Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Paramount Hires The Writers Of STAR TREK XII!!

I am – Hercules!!
J.J. Abrams’ “Lost” co-creator Damon Lindelof will co-write the sequel to 2009’s “Star Trek” alongside Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, the “Fringe” creators who wrote the Jim Kirk adventure hitting cinemas in May. Abrams will produce the 12th Trek movie, which will presumably continue to follow the young Kirk and Spock of a Romulan-altered timeline, but is not yet committed to direct. Many blame Orci and Kurtzman for the lameness of “Transformers,” but I’m here to tell you they contributed some unbelievably great episodes of “Alias’” first season. As for Lindelof, I love what he's doing with his “Ultimate Hulk Vs. Wolverine” funnybook. Find all of Variety’s story, which does not reveal the real title of the 12th Trek movie, here.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • March 30, 2009, 11:36 p.m. CST

    I am excited about the new movie but....

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    still very cautious. Having them hired again could be a good thing or bad thing depending on how the new movie truly is.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:36 p.m. CST

    Have they hired the remake writers yet?

    by ReportAbuse

    You can never do that too early. And I won't type "first" because as soon as I hit the post button there'll be three more above mine and I'll look like an idjit.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:36 p.m. CST

    And could it be first and 2nd?

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz


  • March 30, 2009, 11:36 p.m. CST


    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz


  • March 30, 2009, 11:37 p.m. CST


    by Light_Tweaker

    Faggots in space again already? Give me a break, people!

  • March 30, 2009, 11:39 p.m. CST

    they should call it: STAR TREK: TURD BURGLARS

    by Light_Tweaker

    Goddamn queers. Star Trek is dead. Fuck it.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:40 p.m. CST

    Maybe the sequel will feature a Ferengi fist-fuck

    by Light_Tweaker


  • March 30, 2009, 11:41 p.m. CST

    Wait and see....

    by Doc_Hudson

    Still holding off on an opinion... I'm not excited about any of this...but will see it.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:41 p.m. CST

    chickens and eggs

    by Quin the Eskimo

  • March 30, 2009, 11:42 p.m. CST

    HERC, where is your Amazon links?

    by Light_Tweaker

    How you gonna git paid, nigga?

  • March 30, 2009, 11:43 p.m. CST

    The guy above me trolls too hard.

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    that's the one thing I hate about this site is the trolls that aren't even funny but just troll for the sake of trolling. <BR> <BR> At least humor us instead of everything you say is "gay". What are you 12?

  • March 30, 2009, 11:43 p.m. CST


    by Zardoz

    Star Trek better be good. Transformers sucked all the cocks and so will the sequel, but if Star Trek sucks I will be pissed!

  • March 30, 2009, 11:46 p.m. CST


    by robotdevil

    Sort of makes me wish they got Damon for the first one two.... that transformers movie just sucked.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:47 p.m. CST

    Transformers the live action movie is up there with Batman and R

    by hallmitchell

    As one of the worst blockbuster scripts of all time.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:47 p.m. CST

    Tired of the Trek already

    by Human_Bean_Juice_

    What about the on going adventures of a young Han and Chewi? Man and carpet friend.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:48 p.m. CST

    I don't know...

    by wampa 1

    ...but it sure smells good!

  • March 30, 2009, 11:48 p.m. CST

    New movie looks like ass, and they're lining up a sequel?

    by NinjaRap

    Wait and see if anyone cares about the shitty skid mark you're leaving on the franchise first, okay guys?

  • March 30, 2009, 11:48 p.m. CST

    I enjoyed Transformers but Star Trek is different.

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    I've always considered Star Trek a bit more high brow then your average sci fi. I grew up with. Own every series so being that I am obviously a fan I don't want to see a dumb down version of it. That's my only concern that they have sucked any of the intellect out of it with the new direction. Can't tell from the trailers at all since they are designed to get people (all people) excited. Not just Star Trek fans. So we will have to wait and see. If the writing is like Transformers then yes it will suck but not because I thought Transformers sucked but because that type of dialogue does not belong in a movie with the name Star Trek. Transformers was based on a children s cartoon so I did not expect high brow.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:49 p.m. CST



  • March 30, 2009, 11:49 p.m. CST

    Beam Me Up To The Zone!!!

    by Fievel

    The Zone - AICN's message board.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:50 p.m. CST

    Enough with the transformers bashing!

    by slaughterstorm

    and i don't wanna hear any G.I. Joe bashing either. THEY ARE MOVIES BASED ON TOYS.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:51 p.m. CST

    Transformers was way better than B & R come on.

    by FookU

    Batman & Robin was fucking garbage. At least Transformers was watchable. My son loved it and he thinks Dragonball Evolution looks like shit. So it's not like he has no taste even at nine years old.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:53 p.m. CST

    Ferengi Fist Fuck with a Shatner in hand

    by Supermans

    Ferengi Fist Fuck with a Shatner in hand.. A Shatner is a toupee if you didn't know..

  • March 30, 2009, 11:54 p.m. CST

    honestly, is there much room for improvement

    by slaughterstorm

    could you make better movies based on action figures? They have great special effects. what more do you want?

  • March 30, 2009, 11:55 p.m. CST

    If the movie(s) are anything like the Countdown comics

    by Amy Chasing

    then this could be just what Star Trek has been needing for years. <P> Of course if the comics have been written to appease fans and then the movies are a complete departure because they feel they paid their dues to the fans with the comics, this could be a bigger mess than all the Next Gen movies put together.

  • March 30, 2009, 11:59 p.m. CST

    Can they write an alternate death?

    by ides

    At least send someone back in time to warn him about the bridge collapse?

  • March 31, 2009, midnight CST

    Kirk, that is

    by ides

    If it's not obvious.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:02 a.m. CST

    I hear "The Zone" is a big fag scene

    by themasterofnonsense

  • March 31, 2009, 12:07 a.m. CST

    tranformers is azz

    by tranpkp1

    terrible absolute shite that held nothing of the source material. sick of all the comedies from apatow and action from these guys, but the ST does look badass.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:08 a.m. CST


    by zillabeast

    Gimme some Gorn!

  • March 31, 2009, 12:10 a.m. CST

    I can't wait for Script Girl to report this exact thing to me

    by Turd Furgeson

    6 days from now....

  • March 31, 2009, 12:13 a.m. CST

    Bring on XII & XIII!!!

    by JamesTiberiusKirk

    Based on the trailer alone I think the new Star Trek looks phenomenal. Im baffled that a site like this wouldn't have more ardent supporters for this movie. I think the new Star Trek will probably win over more people then you realize, It looks alot more dark and gritty then the originals. Im not even a trekkie and I got chills from watching it!

  • March 31, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST

    How far down the continuity hole does the JJ-Trek-verse go?

    by TallBoy66

    Like is the Botany Bay still floating out there. And would it be the same Botany Bay seen in TOS. Are the Cardassians still subjectating the Bajorians as they would? Do the Romulans still have forehead ridges? Do the TOS-era Klingons, because the Augments virus from "Enterprise" (pre-Time-travel change) made them more human-ish for a generation? Are Guinan and the El-Aurians still going to be blown up by the Borg? Nero blowing up Kirk's dad wouldn't change any of this. It's minor stuff, but I wonder how beholden they'll be to previous continuity, or just completely change it.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST

    BobOrci, thoughts?

    by zillabeast

    I know you're out there, my main man. What'r we lookin at? Doomsday Machine? Trelane? KHAAAAN???

  • March 31, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Big fucking difference between writing Ultimate Hulk...

    by Hardboiled Wonderland

    ... and Star Trek. Lindelof's work on Lost has been so inconsistent, we may as well have Rick Berman.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST

    "Love what he's doing with Ultimate Hulk vs. Wolv."

    by GunterMonkey

    Are you aware he hasn't finished it yet and probably never will...? Lindelof doesn't have the best track record for finishing projects at the moment... He should have started writing it a few years ago, just so he can make the deadline...

  • March 31, 2009, 12:17 a.m. CST

    TOS: "

    by zillabeast

  • March 31, 2009, 12:18 a.m. CST

    TOS: "Errand of Mercy" could make an epic picture

    by zillabeast

    Looming war betwixt the Klingons and Federation...all powerful alien force stands between, forces the peace.....

  • March 31, 2009, 12:19 a.m. CST


    by BobbyMcPrescott

    There are about 5 words I can't stand, and that's the only one I can remember at the moment because I forget them out of respect for my remaining sanity. Saying it has drained all the happiness out of me for the next 24 hours. Gonna go cry now.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:20 a.m. CST

    "Written by Damon Lindelof" = my ass in the theater...

    by Ravetin

    ...true story.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:20 a.m. CST

    One thing though, too soon for the Borg

    by zillabeast

    We already got the connection in this movie through the Narada. Trek XIII might be fair game though.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:25 a.m. CST

    Alias good Transformers bad

    by Dimes

    I'm very excited about Star Trek, the writers truely proved themselves with Alias. I was never a fan of the Transformers movie, great action though. Hopefully they can combine the depth of Alias with the action of Transformers.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:29 a.m. CST

    Remember when Hollywood would wait until the movie came out

    by axel fff

    before they started in on the sequel. But these greedy cocksuckers don't give a shit about anything but the almighty dollar. Fuck 'em. <p> P.S. Jimmy Fallon sucks donkey dick.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:36 a.m. CST

    A sequel commited to already?

    by Melvin_Pelvis

    blerg<p> gonna need a fork lift to tote ol' dubba jays head around

  • March 31, 2009, 12:40 a.m. CST

    what was wrong with transformers

    by JaredParker3

    i mean yeah they screwed up a few names of the decepticons but the movie was still good 2 will be even better

  • March 31, 2009, 12:44 a.m. CST

    In before the "Star Trek Returns" morons

    by critch

    You don't hear about studios giving huge-risk non-established franchises a sequel a month before the movie comes out. It's just not done. Paramount knows something we don't and it looks like Trek could be bigger than anyone expected. Bring it on, I cannot WAIT.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:44 a.m. CST

    The Transformers script is awful

    by veritasses

    I really hope they did a better job for ST.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:44 a.m. CST

    RIP Andy Hallet

    by NoQuarter

    Can we get a "moment of silence"-type post for Andy Hallet's passing, please?

