Rumor: Star Trek Sequel May Move To Holiday 2012 Release |
jump to navigation

Rumor: Star Trek Sequel May Move To Holiday 2012 Release May 24, 2011

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,CBS/Paramount,Rumor,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

One of the hottest topics right now in the entertainment press is the fate of the 2012 Star Trek sequel. In the last week we have reported that an announcement is coming soon and that prep has been ongoing based on a detailed outline. Today an unconfirmed report has come out stating that the Star Trek sequel may be delayed.


Star Trek To Move To Holiday 2012?

Paramount and JJ Abrams really want to focus on his new movie Super 8. However, much of the press coverage over the last few days has been about Abrams next project, the Star Trek sequel which is currently scheduled for June 29, 2012. To date reports have been that Abrams will turn his focus to Star Trek in June, the final touches for the script will be wrapped up quickly and shooting will start in September. However, some are questioning whether this scenario is possible.

This evening Deadline picked up on TrekMovie’s recent report of prep work being done off an outline, and they added some news in an article titled "Can ‘Star Trek 2′ Morph From 70-Page Outline To Summer Tent Pole In 13 Months?" According to Deadline’s source the announcement that JJ Abrams has promised is coming soon will have "good news and bad news." The good news would be that Abrams will indeed return as director for the sequel, however Deadline is also hearing that the studio is “considering” moving the release to a Holiday 2012 date. Paramount would then possibly move their planned G.I. Joe 2 film (which starts shooting in August) from its current August 10, 2012 date into Star Trek’s June 29, 2012 spot. Deadline also reports that Paramount still hopes to shoot the Star Trek sequel ahead of the Jack Ryan reboot (which stars Chris Pine).

Paramount has not confirmed Deadline’s report.

JJ Abrams directing "Star Trek" – unconfirmed report says he will be back for sequel, which will be delayed to Holiday 2012 season

Wouldn’t be a surprise

It is not inconceivable that the Star Trek sequel would be moved. The schedule for Abrams first Star Trek film called for 13 months from the start of production to release, with an additional half a year of pre-production. That film then got an additional 4 1/2 months of post-production after Paramount decided to move it to fill out their summer 2009 schedule. Last summer Star Trek producer Bryan Burk told TrekMovie they had a similar plan for the sequel, which he hoped would be begin filming in June 2011, and Roberto Orci’s last target date to have a signed-off script was late March.

All that being said, it still possible to make the original date. While pre-production didn’t start as planned, there has been "prep" work going on based on the detailed outline. Plus, the main cast casting and much of the design work and construction of the USS Enterprise was already done for the first Star Trek, so pre-production will be shorter and can focus on new elements. And a source at ILM once told TrekMovie that work on many effects shots can begin during pre-production, especially on space-based shots which wont need live-action elements. One also has to look at Super 8 itself. JJ Abrams began the movie last September and will deliver it June 10, so could he not do it again with the Star Trek sequel?

Right now Trekkies seem to be already bracing for a delay. In a recent poll at TrekMovie, 48% of fans expected the film to be delayed.

And in our most recent poll, 1/3 of fans actually say they would prefer for the sequel to be delayed (likely to ensure quality isn’t hurt by the film being rushed).

TrekMovie will continue to monitor the situation with the Star Trek sequel and report any updates.




1. The Original Animated Next Generation Deep Space Voyager Enterprise I-XI - May 24, 2011

Summer 2012 please. The wait is killing me enough as it is.

2. DeShonn Steinblatt - May 24, 2011

There should be a nice little delay for each sequel. For one thing, the whiners will have died of exhaustion by the time Star Trek 3 or 4 arrives.

3. Harry Seldom - May 24, 2011

Just looking for a comment from boborci…

4. Thorny - May 24, 2011

Shocked! Shocked I am.

Oh wait, no I’m not. This delay has been painfully obvious for at least the last two months, when we first started reading about a production start in late summer. Its a shame those of us who dared point out the obvious were shouted down as being naysayers (here and in other forums).

They’ll delay it to November 2012 first, and then to May 2013 when Paramount (hopefully) sees they have another monster hit on their hands.

5. Cygnus-X1 - May 24, 2011

If it gets pushed back to X-mas 2012, I would expect a subsequent pushback to Summer 2013 by Paramount. They liked the idea of it being a Summer blockbuster, and it obviously worked financially, so I wouldn’t expect a deviation from that formula.

Summer 2013.

6. Cygnus-X1 - May 24, 2011

And if it were up to me, I’d say let JJ go do his thing and get someone else to direct it. I don’t see that you need JJ producing it, either. We’ve already seen the super glossy, super slick, popcorn-muncher blockbuster for the masses courtesy of JJ Abrams. Do we need to see another one?

Let someone else have a go at it.

Let’s have the Star Trek equivalent of what Irvin Kirschner was to Star Wars.

Something a bit more soulful, more artistic and less pandering to the masses.

Unlikely, I know…but a boy can dream….

7. Driver - May 24, 2011

Expect more delays.

8. Bill Peters - May 24, 2011

I expect it on time in 2012 :)

9. Iva - May 24, 2011

Funny how the title says “Rumor”. I mean, come on, what do Paramount people think – that they’ll shock us if they admit it’s truth?
Shocking news indeed.

10. Paul - May 24, 2011

Star Trek movies always do better in summer so 2012 or summer 2013.

Winter 2012 would probably mean less box office as generally space movies play better in the warmer months!

11. CmdrR - May 24, 2011

You can’t see my face, but if you could you couldn’t see the look of shock on it, because there isn’t one.

Guys, make us a good movie, please. We hate waiting, but not nearly as much as we hate paying 12-15 bucks to sit through 02:13:35 of dreck.

12. ensign joe - May 24, 2011

Huh what oh Oh hmmmmm ok sure you sure? Ok then sooooooooo yeah hmmmmm sounds great!

13. MvRojo - May 24, 2011

I don’t know if Super 8 is an apt comparison. From what it seems, that film has a lot more live-action components than Star Trek 2 will presumably have. It was also a tighter production in general since it was filmed for something like $50 million, unlike Trek 2 which will probably be around $150 million.

14. Prologic9 - May 24, 2011

9, It’s a rumor because it’s all just based on outside speculation. Short production schedules for big movies may not be desirable, but that doesn’t mean they don’t happen. The new X-Men film comes to mind…

If it really gets pushed back you can expect some bad blood between Paramount and the producers in the wake.

The writers were hired with a known release date and then produced nothing for 2 years. Bad form.

Abrams waiting this long to commit to the project, effectively keeping the film dead for Paramount? Bad form.

He better pray Super 8 is a win because if it fails and he’s responsible for their 2012 tentpole being MIA, Paramount and perhaps the rest of Hollywood will smell his shit coming for miles.

15. The Great Bird of the Galaxy - May 24, 2011

I think JJ has too much on his plate. Or perhaps the franchise is less important than say, GI Joe. This movie’s time frame has already been stretched to the point of obscurity. If this rumor is true it could damage the franchise. This reeks of internal problems, perhaps trouble with the script.
I consider myself to be an invested fan with nearly forty years of viewership, and I say this with passion, and conviction. Star Trek was born on television- It’s big enough to handle it’s own on the ‘Big screen’, but it’s lifeblood is with the television audience. A new series MUST begin development ASAP. And to the powers that be, If your listening, turn to ‘We the fans’ for advice, and guidance when writing this material, and we will never let you down. Mr. Roberto Orci has been an invaluable liaison, and we praise you for the time you’ve volunteered to interact, and answer any questions we may have. I hope ‘We the fans’ have been a helpful resource, as well.
At this point, since it’ll be at least 3 years between films, anyways, all that matters is that the story, and script be solid as a rock.

16. freezejeans - May 24, 2011

Terrific. The momentum’s been halted, put it back on the shelf for another 5-10 years.

17. JMAN - May 24, 2011

If they need an extra six months to get the film done right, then that’s what they should do. A few extra months isn’t going to kill the momentum. What WILL more definitely do that is making a bad movie.

18. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - May 24, 2011

No one here at Trekmovie would be surprised if it was delayed. I want it on time but want better quality instead of being rushed.

19. Basement Blogger - May 24, 2011

Sigh. I was looking forward to seeing Star Trek in June 2012 before the Mayan calender ran out. and the world ends. :-) Yeah, I don’t want to see a rush job. Trekkers demand quality. After all, doesn’t Star Trek stand for quality science fiction?

Not having worked in the film business, but reading what Anthony wrote, I guess it can be done for a June release. If Paramount wants to release the film in 3D, will there be time to prepare the special effects to take advantage of the medium? A quick and cheap conversion from 2D will hurt the film as it could sour fans expectation for quality.

Well, at least I can enjoy the new Stat Trek TV series. Oh, that’s right there is no new Star Trek on TV. Sigh.

20. Damian - May 24, 2011

I believe a delay is inevitable. They are not going to shortchange their sequel just to get it out earlier. I’m not really worried about momentum. Oh, people may temporarily “forget” the prior film, but as soon as the next one is announced the masses will remember quickly enough (another reason “Star Trek” must be in the title–to remind the masses what a blockbuster the last one was–but I digress). While it may not come as quickly as some of us like, it’s nice to start seeing reports that we are inching closer to the next film as time goes on. I’ve got 5 TV series, 11 movies, an animated series and plenty of Star Trek books to keep me busy until then.

21. richpit - May 24, 2011

I don’t want it to be delayed, but whatever. I’ll see it when I see it.

22. rm10019 - May 24, 2011

Winter or Xmas releases as they are called usually require quite a different tone, because of the holiday slot. Summer = action and spectacle, while Xmas requires a slightly more subtle touch. If someone wants to dig through box office mojo for examples to prove or disprove this please feel free.

23. rm10019 - May 24, 2011

btw, Anthony this new logo is nowhere as good or instantly recognizable as the fun ghostbusters 2. bring it back :)

24. Trek Nerd Central - May 24, 2011

Depends. Would Christmas 2012 conflict with the Mayan apocalypse?

25. Craiger - May 24, 2011

If the movie is delayed then if any Trek TV series would be delayed until 2015?

26. Craiger - May 24, 2011

#24 Lois Lane proved that wrong in Smallville.

27. J.C. England, formerly AnotherQ - May 24, 2011

I wish they would take it a little more
seriously for the fans.

I mean, I understand that these folks
have other gigs and can’t just bust out
one Trek movie after another like a TV
series (hint, hint), but if they don’t speed
things up just a little, all the stars are
going to be Shatner’s & Nimoy’s ages
before the fourth film is made…. or they’ll
trade off actors… yuck.

28. joe - May 24, 2011

Is it possible that if Star Trek gets delayed that it is in danger of being forgotten by the general audience? If so then maybe Orci and Kurtzman should really consider at least doing an animated series so it stays in the minds of the people.

29. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 24, 2011

Everything is possible… including the film premiere on June 29, 2012 as planned… nothing new in this article from Deadline …. but is not it amazing? … Deadline is reverberating news first hand here at … Great guys! … LOL

:-) :-)

30. Trek Nerd Central - May 24, 2011

#26. Phew, well. That’s fine then. I was just worried that the projectionists would all be raptured by then. . . Oh. Wait. Wrong apocalypse.

31. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 24, 2011

A new logo with good vibrations … I hope and wish! … ’12


32. GG - May 24, 2011

WAAAAAIT a minute. I thought JJ was AGAINST “holiday” releases, which is why we had to WAIT through the holidays for the first “Star Trek” to come out the following summer. NOW, we have to wait through the summer, for “Star Trek 2″ to come out over the holidays???

The “new” crew is going to be as old as the “old” crew by the time this thing comes out (and, so will I, apparently)

33. drew - May 24, 2011

there is NO way the trek sequel will make summer 2012. Its my hope these guys take there time with the next movie as they did with the first one.

I’m dying to see what Bob, Alex, JJ and the other guys come up with. I do wish it was Summer 2012 but my feeling is if you want it done right it will take longer to do.

34. ncc50446 - May 24, 2011

Not surprised…
Got a bunch of people enjoying 2009, and now have to rebuild all the momentum that was gained..
If they aren’t that interested in Star Trek, find someone who is…There are plenty of Star Trek fans to choice from…The longer this goes on, the longer it is before it returns to TV…

35. Ted - May 24, 2011

Leave a long enough delay and Hollywood will come out with another reboot. Might be worth the wait.

36. Rosario T. Calabria - May 24, 2011

Wouldn’t surprise me.

37. Chadwick - May 24, 2011

I had a feeling, but they should do what they have to do to make this movie great.

38. The Original Spock's Brain - May 24, 2011

That would disappoint me.

39. Captain Karl - May 24, 2011

Yanno’ Holiday 2012 would not be the best choice really…

All these games being played with release dates, it makes it seem as though they really came out with an idea and it wasn’t really liked completely by the powers that be so they are going back to the drawing board. I know Bob Orci said this wasn’t the case, but these types of delays or rescheduling of release dates doesn’t help their case and makes the people anticipating it wary.

40. Jonboc - May 24, 2011

JJ, having done LOTS of television, is no stranger to fast, short, quality shoots…he can do it in the time frame and he will do it well. Any delay will be due to the studio’s uneasiness, not JJs ability to deliver the goods.

41. mike - May 24, 2011


42. dayxday - May 24, 2011

Let’s see…rushed and half-assed earlier and well-written and great (hopefully) later. I’ll take later.

43. Chelsea - May 24, 2011

I hope it does get delayed. There are too many ‘big’ movies releasing that summer (TDKR, Spidey, Avengers) and I think (hope!) it would do better in winter. And I don’t want this movie to be rushed.

44. Adolescent Nightmare - May 24, 2011

I see that Star Trek is like heroin for some people. Take your methadone and calm down.

45. Doggeh - May 24, 2011

Can’t say I’m surprised….just extremely disappointed if this is true.

Can’t say I’m worried too much about Trek going up against the Avengers or Spider Man. Dark Knight is a bit a intimidating.

No matter what though, Trek is gonna have competition. Theres a little movie called The Hobbit coming out in the 2012 holiday season…THAT movie worries me.

46. Chain of Command - May 24, 2011

As a life-long fan who has loved this saga since my childhood I’m glad Paramount is finally giving Star Trek the royal treatment and not rushing things.

From day one with “The Cage” there was always interference from “the suits” with how Star Trek was made. It was either rushed, never given enough money to be fully realized as intended, or had movie release deadlines set that were nearly impossible to meet (TMP is a perfect example).

While it may be aggravating to wait for the next film, it is encouraging to know that time and effort is being spent to do the film the best way it can be done.

47. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 24, 2011

Anthony Pascale just talked about a rumour of delay. Unfortunately, we have heard nothing new and don’t expect to until after the premier of Super 8 on 10 June. JJ Abrams needs have it all sorted. Anyway, what more is there to do with Super 8 once it hits cinemas?

