New Star Trek Film

Evil_Clown

So there are loads of info doing the rounds about the new movie
First lets start that JJ Abrams will be producer
Then the plot is going to be around the academy with Kirk and Spock
Matt damon is rumoured to be playing kirk
Film will be reeased in late 2008

What do people think?
Have you heard any other stuff ?

Surion

nothing new, just same info from wiki.

User45701

Actually i heard the official release date is odly enough dec 25th 08 but i dont think cinema's open on a x-mass day

US Release date is December 25th 2008, 45701 you are correct!

So far we know:
Directtor: J. J. Abrams
Producers: J. J. Abrams Damon Lindelof
Executive Producers: Bryan Burk, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Stratton Leopold
Unit Production Manager: Stratton Leopold
Co-Writers: J.J. Abrams, Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci
Musical Composer: Michael Giacchino
Production Designer: Scott Chambliss

Proposed title of the film is Star Trek. Basically all casting rumours have been debunked by various sources.

Source for this news: UFPst.co.uk - XI Page

Goodshape

Anyone hoping for a total reboot? Or fearful of the prospect?

Personally, I'm not sure. While it seems a shame to leave 40 years of established 'cannon' behind, is there really much more that can be done with the series as it is? Particularly with established characters like Kirk and Spock, and without pissing off at least half the fanbase due to not adhering to the aforementioned and seriously-bogged-down-at-this-stage cannon.

If they made the bold move of saying "We're starting again. We'll include some of the old bits, but this is New -- with a capital N"... could be interesting.

I haven't actually heard any official word on whether its a 'reboot / re-imagining' or not.

Well, its basically considered to be a reboot of the franchise. I think this could be quite interesting. Take for example, New Voyages. They have recreated the sets, created their own CGI Enterprise and recast the roles of the actors.

The series is excellent, and although made 40 years after the original, it still retains that retro 60s feel, that still keeps you in the 23rd century. Loosing that would be a BIG mistake, i mean lets face it, how cool would it be to hear the whirling, beeps and buzzing of the Enterprise bridge on the big screen?

They just have to remain true to the franchise for this to be a success. Enterprise was slated as it (in seasons 1-3) didn't stay exactly true to what we as Trekkies knew about the show.

The new film, as I think it will as Mr Abrams is a star trek fan needs to tell a new tale, for new audiences, but also keep continuity so as to keep the fanbase - it will be tough, but I think it will be good!

Goodshape

If it's keeping continuity and/or retaining that 'retro 60s feel', then that's not what I consider a reboot.

And New Voyages certainly isn't a reboot. It's a continuation, with new actors.

A reboot would be along the lines of the new Battlestar Galactica, compared to the old one. Same premise, some recognisable characters, plot points and spaceships, but ultimately it's a long way from the show we saw in the 70s/80s.

While I do agree that it would be neat seeing the original Enterprise on the big screen, I can't see that happening. I also think that putting the last 40 years to one side and starting again might be the most respectful thing to do. I don't think there will be any pleasing the cannon-junkies when you're delving into the past of well established characters.

User45701

The next movie should be about... Trailer

Starts off a year or so after Nemesis and the romulans and federation are engaged in diplomatic relations after the defeat of shinzon. A emergency conference is called by the romulans with ,klingons,federation in attendence, untill now the only thing that had been holding back final parts of the negoatations for the dismantlement of the netrul zone was the breen question, while starfleet was quite happy to see the breen back to there space the romulans dont want to sign the treaty because it prevents them from engaging in certin activitys.

Eh anyway ill make this shorter, the reason why they called a emergency confrence was because it turns out the tal-shiar have been monitering the dominion and for some strange un-ex-plained reason the dominion has collapsed.

A medium fleet of romulan klingon and federation ships set out to find out what happened to the dominion/odo and the tal-shiar opertives in the gamma quadrent

Ro: maaan!

I don't have any particular preference for plot, but I do think it would be better to keep going into the future. Don't much like all these prequils. State of the Alpha quadrent after the Dominion war would be nice to see.

Re: Goodshape, I have never seen the original BSG. But I fully understand what you mean.

