Update On Production, Budget and Casting | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Update On Production, Budget and Casting October 12, 2007

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

Pre-production on the new Star Trek feature film is in full force right now. Most of the Bad Robot team including director J.J. Abrams have moved onto the Paramount lot in the last month and according to sources their little golf carts can be seen speeding all over the place. Most design work is complete and construction has been on going since September on a number of Paramount stages, including 4, 8, 9, 14 and 15…all of which have seen past Trek productions. Stages 8 and 9 have the most Trek history, having been in almost constant use for Trek films and TV from 1978 (Phase II/TMP) through 2005 (ENT). The production is also still expected to use some stages on the Universal lot as well.

A word you hear a lot from those working on this film is ‘epic.’ A source tells TrekMovie.com that this film will have more sets than any other Trek film to date. That being said, the source also said that Abrams wants to do a lot of location work for the film. Apparently Abrams wants the film to "feel as real as possible" and if there is a scene in a building or a cave Abrams wants to use a real building or cave (with appropriate set dressing). The Star Trek shoot starts November 5th and will run to next March making it the longest Trek shoot since Star Trek The Motion Picture. There is still a tentative plan late in the shoot to do two weeks in Iceland (which itself will also be a Trek first). Rehearsals are slated to start next week.

Big budget…but not that big
For a long time the TrekMovie.com Star Trek 2008 Info Page had the budget stated at $100+ Million, and it was later updated to an estimate of $120 Million both of which were based on studio sources. The flux may be attributed to the fact that the film’s budget itself has been in flux (and apparently still is to an extent). Moviehole is now reporting that Paramount and Abrams have settled on a budget around $150-$160 Million. However, a source close to the finances tells TrekMovie.com that the number is "somewhere in between" our earlier $120 estimate and the Moviehole’s $150 Million. Regardless, the new Star Trek film will be the most expensive Trek film to date, coming in at twice as much as the last film Star Trek Nemesis. The most expensive previous film was actually the first (Star Trek: The Motion Picture), which cost around $110 Million in today’s dollars. Even though the new Star Trek is in a whole new ballpark for the franchise, the budget will still be less than J.J. Abrams’ first Paramount film Mission Impossible III. It is also less than this year’s Transformers which was written by Star Trek’s co-writing team of Orci and Kurtzman. But Paramount are clearly expecting Trek to be one of their two mass market tentpoles (along with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull) for 2008. 

Pike and Mr. & Mrs. Kirk…no Garrovick
Last January TrekMovie.com reported that Captain Chris Pike and Kirk’s brother George Samuel Kirk would make an appearance in the new Trek film. In their story about Cho as Sulu, The Hollywood Reporter has now confirmed Pike will be in the film along with both of Kirk’s parents. It isn’t clear if Kirk’s brother is in the current draft and the confusion could be that Kirk’s father may share the same name as his brother (if the writers used the non-canon books reference for Kirk’s father’s name). According to THR Pike and Kirk’s parents have not yet been cast. The January TrekMovie.com article also stated that Capt. Garrovick (Kirk’s commander on the Farragut) would be in the film, but apparently that was from an earlier version of the script and is no longer the case. Check the updated cast page for the list of known characters and actors.


1. Naib - October 12, 2007


2. Xai - October 12, 2007

This is starting to look like a long movie. Lots of backstory? JT Kirk’s parents…. being present at their son’s promotion to captain maybe?

3. Xai - October 12, 2007

Lots of location filming (Iceland) would tend to drive up the budget.

4. JCool - October 12, 2007

Epic! Epic! Epic !

5. Snake - October 12, 2007

OK listen up people…

$150 million is about the same budget as Batman Begins & Casino Royale and around $100 million more than Nemesis! ($60 million)…

plus 2005s Star Wars III was ‘only’ about $110 million and War of the Worlds $130 million

Previous Trek movie Budgets: (obviously a lot more if you convert them to todays money)
1 – 45m
2 – 11m
3 – 16m
4 – 25m
5 – 28m
6 – 30m
7 – 35m
8 – 45m
9 – 58m
10 – 60m

oh and dont forget 1999s GALAXY QUEST which was pretty much a Trek film
Budget – $45m

as for Kirks Parents – that obviously opens the door for His SHATNESS to be in the movie…RIGHT??!!?? After all as we all know Bill Shatner with a moustache played Sam Kirk in “Operation” in season 1 didnt he……now would it be THAT much of a stretch for him to play Pappy Kirk?!~?

6. JCool - October 12, 2007

Good news!

7. Cranston - October 12, 2007

#5, re: Shatner as Kirk’s dad.

I think it would certainly be possible, and may be the most “organic” way of fitting Shatner into the film, but (speaking for myself) I think it would be terribly distracting. I’d much rather see a scene between people that I believed to be James Kirk and his father, not James Kirk and oh-my-god-Captain-Kirk-himself-Shatner “playing” his father as an homage.

If Shatner’s in the film, he should be JT Kirk. If not, then he shouldn’t be in it at all.

8. JBS (hailing frequencies open from Issaquah, Washington) - October 12, 2007

“Apparently Abrams wants the film to “feel as real as possible” and if there is a scene in a building or a cave Abrams wants to use a real building or cave…” YES! I’m loving it!

