BREAKING NEWS: Star Trek Pushed To May 2009 [UPDATED] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

BREAKING NEWS: Star Trek Pushed To May 2009 [UPDATED] February 13, 2008

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

Variety is reporting that Paramount has pushed the release of the new Star Trek movie from Christmas 2008 to May 8, 2009. Apparently the reason is to go for bigger box office during the summer season. Variety quotes a studio insider saying “Star Trek has the potential to gross more in May than in December.”

UPDATE: Trek move part of larger reshuffling at Paramount
Apparently this is all part of a larger plan on the part of Paramount and the decision was likely made by new Film Division Head John Lesher. Here is more from Variety’s Blog.

John Lesher is starting to make his imprint felt at Paramount. (And make no mistake, he’s still overseeing Vantage too.) Paramount is changing a number of release dates on their 2008 and 2009 skeds, moving J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek from Christmas, 2008 to May 8, 2009. David Fincher’s Brad Pitt-starrer The Curious Case of Benjamin Button will move from November 26 to December 19, 2008.

DreamWorks Pictures’ comedy Tropic Thunder, originally scheduled for July 11, will now be released on August 15 by DreamWorks-Paramount. And Sam Mendes’ Revolutionary Road, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, originally announced as a DreamWorks-Paramount release, will now be distributed by Paramount Vantage. Which makes perfect sense; who better to handle it as an Oscar contender?

UPDATE 2: Nothing to do with script
The Hollywood Reporter also notes that Paramount’s reshuffling of six films was due to a rethink after the strike and that in the case of Trek it was not related to the script.

Dramatically underscoring the need for movie-side execs to review slates following the long writers strike, Paramount on Wednesday bounced six films to new dates and moved two unslotted films to next year’s calendar.

Other distributors were scrambling to complete similar reviews of their upcoming productions to determine what can or can’t be delivered on scheduled dates. In some cases, films will move because of talent issues, but many film projects have been frozen in time when script rewrites weren’t completed before the 100-day scribe walkout.

“Star Trek” arguably was the biggest film moved, with the intended Christmas Day release now set for the first prime date in the following summer boxoffice season: May 8, 2009. But “Trek” appears something of an exception in the mix of itinerant pics, with its shift unrelated to script or cast considerations.

” ‘Star Trek’ is moving to summer because its has so much boxoffice potential,” Par spokesman Michael Vollman said. “It does not need any script tweaks. They’re two-thirds of the way through shooting, and we would have delivered a great movie at Christmas.”

Summer a better move?
Although winter release films can make a lot of money (like the recent Lord of the Rings films and last years Bond film), the biggest film’s tend to come out in the Summer. Due to the writer’s strike, the summer of 2009 will be a bit lighter than 2007 and 2008. Right now there are no movies slated for the 8th of May 2009, although the week before is X-Men Origins: Wolverine and the week after is Angels and Demons (ironically this sequel to The Da Vinci Code was originally slated to come out the weekend before Star Trek in December 2008). Of course, there is no guarantee those films will stay in those slots. As for Christmas this year, Star Trek was one of three films being released that day (although the other two were likely more aimed at different markets).

The move could be to help fill Paramount Dreamworks 2009 line-up after 2008 which already has a number of strong entries (Spiderwick, Iron Man, Indy 4, Madagascar 2, The Love Guru, Benjamin Button, etc.). The only other big films currently slated for Summer 2009 are Transformers 2 on June 29th and G.I. Joe in August.

As more details emerge, TrekMovie.com will report them.

My take
Obviously my first feeling is disappointment. No one saw this coming and all reports from the production and Paramount are that things are looking great. Looking at the landscape I think it is likely that Paramount feel their 2008 lineup is already strong and their 2009 is looking a little thin. Plus 2009 has less competition and more summer movie goers. Of course it should also ensure a better film as all that time can be spent on more polishing and more post-production. So in the end we can get a better movie that appeals to a larger audience (translating into more strength for the franchise) which is all good. But it still means waiting twenty more weeks for the film and that is not fun.

Comments

1. drew - February 13, 2008

Bullshit!!!

2. JRod - February 13, 2008

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3. Doczane - February 13, 2008

First to say this is WEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak.

4. Doczane - February 13, 2008

never mind.
It’s still weak.
And, it’s all for money?

5. Yammer - February 13, 2008

Good, more time to tweak script, filming, FX.

Bad in every other way.

6. Data_Lives_in_B4 - February 13, 2008

This blows!

That means they’ll have more time to mess around with the final cut which increases the chance of the film turning out to be a crap fest of indecisive edit choices.

Okay, Okay, I trust the creative behind this project. That they won’t do that. But this friggin’ sucks.

7. KS Trekker - February 13, 2008

In the words of Bart Simpson…”Set your faces to stunned!”

8. Noleuser is now Morn Speaks - February 13, 2008

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! This is bittersweet news, BUT more Bitter!

9. JRod - February 13, 2008

I’M PISSED OFF!
(BREAKS SOMETHING)
THAT DIDN’T HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

10. steve - February 13, 2008

the sign is nigh

11. Spock89 - February 13, 2008

This sucks on so many levels! I have been looking forward to this film for almost two years, now we are going to have to wait another year!

12. Z - February 13, 2008

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

13. Adam - February 13, 2008

Some thing might be well worth the wait. Can you imagine this movie getting the chance to open as the prime release Memorial Day weekend? I’m still stoked.

14. Noleuser is now Morn Speaks - February 13, 2008

What else is being released next May, it could make for much harder competition?

15. Rastaman930 - February 13, 2008

HANG IN THERE FOLKS!

It is not the end of the world. Hopefully, that means we will get a more polished product. If it means big sells, I’m down with the studio’s game. But now I wonder, who’ll be our competition come May?

16. Thadd - February 13, 2008

This is actually wonderful news!

Not only have the more recent ST movies fared poorly in their December release, but this gives JJ and the writing staff the capability to do those “on-set rewrites” we’ve been hearing about for months.

While I was really looking forward to opening up some presents and then rushing to the theater to see Kirk bed a few aliens, I think that the late spring release date will help the new Trek team push this version of “Star Trek” as a true Hollywood blockbuster, not just a fanboy piece. Expect wayyyyy more marketing through TV, internet, and toy marketing — May 08 is Indy, May 09 is Kirk. What could be better for two iconic Paramount heroes?

And, it gives everybody @ Trekmovie.com some extra time to revamp this site, which we are all waiting for (especially after CBS canned the startrek.com staff)

17. Sebastian - February 13, 2008

Very bad idea. Principle photography is half done. Photos from the set are being leaked out. The feeding frenzy will peak, and past Christmas it could diminish. You have the Star Trek tour going on, a lot of buzz. The time is NOW, guys. THIS year. I hope the delay is not because of re-shoots and studio cold feet. Strike while the iron is hot, guys!

18. Joseph Brown - February 13, 2008

#5 Yammer, I agree with you 100%.

I really hope this report is wrong.

19. Ves - February 13, 2008

This is six weeks early, right?

20. Daoud - February 13, 2008

IF Paramount would go ahead and greenlight a second and third movie to follow, then how about a 1-2-3 punch. Could have Summer 09, a followup Christmas 09, and a conclusion Summer 2010.

Such a trilogy is the only way I’d buy this.

21. Number Six - February 13, 2008

This could kill the film. Both Dune & Starship Troopers were hyped then took forever to get to the screen. The result was poor ticket sales. Is Paramount this stupid? Keep Trek in December when there is no film to take the limelight away from it.

22. Noleuser is now Morn Speaks - February 13, 2008

Well the teaser and the widget need to be updated

23. boJac - February 13, 2008

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!

I mean, PARAMOUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNT!!!!

24. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 13, 2008

What a bunch of Eggnog flavored cheese photons!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a way to tell the fans to go to hell on a half a hot dog roll!!!!! Only if true of course.

Don’t tease us like this. Bad bad bad bad move if true. Put a hint of thought into what you are doing. Shame on you!

This would really take away my motivation to check out TrekMovie.com every 30 seconds. It would become every 2 minutes instead.

25. New Horizon - February 13, 2008

That would be absolutely silly at this point. It has been promoted up the wazzoo as a Christmas release. I think they’ll miss the mark if they delay now. Anticipation can only be maintained for so long before it strains.

26. Xindi1985 - February 13, 2008

THAT MUST BE A DREAM!!!!
OH MY GOD!!!! MY PERSONAL NIGHTMARE!!!! MAY 2009????WAKE ME UP!!!! I FEEL ME LIKE KIRK IN STAR TREK II, LEFT ON REGULA ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!KHAAAN…..KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:(

27. DFG333 - February 13, 2008

Hell, it’s bad enough having to wait until December but even worst to have to wait until May2009. It really sucks if this is true.

28. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

It would be an understatement to say that i am rather pissed about this.
PARAMOUNT EXECUTIVE SHAME ON YOU !!!!!!!!

29. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

Maybe it’s taking them a bit longer than expected to get a decent performance out of Chris Pine…..

30. JodarTrekFan - February 13, 2008

That’s too long. How could they do this??

On another note, they’ll have time to do IMAX prints, maybe 3D digital versions…how about that? Trek in 3D?

31. Xplodin' Nacelle - February 13, 2008

I wish Paramount would’ve given the TOS-R team another half a year to polish up their work. It makes no sense why “the suits” would rush one project out the door, then turn around & give another a reprieve; unless………………….

Maybe the Okuda’s, & Rossi are being brought in to participate w/ JJ. Hmmm.

If this were the case, it might explain both decisions.

32. Nicholas Sanchez - February 13, 2008

To quote the inimitable Bob Novak in his famous confrontation w/James Carville on CNN: Well that’s just bullshit, and I hate that!

33. Kevin - February 13, 2008

Wait… WHAT?! Okay… I can deal with this. May is a much better time to release a movie than December. It also gives them more time to get it right. The only thing that would concern me is what kind of competition is expected for May?

It was soo close. Less than a year… now… my God I’ll be an old man when this thing comes out.

It’s not April 1st again already is it?

34. Bumbed party of one - February 13, 2008

……whimper whimper…….

35. KublaKhan - February 13, 2008

Take the fork out of my Eye

36. ~~TARA~~ - February 13, 2008

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!!!! I don’t think I can make it another 15 months!

37. Daniel Broadway - February 13, 2008

To make it up to us fans, please show us the Enterprise in a full glory render.
: )

38. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - February 13, 2008

PARMOUNT SUCKS, MONEY GRUBBING SNIVELING FERENGI!

39. Scott - February 13, 2008

This could be good Shatner.

40. Mr. Penguin - February 13, 2008

Variety, even though mostly reliable, could be wrong. Think: they already have a trailer out that says Christmas 08. But oh well, if it means a better film, then good. It will be worth the wait.

But I’m REALLY mad about this…

41. KevinA Melbourne Australia - February 13, 2008

Surely It can’t be true. Hollywood is supposed to be running behind now because of the writers strike. Many movies were slotted in for the end this year but had to hold off because the stories weren’t finished. Star Trek got in just before the strike.

Didn’t AMERICAN TRESSURE II break all boxoffice records this festive season? There wasn’t much else up against it …blockbuster wise. Well there’s that “Potter” thing at the end of November in 2008 and the remake of “The Day The Earth Stood Still” but that’s it. ST should be the big thing in January 2009.

42. Scott - February 13, 2008

The offical movie site still says Christmas 2008.

43. Jared - February 13, 2008

you gotta be F**King kidding me!

44. boJac - February 13, 2008

I’m so angry i just kicked my cat! I love my cat! You see what you made me do? I was hoping to watch Star Wars AND Star Trek on the big screen this year. But nooooooooo. Jerks.

45. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

30 because they don’t give a damn about us, its that simple

46. I-Chaya - February 13, 2008

dam

47. T'Juli - February 13, 2008

WTF?!?!!!! This thing was announced in what, 2006? And now they’re making us wait another half a year!!

I agree on the “sniveling ferengi” comment, #38.

“THIS IS DISHONORABLE!!!” -Just about every single Klingon ever

They can’t do this to us!

“The hell they did.” -Spock, STIV

Shut the hell up Spock…

48. Jorg Sacul - February 13, 2008

To quote Saavik: “Damn.”

49. Scott - February 13, 2008

#31,
Agreed bringing the Okuda’s in would be excellent.
Also I totally agree with the previous posts regarding
this delay as a good thing.

50. CmdrR - February 13, 2008

What??

Are they kidding… after they already announced (both covertly and blatantly) the Christmas release date?

Great. JJ is making a great movie and Paramount is being its usual turd-headed self.

51. Chris H. - February 13, 2008

It’s good for the movie — it means Paramount thinks this film can go toe to toe with the other tentpoles. Christmas is a crap release time for a genre film (Lord of the RIngs notwithstanding).

#21: Dune and Starship Troopers didn’t flop because of the protracted time to release. Dune and Starship Troopers flopped because they were awful.

52. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

44 This is going to alienate a lot of people not something you want to do when your trying to reboot a franchise.

53. T'Juli - February 13, 2008

It’s another Super Smash Brother Brawl!

I AM TIRED OF DELAYS!!!!!

54. Scott - February 13, 2008

Hope Uncle Shat gets in now.

55. Disgruntled Trekster - February 13, 2008

And the other shoe just hit the deck.

Sigh! Maybe this will be good. Maybe it won’t. Maybe the whole thing is to take advantage of 2009 being the 30th anniversary of ST:TMP, though that would be rather lame when you think about it.
But I do agree that the longer the fans have to wait, the greater the risk the film will be dissected and destroyed before it’s ever even seen.
Sometimes the internet isn’t such a great thing.

56. spockboy - February 13, 2008

#16
I agree completely.
We have seen first hand what RUSHING a project can do as far as Trek Remastered is concerned. SO many details overlooked due to lack of time. Quality of work suffering.
I know myself from making my own films that MORE time to tweak things is ALWAYS better.
I would much prefer they get it right and create a CLASSIC, especially if the only safcrifice “I ” have to make, is to wait a bit longer.
Most great films were agonized over anyway.
Think about this as well. Trekkies are getting older. This next incarnation will make or break, Star Trek’s future.
A LOT IS HANGING ON THIS.
If it sucks the fan boys will hate it and go back to the reruns while the potential NEW audience will walk away uninterested. Shatner and Nimoy are getting up there, and if the torch isn’t passed in a successful and memorable way before they go, Star Trek will be dead, or at least on its way to being slowly forgotten.

57. Juli - February 13, 2008

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

My friends and I already made plans…

58. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

51 there is no reason for this other then increasing their proffiet margin, thats all.

59. spockboy - February 13, 2008

Oh, if they want to make it up to us FANS, then release a picture of the NEW ENTERPRISE!

60. KHAAAAAAAN! - February 13, 2008

Orci, JJ! I know you guys read trekmovie! Stop this for the love of God!

61. JRod - February 13, 2008

I don’t f*cking care when a good time to release it is!
I just wanna see the f*cking movie goddammit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

62. Scott - February 13, 2008

#51 Agreed,
The last thing I want to do on Christmas
is go out to the movies.
However I would have done it for Star Trek.

63. garen - February 13, 2008

This….plain…sucks.

It would be one thing if only us “insiders” had knowledge about a christmas 08 release..then the damage might not be too bad. but i think they run the risk of confusing the general movie going population by changing the release date AFTER the media hype and promotional machine is already up and running. Its practically in full swing! Everyone who saw cloverfield knows the movie is coming out on christmas. anyone who has been talking about this film has been talking about christmas. The general population….at least those who go to movies often….are starting to understand that a new trek film is coming out on christmas. I just cant believe theyre changing it after they already put out promotion materials.

my plea: MR ORCI…is there anything that you can do?? Is there anything that JJ can do? JJ weilds some power right?

HELP, MR ORCI, HELP!

64. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

Hmmmm…….the writer’s strike has JUST ended and now TPTB are saying MAYBE a delay for the release date until May 2009?

I smell agenda, as in maybe during the strike a better, more refined plotline has been formulated, one where Abrams knows it will take an extra few months to get it right and they now have the option to implement.

No, this doesn’t necessarily mean an appearance by “you know who’, but rather the possibility of an added dynamic to the story that will raise this movie up from “great” to, dare I say it,……CLASSIC!

In other words, to quote the Simpsons Comic Book Guy…………

“BEST STAR TREK MOVIE EVER!!” :)

65. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

I have added some of ‘my thoughts’ to the article above. I am not happy about this but I understand it. I am fairly certain is decision was a financial and business one and not related to the creative end…where all indications are that the production is producing a great star trek movie. I think paramount know they have a good 2008 and due to the strike they want to move something to 2009 to pick up the slack and take advantage of other studios who have even weaker line ups.

but that still sucks for xmas 08!

i have added a new poll

66. Longwinded - February 13, 2008

I figured the writers strike was going to hold things up. I even asked Roberto that question when he came onto the thread unannounced and answered our questions back in January. Didn’t get an answer then, but I did now didn’t I?

I’m not surprised. If they feel they need more time then why not? I do not want another “rushed to screens” Trek movie. As my mom always said “Take your time, but hurry.”

And there goes the toy tie-in from the previous thread. I just can’t see most kids really caring about getting Trek stuff for Xmas presents unless this movie really, really rocks.

67. Gideonblaze - February 13, 2008

KAAAAHHHHNNNN!!!!!

68. Captain Amazing!! - February 13, 2008

Good Lord, people. We’ve waited this long…what’s a few more months? It’ll fly by before you know it. Plus it’ll give ‘em a chance to make absolutely 100% sure it’s the best it can be. With the strike over, J.J. can now add those lines he wanted to and of course this also allows them more time to work on the FX. Too many films are rushed into the theaters by a specific date and end up seeming a tad “undone” or “raw”. They needed a little more cooking time. Star Trek is getting it. Not to mention the ticket sales will be higher for summer and we ALL want that don’t we? More ticket sales = more movies.

69. John Pemble - February 13, 2008

Christmas day release was alwasy sTuPiD. Even if I don’t have a lot of hope for this film I prefer to go to the first night screening of Trek movies just as I did for the last three Star Wars movies, esp if the theater does a midnight or special evening screenig promotion thing. Than can be a lot of fun and it’s not as if sci-fi fans are known to organize around movie openings or anything… ha ha ha. I even would wear my TNG uniform. No shit.

70. blake powers - February 13, 2008

Damn, This movie was coming out on my birthday… No longer… I’m ok with that… But it seems alot of movies do better when they are rushed, granted that is without a writers strike.. I can see this being a Godsend for the Production staff.. All I need to do is hear that they are excited that they get more time and I will be ok… So if anyone, and I mean ANYONE from the production staff is reading this, please give me a wording of excitement.

71. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

56 Spockboy that I cant disagree with, it just that we all want to see this thing

72. spockboy - February 13, 2008

Obviously the decision was a financial one, but it STILL translates to more time to tweak things.
: )

73. Jabob Slatter - February 13, 2008

Well, that’s disappointing, but maybe it will make more money, and thus secure a chance for a sequel. That would be nice.

74. jonboc - February 13, 2008

…you’re killing me Paramount….

I honestly don’t know if they can sustain the current momentum over 16 months. A year away is bad enough, but 16 months? Don’t know… seems there is a real danger of this film running out of steam before it even opens.

And even then, after such a long build up…does that make it harder to deliver the goods and meet everyone’s expectations?? Man.

…it’s gonna be a long long year…and a half.

75. newman - February 13, 2008

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!

76. I-Chaya - February 13, 2008

i bet JJ wanted to make the script better now the writer’s strike is over

77. Clinton - February 13, 2008

If this is true, it sounds like it’s good news for the film, but it’s darned frustrating to all of us who now have to wait 4+ more months.

78. Chain of command - February 13, 2008

That’s a pretty stupid move on their part, but it’s not surprising.

79. garen - February 13, 2008

#74 great point about momentum. The teaser hit theatres in jan 08 and the movie wont hit until May of 09. Thats a LONG LONG TIME to stay in peoples minds!

80. Spocko - February 13, 2008

I hope that Paramount decides to change it back to Christmas 2008. If not, then Abrams has more time to find a way to put Shatner in.

81. JRod - February 13, 2008

MURDERS! ASSASSINS! I’LL KILL YA!

82. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

so what now beat ourselves over the head knash our teeth , nothing we do is going to change paramounts decision. So we just have to take it lying down because this is not worth raising our blood preasure over either. Im still mad but what the point?

83. Render - February 13, 2008

ANGER!!

84. AaronA - February 13, 2008

I think this is a terrible risk, and seems greed-driven – it could backfire horribly.

Strike while the anticipation is high!

85. Chirs M - February 13, 2008

This is the worst news i’ve heard ever!

86. blake powers - February 13, 2008

WE can have a trekmovie.com convention watching all the movies in order… Jan 09 Movie party anyone?

87. RJO - February 13, 2008

I AGREE WITH 1 SAYING KHANN- I MEAN PARAMONT WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO DO??? ALL THIS TIME ITS BEEN IN WRITING CHRISTMAS 2008- NOT 09!!! IT SMELLS LIKE FERINGEES WANTING MORE LATMIN!!!! ITS ALL ABOUT THE MIGHTY CHA CHING COME ON PARAMONT JJ SAY IT ISNT SO!!!! PHASERS ON STUN!!!!

88. DJT - February 13, 2008

You gotta be kiddin’ me? December was already a ways a way. Now until May 09?

89. Render - February 13, 2008

and Shut up about Shatner, he has treated us like crap, the movie will still be good without him

90. trekboy1982 - February 13, 2008

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOURNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

91. Dennis Bailey - February 13, 2008

This makes it five months less likely that they can keep all the secrets they hope to keep, of course.

One supposes that this resets the publicity operation as well. Not so likely that they’ll have a full trailer out attached to a movie like “Indiana Jones” nor that they’ll release publicity photos of the cast in the next few weeks.

92. CmdrR - February 13, 2008

Wow. I’ve never seen this many angry asterisks on this site before.

f*ck*n*- whatever might that code mean??

C’mon! We’re all surprised and disappointed, but… IT IS ONLY A MOVIE. And it’s still in great hands with JJ. So, we’ll just have to adjust our geeky expectations. Life is good.

93. Will Doe 68 - February 13, 2008

Man its obvious now that the studio hates the fans! After wetting our appetites with the teaser for Christmas. They go and pull a stunt like this!
There’s no way they can keep it under wraps any longer.
Might as well show the designs for the ship and costumes,cause no bodies going to wait that long for movie. Damn you Paramount! You did rape my childhood!

94. PrntScrn - February 13, 2008

PAIN!!!

95. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

I know some people are angry…but entire posts in ALL CAPS is a pet peeve of mine. What you have to say isn’t more important than anyone else’s.

Remember…don’t type angry.

96. blake powers - February 13, 2008

And despite all my emotion.. my need for this movie to do well greatly surpasses my want to see this movie soon… Ladies and Gentlemen let’s remember “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one” We are the few, we have to collect the many to this franchise.

97. JRod - February 13, 2008

We should rebel!

98. Nicholas Sanchez - February 13, 2008

Nicholas Meyer said it best — movies need to be made quickly! Remember, Shatner had too long to dick around w/ Star Trek V, and we lot remember what heppened there, don’t we?

99. AndrosZ - February 13, 2008

Quick, someone make a petition online to boycott the film unless it releases in December!

100. The Vulcanista - February 13, 2008

Le *sigh.*

However, I’m more likely to see it opening day on the big screen if it’s not on 12/25.

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

101. Jon - February 13, 2008

i am a 99 year old man that desprately wanted to see this movie before i died. i guess i’ll have to live a few months more. you suck!!!!!!

102. Graflite - February 13, 2008

#59 spockboy:
“Oh, if they want to make it up to us FANS, then release a picture of the NEW ENTERPRISE!”

I agree with you, spockboy…….

Come on, JJ, give us a photo of the NEW ENTERPRISE.
And a publicity still of the new cast assembled on the bridge!!!
And a publicity still of Mr. Nimoy in full Spock makeup and costume!!!

Is this too much to ask for making us wait another insufferably long 5 months???

103. I-Chaya - February 13, 2008

cinematical isn’t even saying this is big news

104. blake powers - February 13, 2008

99… please stop

105. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

on the plus side we might get a better on the minus side Im still mad as hell but we will at least get our movie, besides whats another months really?

106. Dac - February 13, 2008

DEATH TO ALL WHO OPPOSE AN 08 RELEASE DATE!

Seriously tho – this sucks more than Shatners rendition of rocketman.

107. AaronA - February 13, 2008

Trek has proven that it can perform around xmas – what’s the competition at that point, anyway?

*The DVD would have been in our hands by May 09!!*

108. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

99 a petitition would not change anything Paramount holds all the card here.

109. GARY NEUMANN - February 13, 2008

LISTEN UP PARAMOUNT, IF YOU PUSH TREK TO MAY 2009. I WANT THAT DAMN TRAILER ON THE SUPERBOWL. HOW ABOUT THAT?!

110. deano - February 13, 2008

Paramount executives = pig vomit

111. Kevin - February 13, 2008

So I’m just gonna throw this out there and I’m sure I’ll get in trouble but…

It’s funny that this happened right after the writer’s strike ended… with more time, the Shat could be in it after all.

112. MagnumPC - February 13, 2008

If this is some clever, elaborate ploy to get my space in line, it won’t work! I’m not leaving! :)
(Of course, it’s going to be that much harder to “hold it”…)

113. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

There is one other thing to remember. The script was written before the strike and by the writers guild rules, Abrams could not make any changes, In other words he could not make necessary improvements to the script, now with the strike ending he may now go back and make these adjustments. If you ask me this may be one of the reasons for the delay till 2009.If that is the case then yes we will get a better film. So lets all take a time out.

114. GaryS - February 13, 2008

if they want to make it up to us then gives us a GREAT FILM!

115. fanboy B - February 13, 2008

good job, paramount… you just destroyed all hype for the movie for the general public.

I hope you’re happy in your piss-poor choice.

116. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

Vulcanista, you’re a fan of Pepe Le Pew?? I wonder how many here would recognize your obscure soundbite??

Gawd, I’d love to hear you say, “Le *purr….le meow*…”

You have hidden depths, woman! :)

117. konar - February 13, 2008

couple of realities: the production schedule is the production schedule, and time is money… So don’t assume that having a few more months means the production would be drawn out for a single additional day. it just doesn’t work that way.

Also, paramount is putting $millions into this… They can damn well release it at a time they feel is more advantageous to their recoup if they choose to do so. I don’t like it, but at 47, I’m prepared to accept it like the big boy my mommy says I am!

118. Darryl - February 13, 2008

Paramount could ruin a wet dream! Bastards!!!!!

119. Bink - Illogical - February 13, 2008

Hey, look on the bright side, with the extra time and the writers strike coming to an end perhaps, just perhaps this might be an opportunity to fit Shatner in there some how?!

Everything happens for a reason my friends.
Trek-On!

120. Camaro 09 - February 13, 2008

Cool,

Now with the writers strike over they will have time to get Shatner in the film.

121. James Heaney - Wowbagger - February 13, 2008

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

At least it’s a movie–unlike a video game, the pushed-back release date is not indicative of imminent vaporware.

