Orci & Kurtzman: Star Trek Sequel To Shoot January 2012 + More On Trek From Lindelof & Cho | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Orci & Kurtzman: Star Trek Sequel To Shoot January 2012 + More On Trek From Lindelof & Cho July 24, 2011

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

More news on the Star Trek sequel has emerged from SDCC. Co-writer/producers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman say they are now hoping to start shooting January 2012. And for his part, fellow co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof revealed the sequel is "consuming" him currently and the team will not settle for anything that isn’t "mind-blowing". And Star Trek actor John Cho has no idea what is going on. Watch SDCC videos from each below.   

 

Orci & Kurtzman – Star Trek sequel targeted to shoot in January 2012

While a delay is expected, Paramount has yet to make an official announcement for a new release date for the Star Trek sequel (currently scheduled for June 29, 2012). But on Saturday night at the the San Diego Comic Con Cowboys & Aliens premiere, Trek sequel co-writer/producers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman made it clear their schedule has already moved as they talked to Cinepremiere about when they formed the idea for the film and when they plan to shoot it:

Orci: We had ideas when we did the first [Star Trek] movie – we always think it is bad luck to think of the sequel – but we had some ideas for the sequel way back then and actually we are doing some of those ideas now and pitching and pitching them to the studio and JJ [Abrams] has been developing them with us. The idea’s that we had have stuck so we feel pretty strongly that we have an amazing story and we are going to be shooting very soon.

Q: How soon?
Orci:
Hopefully…
Kurtzman:
…Early next year.
Orci:
I think probably in January, but every time we say "we will be shooting any second now," we are not, but it is going to be soon.

Orci is right about the moving target. The original target was May or June 2011, which later became August, then September and most recently reported as November. With shooting in January of 2012 there is no way the film can be released by the summer of 2012, leaving holiday 2012 or summer 2013 as possibilities.

video:

Lindelof "consumed" by Star Trek sequel  + Dark Knight is standard

In a pair of San Diego Comic Con interviews, Orci and Kurtman’s collaborator Damon Lindelof revealed just how hard they are working on the sequel and how they are keeping a high standard. First up in comments to with OTR:

Lindelof: Right now my days and nights are consumed by Star Trek 2. We were supposed to dive in on that as soon as I finished Lost, but JJ [Abrams] was so busy on Super 8, Alex [Kurtzman] and Bob [Orci] had their own sort of empire to manage. Now finally the four creative minds that made the first movie what it was are all back in a room together and that was the only way we wanted to do it. And we have been doing it and I think that the bar is very high. We are not going to be satisfied with "oh this is fine." If an idea isn’t mind-blowing or super-cool or doesn’t present the Star Trek universe in a way you haven’t seen before, but you also have to pay homage to the fans who have stuck with this amazing franchise for 40 years. So it has been very very tricky, but I think we have finally broken through and figured out what the movie is going to be.

Video:

And then with G4:

Lindelof: We have been working very long and very hard on the scirpt. It is our challenge, we have to make it better than Trek 1. We hold The Dark Knight as a sequel that really transcended the original and now that we have gotten the crew together the "what happens next?" question is something that we are taking really seriously. It has been a lot of fun but it has been really hard.

Video:

John Cho not sure what is going on

Finally here is SDCC video from IGN with Star Trek’s new Sulu John Cho (sporting a mustache for his role in Total Recall) talking about the Trek sequel and revealing that the actors have still not been told when they will be needed on the set:

Q: When will the Star Trek band will get back together?
Cho: I’m not sure. I know we are getting back together. Scribes are working writing this thing. So we will see. 

Q: Do you think Sulu will be rocking that sweet ‘stache?
Cho: I don’t think so. Not my choice.

Video

More Star Trek 2 Videos

 

 

Comments

1. Harry Ballz - July 24, 2011

Well, let’s see what happens……

2. Lostrod - July 24, 2011

About time! Full speed ahead!

First?

3. Bill Peters - July 24, 2011

I still think that it will come out in the Fall of ’12

4. Eric - July 24, 2011

I want Scotty to be less Jim Carrey and more serious. Like a seasoned WWII Army sergeant who manages the men. ALSO, do something with Kirk’s precipitous promotion five ranks up. Still bugs me.

5. Eric - July 24, 2011

I know i’m beating a dead horse here, and no one should take my comments as i hated the film, i loved it and bravo. Most other people would have destroyed another Star Trek film. BUT would it have been so hard to have Kirk go to another ship at the end of the film, raise in rank between films, and come back in the sequel as the new captain? I feel that would have made more sense.

6. Captain Karl - July 24, 2011

So between Thanksgiving and Christmas 2012…let’s just say Holiday 2012.

The single most important thing in all of this hulabaloo is that they don’t miss their mark on story. Deliver unto us a mind-blowing, relevant and engrossing story in which the characters we know and love say believable things, do things within their powers & abilities, and not have a technobabble Mary Sue -fest. (for those who don’t know what a Mary Sue character or story is, do a quick google search for Mary Sue Character).

7. Johnny K. - July 24, 2011

It sounds like the team at Bad Robot has their fingers in too many projects.

Summer of 2013? Are you serious?

Four years between releases is a bit much. Yes, yes I want it to be good but for crying out loud… talk about losing momentum following the huge success of the 2009 release.

All the more reason to bring Star Trek BACK TO TELEVISION where it belongs.

8. Rosario T. Calabria - July 24, 2011

So summer 2013 it is. If they start shooting in January, getting it out that same year would be really rushing things.

Next May would have been nice, but it is what it is.

It’s okay though, I have a hard time hitting planned targets also. ;)

9. Jamie - July 24, 2011

I’m not sure if it’ll be summer 2013 – the Superman film just got delayed out from December 2012 to summer 2013, so I think it might be a good thing to aim for holiday 2012. I have full faith in the film, but the less competition the better is always the case no matter what. I want a third one, too.

10. Enterprise B - July 24, 2011

January 2012?!?!

We’re talking serious delays here… like summer 2013 release pushback! We’d be lucky to make christmas 2012… assuming the world doesn’t end!

11. Anthony Thompson - July 24, 2011

3. Bill Peters

You’ve moved your prediction back several times now. You were steadfast until just recently saying that it would make the release date (no problem). Then it was July until Sept., 2012. Now you’re saying Fall, 2012. Will you next predict “no later than Summer 2013″? LOL.

12. Anthony Thompson - July 24, 2011

10.

“assuming the world doesn’t end”. I thought that trekkies were a more intelligent bunch. But this is the second time I’ve seen a reference to the 2012 armageddon on this board. Eeeeek!

13. MJ - July 24, 2011

Orci: “we are going to be shooting very soon”

Kurtzman: “early next year”

WTF? Again, completely different answers from two Supreme Court standing right next to each other.

???????????????????????????????

14. Vultan - July 24, 2011

#12

The only reason the Mayan calendar ends at 2012 is because they ran out of space—only so many dates you can fit on a stone wall! And since the Spanish wouldn’t lend them any paper….

;)

15. PM1701 - July 24, 2011

A chunk of Starfleet ships and staff were killed in the initial encounter with Nero and crew. I always felt Kirk’s promotion was out of necessity. So no trouble believing it.

16. essay - July 24, 2011

Aww man, first Man of Steel pushed back and now Trek 2. And 2012 was shaping up to be the best genre year ever.

17. T2 - July 24, 2011

At least there’s a sequel. If I’ve waited this long, I can wait til any point in 2012 since this year’s gone by so fast as it is. 2013, on the other hand, is a bit ridiculous…putting all that time in between 2 films. When did the last one started filming, late 2007? Now 2012. Over 4 years in between production is a bit more than Trek fans are used to, that’s all.

Sure, we were spoiled by 5 movies in 10 year periods with the first set of Trek films, but I’m not asking for 5, more like 3-4 in a 10-year period would be good. Anyway, it is what it is and that’s just one opinion…I’ll see it whenever it comes out, but I would be disappointed if it takes them until 2013 for Trek XII. The fans aren’t getting any younger lol, especially the first generation! Trek XIII (jumping the gun) would make a great launching pad for the 50th anniversary in 2016, and it’s gonna be hard to make that happen with a 2013 release, but now I’m just imagining ahead…..let’s get through the next film first!

Best of luck, guys. Looking forward to following the future production as it moves ahead.

18. Hat Rick - July 24, 2011

Everyone involved in the Trek production is saying all the right things.

I’m a happy camper.

19. Buzz Cagney - July 24, 2011

Hoorah! Some positive news at last. A very nice way to start my Monday morning.

20. Browncoat1984 - July 24, 2011

You know, I’m fine with not having it out in Summer. I hope it hits a Christmas release instead because there’s already SO MANY hard hitters coming next summer. This summer was bad enough with TWO pre-avengers movies, TWO DC movies, Super 8 and Cowboys and Aliens, Tranformers 3…next summer will be just as hard hitting with The Dark Knight, Avengers, Spider-Man, among others.

21. Buzz Cagney - July 24, 2011

Just reading other’s post’s…… so is December ’12 not a realistic proposition? It sounds do-able to me, but I’m only a viewer not a movie maker.

22. somethoughts - July 24, 2011

May 2013 would be awesome, im willing to wait as long as it is epic and timeless.

23. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - July 24, 2011

I am beginning to believe there is no Star Trek 12…

But, if there is..when January rolls around…

Punch it, will ya?

;-)

24. Odkin - July 24, 2011

Still giving 30% odds that the cameras never roll due to poor performance of other JJ movies, and that unresolvable cast defections or schedule conflicts from the delays cause a recast or two.

75% that a third one is never made, and if so, includes some recasts.

100% that this crew never does any Trek service again after these (maybe) 3 movies take 10 years to come out and suck all the energy out of Trek.

25. somethoughts - July 24, 2011

Hope some cool sci fi concepts like earths rotation stopping, moving planets into different solar systems, murder mysteries, ancient relic quests, conspiracies, betrayal, ancient astronaught theory etc.

26. Akbrit - July 24, 2011

Excited to see the sequel…..but would love to see a Star Trek Vanguard TV series. Or lets see a couple of star trek Mini Series/ Specials.

