Star Trek Into Darkness

1
From TrekMovie:
BREAKING: Paramount Moving Forward On Star Trek Sequel - Supreme Court On Board March 30, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Paramount, ST09 Creative, Star Trek (2009 film), Star Trek sequel (2011) , trackback First hinted at here at TrekMovie last June, Paramount have finally sealed the deal for the Trek’s ‘Supreme Court’ (Abrams, Burk, Kurtzman, Lindelof, & Orci) to move forward on a sequel to their new Star Trek, five weeks before it even opens up. Variety broke the news Monday night, see below for the first details on on what would be the twelfth film in the Star Trek franchise.

Get Ready for another Star Trek in 2011
Here are the facts from the Variety report:
  • All five "Supreme Court" members back as producers: JJ Abrams, Bryan Burk, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof
  • Script to be written by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof (story in ‘embryonic’ stage)
  • JJ could possibly direct, no decision yet
  • Script to be delivered by Christmas 2009 for a possible Summer 2011 release
This is essentially the same set up as the first deal back in 2006. Abrams did not sign on as director for the current film until early 2007. The only difference now is that Lindelof (an Emmy winning writer) is also listed as screenwriter. However, in previous interviews with both Lindelof and the writers, it has been indicated that Damon worked closely with the writers as they were working on the script for this year’s Star Trek.
Lindelof is quoted in the Variety article:There’s obviously a lot of hubris involved in signing on to write a sequel of a movie that hasn’t even come out yet. But we’re so excited about the first one that we wanted to proceed.Kurztman is also quoted on possible storylines:Obviously we discussed ideas, but we are waiting to see how audiences respond next month. With a franchise rebirth, the first movie has to be about origin. But with a second, you have the opportunity to e xp lore incredibly exciting things. We’ll be ambitious about what we’ll do.Huge vote of confidence
There can be no greater indicator that Paramount believe they have a winner on their hand and they want to make sure they have the same team in place. Paramount has been pushing to get two-year gaps between the Iron Man (2008 & 2010) Transformers (2007, 2009 and possibly 2011), and so it makes sense foe them to want to do the same with Trek. It has been previously reported that all all the main cast have options for two sequels, so with the Supreme Court tied down, Paramount is ready to go.
One caveat, signing a deal to get a script is not the same thing as giving a film a green light. Obviously the performance of the new Star Trek film will be a major factor in how to proceed with a sequel. However, studio sources have been indicating to TrekMovie for quite a while that a sequel was always assumed and some feel that (like with the recent Batman relaunch), the follow-up film can be even bigger.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

4
Oh brother. I suppose this was inevitable. From TrekMovie:
Rumor Control: No Current Planning For Shatner In Star Trek Trek Sequel April 1, 2009

http://trekmovie.com/2009/04/01/rumor-c ... trackback/
Image
Less than 2 days after it was announced that Paramount is moving forward on development of a sequel to the new Star Trek, and already the rumors are starting. And leave it to a British Tabloid to bring back granddaddy subject of all Star Trek rumors, William Shatner. As usual TrekMovie sifts through to find the truth.
The Shat back in 2011?
This latest rumor comes courtesy of the UK’s [url=http://www.e%20xp%20ress.co.uk/posts/view/92439/Kirk-s-new-life]Daily E xp ress[/url], who are ‘reporting’ that "industry insiders say moves are afoot" to get Shatner into a sequel, and they quote one saying "there are hopes he’ll make an appearance:" Not exactly saying much, but this this subsequently got picked up by the notoriously unreliable entertainment news service WENN, which got it picked up by mainstream news outlets and other genre press, including another Star Trek site.
So TrekMovie checked with our always reliable sources, (who have helped us debunk many rumors in the past), and this one is just another to add to the mix. There are currently no ‘moves afoot’ related to the sequel and Shatner. In fact work really won’t really begin on the script for the sequel until after the first movie comes out. Of course it is theoretically possible that Shatner (or just about anyone) could end up being considered down the road, but there is nothing going on now on that front.
Discussion of Shatner being in this May’s Star Trek was a huge topic in the press for a couple years, starting at Comic Con in 2006 when JJ Abrams first mentioned they were looking for a way to include him on the movie. In the end Abrams says they felt it would be ‘forced’ and also felt that since Shatner’s character was dead, it was not workable. The debate on if he should be in, if he was offered a role and more ended up being played out in the media and elevated to to the level of a ‘feud’, at one point prompting JJ Abrams to say to an interview ‘when did my life become watching William Shatner talk about me on the Internet?’
Do we want cameos?
TrekMovie is currently conducting a poll on possible cameos for the sequel and the winning choice right now is ‘no cameos’ with 36%, with Shatner coming in second with 31%.
It is likely that there will be more rumors of casting Shatner and other Trek (and non Trek) celebrities over the next couple of years, so we should just get used it. Maybe early on the filmmakers can make a blanket statement on if they are even considering these kind of guest spots for the film. If not, they say so and save some trouble down the road.
You know, I wanted just as much as anyone for the writers to find a way to resurrect Kirk, not necessarily so much for Shatner to be in ST XI, but because Kirk's death was so poorly realized in Generations and the character deserved so much more. But as we discussed here, the resurrection of Kirk would be a movie in itself, and would have felt tagged onto the movie if they had just shoehorned it in. Even my idea, which was Old Spock mindmelding with Young Kirk and saying, "years from now....Veridian III...stay off that damned bridge!" and then the movie ending with Old Spock and Old Kirk walking along a beach and reminiscing, would still have been tagged on, just a coda or cameo. And Shatner himself ruled out cameos. (Not in response to me, of course, but in response to speculation/desire in general.)