Also, as long as it is respectful to the established Trek fans, I will be happy. But I enjoyed Enterprise, and I am half way through the third season of TOS now, so I would really like to see the series recreated.

If its a right/wrong decision, I'll wait until I know more for definate on the movie.

Kiith

I'd love to see a remake, like the new Battlestar. A darker version, similar to what Deep Space Nine was like at time (i.e. Pale moonlight, The Siege of AR-558). It has to be a fresh start.

But as the Star Trek fan base are (with exceptions) the most bitchey people ever, it probably wont be well recieved.

Justice

i get the feeling here that opinion is that ST cannon is a drag on ST,

i dont agree at all. most of the ST stuff produced in the last 40 yrs is quality stuff and shouldn't be dropped, if it is then it cant be brought back in if they change therir mind (i dont think ST fans would accept a dallas style reboot, as in it was all a dream and bobby gets out of the shower).

ofcourse the exception is the mirror universe where anything goes, i think the fan film star trek gods and men is based in that (i say that cause im sure it has the Empire logo on the ships as per ENT: in a mirror darkly episodes)

imo ST fans are probably the most sophisticated and dedicated TV fans out there. they will notice and analyse everything.
as for plot we'll just have to wait and see, its been a while since suprise and ST went hand in hand.

kevmy

I don't want a reboot and thankfully I don't think it's going to be one. But by basing the film on the early period in Kirk/Spock time there is a certain freedom. Little enough is known about that time or cannon to bog it down.

However I would like to see a post-Dominion series on the future of the Alpha Quadrant. If we remember the Cardassians are gone, the Romulans eyeing up there territory and the Kilgons have a new power structure.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

yeah, thankfully the delta quadrant is so far away we'll never have to see any of them again (cept maybe the borg.. so long as they have some teeth again)

I think a ship would be cool again,like the next generation but if it used a story arc like ds9 instead of just episode, after episode of unconnected nonsense i would love it.

komodosp

Hmm... I don't think I'd like to see a "reboot", I mean it's fine with Batman and Battlestar Galactica... BG was one series plus another series that most fans would rather forget, so creating a new series is fine... Batman has had so many incarnations, that one more won't make much of a difference...

In both cases, the "reboots" have been treated as their own series rather than being related to the original.

However, unlike these two Star Trek has a huge following of many series and movies. It has built a universe over the 20 odd years it was in production. If they go and change all that, well, it's just not Star Trek! It's just some random space programme about 2 guys in an academy.

Tomk1

Yes the past should be let to the past. I mean Star Trek Kirk's years stands for itself more for what classic sci-fi meant, with dodgy special effects, that progressed as into the next generation. Watching the Original series has more enjoyment because of when it was done, and laying the topology for the future series, Like STNG did rehash many story lines as so did voyager, and we all saw the damage "Enterprise" did, well I only did manage to sit through 3 episodes. The Horror.

I would like to see a cross between firefly/startreck, would be interesting.

User45701

i dont think a charactor driven star trek series would be that good, sorry

Firefly and BSG have it when it comes to "family" star trek did a good job now and then but with bsg and firefly where always better when it came to charactor story Lines.

I alwayed loved gareck tho.

With 20 years of history the best thing to do with star trek would be to do it like outer limits.

There are so many different races ships and planets that hae been explored in star trek so why not make a star trek show where every episode is on a different ship with a different main charctor and a different race as well. it would stay fresh and there is a endless amount of stories

Ro: maaan!

User45701 wrote:

With 20 years of history the best thing to do with star trek would be to do it like outer limits.

There are so many different races ships and planets that hae been explored in star trek so why not make a star trek show where every episode is on a different ship with a different main charctor and a different race as well. it would stay fresh and there is a endless amount of stories

That's the best idea I've ever heard.

Jim

User45701 wrote:

i dont think a charactor driven star trek series would be that good, sorry

Firefly and BSG have it when it comes to "family" star trek did a good job now and then but with bsg and firefly where always better when it came to charactor story Lines.

I alwayed loved gareck tho.

With 20 years of history the best thing to do with star trek would be to do it like outer limits.

There are so many different races ships and planets that hae been explored in star trek so why not make a star trek show where every episode is on a different ship with a different main charctor and a different race as well. it would stay fresh and there is a endless amount of stories

Good idea, but would be hard to pull off. Would need a strong story for each episode and strong characters which probably wouldn't work if they were just in it for the one episode.

