JJ Abrams Turned Down Directing Star Wars Ep. VII Over Loyalty To Star Trek | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

JJ Abrams Turned Down Directing Star Wars Ep. VII Over Loyalty To Star Trek December 25, 2012

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Abrams,Celebrity,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Last month TrekMovie reported that even though he had been approached, JJ Abrams was not interested in directing the new Star Wars movie in development at Disney (who recently acquired LucasFilm). In a new interview Abrams offers more details on why he said no, notably that he feels a loyalty to Star Trek.


Abrams said no to Star Wars due to Trek loyalty – could franchises go head-to-head?

Half (2 out of 4) of JJ Abrams feature filmography as a director is dedicated to Star Trek, however he has admitted that when he was a kid, Star Wars was ‘more his thing.’ Even so, last month we reported that Abrams said he was not interested in helming the upcoming "Episode VII" Star Wars film (due out in 2015). Now, in a sidebar in the new issue of Empire Magazine, Abrams reveals more about how he was approached by Disney, and why he said ‘no’…

"There were the very early conversations and I quickly said that because of my loyalty to Star Trek, and also just being a fan, I wouldn’t even want to be involved in the next version of those things. I declined any involvement very early on. I’d rather be in the audience not knowing what was coming, rather than being involved in the minutiae of making them."

But what about the next Star Trek movie? Could it end up competing with the new Star Wars movie? Abrams also addressed this scenario, saying…

"I guess the franchises could go up against each other, but I’m not thinking that far ahead (laughs)…I’m a huge fan of Star Wars, Empire and Jedi, and the idea of the world continuing is exciting and will be amazing."

Abrams sticking with Star Trek

Of course to get a film out by 2015 (in time to compete directly with the Star Wars film), Paramount would have to go into development on another Star Trek film almost immediately after Into Darkness is released. If they wanted Abrams to return to the director’s chair, that is a very unlikely scenario as he has already expressed interest in working on another original film, which he and another writer are currently developing.

For his part, Chris Pine was also asked by Empire if he had any interest in working in that galaxy far far away, but he too seemed to defer to Trek, noting how he and the other actors are already committed to making another Star Trek movie.

Pine featured on the cover of Empire

Much more on Star Trek Into Darkness and from Pine and Abrams in the new issue of Empire Magazine. Pick up the digital copy at iTunes or on newstands on December 27th.

FLASHBACK: Abrams on being in the shadow of George Lucas

JJ Abrams has spoken about Star Trek and Star Wars before. Probably the most in-depth discussion was with the LA Times back in 2009 and it is worth revisiting now in light of how he has given up his chance to put his mark on both franchises…

LA Times: “Star Wars” vs. “Star Trek” is sort of a classic Beatles vs. Stones debate for sci-fi fans of a certain age. You have said you wanted to infuse your “Trek” revival with some lessons learned from the George Lucas universe. Can you talk about that?

JJ Abrams: Well, I’m just a fan of “Star Wars.” 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 — so much of the spectacle has been done and it seems like every aspect has been covered, whether it’s geography or design of culture or weather system or character or ship type. Everything has been tapped in those movies. The challenge of doing “Star Trek” — despite the fact that it existed before “Star Wars” — is that we are clearly in the shadow of what George Lucas has done.

LA Times: How do you overcome that?

JJ Abrams: The key to me is to not ever try to outdo them because it’s a no-win situation. Those movies are so extraordinarily rendered that it felt to me that the key to “Star Trek” was to go from the inside-out: Be as true to the characters as possible, be as real and as emotional and as exciting as possible and not be distracted by the specter of all that the “Star Wars” film accomplished. For instance, we needed to establish that there are aliens in this universe and yet I didn’t want it to feel like every scene had four new multi-colored characters in it. That is something “Star Wars” did so well with its amazing creature design. The question is how do you subtly introduce the idea that there are different species here. And to also do it differently than the [“Trek”] TV shows, which basically had someone wearing a mask sitting in a chair [in the background]. It was the balance of doing what the story needed us to do but also not feeling like we were trying to rip off or out-do what Lucas did.

Speaking of Abrams and Lucas, here is a famous photo of the pair of them chatting in 2007.

JJ Abrams talking to George Lucas back in 2007


1. ProtoVulcan - December 25, 2012

Don’t cross the streams…

2. Rush Limborg - December 25, 2012

To be honest–I think it could’ve been pretty cool, for both Trekkers and Star Wars fans (do they have an “official” nickname, BTW?), knowing that the same guy was behind the helm for the “redemption” of both universes.

Who knows? Could actually bring World Peace behind the militants of both groups, at last….

3. Rob - December 25, 2012

That settles it. JJA is macho.

Star Wars could make him wealthy and the inarguable king of Sci fi, but out of loyalty to Trek, he wont even ENTERTAIN the idea of involvement?

Sir, thee art MACHO.

4. somethoughts - December 25, 2012

Chris Pine would be awesome as luke, or new star wars hero.

5. somethoughts - December 25, 2012

I would love JJ to do star wars or james cameron but not bay lol bay wars

6. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 25, 2012

If on J.J knew the power of the Dark side of the Schwartz!. Lol
Glad J.J is staying in the Federation and not in that silly Empire they have. Now the Terran Empire would be a better thing.