And so now the rumor mill wants him to be in 12. Assuming there is a 12, I think there should be no cameos in it from any of the other casts. The current movie should establish the new cast as the cast of Star Trek, and after that they need to be able to stand on their own feet. To keep having characters from past incarnations of Star Trek popping up says that the new cast can't carry the franchise. I don't think that's a statement that they or Abrams or Paramount wants to make.

Last but not least (and this is not meant to be mean) is the availability and credibility of Shatner two years from now. The man just turned 78 and is quite obese. If he's even alive and capable of acting two years from now, do we really want our last memory of "our" Kirk, ladies' man and bare-knuckled brawler, to be a really fat old man? Personally I'll take his unnecessary death in Generations over a final appearance in 12 that looks like he was trying out for the part of Bombur in The Hobbit.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

5
[quote=""Olorin""]What lawsuit? Are you thrown off by the use of the term "Supreme Court?" That's just Abrams & Co's pompous name for themselves, having been entrusted with the franchise by Paramount.

If you've accidentally gotten your threads crossed (Star Trek vs. Hobbit), then the Hobbit/LOTR lawsuit info can be found here:

http://www.kristinthompson.net/blog/?cat=26[/quote]

Apparently I was indeed thrown off by the "supreme court".

Re: Star Trek 12

8
[quote=""Olorin""]
Last but not least (and this is not meant to be mean) is the availability and credibility of Shatner two years from now. The man just turned 78 and is quite obese. If he's even alive and capable of acting two years from now, do we really want our last memory of "our" Kirk, ladies' man and bare-knuckled brawler, to be a really fat old man? Personally I'll take his unnecessary death in Generations over a final appearance in 12 that looks like he was trying out for the part of Bombur in The Hobbit.[/quote]

To be fair to Shatner, he is actually only 4 days older than Nimoy and comparatively better less rough looking than Nimoy, in my opinion. As you all know, I have hated the fact that they killed off Shatner since I saw the movie in the theater on a school feild trip in 6th grade! But I think I have accepted the fact that there is no conceiveable way to ressurect Kirk with Shatner, he is just too old to fit in to a "time travel" movie (not again!) to go back and not get killed. They'd have to "save kirk" in the future (our future, not trek future) using the newly casted Kirk some how, and like its been said before having an Old Kirk and an Old Spock sitting on a beach reminescing while drinking a nice romulan ale.

Re: Star Trek 12

9
[quote=""BladeCollector""]To be fair to Shatner, he is actually only 4 days older than Nimoy and comparatively better less rough looking than Nimoy, in my opinion.[/quote]

Yeah, and Nimoy looks like death warmed over, so compared to that, sure, Shatner looks good. However, Nimoy can get away with looking like death warmed over in this movie, as we don't e xp ect the 149 year old Spock to do anything other than be wise.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

11
I can't really see it as more than a glorified cameo, the "walking on the beach" scene, and the new movie would have been the best bet for that. You can't otherwise really resurrect him w/o making that the entire plot (such as The Search for Spock), and after this picture, I don't think Paramount wants to go back to using the old cast when they've just introduced a new one.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

12
So, do you think Paramount greenlighting another movie is wishful thinking for the studio that they have a hit and are going to relaunch this series and make it as popular as it was back in its heyday, or do you think that it really will be what Star Trek needs? Just curious right now, but in a little over a week, some of us will have our own opinions after seeing the movie... before I see the movie, I have my doubts, but I am hopefully optimistic.

Re: Star Trek 12

13
Technically the movie is not really greenlit. They've just okayed development of a script. I think they want to be well on the road to the next movie if this one does well, and having a script ready is the biggest part of that initially. I like that they have done this, as it gives the writers oodles of time to create and fine-tune a good story, and figure out how to included Shatner (just kidding about the last part—I believe the cast has to stand on its own feet in the next movie). This was also a way to lock in the "Supreme Court," which looks like a winning team, whatever issues us old-timers may have with the "new" Star Trek.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

14
If this movies rocks at the box office, power to them.

Here is my main beef with this re-imagined continuing: much in the same way as I view 99% of all other reboots, remakes, re-whatevers, I feel sad for what is lost. As newer generations distance themselves further from the original works by the simple virtue of time and e xp osure to the new versions, there is an awareness that is lost with regards to what came before. As someone who works in a club and is e xp osed to a lot of music and young people, I can't tell you how many times I've had kids half my age e xp ress surprise at learning that the song or music they are hearing is not actually new or original, but redone or resampled, oftentimes more than once. This is a phenomenon that is becoming pervasive as the entertainment industry in general struggles to reinvent itself and offer something new, when in the end it only seems to regurgitate old ideas in a new and shiny package.

