menuBarBack
Beam Up News | Join | Your Account
Home
Advanced Search
boxBottom
News Tribblets
boxBottom
Stardates Calendar
News Story

Features

Roberto Orci and Bryan Burk on Re-Introducing Star Trek to a New Audience and the Difficulties of Including William Shatner as Kirk in the New Movie

Features

By GustavoLeao / 13:13, 13 December 2007 / Feature Films

The latest issue of Sci Fi Magazine features an exclusive interview with Star Trek movie writer and producer Roberto Orci and executive producer Bryan Burk. Here are few excerpts

"There are five of us originally involved, Bob Orci, Alex Kurtzman, myself, J.J. Abrams and Damon Lindelof, and respectively we are across the board as far as Trekkers go." Burk said "But we all felt it was an incredible world that has existed for 40 years, and like some other great franchises, be it Batman or James Bond, it needed a boost by finding a new approach to the story and the world. It was too great to let it go away or continue on its current path."

Regarding the movie storyline, Orci said "There were many, many elements of the story that we had talked about just theoretically, if ever Star Trek were to come back. There was lots of stuff we wanted to do, and that was a blessing. Normally you dont have that much investment and research for a project you get hired to do. One of the things we fought for is that it not be called Star Trek 11. Because even if you were a fan back then or you haven't seen the last few [movies], with that title you might think it's like tuning in to Lost now and that you'll never catch up. So it's so important to get out the message that this, in a way, is Star Trek Zero. Its a reintroduction. We designed it so that if you know everything about Star Trek you will have one kind of an experience, because you will pick up on all kinds of references. If you are not a fan, those things will be an introduction, and it wont require you to know anything."

About the new cast playing iconic characters, Burk said "We went to all the original actors when we were casting the younger versions of themselves. Nimoy was totally on board with Zachary Quinto, as Shatner was with Chris Pine. Nichelle Nichols loved Zoe Saldana, and George Takei loved John Cho. It just feel like the baton was being passed in a very respectful way from them to us".

And wwhat about the rumors of William Shatner making an appearance in the movie ? Orci explains "There's two things. One, from our point of view we are still hoping to find a way [to put Shatner in the movie]. Secondly, one of the difficulties that was brought up and discussed with Shatner, when we all met him and pitched him ideas, is that Trek fans are sticklers for their canon. Unfortunately, Shatner's Captain Kirk was killed in Star Trek VII, so the difficult there is not just ignoring that or explaining it away in an unsatisfactoty way merely to get him back in. That is the struggle - the rigors of canon and not phoning it in just to have a cameo. From my point of view, its a very long shoot, and things can change. It's just whether we can figure it out."

"Our goal is twofold" says Orci " One is to make sure that the fans, who have been stewards of the continuity and who are some of the most intelligent fans of any franchises ever, that they be satisfied with anything that has the name Star Trek on it. But more importantly, the goal is really to introduce casual fans and people who dont know Star Trek at all to this universe and to connect it to today. The goal of Star Trek is that if you dont like sci-fi or know Star Trek, this will bring you into the world."

You can read the full article here.



More Top StoriesComments
Jul 04John Cho on How Big Star Trek is, Trek Philosophy and Meeting George Takei0
Jul 03Orci and Kurtzman on Dealing with Fanboys, Say They Listen to the Online Fans4
Jul 03The Evolution of Generations : Part II Don't Miss the Conclusion to this In-Depth Analysis of the Film's Controversial Multiple Endings and the Death of James T. Kirk!6
Jul 03Cover and Info for William Shatner Presents TekWar Chronicles Issue 50
Jul 03First Photo of Chris Pine in New Post-Apocalyptic Horror Movie Carriers0
Story Archives...Browse:   

Talkback

62 comments Post New | Help
View:

Beam Us Up, Gojira | Report this post to moderator
By: TRexx (Odo's file, contact) @ 19:59:57 on Dec 14, 2007


OK, but will the theater confection counter serve Slusho, or Synthehol? ...


'Star Trek' Trailer Boldly Goes To 'Cloverfield' Audiences

It's been the subject of much speculation, but we can now confirm that the teaser trailer for J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" will in fact be shown in front of certain buzzed-about pic this January.

"Cloverfield" director Matt Reeves has told MTV News that Paramount has picked his monster flick as the venue to unveil the "Trek" trailer. There isn't much more to report on that front, but Reeves did say that he's seen the teaser and that it's "awesome."



