Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Star Trek XI - What We Know 341

Posted by Zonk
from the younger-space-babes-beware dept.
Jean Lucy writes "TwitchGuru has an article outlining in detail what is known about Star Trek XI. The film is in the early stages of production, led by J.J. Abrams (creator of Lost), and the movie will most likely be a prequel featuring Kirk and Spock in their younger years. No word of Matt Damon to play Kirk, though..." From the article: "As reported in early September, even former Star Trek actors are saying that CBS has kicked Rick Berman off the Trek bandwagon. This helps to allay the fears of those who say that 'they' will screw up this movie as 'they' have been doing for the past several years. As Anthony Pascale put it to me, however, 'There is no they any more. Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone. There's now a totally different production team running Star Trek. This is what people have been asking for now for years.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Trek XI - What We Know

Comments Filter:
  • Harsh (Score:5, Funny)

    by frosty_tsm (933163) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:09PM (#16328763)
    to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone

    Poor guy...
  • CBS? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by iambarry (134796) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:10PM (#16328769) Homepage
    I thought Star Trek was owned by Paramount...where does CBS come in?
    • Re:CBS? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tverbeek (457094) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:14PM (#16328815) Homepage
      CBS and Paramount are tied up in the same megacorp.

      You do realize that only half a dozen distinct corporations control 99% of the entertainment industry, don't you?

      • by drinkypoo (153816)
        CBS and Paramount are tied up in the same megacorp. You do realize that only half a dozen distinct corporations control 99% of the entertainment industry, don't you?

        Actually, It's only ten [thenation.com].

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Dr_Barnowl (709838)
          This is why I am so glad that we in the UK have at least one major media outlet that doesn't always have to think of the bottom line - the BBC.
    • Re:CBS? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:16PM (#16328841) Homepage Journal
      Here's the story- if you can follow it [wikipedia.org]

      Basically, CBS created Paramount, which split off back in the 1970s, which was eventually aquired by Viacomm, which got swallowed back up by CBS.

      Since corporate splits and mergers rarely make sense to me- go read the wikipedia article instead.
      • by lostboy2 (194153)
        CBS created Paramount, which split off back in the 1970s, which was eventually aquired by Viacomm, which got swallowed back up by CBS.

        Wait, wasn't that a Star Trek episode where the giant space amoeba ... oh never mind.
      • *ahem* Desilu Productions? You forgot that part of the story!

        *Ricky Ricardo voice*: Luuuuuccyyy, I'm back from the Romulan Neutral Zone! (hits bongo drum)

        - Bee Tiberius Beard
      • by OverlordQ (264228)
        Not quite accurate, according to the Wikipedia article:

        There was CBS, it created Viacom to syndicate old tv shows. Westinghouse bought CBS, renamed to CBS Corporation, Viacom bought CBS Corporation. Viacom didn't like the new structure so split into two groups, one named CBS Corporation and . . . Viacom.
      • You've got the story slightly muddled. Paramount dates back to the silent movie era. The CBS radio network was founded in 1927, partly with backing from Paramount.

        The company that CBS created was Viacom itself. Viacom started out as CBS's syndication [wikipedia.org] division, and got spun off in 1971. Somehow, Viacom became this massive media conglomerate, buying up dozens (literally!) of companies, including both Paramount and its former parent CBS. When it bought CBS it renamed itself CBS.

        And that why's CBS owns Star Tr

      • by SeaFox (739806)

        Here's the story- if you can follow it [wikipedia.org]Basically, CBS created Paramount, which split off back in the 1970s, which was eventually aquired by Viacomm, which got swallowed back up by CBS.

        That's how it happened but it's sorta turned around when you state it like that. The Viacom of today [wikipedia.org] is not the same as the Viacom media giant we all used to know.

        Viacom didn't get swallowed back up by CBS, CBS got swallowed up by Viacom, which then split itself into two entities, the larger one took the CBS nam

    • Viacom owns Paramount. CBS owned Viacom. Viacom and CBS split, each taking part of the pie. Don't ask me to detangle it any further. My head already hurts trying to figure out who owns who.
  • New Trek Comics (Score:3, Informative)

    by tverbeek (457094) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:10PM (#16328773) Homepage
    For those who can't wait until this movie comes out (or who may not want to think about it), there's an alternative in the meantime: upstart comics publisher IDW has announced that they'll be launching a new ST:TNG comics series in January (loosely tied to the series' 20th anniversary next year), with TOS and perhaps other Trek titles coming later. More details here. [newsarama.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:13PM (#16328803)
    Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone.

    They fired Steve? Bastards!

