Related Sections: Interviews Movies News Top Stories
Star Trek writers offer up a few sequel details
Remember a couple of weeks ago when Star Trek's Zoe Saldana told SCI FI Wire that she believed the script for a second movie was about halfway done?
That is apparently news to screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, who told us on Thursday that they feel complimented that Saldana thinks they are so productive.
"She's so generous," Orci said in a group interview at the Television Critics Association summer press tour in Pasadena, Calif., where he and Kurtzman were promoting Fox's Fringe. "She thinks so much and so highly of us. We had about a 15- [to] 30-minute discussion with the whole gang and went our separate ways. We're still in the re-reading and taking-it-all-in phase before we actually sit down and start designing it."
Developing a worthy sequel to this year's generally acclaimed and certainly lucrative Trek reboot will take much more time, Kurtzman said. They have to exhaust every possible idea to find the best ones.
"We take nothing for granted at this point," Kurtzman said. "We're only going to do it when it's really right."
The discussions include brainstorming classic Trek missions, which could be revisited with a new timeline established thanks to Spock and Nero's time travel. Even generating new ideas brings up past Trek episodes, Orci said.
"Even when you pitch stuff, sometimes someone will be like, 'Wow, that's like that one episode,'" Orci said. "So even in trying to stay away from it, you can crash back in there."
With so many Trek ideas in play, the writers have toyed with possibilities of multiple sequels, though they are not ready to announce a multi-picture commitment. "It was more the fact that we talked about the minute you start seeing how much Star Trek there is and how many ideas everyone's having, you could have enough material," Orci said. "There's been 43 years of material, so that's all that we meant by that. It has to cross your mind. But we're not leaning one way or the other yet."
At the same time, the writers want to make sure any follow-up is not too Trek-heavy, so as not to confuse the new fans who were brought into the fold by director J.J. Abrams' movie. "A lot of what makes die-hard Trekkers really focused on Trek are those details that can sometimes be alienating to people who are not on the inside," Kurtzman said. "That leads us back to what are the big themes, the emotional ideas? That's a language everybody speaks."
One thing Orci does want to do is get more classic catchphrases into the sequel. Memorable moments in Abrams' Trek included Spock Prime's "Live long and prosper" and young Bones' saying, "Dammit, Jim, I'm a doctor, not a ... ." An example of a possible catchphrase to come? Bones has yet to say "He's dead, Jim."
"I noted that," Orci admitted. "I was watching cable the other night, watching Star Trek. It's been on rotation, the original series. He said, 'He's dead, Jim.' I was like, 'Oh, that has to go [in the script].'"
Abrams' childhood friend, Heroes star Greg Grunberg, has appeared in some form or other in most of Abrams' projects: In Trek, he was the voice of Kirk's stepfather on the car phone. Grunberg has begun telling reporters that he wants to play Harry Mudd in a future Star Trek and most recently said it on Wednesday at the TCA summer press tour. Orci agreed to consider Grunberg's proposal. "It's a good idea," Orci said.
Orci went on to detail the collaboration between himself and Kurtzman, director Abrams and producers Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk. "We're going to come up with the story together, obviously, in consultation with J.J. and Bryan," Orci said. "Then we're going to write it up together, the story. Also Damon, and then Alex and I will go write the script."
Lindelof won't be available for day-to-day writing work, as he runs the final season of Lost. "That's the thing, exactly," Orci said. "He's got this other little thing going on right now."
By Dutchman at 7:41 AM ON 08/07/09
I for one would propose a story involving the Vaudwaar rase from ST: voyager. You could do something very interesting with that I would say....
Greetz from The Netherlands
By gorehound696 at 8:05 AM ON 08/07/09
I do hope they go off on a direction not done before.Turning Trek into another YARM or an alternate YARM will only piss me off and make me want to jump ship and bail.I watch TREK since the beginning and now am waiting to see where this new TREK goes.
Please give us a new and never used story not yet another remake krap.
By Maith at 8:15 AM ON 08/07/09
I would suggest that Kirk and Spock go back in time. That idea seems so new to me. The should undo that whole mess that "Enterprise" made out of the star trek universe. So... go back in time, kill archer, go to antarctica and kill the borg there, go farther back, kill khan, go farther back, bring back some whales, go farther back and bring back mark twain, go farther back and witness the creation of life on earth...
well there's a lot of killing and traveling, but it's all been done before.
By Pez at 8:22 AM ON 08/07/09
They have to include a fight between Kirk and a Gorn.
By Cr8z13 at 8:31 AM ON 08/07/09
Bring back Shatner. That's the only thing I care about. The death of Kirk in Generations was an abomination and the character deserves a proper send-off.
By River at 8:42 AM ON 08/07/09
1. Pine looks stupid sitting in that chair, like a 6 year old sitting in an adult's chair.
2. No Shatner. I'm so tired of all the calls of bring back the old cast. Why? They had their day in the sun for almost 40 years. Spock is enough. Otherwise, the films will continue to be about older versions of the characters providing guidance to new versions.