27. MJ - July 24, 2011

@24. Odkin, dude, you got me again. Fracking hilarious. You are the supreme joekster on these boards. Well done, once again, my friend.

28. Mike Thompson uk - July 25, 2011

God, its been so long, have they reached the Motion Picture era yet!

29. 12YearOldTrekker - July 25, 2011

Sweet.

30. Jim Nightshade - July 25, 2011

I hope it not delayed past eaarly dec 12 since most ofus wont be around after dec21–tough audience after armageden ya know hehe
I also agree that kirks promotion doesnt bother me-saving earth n pikes life by original thoughts n actions proved leadership skills and kirk always was the youngest starfleet captain now we know why–

31. Aurore - July 25, 2011

Best wishes for your (future) endevours (regarding the Star Trek sequel) , gentlemen!

32. Christopher Roberts - July 25, 2011

Hooray. They’re going to back filming Star Trek on my birthday. January 12th That’s a good sign of success.

33. chrisfawkes.com - July 25, 2011

To be sure of always hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target.

34. Alec - July 25, 2011

So, it’s the Klingons again. The opening shot is of Qo’noS: Klingon homeworld. They’re going to present the familiar in an unfamiliar way by having various different varieties of Klingons…some will want war and others will not…

I hope they use the Klingon theme. They won’t find or create better music than that. I hope to see Bird of Preys, battle cruisers activating their cloaks…I hope to see bat’leths and bloodwine. For inspiration, look at the ‘Klingon fan collective’ DVD and Star Trek 6: TUC. If they match that, I’ll be one happy Trekkie.

35. Kirk, James T. - July 25, 2011

I think the studio’s (Paramount & CBS) will want it out sometime in 2012 – its looking like it may be fall – because I get the feeling that they are beginning to get licenses together for next year… we have that video game thats coming and who knows, a animated series too?

If it’s out in 2013 – if the world is still here :P – I think they need to take a break but then organise their time far better and be back doing the final Star Trek so that it hits the studio’s release date.

36. ilker - July 25, 2011

oh never mind about their delays… we’ll have this
http://www.prometheus-movie.com/
next year.

I do not like ST being treated like a nice to have project by this gang and getting delays, although there is the impression of delaying-to-get-the-best veil being pulled in front of our eyes. Super 8 was not so good.

I hope the enterprise gets back its decents looks, and it is not another 90210 out in space.

by the way, action sequences lined one after another, and art direction hardly makes a good film. have you guys heard of character depth? and not like a 2 minute “this guy is this” part but with things interwoven into the fabric of the story? I really have low hopes for ST2. A NG comeback would be more awesome than whatever glitz-effect perfect candy this team will serve.

37. Hugh Hoyland - July 25, 2011

What can I say, it is what it is. I cant make em shoot it faster!

But the way the guys are talking this up its gonna have to be the next best thing since Alien, Blade Runner and other sci-fi classics.

Can they do it? I think so! Only time will tell………lots of time.

38. CmdrR - July 25, 2011

AGAIN… don’t rush it. If we have to wait, give us something worth waiting for.

And, Mila Kunis as Rand taking a sonic shower is worth waiting for.

39. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - July 25, 2011

Ok Bob Orci and the court. Here is your orders. Red Alert. All Engines Ahead at Maxinum Warp for the best Trek Movie Ever!!!.

40. Christopher Roberts - July 25, 2011

34. I’m fine with that… but had hoped the new movie series would treat Klingons, the way the old one treated the Romulans.

The bumpy headed, blood-wine swilling, bat’leth welding barbarians have been done to death. While by comparison, what know about Romulus can be fit onto the back of a postage stamp.

41. Christopher Roberts - July 25, 2011

40. (supplemental) Fan reaction to the reappearance of the Klingons back in 2001 for Enterprise ‘Broken Bow’, just attracted yawns and the obvious question about their ridges. Although that show did finally provide an answer by Season 4.

42. Christopher Roberts - July 25, 2011

Somewhat ironic that Star Trek III was to have originally provided Romulans as the villains, the switch in Search for Spock to Klingons kicked off the whole pop cultural thing.

43. kirk - July 25, 2011

Lame

44. kirk - July 25, 2011

These guys don’t care about Trek.

Only money and other projects.

45. Janice - July 25, 2011

I’ll be so glad when TPTB state that Star Trek is being filmed NOW and all the cast, including Pike, are hard at work! Hope to read that soon because I’m not getting any younger!

Until then i’ll just continue to cross my fingers.

46. VOODOO - July 25, 2011

I for one prefer they take their time and do it right as opposed to rushing out a mediocre product. These guys are in demand for a reason. Waiting six months to a year isn’t going to kill anyone or make people like Star Trek any less.

47. Hugh Hoyland - July 25, 2011

#36

Oh yeah, now thats a movie I am geeked for! R. Scott back in a sci-fi themed movie.

Im reading Shadow 19 right now. That would make a great sci-fi movie as well.

48. trekker 5 - July 25, 2011

Good God,just when I think I might be getin’ up soon,they tell me I have to sit alittle bit longer. Ay me,I’m ok about waiting,as long as it’s good,I think they won’t let us down on that,it’ll be awesome!

49. cdp - July 25, 2011

44

I don’t think its fare to say that. I Think they care if they didn’t they would have past over the Star Trek in favor off other projects. The fact that they are taking there time trying to get it right says something. Damon himself said they have been working long and hard on this project and that they that take it very seriously. Its obviously not easy trying to create the perfect story. I say just give them time and let them work this thing out.

50. Bill Peters - July 25, 2011

#12 I still have faith that they can get this done in 2012 and to us in fall 2012 though it is Disappointing that it has been delayed so much.

51. Bill Peters - July 25, 2011

I agree with #35 as well, it will but out on later then 2012

52. Jay - July 25, 2011

Amazing. Ok so what we have been told is that pre-production should be much shorter for this film because most of the original design work and set construction is done. Some tweaking, changing, etc. should be relatively quick to do.

And we’ve been told they have essentially had the story complete and a rough outline done since February. And that they are all in agreement with the story and have been working on the actual script now for at least a week if not longer.

So, how in the world is it going to take 5 more months to start filming??!???!??!

Really?? Give me a break. Once again, nothing but more bad news about this film. They continue to give excuses for the delay and promise great things, but all they really are doing is continually delaying.

With a completed and agreed upon story and a rough outline, it should take no longer than a couple weeks to put together a first draft script that the studio can green light and they can begin production from. Of course there will be changes along the way, there always are, but absolutely no reason it should take another 5 months to start filming this movie. That just makes no sense.

That is longer than the first preproduction schedule of the 2009 film, and everything we know tells us the preproduction of the sequal should be shorter.

53. Nony - July 25, 2011

Bones: How old are you again, kid?

Chekov: Twenty-one, sir.

Bones: Oh, good, he’s twenty-one.

Kirk: …

54. Jay - July 25, 2011

Well, one thing this bungling has done for me at least is kill any hope that this version of Star Trek will last more than 3 movies.

With it taking so long to make the 2nd of the 3 (i’m still very confident there will be 3 because everyone involved signed a 3 movie deal when they started this), by the time they complete the 3rd in 2017 or so, I think there will be little to no chance that the major cast members will have any interest in signing on for a 4th.

Then there will probably be a 4 or 5 year gap and Paramount will convince some new team to re-reboot Star Trek again with a whole new cast and crew.

So this version, and timeline, of Star Trek will be a very short lived (in movies anyway, not real time) 3 movie version. Then we as fans will be asked to accept another completely new cast and crew in some new version agian.

55. Pizza - July 25, 2011

I know this comment is going to annoy a lot of die hards. But I am allowed an opinion.

I think the wait is way too long. It appears the main stumbling block was JJ Abrams and his goofy Super 8 movie. WTF?! In hind site, he should have been replaced from the word go with someone else. With all due respect to JJ, there are a lot of competent directors who could have done an amazing job. AND, to Gre’Thor with those frakking lens flares!!

56. Ryan Gromm - July 25, 2011

I’m beginning to think these guys are turning into used car salesman…

It’s obvious they gave “Trek” a boot to the bottom of their list of priorities the last 3 years….

I’m very very very surprised Paramount isn’t getting nervous about this… they went from having a tentpole film, scheduled for next summer to now only having G.I. Joe 2… I’d have ejected this writing team a year ago if I kept noticing they were pushing stuff back…

57. Ryan Gromm - July 25, 2011

And don’t tell me replacing their writing team is so far fetched… they are plenty of young, good, up and coming writers in Hollywood at this point…

58. Jay - July 25, 2011

#55 I have to say I understand where you are coming from.

Is there any doubt that the most critically successful, and financially successul, project JJ has done has been Star Trek ?

Cloverfield was terrible, Super 8, by most critical accounts, was ok. Not great, but not terrible. Lost started out with alot of praise, but was criticized in the end for taking too long to answer questions, and ending up being what most had thought in the begining(and were told they were wrong by the writers) – they were all dead.

Maybe one can say that because JJ directed Star Trek, when he was just a producer, or executive producer on the other projects, is why Star Trek was so successful. Maybe that is true. I can at least give him credit for a great Star Trek movie. But outside of that, I don’t think he has done anything else as good.

So, to me that begs the question: Why not focus more on Star Trek? Why spread yourself so thin on so many other projects, and not the one you were most successful at? Especially when critically, and otherwise, those projects weren’t nearly as successful.

59. David P - July 25, 2011

they need to check if the SHAT is available

60. Ryan Gromm - July 25, 2011

Or maybe investors don’t want the “Trek” message out there right now…. of optimism, a moneyless society, lack of greed, etc…

Heck, this country doesn’t even have a freaking space program now, now that the shuttle has flown it’s last mission…. PATHETIC….And now 3 wars being funded… Roddenberry is rolling in his grave as we speak…

Really makes me wonder now why a Trek film sequel has been essentially stalled for this long…

That theory was brought to me by someone else and at first I thought, nahh, no way is that the case, but given Hollywood is now run by investment funds from “banks”, one really has to wonder.

61. Pizza - July 25, 2011

#58. Well Said!