I always loved episodes where they show you inside another Starfleet Ship, or indeed any ship in detail.

Justice

aye excellent idea User45701. too lazy to analyze it but i regcognize an original idea alright

Stabshauptmann

User45701 wrote:

i dont think a charactor driven star trek series would be that good, sorry

Firefly and BSG have it when it comes to "family" star trek did a good job now and then but with bsg and firefly where always better when it came to charactor story Lines.

I alwayed loved gareck tho.

With 20 years of history the best thing to do with star trek would be to do it like outer limits.

There are so many different races ships and planets that hae been explored in star trek so why not make a star trek show where every episode is on a different ship with a different main charctor and a different race as well. it would stay fresh and there is a endless amount of stories

Love the idea, but thats highly impractical from a production point of view.

User45701

i dont see how because to me it would always be cheeper to make because you dont have re-accuring charactors, you have no limit on storyline and you dont have to worry about the actors saying ive been doing this for X long i want more money.

Stabshauptmann

Casting once off is cheaper than doing it for each episode.
A)Because of admin costs and Because you would end up paying more per episode. We're not talking about just extras here, you're hiring quality actors who've you doubly compensate cos of the lack of stability

kevmy

Personally I wouldn't like the idea of doing it for each episode I mean half the fun in Star Trek is the little quirks of the characters that you only get after multiple episodes.

Two ideas I do like are:
The idea behind the new animated version I heard rumours about. Basically 150 years in the future and Federation in crisis. The Romulans have caused havoc by setting of Omega bombs and it is almost impossible to cross the Federation. Some races have pulled out of the Federation including the Vulcans. Action set on board an almost entirely human ship, slightly battered and almost constantly in peril.

Second idea is that of a new crew but with an almost entirely non-human crew. That is captain and most of the regular crew other races but with first officer and doctor human (something like that anyway). It should be set sometime forward from Picard and co. and would give a fresh feel to it all.

Goodshape

Animated version? o_Ó

I like the sound of that, but really -- from watching a bit of TNG in the past couple of days -- I just want to get back to the formula of 'new planet' / 'new adventure' each week. Everyone praises DS9 for the Dominion War story-arc, but honestly I thought it got a bit boring. Continuation of the same scrap each week, while typically nothing truly exciting ever really happened.

In contrast I'd admit TOS and TNG had their fair share of dud episodes, but like kevmy said the quirks of the characters usually held it together. And the plus side was that a dud episode only lasted one week -- with the next one a totally new amazing adventure. Also makes it much more re-run friendly. Tune into any random episode and there's no problem grasping what's going on.

They went off and met gods, weired energy creatures, living space ships and countless other quirky and interesting things, without having anyone shout "damn filler episode!" because it was the whole point of the show. Diplomatic relations and ongoing feuds within the federation were only ever there on the sidelines, to keep some sense of continuity in the show, but they should never be the focal point of a series.

New life. New civilisations. Where no man has gone before. All that jazz.

And bring the science back! Too much shooting at stuff in these modern Treks.

red dave

User45701 wrote:

i dont see how because to me it would always be cheeper to make because you dont have re-accuring charactors, you have no limit on storyline and you dont have to worry about the actors saying ive been doing this for X long i want more money.

you would also run out of actors to play the different parts by the end of the second series

DublinWriter

I remember people were up in arms originally when TNG came out.

The academy idea was being kicked around even as far back as STII.

Personally, I think they should keep going forward. Enterprise was a total flop.

Maybe bring the story line foward and base it around a time-travelling Starfleet where the main characters have to 'police' the time-line, preventing temporal-rifts and paradoxes...oh wait, isn't that Dr.Who?!

User45701

Id like to see one where the romulan empire experments with quantom transporters and they figure out a way to bring entire ships and armys into the mirror univerce, the 2 romulan empires from both univerces goes to war against the allaince and the terran rebellion and the terran rebellion contact ds9 to ask the fedration for help because once the 2 romaulsn controll the mirror univerce they would go after the federation and klingsons would be agood war and a very interesting story line allowing many great charactors like spock, emperor tiberius kirk, garek ect also piccard sisko ect becausr the federation kknow how to use the wormwhole to send ships to the mirror univerce. anyway thats a mad rant of a idea what do u all think....

