Abrams Not Interested In Directing Star Wars VII – Planning New Original Project | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Abrams Not Interested In Directing Star Wars VII – Planning New Original Project November 13, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Star Trek Beyond,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Since the recent announcement that Disney had acquired LucasFilm and they were moving forward with a new Star Wars film trilogy there has been a lot of speculation about who will be involved in these projects. One name that has come up is JJ Abrams. In a new interview the Star Trek Into Darkness producer/director says he has another idea for his next project. Details below. 


Abrams Says ‘No’ To Star Wars VII – Plans To Roll His Own

According to Entertainment Weekly, Disney and LucasFilm sent a treatment for the next Star Wars movie to three filmmakers — J.J. Abrams, Brad Bird and Steven Spielberg. While  Abrams may have loved the Star Wars universe as a kid, he apparently doesn’t want to work there anytime soon. In a new interview with Entertainment Weekly Abrams revealed:

"I have some original stuff I am working on next.”

Turning down Star Wars can’t be easy for Abrams, who has made no secret of his love of that galaxy far far away. In 2009 he told LA Times:

"As a kid, Star Wars was much more my thing than Star Trek was. If you look at the last three Star Wars films and what technology allowed them to do, they covered so much terrain in terms of design, locations, characters, aliens, ships…"

What will Abrams next project do to 3rd Star Trek film?

Abrams comment about ‘original stuff’ is also intriguing and also a bit of déjà vu. In his interview with TrekMovie at the release of his first Star Trek film back in 2009 Abrams revealed he didn’t want to immediately dive into a sequel and instead planned to do something "original." That project eventually became the 2011 film Super 8. which he wrote and directed. And it was Super 8, along with Abrams’ many other TV and film projects, which led to the delay of his follow-up Star Trek feature (Into Darkness) which moved from a June 2012 release to May 17, 2013.

So it isn’t too early to start speculating about a third Star Trek film produced by Abrams’ Bad Robot Productions. It is generally expected that Abrams will at least produce the film and other writer producers Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof have also indicated they will likely want to finish out with a trilogy as well. So once again we will be left with the same question that preceded production on both the 2009 Star Trek film and 2013’s Into Darkness — will J.J. Abrams direct? If he does, then could we be in for another 4 year gap between Trek films to give him time to complete another project?

TrekMovie will continue to keep track of this next big Trek.  

JJ Abrams with his Star Trek (2009) cast – will he be in director’s chair for a third Star Trek?

Worth the wait?

So given a choice would you prefer to wait for Abrams to complete his next project before returning to Star Trek for a third film? Or would you want him to hand it off to a new director to expedite a follow-up? It is hard to guess how long we would have to wait but at least adding a year, more likely 2 years.

Sound off below and in our new poll.


Wait for JJ or new director for 3rd Star Trek?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...





1. grover sald - November 13, 2012

I remember reading Spielberg always wanted to do a SW and Lucas said no… maybe now’s the time? Would be interesting…

2. Devon - November 13, 2012

Anthony?!? You’re alive?!?

3. Elias Javalis - November 13, 2012

I am more interested to see a new trilogy with a fresh approach..Star Wars has good material to work with!

4. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - November 13, 2012

Speilberg said just a week or so ago that he has no interest in doing the third trilogy.

5. TreK_Fan - November 13, 2012

Lets start a campaign to get Sam Raimi to do Star Trek, just look at what he did for Spiderman I & II.

6. Chang's gang - November 13, 2012

I love J.J. Loved the first film, love all his work and creativity.
But CMON MAN, we get that you weren’t a Trek fan when you grew up.
We get it. Not necessary to add it to every interview.

7. Admiral Archer's Prized Beagle - November 13, 2012

“TrekMovie will continue to keep track of this next big Trek.”


8. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - November 13, 2012

@6. It was an interview from 2009.

9. Jason - November 13, 2012

I say they bring a new director to do the third movie while J.J .does his project, then Abrams could still possibly return for the fourth movie.

we can’t go four years in between movies again , that’s too long. They can’t hold the whole franchise hostage for one guy. Its gonna have to move on eventually anyway.

10. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 13, 2012

I vote for Joss Whedon but Avengers owns his soul now lol

11. Jackis - November 13, 2012

JJ is a hack, bring in a new director and make sure he stays away far far far away from Star Wars. The guy has serious issues and should have never been brought it to direct Star Trek, he’s constantly whining about how he lacks passion for Star Trek…

12. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 13, 2012

#11 What you may think JJ lacks in passion for Star Trek he makes up for ten fold in his directing ability… Or would you rather have Baird again?

13. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 13, 2012

1. grover sald – Spielberg has already said no.

I think Lars von Trier should direct the new Star Wars film. Or Terrence Malick.

14. Harry Ballz - November 13, 2012

Anthony, why haven’t you permabanned the morons posting under other people’s names here during your absence?

That should be priority one!

15. njdss4 - November 13, 2012

If JJ is going to delay Trek again due to other projects, replace him. I feel that future Trek movies will be more dependant on the script and the writers for their success than who is directing.

16. LizardGirl - November 13, 2012

JJ is a good director with great ideas. Also the crew in front and behind the camera are comfortable with him. I think that’s very important. The relationship between the director, his team and the actors. I personally feel comfortable/excited with his style and pace, as well as the look of his work.

So yeah I want him to direct the last movie (that’s what I voted on the poll), but please speed it up a bit! Not another four years! Three years at the most. That was what I was expecting with this movie so that will be fine with me. I will literally put it in my calander!

17. pewt - November 13, 2012

Lars von Trier?!?! Hahahahaha oh god….

18. LizardGirl - November 13, 2012

I’m hoping that an independant project won’t eat up as much of his time as starting several television shows + a movie did. History may not repeat itself this time. Circumstances may be different this time around.

My basic wish for the last movie: a reasonable time table, Bad Robot creativity with good Trek storytelling, and JJ Abrams as director.

19. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 13, 2012

17. pewt – Thank you.

20. Red Dead Ryan - November 13, 2012

I think it would be a mistake to get another director for the third movie. If the third one will be the last with the supreme court crew, then it doesn’t make sense to hire a new director who may end up clashing with the writers and cast. Or he may have a directorial style that wouldn’t work well with the type of movie Bob and co. write.

I say its better to wait another four years and let the guys do other stuff in the meantime. I don’t think it would be wise to rush out another sequel just to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the “Star Trek” franchise.

I would love to see a Trek movie for the anniversary, but only if its great. Might as well take the time.

Now, if the upcoming movie sucks, then what I said may not even matter….

21. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 13, 2012

I can’t answer the poll until I’ve seen the second film.

22. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 13, 2012

Shilliam Watner I looked at your poster… Its cool but would be epic awesome if they were to scale…

23. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 13, 2012

22. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) – Thanks for looking! I understand the whole scale awesomeness, but that’s way too much work, and I’m not Trek-astute enough to be sure of the scale of many of these ships. If you are Photoshop savvy and know enough about the scale of these ships, I’ll be happy to send you a version with each ship on its own layer. You can scale ’til your heart’s content ;-)

24. Hugh Hoyland - November 13, 2012

I thought that JJ would jump at a chance to do a Star Wars movie. But tasts change and priorities as well. Looks like he wants to do his own things and thats cool to.

25. WillH85 - November 13, 2012

OMG news! Glad JJ’s not going to direct Star Wars. Doing both would be a huge mistake I think.

26. BitterTrekkie - November 13, 2012

Of course he’s not interested in directing Star Wars. He alreayd made one in 2009 and another one next year. :)

27. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - November 13, 2012

@20. They celebrated the 40th anniversary in 2006, so I don’t think they’ll celebrate the 50th in 2014 even though that’s the 50th anniversary of The Cage.

I’m betting Star Trek XIII (3) will be released in 2016.

@12. Baird is the inspiration for my screenname. I sighed and shook my head in shame when I saw his name pop up in the Skyfall credits the other night. That also occurred when I saw his name pop up in the Casino Royale credits years ago. He’s better off as an editor than director.

28. Capt. Roykirk - November 13, 2012

At least he will only mess up one beloved sci fi franchise.

29. Vulcan Soul - November 13, 2012

It’s most ironic that Abrams – who called himself always a Star Wars fan primarily – has now taken over Trek and turned it into sort of his personal version of Star Wars, while he won’t get to direct the actual thing now that there suddenly is the surprising chance for it.

30. Basement Blogger - November 13, 2012

First, welcome back Anthony. As for waiting for J.J. Abrams for the third film, I say no. Look, he’s a fine director. But frankly, he’s not God. Yeah, it’s likely there will be a delay for the third film if Abrams is involved. More attention must be paid to the Star Trek franchise. It can compete with Star Wars but there needs to be some direction for the franchise. And I’m talking about the Star Trek world not just the Star Trek films. With the exception of Bob Orci, we’ve seen little in publicity for the franchise of Star Trek from the Supreme Court or Bad Robot. Yeah, I get that CBS is in charge of the TV series but they do work together. Check out the StarTrek.com and you will see a picture of Chris Pine to the side. So, Paramount and CBS can help each other out.

31. Bill Peters - November 14, 2012

Keep JJ for the Third, and let someone new come along later on.

32. Bill Peters - November 14, 2012

I have High Hopes for Star Trek Into Darkness

33. MJ (The Original) - November 14, 2012

This just in…

Phil Jackson to direct the new Star Wars trilolgy!!!

34. Aurore - November 14, 2012

“So given a choice would you prefer to wait for Abrams to complete his next project before returning to Star Trek for a third film? Or would you want him to hand it off to a new director to expedite a follow-up?”

Given a choice, and, IF Star Trek Into etc…is any good, I would want him back for a third film.

I would want him back together with his team of hack writers.

35. Raktajino - November 14, 2012

Good. I couldn’t stand lens flares in the Star Wars universe too. I’d have to chop myself in half with a lightsabre.

36. JJ's Secret - November 14, 2012

I’m sick of his condescending attitude towards the fans, and his unwillingness to show even the smallest bit of information to try and keep the momentum and excitement moving.

I hope he never touches Star Trek again.

37. Cygnus-X1 - November 14, 2012

Whoever directs the next SW film will have to do it wearing Disney shackles. Disney makes movies within prescribed parameters for a prescribed audience, i.e. children and families. That’s been part and parcel of their brand for 80+ years and they ain’t straying from it now. What’s the best Disney movie you’ve seen and enjoyed as an adult? Iron Man? The Avengers? If you think those are great movies, then you’ll probably love Disney’s Star Wars. But I predict Spielberg is gonna pass and, in the end, Disney will have to get a novice(ish) director, like John Favreau, who’s got a lot to gain career-wise from making a Disney movie.

38. P Technobabble - November 14, 2012

an aside:

just saw Shatner at Harrah’s. it was a great show.

39. RoadSiren21 - November 14, 2012

nice to have you back Anthony! :)

40. Aurore - November 14, 2012

“…But frankly, he’s not God.”

You’re right, Bernie.

He’s not God. He is…. A…god.
Mr. Cumberbatch said so.’Must be true. Get over it.



41. EM - November 14, 2012

I would love to see JJ direct the 3rd Star Trek, but not at the expense of another 4 year wait!
And, I have no worries about the new Star Wars movies, either. I’m sure that they will be very good, indeed! So long as Mr. Lucas doesn’t get to keep them too child like. Youthful, yes. Childish, no.

42. chuck watters - November 14, 2012

#33 – do you mean Peter Jackson ? Phil Jackson is a former basketball player with the NBA .

43. Killamarshtrek - November 14, 2012

HE’S BACK!!!!!!

Please tell me this means normal service will be resumed Anthony!

