Star Trek Sequel

[Raiden]

Abrams better direct the sequel; he put his stamp on the first movie and a different director might not be able to bring the same kind of energy to the second movie. But I hope they won't delay this too long; audience do have short memories, after all.

 

[Secret_Riddle]

Pffft. That's like saying "This ocean better be made of liquid."

Yah, because there's never been a bad Star Trek sequel.

Haha, just playing. But seriously don't jinx it.

 

[Joker's Lackey]

I want the Cardassian's.
I can see them stealing the info of Nero's ship(something has to give here, klingon's held Nero for so long researching that ship, I have to think it will some part in the next film) from the Kilngon's and using it to build a ship that can defeat the UNF, Klingon and become leaders among the Dominion. I know this is a little early, but they would be a newish threat that fans already know in the ST movies.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

How about finally doing what Star Trek is supposed to be about, going where no man has gone before?

 

[mclay18]

Paramount needs to hurry it up and get Abrams (or a fresh director) signed on. They have a LOT of prep work to do, plus a script they have to write (depending on how detailed that 70+ page treatment is, it probably wouldn't take much to get it translated into a script). That June 29, 2012 date is ticking... they need to get it started since the competition (Spidey reboot and TDKR) have already begun shooting.

I'm really surprised at the lack of progress on this movie. Abrams is understandably busy with completing Super 8 (plus the press he has to do for it), but I'm surprised Orci, Kurtzman & Lindeof haven't turned in a script yet.

 

[8wid]

How about finally doing what Star Trek is supposed to be about, going where no man has gone before?

A city built in the heart of a star that suddenly attacks the Enterprise, could have an interesting environmental message. Or maybe restoring extinct creatures on Earth to habitation on another planet like Dinosaurs. The Q wreak havoc with the ship's crew once again.

 

[Octoberist]

I have a feeling this willget pushed back..

 

[DarthAlani]

Film is definately getting pushed back

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Don't see how it doesn't get pushed back at this juncture (to December 2012) and Paramount takes something else (like Mission: Impossible 4) to fill that June 29, 2012 slot.

 

[Dark Knight]

Sounds like they are struggling to find a compelling story to tell? Yeah, that's what happens when writers try to get to cutesy, and look for an answer that is not there, when the answer is right smack in front of them, but they refuse to see it.

I'm telling you guys, the way to go for this Trek sequel is to show us a younger origin style version of Khan, mixed in with some Klingons and a HIT they will have. We can also see Khans wife die tragically and see him lose it and blame Kirk. It would be great to see onscreen IMO. Also, Khan should NOT die in film. Going where no man has gone before is great and while that happens we see the rise of Khan!

The Dark Knight brought back the Joker after 20 years and Ledger topped Nicholsons performance. Bringing back a GREAT and COMPELLING villain character like Khan after seeing him over 30 freakin years ago would be the right move for Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman IMO. They shouldn't over think it, they should just go with KHAN!

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

No surprise.

"TOLDJA" says it probably won't drop on June 29, 2012 but instead for Christmas. Duh.

Hell, that's what I said yesterday.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

No surprise.

"TOLDJA" says it probably won't drop on June 29, 2012 but instead for Christmas. Duh.

Not a shock at all. I just hope that JJ is directing it, he and the actors were the best part of the first film.

EDIT:
I just read that he will be coming back to the directors chair. Thats a load off my mind. I don't like the fact that they are going to have to rush the film though.

 

[Dark Knight]

No surprise.

"TOLDJA" says it probably won't drop on June 29, 2012 but instead for Christmas. Duh.

Looks like they want to compete with Superman: Man Of Steel during the XMas Holidays in 2012 huh?

If they want to do that, then yeah....they BETTER go with a compelling villian like Khan. The Trek film will need it, if they want to go head to head with the Man Of Steel.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

It doesn't need Khan. In fact, the majority of the movie-goers who made Star Trek a smash don't know who that is.

After the reboot proved so popular and successful, the sky is the limit to where they can go with the sequel. Plus they've said they're not going in that direction. Thank God.

People would choose Trek 2 over Man of Steel were they to open the same day (They won't, obviously. WB isn't stupid).

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It doesn't need Khan. In fact, the majority of the movie-goers who made Star Trek a smash don't know who that is.

After the reboot proved so popular and successful, the sky is the limit to where they can go with the sequel. Plus they've said they're not going in that direction. Thank God.

People would choose Trek 2 over Man of Steel were they to open the same day (They won't, obviously. WB isn't stupid).

I agree with you Jamie, I see a Trek sequel cleaning The Reboot of Steel's clock at the boxoffice.

Not that I'm saying that Trek will gross as much as this film but this is a Pirates 2 situation all over again. Trek will benefit from the previous film and
Supes will have to fight for his money.

I'm seeing both of the films BTW.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Christmas 2009 proved big action-oriented genre blockbusters can co-exist just fine. Avatar and Sherlock Holmes. Plus Alvin & the Chipmunks 2. All three of those were huge.

 

[Dark Knight]

It doesn't need Khan. In fact, the majority of the movie-goers who made Star Trek a smash don't know who that is.

After the reboot proved so popular and successful, the sky is the limit to where they can go with the sequel. Plus they've said they're not going in that direction. Thank God.

People would choose Trek 2 over Man of Steel were they to open the same day (They won't, obviously. WB isn't stupid).

I don't think they necessarily need Khan either but it would be the wise move. I compare the situation to Joker in Dark Knight Rises. Khan is THAT compelling of a villian as much as the Joker is IMO.

We'll see. It sounds like they are struggling to get their stuff together right now. I mean Trelane or Mudd or Horta ahead of Khan??

They better find a compelling villian(s) or else this sequel may wind up not as good as the 1st film.