7. Disinvited - December 25, 2012

Bad Robot used to be a part of Touchstone Television which is Disney. I wonder how much of it was “Been there. Done that.”?

8. al - December 25, 2012

@ 6 Emperor Mike Of the Empire. Star Wars is awesome man, and to a lesser extent, so is the prequels. I’m a fan of both. Of course I will still give it to Trek because it’s the more intellectual of the two. But both are fun universes.

9. gingerly - December 25, 2012

Aww, I’m kind of touched by this actually.

I mean, you know how big a fan he is, (he even threw that R2 easter egg in there) and YOU KNOW they offered him a *bleep!*load of money…

He has fallen in love with Trek. :)


10. al - December 25, 2012

@5. somethoughts

James cameron would never touch Star Wars…not with him making Avatar 2 and 3. Micheal bay needs to stay far away from Star Wars…eventhough… I would love him to do a Trek film, that focused on a space Armada war. Now….. we all know Bay knows, how to make things blow up real good.

11. rock out with your spock out - December 25, 2012

@2 I like to call them Warsians because that’s how “Geektastic” put it in their short story about a Klingon cosplayer girl and a Jedi cosplayer boy having a one night stand at Comicon.

12. Cranston - December 25, 2012

So…was that the dinner conversation JJ had with George Lucas a couple of years ago? The one that we had a caption contest about?

13. Paul - December 25, 2012

Silly man… I’d love to see his take on Star Wars. I was bored to tears by last three movies.

So, who SHOULD direct the new SW movie? Joss Whedon? Guillermo del Toro? Peter Jackson? We’re running out of decent directors fast. *shrug*

14. TigerClaw - December 25, 2012

One of the reasons why JJ Abram doesnt want to direct the new Star Wars movie is cause of all the attention it gets. Hes all about the secrecy and not telling anyone about the movie til it comes out. with Star Wars, everyone will want to know about the Making of it, Whose staring in it and so on, Which is why Lucasfilm did all those little webdocs during the making of the prequels on the starwars site. JJ Abram isn’t about that, He likes keeping things secret til the end.

15. Pizza - December 25, 2012

Disney offered the job on condition ‘No lens Flares’ , JJ declined.

16. Ziro - December 25, 2012

I think JJ may only refers to his first public comments when the news broke about EP7, not sure he was directly asked

17. Commodore Adams - December 25, 2012

Star Wars always takes the spotlight. Don’t get me wrong, fan since I was a kid, I have Ep I-VI on blu-ray, I love me some wars but I really wish if there were more Star Wars films that they would have been released after the third JJ trek, alas money is the game. Star Trek (because of the 2009 film) has seen more popularity among non fans then ever. After the three movies are released, popularity soars, new Star Wars films would be released = new craving for sci-fi, a new Star Trek TV series would thrive.

Regardless….. I am glad the people involved with Star Trek have decided to stay focused until the task is done.

18. TigerClaw - December 25, 2012

There hasnt been a new Star Trek TV Series on TV for sometime, And the movies are all we got at the moment. Surely these films will pave the way for a new Trek series in the future, Whether it be from this Alternate Timeline or the Existing one.

19. ados - December 25, 2012

Disney made a bold advance…just showing how valuable JJ is to Paramount

20. Son of MJ - December 25, 2012

Sorry but I call BS, on this

21. Son of MJ - December 25, 2012

He didnt turn it down is what i call BS on, the fact that he was actually offered I dont buy it for a second

22. TigerClaw - December 25, 2012

In reality, He cant really handle two of the biggest franchises at the same time, Its better he just concentrate on Star Trek and maintain its level of quality.

23. Aix - December 25, 2012

I really like JJ’s integrity about his work. Him not commiting to a movie before he sees a finished script, shooting a movie the way he likes it and not how the studio wants it and now this. Love him or hate him, he seems to have very good work ethics.

24. AlienTwo - December 25, 2012

@1 They are called “Fan Boys”‘, but I don’t know about the girls… back when that nickname become popular girls didn’t EVER like geeky stuff. Oh how things have changed.

25. Rob - December 25, 2012

Knowing Disney, it will Chris Columbus. Star Wars VII: The Rise of the Ewoks.

26. Optimistic Doodle - December 25, 2012

Interesting quote: “I’m a huge fan of Star Wars, Empire and Jedi” (= simply the best of the franchise, the original trilogy)

Smart guy!

27. somejackball - December 25, 2012

i think David Lynch would be a perfect choice for a new Star Wars trilogy. no one can weave and tell a story better than him. Remember folks, he directed DUNE, so he’s no stranger to Sci-Fi =)

28. BitterTrekkie - December 25, 2012

Yes, I’m sure Jar Jar is totally loyal to Star Trek.

29. Caesar - December 25, 2012

Well at least he won’t ruin two franchises.

30. Rob - December 25, 2012

Not only that, but given the dreck that episodes 1~3 were, the whole Stat Wars brand DESERVES Chris Columbus. I doubt the mouse can resurrect a franchise that is nearly 30 years past its useful life.

Really JJ is smart to avoid dealing with that particular brand of white rice and Nyquil…that is bland and boring. Take away the FX, and star wars is a collection of terrible stories with only two interesting, slightly original characters. Im sleepy just thinking about it.

31. Mr. Anonymous - December 25, 2012

@ #3:

I’m pretty sure JJ is already wealthy now. What he’s doing is called integrity.

