


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Simon Pegg Predicts Star Trek Sequel In 18 Months?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/</link>
	<description>the source for Star Trek news and information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:20:50 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: P Technobabble</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1980116</link>
		<dc:creator>P Technobabble</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1980116</guid>
		<description>36. Closettrekker

I hear what you&#039;re saying, and I agree to a point...  that point being that I vaguely recall reading that Gene Roddenberry saw TOS becoming a show where each week a different character would get the spotlight.  Of course, TOS didn&#039;t make it that far, but it did happen in TNG, and later Treks.  But I think Roddenberry may have seen them as an ensemble cast.
I also recall reading where the supporting players did lobby Nimoy to give them more to do when he took the director&#039;s chair.
Should they have gotten better roles?  I suppose if I were an actor I would want more to do than... you know...  sitting, looking tense, making a rare comment.  But, as you point out, the show was about K/S/M...  which Shatner apparently took a lot of grief for, for tending to pull lines away from others because he felt those lines should go to Kirk.   Yes, I believe we tuned in to Star Trek to see K/S/M, and not to see the others.   They did not have significant story impact on the series, but they were significant characters (being African-American, Asian, Russian....) for the times.  And they each developed loyal followings.   When I first saw TSFS, I was really glad to see each of them get their moment, but I admit that was purely sentimental.
Now, should the new cast be given more to do?  I thought they all fared pretty well in Trek09, and I wouldn&#039;t expect them to be doing anything really juicy in the future.  But, only the Supreme Court knows for sure, eh?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>36. Closettrekker</p>
<p>I hear what you&#8217;re saying, and I agree to a point&#8230;  that point being that I vaguely recall reading that Gene Roddenberry saw TOS becoming a show where each week a different character would get the spotlight.  Of course, TOS didn&#8217;t make it that far, but it did happen in TNG, and later Treks.  But I think Roddenberry may have seen them as an ensemble cast.<br />
I also recall reading where the supporting players did lobby Nimoy to give them more to do when he took the director&#8217;s chair.<br />
Should they have gotten better roles?  I suppose if I were an actor I would want more to do than&#8230; you know&#8230;  sitting, looking tense, making a rare comment.  But, as you point out, the show was about K/S/M&#8230;  which Shatner apparently took a lot of grief for, for tending to pull lines away from others because he felt those lines should go to Kirk.   Yes, I believe we tuned in to Star Trek to see K/S/M, and not to see the others.   They did not have significant story impact on the series, but they were significant characters (being African-American, Asian, Russian&#8230;.) for the times.  And they each developed loyal followings.   When I first saw TSFS, I was really glad to see each of them get their moment, but I admit that was purely sentimental.<br />
Now, should the new cast be given more to do?  I thought they all fared pretty well in Trek09, and I wouldn&#8217;t expect them to be doing anything really juicy in the future.  But, only the Supreme Court knows for sure, eh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Tompkins</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1979712</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Tompkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:50:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1979712</guid>
		<description>May of 2011 is far more likely. It would have gone into 2012 or later without the SAG approval of an interim contract running through 2011.
I won&#039;t purchase any new media releases of any movie or TV series before 1974; I understand that the new contract pretty much throws the oldtimers under the bus and rolls the wheels back and forth over them a couple of times for good measure.
I&#039;ve always believed an actor or his/her estate should be compensated for past performances, no matter how long ago even it is released on a new form of media.
It seems hypocritical to me that Cary Grant&#039;s estate won&#039;t see any money on new media releases, but it&#039;d hit the fan if someone downloaded it without paying the studio. 
Just a shame the &#039;younger&#039; actors don&#039;t see how this will affect them down the line too. I can just imagine George Clooney getting bummed out at 80 because he isn&#039;t getting paid for the 3D immersive holodisk release of Ocean&#039;s 16.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>May of 2011 is far more likely. It would have gone into 2012 or later without the SAG approval of an interim contract running through 2011.<br />
I won&#8217;t purchase any new media releases of any movie or TV series before 1974; I understand that the new contract pretty much throws the oldtimers under the bus and rolls the wheels back and forth over them a couple of times for good measure.<br />
I&#8217;ve always believed an actor or his/her estate should be compensated for past performances, no matter how long ago even it is released on a new form of media.<br />
It seems hypocritical to me that Cary Grant&#8217;s estate won&#8217;t see any money on new media releases, but it&#8217;d hit the fan if someone downloaded it without paying the studio.<br />
Just a shame the &#8216;younger&#8217; actors don&#8217;t see how this will affect them down the line too. I can just imagine George Clooney getting bummed out at 80 because he isn&#8217;t getting paid for the 3D immersive holodisk release of Ocean&#8217;s 16.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Closettrekker</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1978070</link>
		<dc:creator>Closettrekker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:39:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1978070</guid>
		<description>#33---&quot; When I watch TMP, it is terribly apparent that Uhura, Sulu and Chekov have nothing to do.&quot;

Nor should they have, in my opinion. They were no more important in the television episodes.

