Yet another "Star Trek" thread: WI "ST1:WOK"?

Pretty much what it says on the tin.:p

It's agreed "STTMP" was pretty dull. The options I've seen for a different "TMP", killing JFK or creating the myth of the Titans, seem really bad.

So, WI a different director, or writer-director team, go looking at the series for a "spinoff" idea, & latch on "Space Seed", instead?

This would IMO get rid of Stephen Collins as Decker (a character I never liked, & IMO not well cast for such a role) & Persis Khambatta as Ilia (IMO another bad call).

This would also set the bar higher for any movie sequel.

How does this impact subsequent Trek development?
 
Pretty much what it says on the tin.:p

It's agreed "STTMP" was pretty dull. The options I've seen for a different "TMP", killing JFK or creating the myth of the Titans, seem really bad.

So, WI a different director, or writer-director team, go looking at the series for a "spinoff" idea, & latch on "Space Seed", instead?

This would IMO get rid of Stephen Collins as Decker (a character I never liked, & IMO not well cast for such a role) & Persis Khambatta as Ilia (IMO another bad call).

This would also set the bar higher for any movie sequel.

How does this impact subsequent Trek development?

The biggest problem with this idea is the fact that most of the script for Wrath of Khan was written in a twelve days period by Nicholas Meyer.
In 1978 when Star Trek TMP was being filmed, Meyer was just a writer with two Sherlock Holmes books to his credit and the script to Seven Percent Solution under his belt.
Meyer at the time is trying to get his first Film Time after Time off the ground.
First Roddenberry has to kick off the film in order to get rid of the Voyager Return script. (A concept that he first suggest back in 1974 in the writer bible for the unmade TV series Genesis Two)
It was going to be the Pilot for Star Trek Phase 2.
So Roddenberry has to be fired from TMP before you could make Wrath of Khan in it place.

Then you have to come up with a reason for Meyer to be brought on the project.
Your best bet might be Leonard Nimoy. He was a big Sherlock Holmes fan and would have read Meyer Book's The Seven Percent Solution and The West End Horror.
He convinces Paramount to bring in Meyer.

But we still not at Wrath of Khan yet.
In OTL, Meyer base the script on several drafts that introduce Khan and the Genesis device.
Meyer did not come up with those ideas.
So we still need some other people brainstorming to inspire Meyer.

And Lastly, there is no way that Paramount is going to let a First Time Director handle a Production of the size that Star Trek TMP was.
So Who will be the Director?
(OTL Meyer had Directed Time After Time. And the Sets and Models were already build for TMP so there is less of a cost for Paramount.)
Robert Wise would not be a good choice for a action film like Wrath of Khan.
(Some question his Direction on TMP)

So before you can replace TMP with Wrath you have to deal with these issues.
 
Another big problem, Ricardo Montalban is currently in Hawaii starring on Fantasy Island (ABC-TV) as "Mr. Roarke".
 
No. TWOK's themes don't fit for a reintroduction to the TOS cast. They needed to make a movie that could reintroduce the cast dynamics and the sense of wonder/adventure that the best episodes of the TV series evoked. TMP was on the right track until it went all "2001". It didn't have to be Star Wars--we got that in 2009--but TMP could have been trimmed down and perked up a bit to provide a rousing little adventure that got us back into the universe. Then, you get TWOK.

Of course, a more successful TMP might kill TWOK, so...maybe we just leave things as they are.
 
unclepatrick said:
First Roddenberry has to kick off the film in order to get rid of the Voyager Return script.
I'm seeing this as the biggest obstacle to overcome.
unclepatrick said:
Then you have to come up with a reason for Meyer to be brought on the project.
Your best bet might be Leonard Nimoy. He was a big Sherlock Holmes fan and would have read Meyer Book's The Seven Percent Solution and The West End Horror.
He convinces Paramount to bring in Meyer.
I like this a lot.
unclepatrick said:
Meyer base the script on several drafts that introduce Khan and the Genesis device.
Meyer did not come up with those ideas.
So we still need some other people brainstorming to inspire Meyer.
Honestly, I'd happily get rid of the Genesis device. If it works, it's got scary genocidal implications...:eek::eek::eek: Plus, I have (had) real trouble believing it would work anyhow.
unclepatrick said:
And Lastly, there is no way that Paramount is going to let a First Time Director handle a Production of the size that Star Trek TMP was.
So Who will be the Director?
That, I really can't answer. My first choice would be Ridley Scott, based on "Bladerunner", but... Frankenheimer could do action reasonably well, but I'm not sure he can handle SF well. Vince McEveety might be a good choice (he'd do a Herbie film released '77). James Goldstone (who did "Rollercoaster")? Or, if you'll go a bit off-beat, Scorsese? Or Sidney Poitier (who'd do "A Piece of the Action", released '77)?
doublegoodprole said:
No. TWOK's themes don't fit for a reintroduction to the TOS cast. They needed to make a movie that could reintroduce the cast dynamics and the sense of wonder/adventure that the best episodes of the TV series evoked.
Do they? AFAIK, Trekkers wanted to see the old gang back together regardless. This would do it, & tie back to the series directly, which "TMP" didn't (unless you count the unfortunate similarity with "The Changeling").

