My husband and I – just old enough to remember TOS in first run – saw ST XI three times. Being less enamored of pure action films than my
husband, I was less satisfied (see above) with it than he was, but I still
greatly enjoyed it. I was impressed with Urban, Pine, Quinto and
Soldana. My husband and I both suspect (heresy alert!) that we will
end up liking Pine as Kirk better than we did Shatner. Shatner brought a lot to the table as Kirk; still, even as a teenager, I never was a Jim Kirk
girl. Which brings me back to where I started: More McCoy. Please.

P.S.
I find referring to the new film as ST IX confusing. ST 09 is fine, but
ST IX was Insurrection. . . .

That is your prerogative.

The fact remains that the NYT reported that Mr. Kurtzman said that the studio required of them “a very specific kind of thinking” which Mr. Orci seems to contend in no way interfered with the script.

Now I can see how some, such as yourself, could see that as a mandate. I’m not so sure as the quoting of what the author says Kurtzman said seems very muddled as a piece of reporting. It does seem to me to be something that had to be somewhat restrictive but Mr. Orci has said there was no studio interference with the scriptwriting. An article on the ViewMaster project reported that K/O had a preexisting script that they felt that introducing a ViewMaster fit like a missing piece of a puzzle. I’m not sure how their creative process is working. It does appear as if requirements are being met but it doesn’t appear as if the creative team views those as “mandates”.

However, if I go with your mandate thinking, it does appear as though Kurtzman is implying that the alternate universe “thinking” was required by Paramount. This would not be surprising to me as I’ve said before that Paramount had to make this Trek quite differently than it had ever been done before, via a license, and it would make sense that they’d want to isolate their new Trek and its creations as much as possible from the intellectual property that CBS now ultimately controls as there was a tug of war going on between the two camps (Viacom versus CBS) in the parent company that holds both even before they were cleaved in two.

As I said in #333, Star Trek is NOT Transformers, nor will it ever be. Transformers is based on a toy line for kids. Paramount is not going to start making mandates to JJ & his team now that they’ve brought the recently moribund franchise Trek back to life. Damon Lindelof is a great writer. JJ Abrams is a smart man. He suggests the next Trek will be more meaningful, and I believe him.

There’s some confusion. I wasn’t suggesting a new writing team. I was suggesting that it wouldn’t be surprising for Paramount to ask them “Now let’s try the very specific kind of thinking that got us the world for XFORMERS 2 on ST:SS.”

According to a report I read from the era TMP’s non-domestic performance was Europe-wide and so good that it was the deciding factor to green-light TWOK. Apparently, it wasn’t until after that, that that capital was squandered to the isolated markets that you cite.

“Space battles, space battles, space battles, that’s all the studio ever wants is space battles. Space battles, that’s not what Star Trek is about.” – Gene Roddenberry

Actually, it’s English-speaking countries—-whether they lie on the North American continent or not. But whether you feel it’s “enough” or not, that’s really all there has been for the Star Trek film franchise since 1979 (with the exception of a usually strong showing in Germany).

But my friend Shatner Fan is correct. Doing something about the performance globally (beyond the likes of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc.) is going to be about the marketing department at Paramount. It has nothing to do with announcing a new writing team. That’s just silly.

#340—”The temptation to segue using that typo is so very strong. Must resist :)”

Lol. Yes, of course….That should read “principals”, not “principles”. Cute.

#341—”If the reasoning is weak then disprove it by example, name another picture that was better written than ST by this same team that also did better B.O.”

That makes no sense at all.

Your implication in post #338 was that hiring new writers might positively affect Star Trek’s box-office performance abroad. You’re asking SFP to ‘disprove by example’ something for which you’ve provided no evidence or basis yourself.

How is the studio telling them (Exactly as they did for this their first Trek movie according to Kurtzman.) that they want “a very specific kind of thinking” messing with their story any more than it did for their first Trek? Both pictures were written by the same team and Orci contends there was no interference in writing STAR TREK.

If the reasoning is weak then disprove it by example, name another picture that was better written than ST by this same team that also did better B.O.

The temptation to segue using that typo is so very strong. Must resist :)

But I look forward to it too. I think ST09 was a good action/space-opera explodey film and I’ve got no problem with plunking down a little green for more of the same … but until something alarming shows me otherwise, what I’m looking forward to is just that: more of the same.

And that’s fine. It’ll tide me over ’til the next creative team comes along (and then, odds are, I’ll feel the same way about whatever they do … unless it’s Brad Bird and Pixar) ;)

If Paramount wants Trek to do bigger box office overseas, they’re going to try new marketing methods, or bringing in established box office stars, not mess with Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof’s story.

The answer to that is obvious to anyone with a planet-wide perspective: because Paramount would like it to exploit the rest of the world market to the tune that XFORMERS 2 did.

Or to continue the Bond them for ST sequel titles:

NORTH AMERICA IS NOT ENOUGH

I happen to think they already have.

Not only do I like what Bob and Alex did on Star Trek (2009), but my wife and I also regularly indulge in “Fringe” on a weekly basis. I certainly think they have some skill.

Although I would change one or two things about the story if I could, I think they did an excellent job. I don’t think they failed to deliver on anything they needed to. As with my other favorite Star Trek films—-TWOK, TMP, TVH (each of which was quite unique in comparison to the others), I will enjoy ST09 for many more repeat viewings (I’ve already seen it 4 times)…and I look forward to what Bob, Alex and Damon (whose work on “Lost” is great too) write for the sequel—-now that the principles have been properly introduced.