Thus my point with this new Star Trek. While us old timers hang around, we'll still be there to remind the young punks that there was once a Star Trek before this one, but it won't be long before this new Kirk and Spock become THE Kirk and Spock, while the old ones become a quaint source of amusement, if not forgotten at all. I'm sure some will argue that Trek has been relaunched before with TNG, but we'd be talking apples and oranges then. TNG was the natural evolution of TOS, a progression of events with a continuous history and internal consistency. The new Star Trek movie truly represents a new beginning however, and a sealing of the vault on the old Star Trek universe. Those tales are told, now the new ones begin. Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that per se, but I can foresee a day when I will cringe at having to e xp lain to someone that no, this is NOT the original crew of the Enterprise, and that there was another Star Trek, long ago, to which this crew owes their popularity, fame, and very existence. I never want that to be forgotten.

Re: Star Trek 12

15
Val,
I'm sure that club you work in isn't The Green Dragon (unfortunately). But I will meet you there (The Green Dragon) and buy you a brew, and we shall lift a toast to the forgotten few!
Your are so correct in your assessment, people forget as time goes on. Worse is that schools are "dumbing down" education in such a way as to "rewrite" history so that foundations are lost and people are being conned into believing that their world is new, fresh, and original.
New, fresh, and original are only remakes of what once was.
As Solomon said, "There is nothing new under the sun."

Re: Star Trek 12

16
I have a friend at work who has never really watched TOS. He's seen bits and pieces, but I don't know if he's ever seen an entire episode. His ST career began with TNG, which was in first run when he was a teenager. I've told him he really must watch all of TOS at some point, since it's where ST all began. If he ever does, I wonder if he will be able to get past the dated effects, sets, etc and appreciate the stories, the characters, and such things that make it so worthwhile and timeless. I've toyed with the idea of giving him my TOS DVD sets as I replace them with the new BD sets, but I don't know if I will. He's more of a casual friend and if I'm going to give away these things that cost me major $$ when they were knew, I should probably give them to someone that I'm closer to. We'll see....
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

17
[quote=""Olorin""]I've toyed with the idea of giving him my TOS DVD sets as I replace them with the new BD sets, but I don't know if I will. He's more of a casual friend and if I'm going to give away these things that cost me major $$ when they were knew, I should probably give them to someone that I'm closer to. We'll see....[/quote]

I dont have the TOS DVDs yet... hehehe.

It would be a travesty if TOS or any of the "current timeline" is forgotten...

Re: Star Trek 12

18
Since a sequel is now assured, it's no longer premature to speculate...and that's just what the writers have been doing. Read and quake in your boots, from MTV....
'Star Trek' Sequel Will Deal With 'Unpredictable Future'

J.J. Abrams and company are ready to continue in the 'alternate reality' the reboot created.

When J.J. Abrams and his team first signed on to resurrect "Star Trek," Hollywood insiders questioned whether sci-fi fans still cared about the franchise. After a $76.5 million opening this past weekend the previous franchise record-holder was "First Contact" with a mere $30 million — you can consider "Trek" successfully rebooted. And as you read this, a whole new series of sequels are being planned for this new alternate reality.

"One of the obstacles that we found ourselves butting up against [when we took on the job] was this idea that we already knew the fate of the characters," writer/producer Alex Kurtzman told us of the newly established parallel "Trek" dimension, forever altered by the reckless actions of time-travelling villain Nero (Eric Bana). "If you're going to bring a whole new iteration of 'Trek' to life, you could never put them in any real danger — because you already know how they either died or lived. So, we felt like, all right, we have to find a way to make the future unpredictable, so whenever they're in these difficult, treacherous situations there truly is the risk of death."

Word already leaked more than a month ago that at least one "Trek" sequel is in the works, and the series' gatekeepers confirmed to us that such memorable characters as Khan Noonien Singh and Dr. Tolian Soran are among the many characters whose life courses may have been altered by the events of the new film.

"All the characters who existed in the universe or canon we grew up with are essentially still around in some capacity," Kurtzman e xp lained. "But their lives have been altered, so they may again intersect with our crew."
"There's a deal in place with the writers and the actors," Abrams said recently of "Trek" sequel plans, e xp laining that all the key actors are under contract to return. "If people like this movie, and there's a demand for another one, we would be happy to work on it."

Well, they certainly did — and Kurtzman and his writing partner Roberto Orci (who also collaborated on the upcoming "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen") told us that their minds are already swimming with sequel possibilities.

"I don't think we ever need to talk about time travel again," Orci e xp lained, saying that Leonard Nimoy and other "original universe" cast members will likely be unnecessary from here on out. "In fact, in the end of the movie, the device that allows time travel is destroyed. So we're stuck with this universe we're in now."

"Now we're in this new world," Kurtzman agreed. "And we're just gonna have to live through the unpredictable future."

