Badmovies.org Forum

J.J. Abrams (Lost, Alias, Mission Impossible III)will be producing and directing Star Trek XI. I know a lot of people aren't going to like the concept, but they got control of the franchise away from Rick Berman (a man of little imagination) finally.


Read the story in Variety (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117941815?categoryid=10&cs=1&s=h&p=0).

Is it going to feature the crew from "The Next Generation" or they are skewing them in favour of the people of "Enterprise"?

Awright!    Finally something comes up that could potentially be a BAD MOVIE.   =)

(Nemesis was terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible.   As in, I didn't finish watching it after 15 minutes terrible!  Once the Captain's Silver Dune Buggy started bouncing over the sand, I shut that bastard off.)

Neville Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is it going to feature the crew from "The Next
> Generation" or they are skewing them in favour of
> the people of "Enterprise"?
>

It's a prequel: the meeting of Kirk and Spock is what I read.


I almost don't care which 'generation' of Trek crew it features, getting it away from Berman is a MAJOR step in the right direction.  That ST survived his 'reign of terror' is a testament to fan loyalty (or fan masochism).

Lost is about the only example of Abrams work that I'm familiar with, but I thought it was one of the best TV series to come along in years, with some great characterization and storytelling, so I'm happy with this news.

The prequel is a good idea for a couple of reasons. For one, it allows them to get away from the established casts. Also, the only way to get Kirk, Spock, etc. back is new people in the roles, and starting them young is about the only way to get fans to accept that. Opens up a lot of future possibilities if it works. More classic characters could be added later, and if they can grow into the roles, we could have new movies set in the time of TOS, which was really the best. And this is a good opportunity to introduce a cast who are not over the hill by the time they start making movies.

And I just like the idea of going back to an earlier time. With TNG and later series, the future was getting a little to clean for my liking. Lose the carpeting, the beige walls and the fancy graphical displays, and get somebody crawling up a Jeffries tube.

I guess the big question will be who they are going to cast when the time comes. Fans are either going to be very happy or very unhappy. I couldn't even begin to speculate who, of the current crop of young actors, might make a good Kirk or Spock.

For that matter, are any other classic characters (Bones, Scotty) to appear right away? And are we going to see characters from Kirk's past, like Finnegan or Carol Marcus or Sam Kirk? Will we perhaps see some of the other past events that have only been mentioned? Does it go back to academy days, or shortly after?

Prequels are perfect for generating fan speculation.

What's this Star Trek thing you guys are talking about?  Is it some space marathon?

Here's a review of the original script by David Loughery which Harve Bennett (producer of STII-V)  proposed for Star Trek VI and is the basis for the movie Abrams will make.

I know some folks here probably don't care for AICN, but this is an interesting read. Star Trek: The Academy Years (http://aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22789)

I find it interesting that this showed up over on AICN just a couple of weeks before this major announcement for Paramount. Also, news had just come out about the same time that the script that was being written by Erik Jendresen (HBO's Band of Brothers) for Star Trek XI (Star Trek: The Beginning) was shelved, but Jendresen made the comment that some major producer was still interested in restarting Star Trek.  Jendresen's script would have taken place between Enterprise and TOS and would not have featured characters from any of the TV series.

Sounds pretty good to me!
If they do it just right, they might just be able to pull it off and the film might actually be good.

(and trek, where is this giant pipe you're referring to?)

I had been wondering for years if anyone would ever bring up the proposed 'Star Trek: The Academy Years' again. I remember some about what happened with that project, and I would definitely be interested in seeing a movie of that type, as long as it was properly.

Can't they let this franchise die in peace?

Why should they?  With fresh creative blood and fans who want more, there's nothing wrong with continuation.

Just celebrate the day Berman no longer has control, and the Trek universe will be fine.

They haven't had a good Star Trek movie in 10 years. Is there truly a need for another Star Trek movie (albeit prequel)?

Then again, I probably shouldn't be critical of this movie since I'll probably see it in the theatres.

I wonder what happened to the Bryan Singer Star Trek..

So.. this would then be an even-numbered Trek?

If so, it COULD be okay, or even good.


That's reight.. .Nemesis was an odd-numbered Trek.  (for those who don't know, odd-numbered Treks suck, and even-numbered Treks can be good.  Not to say that I don't have my favorite moments in the odd Treks.   Such as, most famously,  "I like my pain!  I NEED my pain!!")

Actually, Nemesis was 10, meaning it kind of broke the pattern by being a crappy even-numbered movie.

And I liked Generations, which was odd-numbered, although I think the original cast and Malcolm McDowell had more to do with it than the TNG cast.

First Contact was the last good movie, but then, I think James Cromwell had a lot to do with that, along with an epic story.

Insurrection was kind of a nothing movie -- an extended TV episode.

Really, the first six movies were all good in their own way. The even ones were just outstanding. But with the change in cast and producers, the TNG movies were what killed the franchise. The original cast at least had the benefit of having their show killed before its time. TNG had worn out its characters, its stories and its cast before going to the big screen. That, and the people in charge knew less about movie production than they did about TV, and the movies just didn't feel like movies.

The best thing for Trek is to have new people all around, and to get back to its roots.

GENERATIONS. Kirk, Scottie and Chekov in harness , doing what heros do.....then the rest of the movie starts...

I haven't seen 'Nemesis', but my dad said that it was surprisingly good. The only ST movie I didn't like, out of the ones that I have seen is 5. The ones I really liked were 1-4 and 6. 'Generations',
'First Contact', and 'Insurrection' were so-so.

I liked every Trek movie except for 5 also.

The Final Frontier is proof that Shatner belongs in front of the camera and not behind it.
At least when it comes to Star Trek films that is...