FADE IN: The Making of Star Trek Insurrection - A Textbook on Screenwriting from Within the Star Trek Universe

by Michael Piller

In keeping with Michael’s widely respected mentorship of up-and-coming writers, “Fade In: The Making of Star Trek - Insurrection” has been published as a textbook that can also be enjoyed as a coffee table book - full of exclusive, never before seen photos and commentary - for the enjoyment of Star Trek fans around the world. Written by Michael Piller, who has been variously described as a “writer’s writer” and the man who played a major role in saving the Star Trek franchise, here is the very inside story of the writing process that resulted in the franchise’s 1998 film Star Trek: Insurrection. Certainly for Star Trek fans – of which there are legions – and students of film and television, this is a sought-after look at the screenwriting process from concept to final film script through the inclusion of treatments, story meetings, storyboards, and the moving of the Trek characters on the resultant creative chessboard. Fans, hungry for this kind of rare access, may well be thoroughly engrossed in and entertained by the book; whereas students of writing for television and film will definitely benefit from this textbook as not only reference material but also as a bona fide annotated resource on this particular film and/or on the entire Star Trek oeuvre, in general.

Genres: Star Trek, Nonfiction, Writing, Film, Memoir

271 pages, Textbook Binding

Published January 1, 2016

About the author

Michael Piller, a television scriptwriter and producer, was most famous for his contributions to the Star Trek franchise.

Reviews

[Sean Carlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating insider's account of the creative development of one of the space saga's more underrated theatrical entries, Star Trek Insurrection, and a must-read manual for aspiring screenwriters, full of warts-and-all insights into the challenges and vagaries of that particular vocation. I imagine the book's limited readership demographic -- Trekkies and screenwriters -- explains why the manuscript was never formally published, but if you fall into either category (or both, as I do), Fade In: From Idea to Final Draft -- The Writing of "Star Trek: Insurrection" is worth seeking out.

Of the four Next Generation feature films, I rank Insurrection second behind Star Trek Generations, both of which I think are as underrated as Star Trek: First Contact is overrated (there are two entirely different stories in First Contact competing for screen time; I wish they'd jettisoned the time-travel plotline in favor of focusing exclusively on the Borg Queen's designs to reintegrate Picard into the Collective). I would also argue Insurrection is the last worthy Trek feature, as Nemesis is such a heartbreaking misfire (and an ignoble conclusion to the franchise), and the less said about Star Trek, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Star Trek Beyond, the better. For that reason, I treasure this firsthand peek into Star Trek IX's creative genesis.

[Dustin · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting look at the creation of a movie from the perspective of the writer. Being a fan of Star Trek it was a bit like watching sausage being made, because Michael Piller details the entire two year process of writing the movie, from his initial concept all the way through the last minute rewrite of the final action scene of the film. ST: Insurrection isn't my favorite Trek film, but now I understand the why and how of what we got.
If you're interested in the process of screenwriting or behind the scenes info I'd definitely look this book up.

[Richard Guion · Rating 5 out of 5]

I didn’t like Star Trek Insurrection very much, but this is an interesting story on how the film was developed from screenwriter Michael Piller. At one point he receives notes on the treatment from Patrick Stewart, who says the film sounds like a middling episode from the fifth season of Star Trek Next Generation. Stewart nails it on the head, yet he’s somehow aboard when the angle of the Fountain of Youth concept is introduced. If you’re into Trek and want to read this, it helps to see the movie, which I did, I probably had not watched it in over 20 years. It was not as bad as I remembered, but still not good, a somewhat boring Next Gen episode, as Stewart said. Piller doesn’t hold back much and shows you how this was made.

[Dave Creek · Rating 4 out of 5]

FADE IN gives us an insight to one of STAR TREK's less-explored corners

Most books about films are either about much-beloved productions, such as CITIZEN CANE or 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, or disasters such as HEAVEN'S GATE. It's rare to find a book about a movie that did just middlin' at the box office and isn't one touted as a favorite by most people.

The late Michael Piller wrote such a book, though: FADE IN: FROM IDEA TO FINAL DRAFT. It's subtitled "The Writing of STAR TREK: INSURRECTION," and it's a fascinating look at how such franchise movies are born.