As for JJ, I’d rather not wait for him for the next film and I think Brad Bird would be the obvious replacement. Considering the job he did on ‘Ghost Protocol’ I’m sure he’d be a great choice!!

P.S. Welcome back, hope you’re well!

44. chrisfawkes.com - November 14, 2012

As long as the new director is not just anybody. I would like a decent film for Trek 3 so as to make sure the franchise continues.

Directors i would like to see approached.

Quentin Tarantino.

Leonard Nimoy

Christopher Nolan but perhaps he should come in for 4 with his team to write it as well.

As for Star Wars yeah i’ll have a crack at it. Sure i’ve never directed a movie but surely i could not do as bad a job as whoever directed the last three.

45. chrisfawkes.com - November 14, 2012

Abrams should agree to direct Star Wars on the condition he can do a Star Trek/Star Wars crossover with Captain Kirk battling Darth Vader.

I would pay to see that.

46. Mel - November 14, 2012

New director.
I don’t want to wait again 4 years for another Star Trek movie. That is much too long. Get someone, who has time and release Star Trek 3 in 2015.

47. Damian - November 14, 2012

27. There were 2 Nemesis alums on Skyfall, Baird as editor and John Logan as writer. Baird is actually a pretty good editor, just not the director type. And Logan does have some good stories to his credit. Skyfall was a great Bond film.

48. gov - November 14, 2012

Anthony finally posts. and it’s star wars news.

49. dscott - November 14, 2012

I don’t want to wait on him, there are others just as capable and far less “distracted”.

50. Cygnus-X1 - November 14, 2012

44. chrisfawkes.com – November 14, 2012

Tarantino and Spielberg have already declined to direct SW VII.

51. chrisfawkes.com - November 14, 2012

I meant for Star Trek.

52. Jay - November 14, 2012

Bring in Nicholas Meyer to direct the next Trek film.

53. Sebastian S. - November 14, 2012

Nothing against JJ’s movie(s), but before this cycle of Star Trek films end, I’d like to see what another director could bring to this universe. I’m not keen about bringing in any directors of previous ST movies; not even Nicholas Meyer, whose ST (and non-ST) work I greatly admire. Meyer’s even gone on record as saying he thinks he’d be a bad fit for the new franchise (think I read that here on this site once…), even though he himself enjoyed ST09.

I’d be more curious to see a director outside of ST come in and add new vision to it (even if just for one shot), just as Meyer and Abrams were brought in from the outside. Sometimes I think ‘keeping it in the family’ can lead to a bit of creative myopia….

54. crazydaystrom - November 14, 2012

If it’s going to mean a longer period between the next two films then no to JJ and yes to another director.

55. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 14, 2012

I think JJ Abrams turned down the offer to direct the new Star Wars movie due to the fact that he wasn’t allowed to write the script, too. I think that Mr. Abrams is the kind of person who need complete creative control over a project and to direct a movie based on the script by someone else without having been part of the process of creating the script doesn’t appeal to him.

So, no lens flares in Star Wars ;)

56. Phil - November 14, 2012

@42. It’s a joke. David Petraeus is producing SW 7, the allure of the casting couch was to great to ignore.

57. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 14, 2012

OK. I will direct that ‘thang.

58. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 14, 2012

Thanks JJ. Your stock is rising!

59. Caesar - November 14, 2012

Thank god.

60. Gary - November 14, 2012

I think you mean Abrams plans to *roll* his own.

61. crazydaystrom - November 14, 2012

Also –
Great to see your byline Anthony! Welcome back! I hope all is well.

And –
It perplexes me how many people seem to want Nolan or Tarantino for a Star Wars and now, it seems, for Star Trek. I’m a big fan of both of those directors but I just don’t see either of them as space opera directors. But to contradict myself, maybe, just maybe, for a DS9 film. THAT I’d love to see, actually. But for more than a couple of reasons that ain’t happenin’.

62. Aurore - November 14, 2012

If it is really a trilogy the powers that be had in mind, then, in my opinion, the tale has to be told by the same team, which to me , also means preferably the same director.

Again, given a choice, I would not have it any other way.

Certainly not after what Roberto Orciq, chose to share with us several months ago ( posts 138 & 139 ) :

“…First, this movie is by no menas written by committee. It has been written by ONE team. Me, Alex, and Damon. Thanks to the protective umbrella of the success of our first movie and JJ Abrams, we get less studio intereference than almost any other production around. This process is the OPPOSITE of script by committee….etc…etc…”


63. filmboy - November 14, 2012

Can I just nominate Alfonso Cuaron for Star Trek III or whatever it ends up being named. Cuaron has proven he can make a big budget sequel to a popular series (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) and he has made some very intelligent sci-fi films (Children of Men and his upcoming Oblivion).

He would be a bold choice and one that I think would add some new intellectual wrinkles to JJ’s universe.

64. DP McGuire - November 14, 2012

The old Trek is dead. Next Gen and all the rest look old and out of date. JJ’s version was fresh and people liked it. If you want old Trek then go watch it. If you want any new Trek then it needs to be something fresh like JJs.

65. pilotfred - November 14, 2012

it would be nice to have jj finish of the three films, however if he cant do within three years then get another director as the next film has to be out in 2016

66. Shannon Nutt - November 14, 2012

This article makes it sound like JJ was offered the directing chair…he wasn’t. You can’t “turn down” something that was never offered to you.

67. NCM - November 14, 2012

Look who’s back!

…JJ. I say hand it off–preferably to some yet unknown but blazingly brilliant young talent who happens to love Trek and will give it his or her all. If JJ’s a great director, he ought to be able to choose someone who’s up to snuff. Would be interesting to see if the numbers poll differently after May 17.

is this it?! Is TM back and are we about to start the overwhelmingly exciting and fulfilling run-up to the movie that’s going to fuel our Trek drive for the next couple of years?! Hoping this isn’t a false-start.

68. crazydaystrom - November 14, 2012

63. filmboy –
Cuaron WOULD be a bold choice and one I’d very much like to see as well. But his upcoming sci fi film is Gravity. Oblivion’s being directed by another.