32. Hat Rick - December 25, 2012

JJ, you are absolutely amazing for being loyal to Star Trek.

All the PR men in the world couldn’t do for you what you did by that statement — contribute immensely to the idea that you really do care about Star Trek and what it represents. (It’s not just words, either — your work proves your sincerity, as well as the fact that you did in fact turn down the SW gig.)

And that, Mr. Abrams, is just totally, totally the best thing you could do in my eyes.

Thank you for being such a devoted fan and supporter of Trek. I know I’m not alone in appreciating your sentiments.

33. Vultan - December 25, 2012

Anyone else think it’s a little disheartening he doesn’t mention good writing as one of the points to making a successful sci-fi movie? Spectacle, designs, emotions, characters, aliens, ships, locations, excitement—yes, all important aspects, Mr. Abrams.

But what about the WRITING?

34. Rainbucket - December 25, 2012

Love or hate JJ Abrams (and I mostly loved 2009 Trek) we shouldn’t have the same hand guiding both franchises. They deserve a bigger breadth of style and inspiration than any one person can furnish.

Though I’m already resigned that Star Wars VII will have Benedict Cumberbatch as a villain. Actually I’d love to see him there as a hero.

35. WillH85 - December 25, 2012

I think Trek is going to get better while Wars will just be a sad and obvious grasp to milk the franchise for every cent it can produce. Good choice JJ.

36. Rane - December 25, 2012

JJ just couldn’t say what he really felt with the camera on his face. He’s really just as pissed off as the rest of us that Disney bought LucasFilm.

37. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - December 25, 2012

@9. Actually R2 was an ILM in-joke, the same as the Millennium Falcon in First Contact.

38. Aix - December 26, 2012

@34 No! Cumberbatch should not be allowed to be that awesome (and typecast)! Haha. He’s Smaug, Sauron and a Star Trek villain already. Though SFX Mag wants him as a sith lord and yes that would be cool but… Meh!
I don’t want him to be Dr. Strange either. Aside from being born to play nuSherlock he is born to play Gaiman’s Morpheus and no one can convince me otherwise.

39. WannaBeatle - December 26, 2012

actually, I’m glad he won’t ruin Star Wars as well (or ruin it even more). I’ve seen some of his work..even though I did like MI:3, but there were just some stuff, I wasn’t too keen on.

Then, of course, I hated Trek ’09 with a passion. He might be nice and all that (I haven’t met or worked with him as of yet). But, based on his track record, I wouldn’t be impressed with him in the director’s chair on SW.

40. Elias Javalis - December 26, 2012

Without Abrams Trek would have fallen to the category of cheesy sci fi! Correction…”Its Friday night, what the heck am I doin inside” situation!

41. BOB - December 26, 2012

episode VII
only good star wars movies were 4,5,6
then they ruined the 1,2,3
now they will ruin VII
just my thoughts

42. Devon - December 26, 2012

#39 – Exactly. Here Star Trek was riding high on the coattails of “Star Trek: Voyager,” “Star Trek: Enterprise,” and that blockbuster smash known as “Star Trek: Nemesis.” In fact the franchise was doing SO well that because of all the money Paramount had just made from the powerhouse that Star Trek that we were left with nothing but Tim Russ fan films for 5 years. Here J.J. came along and ruined all that for us. HOW DARE HE!!!!

43. Devon - December 26, 2012

#39 – In fact, Star Trek was SOOO perfect and doing SOOO well that there is a chart to prove it:

This is actually a chart of all the people who WEREN’T watching. By the end of Enterprise’s run there were only 2 million people in the whole universe who weren’t watching. Here J.J. ruined the success story known as Star Trek after “The Next Generation.”

44. Jim Nightshade - December 26, 2012

Integrity is a great word to use for jjs decision…We all know that any star wars movie will make a ton of money since despite ep 1-3 inferiorness to ep 4-6 they were all monster hits…so jj could have made tons more money on a sure thing with star wars…trek is a bigger gamble…we dont even know for shure if into darkness will be a hit….i also hope this is because he now cares bout and likes our franchise plus creatively trek has more freedom to create and grow the franchise than star wars does…well if into darkness bombs he could always go back to disney hahah

45. KHAAAN the weasel - December 26, 2012

Well… now all JJ has to do is make a GOOD Star Trek movie… And I mean REALLY good, not just “good from a money-making perspective”

46. pilotfred - December 26, 2012

he could always do episode 9

47. Classy M - December 26, 2012

#44 ‘We don’t know… if into darkness will be a hit.’

I think it’s likely to do exceedingly well, possibly the most successful Star Trek film to date. But your comment begs the question: how do we define ‘hit’ for the film? Is there a magic figure – rather, figures, both foreign and domestic – that it needs to pass to be deemed a success? What about critical reviews? I’m really curious to know how we define it, given that each of us probably has our own unique set of criteria.

48. Devon - December 26, 2012

“Well… now all JJ has to do is make a GOOD Star Trek movie… And I mean REALLY good, not just “good from a money-making perspective””

And not just “good from the fact most people liked it” perspective either as the previous film had done either. So, in other words, he and the others behind the scenes should keep doing what they have done. :)

49. Aurore - December 26, 2012

JJ Abrams: The key to me is to not ever try to outdo them because it’s a no-win situation. Those movies are so extraordinarily rendered that it felt to me that the key to “Star Trek” was to go from the inside-out: Be as true to the characters as possible, be as real and as emotional and as exciting as possible and not be distracted by the specter of all that the “Star Wars” film accomplished.