Piller was a writer and producer on STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION and co-created two other Trek shows, DEEP SPACE NINE and VOYAGER. He's credited with bringing new life to the writing on TNG when he joined the show in its third season. With Piller insisting upon a new emphasis on character, the show took off creatively.

So Piller was a TREK veteran when he tackled the ninth movie in the franchise, which was also the third TNG film. Coming off the massive success of the previous outing of the franchise, FIRST CONTACT, was daunting, but he forged ahead.

I'll leave the story of the many iterations of the script for you to discover in the book itself. Piller's concepts and eventual script passes through a lot of hands, including that of TREK head Rick Berman, plenty of Paramount studio people, and the movie's two main stars, Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner.

Stewart is especially incisive in his criticisms of the early version of the script, revealing a deep understanding of story structure and of what a STAR TREK story should be. He even has a good handle on the details of TREK lore, citing specific episodes in which he believes INSURRECTION's themes had been explored earlier and insisting that Pillar find new paths to take.

TREK fans will enjoy this look behind the scenes, especially when Piller talks about his professional relationship with TREK overlord Berman, who has remained somewhat of a mystery man to fans.

Other movie fans may appreciate the insight into franchise filmmaking.

I easily found FADE IN online when I searched for it in the days before this review. It was never given a professional release, and given that ST: INSURRECTION is one of the less popular TREK movies, Piller suposedly considered the book a gift to his friends.

But now it seems I can't find a link to it. I hope you have better luck.

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Michael Piller describes the process of writing Star Trek:Insurrection. Though I have seen some people pan this book in their personal reviews because it is not a "tell-all" about the behind-the-scenes tensions and personality conflicts, or a mea culpa for why the film was not amazingly successful, I simply want to say this: it is not that kind of book. Piller is refreshingly honest about the process of creation and change that goes into making a movie. Writing anything, from a short story, novel, magazine article, doctoral dissertation, movie script, or a letter to the editor, is a long and difficult process in which you create something new that still has to fit within the bounds of the world around you. Sometimes it has to fit page restrictions, or match someone else's sensibilities, but if it is to go forward there have to be compromises.
Michael Piller had to do just that. He had to create a story that satisfied the actors, producers, the studio, and the general public. This is not an easy task. Did he do it perfectly? No. Insurrection was fun, but the story was a bit labored at times. For example, it amazes me that every character seems to know the exact method of screwing with the machinery to make it do the impossible - like Ru`afo`s impromptu hacking of the transporters on the holoship. Honestly, is everyone a computer science and engineering major in the twenty-fourth century? Moreover, it is unfortunate that the movies make Riker, Troi, Crusher, LaForge, and Worf subsidiary characters to Data and Picard - but again, you have to satisfy the big names if the project is to advance.
But I digress. Piller speaks honestly, and gives the good with the bad. It is not self-congratulatory, but it is not self-deprecating either. He tells us how he arrived at the story, through many revisions and suggestions, sculpting the words into a final version. There is no vitriol here- if that`s what you want, read Harlan Ellison`s book on writing the TOS episode "City on the Edge of Forever" - he was and is mighty pissed at Star Trek (and justly so, from his arguments). But Piller`s goal was to tell how Insurrection came into being. I found it a fun and informative read.
As for the movie? I will leave that for you to decide...

[Jared · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fascinating insight into how "sausage is made" in Hollywood -- unlike a TV show, where the demand for so much content is so high, the screenwriter seems to have no shortage of interference for a feature film, as Piller demonstrates as he discusses the writing of Star Trek: Insurrection. Budgetary demands, focus groups, producers, actors, etc. etc. all weigh in.

Sadly, this book is more interesting than the actual movie ever was.

[Brent · Rating 1 out of 5]

The screenwriter simply details the changes made to every draft of the script. He's in agreement with the producer, director, and studio at every turn and there is no conflict. It's simply a boring account of how a terrible film got made, told as straight-forward as possible.