I'm seeing *"WOK" somewhat differently: with the heavy Moby Dick emphasis (& hopefully Meyer, or whoever, doesn't lose that thematic angle), it doesn't matter what Khan is after, because it's really Kirk he wants. And this lets established fans, & new ones, see two sides of the cast: how they handle an existing problem, & realizing there's "back story' or "old business"...

That, IMO, could color the next film or two, as well. Not to say all the films should be doing is rehashing old material, but a new spin on a problem isn't a bad idea. So there could well be a second encounter with a Doomsday Machine, or a look at the effects after "Balance of Terror"--especially if there's interest, or intent, to launch a new series.

The characters are older, the fanbase is older--they aren't necessarily going to respond the same way as to "TOS". Nor, IMO, is there perforce a demand for "where no man". Especially not when it leads to Vger--or Q.:eek::eek:
 
The first movie needs to be BIG SCREEN. People want to see something they can only see in theaters. They don't want a glorified TV episode.

They also want to see something that reminds them of Star Trek, and could only happen in Star Trek - not any generic SF movie.

They also want it to be exciting. The major problem with TMP is that it slow moving and boring.

Nicholas Meyers hit these marks in Wrath of Khan. It built on a great episode, and the crew fought for their lives against a dangerous foe.

I would suggest the first movie use the Klingons as villains. They are the obvious choice. I would make a group of Klingons go rogue or terrorist and operate without sanction of the Klingon Empire. That prevents a war between the Federation and Klingons hijacking the movies. Maybe it is dubious whether this group of Klingons are really rogue (as opposed to plausible deniability), but that is the official story.

This allows us to have a great Enterprise vs Klingon star battle - which is what everyone wants to see - without dealing with a war. Even better if they reveal that one of the Klingons behind it was one of the Klingons from the original show - best selections would be John Colicos (Kor) or Michael Ansara (Kang). They had the most presence and menace.

We have something important the Klingons want to do, and which the Enterprise will stop them. It has to BIG. Stealing something like the GENESIS Device would be good. But maybe it is a new kind of dilithium cystal research that would change the balance of power - a Federation Manhattan Project kind of thing. Or maybe it is a false flag operation to push the Federation to go to war against the Tholians or other independent power. or maybe it is a race to recover some ancient alien artifact (which may not actually do what the Klingons and Federation thinks it does; this is a good option if Roddenberry wants any metaphysical speculation).
 
I recall watching Tomorrow with Tom Snyder in the mid 1970's. He had as guests Deforest Kelley and 2 other TOS cast members (IIRC Doohan and Koenig) Anyway I distinctly recall Kelley gushing with enthusiasm about the show. Found out that all the episodes were wonderful and fantastic. Really? Anyway there was discussion about a possible movie in the works and that there were drafts of scripts floating around. Cigarette in hand Snyder pressed Kelley for what sort of ideas were in these scripts and eventually got him to reveal that in a truly fantastic script

<drum roll>

"The Enterprise meets God"

Hmm does that sound familiar to anyone?
 
The thing is that ST:TMP didn't start off as a movie. When filming started, it was going to be the pilot for a new TV series - Star Trek:phase II - which would be broadcast on a new network, Paramount TV Service. Due to lack of advertiser interest, that network was never launched. However, the success of Star Wars convinced Paramount to take the half finished pilot and turn it into a movie. It's hardly surprising that it looks padded out.

Wrath of Kahn is probably not the right story to introduce a new TV series, so to get that made as the first movie is going to require a very different development history to OTL.

Cheers,
Nigel.
 
My question is, how much does any *"STTMP" have to be something to appeal outside the (extensive) fanbase? Let's presume the budget isn't insane (& IDK what the salaries looked like, but...), not $50mil before they shoot a foot of film.:eek: Let's also assume they don't go nuts on SPFX (because they get it in the can, or into post, before "SW" appears).

