Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Star Trek sequel scheduled for May 17, 2013 Release


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
437 replies to this topic

#1 of 438 OFFLINE   Neil Middlemiss

Neil Middlemiss

    Screenwriter



  • 2,742 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2001
  • Real Name:Neil Middlemiss

Posted January 08 2010 - 03:19 PM

According to Boxofficemojo, 06/29/12 has been set by Paramount as the release date for the sequel to J.J. Abrams excellent Star Trek reboot....let the countdown begin!


"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science" – Edwin Hubble
My DVD Collection

#2 of 438 OFFLINE   Dale MA

Dale MA

    Supporting Actor



  • 961 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 2004

Posted January 09 2010 - 04:39 AM

 Man, that's a long time off. 

#3 of 438 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer



  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted January 09 2010 - 04:57 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale MA ">

 Man, that's a long time off. 

#4 of 438 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,468 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted January 11 2010 - 12:50 PM

 I hope I'm still a fan by then!

#5 of 438 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted January 11 2010 - 01:02 PM

I hope it doesn't go where the other films have gone and it goes in a completely different direction, please, please no remakes of the old films....please.

You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#6 of 438 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,468 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted April 29 2011 - 08:24 AM

It's been a little over a year since this thread started!


I just read a report about the reshuffling of films and the Jack Ryan reboot starring the new Kirk, Chris Pine is being scheduled to begin filming in January 2012. So they are hoping that the Star Trek sequel can begin filming no later then September this year so Pine will be done to do Jack Ryan. The release date for Star Trek is still June 29, 2012.


The writers are still wrapping up the story. JJ Abrams is expected, but has not agreed to come back and direct.


I am surprised I am even writing about this! I'm a huge TOS fan. I like TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise. But this JJ Abrams film irked me. It has it's own vibe and it wasn't TOS. As it should have been of course. It was well filmed, and had great emotional punch. But as I said before, it's not my Star Trek. It's great for the next generation of fans.


I hated the new Enterprise external design and how they made it twice as big as it was. I hated engineering. But I really liked the design of the interior of the ship and the bridge. I liked the costumes. I liked Urban as the new McCoy. And I liked the new Sulu and Chekov. And I really really liked Greenwood as Pike. I think for the rest of the cast, their ownership of the roles is yet to be proven to me, especially Quinto. He did a fine job, but his portrayal was very early days. As it was meant to be I think.

Because this is an alternative timeline, that's the part that irks me. They have license to blow up planets. But it was the only way they felt they could go to avoid old ground. Nimoy was happy about that. And it made sense. But quantum mechanics and alternate timelines just didn't work. It wasn't real to me. The Mirror Universe was fun, but it wasn't our Prime Universe. I know, it's a parallel universe and it is all about, "it could go this way" because of Nero.


So I am not really anticipating this movie that much! I'd rather spend time of Shatner and Nimoy and Kelley on Blu Ray.


In terms of what they'll do next. I'm sure it will be tried and true. Space battles to get the 14 year old kids in. Very little to no substance, Maybe a familiar character. Eye candy.



#7 of 438 OFFLINE   snoopy28574

snoopy28574

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 84 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 12 2009

Posted April 29 2011 - 09:00 AM

Right on. They could never be as good.

Originally Posted by Ron-P 

I hope it doesn't go where the other films have gone and it goes in a completely different direction, please, please no remakes of the old films....please.






#8 of 438 OFFLINE   Radioman970

Radioman970

    Producer



  • 5,888 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2006
  • Real Name:James Perry
  • LocationCould be anywhere

Posted April 30 2011 - 01:40 AM

^ seconded

There's so much they could do with this concept, just as Mr. Gene had envisioned.  So far, so good!

Silly Party Candidate: Tarquin Fin- tim- lim- bim- whin- bim- lim- bus- stop- F'tang- F'tang- Olè- Biscuitbarrel

#9 of 438 OFFLINE   Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Long Member



  • 14,401 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted April 30 2011 - 02:51 AM



Originally Posted by Ron-P 

I hope it doesn't go where the other films have gone and it goes in a completely different direction, please, please no remakes of the old films....please.



Hate to tell you this Ron but the full title of the new film is Star Trek - The Search for the Bottlenose Dolphin.


Seems the only way the Enterprise crew can save the universe from a threat is by travelling back in time and grabbing a pair of dolphins...


Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#10 of 438 OFFLINE   snoopy28574

snoopy28574

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 84 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 12 2009

Posted April 30 2011 - 05:18 AM

I don't think the cast as it stands now could make that work.. I had heard different. I thought it was Star Trek the search for more money. Maybe it will be ok, if they don't drink to much Budweiser in that engine room.

Originally Posted by Steve Christou 





Hate to tell you this Ron but the full title of the new film is Star Trek - The Search for the Bottlenose Dolphin.


Seems the only way the Enterprise crew can save the universe from a threat is by travelling back in time and grabbing a pair of dolphins...






#11 of 438 OFFLINE   Radioman970

Radioman970

    Producer



  • 5,888 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2006
  • Real Name:James Perry
  • LocationCould be anywhere

Posted April 30 2011 - 10:18 AM

The search for Radioman in a theater seat at the new Star Trek.

Wouldn't have a happy ending.

