And director Matt Shakman is now apparently attached to Apple+'s Godzilla series: https://twitter.com/GormaruIsland/status/1512812076502241292
It's extremely possible that his shooting block will be done by the time they're planning to do Star Trek, but given the history of this movie I'm fully expecting them to lose another director.
Honestly I would like to see JJ direct again. As long as they get good actual screen writers. Star trek beyond had a good written story but the direction of the movie was no where as good as star trek 2009 that I will say was a masterclass.
JJ Abrams has always had the potential to be a great director, but he tends to let the shallow side of movies and fan reactions get the best of him as seen in (Into Darkness, The Rise of Skywalker)
JJ could have a good bye swan song directing star trek 4 after the mess that became star trek into darkness. if Star Trek 4 also turns out good and well acclaimed like star trek 2009, I think he will gain some major credibility back as a good science fiction/fantasy director. He still won't be considered in the same league as Chris Nolan or Denis Villeneuve, who is just coming of huge success with Dune. however JJ would have some credibility back as an artistic director that we are meant to take seriously.
The visuals of ST09 don't get enough recognition, in my opinion. So many blockbuster action movies these days all share a few visual styles that are going to make them look very dated before too long. J.J. and Dan Mindel the DP managed to give the film a much more timeless look, even with the abundance of lens flares (which I think J.J. does better than most directors who try to copy him.)Honestly I would like to see JJ direct again. As long as they get good actual screen writers. Star trek beyond had a good written story but the direction of the movie was no where as good as star trek 2009 that I will say was a masterclass.
Sadly, many artists are prone to this. Abrams is a good director. I would very much enjoy his return to Trek and Star Wars.Abrams has always had the potential to be a great director, but he tends to let the shallow side of movies and fan reactions get the best of him as seen in (Into Darkness, The Rise of Skywalker)
Fandom doesn't want new. The moment new happens it is rejected.Abrams is only interested in re-hashing the franchise's greatest hits.
I want someone who's going to push the Star Trek story forward; into new territory. JJ isn't the guy for that.
Making the Klingons more alien has pretty much been the driving force of every new production in Trek. TMP, TSFS, TUC, TNG, DS9, etc. all did something new with the Klingons. ID did some of the best work, in my opinion, followed by DSC, and TUC. Each of those work very well. But, each are a different variation and interpretation of what came before. And that change won't always, if ever, be fully accepted.Fandom does and doesn't want everything, it's a multi-headed beast, and 'new' comes in many awesome and terrible flavours. Often the new things I don't like are just old things that have been reimagined because someone thought that Klingons would be considered ridiculous in this day and age without giant heads and two extra nostrils.
What makes a new more appreciable? Discovery just expanded them and didn't reinterpreted themI'd say that TMP to Enterprise iterated on the Klingons' design and culture rather than entirely reinterpreting them, which is the kind of 'new' I do appreciate, and I think the majority of fans accepted and appreciated that evolution. I also like strange new worlds, new life and new civilisations, new spaceships, new stories, new settings, new chapters in ongoing stories, and new characters. I wasn't sure I'd be cool with a new Kelvin timeline with a new Kirk and Spock but it turned out that I liked that too.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.