[David Agranoff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Michael Piller is an underrated figure in Star Trek fan circles. Some fans forget how rough the first couple of seasons of The Next Generation were when Gene Roddenberry brought ST back to syndication. Gene over did it drinking his Kool-Aid after years of being hailed for creating a Utopia. In the first few seasons, the show suffered from following Roddenberry’s rules, because apparently, humans will be perfect in the perfect system. Piller was one of the writers who helped to save Trek.
He also did another impossible thing by turning Stephen King’s amazing novel The Dead Zone into a long-form TV show that actually worked. I always respected Piller’s work on TNG/DS9/ The Dead Zone. So I always thought it weird coming off First Contact the best TNG movie that Piller wrote, such a just ok ST movie in Star Trek Insurrection. Don’t get me wrong, Insurrection is fine. Certainly better than Nemesis.

Anyone who is a screenwriter such read this book about the process of writing this film. Piller wrote this book shortly after the movie was finished and tried to sell it before his death in 2005. Yeah, Piller died young, and perhaps that is why he felt he could write a warts-and-all all book. The studio didn’t really like how it made folks in the production. This was short-sighted in my opinion. But Rick Berman, Patrick Stewart, and probably Brent Spiner felt the book made them look petty.

Not me. I gained respect for everyone involved who was trying to make a movie by committee. Piller puts his various treatments and the “what if” versions of the movie, are interesting. Some of those versions are better than the final movie (while sorta re-doing episodes of TNG). The idea of Heart of Darkness with Data as Kurtz sounds awesome, but I am not sure it would have worked for the public as well as me.

Sandra Piller (his widow) could not get permission to publish, which is too bad because this book should be taught in screenwriting classes. It still can, I suppose, because she made it free to read online. That is how I read it.

A must-read for Star Trek fans, but more importantly for Screenwriters.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thought it took a bit of work to find on the web as this was never officially published. This was very interesting. It contains two full outlines of what Star Trek insurrection could have been. It also gives background info onto why changes were made

[Colin Whiteside · Rating 3 out of 5]

A competent and matter of fact documenting of the making of Star Trek IX from the writer's point of view. Hardly revelatory but readable nonetheless.

[Phillip · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'll be talking my review on an upcoming trek.fm "Literary Treks" Podcast, so I'll post that when it's published.

[Alex Gregory · Rating 5 out of 5]

I remember when this book was first "leaked" to the internet, via a manuscript that showed up on Trek-related sites -- and disappeared just as quickly, shut down by the braintrust at Paramount due to a perceived series of "slights" against them.

They needn't have worried. Fade In: The Making of Star Trek Insurrection is an honest and compelling work that gives equal weight to the views of both sides in the production of the film and shows that, for all the work that went into it, nothing could have saved it after the elongated writing process.

Michael Piller's work documents the various ideas that sprang up after the release of the critically-praised and commercially-successful First Contact. Desperate for another hit, writers at the studio lobbed idea after idea at the executives. The first half of the book documents these ideas in a series of script excerpts. Despite some compelling storylines (Picard going rogue to stop his friend from Starfleet Academy, then resigning at the end to go lone wolf against other fringe elements with the crew), a lot of it just sounded unfilmable and unsustainable given how continuity-heavy the franchise was at this point in its lifespan.

A number of unlikely suspects came out of the ether to help refocus the story. While Patrick Stewart has understandably kept discussion of Picard and the franchise in general at a minimum these days, it's fascinating to hear anecdotes about him relaying character moments that wouldn't be in sync with the current plot to both Piller and producer Rick Berman. He and Brent Spiner were fountains of knowledge who understood the appeal of their respective characters more than most, and it's a joy to hear about them refocusing efforts to rewrite the script.

The most compelling aspect of the book is the studio notes that are written, sometimes verbatim, from Paramount executives. Contrary to how they think they were portrayed, the book (and the narrative itself) casts them in the right for wanting to clarify certain aspects and hype up the action aspects due to the perceived weak links in the story. In fact, the executives come off as the true heroes of the book!

There's also a lot of self-reflection from Piller on his thoughts on the work and his disappointment when the box-office numbers didn't play the way he wanted.

Fade In is a fascinating and eminently-readable work that all Trek fans should pick up and read. Far from being a hit piece, this story is one that's well worth reading.

[Zachary Littrell · Rating 4 out of 5]

As Piller puts it, you gotta really love writing when writing a film. Because by his own account, it sure seems like a tremendous pain in the ass and a regular kick to the nuts to make a movie, let alone one that ends up just pretty good.