Silly Party Candidate: Tarquin Fin- tim- lim- bim- whin- bim- lim- bus- stop- F'tang- F'tang- Olè- Biscuitbarrel

#12 of 438 OFFLINE   SilverWook

SilverWook

    Screenwriter



  • 1,547 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2006

Posted April 30 2011 - 01:27 PM

The search for facts about the sequel that's a year away to legitimately have gripes about.  Posted Image



#13 of 438 OFFLINE   Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter



  • 2,630 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted May 01 2011 - 05:03 PM

Star Trek: What Happens When Dead Romulans Come Out Of Black Hole From An Alternate Universe.  Kind of like The Search For Spock, in reverse! ;-)


or maybe


Star Trek: Two Spocks Argue.  (Actually, I'd pay good money to see that...)



#14 of 438 OFFLINE   todd s

todd s

    Lead Actor



  • 6,923 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 08 1999

Posted May 03 2011 - 03:49 PM

Alright....kinda of a trek-nerd question.  But, in the movie.  We are told their are only about 10k Vulcans left after Vulcan is blown up.  But, weren't their Vulcan colonies that were colonized before and after the start of the Federation?  It should have said that only 10k Vulcan's made it off the planet.  And with regards to that.  The Enterprise has more than one transporter.  Couldn't the Enterprise have been beaming up random Vulcans before they are forced to flee?



Bring back John Doe! Or at least resolve the cliff-hanger with a 2hr movie or as an extra on a dvd release.

#15 of 438 OFFLINE   Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter



  • 2,630 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted May 03 2011 - 04:19 PM

In the original series, the Enterprise had a crew of about 300.  In the new movie, I don't know what the crew compliment was, but it seemed like it was more than that -- Pike says to Kirk in the bar, early on, that his father saved 800 lives aboard the Kelvin.  It seems the Enterprise was bigger, so I'd guess maybe 1000 crewmembers.  But either way, I don't think they had the capacity for 10,000 people onboard.  I don't think they had the transporter power either.  And remember, the Enterprise had about a minute to beam people up from the moment Kirk and Sulu disabled the drill (which blocked the transporter) to when the planet imploded - not a lot of time.  I guess what I'm saying is, I think that 10,000 figure includes former Vulcan colonies and Vulcans that lived in other places.  I doubt the Enterprise was able to save 100 people from the planet's surface, if that.



#16 of 438 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer



  • 11,468 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted May 03 2011 - 07:08 PM

About the size of the Enterprise, the ILM project manager for the guys who built the digital model, either on his own or by direction from JJAbrams seemed to arbitrarily decide to make the ship much bigger then the original. It was enlarged from Ryan Church's original design for the film which was in scale with the original TMP Enterprise to a size on par with Picard's Enterprise D. That's freaking huge. So a crew of 1000 is concievable. The original TOS enterprise was huge, and perhaps my sense of scale is predicated on that, so I found it unreasonably big for the JJ-prise. Another example of the JJ crew leaning towards their Star Wars admiration. Nothing says the starships can't be that big, but it seems wrong for the Trek world.:) Regarding the surviving Vulcans, I thought there was a short bit of dialogue that suggested there were colonies as part of that 10,000 count, but I'm not positive.

#17 of 438 OFFLINE   RickER

RickER

    Producer



  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted May 03 2011 - 11:37 PM

I do not know how i remember these things, but the classic TOS Enterprise was 947 or so, feet long, and the crew was 430. I have seen pics of the scale, of each of the Enterprise ships thru D. The new move did have huge ships, and how many shuttle craft do they have...looks like 50 of them launched when evacuating at the beginning of the flick.



#18 of 438 OFFLINE   Cory S.

Cory S.

    Supporting Actor



  • 983 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 07 2004

Posted May 04 2011 - 12:26 AM

I don't see how that release date stays with the cameras rolling that late on Star Trek 2. Unless they've been in pre-production for a good long while, I just don't see them making that release date.
"Because he's the hero Gotham deserves.  But, not the one it needs right now.  So, we'll hunt.  Because he can take.  Because, he's not a hero.  He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector.  A DARK KNIGHT."

#19 of 438 OFFLINE   Bryan^H

Bryan^H

    Screenwriter



  • 2,690 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2005

Posted May 04 2011 - 02:12 PM

I'd love to see the sequel start with Kirk, Spock, and Bones on an "Away Mission" on some really cool planet.  That would make me happy.


housekeeping 2.jpg

"She always does that, she just wanders away"

 

 

 


#20 of 438 OFFLINE   Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter



  • 2,630 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted May 04 2011 - 04:14 PM

I know some people were unhappy with the scale of the new Enterprise, but I loved it... I loved how when we first see it in the film, it's so big that it's bigger than the actual frame.  I thought the new film was very respectful of everything that came before -- even setting up an "alternate universe" scenario so as not to completely remake or try to negate anything that previously happened -- but I think it was important for them to make it their own.  (I think it would have been a much harder film to make, and probably not as good, if they felt compelled the keep all of the original Enterprise specs, character histories, etc.  Sometimes it's okay to dream it all up again.)


For the new film, the writers have suggested that they might not do something with a traditional villain.  There's a thread about Star Trek: The Motion Picture going on in the Blu-ray section of the forum, and that's one of the things I admire about that film, that it didn't have a traditional bad guy.  If that's the route they go here, that could make for an interesting and unusual film, so I could be behind that.


My only wish for the film, and I'm not really expecting it to happen, would be to have Pike involved in some way.  Bruce Greenwood was so good in that role, and I just enjoyed his take on the character so much, that I'd love to see even a small bit with him in it.  It was really cool to see how both Kirk and Spock respected him even when they couldn't stand each other, and that added a nice bit of sibling rivalry depth to the story.  And, like most brothers who have reason to resent each other at some point, by the end they come to understand how each compliments the other.  So it would be kinda cool to see "Papa Pike" getting to see his kids in action, working together.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users