Shatner co-wrote several Star Trek books in which Kirk is alive after Generations.
By Tom at 8:54 AM ON 08/07/09
One of the Star Trek books had a nifty idea: the Doomsday Machine that the Enterprise faced in TOS (Season 2, I believe) was actually the prototype for an anti-Borg weapon.
How about re-doing the Doomsday Machine episode, but throw the Borg into it? Typical Kirk situation: faced with two unstoppable enemies, he figures out how to pit them against one another and Save The Day.
By pscard at 8:57 AM ON 08/07/09
JJ Abrams should never have touched Star Trek at all and stayed with Lost and Fringe
By shikari23 at 9:54 AM ON 08/07/09
No. NO time travel, no old episode rehashes, and for god's sake NO BORG! They've gotten off to a promising start and used a lesser used race from Star Trek for their first villains (Romulans), I'd like to see them continue this trend. Bring on the Orions, the Gorn, or even the Augments, but no freaking BORG!
By Akuma63 at 10:18 AM ON 08/07/09
I Agree NO BORG!.
What started off as the ultimate challenge ended up as the ultimate cliche: Ratings are down bring in the Borg. Though many others will disagree after "Best of Both Worlds" all other TV appearances of the Borg have been rather pathetic starting with "I, Borg".
Yes Jeri Ryan did look good in her outfit.
By User45701 at 10:34 AM ON 08/07/09
Make it not too Trek Heavy?
thats just silly why are they even calling it star trek?
By Zander at 10:54 AM ON 08/07/09
I, too, say no borg...but.
If they do something different with the Borg, since I'm sure they still exist even with the time line change, I might like it. Maybe make them a little less threatening and easier to defeat. I don't know.
However, they have done the Borg thing throughout all of the Star Trek series (I don't recall any Borg episodes in DS9), and one movie. Perhaps dumping the Borg is a good thing.
As for revisiting or remaking old Star Trek, I would have to say maybe not. There are so many new stories you can creat with this new time line but eventually your going to run across something that wasn't effected by the it.
I'll stop there before I get too carried away.
One last thing, if they do a remake, revisit, whatever....I'd like to see Tribbles!!!
By stavenborn at 11:12 AM ON 08/07/09
one word....KHAN!
By kwaldon at 11:19 AM ON 08/07/09
Very happy with the new Trek for just a few missteps, that is. I wouldn't want them to 're-do' an old episode or movie, that's just a rehash. But I would like them to make note of some events, like an aside, of something 'different' happening. Such as Kirk never had his encounter with the Gorn commander, but another ship did... and now there's war. Something like that. Show how the trek universe can truly change when the timeline is messed with.
By radzman at 11:58 AM ON 08/07/09
I actually like the new direction under JJ. SInce this a new timeline, I want to see the "new Klingons". Will they have bumps or look like tanned Medeterrean people or Hispanics like in the 60's stuff?
By Bb555 at 12:12 PM ON 08/07/09
Paramount should just rename the franchise
to Star Rek (Wreck) after that last boondoggle.
By Gabriel Angeles at 12:33 PM ON 08/07/09
As long as JJ Abrahms has nothing to do with it it will be fine otherwise it will suck just like everything else he does.
By jhawks1510 at 12:45 PM ON 08/07/09
How about Borg & Time Travel together? Kirk & Spock go back in time to 1980 and help McEnroe defeat the Borg in Wimbledon, forever altering humanity's timeline.
By 13th Cylon at 12:59 PM ON 08/07/09
No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel, No Borg, No Time-Travel. I would like to see the “time travel” ability some how locked as an indirect result of the reboot plot. Never again will we be able to use the weak arse premises of Star Ships in the 20th Centaury. Nuff said about that.
I don't mind so much, looking at the original episodes and taking a fresh modern look at them. Some to the classics could and would make incredible movies, especially with modern CG special efx. Personally I want a ship to ship battle that will redefine how movies are made, much in the same way Matrix changed the way we film action movies. I want to see something that will make me excited aganin to see a ST Movie. Not to mention you have a whole host of evil badness out there to pick from Klingon, Romulon, Gorn, (did I mention no Borg?) Tholians, parallel universe Kirk/Spock, Tribbels, the possibilities are endless. The writers need to take any and all of these and turn away from the Trek Cannon and redo everything.
The writers have wiped 40 years of television Trek history clean. Absolutely nothing has happened yet. We have an entire clean slate to make the movies fresh and new, I would like to see everything Trek from this point forward take full advantage of this fact. We have a five year mission to begin, again. Let’s get to work and discover the our universe again for the first time.
By babylon5 at 1:33 PM ON 08/07/09
I want fresh original stories. More action. Hopefully they can come up with new ideas. Having Harry Mudd in the movie would give it a comic relief. The book that Tom was referring to about the doomsday machine and the Borg was a great book. However it was with the TNG crew. First Contact was a good movie but I was hoping for this book to be adapted as a movie when TNG was going to do a movie about the Borgs.