69. Frederick - November 14, 2012

I have also decided not to be involved with the new Star Wars film or direct it. I have too many original projects and just can’t take time away from them to do it. Sorry, Disney.

70. Robert - November 14, 2012

#11, by having someone who isn’t a hard core fan of Star Trek to direct Trek gives Trek more objectivity. Or to dumb it down for you, it’s a fancy dancy term meaning they are not so focused on Trekkies, but focused on everyone while respecting the Trekkies, and flipping the bird at purists.

71. chrisfawkes.com - November 14, 2012

Would Abrams be up for directing an episode of Big Bang Theory?

72. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 14, 2012

Anthony. You are still alive my old friend!.
J.J should stay with Trek and not wars.

73. Stargazer54 - November 14, 2012

Glad you’re back Anthony!

The Christmas movie season is upon us and they let Anthony out.

I expect we’ll see a trailer soon. Here we go . . .

74. Gary S. - November 14, 2012

Welcome Back Anthony,
You have been missed .
I hope all is well.

75. Illogical - November 14, 2012

Anthony, welcome back…..http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QVS3WNt7yRU

76. trekprincess - November 14, 2012

Welcome back Anthony :):)

77. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 14, 2012

My vote: Wait for Abrams to direct… if he want it, of course!

Good to see you back, AP!

;-) :-)

78. Hat Rick - November 14, 2012

Welcome back, Anthony. You’ve been missed.

I don’t know if JJ would have been asked to direct the next Star Wars movie. We know that he’s committed to Star Trek for potentially another movie, whether as producer or director. It would be hard to see him helming both franchises in their movie form.

79. Phil - November 14, 2012

Jonathan Frakes should direct the next Star Wars…

80. DeShonn Steinblatt - November 14, 2012

We know that if Brad Bird joins Spielberg and Abrams in the “No” column, then these storylines for the next trilogy really aren’t very good at all.

81. Captain Hackett - November 14, 2012

Welcome back, Anthony!

Please do not get away from us again for a long time again! :)

82. Red Dead Ryan - November 14, 2012


I meant the fiftieth anniversary of the actual start of the show, in 2016, wiseguy. And I doubt we will see the third movie during that year. It’s probably going to be another four year (at least) wait between films.

83. Graham Laurie - November 14, 2012

Just as well Abrams isn’t doing the new Star Wars films or he would have replaced Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford with new actors as well and made C3PO look like the Terminator? He does have a habit of butchering Sci-Fi masterpieces.

84. Adolescent Nightmare - November 14, 2012


Yes. I am getting nervous that nobody wants to direct the next Star Wars.

85. Romulus - November 14, 2012

George Lucas will only be a “consultative producer” on the next Trilogy and that has to be the greatest benefit to fans in the history of Sci-fi.
The man who introduced Jar Jar, Ewoks and incest in space will only get a script and asked to give his thoughts, after that Kathleen Kennedy will not be taking his calls.

Harve Bennett gave Gene Roddenberry a similar credit thro STII – V but Gene had no real say in the productions.

I just wonder how Rick McCullum is fairing, he gave a recent interview saying that Lucasfilm was going to start concentrating on the live TV show..a few months later and Leia is a Disney Princess.
That poor guy spent 15 years agreeing to every whack idea that George pulled out of his rear end .

86. jamesingeneva - November 14, 2012

I don’t think it’s actually Anthony back. I think one of the editors/writers posts under Anthony.

87. AJ - November 14, 2012

Welcome Back, Anthony!

There is a collective amnesia of who directed the greatest Star Wars film: “Empire”….Irvin Kershner!

How about “Jedi:”…Richard Marquand!

They both carried that ‘Lucas-ness” throughout the trilogy. To me, Eps IV,V, and VI are one long film, and the styles of each director are not noticeable.

The second trilogy, profitable abomination that it is (for my generation) was more of a writing disaster than one of directing (by Lucas), but there was a consistency of style with the first trilogy.

I don’t want to see the ‘Abrams style’ influence the 3rd trilogy, or anybody’s. I just want a good story with more swashbuckling heroism, and no Trade Federations or wooden love scenes. I want “Star Wars.”

88. Jessie - November 14, 2012

New director and new writers but original timeline

89. Yar's love child - November 14, 2012

related headline –

Abrams also not interested in promoting newest Star Trek film. “Fans can suck it and buy tickets based solely on the name of the movie.”

90. Tesla's Cat - November 14, 2012

Joss Whedon would be a good choice.

91. THX-1138 - November 14, 2012

If JJ says he doesn’t want to direct Star Wars do you actually believe him? Because he’s so forthcoming with information on his plans?


If they ask JJ to direct episode VII he would cream his lense-flared jeans at the chance.

Also, I am fine with another director doing the third Trek movie, and then finishing off the trilogy. And then abandoning this alternate universe nonsense altogether. Once it’s over I hope someone who has any sort of control over these things get’s back to the REAL Trek universe, the PRIME universe, and continues the human adventure. If they’re going to do Trek at all.

And all of you TNG era haters. Are you seriously bagging on the look of TNG? Of course it looks dated. It IS dated. Just like TOS is. Just like old Doctor Who is. It doesn’t mean you have to change what universe you’re in, though.

92. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 14, 2012

As for the original question – I don’t know and I don’t care.

Whether another Star Trek movie gets made in time for the franchise’s 50th anniversary is up to joe-blogg public and Paramount. If STID makes back its money and a lot more, then the third movie will get the go-ahead. It will be more than apparent that using the Bad Robot production company with JJ Abrams in charge and using the KO Paper Products writing team is a winning formula so Paramount will want them to make the third Star Trek movie, and really there is little or no reason why JJ Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman and co would not want to create a third success.

