Visit The Official Star Trek Shop Now!

Star Trek Sequel To Be Released May 17, 2013 – In 3D

According to a new report (confirmed by TrekMovie), JJ Abrams Star Trek sequel finally has a release date. The new Trek crew returns to the big screen on May 17, 2013. Not only that, but they will be in 3D. More details below.

 

 

Star Trek sequel in 3D – May 17, 2013

TrekMovie has confirmed a report at Deadline that Paramount Pictures has officially picked Friday May 17th, 2013 as a release date for JJ Abrams Star Trek sequel. The choice is to take advantage of Sony recently moving Roland Emmerich’s Singularity away from that date to to Nov 1, 2013. The May date gives Star Trek a prime spot in the pre-Memorial Day Weekend. This date falls four years and nine days after the May 8, 2009 release date of JJ Abrams Star Trek. This will be the longest gap between Star Trek films with the same crew, beating the previous record of four years and two days between the TNG films Star Trek: Insurrection (Dec. 11, 1998) and Star Trek Nemesis (Dec. 13, 2002).

TrekMovie has also confirmed that the Star Trek sequel will be released in 3D (and 2D of course). A trusted source tells TrekMovie that the studio feels the 3D version will be helpful in overseas sales for the film. Star Trek films have traditionally not done as well overseas as other tentpoles and while 3D has lost some favor in the US, it is still proving popular in international markets.

It has also been confirmed that the Star Trek sequel will again have a co-financing partner. This time Skydance Productions will be chipping in. The 2009 Star Trek film was co-financed by Spyglass Entertainment. It has become very common with big budget tentpoles to have co-financing partners.


The new "Star Trek" crew will be back on May 17, 2013

Delayed but finally moving along

TrekMovie recently broke the news that the Star Trek sequel will kick off production on January 15, 2012. And last week co-writer/producer Bob Orci confirmed that the team were already on their 3rd draft of the script.  Pre-production for the film has been underway for months and some effects shots are already being worked on by ILM. A source tells TrekMovie that the Abrams team would have been able to deliver the film for a Holiday 2012 release, but Paramount preferred a Summer release date (like they did with the 2009 Star Trek film).

The May 2013 date is the second official release date for this twelfth entry in the Star Trek franchise. In early 2010 Paramount set June 29, 2012 as a release date, but in June of this year the studio officially put the GI Joe 2 film into that slot – leaving the Star Trek release date into limbo. While there are a number of factors that led to that decision, the biggest was director/producer JJ Abrams lack of availability in early 2011. Post-production on Super 8 ended up taking up so much of Abrams’ (and producing partner Bryan Burk’s) time, that team could not move forward on finalizing the Star Trek script and starting pre-production in enough time to deliver a film by Summer 2012.


JJ Abrams directing "Star Trek" – he is back in the chair for production kicking off in January

A look at early Summer 2013

The May 17th date puts the Star Trek sequel in a gap between two other big genre movies: Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel (the Superman reboot).

Here is how the early summer of 2013 is shaping up so far:
• Iron Man 3 (BV) – 5/3
• Mommy and Me (Sony) – 5/10
• Pacific Rim (WB) – 5/10
• Pixels (Sony) – 5/17
• Star Trek sequel (Paramount) – 5/17
• Fast & Furious 6 (Uni.) – 5/24
• Leafmen (Fox) – 5/24
• Lone Ranger (BV) – 5/31
• 1000 A.E. (Sony) – 6/7
• Man of Steel (WB) – 6/14
• Monsters University (BV) – 6/21
 

Poll: To 3D or not to 3D

How many dimensions are in your Star Trek future?

[poll=679]

Stay tuned to TrekMovie for all the news about the Star Trek sequel.

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest
November 23, 2011 4:43 pm

3D. There’s one nobody saw coming.

Nemesis4909
November 23, 2011 4:43 pm

Finally some news, I take it they have a script then?

Wonder what it’s about.

Also, first?

Lukas
November 23, 2011 4:43 pm

Great!

November 23, 2011 4:44 pm

Another year and a half (sigh!)

Artrek
November 23, 2011 4:44 pm

As long as Shatner is not in it. The world could not handle Shatner in 3D.

Ahmed Abdo
November 23, 2011 4:46 pm

Hopefully they will stick to that date & not delayed it again. As for 3D, I don’t really care about that aspect, just make a good & decent movie with a strong story & not just CGI.

Quark
November 23, 2011 4:47 pm

What do lens flares look like in 3D?