Unlike the later spinoff series, TOS was not an ensemble show. Star Trek was about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy---although Scotty and Uhura were solid secondary characters.

As for Sulu and Chekov---the bit players on the bridge could have been any random people, and often were in the Original Series. Sulu and Chekov were arguably no more significant than Chapel.

Sulu appears in only 52 episodes (one time by means of stock footage only). 

Chekov appears in only 36 episodes----mostly as injury and/or comedic fodder.

Chapel appears in 25 episodes, but usually with relevant dialogue/purpose.

The only reason for the difference in the number of actual appearances is that a great deal of the activity in many episodes occurs on the bridge. Most of the time, they (Sulu and Chekov) do not even have significant dialogue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#33&#8212;&#8221; When I watch TMP, it is terribly apparent that Uhura, Sulu and Chekov have nothing to do.&#8221;</p>
<p>Nor should they have, in my opinion. They were no more important in the television episodes.</p>
<p>Unlike the later spinoff series, TOS was not an ensemble show. Star Trek was about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy&#8212;although Scotty and Uhura were solid secondary characters.</p>
<p>As for Sulu and Chekov&#8212;the bit players on the bridge could have been any random people, and often were in the Original Series. Sulu and Chekov were arguably no more significant than Chapel.</p>
<p>Sulu appears in only 52 episodes (one time by means of stock footage only). </p>
<p>Chekov appears in only 36 episodes&#8212;-mostly as injury and/or comedic fodder.</p>
<p>Chapel appears in 25 episodes, but usually with relevant dialogue/purpose.</p>
<p>The only reason for the difference in the number of actual appearances is that a great deal of the activity in many episodes occurs on the bridge. Most of the time, they (Sulu and Chekov) do not even have significant dialogue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jorg Sacul</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1978029</link>
		<dc:creator>Jorg Sacul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:13:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1978029</guid>
		<description>14. Frederick - June 30, 2009

    As much as we would like to see it, I don’t think Trek will be returning to the small screen any time soon, as they learned their lesson back when TNG caused a drop in movie interest. I don’t think it can be had both ways any more.
_________________________

I have to respectfully disagree. I don&#039;t think TNG influenced the TOS crewed movies negatively, I think that there was just a weakness in the TOS movies of the time period. Not that they were bad per se, just not the big draw that they might have been. Movie audiences of the time weren&#039;t terribly into Trek anyway...and like I said, the stories were more like &quot;when can we retire from this?&quot; instead of something like Clint Eastwood doing Gran Torino, it was Shatner &amp; Nimoy doing Jim and Spock as Grumpy Old Men (without the laughs). I don&#039;t blame the actors, I think the scripts were pretty much phoned in by the writers with little care for the franchise of the Aging Enterprise Crew.  Too many &quot;safe choices&quot; not enough writing outside the expected plots.

Sure, there were moments of greatness, such as Leonard McCoy&#039;s Sybok encounter in TFF, where he has to relive turning off his father&#039;s life support-- arguably DeForest Kelley&#039;s best ever written scene, or at least equal to the moments after Kirk lets Edith Keeler get hit by the car to save history.  Spock disarming Valeris in TUC... good stuff.

