J.J. Abrams Issues STAR TREK 2 Update; Will Be Shot In 2D And Converted To 3D

J.J. Abrams Issues STAR TREK 2 Update; Will Be Shot In 2D And Converted To 3D

The director comments on the current status of the sequel and confirms that while there has been talk of shooting some of Star Trek 2 in IMAX, it will be shot in 2D and converted to 3D later.

By JoshWilding - Dec 20, 2011 05:12 PM EST
Filed Under: Star Trek
Source: Trek News

When the release date of Star Trek 2 was confirmed, it came with the news that the sequel would be shot in 3D. Well, not so according to director J.J. Abrams. Talking to MTV News (via Trek News) he confirmed plans to shoot the highly anticipated follow up in 2D and convert in in 3D afterwards. While this is obviously extremely disappointing, the good news is that he's considering IMAX. Check out the video interview below - there's also a transcript for those of you based outside the US - and sound off with your thoughts in the usual place.



On The Current Status Of Star Trek 2:

"It’s a little early to be talking about 'Star Trek,' but I will say that they wrote — the three writers, Damon [Lindelof], Bob [Orci] and Alex [Kurtzman] — they wrote the most amazing script, and I’m thrilled to get a chance to direct it. I’s totally mine to screw up, so if you don’t like it, it’s completely on me. Our sets are almost done, so we’re going to go back and start shooting next month."


On How The First Movie Has Prepared Him For The Sequel:

"I’m sure, like many people, you see what you do and you go, ‘I really could have done that one better, I should have done that, that was a mistake, more of this, less of that.’ You always do that. I’m hoping that as we do the next one, all the mistakes that I’ve made that I’ve hopefully learned from, I can bring to this one and hope make it better."


On The Format They'll Shoot The Movie In:

"We’re shooting on film, 2-D, and then we’ll do a good high-end conversion like the ‘Harry Potter’ movie and all that. Luckily, with our release date now we have the months needed to do it right because if you rush it, it never looks good…. "We were talking about [shooting in IMAX] and I would love to do it. IMAX is my favorite format; I’m a huge fan."




Quentin Tarantino Finally Explains Why His R-Rated STAR TREK Movie Is Never Going To Happen
Related:

Quentin Tarantino Finally Explains Why His R-Rated STAR TREK Movie Is "Never Going To Happen"

STAR TREK: Colm Meaney On Possible Miles O'Brien Return And What He REALLY Thinks About Trekkies (Exclusive)
Recommended For You:

STAR TREK: Colm Meaney On Possible Miles O'Brien Return And What He REALLY Thinks About Trekkies (Exclusive)

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
TheHitchhikingGhost
TheHitchhikingGhost - 12/20/2011, 5:53 PM
Converted 3D blows no matter how much time you waste converting. Also, what would be the point of shooting Star Trek in IMAX? Most of it is CG/Greenscreen anyway. IMAX is most effective on real locations and practical effects.
Mrcool210
Mrcool210 - 12/20/2011, 5:54 PM
Converted to 3D?
Photobucket
nuck82
nuck82 - 12/20/2011, 5:56 PM
lol short and sweet right grif
JDUKE25
JDUKE25 - 12/20/2011, 5:56 PM
Shot in 2D then converted to 3D= FAIL.
JDUKE25
JDUKE25 - 12/20/2011, 5:57 PM
@grif lmao
MarkV
MarkV - 12/20/2011, 6:02 PM
Just once....JUST ONCE, can someone please shoot in 3D and convert it to 2-D?
SpiderBat209
SpiderBat209 - 12/20/2011, 6:02 PM
Yargh! I grow TIRED of these snippet STAR TREK articles! :P

