Orci & Kurtzman: Trek XI To Be ‘Reimagined’ Starship Adventure Titled ‘Star Trek’

MTV have a great interview with Trek XI screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. In it they still play things close to the vest about plot details and casting, but do reveal quite a bit.  MTV is also reporting the film is not a prequel, but a ‘reimagining of the franchise,’ quoting Orci:

We’re not going to start totally from scratch…We want it to feel like it’s updated and of the now. That’s actually the discussions we’re having now: how to keep the look of the universe yet have it not look like nothing’s new. It’s tricky.

reimagined canon?
These comments should be read in context of Abrams comments in last week’s press release that Trek XI  ’embraces and respects Trek canon’ and Orci and Kurtzman’s previous comments about how they will not ‘reinvent Trek history.’ When looked at in this context TrekMovie.com does not read the Orci/Kurtzman comments to mean that Trek XI will be a ‘reboot’ along the lines of the new Battlestar Galactica. They seem mostly to be talking about the look of the Trek universe, and not necessarily the history of that universe.  It is also worth noting that just a couple of days ago MTV issued an ‘open letter‘ on Star Trek XI which suggested many of the things they are reporting such as ‘Don’t do a prequel’. None of the quotes from the writers mentions words such as ‘prequel’ or ‘reboot.’ The dismissal of a prequel may just be editorializing on the part of MTV or a matter of semantics (would Kirk’s first mission on the Enterprise be a ‘prequel’?). The article also seems to contradict its own denial of the film being a prequel with this statement:

Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock’s Starfleet Academy days — unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant "Trek" movie idea — have yet to be addressed directly. 

A Big Starship Adventure
As for the film itself Orci promised that it will be more of an action film, not surprising coming from the writers of The Island and the new Transformers movie. They noted that the film is being made for a broad audience, and will therefore be "the biggest one" of the franchise. 

The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one we’re going for the broad audience to bring people into ‘Trek’ for the first time. on the larger economic model.

Specifically they said it will be a starship based adventure, saying:

I don’t know how you make ‘Star Trek’ without a starship…You have to trek through the stars, so you need a ship for that.

The pair also promised that the film will not totally abandon Trek tech. Kurtzman notes:

I actually love the technobabble!…I don’t think you can do ‘Trek’ without technobabble.

Wont talk casting…but hints
They wouldn’t talk casting or even confirm characters, but when pressed Kurtzman said:

I’m the hugest Matt Damon fan ever. If he became [Kirk], great.

They also played coy with the notion of Shatner and Nimoy appearing, but did say that Shatner and Nimoy did come in recently for a meeting. No details but they Kurtzman did say

It was pretty much the most stressful thing ever, but it was wonderful, they were amazing.

Confirm Chambliss as Prod. Designer and Mindel as DP
The pair confirmed the TrekMovie.com report from last year that long time collaborator Scott Chambliss will be doing the production design. In addition Daniel Mindel will again join the team as the director of photography. Mindel worked with Abrams on M:I:III.   

Trek XI will just be ‘Star Trek’?
Regarding the title the pair said they hoped hoped the film will just be titled ‘Star Trek’ saying

‘Star Trek’ is the the intended title..I don’t think we want to put any colons or anything on it.

TrekMovie.com has already come out in favor of the simple ‘Star Trek’ and it was the clear winner of our poll on the subject last week. However, we are told that the final decision has not been made by the studio.

Respectful of the franchise: its about the soul
The pair talked about what giant fans they are, with Orci revealed to be the bigger fan. Even though their film essentially ends the TNG series of film, they only had praise for Next Gen and noting "we just hope they bless us." They believe that their script adheres to the Roddenberry vision, saying:

Orci: ‘Trek,’ more than anything, has always been about the human interactions," Orci said. "It’s all about the human soul.

Kurtzman: And the friendships,…and everyone being a family.Whatever the story was, we always knew what it had to feel like.

 

 click here for the full interview.

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
March 8, 2007 11:39 am

I was against this at first….but it sound like its going to be a fun movie. And I like how they are talking about the soul of humanity. I think this movie will rock.

doubleofive
March 8, 2007 11:41 am

Film simply called “Star Trek”.

Sweet.

doubleofive
March 8, 2007 11:43 am

“Orci and Kurtzman also confirmed that the film is not in any way a prequel but a reimagining of the franchise.”

