah, and all you “Way to Eden” guys, it’s “Yea, brother” not “Yay, brother”. As in “yea, verily.”

16. Bryan - June 24, 2008

Fantastic interview, Anthony. My thanks to Mr. Moore for his time and candidness.

“I was just there to walk onto a Federation Starship again after a long time and just enjoy the thrill of not knowing what the scene was and not knowing who that character in the corner was. I just wanted to be a fan again for a moment and not know too much on the inside.”

I love the grass-is-always-greener irony at work here; this fan is finding “not knowing too much on the inside” increasingly frustrating!

17. DJT - June 24, 2008

What I wouldn’t give to just sit down and have a cold beer with the likes of Ron Moore, JJ or Bob Orci.

18. OneBuckFilms - June 24, 2008

17 – Yea, Brother.

19. Beam Me Up - June 24, 2008

I hope Caprica is good as New BSG. It’s cool Sci Fi gave BSG a spin off series.

20. Splurch - June 24, 2008

A cold beer would be nice, But I think I would prefer a glass of Chateau Picard.

21. WVtrekker - June 24, 2008

Sounds like a man who ahs matured with the profession. Good to see him willing to critique himself honestly. Mistakes aside, I believe he did a good job overall.

22. robamenta - June 24, 2008

i was a member of the star trek fan club back when generations came out. i had a little tag sown onto my jacket..yes i was that into it!!…then when i saw generations i was really embarassed that i had that on my jacket. first thing i did when i got home was rip it off…it really was an awful awful film.. but people at the time were raving about it…star trek fans can be so blind

23. SPB - June 24, 2008

BUT, IN DEFENSE OF MOORE & BRAGA…

…who knows what kind of a script they would have come up with for GENERATIONS had they been given enough time to prepare, nurture and rewrite. The 1994 film was one of the most blatant examples EVER of rushing a movie into production… the corpse of the final season of TNG hadn’t even cooled when they went straight into GENERATIONS, and the final product suffers in almost every way because of this. Yes, the acting is decent; yes, Kirk/Shatner shows up; and yes, it probably has the best photography and special effects out of all the TNG films, BUT….

…the script is a shoddy, undercooked, sloppy, incoherent mess and is the #1 reason why I think GENERATIONS could easily qualify as the worst of the TNG films–it had the most potential to really be something special, but failed miserably in such a disheartening way.

We all know that Moore & Braga wrote some of the best TNG scripts together for the TV show… it’s not unreasonable to assume that they could have come up with something MUCH stronger for TNG’s first film foray, had Paramount/Berman/whoever decided to give “All Good Things…” and GENERATIONS more breathing room than a mere six months. Why they chose to rush it so quickly I’ll never understand…

24. Tango - June 24, 2008

Wow. Ron More sounds almost exactly as that guy that does those BSG podcasts. What is the scotch and is the smoking lamp on?

25. Tango - June 24, 2008

In regards to the “on the budget” threads, you know you’re on a budget when you decide that instead of building a full engineering room, you build a false 3d perspective engineering room and hire midgits to populate it.

26. Tango - June 24, 2008

Er… Little people. Sorry. I didn’t mean to sound derogatory.

27. Jai1138 - June 24, 2008

The one thing about Generations, which I generally liked (and I have always been a bit baffled by the hate thrown at the movie as a whole), that is most intriguing is actually the Nexus — which Moore says turned away Nimoy’s involvement. I find this strange because the concept of the Nexus is the most blatant version of Trek’s most persistent re-occurring theme: mankind’s rejection of Paradise or a simulation of Paradise to struggle and deal with reality on its own terms (a great ironic theme when played against the material’s essential escapist draw and nature). Consider it over and over: the Talosians simulated fantasies for Pike, “This Side of Paradise” (reinforced blatantly by Kirk’s final patch of dialog), the seductions of “I Mudd”‘s androids, the freaky mindset of “The Way to Eden” and the cinematic variant in The Final Frontier. Spock describes the classic painting in his quarters in The Undiscovered Country as “depicting the expulsion from paradise” which reflects the conflicts both at odds in the story and with Roddenberry’s latter revisionist “perfection of human the condition” idea. In DS9′s “Homefront” (I think), Sisko comments how easy it is to live in Paradise. It goes on and on.

I’ve actually thought of writing an essay (or even a book) on this idea: how this is the key and central theme of Trek (with many other related and conflicting themes, of course) and how it changed over time while remaining essentially the same.

At any rate, I think the Nexus is essentially Trek’s main idea (and it’s a big Humanist idea) writ large.

28. Jai1138 - June 24, 2008

Sorry for some confusing grammar. If I ever do write that essay or book, I’ll have someone go over it furst.

29. jmdiaz - June 24, 2008

How awesome would Voyager have been if he had control of it…..just awesome to think about.

30. Justin Toney - June 24, 2008

Ronald Moore is my hero… hahaha

31. Marvin the Martian - June 24, 2008

#:23: Keep in mind that two scripts were commissioned for Generations… the other being from former Trek writer/exec producer Maurice Hurley. I worked with him on another TV series, and I remember asking him about it. His concept was far more interesting that what Generations turned out to be, but it was Paramount that decided to greenlight the Moore/Braga script.

I’m not surprised the film hasn’t aged well. I said it was godawful at the time, and many diehard Trek fans I knew then thought I was crazy. No, I wasn’t. It was just an awful film. Glad to hear that Moore has admitted as much.

32. James Heaney - Wowbagger - June 24, 2008

Ron Moore: still a genius.

33. jimj - June 24, 2008

#5-Not sure how to respond to that, escept to say, “good for you!” It just would have been cool to have Bill and Lenny both kicking this thing off…it would have been GLORIOUS! Even without Bill, I bet it’ll be great, just would have been cool for one last time.

34. jimj - June 24, 2008

Lord, it’s late and I can’t type…I hate having something spelled incorrectly: EXCEPT

35. OneBuckFilms - June 24, 2008

33. The reason I can live without him is the fact that it would have seemed “forced” to bring him back.

Besides, as far as the new Trek movie goes, it would take the spotlight from the new cast to have more than Leonard Nimoy in the film.

Also, the work to bring him back and do it right would have over-complicated the movie, and the whole thing would collapse under it’s own weight.

In some ways, it would have been fun, but once the novelty wears off, what then?

36. Beam Me Up - June 24, 2008

Generations and First Contact are good TNG movies. Much better than Insurrection and Nemesis. I liked Picard in Generations. I really liked the Kirk Picard dynamic at the end of the movie. Kirk should have met Picard at the beginning of the movie!

37. Tango - June 24, 2008

34. In regards to bad typing, I know the feeling. In a prior post I misspelled Ron Moore’s name. I feel like a real wad. I wish there were a way that I could edit my posts.

38. Captain Robert April - June 24, 2008

I managed to see the script before “All Good Things…” had even aired, so I already knew about Kirk getting shot in the back by Soren and already knew the movie would be a complete abomination.

When Shatner made an appearance at Starfest Denver that year and announced that they were going to reshoot the ending, after getting the absolute worst responses from test audiences, I was cheering the loudest.

Simply put, Generations is a script that never should’ve been filmed. I managed to cook up a reset button ending in around an hour or so, probably less. Now, if a rank amateur like me can do that, what’s their excuse?

39. steve-o - June 24, 2008

best video ever!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pPMSvvGP8uY&fmt=18

40. sean - June 24, 2008

Something I’ve always found interesting is that all my friends who are not Trek fans at all like Generations more than any of the other films (TNG films, anyway). I’m not sure why…perhaps because despite its flawed storyline, the characters are more sympathetic and ‘human’ than in subsequent outings.

You have Picard crying over his brother and nephew’s deaths’, Data coming to terms with basic emotions, Soran’s desire to be reunited with his dead family no matter the cost, Kirk dealing with not being in the Captain’s Chair for the first time…these are all things that everyday people have to deal with at some time or another in life, to varying degrees. I mean, that’s only a guess as to why, perhaps someone else has greater insight into it than I do.

