Bryan Burk Talks Jumping Into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS And Comparisons To STAR WARS

Bryan Burk Talks Jumping Into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS And Comparisons To STAR WARS

Expanding on prior comments about the differences between J.J. Abrams' takes on Star Trek and Star Wars, Bad Robot's Bryan Burk also confirms that you don't have to watch the first Trek in order to understand Into Darkness.

By PaulRom - Mar 19, 2013 06:03 AM EST
Filed Under: Star Trek
Source: Herald Sun



Speaking with Herald Sun at a Star Trek Into Darkness preview screening, Bad Robot's Bryan Burk talks about the anticipated sequel and Disney/Lucasfilm's Star Wars: Episode VII - both directed by J.J. Abrams. For the former, the frequent Abrams collaborator says that you don't have to see the 2009 Star Trek in order to understand the sequel, and expresses his hope that Into Darkness will create a broader audience for the franchise. "I think with the first one we got a lot of people who had dipped in and out of the Star Trek universe over the last 40 years and got a lot of new people along the way but that allows us now to go a lot further and open it up to everyone else. People went to see the last film who weren’t expecting to like it and I feel for this film that if people have adamantly avoided Star Trek and thought it wasn’t for them, they will be pleasantly surprised. It was really important to make a film where if you hadn’t seen the last one, you could just jump in."

Additionally, Burk expands on prior comments comparing Star Trek to Star Wars, reiterating that the two will be very different despite being handled by the same director. "It’s very early in the process of Star Wars, but it feels like we are on the precipice of jumping into that world. The worlds couldn’t be more different. The only thing they have in common is the word ‘star’ and they take place in outer space. Star Trek doesn’t take place in a galaxy far, far away. It’s not science fiction, it’s science fact, it’s 100 per cent our future. The guy who invented the cellphone said he was inspired by watching Star Trek." This should come as a relief to those who were worried about one man having control of the two biggest sci-fi franchises of all time.

Star Trek Into Darkness hits theaters May 17th. Star Wars: Episode VII is targeting a 2015 release.









STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER Unused Posters Are Better Than The Movie; New Rumor Teases Rey's Future
Related:

STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER Unused Posters Are Better Than The Movie; New Rumor Teases Rey's Future

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

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

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that 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.

jbak368
jbak368 - 3/19/2013, 6:52 AM
If Abrams Trek is "science fact," then why was there so many scientifically stupid parts of the first one? I mean, a supernova threatening THE GALAXY is utter nonsense, and that's just the tip of the iceberg with this shit.
jbak368
jbak368 - 3/19/2013, 6:55 AM
*were there*

MiracleMe
MiracleMe - 3/19/2013, 6:55 AM
"it’s science fact, it’s 100 per cent our future."
??
If he actually meant that, there're at least a couple of things about a few of those words he does not understand.
MiracleMe
MiracleMe - 3/19/2013, 6:57 AM
Though regardless, I'm a Trek fan. I will be there.
titansupes
titansupes - 3/19/2013, 6:57 AM
He's misused the shit out of the term 'science-fact', but I get what he was trying to say.
Gary8264
Gary8264 - 3/19/2013, 7:49 AM
I'm assumin' what he means by "science-fact", is that our science has a better chance of endin' up like Star Trek than it does Star Wars. I'd like to end up seein' us build a Enterprise. 'Course we gotta get a go from Washington to go back to space first.
diagnostic
diagnostic - 3/19/2013, 8:20 AM
I am hoping for a combined universe!
StarkRaving
StarkRaving - 3/19/2013, 8:25 AM
@jbak368, the supernova in Star Trek wasn't threatening the entire galaxy; the only thing that Spock said was threatened was the planet Romulus.
jbak368
jbak368 - 3/19/2013, 8:44 AM
“129 years from now, a star will explode and threaten to destroy the galaxy. The star went supernova, consuming everything in its path. I promised the Romulans that I would save their planet. "
KaneRomita
KaneRomita - 3/19/2013, 9:48 AM
Star Trek = science-fiction
Star Wars = science-fantasy
KaneRomita
KaneRomita - 3/19/2013, 9:51 AM
and I agree with jbak.. the writing in the last one was moronic.. Nero hates Spock for failing to save Romulus.?
So much so that he waits in space for 25 years..!? If he loves Romulus so much why didn't he fly back there and say "hey dudes, I know the exact date of the romulan apocalypse.. let's get to work on it now..". naaaah.
View Recorder