Friday, March 16, 2007

I am a BIG DORK

Dear Mr. Abrams:

While I understand the allure of big-name stars, I wish to express my concerns with rumored casting decisions for Star Trek XI. The original casts of “Star Trek: The Original Series,” “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine,” and “Star Trek: Voyager” brought dynamism to the series and over the course of 7 years (5 in the case of TOS), the actors and actresses became synonymous with the characters themselves (sometimes to their dismay).

Part of the reason Nemesis failed (along with the short-lived “Star Trek: Enterprise”) was producer Rick Berman’s general weltanschauung when it comes to the series. No one can argue that Star Trek is a huge and enormously profitable franchise, but as with any business, producers like Berman and yourself must remember their audience. Star Trek’s audience is two-fold: self-professing geeks for whom the series represents fantasy, escape, and a world where technological and moral progress go hand-in-hand, and nostalgia fans who remember watching it at a time when the world was just beginning to explore the cosmos first-hand. Either way, Star Trek has become an oasis of idealism in an otherwise cynical world (evidence of this can be confirmed by looking at the launch dates of its most successful serials—at key points during the Cold War and shortly after the end of the first Gulf War), and for a Star Trek film to succeed, every aspect of it must live up to that image.

In addition, most of the Star Trek casts have had limited fame or television exposure prior to participating in a Star Trek series. Their status as relative unknowns (at least to the American TV audience) contributes to the completeness of their Star Trek personae. Their fame, once gained, is often a result, not a precursor, to their connection to Star Trek.

None of this is meant to suggest that you should cast acting novices, but you should consider the impact of the choices you are making. The rumor mill lists Matt Damon as the top choice for Kirk—a disastrous move that would alienate audiences. While Damon is a highly competent actor, his style is temperamental and fluid—two things Kirk (as played by William Shatner, at least) hasn’t been. Damon’s performances lack the magnetism to make him a convincing Star Trek captain.

Likewise, Adrian Brody’s performances are incredibly emotive, making them entirely inappropriate for a Vulcan. Even Spock, whose human side provides him with more emotional “give” than other Vulcan characters, is still at heart a logical being. Adrian Brody’s great for a film with waterworks, but Star Trek XI should not be that film. Rumor has it that Zachary Quinto has expressed an interest in this part. Please take him seriously. He is a fine actor with a history in series’ which share an audience with Star Trek.

That said, the other rumored casting choices—Gary Sinese as Bones and Daniel Dae Kim as Sulu—are both suitable. Kim has a history with Star Trek, and Gary Sinese shares the same wry sense of humor and mischievous nature as his Star Trek counterpart.

Please consider these requests from a long-time fan, fellow filmmaker, and critical theorist. Casting makes a huge difference in whether a film succeeds or fails. Any Star Trek fan will have a vested interest in seeing this film come to life. Don’t disappoint them by privileging mainstream fantasy over a loyal audience and fan base. Please, please don’t mess this up.

Labels: , ,

2 Comments:

At March 19, 2007 4:18 PM , Dad said...

Hi Clara

Although I agree with many of your points, several Star Trek actors had fine careers prior to their roles in the series. LeVar Burton, for example, was a lead in Roots.

 
At March 23, 2007 12:43 PM , Elainers said...

Hello Dorkster! I'm back to the blogosphere, and while I can't intelligently comment on your most recent blog, I'm sure you'll enjoy my most recent one on the wonderful lovable electric car. :) Have a happy weekend.
love,
-E

 

Post a Comment

<< Home