Star Trek Sequel - Part 1

[Young Superman]

I wonder if we will see Bruce Greenwood as Admiral Christopher Pike in the Star Trek Sequel?

 

[Marvolo]

What i cant understand is why do a reboot if you follow it up with a remake. Why not come up with a new villian. I loved star trek 2009, but im losing interest in this film because I have no desire to see a remake of the older films. This is alternate universe. They need to take advantage of that. Why not come up with a new villian?

 

[marvelrobbins]

The point of alternate reality was to be able to do stories with original Star Trek characters that can still be viewed as fans as part of exsisting franchise while freeing them from the you know what happens.It was bound to happen a familar villain would eventully be used In the alternate reality trilogy(very unlikely these films will go on more than 3 films.he cast Is only set for three films)

 

[raybia]

The Klingons have been so overused in Star Trek that the thought of them as the villians leaves my feeling "MEH". I would rather see the Borg.

...I have another crazy idea, that could work for a THIRD film in the rebooted series. Kirk and the rest could go up against borg. I don't think the Kirk Enterprise would be crushed. Why? Because by this time, the borg cube has more than 70 years less technological knowledge than the ones we see in Next Generation.

I agree. That's a crazy idea.

 

[Slushy]

Why should Khan be any different?

Because its fu**ing KHAN!!!

 

[cherokeesam]

The point of alternate reality was to be able to do stories with original Star Trek characters that can still be viewed as fans as part of exsisting franchise while freeing them from the you know what happens.It was bound to happen a familar villain would eventully be used In the alternate reality trilogy(very unlikely these films will go on more than 3 films.he cast Is only set for three films)

I'm not sure "eventually" is the right word for this.....more like "immediately." JJ has gone from reboot to rehash in just one film.

 

[Dark Knight]

I'm not sure "eventually" is the right word for this.....more like "immediately." JJ has gone from reboot to rehash in just one film.

How can you call the Khan story they want to tell onscreen a rehash?

Chances are this will most certainly NOT be a retelling of WOK and it will NOT be an exact replica of the events of Space Seed back in the 60's.

 

[cherokeesam]

How can you call the Khan story they want to tell onscreen a rehash?

Chances are this will most certainly NOT be a retelling of WOK and it will NOT be an exact replica of the events of Space Seed back in the 60's.

How do you know? All we know (or *think* we know) is that they're reusing Khan. If they're reusing Khan, odds are they're reusing a familiar story as well. Why do you assume he'll use an *original* storyline for an *unoriginal* character?

 

[redhawk23]

How can you call the Khan story they want to tell onscreen a rehash?

Chances are this will most certainly NOT be a retelling of WOK and it will NOT be an exact replica of the events of Space Seed back in the 60's.

So far the writers have given very little indication that they have much of an imagination.

 

[raybia]

How do you know? All we know (or *think* we know) is that they're reusing Khan. If they're reusing Khan, odds are they're reusing a familiar story as well. Why do you assume he'll use an *original* storyline for an *unoriginal* character?

I would say the odds are 50/50. We really don't know. Why assume that he won't use an original storyline?

I, for one, like JJ Abrams. I think he is a smart storyteller and I think he knows audiences well enough to be able to entertain us and clever enough to be able to non predicable, more or less with his movies. So for me as a JJ fan, I cannot help but to be very excited for this sequel regardless of the villain but I have every bit of confidence that the story will be solid. Even more than the last one.

 

[Dark Knight]

So far the writers have given very little indication that they have much of an imagination.

Interesting. Didn't the first film do well at the BO along with it being well received by critics and most fans?

The writers and JJ came up with a nice way to reboot the franchise IMO. That in itself took imagination and some creativity IMO.

 

[Dark Knight]

How do you know? All we know (or *think* we know) is that they're reusing Khan. If they're reusing Khan, odds are they're reusing a familiar story as well. Why do you assume he'll use an *original* storyline for an *unoriginal* character?

No...how do you know they are making a carbon copy of Space Seed and WOK?

haha...I think JJ Abrams is smarter than that AND smarter than fanboys.

 

[raybia]

Interesting. Didn't the first film do well at the BO along with it being well received by critics and most fans?