 

[Dark Knight]

People would choose Trek 2 over Man of Steel were they to open the same day (They won't, obviously. WB isn't stupid).

Hmm....we don't know that for sure.

It would all depend on the trailers and how each film looks and how it is marketed and promoted. The Trekkies and Trekkers and Sci Fi geeks significantly helped Treks cause the first time around.

The general movie going public and fans have been craving and have been hungry to see a kick ass Superman film for a loooooong time now. They are ravenous for it as a matter of fact.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Regular Joes liked Trek way more than the crazed fanboys. And fanboys, Trekkies or no don't make films hits.

Like Jamie said Superman could do just fine under Trek and other films but Trek has the advantage of being a sequel to a well liked film.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I don't think they necessarily need Khan either but it would be the wise move. I compare the situation to Joker in Dark Knight Rises. Khan is THAT compelling of a villian as much as the Joker is IMO.

We'll see. It sounds like they are struggling to get their stuff together right now. I mean Trelane or Mudd or Horta ahead of Khan??

They better find a compelling villian(s) or else this sequel may wind up not as good as the 1st film.

A lot of fans have argued they already did Khan with Nero, in a way. I don't completely disagree with that sentiment. Doesn't matter who the villain is. They could make a force of nature like the V'ger and still make it compelling.

The reboot worked because of the hero journey of Kirk and Spock. That's what clicked with people. Not the villain. In the case of that particular film, Nero was the MacGuffin. Doesn't matter what they settle on for the villain/adversary, people will turn out for Star Trek 2 regardless because of how much they loved the first film.

Hmm....we don't know that for sure.

It would all depend on the trailers and how each film looks and how it is marketed and promoted. The Trekkies and Trekkers and Sci Fi geeks significantly helped Treks cause the first time around.

The general movie going public and fans have been craving and have been hungry to see a kick ass Superman film for loooooong time now.

Star Trek was huge because they sold it to the general public. Not because Trekkers and the nerd community. They were going regardless. If that were the case, Nemesis wouldn't have tanked as hard as it did. Paramount was wise to focus their dollars on Joe Six-pack instead, and it worked.

General public and fans have also been wanting a kick-ass Hulk movie for years. They finally got one, and the movie under-performed. A good chunk of that because the last Hulk film was incredibly unpopular.

 

[Dark Knight]

I agree with you Jamie, I see a Trek sequel cleaning The Reboot of Steel's clock at the boxoffice.

Not that I'm saying that Trek will gross as much as this film but this is a Pirates 2 situation all over again. Trek will benefit from the previous film and
Supes will have to fight for his money.

I'm seeing both of the films BTW.

Hmm....I think comparing the Star Trek reboot to the Pirates franchise Box Office #s is like comparing apples to peaches. You guys are acting like Star Trek was a some Box Office juggernaut. It did well for having a 150 million budget, but it was not a worldwide juggernaut.

Take a look at it's BO #'s below:

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek11.htm


Domestic: $257,730,019 66.8%
+ Foreign: $127,950,427 33.2%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $385,680,446

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Don't ever use studio-quoted numbers as the actual budget. They always lie. Star Trek cost way more than $150 million to make.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Hmm....I think comparing the Star Trek reboot to the Pirates franchise Box Office #s is like comparing apples to peaches. You guys are acting like Star Trek was a some Box Office juggernaut. It did well for having a 150 million budget, but it was not a worldwide juggernaut.

Take a look at it's BO #'s below:

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek11.htm


Domestic: $257,730,019 66.8%
+ Foreign: $127,950,427 33.2%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $385,680,446

I know what Trek did and I'm not a Thor fanboy so I don't overstate numbers just to make the movie I like look like it performed better than it did.

I also said in that post that I know that Trek 2 won't be making nearly as much as Pirates 2. I was just saying that it was a sequel to a well liked movie thus it has an advantage over Superman which is in a simular postion that other reboots were in.

In lamest terms:

Star Trek 2 = sequel to well liked film.

The Man of Steel = reboot of franchise after disappointing last film.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I don't think they necessarily need Khan either but it would be the wise move. I compare the situation to Joker in Dark Knight Rises. Khan is THAT compelling of a villian as much as the Joker is IMO.

We'll see. It sounds like they are struggling to get their stuff together right now. I mean Trelane or Mudd or Horta ahead of Khan??

They better find a compelling villian(s) or else this sequel may wind up not as good as the 1st film.

I won't argue about Khan's merit's as a character, because he's a great baddie, but the fact is that he's no where NEAR the Joker in terms of general audience awareness. The general public knows the Joker. Heck, the Joker is one of the most recognizable fictional villains period. Khan is pretty much out of the public consciousness. Even if you made him the villian, it wouldn't do much for the box office draw, because the general audience doesn't remeber who he is. Not the target audience for this movie anyways.

In lamest terms:

Star Trek 2 = sequel to well liked film.

The Man of Steel = reboot of franchise after disappointing last film.

I completely agree with this. Supes has to deal with the negative buzz from the last movie. However, Superman is in the same position as the Spidey reboot. While it has to overcome the negative stigma from it's last film, a few good trailers will get people back in the theatre. Because we need to remember that even though the hardcore fans like us completley BASHED Superman Returns and Spidey3, the general public was not nearly as harsh on them. Their reaction was more or less "meh, it was okay." It's not like a Batman and Robin situation, where even the general audience hated the thing.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I won't argue about Khan's merit's as a character, because he's a great baddie, but the fact is that he's no where NEAR the Joker in terms of general audience awareness. The general public knows the Joker. Heck, the Joker is one of the most recognizable fictional villains period. Khan is pretty much out of the public consciousness. Even if you made him the villian, it wouldn't do much for the box office draw, because the general audience doesn't remeber who he is. Not the target audience for this movie anyways.

Well said.