Oh and #12 – actually, they didn’t have years of sets and designs to draw from. In contrast to Star Trek II being able to use the exact same sets from TMP (and TMP being able to use the Phase II sets) as it was still the same ship, FC had to start from scratch for the most part, as they were literally on a different ship. The bridge, engine room, and hallways were all new. TWOK also had the advantage of using footage from the previous film, with the whole inspection sequence coming right out of TMP (something FC couldn’t do with the Ent-D being destroyed). The Borg Cube was a completely new design, as the original had been destroyed. The Phoenix and many of the other ships seen in the opening battle scene were designed from scratch (those that weren’t CGI). The Borg themselves were completely redesigned, with far more elaborate makeup than previous outings. Instead of relative unknowns and the star of Fantasy Island, FC included 2 Oscar nominees. A budget of $40 million in 1996 for this type of movie WAS limited. Mars Attacks was made in the same year and its budget was $80,000,000! (most of which, I would assume, went to pay the myriad of A-listers playing bit parts). The Fifth Element had a budget of nearly $100,000,000. Hell, I think The Arrival had a bigger budget than FC. I think Moore’s complaint isn’t so extreme.

41. chris pike should be played by chris pine lol - June 25, 2008

there already was a reset button in Generations…Picard initially failed in stopping Soran from destroying the Veridian star hence why he was thrust into the Nexus…when Picard escaped from The Nexus with Kirk, that meant there would’ve been TWO PICARDS ON VERIDIAN 3 the second time around…a much better way out would’ve been the other Picard sacrificing himself to save the Picard that came from The Nexus as well as Kirk…then Kirk not dying but in the manner akin to Kelsey Grammer’s Captain Bateson in Season 5′s Cause & Effect, Kirk acclimates into 24th Century life and much like we never saw Bones after Encounter At Farpoint or Scotty after Relics, we simply assume that Kirk finally got the peaceful, happy, family life he always desired after his son’s murder by The Klingons…

as for Generations being a fundamentally bad story; no it wasn’t…but like Nemesis it would’ve benefitted from a much more epic scope to it…now, think of this: an added dimension to the story…yes, Yesterdays Enterprise but not instead of the Generations storybut as part of it…

we have an added dimension in which Sela tries to go back in time back to Narendra 3 to the battle between the Enterprise C and The Romulans to destroy the Enterprise C before it can engage the Romulans of the past to force war between the Klingons and the Federation and in turn begin a plot to seize control of the Romulan Empire, kill her mother Tasha Yar while she was a baby and raise her own past self the way she wanted with the ultimate goal of conquering both the Klingon Empire and the Federation…

the details are still sketchy in my mind but this other version would have Soran factoring into this with at least 4 different timelines either seen, interacting or mentioned/implied..the original timeline pre-Yesterdays Enterprise anomaly, the altered one with Starfleet at war with the Klingons, the timeline created post-Yesterdays Enterprise with Sela (assuming the whole Yesterdays Enterprise thing wasnt a kind of temporal paradox), the timeline in Generations where Picard fails to stop Soran, the new timeline I spoke of above where Kirk survives, the new timeline Sela in my story was trying to create, and the end timeline where after Kirk survives the Soran incident, he must go back in time and into the Yesterdays Enterprise alternate timeline pre Enterprise C going back thru the rift…and JOINING THE ALTERNATE TASHA YAR on the Enterprise C, commanding the ship into her heroic battle defending the Klingons (a historically ironic extension of the peace he made with Davids death by forgiving the Klingons of it in Star Trek VI) at Narendra 3…giving Kirk the epic, heroic death he was always meant to have…

this story likely wouldve been a 2 or 3 film story, but wouldve been well worth it…as it is now if only Simon & Schuster/Pocket Books accepted this type of story from first time writers for Trek itd make a great novel trilogy…somethin in the vein of DS9′s Millennium saga in scope and depth…maybe if I could contact The Shat…LOL

REGARDING THE NEW FILM…on the issue of the feasibility of other actors playing THE CLASSIC CREW, I’m reminded of what the 1990s tv series Sliders did when Jerry O’Connell and his brother Charlie left the show for the final season…the had the team ‘slide’ into a parallel universe where Jerry’s character looked completely different but thru an anomaly in the wormhole geometry the old version of Jerry’s character Quinn Mallory (his consciousness anyway) merged into the new different looking version of him played by a new actor in a way similar to how Data was a part of B-4 at the end of Nemesis…this idea was based on the multiverse theory element wherein its hypothesized that anyone and/or anything can exist in any conceivable form in an alternate quantum reality, a concept explored to a lesser degree in TNG’S 7th season episode Parallels…so the rumored plot of jj’s film is not only realistic but its one of the most intellectual and scientifically plausible storylines in Star Trek’s history…

as for what is and isnt canon in Trek, everything is canon…every episode, every film, every novel, comic book, fan fiction, and yes even the lamented Animated Series…when you redefine the concept of Trek canon to be from an almost Q-like or Prophets-like viewpoint, viewing not one to thirteen timelines diverging from one another at various points where canon is just Shat’s era or just TNG thru Insurrection, or all live action Trek minus ST X or ST V and ST X and The Animated Series etc…but as one cohesive whole…everything Trek is canon as part of a Star Trek multiverse. End of story.

42. Rainbucket - June 25, 2008

Funny that he speaks of budget constraints on First Contact. Wrath Of Khan also had a tight budget, as did the original Star Wars. Great movies all three. Something about tight budgets in sci-fi gets talented people to focus their priorities right. Firefly is like an entire series bearing this out.

I thought Generations’ prologue was a great and touching 10-minute movie about the eventual death of Kirk. It seemed fitting that he’d meet his end when the Enterprise was no longer his ship, but saving it anyways. You can disregard the Nexus stuff afterward.

43. Jason - June 25, 2008

I enjoy ‘Generations’ quite a bit, but I think it works much better as the final TOS film, then as the first TNG film.

Everytime I watch it, I read it as a metacommentary on the nature of nostalgia–and how the franchise and Kirk are trying too hard to hold onto the past, and extend it indefinitely (ie, the Nexus). Soran could easily be the producers, or Paramount. The end of the film works for me because the narrative spends its time really working through that question of letting go, and laying the foundation for a new crew to emerge, unhindered by the past.

Yes, if you are a TNG fan, and that’s all you are looking for, then I can see Generations being frustrating at best.

But I always thought Generations makes an excellent companion piece to Undiscovered Country, as the melancholy epic goodbye to TOS.

44. jimj - June 25, 2008

#35-But had they not “killed him off”, none of those issues would have been in place or considered a problem. Frankly, having them both in the movie, if the story is as great as everyone claims, shouldn’t (and wouldn’t)have taken away from the new cast–it could have been a double blessing given by the old crew to the new. Now, it’s one original actor giving his blessing (and frankly, the more original crew that likes it and wants to bless it, the better I feel about going to the movie). Just my thoughts–I’m an old die hard Star Trek fan!

45. star trackie - June 25, 2008

Good interview and I agree with all of his observations. And it does my heart good to hear Mr. Moore is giving his kids a steady dose of TOS, the gift that keeps on giving.

46. earthclanbootstrap - June 25, 2008

my extravagant fanboy wish was that they had split Generations into two movies – obviously they would have never ACTUALLY done that, but in a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too sort of world it would have been great. That portion of the film always felt rushed to me when it seemed like there WERE some interesting things going on. #42 Jason is spot on about all of the things going on underneath the surface of the Ent. B sequence …And we would have had more time with Cameron in charge of the Enterprise.

47. AdamTrek - June 25, 2008

Thanks for doing this interview, Anthony. I think it sheds a lot of light on what many of us have thought of the creative endeavors of Ron Moore and the rest of the team that brought us new Trek throughout the years. Ron seems to have a grounding that is refreshing and he doesn’t seem to be the full-of-himself Hollywood type that is very stereotypical. He’s a working guy that just happens to have his work seen by millions of people. All in all, he brought us epic entertainment, which many writers and folks in Hollywood cannot claim for themselves.

I for one have greatly enjoyed the entertainment that Ron Moore’s been a part of for Trek, as it is a team effort, such as the actors, Okudas, Sternbach, Berman, Zimmerman, etc. He has faith in J.J. & Co. for the new film, as I do. It’s neat that he got a set visit, but didn’t want to learn too much about the film so he can experience it firsthand as a moviegoer and fan. That speaks volumes about how he feels about Star Trek, but I wouldn’t pass up a set visit either!

