Star Trek XI Update

For Star Trek XI news, 2006 was both exciting and frustrating. In April and May we first learned about the project and got some public statements from producer JJ Abrams and his cohorts, then the cone of silence descended and it became almost impossible to learn anything about the film. This is actually quite normal for a film this far out. Paramount know that Trek is an important franchise and that there is really no upside to talking a lot about a film at this very early stage. For 2007, some of that will change…and it promises to be a big year for Trek XI. This article is to summarize where we are now (Much of the following has been reported before, but some is new)

First things first: Star Trek XI is set in the pre-TOS era and will feature Kirk and Spock
Although this does not seem like ‘news’, TrekMovie.com will no longer consider this to be ‘rumor’ or say this is ‘probably’ true. Although the studio has yet to say this officially, TrekMovie.com have spoken to enough sources to say that either everyone is being lied to…or we are going to see Kirk and Spock back in action in 2008.

Film Status…moving forward towards Winter 2008 (sorry not Summer anymore)
Star Trek XI continues to move forward and Paramount still continue to assume it will be in their 2008 lineup. However it appears that Abrams has got his way and the film will most likely end up closer to the end of the year, giving the team more time. Here is we have learned from our sources:

  • First draft of script complete (weeks ago)
  • Second draft in progress
  • Development of budget to commence in January
  • Film should receive greenlight (if script and budget are approved) by Feb (at which point pre-production begins)
  • Shooting (production) scheduled to start in late Spring to run through the fall
  • Post production should last around 1 year
  • Release most likely in Fall/Winter 2008

Crew & Creative…little bit of ‘insider’ hiring, more soon
Due to the film still being in development, no real hiring has happened (except for Abrams and the writers who are part of the ‘development’ deal). However, some people are being ‘tapped’ to be part of the film (told to clear schedules, etc). This includes Abrams inner circle people (like Michael Giacchino as composer and Scott Chambliss as Production Designer) as well as others he worked with on M:I:III. It is worth noting that none of those being tapped are  technically hired, because there is still no budget. The studio has brought in Stratton Leopold, a Paramount veteran who worked with Abrams on M:I:III. Leopold is an Exec. Producer and Unit Production Manager who will be handling the budget as well as much of the hiring of behind the scenes types. Once the film gets an approved budget and opens a production office, expect more announcements and leaks in February and March. It is possible at this time Abrams may start reaching out beyond ‘the circle of trust’. As for if Abrams will direct, this still will probably not be known until after the script and budget are approved.

Casting…we got nothing!
Last we heard Abrams has done some auditions already, but have heard nothing new since. Things are tight as a drum around this. On Shatner and Nimoy, all we know is that they have some kind of contract with Paramount for Trek XI related to promotion and/or consulting. We know that Shatner wants in and Nimoy is open to it. We know that various actors are interested (like Quinto, Grunberg, Weisman and others). And all that is known about Matt Damon as Kirk is that Abrams expressed interest once and that Damon is open to it if the script is good, but no contact has been made. Like with the crew, most real casting cannot truly start until there is a final script and budget (although the leads could be an exception to this). The announcement of the new Kirk and Spock will be a big event and Paramount want to be sure they control that. Due to concerns over leaks they will likely announce as soon as a decision is made.

coneofsilence1.jpg
Typical meeting on Star Trek at Paramount

Plot & Setting & Characters…is this movie ‘Kirk Begins’?
Like with casting, the story is something that is a very closely guarded secret. One could almost describe the level of secrecy at Paramount paranoid. The writers (Orci & Kurtzman) have been rather chatty on Transformers, but did get burned with an early script draft being leaked. A source at Paramount tells us not to expect the same level of openness on Star Trek XI (which is typical for how Paramount deal with Trek films). All that being said, TrekMovie has picked up pieces here and there, some of which are possibly conflicting. This may be due to bad information and/or out of date information due to changes between the story treatment and script drafts. Here is what we think we know. (unlike the pre-TOS setting and the inclusion of Kirk and Spock, everything that follows is considered rumor by TrekMovie.com…grains of salt please)

  • Origin story focusing on Kirk (and his relationship with Spock)
  • Story jumps around in time (perhaps a bit like Batman Begins)
  • There will be scenes from various times and locations in Kirk’s life, possibly including
    • Iowa
    • Starfleet Academy
    • USS Farragut (ship Kirk served on as Lieutenant)
    • USS Enterprise
  • There will be a number of familiar characters (beyond Kirk and Spock), possibly including:
    • Captain Pike
    • George Kirk (Kirk’s brother)
    • Captain Garrovick (of USS Farragut)
    • Dr Leonard McCoy
    • Montgomery Scott

NOTE: the above lists of locations and characters is by no means complete and by no means concrete…there are sure to be tons more. Also some of these locations and characters may just appear briefly. 