Anthony Thompson
November 23, 2011 4:48 pm

3D. The suits had their way. Yuck.

trekmaster
November 23, 2011 4:48 pm

I want Shatner in 3D!!! LOL

MvRojo
November 23, 2011 4:49 pm

Not big into non-animated 3-D (I even thought Avatar looked way better in 2-D), but I hope they film it in 3-D. 3-D conversion seem to be getting worse, not better

Drew
November 23, 2011 4:49 pm

Cue the complaining in 3….2…..1….

rm10019
November 23, 2011 4:50 pm

After seeing Hugo last week, I approve of Trek in 3D, but they have to shoot it in Real 3D not convert

Anthony Thompson
November 23, 2011 4:51 pm

5. Shatner’s paunch in 3D would better be utilized in a horror flick.

Vultan
November 23, 2011 4:51 pm

You know what sells even better than 3D?
A good story.

OverlordSpock
November 23, 2011 4:51 pm

It can be in 3D all the studio wants. I don’t really care as I will be seeing the plain-jane 2D version. Simple as that.

Doom
November 23, 2011 4:52 pm

Star Trek in 3D? Lets hope my theater will offer in normal 2D. 3D is the biggest ripoff and does nothing to help story. So I guess there is no script, just effects

sooner Dave
November 23, 2011 4:52 pm

3d Crapola. Year delay. Studio won. Probably won’t even fix the engine room. Sigh.

freezejeans
November 23, 2011 4:54 pm

1,000 comments or bust!

Jeff
November 23, 2011 4:55 pm

Darn. I was hoping to see this movie. Don’t they know that the Mayan calendar ends in December 2012 and therefore the world? Oh well.

NuFan
November 23, 2011 4:57 pm

May 2013 = confirmed

3D = confirmed

Khan = wait a few more weeks

Geek_Girl
November 23, 2011 4:57 pm

Nooooooooo.

Phobos
November 23, 2011 5:02 pm

see, told you the writers were procrastinating. This is it where its gets you.

3D is 3 times as DUMB
November 23, 2011 5:03 pm

Star Trek 3D —- I think I just threw up in my mouth. If it’s not in 2D, I will pass on seeing it. Nicely screwed up, Paramount.

Sunfell
November 23, 2011 5:04 pm

No, no, no! 3D is a cinematic abomination, and a frickin’ cheap gimmick whose time is gone.

Plus, I cannot see 3D, and get migraines from it.

Please do not screw up Star Trek with 3D.

Phobos
November 23, 2011 5:05 pm

anyway, Im happy there is a date.
WAY too long between movies, and 3D will be annoying.

This better be in IMAX. I dont watch old movie screens.

November 23, 2011 5:10 pm

Just think of those big brewery kettles and fermentation tanks coming right at you!

Scott
November 23, 2011 5:15 pm

If the December 21, 2012 event happens, kiss star trek 12 goodbye! But at least we will see it, in the afterlife. LOL

Phobos
November 23, 2011 5:16 pm

@26 rotfl
I hope to God they make a decent engineering this time. No more breweries!

MJ
November 23, 2011 5:18 pm

I will only pay for 3D if the actually film it is 3D. If they really want to make the 3D a success, they should think hard about adopting the new 48 FPS 3D technology that they are using on the Hobbit films and upcoming Avatar sequels.

If I were JJ, I’d be on a plane to New Zealand next week to see how Peter Jackson is successfully using the 48FPS 3D on the Hobbit films. See:
http://www.facebook.com/PeterJacksonNZ#!/photo.php?v=10150451523596807&set=vb.141884481557&type=2&theater

I’ll say one thing more here — THIS HAD BETTER NOT BE SOME 3D POST PROCESSING SCAM — THAT WOULD SUCK!!!

Bob Orci, you should be taking notes here from my comments and reporting my recommendations to JJ. No, I am not kidding!

Phil
November 23, 2011 5:19 pm

That’s my anniversary. I think I’ll be busy that weekend.

Ensign RedShirt
November 23, 2011 5:21 pm

So much for J.J.’s “I don’t like 3D” stance.

Once again, Paramount is going to sit on a negative for an unusually long time.

Desstruxion
November 23, 2011 5:21 pm

I’ll wait for the dvd…….unless Shatner’s in it.

November 23, 2011 5:21 pm

What I love about 3D is it will force JJ and co to play nice with the cinematography. While I loved Star Trek, my only peeve was the “shakiness”. Hopefully they will be respectful of what makes a 3D movie magical e.g. like they did with Avatar.