On a recent video with William Shatner, he mentioned how Paramount mucked around throughout most of the seventies with maybe a new series, then nothing, maybe a movie, then nothing. They managed TAS, although that wasn’t considered canon then. Paramount just do not seem to know how to treat their beautiful golden goose with the proper respect it deserves. As has been pointed, these other JJ, Orci, Kurtzman etc productions have been mostly ones *ordered* by Paramount. Really, the buck stops with Paramount. Someone there really needs to spend a good amount of time in the agoniser booth, frankly.

48. Charla - May 24, 2011

la la la la la *hands over ears* la la la la

I can’t hear you! Until this comes from J.J. or Bob, Alex or Paramount- I am holding out for the on time release.

Next, I do not like the term “tent-pole” movie regarding Trek- it seems like such an injustice to such a great movie! Stop it! – please and thank you. :)

49. somethoughts - May 24, 2011

Imagine 500,000 reimagined klingon extras marching in unison to a epic michael g score while the camera zooms in on our heroes captured and defeated, revealing the klingon homeworld in one beautiful moving panning shot as the cam pans across a enterprise in flames, destroyed on the ground

50. That One Guy - May 24, 2011

I’ll go either way.

If it gets delayed, oh well.
If not, yay. I’ll see it when I see it. Personally, I think Trek has earned a name to play with the big boys in the summer and I think it can hold its own.

51. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011

See, here’s the part that really fries my grapenuts…When the last movie came out, and was a huge success enjoyed by everyone, the producers announced the next Trek film would be 3 years from that point. A lot of hard-core fans groused, asking why TPTB couldn’t crank out a new film every 2 years. “These things take time’ we were told. Most of us finally came around to seeing that logic and everything settled down…..and we waited…..and we waited. Now, we’re being told that it might even be longer.


If a kid in school (even a gifted one) was given 3 months to write a term paper and, at the last minute, asked the teacher for an extension of 2 more weeks, what do you suppose the answer would be?

The answer would be “no” and the kid would be given a “failed” grade.

Not in Hollywood. There, it is accepted as “business as usual”. Sad.

(here fishy, fishy…)

52. ster j - May 24, 2011

Didn’t the movies that premiered at Christmas do really well? Star Trek 4 comes to mind. This might be a blessing in disguise. I’d rather have a good movie vs. a rushed movie.

Just saying.

53. somethoughts - May 24, 2011


If the kid is making dinner, washing dishes, mowing the lawn and washing the car for the teacher, im willing to bet the kid gets a extension ;)

54. Ebbi - May 24, 2011

Please…please..listen to my request. Star trek was such a great show I am an avid lover of it..but your last movie almost killed it for me. There are ALOT of us out here who want to not only watch them..but have our children with us when we do. So please…leave out the sexually expilcit stuff? If you want to have a hit show..that and not too much gore should be your #1 concern. You’d get millions more followers if you only abide by this…We’d love to love it again…thank-you. -E

55. CanOpener1256 - May 24, 2011

Paramount Pictures — the MGM of the future? They have a hot property and seem to drag their feet. Perhaps they need to film 2 movies back to back and give us two big star trek movies 6 months apart like Pirates and Harry Potter.

Or a movie and a new tv series .. Just DO something! Before everybody forgets what star trek is! (from another original, aging, fan)

56. CanOpener1256 - May 24, 2011

#54 Explicit?.. Did u ever watch Enterprise? It made JJ’s trek look positively tame!

57. Bobby - May 24, 2011

@51 – Harry, it’s just a movie. Chill, dude. It has nothing to do with our lives. Why should you or anyone else care? You and I and everyone else are not involved. It sounds like you want perfection and that’s not an element that exist in life. It is what it is; so just chill. Afterall, it’s just a movie.

58. Andrew - May 24, 2011

If there is just not enough time, ok, I can wait. If it is a delay because of creative problems, then I am concerned.

Remember when they had a story that they were going to try and tear apart to test its strength, to see if it would hold up? I don’t recall seeing any update on how that turned out. Maybe the story did “break.” I think this especially likely since we have gone from articles about a nearly completed script to a 70 page “outline.”

59. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 24, 2011

Except, Harry, we don’t know what is actually happening for sure. There appears to be definitely a detailed outline of the story, preparation is being done, and JJ Abrams has not officially announced his decision to direct the sequel, unless our Bob Orci is telling us porkies. That is all we do know.

I think it is the continued NOT knowing, the news that is no news, that is getting on everyone’s nerves. Too much teasing…I have made comments about this before, re JJ Abrams in particular.

You can take it that I am feeling a little pissed off right now.

60. sean - May 24, 2011

I see no reason why they can’t have it done by next summer. 13 months isn’t enough production time? Seriously? They already have the principal cast and main sets in place.

61. Browncoat1984 - May 24, 2011

Who are the people who voted “Never/canceled”?? I would say it’d be nice to have SOMETHING in between like a short miniseries or animated series or something. Doesn’t have to be a full series, just something to hold us while we wait. With Stargate gone the wait will be even harder…

62. Anthony Thompson - May 24, 2011

I’ll reserve my “told ya so’s” until it’s been made official. Until then, I’ll say that I agree heartily with Harry (#51) and Prologic9 (#14) above that a delay past 3 years was unnecessary and is inexcusable. In fact, the sequel *should have* been timed for release THIS MONTH!

P.S. Harry, I don’t think you’re going to get Bob to bite on this issue. After all, what can he really say? If the script had been written as originally intended and reported on this website(X-mas ’09), we WOULD be enjoying the sequel right now! Instead…well, I’m waiting ’til it’s official.

63. Red Dead Ryan - May 24, 2011

Summer 2013. I guarantee it. It’s a summer tentpole so it can’t be released during the winter. Better to take the time to craft a great movie than to rush out a piece of $hit!

Also, J.J Abrams is THE ONLY logical choice as director. Most other directors in Hollywood couldn’t care less about Trek or would have no idea how to direct a Trek film. Plus having J.J back maintains stability and continuity. Usually when a film franchise switches directors during a series of films, the movie with the new director sucks. Case in point:
“Batman Forever”, “Pirates Of The Carribean: On Stranger Tides”.

64. Browncoat1984 - May 24, 2011

Oh, and #54, in case you were watching a different Star Trek than me…sex has ALWAYS been a part of Star Trek.

65. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 24, 2011

#54 In order for Star Trek to get a PG-13 rating, there can’t be much, if any, sexually explicit material, however that rating does seem to allow for quite a lot of gratuitous violence. You only need to see how violent some movies are that only rate a PG-13. In other countries, a lot of these movies are rated M (like NZ) and these are legally enforceable as in cinemas can be prosecuted if they allow person(s) under the age of 16 who are not accompanied throughout the movie by an adult. Apparently this is not the case in the USA. It appears that anybody can see anything, pretty much.

However, studios do try to abide by MPAA rulings (an overseeing organisation with no actual legal powers, I believe) as it is in their interests to do so. The Untitled Star Trek sequel already has a PG-13 rating which means all the production will abide by the guidelines outlined by the MPAA, when it comes to levels of violence, profanity, sexual activity, nudity, criminal activity etc.

66. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

I know of several people who are rather irritated by the after affect of the writers strike of 2008-09 (?) and how it affected of the quality of the finished product of the script for ST: 2009. While I do understand that the production team of ST2009 is not at fault for Hollywood politics, neither does the film going public, for what is an ever increasing bottom line cost at the box office. To be quite frank, there is an entire franchise at stake. Currently there is sparse ST merchandise to be found at Target & Walmart. Go to ANY bookstore and you’ll see the ST bookshelves just about empty in comparison to any other SciFi/Fantasy franchise. There are no ST television series in production. Star Trek is STILL on life support. Given the drama associated with script issues on the past film, it is paramount (no pun intended) that this script kick the box office in the proverbial nut sack. ST fans believe in the talent of the actors. They believe in the effects team, they believe in Michael Giacchino, they believe in the lighting crew and the set designers, the art department, etc. What happens NOW regarding script develpoment & pre production is more important than ever. Perhaps moving ST2012 to the following December would give it more lee way to kick some bigger ass. Besides, if you REALLY want to start talking JJs STvsSW thing, EVERYONE knows that ST2:TWOK was the best of the Star Trek franchise. EVERYONE knows that THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK has been celebrated time and time again as being one of the best sequels EVER. The pressure is on for JJ and team to do the same. ST2012? You are officially on notice -__- !

67. Iva - May 24, 2011


Kind of get the feeling bad blood is already happening. How many times so far has it been said the script is almost done or just waiting for the approval?
If it ever was – how come it’s still in this state today?
J.J. is just being immature. He should own up to it and say loud and clear if he is committed or no. Because this half-state is damaging to everyone involved.
And what if, after his meddling with the script,
he simply decides he doesn’t want to do it after all and just leaves? Because it feels like, by avoiding commitment, he is just leaving a back door open for himself to flee if things get over his head.
In that case, the new guy gets to go over the script again, fit it to his tastes, who knows what will have to be rewritten and how long will it all take.
Plus it is insulting to the fandom to be treated like another item on the shopping list instead of being The Project, which ST deserves to be.

I wish Peter Jackson were into SF.

68. JKim - May 24, 2011

A BIG CONCERN: a push to the fall of 2012 or beyond may truly kill the anticipation and hype of the film. No doubt everyone who visits this site will go and see the film regardless of when it is released but I actually don’t have a lot of Trekkie friends and they LOVED the first film. LOVED it. But if the makers wait too long to release the sequel that enthusiasm will fizzle. As it was, there was going to be a three year gap instead of two (like most films). To push it past that is risky.

ART THRIVES ON LIMITATIONS and DEADLINES. It might not be the worst thing to have to race against the cock.

69. Jesustrek - May 24, 2011

¡ NO ! por favor Orci el JJ es buen DIrector… pero esto se esta tardando mucho, en lo personal prefiero a Jonathan Frakes es ecxelente Dirigindo.

70. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

Lets not forget that the original ST2009 was slated for the previous December. Paramount was quite comfortable with that. According to all TrekMovie reports, ST2009 had more post-production that it ever needed by moving it to the following summer. So the idea that ST can’t “sell” during the winter months, when there essentially isn’t much to watch box office wise, is pretty ludicrous.

71. Charla - May 24, 2011

I say it will still happen, I am not ready yet to concede that the date has been moved to a later date. I am holding on to my confidence in this group to do this. If done correctly, Star Trek could live on indefinitely thanks to Trek 09-

Hey if Harry Potter could do it- Trek certainly can too. Trek has been around longer-and has developed a larger fan base than ever by attracting more and more viewers since this last movie. The franchise could appeal to many more people given the right attention to it.

Trek has been around longer than any of the big franchises because of it’s fanbase, yet has not grabbed the top spot for many years until now. I really believe that can change and the fans deserve to see it get the attention it has earned after surviving almost 50 yrs!!

The studio and marketers need to put in the efforts they put into Batman, and the long list of other franchises. Trek just seems to have come out last in those areas in the past, and now here is the chance to change this!

I love Star Wars, LOTR and even like HP. But Star Trek needs a boost with better franchising from ALL areas, from putting out the movies less than 3 yrs apart, to more choices of quality toys and the works- if 100% were put into the endeavor by all areas and media it could be on top.

By making Trek priority one it would make the fans incredibly happy and in turn it would make the studio, directors, producers and writers equally happy with the monetary returns and satisfaction of making a large group of people both old and new fans happy as well.

With so many people chomping the bit to see this- and the potential earnings with well thought out plans for marketing, etc, etc. Trek could take in millions… millions of fans and billions of dollars if it isn’t looked at like it is just a “tentpole” movie.

Trek has deep roots and has aged well. That fact in and of itself makes it deserve more than what many have given it before, and I hope others don’t forget that. It still has the potential now with it’s new beginning to keep on another 50 yrs. if given the chance.

72. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

@ #67: Iva … “I wish Peter Jackson were into SF.”

HUH? The Lord of the Rings Trilogy & the upcomming “Hobbit” duology doesn’t count as Science Fiction? Peter Jackson has been attatched to the “Hobbit” for 3 or 4 years now as a producer if not an actual director.

73. Iva - May 24, 2011

Science Fiction and Epic Fantasy are two very, very different things.

74. Gary Neumann - May 24, 2011

SUMMER 2013!

75. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

#71: @Charla … WORD!!!

76. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011


Bobby, i don’t expect perfection, just a damn sight less imperfection! :>)

77. jas_montreal - May 24, 2011

Don’t rush it. Delay it.

No need to push it…. Just do it properly. No objection from me.

78. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

#73: @Iva … Im not trying to be difficult. Truyly. Truly. But HOW are they different? From a writing standpoint you still have to have a profound dialouge with the reader; it has to have some emotional connection to the reader. Your descriptions must, at some point, have some sense of realism to it. Finally, ANY story has to have an EPIC sense to it. Be that Drama, Comedy, Romance, Science Fiction or whatever. Otherwise why read it? Why watch it? When Samwise Gamgee (sp? O_o?) looked at Frodo’s descent into hatred and spite, I got upset. When “God” smote Kirk & Spock at the end of STV, it was Dr. Leonard “Bones” McCoy who sacked up and said, *angry face*, “I’D DOUBT ANY GOD who inflicts PAIN for his own PLEASURE!”. That still gives me chills to this day. I can only hope i’m as good a friend to mine as Bones was to Kirk & Spock.

79. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011

68. “It might not be the worst thing to have to race against the cock”

Wow, JKim!! That would be a great new game show….BEAT THE COCK!

80. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

#79: Harry Ballz

Got this irrational desire to say your name like I was doing a Sean Connery/James Bond impression: ” Ballz ! Harry Ballz ! ” Lol …

Your last was funny though. Dont want to know how the game is played. I think i’ll pass on how to … wait for it … BEAT THE COCK! Got too much experience in that already *rim shot* . Thank you, i’m here all night ;) !

81. Iva - May 24, 2011


Emotions are universal to every genre of anything. Two genres being emotion-provoking just makes them both created by a human, not – “the same genre”.

I see you lack the basic differential markers of SF/EF necessary for a discussion of this kind. Feel free to gather some knowledge on the topic first. Wikipedia might be a good place to start creating two lists to be read/watched for consideration.

82. Jordan - May 24, 2011

Disappointing. The writers have been working on the script for a long time. What’s taking them so long?

83. Buzz Cagney - May 24, 2011

A 3 1/2 year gap is rather long isn’t it.
Disappointing that the franchise is being treated, so it seems, as a bit of an after thought.

84. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011

80. ‘Don’t want to know how the game is played”

Johnny, that’s easy! Each male game show participant must unwrap a condom and get it rolled on to a certain appendage before it suffers from deflation!

85. Buzz Cagney - May 24, 2011

Harry, 57 going on 13.

86. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011

Buzz, i’m only 55!

87. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011


See? I was totally being nice to you and you had to totally go and harsh up my aura. I had this whole diatribe typed out, but in the end, the result is that you’re a mean person and I dont like you. Not that that ever mattered to you in the first place. You’re only interested in being right and winning the argument as if that’s the apex of human interaction. You also have some pretty high levels of unwarrented condecension. Finally, what ever wisdon you had to kick out to me you lost at, “I see you lack … ” as if I give a shit what you think. So there you have it. Im rubber. Your glue. What ever you say bounces off me and sticks to you. Neener-neener.

88. Harry Ballz - May 24, 2011


Eloquent to the last, I see.

89. Canon Schmanon - May 24, 2011

I can’t be the only one who saw this coming! It’s disappointing, very much so, but not unexpected. But with extra time to work on the film, my expectations will be all the higher.

It’ll all be worth it if they can get Engineering out of that damned brewery and back onto the Enterprise, where it belongs!

90. Walt - May 24, 2011

Maybe JJ made the sequel already and it’s in post- production! You know how he likes secrets and gimmicks.

91. Anthony Pascale - May 24, 2011

Guys. If it is delayed I will be dissaponted. However, it is not a sign of Trek being dissed. In an ideal world Paramount would have preferred a sequel for summer 2011, but as they also were determined to keep same team then that couldn’t happen as JJ wanted to do his own project (Super 8). Paramount could have forced issue and cobbled together a new team to get a 2011 movie but I am glad they didn’t. Now it’s possible that summer 2012 was too tight and maybe it moves. But I prefer that then rushing it out in 2011 with a new team.

92. Canon Schmanon - May 24, 2011

Yeah, right.

93. Canon Schmanon - May 24, 2011

I mean, yeah, RIGHT! I agree.

94. Iva - May 24, 2011


There are sites with works listed based on their genre, as well as the works which contain both SF/EF elements at the same time and can be interpreted as ambiguous.
You can either look them up and visit the library in order to experience and form an opinion on differences and similarities of the two genres, or not.
It is your choice.
However, without the basic understanding it is not possible to carry on a discussion.
Please refrain from becoming emotional about it, it is distasteful.

95. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

88. (HB),

Hey, the ol’ “Im Rubber Your Glue” defense works every time brotha. Surprised Spock never used it LOL. Seriously, I was totally being nice. I have this way of meeting chicks that are really quite condecending and sarcastic. Those 2 traits are like nails on a chalk board to me. Ugghh.

96. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

94. Again, you have a most shockingly condescending nature.
Just because I have a tendency to fit, for my own reasons, two apparently separate categories into one; it does not therefore mean that I have an inability to understand your reasoning for the opposite. You have a very Hoity-toity attitude which precludes the ability for you and I to carry on a descent conversation. Moreover I doubt you carry on many genuine conversations at all. It is my claim that most of your “conversations” are actually “debates” where you are more interested in being right than carrying on an actual exchange of ideas and beliefs. That, for the most part, is what I find most repugnant about you.

97. Anthony Pascale - May 24, 2011

Iva, Johnny. That’s Enough. Getting too personal. Suggest you both move on.

98. Jack - May 24, 2011

54. What was explicit in the last one? Kirk In his underwear?

94. This is the same Iva who said, pretty harshly and not in these words, that Zoe Saldana slept her way to the part? I call bull$&$t.

BTW, anyone else agree with the Star Trek fading into obscurity thing?

Right now Insurrection and Trek Vi are on different channels on my TV, as is TNG and Voyager. TOS was on earlier.

99. Kryptons First Son - May 24, 2011

I dont understand all this “It’ll make more money in Summer”

The two highest grossing films off all time came out in December. Titanic and Avatar, couple that with the Lord of The Rings films. All of the LOTR films made Hundreds of Millions of dollars world wide. All of them were fall/winter releases

Even the Harry Potter films, if I recall, I went to go see the first three with my parents all near winter time. Winter blockbusters are the done thing now, hell, Even Superman is scheduled for… oh… actually paramount. Competing with Man of Steel may be a bad thing

Its fine, I can wait. Just make the next film as great as the last one and Im there

100. JohnnyB807 - May 24, 2011

97. Will do Anthony … Sorry. Incidentally, I agree with what you said earlier. I’d rather them push ST2012 to December if it means a better script, with the same team & a better end result movie BTW.

101. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

Paramount still hasnt said its moving, Studios have been known to say, hit the road if you cant make the release date. hopefully that wont be the case here. But its not beyond the realm of possibilities where Paramount looks at the winter 2012 release calender which allready has the next bond film comming at thanksgiving and the Hobbit a few weeks latter, wind up getting flashbacks of 2002 when Nemesis opened, and also had a Bond movie opening at thanksgiving and the lord of the rings a few weeks latter leaving Trek clobbered at the box office.
Chances are they wont think well that movie was crappy and thats why it didnt do well, they will be thinking well last time we released a trek movie inbetween a bond film release date and a lord of the rings film release date, star trek( which goes for the same audience) did poorly.

And you know the studio isnt going to want to wait 2 years from now for another trek film.

I have a lot of faith in JJ, Bob and crew in getting all the ducks lined in a row and still releasing a great film if paramount doesnt want to push the date back. I just dont have faith in Paramount in being willing to give them the time needed.

102. Wedge - May 25, 2011

Hope they won’t decide to release it during Winter 2012.
Unless Jay Chou is in the movie, it would flop in Asia.

103. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

Another thing to take into account to is, that Avatar 2 and 3 will be shooting by next year as well, according to an article in yesterdays L.A. Times about The movies being filmed at Manhatan beach studios.

And with Zoe S being the main female lead in those movies, that could definately play havoc with a star treks shooting schedule if they dont start shooting star trek XII this year.

104. StelArian - May 25, 2011

Ohhh gosh…. I was hopping to see the movie before The End of the World! Can Paramount postpone the end of our days after Star Trek’s release? :P

105. Jason - May 25, 2011

Maybe they could have set aside some time in the past three years to work on the movie instead of developing 13 new projects every other week

106. Bugs Nixon - May 25, 2011

Bob, JJ et al – take your time…

Rabid fans – chill….

107. Flake - May 25, 2011

Move it! It needs the extra time, don’t rush it. I can wait! Infact I always thought the holidays was the better time to release it.

108. Hat Rick - May 25, 2011

Que sera, sera. Whatever will be, will be….

To coin a phrase (not).

At this point, whether the next movie is a summer or a holiday release is irrelevant to me.

I’ve been a Trek fan for about four decades. This is a long-term love affair, not a short-term fling. I’ve waited this long for the next Trek movie; I can wait a few more months.

And whether the next movie is a summer “tentpole” or not, in the end, doesn’t matter.

If JJ gives us a great sequel to ST09, then I’ll be happy.

Life’s too short to worry about a matter of months.

Ars longa / Vita brevis.

And wake me when it’s 2012.

109. Jason - May 25, 2011

Summer 2012 is a bit too soon. I would rather wait for a great film instead of seeing a mediocre one. Fall 2012 is already looking full with “genre fare” like Bond, The Hobbit, Superman and the final Twilight, so end of 2012 doesn’t seem too good. A summer 2013 doesn’t look too bad, as the only major franchaise currently with a date is Iron Man 3 (a former Paramount series that’s moving studios).

So, note to Mr. Abrams and company, don’t worry about making a date but rather the best film possible that would be worth the wait,

110. boborci - May 25, 2011

Me and my big f**king mouth.

111. trektech - May 25, 2011

Trek shouldve been a priority not an afterthought. The first movie, flaws and all, did well because it had a team of folks dedicated to it. Now that those folks are ‘popular’ Trek has been relegated to a ‘we will get around to it’. The hardcore JJTrek folks may think thats OK but the general audience out there doesnt have that sort of attention span. To the Supreme Court: If its not going to be a priority then gracefully step aside. The fact that there isnt even a script yet shows that yo are unable or unwilling to DEVOTE yourselves to THIS franchise and instead are simply churning out as much as you can on multiple franchises. Personally Im not invested enough in JJTrek to really care anymore at this point. I gave it a chance and hoped that all of the mistakes made in the first one would be addressed in the sequel but find my hopes and my interest waning. To me this is colossal mismanagement…you brought the patient out of a coma just so you could watch it starve to death.

112. Jack - May 25, 2011

102. Yes to Jay Chou. He would have been a heckuva Sulu, not that there’s anything wrong with John Cho. New character? Surely there’s room for more than one Asian in this thing. And not in the role of “Asian actor” who does mystical martial arts-y stuff and who has a bonsai in his/her quarters simply because we expect it. Make ’em real characters (all the characters). You may have been kidding about Chou, but I like him. He made Green Hornet fairly watchable.

I rant when I’m sleepy.

And as Bob Orci mentioned in one of his enjoyable “oh, yeah?” posts — most or all of these other projects that, as some here have argued, are keeping them from Trek and thus pissing off Paramount so badly that they’ll fire them, are for Paramount. Conjecture presented as fact, even in comments, gets
me grumpy.

113. Trekboi - May 25, 2011

im tired of being treated like a second class fan/viewer.
they just dont care & should have just given the project to someone who would give it their full attention & the priority it deserved & it would be out now instead of being delayed 2 years- they wont release it till june 29 2013 now so four years- no momentum maintained between films & they will have to relaunch the howl franchise again.

F’ing disgusted!!!!!!!!!

114. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

110 For what its worth, I am REALLLY looking forward to Cowboys and Aliens. Definately my most aniticipated movie to watch this summer.
Ford and Craig in the same movie is very cool

115. somethoughts - May 25, 2011

People need to chill, we will get the best star trek ever and a top 10 all time box office hit. When we see the sequel, we will think, this was well worth the wait.

More time means more quality and awesome

116. Remington Steele - May 25, 2011

You mean I wont have to wait that long for GI Joe 2???


Detecting large quantities of Win from this news…..

117. Anthony Thompson - May 25, 2011


That’s rather vague. Care to expand on that comment?

118. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

115 “more time means more quality and awesome”

two words “Phantom Menace”

119. somethoughts - May 25, 2011


I can name more that support my point.

Avatar, T2, empire strikes back, rotj, lotr

120. Remington Steele - May 25, 2011




121. Mark Lynch - May 25, 2011

No surprise here, move along people, nothing to see here….. Apologises to Frank Drebin of Police Squad for paraphrasing!

122. trekpowerman - May 25, 2011


was it befor six month or so, I wrote, they would never be able to be “in time”? but what is really interesting ist how the polls are misinterpreted.

“the only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself”


123. Dom - May 25, 2011

Summer 2013 and a cartoon series in between would be fine with me. No 3D though! ;)

124. Flake - May 25, 2011

We got served up weekly television for 18 years, sometimes two series running at the same time! We got far too much and lots of it towards the end was poor.

This is just what Trek needs right now and for the rest of this decade, a movie every 3-4 years and maybe a cartoon!

We got it good for 18 years and it nearly buried the franchise forever! Be happy! Take your time guys at Bad Robot and don’t worry about random internet nerds like us!

125. pissed off virgin vulcan basement nerd - May 25, 2011

Latest news: shooting starts next week; director will be Mel Brooks.

126. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

119 here are even more movies that had longer gestation periods but were definately lacking in quality and not more awesome.
Kingdom of the crystal skulls (19 years after part 3)
Terminator 3 (12 years after part 2)
Terminator Salvation(6 years after part 3)
Men In black II (10 years after part 1)
Legend of Zorro.(10 years after part 1)

surely you had to realzie when you made that statement that there would be examples to show you otherwise.

127. Darren85 - May 25, 2011

Trek 12 coming out the same time as The Hobbit and Bond 23? It’s 2002 all over again :O

128. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

Mel brooks is awesome! it makes me sad he hasnt directed a movie in over a decade.

129. pissed off virgin vulcan basement nerd - May 25, 2011

I’m going to sh*t my pants when the trailers and clips start rolling. First time I saw Urban as McCoy was one of those moments…

130. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 25, 2011

127 exactly the point i was making in my post further up. Paramount might look at that and get a sense of Deja Vu all over again.

131. somethoughts - May 25, 2011


Theres always exceptions to the rule, I am happy with my statement and stand by it.

If it means waiting another 6mths to a year for a better end product so be it.

132. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - May 25, 2011

I think they could still do everything right and get it out by June 2012. I am already a bit tired of waiting. That said, the script should get as much time as it needs to be done right. I’m not worried about the writers’ abilities, however, as much as the intrusion of the studio suits; they tend to take a good story and ruin it with unnecessary flash. I like ST2009, but it’s important that ST2012 be given more leeway to engage the mind more, as well as electrify the senses….

133. trekker 5 - May 25, 2011

#110,Bob,when I saw this on my twitter I thought,’Oh Lord God!! What has Bob done!!” Then I saw it was only a rumor,and I thought,”Well,its just a load of crap!,thank goodness!!” :) But really Bob,I don’t think anybody is (very) mad at you. :)

134. Gary Neumann - May 25, 2011

Without trying to be insulting or anything, If needed JJ can always give a call to Nicholas… yes Nicholas, he wrote the TWOK script in 8 days. Imagine what would happen if all of you combine forces with him!

Greatest Dialog + Greatest Action = Greatest Trek ever

135. P Technobabble - May 25, 2011

Between the groaning and moaning, the criticisms, the speculations, I think my head is gonna explode.
I think it just did…

Bob Orci – in the words of Monty Python, “Say no more!”

136. Trekman_Dave - May 25, 2011

how about delay the release date but provide us with a directors cut with all klingon/deleted scenes from 2009 trek and intergrated them on DVD/Bluray?

137. Dac - May 25, 2011

Winter 2012 seems plausible. What with The Dark Knight Rises coming out like a week or two after Trek XII, I can’t see Trek having a staying power at the box office. Moving it to Winter away from major competition (Although is The Hobbit launching then? Crap) would be my best bet.

138. Star Trek Sequel Fan Already - May 25, 2011

As much as I will be saddened not to be heading to the theater several times in the summer of 2012 to watch the sequel, I would rather twiddle my thumbs and wait a bit longer to ensure quality.

My vote is not to rush it. I would be more disappointed if I watched it on time but walked out of the theater dissatisfied than to wait a bit longer but walk out of the theater only to head back in and buy another ticket.

139. Seany-Wan - May 25, 2011

@Bob Orci – If it takes time to make a great Trek film, so be it. In this case, the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of th few.

140. Hugh Hoyland - May 25, 2011

Okay, if it is going to be delayed there should be a pay off for the fans. At least reveal who the villian(s) is going to be! We’re starving out here for something, anything new Trek wise. lol

I mean would that really affect the B.O. results?

…I feel like a kid waiting to open my Bd presents. :]

141. Sean - May 25, 2011

I would like them to take all the time they need and make it GOOD! A lot is riding on these three movies to re-boot the franchise so we can perhaps enjoy a new series or two, and some games!