Summer of 2013? Once they said go, it’s like what have you guys been doing for 2 years?

Reading between the lines, you get the impression they just recently all got together and are NOW getting to work.

Star Trek was IS suppose to be a tent pole franchise, and not treated as an afterthought. I’ve said my piece. Maltz! Cho-ee-chu

62. Jay - July 25, 2011

I agree. When the 2009 movie was announced, alot was made and talked about of how Paramount was making Star Trek their tent pole franchise for the next several years. It certainly doesn’t feel like JJ and the crew have been treating it that way.

Eventhough Star Trek 2009 was basically the goose that laid the golden egg for these guys, they have ignored it largely. It’s like they started believing alot of their own hype. Like anything they touched would turn to gold.

The facts are, nothing else has been nearly as good…. critically or financially. Sure Transformers 2 made alot of money, and that helps writers Orci and Kurtzman, but critically it was roasted, and rightfully so. It was a dreadful movie. No matter how much money a movie makes, no writer wants their work so critically blasted.

So, I just don’t get why this team is running around trying to reproduce that success on other projects. Just focus on reproducing it on THIS project. You hit a home run the first time. It will be very difficult to duplicate that, so you should be even more focused, and working even harder on THIS project. Not less.

It’s almost like they know Star Trek has given them all 15 minutes of glory and they are trying to take as much advantage of that as they can, and get every project they ever wanted to do done before this is over.

63. John from Cincinnati - July 25, 2011

A redesign of the iBridge would be welcome

64. Tom - July 25, 2011

Yes, loose the macbridge, budengineering, give us some presentable sets like in all the other filmed shows/movies. And a TV show, it’s been 6 years already!

65. Daoud - July 25, 2011

You mean, they’re really making a sequel to Star Trek (2009)? Cool. Here I thought it was all smoke and mirrors and rumour. Or rumor. But not Rumer… unless they plan to cast her in a role.

66. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - July 25, 2011

I wanted then to dim the lights on the bridge, not turn them out.

67. P Technobabble - July 25, 2011

Bob Orci, and Damon Lindelof: how dare you guys allow anything into your lives or into your minds OTHER THAN Star Trek! Don’t you realize there are billions– er, dozens of people who won’t be able to sleep now? Other projects? Family? Friends? Life? What were you thinking???

Why don’t all the folks who are speaking negatively about the sequel delays form their own Doomsday cult. They could call it Trekdom’s Gate and drink McDonald’s lattes laced with saltpeter. I hear it will stifle your treks drive.

68. BringBackKirkPrime - July 25, 2011

I also heard a rumor that Jar Jar Binks will be the new Federation President in a special crossover role, but that will delay the sequel another three years. But it will be worth the wait, because we want them to get the story right!

69. mr. NUspock - July 25, 2011

i hope we gets to see a new vulcan, in its early state, since it probadly will takes place (hopefully) after 3 years , and maybe some klingons would be great, and earth as well, and yes, redesign scotty´s place, but to much…….

70. MJ - July 25, 2011

Again, the following contradiction between Orci and Kurtzman, who were apparently sitting right next to each other when these questions were asked, greatly concerns me:

Orci: “we are going to be shooting very soon”

Kurtzman: “early next year”

Well which is it, Bob Orci? Very soon and 8 months from now are two very different answers here? Why do you guys have such huge differences in opinion on when shooting will start?

71. Alec - July 25, 2011

54:

Perhaps not. I see one of two directions.

First, there will be no more films, in which case, I predict Star Trek will then return to TV, it’s natural home, in some form: be it as live action or animated and most likely in the JJverse.

Second, there will be more films. This is not so unlikely as you suggest. If the films are good and commerically and critically successful, all parties, especially the studio, will likely want to continue. If Star Trek is making money, Paramount will want to continue. Many on the supreme court are fans and will take little convincing. If not, others can be hired.

Why reboot a 40+ year – and profitable – franchise just for three films…

There are so many stories that can be told. As for the actors, they will be in their fourties by the time the third film and the subsequent films come out. Their chances of becoming big film stars will have passed: acting is really ‘a game for the young’. Why wouldn’t they want to be paid millions of $ to make a Trek film once every three or so years? Also, if most of them want to continue, that’s enough. Minor characters could be written out.

72. VZX - July 25, 2011

May 2013 is perfect. Four years is a perfect amount of time between sequals. Dark Knight came out in 2008 and now DKRises will be released in 2012.

Not only will the momentum hold but the anticipation will only build. I think this is a perfect move.

73. the Quickening - July 25, 2011

#58, 62
I thought Mission Impossible 3 was financially more successful worldwide than TREK ’09? I guess you’re only referring to domestic gross. Super 8 might possibly earn more internationally than TREK ’09 as well. We shall see.

Why not focus more on Star Trek, you ask? Well… the desire for more money and prestige, perhaps? I still maintain TREK is more a niche market, and is not all that popular worldwide. After 10 movies, numerous TV series, etc.–over several decades–it still lags behind many more popular franchises in revenue. Why wouldn’t… shouldn’t these guys give first priority to create more films and/or film franchises with the potential for greater revenue and popularity than TREK? I seriously doubt TREK movies will ever earn the kind of money– internationally–that most genre films of it’s kind do.

Critical acclaim or not, TPTB twisted and molded TREK ’09 to be just another adolescent, dumbed-down, over-the-top, action-figure-cartoon movie that would appeal to a wider audience and it only did slightly better than several of the more popular TREK movies in the series–those TREK films being old fashion and more Shakespearean in nature. I think the possibility is there that they are going to want to focus on more, populist, adolescent-type films that make the most money.

Then again, the delay could be because they just wanted to wait on Abrams–which is what they have continued to claim.

It’s true that there are plenty of writers and directors out there who could do TREK–and do it well; it’s possible that these guys admire TREK enough that they desired to do it themselves and wanted to find time in their busy schedules to focus and do a superior job on the next movie.

Who knows?

74. Rob Lock - July 25, 2011

Cant’t wait! I also wouldn’t mind a Trek TV series again. Too bad John Frakes (Will Riker) and Marina Sirtis(Deanna Troy or I guess Deanna Riker) couldn’t come back for a new series.

Star Trek: Titan

75. Daoud - July 25, 2011

“Roddenberry is rolling in his grave as we speak…”
.
Unlike the space program, aren’t some of his and James Doohan’s ashes in orbit?
.
Roddenberry would have at least gotten a kick out of “Earth” still having a space program. The ISS still flies, with the US in the lead, with Russian cargo services, and ESA and JASA supporting various experiments. Maybe it’s time for a united Earth space probe agency.

76. Dee - lvs moon' surface - July 25, 2011

Soon??… January, 2012?… which means time for a writer of Star Trek? …OMG …LOL …because no good crying for that!!! …

HELLO, Mr. Bob Orci!!! …+LOL

:-) :-)

77. NuFan - July 25, 2011

Since MJ has trouble with English…

we are going to be shooting very soon.
Q: How soon?
Orci: Hopefully…
Kurtzman: …Early next year.
Orci: I think probably in January

78. BrodyKoss - July 25, 2011

@70

Duuuuude. I think they have the same opinion. They are preparing to start a major motion picture here not a home movie taking place in Orci’s back yard.

8 months sounds pretty darn soon to me when you are taking about all the location scouting, casting, design work and other prep stuff that has to be done before you can start shooting.

79. N - July 25, 2011

“Dark Knight is standard”

NO, JUST NO! that was one of the worst films I’ve ever seen.

80. MJ - July 25, 2011

@78. You must have a different definition of “very soon” than most of us. “Very soon” in the business world means “close to imminent,” not 2/3 of a year away. I could buy what you are saying if he had just said “soon,” but he specifically said “very soon.”

So whether “very soon” is a couple of months or 3-4 months, I don’t think most of us would say 8 months is “very soon” — that defies common sense and logic.

81. MJ - July 25, 2011

@79. Dark Knight wasn’t an awful film, but I will agree that it is vastly overrated.

82. MJ - July 25, 2011

@77. NuFan, thanks for validating exactly what I said: Orci: “Very Soon”, Kurtzman: “Early Next Year.

Not sure what your issue is with what I said, but again, thanks for the validation.

83. Space - July 25, 2011

Uhhh, summer of ’13?! They simply CANNOT wait that long!

84. Harry Ballz - July 25, 2011

81.

MJ, I totally agree with you! The Dark Knight was152 minutes long, mainly because they tagged on that bullshit subplot at the end about the Joker challenging the ferries to blow each other up. Stupid and a total waste of time. That movie should have been 126 minutes, TOPS!

85. Jack - July 25, 2011

4. Was watching it again on the weekend, Scotty wasn’t as wacky as I remembered (after having heard for months how over-the-top wacky some thought he was on here), and certainly not anything like Jim Carrey. He was Scotty (and, yes, I wish Kirk hadn’t started calling him Scotty after knowing him for 20 minutes… just like I wish they’d saved Spock’s first on-screen “fascinating” for something more fascinating than a swiveling chair).

What’s with the Dark Knight not-love? :)

I liked that it (DK) played it straight, there were no overly obvious winks to the audience, and, as much as it could, it set it all in our world. Again, I want Trek to be fun, smart and full of wonder and energy — but not Trek IV/ V/ Generations/Insurrection silly.

Although, I sometimes wonder if I was the only one who thought Inception was overrated (don’t get me wrong, I liked it fine, but…).

86. Harry Ballz - July 25, 2011

Jack, you are correct. Inception was HIGHLY overrated!

Nolan seems to be able to push ANYTHING on Hollywood and they nibble!

87. MJ - July 25, 2011

@85. Hmm, I liked Inception a lot more than Dark Knight.

I didn’t see the big deal with Heath Ledger’s Joker performance — I though Jack N. did a better job in the late 80′s version.

88. Red Dead Ryan - July 25, 2011

I hate to say this…….but…..at least when it comes to when the sequel gets filmed, which is now being pegged for January 2012 at the earliest……god this is so hard………..ahem…..geez, should I? Ahhh…….what the hell……..I WAS RIGHT! I knew they weren’t going to start filming till next year!

