IMAX & Paramount Officially Announce Star Trek Sequel To Be Released In IMAX 3D |
jump to navigation

IMAX & Paramount Officially Announce Star Trek Sequel To Be Released In IMAX 3D June 13, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Star Trek is once again headed to IMAX, but this time in 3D. Something we have already reported here at is being made official today with a press release announcing JJ Abrams’ Star Trek sequel will launch in IMAX 3D, with key sequences that were shot with IMAX cameras. See below for the full press release.


Star Trek returning to IMAX in 2013

Today Paramount and IMAX officially announced that JJ Abrams Star Trek sequel will be presented in IMAX 3D. In addition they confirmed that parts of the film were shot using IMAX cameras. This is the same technique which Abrams used as a producer of last years Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol

In the statement, Abrams said of IMAX:

"We were so thrilled with the creative results of shooting IMAX for Mission: Impossible that we jumped at the chance to use the format for Star Trek. All expectations were exceeded — the action and resolution is insane at this scale. We cannot wait for audiences to see the crew of the Enterprise in a way they never have before,"

Also, in his recent interview with, co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof talked about JJ shooting in IMAX:

JJ’s decision to shoot a lot of the movie in IMAX definitely makes the film seem a lot bigger and definitely the sequences he directed in IMAX I feel have tremendous scale and energy, without sacrificing any of things that I talked about on an emotional level.

JJ Abrams 2009 Star Trek movie was the first in the franchise to be presented in the IMAX format. For that presentation, the movie was converted to the larger IMAX format. Also the Star Trek movie was only avaialble for a limited time on IMAX as it was somewhat of a late addition to the distribution plan. This time the team clearly were thinking of IMAX from the beginning, so we can likely expect a standard IMAX rollout.

IMAX Trailer for 2009’s "Star Trek"

press release

Director J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek Sequel to Launch in IMAX® 3D and Feature Key Sequences Filmed With IMAX® Cameras
The Paramount Pictures and Bad Robot Production Will Be Released Worldwide in IMAX® Theatres on May 17, 2013

LOS ANGELES, June 13, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — IMAX Corporation and Paramount Pictures Corporation, a unit of Viacom Inc., today announced that the sequel to J.J. Abrams’ 2009 blockbuster Star Trek, will be released in the immersive IMAX® 3D format on May 17, 2013. The film represents the second feature in the ground-breaking franchise to be released in IMAX following Star Trek, which grossed more than $375 million at the worldwide box office.

Following on the heels of Paramount Pictures’ and Bad Robot’s 2011 hit, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, the filmmakers have once again taken full advantage of the IMAX® camera as well as the clarity and scope that The IMAX Experience® provides in order to transport fans into this 23rd century world. Several key sections of the film that feature big action set pieces have been captured with IMAX cameras, which has become an integral tool for visionary filmmakers to tell their amazing stories.

Exclusively in IMAX, sequences shot with the extremely high-resolution cameras will expand to fill the entire screen and further immerse the audience in the vast dimension and adventure of this highly-anticipated follow-up. Directed by J.J. Abrams and written by Damon Lindelof (Prometheus), Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (Transformers, Mission: Impossible III, Star Trek) the sequel follows another chapter of the USS Enterprise crew’s exploration into the unknown. Returning to their posts on the Enterprise are Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, and Bruce Greenwood. They are joined by new cast members Peter Weller and Alice Eve.

"We were so thrilled with the creative results of shooting IMAX for Mission: Impossible that we jumped at the chance to use the format for Star Trek. All expectations were exceeded — the action and resolution is insane at this scale. We cannot wait for audiences to see the crew of the Enterprise in a way they never have before," said J.J. Abrams.

"J.J. and the filmmaking team behind the Star Trek franchise are once again working to give audiences one of the best film going experiences available today," said Rob Moore, Vice Chairman of Paramount Pictures. "Following the great success of the first film in the newly revived franchise, the sequel to Star Trek will no doubt be among the top choices for moviegoers next summer."

"We are extremely proud to be continuing our successful partnership with Paramount Pictures, J.J., Bryan Burk, Bad Robot and the entire Star Trek team through this iconic franchise that has the perfect DNA for IMAX fans," said Greg Foster, Chairman and President, IMAX Filmed Entertainment.

The IMAX release of the Star Trek sequel will be digitally re-mastered into the image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience® with proprietary IMAX DMR® (Digital Re-mastering) technology. The crystal-clear images coupled with IMAX’s customized theatre geometry and powerful digital audio create a unique environment that will make audiences feel as if they are in the movie.

About Paramount Pictures Corporation Paramount Pictures Corporation (PPC), a global producer and distributor of filmed entertainment, is a unit of Viacom VIA -1.37% VIAB -2.91% , a leading content company with prominent and respected film, television and digital entertainment brands. Paramount controls a collection of some of the most powerful brands in filmed entertainment, including Paramount Pictures, Paramount Animation, Paramount Vantage, Paramount Classics, Insurge Pictures, MTV Films, and Nickelodeon Movies. PPC operations also include Paramount Famous Productions, Paramount Home Media Distribution, Paramount Pictures International, Paramount Licensing Inc., and Paramount Studio Group.

