It looks like we can go ahead and start referring to Star Trek 3 as Star Trek Beyond! I added the exclamation point to the title there because it just feels right - Star Trek Beyond is just calling for an exclamation point, don't you think? It's taken a while to get to there but after losing some writers and directors along the way, we're at the point now where we know the title, some vague ideas about the premise and a little more insight into what Paramount wants to achieve with the new movie.
Star Trek Beyond the Valley of the Blog
As has been the case lately this information is coming from Simon Pegg, who has beamed down an interesting look at the state of affairs on what the studio is after with the new Star Trek 3 script and, while he's at it, went and confirmed the title of the new movie as well. Strangely enough, all of this Star Trek 3 news comes wrapped in a some controversy surrounding our intrepid Scotty and Star Trek 3 script writer as Simon Pegg vented to Radio Times about the current state of geek culture and the effects it may be having on society, his career and everything in between.
After his interview ended up making the internet rounds on the usual websites, Simon Pegg took to his own blog to set the record straight and signed off by adding... "back to writing Star Trek Beyond," and, "p.s. Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan are also Stormtroopers in The Force Awakens," referring to his other loose lipped incident where he recently outed Daniel Craig's secret Star Wars Episode 7 role as a Stormtrooper. The whole blog post is worth a read and you can find it by following the link -> here.
To Avengers Box Office and Beyond
Pegg revealed some insight into what Paramount is hoping to achieve with Star Trek 3 and described what the studio told him when he was approached to take over scriptwriting duties on the sequel. What it essentially comes down to is that there's a big difference between what kind of box office business Star Trek Into Darkness did and what the first Avengers movie did and this is what Paramount to figure out - how to make a Star Trek movie that is "more inclusive", as Pegg puts it.
"Avengers Assemble, which is a pretty nerdy, comic-book, supposedly niche thing, made $1.5bn dollars. Star Trek Into Darkness made half a billion, which is still brilliant. But it means that, according to the studio, there’s still $1bn worth of box office that don’t go and see Star Trek. And they want to know why."
This is always a tricky proposition when it comes to adaptations - which you could argue that the recent Star Trek movies have been. But for any beloved property, especially one with such a huge cult following like Star Trek, when it comes to changing things up in order to attract more fans you run into the issue of disappointing the fans of the original thing. In this case Star Trek fans were already grumbling about Star Trek Into Darkness loosing site of the original appeal of Star Trek and Simon Pegg had previously addressed those concerns, saying Star Trek 3 would see the crew on their 5 year mission and going back to the shows roots of exploration of the final frontier.
In the interview, Pegg revealed that idea behind Paramount's approach to Star Trek 3 was to "make a Western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent." This may sound a little odd at first, but this is essentially what all of the Star Trek television series have done in many of their episodes. The shows have proven that this is often an excellent way of producing an accessible story that can also sneak in some great mythology and deepen the Star Trek universe.
What do you think? What do you make of the new title: Star Trek Beyond!? Do you like the idea of Star Trek 3 going in a more audience friendly and accessible route? Take to the comments section and keep the conversation going!