----------------

Apple Ad Spoof by Novell: Your Linux is Ready! (video)
:: Part 2 :: Part 3 ::

Image
Ubuntu for Non-Geeks: Guidebook ++ Live CD


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

Here's a controversial idea | Report this post to moderator
By: dwd201969 (Odo's file, contact) @ 12:33:57 on Dec 14, 2007

What if the events of the film alter the time line in such a way that when old Spock gets back to his natural time, Kirk never died and Shatner gets his part. To make the role more useful than just a Shatner cameo, perhaps the climax happend in the 24th Century and Kirk plays a crucial role in the resolution. Spock and Kirk ride off into the sunset and their younger counterparts go back to the 23rd century with the ability to tell stories that we've never heard because Old Spock screwed with the timeline. Eliminates continuity altogether, but it would be fun to see elements from established continuity be "re-told" in a new film series. The reboot in effect is done by characters from the existing continuity.

Just a thought.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: Here's a controversial idea by StillKirok @ 08:32:57 on Dec 16
RE: Here's a controversial idea by StarFleet Captain @ 18:38:05 on Dec 14

RE: The writers are 'Lost' | Report this post to moderator
By: c.p. (Odo's file, contact) @ 09:33:48 on Dec 14, 2007

Quote:
When the players don't treat this project as serious business, should the fans?

This project? Methinks so.

--------

"...I don't know. It's going to take a long time, and a lot of soul-searching before I find the answer. But right now we have a mission to complete."



-Benjamin Sisko, Blaze of Glory


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

They could easily include William Shatner! Heres how! | Report this post to moderator
By: The Quick And The Dead (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 07:32:12 on Dec 14, 2007

Do the Guardian thingie story, (and stop listening to the lies of Ellison) and shatner's "fibs..about NOT being in the movie!!!!????

Yes... he is in the film.

my precious we swears it!!


we/i swears it! ...my love!,

REGARDS..
Smeagol

Image

--------

Ellen: [female gunslinger walks up behind a preoccupied bartender] How about a room?

Horace: Whores next door.

Ellen: [carefully sets her cigar down] Say that again.

Horace: I said whores next door.

Ellen: [kicks the stool out from under him, catches his liquor bottle as he falls, & pours herself a drink] Now, do you have a room available?

Horace: Uh, room and bath, yes, ma'am, coming up!


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

What will they call the next movie? | Report this post to moderator
By: VZX (Odo's file, contact) @ 06:18:04 on Dec 14, 2007

Since they are calling this eleventh movie simply just "Star Trek," what will they call the next one? They can't call it "Star Trek 2", because that's been done as the Wrath of Khan. They can't call it "Star Trek 12" because they wanted to avoid the coninutation of numbering from the previous ten movies. If they use a subtitle like "Star Trek: Generations", it will be similar to the naming of the Next Gen movies, which I'm sure they would want to avoid. They would still have "Star Trek" in the title, so what should they do?

My guess is some kind of subtitle, but it will be cheesey and be compared to the Next Gen movies.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: What will they call the next movie? by The Magrathean @ 09:15:33 on Dec 15
RE: What will they call the next movie? by OV-101 @ 08:23:40 on Dec 14

It amazes me... | Report this post to moderator
By: John Calvin (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 06:09:38 on Dec 14, 2007

How people can read so much between the lines and make so many presumptions and judgments about a script they have not seen and a movie that we really know nothing concrete about. We are criticizing writers and producers of a movie over information about the product that is nothing more than rumor and conjecture. I think I will reserve my estimate of this team's competence until I have seen the finished product.

--------

"It's not who I am inside, but what I do that defines me." -Batman



www.gracelockport.com


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

Ho Ho Homeless A-Go-Go | Report this post to moderator
By: TRexx (Odo's file, contact) @ 03:33:19 on Dec 14, 2007


A place for everyone in Roddenberry's future, but not for our guttersnipe tonight...

Homeless Told Move Out Of Park, Make Way For Star Trek!

The city has rented out and fenced off over half of Lincoln Park for Paramount Studios' filming of the latest Star Trek movie -- displacing homeless people who squat there in this happiest time of the year.