About IMAX Corporation IMAX Corporation is one of the world’s leading entertainment and technology companies, specializing in the creation and delivery of premium, awe-inspiring entertainment experiences. With a growing suite of cutting-edge motion picture and sound technologies, and a globally recognized entertainment brand, IMAX is singularly situated at the convergence of the entertainment industry, innovation and the digital media world. The industry’s top filmmakers and studios are utilizing IMAX theatres to connect with audiences in extraordinary ways, and as such, the IMAX network is among the most important and successful theatrical distribution platforms for major event films around the globe. The Company’s new digital projection and sound systems – combined with a growing blockbuster film slate – are fueling the rapid expansion of the IMAX network in established markets such as North America, Western Europe, and Japan, as well as emerging markets such as China and Russia. IMAX deliver the world’s best cinematic presentations using proprietary IMAX®, IMAX 3D®, and IMAX DMR® (Digital Re-Mastering) technologies. IMAX DMR enables virtually any motion picture to be transformed into the unparalleled image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience®.

IMAX is headquartered in New York, Toronto and Los Angeles, with offices in London, Tokyo, Shanghai and Beijing. As of March 31, 2012, there were 643 IMAX theatres (510 commercial multiplex, 20 commercial destination and 113 institutional) in 52 countries.

IMAX®, IMAX® 3D, IMAX DMR®, Experience It In IMAX®, An IMAX 3D Experience® and The IMAX Experience® are trademarks of IMAX Corporation. More information about the Company can be found at . You may also connect with IMAX on Facebook ( ), Twitter ( ) and YouTube ( ).



1. zperk - June 13, 2012

interesting that this press release mentions Peter Weller and Alice Eve, but nothing about Benedict Cumberpatch.

2. Captain Smirk - June 13, 2012

I’m a little troubled by the fact that this film is in the can and in post-production yet a title has yet to be created. Just dive into a Shakespeare play and pull a title out of a line of dialog already!

3. ados - June 13, 2012

I thought i would hate 3d…but Prometheus changed my mind…it was cool

4. number6 - June 13, 2012

This is going to be a long 11 months!! Oh, and first!!

5. number6 - June 13, 2012

or FOURTH!!!!! Yay!! Fourth!

6. Richard Gong - June 13, 2012

Yes, where is the name of Benedict Cumberbatch?

7. MJ - June 13, 2012

Dammit, I was hoping for standard IMAX given this is going to be a 3D conversion. The awesome MI4 they reference was so awesome — but it was in standard IMAX. Sounds also like they are simply convert the source film to IMAX and that they did not use any IMAX projectors during filming?

I’m very disappointed. Count me out….this is basically a scam. I will be seeing Trek 2013 in 2D only.

8. MJ - June 13, 2012

@3. Prometheus was shot with 3D cameras, while Star Trek 2013 is/was not. Big difference!!!

9. zperk - June 13, 2012

@7 no, many scenes were shot using IMAX and 3D cameras. they are not up-sourcing.

10. MJ - June 13, 2012

@7. Correction, it sounds like some select scenes used IMAX cameras. I don’t think these were 3D IMAX cameras though, but maybe someone else knows?

11. MJ - June 13, 2012

@9. I don’t think the IMAX cameras are 3D IMAX cameras. It is my understanding that all 3D will be conversion, although, I expect that special effects scenes would be done in 3D source as they generate the 2D effects.

12. zperk - June 13, 2012

@7, I stand corrected. While they did shoot with IMAX cameras, they did not shoot with 3D cameras. However, as per the recent Lindelof interview on this site, they did secondary passes of almost every shot to better map the shots for 3D conversion. Basically, it sounds like a hybrid method in which they planned ahead to improve the quality of an inevitable 3D conversion.

From the interview: “And when you are doing this process, as opposed to a standard conversion, after every single set up – not just every scene but every angle – we had to do a 3D pass where you clear the set of the actors and the camera has to do the same moves so the guys doing the conversion can map accordingly and that will provide a much better 3D experience for the audience.” (

13. PEB - June 13, 2012

@2 there’s probably a title but like everything else, we wont know it until the teaser is released.

14. MJ - June 13, 2012

Given they are taking so long to do post production for this, it is a shame that they couldn’t bite the full bullet and go full bore with either IMAX 3D cameras or the new 48FPS 3D cameras that The Hobbit is using.

Still sounds like a lot of compromising by me to try to have it both ways and keep costs down. I am still not sold on paying ticket prices for this in IMAX 3D. I’d be a lot more excited if they had done this like MI4 and went full-bore IMAX 2D.