48. James Seals - June 25, 2008

First, thanks to Ron Moore for doing these interviews.

He’s always been my personal writing hero (read: the fan that made good) that I’ve long since admired him and his work, especially all the hard work that went into fleshing out Worf’s character.

Second, I have to side against the notion of revisiting the Nexus to bring back Kirk. As Moore states, the Nexus never quite worked to begin with. Why bring that sort of baggage to what is essentially a new, fresh start for a new generation of fans? I could only imagine the mounds of exposistion needed just to pull of what would be no more than a two page nod to the die-hards — of which I am one.

Now, we are hearing rumors that we’ll be seeing alternate realities in this story as Spcok travels back, through time, to rescue his friend. I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to have a world in which the Federation is corrupt run by an evil Kirk, played by Bill Shatner. He’s still Kirk. He’s still Bill. He’s just not our Kirk and that might even prove an even more interesting role for Shatner, who is proving all over again he’s a force to be reckon with on “Boston Legal.”

49. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#23—-”The 1994 film was one of the most blatant examples EVER of rushing a movie into production”

I don’t buy that as an excuse, and Ron Moore is respectably honest in his assessment of things. They just were not equipped to tell that story and make it work. It was a mistake. Period. Bad movie.

Moore really shows some integrity by being willing to face facts on some of his earlier work. I especially like the way, in retrospect, he defers to Leonard Nimoy’s wisdom. There were good reasons why Nimoy didn’t like the script for Generations, declined the director’s chair, and a cameo appearance. He didn’t want his name on the thing! It also makes me feel more secure about STXI, which Nimoy has touted as an excellent script and a project worth committing himself to.

I also agree with his thoughts on the somewhat puzzling outcries for William Shatner in STXI. I am as big a fan of the Original Series as anyone, but it’s just not that big a deal to me, and certainly not worth going outside of the story to ressurect him, or worse, changing the story to make him relevant.

I’ve seen the old, and although I’m thrilled to see Nimoy on board, I want to see the “new” Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I’m not afraid of change. I want to see a USS Enterprise that my kids will believe is from the 23rd Century. If Captain Kirk slips up and refers to his landing party as an “away team”, it won’t ruin the movie for me.

Moore is approaching the new movie as a fan much as I am. I don’t want to know too much, and I’m excited to know that Star Trek is going back to its roots.

50. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#48—-LMAO.

“I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to have a world in which the Federation is corrupt run by an evil Kirk, played by Bill Shatner.”

I’m sorry, but that sounds more like one of George Takei’s nightmares than a $150 million budget feature film. STXI already has a villain–a Romulan by the name of Nero, played by Eric Bana.

51. Kobayashi Maru - June 25, 2008

I would just love to see another TNG movie as well, but if they’re restarting the timeline, wouldn’t that just confuse people? Do you think that would really work?

52. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#44—All the original cast has (at least at some point) given their “blessing”, even William Shatner (according to Orci’s comments about pitching Shatner an overview in the beginning).

53. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#42—”I thought Generations’ prologue was a great and touching 10-minute movie about the eventual death of Kirk. It seemed fitting that he’d meet his end when the Enterprise was no longer his ship, but saving it anyways. You can disregard the Nexus stuff afterward.”

The biggest problem within that “10-minute movie” is the depiction of Captain Harriman as a bumbling fool, completely unbelievable as someone Starfleet would entrust with a starship…especially one named Enterprise.

54. Nathan - June 25, 2008

I know I’m probably in the minority here, but I really don’t think that Generations was bad…at all. Sure, it had it’s faults; Kirk’s death was tacked on and rather gratuitous, though quite touching all the same…besides this, and a few other mistakes (several plot holes having to do with the Nexus come to mind), it still has plenty of good points:

-the prologue (a loving homage to the TOS movies, funny and well-done)

-the Data emotion-chip plot line (man, can that guy act!)

-Dr. Soran and his over-the-top villainy (“Time is the fire in which…we BURN!” How can you NOT like that?)

-Picard (again, this guy can act; he stands toe-to-toe with both Soran and Kirk, and comes off better both times)

-the overall theme (I don’t know about you, but I’ve always found the theme of death and aging rather well-done…though perhaps, as Ron Moore said, it could have been handled better. But still…I liked it)

-the fact that it’s the only TNG film to really capture the feel of the television show (First Contact et al are good, but they’re quite a different thing)

There’s more I could talk about, but, at least for me, I don’t really understand the people crying Terrible Movie…it’s not amazing, certainly, and under perfect circumstances it could’ve (and probably should have) been much, much better; but I think everyone should keep in mind that it was definitely NOT done under perfect circumstances. If you didn’t know, Generations was written and partially filmed while TNG season 7 was still going on…so during this period of time Moore and Braga not only had to help with normal scripts over the course of the season, but also write their first major feature film script AND the TNG series finale…often at the same time. That’s quite a bit of pressure right there…so even if you absolutely HATE this film (which I don’t, obviously), you can at least cut them some slack…and go watch “All Good Things,” as both Ron Moore and Braga have said that, of the two scripts they worked on during that period (and often at the same time), All Good Things is clearly the better effort.

55. thebiggfrogg - June 25, 2008

Note: Bill Gates mentioned that one of his inspirations was the user-friendly interface of the Enterprise. Now we have Vista….

Forget Khan then, the biggest threat to the Enterprise was the “blue screen of death.”

56. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#54—Either way, the TNG movies are the stepchildren of the Star Trek feature films, IMO. I think 5 of the 6 original films are better than even First Contact. Moreover, the very existence of Generations is the single most influential factor in making STXI (and Shatner’s absence) such a polarizing issue among fans. If GEN had not killed off Captain Kirk in the first place (rather than allowing fans to imagine him off in the sunset), I don’t think Shatner’s absence in the film would be nearly as controversial as it is.

Furthermore, I think you and #42 give a bit too much credit to the first 10 minutes of the film. The character of Captain Harriman was a disaster, and really ruins the whole scene for me. He is a fool, a clueless jackass who has no business commanding a starship named Enterprise. I don’t buy the scene at all. Generations may not be as bad as STV: The Great Trek Turd, but it has no redeeming qualities in my opinion, outside of perhaps the battle scene with the Klingon Pointer Sisters (although, really? Another Bird Of Prey?).

57. chris pike should be played by chris pine lol - June 25, 2008

in a bizarrely humorous twist do ya notice how eric bana sorta looks like ron moore? lol so too in a way does karl urban lol

58. hitch1969© - June 25, 2008

…I’ll take “bad business decisions” for $1000, Alex…

ANSWER: “…as far as I am concerned they are doing Kirk, they are doing Spock. I don’t know. I like Bill. I have nothing against Bill, but I don’t know that there is a need to get beyond Generations in terms of Bill and bring him back in some thing. I don’t know. I don’t quite get it on some level why there is such a hew and cry to do that or not do that. It seems besides the point. They are going back to the beginning and starting over.”

…What is something that hitch1969© has been saying for a long long time here at trek movies dot com dot org?

CORRECT!!

=h=

59. chris pike should be played by chris pine lol - June 25, 2008

in addition to my last short comment..isnt it interesting that paul mcgillion in as much as bruce greenwood looks like pike…not really in truth chris pine in his natural hair color looks more life jeff hunter than like the shat…in any case..as i was saying could it be possible that paul mcgillion could be playing gary mitchell??? its interesting his role, given the films level of secrecy, is listed as ‘Unknown’…

60. focuspuller - June 25, 2008

My question is: why wasn’t Ron told to hold so that damn call waiting could be asnwered? lol

61. Rainbucket - June 25, 2008

With due respect you may not give the first 10 minutes enough credit. Harriman’s not a clueless jackass, he’s just unprepared for a PR voyage in an incomplete ship to become a dangerous rescue mission. Whereas Kirk, Scotty and Chekov have been doing that sort of thing for 30 years plus. Besides, Harriman does try to go risk himself in the deflector room before Kirk does it instead.