I wonder how we can spare cops to guard movie sets when every politician who runs for public office says that he will hire more cops to battle escalating crime. Maybe they just schedule less crime for the days that Hollywood is in town. I wonder if they keep statistics on how much the crime rate falls when Long Beach cops are busy being paid to guard Hollywood's most essential secrets.



When Santa became just another "red shirt"...

Image


----------------

Star Trek: Alien Spotlight - Orions

Image


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
The Enemy Without by c.p. @ 09:44:56 on Dec 14
RE: Ho Ho Homeless A-Go-Go by John Calvin @ 05:47:37 on Dec 14

The writers are 'Lost' | Report this post to moderator
By: Comicman (Odo's file, contact) @ 03:23:08 on Dec 14, 2007 | Edit History (1)

Ok, I'm no newbie to Trekweb, been visiting for years, but never created an account to react to news items. This one made me do it, because of certain irritations I have with the creative forces behind this movie. Don't get me wrong, I expect it to be a fun and adventurous film, but there could be so much more to it, the way I see it. They should be broadening their thinking.
You know, I agree on the fact that this whole 'Shatner in or not' thing has taken up quite alot of time already, endless discussions and quoting by actors/writers/producers/etc..
But if they're still pondering on how to bring Kirk into the story, I'm beginning to worry about the lack of creativity here. There's more that one way to have Kirk in it, and not have to do a resurrection of the character that died in 'Generations'.

Old Spock, when being confronted with the news that Romulans are trying to erase Kirk from history, could have a flashback to a time just before Kirk boarded the Enterprise B, his last conversation with him. A conversation in which Kirk could share with Spock his feelings of being unimportant ever since he stopped being the captain of a starship, similar to what Kirk spoke about to Picard. This would fit into the story, since a big driving force of the movie is to show how much of an impact, an importance, Kirk has made and been for the course of history throughout space.
This flashback scene offers a way for old Kirk to be in the movie without having to bring him back from the dead. Voilá, canon respected.

Another way to involve old Kirk is to say: 'What if Kirk isn't dead at all?'
What if the Kirk we saw dying in 'Generations', the Kirk who disappeared into the Nexus, met Picard and saved the day against Soran, wasn't Kirk?
There could have been a swap made by an unknown party before the time of 'Generations', the real Kirk being abducted and replaced by a genetic replica, undistinguishable from the real thing by medical technology in that era. All this time, the real Kirk being locked away somewhere in cryogenic state, waiting to be rescued. A ploy by enemies of the Federation to gain influence in Starfleet and the Federation by using the popularity and sway Kirk has in that society. Unfortunately for them, their clone was a little too perfect, and really believed he was Kirk and wanted to make a difference one last time, be the hero.

This last idea is a stretch since they're never going to use it in this movie, it takes up too much time since it could easily be made into a film on it's own à la 'The Search For Spock'. This film is all about starting over, passing the torch to a new generation of actors to portray the early days of Trek again. No more TOS movie era Trek, but a startover. No more need for old Kirk, except for possible sentimental value this film has in saying goodbye (again) to old beloved characters before they're rebooted/reimagined/reintroduced as younger versions.
And even in bookform it's not needed, since Shatner himself did a Kirk resurrection in one of his novels.

What I'm trying to say here is, if they're still whining over how to involve Kirk in this film, they're on a wrong track. There's so many ways to do it, and still it's not done? Come on, get with the program. Either do it, or don't do it, just quit bringing it up every once in a while. It get's old.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: The writers are 'Lost' by Judge @ 19:04:04 on Dec 17
RE: The writers are 'Lost' by c.p. @ 09:03:49 on Dec 14
RE: The writers are 'Lost' by TRexx @ 03:57:24 on Dec 14

Generations mistake | Report this post to moderator
By: psp1 (Odo's file, contact) @ 18:13:43 on Dec 13, 2007

Shatner should have never done Generations. He had a great finale in Undiscovered Country. In my view, his own shortsightedness did him in. He got hoodwinked into getting Kirk slaughtered off for a meaningless death so that the TNG crew could do more movies.

I am sure he regrets it- but what is done is done. He took it too casually- I even heard him comment that it was 'just science fiction' , so you could resurrect him.

Well, there is no good way to resurrect Kirk-no katra, no reincarnation. He just has to move along with his great new persona 'Denny Crane'. If he wanted to be really gracious, he would agree to do have film clips of Kirk throughout the years at the end as a respectful gesture (for perhaps 2 minutes at the end of the movie). He should let the clips end with The Undiscovered Country instead of the putrid and meaningless Generations.