I am a big enough Trek sucker that I probably will end up seeing this once in IMAX 3D, but I will going standard 2D on opening night.

15. cr - June 13, 2012

I worked as an extra on this movie and those IMAX cameras are loud and need new film every 10 minutes. slow work!

16. dt1616 - June 13, 2012


In the promo material they say: ” Returning to their posts on the Enterprise are…”

I think this just confirms that Alice Eve and Peter Weller are Starfleet officers, which I think we already knew. No mention of Cumberbatch because he apparently is not a Starfleet officer serving on the Enterprise (I still don’t believe he is Khan, or even one of Khan’s genetically engineered counterparts)

17. Craiger - June 13, 2012

I read a post on a comic book site and the owner of that site thought Cumberbatch might be a Klingon/Human hybrid Starfleet Officer.

18. Anthony Thompson - June 13, 2012

AP, please ask your “sources” (Bob) if the sequel will be released in standard IMAX as well.

19. Tom - June 13, 2012

2. Don’t believe it hasn’t been created. It just hasn’t been released yet.

20. Jellocutter - June 13, 2012

When do we get to see the imax 3D film of the sun shining out of J.J. Abrams butt.

21. Chingatchkook - June 13, 2012


Really? You did? You….lucky….b*stard….. ;-)

22. AJ - June 13, 2012

Make it big and beautiful, guys.

23. Anthony Thompson - June 13, 2012

15. cr

Is Khan the villain? ; )

24. ST Fan - June 13, 2012

15. cr

Can you give us a hint on the movie? and yes, is Khan the villian?

25. Chingatchkook - June 13, 2012

cr won’t talk. He knows that Donvito Abrams will send his capo’s to “visit” anyone who dare to violate Trek omerta…

cr, I still hate your guts, you lucky b*stard ;-)

26. buster - June 13, 2012

That leaked Spock-Sherlock scene is shot in IMAX right?! Damn!!!

27. eowyn - June 13, 2012

Was Benedict fired or something. I think they forgot his name. HAHA.

28. Basement Blogger - June 13, 2012

Star Trek 2013 IMAX 3D willl still be a conversion from 2D. The best they can do is to create a cinematic pop up book. Link. It’s more like 2.5D than 3D. If you want to see an IMAX 3D movie that was converted, see Men In Black 3. It’s not bad but many of the live action scenes didn’t have pop. Look you can’t catch the light and shadow,, nooks and crannies that a 3D camera will do.

You want to see great 3D, watch Martin Scorsese’s Hugo or Wim Wenders’ dance documentary Pina. (2011) Prometheus looks good and the lighting was excellent because it was shot in 3D.

That being said, this site had an interview with Damon Lindelof. He indicated that Star Trek had 3D passes maded for it. They used the same camera angles without the actors. That obviously willl help the conversion. CGI scenes usually look good even in conversions. And Star Trek should have a lot since it takes place in space. I remember the best 3D scenes in the converted Thor (2011) were the CGI end credits of nebulas I’m guessing the virrtual camera used catches CGI images as well as live action native 3D.

Every 3D movie that I have seen on IMAX 3D was better than regular 3D. Those were on RealD projectors. I’ve seen Avatar, Tron: Legacy, Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, and Men in Black 3 on IMAX 3D. The IMAX versions were better, I believe it’s the better resolution and fatter screen. IMAX also has better sound. Remember hearing every whisper from Simon Pegg in MI 4: Ghost Protocol. So if you’re going to shell out the dough for 3D, you might want to think IMAX first.

How do you convert 2D movies to 3D

29. Dee - lvs moon' surface - June 13, 2012

#16. Yep … I guess too

by the way…

Chris Pine and Alex Kurtzman were in Dallas yesterday… and they talked a bit about “Big” things… but always just a bit… ;-) :-)


30. eun - June 13, 2012

@15 At least tell us if the four-year wait is worth it! Come on, come on! And is Cumby really that good?

31. Allen - June 13, 2012

3d sucks

32. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - June 13, 2012

I am happy that it is at least going to be in IMAX. That is a great way to see Star Trek.

33. Christopher Roberts - June 13, 2012

Shame to admit it, but I haven’t even seen the last one in IMAX.

What does it add to the experience exactly?

34. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 13, 2012

When is the rest of the world going to see People Like Us? This film is a Dreamworks production which is not a small indie production company. Having no release dates for a movie like this in countries like Canada, UK, Australasia etc just makes no sense.

This is what I would expect for a movie like Mantivities that Chris Pine hopes to produce and star in and that is because it is being made by a small fledgling production company with limited resources, but not with People Like Us.

Come on, already!

35. Red Dead Ryan - June 13, 2012

“People Like Us” is probably one of those movies that will have a limited release at select theatres, and in only a handful of cities and countries. PLU looks to be one of those flicks that are aimed at a smaller audience.

36. Punkspocker - June 13, 2012

Why not mention Cumberbatch, hes so flippin hot right now. Im thrilled for imax.