As for ideas in that universe, Orci e xp lained: "We've had a couple of really preliminary conversations, but we really didn't want to [get ahead of ourselves], because this isn't something we invented. We wanted to see what fans think of the first one; let's see what works, and what people think is the best in what we've done. And then we can take that into account when we think about the next movie."

Asked how soon they'd start writing the "Trek" sequel if the first one is announced as a hit the Monday after opening weekend, Orci said: "That day."

"I'm already going back and reading some of the books I've missed," he said of "Trek" tales and fan-fiction that have been written in past years, which could be reinterpreted for their new universe. "I'm trying to read every 'Star Trek' book I can get my hands on. We did that a lot for the first movie. ... I'm starting to re-immerse myself again in what's come before."
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

19
Here's something from TrekMovie, more of Shatner angling to be in the sequel:
Bill hears Star Trek is wonderful + wants to be in sequel
In TrekMovie’s recent interview with JJ Abrams, the director said that the hardest decision for him was to not include William Shatner in Star Trek and that it was "a possibility" he could appear in the sequel. JJ repeated this even more recently in an interview with MTV.

And apparently Bill is ready to suit up as well. In an interview promoting Raw Nerve in Australia, the subject came up (or course), here is an excerpt:Shatner is nothing but warm with his words about Abrams and the new Star Trek movie.

"No, I haven’t seen the movie yet," Shatner gently responds during a phone interview.

"I’m looking forward to it. I hear it is wonderful and it has received some wonderful reviews."

With the success of Abrams’ first effort, there is talk of a Star Trek sequel.

Shatner says he is open to being cast in the sequel.
"I would be delighted to be in it," Shatner responds.

Shatner is also open to inviting Abrams on Raw Nerve, but don’t e xp ect Shatner to use his talk show to attack Abrams. Again, he wants to take the friendly route.

"I would love to," Shatner says when asked if he would invite Abrams to be a guest on the talk show.
Personally, I think this is a load of steaming hooey. If Shatner really cared that much about this, he would have seen the movie already. The fact that he hasn't says to me that his love is not Star Trek but simply being in the limelight.

Shatner had his best shot at being in an Abrams Star Trek movie with the one that's in theaters right now. I don't know if the hologram birthday greeting scene was offered to him and he turned it down, or if it was never even offered, but it would have been good. But it didn't happen. And in the next movie, the new cast needs to stand on their own feet with no assistance from past cast members.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

21
Well, technically, he was in Australia promoting "Shatner's Raw Nerve," but I mean, if he really wanted to see it, he'd make an effort. Then again, maybe big celebs like the Shat can only see it at special celeb-only screenings so they won't get mauled by fans.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

22
I'm of two minds on this issue.

On one side, I quite agree that this new version of Trek needs to break all bonds and just go it alone. Having old Spock to tie things in with the regular Trek universe was a nice and respectful touch to the longtime fans, but from here on, any more appearances and references to that era are just going to seem gratuitous and like a crutch. For better or for worse, the training wheels are off and these kids are on their own.

On the other side... I love the Shat. What's more, I love the Shat's James T. Kirk. Whatever they can dream up or do, it would be like a nerd-gasm for me to see him in that uniform one last time, erasing the horrible memory of his useless death in Generations. However, since bringing back old Kirk would make up for a movie on its own, how about Mirror Universe old Kirk? With time travels and alternate realities, there's a million ways that evil version of the beloved captain could terrorize the young crew of the Enterprise. Just imagine all the havoc evil Kirk could visit upon a new, unsuspecting reality. He'd teach young Kirk a thing or two about starship combat tactics, then finish him off with a double axe chop to the neck for good measure while the old school fight music plays in the background.

Ta-ta-taaa-ta-ta-ta-taaa-ta-ta-ta-ta!!! :crazy:

Re: Star Trek 12

23
I pray that Orci and Kurtzman didn't read your post! ;)

Kidding aside, bringing back the evil Mirror Universe Kirk was what the producers of Enterprise had in mind for their attempt to have Shatner on the show. That bothered me for a couple of reasons. First, the evil Kirk is not the "real" Kirk, so to have him appear would have been no more than a curiosity and not a visit with "our" captain. Second, it would have necessitated some sort of time travel element, as the mirror Kirk would have been living in the mid-to-late 23rd Century, whereas Enterprise was set in the mid-22nd Century. And Star Trek has done time travel so many times I've sometimes thought the show should have been called Time Trek.

All those reservations apply to the new Star Trek. Add to that the fact that the current Kirk is not really "our" Kirk and we'd be left with two Kirks that are not ours, a timeline that is not ours, and a ship that doesn't look like ours, and just a whole lot of don't-care. I think that's one factor limiting my enjoyment of the new movie (beyond the whole turning it into Star Wars thing): it isn't "our" crew and they're played by new actors. Abrams & Co's statement that once the new movie was out, that people wouldn't believe they'd once thought these characters could be played by no one else? Well, I still believe that.

I think that the fans—and Shatner—just need to move on. No matter how useless or lamely staged his death was, the fact remains that Kirk is dead. And Shatner is ultimately the one to blame—he agreed to let Kirk be killed. So he has nobody to be upset at but himself.