In the mean time, I will have my box sets to keep me occupied…oh, I also have a job and a family haha

142. thechosenonewhowasntseenbygodbecauseofasolareclipse - May 25, 2011

@boborci -> what we trek-fans are in need of is (also) a new star trek series! do you think, you will be involved in one, in the – hopefully – near future?

143. Damian - May 25, 2011

There are some who are complaining that the new team is not giving Star Trek their all, that they are in too many things. But in a sense you had that. When RIck Berman’s crew was in the big chair, that’s all they did. Rick Berman was 100% Star Trek. He did nothing else. Now I liked all the Berman stuff too, but I am a hardcore Trekkie. I am willing to acknowledge that some of the stuff he put out had very little for the casual moviegoer (except for First Contact). It probably would have helped had Berman did some other things while doing Star Trek. At least it would have given him a wider perspective and possibly incorporate that into Star Trek (of course, after 18 years, it’s probably hard to come up with fresh ideas for anyone).

I think it’s good for the new team to have some varied interests. It allows them to make a movie that can appeal to a large audience. The larger the audience, the more chance for future movies and possible a TV series someday. Some of the best Star Trek movies in the past were made by people that recognized the need to appeal to a large audience (Star Trek II, Star Trek IV, Star Trek VI, Star Trek: First Contact, Star Trek).

That being said, I will agree for a TV series, the formula’s gotta be a little different. For a week in and out series, you have to have a team that is devoted to the franchise and willing to spend a great deal of time on it.

144. thechosenonewhowasntseenbygodbecauseofasolareclipse - May 25, 2011

#143 As a Hardcore-Trekkies, too, I think, … well, I have no interest in a success in the big audience. I only want to get my new star trek stuff ;) Aside of thhis, of course, I do agree. And the last movie was great. I just think, it was never so clear, Star Trek is a product that has to make money. No series, because, as I assume, it is no guarantee for “money”, but a movie is. Frustrating. Before a couple of years I did not know anything about “Paramount” and its goal to earn money in a big way. I only knew “my Star Trek”, that I loved. Meanwhile I had to learn, it only and always is about money. It is clear, true and it would be naive to think different. Nevertheless it is sometimes dissapointing.

145. Janice - May 25, 2011

It should be a summer release.
So if summer 2012 is not possible, than I think summer 2013 would be better. I don’t think Star Trek is a winter kind of movie.
Besides, where I live, theatres really cut down their movie times in the winter. Better chance to see it in the summer.

However, if PIKE is there I won’t mind when it gets here.

146. thechosenonewhowasntseenbygodbecauseofasolareclipse - May 25, 2011

I have seen STAR TREK II in winter. It was great! And the possibility of some merchandise under the christmas-tree … ;) I´d love it.

147. Christopher Roberts - May 25, 2011

It’s beginning to look like a real no win scenario…

148. thechosenonewhowasntseenbygodbecauseofasolareclipse - May 25, 2011

i think it is clever to think from the beginning about a date that is not possible, so you will have to talk about it. and talking about it is a great kind of advertising.

149. - May 25, 2011

Ok just to bring balance to this discussion i heard a rumor that Bob is also writing a book on deadlines in the industry.

That may be slowing script development.

150. VOODOO - May 25, 2011

No big deal. I hope they take all the time they need to deliver another great product.

It may even be better for the franchise if the film comes out at X-Mas time or in the summer of 2013. The level of competition in the summer of 2012 is going to be brutal between The Dark Knight Rises, Spiderman, Alien Prequel etc…

On the other hand the winter of 2012 is be tough as well with The Hobbitt, Bond 23 and Superman: The Man of Steel all due for a holiday season release.

From a business (not as a fan) perspective I think I would shoot for the summer of 2013 where the film would crush against lesser names.

151. VOODOO - May 25, 2011

Anybody who knows anything about what happens when films are rushed into theatres to meet financial deadlines (see Godfather III) will be wishing that the film is pushed back as long as needed if the creative team needs extra time to organize and get everything 100%

The last film was pushed back a few months and we all lived. I suspect the same would happen this time around.

152. Alex - May 25, 2011

Usually I wouldn’t mind waiting to avoid a rushed and badly put together product, and I would applaud the care that Paramount gives to the Trek films — for most other films, schedule is king (see I AM LEGEND, X-MEN 3, IRON MAN 2 for more details, amongst countless others). It’s very hard to move these dates around, and there is a potential for less income in December than in it’s current prime summer spot. So hurray…

BUT WAIT. This would be a terrible failure on the part of the filmmakers. Wasn’t it that they were commissioned to write the sequel BEFORE the first Trek movie even came out? And then they were given 3 years instead of the customary two years to give us a sequel? Seems to me that Paramount is doing everything right, and has given these people ample time. There’s something to be said for commitment, when you’ve been given this kind of schedule.

153. thechosenonewhowasntseenbygodbecauseofasolareclipse - May 25, 2011

#151. Mhm. Right. “Generations”-like. They were so quick, they just had not enough time to seam enough uniforms, so they had to get some of the DS9 – Set. Awkward! Not to mention the big holes in the script.

I think winter 2012 is a fair compromise.

154. Hat Rick - May 25, 2011

You know what? I’m starting to think that it’s actually beneficial that JJ and the rest are into other projects.

You know how your minds sort of zones out or stagnates after you’ve been thinking about something for hours and hours and hours and hours…. zzzzz? Well, maybe the 100%-Trek, 100%-of-the-time efforts of Rick Berman were affected by that.

You need a bit of cross-pollination, I think.

Even the Star Wars influence on the last Trek movie might have been a good thing. (Star Wars itself benefits hugely from Trek’s pre-existing success; for one thing, Trek conventions gave SW cons a reference template from which fans could organize. I’m a strong believer that without Star Trek, SW wouldn’t have been half as successful as it turned out to be. But that’s another bit of blather I’ll engage in some other time.)

So, like Trek itself, I’m eternally optimistic.

On the other hand, maybe it’s just me. That’s entirely possible.

155. - May 25, 2011

I still suspect they are filming now and not letting on.

Then again i also think they have Bin Laden in a dungeon pulling fingers and toes off as they extract information.

156. Hat Rick - May 25, 2011

^^ Into other projects, that is, to a certain extent. I should have been more specific. Incidentally, JJ was already deep into a bunch of other stuff — Lost being an incredibly good example. Also, there were rumblings of interest in a sequel to Cloverfield (which I would see, definitely).

157. - May 25, 2011

The they in my first sentence would be different to the they in my second. Otheriwise all is forgiven for stalling on the film.

158. aaronite_1 - May 25, 2011

Let’s not forget that JJ *did* deliver the goods on time with a very similar similar time frame last time around.

The script also had “time pressures” last time (thanks to the writer’s strike). Maybe this team simply perform well under pressure!

Paramount sat on the completed movie for an extra 4 – 5 months purely for strategic reasons (box office).

They had faith that they had a much-needed tentpole “summer blockbuster” on their hands after viewing the completed movie.

Keeping my fingers crossed for summer 2012 :-)

159. Hat Rick - May 25, 2011

155, despite what the sequence of messages shows, I wasn’t actually responding to your message; I was making a correction to my own posting.

Your hypothesis is an interesting one, BTW.

160. - May 25, 2011

I did pick that up.

161. Buzz Cagney - May 25, 2011

#142 why are you speaking on behalf of all fans? Presumptuous aren’t you! :-P I’m in no need of a new TV series.
I am, however, in need of a good movie delivered on time and properly developed and realised.
Its not as if they haven’t had enough time already.

162. jas_montreal - May 25, 2011

@110 Boborci

LOL. Thats what happens in the big leagues bob. Now a ton of sites have caught this news report. So you and JJ BETTER make a announcement soon for the sequel, because Trek fans cannot take this any longer.

@ Anthony Pascale

Bob just swore on the msg-boards. Is that even allowed? Or does bob get the special treatment? LOL

163. VZX - May 25, 2011

I wonder if Orci got yelled at by Paramount. He spilled too much info.

Anyway, I don’t like the December 2012 release either. Too much competition from Man of Steel (Superman) and The Hobbit. Star Trek should be released in May. Thats the best time, as was proven already. I vote for a May 2013 release, and then the third could be May 2015 to make up for lost time.

164. Charla - May 25, 2011

#110 Bob- Hey, don’t get upset- you are doing the best you can. Most of us realize that- and appreciate that fact. I’m sure it is difficult especially when others are wanting/demanding your talents for this and that project. (both studios and fans)

We know you have and are giving your best to the script of Star Trek. but some of us also know all to well the politics in business-in all business it’s all about the bottom dollar. It is with the powers that be, the ones that you and the other writers may have to answer to that I have issues with.

I can’t imagine the pressure you and the others have been under to complete the many projects you juggle daily, and that you are all able to do this without difficulty under normal circumstances. But what is different is the way businesses now conduct themselves. It is about churning out as much product as possible regardless of the quality of the product.

It’s happening with all businesses it seems. Apparently, the movie industry is no different, considering what is asked of the talented people such as yourself and others involved in this line of work. It’s all about deadlines, something that I’m sure many of us can relate to and at times detest.

I would hope that others could see that you have been very considerate in involving us in a way that no other major film writer would. Thank you for indulging us in great conversation regarding our shared admiration for the Trek universe.

Please don’t feel regret for coming here and expressing/sharing your thoughts with us. If it requires more time from you and the others, then so be it. We have other things to look forward to from you and your colleagues.

My point earlier, shorter, is that I hope that Paramount and whoever else on the business end gives Trek as much if not more opportunity to become more than a “tentpole” or “popcorn” movie. I think with this fresh start it has been given, it could continue it’s long held place in our history of entertainment.

In the end, as long as you are happy with your work, and you and the rest of the crew, and the film doesn’t suffer because of the demands placed upon you, we are all good here.

I hope to be able to speak for some if not most of us here that we will be fine to wait. We appreciate you not forgetting about us when your time is so valuable with the demands placed upon you and your co-writers. I’m sure at times the tasks may feel overwhelming.

I hope everyone here will be a little more understanding, and that above all, that you know we really care about you, your co-writers, and Trek. I hope you have no regret coming here and continue to do so.

Thank you for your time, Bob and don’t let the negativity get you down. You and your team are incredible and I (and many other people) look forward to many years of great writing from you.

Group hug! … …. Quit that Harry…. *smacks hand away from Dee* lol

165. Sam - May 25, 2011

Delays are bad idea; sends the wrong message and the more distance between movies, the more the general audience forgets.

And holiday 2012? Going up against The Hobbit? That didn’t work so well for another Star Trek film in 2002.

166. Desstruxion - May 25, 2011

Maybe they need the extra time to build an engineering set worthy of the Enterprise.

167. Mike Poteet - May 25, 2011

I would much rather them take their time to get it right than rush it out to meet an announced deadline.

168. Tony Todd's Tears - May 25, 2011

This news is very sad, I think I’m going to Cry!

DAD! We’re trying to rescue you!!

169. It's Not Real, Folks - May 25, 2011

Good things come to those who wait!

170. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

I knew it!!! Folks, remember…the pushed the last one back too. I knew this wouldn’t be a summer release. No surprise to me at all.

171. Harry Ballz - May 25, 2011



172. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

And, Bob Orci, don’t sweat it bro. Just give us the best you’ve got. I can say I’ll wait for quality. No pressure man…I think the fans are with you guys on this. Just give us a great film.

173. AdamTrek - May 25, 2011

A delay doesn’t bother me at all. I work, have a family, have a life, and there are plenty of things to do and other forms of entertainment that I like and will enjoy before and until the next Trek film.

Godspeed everyone.


174. Anthony Thompson - May 25, 2011

168. SciFiGuy (and others above with the same misconception)

Star Trek did NOT get pushed back because of production delays! It was already completed by the original due date. Paramount pushed it back only because they felt it would be a great film for the summer.

175. iamnotyou - May 25, 2011

does really anyone think, we would influence the date of the movies premiere? never ever we can influence something like that. they want to know our opinions… do they? or not? or does it many ANYthing, if all trekkers would say “we want it on may” or “june” or so? it only gives us a good feeling … as if we COULD influence change something like that, but… we cannot.

it makes fun, anyway.

176. iamnotyou - May 25, 2011

#173 “…does it MEAN anything…” not “does it MANY anything…” ;)

177. The Squire of Gothos - May 25, 2011

As I suspected… The Dark Knight Rises is already filming for a Summer 2012 release. Trek isn’t ready to go yet.

Winter 2012 or summer 2013 make the most sense in terms of release date.

Sux that we have to wait though…

Looking forward to it!

178. Raktajino - May 25, 2011

I’ll wait until 2013 as long as there aren’t any frickin’ lens flares!

179. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 25, 2011

#110 – boborci… do not get upset about it… we’ll be supporting you… LOL… just make sure that “detractors” are wrong! … ++LOL

:-) :-)

180. dub - May 25, 2011

I’m with those who don’t mind trading a delay for a better movie. The only thing that makes me nervous is the principal cast. I worry that careers will take off and they’ll want to walk away from Trek. For the casts that started in TV, they almost always jumped at the chance to be on film. This is a cast that started on film, and at least 2 of them have potential to be mega stars in the coming years. That’s really the only thing I see causing this trek film series to crash and burn. Delays, who cares. The people who can’t stand the wait (myself included) will be just as excited if you release it in 2012 as they would if you released it in 2020. Just write great scripts, keep the great cast and make great films.

181. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 25, 2011

#51- Harry Ballz …

I suspect that the fishery will be harder from now … the sea is not for fish, I think! … LOL

:-) :-)

182. Commodore Mike of the Terram Empire. - May 25, 2011

Well. I would prefer Trek being out on time. But i want the Quality to be there. So if it is delayed by a couple of months then so be it. But I hope for Trek 3 that they get on it right away for 2013 of 14.

183. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

#178 — Good post and I agree wholeheartedly. I’m not sure what the contractual obligations are for this current cast. I would hope they are all contractually “locked down” for a trilogy at least. I wouldn’t want to see (like the did with James Bond and Batman) a bunch of different people play these characters. And even though I enjoyed this new cast in JJ’s film, I still prefer the original cast because those are the people I grew up with and idolized. They are irreplaceable. As much as I enjoy the new cast, this cast will never have my heart like the original cast.

184. Damian - May 25, 2011

178–The cast is contracted to do 2 more films. I am not sure that means they are definitely locked in or can they get out of it due to certain reasons or after a certain time (for example, George Lazenby was contracted to do 7 James Bond film, but decided to drop out after the first–sorry, I’m a huge Bond fan too).

185. trekker 5 - May 25, 2011

#167,Its Not Real,Folks,I pray God your right!!!