How big does *"WOK" have to be as a film to get Paramount to sign off?

In fact, if we treat it like a pilot, why not "WOK"? It ties into "TOS". Maybe even it forces the old gang back together (a kind of "Blues Brothers" meets "TOS")--& they end up saying, "Y'know, I never did anything since that was as interesting." Even if Leonard doesn't come back. Even if it means promotions or roles shifting. Even if it means Kirk getting killed because everybody absolutely refuses to work with Shatner on a series ever again.:p

Does it have to aim for "Star Wars" box office? Let alone achieve it?
 
NCW8 said:
That would certainly have shock value. The trope of Dead Star Walking was far less commonly used in the Seventies, but it wasn't entirely unknown.
It would parallel OTL. Plus, if you cast the right guy as *Decker, & your story is strong, hero Kirk making the heroic sacrifice actually makes story sense.

The other option is to inflict an injury akin to Chris Pike's in "The Menagerie" & have Kirk "sacrifice" himself rather than live that way... (Which reminds me a bit too much of "Doomsday Machine"...:eek:)
 
It would parallel OTL. Plus, if you cast the right guy as *Decker, & your story is strong, hero Kirk making the heroic sacrifice actually makes story sense.

Having Spock sacrifice himself in the second film of the series isn't quite the same as Kirk sacrificing himself in the first, especially since it was part of the films general approach of deconstructing Kirk.

Consider:
  • In TOS, Kirk deals with various situations and then sails off, not considering the consequences. In WOK, the consequences of exiling Kahn come back to bite him.
  • In TOS, Kirk has his girl of the week. In WOK he meets the son that he didn't know he had.
  • In TOS Kirk gets away with ignoring regulations. In WOK, ignoring regulations allow Kahn to attack the Enterprise before Kirk can order the shields to be raised.
  • Finally, in TOS Kirk often finds ways out of situations that don't really cost him anything. This is underlined by Kirk's solution to the Kobayashi Maru exercies. In WOK, Kirk gets away but only by losing his best friend (admittedly the impact of this is reduced when Spock gets better in the third film)

Decker was part of the set up for the ST: Phase II series. In ST:TNG his character evolved into Riker. Similarly Ilia the Deltan became Troi the Betan. If the movie doesn't grow out of plans for a TV Series then it's less likely that these characters will be included - note that IOTL neither appeared in movies after ST:TMP.


Cheers,
Nigel.
 
Last edited:
NCW8 said:
Having Spock sacrifice himself in the second film of the series isn't quite the same as Kirk sacrificing himself in the first, especially since it was part of the films general approach of deconstructing Kirk.

Consider:
  • In TOS, Kirk deals with various situations and then sails off, not considering the consequences. In WOK, the consequences of exiling Kahn come back to bite him.
  • In TOS, Kirk has his girl of the week. In WOK he meets the son that he didn't know he had.
  • In TOS Kirk gets away with ignoring regulations. In WOK, ignoring regulations allow Kahn to attack the Enterprise before Kirk can order the shields to be raised.
  • Finally, in TOS Kirk often finds ways out of situations that don't really cost him anything. This is underlined by Kirk's solution to the Kobayashi Maru exercies. In WOK, Kirk gets away but only by losing his best friend (admittedly the impact of this is reduced when Spock gets better in the third film)

Decker was part of the set up for the ST: Phase II series. In ST:TNG his character evolved into Riker. Similarly Ilia the Deltan became Troy the Betan. If the movie doesn't grow out of plans for a TV Series then it's less likely that these characters will be included - note that IOTL neither appeared in movies after ST:TMP.
I am aware of that... What I'm saying is, if the producers really wanted (needed) to get rid of Shatner, they could do it, & they could give the film added impact in the process.

The question is (& you're right), is this meant to set up *"Phase 2"? I'm not guessing either way. Let's say it was intended to, until Paramount decides against & releases the TVM theatrically, instead; that's in line with OTL's decision process. Now, if the film does well, that could change...
 
Originally Posted by unclepatrick
And Lastly, there is no way that Paramount is going to let a First Time Director handle a Production of the size that Star Trek TMP was.
So Who will be the Director?