    • by Tackhead (54550)
      > Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone.
      >
      >They fired Steve? Bastards!

      But also in TFA:

      "...the movie will most likely be a prequel featuring Kirk and Spock in their younger years"

      So sure, they fired Berman from his janitorial duties, but because there a slash-fic author managed to sneak into the focus group, so they hired that Foley creep in his place.

      "There's clingons on the aft nacelle, s

  • by avalys (221114) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:13PM (#16328805)
    Just because they've replaced the production team doesn't mean it'll be any better. And if their best idea is to churn out a freaking prequel, I'm betting these people will be no better than who they're replacing.

    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:35PM (#16329095) Journal
      I quite like the idea of an Earth-Romulan War film / series. Unfortunately, you're now going to need a lot of retconning to go from the 'war fought with primitive nuclear weapons' in ST:TNG to all the much more modern weapons in Enterprise (not to mention the fact that in Enterprise they encountered the Romulans for the 'first' time, and they were flying in TOS-era ships. Actually, probably better to just pretend Enterprise never happened; I think most of the fans have.

      The real problem with prequels is trying to squeeze existing characters into them (yes George Lucas, I'm looking at you). A prequel to Star Wars with Luke in it would be very dull (he was just a farm-boy, after all), or it would destroy continuity. A prequel to Star Trek that had both Kirk and Spock in it would just leave the fans wincing.

      Prequels themselves are not a bad idea, but they are difficult to execute. There is a lot of Star Trek continuity you are constantly running into. The first episode of Enterprise had me wincing as they seemed to be trying to cram as many continuity errors into 40 minutes as possible. Sequels are generally easier, although it would be difficult to follow the Voyager finale where Janeway single-handedly defeated the Borg using a shuttle from a couple of decades in the future (are the Federation really only 20 years behind the Borg in terms of tech?). I might be tempted to take the series in a completely different direction; make a show about a group of Vulcan and Romulan terrorists/freedom fighters on Romulus pushing a reunificationist agenda, for example. Have the occasional interaction with the Federation (possibly some weapons being smuggled to them by Star Fleet Intelligence, and the moral issues involved with supporting 'terrorists'), but keep it mainly focussed on the Romulan Star Empire.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)
        are the Federation really only 20 years behind the Borg in terms of tech?

        The Borg has always disappointed me for just this reason. They've been wandering the cosmos for ages scooping up races. They should have technology that makes ours utterly pointless. But I guess it's okay given that Star Trek is fantasy, not Science-Fiction :P

      • by camperdave (969942) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:33PM (#16329903) Journal
        Q could wipe out the entire Enterprise timeline. Then we could all feel good about ignoring it
      • by Kjella (173770)
        Sequels are generally easier, although it would be difficult to follow the Voyager finale where Janeway single-handedly defeated the Borg using a shuttle from a couple of decades in the future (are the Federation really only 20 years behind the Borg in terms of tech?).

        Q: If an indian armed with bow and arrow met a white man with a rifle, how long until they were on comparable levels of tech?
        A: About the time it takes to shoot with the bow and arrow and take his rifle.

        A few decades can be next to forever whe
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Schemat1c (464768)
          Think for example a modern warship compared to not so long ago. You wouldn't even get close enough to fire, and if you did there'd be counterfire to make sure the missiles/torpedos/whatever never reached them. You could send an almost endless stream of old ships but they'd never get anywhere.

          What a short memory you have.

          USS Cole bombing [wikipedia.org]
      • by memfrob (157990) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @09:49PM (#16331315) Homepage
        I might be tempted to take the series in a completely different direction; make a show about a group of Vulcan and Romulan terrorists/freedom fighters on Romulus pushing a reunificationist agenda, for example.

        Or... or... an entire series about the Mirror Universe! Fu-manchus and gold bikinis all around! They could even recast the same actors, use half of the same plots, and rebuild all of the old sets... just EVIL!

        You could even have it written and directed by the Mirror Universe Rick Berman, who makes thoughtful, entertaining, and understated cinematic art.

    • The prequel seems similar to the Academy movie that was one of the original ideas for a Star Trek movie (IIRC, fully developed into a script before the idea of bringing back the original cast and doing what became ST:TMP came up), and seems to be the most frequently batted around but never-gets-done idea in Trek.

      My prediction: It will suck, hard, particularly with no one previously involved in Trek involved. A prequel works, if it all, by carefully balancing new insights with fidelity to the original charac
    • Just because they've replaced the production team doesn't mean it'll be any better. And if their best idea is to churn out a freaking prequel,

      No kidding. I'd much rather see a movie that took place in the future with Riker as Captain of the Enterprise with that uber-awesome cannon on top where the federation was in chaos. Kickass space battles, the universe at war, lots of death and phasers and really cool stuff...