122. Michelle - February 13, 2008

Oh dear. I was so looking forward to seeing this movie around Christmas which is when I normally have work out off anyway. I’m so sorry we’ll have to wait even longer, but hopefully it’ll be for the better.

123. boJac - February 13, 2008

Okay Paramount, if that’s how you want to play…

I was going to gather dozens of my non-trekkie friends and make them see the movie with me, but now I don’t think I will. Unless you make a Quantum Leap movie. Then I’ll make them see Star Trek, and Quantum Leap.

Oh, and put Scott Bakula in the new film somewhere.

Also, I’m going through the five stages of grief right now.

124. Can't Wait for X-Mas 2008 - February 13, 2008

I better change my name now to “Can’t Wait for Summer 2009.” Im hoping they keep the release to Christmas of this year. But at the same time I can see the plus side of having this movie comes out later.

1) Re shoots and Rewrites; since there were things that Abrams wanted to shoot but couldn’t. And also the Shatner issue. They could not come up with a reason to put him in the movie. Well with the extra time they can maybe finally come up with a way to put him in the movie. Im one of those people who really does not care if he is in the movie, im a DS9 fan sorry. But I know alot of the hardcore fans want him in the movie. And it would be very cool indeed if Kirk did come back with Spock one last time. Just because I like DS9 doesn’t mean I didn’t like TOS.

2) SFX, they can really put some time in creating the SFX in the movie instead of being rushed they can take there time to get things right. Some of the SFX I would really like to see alien worlds that I have not seen before. And I would definitely want to see the ships in the movie have some kind of “Mass” to them. I want shots of the ship not zipping all over the place and small looking. I want some grand epic shots of the Enterprise.

To me Christmas honestly is not a good time to release a big budget movie. Especially a Star Trek movie. With the added time I really believe there can be more hype to build up for the movie. And also get the general public to be more aware of the movie.

So hopefully the movie will be out this Christmas but if it doesn’t I still look forward to it coming out next Summer 2009.

125. Joel - February 13, 2008

That was disappointing. It better be worth the extra 4.5 months. If it isn’t…..I’ll be just one of the many fans that will personally throw feces at the gates of Paramount….

126. Gina - February 13, 2008

I apologize, I think I jinxed us. I was telling my friend tonight how excited I was that Heroes came back in September and Star Trek would be in December so I’d be in a Zachary Quinto coma for a while there, and then I come home to this announcement. So I’m pretty sure this is all my fault. *ducks flying tomatoes* ;P

127. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Roberto….

Please step up here. You are not only the co-writer, you are an Exec. on this project. This news is NOT good, and you and J.J. know it. I know “mountain” is nervous, but you know as well as I do that having December just about to yourself as a genre tentpole was gonna be very good. Now you are gonna compete with all of the other big summer movies, and let’s be honest that doesn’t sound good. P-Mount will not be the only studio to shuffle its deck, so don’t think STCero will be alone in the local bijou…

To me, this says either the project is in trouble (but why?), or the studio execs STILL HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO MANAGE THIS PROPERTY! And folks, it’s not like the couldn’t be done by December. They have been working on pre-production/Visual FX for months. So, with a May 09 launch, this project will have been done for a long time before we see it. If there is ANY competition ST0′s opening weekend, and if Cinemascores aren’t A’s, and the buzz has died down…the film will have no legs, and then mountain won’t greenlight any sequels. They just won’t.

Damn the current Paramount management! Double dumb ass on them!

128. Xai - February 13, 2008

Other than the longer wait, I think it’s good for the movie. It allows for more polish and I never have thought Christmas was a good release date.
I can be patient, so can you. Besides, what can be done about it?

#99 That’s pointless..

129. CommonSense - February 13, 2008

Money grubbing whores!

130. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

I can see this fan tirade is going to continue for a few days unabated, Good ,lets get this up to 1000 comments that would be a record on this site Im not mad anymore, its just not worth it ‘s only movie and we will ultimately get to see it , later, but well get to see it. . Time to move on

131. Xai - February 13, 2008

120. Camaro 09 – February 13, 2008
Cool,

“Now with the writers strike over they will have time to get Shatner in the film.”

Oh please..

132. Michael Adams - February 13, 2008

Paramount wants this movie to fail. They got rid of TNG with Nemesis and thought that was the end of it. Then here come JJ and the boys. What an oportunity to be finally be done with Star Trek for another 10 years. This movie will bomb because we (the fans) wont go see it because it wont be Star Trek it will be Lost or Transformers, and Paramount allready knows it. For some reason TPTB want to be done with Star Trek, and another 5 months is just 5 more nails.

133. John from Cincinnati - February 13, 2008

Good, more time to break into their servers and steal the movie from their own memory banks. (Lord Kruge)

134. Cartman - February 13, 2008

http://www.moviewavs.com/0058536645/MP3S/TV_Shows/South_Park/Episode_113_Cartmans_Mom_Is_A_Dirty_Slut/113_sopissedoff.mp3

135. VOODOO - February 13, 2008

Camaro # 120

“Now with the writers strike over they will have time to get Shatner in the film”

I like the way you think.

Xai #131

Xai you have to admit the man has a point at #120.

136. Adam - February 13, 2008

Can this be confirmed?
I’m interested in hearing the creative team’s take on this.
Bob, if your reading this let us know what you think, please.

137. garen - February 13, 2008

the wind has truly been sucked from my sails

138. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Roberto says they read “everything.” He should direct some of the Viacom suits to this site. Can you imagine how much work they are gonna have to do to keep everyone’s interest for more than another freaking year?

Yes, Brad Grey, I am talking to you, sir!

139. Joel - February 13, 2008

Maybe if we could be vocal enough about this, we could put an end to it? We know that both cast and crew have not only read this site but have stopped by to chat with us. We have filmmakers actually listening to fans input. If enough of us want it in December and the film is ready, maybe Paramount will change their mind? December of 2008 is so barren, Trek could OWN that. Within the first week match the highest grossing Trek film. Let’s get vocal guys. Start writing letters into Paramount, start petitions. Get JJ and others on board. They are producers…they can try and pull some weight….SOME being the key word…especially with those suits.

140. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

132 Why would bring in a top notch directorproducer, a new cast and spend million of dollars with the intention to fail that makes no sense whatsever, and on top that alienate Star trek fandom, a major part of their proffeit picture.

141. Sean4000 - February 13, 2008

I’ve just bought 24X40 prints of both teaser posters.

142. Thomas Marrone - February 13, 2008

This Christmas is already ruined and it’s only February. Bummer.

I’m curious to see what the ripple effects of this are. Are they going to push back all the merchandising and promotional efforts as well? 5 more months to see what the Enterprise looks like? Hopefully J.J. and co. will still throw us some bones in the near future.

143. Darryl - February 13, 2008

Red Shirt # 127 is right. A summer release could ruin everything. This may be Trek’s last chance, I hope it’s not squandered.

144. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

139 Joel its a nice idea but Paramont is not budge on this

145. Xai - February 13, 2008

135. VOODOO – February 13, 2008

“Xai you have to admit the man has a point at #120.”

Voo, Sorry. No
. I won’t get into a Shatner rehash here other than to say if JJ had a story that Shatner would fit in, he’d already be in it.

146. jonboc - February 13, 2008

…I’m not believing this. Fargin bastages.

147. Alternate Factor Chris - February 13, 2008

This smells of major plot problems that could not have been resolved until the end of the strike granted them the opportunity for re-writes.

If it’s being delayed almost 6 months for JJ (et al) to work on the script, I smell a huge stinker (especially with so much of the film already complete).

148. Redjac - February 13, 2008

ORCI…ABRAMS…PARA-CLOWN! THIS IS CRAP!!!

What? You guys don’t have enough confidence in this film to release it during the holidays? WTF??

149. Sci-Fi Bri - February 13, 2008

aaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I wannnnnnnn ittt nowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

150. Xai - February 13, 2008

132. Michael Adams – February 13, 2008
“Paramount wants this movie to fail. They got rid of TNG with Nemesis and thought that was the end of it. Then here come JJ and the boys. What an oportunity to be finally be done with Star Trek for another 10 years. This movie will bomb because we (the fans) wont go see it because it wont be Star Trek it will be Lost or Transformers, and Paramount allready knows it. For some reason TPTB want to be done with Star Trek, and another 5 months is just 5 more nails.”

Let’s spend millions to kill it…. It makes no sense. NExt thought…

151. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

yep this article is going to top 1000 comments

152. Redjac - February 13, 2008

Sorry…gotta add this, Anthony:

SHATNER bettter be in it if it comes out MAY!!!!

Shit!!!

153. section9 - February 13, 2008

You people have to understand something.

This is about getting the kids with disposable income. Paramount guys have obviously seen the rushes. They had to be asking themselves: how many weeks will kids be out over the Christmas Holidays vs. how many weeks over the Summer?

Something they saw made them move it to Summer.

They also may be wondering what Paramount has to offer in the Summer 2009 offering. May be thin gruel. Rumor has it that Lucasfilm is pumping out SW: Clone Wars. Again, I may be off here, but if they’ve seen what I think they’ve seen, this is good news, not bad.

Lastly, this is going to make it REALLY, REALLY hard for JJ to clamp down on film security over the next fifteen months. People are going to want to leak plot details, scripts, Big E shots, and what not. JJ has to come up with a more imaginative viral marketing scheme to keep interest stoked in the film. We can’t be watching that damn welder for the next fifteen months.

154. Xindi1985 - February 13, 2008

PARAMOUNT, I ORDER YOU TO POST A SHOT OF THE NEW ENTERPRISE, AND MAYBE A SHOT OF THE BRIDGE WITH THE “NEW” CREW IN UNIFORMS……………….OR I WILL PUNISH YOU!!!!! YOU KNOW THE AGONIZER????

155. Sci-Fi Bri - February 13, 2008

awwwwwwwwwww mannnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

oh well, i’ll just have to put this anticipation in a box and put that box on a book shelf

i’m out ya’ll i’ll see you in 12 months for an update

(sets host file:
http://www.trekmovie.com 127.0.0.1)

156. Juli - February 13, 2008

153- Newsflash: May isn’t summer. It’s about a month before we get out of school.

I don’t know how they are possibly going to keep the fans happy and keep the plot under wraps for another 15 months…

157. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

154 that would be a nice bone for them throw us now wouldn’t it? They could at least show us a few things to tide through the long dark lonely seemingly endless trek less months until we reach the promised lade of Trek movie Premier .

158. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

153

Many here do understand “something.” There is a lot to be said about staking a claim, and sticking to it. You wait, and see how crowded that summer will be. They always are. There are things that will be greenlit and fast-tracked, and they will EAT AWAY AT ST0′s B.O. I mean, look at the opening weekend of “Meet the Spartans.” A quickie piece of crud, and it owned the opening weekend. It had no legs, but that didn’t matter much.

Mountain had that holiday just about to themselves, and unless they change their minds, they have pissed that all away.

:(

159. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

OK people I was not kidding about the ALL CAPS thing…i will start deleting all caps posts. I am telling you…it really bugs me.

160. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

I have updated the article with some more info from the Variety blog that gives some insights into what is going on and context to the larger moves within Paramount.

161. 750 Mang - February 13, 2008

So I had already requested with my wife Christmas at home for 2008, no going to anyones parents house. We were going to stay home watch Star Trek then go see the movie on Christmas Day. Should have been the best Christmas ever.

I’m disappointed.

162. Captain Hackett - February 13, 2008

I cannot tell you how disappointed I am!

Oh I am extremely pissed off!!!!!!!!!

163. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

153

Also, having that as the opening date, that is saying, “We are the first film of the ‘Summer.’” Everyone else line up after us.

164. Pragmaticus - February 13, 2008

Roberto, I swear, you guys had better use this time to do rewrites and reshoots, or so help me, I will go insane.

165. Poida - February 13, 2008

Bad idea.

Public will view this as somehow the studio wants time to make improvements to the movie.

Expectations will be through the roof – fans & general public alike – when movie is finally released.

And let’s face it. Unless it’s a movie like There Will Be Blood or No Country For Old Men, when those high expectations are not met……box office poison.

166. me - February 13, 2008

my life is over. not really, but this sucks.

167. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

It is maddening but we’ve lived how many years without a good Trek Movie, Hey whats a few more month s of Purgatory. before we know it Mat of 2009 will be upon us Its only 14 or so months thats not that long a wait. Besides it give us lots more to talk about and to anticipate.

168. The Realist - February 13, 2008

I can see this going two ways.

1. Will generate more interest in film, plus opening in the US summer and Australian winter ( I find in Aust. alot of people go to the cinema in winter more, or is it just me..hey any other aussies notice that?) thus generating more cash, thus making Trek more viable.

2. People will get sick of wondering about Trek, sick of hearing about Trek etc etc, and wont bother going to the Cinema, yes I know the Fans will but the general public will probably go “meh”, plus the risk of the entire plot been revealed is increased, again running the risk of people going “meh, I know what happens, i have read the plot!”

As in everything there are pro’s and con’s. And people give up on shatner!

169. sean's clone - February 13, 2008

This move only makes sense if the suits at Paramount feel they have a bonafide hit on their hands – outside of the trekkie fandom realm. And given the light calender for summer releases – I’d say this ius a good move.

It also takes the pressure off JJ and co. – they can really fine tune the pic in post….

It’s good news folks!

170. Ali - February 13, 2008

Roberto?

171. Danya Romulus - February 13, 2008

Well, this sucks. I’m definitely worried about everyone’s excitement peaking too early now. But, if I can just get past my disappointment for a second, it does seem apparent to me that this should have been a summer movie all along. And early May is a great time to kick off the summer schedule– I remember it worked great for Spider-Man.

172. Juli - February 13, 2008

163- No one remembers early summer films when the oscars role around…

173. Kevin - February 13, 2008

Ok, seriously too many people are going livid. It’s a friggin movie and it’s release date has been pushed back a few months. You people act like someone just betrayed you. You act like your wives or girlfriends just cheated on you… uhhh maybe the wrong site to try that anology… you act like… Star Trek has become some creepy religion and now the dogma you’ve come to believe has been rewriten.

It’s a pushed back release date… and I for one would much rather wait in line in the pleasant weather than some horrible snow storm anyway.

Get a life. Maybe you can actually spend Christmas your loved ones. If you don’t have any, take the time to go out and find them. Sheesh.

174. Ali - February 13, 2008

I guess all the toys will still come out at Christmas? The manufacturers will have tooled up and the May market is hardly Christmas.

175. Xai - February 13, 2008

And if this had originally been scheduled for May 8, 2009 there would not have been this much whining. It’s just because they changed.
The cries, pleas and threats won’t do a bit of good. Now go turn off your Big E nightlight and get under your vintage Trek sheets and get some sleep

176. sean's clone - February 13, 2008

#165. Poida

Not really – the “public” isn’t paying attention like we fans are. Movies get bounced around on the release calendar all the time.

It has nothing to do with “problems” with the film – it’s strictly a marketing strategy.

177. Petey - February 13, 2008

Even a Ferengi wouldn’t stoop so low.

I really hope this turns out to be a false rumour. Waiting till 2009 for my Trek fix is going to hurt.

178. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

I am sorry the writer’s strike had to happen. So, it’s like this…Paramount had pretty much nothing in the mix for Summer 2009, save the Transfomers sequel, which would do about 80-85% of the original’s domestic BO, based on the way things usually work for sequels.

They have a viable property in ST, that someone just said, “Hey, let’s shuffle this to 09. That will make the balance sheets happier.”

That is what movies are about. If you think it’s all Cinema Paradiso out there, you are fooling yourselves. I am SO mad about this!

179. Chancellorjake - February 13, 2008

I personally think this a stupid move. Shoehorning Star Trek in between a X-men film and a Da vinci Code sequel will insure it’s failure. It was better to release the film in December when competition was light and everyone was on Christmas break.
I’m seriously pissed with Paramount right now.

180. fanboy B - February 13, 2008

this movie is gonna have to perform a movie miracle for it to be successful… the expectations for Trek XI is gonna be through the roof, and honestly, I don’t see how it can be that successful

181. mike - February 13, 2008

ok this is the work of one of kirks most infamas villians. khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. you bloody dloodsucker you will have to do you own dirty work now!!!!!. do you hear me!!!! do you!!!!!. this is khans fault. he came back because hates kirk. thats why we are having to wait. not fair to us fans

182. Data_Lives_in_B4 - February 13, 2008

I couldn’t have said it better, so I re-post:

17. Sebastian – February 13, 2008

Very bad idea. Principle photography is half done. Photos from the set are being leaked out. The feeding frenzy will peak, and past Christmas it could diminish. You have the Star Trek tour going on, a lot of buzz. The time is NOW, guys. THIS year. I hope the delay is not because of re-shoots and studio cold feet. Strike while the iron is hot, guys!

183. Federali Aundy - February 13, 2008

Kaahhhnnnn! Kaaaaahhhhhhhhnnnnnnn!

184. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

As Al Pacino would say, “kiss me……I like being kissed when I’m being f****d!”

185. Gojira Al-Kzin - February 13, 2008

Bah. Personally now I’ll wait for it on HD disk (blu-ray or whatever) and not bother seeing it in the theatre. An Xmas release was kind of special. I hate theatres. I hate the people in them, and I won’t set foot in one in “may”.

If that means that this will be the last movie made, oh effing well.

186. 750 Mang - February 13, 2008

I liked the idea that it was a Christmas present for us all.

187. Dennis Bailey - February 13, 2008

Remarkable how quickly everyone becomes marketing and distribution experts – and remarkable how their “expertise” reinforces the conclusion that they wanted to reach. :lol:

188. Garovorkin - February 13, 2008

173 Kevin well spoken. I got me mad ,but I got over it fast ,so should everyone else. I wish I could take back my initial comment, but when you get agry you say and write foolish things. then after you wonder weather what you got mad over was worth it in the first place. Most of the time its not. This is only a movie its not life.

189. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

174

Good point. What about the fast food tie ins, et cetera? All of those companies have things in place WAY early, and while they aren’t promised that the release dates won’t change, they certainly can slide some other promotions in the slot that the new release date would require.

Roberto????

190. Jorg Sacul - February 13, 2008

and sadly, Mr. Nimoy isn’t getting any younger. I’d like to see this film while he’s still with us!

191. Yippeekaiyaymofo - February 13, 2008

son of a bitch!

192. VOODOO - February 13, 2008

I’m certainly not a marketing expert, but I thought 12/25/08 was actually shaping up to be a great date to re-launch the franchise. Casino Royale re-launched the Bond franchise in the winter and it did quite well.

While I understand that summer films generally make more money than films released in the winter. I also understand that “Star Trek” had almost no direct competition on 12/25 or a for several weeks after it’s X-Mas release.

I’m not really crazy about being in between the new X-Men movie and the sequel to the Da Vinci Code. Those two films have far broader appeal at the moment than Star Trek does and could overshadow the film.

Star Trek will be in direct competition with the X-Men’s audience + Angels and Demons will take market share away from Star Trek.

I’m sure tptb know what they are doing, but from this layman’s point of view it seems risky to place the film in between two very high profile films.

This one kind of has me scratching my head. Could there be problems with the production?

193. Xai - February 13, 2008

Agreed, Dennis.

194. Redjac - February 13, 2008

*sigh* The good news is, it will be warm enough to go see it at the drive in movie! I am sure it’ll look suh-weet on the big screen.

I remember seeing Wrath of Khan that way…

Sorry to post again…just looking for a silver lining. ;-)

195. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

188

We know this is just a movie. Most of us did “get a life.” at some point in our later years. However, for many of us, ST is a cultural zeitgeist, that we enjoy with friends and family. Surely, there is something you feel passionate about that someone out there might deride as being hackneyed or trite, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t special for you…

196. Josh - February 13, 2008

Well… at least it’ll come out (hopefully) a few days after my birthday. I can drag my boyfriend to go see it. He hates sci-fi. But he loves me, so he’ll go, whether he’s sedated or not….

Yay chloroform!

Gay relationships aside, this has its ups and downs. Mostly downs. I just don’t want to think of this as an “opener” for the rest of the summer movies. In other words, by the end of the summer, everyone’s forgotten about Trek and moved on to other things.

197. Etha Williams - February 13, 2008

I want to be happy for the ability for the film to be and do better, but I can’t. I’m just. so. sad….

198. Gojira Al-Kzin - February 13, 2008

Not a huge deal for me. I waited for DVD for the last two movies. I despise movie crowds. I have a great home theatre rig. An Xmas release had potential for a family event, and I was looking forward to it. A May release means nothing. I’ll gleefuly ignore the theatre and wait for a HD video release.

If I never set foot in a movie theatre again it will be to soon. thanks for helping kill the theatre, CBS/Paramount.

199. Robogeek - February 13, 2008

If Paramount’s smart they’ll hurry up and release a cast-in-costume photo of the Enterprise crew on the bridge to assuage our collective pain — and/or a hi-res pic of the big E herself in all her glory and splendor.

(That would be kind consolation. Hint-hint.)

Having to wait another 20 weeks is painful, but I tend to think it’s as smart a move as it is gutsy on Paramount’s part. Star Trek deserves to be a big summer blockbuster, plus this gives the filmmakers more time to get things right.

Oh, and 127, you’re just plain wrong; moving the film to May 8 is a major vote of confidence on Paramount’s part. And 132? You’re simply insane.

200. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

Please, before someone argues about “adjusting for inflation” I realize there is some discussion there, but check out the release dates for the top three on the list…

Plus, not a May release among ANY of them. May is the start of movie season. If the rushes looked so awesome, why not have some huevos and put your tentpole in June?

201. norm - February 13, 2008

If it a good movie they will come no matter what time of the year!

202. garen - February 13, 2008

to repeat myself:

This….plain…sucks.

It would be one thing if only us “insiders” had knowledge about a christmas 08 release..then the damage might not be too bad. but i think they run the risk of confusing the general movie going population by changing the release date AFTER the media hype and promotional machine is already up and running. Its practically in full swing! Everyone who saw cloverfield knows the movie is coming out on christmas. anyone who has been talking about this film has been talking about christmas. The general population….at least those who go to movies often….are starting to understand that a new trek film is coming out on christmas. I just cant believe theyre changing it after they already put out promotion materials.

my plea: MR ORCI…is there anything that you can do?? Is there anything that JJ can do? JJ weilds some power right?

HELP, MR ORCI, HELP!

203. AnnoyedFan - February 13, 2008

I THINK THIS IS GOOD. They have more time to work on it obviously, make it even better with no rush to get it all done by XMas 08..this can be only a good move. Of course it sucks to wait longer but oh well..have faith

204. Fortyseven - February 13, 2008

I’m curious if this really /does/ give them extra time, on the set, or if they’re still bound to a time table and the film will just sit until the time comes.

205. Xai - February 13, 2008

If you all needed a reason to not go see the film, there ya go.

Are you all so concerned that this will be so weak that it needed to be out on it’s own and couldn’t compete? People do go see more than one movie in a season if it appeals to them.

I think all the “problems” with the production lie in that Paramount and Bad Robot feel they have a heavy hitter in this movie and now want it where it will do the best Box Office. This isn’t something wrong… it’s something very right and I don’t blame them for wanting to make the most of it.

206. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

199
I am wrong? You think fleshing out the 09 sked in light of the writer’s strike doesn’t weigh more heavily than the suits saying, “Man, look at the untimed rushes, and those amazing lo-res animatics, and WOW, a scene edited to Media Ventures music…we gotta own the summer, by launching before everyone else, and away from everyone else!”

It is ALL about balance sheets, and accounting. ‘Nuff said!

207. Commodore Robert April - February 13, 2008

Hey, there’s time to get Shatner in now! :) Just kidding!!

Where’s the webisode to tide us over :(

I’m disappointed….

208. Oregon Trek Geek - February 13, 2008

Most displeased.

209. mike - February 13, 2008

everyone to me this is not just a movies. this is startrek and that should say it all. startrek has been watched by everyone from scientist to comics to just every day blue collar rednecks. it’s almost a national institution in of it’s self. so if they can make a tweak here and there and make more money and keep gene roddenberrys vision alive then we fans can live with it. im not a geek by any standereds but i think any star trek movies should be the best and the extra time will be a big benifit to jj and the boys.

210. VOODOO - February 13, 2008

I understand being disappointed, but some of you guys need to get a grip.

211. K. M. Kirby - February 13, 2008

5 more months of teasers and spoilers.

212. Scott - February 13, 2008

Un Be Freakin Lievable. Now I’ve got to eat healthy and work out for another five months to stave off death until I can see this movie!

Scott B. out.

213. ferndawg1972 - February 13, 2008

Sorry but this sucks! More time or less time on the production schedule won’t make it a better movie…this is crap! NOW I’VE LOST INTEREST IN THIS MOVIE!

214. Balock - February 13, 2008

The real reason they are pushing this back is due to my relentless posts on keeping the orignal E. They’ve got to redo a few things. The original E is back, thanks JJ and Orci.

Next onto issue of CGI. Guys, you need to use real models. If ILM isn’t up to it, get a Master Replicas E!

215. Tony Whitehead - February 13, 2008

Okay, everybody take a deep breath…

First and foremost, this is a business decision. “Money-grubbing” comments or not, the motion picture industry is ruled by the bottom line. I, for one, am ecstatic that the powers that be are pushing this back several months. This will allow the filmmakers, who clearly love this project as their participation here has shown, to take the movie even further than they could have even dreamt.

Secondly, Paramount, Bad Robot, et al are well aware how to run a marketing campaign as evidenced by the recent smash opening weekend box office of Cloverfield. I have no worries here, either.

Finally, it wasn’t all that long ago that Star Trek: Nemesis came out and then ENT was cancelled. Remember all the talk about how, ‘the franchise is tired and needs a rest?’ At that time, we weren’t sure if the old girl was dead, buried and gettin’ a tad mouldy. Now, only a short time later, we might see Star Trek rise out of the ashes and, to use a cliche, soar like the proverbial phoenix.

So, hang on, it’s gonna be just a bit longer, but worth the wait!

216. Dennis Bailey - February 13, 2008

Man, I’ll bet LANGUATRON could spin this thing. :lol:

217. Captain Hackett - February 13, 2008

Five months delay + more leaks and spoilers = ruin movie!

218. Kigs - February 13, 2008

Okay- where is Roberto Orci? I agree this does suck, but hopefully JJ And team will use the time to their advantage.

Hey- any Star Trek is better than no Star Trek.

:) Kigs

219. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

217

Good point!

220. Driver - February 13, 2008

Paramount should now give J.J. more money to film a sequel while still filming this movie. Oh, Brother!!

221. Captain Hackett - February 13, 2008

We ought to start a letter campaign and petition to put alot of pressure on Paramount to keep the opening date of Star Trek un changed as planned!

The letter campaign worked in the past when it saved TOS from being cancelled for their this season!

We can do it!

222. DREW - February 13, 2008

If memory serves, Star trek movies released in the Summer have not done well. I’m nervous

223. Ky-Malairn - February 13, 2008

Money Grubbing whores?? Did I read that right, did someone call Paramount money grubbing whores?

If the studios aren’t in it to make as much money as possible then why are they in the game to being with?? For those of you grumbling because this is purely a financial move could you please explain why, in your world, the entertainment business exists?