That, I really can't answer. My first choice would be Ridley Scott, based on "Bladerunner", but... Frankenheimer could do action reasonably well, but I'm not sure he can handle SF well. Vince McEveety might be a good choice (he'd do a Herbie film released '77). James Goldstone (who did "Rollercoaster")? Or, if you'll go a bit off-beat, Scorsese? Or Sidney Poitier (who'd do "A Piece of the Action", released '77)?
Quote:

Sorry, but there no way that the studio go to let Ridley Scott a Director with only one credit, 1976 the Duelists going to do Star Trek.
Beside he doing a cheesy Alien Monster film for Fox.
(Remember that before Alien came out, no one thought that Alien would be a good Film. Dan OBannon screenplay had been around for a number of years and was considered by most people who read it as a Campy script. )

John Frankenheimer had a serious problem with Alcohol in the late 1970's, which was why he did not direct anything between 1977's Black Sunday and 1981 The Challenge .

Vince McEveety was doing another film for Disney, in 1979 the Apple Dumpling gang rides again.
(I think he would have been a good choice but I not sure how committed to Disney he was)

James Goldstone is the best choice that you listed.
He directed a episode of the Original series "Where No Man had gone before"
and Roller coaster was a fun film. Plus he not working on any film in 1978-79.

Other Choices to consider Richard Donner who was fired from Superman Two but he was a hot director at the time with the first Omen film and Superman one to his credits and he has experience on big Special effect films as proved by Superman.
Also in late 1950's and 1960's he had directed a lot of televison so he had worked with some the actors in Star Trek.
(I know he work with DeForest Kelly and George Takei. I think he had work with Nimoy but I forget what show they work togather on)

Another possibility was Oliver Stone. It a long shot but he had directed a film Seizure in 1974 and had just written Midnight Express in 1978 ( He would win a Oscar for that film) and was working on Conan The Barbarian for Edward Pressman at the time.
 
I never like the idea of Decker. I would have rather seen Sulu promoted to Captain and then have him not be happy to have Captain Kirk show up and Take over his Ship.

And for First Officer how about Uhura ?
 
I am aware of that... What I'm saying is, if the producers really wanted (needed) to get rid of Shatner, they could do it, & they could give the film added impact in the process.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you didn't.


The question is (& you're right), is this meant to set up *"Phase 2"? I'm not guessing either way. Let's say it was intended to, until Paramount decides against & releases the TVM theatrically, instead; that's in line with OTL's decision process. Now, if the film does well, that could change...

Well, the point I was so clumsily trying to make is that it is all a bit too much for the first episode of a TV Series. For a movie it's fine, but a pilot episode should be trying to ease it's audience into the new series. The best comparison is DS9, which also did a fair bit of deconstruction of the Star Trek Universe, but not in the first episode and not much in the first season. In short, for the Wrath of Kahn to be the first Star Trek movie, it needs to have been developed as a movie from the beginning, not as a pilot for a new TV Series.

Cheers,
Nigel.
 
NCW8 said:
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you didn't.
Noted, & I may have overreacted.
NCW8 said:
Well, the point I was so clumsily trying to make is that it is all a bit too much for the first episode of a TV Series. For a movie it's fine, but a pilot episode should be trying to ease it's audience into the new series. The best comparison is DS9, which also did a fair bit of deconstruction of the Star Trek Universe, but not in the first episode and not much in the first season. In short, for the Wrath of Kahn to be the first Star Trek movie, it needs to have been developed as a movie from the beginning, not as a pilot for a new TV Series.
That's the big question. I've presumed from the start this was a standalone movie when it finished, but it could have started as a TVM pilot, which would explain its use of Khan rather than a "standalone" story.
unclepatrick said:
I never like the idea of Decker. I would have rather seen Sulu promoted to Captain and then have him not be happy to have Captain Kirk show up and Take over his Ship.

And for First Officer how about Uhura ?
I'd have loved to see Sulu get it. I'd oppose Uhura or Scotty for the reason "TOS" & "TNG" writers ignored: neither wore Command colors. I would have loved to see a "reboot" of that, establishing clearly Starfleet follows the RN model: if you're not command qualified, you don't command a starship, no matter how damn senior you are.:rolleyes: (That would have meant losing Spock as XO for the run of "TOS", I know. Not a big loss. Set up a hawkish character as XO & use him instead of shoehorning in others...:rolleyes:)