I am madly in love with this quote….

50. CJS - December 26, 2012

So he’s turned down an offer to direct for a franchise that he has a chance to understand in favor of staying with one that he has no clue about.

51. Calastir - December 26, 2012

He’s better suited to do Star Wars.

Trek 2009 felt more like Star Wars anyway.

52. J - December 26, 2012

SW7 should have more technobabble, guns that shoot “constant” (phaser-like rays there should be Data’s head floating around in the debris.

Then we’ll be even with JJ, at least on the “fiddling with your favorite franchise that begins with the word “Star”” grounds.

53. chrisfawkes.com - December 26, 2012

Karl Urban as Hans Solo.

Abrams gets Trek more than anyone in the last 20 years.

54. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

“Star Wars” vs. “Star Trek” is sort of a classic Beatles vs. Stones debate for sci-fi fans of a certain age.


I say that Star Trek is the Beatles, and Star Wars is the Rolling Stones. Sure, the Stones may have been a little more wild, free wheeling, and cool, but the Beatles have a greater impact and legacy.

Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty
Paul, John, George, Ringo *LOL*

55. BitterTrekkie - December 26, 2012

53. Sure, if by Trek you mean Wars.

56. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

45. KHAAAN the weasel – December 26, 2012
Well… now all JJ has to do is make a GOOD Star Trek movie… And I mean REALLY good, not just “good from a money-making perspective”


Okay, well, I suppose you’ll have to define what “good” means. Uhm, have you seen ST09? *LOL* I think it’s certainly better than all of the NextGen movies, and better than half of the TOS movies.

But then again, we come down to the “better” debate. Does better mean a better message/theme? ST09’s destiny theme is superlative. Better writing? Equal or better to all the other movies. Better connection with the audience? That’s two fold, because although I think ST09 connected fairly well with the Trek audience, I know it connected better with the general audience. I have never felt completely confortable sharing a Trek movie with friends who weren’t interested, but I have with ST09. Enjoyment factor? Can’t really be beat. Characterization? No missteps that I see.

So what’s “good” to you?

57. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

#39 – Exactly. Here Star Trek was riding high on the coattails of “Star Trek: Voyager,” “Star Trek: Enterprise,” and that blockbuster smash known as “Star Trek: Nemesis.” In fact the franchise was doing SO well that because of all the money Paramount had just made from the powerhouse that Star Trek that we were left with nothing but Tim Russ fan films for 5 years. Here J.J. came along and ruined all that for us. HOW DARE HE!!!!



YEAH!!!!! You know,could they be doing this Into Darkness so they can step on all of the publicity the new fan film starring Koenig and Russ would have gotten? Or the fan fiction? Or to ruin the thunder of the TNG Blu-Ray releases?

58. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

38. Aix – December 26, 2012
@34 No! Cumberbatch should not be allowed to be that awesome (and typecast)! Haha. He’s Smaug, Sauron and a Star Trek villain already. Though SFX Mag wants him as a sith lord and yes that would be cool but… Meh!
I don’t want him to be Dr. Strange either. Aside from being born to play nuSherlock he is born to play Gaiman’s Morpheus and no one can convince me otherwise.


Could Cumberbatch be an augment in real life? Maybe he’s trying to endear himself to fanboys of all types, to raise an army to manipulate from the shadows in a behind the scenes Eugenics war. If he plays Captain Mal in a Firefly webseries and the next Dr. in Dr. Who, we’ll know something.

59. Khanomorph - December 26, 2012

Just as well, lens flares would have had no place in Star Wars…:-)

60. Disinvited - December 26, 2012

#21. Son of MJ

If you would just bother to click on the “we reported” link in this article you’d find the ENTERTAINMENT WEELY article where they reported he was sent a treatment long before he gave this interview.

#23. Aix

What are you talking about? During filming, the testimony has always been Paramount has never bothered them, i.e. never gave them anything to fight against.

Now after filming, there’s evidence of ideas clashing. JJ did his first Trek on film. Globetrotted with REELS showing sneaks of how proud he was that it looked on FILM. Premiered it in Austin in a film presentation. He even said he thought the best way to see his movie was on film. Then he let the studio release it into all sorts of venues that didn’t present it on film.

For the sequel, JJ said he wasn’t a fan of 3D. He didn’t use 3D cameras, i.e. he didn’t film it in 3D. Yet again, he’s letting the studio release it in a venue (3D) for which he didn’t artistically compose his work.

Brand loyalty is one thing. Acquiescing to the practicalities of maximizing product distrinution, another. But I in no way can see how that equates to standing fast against Paramount and maintaining one’s artistic integrity.

61. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 26, 2012

Your stock is rising again, JJ!

This seals it for me. I will see your Trek into Darkness at the movies.

62. msn1701 - December 26, 2012

Thank you, JJ! I know that must have been tough.

63. who knows - December 26, 2012

dr who film is in the future

64. SoonerDave - December 26, 2012

Three cheers for JJ. Keep in mind he’s one of the hottest directing commodities in Hollywood, and could have almost his choice of projects, and then comes out and says something like this. There’s *zero* benefit *to him* in saying this. I think its incredibly cool, and demonstrates he’s really trying to make Trek a broad success.