Oh kay… I thought it wasn’t a reboot.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 11:49 am

I think it’s a “reboot” in the same sense Star Trek-The Motion Picture was a re-imagining.

This is good.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 11:52 am

A wink is as good as a nod to a blind mule, so it seems this film will be about Kirk and Spock, with Matt Damon as Kirk, and be a starship based adventure with more action than the previous films, but at it’s heart have alot of humanity and character interaction.

All is well in the Trekverse I tell you.

March 8, 2007 11:52 am

Maybe they are going to re-imagine Star Trek: The Motion Picture… ;-p

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 11:54 am

Also, I like how they are keeping the same design aethestic seen in TOS, yet modernizing it.

See what happens when you get people involved on the creative end who actually LOVE and LIKE Star Trek, and are not just whoring a paycheck??

God bless you Paramount and Abrams.

I haven’t even seen this film yet and I already like the attitude taken with it behind the scenes.

TLC Baby, TLC.

March 8, 2007 11:59 am

i’m going to reserve judgment until i see the final product. this thing is so far back in the prelim stages that anything could change.

having said that, lets go to yellow alert. there is moderate cause for concern

um… that is all.

best!!

=the new and improved h69=

big E
March 8, 2007 12:01 pm

It’s good to hear that they are such hugh fans. Makes me feel that the ‘reimagening’ is about updating the 1906’s sensibilities to the 21st century.

March 8, 2007 12:01 pm

Lets talk about this: “Orci and Kurtzman also confirmed that the film is not in any way a prequel but a reimagining of the franchise.”

Of course it’s not a real prequel because this movie shows us different situations in Kirks life. It’s a kind of “time-floating” Kirk biography.
BTW are there any “official” definitions that explain the difference between a “reboot” a “remake” and a “reimagination”? Seems like that anybody uses these terms and throws them around without knowing the exact meaning behind them.

John N.
March 8, 2007 12:01 pm

#4 – Josh

“Orci and Kurtzman also confirmed that the film is not in any way a prequel but a reimagining of the franchise.”

I respect your take on it, but that quote is very open to interpretation. BSG could have been described exactly the same way, and people here have taken my head off for suggestion such an approach.

James
March 8, 2007 12:02 pm

Count me as one who is not interested in a re-imagined or rebooted Trek.
I will stick with the ORIGINAL and Best.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:10 pm

I just think that terms such as reboot and re-imagining are perhaps too intellectually limiting to accurately convey the essence of what is being done here.

Was Star Trek -The Motion Picture a reboot or a re-imagining? Both, or neither?
It was independent of any previously seen adventure with only the characters remaining substantively the same, yet visually it was a completely different universe not at all related to the series.
It sounds as if Abrams and company are going for a little bit of everything yet conceptually, it is still the Star Trek we know with the same characters.
I agree labeling it a Prequel doesn’t exactly do it justice either, since there are canon established filmed events that take place previously to this adventure.
Hell, maybe we have a new categorization of film on the horizon!
A rebooted, reimagined, Prequel Sequel, but only slightly.

What the hell would you call a film like that? heh heh

Let’s official deem this project a TREKQUEL!

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:10 pm

I expect royalties you know for the invention of a new term ;)

March 8, 2007 12:11 pm

#10: “BTW are there any “official” definitions that explain the difference between a “reboot” a “remake” and a “reimagination”? ”

No.

That is the whole and correct answer.

Now, bear in mind that “reimagining” was first prominently used in promotion for a movie when 20th Century Fox so described Tim Burton’s remake of “Planet Of The Apes.”

Al
March 8, 2007 12:16 pm

Ready to love it, but not with Damon

ozy
March 8, 2007 12:20 pm

Rebot of star trek franchise. I’am angry.
I hate reboots
That movie i will not watch.
Trek XI wont be real star trek

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:24 pm

All I know is, I may be the minority here, but I’ll go on record and say if Abrams served up a steaming dish of shit and labeled it “Space Track: How Captain Kirk got his groove back”, as far as I’m concerned it couldn’t possibly be any worse than the deliberate shit that’s been served up COOOOOLD for the past few years so, I’m a DAMN happy camper. As I said before, from rock bottom there isn’t anywhere to go but UP.

CW
March 8, 2007 12:26 pm

“Orci & Kurtzman: Trek XI To Be ‘Reimagined’ Starship Adventure Titled ‘Star Trek’ ”

*************************************

Now Star Trek enters into it’s next stage of de-evolution: Berman and Braga part 2.