With *"WOK", that could happen--& it might even be Decker, sharply disagreeing with Sulu for trying to save Kirk at the risk of the ship; enough so, the writers could have Sulu saying, "Mr. Decker, if you feel so strongly opposed to my methods, I suggest you request a transfer. I'll grant it without prejudice. If you continue to fight me, however...", with the result Decker does quit & you put somebody new (*Shelby would be my first choice, but a female Andorian would be even better:cool:) in the XO's seat.
unclepatrick said:
Sorry, but there no way that the studio go to let Ridley Scott a Director with only one credit, 1976 the Duelists going to do Star Trek.
Beside he doing a cheesy Alien Monster film for Fox.
(Remember that before Alien came out, no one thought that Alien would be a good Film. Dan OBannon screenplay had been around for a number of years and was considered by most people who read it as a Campy script. )

John Frankenheimer had a serious problem with Alcohol in the late 1970's, which was why he did not direct anything between 1977's Black Sunday and 1981 The Challenge .
:(:( Figures...
unclepatrick said:
Vince McEveety was doing another film for Disney, in 1979 the Apple Dumpling gang rides again.
(I think he would have been a good choice but I not sure how committed to Disney he was)
Looking at this, he might have had the time between "Herbie" & "The Busters" (unless his Disney contract wouldn't allow it).
unclepatrick said:
James Goldstone is the best choice that you listed.
He directed a episode of the Original series "Where No Man had gone before"
and Roller coaster was a fun film. Plus he not working on any film in 1978-79.
Good!:)
unclepatrick said:
Other Choices to consider Richard Donner who was fired from Superman Two but he was a hot director at the time with the first Omen film and Superman one to his credits and he has experience on big Special effect films as proved by Superman.

Also in late 1950's and 1960's he had directed a lot of televison so he had worked with some the actors in Star Trek.
(I know he work with DeForest Kelly and George Takei. I think he had work with Nimoy but I forget what show they work togather on)

Another possibility was Oliver Stone. It a long shot but he had directed a film Seizure in 1974 and had just written Midnight Express in 1978 ( He would win a Oscar for that film) and was working on Conan The Barbarian for Edward Pressman at the time.
I'd oppose Donner, because I didn't like any of the Superman films, & Stone because he's yet to make I film I liked.:rolleyes:

Looking at it again, & maybe it's a budget buster, but Spielberg crosses my mind. His work on "Duel" & "Sugarland Express" shows he can pace a film well, tho it would probably butterfly "CE3K"--& cost overruns on "Jaws" are bound to give Paramount pause.

Looks like Goldstone's the best choice. *"WOK" would make him (almost?) as famous as Lucas, wouldn't it?:cool:
 
I'd have loved to see Sulu get it. I'd oppose Uhura or Scotty for the reason "TOS" & "TNG" writers ignored: neither wore Command colors. I would have loved to see a "reboot" of that, establishing clearly Starfleet follows the RN model: if you're not command qualified, you don't command a starship, no matter how damn senior you are.:rolleyes: (That would have meant losing Spock as XO for the run of "TOS", I know. Not a big loss. Set up a hawkish character as XO & use him instead of shoehorning in others...:rolleyes:)

With *"WOK", that could happen--& it might even be Decker, sharply disagreeing with Sulu for trying to save Kirk at the risk of the ship; enough so, the writers could have Sulu saying, "Mr. Decker, if you feel so strongly opposed to my methods, I suggest you request a transfer. I'll grant it without prejudice. If you continue to fight me, however...", with the result Decker does quit & you put somebody new (*Shelby would be my first choice, but a female Andorian would be even better:cool:) in the XO's seat.

Some interesting ideas there.
A strong female type would be good if we could keep the Power that be from deciding that she would have to have a romance with one of the other crew members.


Looking at this, he might have had the time between "Herbie" & "The Busters" (unless his Disney contract wouldn't allow it).

I never found anything on the limitation that Disney puts on it Directors.


I'd oppose Donner, because I didn't like any of the Superman films, & Stone because he's yet to make I film I liked.:rolleyes:

Fair enough.

Looking at it again, & maybe it's a budget buster, but Spielberg crosses my mind. His work on "Duel" & "Sugarland Express" shows he can pace a film well, tho it would probably butterfly "CE3K"--& cost overruns on "Jaws" are bound to give Paramount pause.

CE3k is 1977, When did the shooting start on TMP?
But I agree that it would be unlikely that Speilbeg would be considered.

Looks like Goldstone's the best choice. *"WOK" would make him (almost?) as famous as Lucas, wouldn't it?:cool:

Not sure it would make Goldstone famous.
Meyers did not become a Superstar Director after WOK so why would Goldstone.
 
unclepatrick said:
Not sure it would make Goldstone famous. Meyers did not become a Superstar Director after WOK so why would Goldstone.
Regrettably true. (I did say "almost".)
 
Top