Things to look forward to in 2007
2007 is shaping up to be a huge year for Trek. Almost all the hiring will be done. The film will move from development, to pre-production, through the entire fim shoot, and begin pre-production. Also on the promotional side Paramount will probably start to do a few things

  • Casting announcements (probably early 2007…this will probably be the first offiicial confirmation of the Kirk/Spock storyline)
  • Film gets name
  • Poster
  • Teaser Trailer

Thoughts: Cadet? Captain? Lieutenant?
Since the first leak in Variety one of the biggest questions around Trek XI is…where in Kirk’s life is it set. There is a lot of time before the Original Series caught up to him during his 5 year mission as Captain of the Enterprise. Much of the early speculation (sparked by Variety) was that the film would focus on Kirk’s Academy years. This site reported that the film would cover the other end of the spectrum…Kirk’s first mission as Captain of the Enteprise. Now we are hearing there are scenes at other times in his life, most interestingly as a Lieutenant on the USS Farragut. As we know the writers for Trek XI are steeped in Trek lore, and Trek history states that 7 years before Kirk was on the Enterprise he was a young officer on the USS Farragut. It was on this ship that Kirk met with a crisis and lost his captain and half his crew, and he also blamed himself for hesitating to fire phasers on a ‘vampire cloud creature’ that was attacking the ship. This was all covered in the episode ‘Obsession’, when Kirk as Captain of the Enterprise re-confronts the creature and goes a little nuts…or gets ‘obsessive’. This, probably more than the fabled ‘Kobyashi Maru Starfleet Academy scenario discussed in Star Trek II’, is a key moment in Kirk’s life. The big unknown is how much of the film covers these early times in Kirk’s life. It may be that it quickly goes over them and gets us to the Enterprise, or perhaps we can see Kirk’s journey. This is speculation now, but it would be interesting to see how James T. Kirk went from a young officer who lost his crew and blamed himself, to being the youngest captain in Starfleet…in 7 years. How did he pull that off? That sounds like an interesting movie.

So does the film get to the Enterprise early on…or does it show the journey to it (in the same way that Star Wars: Episode III showed how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader). Only time will tell, but rest assured TrekMovie.com will be looking out.

 

 

TrekMovie.com Info Section

Remember that TrekMovie.com has a complete Star Trek XI Info Section

you can always find updated info on the status, cast, crew, etc. This section will be regularly updated and expanded as the film progresses. This section also includes detailed FAQs, which are also updated. 

Remember…things change

As stated in our last Trek XI update…things change. This is a summary of what we think we know now. Nothing is really written in stone. Trek XI may never get a greenlight, or may never get made. Films further along that Trek XI (remember ‘Watchmen’) have run aground. And we fully admit we can be misinformed on some of the above details, it isn’t like Paramount are handing out press releases on Trek XI. Right now it seems like it is easier to get nuclear secrets thand get people to talk about Star Trek XI. Paramount would probably prefer everyone to just sit tight until the first teaser is released…but we just can’t do that. So we will remain vigilant, and remind you to be open minded.

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest
January 3, 2007 5:57 am

Gary Mitchell … interested to see if someone so close to Kirk will be in the story. He saved Kirk’s life (poison dart) after all.

January 3, 2007 5:59 am

Ooops! Thanks much Anthony for the very much detailed Editorial “Reset” — well done.

January 3, 2007 6:14 am

it will be interesting to see how they solve the design issue in 2007. do they stick with the vacuum tubes and 1960s colors, or does this movie look more like ENT? remember that the enterprise is supposed to look futuristic and the old constitution did look futuristic … 40 years ago.

i like the “plenty of letters” version of the constitution by Gabrial Koerner, that would be a nice design for the new film, IMO.

Dom
January 3, 2007 6:20 am

Brilliant Anthony!