62. chris pike should be played by chris pine lol - June 25, 2008

i agree with rainbucket here and add that it could be envisioned that chris pines kirk might be sorta like harriman in the untested unsure way but with a more, as chris pine put it best, an indiana jones-style to him, and back to the jackass thing…i think in part that was also sorta at first meant to be an in-hollywood joke to how trek fans can get all overexcited to meet trek celebs at conventions, or at large any fan meeting any celeb…

63. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2008

44. I see your point, but the story, from what I understand, is about the beginnings of the Star Trek we know and love.

So my question to you is this:

In terms of telling a coherent story on screen, that could appeal to a non-Trek audience, and act as an introduction of sorts, what does the story of bringing James Kirk do to help the story?

The Future Spock/Romulan Interference issue, to my mind, serves to underscore the importance of the original crew, and place the future in jeopardy, thus giving the audience a reason to care about what happens.

The protagonist raises the stakes, and forces our heroes to rise to the occasion. Classic, basic storytelling.

If we introduce William Shatner as James Kirk, then casual viewers would need some explanation as to who he was.

The FIRST question to enter many viewer’s minds: But wait, we saw him die in that Generations movie? Did we miss something?

Then we’d need to explain how he comes back, and we have to move away from the basic story. It goes off course. Too many threads for a more casual audience to track.

We then also have to ask: What would his role be in the story? Is he a necessary part of the basic story, such as Future Spock, the Romulans, or the original crew?

Since William Shatner didn’t want to do a cameo, perhaps as another character as an easter egg to us fans, it probably meant that he could not fit comfortably within the story.

In short, by adding him to the film, you change the nature of the film, and whereas I am open minded, I understand why the Supreme Court ™ decided not to go with him.

64. Anthony Pascale - June 25, 2008

RE 60
I was wondering if anyone was going to comment on the call waiting!

65. Jack - June 25, 2008

Why do so many people in Trek want to go backwards? The shatner Kirk is gone. So is the Sean Connery Bond and that franchise is doing fine.

Furthermore, the Shatner Trek books have been the BEST by far. If you need that version of the character and storyline go read the books.

Lets look ahead and see the re-imagination of Trek for this generation. We can still love the history and past but it is time to boldy go forward.

66. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#61—Perhaps my viewpoint is a bit more critical beacuse I served as a military officer. It is completely unbelievable for Harriman to react without any decisiveness whatsoever when the crisis occurs. He even looks at Kirk as if to say “what do I do?”! Maybe you need to watch that scene again. No one in such a leadership position would ever be put into that situation without a whole lot more fortitude. I don’t care if General Patton was on that bridge as a guest, no ship’s captain would ever show that kind of weakness and indecisiveness, and no ship’s captain would ever defer to ANYONE else in a crisis situation. Harriman would have been stripped of that command for cracking under pressure.

Anyone who has any understanding of what it is to command men and women in a crisis situation (and captain of a first class ship of the line, no less!) will know exactly what I mean, and cringe just as I did in watching that scene play out.

#62— I think they were just reaching to find a way to put Kirk in that situation. I understand the point, but the scene doesn’t work for me. It’s too unbelievable. I can’t stand it.

67. AdamTrek - June 25, 2008

#64 – I was going to but withheld my stinging remark. :)

Dial *70 before the area code and telephone number to disable call waiting when you record telephone interviews. That way, no more beeps.

68. Platitude - June 25, 2008

Heh that was a rather abrupt ending to the interview.

I agree that Generations had some issues (though I still do enjoy it). For me, it sorta feels like just a really long episode of the show. I don’t think it really worked as a feature film.

69. Kevin H. Martin - June 25, 2008

#25
The short people in the forced perspective set in TMP is not a budget measure really, it is a ‘use the space available’ measure, since there would not have been room to build that set in its entirety (nor any reason to do so, since you’re not playing scenes up and down it.) That isn’t cheapness, it is smart filmmaking.

#65
The bond people think they HAVE gone backward, to an earlier unseen version of Bond. The mistake they made is that they’ve got a guy in his late 30s who looks much older playing a guy who is probably supposed to be 28, but is written to be 16 (or whatever the maturity level was for Maverick in TOPGUN, because Craig’s Bond is an immature rash idiot, and that’s the writing being mindnumbingly stupid (along with the killing people to get their cellphone info, as if spies don’t memorize important numbers.) Ignoring Craig being the worst casting in movie history, the writing issues are huge, and it is hard to believe the guy who made CRASH was brought in to ‘improve’ the script. How bad could it have been before?

As for FC being cheap, it cost about 46mil altogether after reshoots. Given the number of new sets and miniatures, it is a pretty good job of controlling expenditures, but then again, I don’t like the movie much (don’t even have the dvd, only laserdisc) and only watch it for some great spaceship miniature work .

Kudo to Moore for interview, for career, for honesty and mostly excellent work. When I ptiched at TNG, he was the only one in the meeting who really listened to the pitches and even made an impassioned case for buying one of them (not that Jeri listened, she was in “picard wouldn’t do that” mode.) God, what I’d’ve given if Piller had gotten to take the meeting as planned …

70. jimj - June 25, 2008

#44-I know they have, and you know the have. Average “Joe Movie, I’ll check out this new Star Trek” won’t know that. they aren’t in the know like we are.

#65-I assume that you mean some people (like me) who think having Shatner & Nimoy together one last time would be “fun”…we are backward thinkers? On the contrary: I am rooting for Pine, Quinto and Company to hit a home run. By the way, I’m a Bond fan and although I love the way the franchise is going, I’d still love to see Brosnan do one last one. Oh yeah, and that comes from someone who actually liked Timothy Dalton, too, and hated Pierce before he became Bond. Once again, it’s all about fun and entertainment-that’s what movies are. Some of us get way too hung up in “you can’t do this or that”, even if it would be fun.

Do I think Star Trek will be bad without Shatner? Heck no! If it’s bad, I’ll blame the writers, producers & director.

71. jimj - June 25, 2008

Oops, I didn’t mean to answer myself-I meant #52, not #44. Anthony, it would be so cool if we could go back and edit our comments. I’m a lousy proof reader until AFTER I make my post, then I always see things!

72. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#69—”Ignoring Craig being the worst casting in movie history, the writing issues are huge, and it is hard to believe the guy who made CRASH was brought in to ‘improve’ the script. How bad could it have been before?”

That’s one opinion. I have been bored to death with Bond for years, and I found it to be an entertaining change of pace.

I’m not looking for brilliant writing with Bond movies (and do not recall any such Bond script in the past), and I like the casting. But who am I? I’m just a guy who spent $50 for his family to see Casino Royale and then another $15 on the DVD. Since I am far from being the only guy who did that, I’d say they are doing something right. I can think of at least 10 or so Bond films I’d rather have my money back on. As for his age, the film explains that. He is a man who has spent previous years serving in the British military, and I don’t get where you figure he’s “probably supposed to be 28″. He could be 35. And I realize you’re exaggerating, but the maturity of a 16 year old? I’d say he has the maturity level sometimes of the average alpha male who is all ego and full of himself. Sounds like Bond to me…but we’re getting off the subject—to each his own James Bond.

I’m interested in what idea you pitched to the TNG guys that Moore advocated, assuming you’re okay with sharing the general idea. If not, I understand. It seems to me that Stewart, Moore, and many fans (including myself) felt that Picard was a little too “chained up” at times. I would also have liked to see Picard and some of the other TNG characters be a bit more interesting and a bit more “human”.

73. Closettrekker - June 25, 2008

#70 and #71—Relax. I do the same thing from time to time. As for your post in #44, I actually agree. Generations is the single most significant factor involved in the controversy over Shatner in/out of STXI. Many advocates of Shatner’s presence just want to see “the wrongs” set right. If Jim Kirk had been allowed to “ride off into the Sunset”, there probably wouldn’t be nearly as many people clamouring for his return in Shat-form. Instead, we have this very controversial death scene that many fans are still unsettled by. The most unfortunate consequence is that, in the minds of many of those fans, Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof and Abrams have inherited that baggage, even though they had absolutely no involvement in creating the problem. Some have even claimed, as indicated by the recent poll here, that they will actually not see the film because William Shatner isn’t in it (5%). What a shame.

74. Shatner_Fan_2000 - June 25, 2008

#73 “Many advocates of Shatner’s presence just want to see ‘the wrongs’ set right. If Jim Kirk had been allowed to ‘ride off into the Sunset’, there probably wouldn’t be nearly as many people clamouring for his return in Shat-form.”