Guys, at the end of the day Paramount is in the film BUSINESS. If they want to move Trek to a more desired spot on the release schedule because it will be good for them understand that it will also be GOOD for all of us.

If Paramount gets their wish this thing will do 200 million domestic and they can keep churning out sequels every 2 to 3 years.

If we get our wish this thing will do 200 million domestic and they can keep churning out sequels every 2 to 3 years.

We gotta wait, it sucks – I know, but when it comes down to it we’re all out for the same end.

224. sean - February 13, 2008

I’ve never claimed to be a marketing expert, but I can’t fathom why they’d sandwich this between an X-Men movie and a Da Vinci Code movie instead of leaving it in a month where it’s essentially unchallenged? Can someone explain that logic to me? We’ve had plenty of winter blockbusters lately (Lord of the Rings, Night At The Museum, Bond) to justify leaving it where it’s at. The horrible Day The Earth Stood Still remake with Keanu didn’t make them nervous, did it?

They’ve got more than enough time for reshoots & FX work, so don’t tell me that’s the reason.

Where’s Bob Orci to provide reassurance when you need him??

225. Vinceman - February 13, 2008

I can wait until May. it’s a better time for me, anyway. I have plenty to keep me busy until May. There is more in my world then this film

ST:TMP was hurried out and lots of people bitch about the original release of that. All will be well in May 2009

V.

226. Jorg Sacul - February 13, 2008

aw frak…. I guess I can hold out. I waited 10 years for ST-TMP to come out.

227. VOODOO - February 13, 2008

Looking at Paramount’s schedule going forward I can understand why they would make this move.

They have some heavy hitters in 2008, but their 2009 summer schedule is a little shaky (with the exception of Transformers 2)

This is strictly a business decision that some people seem to be taking personally.

My one and only concern is that in May of 2009 the film will face much tougher competition.

Look at it this way. We will get 6 moths extra to talk about the film and in the end we will most likely get a better finished product.

Don’t get me wrong I’m a little disappointed, but in the grand scheme of things 5 months really isn’t a big deal.

228. Captain Hackett - February 13, 2008

their this season = their third season.

My brain farted when I excitedly write my most recent comment!

229. Gaius Baltar - February 13, 2008

I don’t think this is a good idea, especially if, which is what these preliminary articles make it sound like, it is purely a business decision of some kind and it really does not have anything to do with the artistic sort of side of the movie. I don’t see how altering or augmenting some scenes, changing some dialogue should take four additional months – the only mad way I could find that amount of time reasonable in this respect would be if they completely abandoned any of their current story and would have to come up with a completely new script – which from all I gather is most far from the truth.

I think this is going to challenge the whole production and marketing thing even more. It’s very evident that, as you can expect for a JJ Abrams project these days, they’re going at this with a great “veil of secrecy” approach. Pushing back the movie’s release date another four months makes it sound very likely all the PR will be pushed back four months too – if they really want to keep their utopic belief to give people just enough so they would not know any spoilers when they get to see the movie in the theatre.

From my point of view, it would demonstrate more faith into the movie’s commercial potential if they had kept the release date they were already going with for quite some time. This is supposed to be a new and exciting chapter for Star Trek. Pushing back a release date that still is ten months away from now for no discernable production reason just to avoid any potential competition from whatever other movie I don’t see on the horizon for Christmas this year just seems like the wrong idea.

230. non-belligerency confirmed - February 13, 2008

ouch. christmas is cancelled.
i’ve never been a caps guy, but if i was:

in all caps, para mount this!

231. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - February 13, 2008

Ok , upon further review , this is most likely a better release date than Christmas , releasing films on the biggest family holiday of the year has never made much sense to me , but hey what do I know? Plus the early summer release with no current competition due to the writer’s strike means on the weekend in may when it is released , it will be the only new film in the theaters , and for some people, they go to the movies on a weekly basis just to see something new . So core audience AKA us + Movie goers = Money and opening a whole new group of peoples eyes and ears to Star Trek. But J.J. , Robert, please heed the fan’s cries and give us :

1. A full render beauty shot of the U.S.S. Enterprise in all of her glory

2. Cast publicity shots

3. At least let us see some of the Enterprise sets, Bridge, Transporter Room, Engineering , etc……

Come on, throw us a bone here!

232. A.J. - February 13, 2008

My question is wether or not this is the right business move. The trade off is alot more movie-goers but also more competition. I feel like Star Trek would do better being the Big Fish in a small pond than being the other way around. Is Star Trek mainstream enough to go toe to toe with Summer blockbusters? I hope so but a christmas release just makes so much more sense to me.

233. Xai - February 13, 2008

“Where’s Bob Orci to provide reassurance when you need him?”

Bob finally got to back to his day job… remember?

234. Captain Hackett - February 13, 2008

JJ Abram and Crew,

What is your official position on this delay?

235. mctrekkie - February 13, 2008

So who is going to fix/reset the Star Trek countdown widget on the right?

Now that the Shatner is soon to be out of work, (perhaps his last TV work) and the Writers are back- and the movie has 5 more months of production room- C’mon Roberto- maybe a last little place for the Shat-man?

I say that Paramount should subsidize some more of James Cawley’s New Voyages to tide us over, and as recompense for messing with the fans.

236. Elrond L. - February 13, 2008

I sure didn’t expect this news tonight. D*mn it! The only good thing is now we can plan a midnight show, which wouldn’t have been possible Christmas Eve.

BTW you guys need to stop crying for Roberto & JJ to help . . . the Paramount suits are making this call. They spend the money, they get to pick the date.

237. Vulcan Soul - February 13, 2008

Jeez, even May >2008< is still 3 months away. Count me in the “strike while the iron is hot” camp. No way can they keep up the tension curve rising steady for such a long time.

238. Xai - February 13, 2008

227. VOODOO – February 13, 2008

“Don’t get me wrong I’m a little disappointed, but in the grand scheme of things 5 months really isn’t a big deal.”

I am circling this date… we agree on something.

;-)

239. Denise de Arman - February 13, 2008

First the shock of such depressingly horrific news, then the awe that it is most probably true. Sigh…

240. Frank - February 13, 2008

I am not so sure that this is bad news for fans, but I am sure that all the movie licensees are just THRILLED with this decision.

They are rushing to get toys and other items to be done by the largest selling season of the year and now they get to launch everything in May. May?!?

If I am Playmates, I am pissed. Sure the hardcore will still buy the toys, but the whole idea of picking up the license is to extend the brand beyond the hardcore. The best chance of capitalizing on that from a sales standpoint is during Christmas. Now Christmas is gone. I would be calling legal and having them take a hard look at the royalty rates I am suppose to be payin’

241. DesiluTrek - February 13, 2008

Yeah, the studio had better dribble out a few more details to sustain us now that we have to wait another six months.
If we are lucky and the film is good, no sequel then until 2012.
How does this affect the marketing tie-ins? Playmates for one won’t be happy not having the movie for Christmas.

242. Michael Adams - February 13, 2008

I knew it wasn’t going to be released on 12-08 anyway. We all heard that date a long long time ago, I didn’t believe it for one minute. Prediction- Paramount will sell Star Trek. Somebody at P hates it.

243. sean - February 13, 2008

#231

It will be facing a new X-Men movie and a Da Vinci Code sequel. Those are pretty heavy-hitters.

#233

I know, I know. Still, a sarcastic, cryptic remark from Bob can make it all better ;)

244. Ky-Malairn - February 13, 2008

“If memory serves, Star trek movies released in the Summer have not done well. I’m nervous” – DREW

Don’t lose sleep over it. Only 3 Trek movies were released during the summer. Khan in June of 1982, Spock in June of 1984 and Trek V (doesn’t even have a cool abbreviation) in June of 1989. Going by budget compared to gross II and III were 2 of the more successful entries in the franchise and they faced such competition as E.T, Poltergeist, Rocky III, Ghostbusters and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

Trek IV started the Thanksgiving/Christmas pattern. It’s 110 million dollar domestic gross gave Paramount the gusto to release V during an incredibly crowded blockbuster season. The first of its kind, to be fair, but they should have known it was going to be ugly from the get-go.

From what I heard Trek V was slated as a late year release for 1988 but the writer’s strike caused production delays. Not too sure on that fact, though.

245. cd - February 13, 2008

So, that means the movie will take about 3 years to make? I remember when 3 years between movies was normal. Another movie franchise (that I won’t name) released movies in 1977, 1980, and 1983, and it did OK.
And maybe this will give them the chance to some un-reimagining! >;>}

246. Elrond L. - February 13, 2008

Here’s a quote from the Hollywood Reporter story:

“Star Trek” arguably was the biggest film moved, with the intended Christmas Day release now set for the first prime date in the following summer boxoffice season: May 8, 2009. But “Trek” appears something of an exception in the mix of itinerant pics, with its shift unrelated to script or cast considerations.

” ‘Star Trek’ is moving to summer because its has so much box office potential,” Par spokesman Michael Vollman said. “It does not need any script tweaks. They’re two-thirds of the way through shooting, and we would have delivered a great movie at Christmas.”

247. Xai - February 13, 2008

221. Captain Hackett – February 13, 2008
“We ought to start a letter campaign and petition to put alot of pressure on Paramount to keep the opening date of Star Trek un changed as planned!

The letter campaign worked in the past when it saved TOS from being cancelled for their this season!

We can do it!”

Kidding…right?

248. MDSHiPMN - February 13, 2008

This will still be a great year for movies without Star Trek, just not as good. For me It’s somewhat of a dissapointment because we would have had all those great films throughout the year with Trek gift wrapped for us on Christmas. But it’s kind of fun to imagine the possibilities of a major marketing and media campaign for this film being one of the first blockbusters of the early summer movie season.

249. Charles Trotter - February 13, 2008

Wow, what an incredibly stupid decision… maybe. Here’s hoping Abrams and the gang talk some sense into Mr. Lesher…. maybe. :-P

Ok, yes, I’m peeved that we now have to wait an extra twenty weeks for this movie. Hell, I’m pissed. I’m glad JJ and co will have more time to perfect the movie, but I could barely stand waiting until Christmas… let alone summer of NEXT YEAR! Plus, the longer the wait, the more spoilers are likely to pop up, essentially ruining the movie (although those can be avoided).

I personally think a movie like Star Trek stands a much better chance as a winter movie than as a summer blockbuster. I could be wrong, of course. I will say this much: Lesher has done his homework. There’s no doubt movies that open in May earn more money than movies opening in December. Twenty movies released in May have opened to more than $50 million at the box office. Only five December movies have been able to accomplish that. So, assuming Trek does come off as summer blockbuster material, it’s possible that it could earn $50+ million in its first weekend alone.

That said, a trailer has already been released proudly stating “Under Construction — Christmas 2008.” I say we try to keep it that way, shall we? :-D

250. Robert Saint John - February 13, 2008

A delay does not mean more time, not unless they’re going to extend the budget as well. I’m sure everything, including the SFX are already scheduled, and won’t be allowed to slip. That’s just the way film production works.

The delay may mean better business, but it’s not likely we’ll get a different or better movie than what would have come out this Xmas.

251. Scott Xavier - February 13, 2008

If this doesn’t suck worse than umox…

252. Can't Wait for Labor Day 2009 - February 13, 2008

#240 and #241 Playmates is probably happy with the decision. The reason they can do more work on the toys. The rumor I heard was that Playmates spent 3 weeks on producing the prototypes of the toys that have been seen at the German Toy Fair. And it does usually take a year to get toys to be designed, produced, painted and released. Prime example Transformers movies. Took them a whole year to get things done.
But I have to agree with people who are saying that Paramount needs to release a official photo of either the Enterprise or one of the characters.

253. Gene Rodenberry's Ghost - February 13, 2008

I am spinning right now!!!

At this rate, Shatner and Nimoy will likely be dead by the premiere.

Oh, to nestle the bosom of Nichelle Nichols once more….

254. Scott G1 - February 13, 2008

Well, on the positive side, it could be worse I suppose. There could be no film at all being made.

This all reminds me of the weird season scheduling that the Sci-Fi Channel is famous for.

255. Ryan - February 13, 2008

This May release date isn’t canon.

256. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

The only letter writing campaign this site will ever endorse is one to end all letter writing campaigns

257. garen - February 13, 2008

does anyone else feel like a christmas release just sums up the overall feeling of star trek a little better than summer does?

i mean in december, its the “holiday season”. The idea is “good will toward men.” People are generally warm and fuzzy feeling from thanksgiving and whatever holidays they choose to celebrate.

summer is the time for high action, high sfx, high volume and low intelligence. Most summer movies arent for the thinking man…theyre just for fun and FX.

trek deserves more than that. trek is more “good will toward men” than it is mutants and transformers.

258. Xai - February 13, 2008

242. Michael Adams – February 13, 2008
“I knew it wasn’t going to be released on 12-08 anyway. We all heard that date a long long time ago, I didn’t believe it for one minute. Prediction- Paramount will sell Star Trek. Somebody at P hates it.”

You really believe this or just fanning the flames?

Paramount hates Trek like I hate breathing. You don’t spend millions on the project just to send it spiraling down into a pit and watch it die. And if they were to sell it… you want the product looking good to get the most money for it.

Read the article above and the Variety article. The movie’s being moved for good financial reasons, not just to piss you off.

259. Daryl Maxwell - February 13, 2008

Although I don’t want to wait, I think that summer is a better release time for a Trek movie. Remember, big box office=sequels

260. theSpockette - February 13, 2008

NOOOOO!!!! This is tragic news!! Waiting all the way to next summer?? Especially knowing the movie will be ready way before then??

*deep sigh*

261. CW - February 13, 2008

Does Paramount really think that Trek will make more money between May 8 and June 26- when paramount releases Transformers 2?

What a joke.

Or do they not have faith in this new film?

262. patrick - February 13, 2008

i’ve been a trekfan for 25 years and even i know that it doesn’t take 2years to put together and release a good trek movie.

no disrespect to mr. pascale intended, but i don’t believe that he can accurately predict what the competition for the trek film will be – nearly a year and a half from now. well, unless he’s consulting the orb of prophecy (DS9). obviously, other studios will also be announcing their own blockbusters to compete with paramount’s trek film.

i’d have to wonder if the studio heads have seen the film’s dailies and are not feeling very confident about the success of the feature.

and, of course, combined with the neglect of the startrek.com website, one would have to echo gene roddenberry’s words of caution and wisdom regarding how paramount pictures has always disrespected star trek (as opposed to the way 20th century fox studios treats the star war’s franchise).

and, let’s face it, there won’t be a single surprise remaing for the film if there is truly that much time between the close of production and it’s release. i’d read the entire screenplay for NEMESIS online months before that film’s release and look forward to doing the same for this feature.

long live star trek!

263. VOODOO - February 13, 2008

XAI #238

I will mark the date as well.

264. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

Star Trek movies traditionally premiere in December and besides, I was so looking forward to being at the theatres on Christmas Day. I was counting down the days, people!

Change your minds, Paramount! I think this is a really bad idea, not to mention a real let down for the people who have been cheer leading for this movie since it was announced.

One more thing also concerns me: I think Abrams’ team needs to keep a steady flow of extras on the web site, and tid-bits coming to keep conversation strong and ongoing about the film I would be worried that if chatter lessened among the most excited about this film, that it could hurt it in the long run. I’m not a professional, but I’m no dummy, either.

265. Ryan - February 13, 2008

Dear Paramount,

You ruined Christmas. I hope you’re happy.

Sincerely,

Ryan H.

p.s. you son of a b*tch

266. Xai - February 13, 2008

If they didn’t have faith in the film, it would not have been made and a good director wouldn’t be working on it.

You people only see one film a year or what?

267. Ryan T. Riddle - February 13, 2008

I’m just gonna borrow from Douglas Adams on this one, “Don’t Panic!”

268. Matt Wright - February 13, 2008

Well this is a bummer, but not totaly crazy, I get why Paramount moved it. Still bummed as I was really looking forward to seeing it this Winter.

269. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

#262: Good points!

At this juncture, maybe it’s not too late for Abrams to pull the project from Paramount and re-market it to Disney. I’ll bet they’re powers that be would drool over the prospect of have a part of Star Trek and a role in ensuring ‘s future.

270. Starfleetemom - February 13, 2008

@#$%^&*(&^%$#$%^&*&^%$%^&*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

271. scifib5st - February 13, 2008

Talk about your basic “bat and switch”…..
Well this will let the writers squees in more “cammreo’s” for the likes of Tom Cruse, Tom Hanks, Dick Smothers, and Harry Reams…

It seams to me that the best films box office was always of the Christmas break for Schools. Now we will have to wait untill Christmas 2009 for the great Hallmark orinaments and the other “tie ins” …..

Too bad other fans are not releasing episods on the web like “New Voyages”….

Well, now I guess I can fly to LA, rent a copter and fly over the Enterprise on the lot and get some pictures…. if I have to wait 15 months I might as well do some sight seeing….

Let’s see, new ST Fans go up against 007 fans at the box office in 2009.

Lets just forget that a Beagel won the Dog Show this weekend… and forget about Enterprise.

You know by then CBS will sell Parmont off to the Japanees and we will be watching “The Comment Empire”… great.

272. Xai - February 13, 2008

265. Ryan – February 13, 2008
“Dear Paramount,

You ruined Christmas. I hope you’re happy.

Sincerely,

Ryan H.

p.s. you son of a b*tch”

Completely uncalled for.

273. Sisko Is The Prophet, Peace Be Upon Him - February 13, 2008

John Lesher = The Grinch That Stole Christmas

lets send him lumps of coal

274. Ryan - February 13, 2008

#272 – No it’s not

275. sean - February 13, 2008

#272

But funny nonetheless!

276. SamwiseVT - February 13, 2008

This is unbelievable! I hope they read TrekMovie.com and see those against it. Better yet, they should head over to MSNBC 5Top Movies of 2008 and see that Star Trek is the most anticipated of the year!

277. David - February 13, 2008

This is sooooo sh*t. I’ve been looking forward to this movie for so long now, another 6 months seems like an eternity

278. 750 Mang - February 13, 2008

Does this really mean that now that the Writer’s Strike is over there is some re-writing and pick up’s to be done?

As disappointed as I am, if it makes Star Trek a better movie then I guess I’m ok with it.

But I do wish someone would say that is the case instead of some BS about better marketing. Surely someone gave some thought to the marketing of a new Star Trek film when they set 12-25-08 as the release.

I dunno…

279. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

OK people lets not get personal. And no Paramount arent out to get the Trekkies.

280. Xai - February 13, 2008

Sure…. and people want to be taken seriously with their comments.

281. David (Flaming Wings Forever!) - February 13, 2008

Unhappy – as it was going to be a great Christmas present this year.

Happy – because they now have a longer time to polish (would that have been necessary anyways?).

Happy – because they might – just might – do re shoots to take advantage of the stuff they could not use before?

Curious – that since the studio is seeing this AS THE FINALLY SHOULD, could this mean… maybe… a bigger budget? Hmmm? more ‘special’ special effects? more cameos? Hmmm?!

***PLEASE NOTE : this comment in no way means finding a role for Will-I-am Shatner. ***

282. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

oh and those saying ’6 months’ it is 4 1/2 months…still a long time, but not 6 months.

I kind of feel sorry for Bob and Alex. They are going to have to do the who Trek dog and pony show with the press in April/May…then do it all over again in June for Transformers 2.

283. KirkPicard Forever - February 13, 2008

I am so disappointed in this latest news just because my Dad and I were looking for a nice father-son trip to the movies this Christmas. My Dad grew up with the Original Series, while I grew up watching Next Generation with my Dad and then rediscovered the Original Series and movies afterwards in the 1990s as a boy. Well, I guess May 2009 is not THAT bad, but it is still so far away and quite a shock since everyone in the media and us fans had Christmas 2008 already etched into our schedules for Star Trek.

However, if the writers and Star Trek production team are reading this (as I know they do and I love them for it!!!), please (all fans will love you forever) spend the extra time adding a meaningful, substantial part to William Shatner, as I do not see any logical, legitimate excuse now not to include him in the movie (especially with the writer’s strike over!!!). And just maybe, pretty please with a cherry on top (I know a lot of people on these boards do not like the newer Trek, but some of us do), include a Patrick Stewart as Captain Jean-Luc Picard cameo interacting with Leonard Nimoy’s Spock in the 24th century.

Leonard Nimoy, William Shatner, and Patrick Stewart (my favorites) all in one Star Trek film would be a dream come true for me. However, in order to please all the good fans on this board, if you could only add William Shatner and not Patrick Stewart, I will be just as happy!!!

284. General Chang - February 13, 2008

hmmm. disapointing. but, although I’m not happy about it, it could be a good move.

I’d really like to hear what JJ and Roberto have to say about it.

Guys?

285. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

I read that the international release dates have bene moved to Christmas 2010.

Just kidding!

286. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

here is what I am really pissed about…I put a lot of time and effort into my big merchandising article…then Paramount go and do this an hour later

couldn’t you have waited a day guys?

287. Matt - February 13, 2008

This totally bites.

288. Q - February 13, 2008

*Sigh*

Well, Mr. Pascale brings up a good point. More time polishing = better film.

But does it have to be sooooo looooonnnng a wait? Buuuuuuuu.

):

*SSSIIIGGGHHH*

289. Xai - February 13, 2008

283. KirkPicard Forever – February 13, 2008

It wasn’t the writer’s strike that prevented “The return” before now…

290. Matt - February 13, 2008

Re 286
Anthony maybe they did read your article and moved it because of wanting a Batman/Transformers type marketing scheme! ;)

291. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Cast and Crew of the Enterprise?

Pop in at any time, fellas, and gals!

292. Ryan - February 13, 2008

#286 – Sorry I didn’t even notice that until just now. oops.

Just kidding. I read it and great work as always Anthony. :)

293. Elrond L. - February 13, 2008

Looking on the bright side . . . we have “Indiana Jones” and “Iron Man” in May, and “The Dark Knight” in July! Plus Battlestar season 4 starts in April.

BTW the Indy trailer debuts tomorrow on Good Morning America. It’ll be the one time I watch GMA this year.

PS – Yeah, Anthony, that was pretty crappy timing …guess I’ll read your merchandising article now, since you made the effort. :-)

294. garen - February 13, 2008

if this film was released in dec like originally intended…it would have had a huge first weekend/week…..followed by great numbers for at least the next two or three weeks. then depending on how good the movie is….the positive press and the all powerful WORD OF MOUTH could sustain it VERY SOLIDLY at the box office for nearly two months!

a May release takes all those extra weeks away. seriously at its absolute BEST…this film gets about 3 or 4 good weeks before peoples interests are strained and distracted by other “blockbuster” films.

bottom line….This film will be forgotten by the middle of june. no matter how good it actually is. :(

295. Gabriel Bell - February 13, 2008

Ha! I was so busy tonight that I was actually considering skipping Anthony’s merchandising article (#286) as I read through this thread and got caught up on this shocking news.

But not NOW! I’m heading over to that story ASAP and I’m going to read it word for word. Keep it up, AP!

296. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

Not only is it being pushed back, it’s being pushed back A LOT!!!! This blows!!!! 12.25.08 will no longer be the best x-mas ever! :-(

297. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

That professor who is dying of cancer and filmed a cameo in the movie……so much for his chances of seeing the finished product.

And if one of you is going to suggest that he could see a “sneak” preview screening of it long before us….then that only confirms that TPTB could release it on the originally proposed date! Jeez!!!

298. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

297

Don’t be so sure they don’t try to help him see as much as is done. We can hope for that, but even more so, hope for a miracle for him, or at least prayers for his wife and children.

299. Anthony Pascale - February 13, 2008

I don’t need pity readers!

I am going off to sulk

300. Katie G. - February 13, 2008

Re: #2. JRod

ROTFLMBO — My sentiments EXACTLY!!

Re: #95. Anthony Pascale

“…Remember…don’t type angry.”

That is one of the first things we were taught in business school (Office Practice). Never write a letter (and send it) while you’re angry. And boy do I wish I always remembered that! (I do now and have saved myself tremendous embarrassment).

But, Anthony,

“aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaugh!!!!!!!!!!”

There.

Must………find……….something…………else to…………..do……..

And in the immortal words of Al (David) Hedison, “help meeeee!”

Re: #255. Ryan

Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaa! Good one!

“Dammit, J.J., I’m a Trekkie — not a mindless automaton.”

Thanks, De.

Woo — I’m a little punchy. Better go to sleep.

kg

301. Denise de Arman - February 13, 2008

Harry- You know that, uh, “body cavity” comment you made on another thread? Now is probably a good time to unmuzzle darling. And aim toward Los Angeles (you know which address to goggle).

302. I Love My Moogie - February 13, 2008

Ahha, this is typical Hollywood PR cover-up to save face. The rushes must be falling flat & JJ is waiting for the strike to end so he can overhaul the script. We may yet see ‘you know who’ join the cast!

The Human Adventure May Just Be Beginning!

303. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Okay, let’s scrap this trekmovie page, Anthony…

Time to launch transformers2movie.com

Don’t sulk, we’ll follow you there.

304. Denise de Arman - February 13, 2008

Darn it, I meant google, Harry.

Poor Anthony.

305. Adam - February 13, 2008

I am a bit conflicted on this. One part of me agrees with Anthony, that having more time to work on the film will improve it.

On the other hand, I can recall hearing Braga and Moore in their commentary on “Generations.” They mentioned had a good deal of time to work on that film, unlike “All Good Things…” which they claimed to have written very quickly. They also mentioned that sometimes they wish they had made “All Good Things” into a feature instead and made “Generations” the series finale. So at least for “Generations,” having more time did not equal a better film, in my opinion.

I sincerely hope that isn’t the case for this film.

306. S. John Ross - February 13, 2008

What #283 said.

307. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

If you hate the idea of Trek being moved to ’09, go to this web-site and make your voice heard:

http://www.paramount.com/startrek/forums/showthread.php?t=654

308. I am not Herbert - February 13, 2008

DUDE!!!

No WAY!!! =(

That Sucks! :-(

309. Da Big Fire-Chief! - February 13, 2008

Wow, even Paramount falls behind.

Well, at least we have our fan films to look for …. Farragut, Exeter, New Voyages, Star Trek Origins and the others in the works. We also still have parts 2 & 3 for “Of Gods and Men” yet to come. Intrepid and Star Trek Odyssey are out there as well.

Those should keep us going until May 8, 2009!

Could be worse things to happen. The USA will even have a new president by them. <akes me wonder if any of those candidates are Trek fans? hehehe

310. Quatlo - February 13, 2008

Move ST to six weeks before TRANSFORMERS 2 and the huge buzz around that sequel. That is a good plan to the Paramount heads? Paramount has never known what to do with Trek and apparently despises the property. They should have sold the franchise years ago but they had to be like the dog in the manger. By May the movie or parts of it in bootleg form might well have been online already for months. At the very least the script will have long been compromised. Not good at all.

311. 1701-N - February 13, 2008

KKKKKHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNN!!!

312. Smike van Dyke - February 13, 2008

This is a catastrophy! Trek would have done great if released in the void between pre-strike and post-strike movies. It was the latest blockbuster being filmed. And now they’re throwing it in against big blockbusters. This is the silliest move EVER and most certainly the END of the franchise! At least, I won’t bother any more. These idiots ruined it all…

313. Frank - February 13, 2008

#252

You MAY get a better sculpt or a slightly better design, but Playmates has got to see their projected sales revenue from the line drop by at least 40% with the loss of the Christmas buying season.