The debates have been getting a bit ‘snipe-y’ on the forums of late as a mix of paranoia and expectation have merged confirmation with supposition.

I hope we get to a point now where people accept that this is the film we’re going to get and move on, rather than discussing whether this film ***should*** be made in preference to any other incarnation!

Between this film, and ST: Remastered, I’m a happy Trekker! :)

Dustin
January 3, 2007 6:38 am

Interesting to have all this information from 2006 in one place now, and makes for some interesting reading.

Thanks for all the scoop over 2006.

Adam Cohen
January 3, 2007 8:18 am

Fantastic reporting, Anthony. Thank you for your hard work.

I’m very very interested in this “Kirk Begins” framework for the movie. It’s got a ton of potential and is infinitely more interesting than a story limited to “Starfleet Academy.”

January 3, 2007 8:34 am

Movie gets a name? How about “STAR TREK”. That’s it.

Jason L
January 3, 2007 8:39 am

MUAHAHAHAHAHA!!! So far this is sounding pretty much exactly like what I was hoping for. I wanted to see a character-oriented film focused on Kirk and his journey from starry-eyed cadet to seasoned captain, not a buddy movie about Kirk and Spock galivanting around the galaxy. Not that I have anything against Spock or any of the other supporting characters, but Trek has done the ensemble thing and focusing on a single character is one more way to add some freshness and originality, and I also tend to think it would be more popular with today’s general audiences.

Stanky McFibberich
January 3, 2007 8:41 am

When they don’t stick to the original design concepts for the TV series I will not be interested in seeing it. This includes using the original theme and background music. I will also not be interested in seeing different people playing Kirk and Spock or anyone else, even if they are in the movie as older versions of themselves. I just think it is a bad idea all around. Of course, I realize that they will do it anyway, so thankfully I can watch the series any time I want and I have no need for new adventures.

Dom
January 3, 2007 8:41 am

I like it!

Some one should have used it before! ;)

I agree that the best thing would be for a Star Trek film to use just the title and not ‘Star Trek: the something something.’

Fantastic way to relaunch the series!

All fans should bow down to you Ralph!

It’s one of those bleeding obvious things that everyone else will wish they’d thought of before!!

T Negative
January 3, 2007 9:14 am

Excellent report!!

Very exciting. There is a HUGE gap in Star Trek where we don’t know how Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise. This is a story that needs to be told!! I hope this is the type of story we get to see.

dalek
January 3, 2007 9:30 am

Hmmmm…

This article includes info not mentioned in previous articles nice work if true.

It doesnt include reports from Shatner and Nimoy that JJ wants the older characters involved too.

KDoug
January 3, 2007 9:41 am

Sci-Fi Bri, what’s this “plenty of letters” version of the Constitution class that you mention?

Captain Pike
January 3, 2007 9:51 am

As Greg said: Gary Mitchell. We know from WNMHGB that Mitchell and Kirk were best friends and had been so since the academy. Any story set pre-TOS has got to include Gary Mitchell. If it does not, I’d see it as a serious flaw.

Jim J
January 3, 2007 9:55 am

Potential, I say…potential!!!

Dom
January 3, 2007 10:13 am

When you think how much detail was put into the backgrounds of of TNG-era Trek characters, it’s shocking when you realise how little we actually, ‘canonically-speaking’, know about the TOS characters.

We know where Chris Pike was born, but we don’t know where Jim Kirk was, for example. Uhura has at least three possible first names. Sulu finally got a first name in STVI.

It says a lot about the writing and acting down the years that no one really worried about it much!

More than any of the generations, TOS’s background has been built up by often-contradictory, non-canon books and comics. The story of Kirk and Spock first meeting works very nicely either way for Paramount. If the film succeeds, the series has been successfully rebuilt from the foundations upwards. If it fails, a line has neatly been drawn under the franchise, bringing it full circle!

As for the design work, I’ve speculated that we’ll see the familiar interior and exterior ship designs enhanced for 21st century 2.35:1 cinema screens rather than reworked from the ground up. Lighting, colour and textures maybe be less theatrical and more naturalistic, although, given the possibilities of the film being set in different periods, I suspect useage of different colours schemes and uniform styles will never be more essential!