9. Cranston - October 12, 2007

Oh, and I’d love to know what the (apparently now removed) scene with Garrovick would have been about!

10. Jon - October 12, 2007


11. Thelin - October 12, 2007

I’m thinking why Iceland, which has a fiery and volcanic rock terrain, and keep coming up with the volcanic landscape of Talos IV.

12. JCool - October 12, 2007


I’m so tired of the Made-for-tv TNG Movies!

Im loving the word “Epic”

Exciting news!

13. Chain of Command - October 12, 2007

Yay! FInally, they’re giving Star Trek what it deserves!

14. Dave - October 12, 2007

ok this getting all to exciting. The term “epic” IMO refers to a film in the ranks of say, 2001: A Space Oddyessy or Ben-Hur, that scale of epics.

15. scifib5st - October 12, 2007

“100 day of shooting”, “Epic”, “Location shooting”, humm
Are they going to rebuild the Bridge of the Enterprise or use one used for filming now? Sounds like they ARE planning to make several movies.

Is it too early to start ticket sales???

16. JCool - October 12, 2007


Did you read the

MSN article

‘Star Trek’ Phasers Set on Snooze


17. Ed - October 12, 2007

Thanks for the info Anthony, you guys do a hell of a job here.

18. Dave - October 12, 2007

So when all is said (filmed) and done, what do we call this cast or movie?

1. Star Trek Classic Trek?
2. Star Trek Classic Trek Retro?
3. Star Trek The Next Classic Generation?
4. Old Trek?
5. New Trek?

Remember New Coke and Classic Coke?

19. Dr. Image - October 12, 2007

They should cast ME as Pike.
There. I’ve said it.
(And I look the part… and I can act…yoo-hoo, JJ!)

Yeah…Shat role: daddy! Why not? It’s so over the top, it’s brilliant!

20. Nelson - October 12, 2007

I don’t like the idea of the Shat as dad. Only because Leonard Nimoy is in there as Spock, then The Shat has to be Kirk. If Nimoy wasn’t Spock in the film, then yeah, maybe Shat could be the Dad.

It is too bad he doesn’t have a son who could play a young Shat.

21. Ed - October 12, 2007

Oh, and this MSN article seems to be nothing but crap. I don’t know about the rest of you here but I’m excited so far from what I’ve read. There’s a lot of buzz orbiting this film and this read like an attempted buzz kill.

22. Stanky McFibberich - October 12, 2007

18. Dave – October 12, 2007
“So when all is said (filmed) and done, what do we call this cast or movie?”

‘Fake TreK’ ;)

23. VOODOO - October 12, 2007


Shatner should play an older version of Kirk. Just as Leonard Nimoy is being allowed to play the older version of Spock.

24. Cranston - October 12, 2007

re: #18:

I’m thinking it’ll end up with another 2- or 4-character abbreviation (TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, etc). So far I haven’t seen anything more direct and to the point than Anthony’s “Star Trek (2008)”.

So, “ST08″ it is.

25. Dave - October 12, 2007


Lets just hope this flick will make a profit and more Fake errr.. Movies will be made :-)

26. NCC-73515 - October 12, 2007

i would love to see shatner as a daddy… :D
seriously, having shatner as kirk’s father is a brilliant idea and i hope they’ll do exactly that.
as for the name… i suggest “Star Trek: Back to the Future”.

27. pizza hotdog - October 12, 2007

#16. I read the MSN Hollywood Hitlist article. Here is a Quote from the article: “Give the fans and moviegoers in general something to get hyped up about, Mr. Abrams. Based on this cast, your movie is gonna need it.”

They do not seem all that impressed. The writer must have left the top off his mayo jar. Mr. Ellwood appears to be basing an opinion of the movie based on the lack of hype, and his opinion of the cast. He obviously doesn’t frequent this web site.

Paramount is putting a lot of trust and dollars into JJ’s hands. Being a “True” trek fan for 40 years, all I can say is ‘so far so good.’

440 dtST

28. NCC-73515 - October 12, 2007

oh and #11 (talos iv): suddenly there is a new sense to what will happen on november 13.
the screening of “the menagerie” would prepare the audience for the new film! so you might be right about talos… but that would mean the involvement of pike, wouldn’t it? as far as we know, visiting the planet was forbidden after “the cage” and this rule was only broken once. i see no way of keeping that and still tell a story with kirk’s crew on talos.

29. Daniel Broadway - October 12, 2007

Man, things are speeding up. I need to get my resume and demo reel into ILM in the next couple of months. I want to do some CGI on this movie. :)

30. Robogeek - October 12, 2007

No Gary Mitchell? :-( That’s kind of disappointing. I’m very curious to see how (if?) they’ll address WNMHGB continuity issues. Very thankful we’ll see Pike, though.

And btw, 27 – that “left the top off his mayo jar” line cracked me up.

31. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 12, 2007


We wants em!!!

32. Johnny Ice. - October 12, 2007

I am very exiting and pleased that Paramount is finally going to make Star Trek MOVIE with the TOS cast(at their prime) then those telemovies after TMP. The words,,epic,, and ,,more sets than any other Trek film to date,, are really encouraging indeed. As for Abrams stated that he wants XI to “feel as real as possible” gives me hopes this movie is on track and will be great success.