They will put on a brave face at Toy Fair next week, but behind the curtain they will not be happy.

314. Ryan - February 13, 2008

#283 – That is exactly the way my dad and I are with Star Trek. He grew up with TOS and I with TNG. And I was planning on going to the movies with him to see it on Christmas. Oh well.

315. Gabriel Bell - February 13, 2008

#299 … Well worth my time. Great job! (Hopefully the extra time leads to a video game!)

#304 … Oh, man. Why did you have to say that?

I am staying positive. Just five more months of hanging out on Trekmovie.com and monitoring the opinions (while avoiding spoilers). A very dangerous sport.

316. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

310

It is odd, considering that Transformers 2 is DreamWorks and Paramount, that they would butt up against their own product…

317. Harry Ballz - February 13, 2008

Denise

it’s kind of redundant to crap all over a “turd” mentality!

Paramount has displayed nothing but incompetence for at least thirty years now……NEVER let a beancounter make decisions pertaining to the movie business! They’ll screw it up every time!

Hollywood used to be defined as where Art meets Commerce……..too bad Art left town years ago!

The Human Adventure Has Just Been Called On Account Of Rain!

318. The Man from Saskatoon - February 13, 2008

*sadpanda*

that is all.

319. Devon - February 13, 2008

“Move ST to six weeks before TRANSFORMERS 2 and the huge buzz around that sequel. That is a good plan to the Paramount heads?”

Think of it like this.. if the Star Trek movie got pushed by a few months, who is to say the same can’t happen to Transformers or any of those other movies?

320. Devon - February 13, 2008

That was to #310 BTW.

321. mistrrhappy - February 13, 2008

This is great news for the postproduction teams, since it hopefully means they won’t have insane, unrealistic post schedules to bang their heads against. Maybe we will see far more innovative Visual FX from ILM (and the other post houses), since they wil have more time to perfect their shots.

322. Kevin - February 13, 2008

I noticed you seemed pretty pissy Anthony. I wouldn’t worry about it. The information is still valid and probably came as a big surprise to those making the merchandise as well.

I just can’t believe some of the stuff I’m hearing here. Paramount doesn’t believe in this movie? There must be problems? Paramount is trying to kill Trek?

They’re showing that they have every confidence in this movie. This is one of their big budget blockbusters. They’re showing it at the begining of the blockbuster season.

Do you think Sony hated Spiderman b/c they didn’t release it at Christmas?

Do you think Lucas hated his baby Star Wars b/c he released it in May?

They’re showing that they have every confidence in this movie. They want it to be big and they want to own a big chunk of the summer box office.

Besides… who goes to the movies on Christmas anyway. I must have missed that Norman Rockwell painting. All the apple cheeked children getting popcorn and soda in the lobby while mom and dad pay 80 bucks for tickets and snacks after already spending a fortune on Christmas presents.

Paramount’s a buisiness. They are not your friends. They are not your parents. They are giving you a product. You are a consumer.

Star Trek may have been a labor of love for those that worked on it, but make no mistake, it was also out there to make money and always has been. You think Roddenberry bought food and women with the love of his fans? No! He bought ‘em with money.

323. Stanky McFibberich - February 13, 2008

re: 187. Dennis Bailey – February 13, 2008
“Remarkable how quickly everyone becomes marketing and distribution experts – and remarkable how their “expertise” reinforces the conclusion that they wanted to reach.”

Remarkable how it takes an expert on everything to point out the non-expertise being shown.

324. Commodore Lurker - February 13, 2008

I just lost all my enthusiasm for this film.

325. 2009 IS FINE - February 13, 2008

OH C’MON! This is GREAT!

Now there are many, many more months for the production team to figure out how to work William Shatner into the movie. :-)

You think I’m kidding? I’m not. Roberto: Please give this more effort with J.J. and co. I’m not one of the rabid Shatner fans out there. In the same way Peter Cullen’s return to voiceover work uplifted the “Transformers” movie, Shatner’s appearance (even in a brief role) would be very welcome.

One hopes he would settle for a cameo role if offered.

326. Katie G. - February 13, 2008

Re: #191. Yippeekaiyaymofo

Bruce Willis said it wrong (or his writers wrote it wrong). I’m old enough to remember that the saying is:

Yippee-ai-o-kai-yay…

Can’t remember where but trust me, that’s it. And who cares…

Anthony:

The following entry is all CAPS:

“#270. Starfleetemom

@#$%^&*(&^%$#$%^&*&^%$%^&*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

(kidding).

G’night, all.

kg

327. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

321

ILM, et al, have other features to complete also. They will finish this pretty close to the original date they promised their FX work to be done.

328. Smike van Dyke - February 13, 2008

Trek fighting of competition like Wolverine, Angels and Demons or Night at the Museum 2?!? THIS IS SO RIDICULOUS! This ruins everything! They had the perfect opportunity to exploit this Christmas niche…now they’re throwing hundreds of millions out of the window. It won’t make a stand! This my friends IS FINALLY THE END OF THE WORLD. 3 Years after the end of ENTERPRISE they finally stuck a fork in it!

329. Devon - February 13, 2008

Anthony, in regards to Merchandising will the new stuff still be shown at the NY Toy Fair? Not thinking they won’t, but don’t want to assume either way.

330. I Love My Moogie - February 13, 2008

I wonder if JJ is now sorry he released the teaser.

331. Negotiator - February 13, 2008

Shoot!

You mean I’m going to have to stand in line outside the movie theatre for an extra 6 months?

……..OK.

332. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

To 322:
Paramount’s a buisiness. They are not your friends. They are not your parents. They are giving you a product. You are a consumer.

Star Trek may have been a labor of love for those that worked on it, but make no mistake, it was also out there to make money and always has been. You think Roddenberry bought food and women with the love of his fans? No! He bought ‘em with money.
————-

Exactly. That’s why I think Abrams should have marketed this project to Disney, not Paramount. Maybe it’s not too late. Paramount doesn’t give a flip about Star Trek–that’s obvious–and, I’ll bet the powers that be at Disney would drool over the prospect of taking ownership of that franchise and it’s future. Not only would they inherit the product, but also the fan base.

Disney is a power house and I’m sure that just like their other projects (i.e: Narnia), they’d “do this movie up right”.

333. Andy Patterson - February 13, 2008

Yeah, bummer.

334. Quatlo - February 13, 2008

330:

I wonder if JJ is now sorry he decided to direct the movie.

335. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

:-( Hopefully JJ and crew can provide us with a nice viral marketing campaign to span a long period of time before the movie. That will keep us coming back for goodies, and maybe stave off the Trek starvation a bit longer?

336. The Guardian of Forever - February 13, 2008

NOOO!!!!

As if the wait wasn’t bloody long enough!! I’m banging my head on my desk here. URGHHH.

That’s not to say I don’t think it’s a good business move, but who the heck cares about business when we have to wait for months longer than before??

Christmas is gonna be dull this year.

337. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

334. Come on, we still have to keep the faith for the movie itself! :)

338. Zodou - February 13, 2008

#256 Anthony:

You do know that’s what kept star trek alive in ’68-’78 right? That’s also why we have a non-functional orbiter shuttle named Enterprise.

Look, write letters if you feel you have to. Who’s to stop you? trust me “they” (meaning Paramount) DO listen.

Just don’t be a belligerent jerk, no one listens to belligerent jerks ;)

339. SirBroiler - February 13, 2008

I think this is a sure sign that they are not happy with what they have – and they are re-writing, re-shooting, etc.

And I have to agree – with all of the major motion pictures slated for the summer of 2009 – it’s going to be hard for Star Trek, no mater how good this movie is, to crack that nut.

And I still say SCREW SHATNER! He took the fat paycheck to star in, and die in Generations. Nimoy knew it was crap, and didn’t sign on. So let him have his moment now.

340. Batts - February 13, 2008

That really sucks BIG TIME!!! To memory Superman Returns sequel is coming out 2009!! I think this just screwed things up in a major way. Why cant they leave well enough alone. I bet Shatner went in and pulled some strings and said if Boston Legal is cancelled, you guys here at paramount should jack off Star Trek. What a disappointment!!

341. Rich - February 13, 2008

Well that does it for me…I have to give the whole Trek Movie excitement a break. I was wondering if I could sustain it through Christmas but I know I can’t do it through May of ’09. I think lots of people feel the same way. I’ll explode if I keep thinking about this movie and don’t get to see it until May of ’09.

So long trekmovie.com until probably July…when I’ll catch up on everything and start the excitement again.

342. BrandonR - February 13, 2008

Well this sucks.

343. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

339. Trust me a re-writing and re-shooting would cost WAY more money than this is saving. There is no way they would do either…EVER.

344. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

341. No don’t stop coming to Trek Movie! Just let your interest be piqued every once and a while with a good Trek refresher here on the site. Keep the faith, man. Keep the faith.

345. Papa Jim - February 13, 2008

CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP! CRAP!

346. Michael Hall - February 13, 2008

“That professor who is dying of cancer and filmed a cameo in the movie……so much for his chances of seeing the finished product.

And if one of you is going to suggest that he could see a “sneak” preview screening of it long before us….then that only confirms that TPTB could release it on the originally proposed date! Jeez!!!”

Right, Mr. Ballz. Letting him see the movie first would be so unfair because, like, this is all about you.

Christ.

347. Hon. David Kulessa - February 13, 2008

Wow, I didn’t know Will Wright worked for Paramount.

348. ShatisDead - February 13, 2008

This sucks. Any delay of a movie is usually indicative of no confidence in the project. Seems to me that the resolution of writers strike was smoke to cover up Paramount’s true feelings on the film.

Paramount can spin it however much they want, but their big film of the summer is Transformers, Star Trek is going to be relegated to the B team marketers and probably B grade marketing support.

This movie will face a lot of pressure from other summer flicks, even though its pretty early in the summer.

349. Litenbug - February 13, 2008

If you dislike the movie cuz your main man ain’t in it… don’t go.
If the bridge rails ain’t red.. don’t buy the ticket
If you feel that the movie can’t compete… stay home.
If you feel they raped your childhood cuz the nacelles spin wrong.. get a life.

a bunch of whiners. You are getting a Trek movie and you still aren’t happy.

350. GaryS - February 13, 2008

Exactly Kayla !
Have faith in the final product .
It might be a good idea to see if other trek films have been reshuffled and if so what were the results?

351. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Okay, now it’s time to release this sucker in 3-D! Let ILM take the extra time to do that!

352. seekerpsion2012 - February 13, 2008

Wow. thats alot of comments. If paramount had brains they would take notice. Also, the longer they wait the more chance ther is that plot lines will leak, or a pirate dvd copies will leak.

Once again trek takes a kick to the balls……….

how sad :)

353. lodownX - February 13, 2008

I’m F’in CRUSHED. The idea that it is still over a year rather than 10 months is depressing. A better movie-franchise… GREAT. My Christmas present to myself… opposite of GREAT.

354. elmachocombo - February 13, 2008

Remember the scene from Raising arizona when John Goodman leaves the kid on top of the car? He screamed so loud he had to take a breath in the middle of it? That about sums up how I feel right now:(

355. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

349:

Are you from Paramount? Because it seems your post implies that we just “owe it” to the “generous elite powers that be” who stomp all over their audience, to clap our hands and jump up and down for every decision they make for us little pip-squeaks.

Wrong!!!!! And to that end, my comment is summed up with “Blah, blah, blah”.

356. Jordan - February 13, 2008

But I don’t wanna spend christmas with my family :(

357. Xai - February 13, 2008

332. Fansince9 – February 13, 2008
” That’s why I think Abrams should have marketed this project to Disney, not Paramount.”

Paramount owns Trek, not Disney. Abrams couldn’t market a Trek movie to Disney because they don’t own the rights.

358. CANON - February 13, 2008

“The” CANON here, maybe with the extra 6 months I’ll finally get some love from the writers and JJ. So far, they have neglected and ignored me, presumably due to the tight deadline. Well boys, it’s time to take care of me, ‘cos time is on our side now.

“Live long and…….whatever.”

359. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

357:
Disney’s wealthy enough for a hostile takeover of the stock, though.

360. KirkPicard Forever - February 13, 2008

#306

Thanks for the support!!!!

#314

Yeah, Star Trek was always something that brought my father and I closer together, at least for an hour each week…or more with all the reruns daily on some channels over the year. Great memories and great talks!!! We only watch Next Generation and Original Series to this day. We tried to give Enterprise a decent shot in 2001, but it just didn’t work for us.

I am still excited about the new movie whenever it comes out, but I do think the release date move is extremely misguided just for the fact that many many people like us fans were already planning on spending part of Christmas Day this year at the movies. May 2009 just feels like an eternity right now, especially in terms of keeping the buzz for the film strong. However, I might add that Narnia: Prince Caspian (a favorite book/film series of mine) was originally scheduled for Christmas 2007 and then moved to May 2008 by Disney. Judging by the Internet and media blogs, I think the buzz for that movie is very strong despite the change in release date. So, it could be a blessing in disguise.

As I said, I just hope the extra time allows for some better dialogue and special effects…and I know I have my head in the clouds but Shatner and Stewart cameos in some form.

361. TrekNerd - February 13, 2008

I don’t mind the move to May.

However, it should be May 2008.

Or at least Summer 2008, which was the original release date.

362. Adam - February 13, 2008

I was thinking about going Home for Christmas and see Star Trek with my Brother…like previous Trek Movies. So much for that idea, but the date might change again.

363. Michael Adams - February 13, 2008

It will make enough money to pay for itself, and it’s Star Trek, and it will look good so someone will want to buy the franchise. It’s like fixing up a used car just to sell. They at Paramount keep putting money into there oldest clunker but can’t make it purr. If I were a billionaire I would buy Star Trek in a heart beat.

364. h-bomb - February 13, 2008

Damn writer’s strike….

365. Litenbug - February 13, 2008

355. Fansince9 – February 13, 2008
349:

Are you from Paramount? Because it seems your post implies that we just “owe it” to the “generous elite powers that be” who stomp all over their audience, to clap our hands and jump up and down for every decision they make for us little pip-squeaks.

Wrong!!!!! And to that end, my comment is summed up with “Blah, blah, blah”.

Get over yourself. No one stepped on you or asked you to accept something horrible. It’s a movie. If you read the articles it’s explained why the movie is being moved. It’s not a vast conspiracy and if you dislike the way you think things are going… no one will make you go to the movie.

As for the “blah, blah, blah”… try shutting your eyes and put your fingers in your ears too.

366. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

http://origin.aintitcool.com/images2007/trekposter.jpg

367. Kayla Iacovino - February 13, 2008

352 seekerpsion2012
Good point about leaking scripts or plots or the movie on the internet. I didn’t even think about that. That sucks, since I am totally anti-spoilers.

And, 356. Jordan:
“But I don’t wanna spend christmas with my family :(”

ha ha ha ha!!!

368. Litenbug - February 13, 2008

359. Fansince9 – February 13, 2008

“Disney’s wealthy enough for a hostile takeover of the stock, though.”

They aren’t going to spend millions and millions just to get Trek.

Perhaps you and Michael Adams (#363) could pool your money

369. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

Now my Christmas present will have to be honoring the birth of Christ and spending time with family….

370. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

369. Red Shirt – February 13, 2008
Now my Christmas present will have to be honoring the birth of Christ and spending time with family….
————-
Well, as much as I love Star Trek, and as mad as I am about the move of the movie date, you’re right.

Jesus is who Christmas is about, and that’s really all that is important.

371. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

368: Only if someday I inherit something from a rich uncle I knew nothing about. Since that’s not going to happen, I’ll just wait and see what happens.

I was just blowing off steam, I know JJ’s not going to market the movie to Disney, I just wish they did have the project because I know they’d do a better job with it.

372. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

370. Fansince9 – February 13, 2008
369. Red Shirt – February 13, 2008
Now my Christmas present will have to be honoring the birth of Christ and spending time with family….
————-
Well, as much as I love Star Trek, and as mad as I am about the move of the movie date, you’re right.

Jesus is who Christmas is about, and that’s really all that is important.
————-

I’m still going to miss going to the theatre that night, though. :(

373. AirForcePA47 - February 13, 2008

#369 and #370:

I agree. I was really debating on going out to see it on Christmas when I should be reflecting on the true meaning of the season with my family.

______________

In the end, I guess it all did work out… :-D “All things work for the good of those…” (I’m still mad though)

374. sean - February 13, 2008

#369

Wait…since when was Christmas about Christ? ;)

375. Fansince9 - February 13, 2008

369: Thanks, for setting my head strait. :)

376. Kirky - February 13, 2008

Good, now they can do rewrites to put Shatner in the movie!!!

377. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

376

Hmmm…

1. Boston Legal possibly cancelled (not announced on ABC’s fall sked)
2. Star Track (giggle) moved back a few months

Maybe it can happen…

“There are always possibilities…”

378. Denise de Arman - February 13, 2008

#369 & #370- Hmm… hadn’t even looked at it from that angle. Thanks for bringing that up.

379. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

BREAKING NEWS: Star Trek fans to spend Christmas day in churches, Grandma’s house and gathering around the fire!

380. Captain Presley - February 13, 2008

369. Red Shirt, 370. Fansince9

Amen!!

381. Red Shirt - February 13, 2008

I am not trying to hijack this board with religion, dogma, or anything like that….Just trying to keep it all in perspective, because I was really REALLY looking forward to this movie coming out this year….

382. Buckaroohawk - February 13, 2008

Well just…dammit. This really trips my trigger. Spockboy just did me a wonderful favor by re-recording the dialog to the fan-made Trek trailer I put together a while back. I had done the original voiceover myself, and it was a little sub-par. Spockboy made it sound wonderful, and I was all set to debut it on YouTube. Now it’s not even worth it because it shows the 12-25-2008 date.

Heavy crestfallen sigh.

And of course, this means that all the publicity stills we’ve been salivating for, the photos of the cast in character, the first images of the new Enterprise, the delicious little tidbits of story we’ve been crying for like junkies will all have to wait.

Frak! Frak, Frak, Frak!!!

I understand the decision to do this seems a sound one, and it does make sense…but this movie was really starting to generate some heat. Word was getting out and I think people were beginning to get curious about what the new Trek was going to be like. Now they have to try and sustain that momentum over an extra 5 months. It’s like pushing a boulder up a mountain (one that looks suspiciously like the Paramount logo), and halfway up the mountain decides to grow an extra mile or two straight up. Argh!

Perhaps the studio will reverse course and decide to reinstate the original release date. I know it’s doubtful, but I can dream, can’t I?

Or maybe I’ll just hibernate until May 2009…

383. Eyewillit - February 13, 2008

Dear John Lesher,

Being a life long fan of Paramount Pictures, the Indy franchise, the Star Trek films and the many other great movies that Paramount has given us over the years I am vexed at your decision to move the release date of the new Star Trek film.

Knowing how much Paramount and it’s parent company Viacom care about it’s fans I’m surprised that your first decision would be to move one of the major tent poles of Christmas season. Thus alienating a large group of paying customers and further proving to Trekkies around the world that the top brass at Paramount don’t understand what Star Trek means to us.

I for one am tired. Tired of lack luster Star Trek films, hastily made episodes and poor decisions by executives that don’t understand the people who buy tickets. And for that reason and that reason alone I will not go see the new Star Trek film when it finally comes out. I also ask that other fans BOYCOTT this poor choice in scheduling and wait to see the film when it’s on HBO, rent it from NETFLIX or better yet DOWNLOAD it from somewhere on the web.

I’m sorry for JJ Abrams, Damon Lindelof and most of all for Leonard Nimoy. I know how much they care about this project. JJ has never let me down. I’m a huge fan of LOST and MI:III, another great Paramount film. His work is amazing and his understanding of what makes us fans makes me that much more interested in what he’s doing. Damon has given us hours of the best entertainment TV has to offer and Mr.Nimoy has enriched all our lives as an actor, director, poet and photographer.

Make no mistake about it, the only reason I will not go to see the new Star Trek film is because of this decision to push back the release date. After years of bad Trek films, disappointing series finales and false starts, this is the straw that broke the camels back. Screw Trek I’m going to go see Wolverine!

Congratulations on your promotion to the head of the Paramount Film Group John. Let’s hope you can keep everyones ego in check.

Sincerely,

Mark Meyer

384. Doug Abramson - February 13, 2008

1. Studios release films that they think will make big bucks between the first weekend in May and the Fourth of July. Look at this year’s releases if you think I’m wrong. Paramount thought that ST:V was going to be big, they were just wrong.

2. Studios dump the films that they think are going to tank to late August and September in the US.

3. Other than TMP, which had good box office, December Trek films have done OK (ST:6) to disapointing (Insurrection and Nemesis). The two big money makers ( TVH and First Contact), were released in late November for Thanksgiving weekend.

4. Paramount doesn’t hate Trek. They just won’t give in to the hard core fan’s every whim. Trek used to have two nicknames at the studio. “THE francise” and “the golden goose”. Both popped up when they learned that they would make an profit on any Trek project. They want Trek to do well. They want to make us happy. They want our money!

385. OR Coast Trekkie - February 13, 2008

Geez, are there actually ADULTS in here? I could swear I’ve been reading the posts of 5 year olds being told “no” about getting a pice of candy at the store…

Think of the positives: The writers strike is over, so now the rewrites and reshoots can happen, and ther ebe more time for editing and the like.

Plus, your families will actually get to see you on Christmas. I’m sure plenty of your mothers would rather see and spend time with you than be disappointed because you were at the theatre in your Kirk uniform .

386. Ken - February 13, 2008

It’s only four-and-a-half months folks. Get a grip…

Imagine if the creators of the very first Star Trek movie had another 4+ months on the schedule. Those poor people started filming before they had a clearly defined ending for the script. The special effects were farmed to two separate companies and they were being “dropped in” at the last minute. Jerry Goldsmith was composing and recording the score often to a blank scene, where a to-be-completed effects shot was supposed to go. The director Robert Wise didn’t even get to preview the final cut, and hand carried the reels to the premier event. Although I’m quite fond the recent “Director’s Edition” version, it would have been a much better movie if they had another four-and-a-half months to get it done right.

I’m not saying JJ and company need another four-and-a-half months, but I’m sure they’ll make excellent use of that time to make this “relaunch” of the franchise even better. The success of this movie is going to fund the future of Star Trek for years to come. Waiting an extra few months is trivial… Besides, going to see a movie in May is much more fun than seeing it on Christmas Day. I want to be at home on Christmas Day, not waiting in a movie line.

387. Sean4000 - February 13, 2008

379: LMFAO!

I actually have to see family and open boxes on X-Mas day…damn!

388. DEMODE - February 13, 2008

I should be mad, but…. This gives them plenty of time to get Shatner in the film. That is all that matters to me.

389. Blackout - February 13, 2008

Wait…so this isnt even related to the script at all? Not even the movie? They just moved it 5 whole months later to make more money?

Dammit, that sucks. If they wanted more time to work with it now that the writers are back, thats understandable, but this just sucks.

Oh well. At least they’ll have lots of time to iron out hte rough edges.

390. S. John Ross - February 13, 2008

#386: Realistically, there’s a pretty good chance that Abrams and company already have their dance-card full for the extra months, and will be busy with other projects while Trek sits in the can, completed on schedule.

I’m not saying that this is a bad decision … I understand and respect the strategy of going for summer-blockbuster status in a year when the competition will be weak, and I think it may well work out in the long run, but in real terms, there’s a very real chance that busy folks like Abrams & company are … well, busy folks.

If the studio is serious about thinking this film has summer-blockbuster potential on merit rather than just placement, maybe they’ll be busy working on the NEXT one ;)

391. T2 - February 13, 2008

no comment…at a loss for words

392. Senator Vreenak - February 13, 2008

May release date….. I sense that this info is a faaaaaaaaaaaaaaakkkkkkkkkkkkkkkeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

393. Jeffrey S. Nelson - February 13, 2008

More time for Shatner to lose weight and shape up and film that cameo! Make it so, Mr. Orci.

394. Chad from Switzerland - February 13, 2008

NOOOOOOOO!!!…. Bad news, bad decision. I c’ant wait until middle of 2009 :-(

395. =A= - February 13, 2008

oh noooooooooooo that take me wait forever!!!!!!!!!!!!! wtf!!!!!!!!!!! next 15 months!!!

396. angry but i'll get over it (except in this case) - February 13, 2008

Time for the trek fans to go on strike! getting on a plane to california right now. let’s go!

397. Commodore Lurker - February 13, 2008

To Kayla 343/344/et al. (and anyone else trying to find the upside).

I commend your cheerleading, and from many points of view there are a lot of upsides to the May ’09 date. Thus, I voted “Good Idea/Not happy.”

Here’s the problem. This is the SIXTH time Paramount has buried the knife in our Hearts & Backs.

If you read my very first post during the “Kirk Book Giveaway” (which suddenly seems like a month ago), then you will see that I am “One of the Old Ones, the Ones Who Made Us,” as Roc said in TOS “What Are Little Girls Made Of.” [what's your point old babbling one?]

The Buried Knives in our Backs & Hearts:

1) TOS Cancelled after the first ever fan letter writing campaign.

2) TAS Cancelled just when it got really good.

3) TMP’s original release sucked because they rushed the script (TOS ‘TheChangling’ ripoff) and rushed it through post-production so it would be a cashcow. Great Director & Great Composer but a crappy and (honestly) a boring movie.

4) Nemesis: had the wrong Director (studio decision) and one of the greatest Trek scripts of all time was butchered along with the movie.
Paramount damn near killed one of their own “Crown Jewels” in the Star Trek franchise.

5) Enterprise Cancelled right when the 4th season was F____ing Brilliant! One of the top five seasons of Trek all time. I think season 5 with Shran on board was going to be awesome!

6) Star Trek 0 delayed to be an even bigger cashcow. After all the buildup and anticapation we’ve been through in the last six months at having J.J. & Co. save that which we love so dearly.

Bottomline: Paramount does not RESPECT US the fans. Stop defending them.

398. maznz - February 13, 2008

All I can say is I’m glad I’m not in my autumn years.

What ever makes financial sense, as that will keep the ship afloat.

399. Son - February 13, 2008

Thank God almighty!
Christmas 2008 might have been a nice present, but what a terrible date! I thought Paramount would never learn from past mistakes. Apparently the new guy doesn’t need to learn from past mistakes – this guy’s made the impact already.

Sucks having to wait, but I was expecting a delay at some point. Not for any particular reason, but because I thought it might happen. Didn’t expect a 5 month push, but the first week of the summer season is the best.

And really, what Star Trek needs is to make lots of money. If it does, that means we’re getting a sequel…and then some.

400. LorienTheYounger - February 13, 2008

DO NOT WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

401. OR Coast Trekkie - February 13, 2008

Funny thing is: these same people complaining about the delay, if it gets changed back, or had only been contemplated would be the first to say (if the movie wasnt up to their expectation) “maybe if they had taken an extra few months, we could have had a better product, but no, this is ANOTHER classic example of Paramount skipping out on Trek quality just to get it to the screen…” or something to that effect

402. Dansk - February 13, 2008

Screw this!!! Dammit Jim!!!