To bring back the only Kirk that matters, our original Kirk, would require its own movie. However, the time for that is long past. If we were still in a run of movies with the original cast, maybe it could/should be done. But even then, I don't know for certain that it would be a good idea. Star Trek had already done that once, with Spock, and they contrived a halfway reasonable way to do it, to which Spock's nature as a Vulcan was key. To devote a movie to bringing Kirk back now would be a disservice to the new crew, which must be able to go it alone now. The only way it could have been done with the new crew would have been where Kirk's return was no more than a footnote to the story (my idea that I have long rambled on about), yet even that would have been unsatisfying to Shatner and probably to the fans as well.

So, moving on.... What shall we call the new Star Trek to distinguish it from the past 40-plus years of the prime timeline? I think we should call it New Trek.

And what would we like to see e xp lored in the next movie? I just about roll my eyes out of my head at suggestions that they bring Khan back. Ricardo Montalban is dead and Heath Ledger is dead, so they should just forget about that. But other than that, at the risk of taking the movie into not-standing-on-its-own territory by reprising villains from past Treks, I have had two ideas for antagonists.

One of these would be...the Talosians. They were great villains...totally unthreatening physically, but with a mental power that could keep you from ever knowing what was real and what wasn't. And the range of e xp eriences they would provide would be nearly unlimited, from tremendous temptation, to burning in Hell (as we saw in The Cage/The Menagerie).

In the new timeline, Talos IV is an unknown world. Captain Pike has never gone there, and it's also possible that the SS Columbia never crashed there, since that is an event that would have occurred after the destruction of the Kelvin and thus might have been altered. The Federation knows nothing about this world, and making contact with it does not bear the death penalty. So the Enterprise could stumble into a real situation.

And a villain for a different story could be: the Borg. Again, the crew would have no knowledge what they are up against. The Borg would be scary again, much as Enterprise made them scary again after Voyager had so thoroughly defanged them.

Now, I'm not really saying I hope they pick either of these two races to build a story around. I'm just saying that if they feel like they have to retread something from Treks past, those are two great candidates, at least one of which has not been overused.
Last edited by Olorin on Tue May 26, 2009 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

24
Commentary from Abrams at the Saturn Awards, courtesy of TrekMovie:
Abrams talks next Trek
With the current Star Trek movie being a hit, everyone is thinking about the next entry. Writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have talked about how they haven’t started yet, but are weighing the big question about on if they should or should not return to a classic Star Trek story for the next Trek. JJ Abrams, who will produce and possibly direct the Star Trek sequel, chimed in on that topic, telling SciFiWire:
The great thing is we’re all open to anything. I think the fun of where we are with Trek is that it can and should just be fully e xp lored. So I think to limit ourselves to only new adventures would be a mistake.
They're going to redo Khan, I can just see it coming. Nothing is sacred to them.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

25
Man, don't know how I missed your big post from four weeks ago, but I totally agree. However, that's twice now you've mentioned Heath Ledger in the same sentence as Khan and Montalban. I don't get the connection. Was Ledger in talks to play a rebooted Khan at some point, or is there something else I'm missing here? :huh:

Re: Star Trek 12

26
"The great thing is we’re all open to anything. I think the fun of where we are with Trek is that it can and should just be fully e xp lored. So I think to limit ourselves to only new adventures would be a mistake."


:laugh: Oh god, anyone with a little bit of creativity should know these two statements are ludicrous. It's "great" that they're open to anything? I see that as awful. Unless we have different definitions of "anything". And to be "limited" by new adventures? LIMITED by originality and progress?! Oh man... the perception is really off here.
-_-

Re: Star Trek 12

27
Yep, Abrams and co. are failing miserably to entice me into their allegedly new vision of Star Trek. One mediocre movie followed by what's shaping up to be a blatant and unoriginal ripoff sequel? Way to go guys, keep it up and you'll kill Trek off faster than the last guys did, because sooner or later, even the brainless fans of this drivel will wise up to your lack of creativity. :huh:

Re: Star Trek 12

28
[quote=""Valkrist""]Man, don't know how I missed your big post from four weeks ago, but I totally agree. However, that's twice now you've mentioned Heath Ledger in the same sentence as Khan and Montalban. I don't get the connection. Was Ledger in talks to play a rebooted Khan at some point, or is there something else I'm missing here? :huh: [/quote]

Yes, you're missing something, but not news that Ledger had been in talks to be in Star Trek. I was merely making reference to the fact that he so brilliantly brought a character to life (the Joker) that had so thoroughly belonged to another actor (Nicholson), after everyone had been scratching their heads over his casting. Well, he's dead, so his brilliance is not available for Khan.