I don’t know. I think right now, Shatner’s Kirk being dead is the only way they’re getting by with not having him in the movie. If he were alive the last time we saw him, and they still didn’t include him in the new movie, I’d be more upset. There’d be no storytelling stumbling block for them at that point.

I do agree with you that Casino Royale reinvigorated that particular franchise, though. I too was bored until I saw that one.

75. c0MmODoRe g0_oFbAlL - June 25, 2008

Another great interview Anthony. I keep asking myself, if I was doing the interview, what other questions would I ask?

The only one I can think of is: “How can I interview for your writing staff?”

76. Kenny Maths - June 25, 2008

Does anyone know if Maurice Hurley’s unused (alternate) script for ‘Generations’ has ever surfaced on the net? It would certainly make for an interesting read.

As for the ‘Generations’ film itself, I thought the opening Kirk/Enterprise sequences were a lot of fun (despite no real effort made to hide the fact that the Scotty/Chekov roles were obviously written for Spock/McCoy).

When we moved to the 24th century, it wqas a horrible mess, particularly ‘The Nexus’ concept. It truly beggared belief that Kirk’s eventual death scene was their second attempt at it, and yet was still so poor. Ron Moore wrote a lot of great Next gen scripts, but if you’re going to kill off an inconic character, you really should make the most of it (as with Spock’s death scene in ‘The Wrath of Kahn’).

77. Splurch - June 25, 2008

I sincerely hope that Mr. Abrams, and everyone else at Paramount, read the excellent opinions, comments and analysis that are offered by Trek fans on this site. It’s really fantastic to read all of the different opinions on what has worked and what has not, in previous Trek films.

I think it goes a long way in showing the powers that be how much we the fans care about this franchise and how much we want them to deliver a well made, well written film that will help Star Trek to continue for a long time.

78. Kevin H. Martin - June 25, 2008

#72
I pitched several notions, but the one I thought had the best possibilities was the one Moore responded to as well. It had a kid dying in an accident aboardship and this unravels Picard a bit. There’s a domino effect with chain of command, and finally, after Guinan tells him essentially that she’s a bartender, not a therapist, he has to get some ‘actual’ therapy from Troi, and reconcile the ‘it can’t happen here (along with the audience notion of ‘this can’t happen on star trek’) and in so doing, he also works through the current exterior dilemma (I had two different versions of the external dilemma, and I like both of them, but there’s potential for my own huge non-trek sf epic to someday actually happen, and I might actually be able to use some of that there, so I’m not going to list the whole thing.) I do remember one scene I really loved, where Riker is on the phaser range (this is after Picard frays, so he has talked with Riker about the kid and whose responsibility children are aboardship) and Data comes in and compliments him on only missing one shot, but Riker isn’t lettting himself off the hook, saying something like, “it only takes one miss.” I’m gonna dig it out of the file, I want to reread the Picard/Guinan scene,

Moore seized on this pitch as building on his script for THE BONDING, since mine addressed his concern, which is, ‘why don’t they pop the top and leave the saucer behind in EVERY dangerous situation?’ He thought it was a very valid Picard story (I had strained and come up with a teensy thread that would link the kid with Picard, one that invoked Picard’s really bad attempt at painting from an earlier show), but Jeri Taylor just said Picard would shrug and go back to work. I guess I should have suggested having his nephew die while visiting the ship instead.

I remember the stuff I wrote on this one as being probably the best I managed during that period (I wrote three full spec scripts and seven treatments from my dozen or thirteen story premises, and pitched at least 8 of them, including a spin on HENRY THE IV pt2 that would have had Picard as the old Henry, Wesley as Prince Hal and somebody like Brian Blessed as the Falstaff figure … my teaser had them finding Wesley on summer assignment from Starfleet, and he is a drunken sotted mess.)

BTW, the one notion I pitched that Taylor liked, which was just a comic thread inside another story, was a hokey old, “crew is trying to give Picard a secret bday party, but he always makes a point of being off the ship on his bday to avoid this kind of thing.” Yeah, she wanted to buy a runner that has probably been done on half the ship or crew shows since F-Troop and most sitcoms.

As for the Bond thing, I’m a huge Dalton fan as well, but found eventually that Brosnan DID have the goods, they just never wrote it well enough to demonstrate this. For anybody who wants to see how good Brosnan COULD have been as Bond, rent TAILOR OF PANAMA, in which he gives a smart, physical, terrific performance as a bastard of a spy. If Tarantino had gotten to make HIS notion of CASINO ROYALE, I think it would have been dynamite. As is, I’m quits with new Bond until the Craig era ends (2016 I think they say?). Fortunately, I have FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and some decent Connery Bonds as well as the Daltonpics on DVD, so between those and the novels, I’ll be well served during the next decade.

79. Kevin H. Martin - June 25, 2008

#72
I pitched several notions, but the one I thought had the best possibilities was the one Moore responded to as well. It had a kid dying in an accident aboardship and this unravels Picard a bit. There’s a domino effect with chain of command, and finally, after Guinan tells him essentially that she’s a bartender, not a therapist, he has to get some ‘actual’ therapy from Troi, and reconcile the ‘it can’t happen here (along with the audience notion of ‘this can’t happen on star trek’) and in so doing, he also works through the current exterior dilemma (I had two different versions of the external dilemma, and I like both of them, but there’s potential for my own huge non-trek sf epic to someday actually happen, and I might actually be able to use some of that there, so I’m not going to list the whole thing.) I do remember one scene I really loved, where Riker is on the phaser range (this is after Picard frays, so he has talked with Riker about the kid and whose responsibility children are aboardship) and Data comes in and compliments him on only missing one shot, but Riker isn’t lettting himself off the hook, saying something like, “it only takes one miss.” I’m gonna dig it out of the file, I want to reread the Picard/Guinan scene,

Moore seized on this pitch as building on his script for THE BONDING, since mine addressed his concern, which is, ‘why don’t they pop the top and leave the saucer behind in EVERY dangerous situation?’ He thought it was a very valid Picard story (I had strained and come up with a teensy thread that would link the kid with Picard, one that invoked Picard’s really bad attempt at painting from an earlier show), but Jeri Taylor just said Picard would shrug and go back to work. I guess I should have suggested having his nephew die while visiting the ship instead.

I remember the stuff I wrote on this one as being probably the best I managed during that period (I wrote three full spec scripts and seven treatments from my dozen or thirteen story premises, and pitched at least 8 of them, including a spin on HENRY THE IV pt2 that would have had Picard as the old Henry, Wesley as Prince Hal and somebody like Brian Blessed as the Falstaff figure … my teaser had them finding Wesley on summer assignment from Starfleet, and he is a drunken sotted mess.)

BTW, the one notion I pitched that Taylor liked, which was just a comic thread inside another story, was a hokey old, “crew is trying to give Picard a secret bday party, but he always makes a point of being off the ship on his bday to avoid this kind of thing.” Yeah, she wanted to buy a runner that has probably been done on half the ship or crew shows since F-Troop and most sitcoms.

As for the Bond thing, I’m a huge Dalton fan as well, but found eventually that Brosnan DID have the goods, they just never wrote it well enough to demonstrate this. For anybody who wants to see how good Brosnan COULD have been as Bond, rent TAILOR OF PANAMA, in which he gives a smart, physical, terrific performance as a bastard of a spy. If Tarantino had gotten to make HIS notion of CASINO ROYALE, I think it would have been dynamite. As is, I’m quits with new Bond until the Craig era ends (2016 I think they say?). Fortunately, I have FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and some decent Connery Bonds as well as the Daltonpics on DVD, so between those and the novels, I’ll be well served during the next decade. The director wanted to hire a 22 yearold for Bond and was overruled by the producers (one of whom seems to have fancied Craig since TOMB RAIDER and just spent 39 grand to get a kiss from him at a charity event), so that reinforces my view that the Bond in CR was supposed to be much younger than we’ve ever seen him.

80. Curtis - June 25, 2008

I agree with most of what he said, however I feel the “Federation” was an absolutely essential character in the newer Star Trek’s, and it’s something that I missed from the original series.

81. thecrisper - June 26, 2008

“Generations” is a fine, fine TNG movie. It is also my favorite (TNG movie). The themes Moore raised in this interview are all there… absolutely. Maybe he’s not happy with how it came together, but whatever –film speaks for itself.