And not only that, it looks like my summer 2013 release date prediction is going to hold up!

ALSO: “THE DARK KNIGHT” is ONE OF THE GREATEST SEQUELS EVER MADE!!

89. Basement Blogger - July 25, 2011

@ 14 Vultan

On the why the Mayan calender stopped in 2012. Vultan says,

“And since the Spanish wouldn’t lend them any paper….”

Ha. ha. ha. I try to avoid the LOL thing but very funny.

90. Basement Blogger - July 25, 2011

Summer of 2013 looks like where the next Star Trek movie is going to be premiered. There’s no logic to releasing it in the holiday period of 2012. It would go against The Hobbit, James Bond and that teenage vampire flick. May of 2013 looks clear.

I think it’s great that Damon Lindelof wants a “mind blowing” movie. And he is shooting high when he wants a deep sequel like “Dark Knigth.” I’m very intersted in seeing their Star Trek movie whenever it comes out.

By the time it’s ready for preproductiont, think about the advances in 3D technology. If there’s one good thing about the stupid Transformers: Dark of the Moon movie, it was the 3D effects. The begininning outer space shots were cool. Just think about the visuals of a Romulan-Klingon war with their ships going toe to toe. I’ve noticed that nebulas look great too. See end credits for Thor. So, we’ll have to wait for this “mind blowing” experience. Oh well, Netflix is streaming TOS, TNG, Voyager and Enterprise.

91. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 25, 2011

Now – can I cry? Yeah, I know, it’s only a movie – except that it ain’t a movie yet and therein lies the problem.

So, what happened to the Jack Ryan movie tentatively set down to be filmed in January 2012? Has Paramount got everything organised so that Jack Ryan gets to be done first, as initially proposed?

All work and no play make “Jack” a dull boy. All play and no work makes “Jack” a dull boy.

Chris Pine is looking so lovely, in the few (papz?) photos taken of him of late. Clearly, the holiday and a little healthy sun, has done him so much good. However, our lovely Pine captain needs a little action film work to do (Jack Ryan/Star Trek movie(s)) lest he lose his edge…

Come on, Paramount/Bad Robot – Have a heart!

There is a Pine man whom we need to see more of…
There are also some Urban/McCoy fans who are also dying of hunger and thirst while they wait…

#85 – Having watched the latest Star Trek many times, Scotty was not that much of a buffoon – just glad of some human company, frustrated and hungry but trying to put a brave and perhaps humourous take on his unenviable situation. Then he walks onto the bridge of the flagship, soaking wet and in need of a towel, just to see the captain punch and throw a cheeky subordinate around same bridge – I’m sure that it certainly surprised him that this was the current method of dealing with insubordination…:) Of course, it was “excitin’!”

I thought Kirk only referred to Montgomery Scott as Scotty at the end of the film, probably at Scotty’s insistence. What surprised/threw me more was the fact the (Quinto)Spock referred to Kirk as Jim, just before Kirk got off the Jellyfish to go find Pike. What was that about? A little wee oops there, Bob Orci?

NB: 90210 and Jar Jar Binks have NOTHING to do with Star Trek and never have!
Posters make such silly clicheed comments sometimes.

92. Jack - July 25, 2011

“Critical acclaim or not, TPTB twisted and molded TREK ‘09 to be just another adolescent, dumbed-down, over-the-top, action-figure-cartoon movie that would appeal to a wider audience and it only did slightly better than several of the more popular TREK movies in the series–those TREK films being old fashion and more Shakespearean in nature.”

I still don’t buy this, looking at Trek 09 and the previous Trek movies. Having characters quote from the Norton anthology doesn’t make the films Shakespearean. They all had explosions. They had (geriatric) fight scenes. And, heck, Shakespeare wrote to a wider audience.

93. Jason - July 25, 2011

four years is a pretty long time between sequels..

something definitely went wrong somewhere

94. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 25, 2011

Although, I am really sad about the delay, it does seem to confirm my contention (for want of more evidence, contrary or otherwise) that it is about doing the movie in 3D (or not). Doing a decent 3D movie could mean delaying the filming schedule and ultimately the official release date, unfortunately… Bob Orci has confirmed that much of the pre-production work has been/is being done. Why do some here insist on contradicting one of the movie’s main writers and producers? What – so some posters here know more than Bob Orci? Please…

Holiday/Christmas time 2012 release time is fine by me. It means I can sit in an airconditioned cinema, where my hands can freeze for want of gloves, while outside we can feel the wondrously hot cancer causing UVA and B sun’s rays as we drip with the subtropical humidity that is an Auckland summer. At least there are the beaches and the bush walks…Bring it on for November/December release date – a real Summer blockbuster movie. The Hobbit and Star Trek (12?) at the much the same time. Oh the Bliss (and I do mean that).

95. VulcanFilmCritic - July 25, 2011

@ 52 54 58 Jay is right on the money:
“So, how in the world is it going to take 5 more months to start filming??!???!??!
Really?? Give me a break. Once again, nothing but more bad news about this film. They continue to give excuses for the delay and promise great things, but all they really are doing is continually delaying.”

Look, it’s going to be Summer of 2013. Deal with it. Fall is the time for studios to release their Oscar contenders, you know, the “adult” films, so that the New York Times can have something to crow about in their Fall Season round-up. So that we can all feel oh so enlightened by the art films that the NPR crowd MUST SEE. Star Trek would be so out of place in the Fall!
Holiday is possible…for an EFFICIENT director…but even Leonard Nimoy in his prime couldn’t deliver a Star Trek movie within a 15 month window!
With this crew, they’ll be lucky if they can meet the Summer 2013 release date.

But i’ll try to believe. And whatever they deliver had better be pretty frikkin’ amazing after all this waiting! I’m not really feeling good about the statement that we’re pitching this to the studio and that to the studio. Are they pitching the story piecemeal? Or has the studio rejected previous story outlines and asked for a re-write? Hmmmmm…

As for Star Trek returning to TV, I’m getting this weird vibe that it’s going to be some kind of animation. Like a very edgy Rotoscope or motion capture. They may even use the old voice tracks from The Animated Series. I think that Rotoscope episode in Fringe with Nimoy doing voiceover for the animated William Bell was a trial run.

96. Bob Tompkins - July 25, 2011

Memo from the desk of JJ Abrams…

Star Trek 2012

Coming to a theater near you June 28, 2013.

No, wait, November 22, 2013.

On third tought, May 22, 2014.

Ehh, it’ll be there when we get around to doing it…

97. Michael Hall - July 25, 2011

“And don’t tell me replacing their writing team is so far fetched… they are plenty of young, good, up and coming writers in Hollywood at this point…”

Hell, there are lots of older writers in Hollywood who would like nothing better than to take a crack at the Trek ’12 script–writers with a proven ability of taking esoteric SF concepts and translating them to film in ways that mass audiences can appreciate. They wound up writing many of TOS’ best episodes, in fact.

Harlan Ellison expressed interest in working on the next Trek film over a year ago. Now that’s a movie I’d gladly stand in line to see, even if it’s set in the Abrams ‘verse.

98. The Professor - July 25, 2011

It should go up against The Hobbit Part 1… by which I mean open 3 weeks before that movie, and thus use the Holiday frame to cash in.

99. VulcanFilmCritic - July 25, 2011

97. @Michael Hall:
“Harlan Ellison expressed interest in working on the next Trek film over a year ago. Now that’s a movie I’d gladly stand in line to see, even if it’s set in the Abrams ‘verse.”

That would be answered prayers!!! Are you listening Paramount?

100. Hugh Hoyland - July 25, 2011

Bob I know theres comics coming out soon (which is cool btw!).

But what say you to an animated series? Is it possible?

101. Jimkirk - July 25, 2011

It’s lame that the studio allowed this to drag out. JJ is a great producer director but there are many talented guys out there who could do this. A new trek every 3 years is about right, anything longer, you lose any momentum and interest generated by the previus film..

Let’s get it done rigth and on time.

102. SciFiGuy - July 25, 2011

TWOK and The Empire Strikes Back should be the standards — great sequels that surpassed the originals!

103. Chingatchkook - July 25, 2011

The whole delay reminds me of George Lazenby deciding to go sailing after the making of ‘On her Majesty’s Secret Service’ a very good film. By the time he got back, the world forgot about him.

Someone else here mentioned that the momentum from the 2009 film is being lost by these delays, I tend to agree. I would hate to see the Star Trek train derailed because it is deemed as a less important project than the others that are in production.

104. Red Dead Ryan - July 25, 2011

#94.

Still the Chamberlain….

105. Bob Tompkins - July 25, 2011

100-
Comics are great, I have been a collector since I was a child. All I am saying is Abrams and Co. aren’t very good ‘keepers of the flame.” Bring someone in willing to devote everything to Star Trek. Even the comic writers seem to have a handle on this thing…
101-
We should be on a Star Trek every 2- 2 1/2 years, maximum. For the previous movies [82-87] that was the timetable and Harve Bennett kept them coming like clockwork and they were excellent with one mediocre exception—even on the miniscule budgets he had to work with. Abrams and Co. have no dedication to Trek; they are hot in Hollywood right now and I don’t blame them for doing all of these other projects.
If Abrams would step back and Executive Produce- great. If Paramount stays with this team, we’ll have #3 around 2022 and they will be reinterpreting Vger in keeping with the actors’ ages……

106. Bob Tompkins - July 25, 2011

With a budget [not including advertising] of around $150m and a gross of $262m, Star Trek 09 was not profitable until it hit DVD sales. Paramount should be more disappointed with that than Warners was with Superman Returns. Converting Star Trek: The Motion Picture to 2009 dollars, the margin and the gross were very close to the same. Even though the Next Gen movies were only given $30- $40m budgets, they all made a profit before VHS sales.

107. Thorny - July 25, 2011

Early next year? Just when I thought they were making progress, they kick the can six months down the road.

No longer any doubt whatsoever, this movie will be Summer 2013.

108. Devon - July 25, 2011

106.>>>>With a budget [not including advertising] of around $150m and a gross of $262m, Star Trek 09 was not profitable until it hit DVD sales.