I hope-hope-hope they leave Khan the hell alone, but their comments about not limiting themselves to new stories (what a moronic statement, that) gives me no confidence they won't retread something, and if they're going to retread something, I'm sure they'll decide they need to go straight for the big kahuna to top the success of the first movie.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek XI

29
From TrekMovie:
Orci & Kurtzman: Chances Of Khan In Star Trek Sequel 50/50 June 26, 2009

http://trekmovie.com/2009/06/26/orci-ku ... trackback/
Image
There is yet another Transformers interview with Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman that delves into Star Trek territory, but this one they actual gave some odds on if Khan Noonien Singh will show up in the Star Trek sequel, along with talking about how fans (like those here at TrekMovie) are informing their decisions.
More from Bob and Alex on the great debate over the Star Trek sequel
excerpt from Movie Morons interview
Movie Morons: You’ve mentioned that the fan talkbacks are informing future Star Trek films. Are there any specific suggestions that you’re going to consider? Any big Red Lights of where NOT to go with the franchise?
Roberto Orci: As you can imagine every kind of opinion has been e xp ressed in relation to the movie, so there have been both red lights, green lights, yellow lights, the gamut. What they have done is very quickly identified the fork in the road, which is to do a completely original story or to harmonize with canon the way we did in the first movie, where some of the events overlapped with the original universe and were the same even if time travel hadn’t happened and some of the harmonies were reversed, like Spock with Uhura instead of Kirk. They very quickly have fallen into those two camps. And that’s interesting cause that’s the debate we’re having with ourselves. So we’re literally getting to read this ongoing debate online and it’s very helpful.
Movie Morons: Seems like it’s a lot of people fleshing out all the possibilities.
Roberto Orci: And just the merits of one philosophy over another more than any specific ideas. It’s more about what’s philosophically right to do. Very fascinating.
——
Movie Morons: Arguably the most iconic Star Trek villain: Khan. What is the chance you’re going to bring him back?
Roberto Orci: What do you think Alex? 50/50? Is that a boring answer?
Alex Kurtzman: That’s a good answer.
Roberto Orci: 50/50. Let’s flip a coin right now on the phone. If I said 10/90 I wouldn’t tell you which direction we were leaning in anyway.
Much more from Alex and Bob, including why Nero never went to Romulus, at MovieMorons.
A new Space Seed?
Most in the mainstream media think of the 1982 film The Wrath of Khan, when the name Khan comes up, but if Bob and Alex are sticking to their timelines (even their alternate timelines), then any movie with Khan would involve a retelling of the TOS episode "The Space Seed" when Khan was first encountered by the USS Enterprise under the command of James T. Kirk. It was Kirk’s solution in that episode, exiling Khan on Ceti Alpha V, that prompted Khan’s revenge (and wrath).
Honestly, I'd have to say IMHO the "movie morons" are Kurtzman and Orci!
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek XI

32
What a joke this is becoming...

You know what? With Orci and Kurtzman writing, you can just ditch Abrams for Michael Bay, add some giant robots to Star Trek, and then you can have the male teenager's cinematic equivalent of snorting cocaine off a hooker's posterior.

Re: Star Trek 12

33
What an image....

Anyway, I moved the preceding 4 posts here from the ST XI thread. I inadvertently posted the one about Khan in the XI thread instead of here...that's what happens when I post when I'm really tired.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

34
But on the bright side... the CGI will look really cool! With lots of s'plosions and stuff.

From what it sounds, they are going to ruin the second one, just the same as they did for transformers 2. Sure, the first one wasn't amazing and it could have been a LOT better, but it wasn't terrible.

I think the lot of you should write a letter to Abrams and ask if they will let you supervise the filming/script to make sure that fans will like it. ;)
Valar morghulis

Re: Star Trek 12

35
That's the problem though. Now we have two vastly different categories of fans, and whatever they come up with, the new Star Trek fans will swallow with joy. Besides, who cares about "nerd Trekkies". Yeah. You're a NERD if you like the intelligent and meaningful Star Trek. You're a hipster if you're on the new Trek bandwagon with the cooool young people and "that guy from Heroes".
-_-

Re: Star Trek 12

36
AMC interviewed the writers. They asked about the Prime Universe:
AMC: Would you ever again want to draw characters from the "Prime" universe in the sequel, like you did for Spock?

Bob Orci: We can’t be done with it completely. But I would start with what’s happening to the crew now, and if that became a great thing organic to the momentum of where the first movie is going, then maybe. Anything is possible right now. That’s really the juice and the curse of this path.
Say what? I was really going to rip on this guy for not being able to write a cogent sentence without adding all sorts of hip buzz words, but then I thought about the "English not his first language" issue and noted that Orci was born in Mexico City. Still, it does sound almost like something that could have come shambling out of the mouth of George Bush.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

37
I'm really just ignoring any further inane babble that comes out of the mouth of these two (Orci and Kurtzman.)

I read an interview where they pretty much swear up and down that they knew the critics would slam Transformers 2 (in fact, they seem almost strangely pleased with that.) So, being possessed of such amazing foreknowledge, they still go ahead and make no cohesive effort to write a story that is above the inteliigence level of your average swamp-dwelling, inbred hillbilly. Sadly, like Star Trek, that movie is making millions hand over fist, therefore enabling and empowering these two in the eyes of Hollywood where nothing but the almighty $$$ reigns supreme. Given the trend, I shudder to think at the stinking pile of mugato manure that the next Trek movie is going to be.

