Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
1 min read
With the departure of Roberto Orci as the director of Star Trek 3, new names have been put forth as possible candidates for the job.
Five different people are supposedly on the short list to direct the movie.
The potential directors include: Rupert Wyatt (Rise of the Planet of the Apes), Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game), Daniel Espinosa (Safe House), Justin Lin (Fast & Furious), and Duncan Jones (Source Code).
Jones, however, has said that he won’t be doing Star Trek 3. “Very flattering being on short list for Star Trek,” he said via his Twitter account, “but won’t be doing it. Absolutely must make my own thing next, or I’ll die of old age!”
Star Trek 3 is due out in 2016, and filming is expected to begin next year.
About The Author
The more I hear about this movie, the less I care about it.
Then again, it’s not like I still had any hope that the franchise could redeem itself. That’s long gone.
its like i said star trek is dead and gone, long live star wars.
I think cinematic Trek is over, for the same reasons that have put the entire film industry into a creative malaise. It wouldn’t matter if Paramount brought the “real” Trek universe back, because they’d only be compelled to put it through the same dumbing-down process that’s characterized the Abramsverse. The Trek film series thrived for 20 years on the kinds of tight budgetary belts that are now (apparently) impossible for major-studio franchise films. Now that Paramount is investing Avengers-level money into them, there’s no room to take chances — thus these WILL be generic CGI action flicks; they WILL boil all characters, situations and settings down to their most recognizable elements in order to pull in the lowest common denominator such as our friend yahnatan down there; they WILL be careful to make everything generic and bland enough to play in as many different foreign markets simultaneously as possible. The more disheartened I’ve become at the trajectory of American cinema, the more I’ve begun to think that maybe it’s just as well that the “rebirth” of Trek is happening in a consequence-free bubble universe.
Our best hope for seeing real Trek again remains with television.
I really think Frakes should direct. This movie needs someone familiar with Trek. I would hope the 3rd movie of the reboot could redeem itself after that awful “into darkness”.
I think people so old and joyless as to find nothing of value even in ST09 will probably find plenty to hate about any TV iteration as well.
I think Justin Lin could be a good choice, even if he does have less indie cred than the others.
Indeed Frakes should direct the third movie…
Disagree. JJ-Trek has zero to do with joy and everything to do with greed and foolishness. You don’t need to be old to know that it’s crap. New things can still be good, it’s all about the execution of the thing.
What I don’t get is, if they are already scouting locations and preparing to start preliminary filming… wouldn’t it be past this point? How important is the person at the helm or conversely, how much will this movie suck if the studio is just saying “We don’t care, just put TREK in the title and everyone will show up?”
While on the topic of studio mindset, I tried to sit through Marvel’s “Guardians of the Galaxy” the other night (I could not STAND that movie and turned it off after 30 minutes). In the previews, I was taken back by Joss Whedon and his commentary on the Marvel productions. Instead of lauding Marvel for fostering creativity and encouraging growth, he touted it as a “great franchise!”. When I hear someone like a producer or director using words like “franchise” to describe an opus, to me that is a “I’m in it for the MONEY HONEY!” word.
Unfortunately, “Franchise” is how I hear Star Trek defined. It’s like “Okay, who wants a shot at the cash cow this season?”
The NuTrek movies are “derivative” works based on TOS, i.e., the characters and situations must remain derivative to prevent having to pay CBS (more money) for their use. So Kirk and Spock act differently, making them a “transformative work.” Hey, to me, you got phasers, you got saucer and nacelles, you got Vulcans, you got Star Trek, but legally that’s not always so. Under those parameters, having to use inexperienced characters, it’s difficult to do any Star Trek story that requires more than action scenes. As in STID, it’s hardly the “main” characters who drive the story. So whoever does this, will have to deal with that.
So true.
The future of idiocracy is here.
As I said, it ain’t “dead” as long as there is science fiction, because Star Trek is science fiction as opposed to star wars, which is fantasy set in space. Current movies departed from the traditional sci-fi approach in many aspects, coming actually closer to star wars in some aspects, and that’s one of the reasons why they suck.
May the sucking be with you. Trek lives.
Bottom line: the makers of the movie don’t care who the fans think should direct the movie, period.
dude get real please, i tell you what after star trek 3, thats officially it, and i bet that we will see a new live action star wars tv show series and not a star trek tv show, i bet all of the tea in china on that one.
To be fair, Trek was officially a franchise back in the 80’s and has been seen as such since.
It was a fun action flick, it even had bits of trek moments, but it was less trek than even nemesis.
After StID I realised the books were the only refuge of Trek. At least we’ve got 28 years of TV to look back on and enjoy.
They named Lin, so I guess we can all look to ST3 as a stupid action movie (even moreso than ST09 and STID). Are you happy, Paramount?