The bottom line: For Seven Years, Picard dealt with a great number of Federation problems. He was diplomat, arbiter, colleague, and the rest, but he had never… EVER had to just BEAT THAT ASS!

Generations gave us that moment. Sauron was a madman (“Now whatcha got, fool?!?! I’m crazy!”). He could not be reasoned with (like so many previous foes). He was somehow IMMUNE to the PICARD GUILT TRIP –some fail to see this incredible move by the world’s favorite captain (“Nice Try! Crazy, remember?!?!?”)

What is anybody’s Captain to do? Well, if you’re particularly lucky, you might find yourself trapped in a space where time has no meaning and meet up with a Captain who dealt with a madman every other week.

The solution?

“Picard… no! You can’t… rea…son…what are you, bald? You… have…to…just beat…that British backside!” Shatner pause. “…what was that…? I thought Picard was a French name!”

So then, with Kirk finally teaching Picard how to handle a new muscle in diplomacy (A MOVIE MUSCLE BTW), he passes the torch on –HAVING TAUGHT PICARD SOMETHING HE DIDN’T KNOW!

This is all much more poignant in the deleted ending on your DVD. Bravo, Ron! You and Brannon were total badasses full of beans and piss and I LIKED IT!

Way better than that FIRST CONTACT shite!

Hate to sound like a continuity whore, but what in the sam-hell?!?

If you’re still reading, please understand that I am a Ronald D. Moore disciple (and if you’ve seen how he dresses, you can see how that’s possible)! I know that this man was victim to what I call the dark Brannon need for weird and intangible (I know they’ve made up, but COME ON!).

This is how I see it going down:

BB: This borg movie just ain’t working.

RDM: It’s close.

BB: Hey, you’re a nerd, have you seen any Star Trek movies? Besides the one we wrote?

RDM: Yeah… uhm… all of them.

BB: What’s a good one?

RDM: Most like the second one… Wrath of Khan.

BB: Yeah? What’s so good in it?

RDM: Well, there’s this villain, Khan…

BB: Who has the wrath, right? I’m with you.

RDM: Yeah… and he wants to destroy Kirk.

BB: Like the Borg wanna destroy Picard.

RDM: What? No. Brannon… the Borg don’t want anything… except tech and flesh. Who a person is… makes no difference.

BB: No! Hold on, listen! There’s this queen, right? She wants to destroy Picard.

RDM: What? Brannon, come on…

BB: No, just hear this out! She’s a chick borg. She’s hot cause she’s a chick Borg and a boss Borg. And she’s never gotten over the fact that she had Picard by his short and curlies and he escaped!

RDM: What?!

BB (shrugs): It makes it personal.

RDM: Goddammit. It undoes everything about the Borg–

BB: It makes it deeper. If anyone bitches, we can have the queen say that… humans can’t comprehend the true essence of the Borg!

RDM: Hold on… Picard’s cube was destroyed over earth, TNG episode 1, season 4. It’s called THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS PART II.

BB: I know. I know. I knew that. C’mon, Ron… maybe the Borg have some other weird way of moving information… or maybe if a Queen is destroyed, the other Borg all take this hot Borg drone and feed her this weird tech shit and make her become a queen or something. And the new queen remembers everything the old queen knew! Right?!

(Rick Berman enters.)

RB: Hey guys.

RDM and BB: What’s up?

RB: Turns out the most popular Trek movie ain’t Wrath of Khan, it’s Voyage Home.

BB: Is that good?

RDM: It’s not bad. They travel back in time to–

RB and BB: Time travel?! That’s great! We have to do it!

RDM: The Borg and Picard and everyone in Modern day America?

(BB and RB look at RDM like he’s crazy).

BB: No.

RB: No. Jesus, catch up… we can’t have them visit modern day, it’s already been done.

BB: Voyage home??? C’mon, Ron, think. Try and keep up.

RDM: I’m sorry, I just thought if you wanted to unlock the true comedic potential of say… Data on a bicycle, current day wouldn’t be so–

RB: It’s been done.

BB: Done. Over.

RDM: So you want to go back further..?

RB: I can’t belivee this guy… Brannon, if I ever EVER develop another show, it will be with you. At least you, I can understand.

BB: Ron, Rick wants us to take our futuristic characters and travel back in time to another point in our future.

RB: See?!

RDM: So Picard and crew will travel back in time–

RB: That’s what made Voyage Home such a huge smash!

RDM: –travel back in time to a point that the audience doesn’t even know about?

BB: Completely invented!

RDM: That seems a little superfluous, I must say… why have time travel altogether? I mean, isn’t some of the fun watching iconic characters interact with a reality that we know better than they do?

RB: What the hell did he say? Brannon? What the hell was all that?

BB: He said it’s fine. He said we’ll do it.

RB: Good! Keep in mind the movie has to feel hardcore, even though we can’t afford it. Hardcore and funny! That is all!

(RB exits.)

BB: Okay, we need a time period to visit. A time nobody in the audience knows!

RDM: Or cares about.

BB: Right!

RDM: Part of the fun in time travel, Brannon, is time travel jokes. If we’re inventing the time visited, we might as well just do a pee joke.

BB: Great! You’re right.

RDM: Goddammit. Okay, fine… Borg Queen… let’s set the story around the time we had our first warp flight.

BB: When was that?

RDM: Shit. I’ll need an encyclopedia.

BB: Now we’re cookin.

RDM: So long as I can have my Data-with-emotions arc, I’ll be fine.

BB: About that… I was thinking he could just turn it off.

RDM: What?!

BB: Just off. It’s funnier that way.

RDM: Jesus Christ.

BB: What?

RDM: We established in the last movie that–

BB: –that what?

RDM: Well, the point was to make the chip impossible and to force Data to live with his emotions–

BB: Right. That sucks now.

RDM: It doesn’t suck. It’s continuity.

BB: That stuff the Okudas are all over? Ron, are you an Okuda?

RDM: Am I…? No. No, Brannon, I guess not. Fine… Borg Queen, First Contact, no emotions for Data. Let’s write this bitch.

Or something like that :)

82. Daoud - June 26, 2008

Sorry I called Ron at an inopportune moment. Who could have known? ;)

83. Closettrekker - June 26, 2008

#74—-”I don’t know. I think right now, Shatner’s Kirk being dead is the only way they’re getting by with not having him in the movie. If he were alive the last time we saw him, and they still didn’t include him in the new movie, I’d be more upset. ”

I’m not surprised that you feel that way, and I’m sure that you are not alone in that opinion. But given some of the comments in previous threads, there is apparently a substantial number of fans who just want to know that Kirk has a better ending than the one afforded him in Generations. There was even a comment (absurd as it was to me) in the most recent Shatner debate which indicated that a particular fan is absolutely certain that he cannot enjoy any stories about a young Jim Kirk (even old reruns) while knowing he died the way he did in Generations. Still other posters answered Anthony’s question (as to whether it was more important to them to know that Kirk does not die on Veridian III, or if it was more important for them to see him in STXI) in such a way that indicates they would be happy with knowing by the end of the film that, for example, timeline changes have resulted in Kirk’s survival. I know you have seen such comments as well—like the ones that suggest Spock returning to the 24th Century and answering the door to what is apparently old man Kirk (even if we never see his face).

84. King Anthony - June 26, 2008

Faith is of little import in filmmaking,. Hard numbers are what’s gospel,

RDM’s fannish optimism aside, that won’t cut it unless there’s hype for that film in general adiences, and there ain’t, only in the niche within a niche that certain Trek fans belong to in the SF community.

Want to know how that film will do?: Take Iron Man or Indy Jones’; demos. Tops, $150 million opening week, give or take, hypothetical. We’ll use this figure for my argument as a baseline for what you can expect next year, wishful thinking aside.

Now, of that demo, ask yourselves how many folks thereof are hyped about ST the same way they were pumped about either of the two mentioned, percentage wise, taking even into account basic curiosity about what Abrams’ has cooked up, and the fact that Abrams is involved in the first place.

Leaving in hardcore ST one-percenters, I doub’t you’d get even a quarter of those demos opening week.

85. AJ - June 26, 2008

Anthony:

Great interviews, as usual. Thanks.