Because these 2 guys are completely incapable of following anything established.

Here’s to Vulcans with the heads of cats.

Stanky McFibberich
March 8, 2007 12:26 pm

Nothing in that article to change my opinion which I will not state because then someone will get all mad and stuff.
I will say this… #12. James seems to have a good head on his shoulders.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:32 pm

I can understand this attitude from those that prefer the other series, but hey I’m a TOS fan myself, where exactly are you guys coming from anyway?
Until they can clone dead actors, and de-age geriatric living ones, or until they master CGI actors, this is about as close to a TOS era movie we can possibly get.
I love my three seasons of TOS and 6 motion pictures as well but, I thought the point here was we all wanted MORE adventures with that crew and era, and like it or not, this is about the only way to go about that, where’s the love here?

March 8, 2007 12:33 pm

as long as this has Stanky McFibberich’s approval. You know that’s what is most important here. whatever Stanky McFibberich says is law, and don’t go breaking the law.

best!!

=h=

March 8, 2007 12:35 pm

It’s all “Star Trek;” it’s all good.

Anyone that expects folks whose whole approach to Trek is to dissect it and declare that some parts are acceptable and some “don’t count” to hail something clever and different is bound to be disappointed. 8)

StillKirok
March 8, 2007 12:36 pm

Notice that re-imagining is not quoted. It’s the author who wrote that. And they have said they would adhere to Star Trek canon.

There’s still no real information other than it appears Shatner and Nimoy met with them again.

Lao3D
March 8, 2007 12:36 pm

“Reimagining” strikes little ripples of fear down my spine, at least in terms of Star Trek. Obviously, with new actors playing the roles, there is some reimagination inherent to the whole deal, but I don’t want to see changes in the basic archetypes of TOS. If they’re doing young Kirk, Spock, et al, they have to at least keep within a few parsecs of the universe defined by the originals, IMHO.

Not too much said in the interview gives me reason to rejoice OR despair yet. However, I’m with hitch, yellow alert.

ozy
March 8, 2007 12:40 pm

I hate rebot concept. This guys will destroy star trek franchise. That movie wont be tight up whit others star trek series and movies.

Don Corleone
March 8, 2007 12:41 pm

40 years of history down the toilet?

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:43 pm

No, hopefully only the last 15

James
March 8, 2007 12:48 pm

I grew up with the ORIGINAL SERIES. I don’t mind re-casting the actors at all. But, to re-imagine or re-boot the visual identity of the original is not what I am interested in. seeing. Star Trek has a visual identitty all it’s own, and it is just fine, cheese and all. This crap about trying to reach a broader audience is just that …. crap. If you are calling it STAR TREK, the general audience is still going to be the fans. I have better things to spend my $8.00 dollars on. Star Trek as we know it is over.

ozy
March 8, 2007 12:48 pm

Rebot down!!!!

Make real prequel Star trek movie ( real new part of star trek canon )

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:55 pm

Ok Ozy, so what would be a “Real” Prequel Star Trek movie exactly?
Can you make Shatner and Nimoy 45 years younger and resurrect Deforest Kelley and James Doohan?

As far as re-imagining the visual identity of the show, if you read the article clearly it says moderning it but keeping the aesthetic of the original intact. That is FAR less severe than what was done with the first movie based on the show.

All of this huffing and puffing is amusing, as everyone and their brother will fall in line and adore this movie, remember this post next year.

It isn’t this film I’m concerned or worried about, it’s the sequel.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 12:59 pm

Ok, so what is a “real” prequel in your estimation? i’m genuinely curious and interested in hearing.

At least have a reason to be dissapointed instead of jumping on a negativity bandwagon for intellectually dishonest reason.

March 8, 2007 12:59 pm

“The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one, we’re going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time.”

This is the single most important factor determining what the film will be like. As the old saw goes, “follow the money.”

Captain Pike
March 8, 2007 1:00 pm

I wish them the same success Hollywood had “re-imagining” Wild Wild West,
or
Planet of the Apes
or
The Avengers.

I am officially off the fence. This is not going to be my movie. I predict there is going to be a HUGE ground swell of disapproval and the studio will rethink handing the franchise over to these flavor of the month wonder children.

Me? I’m not going to comment any further of this debacle in the making.
More news about TOS-R and TOS-HD, please!