  • March 31, 2009, 12:51 a.m. CST

    XII should be OLD Kirk and

    by MisterE

  • March 31, 2009, 12:52 a.m. CST

    Alias, Transformers, Star Trek sequel, Oh My...

    by Tom_Bombadil

    I loved Alias the first 3-4 years. Still haven't seen the 5th season of Alias but saw parts of it. There WAS some good writing in Alias. Abrams has a great creative mind and if he has a good idea for Trek I am happy. I just wonder if the new Trek has a cliffhanger ending. One thing about Alias was that most of the good episodes had cliffhanger ending. As for Transformers it had a lot of action but the story wasn't very deep but I wasn't expecting a deep story with a Transformers movie.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:54 a.m. CST

    XII should be OLD Kirk and Spock...

    by MisterE

    XII should be OLD Kirk and Spock using the "Guardian of Forever" to go back and time fix whatever it is that the Romulans change. Kirk can't let the Romulans win, and would surely give up his timeline-altered existence to set things right.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:05 a.m. CST

    Young Kirk vs. Young Khan

    by NoHubris

    Young Khan should be the villian in the next one - only give him an empire or something.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:07 a.m. CST

    More on Khan

    by NoHubris

    And Young Khan should have the memories of the old timeline. That way he'd be super mad at Kirk.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:09 a.m. CST

    I think Orci and Kurtzman are hit and miss

    by southafricanguy

    to be honest. I thought their script for mi3 was good and that they made a better movie than the previous two imho. Also like some of the tv stuff, some of alias, lost and fringe is damn good. However they are also responsible for Zorro 2(wow..did that suck!) and lets not forget transformers. The strange thing is how sometimes clever these guys can be but then also really dumb at the same time (their writing i mean not them personally)I am curious how they get so much work (they are also writing cowboys and aliens) while so many really good screen writers seem to have a hard time getting gigs (shane black,laeta kalogordis,sam hamm, peter briggs, david towhy etc..) Maybe they are just really well connected...

  • March 31, 2009, 1:16 a.m. CST

    GunterMonkey - Lindeolf finished the Ultimate scripts

    by TallBoy66

    He handed in issue #6, personally infront of a crowd, to the Marvel EiC at the San Diego comic-con. After a years-long wait, issue #3 came out a few weeks ago, two more issues are coming out in April, and the final issue in May. Took the guy forever, and I get the feeling he did scripts 3-5 during the writer's strike and pounded out issue #6 in an all-nighter before the San Diego comic con, but they're done and the artist has been working on it for months. At least he finished it (and Lost was good in the meantime), unlike Kevin Smith's Daredevil: Target (he bailed on that series years ago and is now writing for DC comics in between movie projects).

  • March 31, 2009, 1:24 a.m. CST

    So does this mean....

    by sailingmaster

    that since the new Trek film is an odd one, it's going to suck? Or, is the curse lifted?

  • March 31, 2009, 1:26 a.m. CST

    How was Transformers lame?

    by lockesbrokenleg

    Great effects, reasonably good acting. Nice Optimus Prime moments. Great battles. Cool military stuff.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:35 a.m. CST

    I really hope that with a star trek 12

    by southafricanguy

    we may finally see a full scale war between the federation and the klingons maybe? or how about the return of Khan?

  • March 31, 2009, 1:42 a.m. CST

    SEEK OUT new worlds, and new civilizations.........

    by zillabeast

    I know this team of writers can pull off a very Trekky film, while still keeping it mainstream. I certainly hope they can keep The Great Bird of the Galaxy's vision intact.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:46 a.m. CST

    Just wait till you see the movie guys...

    by Bones

    I was trying to describe the plot of the film to my brother, who is an even bigger Trekkie than I am (refers to himself as Trekker and everything)...and he was dumbfounded by everything that has been leaked.<p> Dumbfounded--as in he was both speechless and found it all to be really dumb. Well, silly to be precise. I thought he was going to have an anurism when I described the "Inject Kirk with a Virus to get him on the Enterprise" gag, complete with swelling hands and tongue. They are going for very broad jokes with this one, like the stupid "Klingon Dictionary in Book Form" joke from Undiscovered Country and the Boob jokes from Insurrection. The computer not understanding Chekhov will be a groaner too.<p> It is going to be very interesting to see how all the little things add up in the minds of the core fans. SO, don't count your sequels before they hatch.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:53 a.m. CST

    RIP Andy Hallett? WTF? As in Lorne?

    by Brody77

    Can someone tell me what this is all about? Is it an in joke or did the guy die for real?

  • March 31, 2009, 1:56 a.m. CST

    Lockesborkenleg...Transformers was lame...

    by Bones

    Transformers was lame because:<p> 1.)The Robots weren't characters<p> 2.)They Focused on the humans..who weren't really characters themselves (except Shia).<p> 3.)Rather than focus the story on the kid and The Transformers (which would have given the film a direction and a focus), they spend the entire movie going back and forth with stock characters like the soldiers and the Pentagon types.<p> 4.) The Action scenes were sloppy and hard to follow.<p> 5.)This ties into the design of the Transformers themselves--being a mass of junk metal rather than being cool looking Giant Anime-Style Robots. It was impossible to tell the robots apart most of the time, especially when they were fighting.<p> 6.)Total lack of logic in the storytelling. The CUBE is the size of a house, then it is the size fo the crystal egg from Risky Business...without gaining any weight or mass--WTF? A zap of electricity will turn anything into a transformer--WTF? I didn't ask for my money back after I saw it--WTF?<p> Dude. It had explosions and Peter Cullen's voice. Other than that, the 1986 cartoon/toy commercial/"We got the Touch" movie was more enjoyable. At least to Transformers fans.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:59 a.m. CST

    How sweet of them to assume this won't be "Speed Racer 2009".

    by Stalin vs Predator

    Awww. Those executives are such nice guys.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:59 a.m. CST

    Lorne...well sad

    by Brody77

    Just saw the twitter link from whedonesque. Died at 33 from heart disease. Scary.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Shit--Andy Hallett DID die...

    by Bones

    ...of congestive heart failure.<p> He was one of the nicest celebrities I ever met--and a great host for any party or gathering...

  • March 31, 2009, 2:03 a.m. CST

    Vapor-ware sequel to an unreleased reboot

    by Toilet_Terror

    of a thirty-year-old movie series based on a 40-year-old TV show where every planet in the galaxy looks like California.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:13 a.m. CST

    Bones, have you ever seen the animated series?

    by lockesbrokenleg

    It's pretty much the same thing.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:18 a.m. CST

    That sucks. Andy Hallett was so charming.

    by Dingbatty

    Peace to him and condolences to his family and friends.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:25 a.m. CST

    Fringe is awful

    by lockesbrokenleg

    The first episode was really good, but the series got confusing, and it became another police/scientist show.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:25 a.m. CST

    Which Animated Series, Lockes?

    by Bones

    The old one or the new one? I am not saying the old show was great--but they put the robots front and center, and minimized the humans which are far less interesting. They do so in the new show as well.<p> Actually, I really like the new show whenever I see it, usually after I have been working all night and Adult Swim is over.<p> Not a lot of annoying John Voights, John Turturros or Josh Duhamels either--and the designs are kind of fun.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:34 a.m. CST

    they better not bring their lameass "comedy"

    by Jesiah

    Super smart black dude still ghetto and eating donuts to prove his innocence? Autobots peeing on cheesy secret agents? Shia lebuf flexing in a camaro? Please. And what's this about Andy Hallet? Please God don't let him have joined Glen Quinn.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:40 a.m. CST

    God rest your soul, Andy Hallett

    by Jesiah

    Checked out wikipedia and according to them he is gone. I don't know for sure when he passed away, but I do know today is the 16th anniversary of Brandon Lee's death, too. God be with you both.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:06 a.m. CST

    To be clear

    by Monkey Butler

    Transformers was pretty damn watchable. It moved quickly, shit went boom, Megan Fox is hot etc. All the necessary ingredients for a diverting couple of hours. THAT SAID, the script was absolute dogshit. There was zero characterisation, the hot Australian hacker chick and her racial stereotype friends were utterly pointless and the actual robots were boring as fuck. Not to mention all the stupid shit about alien languages being etched onto a pair of reading glasses that are tracked down via eBay. I don't like to admit it, but the only reason Transformers was as entertaining as it was is Bay.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:06 a.m. CST

    Really? Noone's made the Simpsons reference yet?

    by Discosis

    Star Trek XII: So Very Tired Again with the Klingons...

  • March 31, 2009, 3:32 a.m. CST

    Why refer to it as Star Trek XII?

    by kwisatzhaderach

    They haven't numbered the movies since Star Trek VI in 1991.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:38 a.m. CST

    Fringe's most recent episodes were actually kinda good.

    by Amy Chasing

    Dr Bishop is great to watch, and they've given him more to do. Plus they're giving the rest of the characters more story.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:44 a.m. CST


    by Gorgomel

  • March 31, 2009, 3:50 a.m. CST


    by TallBoy66

    5 minutes of monster screentime, 90 minutes of shaky-cam, every line of dialogue is "Oh my God!" "Oh shit!" "oh My GAWD!!" "SHit, SHIT, SHITTTT!!"

  • March 31, 2009, 4:10 a.m. CST

    Don't blame them for Transformers

    by Mr Gorilla

    Michael Bay could direct a film of King Lear and at the end you'd swear it was the shittiest script you'd ever seen on the screen,

  • March 31, 2009, 4:35 a.m. CST


    by Gorgomel

    you know you want it to be true

  • March 31, 2009, 4:36 a.m. CST


    by Sal_Bando

    Plus Transformers was exactly what we deserved. It was fun. Deal.

  • March 31, 2009, 4:45 a.m. CST

    Notice that since Majel Barrett-Rodenberry died...

    by BurnHollywood

    ...A lot of major structural changes to the series, whether the fans like it or not.<p> If I were a wee bit more cynical, I'd think Paramount was waiting for the old dame to kick off...golly gee, I wonder if they owe reduced royalties to the Rodenberry estate if the entire storyline is changed?

  • March 31, 2009, 5:06 a.m. CST

    I actually love that they are completely

    by southafricanguy

    fucking with continuity. I think it has hampered trek for ages now and has given writers few places to go. With this crisis oninfinite earths type deal they have going on here, a whole new set of possibilities opens up. How about the return of Khan? Or having the Borg find the federation much earlier due to them sensing their technology being used by Nero's ship the Nerada? Or a war against a completely new alien race? There will just be so many options to the writers now. I hope that if this trek is a big success that they think really big and try to be as ambitious as possible.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:33 a.m. CST

    re: critch

    by Muki

    "You don't hear about studios giving huge-risk non-established franchises a sequel a month before the movie comes out." <br>You consider Star Trek a ‘non-established franchise’??? Where the fuck have you been for the last 43 years.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:35 a.m. CST

    PS: Star Trek = This year's Superman Returns

    by Muki

  • March 31, 2009, 6:04 a.m. CST

    Nero goes back in time and kickstarts the

    by Dingbatty

    cheesy tribal tat craze of the 1990's.

  • March 31, 2009, 6:24 a.m. CST

    I'm confused. Still no mention about Lorne..

    by Brody77

    from any AICN staffer - including Quint, who I messaged on twitter. I've often looked at this site as geek central, so very saddned that we've had no tribute. Is it because of the time difference? (I'm in the UK)

  • March 31, 2009, 6:38 a.m. CST

    Mr. Spock, were you...masturbating?

    by Spyhunter

    I mean, you don't have to call it that word if that makes you uncomfortable... you can call it Spock's happy time special alone time...with myself.

