Next Batman Film Coming July 20th 2012 – 3 Weekends After Star Trek Sequel April 30, 2010
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Sci-Fi, Star Trek sequel (2013) , trackback
The 2005 film Batman Begins, was often held up as a model for how the 2009 Star Trek film could successfully bring back a franchise. And in 2012 it looks like the new crew of the Enterprise will be taking the caped crusader head on as Warner Brothers just announced they will release their next Batman film three weeks after the next Star Trek film.
Batman Returns July 20th 2012
In 2005 Warner Brothers successfully rebooted the Batman franchise with Batman Begins, starring Christian Bale and helmed by Christopher Nolan. And in 2008 they came back with The Dark Knight which brought in $533 Million domestically (and $1 Billion worldwide), making it the highest domestic grossing film not directed by James Cameron (and #5 globally). It has long been assumed that Warner was going to land the next in the series during the Summer of 2012, and today WB made it official by picking July 20th for the release (on regular screens and IMAX), which will be almost exactly four years after The Dark Knight. According to E! Bale will be back under the cowl, under the direction of Nolan. No start date has been set for production and the plot has yet to be locked down. David Goyer is working with Nolan’s brother Jonathan Nolan on a script.
This date will pit Batman, Star Trek and Spider-man together in July 2012. Here is how the mid-summer of 2012 looks so far.
|
Summer 2012 film releases |
||
| Friday | Film | Studio |
| June 15 | Brave (animated) | Disney/Pixar |
| June 22 | open | |
| June 29 | Untitled Star Trek sequel | Paramount |
| July 3 (Tue) | Untitled Spider-Man reboot | Sony |
| July 6 | open | |
| July 13 | open | |
| July 20 | Untitled Batman sequel | Warner Bros |
It is interesting that Warner Bros. chose July 20th, leaving the 13th open. Apparently they wanted to leave some breathing room between their release and the Spider-man and Star Trek films. Star Trek’s biggest competition for the 4th of July weekend continues to be the Spider-man reboot, although that film is reportedly going to have a lower budget than previous Spider-man films and is starting over with a new Spider-man and new director, with a story focused on Peter Parker’s high school years.
The Star Trek movie went into May 2009 with what looked like serious competition, going up against Wolverine, Angels and Demons, Terminator: Salvation, and Night at the Museum 2. Despite some gloomy early predictions, in the end, Star Trek beat all those films domestically, and all but Angels & Demons globally.
One of the big tests for the next Star Trek film will be how it performs globally compared to other tent pole films, like Batman. In November TrekMovie talked to JJ Abrams about his thoughts on the international performance of Star Trek, and he pointed to how The Dark Knight made significant gains over Batman Begins internationally. Watch it below.
[Source: Box Office Mojo]
Loading ...
Comments»
Cool… looking forward to another Batman flick, and I’m not too worried about the competition. Given the performance of Trek ‘09, they can handle it!
great but I am more interested in going to see Trek XII and Batman 3 than a Spiderman reboot what were they thinking?
enough batman!!!!!!! star trek welcome back!!!!
I really hope someone reconsiders their release date.
Trek, Spider-Man and Batman, my 3 favourite franchises one after the other! Though already quite worried about the Spidey reboot if the casting rumours are to be believed.
I’m not too worried about the Spider-Man reboot — if audiences are anything like *everyone I know*, there’s zero interest there. There was a half-decent origin movie only eight years ago, and the subsequent ones were huge letdowns.
It seems like these big movies always get pushed back and moved around anyway. Hopefully Batman will get pushed to Christmas? ;D
I love Batman. 2012 is going to be a kick-ass year for movies.
DOUBLE-FEATURE!
I have a really bad feeling about Trek going up against Spiderman and Batman…. Move Trek to Christmas where there is less than half the competition of summer and then it can clean up like Avatar did.
When a great movie comes out people tend to do two things:
a) See that movie again.
b) See other movies because they remember what fun it can be.
It looks like 2012 is well on the way to being a great summer for movie lovers.
#9
Christmas 2012 is going to feature “The Hobbit” and the next “Superman”.
So the “Star Trek” sequel would still face stiff competition. So far at least, summer 2012 is still fairly wide open. But it will come down to whether or not J.J Abrams and company will be able to get the movie finished in time for the planned July release. I have my doubts and if the sequel is pushed back, it will be to summer ‘13 and not Christmas ‘12.
#6
So you didn’t like “Spider Man 2″? That movie is one of the best sequels made. The first movie was good. The second topped it by a mile and the third stunk like a dead skunk inside a hot car trunk.
#9, your advice makes way too much sense for Viacom to take it. :-)
I only wish that they had used the template of Batman Begins (or Casino Royale, another highly successful reboot) when putting together Trek ‘09. Don’t sweat the details or condescend to your audience, just keep the spirit of the thing intact and the rewards will follow. Unfortunately, they chose to pander to the popcorn crowd instead. It was a successful strategy this time around, but I think it’ll prove short-sighted.
Spiderman 2 reboot will be poo-poo. You can trust my highly accurate guess for that.
But I fear for NuTrek 2 if it goes up against Batman 3: Th Search For the Next Villain.
Spiderman reboot. Whatever.
Alright! Trek, Batman and Spiderman in one summer! And all of it just before the world ends in Dec. 2012!