_Kaiser_

I always liked the Mirror Universe idea but was disappointed with the way it turned out in DS9..

A much better (imo) version was in Diane Duane's TNG-based novel Dark Mirror

In it, the Terran Empire was still the dominant force and was planning an invasion of "our" universe, starting with capturing and replacing the crew of the Enterprise-D with their evil mirror-universe counterparts.

A great read from start to finish I thought. Just a pity the series didn't follow this direction instead rather than the almost comic relief version we ended up with.

User45701

william shatner did 3 mirror univerce books (a trilogy) - well worth a read

Terry

Kiith wrote:

I'd love to see a remake, like the new Battlestar. A darker version, similar to what Deep Space Nine was like at time (i.e. Pale moonlight, The Siege of AR-558). It has to be a fresh start.

But as the Star Trek fan base are (with exceptions) the most bitchey people ever, it probably wont be well recieved.

Just watching Beverly hills cop 3. Stephen McHattie is in it (It's a faaaaake).
Anyway, found this: http://imdb.com/news/wenn/2007-07-25/#10

Heroes star Zachary Quinto may be set to play Spock in the new Star Trek movie, according to media reports. Quinto, who plays Sylar in the hit TV show, is reported to be in final discussions to play iconic sci-fi character Spock for the new Star Trek film. Lost creator J.J. Abrams has been lined up to direct the movie, which will be released next year.

Good choice in my opinion.
He's quite a good actor.

As for the plot. If spock is in it, then you are looking at a prequel. Not something I was hoping for, but it's better than nothing.

Someone mentioned life after the dominion war and so forth. That is something I would really like to see.

User45701

dammit i was just about to post that about sykler playing spock, ye it is a good choice, i also read mat damian is not going to play kirk

Terry

Oceans 11, Dogma, Good will hunting, yes.
However, he is not Kirk and never will be.

I call for an unknown. That way he won't be compared to any other characters.
A lot less messy.

Official announcements on the film are expected to be released today at the Comic Con in America.

I will post any details here as and when I recieve them.

Goodshape

Zachary Quinto could be good as Spock.

Thankfully, I read recently that the Matt Damon rumours are compleatly unfounded. They're looking for someone younger aparently.

Thelikefaneire

The Quinto rummours are supposed to be true and i think he would make a good Spock. But i still feel that ret-conning their younger years doesnt quite make sense when Spock was a science officer on the Enterprise for 15 years before kirk was captain or even on the ship. He served under Pike and other captains are said to have been in charge before Pike. If it means that Kirk cant be on the enterprise it will be the first movie since ST:IV to not feature an enterprise, although the Refited origional was featured in stock footage at the start of the movie and then the A was revealed at the end.

We'll just have to wait and see. Phillip Seemore Hoffman has expressed interest in playing a doctor, but not neccissarly Bones.

Goodshape

Thelikefaneire wrote:

Spock was a science officer on the Enterprise for 15 years before kirk was captain or even on the ship.

It's stuff like that which has me thinking this whole idea is a bad one. People will be turning up with lists of grievances and inconsistencies.

Has it been said in the series when the two (Kirk and Spock) supposedly met?

mcgarnicle

A new series should be what Star Trek is supposed to be, exploration. Not just of space but of issues too. The Next Generation is the stand out series for me, exploring new worlds but also morality and philosophy in ways no other show has ever even attempted.

Talk of making it darker, like the new BSG makes me sick to be honest. BSG is utter trash, it is crass simplistic fluff. I think the only people who want this are BSG fans but if that's what they like why not just stick to BSG, don't try pollute our beloved Star Trek with your low brow toilet programme please.

Goodshape

mcgarnicle wrote:

Talk of making it darker, like the new BSG makes me sick to be honest. BSG is utter trash, it is crass simplistic fluff. I think the only people who want this are BSG fans but if that's what they like why not just stick to BSG, don't try pollute our beloved Star Trek with your low brow toilet programme please.