I have never taken to BSG, but Ron Moore always seems to have some interesting things to say about his tenure on Trek

86. Closettrekker - June 26, 2008

#82—”RDM’s fannish optimism aside, that won’t cut it unless there’s hype for that film in general adiences, and there ain’t, only in the niche within a niche that certain Trek fans belong to in the SF community.”

There “ain’t” only because it is not even close to time to begin such hype. I would not expect the hype machine to be in full force until late December. There is no question that Paramount has an enormous task in front of them. Convincing mainstream audiences that this is a different kind of Star Trek will not be easy. But JJ Abrams is just the face to do it with, IMO. Besides, there are many fans, like me, who haven’t paid to see a Star Trek movie in the theaters since TUC. A return to the 23rd Century will have us out in droves and in the ticket lines over and over again. A $150 million budget and the hype that goes with a May release will ensure that moviegoers will get the message.

87. Nelson - June 26, 2008

Cool reading, thanks Anthony. I wonder what Ron Moore’s kids thought of TOS?

88. snake - June 26, 2008

yes i agree with RM that Yesterdays Ent shouldve/couldve been the 1st TNG movie (btw YE and GEN share the same director)

It couldve been done one of 2 ways:

a) just taken the basic premise of YE from season 3 and used it for the crossover movie – with the Ent A and Ent D (same way TMP used elements of The Changeling/Doomsday Machine…or TVH used elements of Tomorrow is Yesterday/Assignment Earth)

b) not done the YE ep for TNG in 1990 and saved it for the inevitable TOS/TNG movie using the Ent A instead of the Ent C…they could have even tied it in with the end of Trek VI so instead of the Ent C being blasted into the future due to battling the romulans, itd have been the Ent A battling Chang that caused the rift and had them end up in the 24th Century (makes sense for YE as they were fighting for peace with the klingons..if they had disappeared the assination wouldve happened and war with the klingons started)…maybe even a cliffhanger end to Trek VI in 1991 with Kirk and Co looking on the viewscreen and seeing the Ent D-(wouldnt have been that much of a strech considering Meyer already had TNG stuff in TUC)-leading to Trek VII/TNG I in 1994 with Nimoy directing…or (if that was too convoluted) not done the Trek VI link and just had the Ent A come through the rift at some later point (e.g. on their return home after VI)

However at the point YE was developed there wouldnt probably have been much thought of doing a TNG movie/crossover movie since TNG hadnt really established itself (TNG didnt come into its own untill season 3)….in fact YE was one of the key eps that helped TNG become as successful as it did…

Plus wouldnt it have been a slight concern that TNGs first appearence on the big screen wouldve been totally different to what the series was like (battlehardened alternate versions of TNG crew on a battleship at war with the klingons)..still itd have been different and the norm wouldve been re-established at the end of the film..and they obviously would have had a 10-15 minute prologue set in the normal TNG universe before the Ent A appears and everything changes…..

then again did there really need to be a TOS/TNG crossover movie? after all Trek VI had quite a few links (Worf…Kirks last log entry…klingon peace…Unification on TNG)…

maybe Roddenberrys view that the two crews shouldnt meet was quite valid (like mixing two great tasting soups)

But an TOS/TNG YE movie directed by Nimoy quite possibly may have been THE best star trek movie of all time (yeah even better than Khan or this new one)

89. Kevin H. Martin - June 26, 2008

#72
I pitched several notions, but the one I thought had the best possibilities was the one Moore responded to as well. It had a kid dying in an accident aboardship and this unravels Picard a bit. There’s a domino effect with chain of command, and finally, after Guinan tells him essentially that she’s a bartender, not a therapist, he has to get some ‘actual’ therapy from Troi, and reconcile the ‘it can’t happen here (along with the audience notion of ‘this can’t happen on star trek’) and in so doing, he also works through the current exterior dilemma (I had two different versions of the external dilemma, and I like both of them, but there’s potential for my own huge non-trek sf epic to someday actually happen, and I might actually be able to use some of that there, so I’m not going to list the whole thing.) I do remember one scene I really loved, where Riker is on the phaser range (this is after Picard frays, so he has talked with Riker about the kid and
whose responsibility children are aboardship) and Data comes in and compliments him on only missing one shot, but Riker isn’t lettting himself off the hook, saying something like, “it only takes one miss.” I’m gonna dig it out of the file, I want to reread the Picard/Guinan scene,

Moore seized on this pitch as building on his script for THE BONDING, since mine addressed his concern, which is, ‘why don’t they pop the top and leave the saucer behind in EVERY dangerous situation?’ He thought it was a very valid Picard story (I had strained and come up with a teensy thread that would link the kid with Picard, one that invoked Picard’s really bad attempt at painting from an earlier show), but Jeri Taylor just said Picard would shrug and go back to work. I guess I should have suggested having his nephew die while visiting the ship instead.

I remember the stuff I wrote on this one as being probably the best I managed during that period (I wrote three full spec scripts and seven treatments from my dozen or thirteen story premises, and pitched at least 8 of them, including a spin on HENRY THE IV pt2 that would have had Picard as the old Henry, Wesley as Prince Hal and somebody like Brian Blessed as the Falstaff figure … my teaser had them finding Wesley on summer assignment from Starfleet, and he is a drunken sotted mess.)

BTW, the one notion I pitched that Taylor liked, which was just a comic thread inside another story, was a hokey old, “crew is trying to give Picard a secret bday party, but he always makes a point of being off the ship on his bday to avoid this kind of thing.” Yeah, she wanted to buy a runner that has probably been done on half the ship or crew shows since F-Troop and most sitcoms.

As for the Bond thing, I’m a huge Dalton fan as well, but found eventually that Brosnan DID have the goods, they just never wrote it well enough to demonstrate this. For anybody who wants to see how good Brosnan COULD have been as Bond, rent TAILOR OF PANAMA, in which he gives a smart, physical, terrific performance as a bastard of a spy. If Tarantino had gotten to make HIS notion of CASINO ROYALE, I think it would have been dynamite. As is, I’m quits with new Bond until the Craig era ends (2016 I think they say?). Fortunately, I have FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and some decent Connery Bonds as well as the Daltonpics on DVD, so between those and the novels, I’ll be well served during the next decade. The director wanted to hire a 22 yearold for Bond and was overruled by the producers (one of whom seems to have fancied Craig since TOMB RAIDER and just spent 39 grand to get a kiss from him at a charity event), so that reinforces my view that the Bond in CR
was supposed to be much younger than we’ve ever seen him.

90. Nelson - June 26, 2008

You refer to Barbara Broccoli. I agree, she had the hots for Craig. I also agree that Brosnan was robbed and he fought for a more literary version of Bond and they wouldn’t let him. The Tailor of Panama is a tough movie to watch, he’s not very likable in it, which is the whole point.

Tough call on Yesterday’s Enterprise, how could they have forseen then to hold onto the story for a movie. I think they did the right thing and use it. I just saw it a few days ago and it still is powerful and let rip more Tasha stories. So that was cool.

Generations was not a good movie, too bad it happened.

91. chris pike should be played by chris pine lol - June 26, 2008

the interesting thing is that shatner not being in the new film making 5% of fans not wanna see the film might gain like 35% new fanbase at least becuz shat not bein in the film could be a good sign lol to the average public

92. Closettrekker - June 26, 2008

#87—I appreciate you sharing a bit of those experiences with the rest of us. I sympathize with you and your obvious frustration over the limited directions the writers were allowed to take with those characters. It sounds alot like what we hear from Moore. I might have enjoyed TNG more if they had let some of that slack out. As it was, it never captivated me like the Original Series did. While TOS was on the cutting edge of artistic social commentary at times, TNG was very straight and narrow, IMO.

But it wasn’t all bad. I think “Yesterday’s Enterprise” is one of the finest stories in all of Star Trek history. Sadly, it may have been wasted on the small screen though. If that had been the basis for the first TNG-era film, instead of the much maligned Generations, “history” might be a bit different. As it is, it is the only TNG episode that I will actually sit down and watch by design, whereas I can think of 20 or 25 episodes of TOS I could watch any day of the week.

#88–”Tough call on Yesterday’s Enterprise, how could they have forseen then to hold onto the story for a movie. I think they did the right thing and use it. I just saw it a few days ago and it still is powerful and let rip more Tasha stories. So that was cool.”

