Comments on: Orci: Linking Next Two Star Trek Movies Just A ‘Maybe’

By: Digifan

Digifan — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:57:41 +0000

We now have a grand new cast and new history in the making here. I don’t want to see any more cameos from the five series. Instead I want to see new adventures starting with rebuilding of the UFP now that one of its founding member’s home world had been destroyed. This could be the start of the next movie. Picture the Enterprise being assigned to find a new home for the surviving Vulcans. They began exploring one of the promising prospective planets only to discover it had hidden dangers and secrets better left alone.

By: Porthos X

Porthos X — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 18:07:17 +0000

My idea: Next Generation or Enterprise species in TOS era… like another Xindi crisis or maybe something involving The Bajorans…maybe in this timeline the Bajorans are Occupied by the Romulans, not the Cardassians, and because the Bajorans took in the Vulcan refugees, and Kirk is chosen as Emissary by the Prophets to liberate the Bajorans…and amidst this we find Sarek and Kirk’s mom getting ready to get married…to each other…as are Spock and Uhura…so under this weight Kirk gets drunk off his gourd with Bones and hooks up with a certain blonde lab technician named Carol Marcus…

By: captain_neill

captain_neill — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 09:52:18 +0000

I seem to be in the minority who has no faith in these writers.

Granted they got characters right in the film but the plot was thin and thats not even talk about Transformers 2.

I just hope their writing gets better for the next movie and they do an new story unique Trek and that they dont rehash Khan.

Please there is more to Star Trek than Khan and the Borg.

See this is the problem of making Star Trek mainstream, it has to be dumbed down and you have to over do existing villains because its only what the mainstream audience knows off.

By: RD

RD — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:47:57 +0000

Personally, I don’t think Trek 2009 has proven that much to the studio. It hasn’t done as well as TMP worldwide and marginally surpassed it domestically. It did not do as well worldwide as Batman Begins or Superman Returns (adjusted for inflation), though it surpassed them domestically. Paramount has no guarantee that the next Trek will succeed any better than this one, and one thing is certain they must spend in a similar ballpark to provide as much thrill-packed CGI action, and the same or more if they attempt to hire a major star to boost international box-office, which they will almost certainly have to invest more marketing money into in order to boost awareness.

There is no doubt Trek did well and was well received. However, audiences are fickle. What else of Trek’s calibre was out there when it was released? Also, sequels historically tend to do worse than their successful predecessors. Of course there are exceptions, but I did not get the sense Trek built the same kind of fanbase as Transformers. What films will Trek open up against? WIll the sequel be as good a film compared to Batman Returns and TDK? Assuming that for Trek is a much riskier proposition than the original reboot.

DVD sales will undoubtedly deliver solid earnings, I expect Trek to make at least $250M worldwide, which is great for recouping this film but offers no guarantees for the next. But merchandising is at its peak for this film. Unless Trek attracts significantly new numbers of fans in 2011, most of the toys will have been purchased the first time around (this assumes a high likelihood that Paramount will get some profit participation).

So, does Paramount really want to release a movie that is tied to a sequel, something that could actually contribute to poor box office as audiences decide to see it fewer times or wait for it on video so they can watch it closer to the conclusion? I am continually surprised that TWOK killed Spock yet TSFS grossed quite a bit less. How do you have a cliff hanger like that and not double your box office for the resolution? Which brings up another problem, how to have a continuing story in which both halves are equally effective? ST:III was probably poorly received because it was mostly filler, and not very interesting filler at that.

But, even if Orci & Kurtzman deliver it, Paramount can easily say no. So it really doesn’t matter what the writers decide to do. Paramount could just as easily ask them to turn a stand-alone story into a two-parter as well, once they discover Trek 09 has sold 400M in DVDs. But the bottom line is money. How big a risk does Paramount want to take on Trek 2011?

By: Jay El Jay

Jay El Jay — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:19:39 +0000

NO KHAN!!

Klingons are the way forward… a MASSIVE Klingon/Romulan war which is linked to the first movie where the Feds have to get brought in to stop the fighting!!!

A real BADASS Klingon bad guy!!!

Make it so!

By: VOODOO

VOODOO — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:02:34 +0000

I’m not feeling the Khan thing, but I guess it could work.

By: Chaka KHAN

Chaka KHAN — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:40:26 +0000

No Khan.

No remakes.

Just good storytelling and fresh ideas.

Oh…and make it better than Transformers 2 because…

…damn.

By: dmduncan

dmduncan — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:53:00 +0000

I think it’s a damned good idea to link the next two movies. Even James Bond has moved away from the 60’s episodic style by linking Quantum of Solace to Casino Royale, and leaving lots of loose threads in Quantum of Solace to pick up the weave in the next JB film.

I say go for the linkage.

By: Sci-Fi Bri

Sci-Fi Bri — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:49:57 +0000

this is the first time ever that star trek has a sure green light on 2 movies. it would be folly to not do all we can and go for a 2 parter…. the 2 part episodes of TNG are the best ones, the next 2 movies should be in 2 parts too.

By: Jorg Sacul

Jorg Sacul — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:40:49 +0000

I can see how Tarsus IV may have happened in JJKirk’s life– maybe that’s what leads him to be the drunken townie–no dad to come home to, no strong guiding force. That is until he meets Pike.