Star Trek Sequel

Status
Not open for further replies.
You don't see a reason for them to strike while the iron is hot? People have short memories so you do need to strike while the iron is hot.

After four year people will forget whether they liked the movie or not?

Would it have been fine for them to wait five or six or seven years just because they could get the cast and crew back together?

It wouldn't be fine for the studio. I'm sure they would prefer to make the money as quickly as possible (Transformers anyone?), but there's no reason a sequel couldn't be just as successful after that much time. It would be a matter of creating a story that works accounts for the difference in age.

I'm not saying that the movie will fail or not be a huge hit but this wait is a huge risk. And also, people age. Do they all want the youngish cast to be in their 40's when/if the 3rd movie comes out? There are just so many reasons that this wait is ridiculous IMHO.

The cast aging is actually good point, though it doesn't concern me so much. To me, the idea of switching directors is even more ridiculous.
 
have you forgotten that 3D films existed in the 50's and a short period in the early to mid-80's? what's so different about them? i even saw a 3D movies in 85 when i was 4 such as Starchaser Legend of Orin and Freddy's Dead when i was 10.
 
I can't wait foe this movie, I loved J.J. Abrams first "Star Trek" film. I dosn't think I would because I am a huge fan of "Star Trek: The Original Series" and did not think anyone could fill the original cast shoes.
 
It's not about magically forgetting the first film. In the movie biz, you have to strike when the iron is hot when it comes to these types of film unless the movie is a super surprise hit like The Matrix or a movie that slowly builds up a following like The Terminator. Two years would have been too soon because nothing was set up but three years would have been perfect.

I appreciate that Jbrams didn't want to do two Trek movies back-back and it's probably good that he didn't but he should have directed a movie that wasn't as huge as Super 8 so that he could get to work on the sequel sooner. It should be coming out next year to be honest but instead we have to wait because he has been involved with everything not named Star Trek.

Does he even really want to direct this ****ing thing?
but he had a chance working with Spielberg :yay:

but from what i understand Super 8 was not the problem why the movie will not be realesed in 2012.
 
From Variety, Alice Eve has been cast in the sequel.

Sources tell Variety that Alice Eve ("She's Out of My League") is returning director J.J. Abrams' choice to play the newest female addition to ensemble cast. No news yet on what the role would be, but insiders say it is likely that she'll be playing someone new to the "Star Trek" universe.
 
Indeed. Someone new though? I was looking forward to seeing Yeoman Rand and/or Nurse Chapel.
 
We could still see them, since they're still casting and all.
 
I only ever seen her in a small role in this movie I forget the name of.
 
I dig Alice Eve. Solid actress with tons of sex appeal. Good choice on JJ's part.

A shame she had to drop out of First Class. She would have made a killer Emma Frost.
 
will the next film not involve blowing up something at the end? there needs to be a lot more of the social allegory and ethical conflicts from the original episodes..
 
My first thought was Nurse Chapel, but I guess not.
 
I'll try and find the article but months ago there was an article about the ipad being used in hollywood and it mentions during an interview with the Star Trek "supreme court" that they were using an ipad to paint on vulcan ears onto a series of photos of various actresses.

a post from badass digest

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10...

It wasn't about Abrams, but rather the iPad & Hollywood. Here's the bit I was referring to, though:

"Last month at a meeting in Hollywood, it was time to plot out the sequel to 'Star Trek,' last year’s blockbuster reboot of the sci-fi franchise. The attendees all brought smartphones — gadgets far more powerful than the videophones imagined by the “Star Trek” writers 40 years ago. Bob Orci brought something the writers back then could only dream of: an iPad.

Mr. Orci, meeting with the producers J. J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk, and his fellow writer Alex Kurtzman, jump-started the discussion with an iPad slide show, showing stills from the first film, snapshots of potential locations and a photo of a suggested actress for one of the roles. On the woman’s photo, he had used his iPad to paint on a Vulcan ear.”

So, yeah. I doubt it was Eve on the iPad, but I'd be willing to bet she got that role.
 
I have mixed feelings about using Khan. On the one hand, he's Khan, Star Trek's most famous villain (unless you count Klingons as a single character). On the other hand, they could have done something new, and it's hard to top the original.
 

I second this. It really has to be completely different from "Space Seed" to be at all interesting. I can already pop that disc in anytime if I care to watch it.
 
Well, I was hoping he wasn't Khan, but at any rate, I hope they make a clear effort to do something different with him since this isn't supposed to be the same universe it was before. Maybe the ripple effect of changing the past also drastically changed Khan's origins in some way, who knows. Could be interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"