New Batman AND Star Trek? Bring ‘em!
@ryanhuyton
Nah, I didn’t care for Spidey 2. Don’t know why, it just didn’t do it for me…
Im not sure what the Spiderman re-boot will actually turn out, maybe good, and then it might stink, but just the name Spiderman holds a LOT of box office weight dont forget. And Batman 3…well it will almost be a sure fire hit either way and cant even compare in potential box office with Star Treks 09s competition Wolverine, A&D, Terminator and Night at the Museum 2, its in a league all its own. I fear 2012 is going to be much stiffer competition for Star Trek than 09 was, or even 11 could have been. But Im keeping my fingers crossed!
Trek, Batman, and Spiderman. Possibly Hobbit, Bond, and Superman.
2012 is going to be an awesome year for films!
Does any one remember the 1989 Batman? I still enjoy that one a lot and Jack Nicholson was the best Joker, although my sentimental favorite will always be Cesar Romero… I miss his laugh.
Star Trek will have tons more flare than those other movies!
#20
Yes. I enjoyed the 1989 movie as well. Classic. Michael Keaton was great as Batman/Bruce Wayne and Jack Nicholson was great as the Joker as well. I enjoyed Caesar Romero as well. Its too bad the old Batman series will never be released on dvd because of inter-studio bickering. At least the old movie is on Blu Ray which looks great but exposes the flaws.
Isn’t anyone gunna’ reboot “Ishtar?”
And it truly is time fur’ a new Leprechaun series. Oh, and let’s not us furget ta’ do “Leonard Part 7″…
I hope they give ‘Batzman 3: Tha’ Search Fur’ Plot’ a good try… hard ta’ top tha’ first Nolan two films…
Unless…
“I am not an ordinary Batman… I am a vampire Batman!” Finally- a chic flick superhero! And all tha’ teenie lasses flock ta’ tha’ theatre…
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…
I really hope Paramount locked in IMAX screens before Spider-man picked its date. Otherwise, it’s gonna be screwed.
13 “you can trust my highly accurate guess for that”
THX, sounds like your “spidey-sense is tingling”!
Something’s tingling, Harry.
SPOILER ALERT!!!
Bale will not be able to reprise his role as Batman due to all the growling from TDK and Terminator. He is being recast and rumor has it that the Cookie Monster is the front runner for the part.
You heard it here first. Now to take care of that tingling.
My guess is the Spiderman reboot will push its release date back to a different day. Star Trek and Batman will generation too much interest leaving Spiderman little room
“The Dark Knight which brought in $1 Billion worldwide, making it the highest grossing film not directed by James Cameron.”
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (2006) $1,060,332,628
regarding summer 12 – theres also The Avengers May 4th (way off Trek) but theres also Wolverine 2 yet to be confirmed (cant see it being anything other than summer 2012) and maybe X Men First Class (although id be suprised if they release 2 X Men films in the same year let alone the same summer so maybe that will be 2011 or 2013)
and Indy 5 will have to be made sooner rather than later so maybe they will get fast tracked to summer 2012…and then theres Battlestar Galactica that may start up soon as Singers dropped out of directing First Class…plus Ghostbusters 3 might look dead but that might get fast tracked to summmer 2012 too..
im guessing Nolans Superman will be out xmas 2012 or summer 2013 (75th anniversary)
#27. Spider-man isn’t going to move. It’s going to be more successful than Trek 2 will be and picked one of the biggest holidays to open around.
CHRISTIAN BALE: Yarrrrrrgagagag Blarg! Gutta gutta gutta glug! (coughs hairballl…. errrrrr, I mean “batball.”) Yarrrrrrrggggg!
CHRISTOPHER NOLAN: Good take! You really tackled that line “Gotham is not your city… it is all of ours’ city. Now I’m taking this rain gutter and shoving it voraciously up your skinny rear, Riddler! Riddle me this, the itsy bitys batsy shoved up the shower spout…”
THX: Something is tingling in me every time Bale says a line… pass the Pepto.
BND: Awwwwwwk! He’s just speaking all ratty ta’ hide his Bruce Wayne identity! And he’s got a P51 still stuck up his bom from “Empire of the Sun.”
Anyways…
Heys! I just gots me a brilliant idear aboot’ how cable channels can further ruin films they show!
Take, fur’ example, tha’ Rambo films and cut them inta’ 35 minute “episodes” (tha’ other 25 minutes bein’ commercials aboot’ butt medicine) and then they cans broadcast them as a tv series five times a week! They could begin wit’ “Last time… on Rambo, we saw the opening credits” and end wit’ “Next time… on Rambo we see him eat a Deere… a John Deere tractor…”
Why, iffa’ they did it wit’ tha’ Starry Trek films, tha’ first one could fill a whole 22 episode first season!
Call Teds Turdner- I gotta’ pinch this!