Hope that suggests he may stick around for more than a third movie.

65. Nony - December 26, 2012

Imagine the fan outrage if the same person were in charge of both franchises. Those people who desperately keep the mouldy old Star Trek vs. Star Wars conflict alive would be screeeeamiiiing. I think if J.J. hadn’t already been involved with Trek, he would have done a good job with Wars – but I’m glad things are the other way around, because I enjoy his take on Trek.

That said, I would really like to see Karl Urban in the new Wars, even in a little role (and, being a fan, I’m sure he’d like to see himself in it, too). If he gets in, I can mark off the once-hopeless Star Wars square on the Urban Genre Role Bingo Card. And it would be cool to have someone who’s been in three of the hugest franchises.

66. Optimistic Doodle - December 26, 2012

Maybe JJ has a new trek series in mind ;-)

67. Sk8r_gurl - December 26, 2012

JJ is a classy guy and he’s kind to play down the Star Wars talks like it was no thang, but I can’t help but wonder what would’ve happened had he been offered Star Wars with no Trek to tie him down.

Regardless of his true feelings, I’m pretty grateful to JJ for sticking with us; Trek hasn’t been this exciting in a long long time.

68. Smike - December 26, 2012

Being a huge fan of both franchises, I see no reason for JJ not being part of both legacies. Honestly, I hate that Trek vs. Wars gibberish… I love both universes and there is nothing wrong with Trek becoming more like Wars and vice versa (same for Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter)…

As for those who still hold a grudge against Ep. 1-3… I simply don’t get it. Yes, Episode 1 was the weakest Wars ever, but 2 and 3 are nothing short of masterpieces.
It was them and not the OT that made me a Star Wars FAN… the original Star Wars movie on the other hand may be historically significant as it has been a true game changers in its era, but objectively it is certainly not better than Ep. 3…
Ep. 5 was superb but those Ewoks ruined Ep. 6 and I’m glad there will finally be something after Ep. 6 because I don’t want Star Wars to end with those Ewoks…

69. Smike - December 26, 2012

On the other hand I’m not sure if it is a good idea if Abrams sticks around for another couple of movies. Don’t get me wrong. I loved ST09 and I’m sure STID will be even better, but I hope he’ll hand on the torch to someone else at some point before he goes down the Harve Bennett road. Bennett’s TWOK was a masterpiece, then came the dull sequel, then another really good one and then…well… Nope…we need fresh blood after JJ’s third one.

Also I don’t want Giacchino to do each and every subsequent Trek score. I love his music. But then I also adored Goldsmith’s TMP score… his later outings were weak though… INS and NEM were pretty mediocre stuff…

70. Robert - December 26, 2012

With what JJ said, that explains why he brought back Star Trek back to full strength and why Star Wars is pretty much dead.

71. kmart - December 26, 2012

Christ, did he REALLY have to demonstrate this loyalty (i.e., further defoul the nest) to TREK? I am beginning to think even Paul ‘EVENT HORIZON ‘Anderson could have done better with trek than Abrams has.

72. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

68. Smike – December 26, 2012

As for those who still hold a grudge against Ep. 1-3… I simply don’t get it. Yes, Episode 1 was the weakest Wars ever, but 2 and 3 are nothing short of masterpieces.
It was them and not the OT that made me a Star Wars FAN… the original Star Wars movie on the other hand may be historically significant as it has been a true game changers in its era, but objectively it is certainly not better than Ep. 3…
Ep. 5 was superb but those Ewoks ruined Ep. 6 and I’m glad there will finally be something after Ep. 6 because I don’t want Star Wars to end with those Ewoks…


Wow…that’s an interesting take. Now, I realize this is all opinion, but I think that acting, in possible combination with weak writing, was the problem with Ep I-III. That produced characters that you couldn’t personally invest in. Anakin, Padme, Mace Windu, and a few others, came off as sort of dry and uninteresting. So when they start ramping it up towards the end, I didn’t really care. I cared more about the longhead Jedi Master getting killed than Mace Windu, when Padme said that Anakin was breaking her heart it was too late, Not enough personality for me to care. Anakin didn’t quite come off either. Obi Wan was the bright spot in the series. By contrast, Luke was annoying, but he was engaging, so when he makes his Jedi turn, he’s likeable and you can invest in him. Leia was likable from the beginning, and Han was really engaging too.

This probably isn’t fair, but look at this example of a great combination of acting and writing. Karl Urban’s McCoy. He sells his character from the very first scene. You want to know what’s going to happen with this guy, and care about him. Actually, you could say that about all of the characters, except for maybe Sulu.

73. Clinton - December 26, 2012

Thank, JJ. That was a very nice sentiment. While there is a very vocal group who loves to nitpick, I’m very happy with your group’s take on Trek so far. There are many routes you could have taken, but your aim has been pretty true — recognizable Enterprise, classic Trek uniforms (that one pretty much amazed me), humor in proportion, and so on. The fact that you’d rather be a surprised fan in the audience for Star Wars is understandable, too. And, as much as some would love to pit Trek vs. Wars, I’m not a fan of that sort of thing. They both exist — as doe Serenity, Terminator, Battlestar Galactica — in their own universes. One does not need to “win”. If we, the fans, get entertaining films, we all win!