37. braxus - June 13, 2012

I wonder if the special effects shots like the Enterprise in space, will be output to the full IMAX frame? It would be cool to see the ship on that big screen.

38. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - June 13, 2012

I saw Prometheus on Imax 3D this weekend and I think it’s the last time I’ll ever do that. The 3D was very unimpressive and I sit close enough that I don’t need an Imax screen anyway. Maybe my lack of excitement had to do with the fact I was disappointed by the movie, because I saw Hugo in 3D and thought it was great.

Either way, 3D just doesn’t add enough for me to be interested. I’ll take regular sized screens, thank you.

39. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 13, 2012

#35 – Why? These two guys have been going round the country promoting it as much as anything else has been promoted. The film has well-known actors like Michelle Pfeifer, Elizabeth Banks and Olivia Wilde as well as, of course, Chris Pine. There are at least two trailers out. Frankly, I don’t see that there is a lot of difference, except that it is not a shoot ’em up, bang, big explosions movie, but then neither was The Vow.

This site is not remembering my name/email anymore. Maybe this is for security reasons? Anthony?

40. Dee - lvs moon' surface - June 13, 2012

#39. Keachick…

There’s an interesting article about it…


41. MJ - June 13, 2012

All in all, I am sticking with 2D on opening night. If the 3D IMAX reviews are surprisingly good, then I see it on one of those screens on my 2nd or 3rd viewing. I saw Trek 2009 4 times during the original release, and then once again for that special one-day IMAX release last year. I can’t say the IMAX release of Trek 2009 was all that much better other than the better audio.

Again, although the Press Release makes it sound cool, let’s face it — they are “half-assing” the 3D. And to add insult to injury, what they are doing means we won’t even be able to see it on standard 2D IMAX — that, I would have paid for! Seeing a 3D converted movie on IMAX 3D, with many scenes also upscaled from 35MM film to IMAX (note: they only filmed certain scenes in IMAX) doesn’t sound to me like it is worth the extra ticket price.

There is a sucker born every minute, and he aint me. ;-)

42. Basement Blogger - June 13, 2012

@ 33


IMAX 3D offers better resolution that translates to a clearer picture. The big screen and resolution do a better job of 3D than a theater with a Real D projector. The 3D movie pops better, i.e. there’s better pushing out from the screen. I saw Avatar in regular 3D and I MAX 3D. IMAX was better. Oh, screen size is taller and fatter too.

Sound is better also. Saw MI 4: Ghost Protocol in IMAX and regular. Again, could hear every mumbled whisper that Simon Pegg spoke. Sound was crisp and clean.

Check out my post 28 for how they convert a 2D movie to 3D.

43. MJ - June 13, 2012

@42. Not if the 35MM film has to be upscaled to IMAX. If the source film is in IMAX,then yes.

In Trek 2013 IMAX 3D, you are going to be seeing many images that are both converted to 3D and also up scaled from 35mm film to IMAX. That is pretty lame.

44. Basement Blogger - June 13, 2012

@ 41


Looking at all the 3D glasses around the house, I’ve must have seen over twenty 3D movies. Cannot recommend any conversion. Some are better than say “The Last Airbender.” (2010) , like Men in Black 3. Still they’re nothing special.

On the other hand, I love the 3D in Hugo (2011) and the dance documentary Pina. (2011) Both were shot in 3D. While watching Pina, I literally thought the dancers and props were in the theater next to me. The native 3D was that good.

I will try to see all three versions of Star Trek 2013. It better be good. ;-) I like movies and blogging about the ones that I see.

45. somethoughts - June 13, 2012

awesome news

46. Jack - June 13, 2012

I hope Tyler Perry’s back in it. Just watching him on an old Graham Norton and he’s on it. Not a lot of other roles for black men in Trek, arguably (yes, that Dr. Who guy’s in it, but that’s one guy out of, well, a big, big cast).

Saw prometheus again last night, this time in 2D, (I’d previously seen it in 3D at midnight on opening day). I disliked it a little less. And liked it more in 2D than 3D (In 3D, I took my glasses off for some scenes so it wasn’t so dim). I sought out 2D screenings for Avengers too — had no desire to see it in 3D.

I saw MI4 in Imax and didn’t really notice the difference (I’d first seen it in Berlin in a normal theater).

Hugo was neat, but I wonder if there would have been a movie there without the 3D.

Pina sounds neat — 3D actually makes sense for some documentaries…

47. MJ - June 13, 2012

@46. You kill me, Jack. Weren’t you just complaining about how awful Prometheus was a couple of days ago…yet, you go see it again? Huh?

48. Red Dead Ryan - June 13, 2012


I think he had a change of heart after reading our arguments. ;-)

49. Jack - June 13, 2012

I wanted to make sure I wasn’t just tired and cranky the first time. And, hey. I love you guys, so I thought, ‘if those guys like it, it can’t be that bad.’ And I was absolutely wrong — it was that bad.