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…
Wouldn’t it be cool for Jason and Grant from ‘Ghost Hunters’ to make a cameo in Ghostbusters 3? They’re standing out front of a badly haunted house as Bill Murray and Dan Akryod arrive and say “Step aside boys, the men have arrived.”
regarding the The Dark Knights significant gains over Batman Begins …the same happened to several sequels – Matrix 2, T2, Rambo 2, Austin Powers 2, Pirates 2, New Moon
the signs are good for Trek 2…as ST09 really is similar to the first installments of those above in that the first was somewhat of an unknown quanity or a ’sleeper’ (ok i know there had been Trek movies b4 but it was a relaunch of a done franchise and it wasnt really expected to do as well as it did)
I am as much excited about the new Batman as about the new Star Trek. With Nolan again on the directors chair i am sure it will be a great movie. With JJ on the directors chair only one thing is sure…lens flaaaare….siiigh
Philpot
Yes that is correct. I was mixing the domestic and global rankings there. I added a clarification there that TDK was highest *domestic* grossing film not directed by James Cameron
Sounds like another no win scenario.
#35 Boborci you dont believe in the no win scenario do you? ;]
Bob Orci… just add some space sex, a blue cat-like character digitally rendered, make a redshirt “an offer he can’t refuse”, have Harrison Ford just shoot Whiplash from Irony Man 2, and Kirk say “Rosebud” as in tha’ end we see such a tattoo on Yoeman Rand’s thigh… Oh, and Clint Eastwood askin’ Spock ta’ “Make me gay.” and Spock drops his pants (fur’ tha’ ladies) and… You gots Starry Trek 2: The Laughs of Coin… “coins” as in what ye’ paid ta’ see Antonio Banderas say “It iz very cold… in space.”…. instant Oscar winner…
Oh, I kidz cuz’ I loves… ST 09 wuz’ aces! Very fun! Make it so fun agains!
and Starry Trek 2 has a “heavy burden.” Maybe a sci-fi novel can be stolen idears from… When ye’ gets ta’ Starry Trek 5, just leave Sybok outta’ it…
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…
Could be a good month…so far away though…
I know I’m in the minority…or maybe all alone…but I didn’t care for “The Dark Knight” at all and I have no interest in another Christian Bale Batman movie.
I also don’t yet care about the Spiderman reboot, but that could change once more details come out.
Trek 2012 all the way!
#39 – I don’t think you are alone, but the minority is very small.
as for the Spiderman reboot, I think you are probably in the vast majority.
#39,40
Well, I for one am looking forward to “Batman 3″. Both “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight” are classics, with TDK improving upon BB. Can Christopher Nolan continue the trend? We’ll just have to wait and see.
it’s 2 years from now like I freaking care
I am not worried at all about the Spiderman reboot. We’ve all known and loved Toby and Kirsten for the last few years, so I highly doubt that it will do well. I’m pretty sure Trek will come out on top.
As for Batman, I’m not too worried. 3 weeks is enough time for Trek to conquer. No, it’s not the 4 month run that Avatar had in the winter, but I’m pretty sure it’ll still do extremely well. A bunch of my friends are just now seeing it and loving it, so it’s spreading almost like a viral video. I predict this next one will do no less than $500 million.
Move Star Trek to mid to late May. This is not rocket science. They could own the tail end of May after Avengers dies down.
I have zero interest in Spider-Boy, so three weeks between Trek 2012 and Batman Begins 3 is perfectly fine with me. The intervening weeks will probably be occupied by another sophomoric comedy like Hangover 2 and another over-the-top musical like Hairspray 2.
i think before it all comes to pass….you will see the spiderman reboot get moved. It will at least get moved to a normal thursday/friday start date. As dailys come back and negative buzz builds for the spidey reboot….the studio will rethink it’s tuesday release date.
It’s not Spider-Man or Batman that Star Trek needs to worry about…It’s THE AVENGERS that’ll put butts in seats. Seeing Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, and the Hulk all together in one film is gonna be amazing.
#11 The next Superman movie will be released in 2013, marking the Man of Steel’s 75th anniversary.
48
Let’s hope this time the villian ISN”T Lex Luthor!! Brainiac would be good!
Star Trek was less successful globally than Night at the Museum 2.
See here:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2009&p=.htm;;I
I come from Germany and Star Trek is there more popular than in other European countries. Nevertheless I don’t think it has much of a chance against Spider-Man and Batman. Those movies will take a lot of viewers away from Star Trek. Most people I know would rather see a Batman or Spider-Man movie, than a Star Trek movie.
I think it would be better, if they would show Star Trek earlier in February or March. The competition in those months are usually much weaker. Star Trek made only 33 % of it gross outside the USA and Canada. 50 % and more is usual for big blockbuster movies. I don’t see that percentage change with much competition.
Just to clarify, I don’t think that Star Trek is in Germany more popular than in ALL other European countries, just more popular than in most. I think it is in the UK and Ireland for example also quite popular.
NuTrek 2: Doomed against NuBatman 3 and NuNuSpiderman…:(((
I loved Star Trek as well really great let’s hope the sequel will be also 2012 can’t wait.
I just hope all the movies are good and that nobody feels the need to group into “camps” siding with any one against any other. That said, the odds of either hope being entirely satisfied are slim :(
The one thing to crank up the audience pulling power of the next start trek film is having a clever story over an action story.
This is not only congruent with trek but is why The Voyage Home with no real villain was more successful than Khan.
One thing i will point out re action is this. There was a very good fight scene in Iron Man 2 is this. It wasn’t the climax though, it was the scene where Iron Man is fighting his best friend.
The reason it was good is that there was genuine tension, his buddy didn’t want to be fighting but saw no choice. It was very good.
