Rise of Skywalker cast on Trek

[Lance]

Actors play different roles over the course of their careers. That's kinda how it works.

Just staying on STAR WARS, I wasn't distracted or confused when Alec Guiness and Peter Cushing showed up in the original movie back in '77.

"Wait! Why is Doctor Frankenstein running the Death Star?"

I was waiting for his TARDIS to show up.

 

[Qonundrum]

I can see no reason why we shouldn't want to see actors do different franchises. It would be awesome. I also think most people are more than capable of separating the actor from the character. Otherwise, I'd believe Star Lord was working at Jurassic World, when we all know Owen Grady is moonlighting as a Guardian of the Galaxy...

Don't tell my wife this, but Adam Driver is a fine actor, and Star Trek would be privileged to have him.

As for the 'rivalry', some fans, on either side, take it waaaaaaaay too far. Others - most in fact - realise you can comfortably be fans of both. I have a Star Trek tattoo and a Star Wars-based username for everything.

Adam Driver was perfectly cast. Any qualms are with the scripts but he made Ren watchable, to say the least. He did the unpredictability angle extremely well. Nothing "emo" or whatever about it at all. In that aspect he's refreshing compared to Vader, TFA already was doing "movie remake by the numbers" so they had to resort to character archetypes to even get the movie to work - outside of nostalgia baiting. (Oh, I also didn't bother with TRoS once finding out DJ would not be returning. Not because of disliking TLJ the way many had. Luke arguably got the best depth of any returning OT character... but I digress.) A shame most of the new characters didn't get much of any depth and Finn had the potential for most.

 

[Qonundrum]

​

There's really no reason why one actor cannot play roles in different franchises.

Or multiple roles within the same franchise, as far as that goes.

I've seen guest actors (Jon Lormer in TOS, e.g.) appearing in more than one episode (as different characters) being given as a reason for having trouble watching something, but it shouldn't be. Part of the "suspension of disbelief" contract between storyteller and audience is that you focus on what it is the characters are doing in the context of the story currently being told. Any similarities between its players or tropes to other stories or performances don't at that moment matter.

If an actor's job is to play a completely different person, then typecasting shouldn't be much of a problem? But it's not as simple as that as many viewers often get attached to one character and can't go beyond that. Like Ed O'Neill going from "Married with Children" to "Dragnet" and the audience kept thinking "it's Al Bundy with a gun." FTW...

 

[seigezunt]

I may have said this before and have forgotten so I will say it again.

jj loved star wars more. fine.

when he did the force awakens, he should have left star wars and done star trek beyond, now he leaves star wars In ruins, why trek is still okay and no where near as damaged as star wars.

So true.
So much for having "a fan" who "knows the franchise" at the helm. Imagine if he had buckled and backpedaled to canonista Trekkies the way he did to the worst Star Wars fans with that last movie. It would have been a fanwanky mess.

 

[M'Sharak]

So true.
So much for having "a fan" who "knows the franchise" at the helm. Imagine if he had buckled and backpedaled to canonista Trekkies the way he did to the worst Star Wars fans with that last movie. It would have been a fanwanky mess.

**cough**