When is a "Star Trek" movie not a "Star Trek" movie? This doesn’t seem to be a problem the suits at Paramount are aware of. If J.J. Abrams‘ 2009 reboot pushed the franchise in the modern age while keeping the integrity of the property at its core, 2013’s"Star Trek Into Darkness" completely missed the mark, devolving into a bland sci-fi action movie that had Spock uncharacteristically running down bad guys in the film’s climax. Similarly, it would seem that as far as the third installment for the reboot goes, the studio is less concerned about doing what’s right for the brand than it is attempting to find the formula for massive box office success.
Speaking with Radio Times, Simon Pegg, aka Scotty, who has been tasked with co-writing the script for "Star Trek 3," reveals that Paramount had some interesting concerns about the first draft that was submitted before he arrived. “They had a script for ‘Star Trek’ that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y,” he said, which seems like an odd thing to say about "Star Trek" movie. But as he explains, Paramount wanted a film that perhaps doesn’t evoke the franchise’s more headier aspects.
I can already hear the diehard "Star Trek" fans crying foul, but then again they haven’t exactly been happy with this new blockbuster incarnation since 2009. And to be fair, Marvel movies are largely big, broad adventure films, just with lots more spandex and CGI. Thoughts? Are Paramount possibly pushing things too far? Hit up the comments section. [via The Guardian]