By Melora at 1:58 PM ON 08/07/09
Calling it "lucrative" is certainly debateable. Here goes Sci-Fi Wire with their fanboy opinions again. For goodness sake guys, take a class in journalistic integrity.
By Watzup at 2:01 PM ON 08/07/09
I would like to see Trelain is kin to Q messing with the Organian's prophesy of the Klingon's and scew with this time line and modify what we know about the Peace treaty between the Federation and Kingon. A the battle that was stopped takes place and just when it would get really bad the O from TNG comes in and sets things right.
By Sithboy at 2:14 PM ON 08/07/09
Tribbles!!!!
By muadib at 3:10 PM ON 08/07/09
how about they go back in time ..AGAIN... and return the timeline back to the origional and wipe out the abomonation of the new movie? it would return everything to the way it was origionally (enterprise would not look like a 57 chevy built by drunk jawas)and put an end to abrahms mistake.
By rslatt74 at 3:39 PM ON 08/07/09
I would love to see a sequel with Khan in it.
Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson would be a cool Khan.
By ctmm at 4:09 PM ON 08/07/09
Bring Back ENTERPRISE SERIES AND START THE ROMULAN WARS WITH SAME CAST. on tv of course.
By Jimmy at 4:47 PM ON 08/07/09
"To boldly go where no man wants to go". Pretty
much sums up time travel and plot/theme reboots.
By KerrAvon at 5:05 PM ON 08/07/09
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Unless they re-set the timeline, I will ignore any sequel offered. That is NOT Star Trek.
By Bob at 5:15 PM ON 08/07/09
KLINGONS!
Those guys used to ((Hate)) the Klingons! Why not tell us why?
By Rob at 5:18 PM ON 08/07/09
I've said it a dozen times, KerrAvon, but have only been called names by those Abrams-loving wannabe Star Trek fans for my trouble. At least some of us know what real Star Trek is.
By Beggly at 5:38 PM ON 08/07/09
Exterminate! Exterminate! Resistance is Futile! Exterminate!
Dr. Who crossover episode in which the Borg attempt to Assemilate the Daleks with predictable results.
A new Dalek that shouts Assemilate! Assemilate! Resistance is Futile!
(New ideas are everywhere, but are they good ideas. I like the Harry Mudd idea. That could be fun. And toss in the guy with the Tribbles in the original Trouble with Tribbles, and we could have a fun semicomic movie. Star Trek Classic did a lot of humor stuff. Let's see more.)
By bobanort at 5:56 PM ON 08/07/09
bb555, They can't call it Star Wreck. Some kid in Finland (I think) did a whole parody series of star trek and called it that. Google it. The first ones hurt to watch, but the later ones were pretty good.
By MaryAnn254 at 6:03 PM ON 08/07/09
I have been a huge fan of Star Trek since the original series first aired on tv, and have seen most of the episodes aired on TV and all the movies except Nemesis.
That said, the new movie reboot is the best thing to happen to Star Trek since the original episodes first aired. Finally, something to live up to my teenage memories of the original series!
Now all I ask of the second movie in the series (along with maintaining the quality of the first) is that it maintain continuity; for example if an enemy was headed for the Federation from outside its boundaries in the original series, it would still arrive in Federation territory in the reboot, even if who it first encountered when it got here might be very different.
By ikkarus at 6:05 PM ON 08/07/09
Once again, there is, indeed, room for everyone's (favorite version of) Trek! Rob, KerrAvon ... "real" Trek was dying. The series were dying. The movie franchise was dying. Yes, many of us still loved it just as much, but it had burned its brightest, hottest light and was flickering out like the dying star it was. How can you not admit that? Abrams' Trek DOESN'T ERASE ANYTHING (for the millionth time.) It preserves everything right in its original packaging, mint-on-card. It, instead, offers a new interpretation for a new generation to discover Star Trek for the first time. If you truly love Trek, let it live on and grow (and proper?) rather than fizzle out and die. The adventure and life is still there, but it took a bit of re-imagination. As I kept telling myself ... "If it's good enough for Nimoy, it's good enough for me." And I (and a few others, apparently) enjoyed it and still love our "old" Trek just as much.
By pscard at 6:44 PM ON 08/07/09
Rob, KerrAvon - I am in full agreement with you. My feeling is that JJ did worse than kill Star Trek for us true long-time fans. The animated series was more canon than this film. This movie was not our Star Trek.
I may watch the sequel, but I will never buy any of the DVDs.
'Nuff said.
By PatrickInNC at 6:47 PM ON 08/07/09
If it's going to be Khan rebooted, have Javier Bardem from "No Country for Old Men" play him. "Call it!" ;-)
The villain MUST be better written and better acted than what the first Trek reboot gave us. Please put Eric Bana and Jar Jar Binks in a burlap sack and beat them to death with hammers. Thank you!