186. On Vacation With Landru - May 25, 2011

I think a lot of the momentum for the sequel is long gone for non-Trek fans. If the sequel had come out this year, Trek could have really come back and been popular like it was when people found out TNG was actually pretty good!

With the delay they’re going to have to start over from scratch. I don’t think anyone would be surprised to see it delayed yet another full year. I highly doubt they would release a Trek movie in December ever again after Nemesis bombed because that’s the way Hollywood thinks. They wouldn’t taken into consideration all the reasons that it bombed.

I also think a lot of the ‘feel’ of Trek is going to be affected by the delay. They won’t have the same feel as the rest of Trek because they’re just on a movie set . It worked in the last film because they were just getting together. Not sure how the next movie is going to ‘feel’.

I’m sure some remember me posting about my mom and her battle with cancer and the likelihood of her seeing this film. So yeah, not happy about the possible delay which I think most people already felt was likely fact as we saw the team working on projects other than ST. And truthfully, aside from the fact that I’d love to see the movie with my mom before she dies, I’m really starting to feel rather apathetic towards it. I mean, I’ll likely enjoy it when/if I see it, but I’m not longer grasping at every scrap of information that comes out.

187. The Great Bird of the Galaxy - May 25, 2011

‘I weep for ‘Star Trek’, like I would weep for a brother…

188. John - May 25, 2011

It looks like it’s time for another reboot!

189. Jesustrek - May 25, 2011

110.- Honestamente aburre si JJ no confirma nada, ¡vamos es tu trabajo defiendelo! agrego comentarios en español…

190. callmeal - May 25, 2011

Star Trek began as a TV -series. Roddenberry took the risk to lose in many ways. His – in that time – “new” ideas, his modern point of view… I am sure, everyone here knows, what I mean… made his attempt to show “his” version of the future very risky. Possibly it would just fail. But the people in that time were ready to take a risk – much more than today!

In my opinion, “to take a risk” was always a part of good Star Trek. Another important addition of the “Star Trek recipe” was the development of the characters. This is very difficult in a movie-series. If you cannot see every week how the members of the ship find their place in the crew, if there are more than two or three years between the “shows” (how great ever the show might be), after all it won´t feel “complete”.

The point is: It is allright to give a movie 2 – 3 years. It just feels wrong, because Star Trek – a TV show since its birth – is not on the air in between!

191. Snugglepuff - May 25, 2011

It’s not holiday, it’s called CHRISTMAS. Every time I hear holiday, it sounds so stupid b/c that word describes a generic day.

192. Rola - May 25, 2011

Good grief, too much gloom and doom.

As a fan, I want a good movie. Period. I would rather wait for a good ST movie than have a hot pile of lens flared fecal matter onscreen.

It has been my belief (I know I have nothing to back it up) that the success of the next two movies will play a significant part in whether another series gets made in the future. Maybe, maybe not.

But I STILL want a good movie. Take the time and get it right.

193. weyoun_9 - May 25, 2011

189 – Really? Seriously? THIS is the platform where you’re going to rant about this? Let me help you clarify this a bit:

A) The “Holiday season” for movie releases begins at Thanksgiving, which is a holiday that is not Christmas, and typically carries through New Year’s…also a non-Christmas holiday.

B) In addition to Christmas, Thanksgiving, and New Year’s, there are also Hannukah, Kwanzaa and the Winter solstice in that time period…and possibly more than I have listed. That’s, at least, five other non-Christmas holidays at that time.

C) I looked up “holiday” at There were 7 definitions, including this one: a religious feast day; holy day, especially any of several usually commemorative holy days. The word “generic” was not in any of the definitions.

D) Using the term “Happy Holidays” does not, in any way, negate the power, joy, or importance of Christmas. What it does do is acknowledge that other people may not be Christian and that this time is special for them as well. It is a term designed to be inclusive of everyone. it is NOT an insult to Christmas or those that celebrate it.

Anthony…I’m sorry to have to go on like that. As you may have guessed, that’s a hot topic for me.

194. jas_montreal - May 25, 2011

This is becoming a real mess.

Bob and the team OR Paramount should issue a statement about the rumors. EVERYONE in the movie industry is talking about this. Its giving ppl “bad vibes” about the sequel (a la Transformers 2).

Coman Guys, Get your game on….

195. trekprincess - May 25, 2011

I hope it does come out June 29 2012 :):)

196. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 25, 2011

#167 – It’s Not Real, Folks …

Who are you? … HOPE??? … boborci??? perhaps??? …or … CHARADE??? …. ++++LOL

;-) ;-)

197. trekker 5 - May 25, 2011

#193,Trekprincess,me too!!

198. Charla - May 25, 2011

#184 I’m so sorry to hear your mother is so ill. Thoughts and prayers to you, her and your family.

199. Ryan Gromm - May 25, 2011

Call me crazy but I think everyone is crazy on here for acting like it’s going to be the end of the world if Star Trek isn’t crafted into another major franchise for the next ten years…

Come on people! You had 40 solid years of Trek related incarnations. What more do you want?!? And a solid feature film with Leonard Nimoy coming out of retirement to give a nice nod to the original series fans.

I’m just happy we got one more film, and I happen to know how Hollywood works in terms of business… If not for the fact most of the major studios belong to investments on Wall Street, there never would have been another feature length Trek film greenlit to begin with.. Why? familiar titles and characters are now considered the safe bet for investors in films.

If we get a second modern-day Trek film, I’ll consider it as a bonus.

Nuff said

200. rvp - May 25, 2011

@35 “Leave a long enough delay and Hollywood will come out with another reboot. Might be worth the wait.”

And in the new reboot they’ll all be teenagers attending San Fran High For The Young and Gifted, Kirk to be played by Alex Pettyfer.

201. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - May 25, 2011

How’d I know…?

Oh well, I’ll give ’em as long as it takes to make a good film. That’s all I’m asking for.

202. LCDR T'Pau - May 25, 2011

If the next JJ Abrams Star Trek film’s release is delayed to the November-December 2012 time-frame, it will likely butt up against the first of the two Hobbit movies that Peter Jackson is already shooting in New Zealand. Not a good move. If memory serves, “Nemesis” came out the same time as the final Lord of the Rings film, “The Return of the King,” and did not do well at all — part of it was the film itself, and part of it was the competition it faced for box office. The result was the lack of ANY ST films until JJ Abrams’ 2009 reboot attempt.

I’m just sayin’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .

203. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

#189 — I agree with you, bro!!! :-)

204. Anthony Thompson - May 25, 2011

197. Ryan Gromm

You’re crazy. ; )

205. Chris Doohan - May 25, 2011

Possible delay!!! Oh no, that’s surely the end of Star Trek. :)

206. Mark Lynch - May 25, 2011

Just what is it that you know you aren’t telling us Chris? ;-)

207. Basement Blogger - May 25, 2011

Okay, Bob Orci spiil the beans. (@ 110) We, Trekkers who have enquiring minds, want to know. Who killed Kennedy?

What? Oh, this is a Star Trek site. Okay, Bob, does Kirk have a chance with Uhura?

208. SoonerDave - May 25, 2011

I feel quite vindicated.

This does not surprise me in the least. Some here insisted the thing could be done in a turnkey fashion, or that the script was being done “in secret,” when in reality it was becoming evident the June 2012 release was unrealistic months ago.

I maintain that Paramount waited too long to schedule the sequel’s release, telegraphing that it was important, but not prime, to Paramount’s long-term plans. Now, with the delay came too many other projects for Abrams and crew, and Trek’s scriptwriting was the victim – all because it was clear from Paramount, despite its June 2012 release date, that Trek was expendable.

And that’s exactly what it has become: Expendable. Now, at best, we can only hope to see a Trek movie *three and a half years* after the one of the most successful franchise reboot films Hollywood has seen. Leave it to Paramount to drop the ball. Can’t blame Abrams and crew – they just worked on what others told them (directly or indirectly) more important.

209. BringBackKirkPrime - May 25, 2011

I predicted there would be a delay two years ago. It’s a long wait, especially with no t.v. series, which I had hoped they would start based on the first movie’s success. I wish they would film this movie and the third at the same time to insure there won’t be so many years in between each…

210. BringBackKirkPrime - May 25, 2011

By the way, more time doesn’t necessarily equate to better quality. These creative people are used to deadlines and will make it work in whatever time frame they are given.

211. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

I’ve always been a fan of shooting movies back to back. Look how fast they churn out those Harry Plopper movies! It’s because a.) they are able to write them quickly since they are based on books and, b.) they don’t want their actors to age too much in between films. I’m sure there are other reasons but if they can churn out those GD Harry Plopper films that fast, you Woukd think they could produce Trek films on a similar schedule. HP are every bit as lavish films as Trek!

212. P Technobabble - May 25, 2011

I don’t think Star Trek will have to worry about competition, or loss of momentum, or any other end-of-the-world scenarios. This is Star Trek, for god’s sake!!

213. Adolescent Nightmare - May 25, 2011

Some fans will always want what’s best for themselves rather than what’s best for Star Trek.

214. Commodore Mike of the Terram Empire. - May 25, 2011

#211. That is actually not a bad idea. Bob and the court can write an Epic Star Trek adventure with not just 2 Movie but 3 parts like Lord of the Rings. Then we can have Star Trek for 3 years straight. I think it would work.

215. SciFiGuy - May 25, 2011

I wish they would!!!

216. On Vacation With Landru - May 25, 2011

I honestly don’t think fans would be so up in arms if it didn’t feel somewhat like Trek was being constantly pushed aside for other projects when a sequel was announced while the last movie was still in the theater.

Trek will always need to worry about momentum and competition – especially when its just a move – because not everyone out there is into Star Trek. Then of those that are into Star Trek there are many who aren’t into a reboot of TOS. That isn’t a large built-in audience. The last movie had to appeal to a broader audience and the momentum with that broader audience has now, at the very least, slowed. While I would most likely see a movie just because its “Star Trek” (I did suffer through Nemesis, after all, poor Tom Hardy), I can name at least 10 people I know who won’t. I can also name at least 5 who would need to be won over BECAUSE it has “Star Trek” in the title.

This also isn’t the first time ST hasn’t been on tv while we were waiting for a sequel. What would have been really awesome if in the film they had introduced some minor characters we could care slightly about, stuck them on a different ship so we could have a tv series with them. ST does better on tv, too, I think.

(And thanks #198, I try not to be a downer, but I feel I need to express my mom’s feelings, too, since she watched the show when it originally aired. She even told me as a child that she knew while she was pregnant with me that she wanted to make sure I liked ST. LOL)

217. Thomas - May 25, 2011

I’ve posted to this effect on previous threads but it definitely bears repeating here:

People here are concerned that Trek is falling by the wayside because the producers aren’t giving their total attention and effort to it. That is, it’s not the only project they’re working on. Frankly, why should that be so? Just because that’s the way it was before? We got a lot of Trek out of that old system but by the time it ended, ratings (and general interest) had plummeted, stories had become retreads, and Trek as a franchise was worn out. JJ, Orci, et al. should be (and are) taking full advantage of their ability to get projects made in Hollywood which, as I’m sure Bob Orci can attest to, is not easy to do.

After the enormous critical and financial success of ST09, Paramount is not going to let this franchise grow big and bloated just to fall by the wayside again. If anything, Paramount and CBS seem to be trying to avoid the over-saturation of the 90s. People here are complaining that if there is too much time between movies, people won’t want to be bothered with it. What about The Dark Knight Rises? Here we stand three years out from TDK and another year before TDKR is released and that is a hugely anticipated movie. But according to the “too much time” line of reasoning, people won’t see it because there been four years(!) between movies and they might not remember why they liked TDK so much. People remember the movies they enjoy, and a lot of people enjoyed ST09. Besides, when the time comes, Paramount will do everything in their power to remind them why.

218. Will_H - May 25, 2011

With as popular as the last one was I’m surprised that they’re putting as little effort to getting this one done on time as they are. Didn’t the first script take like 4 months to do? I don’t see how anyone can talk about rushing the film with this kind of gap, especially how quickly the sequel was green lit. I personally don’t care if JJ directs, in fact I’d kind of like someone more familiar with the franchise to direct it. The best movies (with the exception of TWOK) were directed by Trek vets. I say throw Frakes back into the directors chair and have JJ produce it. Either way, a 3 year gap is a long time and I think will lead to less hype and anticipation. The delay will only make it worse, if it happens.

219. dmduncan - May 25, 2011

@110: Eh, you mess with the fan, you get the blades.

220. AJ - May 25, 2011

This is called “bad management” on the side of CBS/Paramount. JJ’s participation is NOT critical to Star Trek. Most Americans do not even know who he is, and if you name his films, MI3 is the best he’s done. and most wouldn’t remember anyway.

ST09 was certainly a great film with flaws which had JJ’s full attention, JJ got the accolades, lens flares aside, and he is now aligned with his idol Mr. Spielberg for “Super 8,” and if it’s good, he’s good to go to direct films outside of the “genre” category.


But, I care more about Trek than I do about JJ. It’s clear that JJ has no interest in stewarding Trek. That “role” seems to have fallen to Bob Orci, who is busy with Alex Kurtzmann writing hit films and developing hit series in a very difficult market.

“Trek” needs Bob right now, because, otherwise, we have nobody.

Bob: What the heck is actually going on?

221. MikeTen - May 25, 2011

I don’t care how long they take as long as we get a real engineering set and a original story.
Trek 09 was basically a mash up of Wrath of Khan and Nemisis. Instead of Khan/Shinzon chasing Kirk/Picard it’s Nero chasing Spock.

222. Christopher Arnold - May 25, 2011

I don’t mind if the release date for the 12th “Star Trek” movie gets prosponed because a good deal of time to get all the needed stuff is important to take into consideration. Besides, moving the date can help the film avoid facing a heavy box office war in summer 2012, even a war with other Sci-Fi/Fantasy films (including “The Dark Knight Rises” and “The Amazing Spider-Man”).

223. Tiberius III - May 25, 2011

To be honest, I really don’t care when Pseudo Trek comes out. Any delay just goes to prove that the producers don’t care about the fans. It’s all about exploitation. Not many old TV shows left, Hollywood.

224. John - May 25, 2011

@221: So much was taken from Star Wars (1977).

225. Quatlo - May 25, 2011

By the time the supposed sequels are finished, it will be time for another layoff and re-boot due to an aged, tired and expensive cast and crew who care about nothing but their salaries.

The voyage does not continue.

Trek’s history of failing to fulfill it’s potential due to ineptness and greed continues.

226. NuFan - May 25, 2011

Wow, the old-timey fans are having conniptions. I thought we were supposed to be the impatient generation. So it’s okay for Dark Knight to have a 4 year gap and The Hobbit to have a 9 year gap, but Star Trek will be forgotten if it’s not rushed out every two years? You’re not being very consistent with that opinion. And not very believable either.

227. somethoughts - May 25, 2011

Film part 2 and 3 back to back and release it 2 yrs apart.

Grand Slam, 6hr epic, just do it.

228. jas_montreal - May 25, 2011



229. somethoughts - May 25, 2011

At least bob knows ppl have fallen for startrek reboot and are demanding more!

230. somethoughts - May 25, 2011


No worries the ppl that stay on earth underground will get another reboot of star trek and the folks that ascend into heaven in our makers ships will get to watch pine and crew ;)

231. Daoud - May 25, 2011

“110. boborci – Me and my big f**king mouth.”

farking? you like Fark?
forking? thou speakest with forked tongue?
filking? you sang it convention folksong style?
fraking? you did it BSG style?
flaking? your mouth was dry?
fabking? you’re king of the Beatles?
fadking? your mouth is following trends?
flyking? your mouth is a beast at fishing?
fitking? Jack Lalanne wished for your mouth.

232. jas_montreal - May 25, 2011

Where’s Garek When you need him?

He would definitely get this project moving ! With all that knowledge of the Obsidian Order’s Methodologies.

233. Anthony Thompson - May 25, 2011

226. NuFan

I look “old-timey’ on the outside, but I’m young at heart. BTW, you don’t sound very NU using a word like “conniption”. I think that word last rolled off the tongue of my grandmother! LOL!

234. Basement Blogger - May 25, 2011

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) did not go up against LOTR: The Return of the King, (2003) T’Pau (@ 202). Sorry to correct you, and please do not make me fight to the death. It did go up against Harry Potter: The Chamber of Secrets, James Bond in Die Another Day, and here’s s where you might have been mistaken, it went up against LOTR: The Two Towers. (Wiki link)

If the new Star Trek movie comes out in December 2012, what’s the competition? Well according to ComingSoon and looking at November and December, the holiday movie period. Star Trek would go up against The Hobbit, Superman, Another James Bond movie, and there goes the teenager demographic, another Twilight movie. Better get younger actors for the 2012 Star Trek. I keeed. I keeed.

Nemesis went up against these films.

Movies for late 2012 holiday period.

235. Snugglepuff - May 25, 2011

@ weyoun_9 so why is it then that EVERY TIME any business says the release day is on HOLIDAY it’s actually Dec. 25 which is CHRISTMAS??

236. Quatlo - May 25, 2011

@ 226: Us old-timey fans are impatient, for good reason. We are old, and our friends have been dropping like flies for the past 10 – 12 years. Give us a break, EH.

@ 227: Good idea, it can work, but for some reason the industry just doesn’t like doing things that make good sense in many instances.

@ 228: Dang tootin’. December next year will be kinda busy.

One advantage of being an old fan is we don’t take things too seriously.

237. Bucky - May 25, 2011

Supes and Hobbit are in December. Launch Trek the first week of Nov to kick off the winter movie season and it’ll be all right.

238. Show me the lens flare - May 25, 2011

Good grife. I don’t mind if its pushed back to winter 12. As long as it out before 12/21 or 21/12 for those in the uk i don’t mind. Be just my luck to be sat in the cinema and the lights go down and that naughty robot comes on the screen and BANG. The world ends. I suppose i can keep myself going with Fringe and Hawaii 5-0 till then. Has Hawaii been renewed for a 2nd season Mr Orci. Maybe you could try a time travel story in that. Maybe do something like trial and tribulations.

239. Marcus - May 25, 2011

Can you imagine the marketing tagline for STAR TREK at Holiday 2012:

“This Holiday Season – Deck The Halls & Battle Stations!”

Which pretty much describes every December at the malls…. :-p

240. p'trick - May 25, 2011

these guys did a GREAT job with their TREK2009 reboot. the cast is in place and ready to go to work. i’m truly thankful for their success.

nevertheless, it’s time to find a new production team to move the franchise forward. there’s too much unemployment in hollywood too, and these guys appear to have more than enough work already.

clearly the loyalties of the current director/writers are not with the franchise but instead to keep this TREK-property sitting on their shelf for whenever it works out for them to attend to it. it’s growing quite tiresome for fans like me to hear the film-crew constantly reminding us that they’re fans and that they appreciate us fans. but then fail to nurture TREK.

i have to agree that they’ve effectively cooled the HOT-factor that might have driven the TREK-revival into a continuing success. by the time TREK reappears on the screen again, it’s already old-news.

too bad – so much potential

241. BrandonR - May 25, 2011

@240 — I don’t really understand where you’re coming from with that. They’re not delaying because they’re doing other things, they’re actively working on the sequel. I’d rather they spend more time on it than less time.

That said, re: the main article, I wouldn’t be surprised if it ends up being Summer 2013 if they do intend to move it. Star Trek 09 was a huge summer blockbuster, so why move it to the holidays when it will undoubtedly make less money?

As another poster said, if they do move it to the holiday season in 2012, odds are they’ll move it back to 2013 — just like December 2008 became May 2009 for the first one.

242. Mark Lynch - May 25, 2011

I wonder if Bob Orci will be laying low for a while for the dust to settle? :)
I for one am happy to see Star Trek get pushed back to a November/December 2012 release. Gives them enough time to actually put together a good film.

Just two things I really, really want….
No lens flares
Good looking engine room

243. Mark Lynch - May 25, 2011

Actually there are other things I want, but can’t be posted here… ;)

244. p'trick - May 25, 2011

241 – thanks for reviewing my comment and sharing yours.

honestly, from my review all 239 comments before me (yeah, it’s a slow day here in the office – lol), i don’t think it’s a surprise to anyone that TREKdom has partially divided between the Roddenberry-TREK, the Berman-TREK & the JJ-TREK. for obvious reasons, there’s more collusion between the Roddenberry & Berman crowds. but also strong contention among those fans as well (calling all Berman-haters).

the JJ-TREK fans are clearly loyal to the current production-crew. and often also appear dismissive of the quality of past-TREK. my point here is that i’m seeing a pretty clear pattern of defensiveness of those fans that REALLY like TREK2009. as if there’s no-one other than JJ & crew that could produce good TREK. and, obviously, Paramount agrees with you. if they were more confident about the popularity of TREK, they’d not put the franchise on hold simply to ensure the participation of JJ & crew.

i don’t share that. starting with Roddenberry, Justman, Coon, Fontana, Gerrold, Bennett, Meyer, Berman, Moore, Bragga, Baer, Piller, etc – TREK has continued under the care of many masters in the past. other talents can assume the reign of TREK and actually PRODUCE something.

i do agree with those that say that a lot of this TREKgrief would be abated if they were to announce a pair of sequels to be filmed-concurrently and released in quick order.

245. Harry Ballz - May 25, 2011

241. “they’re actively working on the sequel”

Yes, NOW, but they had 2 years to get an airtight script ready that wouldn’t have to wait to be “reviewed”!

Prep work could be taking place now as we post!

246. Steve - May 25, 2011

But Harry@245 – they weren’t required to deliver a script prior; besides, they had other projects they wanted to pursue. Who can blame them for seizing the opportunities available to them?

247. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 25, 2011

I voted that I preferred that Star Trek be released in June 2012 – the fact is that JJ Abrams has been quoted as saying that there are no plans to change the release date. That is a FACT that we do have at this stage. Everything else is conjecture.

However, in the earlier poll, I voted for the most likely release date to be December 2012, given the apparent delays that seem to be occurring.

For me, it would not matter when Star Trek was released, I would go see it, irrespective of what else might be screening. Of course, having it released in December does make it fall into the category of being possibly a Summer blockbuster down here, as well as the Christmas/Holiday season. Works for me.

I would propose if there has to be a delay, that the release date is (NZ) 15 December or (US) 16 December (my birthday is on the 17th). A very nice birthday and Christmas present. We will be seeing the Hobbit as well – my better half probably has all the books that J R Tolkien ever wrote and has read LOTR (as well as watching the movies…) and the Hobbit several times. Very cool indeed!

#237 A November release date would be good as well – less waiting time.

248. Dyson Sphere - May 25, 2011

I really really want it to come out on time but I could think about waiting if the engine room didn’t look like a brewery. The engineering of trek was always impecable – make it so Mr. Orci.

249. Punkspocker - May 25, 2011

Im trying to stay positive. I Just can’t understand why Trek isn’t the most important thing in the universe. Paramount needs to get off it’s arse. Jack Ryan-big yawn. GI Joe shmoe. Grrrreat big load of crrrrap(say it like Scotty)

250. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 25, 2011

I’m not sure what Jack Ryan has to do with this. Paramount rearranged Chris Pine’s schedule so that he could do the Star Trek sequel without there being any filming clash (apart from the fact that the studio wanted the Jack Ryan movie rewritten). Paramount also want Chris Pine to be available to play Jack Ryan early 2012, which does give the Trek producers a deadline for the main filming of Star Trek to be completed. If they do start filming in September, then the filming aspect (where the actors are needed) should be finished in time for Christmas/New Year holidays.

Please – no more delays!

251. Jack - May 25, 2011

110. That’s what you get for trying to appease the fans. Don’t make the same mistake with the script.

252. Wes - May 25, 2011

No delays! I am waiting very vigorously for this movie to come out. J.J. and his team can do it, I’m sure of it.

Here is what I think of the potential delay until Holiday 2012:

253. dmduncan - May 25, 2011

Visiting this site has probably made Bob second, triple, maybe even quadruple guess himself and what he ordinarily would have done following his instincts with less fan consideration.

That at least shows care…and perhaps a desire to remain an ordinary mortal in touch with reality external to a part of the country where that is not always so easy to do.

Cut Bob some slack. If anyone wants some real stuff to worry about I can offer a few dozen things for starters, none of which are related to Star Trek.

254. Red Dead Ryan - May 25, 2011

Well, no matter what time they release the movie, it’s going to go head-to-head against other blockbusters. Summer 2013 will be just as crowded as 2012.

2013-tentative releases:

“Fast And The Furious 6″

“The Hangover Pt. 3″

“Pirates Of The Carribbean 5″

“Justice League”

“Captain America 2″

“Thor 2″

“X-men 4″/”X-Men First Class Pt. 2″

“Avatar 2″

Another Pixar movie

“Die Hard 5″

“Iron Man 3″

“Inception 2″


“Transformers 4″

255. Harry Ballz - May 25, 2011


Steve, here’s the thing….when Trek 09 was a big hit the ‘boy wonders” were given the choice of how long for the next one. THEY picked 3 years down the road. An eternity to everyone else, but, hey, they were in the driver’s seat. THEY GOT TO CHOOSE THE TIMEFRAME. If you have the luxury of choosing your own extended deadlines, the least you can do is MEET THEM!

256. Red Dead Ryan - May 25, 2011

Also, this sense of entiltlement that some Trek fans feel is absurd. Paramount doesn’t have to give us more “Star Trek”. Bob Orci can take all the time he feels is neccessary to write a GREAT script. He and the other members of the “Supreme Court” have lives outside of Trek and are writers who need other things to write to sustain themselves. They have careers to fulfill and families to feed. Plus they have other interests to pursue.

This sense of entitlement permeating from a whole bunch of you is disgusting and disgraceful. We have had it pretty good for a long time, and all you can do is bitch about how the new movie is going to be postponed a little bit longer or how Bob Orci isn’t staying up 24/7 working on the sequel. DISGRACEFUL! F*CKIN’ DISGRACEFUL!

257. Red Dead Ryan - May 25, 2011

And I hope they DON’T film Treks 2 and 3 back to back. The producers of “Lord Of The Rings” were able to do that because those movies were based on existing novels and had one continuous storyline.

The writers of “Star Trek” don’t have that same luxury. Plus the actors want to pursue other projects.

258. Jack - May 25, 2011

256. Agreed. 257. I can’t think of any good sequels that were filmed back to back, or at the same time. The Matrix sequels = ugh.

The whining and theorizing is, surprisingly, even worse in the comments on the deadline site.

Frankly, I’m a little, not sure of the right word here… disappointed that Anthony was plugging this as an Exclusive! It was a comment on a fan blog. This isn’t Entertainment Weekly.

259. dmduncan - May 25, 2011

Well, if you are going to shoot back to back sequels you should probably be thinking in epic terms, with a story that takes that long to tell or at least have two really good but separate stories ready to go, one perhaps following the circumstances of the previous.

You could do it with Star Trek, but you have to plan it that way and I think Bob has his hands full just coming up with a sequel.

260. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 25, 2011

Harry – How do you know that the Bad Robot got to choose the deadline or that it wasn’t just consigned to them? As I mentioned before, some of the writers/producers have been busy doing other Paramount projects, eg the making of Welcome to People. Ultimately, it is Paramount’s decision as to if and/or when a movie gets made.

(According to producer Bob Orci, no release date has been announced for Welcome to People. I hope post-production is going well and I hope that a release date will be soon forthcoming and that will include Australia and NZ cinema release dates. I am looking forward to seeing this film).

261. VOODOO - May 25, 2011

People grow up!

Paramount could have done what they did in the past with Star Trek and handed over the keys to mediocre writers and directors (remember the days of Stuart Baird (had no idea what ST is) and Jonathan Frakes directing ST films?) in order to make financial deadlines?

Instead they chose to keep continuity of the series going with truly talented people who are in demand… These people are in demand for a reason. They are good. We don’t want ST to fall back into the hands of hacks who turn out mediocre products. These guys have earned the extra few months/year that it may take to make a product they can be proud of. Films that are rushed (Generations) always come out half baked.

We all lived when ST 09 was pushed back a few months and as I suggested in another post I suspect we will live IF the films is pushed back a few months/year this time around.

P.S. Don’t criticize guys like Bob Orci who came here and interact with us and more importantly tell us the truth about what is going on.

262. p'trick - May 25, 2011

I wasn’t personally advocating back-to-back sequels. As i mentioned earlier (240 & 244), my preference is for the current film-crew to do what filmmakers typically do. They PRODUCE movies.

These filmmakers do indeed produce product – lots of product. It simply appears not much of it is STAR TREK. It includes everything from Super 8 and Hawaii 5-0 = but not much TREK.

If they don’t have the desire to focus on TREK, added to Paramount’s nearly 50year neglect of TREK, then’s it’s time for a new production-crew with the proverbial fire-in-the-belly to renew excitement about the future of TREK.

263. Jack - May 25, 2011

Let’s not put the cart before the horse here. Despite outlinegate, we don’t know yet that they’re delaying the darned thing.

And this whole “better filmmakers would…” stuff is hooey.

How many genre projects sat, or are still sitting, in development for years under various big name writers, directors and producers? They got the first one made. It wasn’t perfect, but it could have been a CGI-heavy bore with forgettable young stars and no heart.

Have they delayed this thing before this?

264. Chadwick - May 25, 2011

110. boborci – May 25, 2011
Me and my big f**king mouth.

Oh Bob, lol, sorry I don’t mean to laugh, caught me off guard.