74. Lenny Flare - December 26, 2012

Star Wars – Lucas + Lens Flare = EPIC!

75. Spock Jenkins - December 26, 2012

68. Looool!
You’ve given me the biggest laugh I’ve had all week.

“As for those who still hold a grudge against Ep. 1-3… I simply don’t get it. Yes, Episode 1 was the weakest Wars ever, but 2 and 3 are nothing short of masterpieces.

76. AJ - December 26, 2012

Star Wars Ep 3 jumped the shark when Anakin massacred all the kiddie Jedi in the temple. That makes the Vader of eps 4-6 a non-redeemable mass murderer, no better than the whacko who wiped out the school kids in Connecticut a few weeks ago. Made the franchise meaningless to me.

Oh, and ep. 2 was horribly acted crap.

77. Wes - December 26, 2012

I’m actually moved by this one. This just shows that even though he is a Star Wars fan by heart, he has proven his loyalty to Star Trek. He is also pretty decent human being by saying this. I’m sure the rest of the “supreme court” of Lindelof, Orci, and Kurtzman are Star Wars fans as well, though they are loyal to Star Trek. And here, we Star Trek fans were so worried Abrams would abandon ship for Star Wars. This just proves he wouldn’t do that.

78. Yea No Khan - December 26, 2012

I bet JJ would have jumped on Star Wars if he wasn’t involved in Star Trek.

79. dontcare - December 26, 2012

@20-21. Disney announced themselves that they would offer the job of directing Episode VII to JJ before anyone else, about a day before JJ said he did not want it.

80. Sebastian S. - December 26, 2012

And since he gave ST09 a bit of a pumped-up, Star Wars-y feel anyway, it’s not like he’s really missing anything. He’s mastered the space opera.


81. BeyondtheTech - December 26, 2012

Imagine he does do an Episode of Star Wars and the critics call the movie too “cerebral.”

Oh, the irony!

82. Sebastian S. - December 26, 2012

# 76 AJ~

Vader was a mass murderer before “Revenge of the Sith”. He killed Tusken women and children (who were not responsible for his mother’s death).

And he was an accomplice to the destruction of Alderaan, if not the actual button pusher. Vader IS a mass murderer in my book. He even tortured his own daughter, for chrissakes! How many innocents died during his reign of terror as the Emperor’s pet flunky? I always felt his ‘redemption’ in Jedi was a bit of bulls#!t, but I suppose for the good of the story arc it had to happen…

83. Hat Rick - December 26, 2012

If the Star Trek and Star Wars universes crossed over, then the United Federation of Planets would take the side of the Jedi rebellion and the two would ally to defeat the Empire. From my point of view, it would be be a short fight, because the Federation has mastered certain critical kinds of technologies that the Empire has not. For example, the Federation has transporters; this is a capability that is beyond that of the Empire. The entire rigamarole with Luke and the original Death Star would have been avoided with a quick quantum torp beamed into the station’s central core. This is particularly true with the ultra-long range transporters referenced in ST (2009).

What the Empire has is numbers — countless drones, thousands of planets, and extremely large ships with immense quantities of power. But the technological edge belongs with the Federation.

The TIE fighters, for example, are supposedly examples of Imperial high tech. Their targeting systems nevertheless require manual assistance and seem to miss most of the time. This, despite the fact that the X-wings are more than half the size of a city bus and manually controlled.

A plan to defeat the Empire would involve the quick destruction of their capital ships, including specialized base stations and ships such as the Sun Crusher, through the use of teleported explosive devices. The Storm Troopers and other rank-and-file would fall in line without the assistance of massive machinery seen in the last prequel.

Finally, the use of the Force by Jedi Knights would greatly assist Federation starships in locating any hidden Imperial assets, destroying them before they could organize and come on line.

The above could be written, on the contrary, to favor the Empire, of course, since there are few, if any, Federation ships that would be equivalent, one-to-one, with such Imperial assets as the Death Star II and even Super Star Destroyers. I suppose the way I’ve written it is simply an indication of my preference for ST. Nevertheless, the two universes can be equally engaging in their own way.

I reiterate my praise for JJ for choosing to stay with Star Trek. I think he has clearly made the right choice and deserves our support for his loyalty.

84. AJ - December 26, 2012


Sebastian S.

Good point. I’ve buried “Attack of the Clones” somewhere in my mind I’ll never find it.

I saw a drawing recently on the web ribbing the end of ROTJ where sparkly Obi-Wan, and sparkly Yoda stand next to sparkly Anakin and dozens of sparkly young kids. Thought it made more sense.

85. Hat Rick - December 26, 2012

I’ll give you an example from the real world where technological superiority is key over quanity.

The Arleigh Burke class is the United States Navy’s current generation of destroyer. The Navy has dozens of these vessels, which are capable of shooting a satellite down at orbital distances. Each of these vessels has more than one hundred missiles, each of which is capable of taking down an enemy naval ship from dozens of miles away.

A single Arleigh Burke destroyer is more than a match for the entire Japanese fleet that decimated Pearl Harbor, because the destroyer would be capable of targeting such ships beyond the range of enemy detection and accurately hitting them with high explosives that would rain in vertically from the skies, guided by radar and inertial guidance. Missile technology of this type simply did not exist in World War II.

