jump to navigation

Viacom Chief Hearts JJ November 10, 2006

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,CBS/Paramount,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

A couple of months ago TrekMovie speculated that changes in the leadership at Paramount’s parent company Viacom may ripple down to the recently signed JJ Abrams. However it appears that the new CEO of Viacom is a fan; Philippe Dauman had the following to say in a conference call with investors:

We are doing all this while ramping up to produce a strong line-up of films including Tent Pole under the Paramount marquee. A key component to this revitalization is making sure we attract the best talent and we’ve already been successful in making deals with some of the biggest names in the business including Steven Spielberg, J.J. Abrams, whom I had the pleasure to spend some time with last night, Brad Pitt and Will Ferrell.

We already know that Paramount chief Brad Grey is a big fan of Abrams, and it is good to see that this view goes all the way to the top. It also seems to convey that they see him as a blockbuster ‘tentpole’ producer, so it adds more fuel to the speculation that Paramount has big hopes for Star Trek XI.


In Abrams TV news…
According to E Online Abrams newest TV show ‘Six Degrees’ is being pulled by ABC and sent back to the drawing board. Although the show isn’t being cancelled, it has been put onto hiatus until next year and Abrams and his team are going to make have to make some big changes to keep it alive. In some good news, reports that Abrams’ ‘Lost’ finally saw a jump in ratings, with the fall finale once again on top for its timeslot. Plus Abrams third show ‘What About Brian’ just got a full season order. And as if Abrams didn’t have enough to do, Variety reports that Paramount may be getting back into the TV production business (after splitting off TV production to CBS) and that Abrams deal with the studio includes TV. This means that Abrams could end up producing shows for Disney, Warner Brothers and Paramount. Don’t get your hopes for an Abrams’ Trek TV just yet, CBS still own Trek on TV and they seem to be one of the few studios that don’t have a deal with Abrams.



Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
November 10, 2006 2:30 pm

if Trek XI is a bomb, you’ll quickly see a 180-degree change in opinion of Golden Boy JJ….

November 10, 2006 2:30 pm

from Paramount, I mean…

Levita Lone
November 10, 2006 2:52 pm

To whom it may concern…Don’t make another Star Trek.

November 10, 2006 3:20 pm

To Levira Lone….are you nuts???? Boy did you wander onto the wrong site!

Adam Cohen
November 10, 2006 3:28 pm

I don’t like the summer release for Trek XI. Too much pressure for a film meant to resurrect a severly weakend franchise. Whatever Paramount’s expectations are, they’re probably too high.

November 10, 2006 4:09 pm

But whats the right time for a release? Nemesis started in winter against LoR and HP. That wasn’t much better…

November 10, 2006 4:46 pm

Who comes on a site like this and says don’t do another Star Trek… Admiral, I agree with you…. we’ll let anyone in here it seems.

November 10, 2006 4:51 pm

And while I think of it…. We could see a fantastic film… As a young Kirk, not yet a captain serving aboard Farragut. Lots of action, perhaps a small interspecies war breaks out, etc. I am not eager for an Academy flick, but perhaps a pre-captainacy storyline.
Imagine the possibilities and let’s not worry about it bombing…

Duane Boda
November 10, 2006 5:24 pm
They should take adaquate time to do the film right and not rush things. Flesh it out completely in each and every way possible. Lets not see a Mission Impossible (In Space) do a story thats primarily covers the characters so that when the special effects come into play we will care about the story. Reintoduce the aspect of good stoy telling and everything else will naturally fall into place as it should be. As far as a release date? How about Spring – 2009? Wasn’t the Wrath Of Khan released in March of 1982? New life…green grass and a… Read more »
November 10, 2006 5:30 pm

Star Trek jumped the shark when they killed Kirk.It’s over.Time to have fun with a brand new interpretation.take the essence of what it was and broaden the appeal.By the way …if they don’t get Beyonce to play Uhura their crazy!

November 10, 2006 6:51 pm

Beyonce as Uhura– finally a casting suggestion I like!

November 10, 2006 9:54 pm
I have given up on any hope of seeing the regular posters agree on most anything beside their love of some form of Trek, hatred of funky nacelle caps and too-dark Enterprise paint-jobs. This has caused me to drink heavily. In my delirium I have formulated the ultimate new Trek Movie. (JJ, move in for my close up now…) We don’t need Shatner or Nimoy… No actors playing “kiddie Kirk” in diapers at the Academy. No need for CGI actors faces digitally pasted on some buff body. Deforrest Kelly and James Doohan shall not be raised from the dead with… Read more »
November 10, 2006 11:15 pm
If it has the stench of the repulsive feces excreted successor series namesakes, keep it as far away from real Star Trek as possible. Star Trek – The Next Generation, was a cute novelty for it’s time, a place holder, something to remind us how awesome Kirk and crew truly are, but when it came to pop cultural influence, it fizzled faster than a royal fizzbin. Even as popular as Next Gen was in it’s heyday, the late 80’s to early 90’s, it’s impact was frightenenly negligble. Don’t get me started on DS9, Voyager, and Bermanprise. You talk about smearing… Read more »
November 11, 2006 1:19 am

The studios doesn’t have a problem with the acting or script. But their special effects better be up to par. Fan movies are of high quality anymore.