As opposed to the bad guy comes a fight takes place until the good guys win.
There needs to be more reason and tension rather than just relying on the effects.
My one negative on the Star trek movie was that we sensed Spocks emotions for revenge but we didn’t get a sense of Kirk feeling that drive which given his own father had been killed by Nero and his life screwed over.
I would like to have seen a single tear from Nero in that last second of his face onscreen as he realized it was all over too.
Just hoping the next Trek will be what Nolan’s second installment for Batman was.
why do I get the feeling that this will push them to redo Khan?
20
I love Batman (1989) as well as Batman Returns
In fact Michael Keaton is still the best Batman.
35
Just promise you won’t redo Khan due to pressure.
And keep it true to Star Trek and not Star Wars and you have a great Trek movie.
28. philpot: Singer’s got Jack, the Giant Killer to get through, so I’ll doubt we’ll see Battlefield Earth 2 . . . I mean Battlestar Galactica in the cinema until something like 2015. Hopefully by then they’ll have given up on the whole preposterous idea!
57. captain_neill: I love Michael Keaton’s Batman too – particularly in my favourite Batman film, Batman Returns! That said, he was perfect for the Tim Burton versions (and would have been far better in the lobotomised Batman Forever too), but he wouldn’t be right for the role in the Nolan films any more than Christian Bale would have been right for the Bruce role if we could teleport him back to 1990 for Burton’s Batman. It intrigues me that Kevin Kline was approached for Bruce Wayne/Batman for Burton’s first Bat film: he could have been great as well.
I’d love it if DC made an animated version of The Dark Knight Returns, though! Even better, make it live action with Michael Keaton after the Nolan trilogy comes to an end and they attempt the Justice League film!
As for remaking Khan, I suspect that will happen at some point, but I think it would be a better third or fourth film. I would be fascinated to see a film with a younger Khan at the height of his powers – Ricardo Montalban played him in the 1960s as a magnetic, vibrant personality and a neo-Trek film would need to base his role on that rather than the broken, angry wreck of a (super-)man he became later on!
What Star Trek needs right now, this very moment is promotion, get it out in some form or another. There is an almost three year wait for this sequel, thats to long IMO. So there needs to be some Trek in the mean time to fill in that rather long time space to keep fans interested, and PR potential new fans. A live action series would be pushing it, but a very well done computer animated series like Star Wars: The Clone Wars, done right, could do MUCH to help fill in that gap and keep people interested. Im hoping someone out there is listening.
I think it would be wise for them to pull the date for the new “Star Trek” back to May 2012 so there is some breathing room before these other flicks come out.
Never mind that, I want the VOYAGER MOVIE! :D http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000268047523&v=wall&story_fbid=115280065169292
http://trekweb.com/articles/2010/04/30/Rumor-Mill-Tim-Russ-Hints-atnbspStar-Trek-Voyager-Movie-.shtml
Batman Returns is my fav Bat movie as well.
I hope they do something great, I do fear that redoing Khan will be very lazy on the writers part.
Drawing on the better stuff rather than doing what the shows did, and continuing with new adventures.
They won’t redo Khan, ever.
5 people desperate for a return of Khan is not enough market.
I think the point of the entire storyline of the recent Star trek movie was to be free of the past not to be tied to it.
59 – Dom
yeah i guess a big screen BSG is way off – esp with the Moore spin offs going strong..itd be abit like if someone had remade TOS while TNG and DS9 were still going
re Khan.
yeah i too think itd be better to have Khan for the 3rd film. id like to see him in the 2nd film but that may be too soon after Nero..ive a feeling Trek 2.0 will be all about klingons with an end teaser of the Botany Bay leading on into Trek 3.0 (then hopefully the Borg in Trek 4.0)
in having Khan really itd be no different to what they did with TOS crew in ST09 – younger version in a new universe where all bets are off (not an older revenge driven madman or even a Space Seed version trying to take over the Ent as whos to say hed be located by the Ent this time?) so ive never really been able to understand the opposition from quite a few fans in having Khan as the central villain…if you can recast Kirk, Spock etc why not Khan?
but when recasting the original 9 times out ten people will still prefer the originals.
66 – well the only way to have got around that was to have cloned TOS cast around the early70s-early 80s
67
I have got use to the recast, they were good in the new film. Just saying I still prefer the originals
hell, why don’t they just combine scripts and do “the wrath of bruce wayne”?
it would be the final insult to everyone.
@ 65 “so ive never really been able to understand the opposition from quite a few fans in having Khan as the central villain…”
because Khan is not interesting enough to bring back, except for a very few fans and the idea is to appeal to a wider market.
It’s not opposition as much as it is sense. Create stories and move forward.
The Borg won’t happen either.
Respectfully these would be the first options of a less creative team. That was the problem with the Star Trek franchise and why it had gone stale and also why the new movie broke out of that and pulled a much larger audience.
Whatever is coming expect it to be better than what you and i are thinking.
Well, if Bob and Alex can try to make Kirk a likable character and not some awesome bada** who can do anything because he’s Kirk, than maybe I might give a dang. So far, I can find nothing about NuKirk’s character to like.
Do you have a funny feeling that JJ and company will redo Khan
That’s gonna hurt.
But, hopefully, it’ll hurt Spider-Man more. (Can’t believe I just wrote that; I want that film to do okay, too, at least so far. A lot will depend on what I hear about casting and plot….)
how was NuKirk a bad ass
I think they will redo Khan just because everyone is telling them not to do it. Kind of like a dare.
And then, of course, it will be so good we won’t care later.
I mean, think about it, he did a Star Trek movie with time travel and Romulans as the bad guy’s. And made it work!
Time travel has been way over used and Romulans were in the last movie that bombed! Looking back I though he was crazy.
So if anyone could redo Khan and make it work, it would be JJ and company.
Even though I personally would rather have different story, I would be just as happy with a Khan redo.
47…. “It’s not Spider-Man or Batman that Star Trek needs to worry about…It’s THE AVENGERS that’ll put butts in seats.”
Eh. Maybe, but comic book hero movies are notoriously hit-and-miss. Spidey 1 and 2, Dark Knight, and Iron Man were all well-received and did great at the Box Office. Spidey 3 made a ton of money despite almost no one actually liking it. Batman Begins and Superman Returns were middle-of-the-road both in reviews and box office. Fantastic Four 1 and 2 flopped. Incredible Hulk 1 and 2 flopped. Last year, Watchmen and Wolverine didn’t do nearly as well as the studios hoped. How much wide appeal do you think The Avengers will generate? I think it’ll appeal largely only to the fanboys and at best it’ll be another middle-of-the-road performer.
75
SO you think Khan rehash will work because of these writers and JJ Abrams?
May I remind that the writers were behind the awful Transformers 2.
If Thor is a great movie this will help the Avengers.
Iron Man 2 will be like spiderman 3. People will have seen it before realizing they didn’t really like it and the payoff (or punishment rather) will come on the next installment which will be The Avengers.
It is really is beyond belief that with that kind of budget for Iron Man 2 they decided to rehash the same type of villain story as the first film. That could cost them money down the road.
@75 “I think they will redo Khan just because everyone is telling them not to do it. Kind of like a dare.”
You really think people sit around with a 160 million to invest so they will risk it on a dare?
Then again rehashing last movies story for the new Iron Man seemed mad so who knows but personally i do have more faith in JJ and the guys behind Trek.
77… Yeah, but Transformers (which began life as a children’s toy) is essentially a kid’s movie. No one’s looking for Citizen Kane-level writing in a Transformers movie. Mr. Abrams & Co. gave the studio what they wanted: a loud, noisy movie about giant shapeshifting robots fighting each other. The studio threw in a hot babe (with no appreciable acting lalent) to lure in the teen and young adult male crowd, but that’s about as far as Transformers got away from being an overblown Saturday morning TV show from the 70s or 80s.
It’s safe to say that the studio (and the writers) will aim significantly higher for a Star Trek movie.
Please Mr. Orci: No Khan. Please Mr. Nolan: No Joker.
Ahh! New Star Trek, new Batman, new Spiderman, new Disney-Pixar movie and hopefully Hobbit movie pt 1! 2012 gonna be a great movie year:D
77. captain_neill: We have no idea who would write neo-Star Trek 3, 4 and so on right now; it’s way too early!
JJ, Bob and Alex might have gone on to bigger and better by the time of Star Trek 3 or one or other of them might be busy doing something else. Who knows what the future may bring!
End of the day, Transformers is more of a franchise film than ST09 was. As writers, I suspect Bob and Alex would have been given a very specific list of required ingredients to fit in to build around the film’s loooong action set-pieces.
I think a new-Khan is kind of an inevitability as the name still has a mainstream awareness. Of the first ten Trek films, most people will think of: ‘the one where Spock dies;’ ‘the one with the whales’ and ‘the one with the Borg . . .’ perhaps some will also remember ‘the one with Vejur.’
People remember Khan, so a hypothetical ‘Star Trek 3: The Return of Khan’ would be an attention-grabber, unlike ‘Whales 2,’ ‘Chang 2,’ ‘Sybok 2′ or ‘Nemesis 2!’
Yep, they will remember and figure they’ve already seen it.
I’m still trying to figure out if there will be enough people to go and see a spiderman origins film this soon. It makes no sense to me.
So you may be right but it doesn’t make sense to me.
I will say this. One of the huge problems with taking non trek fans to a star trek movie in the past is that fans often cannot control themselves. They guffaw so loud at every little in joke just to let everyone else in the theatre know they ‘get it”.
I took a friend to his first Trek film when Generations came out and those in the theatre almost having orgasms of hysterical laughter every time Data showed emotion was not only embarrassing but made sure my friends suspicions were confirmed.
If Khan was brought back, apart from just being lazy and uninspired it would bring about that overt geek boy behavior in cinemas world wide and ruin the experience for normal people who just want to go and see a good movie.
#79 “Yeah, but Transformers (which began life as a children’s toy) is essentially a kid’s movie.”
I disagree. Commando, Die Hard, Predator and even Robocop are more kids movies than Transformers. Those movies had great action, awesome characters, straight forward plot, and the kind of hokey acting that you would expect from a kids movie, only tougher and more fun! I would watch all those movies in a marathon with my kids than watch a single live action Transformers movie. And yes, I watched these films when I was a kid and I loved every minute of them.
Orci and Kurtzman to me are brilliant at least in my eyes
Neill
you have been so good, are you back to comment spamming again? I suggest a 12-step program ;)
but please no more commenting over and over to your own posts ok?
84. Jeyl… “I disagree. Commando, Die Hard, Predator and even Robocop are more kids movies than Transformers.”
We have to agree to disagree then. I think the four you cite are considerably better developed movies than Transformers, which seems to exist simply to blow things up on an enormous scale.
Anthony I don’t mean to spam
I just want to comment that unlike most others on this site I am against a redo of Khan.
85
They know what the mainstream wants but mainstream and I are no longer friends. Perhaps in another reality I could have called mainstream friend.
I prefer a lot of past writers.
Bottom line is I will always love Star Trek no matter what direction Abrams takes it in. He made a good movie which is NEW CANON. If he is using this parallel universe to rehash past stuff rather than taking advantage of something new then I will probably be displeased.
Please don’t desroy Qu’nos, it was bad enough you destroyed Vulcan in the new movie.
Captain Neill
Bringing back Khan wouldn’t necessarily mean a remake of “Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan”. It wouldn’t necessarily be a remake of “Space Seed” either, though Khan would still be discovered aboard a drifting Botany Bay.
Everything else would/could/should happen a bit differently because of the new timeline.
I get the sense we will see either Khan or the Klingons or both in the sequel. But I do think we will also see a unique story and plot. One featuring more scenes between Kirk, Spock and McCoy.
And Bob, now isn’t the time to get scared just because one of the most highly anticipated three-quels in movie history is opening just three weeks after the most anticipated sequel in Star Trek history opens. And 2012 is also the 45th anniversary of “Space Seed” and “Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan”. So as you can see, there is absolutely no pressure. ;-)
MMMMMMWWWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
83. Chris Fawkes
Love love LOVE your photos, by the way!
Everyone on here, I know Chris using his web address as his handle is a bit ‘in your face’, business-wise, but follow the link and check out his photos. Really really great!!
#89: “And Bob, now isn’t the time to get scared just because one of the most highly anticipated three-quels in movie history is opening just three weeks after the most anticipated sequel in Star Trek history opens.”
Hm. This has me pondering … hyberbole aside, is there any reliable way to compare how “anticipated” a modern movie is compared to a movie in a prior decade? Arguably, a comparison could be made for two contemporary films … you could measure buzz on twitter and Facebook, advance ticket queries at Fandango, etc … any given metric would be arguable, but measure enough of them and a picture might emerge. Of course, any method would have to take care to filter out artificial “anticipation” that was just part of the actual marketing effort, which gets trickier with every passing year …
But to suggest that the next Trek film is the “most anticipated sequel in Star Trek history” … how would you even begin to measure it against the very different movie-going culture of prior years? I’m not saying it isn’t or it is; it just seems an impossible claim to substantiate _or_ refute.
For my own part, I just hope that the new Batman movie doesn’t suffer some kind of threequel-quality curse. Third outings for superheroes have _not_ been kind to us in recent years.
Sure the new movie will do great in the box office
It seems to have got more respect than the past 5 shows and ten movies.
If they DO end up doing Khan, I’d like to see them do something like what “Sherlock Holmes” did at the end with Moriarty.
Something like:
SULU: Where to, captain?
KIRK: Our next orders are to investigate a derelict ship called the Botany Bay.
Or something to that extent. Something that makes the tension rise and people go “Ooooh crap.” The name Khan is still very familiar to the general public, even if they haven’t seen it.
I’ll bet the Supreme Court is having a field day watching all of us hanging in wait…
Batman no longer has Heath Ledger’s death publicity to help it. It’s sad to say that, but factual. That’s the media for you.
But look at all this lack of confidence in Trek, that so many are worried about what opens before or after it. You’d think, by some of these comments, that Star Trek doesn’t have a chance unless it’s the only new movie opening for 8 straight weeks.
92: “Sure the new movie will do great in the box office”
“It seems to have got more respect than the past 5 shows and ten movies.”
Yeah, because it had everything. It was smart, funny, and fun. It actually made more sense than Trek usually tries to make. It made more sense than for instance:
PICARD: Data, report!
DATA: We appear to be caught in a temporal wake.
WORF: Captain…earth!
DATA: The atmosphere contains high concentrations of carbon monoxide, methane, and fluorine.
PICARD: Life signs?
DATA: Population approximately six billion…all Borg.
TROI: How?
PICARD: They must have done it in the past. They went back and assimilated earth, changed history.
CRUSHER: But if they changed history, why are WE still here?
DATA: The temporal wake must have somehow protected us from changes in the timeline.
DMDUNCAN: WTF are you clowns talking about? Are any of you even vaguely aware that none of that makes any sense at all? Or are you aware, and just have your fingers crossed that nobody will catch on to your meaningless neologisms?
Well said Nu Trek had everything Comedy,Action,Romance great script, acting was superb by everyone.
#91
I guess you didn’t see the wink-and-smile symbol at the end of my last paragraph. What I said was meant as tongue-in-cheek. Hyperbole was what I intended.
#96
I understood that just fine. Actually, the movie that makes the least sense is “Generations”. Mainly due to the ambiguity of the Nexus. Such as how would you leave the Nexus. Especially if it can recreate personal experiences out of nothing. How does the Nexus even work? How would you even know you left?
