New Paramount Film Deals For JJ Abrams & Chris Pine – Is There Still Time For Star Trek Sequel in 2011? | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

New Paramount Film Deals For JJ Abrams & Chris Pine – Is There Still Time For Star Trek Sequel in 2011? October 12, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

The two captain’s of this year’s Star Trek movie have been working even more deals at Paramount in recent days. The trades are reporting that Star Trek producer/director JJ Abrams has put yet another film into development, with a $2M script purchase. Plus, Chris Pine is now in talks to star in a new Paramount drama directed by DJ Carauso. Details below.   

 

Another movie for JJ
It seems a week doesn’t go by that JJ Abrams production company Bad Robot doesn’t add a new project to its slate. Variety reports that Abrams, along with Star Trek exec producer Bryan Burk, will be co-producing an untitled feature for Paramount based on a script which they bought for $2M from writers Aline Brosh McKenna and Simon Kinberg. Variety notes that it is surprising for such a large purchase "at a time when most other studios have shut down development spending for the rest of the year." No details on the plot, but the pairing of the writers is surprising as McKenna is known for female-driven films like The Devil Wears Prada and 27 Dresses, while Kinberg does action movies like Mr. and Mrs. Smith and X-Men The Last Stand. Could JJ be trying to create some kind of alchemy of the perfect ‘chick flick’ that is also a summer action movie with explosions?

Variety also notes how Abrams company is becoming a big part of Paramount:

Bad Robot continues to develop into an increasingly important supplier of pictures for Paramount. Aside from the Roger Michell-directed "Morning Glory" — which stars Rachel McAdams, Harrison Ford and Diane Keaton — Abrams, Burke and Tom Cruise are producing a fourth installment of "Mission: Impossible" that the studio hopes to put into production next year.

What about Star Trek 2011?
In addition to all of that, last week at the Paramount DVD/Blu-ray press event, Abrams said that he is currently writing a script for a film he hopes to direct "next year" and in May Abrams told TrekMovie that if he were to direct the next Star Trek movie, he would want to do something before it. Putting this all together, it seems less and less likely that there will be a Star Trek sequel directed by JJ Abrams in 2011, although no matter what, Abrams will be producing the next Trek movie. Not only is Abrams plate filling up, but Paramount is already slated to distribute four movies in the summer of 2011 (Thor, Captain America, Kung-Fu Panda 2, and Transformers 3). And the Variety article above also notes that Paramount is hoping to put Mission Impossible IV into production in 2010 (for a 2011 release). That script is currently being written, whereas the Star Trek sequel is still in the very early concept phase, without even a story being currently written. It is still possible for there to be a Star Trek movie in 2011 (although most likely with another director), but Holiday Season 2011 or Summer 2012 looks a bit more likely now.

Pine is ‘Making Money’
JJ Abrams isn’t the only one making deals at Paramount. Variety is also reporting that the new Captain Kirk, Chris Pine, is in negotiations to star in The Art of Making Money, a fact-based film to be directed by D.J. Caruso (Eagle Eye). Pine would play Art Williams, the alias for a Chicago man who rose from petty theft to become a master counterfeiter. The film is based on a 2005 Rolling Stone article, which became the book "The Art of Making Money: The Story of a Master Counterfeiter."

Pine is currently on the East Coast shooting Unstoppable with Denzel Washington for director Tony Scott. If he signs on, he would go into production on The Art of Making Money in early 2010. If Paramount wanted a summer release for the Star Trek sequel, they would have to go into production next summer. Although the actors all have options, the studio would still have to block out time for all of the actors and with so many actors returning for the second go around, they would likely want to do that far in advance to make sure they got everyone.

 

Comments

1. Geoffers - October 13, 2009

Let’s hope time is allowed to make it… I am already impatien for it!

2. Doc Gonzo v2.0 - October 13, 2009

Oh well, if they can’t do it by 2011 then that just means that they’ll have that much more time to give us an even better Trek film! Look forward to Pine and Abram’s new movies.

3. Kevin from Akron - October 13, 2009

The principle filming of the first Star Trek movie didn’t take all that long. Also didn’t they already say that JJ was considering turning the director’s job to someone else? Anyways the digital effects could be approved by JJ wherever he is in the world these days with the internet.

4. david b - October 13, 2009

Effects wouldn’t have to be approved if someone else directed.

Nicholas Meyer didn’t say to Robert Wise are you happy with the effects did he?

