Last edited:
Roberto Orci to Direct ‘Star Trek 3′
- Thread starter HaplessCrewman
- Start date
That article is from May 13th. I'm pretty sure we have a thread about it around here somewhere.
We did have a thread and that Variety link was indeed posted:...
That article is from May 13th. I'm pretty sure we have a thread about it around here somewhere.
J. Allen said:
However, that thread suffered a toxic spill and was closed for health and safety reasons. Might as well carry on any new discussion in this one.
Still skeptical. I'm not a fan of Orci's writing, so even if he does end up being a better director like Abrams, I still question his judgements writing wise. I say this because though I think Abrams directed the hell out of his movies, it wasn't enough to save the films for me. When the flick does come out, the only thing that can really get me in theaters is if there's good word of mouth, that he actually gets it right. I do hope he succeeds, I'm just full of doubts concerning him.
The thing is, many of the Biggest complaints about Orci's Star Trek scripts, were imposed on him by Higher-ups. For example, Orci was opposed to John Harrison being Khan, that was forced upon him. So, with Orci being the Director, we may see a more pure vision of his script. It certainly can flop, but, there's every reason to hope being in more control, he may knock it out of the park.
That's what I hope, but I'm just not confident because even when he did have good ideas I don't think he really followed through on them that made them satisfactory. One example is Kirk's sudden change of heart where he initially took Marcus' mission to get revenge for Pike's death, but after a few minutes he announces "okay, let's just capture him and put him on trial". Apparently this was done because there was worrying over audiences not liking Kirk for wanting vengeance, but it really diminishes his arc and makes his ending speech about vengeance come off hollow. How dramatically better would it have been if Kirk held Harrison at gunpoint and at that moment caught himself and decided to put him under arrest? Him just deciding "nah, vengeance is wrong", when on the captain's seat is just anti-climatic.
But like I said, I do hope Orci improves. I hope he took in the more substantial criticisms (not "OMG y KAHN? U RUIN MY CHILDHOOD") and grows as a writer and director. We'll only be able to tell how he handles it in 2016.
Orci has a track record of writing poor scripts.
Judging by his moronic conspiracy theories, he's not the sharpest tool in the shed either.
Anything is possible though. Maybe he'll surprise us, but my expectations for him, and for this franchise are at an all time low.
Bring on Star Trek 3!
Hey....if Chekov gets his own series, would it be called "Tsar Trek"?
Hey....if Chekov gets his own series, would it be called "Tsar Trek"?
Well, Orson Scott Card is as batshit crazy as they come, but he's still a good writer. There's hope.
I certainly wouldn't have a problem with a similar look and feel to the next movie - but I don't understand the resistance to something different.
A fresh stylistic approach does not necessarily equate to an inferior stylistic approach! For example, Alien directed by Ridley Scott - classic movie brilliantly directed. Aliens directed by James Cameron - classic movie brilliantly directed. Both in the same universe, both excellent, but radically different in directorial terms.
I'm not against anything different, I just want it to feel part of a trilogy like the SW movies do - more in terms of cinematography, music and the pre-title sequence, stuff like that. Can you imagine a SW film opening without the yellow 3D text?
One of my problems with the TOS & TNG movies were that they never seemed to be part of the same family of films. Maybe it's just me
One of my problems with the TOS & TNG movies were that they never seemed to be part of the same family of films. Maybe it's just me
Yes, I understand why you'd want to have a connected, homogenous feel to the movies, that approach certainly has its merits. Definitely not just you, I think many would agree with you.
I'm open to that - or something fresh. All I really care about is the quality of the movie!
That isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Agreed.
I think two good examples of third installments by a different director that follow two films being directed by the same guy are GOLDFINGER and HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN. Those installments no doubt feel a part of the franchise, but they have a distinctly different feel from the two films that came before and it's what helps keeps things fresh.
By the way, was it made official that nuTrek is going to stop with this third film to form a trilogy? I don't understand why anyone wants to stop at #3, unless it's a major critical flop. Trilogies are overrated.
By the way, was it made official that nuTrek is going to stop with this third film to form a trilogy? I don't understand why anyone wants to stop at #3, unless it's a major critical flop. Trilogies are overrated.
I had never heard of Orci prior to watching Wil Wheaton's show last night. A point he made concerned Orci's lack of directorial experience. However I don't know enough about the guy to make an informed comment, so I will simply hope he doesn't have his head up his backside and turns out a good product.
It does seem his Trek scripts get a fair amount of criticism on these boards, but I haven't had a problem with them. Remember, the first script was hampered by the writers' strike, too. Their hands were tied at tweaking it.
As far as Kirk changing his mind about killing Harrison goes, it made perfect sense to me at the time he did it, because that was Kirk deferring to the cooler head, Spock. Earlier, Spock had put him on the spot by laying out the case to do what was just, and when the moment arose to decide to follow orders or do what was really just, Kirk did what Spock said had to be done. It was an important step in the growth of their relationship as captain and first officer.
Spock played the "cooler" head quite a bit in TOS as well. Namely "Arena" and "The Devil in the Dark".
Yep. Even in the lighter vein of TVH. Kirk sees the captive whales and tells Spock they just need to beam them up and consider themselves lucky. Since whales are intelligent creatures, that wasn't good enough for Spock, who feels the need to communicate their intentions to the whales, telling Kirk afterwards, "Admiral, if we are to assume these whales are ours to do with as we please, we would be as guilty as those who caused their extinction." Luckily, the whales agreed to be cooperative with the plan.
Edited to add: That's why I thought the only time they really had Spock out of character in these two movies was when Spock had no problem with the Enterprise opening up all barrels on Nero at the end of ST09. I can understand the explanations for why he thought it was OK, but I'd think that it's something he will end up regretting having wanted.
Last edited:
