Visit The Official Star Trek Shop Now!

Paramount Updates Star Trek Credits & Official Synopsis + Adds Production Partner

Today Paramount issued their 2008 preview to the press and it includes a very brief entry for Star Trek. Unfortunately the only artwork included was the same poster released at Comic-Con. The biggest news is in relation to some new producer names and a new production partner. Plus there is an official (yet very generic) synopsis as well.

The official synopsis for Star Trek:

From director J.J. Abrams (“Mission: Impossible III,” “Lost” and “Alias”) and screenwriters Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci (“TRANSFORMERS,” “MI: III”) comes a new vision of the greatest space adventure of all time, “Star Trek,” featuring a young, new crew venturing boldly where no man has gone before.

New Producers and Production Partner
Based on the latest update, Star Trek has four new new executive producers: Jeffrey Chernov, Bill Todman, Jr. Edward Milstein, and Paul Schwake. TrekMovie.com has been told that Chernov has replaced Stratton Leopold on the project and he is handling the nuts and bolds of the production. Chernov has film credits going back to 1976 and was a production executive on the recent The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy film.

Milstein, Schwake and Todman are all executives with Level 1 Entertainment which is now a production partner on the project (possibly they are providing additional financing). Todman is CEO of Level 1 and has many production credits to his name including this year’s Rendition as well as the first X-Men movie. He is also the son of famed game show producer Bill Todman. The new Star Trek will be the first film in the franchise that has a production partner. In fact Star Trek will have two partners, since it also has a ‘produced by’ credit for Bad Robot, which is J.J. Abrams production company.

Full text of the official Paramount Star Trek press preview

STAR TREK

Paramount Pictures and Level 1 Entertainment Present
A Bad Robot Production
A J.J. Abrams Film
“Star Trek”
Executive Producers Bryan Burk, Jeffrey Chernov, Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, Bill Todman, Jr., Edward Milstein, Paul Schwake
Produced by J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof
Based upon “Star Trek” Created by Gene Roddenberry
Written by Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci
Directed by J.J. Abrams

Cast: John Cho, Ben Cross, Bruce Greenwood, Simon Pegg, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Winona Ryder, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Anton Yelchin, with Eric Bana and Leonard Nimoy

Synopsis: From director J.J. Abrams (“Mission: Impossible III,” “Lost” and “Alias”) and screenwriters Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci (“TRANSFORMERS,” “MI: III”) comes a new vision of the greatest space adventure of all time, “Star Trek,” featuring a young, new crew venturing boldly where no man has gone before.

Release: December 25, 2008

This film has not yet been rated.

CREDITS NOT FINAL AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE

“Star Trek” is a Paramount Pictures Release

Who gets top billing?
One of the big questions about Star Trek is related to which actors get top billing. So far they are listing most of the credits in alphabetical order, but Eric Bana and Leonard Nimoy were separated and got the ‘with’ credit. It isn’t known why they have not listed Chris Hemsworth (George Kirk), Clifton Collins, Jr. (General Ayel), Rachel Nichols (unknown), and Jennifer Morrison (unknown) in the cast, but that does not mean they are not in the film. It could be that details on their deals are still being worked out or they just didn’t make the cut for the release.

Sort by:   newest | oldest
bubba
December 5, 2007 1:28 pm

first….

Sean4000
December 5, 2007 1:28 pm

Here we go

Mike
December 5, 2007 1:30 pm

“General” Ayel? O_o

Tony
December 5, 2007 1:34 pm

Ensign Lefler’s Rules

Rule #147

Anyone who posts “first” just to post “first” is actually saying “I am a frack-tard”

Cranston
December 5, 2007 1:36 pm

That’s a lot of executive producers!

One thing that I like about the cast list — is Leonard Nimoy’s name at the very end. It’ll be loads of fun watching the opening credits and seeing the cast list end with:

and Leonard Nimoy

Fun for all.

Ed
December 5, 2007 1:36 pm

Now we wait for the trailer…

David (Enterprise should have wings AND flames on the hull)
December 5, 2007 1:43 pm

Seventh!

Exec Producer credits are given out like candy. In most cases, it’s a meaningless title.

Michael Foote
December 5, 2007 1:44 pm

54 weeks 6 days

Bart
December 5, 2007 1:46 pm

Were no MAN has gone before?? I thought we had passed the macho, human centric from the sixties! Hasn’t Star Trek evolved into Were No ONE had gone before?

And don’t give me the “but it was like that in the Original series so it has to remain like that” crap.

Mike
December 5, 2007 1:52 pm

Cool, I’m looking forward to this.

Bart, human centric? We’re humans, what do you expect? Are we supposed to elevate fictional species to our level? I mean seriously?

Clinton
December 5, 2007 1:54 pm

#9

Please calm down. It’s just a show. You should really just relax.

VanEdge
December 5, 2007 1:56 pm

why does anyone give a fart about being “first?”
instead, just type “i have nothing to do so I’m on this site all day looking for recognition”

anyway…. great to see more tidbits flowing in here and there. really looking forward to the movie… i just hope the story is compelling and the characters are true to canon.

Pat
December 5, 2007 2:00 pm

Okay, seriously, they don’t “announce” every person that gets cast in the film when they announce the production. Plus, I don’t think Paramount has officially copped to Morrison being in the film yet.

BrandonR
December 5, 2007 2:04 pm

#9 I’m actually glad they referred to it as “where no man has gone before”, and I hope they keep it that way for the film. Although their intentions were correct, I never liked how they changed it to “where no one has gone before”. The original saying was something that I always thought shouldn’t have been tampered why. Why? I honestly have no idea.

“One of the big questions about Star Trek is related to which actors get top billing.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if it ended up going in this order for the main parts (this assumes that Pike has a major part):

Bruce Greenwood
Zachary Quinto
Chris Pine
Karl Urban
Simon Pegg
John Cho
Zoe Saldana
Anton Yelchin

with
Eric Bana

and
Leonard Nimoy as
SPOCK

Also Starring:
And then here it would continue on with parts like Kirk Sr., Winona, Sarek, Amanda, etc.

That’s just my assumption based on the way that this story is beginning to turn out.

Dr. Image
December 5, 2007 2:07 pm

Special Guest Star: Jonathan Harris.
Oh, the pain…
Thirteenth (warrior.)

Tim Handrahan
December 5, 2007 2:12 pm

How about the credits at the end of the film…

AND AS KIRK
Willaim Shatner

It happened it Star Trek III

New Horizon
December 5, 2007 2:13 pm

9. Bart –

Man is Mankind, it’s all interpretation. I don’t think we need to go pussy footing around things like this in literature. It’s annoying. Political Correctness is far too anal. Lighten up.

Jay (The Real Jim Kirk)
December 5, 2007 2:22 pm

hmmm dunno what to make of this new news….

why has Stratton Leopold been replaced???

remember he was the guy involved earlier in trying to get Shatner on trek XI… hmmm

NCC-73515
December 5, 2007 2:28 pm

re 9, bart:
actually the new line “where no ONE has gone…” is stupid.
wherever the men (humans) of starfleet go, someone has already been there (borg, vulcans, klingons, romulans, dominion, etc.).
if they went to places where no one has gone before, they would not find any life there, would they?

angry but i'll get over it
December 5, 2007 2:48 pm

Where No Man Has Gone Before…works just fine…obviously does mean mankind….humanity…..as the Enterprise 1701 has plenty of men and women aboard, and for Star Trek XI, Uhura is included on venture where no man has gone before

December 5, 2007 2:55 pm

and Leonard Nimoy as wrinkly old Spock

OneBuckFilms
December 5, 2007 3:00 pm

9 – “but it was like that in the Original series so it has to remain like that”

No crap though. Sorry ;-)

Jay (The Real Jim Kirk)
December 5, 2007 3:00 pm

Anthony… why has Stratton Leopold been chucked off the crew?

OneBuckFilms
December 5, 2007 3:01 pm

Other credits:

Music by Michael Giacchino

Theme from “Star Trek” by Alexander Courage

last o' the timelords
December 5, 2007 3:10 pm

So….so….difficult to not just jump into the ol’ Tardis and pop in in on Xmas next year. But where would the suspense be in that?

Hmmmm, on the other pseudopod, maybe I’ll go a bit further and nick the DVD.

Alex
December 5, 2007 3:28 pm

Many execs is usually a good sign ’cause it equals more money for the production. Independents usually have a shitload of executive producers and the first 5 minutes usually consist of all the logos of the different companies funding the movie.
Strange however that they picked this one. They haven’t done much at all and seem to be a fairly new company. http://www.imdb.com/company/co0148097/ I wonder what’s the reason for Paramount getting them into the boat…

Woulfe
December 5, 2007 3:47 pm

VFX by ILM

Someone forgot to put in good ol’ ILM’s credit among all the credits.

Lotsa exec producers, like LOST, LOST has a ton of exec producers on it.

Tiberius Mudd
December 5, 2007 3:49 pm

Back in a previous job, I “encountered” Level 1 during a script deal. They were looking for material to produce because they had, in the words of one of their junior exec/development people “a shitload of money.” But they got into a situation where they would buy scripts and not do anything with them. They may not have the wherewithal to mount a production, but they certainly have the money. That’s probably the key thing in this whole deal. Paramount and Bad Robot can do the physical production, but they can get a percentage stake in a potentially lucrative film property for the first time.

Izbot
December 5, 2007 4:03 pm

Don’t know why everyone’s getting upset of this “where no man…” jazz. Its just some cutesy b.s. a Paramount press release writer typed up.

And yes, the “first” thing has *got* to end…

Craig
December 5, 2007 4:13 pm

Anthony will you get a set tour once they are finished? Or will St.com be the only place for set and production tours?

December 5, 2007 4:20 pm

About the “No Man…” business.

First (sorry), Izbot is right that marketing copy is a silly thing to fret over. Before the studio is finished hyping this thing, someone’s likely to do the thing where they confuse solar systems, stars and galaxies. If people take that as reflective of the actual film, someone will have a coronary.

Secondly (and not entirely seriously), the paraphrase shows a little respect for canon – it’s established within the Trek universe that Zefram Cochrane coined the phrase and used the word “man.” We never heard it altered to “one” until the end of Star Trek 6. So of course at the point in the 23rd century that this movie mainly takes place, they’d quote it as “man.” :lol:

Bald is Beautiful - Picard for President!
December 5, 2007 4:28 pm

^9 Bart

The 1970s/1980s are gone along with gender neurtal language. It always did sound awkward and contrived.

Have you read the Psalms in the Episcopal prayerbook? “Blessed is the man” becomes “Happy are they”. Just silly!

This movie is retro so it fits to use the old standard English. It’s what I learned and it sounds a lot better to correctly conjugate verbs, nouns and adjectives!

Kirk, James T.
December 5, 2007 4:38 pm

Sounds cool!

Im just waiting for Shatner to be at the end of this film doing the famed Captains monolog;

Space the final frontier, these are the voyages of the starship enterprise, her… mission to seak out new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no MAN has been before – and anyone who says that MAN isn’t the correct term to use nowerdays should be ashamed, Political Correctness gone mad!!

Craig
December 5, 2007 4:52 pm

#34 I think if they did that wouldn’t it be said by Chris Pine?

Spock's Brain
December 5, 2007 5:03 pm

#14 (BradonR) I think he’s got it! Except I would put Winona with Bana.

Lord Garth Formerly of Izar
December 5, 2007 5:50 pm

Love The NO MAN !!!!!! Enough with the PC , man refers to mankind.

Jupiter1701
December 5, 2007 5:53 pm

Regarding “No Man” vs. “No One”:

Word is they changed it back to “No Man” in order to be politically correct.

Yes, yes, you heard that right.