New director, entirely new possibilities think Star Trek 2, Superman 2, Die Hard 2,

5. S. John Ross - October 13, 2009

#4: “New director, entirely new possibilities think Star Trek 2, Superman 2, Die Hard 2,”

And if we don’t get another horribly-timed writer’s strike, the director (whether Abrams or someone else) could have more fully-directorial powers to manhandle the screenplay.

6. Anthony Pascale - October 13, 2009

4, even if Abrams doesn’t direct, he would still be producer, for that, there is no question.

7. Smilin Bob - October 13, 2009

Why doesn’t someone ask Nick Meyer if he would like to direct? And…wait a tick…let him write the script. He actually wrote a script in 12 days? Wow…give this man a cigar! And a directing job! I would, if I were calling the shots

8. jackson - October 13, 2009

And that’s why you aint calling the shots ‘Bob’.

9. Smilin Bob - October 13, 2009

LMAO. You’re right, makes too much sense. It’s Hollywood.

10. screaming satellite - October 13, 2009

Abrams produces

Meyer directs (and has script input)

they could even put on the posters/trailers ‘From the director of The Wrath of Khan’

cmon give Meyer another shot

11. Flake - October 13, 2009

Theres no way Meyer could direct a $150 million dollar hollywood blockbuster of today and he would be the first to admit it.

12. Flake - October 13, 2009

How about Roger Guyett, he did the second unit stuff from Trek XI and perhaps he and Abrams have a good working relationship and might be able to make that work?

I am reminded of Empire Strikes Back and Lucas giving the reins to Irvin Kershner…… that worked out great in the end!

13. screaming satellite - October 13, 2009

11. why?

14. Imrahil - October 13, 2009

I just hope there’s enough budget for the lens flare.

15. David Bowles - October 13, 2009

Quick correction: “Not only is Abrams plate filling up, but Paramount is already slated to distribute four movies in the summer of 2009 (Thor, Captain America, Kung-Fu Panda 2, and Transformers 3).”

That should read 2010, of course.

16. Happy Russia - October 13, 2009

12–

“I am reminded of Empire Strikes Back and Lucas giving the reins to Irvin Kershner…… that worked out great in the end!”

This is true, however, not only was Kershner a better director than Lucas, but he had the amazing script from Lawrence Kasdan. Who does Abrams have? The Wondertwins, Orci & Kurtzman? No, thank you.

17. Capt. of the USS Anduril - October 13, 2009

#15- Actually, that should read 2011. I think Michael Bay’d have a hissy fit if he had to put Transformers 3 out by next year.

#16- And what’s wrong with Orci and Kurtzman? And before you toss Transformers 2 at me as so-called “proof” of their failure as writers, let me say that Transformers and Star Trek are for totally different audiences. They knew this and wrote the movies accordingly. They caught flak for Trans2 and jumped the boat, allowing any blame to fall in Bay’s lap, where it belongs. The two did a wonderful job with Star Trek, and I can’t wait to see where the new voyage takes us.

18. Zip - October 13, 2009

Get Leonard Nimoy to Direct

19. Ben - October 13, 2009

@ 17… You know that wouldn’t be a bad idea. I’d try talks with Nick Meyer though. With the writting talents of K&O and the ability of JJ Abrams, Meyer could do a heck of a job in the director’s chair for the next film.

20. Chris M - October 13, 2009

i can wait until 2012 if it means all the actors are able to come back and that we get the best possible Star Trek movie we can! :)

21. RJF - October 13, 2009

I say pull the release date back to summer of 2012. So what we have to wait another year. We had to wait seven years from Nemesis to Star Trek (11) to be made and the wait was well worth it. Even by then, if JJ does not still want to direct he will get somebody that knows what their doing to direct Star Trek 12. He will still produce and call majority of the big decisions anyways for the sequel. Plus George Lucas decided to produce than direct on Empire Strikes Back so he could have more time running his company Lucas Films just like JJ is doing now with Bad Robot. Plus the extra year can give more time for the two busy writers to finish a better script rather than to spit a bad quality one in a short time. Remember the rush job they had to do on the script on Transformers 2 because Paramount wanted the movie out so quickly. The film really was a bad film, even compared to the first one. How I see it the film is going to be out in 2012 anyways, there is too much on JJ’s plate already with movie deals and TV shows. I say wait. We want quality not quantity.

22. Captain Dunsel - October 13, 2009

#15 – David Bowles – “That should read 2010, of course.”

Why? Abrams and company already have Paramount well steeped in time travel…

23. Closettrekker - October 13, 2009

#13—-For one thing, he has a self-professed aversion to CGI effects.

Meyer last directed a Star Trek feature film in an entirely different era. I just don’t think it is a realistic option. The game has changed too much.

As for “script input”, I think there are enough horses at the trough with Orci, Kurtzman, and now with Lindelof in a more direct role in the writing process.

Meyer’s days with Star Trek are long gone….and that’s okay. They were good ones.

#17—-Nimoy has already stated that he wouldn’t know what to do behind the director’s chair anymore. Once again, it’s just too different now.

Asking Nimoy or Meyer to direct a Summer blockbuster Star Trek film now (or worse, in 2011-2012) would be like asking Mike Ditka to come in and coach an NFL football game this season. Too much has changed, and things have become much more intricate and complex. Neither of them (Meyer/Nimoy) has remained in that area of the business throughout their time away from directing Trek. The “mechanics” of it all have simply passed them by.

Beyond that, neither of them even directed a big budget film when they *were* in their heyday as directors…Asking Nimoy to come in and direct Star Trek after a 25-year absence from the director’s chair and with a budget the likes of which he has only seen from an actor’s point of view is something even he knows (and has admitted) is beyond his ability. And asking Meyer to do the same after a 20 year absence is almost as big a stretch.

I don’t know who will end up directing, but I’m sure it will be someone of Abrams’ choosing who has his trust and won’t be in over his head with a $150 million budget film in this day and age.

Personally, I’d like Abrams to go at it again without the hinderance of a writers’ strike. But I understand if he wants to move on to something else. He has thusfar only directed movie adaptations of old television series. One can hardly blame him for wanting to expand his range a bit.

24. Blake Powers - October 13, 2009

I don’t want them to rush a thing.

25. Simon - October 13, 2009

#20 – Lucas didn’t direct “Empire” because he had such a terrible experience directing the first film. It wasn’t until “Episode I” that he decided to direct again (Fox was only distributing, the studio could not interfere as they did on the first film) and originally had intended others to direct Episodes II & III but had such a positive experience on “I” that he decided to do the rest.

#4 – Robert Wise had nothing to do with TWOK so of course he didn’t have to approve any visual effects. Meyer & Bennett did. For the new TREK film Abrams would still get approval even if he didn’t direct it because he would be a producer.

26. EFFeX - October 13, 2009

Ehh…

I never thought I would say this, but wait until JJ is free and push the film back. Switching directors at this point is too risky. JJ is a main factor in the first film’s success.

27. AJ - October 13, 2009

4:

david b

“New director, entirely new possibilities think Star Trek 2, Superman 2, Die Hard 2″

Superman 2 was directed primarily by Richard Donner, and shot simultaneously with Supes 1. Some now legendary conflicts with the producers, the details which I’ve forgotten, led to Richard Lester being called in to round it out with his own scenes, and then get full credit for it.

Another factor is the availability of ILM. It seems JJ is asked on a weekly basis about the next Trek, yet the writers have been “throwing ideas around” since the summer, and he has yet to move to the ‘next step.’ Also, other 2011 films already have directors and actors signed on which leads me to believe that the next film has yet to be penciled in anywhere on the calendar.

Has the film even been officially green-lit?

28. Eli - October 13, 2009

Don’t rush it.

I can wait til 2012.

Just as long as the DVD comes out before the end of the world… :-)

29. Will_H - October 13, 2009

I’d be fine with another director, I mean as long as its a good director. I think it would be interesting to see Frakes take the chair again. I think in a lot of ways, considering the budget of the films and such, he did more as a director as JJ did, plus he knows Trek a good deal better. Id rather have it a 2011 release, but its not the end of the world if its 2012, just as long as they dont change the date around again.

30. Dr. Image - October 13, 2009

Nick Meyer. STOP already!!!

And Nimoy commented in Toronto that the scope and technical challenges of film making today are WAY beyond his abilities.

JJ would probably get some associate of his to do it.

31. OneBuckFilms - October 13, 2009

I suspect that Nicholas Meyer could probably do a good job. He knows ILM, and knows how to work with Blue-screen.

His aversion to CGI is probably due more to the fact that CGI was not quite there yet.

The problem is, if JJ isn’t directing, we need someone who knows how to draw on the visual style established for Star Trek, and adapt it.

Perhaps the real way to go is to find a talented relatively unknown director who knows how to use the latest tools to tell a story, and knows how to create a fast-paced movie.

Nick Meyer could probably do a great job, but of course, I think JJ should direct this one.

I’m a patient man, but it may be necessary to strike while the fire is still hot.

Wait too long, and people will need more of a re-introduction than a continuation for the next movie.

The next one could take a slightly more serious tone, have a little more interpersonal drama, and perhaps have a slightly more dangerous edge to it. And a little less lens flare, but keep enough to maintain a stylistic thread, since overall they worked.

All opinions of someone who knows nothing about filmmaking beyond DVD Commentaries and playing with 3D software in a very amateurish way :)

32. Jay - October 13, 2009

JJ will direct this movie…
even if he has to pick between this and Mission IV:

JJ– in addition to being a wonderfully gifted artist–
has always been a shrewed business man. And after the
release of the first movie, there have been WAAYYY too
many mentions of him being “the next Steven Spielberg”
for him to ignore.

Well, with ‘Star Trek’ grossing $258 million, the next one
is essentially guaranteed to make $300m with its momentum
alone. And if they make a motion picture for the ages (like
Dark Knight) the sky is the limit.

There are very few times a filmmaker can CHOOSE to make a
$300 million movie. Iron Man 2, Transformers…not too many.
I would argue that Indy 4 wasn’t even a sure thing. And even
Half Blood Prince was the first Harry Potter to make $300m’
since the first film. The next Trek is one of those instances.

Would JJ really deprive himself of this opportunity?
Especially when Mission Impossible III only made $133m? And
the top grossing Mission barely made $215m? I think he’s
going to fullfill his destiny as the next Spielberg.

33. Tanner Waterbury - October 13, 2009

@ 11

I don’t know if you have the new Sstar Trek DVD/Blu ray set, but on the TWOK commentary with Manny Coto and Nick Meyer, Mr. Meyer stated he wouldn’t mind directing a new Trek in the near future. Now as we all know, when Nicholas Meyer is in any way shape or form connected with a Trek movie, you can very well guarantee that its going to be a hit. Therefore, if you are reading this Roberto Orci or Alex Kurtzman, ask JJ weather he would consider Mr. Meyer to direct the next movie. Would be great to have Meyer at the helm one last time.

34. P Technobabble - October 13, 2009

22 – Closet-trekker

I agree with you completely. While it may sound like a cool idea, neither Meyer or Nimoy are realistic choices. I wouldn’t mind seeing JJ direct the sequel at all…

And while some are asking Bob Orci to recommend various directors to JJ Abrams, has anyone ever thought of asking Bob Orci or Alex Kurtzman to direct the film? There is absolutely nothing to suggest they COULDN’T do it (unless they simply wouldn’t want to do it).

35. SpocksinnerConflict - October 13, 2009

I don’t think you can say films like The Devil Wears Prada and 27 dresses are female driven.

Female exploitative maybe.

Screw it, let’s keep just over half of population in crappy genre loop of mindless girl hate.

rant over.

________________

To reiterate my two cents regarding the Trek sequel and the film makers wish to tackle relevent themes:

Portray a socially advanced society that turns a blind eye towards it’s belittling treatment of a majority of it’s population.

I hear female starfleet captains make less then male captains.

For reals though, i like the idea of the Federation getting a wake up call to their own hypocrisy.

36. Pizza - October 13, 2009

What’s Jamers Cameron doing?

37. Pizza - October 13, 2009

Oops, soory

Thats JAMES Cameron

38. dmduncan - October 13, 2009

The 2011 date wasn’t making any sense anyway given that a story hasn’t even been gotten together. 2011 would be a rush job. So I will continue to refer to the sequel as ST.2012.

Hey! And that’s just in time for the end of the world!

39. Thorny - October 13, 2009

I always thought Summer, 2011 was pushing things a little too hard anyway, and with the recent news that Abrams & Co. haven’t even decided on a villain for the movie yet, my thoughts are that they aren’t remotely ready and shouldn’t rush out a script just to make the 2011 target. Go with Summer, 2012 and do it right. And run the story through an extra set of eyes before filming, to get rid of stupidity like Spock banishing Kirk to the conveniently nearby Delta Vega.

40. Yammer - October 13, 2009

34. First time directors don’t get $200M budgets. If O/K wanted to do Trek2, I imagine they would start with a small feisty cool movie to prove their chops, like the Wachowskis and “Bound” (a rather incredible little thriller).

It’s not a far-fetched idea, that. They have the producing power to get it done, and they have hinted at wanting to be involved in a product that isn’t so overtly commercial and genre-driven.

I was thinking that Abrams fellow-traveller Matt Reeve would be a natural for the gig if JJ didn’t want to have to top himself. He’s practically in-house and wouldn’t need to put his auteur stamp on it.

Although, for a far-out choice, I’d love to see what Tarantino would do with this property, he’s such a pop-culture nerd, and now a terrific action director.

I’d also love to see what Kathryn Bigelow could do with $200M.

41. SpocksinnerConflict - October 13, 2009

16-
“This is true, however, not only was Kershner a better director than Lucas…”

So…The eyes of Laura Mars and Robocop 2 are better films then American Graffiti and THX 1138?

Yea Empire is the best. But honestly, that’s his best work and it was created under Lucas who had his hand in every pie of production

42. Sarah S - October 13, 2009

New Paramount Film Deals For JJ Abrams & Chris Pine – Is There Still Time For Star Trek Sequel in 2011?
————
If they aren’t filming by March of 2010, then no. They’re dragging their feet and are going to do whatever they want.

43. VZX - October 13, 2009

I’d rather see it come out 2012. That way they can avoid rushing it in a sloppy way. Also, 2011 is just way, way too crowded right now, they should just hold off. What’s wrong with waiting another year? I think that 3 years between sequals is the perfect amount of time, two years is just too quick.

44. P Technobabble - October 13, 2009

40 Yammer

Yes, I understand that first time directors don’t typically get a big-budget film out of the gate. It has happened, but it is certainly rare. However, I do think — considering the team surrounding Orci/Kurtzman — it is not totally outrageous. If JJ said one of these guys was going to direct the next film, I’d be supportive. As Kirk said, “We learn by doing.”
And, if the film comes out in 2012, in order to accomodate Abrams, I’d be supportive of that, as well.
Star Trek is in their hands, so we have to trust that their imaginations will unfold as they should…

45. Chris_of_ODU - October 13, 2009

I don’t like to think I’ve told people so (not here, but elsewhere) – but I had a pretty good feeling that this sort of thing would happen.

The cast just doesn’t have the devotion to the franchise to stick around.

If Pine (or any of the rest of the cast) has to chose between Star Trek or holding out 4-6 months wile the production crew are on other projects, I’m pretty certain that other projects will take precedence, especially if it is an opportunity to work with someone legendary or showcase something “new” or different (better chance of staying in the biz as a commodity). They have no long-term commitment to the franchise. The original crew stuck with it because it was their gravy train, these actors and actresses are potential hot commodities – and it only takes some offer of millions of dollars more before you run into a scheduling conflict that will seriously impede production.

Unless filming of #3 occurs at the same time as #2, expect them to recast characters or simply write them out of the film (kill them off like Cyclops in X-Men 3) because I doubt that the entire ensemble will stick around until a 2015 release of Star Trek “XIII”

I half-way joked earlier in the year that Star Trek would be rebooted again by 2019. I don’t doubt it now.

The best thing they can do is keep Spock around for the remaining films, and “fix” the time line in the third film (or allow Spock to pass back into the “Prime” universe to be reunited with his friends) and walk away from the franchise before they start having to explain why there’s a new actor for Kirk, Uhura, and Chekov or why Brett Ratner is directing #4.

46. Peter N - October 13, 2009

@38

Excellent point – premiere the last Star Trek movie on December 21, 2012, at which point the Vulcan censors will finally say “enough is enough” and blast the world back to the 1960s where all was right with the world of Star Trek. At least that would be one of my friend’s dream scenarios….

47. Bucky - October 13, 2009

I always thought 2011 was way too close, basically because all of the 2011 stuff is hip-deep in pre-production by this point with a lot more people attached to the project than just writers. (Okay, Captain America only has a director and writer, but that should shore up quickly). Also, Paramount has a full summer slate. I can maybe, MAYBE, see 2011 Christmas, but I doubt it. Summer 2012 will be good, because then it’ll dive up anticipation more. A new movie every 2 years gets a bit tiresome, but 3 years is a decent gap to get people’s blood boiling.

48. S. John Ross - October 13, 2009

#45: “I half-way joked earlier in the year that Star Trek would be rebooted again by 2019. I don’t doubt it now.”

Amen. I hold to my earlier prediction that, if all goes well, we’ll have this crew (both in the “creative team” and “crew aboard the Enterprise” senses) for the obligatory trilogy, and then next time around it’s all new all over again.

49. dmduncan - October 13, 2009

I’d just rather they not rush things.

50. screaming satellite - October 13, 2009

Summer 2011 is looking awful crowded – isn’t Spiderman 4 out as well? and isn’t there another Potter due then? what else??