#3; Lots of location filming (Iceland) would tend to drive up the budget.

Actually the taxing system in Iceland for Hollywood movie producers is quite good in Iceland. Icelandic government will compensate some % of the cost shooting in Iceland back to movie producers. This was main reason why Batman Begins and Flag of our Fathers were shoot in Iceland .Besides Iceland has many exotic location who is popular with movie companies..

33. DavidJ - October 12, 2007

Hopefully they’re serious about the “epic” thing. It seems like EVERY director making a scifi movie nowadays likes to talk about their movie being epic, and they almost never are.

34. Thorny - October 12, 2007

Shatner and Majel Barrett-Roddenberry as Kirks’s parents has my vote.

35. CanuckLou - October 12, 2007

Nay no Kirk’s dad for Shatner. Save him for his cameo at the end of the film when Nimoy’s Spock returns to his time in the ‘restored’ timeline!

36. CmdrR. - October 12, 2007

Kirk’s Daddy not yet cast. Wonder who’s on the short list??
Hell, it would make a great cameo. I know they’ve all said that’s not what Shatner wants… but COME ON!

Anyway, so nice to see Trek getting some studio respect.

37. I AM THX-1138 - October 12, 2007

Johnny, I’m gathering that you are an Icelandic native living in Iceland, no? If so, then it’s up to you, pal, to get us all the py stuff we are jonesing for. Now, go get yourself a job as a driver or craft services guy, bring your spy phone, snap some pics and get ’em to us, pronto.

38. another poster - October 12, 2007

What are the odds that the Guardian of Forever is in the movie… time travel… filming in Iceland… maybe Spock visits to see his old friends displayed by the Guardian…

39. Litenbug - October 12, 2007

Another thread hijacked. Shatner was not the subject.

40. Snake - October 12, 2007


41. spudink - October 12, 2007

NCC-73515 – October 12, 2007

oh and #11 (talos iv): suddenly there is a new sense to what will happen on November 13.
the screening of “the menagerie” would prepare the audience for the new film!

I was saying this last week. :)

but that would mean the involvement of pike, wouldn’t it? as far as we know, visiting the planet was forbidden after “the cage” and this rule was only broken once.

How about what happens to pike and how he got into that chair? :) And how Kirk takes command with his new crew. Old Spock will do a time travel or a flash back memory thing to set the stage. A story in a story.

42. Snake - October 12, 2007

sorry got the wrong link

there I meant this one:..:

flight recorder visual – 28.77


LOOK AT THOSE ARMS!!!..oh boy – I’m not too big am I? I dont want to scare the hell outta everyone!

43. CmdrR. - October 12, 2007


Only one man could play the corpse of his own brother this convincingly.

44. Brent Enloe - October 12, 2007

I have a slight worry about how “epic” this film could be…

Bryan Singer used the term “epic” for Superman Returns, but all he did was rehash a 20 year old movie, and the film underperformed… Yes, I know that’s another genre, but that film was supposed to be “epic”…

I support what Abrams is doing with the franchise, but the term “epic” is used so loosely today that it could be more of a problem than anything else. To be honest, this is the first time that I’ve actually gotten worried about this film… You can’t just say it’s epic and expect people to take your word for it; you need to back it up with something.

45. Snake - October 12, 2007

oh shit i got *40* – WRONG….

It was supposed to be this one..

“She packed my bags….Last night …pre flight…Zero Hour……..9am….and I’m gonna be,…..HIGGGGHHHH……as a Kite by then….

Ohhhhh….i miss the earth so much……I…miss my wife!

It’s LONELY………out in sppace…

on such a…….

46. Kigs - October 12, 2007

So, how do lesser known actors get the chance to audition for Mr. Abrams and Co? Any ideas or know about extras?

47. Jon - October 12, 2007

45 Aha .Now I get it.

48. jonboc - October 12, 2007

Most design work is complete and construction has been on going since September on a number of Paramount stages, including 4, 8, 9, 14 and 15…

That’s what I’m talkin’ about! The sets, they are a buildin’!

49. Dr. Image - October 12, 2007

INFILTRATE! With phone-cam! Anybody! ASAP!

50. Jon - October 12, 2007

Yes.Must infiltrate.

51. Captain Pike - October 12, 2007

No Gary Mitchell? Hmm. Not sure if you can justify that and stay canon. At least I’m in it. Get Ray Liotta on the phone!

52. MiamiTrek - October 12, 2007

That MSN article is full of doo-doo.

I am SUPER excited.

53. Michael - October 12, 2007

#39. Litenbug-

Shatner is ALWAYS the subject!

54. Dennis Bailey - October 12, 2007

TMP (45 million in 1979): 134 million
TWOK (12 million in 1982): 26 million
TSFS (18 million in 1984): 35 million
TVH (24 million in 1986): 43 million
TFF (30 million in 1989): 49 million
TUC (27 million in 1991): 40 million
GEN (38 million in 1994): 51 million
FC (46 million in 1996): 59 million
INS (70 million in 1998): 86 million
NEM (60 million in 2002): 67 million

Parenthetically, at least ten million dollars (thirty million, now) worth of previous development costs – for earlier film development and the aborted revival TV series – were supposedly rolled into the budget figure for TMP.