And to address his poorly worded 'hip' comments, rest assured that once they are done raping Khan and other good stories off the original Trek, they will then start plundering the Prime Universe for further characters and ideas, because they won't be able to tell a story of their own that stands on its own two legs. Everything they've indicated thus far seems to point to the fact that this new incarnation of Trek will never boldy go where no other version has gone before. Instead, they will just keep stealing ideas and characters, dressing it up with modern special effects, and collectiong their fat paycheques, while the balance book of originality runs a massive deficit that even Obama can't bail out. :angry:

Re: Star Trek XI

38
From TrekMovie:
The Great Khan Debate
One of the hottest topics here at TrekMovie in the last few weeks has been about the Star Trek sequel, and whether or not it should include Khan. This debate is playing itself out across the geekosphere as fans debate the future of Khan or no Khan. A couple of recent examples....

DenOfGeek notes 10 things they want in the Star Trek sequel and coming in at number five was…5. Khan Noonien Singh
The genetically-engineered warrior from the Eugenics Wars is probably Kirk’s greatest nemesis, when he defrosts this sociopath when he encounters his ship, Botany Bay. Sadly, Ricardo Montalban is no longer with us, so who would play this charming monster? That’s a difficult one, although Antonio Banderas does spring to mind for some curious reason.
…but io9 argues againstputting Khan in to the Star Trek sequel, listing a number of reasons, including:Say goodbye to the freshness.
Abrams’ Star Trek reboot threw armfuls of candy at the fans, to distract them from the fact that this was a whole new Star Trek. You had the Kobayashi Maru, the classic lines like "I am, and always will be your friend" and "I’m giving her all she’s got," the Orion woman, Pike in a wheelchair, and so on. The constant hand-holding got a little annoying, because I’d rather see a movie that’s concerned with telling a story than with placating a minority of OCD fans. But it was okay, because behind all of this clutter, there was a fresh story.
Even though Nero was a weak villain, he was at least something new, and he had a few really great moments. But it’s hard to imagine a storyline starring Khan that wouldn’t feel a bit warmed-over. It would be the opposite of the first movie: a few fresh ideas, wrapped around a core of fan-pleasing deja vu. Pass.
I have been talking about this topic with others at TrekMovie.com HQ, and will put up my thoughts on the Khan debate this weekend.
As you know, I'm opposed to the idea of them putting Khan in any of these new movies, although I had not thought about Antonio Banderas. It's an intriguing thought, but I'm still against it. And for heaven's sakes, if you can't help yourself and have to redo Khan, at least cast a South Asian to play a South Asian. Too bad they wasted Faran Tahir as Capt. Robau...he'd have made a good Khan if Khan must be redone.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek XI

39
Ugh, I hate to keep posting on an annoying topic, but...just...can't...help...myself. From TrekMovie:
More Star Trek Sequel Talk From Orci & Kurtzman – Is There A Leading Candidate For New Khan?
There are yet a couple more Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen interviews with Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman which delve into the world of the Star Trek: Something Something sequel. And in one case, a name pops up again as a possible new Khan.

The great debate continues
An interview with Canada’s Sun Media, discusses the great debate vexing Orci and Kurtzman regarding the Star Trek sequel.At issue: do they create a fresh plot with never-before-seen characters and scenarios or — because young Kirk and Spock are now part of an alternate timeline where the past has been altered — do they introduce 2.0 versions of such popular villains as the Klingons or Khan? Orci recognizes each approach has its own merits.

Rebooting familiar elements appeals instantly to fans and attracts the attention of "the media-sphere," as he calls it.
Meaning that if you cast, say, Javier Bardem as the new Khan opposite Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto, you’ve automatically excited fans and attracted the attention of the moviegoing public.

"But on the other hand," he adds, "who doesn’t love an original story?"
Taking a break and listening to the fans
In an interview from last week with our friend Jordan Hoffman of UGO, Bob and Alex talked a little bit of the next Trek, including the input of the fans.Jordan Hoffman: Okay, so sequel to Star Trek. You haven’t even begun the script, yes?

Roberto Orci: Little vacation in July then we hit the ground running.

Jordan Hoffman: And everyone is giving you their two cents on what they want to see in the movie. Have you ever e xp erienced this, where people have so many opinions on a script you haven’t even written yet?

Alex Kurtzman: That is unique to Star Trek. That’s what is so remarkable out it – the fans. The fan fiction, the community, the familiarity with the material.
More at UGO, including discussing if Michael Bay is a Romulan or a Cardassian.
Bardem as Khan?
This is not the first time the name of Academy Award-winner Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men) has been suggested for Khan. In fact Orci first brought up the name in a comments section here at TrekMovie in January. In May Orci and Star Trek producer Damon Lindelof talked to ComingSoon about the possibility
CS: I’m on a one-man mission to plant the seed now. If you decide to revisit the character of Khan, two words: Javier Bardem.

Kurtzman: Oh my God!

Orci: Did you know we’ve actually mentioned that out loud as a possibility? What a great idea.