  • March 31, 2009, 6:59 a.m. CST

    2 Trek 2 Furious: Flames on the Enterprise

    by br1947

    In order to save the galaxy from a Romulan conspiracy, Kirk and Spock must take a modified shuttlecraft into one of the most grueling and dangerous high-octane races in the galaxy! When a mysterious woman appears offering a chance at victory, Kirk must decide between honor and nailing the green alien babe.<br><br>...oh wait, that was a Voyager episode

  • March 31, 2009, 6:59 a.m. CST

    Why not go back to the old timeline?

    by ricarleite2

  • March 31, 2009, 7:02 a.m. CST

    Which Trek is XII, when it's at home?

    by pokadoo

    They stopped numbering them after 6, and even a hardcore Trek fan would be hard pushed to remember those later films (First Contact excepted).

  • March 31, 2009, 7:20 a.m. CST

    Kinda of jumpin' the gun. . .a little.

    by Darth_Kaos

    I tell ya. I've said it a million times. . .HOLLYWOOD SUCKS!<br><br> Don't get me wrong, I like JJ, and I look forward to the Star Trek re-boot, but this is a bit premature. WB was pretty much doing the same stuff with Watchmen, and we all know what happen with that movie.<br><br> I think they should hold their horses and wait to see if the world wants more Trek.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:21 a.m. CST

    You're right, southafricanguy.

    by Spamgelus

    It's time to MOVE ON. And to people reading this that are upset that the established canon is being ignored, I say this: You still have all those old episodes and movies. Just keep watching them. BESIDES, the shows didn't follow their own "canon" at times. Kirk once called it "The United Space Ship Enterprise. Khan remembers Chekov, who wasn't even in Space Seed. Data can take bullets from a machine gun, but not a wooden arrow. Seriously, here's hundreds of these, so if you're whining about continuity in the new movie, you're a hypocrite.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:21 a.m. CST

    ultimate h vs w = fail

    by Reelheed

    ish 3 took forever and was a short disappointment. All that wait for a fight that takes up 1 panel. Brutal yes. Fun no.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:34 a.m. CST

    Even Number Trek!

    by chrth

  • March 31, 2009, 7:43 a.m. CST

    I chatted with Stratton Leopold about this film...

    by Damned if I can login

    In case you don't know, he's the Executive VP of Production at Paramount Pictures, but his family owns an upscale ice cream parlor in my hometown, and he's there frequently. A nice guy, very approachable, with tons of stories about working in pictures.<p>He was originally the Executive Producer for the film, but (from his own story) he backed out after delivering a concrete price tag for the project only to have other entities ramp up the cost significantly (additional FX, locations, etc) without upping the overall price.<p>He wouldn't tell us any details about the film (other than what we already knew), but he did say it was much higher quality writing than the previous batch of ST films. Personally I'm still not committing any opinion until I see the finished work. Re-imaged 'franchises' come and go with the change of the weather, and most seem to be remembered more for their failures rather than their success. So we'll see.<p>Oh, and dontcha love how I dropped his name? Hey, we all aspire to rise above, and my aspiration is be Harry.<p>"Yesterday I got a call from Stratton Leopold..." Uh, actually I didn't.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:04 a.m. CST

    The Even/Odd Numbered Rule

    by BoyNamedSue

    No longer applies to Star Trek films. Nemesis was the proof.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:04 a.m. CST

    Transformers was as good as it could've been...

    by Davidia

    And probably the same thing with GI Joe. These are movies based on fucking ACTION FIGURES! No one else cares besides you pathetic nerd twats. Fucking grow up and stop regressing back into your childhood because your adulthood has left you with nothing but bitter contempt. Fucking amateurs.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:09 a.m. CST

    Muki, numbering and the Transformers issue

    by filmcoyote

    Muki, Critch is right is calling this huge-risk non-established franchise. This is not the Star Trek franchise of old, which almost consistently failed to make any money outside the US. Paramount have spent a huge amount on this Trek and to make that money back it either needs to be far far bigger than any domestic return a old-Trek movie has done or it needs to work gangbusters overseas which they never have. To say this is established franchise would be like someone saying in 1987 that Next Gen was a guaranteed winner because it was part of the franchise. In 87 the skeptics were out, the Trekkers were appalled at the idea of a new Enterprise crew. It was firmly seen as a whole new thing. Now it is canon. This is a whole new start. You wouldn't call Batman Begins and Dark Knight part of the same Batman franchise of Burton and Schumacher. This is not part of the old dead Trek franchise. Nemesis killed that 7 years ago. The idiots harping on about it being called XII - and this one was referred to as XI until they decided the title. A new Bond film is always referred to in statements and in the press as Bond 22 or whatever prior to titling. Surely you can't be stupid enough to not see that! I guess we'll have to wait and see what sort of job Orci and Kurtzman have done on this first but i wouldn't right them off just because Transformers sucked. Many times what ends up on scrteen bares no relation to what was on page because by that time it is directors domain. That script also was written to order from Bay's ideas so lameness didn't necessarily come from them. I'm not defending them, it may have been all their fault, but you can't write them off from one script. Akiva Goldsman wrote very solid adaptations of The Client and A Time To Kill and won an Oscar for A Beautiful Mind. But he's also written some of the worst blockbuster scripts ever seen: Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, Lost In Space, DaVinci Code. Orci and Kurtzman may suck but i think we have to see them ballsing up a few times before we can condemn them. I mean if the first associations you had for Brian Helgeland were The Postman and The Order and dismissed him then you'd miss out on LA Confidential and the far-superior non-studio balls-up version of Payback!

  • March 31, 2009, 8:14 a.m. CST

    Are There Like 12 Writers in Hollywood Today?

    by Aquatarkusman

    How about getting some outside, native SF talent to at least write the stories, if not the screenplay?

  • March 31, 2009, 8:16 a.m. CST

    P.S. The Phrase "Unbelievably Great"...

    by Aquatarkusman

    Just got a 500-yard restraining order from the names Kurtzman, Orci, and Alias. Unless "unbelievably great," in some "lexicological mix-up, now means "mind-crushingly similar and stupidly implausible."

  • March 31, 2009, 8:26 a.m. CST

    we have come to a desperate pass

    by Dradis Contact

    <p>Alias was just really really bad. I think last summer I wanted to see what the fuss had been about and decided to watch it from start to finish. Maybe it was good when you saw only 1 episode every 7 days, but it really doesn't stand up to continuous viewing.</p> <p>Am I missing some grand metaphor that makes the series mean something? Every plot twist, every betrayal, every subtlety was painfully obvious.</p>

  • March 31, 2009, 8:29 a.m. CST

    So... What happens if this DOES tank?

    by GeorgieBoy

    Wow, some pretty confident Paramount hacks up there, huh? Guess they'll keep making these, but will they ever set the timeline back as it was? Probably not...

  • March 31, 2009, 8:32 a.m. CST

    FYI: Star Trek is NOT supposed to be "dark & gritty"

    by GeorgieBoy

    If that's the case with this movie, Roddenberry is rolling over in his launch tube.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:37 a.m. CST

    Methinks Lindelof had input on the screenplay already

    by performingmonkey

    He's co-produced the movie, though I bet he also had a look at the script, made a few changes perhaps, even if he's not credited for that. Perhaps he will come up with the story for the next one.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:45 a.m. CST


    by Chadley BeBay

    you are right, the script for transformers is beyond dismal. Its fucking descpicable... I hate that shit movie.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:55 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    People aren't writing Kurtzman and Orci off after just one script. They've written several, The Legend of Zorro, Mission Impossible 3, The Island, Transformers. All generic and unmemorable. I'm a follower of Star Trek (not really a big fan, though I used to be when I was younger) and I hope the new film is good. But based on that track record people have every reason to be sceptical of the writing for this film.

  • March 31, 2009, 9:12 a.m. CST

    More Simon Pegg As Scotty Can't Be Bad

    by The_Man_Behind_The_Curtain

    He's the only reason I'm watching the first one to be honest.

  • March 31, 2009, 9:26 a.m. CST


    by Muki

    I disagree. I fail to see how a film based on a TV series created 43 years ago, that has already spawned 10 movies and 4 additional TV shows encompassing over 600 episodes can possibly be suddenly called a ‘non-established franchise’. Simply drafting in younger actors to play established characters and slightly re-designing the ships and costumes does not suddenly make everything new and different. It’s still called Star Trek, it’s still got the Enterprise, it’s still got Kirk and Spock and it will still follow the same classic Hollywood narrative structure. If the old franchise is as dead as you say, why would they want to include these things? No I wouldn’t call Batman Begins and Dark Knight part of the same Batman saga of Burton and Schumacher but you have to admit that regardless of how Batman Begins and Dark Knight turned out, there would already have been a large in-built audience who would blindly pay to see anything Batman related. The same is true of Trek and therefore it’s capitalising on an existing and long established franchise. There’s nothing new or imaginative about it – just more money thrown at it. It might be entertaining as hell and make an absolute fortune, but lets not you and I pretend it’s something new. And given the billion$ and billion$ that Trek has already made for Paramount over the decades; it’s not the great financial risk that you make it out to be either. When Paramount launched TNG in 87, the episodes were made directly for syndication and the rights pre-sold to numerous overseas markets so that wasn’t a particularly great financial risk either – at least no more so than any other new TV show of the tmie and other TV shows didn’t have the Trek brand name going for them. Paramount are making this film for one reason and one reason only: GREED! I guess the marketing people have really done a hell of a job on you if you believe all the ‘this time it’s completely different’ bullshit. Not your fault but a very said indictment of just how dumbed down and immune to endless sequels and remakes we’ve become when an eleventh Star Trek movie is suddenly considered a completely new franchise. Maybe I’ll write my own Star Trek movie. I’ll call it ‘Star Trek’ and it will feature the same characters, same ships, same costumes, same scenario, same aliens, same everything - do I get to call it a completely new franchise too?

  • March 31, 2009, 9:28 a.m. CST

    What's this have to do with . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . Cronenberg working on Eastern Promises Part II? Oops, this was meant for a yet to be posted thread.

  • March 31, 2009, 9:28 a.m. CST

    "we may as well have Rick Berman.....??"

    by Zardozap2005

    Fuck you man. With a tent pole. Berman made some of the worst Trek episodes/movies ever. Anything, really, anything will be an improvement. Hell even Nemesis wasn't that bad. It at least tried to be different from previous Trek movies.

  • March 31, 2009, 9:32 a.m. CST

    SPOILER??? a Romulan-altered timeline??? WTF?

    by beatleMatt


  • March 31, 2009, 9:34 a.m. CST

    Let's talk about something that will actually be good:

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Michelle Rodriguez talks about Avatar: (remove any spaces). "It's like the change from black and white to colour..."

  • March 31, 2009, 9:52 a.m. CST

    So why does sequel talk surprise anyone?

    by EverythingEverywhereStinks

    Honestly, is there anyone who didn't think they were planning anything less than a trilogy? Sure, that little ratfuck Bob Orci claimed a year ago over on that they weren't planning anything beyond a single movie, but he's a congenital liar. Naturally they have a whole threepeat of suck lined up. I do think it's a bit premature though to start ramping up for a second, when audiences haven't had a chance to scoff at this first piece of shit just yet. I mean, what would the budget be for a sequel to a movie that no one really liked or even bothered to see? Remember..."JJ Trek" doesn't have giant transforming robots, so the 'gee whiz' factor of the special effects just isn't there. What "JJ Trek" DOES have are two of the worst hack writers in the industry, and a stated goal to dumb the material down to get the widest audience possible. And they're basically erasing all of the content out of what was a shared fictional universe. Paramount really ought to see how all this happy horse shit goes over with fans before they start talking sequel.

  • March 31, 2009, 10:13 a.m. CST

    I like this "alternate timeline" concept.

    by Royston Lodge

    It's very "Abrams", in that it affords all sorts of opportunities for more questions than answers, which is a great way to keep a franchise moving along. It also provides lots of opportunities to tie in other trek characters and actors, while also giving them lots of new scenery to chew on. ("So Patrick, how do you feel about playing Jean-Luc Picard, the notorious dilithium smuggler whose addiction to romulan ale drove his family's winery into bankruptcy?")

  • March 31, 2009, 10:22 a.m. CST

    Attention Paramount!

    by TheFarkMan

    Don't count your chickens before they've hatched!

  • March 31, 2009, 10:25 a.m. CST


    by gboybama

    It's really become great. If you ever liked X-Files when it was at its best, you'll love Fringe. They've balanced engrossing stand alone episodes and a coherant overall mythology perfectly, with the stakes going up significantly every recent episode.

  • March 31, 2009, 10:30 a.m. CST

    Trek can be dark & gritty, just not all the time

    by br1947

    DS9 got pretty dark, so did TNG in places. But one of the darkest parts of Trek? "City on the Edge of Forever", for 60s tv that was pretty much pitch black

  • March 31, 2009, 10:37 a.m. CST

    WHAT THE FUCK???!?!!?!

    by ominus

    really what the fuck? <p>why the fuck paramount is raping roddenberys corpse like? what the fuck pisses on his vision? <p>yes the last two st movies were terrible,i am sure this movie will be a decent scifi actioneer,but come on do we have to get the same mediocre script writers for one more movie,without even THIS movie has been released to the public? and how the fuck,is paramount so sure that it will be a big success that it will guarantee more star trek movies. <p> someone said it in a previous talback and as it seems he was right: paramount doesnt want to have a new star trek series which will expand the star trek universe with a new era/cast/characters/technology etc. <p>they just want to use the iconic characters of the TOS generation,and keep making successful actioneers with big budget,shining sfx,nudeness and geek fanfic. <p>they will earn more money that way,rathen than making risky tv series. <p>no real star trek,no mythos,no vision,no future,no nothing. <p>fuck u paramount.

  • March 31, 2009, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Star Trek: The Rise of Khan

    by TheDoctor73

    Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

  • March 31, 2009, 10:46 a.m. CST

    One kickass STAR TREK trailer and look what happens...

    by SpyGuy

    Unless the entire film includes epic Two Steps From Hell music as the score and test audiences' heads have exploded in a SCANNERS-like fashion, this may be a tad premature on Paramount's part.

  • March 31, 2009, 10:53 a.m. CST


    by Geekgasm

    More mediocrity. I hope Misters Orci, et al, chat with Dan Harris and Michael Dougherty before the settle in.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:01 a.m. CST

    "huge-risk non-established franchises"???

    by Geekgasm

    Star Trek has been around for over FORTY FUCKING YEARS!!! How is that in any way a "huge-risk non-established franchise"??? That thing has made BILLIONS of dollars over 40+ years!!! Its fucking established, you dumb mook!!!

  • March 31, 2009, 11:05 a.m. CST

    What about Carlton?

    by HoboCode

    Please don't tell me he's going back to develop a Nash Bridges spinoff. Will this affect him working on a sci-fi follow up to Lost with Damon on HBO?

  • March 31, 2009, 11:13 a.m. CST

    I warned you that the altered time-line

    by kabong

    would become permanent. <P> It's Starfleet High School for TEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENS.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:32 a.m. CST

    WTF? Transformers was fun and funny!

    by FleshMachine

    totally was.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:38 a.m. CST


    by ccchhhrrriiisssm

    ...but Star Trek sucked during most of those 40 years. With the exception of a few TV episodes and a few movies...the TREK franchise has been terribly underfunded. Now we have a film that is funded properly...with first class effects and storytelling. <p> Gene Roddenberry was just a self-indulgent toad who, if he had his way, would have destroyed fan loyalty to the franchise! It is funny that the two most integral members of the Trek franchise (Nicholas Meyers and Leonard Nimoy) are so very critical of Roddenberry's overblown role with Trek. The truth is: Roddenberry had a good idea, did the best he could in the original series, but should have let go of TREK in 1969.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:41 a.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    This new film has first class storytelling? Riiiggghhhhttt...

  • March 31, 2009, 11:52 a.m. CST


    by ccchhhrrriiisssm

    Well, this is according to nearly EVERYONE who has seen any portion of the film. Have you seen it? ANY of it? <p>Oh're probably one of those guys who wants a 300 lb Captain Shatner Kirk to show up and remind everyone just how FAT and MEANINGLESS the Trek franchise has become.</p> *sigh

  • March 31, 2009, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Cronenberg Star Trek = interesting.

    by Stuntcock Mike

    Otherwise, zzzzzzzzzzzz

  • March 31, 2009, noon CST


    by ccchhhrrriiisssm

    Adjusted for inflation, wasn't TREK 2 a "blockbuster?" Besides, a lot of the money that went into this film will not be needed for the next (ala The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan). The design are complete (for the Enterprise...bridge...costumes...etc...). <p>My biggest fear, however, is that you're right. The market for TREK just isn't that large anymore (and never was). With the hardcore Trekkies throwing HISSY FITS over any sort of tangling or extrapolation with the "official" (*cough cough) continuity -- this film will have its work set out for it. I fear that it will be received similarly to Mission Impossible 3 (Abram's last film reboot). The film received rave reviews -- but the fans just weren't there. In the case of MI3, we can blame it on the controversy of Tom Cruise's Scientology scuffles. With TREK, I fear that the hardcore fans might just be lethargic in their acceptance and throw public hissy fits over any sort of issues that they have with continuity. Just look at their idiotic hissy fits over the Enterprise being built on Earth.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:03 p.m. CST

    What Trek was about...

    by TheDoctor73

    Trek was about exploration and 1960's social undertones played out in space. Everyone wants Trek to be more like Star Wars with epic space battles. Trek will never be like Star Wars. What everyone wants is more Star Wars because... well... the Star Wars we got was not what we wanted.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Not excited at ALL for Star Trek

    by one_guy_from_andromeda

    Writers with a terrible background (some early TV show episodes they did were kinda decent is pretty much the best anyone is able to say about them), a TV director with one movie under his belt (which looked like a TV show with too much cash and was boring as hell), a trailer that shows nothing of interest except for special effects, reports of "funny" scenes like Kirk with the swollen hands virus and Chekov accent jokes, the new continuity they try to establish yet at the same time it stars Nimoy as old Spock to tie in to the old timeline because they chicken out of doing a real reboot... Everything about this movie so far reeks of failure. I really don't get why most of the people around here get so pumped up about this, it's the same as with transformers a year ago. <p> The emperor is naked guys, wake up!

  • March 31, 2009, 12:06 p.m. CST

    @ slaughterstorm

    by cococommander

    "THEY ARE MOVIES BASED ON TOYS" is a very poor excuse. Good writers can come up with a good story no matter the topic, even toys. “The Red Violin” is based ON AN INSTRUMENT and it was good! Akiva Goldsman wrote a horrible Batman movie ("B&R") and yet "The Dark Knight", albeit flawed, was great. People like you enjoy the crap Hollywood churns out and calls it ice cream.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:13 p.m. CST


    by ccchhhrrriiisssm

    Are you talking about Nicholas Meyer and Co. (WRATH OF KHAN, UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY) or Abrams and Co. (STAR TREK)? There were plenty of stupid Checkov jokes in the original films ("nuclear wessel" anyone?). At least Abrams made one heck of a film (MI3) that was leagues ahead of the previous film incarnations...and he has done some pretty good TV shows too (Alias, LOST). What did Meyers do BEFORE The Wrath of Khan???<p>Your point is taken...and dismissed due to precedent.</p>

  • March 31, 2009, 12:15 p.m. CST

    Established with fans, and still a new franchise

    by filmcoyote

    I see this as being like the horror reboots like Halloween, Friday The 13th etc. It is the same characters, universe etc and capitalising on existing knowledge but does not belong to the same franchise. Although i suppose the fact Nimoy is in it somewhere connects it. I think the big problem facing Paramount here, and why i'm surprised they are announcing sequels now not waiting 6 weeks, is that for all the money the previous films made in the US every single Trek film has lost money overseas. This didn't used to be a problem but now an average blockbuster makes 60% of its money from overseas, that's how the giant budgets are justified and is exactly why Trek was never given such a huge budget before. Maybe it's because i'm not American but to me while i know of Trek and have seen the previous films, so you might fairly call that "established" i think of established as being something that will get a broad audience not just a cult audience in, and that way get their money back. Paramount need this to pull in non-Trekkers - that's the risk, and that's is what Critch (i imagine) meant by non-established. Most people i know won't automatically go to it because it is Trek, in fact the name might turn many off. It isn't like Batman in that way overseas either. It is more like Iron Man. Iron Man prior to the movie being released was a little known character outside comic-book circles. Batman on the otherhand was well known regardless

  • March 31, 2009, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Remake of a remake...


    I'm still waiting to see the first remake of a remake... oh wait... that will be THE THING.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:28 p.m. CST


    by kwisatzhaderach

    No, i'm all for a reboot. I just wish they had hired some talented writers to pen it. Now i'm off to try and find some rave reviews for Mission Impossible 3.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:31 p.m. CST


    by one_guy_from_andromeda

    Uhm, Meyer did Time after Time? Kinda dated now but still more watchable than MI3 which was about as good as MI2. The action is unwatchable and his characterization is a fucking joke. Am i really the only one who recognizes that the only thing the Star Trek trailers show is things blowing up? It looks like some generic sci fi actioner with starships that look kind of familiar - that's all. I still don't get what's exciting about this...