According to studio sources who spoke to Anthony Pascale, the film was turning a profit i think like three weeks a release, so it was fine.

>>>>Even though the Next Gen movies were only given $30- $40m budgets, they all made a profit before VHS sales.

Just as this film did (with DVD sales.)

107. >>>>No longer any doubt whatsoever, this movie will be Summer 2013.

Not necessarily.

109. Devon - July 25, 2011

Correction:

“like three weeks a release, so it was fine”

Should say “three weeks AFTER release.”

110. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 25, 2011

I ain’t no Chamberlain…Duh (I know it’s a double negative – like I care…)

Bob & co – will the next Star Trek be done in 3D or not? Give us an answer so all those crystal balls will have something to work with. Otherwise, RDR and co…

Star Trek 09 actually made approximately $385 million, not $262m. Overseas earnings almost paid for the entire production costs. No doubt it was not as much as the studio might have been hoping for (one always hopes for more money), but there was something of a profit, which may be one of the reasons why they have okayed doing the sequel…

111. dmduncan - July 25, 2011

I like what I’m hearing and I’m excited about their excitement!

112. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - July 25, 2011

Whose enormous, retro 50′s , Prada, eyeglass frames win in a fight?

Lindelof’s or Kurtzman’s??

113. T'Cal - July 25, 2011

I’m very disappointed that it’s been delayed and worried that popularity among non-Trekkers as well as fans will wane. The only spark this news has is the reference to TDK, one of my all time favorite movies. That they recognize the need to better their last effort is promising. Damn their delays! Focus on the sure thing! Make good on your promises.

114. freezejeans - July 25, 2011

This is getting ridiculous, Orci. I’m 43 and grew up on TOS and those movies, and I realize you’re a busy guy. Just hand it off to somebody else equally capable if you guys are so busy.

Otherwise, stop getting involved with other projects until the next Trek is complete. Yes, I understand multitasking, but in today’s world, this all just looks like a money-grab and not about anything you actually have passion for.

Apologies for being a hardass, but obviously I care about the next film and I think you’re very talented. Just pick ONE and run with it. Thanks :D

115. MJ - July 25, 2011

Enough with the Summer 2013 nonsense. They will have months of pre-production now to get completely ready for shooting, so if shooting starts in January and wraps by the end of March, the natural time-line for special effects completion, post-production, a mufti-month marketing campaign that will kickoff at Comicon in July next year with trailer release — yes folks, the natural unforced time-line based on this fully supports a November 30th, 2012 release date. (note: this time-line can support 3D too if needed).

Remember that you hear it heard it here from MJ first — November 30, 2012, two weeks before The Hobbit, 3 weeks after Bond, and 1.5 weeks after Vampires Farting (i.e. Breaking Wind…whoops Breaking Dawn).

The pushing back of Superman: Man of Steel to Summer 2012 gives Trek this great holiday slot of November 30, 2012 — mark my word, the movie is coming out on that day!

116. MJ - July 25, 2011

@109. Keachick, I love your posts and great comments on these boards, but yes, my dear, you are a Chamberlain!. :-)

117. MJ - July 25, 2011

@97 “Harlan Ellison expressed interest in working on the next Trek film over a year ago.”

Sheesh Dexter, isn’t Harland in a nursing home by now…I was surprise to find out from you that he is even around still (congrats Harlan!). :-))

What’s next — are you going to tell us the H.G Wells should be approached to write the sequel? LOL

Dex Man, gotta love you, dude!

118. Michael Hall - July 25, 2011

Well, it just so happens that Mr. Ellison is alive, well (all things considered), and damn near feisty as ever. (Don’t keep up much, do you?) But were he indeed consigned to a nursing home with only his daily dose of Erocet and a dinner of strained peas to look forward to, I would still put his talents as a writer up against that of Abrams’ entire “Supreme Court,” no problem.

And since you ask: yes, I’m guessing that even the dead H.G. Wells would likely do a better job.

119. agentm31 - July 25, 2011

I want to preface this with saying I enjoyed JJ’s movie. I thought it had a very natural humor to it, great action, and a story that introduced characters and previous canon very well. (I can forgive the weak plot points. Star Trek III had Spock’s dead body get reanimated into a kid’s body, it took a day for the Enterprise A to travel the 50,000 light years to the center of the galaxy and there’s no way Picard could’ve taken out all those Reman guards in Nemesis)

My opinion is this: Star Trek is on life support. It had two heart attacks; one in 2002 with Nemesis and another in 2005 with the ending of Enterprise. What we have is a dying franchise, and a lot of concerned family members. Then Paramount had a good idea: give the franchise a jolt of electricity: give it to a new team and make it appeal to a grand audience. JJ took the offer, and made good with his promise.

But where are we now? Do we have to wait 4 years in between each and every new snippet of Trek? And how good can Star Trek be if we keep it only on the silver screen? My answer is I don’t know, no, and not very good, respectively. Star Trek is at its best when all characters have a spotlight, relationships are shown and grow, and moral decisions face our heroes at every turn. This cannot happen in a movie. I wish it could, but drama and action simply don’t mix in Trek.

My plea to Paramount: Take it back to the living room. Give it to someone who knows it, or at least, Science Fiction: Tom Hanks (Star Trek miniseries ala Band of Brothers?), Joss Whedon, Ron Moore, hell, keep Abrams, but do something with it. Star Trek is one of the most influential pieces of art in the last century, and it deserves better than 2 hours every 4 years.

120. MJ - July 25, 2011

@118. Dex, something tells you are a huge fan of “Weekend at Bernies.”

121. Buzz Cagney - July 25, 2011

#119 by my calculations Trek’s ‘heart attack’ came at the start of Enterprise not at its humane euthanasia.

122. Devon - July 25, 2011

Oh yay, more comments…

114 – >>>This is getting ridiculous, Orci. I’m 43 and grew up on TOS and those movies, and I realize you’re a busy guy. Just hand it off to somebody else equally capable if you guys are so busy.

So.. even though they are all working on it now and Star Trek has their full attention, you want them to delay it MORE by “handing it off?”

123. Devon - July 25, 2011

112 – > “so if shooting starts in January and wraps by the end of March,”

Shooting usually lasts 5-6 months.

124. Jerry Modene - July 25, 2011

I do wish they wouldn’t call the new film Star Trek 2.

125. MJ - July 25, 2011

Most of the live action shooting can be wrapped in about 90-100 days for a Trek film.

126. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 25, 2011

I assume when MJ and RDR refer to Chamberlain, they are referring to the British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, who signed a peace pact with Adolf Hitler. Soon after Hitler invades Poland, rendering the peace pact somewhat defunct. Neville Chamberlain and his ministers were taken in by a very smarmy, lying and manipulative person. Hitler managed to take in a lot of Germans as well, and by the time they realised what his real agenda was, it was too late. If a German spoke up against the Third Reich, well, they sort of disappeared and soon people dared not say anything, let alone ask…

If I am correct in my assumption, why are you likening me, comparing me to (Neville) Chamberlain?

On the other hand, perhaps I have totally misunderstood you guys…

This is not the first reference made.

127. MJ - July 25, 2011

Basically a well-meaning person who wants to believe what people say at face value. I wish I were a Chamberlain — it would make my life and viewpoints easier, less stressful and more positive.

128. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 25, 2011

Shooting/filming of the first movie took about four months. Post-production often takes longer. Extra work needed to be done with the first movie, like all the different film takes on how Chris Pine could play Kirk best, since it was Chris’s first time actually playing this well known character, stuff like that… Presumably, by now, the cast should be more familiar with how their respective characters should be played, so less time taken on filming their scenes.

129. MJ - July 25, 2011

@128. Agreed. 3 months for primary cast main shooting schedule. Some ancillary scenes and re-shoots could occure later, but 3 months for the main shooting schedule should do it.

130. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 26, 2011

#127 I guess I have been complimented. Thank you.

It is a fine rope I walk between cynicism/skepticism and naivety and that is trust. So I trust that what Damon Lindelof, Bob Orci, JJ Abrams, William Shatner, Chris Pine – everyone/anyone actually – have said on video or have been reported as saying is true. However, my skeptical, cynical side does tell me that this is Hollywood and make believe/lies perhaps come as easily as day or night…

I suppose I TRUST that these people know the difference between telling porkies (lies) and the truth, and choose to tell the truth, because ultimately, it doesn’t make any sense not to tell the truth.

“it would make my life and viewpoints easier, less stressful and more positive.”

Except when you find out you have been lied to, not taken seriously, made a fool of. I am making a general statement. I am not referring to anything that has happened on this site.

I could be a skeptical, cynical person. Sometimes I am just that. A cynical person has put on protective armour, so as not to be hurt. If you don’t believe, trust anyone, then you can’t be hurt if it turns out they are talking BS. I guess we all do it to some extent, more so in certain circumstances. The problem is that the armour starts digging into me, causing me to hurt, even bleed, so eventually it comes off…Becoming naive isn’t going to work either, so what are you left with?

Life can be Dukha.

131. VulcanFilmCritic - July 26, 2011

So now that it looks like the movie is going to be coming out in 2013, is there any point in hanging around here for the next two years?

132. MJ - July 26, 2011

@130. Well put!

133. MJ - July 26, 2011

@131. It is coming out on approximately November 30, 2012. I guarantee that it will be released on or about that date — definitely within 30 days either side of this date. You can go to the bank with my prediction here — I may end up eating crow, but I am putting my guarantee on this!!!

134. somethoughts - July 26, 2011

Paramount will make more money with a blockbuster summer star trek, so even if the film is lock and loaded, they will pull a startrek2009 and delay it to summer 2013.

MJ, I love the positive thinking, but I doubt they will meet the january 2012 shoot schedule and will ultimately miss the nov 2012 release.

My best guess is summer 2013 or 2014 yikes.

135. Trekboi - July 26, 2011

these guys should have been replaced 6 months ago when the show was falling behind- they dont care about the franchise or fans they just want to hold onto their little cash cow & get payed even if it is gunna flop because they left too long between movies & lost all momentum or mainstream interest

Hate is a strong word but i wanna use it in relation to their profesionalism & work ethic.

a 6 month to a year delay is unnacceptable for a no-brainer sequel to an established universe.

