British actor Simon Pegg (Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol) recently opened up to the Radio Times about his thoughts on geek culture. While his somewhat controversial rant about the "dumbing down" of modern cinema may have seized headlines, it was his comments about the upcoming Star Trek sequel that made for a far more interesting read.
Earlier this year, Pegg was revealed to be co-writing the sequel to JJ Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness, following Roberto Orci's departure from the project. Rumored to be titled Star Trek Beyond, details about the film's plot have so-far been sketchy at best, but Pegg revealed that the higher-ups at Paramount have been pushing for a "more inclusive" tone this time around:
"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. 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."
It's interesting to see Pegg bring up The Avengers here. The Marvel flick smashed box office records in 2012, and has been used as a blueprint for success by much of the blockbuster movie industry ever since - with mixed results. A shift in tone for Star Trek 3 could end up being a recipe for success for Paramount - and yet it could quite easily backfire as well. Indeed, many fans' complaints about Into Darkness were focused on the sequel's attempts to emulate the bleak nature of 'dark and gritty' box office hits like Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.
What do you think? Should classic franchises like the Star Trek series change and evolve in order to meet popular demand - or would you rather they stayed true to their original tone? As always, leave your thoughts down below!