2012 looks to be the best bet – be like the 1979-1982 gap then

Also be the 30th anniversary of Star Trek II

51. Pyork (JE) - October 13, 2009

Well if Star Trek is going to be on hold for a while, I guess I’ll have to do whatever I can to get my script for a new TV show submitted…

52. siphunclekaiju54 - October 13, 2009

As soon as they confirmed Transformers 3 for summer 2011, I knew there wouldn’t be room for Trek since the only open space available is in August (yuck). And don’t push it back to the holiday season, The Hobbit is going to crush everything around then.

Summer 2012 sounds good to me.

53. Sarah S - October 13, 2009

I hope they show the first Star Trek movie on tv before the next one is out in 2012 because if not, I feel that the “heat” of the excitement generated from this film will have cooled by then. I don’t want to see the next film crash and burn but I’m concerned that’s what may happen if film makers wait too long–unless what they bring is a D-*&%! good movie. This one was great. The next one will have to be ground shaking, especially considering that it may not be the biggest movie of the year. The next Ghostbusters script is rumored to be really good, so ST will have strong competition.

54. dmduncan - October 13, 2009

34: “And while some are asking Bob Orci to recommend various directors to JJ Abrams, has anyone ever thought of asking Bob Orci or Alex Kurtzman to direct the film?”

Yes. I wondered about that in a thread Bob was commenting in once. No answer.

55. dmduncan - October 13, 2009

But then, to paraphrase JJ, that’s a whole other dimension of pain in the ass you really have to aspire to. You can’t just jump into that haphazardly and do a great job.

By the Power of Grayskull, they must have the power.

56. dmduncan - October 13, 2009

But you know, they might make a good team in directing as well as writing, like the Farrelly brothers or Coen brothers. If they felt confident about doing it, I wouldn’t be out here second guessing them. They know Star Trek through and through.

57. BillyGayHillBillyHornAzzSucker - October 13, 2009

JJ should remake Teen Wolf!!!!!!

58. Smilin Bob - October 13, 2009

Apparently, Paramount wants Chris Pine to play Jack Ryan. Now, he’s a bit busier than before!

59. Jonezin' Trekkie - October 13, 2009

3 years between Trek injections. Dang.

60. Lord Ravenwood - October 13, 2009

After this poor excuse for a sci-fi film, I hope JJ Abrams NEVER directs or produces another one!
Paramount should give the franchise to someone who knows “Star Trek,” restore the time line, ad this film to the “Alternate Realities” DVD collection, and continue with a totally different concept set several years after TNG era!
Over writing 43 years of history is ridiculous!

61. Enterprise - October 14, 2009

60 Does that include the crappy books, too?

62. Cobalt 1365 - October 14, 2009

Aw, man. Does the world really need another Transformers movie? That movie would have been much better if it hadn’t been so bad. All due respect to Orci and Kurtzman, they put together a good script. It was probably Michael Bay who put in all the unnecessary language and innuendo. Ruined the movie for me.

But, of course it’s a massive cash cow, so of course Paramount would milk it dry.

Paramount pull Transformers 3 and replace it with Trek 12!

63. Spockish - October 14, 2009

#62) Cobalt 1365 – Aw, man. Does the world really need another Transformers movie?

That is not the question, the question is do they think that money can be made. The film could be watching mold grow (which could be more entertaining) if they can make money they’ll make the movie.

64. Spockish - October 14, 2009

more for #62)

You have to remember that the Transformers is simplistic and aimed at young simple minds who are empowered by their parents credit cards.

And Trekkie most likely have many credit cards that they bounce to see if they can still spend money they wish they had. The credit card bouncing is to see if it does not bounce when it hits the ground that means it’s still safe to use, and if it bounces back up then you know it’s like a check and it has no money to hold it to the ground.

65. frederick von fronkensteen - October 14, 2009

Let’s hope we see it before 12-21-2012 or it will be too late.

66. Bill Peters - October 14, 2009

I hope for Winter 2011!

67. Closettrekker - October 14, 2009

#41—“Yea Empire is the best. But honestly, that’s his best work and it was created under Lucas who had his hand in every pie of production”

I think what that says is that Lucas is a better businessman/ producer than director….

I think there are some similarities between Lucas and Abrams. While Abrams did an admirable job directing Star Trek, he is definitely more of a “jack of all trades” in the industry than a truly great director—-and I think the same could be said of George Lucas.

Something I think tends to be underrated in the sequel discusssion is the more direct involvement of Damon Lindelof in the writing. Instead of being a consultant with obvious input, it appears as if he is on board as a full-blown writer, and I think the story could be quite interesting.