…..I am really looking forward to C&A this summer :D

265. - May 25, 2011

Just throw me a fricken bone here.

266. MJ - May 25, 2011

If we have to wait another six months, then there sure as hell better be a new engineering section.

267. Aurore - May 25, 2011

Ah….Mr. Orci.

You and your big phoquing mouth…(“respectfully”).


268. BrandonR - May 26, 2011

@244 – good post. That said, you’re leaving out another important group — the ones who don’t feel that division who, IMO, are a silent majority. There are people, such as myself, who like and respect Roddenberry Trek, Berman Trek, and JJ Trek.

Roddenberry’s Trek is the definitive Star Trek, there’s no denying that, and it’s the tent pole that all Treks after it are judged by. Berman Trek continued the Roddenberry legacy, while building upon it, for two decades.

JJ Trek recognized, rightly or wrongly, that in order for the message of Star Trek to have a broader appeal and impact more people, it would have to actually appeal to more people than just Star Trek fans — which is what previous movies always failed at, as they only really appealed to Trek fans with the exception of Khan and First Contact. JJ and co. have also said that while Star Trek 09 is more action packed in order to draw more people in, and that it was focused on rebuilding the relationships between the characters (particularly Kirk and Spock), the sequel will be more of the classic Trek allegorical message. I can respect that; draw people in and then give them the big message. From both a financial and storytelling standpoint, that logic is sound. You can agree or disagree with that, as it’s not the only way of going about it, but it’s hard to deny that the approach isn’t a good one even if you prefer a different approach.

I also don’t think JJ and co. are the only ones who can produce good Trek. My post was explaining that I didn’t think it was fair to negatively fault them for the time it’s taking, because I’d rather they take more time than less time in order to get the best script they possibly can. It’s not a matter of putting the franchise on hold, it’s a matter of making the best possible film they can — which is why the 2009 film was pushed back from December 2008 to May 2009 (that and, admittedly, the potential for major $$$$$$).

Now, let’s look at the length of time between past films:

TMP to II – 2 and a half years
II to III – 2 years
III to IV – 2 and a half years
IV to V – 2 and a half years
V to VI – 2 and a half years
VI to Generations – 2 years
Generations to First Contact – 2 years
First Contact to Insurrection – 2 years
Insurrection to Nemesis – 4 years
Nemesis to Star Trek – 6 and a half years

Now, if the film sticks with its current release date, it will only be slightly above the typical wait time of previous films (2 and a half years). We can also see that the longest wait, 6 years where there was no Trek produced for 4 of the years, didn’t adversely affect the franchise. In fact, Star Trek 09 was popular enough to make it a major summer blockbuster and the most profitable and popular of all the Star Trek films to a general audience. I’m not concerned about people losing interest in the franchise because of a little extra waiting time.

Additionally, from 1987 to 2005, 4 Star Trek shows were on the air while 6 Star Trek films were produced. IMO, the fault for Trek not being produced fast enough isn’t with the film crew, it’s with the fact that there isn’t a television show to keep Trek fans engaged and to keep Trek somewhat on the public mind during the waiting period.

What Star Trek needs isn’t films to come out faster, because I’d rather they take their time as I said before, but for Star Trek to also air on its home medium: television. There needs to be a television show, whether in the prime timeline or the new timeline. I’ve always felt that the Star Trek films, while a franchise in and of themselves, were secondary to Star Trek’s home venue of television.

@245 – as the article states, prep work is taking place now as we post based on the script outline. They’re doing things that they don’t need the script for. As I also said in my response to 241/244, I’d really rather they spend more time than less time. I’m patient, I can handle the wait, so it doesn’t bother me.

@253 – well said. It’s a double-edged sword. On the one hand, Bob is able to engage with fans and get their input, but on the other hand that (as you said) can make him second guess what he feels might be right for the story in favor of trying to do everything the fans want. Maybe we’re both wrong here and he’ll correct us, but I have to imagine there’s somewhat of a psychological conflict there.

269. Aurore - May 26, 2011

@267. Aurore.

It’s a **rumour**.My money is on Phil. Enough said.


270. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 26, 2011

261 I would hardly call Frakes a mediocre director.

271. Jim Nightshade - May 26, 2011

harry ballz, cock fight kinda sound related-mel brooks–star trek cockfight men in tights-uniforms women too—-hmmm could be a cockatiel fight aspca might not like that harry—my birds name is bebe geheh–
sounds like sir robert is regretting giving fans some info–reminds me of a lil info(knowledge) being a dangerous thing–the bottom line to me–paramount n us trusted orci n jj last time n look what we got-a movie so good paramount wanted it delayed to summer as a tentpole flick–i say trust em again n chill out–but even if it is delayed–movies do sell in dec–even tron legacy made 350 plus mill–my only concern is if jj is powerful enuf to move armagedden back a year–does jj have good connections with god?–if the movie is great it will be a hit in summer or winter–if a movie is not great guess what-it wont be a hit–obviously jj n bob n company are not careless rush job filmmakers they will do the movie n us fans justice n spend the time they need to make it right-which could be a shorter amount of time or not dur to many factors–chill out n trust them–i know i do–carry on mr bob orci n thanx for caring bout trek and us fans–we luv ya–

272. a Fan of Star trek - May 26, 2011

i just cant understand one thing…if the group of people who r going to be involved( JJ and co) is known, the scheduled release date for the sequel is known and ofcourse all other related dates like script completion,pre,post prod etc can be calculated..all these are known way back in 2009-10 itself..they knew the people to involve and probable release date..
in this case why does JJ keeps overloading himself and delaying the Trek 2..won’t paramount have in its contract some kind of penalty clause to penalise if the individuals r delaying even though details r given well in advance to them..
How can they allow JJ to take commitments after commitements when it directly impacts trek 2

I dont know who is at whose mercy?

273. Damian - May 26, 2011

244–I tend to agree. I sometimes feel like I’m the minority here who happens to like the original series, The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise, and all 11 movies (including the 2009 movie). It almost seems some here feel it is sacrilege to like Rick Berman produced Star Trek alongside Abrams’ movie (ironic in the fact that Bob Orci has stated time and again that he himself is a fan of ALL Star Trek).

There’s almost this attitude that if you liked Berman Star Trek, you can’t possibly like Abrams’ Star Trek, and vice-versa. Well, I do. At the very least, had there been no Berman regime, Star Trek probably would have died with Gene Roddenberry (people sometimes forget that the Next Generation finally started coming into it’s own when Berman started exercising more influence on it–it was floundering a bit when Roddenberry was in charge).

274. P Technobabble - May 26, 2011

We do live in an “instant” society. People want things right this minute, they don’t wanna wait. Fast foods, drive-thru pharmacies, instant coffee, instant karma… Patience and attention spans are becoming extinct.
If the boss gives you five projects to work on he would know that if you rushed through them to get them in that day, your work would probably be lacking. So he might prioritise them, based on whatever committments he has made, sp upi can work on one at a time… and he’ll be expecting your best for each project.
Cut the Court some slack, give em the time they need and you’ll get their best.
Now, I really must get back to my own project that is about a year late…

275. P Technobabble - May 26, 2011


“sp upi” should have been “so you”…
one little mistake…

276. VOODOO - May 26, 2011

# 270 The 76th Distillation of Blue

“I would hardly call Frakes a mediocre director.”

I would. Did you ever see Star Trek Insurrection? It’s the worst film in the entire series. Even worse than Shatner’s ST V which was another example of Paramount going the cheap route and handing the keys over to someone who was not qualified to direct a film in a major franchise.

I’m not saying Frakes he is a bad director, but a project like Trek 09 seems to be out of his scope. He seems more at home on the small screen. I want ST the be in the hands of the best people available… For example, I noticed that Steven Spielberg chose to work with J.J. Abrams and not Jonathan Frakes on his new “Super 8″ project.

277. denny cranium - May 26, 2011

This is what happens when the cast and crew get successful.
Scheduling becomes a huge issue.
I’m not excited to wait but want a good movie all the same.
This is why Trek needs to be a TV show.
3 year waits between movies makes it tough for Trekkers

278. Phil - May 26, 2011

I think a few people have lost sight of the fact that the contracts these guys have with Paramount requires then to do a set number of projects, and not Star Trek projects exclusively. There has been a lot of ink spilled about how Berman and Company became stagnant just doing Trek, well, this is the trade off. As long as the next film is quality stuff, it will happen when it happens….

279. SciFiGuy - May 26, 2011

Regarding Frakes: Two words — Insurrection and Thunderbirds.

280. - May 26, 2011

Phil, i don’t think anyone has lost site of that. Simply that expectations have been set up and now it looks like some expectations relating to time frames may not be met.

Speculation too but been so close to the bone discussion will happen.

281. SoonerDave - May 26, 2011

Some here just don’t get it. All artistry and creativity aside, moviemakers practice their trade for the same reason (most of) the rest of us do – to make money. And the people writing the checks dictate what’s important.

Paramount, nobody but Paramount, put the Trek sequel on the back burner by waiting three years for a release date. Some here have said “well, there were only 2-1/2 years between some of the TOS cast movies,” but get this – that six-month difference is a 20% increase in the delay – and now we’re looking at 3-1/2 years! And in that time, other folks with willing checkbooks gave Abrams the chance to work on other projects, which of necessity became more important.

If you’re Paramount, and you’re looking at what makes money, and you then decide to push Trek back at the end of your “hot” list, there must be a reason – that the other things in their pipeline were and are more important – can make more money for less investment. Perhaps its because Trek, despite its grand success domestically, didn’t fare quite as well internationally. Who knows.

The point is that its pretty hard if not impossible to blame Abrams and/or his writing team for the delays. They didn’t set the schedule. Paramount did. That they’re having trouble finishing out a story and/or script from the “70-page outline” is merely part of the writing process, and Paramount knows that’s the case for nearly any film, yet took the risk of pushing it back so far anyway.

Ultimately, I think it is positively tragic for the franchise that so much was invested to create such a great quantity of momentum merely to throw it away. And if you truly believe that there will be no loss of that momentum whenever they finally get serious about releasing this film, you’re fooling yourself.

282. VOODOO - May 26, 2011

Soonerdave# 281

“Ultimately, I think it is positively tragic for the franchise that so much was invested to create such a great quantity of momentum merely to throw it away”

I agree with every thing you mentioned. As someone who wants to see the series thrive, the loss of momentum is the only thing that really concerns me. ST was on fire for the first time in 15 years when ST 09 was released. I think it is a legit question to ask if the “buzz” from the last film with the general public will still be there next after such an extended wait between films.

While I can’t point fingers (we have no idea who is to blame for the wait) it seems to me that Paramount would have made the sequel more of a priority, especially when you consider the series had been commercially dead at the time of the 09 release.

283. SciFiGuy - May 26, 2011

On this momentum thing: the “loss of momentum” is just supposition and conjecture. The fact is, if they make a great movie people will go see it. That will be true if it comes out next year or two years from now..whatever. Just admit it some of you: you’re just impatient and want to see a new film right away — I get that. Instant gratification and all that. But it really is just that simple.

284. SoonerDave - May 26, 2011

@283 – SciFiGuy

You may not realize it, SciFiGuy, but you argue against your own point. You make the case that loss of momentum is merely “supposition and conjecture,” implying it’s an illusion, yet you proceed to point out that the broader fan base is “just impatient.”

If there’s no momentum out there from the ST09 success, who’s around to be impatient? That impatience is a practical manifestation of that momentum. If people aren’t eager and excited for the sequel, then there is no momentum.

Sure, many of us here will the sequel whenever its released, but part of that momentum was the broad-based “non-traditional” Trek fan that ST09 captured in no small measure. Waiting so long for the sequel brings to mind the old adage, “out of sight, out of mind.”

285. SciFiGuy - May 26, 2011

My point is, since the films aren’t directly connected — like say, Lord of the Rings — familiarity isn’t really a necessity for the next film to be successful. If it’s good, it’ll bring people in to see it regardless of when it comes out. I’m just not convinced “out of sight, out of mind” applies here. And I say that because look at the span of time between Nemesis and JJ Trek…it didn’t stop people from going to see it. The “momentum” will cone from folks like you and me — the fans. Frankly, we’re never going to carry along the casual fans/crossover audience until release day. They aren’t sitting around waiting and counting the days til the next Trek film…lol! It’s only the true fans who are doing that.

Having said that — sure, I’d like for the next one to come out ASAP if doing so results in a quality film. I’m all about the quality…

286. Thomas - May 26, 2011

285. SciFiGuy

I agree completely with your post. As I said in my previous post (# 217):
“People remember the movies they enjoy, and a lot of people enjoyed ST09. Besides, when the time comes, Paramount will do everything in their power to remind them why.”

287. Red Dead Ryan - May 26, 2011

This thread is why Trekkies are seen as a joke in the media.

There’s a better case to be made that the lack of merchandise related to “Star Trek” and “Star Trek” is what is hampering “momentum” as opposed to the sequel being delayed. Playmates, who did a lousy job with the last movie, decided to drop the license for the sequel. There was no making of book. The “The Art Of” book should have come out BEFORE the movie did. Not only that, but Art Asylum, which puts out some great stuff, often can’t deliver on time or cancels some items altogether. There hasn’t been much in the way of non-fiction Trek books until very recently.
And there hasn’t ever been much in the way of a good console video game. There was an opportunity for that when “Star Trek” was released in 2009. Paramount dropped the ball that time too.

Ultimately, a great movie will (usually) bring back the momentum, while a bad one will (usually kill) it. But often it is what is done in the interim that can often add more interest to the sequel. And that is merchandising. It’s a great way of promoting something to all demographics. I hope they do a better job of this next time.

288. Shannon Nutt - May 26, 2011

I want a Christmas Day 2012 release! If only so I have an excuse to get away from the family!

289. p'trick - May 26, 2011

#268 – thanks for your thoughtful & exhaustive reply to my comments. Actually, I share your multi-TREK sentiment. Since Roddenberry’s original TREKflavor is usually present in most filmed incarnations Even enjoy TREK-Phase II (Crawley’s web-based series) despite it’s often inexplicably dreadful acting. LOL.

Personally, i don’t perceive the success of TREK to be limited the volume of it’s box-office numbers or the vastness of it’s popularity. I believe it’s a fact that each and every previous TREKfilm has profited it’s producers, its stars and the studio. I’ve never bought into the idea that TREK would only be a success. Even the quickly-cancelled TOS, deemed a failure because it failed to reach a mass-audience, proved itself to have a lasting impact. Inspiring generations of scientists and creative minds. To me TREK was already successful. It can only be considered a failure by TREK2009 standards if one values TREK the way a movie-studio would – based on financial-calculations & popularity-contests (can we make as much as STAR WARS or other blockbuster-franchises?).