By AngryJonny at 7:34 PM ON 08/07/09
MaryAnn254 & ikkarus:
Well said, both of you, and I agree. I've been a Trek fan for decades and I loved the new movie. The divergent timeline idea was a stroke of genius; I don't understand how some people can find fault with that. All that came before still exists, but now we have new adventures.
But the pressure to do well with the sequel must be enormous. Not sure I'd want the job. A brand-new story with nods to the original series and movies seems like the right way to go.
By MartinFX at 7:39 PM ON 08/07/09
Is this latest Star Trek the actual platform they plan on using for the resurrection of this series? Why? It was so bad, Cool fx, CGi and nice sets and art. But otherwise its nothing new. Where has all the creativity gone? If this is what we have to look forward to from Star Trek, then I'll stick to watching re-runs of the original series, where imagination obviously was original. The Writers of this trash should take the next galactic drill bit and point it at their heads, maybe in the 45mins it takes to calibrate , they might think up something original and realistic... and if they want any ideas, i'm available...
By awreti7y7 at 7:46 PM ON 08/07/09
Neil Young said it best, "it's better to burn out than to fade away". Simply put, Star Trek was, leave it alone. People can't accept that. If you want to watch it, watch what was already done. Paramount, leave it alone. Of course they won't, since they ran out of ideas and rebooting past successes ensures future revenue streams.
By Col. B.K.. McKlusky IV USMC Retired at 7:56 PM ON 08/07/09
What some one should do is dig up the old scripts for such movies as "Action in the North Atlantic, From here to Eternity."
Now throw in a bar scene with a bunch of Klingons sining such hits "Ten round with Senor Jose Quevor."
Now that would be a real sight.
ALso for laughs, character who quotes "Looney Toon." instead of famous witters. Now that would be worth going to see.
As for going, if left after 10. just couln't take it.
By joesocwork at 8:21 PM ON 08/07/09
The newest movie was fun and the time travel was a cute gimmick to justify the changes. In fact I had a blast counting episodes that would no longer be able to take place with the alternate timeline. However I don't know of any serious science fiction plotline where they protagonists try to keep the original timeline from altering. Ultimately I think the writers will have a much harder time trying to keep a next sequel fresh.
By Flux Chese at 8:59 PM ON 08/07/09
No! Remakes.. No! more time travel.. (eventhough the new film was awesome and had to use it to set up the new storyline, but it's done, let's move on please!) NEW! storylines only... NEW characters and baddies... Bring on the KLINGONS!! and LET'S! see some god damn exploration already!!!!
By starkiller at 9:36 PM ON 08/07/09
The closest they should come to the old stories is have a report of say, another ship running across Khan's ship and leaving them frozen.
By KC at 9:59 PM ON 08/07/09
I love the idea of bringing back Harry Mudd. Greg Grunberg as Mudd? It might be interesting but Grunberg doesn't seem to have the gregarious ebullient personality needed for the part.
By KC at 10:01 PM ON 08/07/09
I sink to my knees - utterly prostrating myself before you- and beg for NO MORE TIME TRAVEL STORIES!!!!
By Rubicon at 10:26 PM ON 08/07/09
No Borg.No Time-Travel....AND NO FU$%IN TWIN / DOPPELGANGER!!!!!! plotlines
By talon at 11:42 PM ON 08/07/09
they need to reset Vulcan in some way. all the other stories are wasted in the books and tv series otherwise. the federation is totally different without the Vulcans and the number they gave which survived is to low. just don't make that the movie of how Vulcan timeline is restored. let that be a few lines and make a new story that goes closer to the original timeline.
By Richard63 at 12:59 AM ON 08/08/09
"Simply put, Star Trek was, leave it alone. People can't accept that. If you want to watch it, watch what was already done."
I'd flip that around.
If you're not interested in the new stuff, no one's forcing you watch it or even accept it. It's not as if the old series have been removed from circulation and erased from existence. You can still happily watch your TOS DVDs while ignoring this new incarnation of Star Trek.
By century77 at 5:29 AM ON 08/08/09
I thought the new trek film was awesome. One of the best of the whole series. Star trek was all but dead. Enterprise was a total let down. The TNG films were crap (with the exception of first contact.). It was all just so tiresome I was sick of even how the phazer blasts looked and sounded. Nemesis was just a total pile of crap. I swore I’d never step foot in a theatre to see another TNG film again.
By cheshirecatgirl at 5:34 AM ON 08/08/09
Personally I love the new film. I think a sequel would be great. And the best part is cause of the new time everyone can be right and if you’re a true lover of Star Trek you should be able to see the potential laid out by the film. As several other people have commented on the original time line has not been erased it still exist. (Just in a parallel universe, DUH!) Which means if were really going to get all nerdy that this one always existed too. HA. Bet some of you are wishing you thought of that. Any way that also means that in making a sequel playing off original story lines as well as enter mixing new fresh ideas is all a good and plausible route in the future of Star Trek. The sky is the limit and I think Gene Roddenberry would have want his creation to go on this way, growing and every now and then taking new breaths with out forgetting where it came from so that perhaps the next generation will enjoy it enough to go back and see where it started. Lastly I would like to say that should there be a sequel they absolutely have to get Simon Pegg back and put in way more Scotty. I mean I really liked every one in that movie, but yeah Simon Pegg as Scotty. Genius. I LOVE Scotty!