Yes, of course it’s easier to say in hindsight, but we do have that benefit, don’t we? It could have made a powerful movie, but it is still a wonderful episode. What would we say about TNG movies then? I wonder.

93. snake - June 26, 2008

87 – “The director wanted to hire a 22 yearold for Bond and was overruled by the producers (one of whom seems to have fancied Craig since TOMB RAIDER and just spent 39 grand to get a kiss from him at a charity event), so that reinforces my view that the Bond in CR was supposed to be much younger than we’ve ever seen him.”

LOL thats what my old man said when he watched CR when it came out and LOATHED it and Craig with a passion..he actually said i bet that producer woman fancied him and thats why he was cast…(i actually liked CR and Craig btw)…

however i disagree that Bond should have been a 22 year old…i know 22 year old Henry Cavill was supposedly down to the last 2 (with Craig)…but really how can Bond be 22? in the CR novel hes supposed to be 37 and that makes total sense for a Commander in the navy whos serving MI6…a 22 year old would be a bit of a stretch…

Yesterdays Ent is a superb episode…that would have made an incredible movie …its not unheard of in hollywood to hang onto scripts untill the time is right

94. Closettrekker - June 26, 2008

#91—A bit of a stretch? He definitely wasn’t supposed to be 22. He is a university-educated veteran of Her Majesty’s armed forces, who is early into his second career (at MI-6). Mid-30′s is definitely about right. If Craig was in direct competition with a 22-year old actor, and given the character’s backstory, Craig was a no-brainer.

95. sean - June 26, 2008

Craig was young enough to be believable as something of a newbie for MI6, but old enough to buy as having previous experience in a related occupation. If they had picked a 22 year old, I think I would have had a difficult time swallowing it. And I certainly have no problem with Craig, who (to me) nailed Bond in a way only Connery and the all-too-brief Dalton did.

Brosnan is a fine actor, and maybe if he’d been given better material to work with I might have taken more of a shine to him (then again, even Connery made the mistake of filming Never Say Never). Goldeneye was definitely a solid Bond flick, as far as I’m concerned.

96. Kraig - June 27, 2008

I appreciate Moore’s thoughts, but I think the concept of Generations was a broken one to begin with. The passing of the torch by killing the current generation thing has been way overplayed in films in general (Offhand, I can think of Highlander and Mission Impossible that tried to do this to ill effect). It just isn’t necessary in most cases.

I may be a conspiracy theorist here, but I can’t help but think that Berman pushed for this so hard because of his disdain for TOS (and to elevate TNG over it in his mind any way). If Roddenberry had been alive, he would have ever allowed this. I think he understood the immortal mythic hero concept better than anyone.

97. Kevin H. Martin - June 27, 2008

92
Bond is a dropout from Eton, unless you buy into some bs in the film of You Only Live Twice. His military duty would have been in his late teens early 20s, and there is plenty of speculation that his first derring-do PREDATES his military service. Bond is described as early-mid 30s in the first books, but the filmmakers — possibly the original screenwriters as well — on CR were saying they figured out he was 28 and that was what they aimed for (a 28 year old was another of the four finalists, dont’ know his name.)

This Bond of the film CR is clearly not seasoned or professional (and IMO it just ain’t even Bond at all), so it is easy to see why casting younger would have been smarter. Anybody who has read John Pearson’s superb ‘biography of 007′ will probably draw the same conclusions (Pearson’s book is practically like an extra Fleming novel, but in a lot of ways, even better than most. It has been out of print for decades, but was republished this year in the US supposedly,) as it has Bond involved with intelligence work in his teens, and having ‘fits of temper’ like those in CR when he is 16, not decades later.

#94
If you look at Berman’s comments about people in togas from TOS and how ridiculous it was (I supposed I shouldn’t talk about “planet of the diapers’/JUSTICE from season 1 TNG, should I?), it is clear he couldn’t come close to looking at TOS objectively. I think of him as Bob Justman without any of the integrity or creativity, so he had the ability to make the show run, just not in any way I appreciated (outside of hiring Piller.)

98. petitspock - June 27, 2008

“I am always struck by how out there by themselves Kirk, Spock and McCoy felt. The Enterprise was always a long way away from Starbases. Messages would take a long time to go back and forth. There was really a sense of them being out there on their own, with no one to turn to for help. There was a great sense of the frontier and the unknown and not knowing what is around the corner and only having themselves to fall back on.”

I completely agree with him. It’s one of the things I really like about TOS. I miss it when I watch TNG episodes.

99. SciFiMetalGirl - June 28, 2008

#67. AdamTrek – I think you better tell us how to re-enable call waiting, as well?

Thanks! ;)

100. Closettrekker - June 28, 2008

#95—”Bond is a dropout from Eton, unless you buy into some bs in the film of You Only Live Twice. His military duty would have been in his late teens early 20s, and there is plenty of speculation that his first derring-do PREDATES his military service. Bond is described as early-mid 30s in the first books, but the filmmakers — possibly the original screenwriters as well — on CR were saying they figured out he was 28 and that was what they aimed for (a 28 year old was another of the four finalists, dont’ know his name.)

This Bond of the film CR is clearly not seasoned or professional (and IMO it just ain’t even Bond at all), so it is easy to see why casting younger would have been smarter. Anybody who has read John Pearson’s superb ‘biography of 007′ will probably draw the same conclusions (Pearson’s book is practically like an extra Fleming novel, but in a lot of ways, even better than most. It has been out of print for decades, but was republished this year in the US supposedly,) as it has Bond involved with intelligence work in his teens, and having ‘fits of temper’ like those in CR when he is 16, not decades later.”

I have some issues with that. Pearson’s “biography” may be an entertaining read, but is hardly a concrete source. Perhaps the people behind Casino Royale wanted Bond’s backstory to be a little more plausible (if you can use that term in application to a Bond film). From what I recall, the novel, “Casino Royale” lists Bond as a former Commander in the Royal Navy. That rank usually requires about 10 years of service in most cases, and there have not been any teenage “officers” in any Western military organization (aside from 1944-45 Nazi Germany) since the First World War. Those factors would place Bond at an age of 32 (at a minimum) when he entered training for MI-6, if it is to be believable at all. The filmmakers may not maintain continuity with the fictional biography you mention as a source, but their backstory makes alot more sense to this former United States Marine officer than Mr. Pearson’s version does.

The bottom line is, you are certainly entitled to your opinion of the “Bond reboot”, but like millions of other fans across the globe, I was thoroughly entertained…and look forward to the next one for the first time in awhile.

On another note, I think you are 100% correct about Rick Berman. I don’t think he even liked TOS.

#96—Excellent point, and I also agree with Moore. I think TNG’s overreliance on technobabble problem solving and lack of frontier romanticism was one of the reasons I enjoyed it much less (along with my obviously more advanced age when it aired, as compared to TOS).

101. R. - July 1, 2008

Ron Moore is amazing.

Can’t wait till BSG returns.

Can’t wait to see what his new films will be.

And can’t wait till May 2009!

102. jdp13 - July 1, 2008

Great interview. This new Sci Fi Trilogy has me very excited.

103. VIRTUALITY: pilot script preview « Unleash your inner geek - July 7, 2008

[...] panel on Saturday night. He also recently discussed a few details of the project with Trek Movie in this section of a 3-part [...]

104. ROH - July 8, 2008

Generations sucked because it lacked a plot – not a budget. Realizing this half way through, they tried to make up for it by resorting to outrageous shock value by killing Kirk. If not for that event, most Trekkers would have skipped the whole move. Hence the “prequel” since the other segments were already in the can.

In retrospect, the writers and greedy studio looked to only hijack the series from the original stars and make it a cookie cutter operation where they could turn out their own lame movies indefinately. What happened is they literally killed the goose who laid the golden eggs. Now, with the ability to rewrite history as only hollywood can, they are trying to “make gold” without bringing back the golden goose. I believe history has already proven alchemy is a dead science.

Ron Moore and the new alchemists can KMA. If the movie was a stock, I’d sell it short like a landslide.

105. Última parte da entrevista com Ron Moore « Startrekbr’s Weblog - July 14, 2008

[...] com a entrevista concedida ao site The Trek Movie, agora em sua terceira e última parte, o produtor Ron Moore falou mais um pouco a respeito de [...]

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.