  • March 31, 2009, 12:38 p.m. CST

    I loved that simpsons joke...

    by emeraldboy

    Star Trek 12 so very tired. Uhara: Captain Klingons on the starboard bow. Kirk:again with the klingons. Kirk Engine Room: mister scott. scotty: I cannae reached the controls. Cut to scotty who is now so fat he cannot he cannae reach the controls.

  • March 31, 2009, 12:48 p.m. CST


    by WeLiveStill...OrNot

    That's great!! Sure as hell beats calling them "Graphic Novels". I've been reading "comicbooks" since the late sixties...."funnybook" works just as well.... makes me smile everytime....

  • March 31, 2009, 12:56 p.m. CST

    Thanks guys

    by critch

    I was going to explain what I meant by "non-established" but everyone's already done that. TL;DR, Star Trek is being treated as a non-established franchise by Paramount, since the franchise that was really never did that fantastic (Only a couple ever got above a hundred million) and recent movies and series were failures. They know that the hardcore Trek fans do not support the franchise in numbers that mean anything, so the best chance is to start anew. Kwisatzhaderach, you won't have to look too hard. RT shows that MI:III was better reviewed than either of the first two by a factor of 15%, and is the only one of the three that is ranked as 'fresh'. Personally, I loved it. Much better than the nonsense of II and the complete trashing of the original that was I. The only reason it wasn't as big a hit as it could have been was because of it coinciding with Cruise's craziness. But Paramount liked it enough to offer Trek to Abrams anyway. I thought, just like Speed Racer, that the five people that went to see the Island liked it? And I'm getting tired of the Transformers hate. No wait, I was tired of it before the movie came out originally. The damn thing was a crappy 80's toy commercial that in one form or another keeps getting reborn, always with a bad plot. I swear that everyone that bitches about the movie has completely forgotten the entire show, which SUCKED just like every other toy commercial from the 80's. Orci and Kurtzman took that thing and managed to build something that still tried to honor it's past and everyone gave them shit for it...The best thing was seeing how all the internet bullshitters were shown their true relevance when the movie went on to become the blockbuster of the summer, just as it's sequel will this year. I'm not saying Trek is gonna win Oscars (Though if something like Juno can win best screenplay, it damn well should win something) but going by what everything that has actually seen footage, going by the trailers (not the kickass music, but the scenes), going by the snippets of music that have been coming out, and based on the past work from Abrams and Co., It's going to be something very good, and it's going to do much better than people think at the box office. And for the haters, don't worry, I'm sure there'll be a couple of screens left for 'Bruno' or 'Land of the Lost' or whatever else shit you'd rather see. What am I saying? You'll be lining up just like everyone else. All hail internet anominity.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:06 p.m. CST


    by one_guy_from_andromeda

    The reason nobody wanted to see MI3 was that it sucked. What a boring movie. What an incomprehensible plot. <p> What about the footage in the trailers gives you guys hope? The big, expensive effects or the prepubescent actors in their colourful outfits screaming at each other in close-up? Well, what can you expect from people who consider Transformers watchable... <p> I wish they would have really shat on the goddamn Trekkies and made this a reboot, forget the stupid continuity and just do something fun - but no, they gotta tie it in to match everything that came before. Result: Convoluted time travel bullshit and the reanimated corpse of Leonard Nimoy. This will suck terribly.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:08 p.m. CST

    O & K track record

    by TallBoy66

    Having not seen Fringe or Alias, I'm going to have to go with Island (sucked), Transformers (pretty dang awesome), MI:3 (also pretty dang awesome), and the fact that Bob Orci is an out-and-out Trekkie (and Nero's backstory in the Countdown comics is interesting) gives me good vibes for this one.

  • March 31, 2009, 1:19 p.m. CST

    KAAAAHHHHHHHHN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by BendersShinyAss

    i can't believe no one else has said it yet. Kirk and crew encounter Kahn - ala space seed. halarity ensues in this new altered timeline <p> hey is it vulcan imploding in the trailer... man imagine if they destroy vulcan. that'll be fucking WILD!!

  • March 31, 2009, 1:19 p.m. CST

    hey you know whats cool?

    by robamenta

    i was just watching the original star trek episode today 'balance of terror' in the ep. it was the first time romulons were mentioned and seen...anyway at the end of the episode, the defeated captain of the romulan ship says (to kirk)something like 'in an alternate reality we could have been freinds'.... did the writers of the new movie use this line as the backdrop to the new film?

  • March 31, 2009, 1:26 p.m. CST

    personally, i think they should forego the films

    by BendersShinyAss

    and just make a new tv show with this film establishing the standard. more films can come later

  • March 31, 2009, 1:27 p.m. CST

    here's the real poster btw

    by BendersShinyAss

  • March 31, 2009, 1:45 p.m. CST

    If you are talking of a New Timeline?!!!!1

    by DarfurOnTheRocks

    Does that mean that Kirk does not die like a punk in this new timeline....? I could buy into that!

  • March 31, 2009, 1:58 p.m. CST

    The Return of Khan

    by seagrass

    is the worst idea I've heard on these boards in a while...and that's saying a lot. Khan spat his last breath at thee...let's not sully that, hmm?

  • March 31, 2009, 2:01 p.m. CST

    "In An Alternate Reality...

    by Aquatarkusman

    "I will be played by somebody that says 'crikey' and 'sheila' a lot when not in character."

  • March 31, 2009, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by BendersShinyAss

    Kahn is alive and well and in stasis with bulging muscles and awesome long black hair. <p> He'll be back for star trek 2. mark my words

  • March 31, 2009, 2:15 p.m. CST

    Wolverine vs. Hulk?

    by Ribbons

    Was that just sarcasm? Because I'm pretty sure there hasn't been a new issue of that comic in years. Either way I have no idea what's going on, but Lindelof is a pretty good writer so I guess this is cool.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Orci and Kurtzman + Abrams = Good...

    by Ribbons

    Orci and Kurtzman - Abrams = Bad. It's weird. They DID write a lot of great episodes of "Alias," typically the best ones in the entire series, and I thought Mission: Impossible 3 was pretty solid, but almost everything else they've done is awful.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:20 p.m. CST


    by Yotz Von Frelnik

    Hee hee hee... I am SO only kidding.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:21 p.m. CST

    Enterprise vs. Cloverfield in the sequel!!!

    by MrMysteryGuest

    A guy can dream, can't he?

  • March 31, 2009, 2:21 p.m. CST

    Star Trek II: The Beginning to Get Annoyed of Khan

    by Yotz Von Frelnik

    Cuz he hasn't me him yet.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:39 p.m. CST

    never have I heard so much crap

    by Muki

    >>I was going to explain what I meant by "non-established" but everyone's already done that. <br><br> No they haven’t. Plenty of people have said you’re talking shite though. <br><br> >> Star Trek is being treated as a non-established franchise by Paramount, since the franchise that was really never did that fantastic (Only a couple ever got above a hundred million) <br><br> The Star Trek franchise has made Paramount absolutely billions over the last 4 decades. How can you honestly say it ‘never did that fantastic’??? Every Trek movie, with the exception of Nemesis, has made money (and had Nemesis opened on any other weekend other than in direct competition to LOTR: TTT, it would have faired much better) <br><br> >>and recent movies and series were failures. <br><br> A combination of over-saturation of Trek and lack of new ideas – which makes re-making the original all the more retarded. <br><br> >>They know that the hardcore Trek fans do not support the franchise in numbers that mean anything <br><br> The numbers obviously meant enough to keep the franchise going for the last 43 years. <br><br> >>The best thing was seeing how all the internet bullshitters were shown their true relevance when the movie went on to become the blockbuster of the summer <br><br> Clearly somebody never explained to you that just because a movie makes money, doesn’t mean its any good. Obviously you’re unable to tell the difference – the studios must love you. Easy money for them and a diet of crap for you.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:40 p.m. CST

    KAAAAHHHHHHHHN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    by NoHubris

    I mentioned it early on in the TB.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:46 p.m. CST

    What's with all the bagging on Transformers?

    by kabookieslap

    And the "lameness" Two years ago you guys where all jizzing your pants over it. God I hate internet, suckup boys looking for their 2 seconds of fame.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:53 p.m. CST

    The Return of Khan

    by NoHubris

    The character is among the top all time villains in Trek. Besides, I wasn't suggesting a redo of Montabaln's performance nor a rehash of Space Seed or Wrath of Kahn.<p>A young Khan (played by a very good actor) in the new timeline, ruling an interplanetary empire (i.e. new weapons, ships, alien soldiers under his control) and harboring ill will against Kirk and Earth would be cool IMHO.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST


    by kabookieslap

    "I was going to explain what I meant by "non-established" but everyone's already done that. TL;DR, Star Trek is being treated as a non-established franchise by Paramount, since the franchise that was really never did that fantastic (Only a couple ever got above a hundred million) and recent movies and series were failures. They know that the hardcore Trek fans do not support the franchise in numbers that mean anything, so the best chance is to start anew. Kwisatzhaderach, you won't have to look too hard. RT shows that MI:III was better reviewed than either of the first two by a factor of 15%, and is the only one of the three that is ranked as 'fresh'. Personally, I loved it. Much better than the nonsense of II and the complete trashing of the original that was I. The only reason it wasn't as big a hit as it could have been was because of it coinciding with Cruise's craziness. But Paramount liked it enough to offer Trek to Abrams anyway. I thought, just like Speed Racer, that the five people that went to see the Island liked it? And I'm getting tired of the Transformers hate. No wait, I was tired of it before the movie came out originally. The damn thing was a crappy 80's toy commercial that in one form or another keeps getting reborn, always with a bad plot. I swear that everyone that bitches about the movie has completely forgotten the entire show, which SUCKED just like every other toy commercial from the 80's. Orci and Kurtzman took that thing and managed to build something that still tried to honor it's past and everyone gave them shit for it...The best thing was seeing how all the internet bullshitters were shown their true relevance when the movie went on to become the blockbuster of the summer, just as it's sequel will this year. I'm not saying Trek is gonna win Oscars (Though if something like Juno can win best screenplay, it damn well should win something) but going by what everything that has actually seen footage, going by the trailers (not the kickass music, but the scenes), going by the snippets of music that have been coming out, and based on the past work from Abrams and Co., It's going to be something very good, and it's going to do much better than people think at the box office. And for the haters, don't worry, I'm sure there'll be a couple of screens left for 'Bruno' or 'Land of the Lost' or whatever else shit you'd rather see. What am I saying? You'll be lining up just like everyone else. All hail internet anominity." The reason for the retread is that the last two Star Trek movies (featuring the comatose Next Generation Crew) didn't do well. After Insurrection, Paramount made a decision, and publicly announced it, to wait on the next Star Trek movie till the 3 Star Wars prequels were done. However, after Phantom Menace, and because of Spiner bringing in the guy who had just written the blockbuster "Gladiator" wanting to do a Next Gen Trek movie, they did Nemesis, but trying to shake things up with it and do different things. They also made Nemesis to stand as an ending to the series, while leaving a door for a sequel should it be popular. When it wasn't, Paramount decided they had gone too far with Star Trek and were going to give it a long rest. Then there was a shakeup at paramount, and the new studio runners loved Star Trek, but realized that Next Gen was boring, and the OT actors were either old or dead. So they are doing the reboot to change the established things in continuity and keep Star Trek going and fresh with the crew that didn't sit around spouting Shakespeare and holding boardroom meetings.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:58 p.m. CST


    by NoHubris

    Its a new timeline. Khan and his fellow superhumans tried to take over the world long before Kirk was born and were banished.<p>He now could meet him anew in the changed timeline at any time.<p>Of course this would be new type of Khan.