136. Trekboi - July 26, 2011

These guys have delayed a sequel 4 YEARS
They should have done 2 in that time- a sequel each 2 years now we just get one last minute after thought because we are contracted too- im so angry- they have cheated us out of a howl movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

137. captain_neill - July 26, 2011

I still get annoyed that they are calling it Star Trek 2 at this point. Everytime I think of 2 its The Wrath of Khan. Got to remember new canon.

It will still be a good film if they do it right.

138. Christopher Roberts - July 26, 2011

121. What nonsense.

139. Anthony Thompson - July 26, 2011

80. MJ

Why do you keep saying 8 months? If they started shooting at the beginning of January, that’s just over 5 months away. And, considering that it’s been well over 2 years since ST09 came out, that does seem “very soon”! : )

140. captain_neill - July 26, 2011

It will be made sometime.

But I am happy they are taking the time to make it good but still they are taking too long. But with this longg here’s hoping that we dont get Revenge of the Fallen quality for the next one.

And I do feel a bit more confident with writers that they said they would not be remaking the classics.

141. Daoud - July 26, 2011

Once upon a time, we began all this talking about Star Trek (2008) rather than Star Trek (2009). They have no sense of time. Originally, we expected the sequel in holiday 2010. I wish I could push my projected dates back by years and years rather than hours.
.
Of course, when you play with time travel, these things happen.
.
Oh, and it’s only appropriate that they delay: then between the two movies JJ, K/O & L they’ll have made:

ALL OF THE ORIGINAL SERIES AIRED. Maybe beatifying Roddenberry isn’t such a bad idea after all. 78 episodes in between the time they’ve taken to make 2 movies. Hmmmm.

142. aaronite_1 - July 26, 2011

Let’s not forget that even though the last movie was completed and ready in time for holiday 2008, the studio decided against a winter release, so my guess for this one is May 2013 (sadly).

143. VZX - July 26, 2011

I don’t get all the Dark Knight hate. It’s my favorite film of all time. Screw the haters.

BUT, I think that Damon should try to emulate Empire Strikes Back as a sequal more than Dark Knight. While Empire has its dark moments, it’s no where near as dark as, uh, Dark Knight. Not only that, since Trek ’09 emulated the first Star Wars so much, it would be neat to continue that trend in Trek ’13. Hit the same story beats, etc.

144. P Technobabble - July 26, 2011

I can completely understand the disappointment some people are feeling over the delay of the film.
When you’re a Trekkie, once you get bit, that’s it.
What I can’t understand is why anyone would attribute this delay to some sort of incompetence or lack of interest on the part of the studio, the producers or the writers.

Does anyone honestly think the consumers of the product care more about it than the makers of the product? They’ve got to care about it at least as much as the fans, otherwise why would they bother with it at all? And they probably care about it more since they have a lot more riding on it than we do. When we go to see the film, it costs us about $10 – $12 per ticket. It’s costing Paramount about— what?— $150,000,000?? I’d say they’ve got a lot more to lose, so they have good reason to care about it.
I say Good for them for taking the time to give us a good movie, rather than just saying, “Ah, it’s good enough. It’s only Star Trek.”

145. Jack - July 26, 2011

144. Hear, hear.

146. rtrj - July 26, 2011

Wow, what an angry group of hungry Star Trek fans. I want it NOW!!! Well no matter how hard we stamp our feet or insult the creative people who “own” the franchise now. The movie will be done when it’s done. I was so excited
when it was announced in the 70′s that Star Trek was coming back to TV. I was less excited when Paramount decided to make it a movie instead.Some fans knew moving into the movie arena would create much longer cycles between Trek , so we watched the crew age with each film. This is what we
have. I appreciate Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman for what they have given us and I can’t wait for what’s coming. I just wish people would lay off Bob, he is one of us and he listens to our opinions and suggestions so maybe we shouldn’t burn our friends.

147. Hugh Hoyland - July 26, 2011

Ok, I’ve always been a bit like a kid that cant wait for his birthday present as far as the sequel goes lol I always thought a three year span between movies was to long. The reason being is that the SC made Trek relevent again. But my problem is not the extended wait or even the delay.

Its the fact that theres very little new product based on Star Trek 09 out there, and I mean very little. Yes there’s the great graphic novels based on the movie and the comics coming later this year (yeah!) but other than that, ziltch. And that’s not good anyway you look at it. Almost every other franchise cashes in on the success of a movie.

Usually with novels (remember the canceled novels?) and often an animated series (see Transformers, CW ect..) and other stuff as well. This is done not only to make money of course, but to keep people interested in the franchise inbetween movies. That just didnt happen with Trek 09, and Im not sure why.

148. Daniel Shock - July 26, 2011

I wish that something had been announces regarding and animated trek or tng remastered at comic – con. Something. Something to keep us going in the long… Long wait this is turning out to be.

149. Hugh Hoyland - July 26, 2011

And let me add that Im not blaiming the SC for this either. Im sure Bob being a trekker is chomping at the bits to get this thing rolling. Which is why I asked if he would be interested in producing an animated series, or even a live action one. I mean he aint got nothing else going on right? ;]

150. BringBackKirkPrime - July 26, 2011

There’s another Old School Trek film coming out in 2012 with a young Sulu played by yes, George Takei! Filmed back in the 80′s no less! Here’s a link with a photo of George as Sulu, the film is produced by Stan Woo with James Shigeta as Admiral Nogura. So at least we wil have some Classic Trek to look forward to before the next JJ film comes out, whenever that will be.
http://forums.startreknewvoyages.com/index.php?topic=12340.0

151. BringBackKirkPrime - July 26, 2011

p.s. Scroll down on the page from the link below to see more photos of George Takei back in the 1980′s as Sulu when they filmed this upcoming Trek. I hope it doesn’t take 30 years for JJ to get his next Trek film to be finished like this one has. http://forums.startreknewvoyages.com/index.php?topic=12340.0

152. CanadianShane - July 26, 2011

The bottom line is that these guys are super hot and want to do many things, although they love Star Trek is hasnt been a priority. Star Trek is a victim to their success, Abrams, Orci, and all the others. They are wanted by everyone in hollywood, so Star Trek has been low on the totem pole. I doubt we will see anymore than 3 movies from these guys.

153. Shannon Nutt - July 26, 2011

I’ve been saying it on multiple threads for about a year now: December 21, 2012

I can see the tagline now:
“The End Of The Universe is Just the Beginning”

(kind of a take on that original Star Trek 2 tagline)

154. Red Dead Ryan - July 26, 2011

MJ,

I agree that the sequel COULD be out in Nov.2012, but based on the history of it being pushed back, I’m not betting big money on it. January is the new target for shooting, but I get the sense that it will really be closer to March or April. Spring 2012 will be the absolute latest that the sequel will start shooting, because Paramount will want the movie made at some point. Even if they started shooting in January, they’d really have to rush everything. They wouldn’t have a whole lot of time to properly market and promote the film, especially overseas.

So far, I’ve been right about the shooting not beginning until early next year.

Unfortunately, one can take nothing for granted. One has to take what the supreme court says with a grain of salt. Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said the levees would hold prior to hurricane Katrina. They didn’t, and look what happened. Now, I’m not comparing what happened in New Orleans to the sequel getting delayed. I just don’t want to see people end up with the “Ray Nagin” mindset and insist that the everything will go according to plan out of pure faith, while ignoring the warning signs.

We already have a few Chamberlains on this site, and I hope we don’t have any “Nagins” either.

155. Daoud - July 26, 2011

Although Paramount moved the movie from Holiday ’08 to Summer ’09…. Paramount also greenlighted the sequel in March of 2009.
.
March, 2009.
.
Stall, baby, stall.
.
At least they’re making the folks at Starship Exeter look good.

156. the Quickening - July 26, 2011

#92
I still don’t buy this, looking at Trek 09 and the previous Trek movies. Having characters quote from the Norton anthology doesn’t make the films Shakespearean. They all had explosions. They had (geriatric) fight scenes. And, heck, Shakespeare wrote to a wider audience.

But did Shakespeare dumb-down to his audience? I hope not.

The focus… the impetus of previous TREK films were more character, thematic, dialogue conscience, and dramatically driven (the key). TREK ’09, as well as most of today’s over-the-top movies are action-cartoon driven–with only occasional character, dramatic, and thematic moments.

Compare the action movies that I grew up with: THE GUNS OF NAVARONE, THE DIRTY DOZEN, to the recent past: RAIDERS, DIE HARD. The latter are good movies for sure, but clearly more cartoon focused, than dramatic. And RAIDERS and DIE HARD were done ages ago. The trend has gotten worse today. That’s what I mean when I say Shakespearean.

157. N - July 26, 2011

I don’t want to be insensitive but Dark Knight’s over-hype was down to nothing but martyrdom. Some sub-par actor dies increasing publicity, simple as.

158. Ryan Gromm - July 26, 2011

Either way you slice this debate about the next Trek movie, any momentum Paramount could have had to make a LOT of money off the sequel, after lots of non-trek fans went to see the first, was lost.

So with each day that passes, there’s less chance this film even gets made… It’s all about $$$$, and eventually the suits at Paramount will decide they could probably make the same amount of money off, I don’t know, a Jack Ryan movie:)

159. Harry Ballz - July 26, 2011

157.

N, Heath Ledger was anything but sub-par. He was the only good part IN that movie.

160. Rusty0918 - July 26, 2011

Captain_neill:

As much as I hate to say this, and as much as I agree with you on most other occassions, I wouldn’t be surprised if the film was “Star Trek 2,” with no secondary title period. I’m willing to bet that’s what they’re going to call it.

About remaking classics, well, it depends on what you call a “remake.” Abrams said the last movie wouldn’t be a reboot, and well, to 99% of us, it was. It could be very well what the majorities call a remake. So I’m not taking what they’re saying at face value.