96
Perhaps you prefer the dumbed down Trek but that line of Dialogue you quoted from First Contact is not confusing and it makes sense to the plot.
And you know what First Contact isa better film than the new one.
Well this site proves that when something new happens that fans will spit on past stuff when something new comes along.
First Contact is a 5 star movie, where as Trek XI is a 4 star movie.
If you don’t understand that scene in FIrst Contact then there probably is no hope as that was pretty simple techno stuff.
Please why where you a fan of the past Trek for all these years when you are willing to forget it all because of one movie.
100: Actually, from a scientific standpoint it’s FC that’s dumbed down.
There is no comprehensible version of time travel that would work the way it has been depicted there. It only seems to make sense in FC because you’ve seen it done that way in previous Trek, so it “makes sense” only in the loose sense of that phrase as “something you’ve seen before and accept,” in the same way that you accept that a man from Krypton could be normal there but have super powers on earth. Not because you’ve actually understood the mechanics of how those things really work and it makes sense, but because you’ve accepted the stipulated conditions of that story’s universe.
“If you don’t understand that scene in FIrst Contact then there probably is no hope as that was pretty simple techno stuff.”
“Temporal wake” my buttocks. Nuthin but hand wavy balderdash, that is.
“Please why where you a fan of the past Trek for all these years when you are willing to forget it all because of one movie.”
Comparing all the past Treks before ST.09, I like TOS the best, better even than the TOS movies. I guess that makes me a TOS fan more than a Star Trek fan. Oh, and now I’m a Firefly/Serenity fan, which I think is better than anything to come out of Trek since TOS and ST.09.
The pointy-eared bastard!
101
Yes they did tone down the techno babble for the TNG movies. SO I was saying that how could this liine be complex for an audience. Its bloody simple.
Perhaps some fans want the simple “Push that Red button” instead “Inititate the deflector dish.”
But I do notice that every Star Trek except the new movie is getting penalised. Makes me wonder if you spent he last 40 years criticising what went wrong.
And First Contact is a much better film.
There are so many different theories for Time Travel. But I do feel that the quantum theory that Orci uses makes time travel no long er a dramatic device because there is no risk.
God I seem to lose my calm logical stance when I read comments on this site anbout the Best franchise ever and its all because of differing opinions on this new movie.
You all love it where as I love the film but can see so many flaws in this film.
103. neill
I’m as much an avid Trekkie as anyone, but I’m willing to look at the numerous “flaws” in ALL the Trek films. But I don’t necessarily look at them as flaws; rather, I see them as “means to a plot.” If I find such things acceptable within the context of the story, then I’m willing to overlook them. For example (and this has been mentioned numerous times), in TSFS Sarek tells Kirk that he should have returned Spock’s katra to Vulcan — everything that was “not of the body,” the essence which survived. However, it seemed understood, somehow, that Spock’s dead body also needed to be returned to Vulcan. This was never really explained in the movie, yet without it, there’d have been no “resurrection” of Spock. It made for a good story, but it made no sense, really.
This is just one such “flaw” that could be pointed to. There are other questionable “plot-isms,” so I don’t see why “Star Trek” should be singled out as being flawed. You can look at any review of previous Star Trek films and find the critics were not always kind.
I also liked FC. But to say it is a much better film is entirely subjective. It certainly wasn’t a better performing film at the box office
or dvd sales, which is, ultimately, where it counts. If you liked it better, then YOU liked it better, which is completely fine, but your opinion is not unanimous. There’s really no need for anyone to get emotionally unglued about Star Trek movies. Everyone has their personal favorites, or their personal dislikes, and that’s just human nature.
I think it’s like marmite Star Trek you either like or dislike I for one loved JJ Abrams Star Trek it was great fun enjoyable IMO and I can’t wait til Trek XII
I do like Trek XI but I dont treat it as the best
Like TNG it adds to Trek but hat I get on this site is the feel its going to take over.
Neill, I think it depends on what you mean by “take over.” When TNG came along, it was the NuTrek, and it took the reigns. It’s not about whether or not anyone cared about TOS any more, it was simply the passage of time. Using the example of Batman, does anyone remember Lewis Wilson who played Batman in the 40’s? Many people might still associate Adam West with Batman, but is anyone campaigning to have him appear as Batman again? And when Michael Keaton was cast in Tim Burton’s Batman film, there was a pretty unanimous cry of “WHAT???!!!!” Keaton won over a lot of naysayers with his performance. And now Christian Bale wears the suit, and Christopher Nolan is the leader of that Supreme Court.
It’s all about the passage of time. For those of us who grew up on TOS and TNG, those shows will always be closest to our hearts because it’s one of those things we loved during childhood.
Finally, I think Kirk’s question “How can history ever get past people like me?” is always appropriate.
fn spiderman
“There are so many different theories for Time Travel. But I do feel that the quantum theory that Orci uses makes time travel no long er a dramatic device because there is no risk.”
————-
There are many theories, but ours is the most current and internally consistent by avoiding paradoxes.
As for the drama, you are correct that we don’t rely on the paradoxes as a threat. After all, what’s so dramatic about painlessly disappearing if you interfere with your own birth. Although I suppose Marty McFly did appear to be in a lot of pain during his brief flirtation with non-existance. Is that the kind of drama you were imagining?
