Yet even more on Star Trek from Mr. Orci’s press tour for Transformers. In the second part of the IESB interview with Orci there is one Trek question related to the future of the franchise and if it will ‘re-establish’ the universe. Orci replied:
Absolutely, it’s gotta bring in a whole new generation, it’s gotta bring in people who don’t know Trek so it absolutely trying to re-establish what this universe should be…
Regarding TV Orci dived into the whole CBS/Paramount thing.
…In terms of TV versus feature, there is a whole weird thing I am sure you can find out about, Paramount owns features and CBS owns the TV and like they have to be separate because maybe CBS was trying to compete to do a show that was going to get in the way of a movie. There’s all kinds of weird business politics that I am not entirely privy to yet. Our responsibility is to make a good movie and to hope that the success opens other doors, but it’s not our intention to go, let’s take this character and make this show out of him. You can’t think in those terms, you start getting in your own way and counting your chickens before they hatch. Make a good movie and then the rest of it will take care of itself.
In case you missed it in the other article, the subject of TV came up with his talk with SciFi Wire. Orci said of a new TV show
I’m sure CBS is thinking about that,…that’s not [something] we’re thinking about. We’re just thinking about the movie. Certainly, I don’t know how they could not think about that.
Some websites have jumped the gun and taken these comments to mean there is a new show in the works, but TrekMovie.com can find no evidence of that. It appears that CBS will do nothing until after the movie. I believe that if Abrams and his team can bring Trek back like Meyer and Bennett did in the 80s then CBS Paramount TV are likely to do what they did back then and create a new show with no relation to the film franchise (TNG). They will also keep a close eye on Lucas’ new Star Wars live action TV show which premieres (possibly) in 2009.
Fascinating… TOS on TV again with a new show… One could only dream…
Got me interested!
…
But then again, I’m easily impressed.
: /
First they fix the FX, then they fix the acting….
Just kidding, of course. I’d love to see a new series. I hope they do not redo episodes from the original series. I don’t want to sit there comparing the New TOS (NTOS?) to the Original TOS (OTOS?)
Looking forward to XI!
I’ll believe it when I see it! Do you know how you can tell when someone in showbiz is lying? Easy,….THEIR LIPS ARE MOVING!!!
re: post 1;
He didn’t say the movie would be made into a TV version, he said that CBS is probably thinking of doing a show separate from the film. Probably different group of people, crew and ship. Like DS9 verse TNG films, that’s how I read the comments.
Of course, if the new Star Wars TV show blows chunks, then all bets are off.
5. Nelson – June 19, 2007 – That’s how I read it as well, and it would be the smart bet. The X-Files is an example of what can go wrong with a TV show being made into a movie while the show is still going, it does not work too well. Part of the problem with Trek before is that we were over saturated, Paramount was squeezing Trek for all it was worth, TNG and DS9 on at the same time, then DS9 and VOY and TNG Movies, then just after VOY ended ENTERPRISE came along (though I am a big fan of it). We had to much Trek in a period of 7 years.
Now while Paramount runs a movie series of say 3 films, CBS can run a TV series, unrelated to the Movies (maybe through in a reference here and there) a normal show runs for 7 years, 3 films over 7 years and 1 TV, would be just the right amount. Having two shows and movies on at the same time was simply two much.
Maybe even setting the films in time of TOS and ENT (yes I said ENT) and the TV series after the Dominion war and Nemesis (Use the Book Articles of Federation for inspiration, or even the Titan books), would give a well rounded view of the Trek Universe and would appeal to most fans of Trek, from the Fans of TOS to fans of DS9 etc, while still not over saturating fans and the broarder community.
re: TV- we’ll see. Pray. And wait. It will eventually.
I think that this is REALLY premature. If Paramount has the movie rights and CBS has the TV rights what chance would there be that the two storylines would bear any resemblance to each other? Star Trek suffered from too much product thinning down the overall quality. You shouldn’t have the A squad doing one thing and have the B squad doing another thing. Besides, like I said in the first place, let’s get a good movie and then see what’s next.
Here’s the part that scares me: that they are trying to “re-establish what this universe should be…” Not what it IS as has been laid out over dozens of writers, artists and producers, including Gene Roddenberry, over the last 40 YEARS, but what a group of flash in the pan laptop jockeys with fitted untucked shirts and “product” in their hair think it “should be”.
Here’s an idea, Orci. If Star Trek isn’t what you think it SHOULD BE, then don’t make a “Star Trek” movie. Make up your OWN story. Yeah, make THAT movie — your own. Then you can make it the way it SHOULD be. And no one would care. Or go see it. Because it would probably suck. Because you have no talent. So instead you piggyback on titles and projects created by others with MORE talent and then “re-imagine” them as they “SHOULD BE” because you don’t have enough creativity to make up your own damn stories. Hack.