By why guy at 1:50 PM ON 08/08/09
Harcourt fenton mudd have you been drinking again?
By Spaceman Spiff at 6:06 PM ON 08/08/09
~~Ikkarus~~
*Abrams' Trek DOESN'T ERASE ANYTHING (for the millionth time.) *
Yes, It does(For the millionth time) since THIS movie has become the new canon and no more movies or TV shows are made in the OLD timeline then DUH!
IT IS DEAD!
cheshirecatgirl:
~~HA. Bet some of you are wishing you thought of that.~~
No, I can honestly say that I'm not.
~~I think Gene Roddenberry would have want his creation to go on this way~~
that's very easy to say since he is dead and can't respond to this Trek wanna be movie.
If you like this movie then by all means like it, enjoy. Comment here in these scifie wire articles about how VUNDERBAR! Abrams is.
We don't like it and since this is an open forum we will also continue to comment about it. If I can deal with all of the slobbery JJ worshiping then you can deal with us nitpicky old timers who prefer the original.
By Michael at 7:47 PM ON 08/08/09
Spaceman Spiff: "...THIS movie has become the new canon..."
Sorry, but the new movie hasn't become NEW canon; it's "canon" for an ALTERNATE universe, which is something very Trek-like and should therefore be quite acceptable to Trek fans who are mature enough not to throw tantrums when somebody else plays with their toys.
By AngryJonny at 8:12 PM ON 08/08/09
Michael,
Your comments cracked me up! And I agree. Mirror universes and alternate timelines are nothing new to Trek, so why is the new movie so hard to swallow for some?
Blowing up Vulcan was shocking and an amazing decision; I'm really looking forward to seeing how it impacts this new Trek universe in the sequel.
By juniobc at 9:33 PM ON 08/08/09
Olá Michael, it is hard to swallow beacuse it seems that te Prime Universe is going to be abandoned. That is it. I do hope it does not. I particulrly wish they think a little on Enterprise: Xindi, Sulliban, aged Archer, Andorians, etc.
We all wish the Prime Universe were at least , not forgotten.
By f235r at 12:18 AM ON 08/09/09
The new movie is stupid, kinda like syfy. They should redo
The Wrath of Chaka Kahn starring 50 cent with Jim Carey
as Captain Kirk and oh yeah, better throw in some NASCAR
while were at it. This should be better than Star Trek.
May be some time travel, alternate universes, shopping at a
convenience store and 40ozers...boo-yah!!! Trek fanz, yo...
By Simon Baylor at 12:24 PM ON 08/09/09
f235r The New movie saved the franchise from oblivion.
By Rob at 1:42 PM ON 08/09/09
Turning Star Trek into something it isn't is NOT saving the franchise. Grow a brain.
By Locutus at 2:19 PM ON 08/09/09
To all of you wishing for no Borg rest assured. Janeway annihilated all of them!
By Spaceman Spiff at 5:24 PM ON 08/09/09
Micheal said:
~~Spaceman Spiff: "...THIS movie has become the new canon..."
Sorry, but the new movie hasn't become NEW canon; it's "canon" for an ALTERNATE universe, which is something very Trek-like and should therefore be quite acceptable to Trek fans who are mature enough not to throw tantrums when somebody else plays with their toys.~~
So, do you have some inside info that we don't about a new movie being made in the old timeline? What's that? No more movies in the old timline? Well then, I guess that means it's----Everybody say it with me, DEAD!
AngryJonny said:
~~Mirror universes and alternate timelines are nothing new to Trek, so why is the new movie so hard to swallow for some?~~
I would have no problem 'swallowing' this movie if it didn't SUCK! I was actually very excited when this movie was first announced. I even defended it as a prequil to some people who thought that a prequil was a bad idea.
then I began to hear what the movie was about and then I actually saw it.
If this movie had shown any kind of respect for Star Trek, Or celebrated what had come before instead of ripping the story apart to satisfy Abrams ego then I wouldn't be saying this now.
As I said, If you like it? Fine like it all you want. I don't. Because it sucks and not just as a Trek movie. Their are so many logical inconsistancies it's rediculous.
By Joe Mama at 8:04 PM ON 08/09/09
Is that Spaceman Spiff or SpaceCadet Spiff. From the quality and depths of your comments, I have to say the latter name is more fitting. Your latest response to Michael's comment demonstrates that you don't even listen to what the others are saying. Instead, you just keep whining like a spoiled brat.