Duane Boda
March 8, 2007 1:01 pm

# 32: Thank you for your input on Ozys spamming – there is absolutely no need or place for that in here. Certain people (sadly) who have no useful contributions shouldn’t be allowed in here. So…seeing that you may remove him IF he continues is exactly what we need. Keep up your excellent work.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 1:01 pm

That only says to me Dennis they are going to spend alot more money on it than previous Treks, nothing more or less.

The actors fees alone, and production budget should be considerably higher than previous entries.

If you get Shatner, Nimoy, and Damon onboard, that’s a sizeable budget chunk right there before a camera even rolls.

Josh T. (The flaming tits of the one true UberShatner) Kirk Esquire'
March 8, 2007 1:05 pm

I wish them the success of re-imagining James Bond, Zorro, Batman, The Fugitive, Battlestar Galactica, et al.

I guess the glass is either half full or half empty.

Driver
March 8, 2007 1:06 pm

If the movie bombs(I hope not!), it could get rebooted again.. Doh!.. until they get it right.

Windsor Bear
March 8, 2007 1:09 pm

I was a Top 40 music fan until I hit 40. At that point, I decided I could no longer stomach current hit music and have since listened to mostly oldies… music of my generation. Now, at 46, I think I’ll be sticking with “Trek” of my generation and letting the young-uns have the new versions. I’m having enough problems handling CGI updates that don’t work… let alone a “reimaging” of the whole thing. Have fun kids.

CIC
March 8, 2007 1:11 pm

There was no technobabble in STar Trek. I hope they don’t fill valuable dialog with wasted technobabble. Kirk and spock and mccoy never needed it.

What a Joke.

Lao3D
March 8, 2007 1:11 pm

I am kind of hung up on the look of the original series I guess. We’ve already seen the Enterprise “reimagined” as 70’s airport lounge (TMP and Next gen) and battle submarine (Enterprise) and nothing has been very successful. Nobody (I think) is recommending a slavish recreation of the original down to the plasterboard walls and painted wood consoles, but they have to recognize that the look WAS part of the heart and soul of the show. The intense color, the “mid-century” cool. And how about a phaser that looks like, well, a phaser?! The original series had some kick-ass designers from Wah Chang to Matt Jefferies to Bill Thiess to Irving Feinberg, etc. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, is all I’m sayin.’

JoeB
March 8, 2007 1:13 pm

I’m excited about it… I’m really looking forward to the first trailer. We shouldn’t base everything off this one interview. As more and more details emerge(and they will), it’ll be much easier to tell whether or not it’ll be good. I have a feeling it will be (good), and I’ll probably see it no matter what.

I’m very interested to see how the whole film will look. It’s interesting what he said about keeping the old feeling but modernizing it… (my interpretation) Heck thats worth seeing the film by itself.

I guess to sum up my opinion, lets wait and see.

ozy
March 8, 2007 1:15 pm

For me real prequel will acept all star trek series and movies equely, and not changing establise trek canon, and timeline.

Rebot is changing of establise canon and timeline.

I love all five series and 10 movies of star trek. I cant forget 40 years of establise star trek canon.

March 8, 2007 1:21 pm

There’s no need to.

Those of us who liked TNG didn’t forget TOS simply because the new series didn’t closely match it.

There were quite a few narrow Trek fans who simply never accepted TNG and the follow-on series, but modern Trek nonetheless entertained tens of millions of people and commercially succeeded for the studio for almost twenty years. This new “Star Trek” film will probably be rejected by a portion of the existing, long-time fan base but that doesn’t mean that it won’t set the creators and the studio up for decades of new success with some old fans and many new ones.

And when, eventually, the tide ebbs on the success of “Star Trek 3.0″…then new people will find new ways to start it up again. 8)

March 8, 2007 1:21 pm

What about this storyline for “Trek XII”!? The Enterprise-D still exists, Kirk never died and the TNG movies we know never happened that way. Just re-imagine…

March 8, 2007 1:22 pm

“There’s no need to” references #45: ” I cant forget 40 years of established star trek canon.”

Sam Belil
March 8, 2007 1:22 pm

#45 — I completely agree with you, at first I was excited – now I have lost some of enthusiasm. “Reimagined?????”. Hell lets make James Kirk Jane Kirk or Jamie Kirk for that matter, etc. etc. etc. Lets the change the name of the Enterprise, Let change everything for that matter.

wpDiscuz