Sort of.

This time (going in hating it) I had low expectations, to put it mildly (as a bonus, when I was standing in line to buy tickets, some guy walking out of it yelled out to everybody “If you’re going to Prometheus, save your money. It blows!” I’m pretty sure he wasn’t on of you guys.) .

It was okay. Still some eye-rolling lines. Maybe, the first time, I’d been expecting a 2-hour accelerated Masters degree in philosophy and, well, a few scenes with the guys in the same tiny bandage outfits as the ladies).

here’s an odd non sequitur — at the end, a girl in the audience said to her friends (“Okay, that totally wasn’t a prequel to Aliens because the first one takes place in the 1950s, on Earth. So that was really dumb! Hadn’t teh director even seen the movie?”

I have no idea what movie she was talking about.

50. Red Dead Ryan - June 13, 2012


Good, now you’re coming around. :-)

You also might want to catch the movie again on the director’s edition Blu Ray. I hear that it’s going to add twenty extra minutes worth of cut scenes back into the movie.

51. Jack - June 13, 2012

50. I might as well buy the blu ray. I’ve now spent $30 on a movie I didn’t like, why stop now?

52. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - June 13, 2012

49. Jack – I had kind of the same reaction. Prometheus seemed to me to be a movie that thought it was deeper than it really was. I absolutely loved the visuals, but the story really let me down.

When you must have people do unbelievable things, acting totally against human nature and scientific training, just to tell your story, something’s wrong with your premise. You shouldn’t have to take so many curves of logic to get to your destination. I think the idea was there, but not the execution.

In Alien, people acted pretty much along the lines of human nature. It was a simple film, but effective, and very believable. Prometheus tried not to be simple, but instead of being deep, it was just ineffective and unbelievable to me. I think it actually suffers from its connection to the Alien series.

Now that’s just my opinion, mind you.

53. MJ - June 14, 2012

@50 “You also might want to catch the movie again on the director’s edition Blu Ray. I hear that it’s going to add twenty extra minutes worth of cut scenes back into the movie.”

Seriously guys, when seeing Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven in the theater, I was like, WTF? that was confusing! Then I get the Blu-Ray, with 45 FREAKING MINUTES of footage back in that the studio made him cut, and it becomes one of my favorite movies of all time.

If you don’t believe me, please see:

54. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 14, 2012

#40 – Thanks for the link. That was interesting.

The studios seems to be going on the premise that the kinds of things that can happen to families in ordinary life in US can’t happen elsewhere, so why bother even finding a distributor and having the movies released elsewhere.

Curiously, I could have easily been a Sam, only finding out later that I had an older half-sister to a different mother. However, we knew about her from an early age, but the relationships were always strained and contact was lost altogether for many years. My husband’s late partner also had a story of her own, a rather sad one actually…

Are these people saying that no one outside the US could relate to the kind of story that People Like Us tell? Well, I say NO.

There is underserved audience, not just in the US but overseas as well. Frankly, I would much rather see People Like Us than Prometheus and it is NOT just because Chris Pine is in it.

Bob Orci, Alex Kurtzman – I want to see People Like Us and I pissed off because, as of now, I have no idea if I ever will see, given the sucky attitudes. Anything you guys can do? Most of the reviews I have read from those who have seen the “premiers”? say the film is very good…

55. Jack - June 14, 2012

52 “I think it actually suffers from its connection to the Alien series.”

Yep. It feels like a story that exists only to put the pieces in place (a little likea film I saw in 2009… ). And there are limits — you know that Earth doesn’t get destroyed anytime soon because there are Alien movies set way in the future. We can assume they won’t find the answers, or at least, share them with everyone else and redeem humanity anytime soon because… again. Although… there are always possibilities.

Funny, I was just wondering whether or not the Star Wars prequels would have been any better had they somehow not been connected with Star Wars (not that tough to do, just change a few names, make Yoda blue and call him Dave etc.) but their own, self-contained tales set in another universe. Probably not.

56. Hat Rick - June 14, 2012

How great is it that Star Trek is now an IMAX franchise? And in 3D, too?

Unbelieveably great, that’s how!


57. Sebastian S. - June 14, 2012

Too bad it’s going to be an 3D-upconvert job. Those never quite look as good as native I-Max 3D (the recent “Prometheus” was shot in native 3D and it looked incredible). I just wish that they’d show the new ST in I-Max 2D. I saw the 2009 movie that way and it looked great.

58. Garak - June 14, 2012

I want to see a Bird-of-Prey decloaking over my head!

59. shamelord - June 14, 2012

Looks like Benedict Cumberbatch’s part lies on the cutting room’s floor

60. VZX - June 14, 2012

I just hope I can watch in Imax WITHOUT 3D!!

Imax shot with Imax cameras = Awesomeness.

All 3D = Suck and a waste of money.