Sam Belil
January 3, 2007 11:10 am

Like I have been saying all along Gary Mitchell HAS TO BE in the film. In that one episode only “Where No Man Has Gone Before”, we see just how close bond is with him and Kirk. You want to leave out Pike — FINE, You want to leave out Carol Marcus — FINE, You want to leave out Garrovick — FINE. Just DO NOT leave out Gary Mitchell!!!!

Orbitalic
January 3, 2007 11:27 am

#16 Dom,
Kirk has origins… “I’m from Iowa. I only work in outer space.” – Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.
Riverside, Iowa has “claimed the fame” to his future birthplace, although it’s not canon. It was mentioned in a ST novel as Riverside. But should JJ want a nice, real Iowa locale, I have a few places in mind and for a small fee or a line in the movie (How much IS a SAG card?) I’ll be happy to guide the production. I am sure I can get time off.
JimJ, y’all come up… what size uniform you need?

#9 Stanky,
Shatner can’t play the part anymore if this takes place outside a retirement home. Youth will be served at least through part of the flick. I guess you’ll miss the movie. We’ll let you know what happened. Maybe.

Anthony… thanks for the recap.

O

SithMenace
January 3, 2007 11:45 am
I’m so thankful they’re going back to the TOS era with this film, and with a great director/writer/producer leading the way. I saw Generations in the theater and was so disappointed that it became the last one for me. It took several people telling me how great FC was for me to rent it, and it was definitely an improvement over Generations, but then with the last two I didn’t even bother. I tried to hang on but I just couldn’t take anymore TNG, so Trek has been dead to me for years. When I heard the news about Abrams going back to the TOS era, I got excited about Trek for the first time in over a decade. The more I hear about this movie, the more excited I get. I can’t help but think this one is going to be the best post TWOK movie, and possibly the best one yet. There is so much untapped potential for everything in TOS Star Trek, from character development to visual effects to truly exciting and epic space exploration, the possibilities for this movie are endless. After the creative slump the films have been in, this series needs someone like Abrams to come in and do the things that few people have been able to imagine, to boldly take the series where no one has gone before. To me, the news of Abrams doing this movie is up there with the “what could have been” of Spielberg directing Return of the… Read more »
mikeg
January 3, 2007 11:52 am
No matter what gets posted, or said, or rumored, or whatever, I am simply going to wait patiently to see what the “new blood” comes up with. Sure, I have all sorts of ideas of what the film could be, or might be, but none of that amounts to anything more than self-indulgent speculation. Let’s give Abrams & Co. a chance to show us what they think Star Trek is. Let’s give the new cast (whoever they turn out to be) a chance to show what they can do with the characters. Of course, it is going to be near impossible to separate Shatner from Kirk, or Nimoy from Spock, but these actors have already let go… perhaps the fans should, as well — at least enough to allow the new movie to stand on its own. Everything in our whole damned lives informs us that CHANGE is the only constant in the universe (someone else said that too, eh?) Let the changes happen… they are inevitable anyway. A little aside: I remember hearing that Michael Keaton was cast as Batman when that film series began. My immediate reaction was “MICHAEL KEATON?????” In the end, I think he was the best Bruce/Batman of that entire series. Just goes to show that sometimes you can think something is gonna stink to high heaven, but then it turns out to be something worthwhile. I think Abrams made a good decision in bringing Shatner and Nimoy on board (to whatever degree they are… Read more »
SithMenace
January 3, 2007 12:38 pm

I think based on what was done with MI:3 we have a pretty good idea of what the look and feel of this film is going to be. Sure, it could be completely different in tone and style, but so far there’s no reason to think it will be.

scott
January 3, 2007 12:41 pm

Thank you for the Cone of Silence.

January 3, 2007 12:45 pm

13. KDoug :

the only web based image i can find is on amazon.com. check the back of the calender on the lower left, theres a greyish enterprise that sorty looks like kirk’s enterprise.

http://www.amazon.ca/Star-Trek-Ships-Line-Calendar/dp/0740758799/sr=11-1/qid=1167852995/ref=sr_11_1/702-1718026-7568063

and here’s a page more about the image including a like to the image.

http://trekweb.com/stbbs/showThread.php?bid=FldwoPP0qETo2&tid=4532d7a0a921f&cid=4532d7a0ae044&viewby=&sort=&order=

to be honest, i’ve just found these images now, i like what i see. imo it’d be an exciting change.

