Joe Cornish To Direct STAR TREK 3?

Some interesting comments on the /Filmcast Ep. 250 podcast.

The commentators speculate that Trek 3 may get the pieces in place for a return to TV. The also talk about a reduced budget for the next film and what a troubled production Into Darkness was. They also touch on the (much-debated) disappointing(?) performance of the second film.

It's a pretty good listen; the Trek stuff starts at their Film News segment which is at 30:20.

http://www.slashfilm.com/category/features/slashfilmcast/

 

Why was STD a troubled production? Can't listen to it right now.

 

That's exactly what I was thinking too, assuming the 2014 date on shooting trek3 is actually true.

I have always been skeptical about Disney releasing their 2 biggest movies in development (Avengers 2, SW 7) at around the same time (summer 2015).

 

They said there was some infighting between Paramount, Bad Robot and CBS over the film. It wasn't mentioned, but I also believe part of the problem was the use of Khan, as Orci and Kurtzman wanted to just do John Harrison as a new villain while Lindelof was fighting for Khan and so compromises were made.

 

On the podcast, those guys have a lot of it pretty much spot on (but beware STiD fans, they are not STiD fans nor Orci Trinity fans )... and their comparison of the Cornish possibility to Shane Black taking on the Iron Man franchise is interesting. (Still don't believe it will happen.) Thanks HaplessCrewman for the link, I hope I can listen to that podcast regularly.

 

You're welcome, BigJake. Thanks for summarizing the relevant portions.

I've never heard anyone say anything but nice thing about J.J. Abrams. I wonder if there is any truth to him having a big ego, being smug, being hard to work with, etc. as that one guy says on the podcast.

 

Given the reports of Abrams getting frustrated over CBS not stopping TOS merchandise like he demanded, there could be some truth to the whole big ego/smug/hard to work with angle to it. It's the first I have ever heard of this, and I usually hear nothing but nice things from everyone to the point he's mentioned by his first name "Oh J.J. is such a great guy, J.J. is a visionary, J.J. walked my dog". I think many tend to forget that for a long time before he gained such a huge fan-base over ALIAS and LOST that Abrams had largely been known as "Jeffrey Abrams", just another Hollywood hack writer and executive that helped churn out some of the most generic product of the 90s that included "Regarding Henry, "Gone Fishin'" and "Armageddon".

Of all his work, I think I only genuinely liked the pilot of LOST, the only episode he directed for that show. In fact, that was the only work I've seen of his when it was announced that he was gonna work on STAR TREK, so I had some high hopes, especially after the Berman & Braga years. Then I saw his other work... Can't say I was impressed.

 

Like most, I also first came to know J.J. Abrams through Alias (with I enjoyed) and later Lost. I did not stick to the end with Lost - and I guess I am lucky I didn't considering it's notorious reputation.

Maybe J.J.'s personality is more akin to Stan Lee's - a writer who is equally adept at co-creating classic superheroes and self-promotion.

 

I'm pretty sure TrekMovie ran an article that pretty much debunked the above.

But if it is true, I can understand where Abrams is coming from (even if I disagree). He would essentially be competing with TOS merchandise, which he probably saw as a bad thing.

 

Abrams had virtually nothing to do with LOST after the first couple of seasons. The show was Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse's baby.

 

Same here, I think both sides are very understandable. CBS has a cash cow, why throw it out? Abrams wants to set up his own brand, why confuse it with an older one? He probably would have had a lot more freedom starting a TV show with new characters instead of having to license older ones. Given how audiences bought up the two nuTrek films, I think he would have been able to pull it off on TV, incorporating the jovial tone and sense of fun that attracts viewers. And nobody can tell him what he can and cannot do.

 

I just remember when Aliens 3 was directed by someone who hadn't directed a feature film before.

I want Ridley Scott. Not that he'd ever agree to do it

 

Nicholas Meyer had directed only one movie before doing Trek. I am not that crazy about him as a director (like him better as a writer), but many Trek fans seem to worship him.

 

Variety is reporting that Joe Cornish no longer attached to Trek 3:

http://variety.com/2013/film/news/star-trek-3-recruits-writers-to-join-roberto-orci-1200927608/#

 

Bring back Leonard Nimoy, I bet he would do it if the price was right.
Or David Carson who directed STNG Yesterday's Enterprise.

 

As to J.J. Abrams being high on himself ... Welcome to Hollywood! I hope the next movie is as fresh and different to the past two as EMPIRE was to STAR WARS. Another director, other than J.J. might just accomplish that. I loved that J.J. brought a "no rules" aspect to the reboot and though I would like this, very much, to continue ... it would be great to see the series take a surprise turn! It's nice to add to the pot, you know?

 

Sounds like he read the script and bailed.

 

I bet he wouldn't.

 

The usual reaction of sensible people to an Orci script.

 

And we wouldn't be getting TOS and TNG on blu ray or any Prime Trek tie in novels if Abrams had it his way. That waters down his brand. Good thing that CBS essentially told him to fuck off. Apparently you can't do JJverse fan films. So if Abrams was in full control, they'd probably stop stuff like Phase II or Renegades as well.