The writers and JJ came up with a nice way to reboot the franchise IMO. That in intself took imagination and some creativity IMO.

No...how do you know they are making a carbon copy of Space Seed and WOK?

haha...I think JJ Abrams is smarter than that AND smarter than fanboys.

My sentiments exactly. I think haters just like to hate.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

eh, i think people can actually have a problem with the movie without being a hater...My problem with the reboot movie is that the story ultimately didn't have much impact on me.
I wish they had just used the characters and universe fresh, no link to the old universe, just do it all over again like Batman Begins.
I don't see why they had to do that, it just made for a very convoluted story, which was why I think it didn't have much impact on me.
In other words, they got a bit too smart for their own good, they should have kept it...simple.

Y'know, just sit down and write a good story, don't try to do fancy footwork to integrate a story around the concept of breaking off into a new timeline, because writing a good story is hard enough in the first place, you're constraining your muse by cowtowing to needless rules like that.
Show us the origins for the first time, and then have the crew just strap into a great Star Trek yarn, you don't need the excuse of a changed timeline to re-use characters and concepts differently.
why did they even bother to do that? To appease trekkies?! That's the only reason I can think of, and it that's true, that is ridiculous.

edit: Also, y'know, they are still gonna be somewhat constrained in the sequels by this approach, they are gonan have to sit down, look at ST history, and come up with angles to explain why and how this and that turned out this way...now, *whatever* story they come up with, they could have come up with from scratch if they had just done a straight reboot. But, there will be other story ideas they might coem up with, that they will find difficult to explian fitting into the old timeline, and might throw away completely.
In other words, they have restricted themselves to a smaller canvas than they would have, if they had just done a fresh reboot.
They have tied themselves up in needless knots with this concept, and I'm not surprised they had a lot of trouble coming up with a new storyline.

I guess they liked the new timeline story, because they had difficulty coming up with a new story without it, because, underneath all the convoluted fancy footwork and gymastics of the plot... the villan was pretty crappy.

edit: When i saw it in the theatre, i always remember afterwards my friend saying to me that he didn't know what the hell was going on in the story...now, i enjoyed it cause I liked seeing all the origin stuff, but after that, when the timeline story kicked in, it was a bit like coming onto these boards, it was more a geeky chin scratching plotline, too smart for it's own good, when it should have been a rip roaring space adventure. so, when all that kicked in, I was not enjoying the movie as much, I was like, 'why the f does Leonard Nimoy even have to be in this?!' What is the point of this multiple timeline bollocks?! I don't want to sit in a cave with Leonard Nimoy explaining a lot of What if bollocks to me, the plot was like being on a frickin geeky message board! **** that! who wants to be on a message board when you can be on a frickin spaceship having an adventure?!

 

[raybia]

eh, i think people can actually have a problem with the movie without being a hater...My problem with the reboot movie is that the story ultimately didn't have much impact on me.
I wish they had just used the characters and universe fresh, no link to the old universe, just do it all over again like Batman Begins.
I don't see why they had to do that, it just made for a very convoluted story, which was why I think it didn't have much impact on me.
In other words, they got a bit too smart for their own good, they should have kept it...simple.

Y'know, just sit down and write a good story, don't try to do fancy footwork to integrate a story around the concept of breaking off into a new timeline, because writing a good story is hard enough in the first place, you're constraining your muse by cowtowing to needless rules like that.
Show us the origins for the first time, and then have the crew just strap into a great Star Trek yarn, you don't need the excuse of a changed timeline to re-use characters and concepts differently.
why did they even bother to do that? To appease trekkies?! That's the only reason I can think of, and it that's true, that is ridiculous.

edit: Also, y'know, they are still gonna be somewhat constrained in the sequels by this approach, they are gonan have to sit down, look at ST history, and come up with angles to explain why and how this and that turned out this way...now, *whatever* story they come up with, they could have come up with from scratch if they had just done a straight reboot. But, there will be other story ideas they might coem up with, that they will find difficult to explian fitting into the old timeline, and might throw away completely.
In other words, they have restricted themselves to a smaller canvas than they would have, if they had just done a fresh reboot.
They have tied themselves up in needless knots with this concept, and I'm not surprised they had a lot of trouble coming up with a new storyline.

I guess they liked the new timeline story, because they had difficulty coming up with a new story without it, because, underneath all the convoluted fancy footwork and gymastics of the plot... the villan was pretty crappy.

I don't think it was any of this. Abrams took the approach that he did with an alternate universe to free himself from the restraints of the original Star Trek universe and from the criticism and wrath of the trekkie fanbase of simply doing a reboot which in the minds of many would be erasing everything that came before it.

I think this was a very smart and innovative idea. Now he can do anything he want while leaving the ST canon intact.

 

[Dark Knight]

I don't think it was any of this. Abrams took the approach that he did with an alternate universe to free himself from the restraints of the original Star Trek universe and from the criticism and wrath of the trekkie fanbase of simply doing a reboot which in the minds of many would be erasing everything that came before it.

I think this was a very smart and innovative idea. Now he can do anything he want while leaving the ST canon intact.

Exactly!

It's funny how since the leak that Khan may indeed be the main baddie of the sequel. The fanboys who were all gung ho and felt the first film was such a success, are now jumping off their high horses, cause it looks to be Khan in the sequel. lol

 

[raybia]

Exactly!

It's funny how since the leak that Khan may indeed be the main baddie of the sequel. The fanboys who were all gung ho and felt the first film was such a success, are now jumping off their high horses, cause it looks to be Khan in the sequel. lol

Not sure people are equating the use of Khan in this movie as a rehash of the Space seed and the Wrath of Khan.

For those who don't want Khan because they think Ricardo Montalban's portrayal cannot not be topped that is an old and flawed argument.

It was used for every actor after Sean Connery for Bond, it was used for the role of Batman, the Joker, and even for the crew of the USS Enterprise. Thank God the studios don't listen to the fans in this regard otherwise there would be many great movies over the years than would not have been made.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I don't think it was any of this. Abrams took the approach that he did with an alternate universe to free himself from the restraints of the original Star Trek universe and from the criticism and wrath of the trekkie fanbase of simply doing a reboot which in the minds of many would be erasing everything that came before it.

I think this was a very smart and innovative idea. Now he can do anything he want while leaving the ST canon intact.

No, what he has done is restricted himself to aspects of the old universe, when he could have totally broken free from it, and played with the concepts and characters freely, with more scope for new stories.
and if he had come up with great stories doing a fresh reboot, then any Trekkie who complianed about it 'erasing' the old stories, is, i'm sorry, a little out of their minds.
It is taking the concept of 'canon' to the extreme point of it hampering artists, and imo that is nonsense.

Y'know, *I* could follow all the what if/timeline talk and plot, because i have been into comics and sci-fi stuff like that my whole life, but that doesn't mean i want to hear a whole story like that, that sounds like a message board conversation...and I could totally understand why my friend, who is a very smart guy, got lost in what was actually happening in the tale...because it was a lot of convoluted explanations and back story, it was just not that interesting a story, but you had to concentrate on everything they were saying to follow it. That can be tiresome, esp for folk who are not used to such geeky sci-fi conversations, which the plot essentially was.

edit:

i found this quote in your following post interesting...

Thank God the studios don't listen to the fans in this regard otherwise there would be many great movies over the years than would not have been made.

see, I wish they had not listened to the ST fans who didn't want the old stories 'erased', as you put it, because maybe in some alternate timeline there is a new ST movie using the old characters in a fresh reboot, that was miles better than the one we got.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Exactly!

It's funny how since the leak that Khan may indeed be the main baddie of the sequel. The fanboys who were all gung ho and felt the first film was such a success, are now jumping off their high horses, cause it looks to be Khan in the sequel. lol

Wouldn't they be actually getting *on* their high horses, because they felt they were in fact better qualified judges than the actual artists making the film?
I think you used the phrase wrong there.

So, what is being said here is, that the Star Trek fans who did not want the old timeline erased, and wanted things to be similar, are now complaining that they will be getting a similar story?
Is that what you are saying? Becasue you did agree with raybia's post.