Star Trek is back in the theatres... let&#039;s keep it there for a while.  Let Lucas have TV with his new live-action series.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>14. Frederick &#8211; June 30, 2009</p>
<p>    As much as we would like to see it, I don’t think Trek will be returning to the small screen any time soon, as they learned their lesson back when TNG caused a drop in movie interest. I don’t think it can be had both ways any more.<br />
_________________________</p>
<p>I have to respectfully disagree. I don&#8217;t think TNG influenced the TOS crewed movies negatively, I think that there was just a weakness in the TOS movies of the time period. Not that they were bad per se, just not the big draw that they might have been. Movie audiences of the time weren&#8217;t terribly into Trek anyway&#8230;and like I said, the stories were more like &#8220;when can we retire from this?&#8221; instead of something like Clint Eastwood doing Gran Torino, it was Shatner &amp; Nimoy doing Jim and Spock as Grumpy Old Men (without the laughs). I don&#8217;t blame the actors, I think the scripts were pretty much phoned in by the writers with little care for the franchise of the Aging Enterprise Crew.  Too many &#8220;safe choices&#8221; not enough writing outside the expected plots.</p>
<p>Sure, there were moments of greatness, such as Leonard McCoy&#8217;s Sybok encounter in TFF, where he has to relive turning off his father&#8217;s life support&#8211; arguably DeForest Kelley&#8217;s best ever written scene, or at least equal to the moments after Kirk lets Edith Keeler get hit by the car to save history.  Spock disarming Valeris in TUC&#8230; good stuff.</p>
<p>Star Trek is back in the theatres&#8230; let&#8217;s keep it there for a while.  Let Lucas have TV with his new live-action series.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shadowcat</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1977972</link>
		<dc:creator>Shadowcat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:56:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1977972</guid>
		<description>@32:

I have to agree with you there. They certainly have a healthy respect for each other. They are both brilliant in their respective fields. My huband thinks it is because Scotty and Spock are both stubborn and strong-willed individuals. Oh, I forgot about that scene in STTMP. I do hope Pegg and Quinto bring that dynamic into the next film.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@32:</p>
<p>I have to agree with you there. They certainly have a healthy respect for each other. They are both brilliant in their respective fields. My huband thinks it is because Scotty and Spock are both stubborn and strong-willed individuals. Oh, I forgot about that scene in STTMP. I do hope Pegg and Quinto bring that dynamic into the next film.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: P Technobabble</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1977880</link>
		<dc:creator>P Technobabble</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1977880</guid>
		<description>I have mixed feelings about getting the next Trek movie in a hurry.
Trek09 is still playing in theaters, at this point, people are already talking about the sequel, and I am starting to get that feeling of Trek Overload I felt when we had a Trek film and 2 Trek tv series going all at the same time.  As Kirk, himself, once said, &quot;Too much of anything is not necessarily a good thing.&quot;
And after reading comments from Paramount&#039;s CEO, I can see that $$$$$$ are what&#039;s going on inside his mind.  So, I hope the film is not rushed into simply to get another Trek movie out quickly.
Of course, at the same time, I loved the new film and can&#039;t wait to see the next.  As we have seen in various threads here, there are so many possibilities, and directions for the sequel...  I imagine Orci &amp; Kurtzman will be sorting out endless lists of things for possible inclusion in the next film...
  
Meanwhile, I liked Simon Pegg just fine as Mr. Scott, as I liked every member of the new cast.  It is just a pity (well, sort of) that Trek is so heavily hinged upon Kirk/Spock/McCoy that the supporting players must settle for lesser roles...  although I&#039;m sure they had to know what they were getting into.  But Scotty is next in line behind K/S/M, so his role should be a bit beefier.  It&#039;s gotta be hard trying to give the supporting players something more to do than, &quot;Aye, Captain,&quot; and &quot;Hailing frequencies open,&quot; etc. because it really depends on the story.  When I watch TMP, it is terribly apparent that Uhura, Sulu and Chekov have nothing to do.  Chekov fared better in TWOK, but it really wasn&#039;t until Nimoy took the reigns in TSFS that the supporting players got more to do.  I think HE understood their significance more than the previous directors anyway...  not to mention they probably felt more comfortable talking to Nimoy about their roles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have mixed feelings about getting the next Trek movie in a hurry.<br />
Trek09 is still playing in theaters, at this point, people are already talking about the sequel, and I am starting to get that feeling of Trek Overload I felt when we had a Trek film and 2 Trek tv series going all at the same time.  As Kirk, himself, once said, &#8220;Too much of anything is not necessarily a good thing.&#8221;<br />
And after reading comments from Paramount&#8217;s CEO, I can see that $$$$$$ are what&#8217;s going on inside his mind.  So, I hope the film is not rushed into simply to get another Trek movie out quickly.<br />
Of course, at the same time, I loved the new film and can&#8217;t wait to see the next.  As we have seen in various threads here, there are so many possibilities, and directions for the sequel&#8230;  I imagine Orci &amp; Kurtzman will be sorting out endless lists of things for possible inclusion in the next film&#8230;</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I liked Simon Pegg just fine as Mr. Scott, as I liked every member of the new cast.  It is just a pity (well, sort of) that Trek is so heavily hinged upon Kirk/Spock/McCoy that the supporting players must settle for lesser roles&#8230;  although I&#8217;m sure they had to know what they were getting into.  But Scotty is next in line behind K/S/M, so his role should be a bit beefier.  It&#8217;s gotta be hard trying to give the supporting players something more to do than, &#8220;Aye, Captain,&#8221; and &#8220;Hailing frequencies open,&#8221; etc. because it really depends on the story.  When I watch TMP, it is terribly apparent that Uhura, Sulu and Chekov have nothing to do.  Chekov fared better in TWOK, but it really wasn&#8217;t until Nimoy took the reigns in TSFS that the supporting players got more to do.  I think HE understood their significance more than the previous directors anyway&#8230;  not to mention they probably felt more comfortable talking to Nimoy about their roles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mustard Shirt</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1976879</link>
		<dc:creator>Mustard Shirt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:31:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1976879</guid>
		<description>@#26

