On Monday we ran a story from iF Magazine seemingly quoting Trek XI producer Damon Lindelof revealing an ‘official’ release date of July 2, 2008 for Star Trek XI. This was surprising as our Paramount sources have been telling us (off the record) that the date had moved from the summer to a winter release. We have reconfirmed that it still appears to be winter, but that officially Paramount are still not being more specific than ‘2008’. We contacted iF Magazine and apparently the release date in their article was not actually from Lindelof; they have now removed the date. So it was a false alarm, not the first related to Trek XI (remember the Tom Cruise thing) and we do not expect it to be the last.
It was nice to have a date to work towards… ah weel, we will wait adn see now!
If Paramount is releasing Indiana Jones 4 in summer 2008, I’m sure they’ll delay Star Trek XI until Christmas. BTW, heard the rumored title for the film will simply be Star Trek. That’s perfect and just what I thought it should be based on the teaser poster. Back to the basics.
Would have liked the summer release date to be correct but what the heck, We’ll just have to wait a little longer.
LLAP
#2 Jimtibkirk
Calling it simply “Star Trek” is perfect! Where did you hear this rumor?
^^^ I agree.
BTW Adam, I just want to repeat what I posted yesterday in a thread from December 2nd–I was NOT the author of several asinine remarks posted under my name last month–**especially** the insulting remarks aimed towards you. I don’t even *know* you, but I just wanted you to know that I was not the one who wrote those messages.
Thanks Scott,
I appreciate your saying so. I took it in stride, I don’t take internet insults personally, but I thank you for clearing up the air- that’s a stand-up thing to do. See, I like you already.
Someone suggested just calling it Star Trek on another thread on this site a while back. It’s a very good idea, but I think the rumour’s generated by this site’s threads!
i believe I have stated that I think calling the film just ‘star trek’ would be a good move. However that is purely opinion and not based on anything I have heard. I havent heard anything about a name
Rejected titles for Star Trek XI:
Star Trek: Kirk Begins
Star Trek: Kirk Rising (too provocative)
Star Trek- Episode I: The Phantom Vulcan
Star Trek Returns
Star Trek: Rick Berman Is Not Involved In This Picture (my personal fave!)
Depending on the plot, how about:
If Sulu is outed:
Star Trek – Turnabout Sulu
If Kirk is still dead:
Star Trek – You’re Dead, Jim
If Brent Spiner helps write the script:
Star Trek – For My Head is Hollow and I have Lost My Mind
If Oprah guests stars:
Star Trek -The Squire of Pathos
If Tom Cruise guest stars:
Star Trek -May as well Bring Back Berman
If Eddie Murphy guest stars:
Star Trek – Now also known as Lost in Space
If Rosie OI’Donnell guest stars:
Star Trek – Where No Man Has Gone Before
If the ex-female lead of Third Rock guest stars during THAT time of the month::
Star Trek – The Savage Curtain
If there are Klingons:
Star Trek – Trouble With Uranus (Sorry–old joke)
If Shatner appears without CGI:
Star Trek – Requiem For Methuselah
Who’s next?
Or,
Sulu’s academy days………….
Star Trek: Enterguys.
(Don’t ask, don’t tell.)
#9 dig those, i agree whole heartedly with your personal fav. anyone open to burning Berman in effigy on the day XI opens?
Star Trek XI: Legends Never Die: (The Return of James T. Kirk)
13 – I hope that’s not another reference to wanting to start the movie with a long-winded, convoluted explanation of how Kirk appeared to die in his era but really was transported via the Nexus to Picard’s era, and also appeared to die in that era, but in reality that was just the echo and he is actually still alive in the Nexus and now Spock has to go save him–all before we start the real movie. Terrible.
Depending on the content of the movie…
The simple title “Star Trek” is a double edged sword. When a music artist releases an album under just their name (with no other title), it is almost always (1) their first major-published album or (2) an album released once they’ve already become highly successful and are looking to get back to basics.
# 2 might be the case here. But having said that, the film better be good – in the opinion of people that actually see the movie – if you are going to affix “Star Trek” singularly to the label. What do you name the next film if it flops? “Star Trek: Do Over”?
Otherwise, here are some labels for the films I fear many people want XI to be:
“Star Trek: Berman Sucks”
“Battlestar Enterprise”
“Star Trek: First Blood”
“Star Trek: The Search for Dollars”
“Star Trek Troopers”
The Treks a bunch of people seem to want:
Star Trek: Canonballs! Tagline: ‘It’s a blast!’ Reality: it’s a damp squid!
A controversial, but effective movie title: Star Trek: Where No Man Has Gone Before would be catchy (if a bit ‘Sulu!’ ;))
The ‘Kirk Rising’ title could lead to an amusing trilogy of films:
Kirk Rising
Kirk Conquers
Kirk Comes
followed by:
Son of Kirk
And, to be blunt, anyone who thinks this film is going to be:
“Battlestar Enterprise”
“Star Trek: First Blood” or
“Star Trek Troopers”
should, respectfully, pull their heads out of their big, fat buttocks, grow up and get a life! These constant remarks based on ZERO evidence are getting very wearing.
Most of us don’t give a flying fart if something in this film contradicts a remark made by a Ferengi in a ST: Voyager episode or something equally trivial!!