Welcome back, Anthony Pascale. I hope all is well. I hope that you will be able to provide us with some genuine TREK-alternate universe news (of the very good kind). Fingers crossed…

I agree with Harry Ballz. I hope that whatever has been happening on this site will be sorted out and that imposters and sockpuppets will be “put down” never to rise again, along with the trolling. Thank you.

93. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 14, 2012

#91 – What is real and why is one reality more important than another? Why should one alternate universe cease to exist because the another prime universe is preferred?

It is all a form of LIFE – whether it exist in one’s imagination or in actuality, be very, very real.

After all, the stories were based on what was thought to exist by people like Data and experienced by Worf, both of whom are prime universe individuals living within the TNG era. The idea is also based on current scientific theory as to what could be possible, eg Kerr’s black hole theory.

94. Hodge Podge - November 14, 2012

Welcome back Anthony, you’re awesome no matter how much complaining the comments can contain. (Lets remember, there really hasn’t been much news about ST Into Darkness…)

95. Romulus - November 14, 2012

@ 93. Hodge Podge

In your rush to grovel before Anthony you have not read the comments….no one is complaining so stop trying to bait.

96. Kirk, James T. - November 14, 2012

First off: to all those complaining about this site, if you don’t like it, don’t come here, simple. There should be no comments anywhere about how this site operates so if you are one of those people, I suggest you leave and start your own site.

Secondly: to all those JJ Abrams haters out their, If you think you can do a better job then why aren’t you where Abrams is right now in his career and how come’s we’re not talking about you running the Trek franchise and developing your Star Trek film or TV series? The fact is no one here can pass judgment on a guy that literally SAVED Star Trek from becoming this exclusive fan-boy nonsense that only a few would ever care to watch – the same few who hate Abrams. As far as I’m concerned if you’re not a fan then go burry your head in the sand because clearly you like nothing but your own ideas on what Star Trek could or “should” be.

Thirdly: If JJ Abrams says he has no interest in doing Star Wars then JJ Abrams HAS NO INTEREST in doing Star Wars. He has said Star Trek appealed to him because he could step into that universe without the burden of being a fan and thats a very sensible way to look at it and THANK GOD he isn’t a Trekkie otherwise we’d have got just another Star Trek film for Star Trek fans rather than a wildly enjoyable Star Trek film that anyone can love and be excited for.

Quite frankly who could blame him for not wanting Star Wars! Whoever get’s that job will have a harder time than Abrams did reinventing Star Trek. Personally I think Star Wars will eventually go to Brad Bird.

97. Kirk, James T. - November 14, 2012

Also as for JJ Abrams wanting to do his own projects in between Trek’s is fine by me. The next Trek won’t be until 2016 anyway since Paramount won’t want to do the final JJ Abrams Star Trek movie the same year Disney relaunches Star Wars.

JJ Abrams should direct the third movie since he’s done 2, It would be silly for him not to direct 3. Then after 3, I say return Star Trek to TV. Abrams, Moore, Kurtzman and Orci producing with Abrams directing the pilot and then staying on as executive producer with Ronnald D. Moore, Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman as show runners with Battlestar Galactica writers and directors.

98. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 14, 2012

It seems my first post disappeared. Gosh, I must be such a controversial person…

In answer to the question posed in the poll – I don’t know and I don’t care.

If STID is as successful at the first Star Trek movie and hopefully even more successful, then I feel sure that Paramount will want the same team back to do the third movie. JJ Abrams and his team need to complete what they started and by 2016 in time for the 50th anniversary of the Star Trek franchise beginnings – 8 September 1966.

My own focus is on this sequel getting made and I finally seeing the finished product. Nothing else is really that relevant or important right now, more like a distraction, and sometimes a rather annoying distraction at that.

99. Romulus - November 14, 2012

@95. Kirk, James T.

1..on this thread no one is complaining about the site, but thanks for showing what a little drone you are by telling others where to go.

2..This thread is about JJ passing on Star Wars so it makes the rest of your rant irrelevant.

some people are Trolling for a fight….your not gonna get it from me.

100. DeShonn Steinblatt - November 14, 2012

Note to morons:

Abrams WAS offered Star Wars.

He read it.

He said no.

101. Romulus - November 14, 2012

@ 97. Rose (as in Keachick)
You are a part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor! …take her comments away :P

It’s frustrating when censorship occurs on TMN, heck it was happening even when Anthony wasn’t around.

102. Admiral Stedman - November 14, 2012

What’s the obsession with trilogies? Trek accidentally made one in the 80’s with 2-3 & 4, but they also stand alone for the most part too. So while I get keeping the team together, I’m fine bringing in someone new to direct as well.

As for SW, I really like Brad Bird and what he did with MI:GP jumping from animation to real folks. So why not give him their reins?

Also think JJ and Co. are getting washed over with all this LucasFilm / Disney/ New Trilogy press. He needs to come out swinging in December with a trailer and marketing package for STID that makes Trek stand out after all this SW stuff settles down.

103. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 14, 2012

Very happy JJ has “PASSED” though I dont think he was ever actually sent the story treatment. cause outside of entertainment weekly he Wasnt not one of the names bandied around as having recieved ala Spielberg and Bird.

I think it will end up either being Brad Bird or Frank Marshall, though I wouldnt mind seeing (though unlikely to happen) Frank Oz direct one.

104. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 14, 2012

*was not.
not sure how i ended up with wasn’t not in my post above lol sorry.

105. Hodge Podge - November 14, 2012

@94 Romulus: I read the comments… I’m glad there are no negative comments on this page but there has been a lot of anger on previous articles.

106. Tony Whitehead - November 14, 2012

I’m glad you’re back, Anthony. Will have to start making this my daily routine again!

107. sonarman - November 14, 2012

Wait another 3-4 years for a movie that may or may not satisfy when we could have 78 episodes of TV in the intervening time, no thanks, Star Trek is about story not just action, fx and lens flares get it back on TV where it belongs.

108. Craiger - November 14, 2012

Its nice that’s Anthony’s back but how long before Trekmovie goes on another month and half vacation and the fake posters show up again?