55. Dennis Bailey - October 12, 2007

The above, if it’s not self-explanatory, is an inflation-adjusted list of the budgets for previous Trek films.

56. TrekNerd - October 12, 2007

#43: “http://images.wikia.com/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/e/e2/GeorgeSamuelKirk.jpg/180px-GeorgeSamuelKirk.jpg

Only one man could play the corpse of his own brother this convincingly.”

And yet another toupee and hairline.

57. DavidJ - October 12, 2007


Interesting that the BEST Trek movie was the one that was cheapest to make.

That tells you that the only thing that really matters is a good story.

58. Cranston - October 12, 2007

Re: Gary Mitchell.

I’m not sure that I would take the reports of “Pike and Kirk’s parents” as a comprehensive character list. Mitchell may still be part of it, but may be a minor part.

Or, if he’s not in it, they could still protect continuity; I’m not sure I’ve seen anything conclusive that indicates that the movie will be literally about Kirk’s first mission on the Enterprise — only how the 7 characters we know well came together to be the group we saw in TOS (which would necessarily happen, at least partly, after Mitchell’s out of the picture). In fact, given the ages of the actors, I think they’re aiming for at least part of the picture to take place well into the TOS timeline, with excursions into other points in time (i.e. Kirk’s Kobayashi Maru experience).

Until we know more about the plot — or, for that matter, see the movie — I’m not going to assume problems.

(But if I had a vote, Mitchell would be in there *somewhere*. He was one of Kirk’s old buddies, after all. Maybe he’s there during the Kobayashi Maru segment?)

59. toddk - October 12, 2007

yes as you may recall a few years back that nemesis was going to have a decent budget and that we were going to see the greatest star trek adventure ever seen. Oh, yes the budgets are big and so are the paychecks. All the people behind the scenes like berman, baird and other bigshots were guarenteed their money before hand.

I also see too many captains fighting it out to see who will save the franchise, I see ego’s flaring behind the scenes and maybe 25 years from now we will read about how the cast of the film were helpless and powerless in the entire production and that their input and ideas would ultimately be ignored.

I hope I’m wrong..I quit smoking a week ago and am still smarting from nemesis:(

60. Litenbug - October 12, 2007

#53 Just one cog in the wheel…

61. Driver - October 12, 2007

Paramount should let information leak about this film as it is made as though it comes from a Denebian Shellmouth.

I should go to an island for a year.

OTOH, patience IS a virtue.

62. Iowagirl - October 12, 2007

Shatner as Kirk’s father is the most idiotic concept I’ver heard of in a long time. Unless you guys actually mean he should appear in a kind of double-cameo playing Kirk alive and well post Generations AND his father with make-up making him look about 100 years old and with a moustache for camouflage reasons…

63. trektacular - October 13, 2007

#57 it also shows that good stories are hard to come by, so lets gets some good window dressing in there just in case!

64. Tj Trek - October 13, 2007

This article got me really, really excited. I mean a true Trek fan has always imagined what could be done with Trek with the right people involved, the right amount of dollers thrown in. I am getting the sense that this film is on that type of scope. and I am very excited. Very, Very, Very……

65. lorenz - October 13, 2007

If it’s expensive paramount can loose a lot of money….

66. Cervantes - October 13, 2007

Well at least Paramount’s new ‘Indy’ Movie, mentioned above, isn’t getting revisualized…thank goodness…and that is going to make a mint…

67. Cervantes - October 13, 2007

#7 Cranston

In this ‘alternate-timeline’ Movie, the gates are open for ANYTHING to happen…and this is a distinct possibility…

One that I too hope doesn’t happen, as that will be one parody too far…

68. raulpetersen - October 13, 2007



this just keeps getting better and better!

69. raulpetersen - October 13, 2007

that duded from the hollywood hitlist wants a freking vulcan death grip and i vote nimoy shold be the one to adinister it!

70. Gary - October 13, 2007

we will call it… “NST” instead of “ST08″ of course

71. Mark Lynch - October 13, 2007

Couldn’t think of anywhere else to place this thought….

I think that Anthony will need a Cray super computer to handle the load when the first image of the Enterprise becomes available here. ;)
What JJ is going to do to the ‘old girl’ is actually making me more nervous than any of the casting announcments and rumours.

I hope that our ship is given the treatment she deserves to look wonderful on the big screen, but not so much changed that we don’t recognise her.

BTW I have always thought that the explanation given for the change of the Enterprise in TMP was excellent and I loved what was done. IMO one of the best models ever made in the history of film.

Please have a real model for the Enterprise, CG enhanced if needed. Otherwise I think a lot of people will not feel she is a real character, and we all know she is…

And please add my vote for the minimal use of CG in this movie. I am not against CG, I just don’t want to see the movie swallowed by it, is all.

Hailing frequencies closed. :)

72. Gary - October 13, 2007

Not for me to tear anyone’s dream or anything, but wasn’t Kirk 13 when he lived(?) on tarsus IV the planet which suffered from Kodos the Executioner?
Doesn’t that leave some kind of mark on you? Didn’t he loose friends then? Did he go to Starfleet after this? hmm….

73. Moonwatcher - October 13, 2007

# 38 ….I agree with you about the possibility of Iceland not being Talos IV, but the backdrop for the Guardian of Forever’s planet? Perhaps the Romulans have overtaken the planet and are messing around with the time line? That is if time travel is indeed an element in the script.