He goes over how the whole process of how the sausage is made, with receipts to boot:

* He included multiple iterations of his draft treatment, and you can see the evolution from a Robin Hood sorta story, to a dark Apocalypse Now setting (which honestly would've been pretty rad), to the perfectly nice bits of script that ended up in theaters.

* He goes over letters from actors and producers and studio heads on what really burned their breeches. Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner are obviously a little precious about their characters, but they also bring up salient remarks, like why is Troi used as a sex object...again. True, the criticism maybe shouldn't have been sandwiched with "it has little fun. It is dull [...] I feel that there is so little for us here to even start work on," but that's Hollywood for ya. And then comes the problem-solving he had to do to get "Yes" from folks.

* He covers the (arguably unfortunate) attitude most in the studio had towards what a Star Trek movie should be: namely, less the thoughtful, philosophical, political stuff that made TNG great, and more action, baby!

* He even includes trying to work within budget constraints and getting a break down from the budget guy on advice of what to cut, like scenes involving briefly used rooms, cutting a scene with Quark with little importance but a $156,323 price tag, and...

FINALLY - THE LLAMAS

(The llamas, by the way, something that barely factors into the movie at all, came with a projected price tag of $73k in 1997 money)

I think Piller is a good teacher because he's not just a good writer, but a great workman. He had neat ideas and a job to do, and tries his best to convey how to practically (on time and on budget) reconcile the two and not get lost in the weeds or fired from the writing room.

In one version, I had an exhausted Beverly Crusher about to take a rejuvenating mud bath in one of the mineral-rich caverns until she sees a llama urinating in the mud. After reading that, Rick went home and told his wife, "I think Michael's starting to lose it. He wrote a scene today in which a llama pees on Beverly Crusher." The scene didn't stay in the picture.

[Thomas · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not the big book about a big movie (Casablanca, Citizen Kane, or Porky's 2) but what it is is a great behind the scenes look at just making a Hollywood studio movie. Kind of like all movies were just another film being made at any given time, such as Casablanca which was the film being made that week at that time. Piller's behind the scenes stuff is really cool and the early story treatments and scripts, the established script parts drag a bit as we know the movie and we get it.
If you are a Trek fan you will find it interesting, as a film fan you will like it as it shows another look at how the sausage is made. The average person won't really be into it.
It is fascinating, pun intended, to see how a movie goes from idea to story to finihsed product and how much it can change on the way and boy does this one change.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating look into the writing of Star Trek: Insurrection by the screenwriter himself. He tracks the whole process from the beginning and briefly covers filming and release in fairly transparent way. Having just rewatched Insurrection, it was helpfully fresh in mind and I would have been curious to see some of these other iterations instead of what we got (though some aspects I'm happy they moved away from). I did read a digital version of this book as opposed to the textbook version, so I'm not sure what, if anything, is missing, but it feels like a complete account.

Also, I learned that everyone involved were really dead set on this being a sexier movie. "Make it sexier. It has to be sexy. This is a much sexier Star Trek."

I'm not sure they succeeded there, but what do I know?

[Jamie Teller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably closer to 3.5, but I’ll round up. It’s a good book, an interesting look at how the worst Star Trek film came to be written—how a rather interesting premise mutated into an okay story, which was watered down into a mediocre film. If it’s slightly compromised by a desire not to step on too many toes (to no avail as Paramount kept it from being published, at least for some years), it still offers a lot of useful information about the process and a friendly, smartly observed authorial voice.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5. Unpublished, but easily findable online, this is an interesting look at how a big tentpole Hollywood picture got made in the late 90s. Only of interest to aspiring screenwriters and Trekkers, but a must-read for the cross section of that Venn diagram.

[Dom King]

Reading this made me understand how dull the movie was. The original idea Piller pitched sounded amazing, but actor, studio and producer tinkering resulted in a bland nothing that was like an average episode of TNG season 1 and 2.

[Marty Twelves · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful read about the nuts and bolts of screenwriting in the Hollywood system, not to mention crafting a story that would work both for hardcore fans and for newcomers alike.

[Sam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Weird.

[omiczech · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very thorough decomposition of the creative process of Star Trek: Inusrrection's script.

[Richelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting view into the process and many layers of revisions (from many layers of opinions that had to be accounted for).