I agree to an extent, but have you actually seen BSG? Exploration isn't really it's thing, but it does go pretty much out of its way to tackle social and moral 'issues'.

Terry

Thlkefaneire wrote:

We'll just have to wait and see. Phillip Seemore Hoffman has expressed interest in playing a doctor, but not neccissarly Bones.

He's an actor, not a doctor.

I like the darker idea, but only in a DS9 way.

comparing BSG with trek is wrong.
Two different universes and two different stories.

Sorry, it's been an emotional day for me.

mcgarnicle

Goodshape wrote:

I agree to an extent, but have you actually seen BSG? Exploration isn't really it's thing, but it does go pretty much out of its way to tackle social and moral 'issues'.

Yep, I have actually seen every episode and I think it's pretty awful when compared with the best Star Trek. The issues that BSG deals with and the way they are dealt with are not a patch on those which Star Trek tackles. I, and any Star Trek fan I have spoken to about this, enjoy the subtlety that TNG dealt with things and the philosophical musings of Picard etc. BSG is so far away from this that it really bugs me to hear the two shows even compared.

Goodshape

Well, enough of that comparison anyway. Too different shows as Terry said.

Back to the new film...

Zachary Quinto has been confirmed as Spock -- and so has Leonard Nimoy!.



Plus they're apparently "desperately trying to find a way to put Star Trek star William Shatner as James T. Kirk in the movie".

To be honest, I don't like the sound of that. Some sort of flashback story? Gah.

5uspect

mcgarnicle wrote:

A new series should be what Star Trek is supposed to be, exploration. Not just of space but of issues too. The Next Generation is the stand out series for me, exploring new worlds but also morality and philosophy in ways no other show has ever even attempted.

I always liked the way Enterprise began with the whole moving out into the unknown thing. The new technology was suspicious to many of the crew and the Enterprise had a feeling of being bolted together unlike the detached technology of TNG.

mcgarnicle wrote:

Talk of making it darker, like the new BSG makes me sick to be honest. BSG is utter trash, it is crass simplistic fluff. I think the only people who want this are BSG fans but if that's what they like why not just stick to BSG, don't try pollute our beloved Star Trek with your low brow toilet programme please.

Thats a rather harsh thing to say, How is dealing with real issues like Iraq suicide bombings, abortion, corruption and genocide simply low brow fluff? If anything Star Trek generally portrays humans in a rather homogeneous un-selfcritical light constantly riding the high moral ground. Its as far removed from reality as sci-fi generally gets. There's nothing wrong with an injection of realism.

That said I wouldn't like to see Star Trek go too muck down the dark BSGesque route either, however I would like to see it with more human characters, less humanoid aliens and some morally gray themes.

A decent fire fight wouldn't go astray either!

5uspect

Interesting call on Quinto as Spock. I wonder if they want both young and old characters will the nexus reappear especially with Kirk and all.

The Gnome

Glad to see Quinto as Spock and Hoffman would be a nice addition. The only thing that worries me is the following quote from JJ Abrams:

"We're desperately trying to figure out how to fit Shatner, and it needs to be worthy of him and the movie."

Not sure if I like the sound of them trying to fit Shatner in, seems gimmicky. If it's going to be a young Kirk then have it at that instead of throwing Kirk in because he's cool....

Hmmmmm...

User45701

you cant not have william whatner in it

shinzon

Spock must play a very big part in this movie, especially as Leonard nimoy has come out of retirement to play him, at his time of life he doesnt need to be part of a glorifed cameo, which he already turned down in Star Trek 7

Shatner will be problematic, simply because kirk is dead, so anything that they do to try and get him in the movie would have to be set sometime before the launch of the Enterprise B, Harve Bennetts proposal for Starfleet academy was simply they introduced the story, the younger actors basically went on the adventure, and Shatner and Nimoy came in to book end the movie

The problem with that is bennett got script approval for that movie, yes it was never made but it was green lit and any idea from that proposal would have to go through bennett, not a big obstacle as harve has said he be open to some consultation, but hed also have to be paid as he was the writer of the original academy idea

Well just have to see, but everyones right they cant have a kirk/spock story without shatner in it

Shin

Overheal

Goodshape wrote:

Well, enough of that comparison anyway. Too different shows as Terry said.