61. cr - June 14, 2012

21 23 24 30 I have no idea who the enemy is. I even asked other extras what they know and no one would tell me a clue. My scene was just a large group of Starfleet officers with very little action and talking. I didn’t even know why we there !

62. Steve - June 14, 2012

“Prometheus” was one more demonstration of how bad IMAX 3D really is. The problems:

1. The “flicker” (a certain percentage of people always see the flicker in 3D presentations, and always will, until theaters convert to higher frame-rates)

2. Dark, dark, dark… No matter what they do to try to fix this, dark scenes just always look so bad in IMAX 3D. Instead of the crispness you get with regular IMAX, where the contrast is so good, dark scenes in 3D just look completely muddled. This is especially going to hurt the space scenes in the Trek movie.

3. SO small: Everything in 3D will always look smaller than it does on 2D, since the 3D effect is mostly created by making the background of the shot look further away, versus foreground items appearing closer. So even if you’re lucky enough to even FIND an Imax theater anymore with a decent sized screen (and to me, “decent” means at least 60-70 feet), everything is going to look smaller. This effect just killed all the scenes set in space in “Prometheus”.

4. The glasses are just SO uncomfortable.

Trek 2009 looked amazing at a large-screen IMAX theater. 3D IMAX is just going to ruin it. It would be great if they could at least present one showing a day in regular 2D IMAX (maybe the first showing of the day?), for those of us who can’t stand the 3D quality. But we know it’s not going to happen, as they can charge more for the 3D IMAX.

I was really hoping that JJ would be one of the holdouts against this wave of poor quality 3D IMAX. It’s a shame.

63. VZX - June 14, 2012

62: No, JJ likes money too much. He won’t hold-out.

Anyway, I agree with all your points about 3D. I can’t stand it. I saw a few movies in the new 3D era and vow never to go again as long as I can help it. I’m really bummed about the IMAX 3D for the new Star Trek. I’d love to see it in IMAX, but I refuse to be forced to watch it in 3D. I’ll just go see the 2D version in a regular theatre, then (if I go see it even).

64. A Question For The Orcister! - June 14, 2012

Mr. Orci,

I am wondering with the success you and your writing partner have had in recent years, have you both given any thought to writing a treatment for a comedy?

I am interested in your opinion of Ghostbusters 3? I believe if you guys can bring Star Trek back, you could bring Ghostbusters back!

Please respond if you can, have a lovely day!

65. MJ - June 14, 2012

@62. Must have been a poor 3d set-up your theater. It was the best 3D I have seen since Avatar — definitely worth the extra money.

FYI — After being burned early with seeing some bad 3D conversions, I now have a “personal policy” of only paying to see 3D movies that were shot with 3D cameras — i.e. true 3D films. There is a reason why Avatar, Tron 2, Hugo and Prometheus are among the best 3D films to date — it’s because they were all shot with 3D cameras (Tron 2 was not 100% 3D shot, but close enough).

Based on what I know now technical of Trek 2013 IMAX 3D, I would have to advise folks not to get hoodwinked into seeing it on IMAX 3D, as you are going to see a movie that has been covered twice:

— Most scenes will be upscale from 35 MM film to IMAX (note: some of the actions scenes were filmed in IMAX)

— The entire movie will undergo the 2D to 3D conversion process.

It is thus really unfortunate that they are both cheaping out on the 3D while also ruining the IMAX 2D great potential of Trek 2013.

This is why I will be seeing it in a normal 2D theater on opening night.

66. MJ - June 14, 2012

@65. correction to my paragraph above:

“Based on what I know technically of Trek 2013 IMAX 3D, I would have to advise folks not to get hoodwinked into seeing it on IMAX 3D, as you are going to see a movie that has been converted twice:”

67. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 14, 2012

#63 – No, I don’t think it is just because JJ Abrams likes the money too much. My understanding is that JJ Abrams held out as much as he could in not doing the movie with what he considers an inferior filming technology, which is why the movie is being made in 2D.

It is not Abrams, but Paramount (also owner of the ST movie franchise) who is insisting that the film be converted into 3D IMAX. I think one of the *leaked* photos showed an IMAX camera in the foreground, but I suspect that was to make a 2D IMAX film. JJ Abrams and his Bad Robot production company is under contract to Paramount to make these movies. Ultimately it is Paramount’s call.

68. Mark Lynch - June 14, 2012

I like 3D, but I am disappointed that it is not being filmed in 3D and merely converted instead.

69. Captain Hackett - June 14, 2012

Beware of 3D lens flare! ;)

70. boborci - June 14, 2012

68. You won’t be.

71. boborci - June 14, 2012

64. Would love to do comedy more. We were fortunate to Executive Produce the Proposal, and we learned a lot from it. Would love to do another comedy and actually write and direct one. Maybe Someday…

72. MJ - June 14, 2012

@71. Bob, you mean Transformers-ROTF wasn’t a comedy?

