Orci and Kurtzman Talk Fan Pressure & 3D for Star Trek Sequel

Any cursory glance through the comments here at TrekMovie.com will show that there has been a lot of talk about the Star Trek sequel, with expectations raised now that the film has been delayed. In a new interview co-writer/producers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman talked about how they are feeling that fan pressure. While they are thinking about the fans, they apparently aren’t thinking much about 3-D. More below.

 

Orci and Kurtzman talk fan pressure and 3D for Star Trek sequel

In a new interview at Collider promoting Cowboys & Aliens (opening today), Star Trek sequel co-writer/producers also talked about how their second Trek is progressing. Here are some key excerpts.

Orci and Kurtzman on the fan pressures for the Star Trek sequel:

Orci: Every project is different. However the fan pressure on Trek is something unlike any other project I think.

Kurtzman: That is why we didn’t want to rush it.

Orci: Yeah. We want to take in all of the information culturally because it is a cultural icon that does require a couple of different hats that other movies don’t require.

Kurtzman: When we were first approached about doing the first one we said “No.” and it took us a year to say “Yes.” for all of the same reasons. We just did not want to mess it up. I think we feel the same responsibility on 2. Now even more so actually because expectations were low on 1. No one really knew what it was going to be. Now everybody is waiting for it to match what they felt wabout the first one. So there is that added pressure.

Orci and Kurtzman on Star Trek sequel in 3D:

Kurtzman: I don’t think we are thinking about 3D at this point. At least I am not. I am just thinking about the story.

Orci: Yeah. We are not. I’m sure it will be budgeted both ways probably and we will be able to make an assessment there, but we actually haven’t discussed that with our band mates. I actually don’t know what they think about it.

Kurtzman: If there is a great reason to do it then it’s certainly a conversation. But we are not thinking around 3D right now.

Much more from Orci & Kurtzman on Cowboys & Aliens, Enders Game, the Star Trek game and more at Collider.

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Spock's Uncle
July 29, 2011 4:37 pm

Good, 3-D is a bad idea… Gimmicky…. Trek is not about gimmicks. FIRST

Long Island Trekster
July 29, 2011 4:38 pm

3D has its place in cinema. It is ideal for action sequences like those in Transformers.

It is not needed in Star Trek! Why put chrome on a classic car like a Porche? Write a great story with compelling dialogue. The special effects should be an after thought to convey the dialogue and action only when needed.

Pierre
July 29, 2011 4:38 pm

“But we are not thinking around 3D right now.”

Excellent!

Captain Bryan
July 29, 2011 4:41 pm

No 3D please! All the Star Trek movies are and will be timeless. Do not “date” them with lame 3D gimmicks.

Allen Williams
July 29, 2011 4:43 pm

3D sucks don’t do it

July 29, 2011 4:44 pm

I’d love to see Star Trek in 3D, but I’m fine either way. Anyway, what is most important is an awesome script from Bob and Alex.

MDSHiPMN
July 29, 2011 4:48 pm

No 3D please.

July 29, 2011 4:48 pm

If they’re still working on the script, it’s not like 3D would make any difference. They don’t write scripts around surround sound, either.

Balok
July 29, 2011 4:53 pm

@ 1 yeah, 3D is gimmicky. Almost as gimmicky as boasting that you’re FIRST.

somethoughts
July 29, 2011 4:58 pm

3D FX and a movie like Indiana Jones mixed with Hunt for red october in space with some matrix and T2

bjdcharlie
July 29, 2011 5:00 pm

Please, no 3D. The writers understand this; it’s only a gimmick.

captain spock
July 29, 2011 5:04 pm

please dont rush trek guys if it take a a year to do so be it , trek 3d thanks but no thanks ok

somethoughts
July 29, 2011 5:10 pm

Cmon ppl 3D option wont hurt as long as the non 3D version can stand on its own. Thats like people turning down the option to add bacon to a burger!

July 29, 2011 5:11 pm

@13 – I agree. And bacon sounds good right now.