  • March 31, 2009, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Paramount is finally taking Trek seriously

    by lockesbrokenleg

    Before it was just a cash in staring with DS9, but now it's like they're actually giving a crap about it.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Sequel too soon

    by Brigon

    They are writing a sequel already? This one hasn't flopped yet, isn't it a bit early.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:23 p.m. CST

    How can anyone

    by TedKordLives

    over the age of 16 defend that god-awful Transformers movie. I don't care what it was based on, it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Every character is the comic relief? The bots are more or less interchangeable, if not visually then in personality (except for the 'street' bot, of course.) One of the worst scripts ever to be filmed, imo. Anyone defending this brain cell destroying abomination should be required to post their (actual) age. Please note that in the beginning I wrote that I don't care what the movie is based on. In my mind the source material is irrelevant. A movie is a movie, and should be judged on its own merits. <P> And Transformers has none. Ok, except for MegaFox. <P> Oh, and Star Trek begins and ends with Kirk for me, so if Pine pulls it off, it'll go a long way towards pulling me in.

  • March 31, 2009, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Whoa..that wasn't an Amazon link

    by Nobody_Touches_Buddy_Revell

    Caught me off gaurd

  • March 31, 2009, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Yes, more writers, that'll make it better.

    by JT Kirk

    It's a well-known Hollywood Studio fact that the more writers a film has, the better it gets. Why have someone with vision and integrity and faith in a project when you can just keep adding more and more hired guns to throw ideas at a concept they barely understand in an attempt to see what sticks? Art by committee, that's the way the best stories are told, right... right?

  • March 31, 2009, 4:19 p.m. CST


    by ominus

    the TOS movies did have quotes from shakespeare or u havent seen star trek 6? <p>and the TNG was boring? star trek first contact was a boring movie? <p>but yes i agree lets start killing things instead of being civilized and find a solution to problems through a peaceful discussion in a boardroom room. <p>Let the white cowboy leader Kirk give the orders to his inferior crw,assault his half alien friend with racist jokes ,just shoot the bad guy and then talk for peace,and ofcourse let him fuck all the females he encounters.just sex,not romance. <p>yeah i am definitely sure that Kirk must be rodenberrys favourite captain,not Picard,because after all he is the personification of his vision about humanity's future,or not?

  • March 31, 2009, 4:37 p.m. CST

    Orci and Kurtzman..The Gold Standard of Mediocrity

    by conspiracy

    They are to script writing what Larry the Cable Guy is to comedy...simplistic, loud, and designed to appeal to people eat Ritalin for breakfast.</P><p> People say "MI:3 was the best of the bunch"..that's like saying you are the worlds tallest midget,or "Transformers was Fun!", sure..if your idea of fun is chasing the light out of a laser pointer or snapping your best friends ass with a towel. Really...Lame doesn't do that shit justice; it is worse than is insulting to all but the lowest common denominator...which means it'll do $250M easy </p><p> As I said...I HOPE I am wrong..that somehow, Orci bought his soul back from the devil and manages to turn out a quality product that is more than just tits, explosions, and mile a minute action...that somehow this band of Hollywood Flavors of the Month bring the pain and give us something more...but given that these guys also brought you Cloverfield and write for Xena:Princess Warrior..I just don't know if they have it in them.

  • March 31, 2009, 4:48 p.m. CST

    I want to see a Star Wars remake

    by yomomma

    Produced by Bay, directed by Ratner, directed by Kurtzman and Orci, staring Will Smith. Just so all the hate-everything-and-everybody talkbackers would have strokes and die. Hopefully crapping themselves, so it would extra humiliating. This site would be so much more enoyable without all this hateful bile from basement dwelling uber geeks with superiority complexes who never wrote or created anything but delight in spending all day pissing on the hard work of others before they have even seen it. Seriously, fuck you guys.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:18 p.m. CST

    yomomma...Sometimes I wish I could be as..

    by conspiracy

    optimistic and easily entertained as you seem to be. Life would be so much more fun and easier if I just had super low expectations. would be so much eaier if I just rolled over and enjoyed the raping given to me at the box office. But alas, I like so many on this board expect quality in return for my $$$...and am not afraid to point to and deride those entities who have given me less than stellar value for my dollar...people like Orci and Bay.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:31 p.m. CST

    They probably shouldn't count their chickens...

    by rbatty024

    As much as I want this film to succeed, I have my doubts as to whether there is an appetite for Star Trek anymore. Maybe they'll pull it off, but after Voyager and Enterprise the franchise is on life support. I loved the first three series and a little under half of the film, but I have to be realistic about others.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:48 p.m. CST

    Don't they need to see

    by Gooch1195

    if the first movie is even going to be worth the effort of a second. I'm not a Trekker or Trekkie or what ever you call it, but I will be in line on May 8th because I'm an Abrams fan. The first will probably make $$$$$$$ and give them the "greenlight" for a 2nd but, if its not any good....

  • March 31, 2009, 5:54 p.m. CST

    P.S. You expected a quality Transformers movie?

    by yomomma

    Evertime I read an outraged post talking about how you were personally robbed by a crappy movie (made to sell toys and other crap)based on a cartoon that was only a glorified comercial for cheap plastic toys was, it makes me wonder how you guys can get through life with such a bloated sense of entitlement.

  • March 31, 2009, 5:58 p.m. CST

    Shatner to IS TO appear as Captain Robert April.

    by scriptgirl_nipples

    You've heard it here!

  • March 31, 2009, 6:01 p.m. CST

    Hey, Morons...

    by amrcanpoet

    All they did was a commission a script. They didn't greenlight the production. Of course they want a script as soon as possible, so that if the reboot is successful, they can get moving on the production as quickly as possible. If the reboot fails, then they dropped a couple mil. on a script, NBD.

  • March 31, 2009, 6:04 p.m. CST


    by yomomma

    I just try to take some joy in life instead of hating everything for not being a masterpiece. I couldn't finish MI3. I do enjoy fringe. Are Orci and Kurtzman hacks for being involved with one terrible and 1 mediocre movie? Do I need to go online and trash them and predict terrible movies every chance I get? Some of you guys have gone far enough to bash Spielburg, so it's not just a matter of taste. I understand, talking trash can be a self esteem boster, but jeez, we talkbackers need to decide whether we dislike certain movies or hate ALL movies. If you hate 90% of what hollywood produces, maybe you should just read more. There used to be an appreciation for awesome terrible movies, and B movies in general. Now, unless any given movie is a unique and original timeless classic, it sucks. A remake? It sucks. A bad action movie (a genre I love)? It sucks. It somewhat resembles another movie? It sucks. The producer, director, actors or screenwriters made a mediocre or bad movie at some point in their carrer? THEIR NEXT MOVIE IS SURE TO SUCK! And why would I (a movie buff) want to spend my time reading about how just about all movies suck? When geeks at a genre movie site can do nothing but talk trash about an upcomming Trek movie that actually may be exciting, and can talk endless trash about James Cameron or Spielburg, something is wrong!

  • March 31, 2009, 6:34 p.m. CST

    yomomma...We only despise that which deserves it.

    by conspiracy

    WE still do love B grade schlock...when it knows it is b grade schlock..some things are so bad as to be watchable. But this is NOT The case for the movies we complain about.</p><p> The problem we that THESE movies are $150M + Big Names attached, loads of SHIT! They ADVERTISED greatness simply by the $ spent, the public staments made, and the names involved. Movies like Transformers, Indy 4, etc. Can you honestly say that Transformers was made, marketed, and promoted as a "B" movie? No, you can't...instead we got endless streams of PR stating how they were fans of the material, even the post cartoon material WHICH was NOT made to sell long gone toys.., and that they were taking this as a serious film...with good story, writing, and action.</p><p> And what did we get for our $12-20 bucks? Pissing fucking robots..ZERO character development (the toy cartoon had more), Horrible acting, and action scenes that were completly unfathomable. It was a CGI wankfest/Product placement extravaganza and nothing else. It insulted its audience...the only people who enhoyed it were kids too young and spastic to even remember the original cartoon. Same with Indy 4...It should have been named Indiana Jones: Sleepingwalking to One Last Payday. It was so thrown together, disjoined, poorly planned , poorly directed written and shot. It was SHIT..Not "B" grade greatness..Shit I say. And Hollywood keeps throwing this shit at us. People today are so used to disappointment and getting fucked they just expect it and don't complain when it happens. Well not here friend. We complain...because we can, and we should..somebody has to yell and scream even if nothing changes...I'm done being the silent victim...I WILL complain when I get fucked.

  • March 31, 2009, 6:38 p.m. CST

    Abrams, Orci & Kurtzman - go get fucked by an elephant.

    by scriptgirl_nipples

    All three are hacks, and don't belong in cinema.

  • March 31, 2009, 6:51 p.m. CST



    I couldn't have put it better myself, well done.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:09 p.m. CST


    by TedKordLives

    Hear Hear! Spoken like a true fucken PROFESSIONAL! Man, I wish I coulda been there. I was sitting at work for a week doing nothing but reading that epic TB.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:13 p.m. CST

    Kirk and Uhura are Shagging Like Jackrabbits!!!!!

    by victor82

    This is, after all, NU-Trek 90210! <p> You don't think they are going to waste Zoe Saldana like the Great Bird wasted Nichelle Nichols, do you? Hell no! Time for some romantic tension on board ship. Wonder if Sulu is gay? <p> "I like this ship! It's exciting!"