By Spaceman Spiff at 8:23 PM ON 08/09/09
Yea Yea I know. Anyone who doesn't share
the love of Abrams vision is a whiny spoiled brat. you keep right on believing that if it makes you happy. Doesn't bother me a bit.
Sticks and stones.
As for a sequil? Doesn't matter what it's about. If it's made by the three amigos, it will be just as bad as the first one was.
By scifijimmy at 8:58 PM ON 08/09/09
For all you Borg haters, "Read the Destiny Trilogy, it only takes places a few months before Spock went back."
Otherwise ANYONE in the vinicity of Federation space is game.
By Michael at 9:16 PM ON 08/09/09
I agree, AngryJonny: I think the makers of this new film were brave to make this change and try to avoid following the worn and well-trod path, and in the long run, it is we longtime fans who benefit. I'm excited to see what new adventures our heroes will face in this alternate universe.
By Simon Baylor at 9:30 PM ON 08/09/09
Rob first off , prior to abrams involvement , the trek franchise was largely dead in the water and irrelevant . So contrary to what you might think, Yes J J Abrams did save the franchise. I suppose you didn't happen to note both the positive critical response that the film got and the huge box office . this film unlike past trek films appealed to both trek fans and non trek fans alike. Spiff The film made millions so most likely we will be getting additional trek films with this cast. JJ Abrams did damned good film that more then did justice to Star Trek .I look forward to the sequels and so do alot of other people both trek fans and non trek fans alike
By My Idea at 1:49 AM ON 08/10/09
How about device that turns ships inside out? This technology, once used on the planet Sooga, turned forced people to live in the planet's nucleus. Now, this weapon will be not only be used on starships and planets, but on suns as well. Of course, spock discovers that no only will the Splaents (Sooga's enemy) be destroyed, but also Sol (Earth's solar system) as the sun's explosion would create a domino affect unraveling the very core of every sun in this galaxy.
The Enterprise, in a race to destroy this weapon soon realize that they and the Sooga will be destroyed. The only answer must be is to reflect the weapon's power back unto itself, and reversing it's structure. However, when that happens, a tiny backhole is created, and Sooga's planet gets sucked in with the Enterprise barely escaping.
By Son of a Maui Portagee at 7:46 AM ON 08/10/09
@Simon Baylor,
Beyond hype there's absolutely no evidence for your claims:
http://www.slate.com/id/2222096/
Planetary-wide ST:TMP is still the B.O. champ of the Trek movies which means there's no evidence of "new" attendance - only a successful activation of a significant portion of the 1979-1980 core ToS movie going fans that launched the film franchise.
Paramount started 2009 in the hole due in no small part to spending with regards to this film and its 2Q report shows it ended June 30 still in the hole. This in spite of many fan fantasies asserting that in the period of release May 8 - June 30 that ST'09 was generating HUGE profits at the B.O. and in merchandising for Paramount. Also note this is in stark contrast to the same quarter last year in which Paramount was flush with funds and B.O. from its IRON MAN tentpole.
.I can't even understand why ST'09 fans keep clinging to B.O. as a metric of "best ever" when it forces them to have to concede that these films are far superior?:
IRON MAN
TRANSFORMERS 2
HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE
ANGELS & DEMONS
UP
ICE AGE: DAWN OF THE DINOSAURS
THE HANGOVER
Now many argue that ST'09 will eventually generate profits. That may well be but it is also true of all Trek productions, even NEMESIS, and undercuts your contention that ST was dead in the water, i.e. revenue neutral. Of course, since CBS owns STAR TREK its not even clear what that means for the licensee Paramount.
By Joe Mama at 9:09 AM ON 08/10/09
@Son of a Maui Portagee:
TRANSFORMERS 2 a superior movie? Ha ha ha ha ha ha...um, no.
By Simon Baylor at 9:26 AM ON 08/10/09
Son Of Maui Portagee
Fair points but absent Abrams , I have my doubts that any new trek films were on the Horizon. No one else seemed much interested in Trek so yes the Trek franchise wa pretty much dormant.
By Son of a Maui Portagee at 4:54 PM ON 08/10/09
@Joe Mama,
I think you missed that that is my point. I agree with you. This is why ST'09's B.O. is meaningless as some sort of indication of "best ever" for Trek fans.
@Simon Baylor,
Again, you are falling victim to Paramount's hype. If anyone's responsible for getting ST'09 rolling it was Gail Berman and her assistant Brad Weston at Paramount. Unfortunately for them, Paramount was so satisfied with ST'09 that they were rewarded by consecutive terminations. Paramount took the same approach to the "success" of ST:TMP - except this time the the execs responsible couldn't scapegoat "the talent" because Abrams wisely cut deals that would cost Paramount BIG if they tried what they shamelessly did to Roddenberry.
By John at 6:22 PM ON 08/10/09
*sigh* Abrams-lovers just can't see that they are the ones doing what they acuse others of. Being single-minded. Not caring about anyone else's point-of-view other than their own. Being selfish. Sorry, but this debate isn't only in your favor as you would have it be.