Steve
July 29, 2011 5:13 pm

I must be in the minority here, because I think 3D is awesome. The more, the better!

July 29, 2011 5:18 pm

I <3 3D!!!

Tanner Waterbury
July 29, 2011 5:21 pm

No 3d, BUT D-Box would be cool to have with the movie…

Tanner Waterbury
July 29, 2011 5:22 pm

Actually…. yes, D-box would be AWESOME with the next Star Trek movie, especially with the battle sequences between starships.

1984
July 29, 2011 5:31 pm

They’ll need all the gimmicks available to draw an audience by the time it is finally in theaters.

July 29, 2011 5:31 pm

And they used to say that movies in color were a gimmick. :)

Bernie Lugo
July 29, 2011 5:32 pm

PLS KEEP J.J.ABRAHAM’S STAR TREK II 3D FREE. 3D STRAINS YOUR EYESIGHT AND IT IS A PAIN IN THE B…. FOR GLASS WEARING FANS…….. HOWEVER, PLS DO NOT EXTEND RELEASE DATE ANY LONGER THAN IT ALREADY IS. KEEP UP FINEST WORK……..

Jeff O'Connor
July 29, 2011 5:36 pm

Three cheers to the nuTrek team. Keep on being awesome.

somethoughts
July 29, 2011 5:38 pm

#21

How bout no capslock?

Tom
July 29, 2011 5:48 pm

4 years in between movies. Totally enough time to figure out a way to get Shatner in the movie

The Middleman
July 29, 2011 5:51 pm

After reading all these comments, it seems that Kurtzman is right about Star Trek fans and Fan Pressure.

EM
July 29, 2011 6:08 pm

I love 3D and I hope that they go with it. It’s as much of a gimmick as color and sound! If they don’t, I’ll still be happy to see the awesome 2D version.

BringBackKirkPrime
July 29, 2011 6:12 pm

Either way is fine, but there’s nothing wrong with 3D, no need to bash the idea.

weyoun_9
July 29, 2011 6:19 pm

If I had a voice, I’d say no 3D. The past two films I saw with it I found the glasses irritating and the pay off not enough to warrant what I imagine must be the extra expense. I’d much rather they use the money to re-do engineering. :)

Brett Campbell
July 29, 2011 6:24 pm

How many times has Hollywood tried this 3D gimmick? First in the ’50s, then in the ’70s, and now a third time. It will be a dormant fad for a third time, by the time this film is released.

Bob Tompkins
July 29, 2011 6:27 pm

Movie review:
I saw ‘Cowboys and Aliens’ today. I thought it was a marvelously stupendous, fantastic, jaw-dropping waste of $7.50.

Without giving anything away, it had exactly 3 humorous moments. Not funny, just mildly amusing.

Moments that looked good in the trailers are totally missing from the movie.

I wanted to like it; I really did. There aren’t many movies I go to see on their first day, preferring to wait for some word-of-mouth. I wish I had waited….

Mark Anton
July 29, 2011 6:30 pm

No 3D, please. A beautiful digital projection system with state of the art sound is all I need.

somethoughts
July 29, 2011 6:32 pm

#30

Dam was so hoping it would be good, maybe I will wait and see, it looked promising with the teaser trailer but does look less and less good more trailers I see, it cant be worst than captain america or green latern?

somethoughts
July 29, 2011 6:34 pm

Why is it the movies of the late 70s and 80s are so much better ie aliens, indian jones, starwars, et, n terminator

Mikeypikey
July 29, 2011 6:37 pm

Isn’t there always the option for 2D when 3D is playing also, I’d love to see the enterprise in 3D and I’d also check the 2D version, oh well, missed opportunity