10. kickinhacksinthesacks – June 19, 2007 – Come on tone it down a bit, the movie appears to be a “prequal” of sorts, set before Kirk was Captain, so in essense there is not much that they can “change” they can put a new spin on the design of the ENT or what ever ship, but even that will have to be limited, they biggest changes may come with the sets, but even Rodneberry changed that, and I doubt they are realy going to go out and change forty years of hard work but alot of writers and produces, maybe he was taken out of context who know, but let’s not jump the gun.
fyi….#10 is our old friend who hates everything and everyone…Dip Thong…the flame machine
and I warn you again…find a way to make your points without pointless attacks
11. The Realist – June 19, 2007 – Why must people attack something that is still in it’s earliest stage? Eys voice concern, even offer your hope of what it will be, if you have a criticism of something they said address it in a constructive way instead of pointlessy attacking the artist behind it, and let’s try and avoid name calling. I am hopeful of a great movie, true to the past, but free to make it’s own way, they all seem loyal to the heart of what has kept Trek going for Forty years, so lets wait and see. Thanks for the heads up Anthony.
#11… Like I said, his comments scare me because he’s “re-establishing” what’s already been established (as opposed to changing sets) as it “should be” rather than how it “is” and “has been” for 40 years. Look at the outcry when CBS-D slightly changed the look of the Tholian ships recently. That was just a cosmetic change. I hope I’m wrong.
#12… Sorry Anthony. Sometimes my passion gets the best of me. Love you, love the site. Kisses all around.
I think we should all keep in mind how secretive these guys are being about the whole thing, normaly by now we have generaly got a good idea of who is in a movie and what the plot is roughly going to be, all we have now, is a time period and a couple of characters and even then we don’t know if they are going to be playing a big part.
They may be sending some of us on a wild goose chase or throwing us of the scent, I must admit if I were diong a Trek, and wanted it to be big, I would chuck some red hearings out there. I can understand people not wanting TOS changed all that much, it is what it is, but this is in a way going to be something completly new, Rodenberry basicaly did a reset with TMP. But lets see what time brings.
Here’s another idea.
Everyone quit reading more into the comments than what Orci says.
Timeline…
Paramount…
Write movie
Film Movie
distribute and promote movie
Movie debut
at CBS….
Movie?
Movie could be success…
meet with them about Movie
pencil plans on possible series
wait and see.
This is rumor based on a movie with an unknown script, no casting announcements and no official title.
Definitely a good idea to bring in a new generation.
#10 Kick/Dip/Flaming..
I fully agree with the Realist in most all he’s said, except his spelling…LOL.
This needs a wait and see attitude and not attempts to tweeze out bits of stuff from between the words in quotes.
and I hate name-calling for any reason.
18. Xai – June 19, 2007 -You are right there, my spelling is shocking! My English Teacher would have a stroke! Xai, I shall endeavour to improve my spelling :-)
I also agree with name calling, I try to avoid it when every I can, as it distracts from the primary topic of conversation, it also lowers the meaning and sophistication of a debate/discussion.
I also feel a bit of impatience from some of the people on here, who want more and more information, any information, I have to ask why? The production team appears to be going to great lengths to keep things as quiet as possible and thus preserve the surprise for the fans and greater public, your post at #16 is probably what is going through the minds of CBS Executives and Paramount Management, it would be nice if it happened that way but who knows what will happen in a year. Remember patience is a virture and good things come to those who wait. I hope my spelling has improved.
As I’ve said previously, I just hope that IF a TV series does come out of this, that it isn’t set as a prequel to anything. To make a thrilling and exciting story in a TV series, you need to make a few new things. TNG brought the Borg, DS9 the Cardassians/Dominion, VOY brought the Kazon and ENT did the Xindi and the Suliban.
That is one of my main problems with ENT, though; they make up these NEW THRILLING bad guys who’ve never been mentioned before hand. Sure, they’re exciting and menacing, but you can’t continue making up thrilling bad guys that simply slot into history without any mention in the future.
That’s why I’m hoping for another sequel series. The discontinuity in ENT could have easily been avoided, but I’d rather not see it happen again. Post VOY, please!
-TGP-
#19 Realist.
Thanks! Where from, may I ask?…
Iowa here
“Make a good movie and then the rest of it will take care of itself.”