109. crazydaystrom - November 14, 2012

98. Rose (as in Keachick)
“If STID is as successful at the first Star Trek movie and hopefully even more successful, then I feel sure that Paramount will want the same team back to do the third movie. JJ Abrams and his team need to complete what they started”

I agree with you on this mostly but I feel certain Paramount would be happy as long as it’s a Bad Robot production even if JJ is not the director. As long as not having him in the director’s chair is not something they feel would be detrimental to boxoffice, that is.

I want a good movie as quickly as we can get it. And if that means another director and JJ wearing only a producer’s cap, then that’s what I opt for.

110. THX-1138 - November 14, 2012


I’m glad you feel that way. I don’t. I’m expressing my opinion. I prefer, on a much broader and grander scale, the Prime Universe. I don’t hate JJ Trek, I just don’t particularly care that much about it. I would be quite happy if after 3 movies Star Trek either abandoned this AU storyline or just went away. After all, I have plenty of Star Trek in recorded form to draw upon for entertainment.

Deshonn Steinblatt

How do you know JJ was offered Star Wars? I have seen NOTHING that says he was offered the director’s job as of yet. He was offered the script to read, as others were. That in itself is not a request for him to fill any particular job with the production. Careful about calling people morons when you make statements of fact that aren’t necessarily correct.

111. Basement Blogger - November 14, 2012

@ 40


You’re displaying that great memory. How’s everything in France?

112. Peter Loader - November 14, 2012

In my opinion JJ will never do a fourth film. He’ll move on. In fact, I think some of the cast will also.

113. LizardGirl - November 14, 2012

Keachick (98) and crazydaystrom (109)

Yeap, however it happens JJ and Bad Robot will need to be apart of the full ST trilogy at least with JJ as director or producer.

But with something as big and iconic as Star Trek, I can’t picture JJ turning the directing reins over to someone else completely. Maybe he’ll take on a co-director if needed? Either way, Bad Robot should finish what was started. And Mr. Abrams should be apart of that. Agreed.

114. Romulus - November 14, 2012

Possibly, just possibly the new Star Wars trilogy will reignite studios confidence in Sci-fi for a TV audience and maybe CBS will commission a new Trek series.
Trek got 6 movies of the back of Star Wars and 4 spin off TV shows, now that there has been a drought with Trek the studios will note the fan hunger and a new generation ready for more adventures of the Enterprise.

Star Wars…Your my only hope

115. Ensign RedShirt - November 14, 2012

I think it’s pretty safe to say this cast will be done after the third picture – they’re all on 3-picture deals that they signed before the first film started shooting. After that, they’re all going to want huge raises, which will push the budget into the stratosphere(at least for a Trek movie). At that point they’ll either recast or (ugh) reboot again.

116. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 14, 2012

I’ve always thought that Joss Whedon would be a good choice for a Trek movie… he “gets” Sci-Fi more than most. And Firefly had a very Trek feel to it in my opinion.

As for Star Wars, I think they will end up going with a “B” Director. Most big names haven’t gone for it and probably won’t. Maybe Jonathan Frakes can Direct Star Wars. Could be interesting.

117. Aurore - November 14, 2012

@ Bernie

“How’s everything in France?”


Everything is fine, Mr. Wong. Thank you!

How is everything in….Ohio?…Um…Pennsylvania?….

Damn memory!!!


118. Jack - November 14, 2012

RE: JJ’s not a fan. Nicholas Meyer had contempt for TOS, some say, and at the very least he didn’t buy into the ‘what they’re doing is a big deal and they’re all aware if it” mythology. The heroes became normal, extremely fallible, people doing a tough job. And yet many people here (and elsewhere) consistently say his three Trek movies (including his writing the 1980s parts of TVH) are the best.

So like or don’t like JJ — but I think Meyer showed that fannishness and hero worship aren’t requirements for the job.

And, also, as far as ‘being a Star Wars kid’ goes, he was talking about when he was 10 or 11 years old, for Pete’s sake. Part of that’s generational — most kids around then were big Star Wars fans.

In the same piece, Spielberg says he’s not interested either.

119. milojthatch - November 14, 2012

#118 – The difference between Nick Meyer and JJ Abrams is that even with his not being a fan, Meyer “got” Trek.

I think JJ’s response is interesting coming from the same guy who turned Star Trek into Star Wars.

120. Tomar Re - November 14, 2012

Nine Minutes of Star Trek Into Darkness Hits IMAX Theaters December 14

121. Sxottlan - November 14, 2012

Variety reports first nine minutes of Star Trek into Darkness will play on IMAX screens in front of The Hobbit:


122. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 14, 2012

119. milojthatch
“… Meyer “got” Trek.”

Now we say that. But back when TWOK was coming out, lots of people were extremely upset at changing everything about it… the uniform, the more military look, the death of Spock, not paying attention to canon (ie Chekov) and the list goes on. But now he is regarded as “getting” Trek.

In about 20 years when they are rebooting Trek again, people will be talking about how JJ “got” Trek. :)

123. Kirk, James T. - November 14, 2012

I don’t think drectors have passed up Star Wars because its necissarily a bad treatment. I think really the task of doing something that is as relevant to the modern cinema audience as the original trilogy still is, is just too daunting for directors who are also fans of the series. With Trek by comparason it was simple because you have various avenues to go down that the public at large were aware of, time travel, warp speed and all the science fiction that is available to Star Trek to explain why Kirk is now played by Chris Pine and was born in space rather than being played by William Shatner born in Iowa. With Star Wars its never going to be that simple for the simple fact that Star Wars to the world at large is one story about good and evil with the first trilogy being about the Rise of Vader and the original trilogy being about the fall of evil and the return of the jedi also the stamp the original trilogy made on modern cinema goers and the cultural impact it had is still huge, far bigger than that left by a cancelled 60’s TV series (how ever important it was at the time).