--------

psp1


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: Generations mistake by ericphillips @ 06:56:26 on Dec 14
    RE: Generations mistake by psp1 @ 18:34:27 on Dec 14
       RE: Generations mistake by StillKirok @ 08:34:44 on Dec 16
RE: Generations mistake by GustavoLeao @ 18:20:57 on Dec 13
    RE: Generations mistake by StarFleet Captain @ 18:27:49 on Dec 13
       RE: Generations mistake by GustavoLeao @ 19:46:16 on Dec 13

Battlestar Shatner | Report this post to moderator
By: TRexx (Odo's file, contact) @ 16:46:40 on Dec 13, 2007

Quote from Roberto Orci:
We are still hoping to find a way [to put Shatner in the movie]


The Shatner issue continues to be as viral as JJ's Cloverfield PR: it surfaces in ST:XI overviews, in talk about Shat's awards, and on signage in the WGA strike. Brilliant.


Writers' Strike: The Directors' Cut?

As Battlestar Galactica creator Ronald D. Moore walked the Paramount picket line Monday, he articulated the view shared by most writers. Moore waged a protracted battle with NBC Universal last year over delivering unpaid, uncredited webisodes of his show. "That taught me the lesson that the studios thought Internet stuff somehow existed in this magical realm where they didn't have to pay anybody and they could do whatever they want," Moore says. "That experience a year ago lead me to believe we were gonna be in this situation today. It's wearying to be in this sort of limbo state. Now all eyes turn to the DGA."

Image


----------------

The Wrath of Khan - Death of Spock Figures

Image


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

Subterfuge or sh*t | Report this post to moderator
By: Scorpius (Odo's file, contact) @ 16:35:41 on Dec 13, 2007

They've had since the meeting with Shatner (pre-script) to come up with a way to get Shatner's Kirk in.

Does anyone believe that after the strike and JJ saying the script is locked, that Orci's statement that they could still work him in is feesable?

Subterfuge because he is appearing in a surprise ending, or bullshit.

Time will tell. Smells like bull manure tho.

--------

"Men don't use sex to get what they want. Sex IS what they want" - Frasier


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by StillKirok @ 16:42:37 on Dec 13
    RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by StarFleet Captain @ 17:14:02 on Dec 13
       RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by Scorpius @ 17:37:38 on Dec 13
          RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by StarFleet Captain @ 17:50:02 on Dec 13
             RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by Scorpius @ 18:46:49 on Dec 13
                RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by StarFleet Captain @ 19:38:16 on Dec 13
                   RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by Scorpius @ 20:13:31 on Dec 13
          RE: Subterfuge or sh*t by StarFleet Captain @ 17:50:00 on Dec 13

Orci talks Shatner | Report this post to moderator
By: GustavoLeao (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 14:52:07 on Dec 13, 2007

Well, people wanted to hear Orci (or someone from Abrams team) talk about the Shatner casting controversy. So, there you are.

Gustavo

PS - Boy, it was difficult to write this article.

--------

TrekWeb.com Supervising Editor



gl2000@uol.com.br


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

Holy Crap | Report this post to moderator
By: Dukat (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 14:15:05 on Dec 13, 2007

Ok, from page 30. last paragraph, 2nd sentance:
Quote:
Star Trek is their love letter to the fans and franchise and they hope it is expected in that spirit.

First time now, I have felt a little sick about this movie. The last time we got a "valentine" it was like getting crapped on.

And for those of you with short memories, the "valentine" was from Berman and Braga and came in the form of the TNG wraparound to the Enterprise finale.

--------

Image


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote

OK, I get it | Report this post to moderator
By: StarFleet Captain (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 14:13:51 on Dec 13, 2007 | Edit History (1)

So, the reason that Shatner is not in the movie is because there is no way that they can explain his coming back from the dead AND focus on REBOOTING the franchise with a new crew. See, Spock is still alive, as far as the Trek franchise go. Kirk is dead. Given that, it would be easy to bring Nimoy (Spock) back for a cameo. Bringing in Shatner (Kirk) for a cameo would be a big problem, considering they'd have to explain how, all of the sudden, he is alive. Doing that, will take too much focus off of the new crew and their storyline.