November 11, 2006 4:59 am
Hiya MichaelT, yeah, you just made me realise how much some contributers to this fine site are going to be disappointed if each new future CONFIRMED casting, storyline, or production snippet to do with this movie is NOT what we individually hoped it would be…myself included possibly, in which case I may just join you in drink my friend…however these threads are going to make fascinating reading throughout the next few months…I just hope everyone remembers that Anthony’s Mom will be reading too… Whatever the comments, it will mainly be because people care so much about this property…and that can… Read more »
November 11, 2006 5:07 am

Deep apologies JON,

The Beyonce idea was yours, not Josh. Eyesite is not what it was…

November 11, 2006 5:10 am

Any ideas for who plays Yeoman Rand anyone?

November 11, 2006 5:14 am

Finally, awesome video on post #14 Ralph.

Scott of the Morgites
November 11, 2006 7:40 am
He’s baaaaaack… #13 – Josh – As someone who has been known to get on a soapbox or two myself, I was wondering maybe you and I could share the expense for future purchases. Of late the cost has increased tremendously… Man oh man, the last four or five years have been a killer. And the quality of the soapboxes are not nearly as good… I can’t prove this but I think the assertion by the Bush Administration that there were Soapboxes of Mass Destruction really hit the industry a lot harder than expected. But seriously, folks… Josh, a very… Read more »
November 11, 2006 10:56 am

17-I had suggested Paris Hilton once before.But I think I was in one of my punchie moods after work.Kinda works though ,doesn’t it?Think of the free press.And she would’n’t have to act much.thank God.Just a cameo.

November 11, 2006 10:54 pm

Wow… I try to lighten the mood a bit with parody and Josh is reminded of “repulsive feces excreted successor series namesakes”. I am not your set up man Josh… Don’t use my comments, comedic or otherwise, to set up your own viritol.

November 12, 2006 12:37 am

Do you mean “vitriol?”

If one is bold enough to mention television series that have the quality of fecal matter served steaming fresh, one must be prepared to garner such anecdotes and allegories,

aside from which , you presume a great deal by suggesting your post mattered enough to me to merit expanding upon.

Which it didn’t.

November 12, 2006 5:27 pm
Hm, it appears that Josh is a recognized troll around here, but I’ll bite anyway. Next Generation had a frighteningly negligible impact? Then why is “resistance is futile” a catchphrase? Now, Voyager inarguably shot the Borg in the foot, but the fact remains that they’re established right alongside the Klingons in the popular perception of Star Trek. Why was “The Inner Light” the first Trek episode since City on the Edge of Forever to merit a Hugo award? Why did the TNG finale rope in a record audience for syndicated television? Why did First Contact have the best theatrical gross… Read more »
November 12, 2006 6:19 pm

Dear Josh, I spelled it incorrectly, my mistake, but you understood.

And to continue… you did “expand upon my post”, despite what you said. But I can’t figure out where I mentioned any “television series that have the quality of fecal matter served steaming fresh”. I was, I as said. doing a parody of some of the conversations in here to lighten the mood and mentioned in jest… “Star Trek XI: The Reign of Empress Sato”. If THAT was the fecal matter series… golly, I am sorry. I thought I made that one up.

I am off to study my thesarus.

November 12, 2006 6:21 pm

But my apologies to Anthony, sorry…. I had to.

November 12, 2006 7:01 pm

Josh… you say whatever you wish… Your opinion is yours, of course.
I re-read your post above and can see where I likely thought it referred to my post. I’ll retract my statements above and apologize.
However, could you refrain from comparing anything in here to feces? Please.

Scott of the Morgites
November 13, 2006 8:14 am
MichaelT don’t be too hard on yourself. When I’ve had a few too many, I’ve done much worse than misspell a word. Actually, in your admonishment to Josh (post #21), I thought you had spelled it correctly… you just forgot to capitalize the “v”. I heard that Viritol is a new enhancement drug by the makers of Viagra. It localizes it’s effects to one’s tongue, making it harder and, in some clinical trials, sharper. One can only extrapolate by the contents of this thread as to it’s efficacy. Josh… However, salient or insightful your arguments about what made the original… Read more »
Scott of the Morgites
November 13, 2006 11:08 am

Josh – I just re-read what I wrote above and forget about my finger-wagging… you should be able to say whatever you want… however you wish… It isn’t my place to tell you otherwise. Take care and good luck.

November 13, 2006 9:47 pm
November 14, 2006 1:10 pm

And yet,

To those in defense of modern incarnations of Star Trek as being quality television entertainment….

Are we not in the slump and dryspell Trekwise because of those series?

Why the need then to go back to basics instead of revisiting Kirk?

Why was Berman axed?

It is no disrespect to the artists of those series to call a spade a spade. They recieved their paychecks just the same.

If modern incarnations of Trek had resonated, this dialogue would not be occuring.

I am justified in my assertion.

November 16, 2006 10:07 pm
your assertion is still an opinion, Josh… this is my (slightly modified) post from another thread. I think this addresses most of your opinion with one of my own. “…In my opinion and others I have read here and on other threads, this film is almost 100% likely to be a Kirk/Spock TOS story. Not any of the other franchises because since TOS was first and did it well (for the most part, despite giant space amoebas), and it’s the most recognizable to fans and non-fans. Both are needed to make this film a financial success. I disagree with the… Read more »
wpDiscuz is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.