Picardsucks
January 3, 2007 1:13 pm

JJ knows his shat!!!! This will be a great year for us Trek fans indeed. Doomsday machine and Ultimate Computer are coming, Our new Kirk and Spock are coming and hopefully Gary Sinise as Dr. McCoy, There are new Babylon 5 movies coming, More Shatner being Shatner, More Nimoy chasing after nude models with his camera, Starship Exter Act III and beyond??, More George Takei on Howard Stern and now apparently on Heroes, Of Gods and Men, more bitching and sniping from the Next Gen crew of the USS SourGrapes, more Lost episodes from JJ, no more Rick Berman!!! very exciting times indeed

Stanky McFibberich
January 3, 2007 1:21 pm

re: 18. Orbitalic – January 3, 2007
I’m not asking for Shatner to play the part of the young Kirk. I am just stating that no one else should play the part of Kirk even if they allow Shatner to play an older version. I realize that would scrap this movie concept, but that’s A.O.K. since I know my opinion means very little to the producers or anyone else for that matter. It’s all about M O N E Y.

New Horizon
January 3, 2007 1:53 pm

-9. Stanky McFibberich-

Pfff, and you call yourself a Trek Fan. Come on off it, give it a chance to succeed at least. The original series was more than just the actors, it was an idea almost fully realized. So long as the new production crew stay true to the spirt of Gene’s vision, it WILL be the characters we love on the screen. Sure, they may look and sound a bit different, but IF they are true to Star Trek…why would we not want to see it thrive? I don’t want to see new actors give a bad Kirk/ Spock performance, anymore than I want to see Shatner and Nimoy hand in another hammy, half baked caricature piece like the original series movies decayed into. Sure, they were the same actors…but the writing wasn’t completely true to Trek or their characters. When I was younger, I could never fully put my finger on what bothered me about every Trek after The Search For Spock. Yes, I know the Voyage Home is a beloved film…heck, even I love it, but it was Ham….and the beginning of the end really.

Lets give this new team a chance. I doubtful it can get worse than Nemesis.

Stanky McFibberHitch1969
January 3, 2007 3:39 pm

re: 26. New Horizon – January 3, 2007
Just to clarify, actually, I call myself a fan of the 1960s Star Trek TV Series. To me, Shatner/Kirk and Nimoy/Spock can’t be separated. I’m sure there are plenty of others that feel this way. But, I will just shut up and let the “true” Star Trek fans rule the roost. Now there’s a saying you don’t hear that much any more.

Koowl Roowl Droowl and all very much ants in the McPants.

Best!?!

=S=

January 3, 2007 3:42 pm

@#26
I love the classic movies because they really contain a development of the characters that fits to the aging crew of the ship. The TNG movies did not have that, so they have been a disappointment related to the absolutely character based TNG series itself. In addition TNG either was a too intellectual concept for the common audience.

VOODOO
January 3, 2007 3:50 pm

The author of the above article left out the biggest piece of news in regards to Star Trek XI.

He failed to mention that Shatner + Nimoy have been asked to be in the film.

JGG1701
January 3, 2007 4:14 pm

What about Finnegan??? ;-)

John N
January 3, 2007 4:18 pm
Why is it that enough Bond fans can get past an “ugly, blonde” actor replacing the previously beloved Pierce Brosnan to become the highest grossing Bond film ever (and currently the 47th biggest international gross of all time according to IMDB), but there are STILL a very vocal group of closed-minded Trek fans that ‘cling for dear life’ to Shatner and Nimoy playing Kirk and Spock? A while back, a regular poster to this site went on record and stated that he wouldn’t waste his hard-earned $10 on what he felt was a terrible casting choice. That’s his choice, and he’s more than entitled to make it. He is obviously a very passionate Bond fan, with a certain type of Bond that he can tolerate, and another kind (I believe he mentioned Bourne Identity as a comparison) that he cannot. I think that the recasting of Bond is a fair comparison to the recasting of Kirk. If the makers of the new Trek are paying attention to the casting courage of the new Bond, and feel that they can appeal to a larger audience at the risk of losing some of their hardcore fan base, I seriously doubt that they’ll hesitate for a moment to do so. After all, the ticket sales of the many, outweigh the ticket sales of the few… or the one… ;) For those who have seen it, the general consensus is that Casino Royale was exciting, fresh, and dynamic… and obviously enough other people did… Read more »
January 3, 2007 4:54 pm

@John N
Shatner and Nimoy played their roles for decades and not just for a few years in a fistful of films.