From watching old episodes on Blu-ray it does seem that the Spock-Scotty relationship is different from the Spock relationship with the rest of the crew.  It&#039;s almost that they have a healthy respect for one another.  What&#039;s the first thing Spock does in The Motion Picture when he arrives on the Enterprise... ignores everyone and disappears off to visit Scotty in engineering. (lol)  This understanding that Nimoy and Doohan had of this dynamic has to be picked up in the next film Quinto and Pegg.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@#26</p>
<p>From watching old episodes on Blu-ray it does seem that the Spock-Scotty relationship is different from the Spock relationship with the rest of the crew.  It&#8217;s almost that they have a healthy respect for one another.  What&#8217;s the first thing Spock does in The Motion Picture when he arrives on the Enterprise&#8230; ignores everyone and disappears off to visit Scotty in engineering. (lol)  This understanding that Nimoy and Doohan had of this dynamic has to be picked up in the next film Quinto and Pegg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Thompson</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1976808</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1976808</guid>
		<description>20. Jtrekker

&quot;The whole Avengers thing is going to tie up the box office for most of the next two years&quot;. Are they rebooting Steed and Peel again? Please, no Ralph Fiennes next time!  : D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>20. Jtrekker</p>
<p>&#8220;The whole Avengers thing is going to tie up the box office for most of the next two years&#8221;. Are they rebooting Steed and Peel again? Please, no Ralph Fiennes next time!  : D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken1w</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1976803</link>
		<dc:creator>ken1w</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1976803</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s quite interesting how so many people were whining about Star Trek being delayed six months from the original late 2008 release.  Now, when Simon Pegg suggests that the next one will be out six months earlier than anyone else would have predicted, just as many people want it released six months later (for &quot;quality&quot; reasons).

Now that Star Trek is a power franchise again, I&#039;m sure Paramount would like to compress the schedule as much as feasible.  There&#039;s nothing wrong with a holiday season release.  Less competition from the summer action movie blockbuster schedule can produce MORE revenue for a great winter movie.  A lot of the decision on release date will depend on what other movies Paramount has slotted for late 2010 or summer 2011.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s quite interesting how so many people were whining about Star Trek being delayed six months from the original late 2008 release.  Now, when Simon Pegg suggests that the next one will be out six months earlier than anyone else would have predicted, just as many people want it released six months later (for &#8220;quality&#8221; reasons).</p>
<p>Now that Star Trek is a power franchise again, I&#8217;m sure Paramount would like to compress the schedule as much as feasible.  There&#8217;s nothing wrong with a holiday season release.  Less competition from the summer action movie blockbuster schedule can produce MORE revenue for a great winter movie.  A lot of the decision on release date will depend on what other movies Paramount has slotted for late 2010 or summer 2011.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Thompson</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/30/simon-pegg-predicts-star-trek-sequel-in-18-months/comment-page-1/#comment-1976776</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/?p=5348#comment-1976776</guid>
		<description>Simon: the weak link in the film. As to his prediction: 
1. The script is due in 6 months.
2. The production (filming) and post-production of the current film took about 13 months. 
3. Pre-production (set design and construction, effects planning, etc.) will have to be sandwiched between the script and the commencement of filming. You TELL ME how all of the above can be accomplished within 18 months! 24 months is even somewhat of a stretch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simon: the weak link in the film. As to his prediction:<br />
1. The script is due in 6 months.<br />
2. The production (filming) and post-production of the current film took about 13 months.<br />
3. Pre-production (set design and construction, effects planning, etc.) will have to be sandwiched between the script and the commencement of filming. You TELL ME how all of the above can be accomplished within 18 months! 24 months is even somewhat of a stretch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