74. StillKirok - October 13, 2007

Shatner as Kirk’s dad is a copout. It also doesn’t work since Nimoy is already there as Spock.

Not to mention, Shatner is too old to be Kirk’s dad. This movie is not epic because it is missing the actor that would make it epic. Shatner is the brass ring.

They are bringing in some cool characters. I don’t know if they realize this, but according to the novels, Kirk’s father was in Starfleet, and served on Enterprise even under Captain April. George Kirk Sr. even disappeared on a mission and was presumed dead.

I realize that this isn’t canon, but it’s a hell of a cool background story.

I also think Gary Mitchell should be in the movie–unless it takes place after Where No Man….

75. Andrew - October 13, 2007

How about a cameo from Scott Bakula ??
That would be a nice touch. Perhaps if Kirk is at starfleet acadamey they could be in class watching that speech that Archer was going to make at the end of “These Are The Voyages” (final episode of Enterprise), which we never got to see because Riker turned the bloody holodeck off !!!

76. Thelin - October 13, 2007

#’s 73, 38, 28, 41

I agree that Iceland could easily be the backdrop for either scenario, Guardian of Forever or Talos IV. Either one would be a very tantalizing story for the new Star Trek movie. I have always wanted TOS to go back to some of the original storylines so abundant from the TV series.

With the Talos IV scenario, the Talosians powers of illusion could pretty much give the writers free reign to write in whatever they want.

With the Guardian of Forever scenario, ditto. The alternate timeline gives them carte blanche.

I am leaning a little bit to the Talos IV scenario right now simply because of the “coincidental” timing of the re-mastered theatre release of The Menagerie. They could’ve chose any re-mastered episode, why Menagerie? Also Pike is confirmed as being part of the cast, BIG hint.

Of course we could all be wrong and ST XI may have neither of these TOS stories in the plot. I guess thats why we all show up in here everyday looking for clues!

77. StillKirok - October 13, 2007

The reason for no cameo for Scott Bakula is because Enterprise was not popular. For the 6 people that might care, there were will be a dozen or so that will roll their eyes. The rest of the audience wouldn’t have watched the show and not get the reference. Enterprise isn’t worthy of being acknowledged.

78. Storma - October 13, 2007

135 million dollar?

This movie will bomb completely… whom exactly do they expect to go to see it?

Half the fanbase won’t go (I am proud to be one of those people) and will boycott anything Abrams touches!

The average audience will go to see POTTER 6 which will open few weeks before TREK XI.

So, only half of the fanbase will have to carry this movie.

It won’t even make 50 % of its budget.

Cannot wait to see it fail completely…

79. 1701 over Gotham City - October 13, 2007


It stands out like a sore thumb. Would you have cast Connery as a villian in Roger Moore’s first Bond pic?

The only situation I could imagine along these lines would be casting Adam West as Bruce Wayne’s father… that I would take. However, if Nimoy is STILL playing Spock, than do not put Shatner in a role that is NOT James Kirk in the exact same film… it doesn’t wash.

Now then… I am disappointed to hear no Garrovick, the idea of it really rang true to canon, but it doesn’t harm it either way.
Just PLEASE do not alter the ship!!! Detail it, make it a huge presence, but don’t change it! That means the bridge too!

Wow… a budget!! Now can they make it sing? Wrath of Khan had no budget, and it’s still held as the Trek of all Trek. So money isn’t everything… it’s what can be done with it!!

80. Dennis Bailey - October 13, 2007

“Enterprise” was actually better than a lot of modern Trek and about half of TOS.

#70:we will call it… “NST” instead of “ST08″ of course”

Nah. nuTrek. :lol:

81. scott - October 13, 2007

Love those inflated Hollywood prices. They tripple bill themselves for lighting & other services through third party companies that they secretly own. George Lucas said that most movies someday should only cost a million.

82. Greg2600 - October 13, 2007

Well, I’ve been asking for something epic in this movie, so that seems to be J.J.’s aim, which is good. I also don’t think having Shatner as Kirk’s father for a 5 minute scene is worth his or the filmmakers’ efforts. Although it would be funny if Kirk’s mother was Majel Barrett.

83. Jon - October 13, 2007

#80 It’ll make it back in merchandising.180 mil is more than enough to mack a movie.They just like to spred it around a little out there.

84. Jon - October 13, 2007

Ah, “Spread”.

85. Robert Bernardo - October 13, 2007

Dennis Bailey wrote:

> “Enterprise” was actually better than a lot of modern Trek and about
> half of TOS.

Enterprise = dull.

86. StillKirok - October 13, 2007

Enterprise stunk on ice. It was the worst show by far, and there’s a reason no one watched it. Maybe a few people liked it, but the three of them will have to cope.

#84–I think you’re insulting shows that were dull by comparing Enterprise to them. Dull was at least a level up for that show.