In addition, certain missiles of the U.S. Navy are capable of nuclear ordnance, meaning that a few missiles could destroy dozens of assembled enemy battleships sailing in formation.

Guided missiles launchable from ships represent a technological qualitative edge that makes all the numbers found in World War II ships completely irrelevant. Nuclear technology is simply icing on the cake.

86. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

#45: He did, in 2009.

87. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

#50: If you think, after watching the 2009 film, that he has “no clue” about it, then I’d say it’s you who are clueless. He nailed it.

88. Jeff O'Connor - December 26, 2012


I’m impressed, I almost couldn’t disagree with your view of the Star Wars films less if I tried. No offense intended, I’m just kind of amazed our opinions are so polar.

89. DonDonP1 - December 26, 2012

I grew up on both the CBS-owned “Star Trek” and the Disney/Lucasfilm-owned “Star Wars.” Kevin Kiner and Michael Giacchino are the composers associated with those two “Star” franchises.

90. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

Vader was a mass murderer in the ORIGINAL trilogy. He’s ALWAYS been unredeemable, which is one of ROTJ’s biggest issues, other than the Ewoks.

91. LJ - December 26, 2012

Talking about producers, directors and cultural phenomena, I’d like to say RIP Gerry Anderson. You made the childhoods of many British kids – indeed, kids worldwide – memorable.

92. Just a Curious Fan - December 26, 2012

I wonder if Disney has considered James Cameron (remember Avatar) or Ridley Scott (Prometheus) for the honor?

93. Just a Curious Fan - December 26, 2012

Speaking of great directors, I am curious if Paramount Pictures would consider Star Trek’s past directors, such as Nicholas Meyer or even Leonard Nimoy for the role of director for the next Star Trek film?

94. LJ - December 26, 2012

@85 Similarly, from what I have read in the past, the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyers (Daring class) have such advanced air defense technology that one vessel can hold the combined air forces of Latin America at bay. Admittedly, I don’t know if that’s hyperbole or not.

95. Sebastian S. - December 26, 2012

Interesting post I read earlier (#83 Hat Rick) in this thread about a Star Wars/Trek crossover.

Only one big issue as to why it could never happen (besides studio logistics, money, etc): It’s a matter of Time.

SW takes place ‘a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far, away…” and ST takes place in the 22-24th centuries.

Just a little nerdy nitpick… ;-P

96. Hat Rick - December 26, 2012

@Sebastian S. — good point. although time travel was never a problem before in Trek. ;-)

97. AJ - December 26, 2012


Too late.


98. TrekMadeMeWonder - December 26, 2012

Aye, Rip Gerry.

99. Hat Rick - December 26, 2012

@LJ (94), I don’t know how I missed your post; sorry for not replying earlier. I would have to know how advanced the South American navies are these days. At least one of them is completely landlocked and its navy practices entirely on a lake.

100. Killamarshtrek - December 26, 2012

Yes I’d like to add my RIP to Gerry Anderson. Many posters on this site (especially amongst the UK contingent) will be aware of his work, shows like Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlett, UFO & Space 1999 shaped my childhood just as much, if not more so, than our beloved ‘Trek’. I still have my UFO ‘Intercepter’, my Space 1999 ‘Eagles’ & my ‘FAB1′ pink Rolls Royce. Hopefully someone will carry on his work the way JJ has with Trek, LET’S MAKE IT HAPPEN!

101. Dr. Cheis - December 26, 2012

He could have done both. I’m guessing he’s worried about Trek fans (i.e. a lot of the people who post here) constantly pointing out how he hates Star Trek and he just wants it to be Star Wars. More fuel for the fire if he worked on Star Wars. A pitty. :(

102. Andy Patterson - December 26, 2012


Interesting. Didn’t know he’d passed. The theme that Barry Gray did for UFO was a great match.

103. Mad Man - December 26, 2012

Huh. Rich peoples’ problems. Such a hard decision. Like “should I avoid foreclosure on my house or pay for my kids’ dance lessons?”

104. Daz - December 26, 2012

My guess is they wont get any main stream director to agree to do star wars. what if they stuff it up?? would you want to be known as the director that ended Star Wars.

105. Check the Circuit - December 26, 2012

I don’t think anyone could stuff it up more than Lucas did in the prequels.

106. Conrad - December 26, 2012

Abrams, you could have taken the first step on the road toward a Star Trek/Wars cross-over… all well

107. Calastir - December 26, 2012

Have you seen any of the prequels? His name is George.

108. Jim Nightshade - December 27, 2012

Star Wars 1-3 almost universally panned although most of us thought 3 was a bit better…but all 3 made tons of money in box office and dvds etc…why….cuz they look pretty awesome….re vader…yah pretty much as soon he wiped out those tuscans not involved in his moms death…i thought why oh why cant the jedi with all their powers realize his darkness…he never should have been trained as a jedi much less them thinking he would be a savior….that subplot sounded too much like a dune paul atreides ripoff to me…nyeh howcum vader never realized leia was his daughter…so much for either light or dark sides being all knowing huh….
gerry anderson shows were great during the syndicated days..after tos at least some scifi shows were on…they were better than buck rogers for instance…and the marionettes…puppets piloting advanced aircraft/ships was awesome when i was a kid….team america world police is a great if crude send up spoof too….i hadnt heard anderson died… rip…

109. Daz - December 27, 2012

@107 & 105
Yes George did stuff them up but George is or was Star Wars and you should always forgive a parent. The first Director will be a brave man or woman. Where can you go with star Wars Seriously? Darth Vader is dead the emperor is dead. I can’t blame JJ for turning it down.