  • March 31, 2009, 7:15 p.m. CST

    seriously how hard could it have been to make a Transformers mov


    the Transformers had a plethora of interesting characters and character traits to include and they left it out for a huge pile of turd.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:15 p.m. CST

    Scotty fucking Sulu against the warp core.

    by scriptgirl_nipples

  • March 31, 2009, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Bay vs. Kurtzi Orcman


    OK, who do you think were the buiggest proponents on why Transformers sucked so badly? Personally I put the majority of the blame on Bay...... he made so many lame decisions. Then again... I think it was Kurtzi and Orcman who actually decided to bring BAY ONBOARD! And then change the entire Transformers mythology just to please the fool. So its really a tough call.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:21 p.m. CST


    by yomomma

    There's nothing inherently wrong with bodily functions or poor characterization. There are plenty of awesome movies that are all plot and action. Transformers was a failure because it didn't deliver a superior experience at any level, the shaky cam, the poor casting... It failed to take the action to the next level. We didn't see anything new, which is a sin in a giant robot movie. It was a mediocre movie that was a financial sucess, so obviosly our opinions don't matter all that much. However, I cannot look to that movie and know for a fact that the new Trek is going to blow because the screenwriters also wrote Transformers.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:38 p.m. CST

    Only way to fic those damn ROBO-movies

    by kungfuhustler84

    Have Megatron eat Shia within the first 60 seconds of the movie, then have a huge hour and a half long war, with trenches and shit, on Cybertron. If they don't do exactly that, I guess I'm just staying at home this summer.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:40 p.m. CST

    Reboots, reimagining and sacred cows.

    by Sithtastic

    The big beef with this franchise is essentially that it is trying to re-create the trek magic, while taking liberties that outright neglect the characters' original archetypes and press them into the Abrams' archetypes a la LOST and a variety of other vehicles. In short, as characters, the writers are simply broadening the appeal. It is for this reason the die hard fans continue to cry foul (I remain cautiously optimistic because a) I am at best a hard fan and b) the preview looked like good sci-fi fare.). Put in pseudo-religious terms, you cannot reimagine a sacred cow because it is sacrelige against the original creator.

  • March 31, 2009, 7:45 p.m. CST

    Will Smith as Star Trek :

    by PTSDPete

  • March 31, 2009, 7:54 p.m. CST



    i've just never seen Spock look angry. Quinto seems to fall out of character in that trailer.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:23 p.m. CST

    benecio del toro as Khan

    by mojoman69

    oh yeah!

  • March 31, 2009, 8:27 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    Yeah, well... that might be something to take up with Abrams. It's not like Quinto decided to choke Captain Kirk. Nothing personal, I just see people blame the actors a lot for poor characterization (I guess because it's easier to focus their hate on a face they can see), like Tobey Maguire not being "funny" in the Spider-Man movies.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:28 p.m. CST

    You can do better

    by Larry Sellers

    Watch Beast Wars and read the comics. Also watch TOS and TNG. Stay home and don't watch the films. Problem solved.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:33 p.m. CST


    by conspiracy

    MI3: The least worst of the films.</p><p> Cloverfield: Not even B grade schlock...just boring and pretentious.</p><p>Eagle Eye: A Movie so bad it came and went before I could muster up enough for matinee.</p><p>Xena/Jack of all Trades/Hercules...Bruce Campbell and hinted lesbianism were the only reasons to watch these turds</p><p>The Legend of Zorro...need I say more.</p><p>THESE are the works of Orci and Kurtzman. Now...based upon these properties should I get my fucking hopes up?</p><p> And of course our opinions don't matter much...but as I said..does that mean we should just sit here at take it? Just because a cavalcade of retards tunes in daily to Oprah doesn't mean it is worth a shit. Are you really going to take the stand that as a film fan the masses are the determination of quality? That your tastes and expectations are no better than the 18yr old thug and his knocked up 16yr old girlfriend lined up tonight to see Fast and Fucked up IV? Dude...respect yourself..demand better...stop taking it in the ass and saying.."well it could have been worse" Stand up be a fuckin Man/Woman and complain...Fuck! This is the reason this whole country has gone to shit..people just lay down and take their fucking and never raise their voice...sack up folks...demand quality from life, expect value and honesty..and hold people accountable when they fuck you over.

  • March 31, 2009, 8:34 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    Agreed, sort of... I'm not really a fan of Star Trek so I don't care all that much, but based on the trailers it looks like they've turned him into some sort of hybrid of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo. The whole Joseph Campbell "hero's quest" thing is a little hard for me to swallow... I mean he is still just the captain of a spaceship, right? It's not like he's destined to bring balance to the Force.

  • March 31, 2009, 9:36 p.m. CST


    by TedKordLives

    We agree in principle, and yet our opinions differ on certain properties/movies. And yet I'm not 'screaming' at you. Isn't that amazing?

  • March 31, 2009, 10:02 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    To be fair, I don't imagine most TalkBackers "screaming" when complaining about movies they don't like either... as frightening as this place sometimes is. I can understand what you're saying about manners, but there's not really a polite way to say you think Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and doesn't treat the audience with respect. Well, I guess you could say "That new Michael Bay actioner wasn't UN-bad..."

  • March 31, 2009, 11:03 p.m. CST


    by Series7

    Until it flops.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:12 p.m. CST

    In the new Trek Movie, the Enterprise is the most advanced...

    by Bones

    In the new Trek Movie, the Enterprise is the most advanced ship in the fleet. That is stupid. In the original show, it was just one of 12-18 ships out in space, nothing spectacular about it, doing it's job.<p> Of course, it's job was the most adventurous there is--to seek out new life and new civilizations--but so was every other ship as well. What made the ship so great was the crew that came together--not all at once as this movie forces it to do--but over time. First, there was Captain April and George Samuel Kirk---then Christopher Pike, Spock, Dr. Boyce and Number One--then Spock stayed as Kirk came in with Gary Mitchell and Dr. Piper--with Sulu as a Physicist and Scotty as Chief Engineer. Then McCoy and Uhura came in, followed a year later by Chekov.<p> The point is it took time...time that the new film erases--because it is "easier, quicker, more seductive". Yes, I get it's a tangent universe. I don't really care. That is the thing about tangent universes--they are tangent to something prime.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:14 p.m. CST


    by Bones

    And unless the film fixes most of it's changes by the films end (Destroying VULCAN, for instance--WTF???), then I wash my hands of it.

  • March 31, 2009, 11:25 p.m. CST

    Who fuckin cares The Room is on adult swim!

    by Kenny_Fuckin_Powers

    Tommy Wiseau' The Room, greatest movie ever made, is being run at midnight on adult swim for april fools

  • April 1, 2009, 1:07 a.m. CST

    Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman are to Star Trek as -

    by Laserbrain

    - Schumacher/Goldsman are to Batman.<p>Hopefully this franchise's Chris Nolan is waiting in the wings somewhere, biding his time, plotting Star Trek's rise from the ashes of this misbegotten reboot.

  • April 1, 2009, 1:11 a.m. CST

    Transformers Rocked

    by ComputerwizardPK

    Transformers was by far the best movie of 2007. I'm beginning to think that most people have forgotten how to have a good time at the cinema, put away your pretentious, too cool for words attitude and learn enjoy things again. Believe me, its a lot more satisfying than the alternative.

  • April 1, 2009, 2:05 a.m. CST

    What if the movie...

    by 420 Boylston St

    doesn't meet expectations? The writers would be wasting their time. Paramount must be desperate for hits since they're cranking every franchise they can possibly muster. Too bad they can't produce any good material instead of dipping into the well for old franchises. They will sink like the Titanic forever.

  • April 1, 2009, 4:02 a.m. CST

    Bones, quit hatin'...

    by BurnHollywood

    Fuck man, didn't you see the trailers? Can't you tell how AWESOME this is gonna be?<p> There's a kid who looks like the producer's son driving a priceless car over a cliff, then telling Robocop I'm JAMES TIBERIUS KIRK! and a bar fight, and fucking, and a bunch of people staring at something from Starfleet Academy (probably something AWESOME) and Spock choking Kirk, and Kirk plunking his ass in Pike's chair, and Pike telling Kirk a story in a bar, and that Nero guy with the sweet-ass head-tats saying FIRE ALL WEAPONS! in his dreadlock starship, and Kirk riding the bike he replaced the priceless car with to go stare at the twin suns of Tatooine setting behind the Enterprise being conveniently assembled by his ranch, and Simon Pegg saying EXCITING! and gobs of shit blowing up, including the USS Kelvin, which looks like the Enterprise if you assembled the model kit after huffing the entire tube of glue first, and an Enterprise that has a white girl's ass, and a planet shattering like a dirt clod, and some gayed up new tunics, and a pretty new Chekov that looks abso-fucking-lutely nothing like Walter Koenig, and Harold, or Kumar (can't tell those fuckers apart, but neither can any pothead who watches that shit) as Sulu, who was turned straight when the Kelvin blew up...<p> I'm counting the days. All I can say is...ENGAGE (oh wait, they probably don't say that anymore)!

  • April 1, 2009, 5:57 a.m. CST


    by BendersShinyAss

    when you think about it... none of them look like the original cast. except chris pine, who actually looks more like Pike did in the first episode. They've got spock pretty close.... but the voice just doesn't cut it. but... so what. looks fucking awesome. like you say. especially after sniffing model glue. which reminds me......

  • April 1, 2009, 7:22 a.m. CST

    I m a trek fan, grew up on it and i dont care

    by southafricanguy

    about the changs to continuity.For me trek got stale and completely wrapped up in its own continuity. It badly needs this reboot, and while im not crazy about the writing of orci and kurtzman, i am glad they are fucking around with things. I think ta about time...I want to be suprised by trek again, and damn if that trailer did nt get this lapsed trek fan excited about trek again

  • April 1, 2009, 8:24 a.m. CST

    "I like this ship! It's exciting!"

    by kwisatzhaderach

    Am I the only person that wants to put their fist through the screen when Pegg performs that line? Scotty was many things but he was never an annoying twat.

  • April 1, 2009, 8:58 a.m. CST

    KWISAHATZHADERACH...hows it going?

    by southafricanguy

    so you are definitly not a fan of JJ? Are you a fan of Trek? Just curious what it is that bothers you so much about this new take on it. Im causiously optimistic...

  • April 1, 2009, 9:46 a.m. CST


    by yomomma

    Your last post is exactly what I'm talking about. Cloverfield was awesome and fresh, yet you dismiss it as if you could do better. I LOVED Raimi's TV shows, they were dumb, fun and they rocked. Zorro was also a fun movie. NOT EVERYTHING HAS TO BE AN ARTISTIC MASTERPIECE. Look back at the history of Cinema - tons of schlocky fun that if released today would be trashed relentlessly by movie haters like yourself. YOU don't pay the budget for these films, they aren't tax dollars, you only pay the price of admission, or the free rental on netflix after 3-6 months. So try to lose the uber-arrogant sense of entitlement, and just lay back and enjoy fun movies for being fun. (Christ, whining about poor characterization of the robots in the Transformers movie). Oh, and people complain all the time. This country sucks because that's all people do nowadays - complain on the internet. Always tearing each other down, never building community or taking actual action. You hate the state of Hollywood so much? Band together with some other geeks, raise some money and be the next Kevin Smith (oh wait, he sucks too, right?).