87. George Armstrong Custer - October 13, 2007

The Movie is about Captain Pike using the Talosians to contact the Romulans (since the Federation is off limits to Talos IV) to get them to use the Romulan temporal transporter seen in Enterprise ( future Guy) to go back in time and prevent Kirk from taking command of the Enterprise. Pike wants his life back and regrets leaving the big chair for a cadet vessel. Spock learns of this in the TNG timeline during reunification at the first of the movie. This explains Nimoys role.In the finale torwards the end, the Old Enterprise with Pike realizing his mistake battles Nero at Archer IV with young Kirk on the Farragut. Kirk saves the Enterprise from being destroyed by Praetor Nero. At the end of the movie we see the timeline corrected and Pike hand the Enterprise over to Kirk.

88. Plum - October 13, 2007

LOL!, good one George. :D

89. ObiWanCon - October 13, 2007


90. Psychic_Snake - October 13, 2007

I hope that ST11 will do for the Star Trek franchise what Casino Royale did for Bond. Personally, I want hard, gritty Trek. We all know that the best ST stories were the raw ones (e.g BoBW, Chain of Command, ST2:WoK). Involving Gary Mitchell in the film would really help to show how much it actually hurt Kirk to kill him. The Romulans are the best enemies to help this along. The Klingons are too cliched in a movie-goers eyes. The Romulans add that sense of subterfuge and secrecy.
However, in spite of this I don’t want it too much about Kirk and the much despised “Starfleet Academy” idea. I couldn’t care how Kirk and Co met; I just want a Trek story. In my opinion, TNG was the pinnicle of ST; Picard was always the better captain. A TNG-type story featuring the TOS crew would be the best mix.

BTW- Praetor Nero? I think that the writers should stop borrowing from the Romans. Wait a tick! ROMans…ROMulans? >gasp!

91. Rhett Coates - October 13, 2007

#87: I thought of that scenario, too—since Pike is reported to be in this storyline. But, I’m not Roberto, so I have no real clue. (I’d still like to see Guinan fit in somehow, but that’s just a wish list on my part!)

Here are MY two votes (LINKS BELOW) on actresses to audition for portraying Mrs. [“Winona”] Kirk’s mother, as shown in at least one of the Star Trek novels (and we already know that the film’s writers have stated they might consider some of the material from the novels as potential canon). In the novel I’m thinking of (and I’m sorry that I can’t remember the title at the moment), Winona Kirk is descended of Sioux Indians of that region [Iowa and thereabouts] of North America.

Winona Kirk — portrayed by YVONNE RUSSO …..?
—also see:

(Yvonne Russo is an actual native American actress originally from South Dakota, and her casting in that role might serve to honor Gene Roddenberry’s respect for native Americans, as he did with one particular NCC-1701-refitted crewman seen in the rec-room scene in the first movie—with the entire crew of the Enterprise assembled just before the V’Ger mission launched from Earth orbit.)


Winona Kirk — portrayed by SABRINA SCHARF, who appeared on Star Trek: The Original Series, playing Miramanee in the third season episode “The Paradise Syndrome.” I believe she has retired from acting, however with a film of this magnitude, perhaps she might consider coming out of retirement for such a poinient role.

Roberto: I realize you’re not the casting director, but what is your comment on such possibilities? (Or are you allowed to comment to us or to J.J. about those suggestions?)

92. Rhett Coates - October 13, 2007

#91: OH, BROTHER! I took the time to edit what I typed in the response post above, but one GLARING error remained nonetheless. The first line in the second paragraph SHOULD have read (MINUS the word “mother”):

“Here are MY two votes (LINKS BELOW) on actresses to audition for portraying Mrs. [”Winona”] Kirk.”

Sorry about that, friends! (Nobody’s always perfect…..)

93. James - October 13, 2007

Just show me some set photos to ease my mind that the ship won’t be too excessively different. Just make those overhead monitors actually display USABLE INFO…not just rear projections! And maybe put some more buttons on the helm/nav console, or at the very least, spend a small bit of screentime on how the systems are quite advanced and have macro programming functionality.

But glad to hear it’s moving forward.

94. Iowagirl - October 13, 2007


– We all know that the best ST stories were the raw ones..-

Not ALL of us know that. I’m sure there are still many of us who are in favour of some sense of wonder, sparkling surprises and – dare I say it – decent emotions.

BTW, if you want raw material you shouldn’t plead for a mix…

95. Caspar - October 13, 2007

I like the idea of the big budget. With J.J.’s TV project “Lost”, one of the big reasons for that massive budget is the sheer size of the cast. This is promising.

I know ST:XI is about the original series’ crew, but I so desperately want TNG to get a proper send-off. I am waiting for the day when XI’s cast is complete and I can find all the characters from TNG in it. Picard and Spock have a very strong bond, they are alive in the same time and both Sarek and Spock have shared a meld with Picard.

I just hope Orci and Kurtzman are able to do something fitting here, in what may be our last opportunity to see the crew of Enterprise-D. The movie doesn’t need to be about them, but it can redeem them.

96. Etha Williams - October 13, 2007

Re: Gary Mitchell — I’m split on this one. On the one hand, I think he should definitely be in the film based on his relationship with kirk in WNMHGB, but on the other hand, I would hate to see this movie get side tract and spend an hour trying to explain WNMHGB and lose site of the main plot in doing so.

Re: The Menagerie — I wouldn’t get to suspicious that Talos IV is going to be in the movie just because this is the episode they chose to show — it was an obvious logical choice because of its length. I am hoping for some kind of a preview for STXI (ST08? NST?) before the showing, though. BTW, does anyone know if they’re showing it uncut or if they’re cutting it to modern TV time like they have with all the other episodes?