      None of this prequel crap. it sucked with Star Wars. It sucked with Enterprise, and it'll
  • by Faizdog (243703) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:17PM (#16328861)
    I don't know if I like the idea of a complete replacement of the behind the scenes Trek crew. Sure I'm glad that B&B are gone, but what about folks like Mike Okuda? The man behind the TNG techincal manual and the Star Trek Encyclopedia? Who is reported to have the entire continuity in his head?

    I think that replacing the problem people is a good idea, but replacing some of the other key old hands who know Trek inside and out? This along with the report on NPR this morning that A TON of old Star Trek memrobelia, props, costumes, ship models, etc are being auctioned, has me worried.

    Sure Trek was really going downhill fast since Voyager, but fix the problem, don't just toss it all away. We still want our Trek, not something new.
    • While I agree that I still want the spirit of Trek, I'm not convinced this is a bad idea. For a start, the continuity of Star Trek has been messed up beyond belief by Enterprise anyway. While I want things keeping generally the same, I'm not too bothered if maybe some planets get rearrange a little, or the time-line gets a clean-up.

      Comparing to Marvel, I think their "Ultimate" universe restart was one of the best ideas they had had in a long time, as while the characters were basically the same, it helped s
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by masdog (794316)
        On one hand, I'd really like a series set after Voyager + DS9. On the other hand I accept you would either have to ignore much of what had gone on in DS9 in particular, or the storyline would be too complex for new viewers.

        I think you confused Voyager for DS9. The aftermath of a war would make a good story, and if it is properly executed, you can entice new viewers to the series while tying it into past continuity. It can even be used to increase sales of DS9 on DVD.

        Think about it. The setting is
    • I agree. There are a lot of people who were responsible for the look and feel of Star Trek, when only a few executive producers and writers screwed it up. Hopefully the summary is just hyperbole, the article itself doesn't say "everyone" was fired.
    • what about folks like Mike Okuda? The man behind the TNG techincal manual and the Star Trek Encyclopedia? Who is reported to have the entire continuity in his head?

      People like that should be the first against the wall.

      Seriously.

    • I'm actually in New York this week attending the Star Trek auction at Christies and I spoke with Mike Okuda and his wife Denise. Both of them are onboard for the next movie. They are also working on the remastering of the original series right now too. // Sean
  • Everyone? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by exley (221867) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:17PM (#16328863) Homepage
    Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone.


    I don't know if this is exactly what people have been clamoring for. Quite a few people, yeah, they needed to go to get some fresh blood in there. But to mix in some new people and still have have some people around who have a history with Trek and who understand what the franchise is about wouldn't be so bad. Hopefully.


    I guess it could go either way, though. You could bring in all new people who also have an understanding as to what it's all about and have them really rejuvenate things. Or they could get people like that guy who directed Nemesis (Stuart Baird) who was so clueless about the franchise that he thought Geordi was an alien for awhile.

    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:31PM (#16329049) Homepage

      Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone.

      I don't know if this is exactly what people have been clamoring for.

      I was. I hated the guy who swept the floor.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by SamSim (630795)

        See, in TOS you had the brushed kind of metal/plastic grey floors that were so classic in the sixties. You couldn't see dirt or footprints in that, you waxed it - it was shiny, it was a little camp, a little primitive by today's standards, but you kind of look past that, you see the show for what it really is at the core: a clean, shiny floor.

        TNG took a while to find its own direction, but I think carpets were a good logical development on the theme. You brought in new technology - vacuum cleaners, carpet

    • The people that did the design, effects & post work were doing a good job. The problem is the directors, producers, executive producers and the network nitwit meddlers weren't doing a good job. Anyone that did the writing needs to be able to write something better than a fanfic.
    • It's going to be a "re-imagined" series.. Kirk will be played by Anthony Michael Hall, and Spock will be played by Andie MacDowell... that's right, a CHICK!

      Okay, jokes aside, in any case, I guess it's more of a wait and see thing at this point.

      And to those who are gonna slam me re: the BSG ref, I like the new series.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:18PM (#16328869)
    Cause odd/even principle will show that this movie will be terrible anyway so lets just get it over with.
  • Amazing (Score:2, Funny)

    by Jason1729 (561790)
    CBS has kicked Rick Berman off the Trek bandwagon

    Someone at CBS actually has a brain?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:22PM (#16328923)
    New production crew, why not new characters?

    I don't like the idea of introducing new characters and a set in a Star Trek movie, but I dislike the idea of bringing back old characters in their early academy days even more.