110. Admiral_Bumblebee - December 27, 2012

Sorry, I don’t believe him. I think JJ Abrams turned down the Star Wars because he wasn’t allowed to write the script, too.

111. chrisfawkes.com - December 27, 2012

If there is going to be a crossover lets make it a kids film with Ewoks and Tribbles.

Guaranteed to breed a new generation of fans for both franchises.

112. Allen Williams - December 27, 2012

If you put lens flares in this new movie, then please go to star wars and never come back. You can ruin star wars with your stupid lens flares.

113. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - December 27, 2012

This is why I love JJ… He is loyal, and you dont see much of that anymore… especialy in Hollywood.

114. Basement Blogger - December 27, 2012

I’ve criticized J.J. Abrams for what I perceive as a fear of Trekkers. “We’re not making this movie for fans of Star Trek, etc.” But now I am happy that Abrams believes in Star Trek. It’s more important to him than a bigger franchise. I hope he also gets what Star Trek stands for. To paraphrase the PBS documentary on Roddenberry, Star Trek was the show that had something important to say.

It’s a good decision. Abrams has a chance to have his science fiction stand the test of time.

115. Izzy Ryder - December 27, 2012

Lens flares and Lightsabers? Definitely not a movie for epileptics…

116. Daniel - December 27, 2012

The Force is strong in master J.J. !

117. I am not Herbert - December 28, 2012

glad to hear that JJ will not be f*cking-up Star Wars even worse than the last three episodes did… ;-)

Loyalty… LOL!!!

118. Daniel - December 29, 2012

Logial Leopard-To those who dellusionally said that “Star Trek had been a long time before STAR WARS, and will be long after it will fade away” are so dead wrong!! the prove it`s how almost two months ago ALL the social websites from many parts of the World almost “exploded” after the announcement of the upcoming new trilogy

119. TheChiefInARedShirt - December 29, 2012

If you want to draw a more realistic muscial comparion, Star Trek is like Oasis, whereas Star Wars is like One Direction !!

120. Richard - December 30, 2012

Our loss; SW gain!

121. Daniel - December 30, 2012

“Our loss; SW gain!”

The funny thing is that these new TREK movies are directed by a SW fan, and he infused that same swashbuckling Space Opera feel that we relate George Lucas`Galactic saga, and thanks for that, it`s because STAR TREK is popular again

122. I love Star Wars - December 31, 2012

STAR WARS might not be as “sophysticated” as its fans claim it to be,regarding it as “classy” sci-fi, but, hey! it brought illusion, romance, and adventure in a way that not even Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon did to our grand or great-grandparents ages ago, not to mention that without its success we couldn`t have many of the cool sci-fi films we have seen for years,including the STAR TREK movies that came in the 80’s and 90’s, and especially this recent reboot of the franchise…

123. JimGrant1701 - January 3, 2013

I don’t think he should continue a rivalry that shouldn’t exist. It’s like having two kids, they are different, but you love them both. I feel that way about Trek and Wars. He also made it sounds like he cares more for Star Wars. It’s to important for him to be involved with, but not Star Trek? I think he should have said yes and done both.

124. Greg - January 3, 2013

“The key to Star Trek was…be as true to the characters as possible.”


Spock kissing Uhura?
Spock bashing Kirk with fury on the bridge?
Scotty as a whimsical buffoon with a sidekick?
Kirk as a renegade, bar brawling punk?

Sounds like you hit the nail on the head jar jar.

125. Anonymous - January 3, 2013

This reminds to me the confrontation between Shatner and Carrie Fisher…Shatner didn`t even came to discuss politely, he just started rambling agaisnt SW, like any biased Trek-fanboy, but Princess Leia came to deffend the Force fanbase, and owned the former Captain Kirk!!

126. Bob - January 19, 2013

thank you,the cast the crew,all involved in star treck.i was borne in61.well do i remember sneeking down stairs at night hideing under and behind furniture.just to get a glimps when trek originaly aired.boy did iget it and in trouble too! no complaints here. loyalty is an earnd respect.again thank you all.

127. Hix - January 24, 2013

Looks like Abrams lied. http://www.deadline.com/2013/01/j-j-abrams-to-direct-new-star-wars-movie-for-disney/

128. freemytrek - January 24, 2013

“um, guys? scratch that…”

now i’m diaappointed.

129. MAX - January 24, 2013

I feel so cheap and used and betrayed.

130. NCC-73515 - January 24, 2013

Romulan deception! XD

131. whatyoudonotknowandmustnowbetold - January 24, 2013

Two weeks ago J.J. Abrams said he’s not interested in directing the new Star Wars because of his loyalty to the Star Trek franchise. The latest Star Trek movie hasn’t even been released yet and I already know I won’t be seeing another big screen installment of Star Trek before 2018.
You may now add “Lying” in front of Abram’s title “Hack”.
J.J. Abrams set to direct ‘Star Wars: Episode VII’
J.J. Abrams is set to direct “Episode VII.” Sources have confirmed the “Star Trek Into Darkness” filmmaker will helm the …

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