Because when you specifically glorify those people who are called “One” it upsets all the people who aren’t Number One. It makes them feel smaller, or incomplete in some way. Left out, to be precise.

I mean it’s bad enough to be Number Two, but to insinuate that only those people who are called One can explore space is just very politically incorrect! It offends a lot of second place finishers.

In fact, there have been a lot of people out there demonstrating, holding up signs and chanting:

“We’re Number Two . . . WE WANT TO GO TO SPACE TOO!”

There’s a lot more people who aren’t number one, versus people who aren’t a part of mankind. It’s a numbers thing. Also, saying, “Where no member of mankind has gone before” is a tongue-twister, so it got shortened to Man. So it was the lesser of two evils.

;-)

(The answers are so simple, when you stop to think about it)

December 5, 2007 6:09 pm

Yeah get over it #34, Chris Pines the new Captain Kirk!!!!
^

Oregon Trek Geek
December 5, 2007 6:11 pm

I believe “man” is a shortened version of “human.” When the term “man” came into use, females were referred to as “womb man.” That was then shortened and combined into “woman.”

AJ
December 5, 2007 6:16 pm

I think “No One” was so 1986.

And Dennis, the phrase was coined on TNG before ST VI came out in 1991.

December 5, 2007 6:38 pm

41 posts, and most of them about the whole “…where no man has gone before.” bit. The whole thing is just some stupid little thing written by some underpaid monkey, in a small dimly lit room, and is not actually represenitive of the movie itself. To be fair to Paramount, at least they’re giving the movie some respect, a big budget, and quite a lot of talent. Before we all have a coronary, let’s just take a deep breath, and wait for the damned movie to come out. One last thing: at least we’ve got a NEW Star Trek to watch. Some new adventure that we haven’t seen before. Something we can’t quote line for line in our parent’s basements. Chill, and enjoy it for what it is, not what you -think- it should be.
-The Doc

December 5, 2007 7:02 pm

#41: “And Dennis, the phrase was coined on TNG before ST VI came out in 1991.”

You miss the point of the whole “canonicity/continuity” thing. The phrase was first used in TNG, but the first person we hear *within* “Star Trek” use the updated phrase is Kirk in his log entry at the end of “The Undiscovered Country.” That’s during the 23rd century; Picard’s recitation is in the 24th.

BTW, “Humanity” is a more accurate and intelligent way to refer to all human beings and it’s just as traditional as “mankind.” You know, American society is just not going to go back to the way it was prior to the social movements of the 1960s and 1970s, nor do most people want it to. So, there you are. :)

December 5, 2007 7:07 pm

About the “Where No Man…” controversy:

I’m actually more upset about the split infinitive. “To Boldly Go” should be “To go boldly”! ;)

Penitent Pete
December 5, 2007 7:26 pm

Just PLEASE put the women in miniskirts. In the end, that’s all I really care about.

Xai
December 5, 2007 7:48 pm

This MAN…this ONE MAN..

…is tired of something not worth debating…move ON, man!

CmdrR
December 5, 2007 7:57 pm

Amen, Pete. Thank goodness somebody’s got his priorities straight. If there are no mini-skirt and go-go boots, this MAN will boldly go to the MEN’s room halfway thru this flick.

BrandonR
December 5, 2007 8:30 pm

36. I would have put her in my assumption for the credits, but I did that assuming that Amanda would have a smaller part and would look awkward with Bana under “With”.

44. Cochrane actually said “to go boldy” in ENT: Broken Bow, so they have used both in canon.

Gene L. Coon (was the Better Gene because he) was a U. S. Marine
December 5, 2007 8:38 pm

The minute Picard said “where no one” in the opening credits of the first TNG episode, they lost me. I still liked some of the episodes, but they were mostly flaccid. #9 must be spoiling for a fight.

Gender neutral crapola. Coon would never approve! Brain and brain, what is brain?!

EdDR
December 5, 2007 8:50 pm

to #10 it all depends on what fictional character Bart is #9. Just let Bart rant and rave all he wants until his spikey hair goes flaccid.

wpDiscuz