  • April 1, 2009, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Yes, Star Trek did get stale.

    by kabong

    That is no reason to alter the canon/continuity. <P> Just do a reboot. And ignore the canon/continuity that impedes. <P> But no. JarJar wants to destroy what he does not have the talent to surpass.

  • April 1, 2009, 11:20 a.m. CST

    Happy "April Fools Day", Burn Hollywood!

    by Bones

    ..And thanks man. That cheered me up like you just don't know!<p> It is a rare gift to be able to type out Sarcasm, and you sir are gifted! Thanks again!

  • April 1, 2009, 11:25 a.m. CST


    by yodaismyhomie what exactly would that make this sequel anyway? I mean, the new one (Star Trek) is a prequel, sequel, remake and reboot all rolled into what do you call the sequel to that? And what if the movies sucks? I mean seriously...I know there are a lot of Trekkies out there (myself included), but if the new cast doesn't do justice to those characters, it will be a failure. They are already payrolling writers for this? Wow.

  • April 1, 2009, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Shat

    by yodaismyhomie

    I think Star Trek 2 (XII) should cast William Shatner as the main villain. And at some seen the new Kirk needs to have a "KHAAAAAAAAAAAAN!" moment.

  • April 1, 2009, 11:32 a.m. CST

    Oh and here's a thought...

    by Bones

    Instead of remaking Star Trek--why not make SOMETHING NEW? Something that doesn't remake, reboot, retread, twiddle, diddle, finger, fist and otherwise rape Star Trek?<p> Something that might...dare I say it...even be BETTER than Star Trek or Star Wars? Hollywood is so terrified of making anything new and potentially risky that they keep reheating old properties that act on the Nostalgia that people have for anything that is 20-30 years old--but now we are getting to the point where we only have remakes of remakes to look forward to. Think about it for a minute.<p> At least 25 years ago, there were new movies coming out--yes there were some remakes or sequels, and even films that would take old story ideas and put them in new environments (Battle Beyond the Stars or Outland come to mind) but at least it wasn't mindless retreads. Iron Man felt fresh last year because there had never been THAT story told in Live Action before--even if the plot is pretty much by-the-numbers--RDJ's performance along with all the other actors (and kick ass design and SFX) made it a great film. Like in 2003 when the top grossing films were all original--Pirates of the Caribbean, Finding Nemo and Return of the King (or the last part of story like ROTK).<p> When I started coming onto this site there was a script going around called The Mercury Effect that everyone was talking about--what ever happened to that? Not the films with Bruce Willis and the little autistic kid, I mean the one where a lost Mercury capsule comes back to earth and animals begin to turn on humans...that was an original idea.<p> Where are the smart scripts and the excited filmmakers? Where are the excited fans? This is supposed to be the AGE OF THE GEEK...where are the Geek Masterpieces?<p> Harry--help us out here!

  • April 1, 2009, 12:26 p.m. CST


    by Yotz Von Frelnik

    Sure, very true. And I think that if they ever intend to inject Khan into this new history, they really better come up with a darn fine excuse to do so. Still, after this time-bending solution to make a rewriting of the history of Kirk and crew, I'd trust these guys to devise something clever. Hopefully.

  • April 1, 2009, 1:17 p.m. CST

    What film am I talking about?

    by Bones

    A Reboot/remake of a classic Science Fiction TV show.<p> Original cast member in a smaller part/cameo.<p> A massive budget--more than any film or episode in the franchise's history.<p> An emphasis on action and special effects.<p> A complete re-design of the sets/ship/visual continuity<p> Time Travel, complete with alternate timelines<p> Snarky dialogue with anachronistic lines like "Buckle Up or Pedal to the Medal"...<p> A large media buildup, including Trailers that focus on the visuals and action.<p> Also many attempts to court the hipster/retro/party scene with Hip Music/Parties/Poster/Internet content<p> Fans split down the middle between Anticipation and Dread.<p> ---------<p> Why, I am of course talking about the classic science fiction adventure "Lost in Space" from 1998! Or am I talking about 2009's Star Trek?<p> Will this film open to a huge weekend and then plummet as fast and as hard as LiS? Will it alienate it's core audience and not connect with new fans? Will it kill the franchise for the forseeable future or will it resurrect it?<p> Will history repeat?<p> T-minus one week until the full film is screened with an audience...

  • April 1, 2009, 1:42 p.m. CST

    Smart move...

    by StatelyWayneManor

  • April 1, 2009, 1:43 p.m. CST

    by StatelyWayneManor Frank Miller getting named director of Buck Rogers BEFORE the Spirit movie came out.

  • April 1, 2009, 1:47 p.m. CST

    "Our opinions don't matter"

    by Damned if I can login

    Hey, I agree fully that we should stand up and demand better. No argument there.<p>But do our opinions *actually* matter?<p>If they do, well...then it's most certainly the exception rather than the rule.<p>Feel free to flame the frag outta me for saying it, but the old adage 'actions speak louder than words' applies here like gangbusters. Somehow in Hollywood, The Powers That Be continue to commission remakes that never should be remade, produce sub-standard scripts that should never have seen the light of day, and PAY THESE BASTARDS MORE LOOT THAN ALL OF US WILL MAKE IN OUR LIFETIMES COMBINED to do these things.<p>The less-than-mildy humorous diaglog I posted a month or more ago still stands:<p>"So...Harry and his gang of maniacal, miscreant momma's-boys are callin' me a hack, huh?"<p>Ring Ring<p>"Hello? What's that you say? 10 figures to make a film based on the Sony Walkman? Suuuuuure, I'll do it! Hey Harry, I'd love to tell you and yours to suck it, but I gotta go close on my 4th home in the Cayman Islands..."

  • April 1, 2009, 2 p.m. CST

    Sorry for all the alliteration

    by Damned if I can login

    Forsooth, it was unintentional...

  • April 1, 2009, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Damned If I can Login...

    by Bones

    Well, there is exactly one way to get film companies to stop remaking old classics--unfortunately we movie geeks are too weak to actually do it: DON'T GO!!!<p> If there was a grassroots campaign that got thousands of people NOT to go see remakes--and possibly educate average film fans on the benefits of old movies--then, and only then would there be a change in how they do their business.<p> But, as I say, who here would actually NOT see a movie, rather than go see the film, give the studios their money and then bitch about the fact that they should have spent their money someplace else?<p> Practically no one.<p> We are Movie Geeks. We are happiest when getting lost in the communal temple of a Movie Theater, with emotion and anticipation running high.<p> But what a world it would be if people only went to see movies that were worth their time and money. Maybe then, Studios would only make quality films that are smart as well as being highly entertaining--and only films that are BAD ON PURPOSE, the kind you love to see with your friends, would be the only "bad" flicks out there.<p> A guy can dream, can't he?

  • April 1, 2009, 3:38 p.m. CST

    Bones - AGREED on all points...

    by Damned if I can login

    Yep, we can definitely dream...and I keep hoping that as time goes on we may actually make a difference.<p>But the collective intelligence of the movie going public is pretty darned low...and the money grubbing people in power just love to cater to 'em. Hey, people even paid to see From Justin to Kelly. For the life of me I can't figure out *why*, but nevertheless some people did...<p>But it's all the remakes that get me, though. I read this morning about that they're gonna remake Slap Shot. *SIGH* Ya gotta love the quote from Red Dwarf:<p>"Philistines! I mean how can you remake Casablanca? The one starring Myra Dinglebat and Peter Beardsley was definitive!"

  • April 1, 2009, 4:42 p.m. CST


    by yomomma

    A better solution is to organize and support ORIGINAL movies. Some remakes are great - look at Batman Begins. Without remakes or relaunches, we would have Adam West antics instead of Heath Ledger greatness. Also, think of all the awesome sequels we would never see if movies had to tell the whole tale in just one film. So the better solution is just to go see the next quality original movie several times to ensure commercial success of original films. Besides, how many original genre movies were made in 'back in the good ol' days'? MORE movies are made today, so more crappy movies and sequels are made. You aren't movie god, other people have different tastes, why should you get to dictate what movies everyone else get to enjoy? Just lose your sense of entitlement and support good movies that meet your high standards. Then more of those movies will be made.

  • April 1, 2009, 7:02 p.m. CST

    They should have gone more boldly

    by agnosticyesno

    The problem I see with this movie from the start is that the creators were too frightened to make an actual reboot. So they had to go with this hugely contrived plot which sees the inclusion of all the original characters together etc. Why not just go with a revisioning of Star Trek? Keep the essence of the original. They could have made a trilogy starting with the Captain Pike character, 2nd moving including Spock and the third movie could be about Kirk's first command and not include all the characters, like Chekov. The benefit of starting off with Pike is that it would set the tone and "prepare" the die hard Trek fanatics for the alterations of the more well known characters. If the story is great and the acting etc. most people would not care if they changed it. And don't include any cameos of the original actors.

  • April 1, 2009, 7:23 p.m. CST

    Bones, back at ya...

    by BurnHollywood

    ...And you're 100% right: retconning a 40 year old classic series is absolute bullshit. JJ Abrams is a lazy, no-talent, motherfucking hack, and now he has at least two other hacks to circle-jerk with.<p> Unless this passes the Ebert/Travers/Filthy Critic test with flying colors, I'm boycotting. Not because I'm a Trekkie/Trekker (although I didn't realize I was one until I saw the first lame-ass trailer...and I wouldn't touch a Klingon headpiece with a ten-foot-pole), but based on the principle that you don't break out the white-out and wreck other people's contributions because you can't cut it creatively.<p> The sad fucking thing is that the much berated Lucasfilm has a ton more respect for their fans...they even have a full-time continuity guy, Leland Chee, who makes sure everything fits into their evolving universe.<p> Fuck Paramount up the ass with the "reimagined" Enterprise.

  • April 1, 2009, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Simon Pegg is an annoying twat!

    by scriptgirl_nipples

    And you all know that.

  • April 2, 2009, 11:43 a.m. CST

    Cloverfield = the worst "moster" movie ever

    by paulyd30

    Cloverfield blew ass all over the place and sucked donkey balls. That so called WTF looking monster could not even lick the sweat off of Godzilla's balls.

  • April 5, 2009, 3:37 p.m. CST


    by Replicant23

    Final word: Okra and the other guy suck. You can't make a good movie with a shitty script, period. Therefore, this movie will suck.

  • April 5, 2009, 4:04 p.m. CST

    No Fool...I am LAST!!!!!

    by ElPalabraUltimo

    The Final Word: Massive script suckage. You know this to be true. I have spoken.

  • April 5, 2009, 4:04 p.m. CST

    No Fool...I am LAST!!!!!

    by ElPalabraUltimo

    The Final Word: Massive script suckage. You know this to be true. I have spoken.

  • May 11, 2009, 5:57 a.m. CST


    by Kobaal

    Anyway, Lindelof! Hell yes.