#34 — Not sure how I feel about Shatner as Kirk’s dad, but I love the idea of Majel as Kirk’s mother. Speaking of Majel, I’m really hoping to see Number 1 (from Pike’s command, not Picard’s) in this movie…I loved that character, for the brief 45 minutes she existed.

#94 — I don’t see why you seem to think that “raw” trek and trek with “a sense of wonder, sparkling surprises and – dare I say it – decent emotions” are mutually exclusive (unless I’m understanding you incorrectly, which is very possible). IMHO, the episodes with both of those qualities were the best of Trek…

#95 — Interesting that you bring up Picard and Spock’s bond. If older Spock’s time travel is Federation-sanctioned, it might be neat to see Picard sending him off to the past. I’m not usually a fan of cameos, but I feel like this would fit nicely & organically and would maybe even serve to enhance the characterizations. I don’t know about the rest of the Ent-D crew, though — while I would love to see them given the send-off they deserve, I don’t think this movie is the place.

97. Iowagirl - October 13, 2007


Yeah, that’s what I meant: Abrams & Co. should consider both of those qualities. In post 90 the words raw, hard, and gritty were a bit too much for me and gave a kind of loapsided impression of good ST being just that, having just that side, disregarding the other side (emotions etc.) which IMO has always been equally, if not more important. This holds true particularly for TOS.

– I am waiting for the day when XI’s cast is complete and I can find all the characters from TNG in it. Picard and Spock have a very strong bond, they are alive in the same time and both Sarek and Spock have shared a meld with Picard. –

This is a TOS movie. So far, all the main TOS characters have been confirmed. The screen will be quite overcrowded with all the TNG actors joining. Apart from that, it doesn’t make any sense. Maybe, Abrams & Co. will make a TNG movie with a recasted crew someday in the future, but THIS is a TOS film. And sorry, but I couldn’t care less about mindmelds between Spock and Picard. If we’re talking about TOS, and we are definitely talking about TOS, our topic is mindmelding between Spock and Kirk. They were the first to do it and they’ll be the last to do it. Let’s come full circle, at last!

98. Gary Lee - October 13, 2007

How about Spock (Nimoy) is dying he is mindmelding and we see his past before he dies in flashbacks. At the end we see dead Kirk (Shatner) and Spock together.

99. Mattiac - October 13, 2007

How about a movie starring Q??

100. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 13, 2007

#98 – No way! I don’t want Kirk & Spock reunited in death! Morbid. How about this: Spock succeeds in saving the timeline, though it is not without alterations. He returns to his proper time at the end of the movie and is greeted by a living, breathing, smiling William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk. The film could have no better ending than that!

101. Mattiac - October 13, 2007

@Gary Lee: I don’t think that sounds exciting because we know it’s flashbacks in advance and that it will end with Spock dying.

102. Daskill - October 13, 2007

On an unrelated note, I hope they continue to use the original motion picture/next generation theme music for this movie, or at least over the end credits, because, besides being totally awesome, let’s face it, it’s the theme music to Star Trek! It wouldn’t be Trek without that!

103. Mattiac - October 13, 2007

@Shatner_Fan_2000: What do you think of my idea where Q is in the movie? I’m not sure what he’s gonna do though. Not yet anyway.

104. Daskill - October 13, 2007

Oh, and they should so use Archer’s theme too. I reckon it’d be cool if they worked it in as the Federation Anthem. That’d be so cool!

105. Litenbug - October 13, 2007

We are back to working titles.

Star Trek: The Resurection of Shatner’s Checking Account.

Yeah, let’s find a way to bring the guy back..ONE.. MORE.. TIME… and please announce it soon, the BBS campaign on the threads was old months ago.

106. jeff - October 13, 2007

I wonder if we’ll see Kirk’s buddy…..Finnegan? [TOS Episode- “Shore Leave”]

107. Dennis Bailey - October 13, 2007

#85:”Dennis Bailey wrote:

> “Enterprise” was actually better than a lot of modern Trek and about
> half of TOS.

Enterprise = dull.”

There’s no contradiction at all between those two statements.

Granted, we’re about as likely to see Archer in Trek again as we are to see Shatner – which is to say “not very,” and the movie won’t suffer in either case. :)

108. Diacanu - October 13, 2007

Yeah, put me in the Shatner should be Daddy-Kirk camp.

“Distracting”, and “inorganic”, my eye.

I seem to recall hearing similar logic in the commentary for Generations.
They COULD have given us the uber crossover with both Enterprises teamed up and/or fighting each other, but “that seemed too obvious”, so they did the opposite of all the fan cream-dreams, and look at what we got instead.

Kirk falling off a cliff, and Data crying over his cat.

Just do it.
Just have him be Daddy-Kirk.

“Eww, it’ll take me out of it”.
Oh, and all the other implausible crap never did?
It’s Star Trek, get over it, and have some fun, people.

109. max flash - October 13, 2007

Yes, of course . . . Majel NEEDS to make a cameo; after all, she did care for The Great Bird of the Galaxy to the very end!

110. Diacanu - October 13, 2007

And yes, Majel should be Mommy-Kirk.