Over on the message board, I posted an idea that had Kirk showing up at the end of the movie, revealing that he is still alive, ending the movie on that cliffhanger, and then explaining it in a possible sequel. But, my Idea was shot down. A good point was made that even if they did go that route, They would still have to take a lot of time to explain his return in the second movie.

Let us all just finally ACCEPT that Kirk was killed in "Generations" and move on with our lives. Heroes fall, Heroes die, that's the nature of the Universe.

--------

"I can't be President. I mean, I've abused cocaine and I've been arrested. Besides, its completely stupid to believe somebody can be President just because his father was."

--Charlie Sheen (Saturday Night Live 2000)




Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: OK, I get it by sb2004 @ 15:02:26 on Dec 13
    RE: OK, I get it by TRexx @ 21:18:23 on Dec 13
       RE: OK, I get it by StarFleet Captain @ 21:36:20 on Dec 13
          RE: OK, I get it by TRexx @ 21:53:21 on Dec 13
             RE: OK, I get it by StarFleet Captain @ 08:01:15 on Dec 14
                RE: OK, I get it by TRexx @ 08:26:00 on Dec 14
                   A Tick In the Fur by c.p. @ 11:05:56 on Dec 14
                      It's Incidental, My Dear Spock by TRexx @ 18:42:46 on Dec 14
                         RE: It's Incidental, My Dear Spock by c.p. @ 22:34:29 on Dec 14
                            RE: It's Incidental, My Dear Spock by TRexx @ 02:37:20 on Dec 15
                               RE: It's Incidental, My Dear Spock by c.p. @ 21:29:27 on Dec 15
    RE: OK, I get it by c.p. @ 18:00:50 on Dec 13
    RE: OK, I get it by StarFleet Captain @ 15:20:39 on Dec 13
    Quinto says reimagining by GustavoLeao @ 15:12:13 on Dec 13

They NEVER wanted Shatner | Report this post to moderator
By: NEXUS (Odo's file, contact) @ 13:56:48 on Dec 13, 2007

Simple as that.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: They NEVER wanted Shatner by Jeremy Grunloh @ 15:47:24 on Dec 13
RE: They NEVER wanted Shatner by The Magrathean @ 15:18:07 on Dec 13

blame the anal trekkies | Report this post to moderator
By: SkyGuy (Odo's file, contact) @ 13:49:32 on Dec 13, 2007 | Edit History (1)

That's so funny -- the continuity sticklers are stickled by their own sticklerness!

It's funny that the Bring Back Shat crowd are the same bunch that is so anal rententive about canon, and their anality has married them to the "Generations" debacle.

Shat can drone on about he's the "money" star, and "there at the beginning" and all that, but he already closed his own door on future appearances as Kirk, now we're all stuck with it. But even if they did offer him only a cameo, would his Great Big Head settle for that?

--------

Image



GET A LIFE,
will you people? I mean, for crying out loud, it's just a TV show!.... You've turned an enjoyable little job, that I did as a lark for a few years, into a COLOSSAL WASTE OF TIME! -- William Shatner on Saturday Night Live (1986)


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: blame the anal trekkies by steveleenow @ 16:28:06 on Dec 13
RE: blame the anal trekkies by StillKirok @ 16:18:32 on Dec 13

Star Trek Zero? | Report this post to moderator
By: Postdoc (Odo's file, contact) @ 13:24:26 on Dec 13, 2007

I thought that was The Cage. On Shatner, if they wanted him in, he'd be in. They don't. Enough already.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
RE: Star Trek Zero? by Jeremy Grunloh @ 15:48:31 on Dec 13
RE: Star Trek Zero? by MartinCahn @ 13:44:52 on Dec 13
    RE: Star Trek Zero? by Postdoc @ 13:56:23 on Dec 13

Star Trek Zero? | Report this post to moderator
By: Postdoc (Odo's file, contact) @ 13:20:20 on Dec 13, 2007

I thought that was The Cage. On Shatner, if they wanted him in, he'd be in. They don't. Enough already.


Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
Promenade










TrekWeb Merchants
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
Amazon.ca
Amazon.de
Barnes & Noble

Get Firefox!
Privacy Policy | About Us | Legal Notice | Contact Us | | Get Firefox!
© 1996-2009 TrekWeb.com and Steve Krutzler. All rights reserved.