People tend to forget that Abrams initially had no particular inclination to direct ST09. If he was to be shown a rather intriguing script by Lindelof/Orci/Kurtzman, it is quite possible that he could be inticed to reprise his role as director…I would like to see what he is capable of without the hinderance of a writer’s strike, and with a little more confidence, having such success with the first installment under his belt.

With that scenario, I think it is quite likely that we’re looking at 2012.

68. Closettrekker - October 14, 2009

#60—-“Over writing 43 years of history is ridiculous!”

A lame continuation of the TNG-era would be ridiculous. Who was ever going to pay to see that beyond the “geeks only club”?

That kind of thing is television material….always was. If you want feature films in Star Trek’s future, it has to be Kirk/Spock/McCoy….

Even the most successful of the TNG-era films (FC) did over $13million less in total gross than TVH, despite having been released a full decade later!

The spinoff characters simply were not “crossover friendly”.

I’m sorry you don’t like Abrams’ film, but I suppose you’ll have to do as I did when the spinoffs did nothing for me—-sit around for 20 years waiting for something else to happen with the franchise.

The rest of us can enjoy Star Trek going back to its roots—-sexy, humorous, romantic, fun, and unfraid of a good old fashioned visceral action sequence…..

69. Kirk - October 14, 2009

Chris Pine is new Jack Ryan.

70. P Technobabble - October 14, 2009

60 — Ravenwood

The history of Star Trek has not been over-written at all. All of Trek had to exist and evolve exactly as it did for the new time-line to come into being. The new time-line exists in association with, or in relationship to, the former time-line, it does not over-write it.

I really do not think another romp through the TNG era would be a better direction to go than where Trek is at now. Star Trek needed something to shake it up, open up some avenues where truly new and different stories could be told, rather than running circles around a Trek-verse that was growing weary.

And I’d have to debate you on your rather callous contention that Trek09 was a “poor excuse for a sci-fi film.” I found it to be every bit as “good” sci-fi as any of the other Trek films, and as “good” as many other sci-fi films. Of course, we are both simply stating our opinion, eh?

Finally, I’m afraid the contracts have been signed, the ink has dried, and JJ Abrams will be making Star Trek films for as long as they make money, or he wants to. I’m rather happy for the guy.

71. siphunclekaiju54 - October 14, 2009

53 –

I can see your concern, but remember that Batman Begins came out 3 years before The Dark Knight. More people saw BB in that time between releases on DVD, increasing the audience level (not to mention that people who hadn’t even seen the first film went to see the sequal).

The first film will do great on DVD for everyone who missed it in theaters, and if they spend the 3 years making a really great movie, they will increase the audience even more.

72. Closettrekker - October 14, 2009

#70—“The history of Star Trek has not been over-written at all. All of Trek had to exist and evolve exactly as it did for the new time-line to come into being. The new time-line exists in association with, or in relationship to, the former time-line, it does not over-write it.”

Very well said. At the very least (since the MWI of QM theory supported by offscreen commentary on the part of the writers isn’t technically canon), the state of the timeline after the attack upon the USS Kelvin is a direct result of events taking place within the timeline with which we are all so familiar.

The events depicted in ST09 cannot occur at all without each and every event previously depicted in 5 live action television series and 10 films playing out precisely as it did. Therefore, the previous timeline cannot be rendered irrelevant. In fact, the current timeline’s (that which is a result of the opening sequence in ST09) very existence is completely dependant upon it.

It is hard to believe how this can still be difficult for some to grasp.

73. colonyearth - October 14, 2009

45 You have no idea how the film industry works, do you? The cast will return, when Paramount arranges it. They’ve all stated they are looking forward to it and had a blast doing it. Why do you think the cast just isn’t as devoted? That’s a serious leap of lack of logic and littered with personal bias and opinion. The cast, BTW, is under contract as well. They have to return. As for Trek being rebooted again? Nope…not gonna happen that soon.

74. Jorg Sacul - October 14, 2009

It’s all a Talosian mind fantasy.

#73 is absolutely correct. These people are under contract, and will work accordingly. I’ve yet to hear any of the actors cast aspersion #1 on the concept of continuing in the roles– in fact I’ve heard only positive comments from every varied source reporting on them.

75. S. John Ross - October 14, 2009

#60: “Over writing 43 years of history is ridiculous!”

A lot of that 43 years was already pretty overwritten. This film had the opposite problem, IMO ;)

#68: “The rest of us can enjoy Star Trek going back to its roots—-sexy, humorous, romantic, fun, and unfraid of a good old fashioned visceral action sequence…”

That’s my hope for Star Trek XIV. (although the Abrams’ film did manage “humorous” most admirably – I didn’t even mind Keenser, as some did).