Well said, Mr. Orci. Now get cracking on that good movie! :)
21. Xai – June 19, 2007 – Australia, English background. Believe it or not, my passion is Theatre and English Literature, you would not tell my spelling abilities! I hang my head in shame!
then I clarify… state of Iowa (Kirk’s future home state), USA, here.
“To my computer, welcome!”
Pleased to meet you.
#22 Scott…
Agreed.
re: 19- I totally agree, The Realist. Good, positive and intellegent discourse makes for an intellegent forum too.
Speaking of The Realist’s spelling, I thought the funniest example was in post # 15 where it was stated, “some red hearings out there”. Weren’t those the ones televised live, in the early 1950’s, during the big Communist scare? Bwahahahaha………..
Kind of a stupid thing to realize, but if they were to make a new TOS series under the leadership of JJ Abrams, that would make it the Star Trek: ATOS (Abrams TOS)
Atos was known from the original series of course, and similar spelling to a Mr AtoZ (A to Z)
Seriously thou, I hope the movie does well and that it leads to a new Trek series regardless of the actors involved. If they could focus more on character development, and less on the technical and scientific aspects of Trek (ie TNG and beyond), I think they would be able to make a great show. I’m just hoping that they refrain from using known actors in the movie. Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan etc… none of them were really “uber known” actors at the time of TOS.
24. Xai – June 19, 2007 – Thank you and to my computer welcome. To everyone picking apart my spelling, I only make this suggestion, don’t, not because I am offended, I’m not, in any way offended, it is sort of flattering! But there are probably far to many mistakes to list.
Remember a positive attitude is far healthier than a negative one! “We can’t be afraid of the wind” ;-)
As most of you have figured out I am an optimist, I can see good in most things in and always think positively, where I work I started a Positive Thought Bank, each day we take it in turns to email around a positive thought and each of us saved it to a folder on a computer, this was so we could always have a source of positve and fun thoughts at hand for when things get hectic and stressful. In it people can put general thoughts, funny observations, emails, anything that is positive! I know it is not related to the link and it draws away from the thread of conversation but thought I would share something positive, feel free to copy me!
I think it would be neat for CBS to make seasons 4 and 5 of the original series and possibly more. That way you could have a new original series feel but it wouldn’t be meant to replace the first 3 seasons.
I think people are confusing reboots, re-imaginings, sequels, prequels, and everything else under the sun, with simply getting back to basics.
Star Trek, at it’s core when you strip off the 40 years of bullshit and pork, is simply about the 5 year mission of a futuristic starship with a crew representative of vast numbers of worlds, skipping through the stars. Nothing less, nothing more.
Star Treks primary problem IS infact it’s vast history, and any writer that has worked on the show will tell you that, and they have.
It’s entirely possible for a thing to become so burdened by it’s own seeming success that it negates creativity.
So now 40 years on, what are your alternatives creatively?
You can create plug in adventures, neatly fitting in between A and C , making damn sure to avoid stomping on A and C, effectively neutering any sense of drama, risk, jeopardy, or adventure, since we already know C is the outcome, you can re-create A, abandoning B,C, etc, you can go beyond C, and make G, which is merely more of the same of everything that preceded it, or, you can wipe away all of the bullshit and really examine A and ask what is A trying to say, what does it mean, and go from there as a starting point, neither altering nor re-interpreting A, but rather embelleshing it.
It sounds to me like these guys are returning to what they percieve Star Trek at it’s core is, and if that so happens to step on the toes of the fans of the successor series, well, they had a long ride, 4 different series worth of material for your viewing pleasure.
I like the idea of getting back to basics, because Star Trek lost it’s own identity, first they lost Kirk, then even the name of the ship, until finally you can’t even answer what the hell Star Trek is about. Is it about a ship named Enterprise or Voyager? Is it about James Kirk or Benjamin Sisko? is it about a spaceship or a space station?
Creatively, the WORST mistake Paramount made was continuing series after series after series.
Addendum:
Star Trek isn’t Star Wars. It can’t extend beyond it’s own premise and be all things to all people. Star Trek is far more serialized and self-contained than Star Wars.
If ccaptain every Joe on Any ship during Any time is Star Trek, that becomes silly after awhile. Star Trek has to be about someone doing something for some purpose, and once established, those attributes have to remain consistent. That’s story-telling 101.
Let’s face it, the new movie is probably attempting to AUGMENT the original premise of Star Trek, not change it! Let’s hope for the best!!
Star Trek and Star Wars will probably compete with each other on the same night. Sigh. Bureaucratic thinking is consistantly predictable.
Absolutely, it’s gotta bring in a whole new generation, it’s gotta bring in people who don’t know Trek so it absolutely trying to re-establish what this universe should be…
To re establish is a word I dont like.