Back to the new film...

Zachary Quinto has been confirmed as Spock -- and so has Leonard Nimoy!.



Plus they're apparently "desperately trying to find a way to put Star Trek star William Shatner as James T. Kirk in the movie".

To be honest, I don't like the sound of that. Some sort of flashback story? Gah.

Didnt we already have this with Generations.......

Whats wrong with shatner? he did................................................

I see your point.


Im hoping they go dramatically forward in time to the 26th century or wherever it is when the federation spends its time policing time. They already have quite a lot of material to leap off of in that area between Voyager and Enterprise alone. Not that I sat all the way through Enterprise so maybe im just shooting my mouth off there.

I dont even think the true-core trekkies want to see kirk return - he had a good Klingon death; let it be so.

Quinto was a great choice for Spock though.

Talk of making it darker, like the new BSG makes me sick to be honest. BSG is utter trash, it is crass simplistic fluff. I think the only people who want this are BSG fans but if that's what they like why not just stick to BSG, don't try pollute our beloved Star Trek with your low brow toilet programme please.

---

Thats a rather harsh thing to say, How is dealing with real issues like Iraq suicide bombings, abortion, corruption and genocide simply low brow fluff? If anything Star Trek generally portrays humans in a rather homogeneous un-selfcritical light constantly riding the high moral ground. Its as far removed from reality as sci-fi generally gets. There's nothing wrong with an injection of realism.

That said I wouldn't like to see Star Trek go too muck down the dark BSGesque route either, however I would like to see it with more human characters, less humanoid aliens and some morally gray themes.

A decent fire fight wouldn't go astray either!

what low-brow gostickyourownheadinatoilet man forgets is that Star Trek did handle this stuff - we had gritty zero-G murder conspiracy, a very troubled Picard in First Contact (as well as a great drunk scene from the hottie Troy)

Basically your both wrong - star Trek has always handled these things and had them. Granted the characters in the series often seem fake (Oh Tom Paris, how I would love to scalp you) but you gotta hand it to them in the movies the directing is fairly spot on. And thats what we're talking about here dont forget.

So McGarnicle you cant really go and dismiss BSG (cos if it didnt have such a lethargic season 3 you and I would both embrace it) but more importantly its a red flag on you to praise Star Treks boring, sterile environs. The best times were when **** hit the fan and dark stuff happened; I could name off a long list Im almost ashamed to say (my saving grace being Ive never owned any Star Trek merchandise...phew) the shortlist being the Borg, Cardassian and Maquis terrorism, Klingon foulplay, Romulan chemical warfare, blebleblahblah.

Yep, I have actually seen every episode and I think it's pretty awful when compared with the best Star Trek. The issues that BSG deals with and the way they are dealt with are not a patch on those which Star Trek tackles. I, and any Star Trek fan I have spoken to about this, enjoy the subtlety that TNG dealt with things and the philosophical musings of Picard etc. BSG is so far away from this that it really bugs me to hear the two shows even compared.

And well they shouldnt. That doesnt mean they cant borrow from each other. I too enjoyed to a point the light and 'musing' way in which star trek boldly went, and at the same time would it kill them to display some action? DS9s last season aside, the whole thing just leaves you asking for more hands on approach, and less of the button pushing "if we re-modify the deflector dish again.."

it would be bad parenting on the part of Star trek not to adopt at least one or two influences from its offspring - like Stargate and BSG and perhaps any other scifi you can shake a tricorder at.

"Sir...we can't call it the Enterprise." - Carter

Goodshape

Dark Horizons is reporting that Abrams is looking for Tom Cruise to play Christopher Pike in a cameo.

Boo.

Evil_Clown

Scientologists gave us the Battlefield earth film
So I will have none of their input on star trek please
Keep Cruise out
Anyway hasn't he got other aliens to worry about ??

Goodshape

Anton Yelchin will be playing Chekov (yeah, I've never heard of him either). So says Empire Online.


He's 18 and was born in Leningrad, though he grew up in the US.

...didn't Chekov join the crew in the second season? I was sort of hoping he wouldn't be in this film. Never much liked the character and might have been good to cut down the numbers at least a little bit.