Lindelof: Come on. That’s a no-brainer. That would be the most amazing thing ever. Who would even what to see these [new] guys then? That’s the problem. You would just watch them for scenery.[/indent]
If they do choose to go with a new Khan, the ‘who will be the new Khan?’ buzz will certainly be a hot topic for the geek and entertainment press, something that could only help the movie.
Image

Ricardo Montalban in TOS "Space Seed" and Bardem in "No Country for Old Men"
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

40
Er... I guess Khan is to be forever typecast as a spanish-speaking actor? :huh:

I suppose there must be a shortage of english-speaking Sikh actors that could play Khan convincingly, because heaven forbid they should cast the correct ethnic background (and yes, the captain of the Kelvin would have been an excellent choice, Olorin.)

(Mind you though, aside from his outstanding performance, Montalban's dark looks and features were actually somewhat passable for an individual from the Indian subcontinent.)

Anyway, all this talk and constant media pressure about the sequel and Khan is only going to push Orci and Kurtzman into a corner, and in that corner is a rehash of Space Seed just waiting to happen. The e xp ectation is being so built up already around this that they are not going to feel that they can write any other story and make fans happy unless they redo Khan.

Someone bring me a vomit-bucket and let me off this stupid ride. :angry:

Re: Star Trek 12

42
No Val.. You gotta stay on the ride with the rest of us... A 2 hour movie of space seed... Boring... Oh oooh ... Maybe they can TWOK it and kill spock at then end and then go get some whales... Orcas this time...you don't wanna do the same thing...then spocks brother can go look for god at the center of the galaxy which is now probably down the street from the remnants of vulcan... Then we can wrap things up with the peace treaty with the klingons ... Sounds original ... I can see the title now... Not Another Teen Star Trek Disaster Movie.... BRING BACK BERMAN AND BRAGA AND MANNY COTO!
Last edited by BladeCollector on Sun Jul 05, 2009 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Star Trek 12

43
I don't know if they could afford Javier Bardem's price tag...he did win an Oscar, after all. On the other hand, James Cromwell did First Contact after his Oscar win for "Babe," so anything's possible.

I really think they should bring in someone else to write the next movie, someone that could restore some Trek cred to it, like the Reeves-Stevens. Of course, the chance of that happening after the ridiculous success of the new one and the beyond-ridiculous success of the new Transformers (which has left ST in the dust and has already made significantly more money) is about the chances of a snow dog chasing and catching an asbestos cat in hell.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

44
[quote=""Valkrist""]Er... I guess Khan is to be forever typecast as a spanish-speaking actor? :huh: [/quote]

I suspect the fact that Khan was supposed to be derived from a south Asian heritage is a fact lost on a lot of people, including the so-called "Supreme Court" (Lord, I hate that term) of New Trek. But beyond that, it's just lame to have an actor of the wrong ethnicity play Khan because it lends credence to the old saying that everyone who's not white looks alike to white people.

I have it! Naveen Andrews, the Indian guy from Lost! He would be a shoe-in because Abrams has worked with him. Of course, I think he's tubbed up quite a bit. I've never watched lost but in clips I've seen, he looks a tad portly. I tend to remember him from The English Patient. Anyway, he would have to hit the gym big time if he's to play a genetically engineered superman.

What on Earth am I doing casting a movie I don't want them to make in the first place? :P

Digressing a bit back to the original Khan.... This may be heresy, but I didn't really think all that much of Montalban's performance in TWOK. Don't get me wrong, it was fine, but I recently rewatched Space Seed and Montalban was really just sensational in it. I think a little bit of Mr. Roarke may have seeped into the TWOK Khan.
Last edited by Olorin on Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Olorin I was in the West that is forgotten...."

Re: Star Trek 12

45
Well, to be fair, we are dealing with two different Khans here. The first one was already a slightly unhinged megalomaniac; to then have the planet you lived on laid waste to, your wife and friends killed by brain-eating eels, and nothing and no one to vent your grief and rage on, I can see how the man would totally lose it.

It all does come across as very one-dimensional, his driving need for vengeance, but it was all he had left to live for after all those years living in hell, and Montalban plays it up with singular determination. When I watched TWOK the first couple of times, I always wondered why they didn't try to reason with him more, but it became very clear that there was absolutely no point. Gone was the cultured, debonair, and subtly menacing villain, now replaced by a sinister and homicidal maniac.

Yes, I agree with you in liking the Space Seed Khan better, but I can see how one is a natural evolution of the other, and I laud the writers/director and actor for bringing that to life convincingly.

So please... if there's any justice left in this world, leave these television and cinematic gems alone, and for love and memory of the Great Bird of the Galaxy, do come up with an original story.

Fat chance, eh? :|
Last edited by Valkrist on Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Star Trek 12

50
BC, I didn't want to comment on it because if Orci and Kurtzman (or JJ, like Sed pointed out,) actually happen to pop in here on a random forum search for Trek-related chat, the more we talk about your nightmare of a movie, the more they might think what a cool idea it would be to actually bring it to life.

*shudder* :|
Post Reply

Return to “Star Trek & Star Wars”

cron