Matt from Bradford Uk
November 23, 2011 5:25 pm

Here we go again. Can’t wait to get all the information from Trekmovie.com. My official Star Trek site. Hope they’ll film it in 3d. With the timescale they have I think it will be. Hope JJ can still do his filming style in 3d. Maybe a few less lense flares.

jesustrek
November 23, 2011 5:29 pm

Ok no more…please :) reday to May 17 2013.

Ahmed Abdo
November 23, 2011 5:30 pm

I want to see more of the federation, the major players in that new timeline, not just the Klingon . And if they brought Shatner back, I’d be more happy.

November 23, 2011 5:31 pm

Holy crap what a dumb idea. 3D?!? Why?!?!

Vultan
November 23, 2011 5:37 pm
Cygnus-X1
November 23, 2011 5:38 pm

May 2013. I called it a year ago, thank you very much.

They did May last time around and the results were superbly lucrative.

They weren’t gonna change a winning formula the second time around.

I haven’t seen any of the new 3D movies, so I can’t have too much of an opinion on whether it’s a good idea. I hope the 3D glasses aren’t annoying over my prescriptive glasses. My gut reaction is to be a little worried that they’re going to put in a lot 3D-eye-candy-shots and there will be an even greater imbalance than last time between drama and action time on screen. And if it’s cut together at the breakneck ADHD pace of the last one, the 3D effect might be overkill. Though, I got the impression from the last one that thoughtful science-fiction fans over age 24 are ultimately not the target audience, so the concerns of myself and those of like mind may be irrelevant. And if the aforementioned are true, Abrams’ appropriation and selling-out of the Star Trek franchise will bear out to have been more than mere suspicion. But maybe we’ll be pleasantly surprised by the integrity, fidelity and substance of the sequel over the first one. Maybe having proven themselves commercially successful with the first one, they’ll aim for substance more with the sequel. Here’s hoping…

Devon
November 23, 2011 5:39 pm

I hope those of you worrying about 3-D realize that there will be 2-D options, obviously. Stop worrying.

November 23, 2011 5:40 pm

As I am not a big fan of 3-D, thank goodness I live in a small town, with a small cinema that gets 2-D prints of the 3-D releases.

Valenti
November 23, 2011 5:42 pm

3D after all. Huh. OK.
Despite my literal blindness to 3D effects, I don’t really mind, tho.

Obsidian
November 23, 2011 5:51 pm

Wow, what a wait!

How about a TV series then? One in the new timeline. Or the prime timeline, or the TNG era. Anything as long as the writing is good! Get Ronald D. Moore on the phone STAT!

He's Dead Jim
November 23, 2011 5:53 pm

I thought for a long time it would be 2013 so they could have the 3rd one lined up for 2016 Star Treks 50th anniversary.

Neumann
November 23, 2011 5:54 pm

Lens flares in 3D just make it look like there’s glass against the screen (as seen in Transformers 3)

Considering that they could barely get the first film finished on time for its intended Christmas day release, how are we supposed to believe they’ll get the conversion done in time?

Dab
November 23, 2011 5:55 pm

3D usually means a much darker lighting scheme than I like (necessary for effective 3D with current technology). And that makes me sad. :(

Trek Lady
November 23, 2011 5:55 pm

3D? Oh crap. Well, I won’t be seeing it on the big screen. I live in a small community, and it is a 3D film, they will only show it locally on the 3D screens – not in 2D anywhere.

3D gives me massive migraines.

I guess the audience can now enjoy watching Scotty throw things at the screen…in vivid 3D!

November 23, 2011 5:56 pm

What a bunch of whining bastards. Geez.

My only concern was that it be filmed in 3D and not post-converted. Another article I’ve found says it will be filmed in 3D.

Concern assuaged.

Trek Lady
November 23, 2011 5:58 pm

Every had a migraine ety3? A good reason to whine, belive me.

Cygnus-X1
November 23, 2011 5:58 pm

20. NuFan – November 23, 2011

—-Khan = wait a few more weeks—-

Oh, God. Maybe Abrams with his limited Trek experience might think that resurrecting the most effective and brilliantly acted Trek villain of all time would be a good idea, but I have to believe that wiser heads would prevail.

Ricardo Montalban’s Khan has become a cinematic icon, and it’s all but impossible to imagine any actor living up to Montalban’s unique performance, even Benicio del Toro, whom I love. Can you imagine any other actor doing justice to Brando’s Don Corleone? Or Bogart’s Rick Blaine? Or DeNiro’s Travis Bickle? Never mind the fact that ripping off past Trek at this early stage in the franchise re-boot would signal an alarmingly disturbing dearth of creative energy on the part of the writing team.

There are certain things you should just know not to do.

wpDiscuz