;-) Just kidding!!!

73. boborci - June 14, 2012

72. actually, yes. both movies intended to have much comedy, but if I say it I get attacked!

74. Sebastian S. - June 14, 2012

# 58 Garak~

“I want to see a Bird-of-Prey decloaking over my head!”

Maybe you should get a job with a Russian whaling fleet. Just kidding, of course…


75. Sebastian S. - June 14, 2012

# 65 MJ

“FYI — After being burned early with seeing some bad 3D conversions, I now have a “personal policy” of only paying to see 3D movies that were shot with 3D cameras — i.e. true 3D films. There is a reason why Avatar, Tron 2, Hugo and Prometheus are among the best 3D films to date — it’s because they were all shot with 3D cameras (Tron 2 was not 100% 3D shot, but close enough).”

This is my own ‘personal policy’ on 3D as well; the only exception I’ve made so far were “John Carter” and “The Avengers” and neither of them really felt like ‘true’ 3D; they had ‘popout’ moments that felt more like a bad Viewmaster 3D effect, but they didn’t have the smooth, natural, textured 3D of “Avatar”, “Hugo” or “Prometheus.”

It’s a shame new ST will not be offered in good old fashioned 2D I-Max; I would love to see it that way (as I did the 2009 ST movie).

76. MJ - June 14, 2012

@72. Well those of us who now the real story are aware of how the writers strike ruined your ability to improve the script. We got your back, man!

77. Simon - June 14, 2012

When it comes out on Blu-ray it had better have the shifting aspect ratio to allow the additional top & bottom information to be seen, unlike the M:I:4 disc which is 2.40 throughout. VERY disappointed that disc didn’t allow for it, even though previous movies like THE DARK KNIGHT and TRON: LEGACY did.

78. Jack - June 14, 2012

Hadn’t realized you guys worked on the proposal. I liked it. Bullock, Betty White, Craig T. Nelson, a little absurdity and a naked Ryan Reynolds = can’t miss. Add them all to the next Transformers (can’t remember if you guys are producing it). I liked Morning Glory too.

I appreciated the effort at comedy in the transformers pics (the second one), even the balls jokes — without it there would have been not a lot there except scraping metal and long shots of Megan Fox bending over a motorcycle. Some of it (Mom’s crazy when she’s on pot! Jive talking robots! was a little… well, broad’s an understatement… ). My big beef was the fembot — led to some fun scenes, but I sort of wonder whether it was fun on the page but didn’t really get thought out (or it was assumed viewers wouldn’t think it through)… It’s gotta be possible to have comedy, and even absurdity, without making the characters ridiculous (see Star Trek IV and V for examples of how not to do this).

79. VZX - June 14, 2012

OK, Bob. I got a comedy-pitch for your comedy movie for you to comedy-direct. A comedy about a writer that continually goes to talkback sections on the Inter-webs to engage, enlighten, and enrage the fans! Hijinks ensue!

80. Jack - June 14, 2012

79. Er, writer “borrows” irresistible pitch from a lady in, say, New Zealand. She goes on journey to meet said writer and get a cut, or at least a date with famous actor Phil Spruce. Love blossoms.

81. MJ - June 14, 2012

@80. Yea, but Keachick is married. There is that! :-)

82. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 14, 2012

What? What? You called?…:) Keachick married? True. Ryan Reynolds butt naked? Very nice! I go away for a few minutes and look what I come back to…:)

Yes, Bob Orci – Love the Proposal. Older son picked the DVD up at the Warehouse (your Walmart) for a two for one cheap deal or something; got it home, played it and laughed our heads off. The film was much better than we expected and I did not notice at first that it was one of your movies. Good one! Then there is Ryan Reynolds with that nice naked body of his.

Now, Jack, there are rules about who gets the cute, hunky guys first and it is – Ladies FIRST! Understood – good chap…:) Of course, I have only one “Get out Free” card from the husband and that is for Chris Pine, because he is even cuter than Ryan Reynolds with his nice blue eyes and the way he can look and be such a honey at times, like in some of the interviews…

Where was I? What irresistible pitch?

BTW – I have once again been called Chris Pine’s publicist on another site. Does that count? Apparently If I am not his publicist, I sound like his publicist and must have something going on. What does a publicist sound like and what have I and Chris got going on? Perhaps Chris Pine himself might wish to enlighten me…LOL

83. Battle-scarred Sciatica - June 14, 2012

I’d love to know where my nearest IMAX theatre is.

Not close would be the answer….

84. Basement Blogger - June 14, 2012

For months, we debated 3-D or 3D for Star Trek. . My view was the more money Star Trek makes, the more Star Trek. HOWEVER, I supported a film shot in 3D. I argued that Trekkers deserved the same quality as Avatar and maybe better, When it was announced that Star Trek 2013 was a conversion, I’ve argued that you will get an inferior product as ti relates to 3D film.