JON
January 3, 2007 4:55 pm

I’m with you #31.Star Trek needs exciting,fresh and dynamic.All the the Shatner/Nimoy features were about the characters either coming out of retirement or coming back from the dead

January 3, 2007 4:56 pm

As always, an exhaustive and informative article, Anthony. My compliments to the chef. :) It’s interesting that they’re now saying fall/winter 2008… that’s pretty much what I had assumed all along–in fact, the Star Trek XI countdown clock on my website has been assuming a premiere date of Friday, December 5, 2008 ever since the movie was announced last April! It will be interesting to see if my prediction turns out to be correct. :)

January 3, 2007 4:57 pm

so my post being #1 got deleted. Thats nice

JON
January 3, 2007 4:59 pm

Additionally.I feel alot of Trek fans are resisting the reboot and holding on to “canon” because it makes THEM feel old and obsolete.

Sam Belil
January 3, 2007 5:00 pm

John N — I could not agree with you more regarding Casino Royale. In addition to being a MAJOR Star Trek fan since it first came out 40 years ago — I’m also a big Bond fan, and for me Casino Royale was the best Bond movie since From Russia With Love and Goldfinger. Daniel Craig was nothing less than superb (really playing Ian Fleming’s character according to his original novels).

Still Kirok
January 3, 2007 5:51 pm

As important as the origins is to make sure the crowd has something to look forward to–hence including Shatner and Nimoy as a POST-Generations Kirk and Spock.

jonboc
January 3, 2007 6:50 pm
#31-since you asked… Mind you, I am very excited to see a new Star Trek movie, but I have to admit the idea of recasting these two icons is somewhat bothersome. Why? Because Bond was based on fiction while Kirk and Spock were based on Shatner and Nimoy. For over 40 years we have seen Shatner and ONLY Shatner as Kirk. In the 60’s we saw a young energetic 30-something Shatner as Kirk. Then the 70’s gave us an animated series and movie with Shatner as an older Kirk. Then the 80’s gave us a middle aged Kirk, portrayed my Shatner. Then the 90’s gave us Kirk’s retirement and swan song..again played by Shatner. Every incarnation of Kirk from books to comics to parodies has been solely based on the voice given to Kirk by Shatner. The same applies to Nimoy’s Spock. Almost 100 hours hours of TV, almost 20 hours of movies, countless audio books and video games…all these things create a very solid image of who Kirk and Spock are. It’s not just that Kirk loves his ship….its the mannerisms Shatner breathed into Kirk that makes Kirk who he is. It’s the wry smile and the boyish charm and the strong commanding presence that Shatner brough to Kirk that influences writers that are trying to find a “voice” for Kirk…not the fact that that, according to the writer’s bible, Kirk has a brother named Sam. The overused comparrison to Bond and Batman are so out of place it… Read more »
John N
January 3, 2007 6:55 pm

#32 – trekmaster

While that is a point to consider, it by no means invalidates my point. To each successive generation that grew up with them, Connery/Moore/Brosnan WAS Bond.

Even to those who accepted mulitple actors, only a charming, martini drinking, ultra-cool, uber-suave Bond WAS Bond.

Only an audience with an open mind as to how the character can be portrayed was willing to embrace this new Bond.

Star Trek fans should pay attention.

John N
January 3, 2007 6:59 pm

#40 – jonboc

Agreed… it is unrealistic to think that it would be a cake-walk for the new actors. Fortunately, I never suggested that it would be… ;)

Like you, I’m cautiously optimistic. But Cautiously optimistic is a far cry better than close-minded premature rejection.

jonboc
January 3, 2007 7:19 pm

#42 Thinking it over, I think one thing that is in the new actor’s favor is the fact that the youngest of the movie going audience will not be that well versed in TOS, aside from a few pop culture references. And if Berman’s 24th century hasn’t soured them (assuming they have even watched it) and if JJ can make it “cool” and as aceptable as LOST, Trek might lose the stigma attached, find a new audience and succeed.
If the comparrisons are left to film critics and old school Trek fans then maybe, just maybe, that new, mainstream, fan base that Paramount wants to attract will come into the fold with no pre-conceived notions and make the movie a success. That is the studio’s objective, after all. In the end, I might not like it, but if it brings a new crop of fans into the TOS universe I can’t complain too much!