109
An example I would like to take would be from one of my fav Trek movies, First Contact.
The crew have to make sure that history does not get altered so that thfuture happens as planned, essentially they need to ensure that Star Trek happens.
But if First Contact used this new theory then there is no problem, does this new theory fit in with that still.
First Contact is still a fav film of mine, in fact in is in my top movies list of all time along with Wrath of Khan
110: neill, two suggestions:
1. Make a distinction between what is done by poetic license and what is done as a depiction of how things really work.
Getting to the past by sling shotting around the sun is an example of the former; so is Kirk visiting one past, while Spock and McCoy get stranded in another. The past is not a literal place you can get in some machine and go to (while everyone you know remains behind living their lives) in the way that Costa Rica is. Nor is the future. The Einsteinian conception of relativistic time travel to the future is a very loose way of thinking about that aspect of time, i.e., it’s not literally the future anymore than Rip Van Winkle going to sleep for 20 years awakens in the future, or any more than you and I wake up 8 hours in the future after 8 hours of sleep.
Like it or not, but we are, all of us, stuck in the present, just like Spock Prime — no matter what side of the black hole he is on, he is always in the present.
What Bob did in ST.09 using MWI actually made more sense than any version of what we are here calling “time travel” than Star Trek has ever done before. The time travel move that probably makes more sense than any other is Coppola’s “Peggy Sue Got Married,” which is a really good movie. Check it out. But strictly speaking, I wouldn’t even call ST.09 a “time travel” movie despite how it looks. And this again is an example of how tricky the film is. It isn’t simple or dumbed down despite how funny or how much fun it is.
Now whether Bob knew all that he was doing when he was writing it I can’t say. I have my own theory, that coincidence is rubbish, that we know more than we are aware of and those things come out in ways that we do not consciously control.
2. Do not try to make all Star Trek self consistent with every other part. You’ll make yourself very unhappy. And you can’t blame Bob for that, because inconsistency has been as much a part of Star Trek as the Enterprise.
And MWI assumptions already exist in TNG: “Parallels,”
#98: “I guess you didn’t see the wink-and-smile symbol at the end of my last paragraph. What I said was meant as tongue-in-cheek. Hyperbole was what I intended.”
Of course I noticed; that’s why I responded as I did. It just got me thinking, is all.
I get that it is a different style of Time Travel
Does not change the fact that First Contact is the better movie.
@113: As a fan of movies, generally, I think that in the day, FC is tolerable, while at night, it is an effective treatment for insomnia. Fans will give it higher ratings as fans of the franchise than it deserves as a movie.
I think ST.09 far surpasses it in the genre, and competes favorably with other great action films of the genre like Raiders or Pirates, but without losing the soul of what it is.
But it’s okay to disagree.
#114
“As a fan of movies, generally, I think that in the day, FC is tolerable, while at night, it is an effective treatment for insomnia. Fans will give it higher ratings as fans of the franchise than it deserves as a movie.”
I disagree. I think that “First Contact” works on many levels. Great action, visual effects and great performances from Alice Krige as the Borg Queen, Patrick Stewart as Captain Picard and James Cromwell as Zefram Cochrane. Plus it had a theme which touched on the very idea of what Gene Roddenberry envisioned. I know that you aren’t a fan of non-TOS related Trek, and that you have your own taste but I think you are wrong on this front.
“I think ST.09 far surpasses it in the genre, and completely favorably with other great action films of the genre like Raiders or Pirates, but without losing the soul of what it is.”
Again I must disagree. As great as “Star Trek” 09 is, I wouldn’t rank it with “Raiders” but maybe with “Pirates”. There were many flaws with ST 09 such as plot and a somewhat stereotypical villain. And the movie lacked something that made “The Wrath Of Khan” and “First Contact” better movies in my opinion. That something was a subliminal message.
ST 09 lacked that. But what ST 09 definitely had were new versions of classic characters that remained true to the ones portrayed by the original actors. And it was a really fun movie. J.J Abrams, Bob Orci and crew truly know what they are doing despite a few missteps(cough***brewery***cough). They understood the characters. Overall though, there were flaws that need to be rectified for the sequel. Such as more McCoy and less Spock/Uhura romance.
“But it’s okay to disagree.”
That we both agree on. It would be a very boring world if everyone agreed on everything 100% of the time wouldn’t it? :-)
“That we both agree on. It would be a very boring world if everyone agreed on everything 100% of the time wouldn’t it? :-)”
Yup.
115
Curious to know what the subliminal messages were?
Bob
Do you like First Contact?
#117
“Subliminal messages” was the wrong term. I goofed. My apologies.
Batman will CREAM Star Trek in 2012.
Star Trek will drop in box office like a lead anchor and that will be the end of big budget Star Trek movies.
They better make the 2012 version real cheap because it will fall off the box office when Batman comes a knockin.
i want crispin glover as the joker to be in the 2012 batman 3
movie, and, i want aaron eckhart as two face to be in the batman 3 2012 movie, and i want sarah michelle gellar as big breasted harley quinn to be in the batman 3 2012 movie
with the gotham city thugs too,.. and with robin williams as the
riddler in the movie too,…