By Spaceman Spiff at 10:04 PM ON 08/10/09
JJ Abrams did damned good film:
Really? Let’s see:
There was a single star that was going supernova and threatening the entire universe! A SINGLE star! The entire universe? I don’t think so.
Vulcans who spoke English to each other on their own home world.
A villain who’s motivation was; They didn’t come to our rescue fast enough.
That same villain upon finding himself thrust 150 years into the past and presented with a unique opportunity to save his world, decides to forego that to continue his illogical plan of trying to destroy the entire Federation.
Then he just sort of hangs around doing nothing for 25 years waiting for Spock.
Also the villain was captain of a mining vessel that was armed to the teeth with a seemingly endless supply of uber torpedoes. A “mining” vessel.
They had black holes that acted like wormholes.
A mysterious McGuffin(red matter) that is powerful enough to destroy whole stars and planets with no explanation whatsoever as to what it is or where it comes from. A few lines of dialog would have sufficed.
Kirk and old Spock just happen to wind up on the same planet. The same planet where Scotty just happens to be stationed.
A Starfleet that can muster only a handful of ships to defend Itself against a villain who wants to and has the means to, destroy the Earth.
That same Starfleet has no defenses whatsoever for it’s two primary planets.
(Defensive platforms, space stations, patrolling vessels.)
They destroyed one of the most important planets in the Star Trek universe.
(Exactly how is this a good thing? How does it make Star Trek better?) the only purpose I can see that it served was to show that Nero was indeed a “BAD” guy and to give Spock some emotional turmoil. Both of these could have been done without destroying Vulcan. Oh yes and so people could see how Abrams is so willing to take risks with(i.e. butcher) The star Trek universe.
There are others but I think I‘ve made my point. A damned good film? I think not.
By Captain Cohen at 5:17 AM ON 08/11/09
Does the JJ "version" of Star Trek mess up the whole of what I loved, and love, and grew up with from the 60's? NO!
Why not?
Well Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman dealt with all our canon / non-canon concerns by reminding us early on in the film.
here's YOUNG SPOCK being tested on Vulcan in the new movie ..
COMPUTER: "What is the central assumption of quantum cosmology?"
YOUNG SPOCK: "Everything that happen does happen in equal and parallel universes"
Okay, folks?? and by the way why not check out Uhura and Spock [Quinto]'s comments on the bridge -
Spock: "{Nero}'s actions have created a new chain of events that cannot be anticipated by either party. "
Uhura: "An alternate reality. An alternate past."
Spock: "Precisely. There may be a thousand others, or only this one."
------------------------
Yeah, I'd love to see Mudd.
There are always possibilities.
let's see "Infinite diversity in infinite combinations."
let's see what's out there.
and let's try to get along with each other's views on THIS little rock. After all it's "just a t.v. show", according to the Shat.
Mind you - it's one helluva show - and to quote McCoy "if you ask me which, you haven't" ..
I think it's going to still be one helluva show / film series / comic-book interpretation ..
If we don't boldly go we'll probably never go anyway.
Peace and long life.
By ssbeagle at 2:52 PM ON 08/11/09
The best episodes involved "Q". He truely took us to new areas. More "Q". Stop fighting old stuff. More discovery.
By pscard at 2:54 PM ON 08/11/09
For the true Star Trek fans, it was never about the franchise or how much money Paramount made. It was always about Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future in the stories and Trek history (canon).
Metaphorically, what JJ did was like someone who steals your favorite toy then breaks it.
By Captain Zacary R. Wildstar SSD Dexterous at 6:10 PM ON 08/11/09
Greeting and felicitations one and all. I'm Back. I broke down went to the buck a movie theater and watched Abrams "Star Trek" I know even before the movie came out I was bad mouthing it, making fun of it and in general trashing it at every chance i got. Some people even got a little up set with me about what I said not even seeing the movie. Well as I said I did go see it today. And I have to admit after seeing it ..... I was sooooooo Right. It was god awful! it stank like a three day old beached wail. I thought it was going to be bad and a little off. I was way wrong. Face to face It would take me longer to tell you what was wrong and incorrect in that movie then the movie itself. Alternate universe? Folks when you get something altered (Like a suit)They make little changes to make it fit. THis was like Altering a suit coat into a pair of pants. Since when was starfleet ships Pipes and catwalks? I know some people Liked it and if you did More power to you. But it Wasn't Star Trek It just wasn't. Galaxy Quest was a more accurate star trek movie. I really want to sue JJ Abrams for $1 for the two hour mind rape. I feel dumber having seen that movie. Not only did i lose some self respect watching it, but i felt like i needed a shower after, I felt dirty and unclean. THe nice thing is No matter what the next Movie can only get better. Poor Porthose floating around as disembodied atoms, Even though he would of been dead for 135 Years it's still sad.