403. Don - February 13, 2008

Way to fail…what the greedy bastards at Paramount fail to realize that breeding resentment within a fanbase that is already charged with some hesitation over recasting (and LACK of casting in Shatners case) is that this is a STUPID move. They were on the right track with a decent teaser and the leaks from Toyfair but now, just as some folks interest was starting to turn toward anticipation the morons at Paramount shoot themselves in the foot by sayinwe now have to wait 15 months. Idiots. I was one of the old school fencesitters willing to give this a chance but now I think Ill hold on to my money in May and MAYBE watch it if a friend LOANS me the DVD when it is finally released.
Morons.

404. Don - February 13, 2008

PS
I wont bother coming to Trekmovie.com or to the official website now for updates and it this also screws marketing and licensing. All those great items that were supposed to be released at Christmas? Gone. Playmates and MR? Screwed.
Paramount manages to shoot themselves in the foot once again.
Hope youre reading this you friggin chuckleheaded executive meatheads.

405. Radioactive Spock - February 13, 2008

uggg! weak sauce, man. hopefully it translates to more profit in the end, but in the mean time i’m totally bummed.

406. Devon - February 13, 2008

#403 – “They were on the right track with a decent teaser and the leaks from Toyfair but now,”

I don’t think that was Paramount’s donig necessarily, and it wasn’t really a “leak.” It was there for retailers to see.

Also, I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to see the movie on its own merits?

Personally, I’m disspointed. But I think some are taking this WAY too seriously.

407. Devon - February 13, 2008

#404 – “PS I wont bother coming to Trekmovie.com”‘

Geez calm down my friend. What did TM.com? You do realize this is more or less a fan site right? This isn’t an official Paramount page. So what’s your problem with this site?

408. Michelle - February 13, 2008

Sheesh, I was disappointed but I think some people are overreacting a bit.

409. Pissed - February 13, 2008

A big valentines kick in the balls to whoever decided to push this back.

410. trekee - February 13, 2008

It’s just pants! Though it does save me from having to climb out the bathroom window on Christmas day and sneak off to the cinema.

411. Devon - February 13, 2008

“#256 Anthony:

You do know that’s what kept star trek alive in ‘68-’78 right? That’s also why we have a non-functional orbiter shuttle named Enterprise. ”

That’s the whole thing. We’re dealing with different times now. Of course, keep in mind that Roberto and Co. have said that they DO listen to us through the site. So hopefully they are lurking now and that one of them can address this issue and the concerns regarding it, especially squeezing it between the other two blockbuster movies before/after it.

412. Boborci - February 13, 2008

Ryan – February 13, 2008
This May release date isn’t canon.

LOL!

413. Don - February 13, 2008

407. The only reason I started coming here was for the new movie coverage. Im not blaming Trekmovie.com I just choose not to spend 16 months coming here waiting for table scraps about this movie. Im due to redeploy to Iraq in January so I was seriously psyched that Id get to see this movie before hand. Now, its not gonna happen so I have to desire to dwell on this anymore. If I see it on a bootleg DVD by way of China and Syria in a Baghdad market I may pick it up for a buck.
Peace and out.

414. Devon - February 13, 2008

#413 – Good luck and god bless, and thank you!

415. DJT - February 13, 2008

Hmm….when will Transformers come out? Will Star Trek have to compete with it at all? If so that would be bad. There’s only so much time and money people will invest during a period on luxuries such as going to the movies.

Also, with such lead time, they might as well get started on Star Trek 2.

416. Reliant - February 13, 2008

Bad news for this Star Trek fan. http://www.comingsoon.net is posting the same headline about the film being pushed back.

417. Charles Trotter - February 13, 2008

By the way… this was a terrible birthday gift. :(

418. DJT - February 13, 2008

This has to be an event movie. Much like Transformers was. If it is sandwiched between other franchises, like Nemesis was with LOTR, then it is going to perish in the box office much like Nemesis.

C’mon guys, I want this movie to fly, too. Don’t stack the odds against it.

419. AJ - February 13, 2008

Paramount is perhaps worried that the 150m is too rich to take a chance on an XMAS release. No, or low, profit means no franchise. This flick is a big gamble for them. And they may feel they need more time to prepare the vast masses who don’t what Star Track is at all.

420. Commodore Lurker - February 14, 2008

To: #401
You make a lot of good points. The thing is this film has all the money, talent, and especially time it needs to be successful (unlike some previous efforts). A four month shooting schedual for principal photography is an enormous amount of time these days. This decision is purely greed based. I understand they are running a high cost / high risk business. But, as you can see from the extraordinary number of posts and volatile reaction, all Paramount has done is piss off the core of their market base. We Trekkers are the ONLY customers who will pay to see this film ten times AND buy the DVD. Everytime they try to make a Trek movie appeal to the mass audience it fails. ST IV: The Voyage Home was written for US. Yet, it still holds the record for highest gross and largest mass audience appeal. Again, Paramount does not RESPECT US!

421. Ali - February 14, 2008

Bob
What are you saying? The date is not May?

422. Charles Trotter - February 14, 2008

#421 Ali

He was laughing at a comment Ryan made

423. down here in nz - February 14, 2008

sigh – oh well, more waiting

It takes ages to scroll down this page using an iPod touch

424. Aragorn189 - February 14, 2008

No for crying out loud. So much for their Christmas gift.

425. TerPor - February 14, 2008

And more time to add Shatner to XI :)

426. Battletrek - February 14, 2008

The film will have a better polish to it, but I doubt box office will be any better.

427. Sarek of Vulcan - February 14, 2008

SHAME.

428. D. McCoy - February 14, 2008

426-

Good point, there are plenty of lame films that make a profit without “polish”.

429. Valar1 - February 14, 2008

just awful

430. PaoloM - February 14, 2008

Well, Paramount will use the extra time to polish the movie. It’s a good thing, in my opinion.

431. Allister Gourlay - February 14, 2008

well we have waited this long!

432. D. McCoy - February 14, 2008

Hee, hee, given the extra time, and writers, how could they not find a way to get the Shat in the film. I mean, if that was the real reason.

Either way, if asked again, other reasons will have to be given as to why Shat is not in it.

433. Commodore Lurker - February 14, 2008

To Don #413:
I’m an ex-Army Grunt. Take care and be safe my brother. Thank you for your service to our freedom, sir. You should be able to post from “The Sandbox.” Check in with us from time to time. Out here.

434. newman - February 14, 2008

Anthony you’re going to have to reset the countdown widget!

435. DGill - February 14, 2008

Hmmm. For a moment I was overcome by a serious urge to kick Lesher’s ass, but there’s nothing one can do about it. My anticipation for this film, like the film itself, is going to go on hiatus for a while.

436. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - February 14, 2008

No Paramount isn’t in the business of giving people what they want when they want it , they really might be doing all of us Trek fans a favor by delaying it till summer of 2009. That means they have a Helluva lot of time to get any possible concived of item you buy to eat, drink, read, play with, brush your teeth with, emblazoned with the Trek logos and emblems , then Joe Consumer says, “Hey looks like there is gonna be some kinda new Star Track thingy soon, wow check out that cast !! They have acting chops and are pretty hot to boot, Wow with JJ and Roberto at the helm , Hmmm …..sounds pretty cool, I might have to check this out when they release it in……..wait a sec….April 4, 2069!!! Forget it!! I can’t wait that long!!!” *Crumples BK cup and walks away in a huff* LOL

Who says us Trek fans have no imagination? LOL

437. D McCraven - February 14, 2008

I have been a fan for several years, and have read many posts by different people. I still believe that the Enterprise must not be altered from its original form, and from all that could be seen from the trailer it has. It looks like a cross from TNG and the theatrical Big E from ST 1-6. Please don’t mess with perfection, as far as Shat goes would love to see him. Finally , Star Trek was always a morality opera. Abrams should know that a good story will always suspend disbelief. My point is that I was not a fan of ST Enterprise, but In a Mirror,Darkly was excellent. The Old School Stuff will work. To all Live Long and Prosper

438. Mr Phil - February 14, 2008

Think of it this way – it’s like when a TV show gets upgraded from BBC2 to BBC1 – the film is getting a promotion to the premiership, or something…

439. Quatlo - February 14, 2008

This is one film production that needed to run smooth and steady and project calm confidence from start to finish. It must win back long time fans who are jaded and draw in media savvy younger audiences looking for a theater thrill ride with an updated somewhat familiar fable. What do you think when you hear a movie release date has been delayed? Production problems maybe? A troubled script or other issues? ST might be cited as merely ‘rescheduled’ in the media to begin with. Then it may well be referred to as the ‘much delayed’ ST film. Perhaps next it will be tagged as the ‘reportedly troubled’ new ST film whose release date was extended five months. Perhaps someone jealous of JJ, RO and AK will plant rumors and up the negativity factor the media loves. This is far from the ideal scenario for birthing a project such as this. Any spin saying it provides more time for sweetening is decidedly askew. Production dates are met and people in the biz move on to the next project. Of course time can be found for additional editing and re-shoots of key scenes. But that time is factored into production to begin with. Christmas with no major sci-fi or action competition in sight was great timing. Ideally the film would have still been pulling in some revenue at the box office the first week of May. The merchandise tie-ins would have created even more PR and hype leading up to a Christmas day release. The Transformer crowd would be bored and might be drawn to an FX laden big budget sci-fi romp and fix. None of this will be in place come early May 09. The more you think about it the more you wonder if common sense is alive at all in suit HQ. Mind numbing.

440. Eyewillit - February 14, 2008

#413

I’ll be the 1st one to send you that bootleg!

Look out John Lesher you’re about to enter a world of hurt.

Sumner doesn’t tolerate failure!

441. Charles Trotter - February 14, 2008

Wow, I knew the move was disappointing but I never actually thought it would screw people over. If the general reaction to this news matches the overall reaction here… I dunno, it looks as though Paramount may actually lose money.

Personally, I want it to be released this Christmas, as originally conceived. Lesher may have done his box office homework, but I don’t think he and the other big-wigs at Paramount thought about the effect this may have on the community who are looking forward to this film. Their only thought was how to make the most money possible, and this could very well backfire on them.

As I said above, Star Trek is more a fall/winter season movie to me than a big summer blockbuster. Many of the movies released during the summer are rather forgettable; they’re generally big, dumb popcorn movies that don’t require a bit of thought. Not all summer-released movies are like that, mind you… but most are. For every Spider-Man 2 or Batman Begins or Transformers, there are ten horrible movies opening along with them. December, however, is known as the month when the “good” movies come out… and besides, look at movies like I Am Legend and all three Lord of the Rings films? They did fantastic business and they were all December releases.

So… JJ, Bob, Alex, Bryan, Damon, Jeffrey… if any of you guys are reading this, could you please try to get the release date bumped back up? Would be greatly appreciated. :)

442. Devon - February 14, 2008

#441 – Good post. Yes, for once, I’ve actually seen an overwhelming NEGATIVE reaction to something regarding this movie and I think everything was just RIGHT personally. Yes, I’m not a studio exec. I mean the merchandising opps for Christmas and a chance for this movie not to get knocked down by another blockbuster was ALL RIGHT THERE for Christmas.

443. Battletrek - February 14, 2008

Star Trek will never be about major box office anyways, this is just stupid.

444. D McCraven - February 14, 2008

I think that someone at Paramount has figured out the Destruct Sequence and activated it 9…8…7…6…..get ot of there get out 3. .. 2…1 BOOOM!!!!!

445. max - February 14, 2008

It was just beginning to feel close, too… ;)
Eh… frustrating, but not worth getting upset over.

446. Devon - February 14, 2008

Just curious, does/did Bad Robot have a say in this???

447. Enc - February 14, 2008

i turn my back for a sec…
#9
LOL

#33
i was thinking the same thing. ehat day is? wheres my calendar?

#123
stage 1) blame bermanaga
stage 2) blame paramount
stage 3) …

#357
even if disney coulda woulda… they woudl lable it under one of there other houses and it would might end up as a Bruckheimer, Bay deal

448. Mark Lynch - February 14, 2008

Well as long as I don’t die on Boxing Day, then it won’t be so bad to have to wait until May 2009.

I agree with everyone who has stated that it will give the team more time to get in any bits and pieces that were thought of during the writers strike but could not be written up and filmed.

For all those moaning about Paramount wanting to make more money. Look, you can’ have it all ways. For us to get sequels or a new TV series etc. The film must do well at the box office and make its money. My personal opinion is that a May release will garner more Dollars. So let’s stop complaining about the delay and instead consider the long term benefits for Star Trek of this move.

And also, this means we can spend all of our Christmas Day time with our wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/husband….

Wait, I forgot, us Trekkies don’t have such things…….. ;)
And before I forget, Happy Valentines Day!!

And one more thing, is it possible to have a sentence that begins with the word ‘and’ and ends with the word ‘and’?
Nah, didn’t think so.

449. EricAD - February 14, 2008

Seriously, there is some selfishness going on in this thread. Yeah, I wanna see it sooner rather than later too, BUT…the truth is this is a Vote Of Confidence from Paramount. Since about 2000 or so, the first few weeks of May have been seen as the official start of the Hollywood Blockbuster Summer season. People are ready to go back to the movies aeound this time more than during the winter months, and whichever movie gets that prime few opening weeks of May has a huge advantage. Don’t believe me? The numbers don’t lie:

2000: Gladiator opens May 5th, makes $187 Million and wins Best Picture

2001: Shrek opens May 16th, makes $267 Million, #3 Movie of the Year

2002: Spider-Man opens May 3rd, $403 Million, #1 Movie of the year

2003: X2 opens May 2nd, makes $215 Million, #6 Movie of the year

2004: Van Helsing opens May 7th, $120 Million total
( Yeah, I know it sucked, but just being the summer starter INSURED it got a $50 million opening weekend. Bad word of mouth killed it eventually. Let’s face it, ANY Trek film would kill for a $50 million opening weekend ) Also early May 2004 flicks include a little money maker called Shrek 2. You may have heard of it.

2005: Star Wars Episode III opens May 19th, finishes with $380 million. #1 movie of the year

2006: The Year that bucks the trends: The only major movies to open in early May were Mission Impossible III and the ill fated Poseidon. The latter totally tanked, and MI3 ended up with only $134 Million. However, I think people’s attitutude about Tom Cruise had way more to do with that one uderperfoming than anything else. Star Trek will be seen more as a big FX blockbuster escapist fantasy, which is more appealing to families and teens than the Mission Impossible franchise, at least in my opinion.

2007: Spider- Man 3 opens May 4th and ends up with $337 milion and the #1 movie of the year.

So, with the notable exception of 2006, the Prime Real Estate of the Movie business is the first few weeks of May. Star Trek has much better odds to do well in this time frame than any other. So we have to wait 4 1/2 months longer. We’ll live, and Star Trek may be in a far better position because of it.

Special Thanks to Box Office Mojo. Even more reliable than IMDB.

450. Kuvagh - February 14, 2008

Chill out. :)

451. maspill - February 14, 2008

well i suppose if it helps the startrek franchise and it opens the door a bit more for new films and series ill acept it a bit upset but it we have to wait to get more its a good thing i suppose

452. Devon - February 14, 2008

# 449 – Good post. Certainly some food for thought. Thank you for the info!

453. EnsignJulka - February 14, 2008

Yeah I guess money wise it’s good move, but it’s just the wait. After a year or so promising it would be released at Christmas we have to wait another 17 months…*sigh*….oh well.

454. maspill - February 14, 2008

anthony u need to reset ur clock now :-(

455. Charles Trotter - February 14, 2008

#448 Mark Lynch

Big, anticipated summer movies (especially sci-fi) typically start out strong, maybe have a week or two of good business, then disappear. There may not be any long term benefits. ;)

Of course, that hardly means that those one or two weeks of good business won’t be outstanding… but, still. It’s one hell of a risk. Just making this movie was risky enough, but they’re kind of walking the line now.

IMO, of course :-)

456. Charles Trotter - February 14, 2008

#449 EricAD

Yeah, movies released during the first few weeks of May normally do make big bucks, which is why I’m not completely worried about is chances. Just… mildly concerned. :) If this movie opens with $50 million+, though, then it’s pretty much set. It’s smooth sailing from there since it’s pretty much guaranteed to make $100+ million, possibly $150 million.

457. Enc - February 14, 2008

ok so. what do we have

may 1 Wolverine and G-Force
may 15 Angels & Demons

458. bono luthor - February 14, 2008

Of course it’s about money. That’s all suits care about. Doesn’t matter which corporate master they have, be it IBM, GM or Paramount.

However from the perspective of a fan wanting the film to turn out as good as it could possibly be, I’m optimistic. Maybe they have taken a look at this and thought “Hmmmm, this has even more potential than we thought to be HUGE!”.

I’m also optimistic because it creates (with the writers strike over also) more time for…possibilities *cough*. Don’t phaser me Anthony! It was one little comment! : )

It is dissapointing to not have it at Christmas though, because there is something extra magical about going to see a Sci Fi / Fantasy flick at that time of year.

Oh well. I’ll look forward to watching the DVD Christmas 2009!

459. haissemguy - February 14, 2008

WHY GOD WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

460. Benjamin Sisko - February 14, 2008

Now they have enough time to put Shat into the movie.

461. Harry Ballz - February 14, 2008

#346

I don’t begrudge them showing the professor the movie before us, I simply meant that it proves the movie is ready to be shown at that time.

As usual you completely miss the point of a simple observation.

Try taking an Anger Management class!

462. bono luthor - February 14, 2008

#460 *cough* Yup *cough*

463. TOS - February 14, 2008

this may be good news,
I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good. Remember that Mr. Orci and some others were wanting to call the new film “Star Trek: Zero” and talked about it being an updated Prequel to Star Trek. But, J.J. named the new film just “Star Trek” and J.J. seem to be making a re-boost. I feel now that the writer strike is over, the first thing the studio wanted was a re-write to make it more true to Classic Trek and to bring in William Shatner.
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.
I feel that as the writer’s strike was going on , J.J. was rewriting the film (The same thing happened to the 1989 batman).
J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek was a re-boost.
But now I feel that J.J.’s “New Vision” will never be seen and that a better new Star trek film is starting to be made.
I think that the film’s name maybe changed from just “Star Trek” to “Star Trek: Year Zero or Star Trek: Origins or something like that”.

I know that everybody working on the film will say that what I am writing about is not true, but watch 10 or 20 years from now it will come out.

464. Devon - February 14, 2008

# 463 – TOS – I’m going to assume your post is meant as a joke.. but if not…

“I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek.”

If they didn’t like it why did they green-light it and give him a 130-140 Million Budget?

I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good.”

Oh puhleeze.

“Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.”

He never said it like that. That sounds like he made it a personal mission to get him into the movie. On this very site he is on record as saying that the attempts to bring Kirk back were “Rediculous” both in the novels and I believe just the idea in general.

Please tell me you’re joking with your post.. cause it’s hard to tell if you are or aren’t.

465. Battletrek - February 14, 2008

I hope so TOS, I hope so.

466. Kelvington - February 14, 2008

This officially ends ANY interest I have in this film, it’s production, or it’s showing. I will neither see it in theaters, watch it on TV, nor will I discuss it further here or anywhere. Goodbye JJ, Goodbye Paramount. See you on the Re-Remastered versions in about 5 years! THE END

467. Jan - February 14, 2008

5 month more to wait… :’-((

468. Garstanglerton - February 14, 2008

^yeah yeah Kelvington, whatever you say. I assume that will be your last ever post on this site too if you can remain true to your word. Which you won’t. Oh boo hoo for you, we all have to wait a little longer so you are going to boycott the movie. Get over yourself and GROW UP!

469. madcynic - February 14, 2008

Heh, at leeast now I know what I’m doing on my birthday. Presuming the film does show up in Germany on the same date (which it won’t anyway, but I wouldn’t let reality ruin my statement here ;-) )

470. OR Coast Trekkie - February 14, 2008

#449 – Good info. there thanks.

I can’t believe how many people are taking this PERSONALLY! Goodness, that’s paranoia there. Nobody sat in the Paramount office and said “Hmm, lets see how we can mess with Chad Smith’s head and delay Star Trek” or something to that effect.

Praamount dumped $150 million into this movie. They need to make the move which has the best opportunity. Based upon what EricAD just posted, this might be a sign that Paramount’s CONFIDENCE in this movie is GROWING. That would mean they’ve seen the early stuff and LIKE it.

But geez, look at the way you are reacting. It’s just a release date for a movie. Your life will go on. But I am serious: there are a lot of reactions in here which indicate the social development of toddlers. Are any of you REALLY not going to go see the movie now because of it’s later release date? You guys say “Paramount doesn’t respect us.” But your childlike reactions are not deserving of respect.

#420 – I saw that you responded to my last post. But you need to realize that script changes could not be made during the writers strike. And as for people going to see this movie 10 times… that is an INCREDBLY SMALL percentage of the general public. This movie isn’t made just for you. Its trying to appeal to a broad audience.

#441 – You also have to realize that internet sites like this are going to be filled with people who are a bit more hardcore. I would say I’m a more middle of the road fan. I know quite a bit about Star Trek, but I don’t know “the combination to Kirk’s safe.” However, a site like this is going to have more people that DO know that. And if you look closely, there’s proably only really 40-50 different names on herebut they’ve just commented a lot of times… and I’m sure there are probably at least 15-20 folks who use multiple names and e-mail addresses. So really, to gague the reaction according to this site is really not accurate, because it’s really mostly going to get a FANATIC perspective.

471. TOS - February 14, 2008

I not joking and try not to make so much drama about it.
Devon you just have to think about that the studio Green-light it and give him a 130-140 Million Budget before seeing how it looked on screen.
Things change, Devon.
——
this may be good news,
I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good. Remember that Mr. Orci and some others were wanting to call the new film “Star Trek: Zero” and talked about it being an updated Prequel to Star Trek. But, J.J. named the new film just “Star Trek” and J.J. seem to be making a re-boost. I feel now that the writer strike is over, the first thing the studio wanted was a re-write to make it more true to Classic Trek and to bring in William Shatner.
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.
I feel that as the writer’s strike was going on , J.J. was rewriting the film (The same thing happened to the 1989 batman).
J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek was a re-boost.
But now I feel that J.J.’s “New Vision” will never be seen and that a better new Star trek film is starting to be made.
I think that the film’s name maybe changed from just “Star Trek” to “Star Trek: Year Zero or Star Trek: Origins or something like that”.

I know that everybody working on the film will say that what I am writing about is not true, but watch 10 or 20 years from now it will come out.

472. madcynic - February 14, 2008

Right, Sixty-two thousand four hundred repetitions make one truth, eh? Good Lord, get a hold of yourself, TOS…

473. Devon - February 14, 2008

“I not joking and try not to make so much drama about it.
Devon you just have to think about that the studio Green-light it and give him a 130-140 Million Budget before seeing how it looked on screen.”

But that makes no sense. The filming was on-going, if Paramount didn’t like what they saw, then WHY would they allow filming to continue for as long as it did. Also did you read the second update provided in the article above?

It states:

“” ‘Star Trek’ is moving to summer because its has so much boxoffice potential,” Par spokesman Michael Vollman said. “It does not need any script tweaks. They’re two-thirds of the way through shooting, and we would have delivered a great movie at Christmas.””

So you can see they aren’t “Scrapping the movie” as you claimed.

“‘Things change, Devon.”

Yes they do, but what you suggested was unlikely and seemed to based on your criticism toward J.J. It was just rediculous assumptions/wishful thinking on your part quite frankly.

474. Cheve - February 14, 2008

471. TOS

I think and feel that you have a very vivid imagination.

They have a new boss and new bosses love to move things around so people notices they are there. New bosses have to make people think that they know what they are doing, but it often isn’t the case. this boss thinks that making a release date movement of this kind will make people think that he knows how to make more money.

Remember Enterprise? A new boss arrived and decided to execute Star Trek in order to get noticed, so he cancelled Enterprise.

475. Rac0r - February 14, 2008

What a moronic decision lol. On Christmas I’m ten times more likely to go and see a movie than in May. I hope they’re ready for a whole lot of mail from pissed fans at Paramount. After 40 years you might think they could have learned: Don’t mess with Trekkies.

476. TOS - February 14, 2008

-Devon
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Why did both things happen this week? Why did the studio not push the date before? Why did they push the date after the writer’s strike?
I know that they are not “Scrapping the movie” all of the movie. but I think they are re-writing and are going to re-film parts of it.
Devon, I said “to try not to make so much drama about it”.
I think we are both wanting the best for Star Trek.
—-
this may be good news,
I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good. Remember that Mr. Orci and some others were wanting to call the new film “Star Trek: Zero” and talked about it being an updated Prequel to Star Trek. But, J.J. named the new film just “Star Trek” and J.J. seem to be making a re-boost. I feel now that the writer strike is over, the first thing the studio wanted was a re-write to make it more true to Classic Trek and to bring in William Shatner.
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.
I feel that as the writer’s strike was going on , J.J. was rewriting the film (The same thing happened to the 1989 batman).
J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek was a re-boost.
But now I feel that J.J.’s “New Vision” will never be seen and that a better new Star trek film is starting to be made.
I think that the film’s name maybe changed from just “Star Trek” to “Star Trek: Year Zero or Star Trek: Origins or something like that”.

I know that everybody working on the film will say that what I am writing about is not true, but watch 10 or 20 years from now it will come out.

477. peewee - February 14, 2008

thanks for making my valentines day even worse paramount.

478. Adm.Polli - February 14, 2008

KAAAAAAAAAAHN!

479. matt D - February 14, 2008

TOS – I love the part of your theory that says “everyone will deny it but in 10-20 years it will all come out”.

From now on, I think I will use tis device as a way of removing accountability from any claims I choose to make.

480. EricAD - February 14, 2008

I can’t imagine anyone as seeing this as anything but a sign that they think this movie is gonna be a hit. Star Trek has been playing it safe for over 16 years now…every movie since VI has come out during the Holiday season, all just because STIV ( the biggest moneymaker of the franchise to this day ) opened during the Holidays. Opening in the summer Blockbuster season is their way of saying that Star Trek can play with the big boys. Sure, some big movies like Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter can make serious money during the Christmas season, but let’s face it…the real money usually comes in the summer. That’s just the way it is. And based no doubt on what they’ve seen, they now think Star Trek can make some real money too. I say right on.

481. TOS - February 14, 2008

–474. Cheve
Remember Enterprise? A new boss arrived and decided to execute Star Trek in order to get noticed, so he cancelled Enterprise.

I Remember that and think about it alot. I know that they said “Star Trek is Dead” just to turn around and say “Star Trek lives”.
But I think that was more J.J.’s doing. It fits his Style.
J.J. was the new boss of star trek and more likely even before we heard about it.
Think about J.J.’s Star Trek in and Star Trek: Enterprise out.
I think that now the studio is thinking “some” of J.J.’s Star Trek out and more Classic Trek In.
——————————-
this may be good news,
I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good. Remember that Mr. Orci and some others were wanting to call the new film “Star Trek: Zero” and talked about it being an updated Prequel to Star Trek. But, J.J. named the new film just “Star Trek” and J.J. seem to be making a re-boost. I feel now that the writer strike is over, the first thing the studio wanted was a re-write to make it more true to Classic Trek and to bring in William Shatner.
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.
I feel that as the writer’s strike was going on , J.J. was rewriting the film (The same thing happened to the 1989 batman).
J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek was a re-boost.
But now I feel that J.J.’s “New Vision” will never be seen and that a better new Star trek film is starting to be made.
I think that the film’s name maybe changed from just “Star Trek” to “Star Trek: Year Zero or Star Trek: Origins or something like that”.