Now you might say I’m being snobby. Let me say I’ve seen about twenty to thirty 3D movies. Conversions from 2D to 3D are inferior to a movie shot in 3D. These movies are too dark. Directors of photography and the director usually aren’t thinking 3D. Link. Directors of photography are not thinking of the inherent problems with 3D projection. They’re making a movie for 2D. Thor (2011) was a conversion. and ti was too dark. The fight with the Frost Giants was too dark. Cinematic mud.
Roger Ebert, film critic has ranted against 3D . What you need to realize is this. You will not capture every light, shadow, nook and cranny with the conversion process. It is a cinematic pop up book. I’ll let Ebert say it for me. He loves Titanic. Here’s what he said about the conversion of Titanic. Cameron spent million to covert it.

” But “Titanic” was not shot for 3D, and just as you cannot gild a pig, you cannot make 2D into 3D. What you can do, and he tries to do it well, is find certain scenes that you can present as having planes of focus in foreground, middle and distance.”

Amen , Roger. Titanic 3D was nothing special. Great 3D works where you feel the actors and objects on the screen are with you. Again see Scorsese’s Hugo and Wenders’ Pina. (2011)

Star Trek 2013 has the advantage of what Damon Lindelof described as 3D passes where they use the same camera angles for scenes without the actors. That’s great for the conversion process. But it”s not the same as being shot in 3D. CGI in conversions comes off well. So let’s hope for the sake of people paying extra to see Star Trek 2013 3D that there is plenty of that.

1. 3 D movies are too dark.

2. Roger Ebert’s review of Titanic 3D

85. NuFan - June 15, 2012

You will be able to see it however you prefer.

86. Cervantes - June 15, 2012

Prometheus in it’s ‘theatrical’ cut is a complete mess in many ways, but the RealD 3D showing I saw really looked terrific overall I thought. And hopefully the ‘extended’ Blu-ray version will flesh things out a little better, although that unnecessary end scene will still remain ‘shlocky’, no matter what…

The movie had a decent ‘exploring strange new worlds’ feel about it however.

I was disappointed that J.J.’s first ‘Trek’ reboot hadn’t been filmed in 3D for it’s release, and was also disappointed to find this upcoming sequel was only going to be ‘converted’. It would have been nice to see this in the kind of 3D quality that Ridley Scott produced, but will hopefully be one of the better ‘conversions’ regardless.

Still wish the ‘STAR TREK’ font had the same slanted look as the TOS series title did, however.

87. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 15, 2012

Battle-Scarred Sciatica is right. I have just done a search for any IMAX cinemas near where he lives in Dunedin, NZ and as far as I can tell there are none. The only IMAX cinema I know of is in Queen St, Auckland CBD. However, it is possible to see movies in both 2D and 3D throughout NZ, but not IMAX.

It is approx. 1 and a half hours flying time between Dunedin and Auckland or several days by car. Very much more scenic with a ferry trip thrown in (hopefully you don’t get seasick – Cook Strait isn’t the calmest of waters) if done by car. Hardly worth it though just to see a movie…

88. Mel - June 15, 2012

There is no IMAX cinema, where I live. How is it in the USA? Has every bigger city one? Or only the really huge ones?

89. T'Cal - June 15, 2012

I’m not a 3D fan usually but I’ll try this film in IMAX 3D for the first viewing. If I like the film but not the 3D effect, subsequent viewings will be in 2D. I tend to see Trek and Batman films 5 or so times at the theatre.

90. Phil - June 15, 2012

@54. Pay per view….cable/satelite TV. Netflicks, or it’s NZ equal….

91. Phil - June 15, 2012

3d is a gimmick, and I won’t pay extra for a case of motion sickness. Seeing it in 2d is just fine.

92. Phil - June 15, 2012

Maybe this is the title of the movie – Star Trek: Experience it in 3D

93. Keachick - rose pinenut - June 15, 2012

#90 – People Like Us was made to be screened in cinemas. It’s not a TV movie. Hopefully, I will eventually get to see this film on DVD, which is how I first got to see Carriers (another genuinely indie Chris Pine film). It is just that I don’t see People Like Us as being an indie type movie. The other query I have is why are people in Argentina and Hungary, but not English speaking audiences outside the US, able to see this film in cinematic release in August 2012?

Alex Kurtzman/Bob Orci – An answer to these questions would be really appreciated.

94. Phil - June 15, 2012

@90. It’s a small budget movie, with a limited release. Further, it’s hitting theaters a week after Disney/Pixar’s Brave, which means it’s going to get buried in the US market really fast. The distributers just are not going to spend any money for a wide release unless it does really well in it’s limited one.

95. MJ - June 16, 2012

People like us is a good DVD chick flic rental. No need to see it on the widescreen. I will rent it on Netflix later this year.

96. Platitude - June 17, 2012

Wish it was regular IMAX. I love IMAX but don’t care at all for IMAX 3D. This is a bit disappointing for me. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.