They sorta tried do that with ENT and we all know how that turned out. 13-1.5 million viewers in four years.
People who see Star Trek think its too geeky for the common moviegoer. This isn’t a Mission Impossible Tom Cruise instant blockbuster here. This is trying to recapture 90’s glory.
Thousands of people think they know what the Star Trek Universe should be but how are they going to agree on that? We cant even agree now which captains better. Which episode was the best… which show was the best. Remastered or classic? Which movie was the best etc. .How dimwitted and short sighted can this guy really be here?
Instead of Berman Trek we now get Orci and Kurtzman Trek, YAY! Where is Leonard Nimoy when you need him?
Let’s face it, in the 60s and early 70s space was exciting. Kids used to build model space ships and wanted to be astronauts. The Apollo missions were happening; we all remember Neil Armstrong’s first words on the moon: “It feels all spongy, it’s like a giant sponge cake”. But that’s all gone. We know there’s no other habitable planets within reach.
I think they should just let star-trek go. Like everything else these days, they take something good and milk it dry. Just… let it go.
#37…
And… why are you here, exactly? Seems more fun to spend time posting to sites with topics you actually care about.
@ #35, Redshirt…
Sisko, Parallels, TOS, Classic, tWoK/FC, very.
-TGP-
Berman & Braga = BB
Orci & Kurtzman = OK = > Hey, Trek is OK for a long time again!!! ;-)
#38
“And… why are you here, exactly?”
I come here to check the latest remastered original series episodes. I saw the title of this thread and poked my head in to have a look.
Actually, I don’t really know why I’m here. I’m not even sure I really like star-trek that much thinking about it. I want to enjoy it, but the bad scripts, bad effects, English-speaking human-looking aliens, all planets having the same gravity as earth and impossible ideas like the transporter and faster the light-speed travel always spoils it.
Actually, thanks for asking. I shouldn’t really be here at all.
The term “re-establish” sounds too much like the term “reboot” to me. Please tell me that it’s not a reboot.
re: 41
“Actually, I don’t really know why I’m here. I’m not even sure I really like star-trek that much thinking about it. I want to enjoy it, but the bad scripts, bad effects, English-speaking human-looking aliens, all planets having the same gravity as earth and impossible ideas like the transporter and faster the light-speed travel always spoils it.”
I can more easily believe in the transporter and faster-than-light travel and the other things you mentioned than I can in someone new playing Kirk or Spock.
#20:
What’s the difference between introducing the Xindi and the Suliban on ENT and never showing them again in the 23rd and 24th century Treks and introducing the Andorians, Orions, Tholians, and Tellarites on TOS and never showing them again in the 24th century Treks?
Really, the only aliens from TOS that made a substantial appearance in the 24th century Treks were the Vulcans, Klingons, and Romulans. Everyone else seemed to be forgotten.
In fact, the Andorians, Orions, Tholians, and Tellarites make more of an appearance on ENT than TOS itself.
REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT,
GET USE TO IT
This is sounding more and more like a 100% reboot.
I for one don’t like the reboot idea.
So TNG was a reboot of TOS or what? No, it was a reimagination within the chronology. So it’s the same with TOS and the new film. It’s a reimagination that lies in the chronology we have and it fills holes in it. These are the voyages we don’t know – the human adventure begins again!
#47:
TNG wasn’t a reboot. It was a continuation, just 100 years in TOS’s future.
#45:
If this next movie IS a reboot, I’m not watching it. I’d feel like I’d be betraying what has already been done.
Some would say “If you could except a Batman reboot, why not Star Trek?”
That is totally different. The movies “Batman”, “Batman Returns”, “Batman Forever”, and “Batman & Robin” were very loosely connected. And furthermore, ALL of the movies were based on the comic books. They’re not REPLACING the comic books.
TOS wasn’t based on anything. Basically what would be happening is the new movie would make it as though TOS (and all that followed it) never happened. It would REPLACE all of it.
I wonder how “Star Wars” fans would feel if Episodes 4, 5, 6 were redone with new actors. I don’t think they’d stand for it. But when it comes to “Star Trek”, everyone’s okay with it??? I don’t understand that.
#48
“OS wasn’t based on anything. Basically what would be happening is the new movie would make it as though TOS (and all that followed it) never happened. It would REPLACE all of it.”
Well there you are, you’ve come up with a plot. The film starts with something happening that alters the time-line — like those borg thingies tried to do in that film (first contact I think) — only this time it isn’t corrected and the past is changed. They can take the whole of star-trek, throw it in the air and start again. Brilliant Kyle Nin. I’d go along with that.
I think they said there’s no time travel in the movie. Didn’t they?