I know that everybody working on the film will say that what I am writing about is not true, but watch 10 or 20 years from now it will come out.

482. Bryan - February 14, 2008

The only good thing about this is now maybe the script CAN be tweaked ti include…dare I say it? The Shatner! It gives him some time to slim down a bit also. You see Paramount does love him.

483. Jon G - February 14, 2008

That blows so much… i won’t even be near a Theater next May…

Oh well, looks like i’ll have to rely on the pirating to see it now…

484. JB Gestl - February 14, 2008

I’m still going on Christmas! Then I’ll go again in May.

485. Devon - February 14, 2008

#476 – TOS “Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.”

If you read the article, you’ll note a few other movies were pushed around as well (yes, due to the writer’s strike but probably because these scripts were not finished and caused a delay in production anyway.) It also mentions that Trek’s rescheduling was NOT for those purposes however. They just moved it to a time they felt it would make more money during the Summer Blockbuster Season.

“Why did both things happen this week? Why did the studio not push the date before? Why did they push the date after the writer’s strike?”

See Above. But it still makes no sense, if they didnt like what they saw then wouldn’t they have just halted production on it sooner? Why would they wait till the writer’s strike was over just to say “Hey we don’t like it.” From a financial and logisitc POV that would be very stupid and very expensive for Paramount to do. (and plus for all they know the strike could have gone past when the last shoot took place and production was already over)

“I know that they are not “Scrapping the movie” all of the movie. but I think they are re-writing and are going to re-film parts of it.”

But your original post (which by the way, why do you insist on posting it multiple times?) you state this:

“I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version.””

What you were suggesting would almost require MAJOR re-writes or almost possibly a complete re-do of the movie. I mean, how can you “rewrite” something to make it more like “Classic Trek?” For you to make an assumption like that would require that you know what the original script was like, which you don’t. Also you are not taking into consideration that there would have to be MORE money pumped into this thing considering they would have to bring all the crews, etc back to re-shoot and re-do stuff yet again. If they were wanting to make more money by moving it to this release date, why would they then throw MORE money at this possibly pushing the budget to $250 Million or more?

Having said that, I think with the writers strike being over, some small re-writes or possible reshoots were inevitable as is probably normal with most, if not all movies (even if it’s just a couple of things.) However, not to the scale that you mention.

“I think we are both wanting the best for Star Trek.”

Yes, but I think you’re wanting something different than me, and it reflects in your post(s)

486. TOS - February 14, 2008

Dear matt D ,
I am not removing accountability.
I am stating something I have seen been for.
I have seen things being deny it but 10-20 later years the truth comes out.
(like WB studios saying that tim burton walked away from the batman films, but 15 years later the truth came out that WB studios fired him and that tim burton was planing to start work on Batman 3 at the time of his firing.)
——————–
this may be good news,
I think the studio did not like J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek and Now are re-writing and re-filming to make it more like Classic Trek. I have a feeling that Spock was going to die in the J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek version and now I have a feeling that Shatner’s kirk will return in the Studio’s “Classic Trek” version. I feel that the studio is taking back power from J.J. and I think that is good. Remember that Mr. Orci and some others were wanting to call the new film “Star Trek: Zero” and talked about it being an updated Prequel to Star Trek. But, J.J. named the new film just “Star Trek” and J.J. seem to be making a re-boost. I feel now that the writer strike is over, the first thing the studio wanted was a re-write to make it more true to Classic Trek and to bring in William Shatner.
Think about it: This week, The writers strike ended and the new star trek film is pushed from Dec 2008 to May 2009.
Remember that Mr. Orci said that he was trying to find away to bring William Shatner in to the movie.
I feel that as the writer’s strike was going on , J.J. was rewriting the film (The same thing happened to the 1989 batman).
J.J.’s “New Vision” of Star Trek was a re-boost.
But now I feel that J.J.’s “New Vision” will never be seen and that a better new Star trek film is starting to be made.
I think that the film’s name maybe changed from just “Star Trek” to “Star Trek: Year Zero or Star Trek: Origins or something like that”.

I know that everybody working on the film will say that what I am writing about is not true, but watch 10 or 20 years from now it will come out.

487. The Last Maquis - February 14, 2008

“I believe My response would be …Go to Hell !!” We Should Strike!!

488. haissemguy - February 14, 2008

You kingons bastards, you’ve killed my christmas.

489. Enc - February 14, 2008

do you have any idea what a toll this move will have on the projects secrecy?
we have actors who cant keep there mouth shut, we have helicoptersover head, and spy photos from day 1.

490. fakesteve - February 14, 2008

well, that will be 4 days after my birthday, what can we do.
Maybe they can rethink the larger nacelles now ;))

491. Mastrada101 - February 14, 2008

Oh hell NO. KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!! oh wait wrong one. PARAMOOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!! Somebody fix this before it gets any worse!

492. Jim - February 14, 2008

ha, ha, ha……I will effin love it when it bombs at the box office….MONEY that’s what it’s all about boys and girls…..

493. rooster - February 14, 2008

and so the lurkers are finally summoned out of our hiding.. ;)

I say whatever brings the most success to the movie, brings it to the franchise. Which is what this movie needs to accomplish. I’m willing to wait.

Perhaps then we’ll get another new series… ;D
2010?

494. Dom - February 14, 2008

Not panicking about this: it shows a confidence in this film to perform well. The first teaser has only just gone out. By the time the film is released, TOS: Remastered should be out on DVD (and, perhaps Bluray!) and loads of spin-off media can be prepared and a real buzz can develop about the film,

Right now, he existence of this film is still little known outside of the fan community. Star Trek could be the early summer blockbuster success of 2008!

495. M-BETA - February 14, 2008

What annoyed me was every other movie that’s being delayed has only been delayed for a month.

Star Trek is being pushed back 5 freakin’ months!!!

As it’s being reported that it has nothing to do with the script; the chances are is that the film will be wrapped and finished as originally scheduled, but kept in the tin until May. That’s what really sucks.

496. Shatner4TrekXI - February 14, 2008

Now there’s even less rush, and maybe they can make the change that so many people want.

497. rooster - February 14, 2008

p.s. those Christmas posters are now collector’s items.

498. mooseday - February 14, 2008

I agree with …. jeez .. #494. It Paramount had shifted from Summer to the next winter we’d all be panicing that it was a crap movie and Paramount had no faith. To be released in summer will at least offer a strong opening weekend. If the movie really IS good then word of mouth will keep it running for a few weeks. I suspect Paramount is hoping for MI-III type states, nice opening, drop off quickly but make some cash abroad …

499. Smike van Dyke - February 14, 2008

This “confidence” is awfully misplaced. In its current state the TREK franchise can’t compete with X-Men or Angels&Demons. It’ll become another Evan Almighty, a movie that was eaten alive by all the 2007 summer competition.
Today is the day Star Trek died. The movie will bomb. It won’t make more than 65 million in May 09. At Xmas 08 it might have grossed around 120 million. But now it’s gonny be crushed by the tides of blockbuster season. That’s it…

500. Petey - February 14, 2008

Dear TOS,

Please stop spamming and pasting your original post over and over again. You’ll notice that this will attract the attention of the owner, who may see fit to give you a warning or a ban… definitely in the next 10 to 20 years.

501. Devon - February 14, 2008

“‘Now there’s even less rush, and maybe they can make the change that so many people want.”

Sorry, but not even Paramount can control who the next president is.

502. Viking - February 14, 2008

Hello, police? I want to report a mugging. Paramount stole my patience!

503. Kurt - February 14, 2008

I think the next teaser trailer during the holidays should go as follows:

The Enterprise is complete and sitting in orbit. A welder in a space suit floats by.

You hear Nimoy’s voice. “These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. It’s 5 year mission … starts 6 months from now.”

504. thomoz - February 14, 2008

You guys shouldn’t fuss . . . if this Trek movie makes 300m
then there will be more. If it only makes 150m, the future
of the franchise is in doubt again.

I think this is a good move. AND it also buys them time
to test the film before an audience and tweak it if necessary.

505. Multitrek - February 14, 2008

There’s a new crowd of suits out there who seem to forget that behind every dollar bill there is a human hand holding it.

Why not call the movie Star Trek Forever like Duke Nukem Forever.

506. fxtmn australia - February 14, 2008

Nooooo i was so looking forward to xmas 08,I guess maybe we sould all hope this movie makes oodles of money or this may be the last time we see any new trek,so if moving to may 09 means more box office takings then maybe we sould be happy…But right now i could cry….

507. Ty Webb - February 14, 2008

I’m pleased actually. I don’t want Christmas to be overshadowed by this. It might reduce the impact of the film.

508. ObiWanCon - February 14, 2008

SH!T

509. Timncc1701 - February 14, 2008

Now there is time to write the Shat into the movie. If the studio is all about money. . .There are always. . .possibilities.

510. Matt D - February 14, 2008

So this could be a vote of confidence, or a realisation that some things need to be done over.

I hope it’s the former, but I have never seen Trek as capable of opening big in the summer. Hope I’m wrong.

511. Mike T. - February 14, 2008

If Paramount waits too long to release the completed movie, it might show up on bootleg DVD like American Ganster did a week before the movie was in theaters.

512. Shatner4TrekXI - February 14, 2008

I hope it’s the latter, and they can fix what’s missing from this movie.

513. Mike Thompson (UK) - February 14, 2008

Should be starting filming the second film before this one is released. Now looking like the sequal won’t start shooting till sometime 2010….11

Thge new actors will be ageing fasr!

514. Chris Pike - February 14, 2008

It’s a very drastic change, and does makes you wonder if there really is more going on here. Will they re-do the wording on the present trailer?

515. Krik Semaj - February 14, 2008

Wow,
I can’t believe (actually I can) all the selfish complaining. Other than a few rational posts, most of you are appalled that Paramount wants to make as big a profit as possible on this movie. What a shock! Guess what? They are in the business to do just that. Movies are a PRODUCT. Don’t get this confused with an “indy” art movie.
Relax people. The movie will come out 4 months later – big deal. I love Trek as much as anybody, but it’s not the end of the world.
I just hope opening day is not on one of my sons little league game dates. If it is I’ll just have to go to the midnight show.

516. Biodredd - February 14, 2008

The teaser does not announce a date of Christmas Day 2008. It simply says under construction.

I also don’t understand why this news is a big shock to anyone here. Just a few weeks back there was news that the release date might be changing. Of course, they were only talking about moving it up a week of two. But if they were considering a move then, it should be no surprise that they moved the film now.

I’m no happier about it then anyone else.

517. JimJ - February 14, 2008

Nut sure after 500+ post if someone used this, but: “You Paramount bastards, you’ve killed my movie….you Paramount bastards, you’ve killed my movie…oohhhhhh…you Paramount bastards!” “I swear to you, we’re not finished yet…”

IDIOT move, in my opinion.

518. AaronA - February 14, 2008

Let’s face it, if they gave the SFX over to the TV Trek guys, they could get this movie out by *MAY 2008*, if they wanted to!

Granted, that would be a *bad* move, as quality would suffer.

Almost as bad as sitting on a completed blockbuster for five months, when all the fans know it’s fresh and ready for viewing!

This is a definite buzzkiller.

519. Aito - February 14, 2008

Anthony I hope you made a mistake and meant to type “moved ahead to May 2008″…….that would be sweet!

Wishful thinking

I guess I can wait. :(

520. fxtmn australia - February 14, 2008

i like that one paramount may be full of Klingon bastards

521. Chad from Switzerland - February 14, 2008

lol, the last Star Trek “Valentins Gift” was from Rick Berman (ENT: “these are the voyages”). Thanks Paramount!

But anyway. Star Trek will rocks at Mai 2009 and I will be the first guy at the cinema.

522. I Love My Moogie - February 14, 2008

JJ’s ‘vision’ of ST is DOA.

Paramount is taking control back & now we’ll be getting the real McCoy (hopefully with the real Kirk!).

JJ didn’t release the teaser to have this happen a few weeks later, Paramount didn’t just wake up & realize May means better box office, that’s typical Hollywood spin. Paramount saw the rushes, freaked out & is now planning a major overhaul to canonize the movie. This is a clear win for all those who honor canon.

523. fxtmn australia - February 14, 2008

Yeh the movie sould be a whole lot better than that lame duck that was innsurection which i might ad was the reason nemisis died a terrible death..I will wait as long as it takes

524. section9 - February 14, 2008

I say again-Paramount Dreamworks must feel that it’s got the Movie of the Summer on its hands and it wants to Own the Season. It thinks that ST Part Deux will get repeat business throughout the kids’ season.

This isn’t about you. This is about Paramount-Dreamworks’ 150 MILLION investment in the Trek Franchise. This is also about the investment that thousands of members of the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO) will make. If all Paramount has to offer NATO is thin, reedy, lentil soup in Summer ’09, then it makes sense for the Suits to move this big, franchise making movie to KidLand.

These are life and death financial decisions in a very, very unforgiving business called Hollywood, where everyone lies to you (including your agent) and the only friend you’ve got in that town is your dog.

Don’t believe me? The Writers just went through a month’s long walkout because the Producers were trying to screw them out of downmarket internet royalties, among other things. If you think it sucks to be an actor waiting tables in Hollywood, try being a writer hustling a script to some producer whose just as likely to steal your idea as not.

This is our One Shot at bringing Trek back. I’m telling you people who are bitching up a storm about this date move that Paramount wouldn’t have done this unless they saw that JJ was producing something good.

The only thing that matters is the color of money to these people. They moved Trek to Prime Time because they like what they see. Now stop griping: it’s not your 150 million dollars, it’s Paramount’s.

525. Mike J. Hafezi - February 14, 2008

This will just further accuse Paramount of treating Star Trek like a cash cow, but maybe it’s better, because who wants to see a Star Trek movie on Christmas Day.

526. Lou - February 14, 2008

AAAAAAAAAAGGGHHH!!!!!
IMPATIENCE GETTING THE BEST OF ME!!!! WANT MOVIE!!!!!!!!

527. fxtmn australia - February 14, 2008

523 comments,maybe we sould forward this to paramount

528. Sam Belil - February 14, 2008

Not a Happy Valentine’s Day at all!!!! For me, since day one I felt we have been constantly teased with these little nuggets of information. Regarding Shatner (and I wanted him to be in this movie just as bad if not more than the next person) — let’s not fool ourselves he is not going to be in this movie, (so lets just get over the Shatner thing already!!!!) even if they push the release date to Christmas 2010. There is a difference between 10 months from now and 15 months, and yes I’m very disappointed. Everytime I start to get genuinely excited about this film the so-called “powers-that-be” pull the carpet from under my feet. The empty-suits at Paramount are turning me off more and more and more!

529. UKDan - February 14, 2008

First-time poster.

I have to be honest and say that if this is true then I’m deeply disappointed.
I’m a life-long UK fan and the implication of a May 2009 release in the US will probably mean a June/July release in Britain, so for Brit fans the waits even longer.

Not much I can do but wait and hope that blows the box-office away.

530. fxtmn australia - February 14, 2008

Noo just hang in there all the fans must stick with trek,this flick will be good …

531. So Much Cooler In Person! - February 14, 2008

Money is no reason to delay. If they are unhappy with their Christmas take all they have to do is rerelease in May. My feeling is we need to begin a concerted effort to make them stick to the original game plan. Protests have brought TV series back (TOS & Jericho) we should have enough clout to make them understand the error of their ways with this new relese date. What say you?

532. Trek Or Treat - February 14, 2008

Not sure what to think. My overall perception is that Summer movies mean bigger bucks and that’s what it’s going to take to keep Star Trek going after this film. Fortunately it’s early in the summer so there won’t be as much competition as there will be in June or July. But I’ll wait to see how the other studio schedules shake out.

NOT excited about waiting another 4 months to see it tho.

533. Stef* - February 14, 2008

Noooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!

534. LordCheeseCakeBreath - February 14, 2008

I’m still in shock. I thought it was a really bad dream.

I wonder how Mr. Orci feels about this. I’m sure he’s only permitted to say “…it’s in the best interest of the film.” or something like that. I wonder how he really feels. Must be a little disappointed. I’m a big fan…small fan of Paramount suits!

535. Jon C - February 14, 2008

I know it sounds like a drag to the fans to wait longer but it’s actually a great business decision because most of the money to be made will be in the toys and video games that sell at Christmas.Obviously if You debut a movie ON CHRISTMAS you’re not cultivating a an interest for Christmas purchases.
May 2009 will give plenty of time to get the kiddies ready
I remember when I was a boy and Star Wars came out in May.Me and my freinds say that movie 10 times that summer,in part due to summer vaca and too much time on our hands.Star Wars could have made even ,more in 1979 if they had their merchandise available for the Christmas buying season of 1979.

536. RTC - February 14, 2008

Anthony,

What’s the impact of this delay on Trekmovie.com? How does it change your plans and activities? Maybe worth a separate article … if just to reassure us all that you and the site will hang in there! : ) Thanks for all you do.

537. Stanky McFibberich - February 14, 2008

Whenever and whatever.

538. ThePhaige - February 14, 2008

I will have to DEAL , but I do believe this is a poor decision on Paramounts part. With the Christmas release on a Thursday and most folks off that week between Christmas and New Years.

Not to mention all the damn literature says Xmas 2008 including the teaser.
Finally the buzz momentum is starting to build, and a lot of folks will steer away until it gets closer.

Plus the likelihood of more time for things to leak that will ruin the surprises.

Momentum is a hard thing to slow and then restart.

539. diabolik - February 14, 2008

There has been nothing but excitment and support from the studio. The idea that they don’t like it and are now pushing it back to re-tool is a silly idea, I’m sorry. If anything, this shows that they are confident it will be a big hit and want to give it every opportunity to have the most box office impact. This is a vote of confidence, not a turnaround.

540. joe1306 - February 14, 2008

What the…?!?!?!?!?!!! Damn!!! Is it April Fools Day already?! This is a joke, right?! I don´t…. I don´t want to believe this! MAY…2009?!!! Oh my…! This is f*cking bullsh*t!!! Paramount: PLEASE… DON´T… DO THIS…TO US!!! :´(

541. PaoloM - February 14, 2008

I think that the writers felt the need to tweak something about the plot now that the strike is over. This is good for the movie and is surely good for me. By the way, the italian release date was set on 2009 so this is no big change for me :-)

542. Aelora - February 14, 2008

Okay, I’m going to try to accept this all with a smile as a Heroes fan because this means Zachary won’t have to disappear for promotion stuff from the show at some unfortunate time in the first half of the season. So yay for more Sylar!!!

(That’s just me trying to put a positive spin on things because I really kicked the trash can under my desk when I read this and hurt myself…)

*tries not to pout*

543. Commodore Redshirt - February 14, 2008

Okay, everything has already been said above here…

1] I’m happy it will be warmer while I stand in line,
2] I’m sorry we must wait so long to see it,
3] I hope that all the time Orci was here during the WGA strike he got some ideas from us that he can now “write-in” to the script.

From the way the buzz is around that town, we should all be thankful this thing seems to be a Hollywood “HOT” rather than a “NOT”! :)

544. DIGINON - February 14, 2008

Release dates change all the time from teasers to trailers to the actual release of the movie. So I don’t think they will necessarily change the teaser just to include the new date.

545. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - February 14, 2008

Im really choked about this… my 21st birthday is on the 22nd December, this was going to be a great present!!

Ahh well, i am really really gutted but i can see the pros and cons of a May release:

Pros:

1) Christmas was always a weird time IMO to release this film, i think May would be more convenient for everyone.

2) May films have always in the past been really successfull in the box office… see one of the posts above (im sorry i cnt remember the number)

3) There doesn’t seem to be, at the moment anyway, any real competition for this film. As stated above, Paramount are simply boosting up a weak summer line-up.

4) Summer weather releases endorphines in our brains that make us happier , we’ll love this film!

5) All the polishing and amendments can be made to the script and we may even get the SHAT!

Cons:

1) Obviously it sucks that we have to wait so long

2) All the press has been hyping up a christmas release, along with the teaser, this will cause un-needed confusion amongst fans and the general public.

3) Have to wait even longer for the DVD

4) We’re not getting any younger

5) Christmas makes me happier than the summer

6) Will all these ammendements and polishing do any good/ or make it worse?

7) KHHHHAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!

Thus concludes my rant on this subject…

I for one am waiting for JJ and Co to respond to this…

Regards

Jay, UK

546. David Combe - February 14, 2008

Nice to See Mr Orci has given this topic a wide berth for awhile, If I were him i’d be packing on a trip to the bahamas for a week or two :p

547. JDragon - February 14, 2008

That has to be the most stupid decision ever.

548. DIGINON - February 14, 2008

And to all non-US visitors: Moving the release date back to May 2009 could give the studio enough time to prepare the movie for simultaneous world-wide release. Of course, this is nothing more than wishful thinking but who knows. If this move is motivated by the prospect of better boxoffice in May….

549. Commodore Redshirt - February 14, 2008

WE DID THIS!

WE MADE THEM RETHINK WHAT THEY ARE DOING!

JJ CAME AWAY FROM THE CHAT AND SAID:
“We need Shat.”
“Gotta hold true to canon!”
“Orci, you were right, so re-write those scenes and make the fans happy!”
:)
haha :)
:)

550. Jamie - February 14, 2008

I don’t see why everyone disagrees with the decision. Can’t you wait just a little longer?

I might understand the disappointment if the film was scheduled to be released next week and we found out we had another year to wait.

Surely the extra time will only make the film better? Presumably it will give them time to screen it to more test audiences, and change things, and make it more perfect. And hopefully it will give the music composer more time, too, which is possibly one of the most important parts of the film.

Let me ask you a question: suppose you could go back in time and change it so that The Wrath of Khan came out a few months earlier, meaning audiences didn’t have as long to wait (but meaning the film was not quite as good) — would you do that?

551. Star Trek: Voyeur - February 14, 2008

Let’s be resolved in that Paramount is tinkering ONLY with the schedule
and NOT with creative control.

552. RaveOnEd - February 14, 2008

I didn’t read all of the posts above, so please forgive me if this has been discussed:

What about the marketing now for this movie? Are the toys now going on our Memorial Day gift lists?

How will the toys sell now, if they come out at Christmas for a movie 5 months away from that? Not even Disney sells toys for their movies that far away.

It may make good box office in May, but may lose out in other marketing revenue.

553. star trackie - February 14, 2008

Leave it to the suits to rain on the picnic.

My interest level just dropped considerably….for now. Oh, it’ll rise again as the release date gets closer, but I can’t sustain the “excitement” for another 15 months.

554. Commodore Redshirt - February 14, 2008

29. Harry Ballz – February 13, 2008
” Maybe it’s taking them a bit longer than expected to get a decent performance out of Chris Pine….”.

the above is the best post EVER!

555. JL - February 14, 2008

Time to change the countdown clock. damn

556. Cervantes - February 14, 2008

Being individually released at Christmas time sure didn’t hurt the ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogy grosses…

I’d have far rathered this Trek movie to be released at Christmas, rather than in the summer silly season, where there is a LOT of product being put out in competition next year.

557. Husker - February 14, 2008

In a way it’s not too bad, considering the more money this makes, the more likely we might see a Trek come-back.

558. Vulcan Soul - February 14, 2008

“It does not need any script tweaks. They’re two-thirds of the way through shooting, and we would have delivered a great movie at Christmas.”

Now if that isn’t acid in the wound!

559. Deep Space 913 - February 14, 2008

This is just me throwing my anger in with all my fellow treksters (trekster, I kind of like that) BOOOOO FREAKING HISSSSSSS on moving Trek back damn near six months!

560. haissemguy - February 14, 2008

Looks like paris hilton has seen the news judging from this picture

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/06_01/tears080607_468x555.jpg

Poor lamb

561. Daoud - February 14, 2008

At this rate, whenever it’s finally released, there’s a small chance that Nimoy (and Shatner) might not be around for it or its sequel. Nobody lives forever (except Mr. Bond).

562. Danpaine - February 14, 2008

KAAAAAAHHHHNNNNNN!!!!!

563. Pizza - February 14, 2008

This is a Paramount Corbomte Maneuver!

564. Pizza - February 14, 2008

Sorry typo,
Corbomite Maneuver!

565. Tox Uthat - February 14, 2008

Being Jewish, now I’ll nothing to do on Christmas Day.

566. Steve - February 14, 2008

On the plus side, this gives the cast and crew more time for re-shoots and to tweak the visual effects more.

I’m saddened that we have to wait an additional five months to see the film, but that’s life, I guess. God bless!

567. UKDan - February 14, 2008

#550
I think you’re missing the point.

Just because the scheduling has changed doesn’t mean extra time has been given over to production.

As someone has already pointed out the movie’s script and budget were fixed already and would have factored in any reshoots/scripts/post-production changes necessary.

I’m still hoping this is a mistake, because as you can see the majority of the fans are NOT happy.

568. Tony Pieta - February 14, 2008

If we go “by the book”. like Lieutenant Saavik, months could seem like years.

569. ShatisDead - February 14, 2008

Honestly, at his point, I don’t Star Trek has enough cache to survive in the summer movie season. It will be an early release and will quickly be drowned out by the competition. It will do great BO for a week and then be pushed aside. With the holidays you have a chance for things to pick up steam.

I don’t think Christmas day was optimal either – should have been around Thanksgiving.

I’m also worried that people expect big, dumb action movies in summer. I’m all for action, but what is going to save Trek is not big action pieces (see Nemesis for that failure) but is heart and humanity. Unfortunately, people don’t seem to want that in the summer.

570. CmdrR - February 14, 2008

Nearly 600 posts. You think Trekkies cared about this movie or something. I know this all makes sense. I just wish they’d thought of it before they released the trailer. Ah well… at least I won’t be coming up with excuses to be away from my family (of non-Trekkies) on Christmas Day.

But, just to show the proper disdain…

Jooooohhhhnnn! (Lesher)

571. freezejeans - February 14, 2008

Ack! This news caused me to re-visit http://www.khaaan.com/

572. Serenity » Blog Archive » Elsewhere on the Paramount Lot…… - February 14, 2008

[...] Star Trek moved to Summer 2009 [...]

573. MoJoD - February 14, 2008

JJ and Orci say that they look at this site and take all of the comments posts seriously. JJ and Robert: forward this page to John Lesher and tell him how p-ssed off we all are!

574. British Naval Dude - February 14, 2008

Wonder if anyone’s still a’reading posts at this point?

Wonder if I’ll lose interest in the film and kind of forget about it in another year…

arrrr… Oh, well… Suppose I can also wait another five years for a new Daniel Day Lewis movie…

Waited years ‘fore I ever saw Enterprise cuz it was on a tv network I never could get…

And… by 2009 I may finally get me a microwave so I can make me own popcorn to bring to the show…

575. Tallguy - February 14, 2008

Ahhh, the maturity and generosity that Trek fans are known for.