And i don’t intend to dispute your facts at all, simply to add to those thoughts. Since I don’t think it’s clear that the writers are spending akk that time on TREK, however. And i can’t say how devotees of the JJ-Crew can suggest that the universe is so devoid of good TREKstories, that it’s necessary for TREKfans to be “patient” for writers to “take their time”. I’d have to presume that if the franchise was handed over to them, it was because they already had a vision for the series and were fresh with ideas? And not because in all these years not one of them apparently come up with a story?

It’s worrying because, as i previously described, it limits the creative minds that could create a successful biennial film-franchise. It continues the baffling Paramount-history of dispensing with the volumes of outstanding TREK-stories available from the book-series, comics & even fan-fiction. A bit of shopping around through those stories, some relatively cheap acquisitions by the studio of the literary-rights and bring in a screen-writer to polish the dialogue. Instead we once again appear captive to TREKscripts-by-studio-committee that suggests that only the mind of a few writers have any creative ideas.

This film-series has ALL the breaks too. Firstly, they can blatantly remake previous TREK episodes. And using the alternate-timely ruse most cleverly concocted for TREK2009, they then can alter elements of those plots to make the stories fresh for trekkies and more exciting for new fans (who’ve likely not viewed TOS).

The old films were burdened with the TREKbackstory already being developed. The latter TREKfilms hit the screens while TREKseries were churning out dozens of TV-episodes and so on. So those writers deliberately had to avoid redoing the same material from those series.

And, of course, there’s the usually tepid Paramount response to the TREKfilms. Even though generally cheaper to produce than other Sci-Fi films, the studio was usually disappointed in the failure of most of those features to achieve SUPER-profits. So the studios held up production until they were sure there were a few dollars they could squeeze from the TREKfranchise. Obviously now, they know a quick sequel would be successful, but they, like some fans, appear to believe that TREK is only as good as the 4 men currently at the helm of the franchise.

Finally, the past TREKfilms also were star-vehicles for the lead-actors – Shatner/Nimoy & Stewart/Spiner. Scripts had to meet their approval and the stories basically crafted around developing their characters, concluding with them saving the day. The new TREKfilms started by signing relatively-unknown actors for a series of features with the apparent goal of expanding the appearance of the secondary characters to make TREK more of an ensemble series. The current films don’t need to be so precisely developed around satisfying the stars egos. I always wonder how much better the past TREKfilms might have been if the writers were encouraged to come up with the best story possible using the entire set of characters.

290. p'trick - May 26, 2011

oh no, didn’t realize how “extensive” my screed was there until it actually posted on the site.

i apologize to everyone!

291. Phil - May 26, 2011

I’d argue the point that the movie franchise has been handed over to JJ and crew. The trend these days seems to be “three and done/reboot”, and I’ve not heard anything to suggest that current form of Trek is going to be any different.

292. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 26, 2011

276 Did you see First contact? one of the best of the series.
How do you know that it wont be the same with J.J. who is also primarily a Television director.
And that star Trek XII ends up being no where as good as star trek XI

293. SciFiGuy - May 26, 2011

#289 — A movie that used all the characters to full advantage was made — it was called Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. :-)

294. The 76th Distillation of Blue - May 26, 2011

#270 your for an example doesnt make any sense. J.J. wrote super 8, he took that to Amblin, and spielberg signed on. why would you even try to compare that saying well spielberg chose to work with J.J. and not Frakes on super 8. like it was spielberg who choose for j.j. to direct it.’
J.J. wrote super 8,it was his project he just went to spielberg to executive produce him for it.

295. SciFiGuy - May 26, 2011

#292 — One great film doesn’t make a great director. First Contact was excellent, but I don’t know what happened to Frakes as a director after that. In hindsight, he probably should have passed on Insurrection and Thunderboyds…

296. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 26, 2011

Another Deadline article states that Bob Orci says that there is no script, just a detailed 70 page story outline. A few weeks ago, Bob told us here that the story/script was at least 70% complete. Which is it or is there both – 70+ story outline as well as script which is 70% complete? I am hoping the answer is – both! That would make sense.

Bob – please. I am getting confused here, especially when you say that once JJ confirms that he will be director, along with getting Paramount’s green light presumably, that everything else will happen quite quickly from that point on.

Right now, I think that until there is an official announcement from Paramount or JJ Abrams or other Star Trek producer or other official representative, then what we are reading is just Deadline journo wank.

297. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 26, 2011

#279 – “Regarding Frakes: Two words — Insurrection and Thunderbirds.”

And two movies I have enjoyed watching on a number of occasions!

298. THX-1138 - May 26, 2011

Movie schmovie.

I want a TV series to watch. Set 80 years after TNG/DS9/Voyager. Aboard the Enterprise. Explore the universe and what it means to be a human amongst all the various races. How far has the Federation of Planets been able to explore? Who are our new friends? Who are the new potential threats? What amazing and fantastic things have been discovered?

Get the best and brightest new writing talent to work on it. Do it the way Star Trek deserves to be handled on TV. Learn from what has come before with Trek on TV. And learn from other high quality sci-fi series like Babylon 5, and Moore’s BSG. Firefly too.

Don’t get me wrong, the movies are fine. But they seem to be too cumbersome for real Star Trek style storytelling. They get bogged down in visuals and micro-scrutiny of fans, myself included. Series Trek seemed to have the flexibility to find it’s way and Trek fans are intelligent enough to take the good with the bad. And maybe even learn to love some of the bad.

When Trek was on TV and it was good, it was spectacular.

299. p'trick - May 26, 2011

#293 = agreed. TREK4 allowed the full-cast to shine. but it was pretty much the exception to the rule there.

#298 = agreed. When done well, TREK is unique,outstanding television. At their best, TREKfilms are only reasonably good cinema and rarely as good at the best episodes of the TV-series.

In this instance, the filmmakers have the option of remaking any of the stories from TOS and even characters from the future TREKs since the timeline has altered. Making it easier to proceed promptly with new TREKfilms. If they were really trying.

Ultimately, great fellows like Orci join us around here in fandom. And i’m sure, when it’s permissible, well get updates that will explain some of this. And, of course, any press is good press as they say. So this growing “controversy” obviously creates some publicity of its own, obviously (as i’m about the 300th person posting!). Hahaha.

300. Anthony Thompson - May 26, 2011

Just as I had suspected he would, Bob is lying low. But I’m still puzzled by his one comment above (at #110). He has not exactly had loose lips. What has he supposedly divulged that is shocking or secret? I’m scratching my head…

301. Jack - May 26, 2011

296. Howdy, Rose. I think Deadline’s outline thing is entirely taken from Orci’s post on another thread here

They COULD be prepping from the outline (scouting locations, doing concept art, figuring out roles to cast) while the script gets fine-tuned and/or awaits the director’s input or rewrites or whatever. So there could be both. I, of course have no idea — total speculation, which I complain about when other people post.

I think it’s actually a good sign that they’ve been crafting it for awhile. To me, anyway, it suggests that it’s not some rushed out amalgam of studio demands and “wouldn’t it be crazy if” scenarios or a cobbled together mash up of spec ideas or rejected earlier scripts.

302. Jack - May 26, 2011

300. That they have a 70-page outline…

Anthony turned it into an “exclusive!” used words like “admitted” and followed up with asking whether they can make the release date if they only have an outline right now. It turned up in a Star Trek Movie google alert and a few stories were written, and the story has become — Orci Admits: Trek Script Only Outline. Summer Release Impossible, Insiders Say. Fans Outraged, Betrayed.

All from a little comment on a fan blog, presumably intended to make fans feel better.

303. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 26, 2011

Bob Orci told us here on this site that they were doing “soft prep” or am I mistaken?

Anthony? Bob?

304. Jack - May 26, 2011

From this site, May 22, linked to in story above.

Yesterday we reported that Star Trek sequel producer (and possible director) JJ Abrams had confirmed that the writing team of Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof were still “working hard” on the script for the Trek film planned for June 29, 2012. News of the unfinished script over the last couple of months has spawned much talk and speculation with Trek fans. Today in the comments section, Orci responded by dismissing notions that their original draft had been rejected and explained what was really going on, saying (in part):

“Just been waiting for JJ to be free to really decide if he likes the story and hear his suggestions before we finish the script. Once he says go, we’ll have it in no time. Meanwhile, our outline is detailed enough (70+ pages!) to do some prep :)”

305. Jack - May 26, 2011

303. From a hitfix interview, and Anthony said it had been confirmed.

“We are still working on [script] iterations. We have enough stuff that we are able to start a little bit of a soft prep. We can have designers working on stuff. There are things we know for sure we want to do. But in terms of the script and the dialog, that is something we continue to hammer out.”

“We are able,” and “can” doesn’t mean that any prep had actually started yet, then (April).

Maybe more’s been revealed since…

306. T'Cal - May 26, 2011

“298. THX-1138 – May 26, 2011
Movie schmovie.

I want a TV series to watch. Set 80 years after TNG/DS9/Voyager. Aboard the Enterprise. Explore the universe and what it means to be a human amongst all the various races. How far has the Federation of Planets been able to explore? Who are our new friends? Who are the new potential threats? What amazing and fantastic things have been discovered?

Get the best and brightest new writing talent to work on it. Do it the way Star Trek deserves to be handled on TV. Learn from what has come before with Trek on TV. And learn from other high quality sci-fi series like Babylon 5, and Moore’s BSG. Firefly too.

Don’t get me wrong, the movies are fine. But they seem to be too cumbersome for real Star Trek style storytelling. They get bogged down in visuals and micro-scrutiny of fans, myself included. Series Trek seemed to have the flexibility to find it’s way and Trek fans are intelligent enough to take the good with the bad. And maybe even learn to love some of the bad.

When Trek was on TV and it was good, it was spectacular.”

What he said!

I would really have no problem if JJA continued making nuTOS films that focused on Kirk, Spock, and Bones. Meanwhile, turn the TV part of Trek over to those who know how to produce a good ensemble cast. I’d love to see Ronald D. Moore or a team of Frakes & Burton produce a post-NEM era show.

307. MC1 Doug - May 26, 2011

Hey, the best of all of the TREK movies was also a holiday release! 1979 was a great year signalling the rebirth of “Star Trek.”

308. NuFan - May 26, 2011

306. a post-NEM era show

Yeah, that would be a hit. Thank god no one listens to the fans.

309. Jim Nightshade - May 26, 2011

i disagree nufan–i think any trek series or movie could be a hit if done correctly–settings may initially attract, or not attract but any show with right cast n great writing n efx will do good–

310. P Technobabble - May 27, 2011

Somebody once said, “Writing is re-writing.”

311. Hateya - May 27, 2011

Take your time, guys, and do it right.When I need a Trek fix, I pull out my TOS dvds and the 2009 film is permanently on various computers. Best of all, my big ol’ brain came with an IMAGINATION as an accessory. A great movie in 2013 sounds good to me. Star Trek won’t be losing momentum with this fan of both the old and the new.

312. 12YearOldTrekker - May 28, 2011

It pains me to say this, but I want it to come out summer 2013. I’m a big trek fan, and found the first movie great. The second one needs to be a lot better, like “The Empire Strikes Back” to “A New Hope”. If you need something to fill the time-frame, then make another show. Preferably a show using TOS characters. And to cash-in on the kid demographic, you could animate it with a QUOGS theme. Hopefully not a kiddie show, but rather like “The Clone Wars”. If that happened, I would actually have a reason to watch television. Sorry, I’m getting sidetracked…

Overall, take your time, and make a great movie. After all, the 2009 reboot started production in 2005. Just, make something worthy of comparison to “Wrath Of Khan”…

313. Harry Ballz - May 29, 2011

These wunderkinds had 3 full years to crank out the next movie. More than enough time to “get it right”.

314. Red Dead Ryan - May 29, 2011


They also had other projects to complete. And besides, I think we can wait till summer 2013. I’m in no hurry. I’d rather they take their time.

315. the Quickening - May 30, 2011

I wouldn’t say Abrams and company are the best people available. They are “hot” right now, but hardly the best. Moderately talented, yes. I can’t think of one really good film any of them have been involved with… not one. Their movies are either over-rated: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 and STAR TREK ‘ 09; mediocre: THE PROPOSAL, REGARDING HENRY, FOREVER YOUNG, MORNING GLORY; dumb-fun and juvenile: THE ISLAND, EAGLE EYE, again STAR TREK ‘ 09; or dreadful: GONE FISHIN’, ARMAGEDDON, THE LEGEND OF ZORRO, TRANSFORMERS–and two of these were considered the worst film of the year in the respected year they were released. Actually, I think they do their best work for television: LOST and FRINGE.

Hollywood–particularly Paramount–has been trying to sell Abrams as the next Spielberg for years, and so far I’d say it’s a bust. The guy is a television producer. I think the only reason MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 and STAR TREK ‘ 09 got the positive reviews they did was because to some in the media arena, he’s a critic darling and they are hoping he will spring forth as a good director–so he is getting a pass to see if it’s true and they are holding back the knives to see if it happens. Well now with SUPER 8, which he’s producing with Spielberg for Paramount, he is better able to be sold that way. How convenient and cynical is that?

What really burns me regarding his involvement with TREK is he’s always proclaiming he’ll do TREK if it has a good script, rather than just committing up front, and then helping with the writing and producing to make it a good story and movie. I’d rather have someone–TREK fan or not–who looks at the concept and project, takes an interest, makes the commitment and goes after it aggressively to make it great. The way he goes about getting involved with TREK is so…. god, I hate to say this, cowardly. He’s just not on fire with the franchise and I think Paramount needs to find someone who is. There are many producer / directors / writers out there who would do a better job based on their past work anyway. TREK really doesn’t need him.

316. Aurore - May 30, 2011

Still here,Mr. Orci, Roberto?

You don’t mind my calling you Roberto ,do you?…..You do.
Then,Toto , maybe? No? I understand.

So, Roberto,are you happy with your consultants, so far?


317. Charla - May 30, 2011

I wouldn’t blame him if he didn’t come back here for a while. There have been many negative remarks concerning this and it has got to be getting old.

Know one here knows what Bob and the others have been through or are still going through, and to make assumptions they are blowing off Trek is wrong.

Though I would like to see/hear more enthusiasm from J.J. myself, (and this at best is second hand also) unless it comes directly from them, I won’t rely on “Deadline” or others information.

Hang in there everyone, I’m sure it’s gonna work out for the best-

And thanks Bob for interacting with us. I (and others here) hope to see you back here when you feel up to it again.

318. Aurore - May 30, 2011

Yes. There have been many negative remarks.
Fortunately, he can handle criticism. Even if it is not such an easy thing to do,
at times:

(Some of his comments, on this ancient thread, are, in part, responsible for the
fact that, my expectations are high, for the sequel.).

319. Bob Tompkins - June 2, 2011

Hate to be an ‘I told you so’, but……… is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.