The fundamentalists’ precious canon is gonna be handy reference material and will be sampled as far as it is useful to a good film and, rather than being overtly contradicted, will be otherwise shoved into the background, to make sure that Damon Lindelof’s grandmother and the majority of the human race will see a good movie! This is a Star Trek movie, people, not a movie about Star Trek!!
Dom you say the same thing every post too. ;)
The difference is, I don’t personally insult you. I just state my opinion…oh, and I do so less often than you do too.
BTW…I didn’t say that was the “OFFICIAL” path for the next movie.
Please re-read…”I fear many people want XI to be” rather than “JJ Abrams wants it to be.”
Canonista, I didn’t personally insult you. I thought I was agreeing with you, by saying that ‘people with that view blah blah!’
You use the word ‘canon’ in your chosen identity – I really am called Dom – which means every time the word ‘canon’ is used it could potentially be addressed directly at you, even when it isn’t. A rather unpleasant way of trapping a lot of us, no?
I said “fundamentalists'” plural, the apostrophe being ***after*** the “s” making it a generalisation. If you choose to take offence, that’s your problem, but if it was aimed directly at you, surely I’d have picked all the titles you listed and addressed you at the start of the post, as you’ll notice is my style?!!
And I wasn’t aware that there was a quota on posting here. I type fast (have to for a living!) and have the sort of job that gives me sporadic breaks where I have access to the web. I’ve been posting on this site for a substantial portion of its life and you seem pretty new, unless you use other identities. I’m excited about this film whether it’s Rambo Trek, Trek Hard, Lost Trek or Alias Trek and like to talk about it with other people!
If you think that us regular posters should be limited on what we say, talk to Anthony, who prides himself on the openness of this site, and try to get me banned!
First Dom…let’s say “truce”, okay (not meant sarcastically)…I’d expect I’m far closer to “being banned” than you are…and I probably wouldn’t request that anyone get banned.
People of your viewpoint are in abundance on this site. I chose Canonista as a name because commenters are taking some extreme viewpoints on either side of the debate. I’d say that your opinion is a ‘majority’ viewpoint around here. So be it.
We disagree on what we’d like to see in the next Trek. Fine. What I ask of you is what I ask of all posters that disagree with my viewpoint (or any minority viewpoint in any conversation)…don’t target people…
Whether you mentioned my name or not isn’t relevant. I believe there’s a chance (hopefully not, but…) the next film could very well fit one of those titles. So your post does apply to me..and you used my quote in the process…
Anyway, we disagree. Let’s call truce, okay? I enjoy TOS as well. I just have more expectations from Trek XI than you do. Besides, this site gives me something to do while I’m at work besides track my investments!!
hmmm… these make little sence but here goes….
Star Trek: Shats on a Plane (sponsored by Priceline)
Star Trek: The Moving Picture Show Talkie in Technicolor
Star Trek: The Wrath of the Tribbles
Star Trek: The Search for Shatner’s Hairpiece
As long as it’s NOT …
Star Trek: The Final Film.
Let me modify the subject so we don’t draw blood.
IMO… I’d like to see a three movie project…. arc the stories and contractually tie the actors to the flicks for the duration. Film concurrently over a year or so and release the films all one year apart. It would speed the process, reduce the aging and wear on the cast and crew. It also saves money on the technical side. Pirates of the Carribean is doing this with great success.
Yes, but I believe they only shot the last 2 movies together, not the first one. I don’t think anyone’s gonna spend the money to make 3 movies at once until they know how well the first one does.
Hi Canonista.
I have massive expectations of this new film. Thing is, I’m not bringing a fixed list of requirements to this film.
I’ve said before that this film has to be the ‘The Cage’ or the ‘Where No Man . . .’ of this day and age. This film has to lay the groundwork for Trek’s future and can’t include non-stop references to five TV shows, ten films and a cartoon series.
The film is being made by a respected team with some solid work behind them and massive enthusiasm for Star Trek itself. They’ve never shown any intention of doing anything to Trek beyond stripping it down to what made people like it in the first place.
Quite where all these stories about ‘Rambo Trek’ are coming from, I don’t know, but there are a lot of ill assumptions being made, given almost nothing has been announced about the film!
It’s sad and silly, given the omens for the film are so promising!
24. Kevin, Peter Jackson and New Line did, but it was a huge risk that luckily paid off. Not many studios are willing to do that.
I would think Thanksgiving weekend would be a better time for this. Four day weekends are usually a good time for premiers. I can’t think of any in earlier fall which is too bad b/c warmer weather actually gets people out of thier houses.
I have to say I will be very disappointed if there is no McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu… I mean I dislike how Star Trek (books etc..) seem to ignore the secondary characters. I love the Three Amigos just as much as anyone, but I really would like to see Uhura take a larger role in this movie.
I’m already dubious about this whole ‘get back to basics’ thing (the basics are all in their 70s), don’t leave out characters cause its easier to write.
Just my two cents (also…I like the idea of ‘STAR TREK’)
Scotty’s in this film, apparently. If McCoy doesn’t appear as an Enterprise crew member, it’s not to say he won’t be in it at all. Vulcan’s Glory, for example, had Scotty as a youngster on the Enterprise, even though it isn’t canon!
I suspect the majority of the secondary characters will be intended to emerge in a sequel.