They’re moving Star Trek into the SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER territory. They have high hopes that it will hit it BIG. And they will make MONEY and thus MORE STAR TREK.

Oh, and by the way. Go ask Joe Six-pack at the office “Do you know about the new Star Trek movie?” They will say “No”. So it’s not like they’re building up this tremendous head of steam just to squander it.

576. Mikeat5280 - February 14, 2008

That’s not good enough, Paramount, you’re going to have to do better.

We’re in a wee bit of a snit aren’t we?

577. Ensign Ricky - February 14, 2008

I’m obviously disappointed that I won’t be able to see the relaunch of the Enterprise this Christmas, but at the same time I think that we have to have faith in what JJ and Paramount want to deliver to us. I’m not a director, producer, or a Paramount executive, so I’m not going to start second guessing these folks in their jobs. In many respects, they have one shot to get this just right, and I for one am willing to give them the extra time in order to give us this product that we all so dearly love.
In the meanwhile, I hope that they toss us a bone….maybe a pic or two of the Enterprise? Or the crew? Please?

578. Joe - February 14, 2008

That gives more time for plot leaks.

Either we’ll know everything about the movie by then or we’ll already have a bootleged version via a sidewalk dvd by the time it’s in the theatres.

579. scootypuffjr - February 14, 2008

I’m disappointed, very much so, and it has the potential to backfire. Movies with a lot of buzz around them that were delayed haven’t faired too well. A lot of build up peaked then petered out before the movie premiered.

but…

Wouldn’t this move make the “reboot” movie premiere almost 40 years later exactly since the original series left the air. Kind of poetic.

Ended 1969, reborn 2009.

BTW-I’m not reading 570+ comments when the first 40 were mostly “OH NO!” in sentiment.

580. j w wright - February 14, 2008

the only reason to make any movie, in the movie business, is to realize a profit. more meat in the seats = more ticket sales.

581. Commodore Redshirt - February 14, 2008

I am almost 46 years old and have watched TOS all my life… as far back as I can recall.
I think I was 5 when I first watched an episode… Miri ?….
Spock and Kirk were always there… lunch box, comics, man I wish I still had that stuff….
When TMP came out I was there opening night!
I had a huge party the night TNG first aired.
But then Trek was not what it was. I’m not saying it was bad , but I lost interest, that’s all.
What I saw I liked I guess, but DS9 and ENT lost me a bit. VOY was hit or miss. Fantastic when good but ugly when not!
After ST-VI the TNG films have been second run or DVD for me. I was not gonna wait in line to see Kirk die!

But finally, I was looking forward to xmas, but alas, now we must wait for the paint to dry…
Anyway, I’ve waited this long, what’s a few more months :)

582. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

570 CmdrR I figured that one this would reach 1000 from the beginning , now it looks like it may go past 1000, good, people need to get the anger out of their system. What it all boils down to is yes ,Paramount should have delayed the Promos , companies sometime put things into motion prematurely but again May is only 15 months away, its a pain, but its not like its forever, although from from some comments Ive seen May of 09 might as well be forever. Believe me I am disappointed myself but its a movie and its not worth getting angry about.

583. Trek Nerd Central - February 14, 2008

Quote Spock mind-melding with Horta here.

584. Blowback - February 14, 2008

My God! I Don’t check in for a few hours and this is what happens..

Lots of wild conjecture coming out of this annoucement. Maybe we’d better all come down off the ledge and see what the next few days bring…

585. Cervantes - February 14, 2008

To cheer myself up over this delay, I watched the just released trailer for ‘Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’.

One of the best trailers ever. :)

See it at:- http://www.indianajones.com

586. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

I do hope Paramount will at least be forthcoming about showing Photos and film clips and give us some info about the film maybe a preview or two when the become available. that might ease some of the tension. chats with the actors on set. stuff like that.

587. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

584 yep this going to be a new record for comments 1000 or more i think more

588. Nicholas Angel - February 14, 2008

OH MY GOSH, OH MY GOSH!!!!
I feel pain… I am 23 now… I will be 25 when this movie is released!

589. So Much Cooler In Person! - February 14, 2008

Paramount is obviously shooting itself in the foot. This has nothing to do with creative control, rewrites, et. al. It’s all about the MONET! I say we start an e-mail protest the likes of which have never been seen.

590. Star Trek: Voyeur - February 14, 2008

The stock market is down today.
Coincidence?
I don’t think so….

591. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

585 Cervantes thanks I needed that , great preview can’t wait to see it!!

592. Michael Adams - February 14, 2008

#444 It’ts true. Pmt wants Star Trek gone for at least ten years.
#446 Bad Robot is oblivious
#449 All those movies were for kids, even Gladiator. Star Trek is for adults.
#463 Your correct. Paramount Trekkers told the new boss that JJ is
messing it up, turning it into Lost or MI
#466 Whatever
#470 Silly
#471 With JJ Abrahms- Star Trek is over. It’s going to be “Lost” in space,
those fans will love it but we wont and P will get to wash their hands
#474 That’s right
#497 It will be released on 12-25-08 you heard it here

593. jr - February 14, 2008

Looks like shatner has more time to get into the film.

594. GaryS - February 14, 2008

#588 surely you mean 24 right?

595. BLFSisko - February 14, 2008

Ich muss kotzen, so eine verdammte SCHEISSE.

596. Jorg Sacul - February 14, 2008

Jeezus. I got tired of reading all this around #300… no offense to any of those posts that made sense.

End of discussion: You are all going to go see this movie, or buy/rent the DVD, no matter when it’s released. Be honest with yourselves.

Yes, I’m disappointed, but for goshsakes, THIS IS ONLY A MOVIE. Go out and live life while you wait for 2009. I know I plan to continue doing so. And, I’ll be in the long line for the frakkin’ midnight show, whenever it’s released.

All this vitriol directed towards Paramount is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as saying Transformers II (or any other film)will divert audience from Trek. Please. People who are going to see a movie won’t divert because another is out. Back in 1977 people went to Star Wars dozens of times, and still made other films huge hits as well. And every year since.

597. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

you know what will be interesting is how quickly all of this anger wil evaporate when the film finally arrive. A day after the film premiers in May 09 no one is going be upset any more, but now many of want to throw Paramount under the bus on this one. Here is something to consider what if they rush the film and it ends up being a real suck fest as result. is that what any of us want? Don’t we all want the best possible film that they can give us remember Abrams when he began production on the film could not make any changes to the script because of the strike and its WGA rules. Now with the strike over he fix the things that he could not fix before.

598. TrekLog » Blog Archive » Star Trek XI - Kinostart verschoben - February 14, 2008

[...] Start des neuen Star Trek-Films wurde laut TrekMovie.com vom 25.12.2008 auf den 08.05.2009 verschoben. Angeblich wäre dieses Datum besser fürs Box [...]

599. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

Paramount needs this to be a hit they need this film to jump start the film yeah I was angry in the beginning but you know delay is not as bad as most of seem to make it out to be.

600. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

598 sorry I don’t understand are you now say august of 2009? oh boy

601. ShawnP - February 14, 2008

#600 – Europeans place the day ahead of the month…

602. Star Trek: Voyeur - February 14, 2008

600 and 601 – This is why the world should use a ‘Star Date.’

603. trekkie1415 - February 14, 2008

Hey! I guess this means J.J. can shoot through september now! Harharhar!

This is really disapointing, but hey. I’ll get over it. It just means a birthday present rather than a christmas present ^-^!

Its all good…

604. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#603 look on the bright side this who controversy has given us lots more things to talk about and again by the time the film premiers all of this rancor will be forgotten

605. Blowback - February 14, 2008

#600 – No, the date format in Europe goes Day, Month, Year. It still says May 8, 2008…

606. British Naval Dude - February 14, 2008

#588 For an old sailor, I must say that I wish I could be 25 again when this film is released!

arrrr…

607. trekmaster - February 14, 2008

@Garovorkin
08.05.2009 (german) = 05/08/2009 (english)

608. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#463–Your conclusions are ridiculous. No one is rewriting the script and scrapping JJ, Bob, and Alex’s movie.

#512–sigh…

I am extremely disappointed, but I’ll get over it. It has been 21 and a half years since I’ve seen a really good Star Trek movie released. What is an extra 4 and a half months after X-mas? I can think of news which could be a whole lot worse.
Still, this is not what I expected to see this morning. All I can say is, they must be expecting alot from the film to make it a Summer release.

I hope you will press on, Anthony. Maybe the guys will throw you a big bone now and give you the biggest spoiler yet!

609. JustSomeGuy - February 14, 2008

I think the key thing to remember here is…um….it’s just a damn movie? Yeah…it’s just a damn movie, and stop being a buncha whiners.

610. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

Bob Orci–”The May release date is not canon.”

Am I the only one who read that?

611. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

607 Trekmaster thanks was not aware that the date format in europe was that way. Hope paramount doesn’t decide on 8 5 09 as the new date of release for movie.

612. Jim - February 14, 2008

Meesa tinks yousa all cwaaazy! Isa gots bigger fishes to fry!

613. Rac0r - February 14, 2008

#610

He was laughing about another comment.

614. PaoloM - February 14, 2008

Guys, you know what? We are over excited and it’s way too soon! 17 months to go and we are asking for photos and trailers. It’s unlikely that something will be shown before christmas. The first Indy 4 trailer has been released today, 3 months before the release date, so we have to prepare for a full year of silence. Be patient :-)

615. doubleofive - February 14, 2008

610.

Boborci (not “roberto Orci”) was quoting someone else who was making fun of the canon argument. All he did was “lol”.

616. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#614 PaoloM well said. This will benifit the movie

617. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #594. GaryS

That threw me too. However I think he means between today (Feb. 14) and the end of the first week in May this year, he’ll turn 24. That means by the time the film opens in May 2009 he’ll have another birthday, making him 25.

Right, #588. Nicholas Angel ?

kg

618. Garstanglerton - February 14, 2008

I can’t believe people are still whinging about shatner, for gods sake, get over it!

This move is a great one, a show of confidence in the brand, may has always been a month to release blockbusters, I think the studio feel very confident in the film JJ and co are producing. Great!

619. Thomas Jensen - February 14, 2008

It a good thing. Star Wars came out about the same time in the year and did well with it. And it gives Shatner time to loose weight for his part (now they won’t have to CGI him from the neck down) and as an added plus, it gives the filmakers more time to polish the film.

I think it’s a ploy to have more time to complete the trilogy anyway. Everyone knows the actors have signed for three movies.

I hope the country is still here in 2009 though.

620. Jerry Seward - February 14, 2008

I’m disappointed about having to wait but I remain optimistic. Yes, I was looking forward to seeing a new Bond film one month and then seeing STAR TREK the next month. This movie is going to be a real gamble for Paramount whenever it’s released. But if this film is going to be between Jackman and Hanks, I trust it will be the best TREK movie ever… It has to be.

621. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #610. Closet-Trekker

Bob Orci was responding to #255. Ryan.

kg

622. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Oops.

#613. Rac0r and #615. doubleofive already answered.

Sorry, guys.

kg

623. continuum - February 14, 2008

This sucks…

624. Moi - February 14, 2008

624th! Yes!

Big deal, I say. I’ll have more time during the summer to see it 12 times anyway.

625. AJ - February 14, 2008

I still hope they intend to show us crew, uniforms and ship “soon.” As well as the trailer.

626. AJ - February 14, 2008

I guess the on-site talks, and chats with Bob Orci will go silent for a while, and once it wraps, there will be no news for a long time, which kinda stinks.

It also means that all the contracted merchandisers have to move their toy launches into summer 2009.

I guess PP gets the summer bump, and then Xmas for DVD release and toys.

AND Trek won’t be eligible for all the tech Oscars in 2009.

627. ActionJustin - February 14, 2008

They owe us a short film on 12-25… something like DARK KNIGHT’s heist footage… not footage from the film, something different, like heavy petting before we consummate in May.

that’s how to get the kids, with the You Tubes!

628. sean - February 14, 2008

People really need to learn to read…this extended release date does not mean reshoots, rewrites or Shatner inserts. Read the Variety article and what Vollman said. The movie is 2/3 completed. They are on schedule for a December release date. JJ said he likes to bring them in under budget. Extending the shoot and doing a major rewrite to include Shatner will cost millions more. They’re merely delaying the movie’s release to get a better box office (In theory – I still think it’s questionable considering the two blockbusters it will now be competing with).

629. The Quickening - February 14, 2008

A HUGH ERROR!!!!!

TREK can not compete with the kind of genre films it will go up against in the summer. Have they forgotten what happened to NEMESIS and it being released near LOTR?

HUGH ERROR!!!!!

630. I Love My Moogie - February 14, 2008

What a delicious Valentine’s gift to all of us who knew Paramount needed to regain the reins from JJ, they realize farming ST out to Bad Robot wasn’t good business. It’s now not a matter if Shatner will be in the film but how great a force he will be in it. I’ll be the first one on line next May!

631. KIRKBRAZIL - February 14, 2008

Go to HELL! PARAMOUNT AND JJ! A Line must be drawn here! And I will make them pay for what they´ve done!!!!!

632. Balock - February 14, 2008

relax all, they needed more time to but TOS E back in place…

633. Balock - February 14, 2008

relax all, they needed more time to put TOS E back in place…

634. Luke - February 14, 2008

Paramount really have disapointed us this time…

635. K Haugen - February 14, 2008

As for me:

I was really looking forward to Indiana Jones, James Bond, and Star Trek in the same year.

The last time that happened was 1989!

636. Amanda - February 14, 2008

Okay, this will sound corny, but I was totally looking forward to seeing this movie with my parents for my *last* Christmas at home with them before I graduate, get my commission and ship up to Quantico. Star Trek is something we’ve all always enjoyed together. What a bummer.

637. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#615–Bob Orci is “Roberto Orci”. He posts here often. Are you saying Anthony allowed someone else to post under his name? If so, that would not be consistent.

#621–Thanks, Katie. I guess I missed that one. How have you been? Is your family doing okay, with everything that has been going on recently? I hope it is okay for me to bring it up. I’m not all that good at such things. Anyway, I hope your spirits are up.

638. Michael Hall - February 14, 2008

“Whenever and whatever.”

For once, The Killjoy and I are in complete agreement.

639. Red Shirt - February 14, 2008

Just go watch the Indy IV trailer and smile, and forget about ST for a bit.

640. Irishtrekkie - February 14, 2008

well this just give them all the time they need to get the movie as good as it can be, we can hype the movie more, and hell if they think they can make more money, sure go for it

641. Freddie Wise - February 14, 2008

hmph… oh well, I guess this will just give me more time to save up money to go see it a ridiculous amount of times :-D

642. Jordan - February 14, 2008

the studio execs don’t give a shit about providing fans with a new trek experience, they only give a shit about making MONEY MONEY MONEY.

643. PaoloM - February 14, 2008

#629 “Have they forgotten what happened to NEMESIS and it being released near LOTR?”

I think that Trek XI and the crappy Nemesis are in two different leagues. I will not compare them.

644. Chapman - February 14, 2008

Man we will never get to see this movie. JESUS will be here by then.

645. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#636–Quantico? Amanda, are you a fellow Devil Dog (or Devil Dog to be)?

646. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

643–Amen to that!

647. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

641–Great attitude. I will also probably see it several times.

648. AJ - February 14, 2008

Paramount, like any publicly traded corporation, will never, ever say anything negative about a film in production, especially one as big as Trek11.

James Cawley and Chris Doohan came off the set with Joker-style grins on their faces because they have become part of the PR machine. Also, I believe they actually were telling the truth.

If the initial rushes were crap, or research was showing that its premise was irrelevant to the masses, and huge rewrites and reshoots were needed, we will not know it until way after the film hits the bargain bins.

I actually choose to believe the story in Variety. Paramount is still a newly re-structured company, and new senior management are looking to maximize returns over the long term.

Trek needs the summer bump to get the casual action punters into seats, and get them coming back for 2 more contracted films.

And JJ certainly knows the value of a good cliffhanger better than anyone in the business.

649. Amanda - February 14, 2008

645 — I’m a “Devil Dog to be”, or a “Devil Pup” as my Marine Officer Instructor refers to us. *lol*

650. Kirk, James T. - February 14, 2008

I think pushing it back 19 weeks is a bit too much, if they’d not just released a trailer and had not been keeping this trian rolling then yeah ok, but now, people are going to get bored with it.

651. Zodou - February 14, 2008

That’s the whole thing. We’re dealing with different times now. Of course, keep in mind that Roberto and Co. have said that they DO listen to us through the site. So hopefully they are lurking now and that one of them can address this issue and the concerns regarding it, especially squeezing it between the other two blockbuster movies before/after it.

I don’t think the times has anything to do with it, no offense, but check out movie sites AICN or IESB and you will read countless stories of movies being released on DVD, simply because the fans wanted it and wrote the copyright holders to get it released.

People do have power, you just have to want it enough.

Oh, to clarify, when I meant write to Paramount. I meant write to them snail-mail style, Get old school. It’s easy to dismiss emails. It’s much harder to dismiss loads of tangable real hand written mail. That’s what’ll get their attention, not chatrooms or online petitions.

Just a suggestion….

652. Derek Evans - February 14, 2008

This is a Huge MISTAKE! If this movie is NOT in trouble..Then release is this X-Mas as planned. I don’t give a rip about ANY of the other films that have been pushed back. The promotion has already started for the movie, with the release of the teaser. Why stop and start the promotion. This movie would have been and SHOULD have been a X-Mas gift to the Fans. ATTENTION PARAMOUNT and Co. DON’T LET THIS FILM BE LOST IN THE SUMMER SHUFFLE….Disapointment is an understatment. A Sad day in TREK

653. Cyberghost - February 14, 2008

This sucks……big time…. $$$$$ paramount$$$$$

They should at least change their website….

http://www.paramount.com/startrek/

654. AJ - February 14, 2008

I must say, speaking of tentpole properties, that Indiana Jones trailer simply rocks.

655. Andrew - February 14, 2008

I’m all for a summer blockbuster!! Let’s hope if it does gross more in the summer it will lead the way for a new series. Truly revitalising Trek!

656. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#649–I am a combat veteran Marine myself. There is at least one other who frequents this site as well. Semper Fi. I am sure you will make a fine addition to The Corps’ Officer ranks. Maybe your parents can come up to visit when Trek is released. There are theaters up at Quantico too!

657. Andrew - February 14, 2008

OH AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PEOPLE —— STOP COMPLAINING!

658. JCB3 - February 14, 2008

As painful as this is for the fans to have to wait a little longer, it is actually an endorsement of the movie. A May premiere is reserved for the movies that the studios believe will be the most successful. Paramount clearly sees this launching big and maintaining some momentum as a summer popcorn movie. While Christmas is a good launch period for a movie, May is the premiere launch date. It gives the new Star Trek film a better chance of maximizing revenue, and every dollar added to the coffers will ensure future movies and Star Trek’s viability as a franchise. That momentum could even renew interest in another TV series. So, although we’d all like to see the movie tommorrow, patience may have its rewards.

659. Sebastian Prooth - February 14, 2008

I have to say as a Star Trek producer myself I had made specific plans to release material in line with the Star Trek film in December. Now I am put in the position of having to completely re-think what I am doing with my own show.

As far as my feelings about the new film being put back all I can say is the amount of hyping, cast information, photos and other leaked materials off the set acquired from various sources will only serve to bite Paramount in the butt when they hold the film, finished on a shelf for months. Far be it for me to tell them how to do business but the film has a large budget and of course they are looking to get the highest return on their investment but they could suddenly face a diminished interest from the fanbase by holding the film, finished but unreleased.

On the business side, it makes sense that following the WGA strike that the Executives at Paramount would be somewhat gun-shy of releasing material that they have invested heavily in while recovering from what they may consider a serious blow, meaning the writers’ strike. They want to make sure that this Star Trek film is a success because of course if it bombs like Nemesis and Insurrection then they will consider it a complete lemon and not produce another film for many years or perhaps never.

It should be interesting to see if JJ Abrams is allowed to release a statement as to the reasoning behind his film being delayed.

Meanwhile my show, Star Trek: The Continuing Mission will continue to produce Star Trek in the audio format.

-Sebastian Prooth.
Executive Producer
TCM Productions

660. Duane Dibby of Borg - February 14, 2008

But Armageddon is happening soon!

661. Batts - February 14, 2008

Hey! back in the 60′s fans had to write letters to keep Star Trek on the air!! This is a hint folks!! Are your pens and paper ready!!!

662. AJ - February 14, 2008

661, or Anthony: (In a “Lex Luthor” voice from S2 talking to Zod) : John Lesherrr’s addrrrress?…

663. John - February 14, 2008

This news of them pushing it back pleases me, now they will have more time to do it right, tweek it out perfect AND most importantly have William Shatner in it!

yaaay!

;-)

664. Balock - February 14, 2008

you guys are crazy for talking about letter writing, seems like a complete waste of time. I have it on good authority that the delay is in place for a grand finale where Shatner saves the movie by bringing TOS E back into the balanced universe.

665. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

I just watched the trailer again in my office. The hairs on the back of my neck stood up. A few extra months means nothing to me.

I can wait. Just give me a good Trek movie.

Give me James Kirk, Spock, Bones, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura and Checkov!

Give me an Enterprise NCC-1701 without children or holodecks!

Give me “fip-style” communicators!

Give me redshirts!

Give me Orion slave girls!

Give me Tribbles!

Give me Kang and Kor!

Give me Andorians, Tellarites, and Vulcans!

Give me Romulan Birds Of Prey and cloaking devices!

Give me Spock with a goatee!

Give me– “hailing frequencies open”,

“phasers on stun”,

“Damnit, Jim”,

“Scotty, I need more power”,

“ahead warp factor 6″,

and “one to beam up!”

I’ll wait…

666. D.J. - February 14, 2008

I am very disappointed. To the person who said this might allow script rewrites to improve the film I would like to point out that 2/3 of principle photography has already been completed so that is not going to happen in any meaningful way.

I can only hope that Paramounts calcuations are correct and that a summer release may mean bigger box office.

I thought December was a good timeframe though because the demographic for Star Trek is a little older than some franchises.

667. MikeG - February 14, 2008

This is disappointing news, although my wife is glad I won’t be going out on Christmas day…

668. ChristopherPike - February 14, 2008

Exactly what was the competition on Dec 25th?

Star Trek now faces stiff competition from the likes of that Da Vinci prequel and that X-Men prequel centred around Wolverine…

Xmas was the perfect tie-in for merchandise. By the end of 2009, both this movie and the franchise will be dead again.

669. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#667–Mine will be too.

Seems she gets extra good news on Valentine’s Day, since I had already told her that I was taking the kids to see Star Trek on Christmas night (to her credit, she only made a mild face and her eyes only rolled slightly). She will no doubt be relieved…

670. John - February 14, 2008

The Wrath of Khan was released in the summer and it was a mega HUGE hit!, anybody care to say debate THAT fact???

Great Idea for a great comeback to Star Trek!

:-)

671. ChristopherPike - February 14, 2008

I recently caught the trailer for TMP from my DVD collection. Low and behold, Orson Welles announces “Coming this Christmas from Paramount”.

My point? The movie that grossed the most money for Star Trek was at Christmas. It should’ve been allowed to happen again…

672. Spock's Brain - February 14, 2008

#668 “Xmas was the perfect tie-in for merchandise.” What? All the Christmas shopping would’ve been done with on Xmas Day. Kids won’t get into until they see the movie. It’s great idea for biz, sux for the fans.

673. wilder - February 14, 2008

Wow, never seen this many posts before. I thought the Christmas day release was a bad idea, but I had hoped they would move the date to around Thanksgiving. That would have been better than making fans wait until May ’09. Well, I hope it will be worth it. At least it gives the general public more time to forget about previous Treks.

674. Bink - Illogical - February 14, 2008

Whata ya wanna bet this will change again?

675. ChristopherPike - February 14, 2008

I wouldn’t dream of saying anything crass like describing this as “a valentine to the fans”…

676. Jorg Sacul - February 14, 2008

I can’t wait to see it at my local drive in, which is still in business.

will they still marquee it as “STAR TRAK ” like they did for STII? :-)

677. John - February 14, 2008

….and the most POPULAR trek movie was released on June 7th 1982, TWOK, so…what does “that “prove” #671???

notta!!!

A Summer release shall rule for Trek 11, I dare say.

;-)

678. Spock's Brain - February 14, 2008

#676. LOL!

679. Spock's Brain - February 14, 2008

Most of you knuckle heads know ZERO about filmmaking or the film business.

680. Spock's Brain - February 14, 2008

Let it go…

681. Mike - February 14, 2008

Paramount, are you ******* kidding me?!

682. Xai - February 14, 2008

Ok, we are all disappointed. The film’s not in trouble, it’s just being moved.
Time to move on.

683. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#658–Excellent point. If anything, this is a further ringing endorsement for JJ and the Trek movie. Paramount has obviously become even more confident in this film if they have enough guts to make it a May release. There is something to be taken from all of this, and it is not at all negative.
People may forget about the trailer between now and then, but the real hype is not even close to starting in the theaters and beyond. Star Trek has a pulse…A Summer hit is sure to bring Trek back to where it is best…on the small screen (although mine is pretty big).

684. seangh - February 14, 2008

I can’t believe the people who have their knickers in a twist over this news. Yeah, it’s a bummer to have to wait a few extra months, but Paramount is trying to run a business and they are looking to have some product on the shelf in a time when things are going likely to be lean.

And to the folks who are taking this as a bad sign, that the movie is in trouble – save your drama for your mama and get on with your lives.

685. Dunsel Report - February 14, 2008

Tony Pieta–Brilliant.

686. J. Parker - February 14, 2008

You know, Roger Ebert has been sort of a friend to Star Trek, if you recall his review of the first film, after all the negative reviews. But I recall what he wrote about Lucas’ prequels, and will quote below.

So, with ILM Visual effects and designers, perhaps there will be time to “punch up” the visuals and have Roger eat crow.

He wrote here:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19990517/REVIEWS/905170301/1023

What he does have, in abundance, is exhilaration. There is a sense of discovery in scene after scene of “The Phantom Menace,” as he tries out new effects and ideas, and seamlessly integrates real characters and digital ones, real landscapes and imaginary places. We are standing at the threshold of a new age of epic cinema, I think, in which digital techniques mean that budgets will no longer limit the scope of scenes; filmmakers will be able to show us just about anything they can imagine.

As surely as Anakin Skywalker points the way into the future of “Star Wars,” so does “The Phantom Menace” raise the curtain on this new freedom for filmmakers. And it’s a lot of fun. The film has correctly been given the PG rating; it’s suitable for younger viewers and doesn’t depend on violence for its effects. As for the bad rap about the characters–hey, I’ve seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They’re called “Star Trek” movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day.

687. British Naval Dude - February 14, 2008

Hey- lookee at the ad on the upper right…
We got a re-booted Knight Rider to tidy us over until 2009…

arrrr… wonder if they got Harvey Fierstein to do the voice o’ the car?…

688. Bobby Dobbins - February 14, 2008

The official website has verified it. “Under Construction May 2009″

689. richpit - February 14, 2008

this sucks…and NOT in a good way.

690. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#686–To each his own. As a fan of the original Star Wars movies, I disliked alot of what was done in that prequel. If Ebert liked it despite the horrible acting and poorly developed characters, then I can’t say his opinion about Trek movies means anything to me.

Keep in mind also that the “Star Trek movies” he was referring to are probably the ones in the TNG-era or V and VI–not the really good ones. I doubt TMP, TWOK, TSFS, and TVH were fresh on his mind in 1999.

I’ll take better characters anyday…CGI has its place, but it shouldn’t substitute for good writing and character development.

691. Ryan - February 14, 2008

#688 That ruined my last hope that this was all an error. Oh well, time to get over it.

692. Lousy Canadian - February 14, 2008

WTF!?

693. Captain Pike - February 14, 2008

I think for us fans who are following it closely (like everyday – what a bunch of losers we are…) the later date just increases the chance of “fan fatique”. That lose of interest will impact the box office somewhat.

I don’t know if the change will have any impact on the general public. I hope when release date approaches the movie gets solid but moderate advertising. You can always tell a bad movie from it’s promotion because it either gets no publicity or an “OMG we are desperate” huge amount of publicity.

This will impact the toy lines significantly. All those retailer orders from the Toy fairs for Xmas 2008 are down the tube. I bet Playmates had to change their trousers when they heard this announcement.

694. ChristopherPike - February 14, 2008

#397 Ain’t that just the truth.

695. John - February 14, 2008

#690, star trek 6 the undiscovered country was one of the very best movies and its box office reciepts prove that!

p.s. i am glad they are pushing it back till summer, now they put Shatner in after all!

;-)

696. Viking - February 14, 2008

I wonder how many more BOHICA moments Paramount has penciled in on their calendars for us…………

697. Stephen from Scotland - February 14, 2008

I just found out about the 15 month wait.

It really sucks to be a Star Trek fan just now.

698. NCC-73515 - February 14, 2008

Note that May 8 is Federation Day!

699. ~~TARA~~ - February 14, 2008

Okay, I’m not as mad this morning as I was last night about this. Giving Star Trek an opening at the start of the summer is actually a smart (financial) move for Paramount. Plus it says that they see this movie as being a big blockbuster. Basically they are saying they think it is their biggest picture of 2009, so why waste the money potential during Christmas, which typically doesn’t have as high of a return.

I do hope that they still market in time for Christmas. I can see buying a bunch of toys for Christmas, but not in the spring. I save my money for Christmas shopping and usually don’t buy toys for my son the rest of the year. He loves Trek, so I think he’ll enjoy the toys.

He’s 3 (will be 4 when the movie comes), so unfortunately he’s too young to see the movie, but he loves TOS. He’s been watching the HD’s with me.

700. Izbot - February 14, 2008

700th!

701. freezejeans - February 14, 2008

701st!! YEAH!

702. Marian Ciobanu - February 14, 2008

-I just want to see a good movie…

703. redjac - February 14, 2008

No…
No, NO
No!
NO!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

704. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

Well looks like 1000 comments will be the goal here. Ita amazing how one bit of bad news can trigger such a chain reaction of anger and outrage. no worries now about the film it will be worth and all of this anger will be not even a memory at and after is premier. If anything the delay will probably ad to the box office take.

705. Olympus1979 - February 14, 2008

Once again, its F*** THE FANS WE ARE ALL ABOUT MONEY over at paramount.

This stinks.

706. Marian Ciobanu - February 14, 2008

13 – BAD LUCK !!!

707. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

705 Welcome to the real world. they are going to do everything they can to make the most money out of and thats how most big companies work and you cannot fight. you just have to not let it affect your life.

708. John - February 14, 2008

Can’t you guys get how wonderful this could be in fact?, that this is perhaps a blessing in disguise!?

Now they will have the extra time to get everything right, in editing, and in putting in any extra people that will make the Star Trek movie soar…like maybe William Shatner for example.

Please try and look on the bright side, and think how much more it will mean when we see it!?

Live Long & Prosper, One and All…Happy St. Valentines Day!

John

709. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#708 Good points i and others have said the same thing and good number of people are not listening. To much anger here!

710. Deep Space 913 - February 14, 2008

I woke up this morning and checked the site again. I had hoped the push back was a bad dream. Sadly this is not a dream. It is a dark day.

711. New Horizon - February 14, 2008

A month delay would have been acceptable, but five is completely ludicrous. Especially with the DaVinci code sequel being released a week later. The Christmas release date had a real charm and magic about it…it was like a gift…now, the studio has gone and taken all that away from us. I’m sick of them. They’re going to lose a hell of a lot of momentum doing this. I hope JJ and crew fight to get the Christmas date back. As a fan, I want this for Christmas!

712. worried fan - February 14, 2008

oh dear – this is bad news. I fear this delay will severely impact the “Anticipation” factor which helps make a film a blockbuster. If the film had been relesed at Christmas, it would have faced no competition and would have been THE family film to go to. In May 2009 it will simply be another movie. Sure, the die hard fans will go and see it anyway. But the non-trekkie moviegoer will simply choose one of the many other films around. It will not be a holiday ocassion anymore. A bad miscalculation born of greed, I’m afraid. When will the fans be treated seriously by TPTB in Paramount instead of thinking we are simply there to be squeezed for money?
Paramount can give everyone a lesson – “This is how you kill a franchise…”

713. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

# 710 as you can see there are more then a few who share that bit of sentiment. But a delay is not the end of the world as some would have you believ. Oh Woes as me , has no place here. We will get the film maybe a better one then we would have otherwise got.

714. Phil Smith - February 14, 2008

Frack.

715. Ensign Harris - February 14, 2008

I think a little part of me died when I read this news.

716. star trackie - February 14, 2008

#670 “The Wrath of Khan was released in the summer and it was a mega HUGE hit!, anybody care to say debate THAT fact???”

True, yet Star Trek 4, the most successful movie of all the Trek films was released in the winter. I honestly don’t know what to make of it all.

717. rusbeh - February 14, 2008

Phuck Paramount wat a pile of crap studio.
they should check Lucasfilm see how they do it.
ALL trek movies came out in December so this would have been real traditional….all the hype will be gone nobody will give a damn…
computer,activate self destruction…………………

718. ChristopherPike - February 14, 2008

#698 There are other non-canon dates for Federation Day too…

such as October 11 (from a news clipping in Picard’s photo album) not actually visable in Generations.

or August 12 (last chapter of ENT novel) Last Full Measure.

719. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

# 716 that state is true enough. the film be a hit because its freaking Star trek, because all of us want to see it and because Abrams will make it a hit. A few month delay IS NO BIG DEAL!!!!

715 Yes its Disappointing but its only a freakin movie. when you see all will be well!!!!!!

717 Lucas is a bad example The last three Star wars film were crapp on a monumental scale. Trek is huge cut above Lucas and his shoddy products.. A geoge lucas film was about the effects and how many he cram on to the screen to hid the the fact that he could not tell a coherent good story.

720. BK613 - February 14, 2008

Sigh…
Words cannot express my disappointment so I’m not even gonna try.

Par for the course though, for Paramount.

721. Elvis_Shatner - February 14, 2008

Damn! Damn! Double-dumbass on you, Paramount!!!!!

722. T2 - February 14, 2008

anybody got any comments from j.j. yet?

723. Krik Semaj - February 14, 2008

#717.
TWOK came out in MAY 1982. Not dec.

724. Chuck - February 14, 2008

#711 New Horizon

A month delay would have been worse. January is known as the month in which studios dump their more low-quality (read: crappy) movies. There may be one or two exceptions, of course (i.e. Cloverfield), but releasing Star Trek in January would be a terrible move.

The best months for a Trek release, I think, are December, May, June, July, and November. All other months are generally reserved for forgettable clunkers.

#723 TWOK came out in June 1982, not May. :)

725. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#772 no but I would image we will be getting his side real soon because this is going to be a sizable public relations problem for Paramount to content with and the studio will probably want him out on the front lines to calm things down.

726. garen - February 14, 2008

i’m repeating myself here…

does anyone else feel like a christmas release just sums up the overall feeling of star trek a little better than summer does?

i mean in december, its the “holiday season”. The idea is “good will toward men.” People are generally warm and fuzzy feeling from thanksgiving and whatever holidays they choose to celebrate.

summer is the time for high action, high sfx, high volume and low intelligence. Most summer movies arent for the thinking man…theyre just for fun and FX.

if this film was released in dec like originally intended…it would have had a huge first weekend/week…..followed by great numbers for at least the next two or three weeks. then depending on how good the movie is….the positive press and the all powerful WORD OF MOUTH could sustain it VERY SOLIDLY at the box office for nearly two months!

a May release takes all those extra weeks away. seriously at its absolute BEST…this film gets about 3 or 4 good weeks before peoples interests are strained and distracted by other “blockbuster” films.

trek deserves more than that. trek is more, “good will toward men,” than it is mutants and transformers.

bottom line….This film will be forgotten by the middle of june. no matter how good it actually is. :(

727. Jacob - February 14, 2008

That totally sucks!!! I have to complete ANOTHER school year…and then still wait a damn month on top of that. And you know the movie’s gonna suck. I hope it’s the best thing that’s ever been done….but what always happens when something is built up to be “so awesome” because you’ve waited so long and you trust the team behind the movie to blow you away? *cough* Simpsons Movie? *cough* That’s right it’s never what you want it to be. Just bring it out in December so that we can get it all over with and criticize it thoroughly so the NEXT one is better…..ya jerks. lol

728. Krik Semaj - February 14, 2008

June 82 not May
sorry

729. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

I hope that the studio at least keeps us in the loop on the films progress, that at least would be something given every thing that has transpired in the last 24 hours.

730. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#726 I have disagree, being a Star trek film with all the add build up it will still do well, even in May. No worries on this one.

731. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#705–Obviously, you don’t own a business yourself, or if you do, you probably aren’t maximizing your growth and profit potential. This is a $130+ million project, not a Sundance movie.

X-Mas releases don’t generally get the returns that late Spring/Summer releases do. Moving the release date to May just shows that Paramount now has more faith in JJ’s ability to deliver a blockbuster movie than they did before.

So the silver lining seems to be that this is shaping up to be the most ambitious Star Trek movie ever, and confidence in the writers/director is soaring.

If that’s not good news for the fans and the franchise–I don’t know what is.

Some of these posts lack rational perspective. I understand. I was frustrated at first by this as well. But the bigger picture is that we need this to be a big time money maker if our collective goal (more Star Trek on the small screen) is to ever come to fruition. I’m willing to bet that this was a well thought out decision.

732. Gabe - February 14, 2008

Now that they have 20 extra weeks to get the movie right, WILLIAM SHATNER HAD BETTER BE IN IT!!!!! And not just some cameo. I mean he better have a big important role. With the writers back on the job they’ll be able to come up with something good, something that fans will approve of for explaining his return. I don’t care what it takes. Even if it means hundreds of reshoots. Now there’s plenty of time for it. I want the REAL CAPTAIN KIRK back. If they can resurrect Spock anything can be done. This is afterall science fiction. Just make it believable and respectable and BRING BACK THE REAL KIRK along with the real Spock. In the words of another great captain, “MAKE IT SO!!!!!”

733. Diabolik - February 14, 2008

#726…. for a fan of such an optimistic series… you sure are negative!

“bottom line….This film will be forgotten by the middle of june. no matter how good it actually is. ”

I doubt that. If it’s a hit, it won’t be forgotten, and the DVD sales will be another hit. The only way it will be forgotten so soon is if it’s a letdown.

734. garen - February 14, 2008

#730 Garovorkin…

You truly think the Trek movie will be able to maintain nearly two months of SOLID financial returns in the middle of May? when its completely surrounded by blockbuster competion?

If you think so…then we must agree to disagree…..and i hope you are right!

735. garen - February 14, 2008

#733 Forgotten by the general movie going population i should say. i wont forget it….i’m sure none of us will. But i was refering to a general population…where most of the all the ticket sales come from.

736. Star Trek: Voyeur - February 14, 2008

Nemesis was for the fans…and Paramount suffered.
Thus our Paramour wants a Trek to appeal to non-fans,
NOT us fans.

Logically….it’s all Rick Berman’s fault.
I say BURN the Monster!!!

No, wait…that was from Frankenstein (the original Sci-Fi story)
Never mind…..

737. Del_Duio - February 14, 2008

I stopped reading after post #101, which so far is my favorite and it says:

“i am a 99 year old man that desprately wanted to see this movie before i died. i guess i’ll have to live a few months more. you suck!!!!!!”

This is just too funny, but then I realized that there’s about 600 more posts after that one!

I was really looking forward to a 12/25/08 release date, as I was planning on taking my wife to see this, and hope that I can find her a Star Trek movie that she’ll actually watch. I’m a huge fan of DS9, TNG, and ToS (in that order), and was really excited that JJ would make this a very great and fresh ST movie in the vein that Batman Begins reinvigorated its franchise. The only really big problem with a summer ’09 release is that it’s got to go up against a lot of heavy-hitters, whereas it’d wipe the floor with anything other studios would have put out at Christmas time.

If they do indeed wait another 5 or 6 months, I hope that time is well spent making it as good as humanly possible. As a lot of other people stated, this is the now or never shot in the arm this franchise desperately needs. Long gone are the days when millions would tune in on Saturday evenings to watch TNG first-runs. Hell, only one station I know of even plays DS9 at all now! After Voyager and Enterprise (and in some respects, Nemesis) we need this movie to be the friggin’ savior, baby!

738. Captain Presley - February 14, 2008

Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t the two biggest grossing Trek movies Thanksgiving/Christmas releases? TMP came out on Dec. 7, 1979, and TVH Nov. 26, 1986. Hhhhmmm… Perhaps Christmas and Trek go together better than some think. Plus toys certainly sell better at Christms than Summer.

739. Garovorkin - February 14, 2008

#734 Garen in a word YES. it will do fine If anything it might even trounce the competition. The Star Trek Brand is a formidable one. If I were the other studios I would be worried by this move on the part of Paramount. Now they will have to respond by moving the premiers of their movies.

740. Tox Uthat - February 14, 2008

At this point, only 740 or so comments and mainly complaints.

C’mon, people, you’re not trying hard enough.

741. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#732—If they were making another Shat Trek movie, you can bet it wouldn’t be getting a May release!!!

#734—People go to see movies all Summer long. That is why May is such a big release date. It is a compliment to JJ Abrams that this film is getting a first class release.

742. AJ - February 14, 2008

The one illusion some of our colleagues her have, is that some kind of snowballing PR effect of anticipation has begun with respect to Trek11. I have rabid TV watching friends who nothing about it, and the most news coverage we’ve seen is the “Star Track” flyover.

The world has, in fact, not been whipped into a frenzy over the impending December launch. The one waste, however, is the teaser in front of Cloverfield, which was meant to get the younger potentials psyched. It’s already forgotten. It will be forgotten within weeks.

And now, a bit of money will be wasted on a website which will show the same 4 unchanging screens to nobody for the next year.

743. BorgDrone - February 14, 2008

OK, I haven’t read all 716+ posts, but I can get the jist pretty well.

I agree this is a big disappointment. I was looking more forward to Dec. 25 than I can remember in a long time.

And while I’m not sure what to make of this at this point, I don’t feel that it’s as bad a move as we think. Personally, when I first heard of the Christmas release I said to myself “Oh no, not again”. Only because the last few winter releases for Star Trek films have been terrible. Granted, several of the films in the franchise have been successful at different times, i.e., Summer/Winter, and I don’t think it’s necessarily as much of the time factor as it is what the competition is.

I also feel like, because of past Fan reaction, this has made the average movie-goer skeptical, i.e., “well if the fans don’t like it, it must be bad”. I believe we fans carry a lot of influence with non-fans, and personally I think all the bashing and trashing of the last number of years has also weighed negatively on the franchise.

I think a lot fans, especially younger fans got very spoiled and whiny with regard to Trek. I think they’ve gotten arrogant and selfish. If for some reason something isn’t as so and so thinks it should be, they p*ss and moan. I even saw one comment here bashing the ST Remastered project, which I personally feel has been superb. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a couple of editing things I’ve scratched my head over, but overall, I think the team working on the project has done an excellent job, and I think the episodes themselves look better than ever. Whatever happened to just appreciating something and enjoying it, and not criticizing every little thing?

All that to say this: Get over it people! It’s just a movie!!!! Is this a mountain worth dying on?? Personally, I think there’s a good chance this will turn out to be a positive move. A different release time could prove advantageous. I’ve often wondered myself over the last number of movie releases why they stuck to a winter release date, when those movies ended up being up against such stiff competition. Sure, you can say their story lines were weak, and maybe some other things too, but I also feel that ST movies almost became too commonplace, as most people’s, (i.e., the average movie-goer), reaction was “Oh, just another Star Trek movie”. Think about it. What other movie franchise, other than horror, has more films.

I think it says something that the Star Trek franchise will now release an 11th film and possibly more depending on this one’s performance. There is no other franchise that has been so enduring or, dare I say more profitable for Paramount. Do you really think they want to kill it? I don’t think so.

So stop complaining. Things are what they are, and at this point, there isn’t a lot we can do about it. As fans, I think we also have to recognize the right battles to fight. I don’t feel the release date is one of them. So we just have to adjust our expectations and contribute, not detract, to the buzz surrounding this film.

Kaplah!

744. Avindair - February 14, 2008

Wow, talk about the gnashing of teeth. Yikes.

So it’s a four month delay. I’d rather they have the time to get the picture done right than to shove it out the door unfinished.

My only real disappointment now is that I don’t think we’ll see leaks of costumes and the ship as early as we would have otherwise.

Oh, well. I’ll live.

745. The Vulcanista - February 14, 2008

#629: This is not “Nemesis.” From all indications, this is much, much better. And X-Men and Transformers II (sorry, Bob) are *not* LOTR.

#649: Semper Fi! My Dad is a Hard Corps Iwo survivor. Best of luck at Quantico!

#116: Harry, I’m a fan of all Warner Brothers cartoons from about 1930 through the Roadrunner series. *Meep-meep!* And happy Valentine’s Day!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

746. Shatner_Fan_2000 - February 14, 2008

“If they were making another Shat Trek movie, you can bet it wouldn’t be getting a May release!!!”

Uncalled for. Bad form, sir. And illogical too, since this edition of Nim Trek is getting a May release.

747. Harry Ballz - February 14, 2008

Vulcanista

Happy Valentine’s Day to you! Hope the fella in your life spoils you! :)

748. sean - February 14, 2008

The only worry I have is that this will impact the box office negatively. All the big May openings mentioned above went essentially unchallenged (unless you count the Lizzy Macguire movie as a blockbuster). Trek is basically an unproven property right now, and it’s going against two of the biggest boys on the block. I’m concerned, but optimistic.

749. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#746– I don’t see anything illogical about it. The May release date is a statement of confidence in the movie and in JJ Abrams. And given the content of post #732, it was not at all uncalled for. That is a dead issue, and has nothing to do with the new release date. There is nothing to suggest that JJ will use the extra time to rewrite the story, allowing a Shatner comeback, nor is there anything to suggest doing so would improve the film. Paramount obviously doesn’t think it’s broken, or they wouldn’t have given it such a “prized” release date.

750. Herbert Eyes Wide Open - February 14, 2008

Hey Anthony, did my previous comment get deleted because I used the “F” word?

751. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #637. Closet-Trekker

Wow — it’s been busy since I logged off (11 a.m. ish).
We’re fine, just very sad. Thanks so much for asking!! It will take a while before it doesn’t hurt but it happens to everybody so you’ve got to keep perspective… My husband will grieve his father in his own quiet way. I just try to leave him alone and give him space.

This article brought a lot of, um, “people” out of the woodwork, didn’t it? Gotta say I’m really disappointed in the delay. Thought I could hold out until Christmas but next May? Nuts. However, an old friend from high school looked me up on classmates.com and contacted me in late January. We’re meeting on Sunday to plan a reunion of our old gang. That really cheered me up. Hope he and his wife are Trekkies. I need to talk about this to someone!!! :-|

Looks like Anthony abandoned this thread a long time ago or some posts would have been deleted. Oh well. On to the next thread…

Now it’s 3:38 p.m. Toronto time. Gotta go.

kg

752. The Vulcanista - February 14, 2008

#751

You’re in Toronto? Just exactly how many of you are out there?? :)

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

753. Greg2600 - February 14, 2008

Sounds like we have another non-Trek “fan” at Paramount. Guess some things never change.

754. Steve Hall - February 14, 2008

Terrible decision by the idiot executives in suits.

755. Shatner_Fan_2000 - February 14, 2008

#749 “I don’t see anything illogical about it. The May release date is a statement of confidence in the movie and in JJ Abrams.”

Your comment in 741 clearly states that if Shatner were involved, the studio wouldn’t have the confidence to release the movie in May. Where do you get that from? It was nothing more than an unnecessary swipe owed to the fact that you’re annoyed by talk of Shatner, and you know it.

And I maintain that it IS an illogical statement, since old co-star Leonard Nimoy’s participation has in no way hurt Paramount’s confidence.

Sorry, pal, you can’t win ‘em all. :)

756. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #745. The Vulcanista

“#629: This is not “Nemesis.” From all indications, this is much, much better. And X-Men and Transformers II (sorry, Bob) are *not* LOTR.”

I absolutely LOVE the X-Men. Bought the first one because by that time it was $3 at Wal-Mart and it had Captain Picard and Gandalf in it so I wanted to check it out. Now I got my friend hooked (she put me onto LOTR and got me hooked) and we’re both champing (chomping?) at the bit. Just saw a reference to another X-Men movie coming out. What did I miss? It’s a prequel? Wolverine? Are Stewart and McKellan in it?

Sorry didn’t mean to hijack (is that the word?) the thread. Where can I get the info? Think I’ll ‘google’ X-Men.

kg

757. OR Coast Trekkie - February 14, 2008

Anthony –
Any possiblity of closing comments on this? Obviously the point has come across, and really, very few people are reacting in an adult manner. Can I understand disappointment? Yes. Can I understand actual anger, sadness, or as some people have even said, crying, or even one person saying, “a part of them died?” No.

Come on, Paramont dumped $150 million into this. Of course they want returns and to make the most money. I mean, come on, aren’t you guys happy when you get a raise at work?

And think of the saying “The best things come to those who wait.” Delayed gratifiction folks…

758. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #752. The Vulcanista

Sorry — was typing above post to you when you posted. Don’t know how many there are. I know that HARRY (!) is here somewhere as well. There were a couple of others that mentioned it and some mentioned Canada. There may be quite a few I would imagine but I don’t know how many are aware of this website. I stumbled across it while in a perimenopausal fog. (Sorry, guys. A little female humour.) As Spock would say — “Very little”.

kg

759. Katie G. - February 14, 2008

Re: #757. OR Coast Trekkie

I was just thinking the same thing. I said I was leaving at 3:38 p.m. and now it’s 4:17 p.m. (T.O.) time. What a colossal waste of time. Guess I just like talking…

kg

760. Devon - February 14, 2008

I’ve seen a couple of comments saying Paramount “F***ed the fans, it’s all about the money.”

How did they “F***” the fans? It’s still going to be in theaters.

Don’t we all want this thing to make as much money as possible?

If it makes more money, then possibly wouldn’t insure more Trek in the future and a revitalisng of the franchise?

761. AJ - February 14, 2008

We know it’s just a movie, but obsessive compulsive types thrive on this stuff. My brother is poor because his Corvette mod has 540 HP. I own every manifestation of official screen-Trek, as most do here, I am sure. I watched it since around 1972. We just love it.

We went to the movies and cheered every name in the credits, and we felt comfortable because, especially during those first screenings, the audience was a community.

And that palpable joy was forming for this film as well, almost to fever pitch, and way too early thanks to the Internets. The business decision is sound, but is pisses off lots of people. Hopefully TPTB will find some way to reimburse us.

Just realize, if Bob Orci or JJ come on, they are not responsible, and should in no way be the targets of fan wrath. It was probably news to them at some point as well. And this is a tough crowd.

762. Ky-Malairn - February 14, 2008

You know, the best thing about the capitalist system is that the consumer holds all the power. I’ve read most of these posts and there are some cooler heads here that see what Paramount is trying to do. Then there’s the alarmist, knee-jerk reactionaries who see this as an insidious plot by Paramount to “kill” their most profitable franchise. They just don’t like Star Trek. To hell with the stockholders!

Obviously those of you who are crying for blood because Paramount is being “greedy” have never owned or run a business.

Getting back to my original point. If you don’t like the business practices of Paramount you have ALL the POWER.

Who, me?

Yes, you!

Don’t hand your money over to a corporation you feel does not respect you. Boycott the film! Don’t buy the licensed products! The DVD?? Ha! Not on your shelf, right? Not never!

That’ll show them greedy bastards!

Once they’ve finally killed Star Trek they can start killing off those other pesky franchises. Uh oh, they’re releasing Transformers 2 during the summer. Why?? That is so obviously a Presidents’ Day weekend opener! I guess I’ll start writing the eulogy for that one. Wait, Paramount distributes Indiana Jones and that’s coming out in May. I guess on opening night I’ll stand in line and say to the gathered masses “I did not come to praise Indiana, but to bury him.”

763. Crusty McCoy - February 14, 2008

Out of all this… there has been only one comment from Boborci? What’s the deal Bob? Seriously…

764. Closettrekker - February 14, 2008

#755–Like I said, in response to #732, it was not uncalled for. I don’t see you chastising his post. Of course not, since you agree with his agenda.
I don’t see Nimoy’s part in the film having any relevance to Bill Shatner. One character is alive, and one is dead. One actor can play a very old Vulcan, while it is difficult to fit a man who, regardless of whether he dies on Veridian or of natural causes, is most likely dead by the post-Nemesis era anyway (which is where Nimoy’s character fits into the story).

Are we really going to do this?

765. bmar - February 14, 2008

#742 “And now, a bit of money will be wasted on a website which will show the same 4 unchanging screens to nobody for the next year. ”

Not true! Have you checked them recently? Now that there’s a four month delay, the construction workers are slacking off. I just saw one of them playing handball against the sie of the ship and the other one is filling out his tax forms.

On the brighter side, the 4 month delay will allow them to have that drab interior hallyway we saw spruced up quite nicely. I hear they are doing a shag rug and some cool lava lamps along the sides.

766. BK613 - February 14, 2008

Of course it is also annoying because the delay means 5 more months of the built on earth/built in space “discussion” before we get to see how JJ pulls it off.

Grrr…

767. Shatner_Fan_2000 - February 14, 2008

#764 You’re sidestepping the main issue: you claimed Shatner’s involvement would lower the studio’s confidence and negate the new May release date!

You know that is plain untrue. Or, at best, unfounded. That’s all I’m saying.

768. wilder - February 14, 2008

I thought Nemesis was a great movie. Had one of the best space battles ever! I never understood why people gave it such a bad rap. If you are a Sci-Fi fan or a Trek fan or whatever, it was a good freakin movie!

769. Anthony Pascale - February 14, 2008

OK that is enough

continue the discussion in the new article:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/02/14/official-sites-updated-to-may-2009-intl-sites-to-2009/

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