Its been my opinion since hearing the news that Star Wars was coming back for Episode 7 ongoing, that Abrams would not want to step into a movie without having been there formulating it from the very beginning. With Star Trek he was afforded the opportunity to start from scratch telling an original story that came from his and his team’s mind. With Star Wars any director coming in will have to closely follow what Lucas wants. This is nothing like Roddenberry’s role as consultant, Lucas has had far more control over Star Wars than Roddenberry ever had with Star Trek so to think that Lucs’ adivce will not have any baring on the story is just insane on the face of it. Lucas will be there every step of the way making sure that his baby isn’t mesed up. Thats no to say someone cant come in and make his (or her) own stamp on Star Wars but theres a big laundry list of things Star Wars has to be and has to contain for it to work on a global, mainstream way.

I would think Brad Bird is most likely since he has a close working relationship with both the writer and Disney. Joss Whedon may be a good choice but I don’t think he’ll want it with the same reasons Abrams gave but also I think Bird is more of a director who can step into something that has been worked on by other people plus he’s very disney friendly so I don’t think characters similar to Jar Jar Binks or Ewoks are out of the question. However much they try to inject some integrity into the stories they tell, Star Wars is first and foremost an opportunity to make money off of toys, I doubt Disney bought it for it’s deep and philosophical ideas.

For Abrams to be back for Star Trek 3, Star Trek Into Darkness will be the crucial turning point for Star Trek’s future. If it fails financially then I’m not sure what will happen but my gut feeling is that it won’t fail. Even if it doesn’t attract the critical praise the first Abrams movie got, I think due to the huge success of the 2009 movie, the next one will do bigger business. The one issue people seem to have is will people have remembered the 2009 movie or will the marketing have to be ramped up to sell the second movie even more? I dunno I think people tend to have long memories if what they saw was any good and regardless of what some Trekkies say, Star Trek 2009 was brilliant so I think/hope we can expect the next movie to do big business.

Oh and Romulus be damned, you were wiped off the face of the universe in the prime timeline…

124. Peter Loader - November 14, 2012

123 – Obviously there are a few Romulans still around in the prime universe, on ships… and safely tucked away in colonies… etc.

125. Basement Blogger - November 14, 2012

@ 117


Things are better here in Cincinnati, Ohio since the election is over! Got up to ten robocalls a day, the week leading up to November 6. And the political commercials. We were carpet bombed. Thank goodness I can watch commercials for male testosterone drugs again. :-)

126. The Observer - November 14, 2012

J.J. Abrams will continue to be rewarded for saving Star Trek and not punished for annoying 3 canon-obsessed fanboys on the internet.

My condolences to canon-obsessed fanboys.

127. Ahmed - November 14, 2012

I hope someone else will take over Star Trek after the 2013. Otherwise, if we waited for Abrams, we might as well forgot about new Star Trek movie before 2020 or something around that time frame.

I love JJ works on TV & movies, but the guy took FOREVER to do the sequel, let someone else come with a fresh view & idea

128. Snorky - November 14, 2012

I’m no big Star Wars fan, but I’m all for keeping the Orci/Abrams/Lindelhof “Hack Pack” as far away from important projects as possible.

129. Sebastian S. - November 14, 2012

# 63 filmguy~

I think you’re absolutely right with Alfonso Cuaron. He’d be an amazing choice. I’m not much of a Potter fan, although I was intrigued by his installments. And I really enjoyed “Children of Men.” That was an amazing movie….

Now I’m not knocking JJ Abrams. Far from it; loved ST09. But movies (and any collaborative art form) thrive on new ideas from different sources. I think Cuaron would be a great pick. Maybe he’ll do one of the new Star Wars movies if he doesn’t get a ST gig….

130. SearchforSock - November 14, 2012

how about Luc Besson?

131. SearchforSock - November 14, 2012

or maybe Jean-Pierre Jeunet. both know when and when not to use cgi..

132. Aurore - November 15, 2012

“….Thank goodness I can watch commercials for male testosterone drugs again. :-)”


133. ME!! - November 15, 2012

No J.J. directing Star Wars!


134. THX-1138 - November 15, 2012

The Observer

If there are only 3 canon obsessed fanboys that are annoyed why do you feel it necessary to pay them any heed?

But thank you for another enlightened and sweeping generalization.

135. Lens Flares Suck - November 15, 2012

Our problem in a nutshell… STUPID MOVIES MAKE TONS OF MONEY.

J.J. is a hack, yes. But ST-09 made a lot of money. The prequels suck…but they made a lot of money.

The new James Bond film is insanely stupid, but it’s making a LOT of money.

We will have stupid movies forever, apparently.

136. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 15, 2012

For the 50th Anniversary I want to see a movie with all of the cast from all of the series!

137. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 15, 2012

I misread the poll. My bad. Since the thread was about JJ Abrams and Star Wars, I thought the poll was about whether JJ should direct the next Star Wars movie. Obviously the poll did not ask that.

My amended answer is that, if at all possible, JJ Abrams should direct the third Star Trek movie.

I stand by everything else I wrote in my post #98.

138. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 15, 2012

I don’t think that Nicholas Meyers “got” Trek anymore than JJ Abrams or the current writers “get” (TOS) Trek.

139. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 15, 2012

The problem with disliking the AU universe and wanting to see it “disappear” etc is that no one really knows what this new universe is really like. We’ve only seen one movie…STID will give everyone a better idea of what this alt universe is like and whether most would want to see more of it.

It is also about intent as in shown in some people’s attitudes. JJ Abrams and co. did not destroy the prime timeline/universe. It still exists. A supernova may have destroyed a planet – the vagaries of nature, but the destruction and murder of all that lives in the prime universe has not been committed by anyone.

However, I get the impression that some people would happily see the alternate universe cease to exist, be destroyed, ie everyone murdered, everything gone.

That’s wrong!

140. THX-1138 - November 15, 2012

However, I get the impression that some people would happily see the alternate universe cease to exist, be destroyed, ie everyone murdered, everything gone.