Yes I do agree, I don’t want Trek to slip to the levels of “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.” But I wouldn’t be surprised that if it did, critics and mainstream media would still be bowing down at Abrams and company’s feet and giving it universal praise regardless. At this point, I could believe it.

#157, you do have a good point. What if Heath Ledger didn’t commit suicide?

161. Jack - July 26, 2011

159. Agreed on Ledger. Although, as for the rest of the movie, I liked the Harvey Dent stuff too. The message was hammered in a bit, but, alas, that’s part of a superhero movie. The ferry stuff and the batman voice, I could have done without.

Incidentally, while I’m all for the next Trek flick to resonate, I’m hoping they don’t heed the calls for an obvious message/allegory. I just watched Of Gods and Men, finally… and, man the message was repeated over, and over. The fan films can be fun, although not entirely watchable (some)… and I think that’s what we’d be getting if Orci and company gave in to all our demands here (and I mean no insult to James Cawley, who’s done some impressive stuff [I have a fan on fan crush on him]). My message: sometimes a little perspective is needed.

162. MJ - July 26, 2011

@159 @161

Don’t get me wrong — it was a good performance. But I just didn’t that it was as great as all the hoopla, and I certainly think Jack N. put in an even better performance in the late 80′s Batman.

But I didn’t like the Harvy Dent character either, and thought the hole-in-the-face thing was ridiculous.

163. MJ - July 26, 2011

@157. “I don’t want to be insensitive but Dark Knight’s over-hype was down to nothing but martyrdom. Some sub-par actor dies increasing publicity, simple as.”

Agreed. Wait until the Amy Winehouse new CD is released — here’s betting that it wins all kinds of rewards no matter the quality due to here pre-mature death. The media builds all this stuff up when someone dies — it is pretty ridiculous.

164. MJ - July 26, 2011

@154 “Even if they started shooting in January, they’d really have to rush everything.”

I disagree completely. Considering the are REALLY in soft prep now, and would be in format pre-production from say September through December of this year, then doing the live action shooting from January through March/April would have them on a very normal and non-rushed schedule for a late November/early December release. Also, this provides months of planning time for the marketing campaign to begin, with ComiCon 2012 in July being the HUGE KICKOFF for the Trek 2 marketing campaign — in fact, one might argue that Trek 2 might be the “biggest star” except for The Hobbit at ComiCon, based on this time-line for the marketing campaign, which would continue towards a massive buildup through the fall.

165. Daniel Shock - July 26, 2011

#150 & 151

Thank you for that info! I had a vague memory of Takei doing a fanfilm in the 80′s. I’m sure I saw something in Starlog magazine years ago and recently I had been searching for whatever happened to it and could find NOTHING! Probably because it was never finished and I couldn’t remember the name of it ! Can’t wait to see it!

166. VulcanFilmCritic - July 26, 2011

133. MJ. I’ll keep my fingers crossed but I’m doubtful. Maybe I should have the mindset that the franchise is just plain over. Then I can be pleasantly surprised whenever we get the movie.

150, 151. BringBackKirkPrime. Thanks. That’s interesting, and I’d like to see it, if only for nostalgic reasons.

The problem I have with these fan-generated productions is the rank amateurishness of the acting. Usually the sets and technical effects are great. The costumes and make up are serviceable, but the acting is usually atrocious! Most amateur artists have at least taken some art classes.
But the folks who call themselves actors look like they’ve never tread the boards even in high school. And this lack of passion for theater art shows.
If I would have one piece of advice for any wannabe Kirks and Spocks out there it’s: LEARN YOUR CRAFT! Get out and volunteer at your local community or church theater and learn the basics. See whether you have any talent or charisma. Can you hold the attention of the average person, not just Star Trek fans desperate for “content?”
Take acting classes for crissake. Then put what you’ve learned into your parent’s-basement-Star-Trek-production. Who knows where it will lead?

P.S. To both male and female actors. Believability might be enhanced if you disguised the flabby love handles. I’m sure there are beefy guys in Starfleet, but they are buff. If you don’t care to work out, then please get the proper foundation garments. Please.
Oh, in addition, shaving and combing your hair before filming or videotaping is also recommended.

167. Dee - lvs moon' surface - July 26, 2011

#91- Keachick…

I wonder if it’s good for the career of Chris get stuck that way for these two projects… Jack Ryan andTrek sequel?… but of course I want to see him as Captain Kirk… hmmm…Oh my!!! …LOL

where is Mr. Bob Orci now?

:-) :-)

168. TrekMadeMeWonder - July 26, 2011

4. Eric – July 24, 2011

“…ALSO, do something with Kirk’s precipitous promotion five ranks up. Still bugs me.”

Would’nt it be something if the Talosian’s we’re involved somehow? Pike seemed to know and expect too much from the young Kirk in 09′s Trek.

169. MJ - July 26, 2011

“ALSO, do something with Kirk’s precipitous promotion five ranks up. Still bugs me.”

He not only saved Earth, but he saved perhaps the entire Federation…say 100 Billion fracking people.

What more do you want?

170. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 26, 2011

Without knowing Chris Pine, I suspect he may find these delays with both Star Trek and Jack Ryan very frustrating. As I have already said here – Come on, Paramount/Bad Robot team – get our Pine man working sooner rather than later on being our new Captain Kirk or ex-marine come CIA agent, Jack Ryan.

What are the chances that after leaving our Chris “twiddling his thumbs” for a good part of this year, it seems, that they decide to get him to do two major films, where he has the lead role in both, back to back without so much as a “toilet break” in between? Duh.

(That’s my cynical side coming out.)

171. captain_neill - July 26, 2011

If they are aiming for January to start shooting then it will be a Christmas release.
First Contact went into production in April 1996 and was relased in November 1996 in US and Dec 1996 in UK.

172. Christopher Roberts - July 26, 2011

171. Star Trek movies are a lot more technical than they used to be. The number of effects shots now… it’s essentially like the whole work load in Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis all rolled into one. Although the physical filming may only take a few months.

173. Christopher Roberts - July 26, 2011

Independence Day came out the same year as First Contact and that’s more where the bar is now for a Star Trek film. It’s a level which makes the TNG era efforts look television in scale… Just progress, I guess. Like I say, the actual shooting of actors in the studio and out on location, hasn’t changed much since moustachoed guys were tying damsels to railway tracks.

174. Bill Peters - July 26, 2011

I agree with 171 it can come out in 2012, they have all ready said that they are doing FX shoots ow.

175. captain_neill - July 26, 2011

Also First Contact hasa lot of great visual effects that hold up to this day.

176. gingerly - July 26, 2011

No chickens before they hatch, but fingers crossed that this sticks and thery’re ready to go! :)

177. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 26, 2011

OK, I should really google this, but I am lazy. Forgive me. What is FX, in simple laygirl terms? Another person on a completely different site to this has also said that a lot of the FX for this sequel has already been done or is being done now.

Anthony? Bob Orci? Anyone?

178. Jack - July 26, 2011

175. First Contact had a little bit of ‘not bad, for a Star Trek movie’ to it. I still haven’t been able to see whether or not it works without my ‘gee whiz, the enterprise!/’wow, the Goldsmith theme!” nostalgia goggles/earphones on. It kind of wrecked the Borg for the franchise — the TV guys were a lot creepier and more interesting, and I still cringe at the memory of most of Brent Spiner’s lines in any of the movies (either that smug, unfunny funny, or that smug, unintentionally funny, phony earnest). It still looked like a TV show to me, apart from some of the ILM effects. That engineering set is what I fear whenever anyone calls for a ‘real’ engineering set and a warp core for this next flick.

Stewart and Alfre Woodard were alright, though. And i liked the pacing, especially early on.

I’m not sure what sparked the impromptu review — i was just reading some of Zack Handlen’s reviews of TNG on the Onion AV Club.

179. dmduncan - July 26, 2011

166: “The problem I have with these fan-generated productions is the rank amateurishness of the acting. Usually the sets and technical effects are great. The costumes and make up are serviceable, but the acting is usually atrocious! Most amateur artists have at least taken some art classes.”

Given Paramount’s willingness to allow Star Trek Phase II, it is theoretically possible to make a big budget independent Star Trek movie so long as it is not distributed as a feature for money. Following the NYC / Northern Cal independent film community model, a thing like that could happen if such a project had donations of labor from the professional film production community such as ILM, financial support from the fans and a few wealthy donors to make it happen, but it would be a disaster unless it was strongly directed by one person with the overall vision to pull it off and who would not allow any of the contributions to create special obligations to those contributing the money. It could then be downloaded, shown at conventions and other sites for free, and it would have real actors, real sets, real special effects — it would be everything you would expect from an expensive Hollywood movie, and possibly much better. Theoretically you could actually hire the same cast (THEM you use some of the raised money to pay). Also, such a radical departure from the traditional greed based Hollywood model of making movies would exemplify the sort of cooperative future that Star Trek is supposed to represent. Such an accomplishment would be the philosophy of Star Trek’s future in action. But are there enough Star Trek fans out there who could donate the money needed to pull something like that off?

Now what I’m talking about already DOES happen in the film community in the independent scene. Francis Coppola didn’t make that excellent little film Tetro to roll in the bucks. He did it out of love, and it shows. But that’s never been done on such a huge scale before. Theoretically, however, it is possible if not probable.

George Lucas was a badass director when he came on the scene; he and Francis Coppola are like brothers. And those guys changed movie making in the United States with the work they did as independents, which is what George Lucas really is. He hates the Hollywood studio way of making movies and might be sympathetic to such a project enough to help.

Realistically? We are probably not ready as human beings to act that cohesively on a never-been-done-before independent project like that without getting paid in anything but the joy of watching the movie when its done in return. But it’s nice to consider that someday…it might could be that way.

180. Daoud - July 26, 2011

Keachick, FX = effects. Say it fast, it makes sense. We used to say SFX for ‘special’ effects too. SEX, that’s something else. :)
.
The special FX houses, like ILM, need a good amount of lead time. They could be making Enterprise swoops and trying angles out, but they can’t do diddly really until they have the storyboards. They can start to a degree without the shooting script done, but not THAT much in advance can be done.
.
Of course, some FX in Trek movies was poor because it wasn’t done at ILM. Star Trek V suffers of course, because its effects were essentially done in some guy’s mother’s basement in New Jersey.