Who the F*ck is the villain?! What the F*ck is the plot?! And MOST IMPORTANT: Did Scientists (in reality) FINALLY find that Planet full of Green Chicks for us Earth Dudes to get our F*ck On with yet?! ;D
Joe6Pack74
Joe6Pack74 - 12/20/2011, 6:05 PM
Why not shoot it in 2D and leave it in 2D.
PaulRom
PaulRom - 12/20/2011, 6:11 PM
Hope it films in IMAX. Not big on 3D conversion.
IDKwhatToChoose
IDKwhatToChoose - 12/20/2011, 6:17 PM
@Grif--LMAO
JR
JR - 12/20/2011, 6:21 PM
like the IMAX idea! the 3d conversion no way!
MovieMann
MovieMann - 12/20/2011, 6:26 PM
Post Coversion?! that sucks! ..... Oh wait! Did he say shoot in IMAX?!!! Hell Yes!!
Ceejay
Ceejay - 12/20/2011, 6:29 PM
This is the most pointless,slowest reboot of all time! At this rate they'll be as old as the original crew were in their last film by the time they finish a basic trilogy! I'm pretty sure most people don't even give a damn anymore about this shite except fanboys who just need to see any old space battle!
soberchimera
soberchimera - 12/20/2011, 6:37 PM
IMAX > 3D
l0rdleg0las
l0rdleg0las - 12/20/2011, 6:37 PM
this 3D bullshit needs to die. i am sick of it. it doesn't make the movie any more enjoyable, it's just a money grab gimmick.

i do love the idea of IMAX though
leeharveyoswld
leeharveyoswld - 12/20/2011, 6:40 PM
Bring back Patrick Stewart. He makes boy parts grow all over the world
pro346
pro346 - 12/20/2011, 6:43 PM
Why does everyone complain about 3d ...just see it in 2d!
LP4
LP4 - 12/20/2011, 7:19 PM
Eh whatever
Kamdan
Kamdan - 12/20/2011, 7:33 PM
He probably can't use 3D camera, because he constantly bangs on them as he films.
deadpoolstaco
deadpoolstaco - 12/20/2011, 8:05 PM
converted 3D is always terrible....thor, capn am., and clash of titans all had weak 3D....green lantern(the film itself aside) had decent 3D because they planned for it...and they had a ton of CG(which looks better than real things in 3D) and had shots to take advantage of it
VikingPatar
VikingPatar - 12/20/2011, 8:44 PM
I'll wait until I see The Phantom Menace in 3D. That will set the standard for post conversion from then on, because honestly, if someone can get it right it will be ILM.
Mechagino
Mechagino - 12/21/2011, 12:07 AM
Well then, that's a pass on the 3D then.
Bjorn
Bjorn - 12/21/2011, 12:24 AM
I like 3D. When it's done well. I used to hiss at the thouht of movies being converted to 3D and that was less than a year ago. But I remember Joe Johnston saying confidently that they didn't need to film Captain America in 3D, converting it would be fine. Why ? Probably because they planned the shooting with 3D in mind. And well the 3D turned out to be fine.

We mostly have bad experience with films being converted to 3D as an afterthought. Films like Clash of the Titans and Alice in Wonderland (bad films anyway). The thing is , shooting a film in 3D doesn't guarantee a great 3D, well you've probably seen Resident Evil : Afterlife so you know what I mean. It takes a good filmmaker and great sensibility during pre-production and filming and all that to get good 3D in a film. It can't be an afterthought.
Bjorn
Bjorn - 12/21/2011, 12:25 AM
And oh yeah, I trust J.J. on this
marvel72
marvel72 - 12/21/2011, 12:30 AM
if it was shot in 3d i would of watched in 3d,but its not so i'll just watch it in 2d.
bhorwith22
bhorwith22 - 12/21/2011, 4:41 AM
I was going to say post-conversion to 3D=lame, but then I heard they were thinking about shooting it in IMAX. I'll just play it by ear for this one.

Also, I like how Abrams is admitting that he made a few mistakes in the first one. I hope he improves on these parts (couchlensflarecough) in the sequel.
marvel72
marvel72 - 12/21/2011, 5:02 AM
@ grif

thats some funny shit.

@ lp4

how have you been mate,haven't seen you on here in ages.
Shaman
Shaman - 12/21/2011, 5:13 AM
Even Avatar's non-converted 3D blew, especially in scenes where things moved faster than a snail. 3D is bad no matter how you do it. Keep it 2D and IMAX HD.
Shaman
Shaman - 12/21/2011, 5:18 AM
Grif- You're why i still stick around here. I love you, man!
JackBauer
JackBauer - 12/21/2011, 9:30 AM
I prefer to see it in Double D ;)

1 2
View Recorder