 

[raybia]

No, what he has done is restricted himself to aspects of the old universe, when he could have totally broken free from it, and played with the concepts and characters freely, with more scope for new stories.


Well, if they totally broke free from the original universe then they ran the risk of it not being Star Trek anymore and alienating the fanbase. Remember, the Star Trek Universe is a integral part of American pop culture maybe even international pop culture. What JJ successfully did with Star Trek even though you and others may not like his approach, was to get the general audience to accept these new actors as the iconic characters that are closely associated with the original actors who played them. An almost impossible feat.

and if he had come up with great stories doing a fresh reboot, then any Trekkie who complianed about it 'erasing' the old stories, is, i'm sorry, a little out of their minds.

(My friend, that is part of the core definition of a trekkie! )
It is taking the concept of 'canon' to the extreme point of it hampering artists, and imo that is nonsense.

Y'know, *I* could follow all the what if/timeline talk and plot, because i have been into comics and sci-fi stuff like that my whole life, but that doesn't mean i want to hear a whole story like that, that sounds like a message board conversation...and I could totally understand why my friend, who is a very smart guy, got lost in what was actually happening in the tale...because it was a lot of convoluted explanations and back story, it was just not that interesting a story, but you had to concentrate on everything they were saying to follow it. That can be tiresome, esp for folk who are not used to such geeky sci-fi conversations, which the plot essentially was.

edit:

i found this quote in your following post interesting...



see, I wish they had not listened to the ST fans who didn't want the old stories 'erased', as you put it, because maybe in some alternate timeline there is a new ST movie using the old characters in a fresh reboot, that was miles better than the one we got.

Well, the director of an origin movie of any franchise of this sort will more or less have restrictions. You have to introduce the main characters, or in this case, reintroduce, and you have to bring all of these different characters to the point where their destinies intertwined while at the same time recapture lighting in a bottle as far as the chemistry that the original actors shared with one another.

Essentially, the first movie was the setup or the setting the stage for the real story that follows it.

Really just like how Batman Begins was the prologue for The Dark Knight.

Of course thats a huge expectations for JJ to suggest that ST2 can be on the same level as TDK however I have a feeling that JJ wants to be in this position to at least deliver a much more superior movie than the 1st one.

 

[cherokeesam]

I don't think it was any of this. Abrams took the approach that he did with an alternate universe to free himself from the restraints of the original Star Trek universe and from the criticism and wrath of the trekkie fanbase of simply doing a reboot which in the minds of many would be erasing everything that came before it.

I think this was a very smart and innovative idea. Now he can do anything he want while leaving the ST canon intact.

Or, you know, he could've simply made it a prequel and ran with the new movie series being about the adventures of Enterprise and crew pre-TOS. Since, you know, that was the *actual* original intent of Roddenberry and what Gail Berman actually commissioned Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman to come up with.

"Starfleet: The Academy Years" is wide open enough to give Abrams a new canvas with familiar characters, and still explore *new* characters and storylines that are fresh and new. Instead, like Bum said, he's painted himself into a corner by digging up an old familiar nemesis; and even in a "parallel alternate dimension," Khan is still Khan, so you'll still have Trekkies and casual fans alike saying of Abrams' take: "b-but....but....that's not Khan."

 

[raybia]

Or, you know, he could've simply made it a prequel and ran with the new movie series being about the adventures of Enterprise and crew pre-TOS. Since, you know, that was the *actual* original intent of Roddenberry and what Gail Berman actually commissioned Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman to come up with.

"Starfleet: The Academy Years" is wide open enough to give Abrams a new canvas with familiar characters, and still explore *new* characters and storylines that are fresh and new. Instead, like Bum said, he's painted himself into a corner by digging up an old familiar nemesis; and even in a "parallel alternate dimension," Khan is still Khan, so you'll still have Trekkies and casual fans alike saying of Abrams' take: "b-but....but....that's not Khan."

I disagree. JJ would have painted himself in a corner by making this a prequel to the original series. Paramount wants the Star Trek movie franchise to continue for years to come so at some point the starfleet years in going to collide with the timeline of the original series and then they are trapped.

For JJ and crew Khan is not still Khan, unless they are as narrow minded as some people are who believe that using Khan means having to follow how he was characterized in the original T.V. and movie series.

Anyone who says that JJ's Khan is not Khan would be right.

JJ's Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the entire Star Trek Universe is NOT the universe of the original and that is what makes this very exciting and opens up a new frontier of possibilities...If only JJ and Paramount has the guts to do it.

I am hoping and predicting they will.

 

[cherokeesam]

I disagree. JJ would have painted himself in a corner by making this a prequel to the original series. Paramount wants the Star Trek movie franchise to continue for years to come so at some point the starfleet years in going to collide with the timeline of the original series and then they are trapped.

For JJ and crew Khan is not still Khan, unless they are as narrow minded as some people are who believe that using Khan means having to follow how he was characterized in the original T.V. and movie series.

Anyone who says that JJ's Khan is not Khan would be right.

JJ's Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the entire Star Trek Universe is NOT the universe of the original and that is what makes this very exciting and opens up a new frontier of possibilities...If only JJ and Paramount has the guts to do it.

I am hoping and predicting they will.

But you don't think that creating an entirely new villain to add to the mythos would be far more exciting and daring on Abrams' part? And it wouldn't step on any fanboy's toes in the process.

As it stands currently, a casual bystander could be easily forgiven for seeing the issue as simply that Abrams got stung by remarks that he created a lousy, forgettable villain in his first ST movie, so for the follow-up, he's playing it safe by simply revamping every Trekkie's favorite villain.

 

[redhawk23]

Interesting. Didn't the first film do well at the BO along with it being well received by critics and most fans?

The writers and JJ came up with a nice way to reboot the franchise IMO. That in itself took imagination and some creativity IMO.

Alternate realities are a standard trope of sci-fi and of Star Trek. It was a well done out to the problem they were facing, I will give them that, however.

But the story itself? Not a lot of new stuff going on. The threat could of been anything. Instead you just have another Villain ticked off at one of the main characters (this time Spock instead of Kirk), blaming them for their own loss, including their wives.

Essentially the archetype of the original film Kahn.


Now in the commentaries they mention that they thought about having some set up at the end or after the credits of ST09 showing the Botany Bay drifting through space.

This shows that at the very least the premise of the next film will be "Crew finds 21st century dictator floating through space, conflicts resulting from reviving said dictator occur." Now they may do some cool stuff with Kahn...but he's still Kahn, its still the premise of Space Seed.

As I've said they've yet to show the sort of imagination shown by the original writers of the show. These film makers have the capability to do so many more possible stories than the people writing 45 minute television episodes in the 60s, and yet they don't.

While the original Trek from time to time fell into the trap of "The crew encounters X themed planet/society" There were some fairly original threats, conflicts and antagonists.

Star Trek 4 has a probe threatening the planet, not for revenge or malignant purposes, or for territorial disputes...but by accident while trying to contact whales. That is the kind of imagination I'm talking about.

In recent times, the past decade or so, the threats in Star Trek have been so many derivatives of Kahn and now once again, Kahn himself.

It's also telling that the officially licensed comic series associated with these films are also just remaking episodes.

You speak of "fanboys" but you're just a fanboy of a different color.

 

[raybia]

But you don't think that creating an entirely new villain to add to the mythos would be far more exciting and daring on Abrams' part? And it wouldn't step on any fanboy's toes in the process.

I can honestly say that what I want is an exciting, daring and engaging story that features a worthy antagonist. Really makes no difference if its an entirely new villain or an established character. Of course a fan favorite villain does add buzz to a movie and the prospect of them using Khan is both very risky but at the same time intriguing. If it is Khan, it will not step on the majority of fanboy's toes because for one, the character is a fan favorite, and two, using Khan does not in anyway shape or form, represent a threat to the original Khan and his portrayal by Montaban...at least anymore than getting new actors to play Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Co. If JJ could win over the Trekkies for those roles, believe me, he can do the same with Khan.

As it stands currently, a casual bystander could be easily forgiven for seeing the issue as simply that Nolan got stung by remarks that he created a lousy, forgettable villain in his first Batman movie, so for the follow-up, he's playing it safe by simply revamping every Batman fan's favorite villain.

There, I fixed it!