181. Minerva - July 26, 2011

*sniffles* So sad now – I’ve been waiting and waiting and looking for a release date for next year, thinking it’s sooo far away, and now I have to wait till 2013?!?

On the subject of Kirk being promoted too far up the chain of command; I agree that with the entire secondary fleet (the primary one being in the Laurentian system) destroyed – including a whole crop of cadets – Star Fleet is seriously short on manpower.
Add to that the PR and political angle; Kirk would be considered a hero (just like his father) and SF would probably consider it a bit of a “feel good”-story and a boost to SF popularity to put him in the captain’s chair.
Or maybe the writers just got lazy and skipped to the happy ending as quickly as possible. ;)

182. richpit - July 26, 2011

Wait, what? There’s going to be a sequel? Just kidding.

I still say, NO “HOLIDAY” RELEASE! If they don’t make summer 2012, wait until summer 2013.

JJ Trek IS NOTa “holiday” release franchise, it’s a summer tentpole franchise.

183. Bob Tompkins - July 26, 2011

And as regards 3D, nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

It is an incredible waste of time and resources. It’s not that popular because a certain %age of the population leaves the theater with a headache and never goes back. It’s a technology that needs to be perfected before wasting valuable time and money that is better spent making the best 2D product they can make.

184. MJ - July 26, 2011

“JJ Trek IS NOTa “holiday” release franchise, it’s a summer tentpole franchise.”

Man I am getting sick of the ignorance of people making these summer tent-pole versus holiday franchise. Avatar, $2B+, Holiday Release = case closed. Not to mention ALL of the Lord of the Rings films = $2.5 Billlion total for holiday release.

And for those of you saying, “oh, I’m so scared of going up against The Hobbit,” well consider that Sherlock Holmes, which wasn’t even a sequel, made $525M in the same holiday period as Avatar. So case fracking closed on that issue as well.

Not taking any potshots here against anyone in particular, but given I keep hearing this argument, it is getting on my nerves because it is not based in reality.

Have some confidence in our product here folks. This is not some wimpy franchise that can’t compete, and if is is a very good movie, it will at least make $500M regardless of when it is released as the follow-up to the very successful reboot. Stop being afraid!!!!!

185. MJ - July 26, 2011

@171 “If they are aiming for January to start shooting then it will be a Christmas release. First Contact went into production in April 1996 and was released in November 1996 in US and Dec 1996 in UK.”

Great Point Captain Nell !!!!!

186. Charla - July 26, 2011

*THIS* is what I’m talking about…. without the influence of any of the posts above, this information is more definitive. Especially appreciated the excitement in Damon’s face and voice. The information from Bob and Alex made me feel somewhat bad for them because they have caught SO much flack here…. it must have been a little daunting to even discuss the film’s anticipated start for filming date.

None the less, the information provided was great, I gather JJ is on board, and everyone is ready to get busy on Trek soon. :-D

187. MJ - July 26, 2011

@172 “Star Trek movies are a lot more technical than they used to be. The number of effects shots now… it’s essentially like the whole work load in Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis all rolled into one. Although the physical filming may only take a few months.”

Even if the special effects take 6 months, that means they would be done by 30 June next year, assuming a 1 January start date. But also, there is no reason why the special effects couldn’t start a month or two before live action shooting.

188. MJ - July 26, 2011

@186. “The information from Bob and Alex made me feel somewhat bad for them because they have caught SO much flack here…. it must have been a little daunting to even discuss the film’s anticipated start for filming date.”

This all could have been avoided if the Supreme Court had provided us regular non-contradictory info on what was going on. My perception, wrong or right, is that they have been (perhaps unintentionally) somewhat secretive about schedule in recent months.

Take The Hobbit. It took multiple years for that project to get moving, but Peter Jackson was completely open about where they were in planning the movies at all times. And now Peter is providing video updates of the production journals from the movies. JJ could learn a thing or two concerning best practices for fan outreach for his movies.

189. VulcanFilmCritic - July 26, 2011

179.dmduncan. Now THAT would be wonderful! We can only dream of such a thing. I would definitely get in line to be an “angel.”

190. Red Dead Ryan - July 26, 2011

#188.

Yes but “The Hobbit” movies are based on the book. Peter Jackson isn’t really going to give anything away because anyone who’s read the book knows what’s going to happen anyway. Since the “Star Trek” sequel is going to be an original movie, there’s the danger in giving things away. I don’t think that J.J Abrams or Paramount would want to risk revealing key details. I think that is the best approach, to keep us fans hungry and for the writers and producers to not have fans hanging over every thing they do.

191. Fubamushu - July 26, 2011

What a frakkin’ joke. These guys really are incompetent. Their first movie was delayed and what did we get for the delay? Garbage. Junk. A mediocrre adventure film.

And what’s the plan now? We will take so long to get together that we will have to delay the second film as well. It will be four or more years between sequels. That is absurd. And what will we get for our patience? More mediocrity.

192. MJ - July 26, 2011

@190. It could be done in a general way without giving any story points away. Besides, that wasn’t really my point. My point was that Peter Jackson is the gold standard in how a franchise leader should communicate with fans, while JJ is still a work in progress.

193. Jack - July 26, 2011

179. Hmmm…

194. Keachick (rose pinenut) - July 26, 2011

The difference between how Peter Jackson handles fans and the media and the way producers/directors/actors in the US handle same may have something to do with differences between a NZ kiwi culture and an American culture. We may all speak the same language, but experiences and perspectives can vary. The media/paparazzi does not seem to be as big here or appear to be as invasive…Just my impression, but then I am not any kind of celebrity or whatever.

I believe Los Angeles has about 12 million people. NZ’s entire population is approximately 4.2 million. It hit the 4 million mark about 5 years ago…It is said that there is about a 6-7 degree of separation between people in most parts of the world. In NZ it is a 2-3 degree of separation. I don’t know how much of a difference just that factor may make to how Peter Jackson manages publicity etc.

195. MJ - July 26, 2011

Keachick, a couple interesting stats:

– The Greater LA Region has 20 Milliion people

– One out of every 10 people in the U.S. live within 100 miles from the Ports of LA/Long Beach, CA.

Now you can see why I have vacationed to New Zealand twice in the past two years! :-)

196. rvp - July 27, 2011

The wait killed my excitement for this movie, but I’m starting to think it’s for the best, since it’s allowing me to be very zen about the whole thing.

I’ll see it when/if I see it, whenever that its, whatever it’s done to it. I don’t really care at this point.

197. Christopher Roberts - July 27, 2011

178. I can see why some fans think First Contact ruined the Borg. It’s not necessarily that they were ruined, it was the introduction of a Queen for Data to work again. Voyager took that and ran with it, until it took an Enterprise episode (ironically) to restore them back to that cold threat that can’t be reasoned with.

Anyway if you want to know where the rot set in with the Borg, it was definitely Next Generation and that two-parter where they’re essentially turned into a personality cult of Lore’s making!

198. Christopher Roberts - July 27, 2011

197. (correction) …introduction of a Queen for Data to work against.

199. The Pheonix - July 27, 2011

My personal opinion has been simply that they go throughout the generations of the show to create each movie.Yes, you can’t beat the original, but move on to the next generation, do something with the borg.That would be an awesome movie. Also doing something with deep space nine and Voyager would be enjoyable as well…..

200. The Pheonix - July 27, 2011

And im sorry but you dont have to run hand in hand with the series, it could be a great movie if they went off on their own.

201. dmduncan - July 27, 2011

193. Jack – July 26, 2011

Think of the money raising scheme as sort of front loading the movie. Instead of paying at the box office to see a finished movie, they pay in advance to finance the movie they will then see for free and even own.

You will still need some “angel” donors, but what a really cool thing it would be to use the Star Trek philosophy to actually break the mold of Hollywood studio productions to make a Star Trek movie that could compete with Hollywood on every level of production quality.

I myself would love a shot at making a movie like that, not having to pitch anything to any executive at Paramount to see if they like it or understand it from their box office receipts perspectives, without having to be concerned if it’s going to be a commercial hit so you can really be free to dare new things in an artistic way that fans would love. The greatest movies are movies that break past old boundaries, that take risks — but that’s exactly what those who bankroll Hollywood productions are afraid of because their concern is for financial profit and risk taking is anathema to a good return on their investment. That is, you simply cannot predict the outcome of a risk taking artistic endeavor. But the people who have the money WANT to know the outcome because they are afraid of losing their money on a risky thing that may not get them their money back plus some, and that’s why we get all these known quantities being made and remade by Hollywood. Because known quantities make them feel like they’re playing it more safe with their money.

Artistically, however, the stuff Hollywood makes is usually stagnant because of their way of doing things, and it doesn’t seem to change even when there are numerous examples of how ART SELLS. American Graffiti is one example of that. The Godfather is another. Paramount thought they were getting a basic gangster movie, and Francis Coppolla gave them something else entirely. And the world is richer for that.

202. Captain I need a good story. - July 28, 2011

With the long wait for the sequel, it better be good. The first movie had so many holes in, you could drive a circus through it.

203. gingerly - July 29, 2011

@202

There were no holes, just people who didn’t like or fully understand the plot.

204. dmduncan - July 29, 2011

203: “@202 There were no holes, just people who didn’t like or fully understand the plot.”

He means flea circus.

205. Captain I need a good story. - August 1, 2011

@203 and 204

By holes I mean. IE: “Get him off the ship” not “Throw him in the Brig”. Sent off ship and onto a planet with, wait for it, Old Spock or Spock Prime whichever you prefer. There are many examples of this in the story. That being said I have no problem with a reboot, just make it easier to swallow. Part of the fun is the history or canon of Star Trek, so if you are going to “write it out of existence”, please make it more plausible. Had a real issue with Nero waiting around for 25 years for Spock to show up also. Talk about time well spent?!

Thanks

206. raymond humphryes - March 2, 2012

i con’t wait for he new startrek i have all of the flirms do youknow if they is going to be more then a flirm is so do you know when

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