76. Daoud - October 14, 2009

Get adjusted to there being no Star Trek XII, XIII or XIV. At the rate they’re all going, no one is rushing (let alone pushing) to get the next Star Trek done. They don’t know what to do next is increasingly 100% apparent.

The contracts are pointless, as if the sequel isn’t set into production, there’s nothing to hold the actors to.

They’ll just delay and delay. A shame. Paramount still can’t find the right combination of production and development to set Star Trek on the path that Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and even the X-Men films all managed to pull off.

77. Chris_of_ODU - October 14, 2009

#73. Yes, I do have some idea on how the film industry works.

They’ve signed for 3 films, yes. However, they are not expected to refuse all work for a 4-6 year period should Star Trek sequels be green-lit at some specified time.

Scheduling conflicts happen all the time. Films get delayed because a big star signed to movie B was filming movie A. Should an actor sign a deal to be in another film, with announcement of Star Trek when production will start in the middle of some other production – there’s a problem. There are usually compromises, with shooting schedules worked around, but stuff happens. Happened on X-Men, has happened on just about any other franchise or sequel.

At any rate I was only throwing out one possibility for the third film. I hold firm that this iteration of the franchise will only see 3 films before the likelihood of future endeavors becoming next to impossible (depending on cast demand, $$$, interest, etc).

And that’s really assuming that Paramount can get its act together in the first place. Look at The Hobbit, setback after setback for one of the biggest movie franchises ever.

78. dmduncan - October 14, 2009

Why the skepticism over a ST sequel? Is there anything more than paranoia here that Bob and Alex have gone all Barton Fink?

All the signs are positive, all systems go. They haven’t written a script yet. So what? And if they had cranked one out already we’d probably be seeing paranoia over the quality of a script written so quickly. The deliberation here is actually a positive sign.

79. Bucky - October 14, 2009

#76 “The contracts are pointless”

You know who disagrees with you? Every single contract writer ever. Contracts are never pointless. That’s why they’re called C-O-N-T-R-A-C-T-S!

Sheesh. “Contracts are pointless.” Are you high? I mean, honestly.

80. Anthony Pascale - October 14, 2009

The Star Trek sequel is still a priority for Paramount. Both Viacom’s CEO and the head of Paramount have talked about it and they have contracted Bob, Alex and Damon to write it, and have all the cast optioned to be in it. The writers are planning to dive into it later this year and Paramount will then put it somewhere on their schedule, just probably not Summer 2011, no biggie

81. Dom - October 15, 2009

Given that Paramount own the rights to the Jack Ryan series, signing him to play that character is a good way to keep him around making money for the studio.

Or maybe he could play the young Jim Phelps. ;)

82. Son of a Maui Portagee - October 15, 2009

#.79

I think Daoud is dancing around the often ephemeral nature of a contract in “Hollywood” (It is often joked, they are not worth the paper that they are written on.) most of which revolve around options with time limits that expire.

For example, while the exact details of Paramount’s license from CBS is unknown, it is certain that if Paramount does not begin production of the next ST by the end of a certain time window that the rights revert to CBS and they are free to license ST to another party. It was well reported that Moonves gave Berman 18 mos. to get 2009’s production started and seems reasonable to expect that the same window holds for the next Trek movie.

Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan wouldn’t fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first (I mean Redstone just had to sell $1 billion worth of Viacom and CBS stock just so he could be certain their parent company could make the mandated payment on on its huge mound of debt.)

Myself, I’m puzzling over whether their decision to release TRANSFORMERS 2 and GI JOE to home video before ST is any hint of how Paramount is juggling its sequel productions – especially given the recent consolidations of its home and movie marketing departments?

83. Son of a Maui Portagee - October 15, 2009

#.82 Errata

“Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan wouldn’t fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first…”

should be:

“Given Paramount’s current financial situation I think even the most rabid Trek fan would fault them for concentrating on their franchises with the largest ROI first…”

84. Son of a Maui Portagee - October 15, 2009

#83. Errata

I think I need a nap I had it right the first time. SHEESH.

85. Van Ness Gate - October 15, 2009

#82 – And Paramount is still a potential target of a merger with another studio. If that happens … all bets are off.

86. Next Trek Movie maybe not until 2012? : TREKS in SCI-FI - October 19, 2009

[…] this week TrekMovie reported that, based on the Paramount’s release slate and the schedules of the filmmakers, the chances of […]

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