    What is this movie going to be about? Kirk spent the night with a girl when he should have been studying for his final test, Spock tries to warn Kirk, but Kirk doesn't listen. Now Kirk may not pass and become a officer. The future of the entire Alpha Quadrant is at stake, Kirk won't be able to fly the Enterprise around and seduce alien women!

    Let's move beyond prequels let's even pass up the 24th century. We already know the past, lets see the future of the Federation of Planets in the 27th or beyond.

  • by Maxo-Texas (864189) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:27PM (#16328991)
    But they PROMISED us if we stopped pirating films, the little guys would get to keep their jobs!

    NOOOOOOOooooooooo!!!!!!
  • by ThinkFr33ly (902481) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:28PM (#16329001)
    ...and as far as I'm concerned, if you kill Data you have to go.
    • I don't know, my willing suspension of disbelief was having problems keeping up with the idea of an android that could put on that much weight over a few years. Especially after a film in which he explained that his body measurements would stay the same for his entire lifespan...
      • by onosendai (79294)
        It was entirely (afaik) Spiner's decision, basically for that reason, that he was getting too old to play Data (hence his appearances as Soong in ST:ENT)
    • There was plenty of good Trek after they killed Spock, even with many of the same people in the production crew.

      That said, I dunno if the new movie will be any good, I'd rather see the Federation in the 27th-29th centuries.
  • by B11 (894359) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:32PM (#16329053)
    'Nsync cameos as red shirts?
  • by rkcallaghan (858110) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:42PM (#16329187)
    Enterprise failed because its just not that interesting to watch the "old" again. I don't want to see young Kirk.

    Bring back any of the TNG/DS9/VOY actors that want a job; seed the environment with a couple familiar faces. Everybody loves Worf and Michael Dorn basically never turns down a chance to come back, get him. Get some new blood and tell a new tale. How about the crew of the Titan; heading up that task force near the neutral zone, that has some options and I'm sure Frakes needs a job. How about a period of recovery for the Alpha Quadrant post Dominion War; paralleling the WW2 Europe -> European Union evolution?

    Maybe you like my ideas, maybe you don't. All I'm saying is seek out new life, and new civilizations; and don't try and cowardly go where we've already been a billion times. Unless you're trying to duplicate the success of Enterprise

    ~Rebecca
  • by eebra82 (907996) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @06:45PM (#16329217) Homepage
    What? A prequel? That means outdated technology? How on earth do they expect Star Trek fans to enjoy a film where space ships can only go to warp 5?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by camperdave (969942)
      You mean like the Enterprise-D? Federation vessels were limited to warp 5 when it was discovered that warp drive destroyed the fabric of space-time.
      • by xkenny13 (309849)
        Federation vessels were limited to warp 5 when it was discovered that warp drive destroyed the fabric of space-time.

        I thought that limitation only applied to that specific warp corridor?

        Riker takes the Enterprise to Warp 13 towards the end of "All Good Things".
  • Fuck, a prequel? That's pretty damn sad. Didn't they learn anything from Enterprise?

    You know what I want to see (it's there in the subject line so you shouldn't have to guess too hard). That's right, the friggin' Gorn. That was the coolest damn alien in the original series and he only got one episode. Stronger than hell but also very clever. They seem like they would be an interesting species to have as an enemy. There was a ST:TNG comic featuring the gorn that made them sound like just another warr

  • Thank GOD! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by davygrvy (868500)

    'There is no they any more. Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone. There's now a totally different production team running Star Trek. This is what people have been asking for now for years.'

    It was bad enough hearing Berman defend his crappy opening credits music choice for Enterprise on the first season DVD.. About time he got the boot.

    I for one welcome the new trekkie overlords..

  • by HTH NE1 (675604) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:02PM (#16329451)
    "There is no they any more. Everyone who has worked on Star Trek previously, from the top executives at the studio to the guy who sweeps the floor on-set, is gone. There's now a totally different production team running Star Trek. This is what people have been asking for now for years."
    "I want Gene Roddenberry back you son of a bitch."
    -- Ensign Montoya
  • by eadint (156250) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:16PM (#16329655) Homepage Journal
    Lets see here, there are rope traps in the hallway.
    half of the crew is the enemy.
    there is a lot of sexual homosexual hermaphoditic and beastial sexual tension going around.
    you have two watch 10 movies just to know what is going on.
    oh yea and their trapped in an alternate univers that they cant get out of.
  • Prequilitis (Score:4, Funny)

    by mrmeval (662166) <<mrmeval> <at> <gmail.com>> on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:29PM (#16329865) Journal
    *another* prequel? They never learn.

