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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Orci and Kurtzman on Star Trek sequel in 3D:

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

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

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

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

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

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

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

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

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


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

3D sucks don’t do it

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

No 3D please.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I <3 3D!!!

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

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

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

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


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


How bout no capslock?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

How about a Star Trek fan getting dumped on?

The poster here is commenting on my previous post(s). This can be found on the IMDb Star Trek 2009 message board. I am Keachick there as well.

“B. The end result is indeed the same. Roberto Orci has no more idea than you do abut the workings of a military command structure. Again, feel free to ask a serving member of the armed forces if he or she intends to run for Colonel. To say that Kirk and JFK were alike ethically is one thing, but according to you and Bob Orci, JFK was promoted to President (and also gave comparison between he and George W. Bush, btw…)

C. You still don’t get it… elected positions versus promoted positions are NOT THE SAME THING!!!

D. The fact of the matter is Kirk completely defied protocol and tampered with the parameters of a (what’s effectively) government owned equipment. Any way you want to romanticize it, it’s still cheating.

E. “Genius level repeat offender” still has that nasty little phrase “repeat offender” in it. Court systems don’t generally label people repeat offenders unless they have been convicted. For Pike to have called him that, there must have been some basis. Oh, maybe he was just like Bush and swept all the stuff under some Starfleet rug.
Besides, even “geniuses” can be convicted.

F (i)This is silly ass stuff on your behalf, fbi press.
Quite right – I thought I was entering a solid debate on filmmaking – not a Bob Orci love-in.

(ii)Give the writers (and a 23rd century Starfleet) some credit for not having a person who may be mentally unstable and with clear criminal tendencies become a Starfleet cadet.
You know, you’re right! I completely forgot about that episode of 90210 where Luke Perry was recruited into The US Naval Academy despite his bad boy ways! During his time there he sharpwittedly damaged a combat simulator, but instead of paying for the damages or was in any way disciplined, Shannon Doherty snuck him onto a battleship full of cadets and midshipmen as a North Korean sub approached the shoreline of southern California. Luke directly defied orders and swam aboard and along with Jason Priestly overpowered the entire crew, and for his heroic actions was given command of an aircraft carrier – ooops – was elected Captain of an aircraft carrier.” from fbi press.

Note the comment made (to me?) in F. News to me…something you haven’t told me, Bob?…:)

There have also been comments challenging mine and other posters’ intellectual abilities etc. This is nothing new btw. I was really taken aback when I first read these types of comments (some a lot ruder) when I first came to the Internet almost two years ago, but I guess I’ve grown a thick skin, sort of… I have grown tired and bored.

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

“I wanted to like it; I really did”

Ah, the most common lie on the internet.

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

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

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

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

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

@ 38

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

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

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

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

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

No freaking 3D crappery. Just fix Engineering.

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

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

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

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

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