By Spaceman Spiff at 8:45 PM ON 08/11/09
~~THe nice thing is No matter what the next Movie can only get better.~~
I wouldn't count on that Captain Zachary. If anybody can make it worse it's the Three Amigos.(I refuse to call them the three stooges, that would be an insult to the stooges)
Orci and Kurtzman want to make a viewmaster movie, have you seen that article?
Captain Cohen:
Yes yes I have heard this argument before, The old timeline is still there this is only an alternate I understanmd that I really do. This is the same argument that everyone who defends this movie uses. "The old timeline is still there" My point is it doesn't matter if it's still there. it doesn't matter that we have all the DVD's of the TOS and the movies. All subsequent movies are going to follow THIS timeline. This movie is the new canon despite what others say. It wouldn't be so bad if the movie weren't so bad. Thank you at least Captain Cohen for not being snide and insulting like so many JJ lovers are towards those of us who don't like this movie.
By Melange Rehab at 8:57 PM ON 08/11/09
Two words: pon farr.
By pscard at 11:46 AM ON 08/12/09
This movie will NEVER be canon.
By Galen at 6:48 AM ON 08/13/09
Okay guys, I think I have a way to please everyone - as both Universes still exist (Original and Reboot) then the sequel should be a team up! Some space/time anomaly (maybe caused by the stuff in the first film) is causing Universes to bleed together. Then the new Enterprise crew and the old crew (maybe set just after Undiscovered Country and explaining Scotty and Dr McCoy's absences) come face to face and have to put a stop to it. This could allow for a new death for Kirk (which would be better than in Generations) or maybe not if that would mess up the Original timeline. All you have to do is throw in some Borg (or Kilingons or Xindi) trying to invade all Universes through the rift and you've got an antagonist as well. Anyone got the number for Orci and Kurtzman?
By Grizzlyzone at 5:54 PM ON 08/15/09
No holodeck. No reconfiguring the main deflector to emit whachacallem particles. No Shatner. (He's dead, Jim.)
By ChuckB at 11:55 AM ON 09/06/09
To Bb555 and Gabriel... I would not consider
any movie that makes 260 million in US alone and close to 1/2 billion worldwide a wreck or boondoggle or a movie that sucked.
Fortunately u are in the very very small minority.
By Son of a Maui Portagee at 6:48 PM ON 09/06/09
@ChuckB
$385 million dollars might be close to $400 million which seven other films easily crested and were thus far closer to half a billion than ST. It is doubtful ST will even be in the top ten B.O. by year's end.
And lets be clear it didn't make your numbers in profits. That remains to be seen.
But let's look at some recent Paramount quotes:
""Our 2009 slate was greenlit in a very different economic climate and as a result we must remain flexible and willing to recalibrate and adapt to a changing environment. This is a situation facing every single studio as we all work through the financial pressures associated with the broader downturn. Like every business, we must make difficult choices to maximize our overall success and to best manage Paramount’s business in a way that serves Viacom and its shareholders, while providing the film with every possible chance to succeed both creatively and financially." - Brad Grey, Paramount
''I hear that Paramount told the filmmakers it doesn't have the financing in 2009 to spend the $50M to $60M necessary to market a big awards pic like this. (But a studio source insists to me it's got the cash, just not the home video sales: "Given where the DVD business is in 2009, our only hope is the economy and the retail business rebounds in 2010 because the hardest hit segment has been movies that play to an older adult audience," a studio source tells me.)'' - Nikki Finke, DEADLINE HOLLYWOOD DAILY
Now I ask you "Does this sound like a Paramount rolling in HUGE profits from ST or even expecting HUGE profits Nov. 17 from its video sales?"
By Charlee at 5:08 PM ON 10/02/09
I may be getting in here a little after the fact, but stay with me here. I was doing a senior apprentice (a thing you could do in your senior year in college) at NBC when Star Trek was a young and unknown series. I watched it grow over the years, and bemoaned the series TNG when it started. I Hated that show. It seemed to destroy everything I liked about the original. And didn't have the original cast (lol). I loved the old movies, never saw a TNG movie until Generations, then heard about the remake idea of a "new" old Star Trek, going back to when Kirk was in the Academy. I was thrilled, expected a new cast (since Shatner is in his 70's, how could he play Kirk?) and wasn't disappointed with that. And get this, I loved the new movie. Pine was a great young Kirk. I was sold when I saw him jog down the stairs of the academy. I could have sworn it actually was a young Bill Shatner. So, yes, I think the new movie was good -- and the new timeline will give new directions to go. I, too, was startled when they said that Spock's mother was dead (?what?), and then they blew up Vulcan. But guess what? I got over it! I will buy the DVD, and I'll go see the sequel, along with many longtime fans, and I'll enjoy it. If you didn't like the movie, it is your perogative NOT to see a sequel, just as it is mine to see it. You all have your rights to dislke it, as much as I have mine to like it. Hope you understand this.
Visit mobile.syfy.com/wire on your mobile device.
Charlee:
I may be getting in here a little after the fact, but stay with me here. I was doing a senior apprentice (a thing ...More »