    So Kirk will be 12 and Spock will be 100 and McCoy will *still* be 90 and Uhura will not have developed yet.

    It will die quickly.
  • by dangitman (862676) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:36PM (#16329955)
    and the movie will most likely be a prequel featuring Kirk and Spock in their younger years

    Kirk and Spock were young men with dreams of trvavelling the universe. As they tweaked the knobs on their prototype spacecraft, Kirk let out a sigh and said "Is it getting hot in here, Spock?" The nubile, yet distinguished young Vulcan replied "My temperature sensor does indeed indicate much wamrth and humidity." Kirk nodded coyly to Spock as he peeled off his lycra bodysuit. "That seems like a logical thing to do," noted Spock as he proceeded to do likewise, revealing his silky-skinned chest. Striking up a conversational mood, Spock enquired "What is this thing you humans call fisting? Is it a medical procedure?" Kirk winked and said "It's the way we calibrate the Warp Drive." Unaware of Kirk's subtext, Spock replied "Most interesting. Would you care to demonstrate these techniques in the interest of knowledge?" Kirk tried to subdue his enthusiasm. "Oh damn, I dropped my wrench. Could you bend over and pick it up for me?" Kirk could no longer control himself. "Engage! Engage like a pig!" he cried, as he set his thrusters to full.

    • by frogstar_robot (926792) <frogstar_robot@yahoo.com> on Thursday October 05, 2006 @07:40PM (#16330007)
      That's funny but it is generally agreed that Spock is the pitcher and Kirk is the catcher. After all, Spock is MUCH stronger than a human.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by dangitman (862676)
        You see, that doesn't really matter. We are talking about trangression here. Often submissives are people who are strong, but want to give themselves up to another. Likewise, dominants are often people who are weak, but crave power. Sex is often about role-reversal. After all, Spock chooses to defer to a "Captain" who is much dumber than he is. Spock could make a much better Captain and lead Starfleet to glory, but he chooses to belong to a hierarchy where his skills are undervalued.
  • It's the same problem that can befall any prequel: Inconsistent production values! Sure, the episodes from the original series represented the state of the art for the 1960's (and cost Desilu a ton to produce each episode). And sure, the original series-based movies used movie-making technology from the 1980's/1990's...but how do you make a new film that looks like it belongs in the original series star trek universe but still incorporates modern production values? Seems tricky.

    It's just like in the Star
  • by lelitsch (31136)
    Star Trek Number Nine
    Attempt to reap more money
    It will suck and blow
  • Three Words (Score:5, Interesting)

    by flinxmeister (601654) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @08:12PM (#16330357) Homepage
    Captain
    Wesley
    Crusher
  • This rumor has been around for years about this idea for a film, and has been explicitly DEBUNKED as being the plot of the next film. So quit rehashing this garbage.
  • by petrus4 (213815) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @09:10PM (#16330965) Homepage Journal
    There was a very funerary feeling about the last few minutes of that film for me. The meeting with the Vulcans seemed as though it was meant as one last look at what Trek was about, and I don't think any studio executive can be expected to know what I'm talking about there, either.

    Although if they'd wanted to portray it in a humorous manner, (although it would have clashed with the existing vibe at the end of the film, as I said) as the Enterprise left Earth at the end of First Contact it would have been appropriate I think to have a spacebound shark [wikipedia.org] at the bottom of the screen, with the Enterprise entering warp above it.

    Star Trek is dead. Let it rest in peace.
  • Creativity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jerim (872022) on Thursday October 05, 2006 @09:25PM (#16331131)
    That entire problem with Star Trek has and will continue to be creativity. TOS was very original. TNG was a comlete 180 from TOS. DS9 was just more TNG. Voyager was just more TNG. Enterprise was just more TNG. They either need to set a story in the past or way in the future. Ditch all the flashy LCD screens. Go with holo-displays or organic walls that can display any type of wall texture or video. Something, anything that is different. Gene had the vision for not just one series but for two. I want to see a comletely differently interior design/architecture scheme. I want to see different fashion. I want to see different ways of doing things. We need as big a jump from TOS to TNG from TNG to what ever comes next.

    I say set the next story 60 years in the future. Have the Vulcans break away from the Federation to pursue their own logical ideas. Have the Klingons a now extinct race. The Romulans haven't been heard from in 30 years. The Ferengi have been accepted into the Federation. The Borg have become completely independent from the Collective, yet they continue to assimiliate. Make them evangelicals of a better way of life. You know, just shake everything up. Make it completely foriegn from the Star Trek we have come to know, but also have it link back to the prior series.

Real Users hate Real Programmers.

Working...