VOODOO
January 3, 2007 8:18 pm

All the TOS fans who left the series after Kirk’s death. Need to see him alive post nexus in order to get back on the Star Trek bandwagon.

JON
January 3, 2007 8:20 pm

The movie going audience for a Trek reboot will be a young crowd.Probably not tht different in age from Transformers appeal (my guess,8 years to 18yrs).The new Trek will be made for them.They don’t care about canon and they re not loyal to Shatner’s interpretation of Kirk.

KDoug
January 3, 2007 8:38 pm

Thanks for the links, Sci-Fi Bri! I agree that Gabriel’s re-imagining would be an interesting choice for a Star Trek movie, but I don’t think they should do it unless it’s going to be a reboot or if it’s supposed to represent a previously unseen class. If they’re going to show us the original Enterprise in the established continuity, it should remain true to the original design.

Agent69
January 3, 2007 8:41 pm

With every new info I get more and more excited about STXI. The only thing I’m worried about is release date.
As #34 I think Dec.5 is most likely.

January 3, 2007 9:53 pm

Thanks for the excellent recap, Anthony. It definitely helped clear some things up. It also helped me in completing the overhaul of the STXI article at Memory Alpha to include all available information. Proper credit is given in the sources, of course. ;)

I think this movie has great potential. I know many fans will have trouble accepting different actors in the iconic roles of Kirk and Spock, but as long as the RIGHT people are cast in the roles, I don’t see a problem with it. Besides, as someone else stated above, Shatner and Nimoy have let go and have given their consent to have their character recast (so long as they have a voice in who plays them), so we should also let go and accept it. Let’s give Abrams and his team a chance.

#24: Can we also look forward to no further bitching and sniping from Picardsucks, or would that be asking too much. :)

Buckaroohawk
January 4, 2007 1:08 am
I love the idea that the film simply be titled “Star Trek.” That is so freakin’ fabulous! Not “Star Trek: Blah Blah Blah.” No bloody A, B, C, or D. And it’s a fantastic promotional idea, too. “You want ‘Star Trek,’ well, here it is!” I really hope they have the courage to do this. It would be so damn cool. Re: Gabriel Koerner’s Enterprise. I’ve seen this design before. The hi-res photos from the third link are excellent. As a CGI artist myself, I love the design. Mr. Koerner did a great job of retaining the ship’s wonderful design elements while upgrading the overall look. However, I don’t want to see any of the Constitution class ship that may appear in Trek XI look like that. It’s too close to the new Battlestar Galactica (which Koerner has also worked on) and too far from Trek. The ships in Star Trek have a clean, graceful, modular design that sets them apart from anything else in science fiction. I think that aesthetic should be maintained. Koerner’s design is artistically wonderful, but a little too busy for Star Trek. Anyway, I doubt that CBS Paramount would go through all the trouble of doing TOS Remastered if they were just going to create entiely new designs for the ships in Trek XI. That would be begging Trek fans to go on a rampage. Finally, a word on recasting Kirk, Spock, et al. Yes, it may be difficult to imagine other actors playing these… Read more »
January 4, 2007 2:54 am

#49

I, too, think just naming the film “Star Trek” would be a great idea. In fact, the day the teaser poster was released, I figured that would become the title. Based on what Abrams and his crew intend on doing with this film, I don’t think a sub-title will be necessary.

That said, however, if they DO choose a sub-title… I hope it’s not something simple like “Star Trek: Origins,” “Star Trek: Beginnings,” or “Star Trek: The Beginning” (which was the tentative title for the abandoned Rick Berman / Erik Jendressen “Trek” project). Also, I hope it’s not something cheesy like “Star Trek: Warp One,” “Star Trek: To Boldly Go…,” or “Star Trek: First Voyage.” Based on the rumored story, it might be something like “Star Trek: Republic,” which I could live with, but I’d much prefer just plain “Star Trek.”

Actually, now that I think about it, I could probably live with “Star Trek: Origins”… but, yeah, whatever.

Also, I agree with your conclusions regarding recasting. However, a counter-argument might be that the characters don’t need to be recast in order to survive over the next few generations and that their iconic status will endure throughout. I agree with that, too, but recasting the roles (with the RIGHT actors) for new adventures certainly couldn’t hurt.

wpDiscuz