Technically, she IS mommy Kirk.

111. toddk - October 13, 2007

regarding finnigan, I would love that “aye jimmy boy!!!”

112. Iowagirl - October 13, 2007


The morbidity lovers have been trying to take over for quite a long time, buddy. I’d say, they better save some energy to get over their disappointment on 12/25/08.

113. Gary Lee - October 14, 2007

100# I agree with you about the time travel and getting Kirk back at the end. People are saying no more time travel Star Trek movies, but time travel is a big part of Star Trek. That’s why I thought about mindmelts, your right you would have to find out at the end it was a mindmelt like it was just a dream.

114. richard - October 14, 2007

did you folks ever think it could be Kirk and Spock having dinner and just remembering when it all began…………………and our story begins……..

115. Iowagirl - October 15, 2007


We are talking about casting – Shatner is a constitutional part of that subject.

116. Iowagirl - October 15, 2007

# 114

Dinner’s always fine with me, but the timing of this particular dinner is essential. It must take place POST Generations, because that is what “our” story is supposed to begin (or to end) with. After that, I am ready for a freshly served five-course lunch…

117. Iowagirl - October 15, 2007

The inflationary use of sets and a looooong shot won’t make a film “epic”…

118. AJ - October 15, 2007


119. jkerouac59 - October 15, 2007

You know, I could care less about the size of the budgets or how much the new cast looks like the old cast (although that IS a plus).

What will really turn me off is if the animating spirit that was present in the TOS is not in this “re-boot”. Further, the “look and feel” of the “reboot” needs to at least echo TOS if not replicate and improve on it. The whole reason “Enterprise” never worked for me is because TNG character sensibilities and physical design were applied to an era in which they did not exist.

Please JJ & Co., do NOT “Phantom Menace” TOS.

120. Patrick Waters - October 15, 2007

No. Ray Liotta for Pike. Get someone who actually resembles one of the “TOS” characters.

The more I hear and read about the upcoming “Star Trek 11″, the more I come to believe that the Nov. 13, 2007 theatrical showing of “The Menagerie” is money better spent.

121. Gary Lee - October 15, 2007

#120 Do you think Kurt Russell as Pike would work? The only thing would he draw attention away from who ever plays Kirk if Pike was in the movie for along period of time? Or just get an unknown that looks like Pike?

122. Gary Lee - October 15, 2007

I think the Enterprise should have a small upgrade on the outside, a big upgrade in the inside. The inside is too 60’s look, tv.

123. snake - October 16, 2007

Snakes Guesses as Pike (although if the Bana and Pegg casting is anthing to go by whoever is cast will not have been mentioned before… in that case i’m throwing in some names that havent ever been considered b4 on the off chance it might be them..)

Tom Cruise (most likely due to the MI 3/Abrams/Pegg connection?)

Russel Crowe (maybe he wanted to be Pike instead of the villian? maybe he hasnt got the time for a big role amoungst all the Ridley Scott films and just wants an extended cameo like Pike might be)

Ray Liotta (does look like Hunter alittle)

Jim Caveizal (another Jesus – abit too young though)

Val Kilmer (sure why not – another Top Gunner )

Tom Hanks (mega Trek fan – apparently was nearly Cochrene in FC)

Arnold S (isnt he a big trekkie too? fans would die in horror though..)

Mark Walberg (Planet of The Apes Marky Mark… – too young though right?)

Liam Neeson (Quin Gonn as Pike?)

Ewan McGregor (nah too young)

Bruce Willis (…be a bit weird….have to wear a piece too – like he should have done for Die Hard 4!!)

Michael Biehn (Michael ‘Terminator/Aliens/Abyss/The Rock’ Biehn….not big enough a name though is he really)

Matthew Fox (Mr ‘Lost’…..could it be him due to the JJ thing? – but again not really a big enough name)

Kiefer Sutherland (but hes ‘banged up’ making 24 too much right?)

Peter Weller (Robocop? big genre name but not an A lister like they say they want – plus was in Enterprise – the ep that shouild have been the final one wasnt it?)

Kurt Russell (yeah I d like to see that – Snake Plissken as Pike…)

Kevin Bacon (he must have some Trek connection somewhere)

Daniel Craig (“the names Pike…Chris Pine…I mean Pike”…..wernt there a few rumours about him wanting in this film a short while ago? cue all the ‘Bond as Kirk’ rumours..I know hes just about to start filming Bond 22 but maybe Pike only requires a day or so shooting…)

ok thats enough – my brain is fried

124. snake - October 16, 2007

oh and as for Kirks Mom – cast some HOT TOS co star like Andrea from What ARe Little Girls Made Of? (bet shes still way hot now lol)

125. Psychic_Snake - October 16, 2007

I’m just hoping that Picard gets to punch Kirk in his ugly, ugly face.

“Ow…(pause)…you…appear to be…(pause)….punching me…repeatedly…”

Sorry ;-)

126. Robofuzz - October 16, 2007

Kirk risked everything and threw away his career (or so he thought) to save Spock in ST III. I would like to see Spock repay that sacrifice, ending with Kirk not having died in Generations.

127. M-5 - October 16, 2007

Any information on what the uniforms will look like? Will it be a variation of what they wore in the original series?

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.