A bit slow in reading each potential change, each specific note

[Vedran Bileta · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Would your movie be about the girl who broke our heroʼs heart and the best friend heʼs sent to kill, the rag-tag army of space mariners, the mysterious society of alien children, the treacherous Romulans, the mutes, the android squad, the holographic stand-up comedian, the lecherous three hundred year old munchkin, the masked race of Generation ʻXʼ aliens..."

"Fade In" is an unknown book about the making of a not so known movie, Star Trek Insurrection. And yet it is probably one of better books that deals with movie creation process, and definitely the best written on making of Star Trek movie. The reason for this is its author., "Fade In" is written by none other than a man who was involved in some of best Star Trek to date - Michael Piller. Piller worked on best seasons of TNG, helped to conceive DS9, and supported Voyager during its first years. Also, he wrote a script for "Star Trek: Insurrection", his only contribution to the Trek movie franchise.

Piller wrote this book after the failure of the Insurrection at the box office in 1998. It is an insightful read, as it gives us not only a making-of story from the writer (Piller), but also an illuminating look at the process of the Holywood movie making from a person from the film industry. It shows us this very complex, and often painful process of the voyage from the idea to the screen, and gives us a tantalizing glimpse what Insurrection could be, if author was given more creative freedoms...

Reader can follow the process of the movie-making from its inception to the premiere screening in Las Vegas in great detail. Piller present us not only with month to month movie development, but also with a personal story, and the emotional impact that all changes had on him up to the premiere. Readers can also see how Piller's project is being taken over by his co-producer, actors, and most of all studio, and how it morphs into something completely different, something that Piller actually did not want.

And to make matters worse, this book release was boycotted by the studio (for obvious reasons), and Piller died too early (in 2005), not being able to see his book reaching the readers. "Fade In" was after all imagined as a gift to the fans..

Thankfully, through his wife "Fade in" is now available at this link
https://www.michaelpiller.net/

If you are a Trekkie, a movie aficionado, or a film student, get it... it is a valuable read, and a fine addition to the "behind of the curtains" of the Trek universe. It is also a fitting tribute to the man who had a huge impact in making the Star Trek that we love...

5 stars

[Scott Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this fascinating and I'm glad it's finally been made available to read. Piller takes us on a two-year journey as he develops the script for Insurrection. He shares notes and letters from Rick Berman, Patrick Stewart and studio execs and it was so interesting to notice where little bits of the final film originated.

I'm one of the minority who really enjoys Insurrection. I think Michael Piller's Trek work is brilliant. I'm not sure I'd be as big a Trekkie as I am without Piller's influence on the franchise.

[Ian Banks · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm a bit of a Trekkie and I've always had an interest in the production side of films and TV so this is like catnip for me. Mr Piller goes through all the stages of the production of a script, from ideas to outlines to drafts to edits to production. It's amazing to see the difference between idea and the final picture as well as the reception and the corners that get cut to get there. The input from actors and producers is interesting: several people say that nobody wants to watch the story about someone who decides to save a bunch of aliens being uprooted from their home because the Federation wants a rare rock that's only found on their planet. Reader, I LOLed. Really interesting and entertaining read.

[Aaron · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great insight into the mind of a writer and the process that goes into the making of a big budget movie. Being able to view the drastic changes in story and the forces pushing the creative process along is a treat for the typical movie goer and an inspiration for aspiring writers.
Above all, this helps put into perspective, the monumental effort & teamwork that goes into writing a movie and making it work on screen. The friction between budgetary concerns by the studios and the creative license of the writer and director is intriguing.
Not only was this a well written piece of non-fiction, it provided some great insights with subtle and not-so-subtle themes. I will be looking for Michael Piller's name in the credits from now on.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Absolutely fascinating text for any Star Trek or writing wonk, providing uncommon access to the process of developing and producing a screenplay as part of a long-running franchise with so many cooks in the kitchen you're surprised anything makes it out on the plate at the end. I can sort of see why Paramount balked at publishing it, but then again, they're perfectly happy to put out multiple seasons of Picard and I don't see how that's in any poorer taste.

[Pierre A Renaud]

http://goo.gl/F6z62 - but you might want to read http://goo.gl/FevzD first.