Keachick (rose pinenut)
July 29, 2011 6:39 pm
How about a Star Trek fan getting dumped on? The poster here is commenting on my previous post(s). This can be found on the IMDb Star Trek 2009 message board. I am Keachick there as well. “B. The end result is indeed the same. Roberto Orci has no more idea than you do abut the workings of a military command structure. Again, feel free to ask a serving member of the armed forces if he or she intends to run for Colonel. To say that Kirk and JFK were alike ethically is one thing, but according to you and Bob Orci, JFK was promoted to President (and also gave comparison between he and George W. Bush, btw…) C. You still don’t get it… elected positions versus promoted positions are NOT THE SAME THING!!! D. The fact of the matter is Kirk completely defied protocol and tampered with the parameters of a (what’s effectively) government owned equipment. Any way you want to romanticize it, it’s still cheating. E. “Genius level repeat offender” still has that nasty little phrase “repeat offender” in it. Court systems don’t generally label people repeat offenders unless they have been convicted. For Pike to have called him that, there must have been some basis. Oh, maybe he was just like Bush and swept all the stuff under some Starfleet rug. Besides, even “geniuses” can be convicted. F (i)This is silly ass stuff on your behalf, fbi press. Quite right – I thought I was entering a solid… Read more »
njdss4
July 29, 2011 6:48 pm

Please don’t do 3D. It’s a poorly implemented gimmick that gives me a headache from having to wear two sets of glasses.

DeShonn Steinblatt
July 29, 2011 6:51 pm

“I wanted to like it; I really did”

Ah, the most common lie on the internet.

Mikeypikey
July 29, 2011 6:57 pm

Please make 3D version available, the people that whine and moan about their delicate little flowers for eyes can go see the 2D version?!?!?

July 29, 2011 7:02 pm

3d is pretty lame. Gimmicky, don’t do it! The movies that are made in 3d, the 2d versions suck. We shouldn’t have to watch it in 3d to get the best picture. 2d all the way.

Geha
July 29, 2011 7:05 pm

Umm … 3D isnt out yet. What is out is fake 3D … Don’t fall for the fake 3d scam

Mikeypikey
July 29, 2011 7:06 pm

I’m sure it would be converted to 3D and not shot in 3D, panaflex is needed to create them lens flares!!

Keachick (rose pinenut)
July 29, 2011 7:15 pm

Just a note re my post #35 and the comments quoted – None of the present Star Trek writers or producers had/have anything to do with the making of 90210. Just for the record.

Mel
July 29, 2011 7:17 pm

@ 38

“Please make 3D version available, the people that whine and moan about their delicate little flowers for eyes can go see the 2D version?!?!?”

My local cinema usually shows 3D movies ONLY in 3D. So most of the times there is only the choice between watching a movie in 3D or not at all in the cinema.

Mikeypikey
July 29, 2011 7:23 pm

Your local cinema doesn’t sound very good at all :-(

Magic_Al
July 29, 2011 7:25 pm

3D would make it look like a cartoon. Would they show the stars that rush by a warp ship in 3D? Stars are so far away stereo vision should make no difference.

Although if we talk realism, stars are so far away you shouldn’t be able to see them “move” at all, even at the highest warp speed. Any speed high enough to make stars whip by, one per second or so, would get you across the entire galaxy in just several hours. If you use the 24th-century warp scale it would take 100 minutes to get from Sol to Alpha Centauri at warp 9.9.

July 29, 2011 7:33 pm

No freaking 3D crappery. Just fix Engineering.

July 29, 2011 7:34 pm

There is one advantage to shooting Star Trek in 3D. It will mean that JJ can’t bang on the camera from behind anymore since shaky camera footage would make the 3D unbearable.

C Mosenko
July 29, 2011 7:37 pm

Special FX should be unnoticed. Original star wars was way better then the later 3. Sometimes special FX can replace good storytelling. If 3d can help tell the story why not? If it’s going to be a distraction leave it out. Imagine seeing a klingon bird of prey in 3d attacking the enterprise. That would be fun.

Brett Campbell
July 29, 2011 7:42 pm

30- Sorry you wasted $7.50, but thanks for the laugh and good for you for keeping a sense of humor about it.

Seriously, from its trailer and its title alone, you weren’t really expecting it to be a good movie, were you?

Brett Campbell
July 29, 2011 7:44 pm

40 – Good point. See you some day at the Hologramodeon.

wpDiscuz