That’s wrong!

Wow. Hyperbole much? Murdered? What are you talking about? If Star Trek never get’s another story told, in any universe, who is getting murdered? All I’m saying is that I have no vested interest in the AU. Doesn’t do anything for me. Could care less if the public at large embraces the sequel or doesn’t. I’m glad that some people are huge fans of JJ’s take. I’m just not one of them. And why should I be? Sure, I’ll be in the theater watching STID. After all, I go to the theater and see EVERYTHING that comes out.

Come on Rose, you can’t seriously be saying someone’s opinion about what they like and dislike is wrong, can you?

141. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 15, 2012

I am talking about an impression I have got over the past three years after reading some people’s reaction – veering on sheer hatred, to the alternate universe. They make inaccurate claims about JJ destroying the prime universe and are more than happy to see the alternate universe destroyed and the prime universe replace it.

I guess I have been watching too much of the fourth season of Fringe – ref. William Bell.

142. THX-1138 - November 15, 2012

Well, in a sense JJ did destroy the Prime Universe. I mean let’s be honest:

What are the chances that we are ever going to see any more stories set in the Prime Universe? Only if Star Trek get’s rebooted yet again. JJ certainly isn’t going back. And I have serious doubts that the current movies will go beyond 3 in the series given that JJ is going to want to do more of his own projects (he’s as much as said so himself in this very article). Plus the actors are going to want either too much money or they will just want to move on with their careers.

143. LizardGirl - November 15, 2012

You can’t destroy something that doesn’t exist! Ha! (Sorry couldn’t resist).

When it comes to the AU universe, many are thinking too linear. I like to think that all of what happens in TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY still happens in the altered timeline…just a little different. Maybe the ages of the characters are off or those blasted jumpsuit uniforms don’t exist. Maybe Capt. Janeway has blonde hair instead of red. Whatever the case I don’t think everything becomes moot. It just changes a little.

But for better or for worse, no more prime universe from these days on. Just treat it like one of those big “What If” trek episodes that resets itself at the end. The “what if” part is the prime universe (at least 46 years of television, spanning several hundred years of Federation history, wow!).

A very long episode indeed.

144. Uberbot The Great - November 15, 2012

Star Trek III — Directed by Alex Proyas

145. Mark Lynch - November 16, 2012

“I don’t think that Nicholas Meyers “got” Trek anymore than JJ Abrams or the current writers “get” (TOS) Trek.”

Sorry, but you are completely wrong here. While Nicholas Meyer did not have a previous knowledge of Star Trek when approached to do ST:II
He did his research and came to the conclusion that Star Trek is essentially the navy in space, especially the older naval era where vessels are out of direct contact with their superiors for weeks, months or years at a time.
Kirk’s character he “got” too, interpreting him as a futuristic Horatio Hornblower. Exactly as Gene Roddenberry did.

Nicholas Meyer did not have a knowledge of Star Trek in the terms of being a fan. But he did pick up on what Star Trek was in terms of theme and characters.

What you may not know is that Nicholas Meyer was instrumental in writing ST:II or at least giving us a version that was decent. He re-wrote the original draft script (which by all reports was terrible) in 12 days, handing in a version that was universally liked by all that had a hand in the decision process.

But don’t take my word for it, do your own digging.

146. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 16, 2012

What makes you think that the writers and JJ Abrams did not do their own research as well? Roberto Orci was/is a Star Trek fan – his favourite series being TNG. Your contentions seems to be that Nicholas Meyer understood the Gene Roddenberry TOS Star Trek better than JJ Abrams and co. I don’t agree.

People often criticize TNG because Gene Roddenberry had too much say, especially with the first two or three series, saying that it improved once Roddenberry stepped back. Personally, I don’t agree. Now that I have all seven seasons on DVD, the discs that I am most likely to watch all the way through without saying, “Oh God, not that episode” are the ones from the earlier seasons.

I hated the greater militarization of TWOK and it got much worse with TUC, what with the “Now hear this” stuff. Just awful. TUC is not one of my favourite movies. I found myself cringing when I watched some of the scenes. Spock was also out of character! Frankly, I have no idea what Leonard Nimoy (the writer) and Nicholas Meyer thought they were doing, but Yuk.

Apparently later I found out that Gene Roddenberry felt much as I did.

147. Uberbot - November 17, 2012

Abrams would be wrong for Star Wars….

148. Ahmed - November 17, 2012

@ 147. Uberbot – November 17, 2012

“Abrams would be wrong for Star Wars”

I totally disagree with you there. Abrams is the best one to direct a Star Wars movie. He is excellent in combing action with character moments as he did on Mission Impossible III & Star Trek.

The only problem is that he take long time to finish his projects.

149. Mark Lynch - November 18, 2012

Gene’s back-pedalling on the militaristic aspect of Star Trek came in his later, TNG years. He had a change of heart as to some of the core aspects of Star Trek.

In the original series he wanted to show Humanity as still flawed but working on those flaws.

For instance, open bigotry shown to Spock from one of the bridge crew in “Balance of Terror” because it is discovered that Romulans are genetically related to Vulcans.
Kirk admitting that Humans are savage but to stop a war all we have to do is say “We aren’t going to kill, today!” from “A taste of Armageddon”

Gene had a military (aviation) and police background, which he drew upon as part of his creation of Star Trek.

There are naval references peppered throughout TOS. You just can’t say it was not militarily based. As that is blatantly untrue.
Otherwise why do we have Captains, Lieutenants, Commodores etc. There is a strict hierarchy of command and orders are acknowledged with “Aye, Sir”

Sounds naval/militaristic to me!

I will concede that Gene Roddenberry changed his stance and tried to distance Star Trek from being overly militaristic with TNG. And that he wanted Humanity to have “grown up” beyond their savage instincts.
Just look at the TNG pilot episode “Encounter at Farpoint” the courtroom scene with Q is the perfect example of how Gene wanted to represent Humanity.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.