Star Trek Into Darkness

[Rappy Veteran]

In advance of its May 8th release, Paramount has already preemptively greenlit a sequel to J.J. Abrams' Star Trek, and has confirmed that screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci will be back. Joining those two, however, will be Damon Lindelof, a Paramount producer and writer for "Lost" who helped get this Star Trek reboot off the ground with J.J. Abrams to begin with. No decision has been made on whether Abrams will return to direct the sequel. Although we can expect to hear a lot more about this in May, soon after it hits theaters. It looks like Abrams has indeed already successfully rebooted this franchise!

While Paramount is hoping to get this made for a summer 2011 release, no ideas for a story have been solidified just yet. Kurtzman, Orci, and Lindelof will wait to hear from the fans before deciding which way to go next. "Obviously we discussed ideas, but we are waiting to see how audiences respond next month," Kurtzman said. "With a franchise rebirth, the first movie has to be about origin. But with a second, you have the opportunity to explore incredibly exciting things. We'll be ambitious about what we'll do." For someone who is truly excited for this reboot this summer, I can say this makes me even more excited.

Source

[MasterC]

I'm going to laugh if this thing bombs out and nobody will want to see the sequal. :laugh:

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

I guess they want the movie to be canon.

[Rappy Veteran]

I'm going to laugh if this thing bombs out and nobody will want to see the sequal. :laugh:

I don't think it will bomb but there could be some bad reviews but that's to be expected.

[Richard Hammond]

I think this was a given seen as the actors are contracted for another 2 sequels.

Lets hope it doesnt suck and we get the other 2 sequels.

I think it will get lots of bad reviews because its a casual film not made for trekkies, but i have an open mind.

[Corris Veteran]

They better not make a sequel to J.J. Abrams' Star Trek, with out J.J. Abrams.

Nothing worse than making a good movie (if it is going to be good that is) and then having a sequel made by someone else that could ruin it.

Like if someone else carried on the new batman franchise without Christopher Nolan, it would be really stupid.

Just my opinion though.

[mad_onion]

I guess they want the movie to be canon.

no, the new film and this one too (i would think) are a reimagining of the original story. it is a separate continuity.

[Rappy Veteran]

They better not make a sequel to J.J. Abrams' Star Trek, with out J.J. Abrams.

Nothing worse than making a good movie (if it is going to be good that is) and then having a sequel made by someone else that could ruin it.

Like if someone else carried on the new batman franchise without Christopher Nolan, it would be really stupid.

Just my opinion though.

JJ will stay on in some form even as adviser.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

no, the new film and this one too (i would think) are a reimagining of the original story. it is a separate continuity.

It could still be canon. The same way those alternate timeline episodes of DS9 and Enterprise are canon. :p

[Rappy Veteran]

Now the film is out and doing well...good time to dig this thread up from the graves!

/discuss!

[~WinGz~]

I haven't seen the new movie yet, However all my friends have said it was an awesome ride.

So I guess a sequel would be pretty awesome. Now only for me to see the first that will be my goal.

[Hupp]

after already seeing the movie twice, i can say I can't wait :D

[qdave]

after already seeing the movie twice, i can say I can't wait :D

any chance for a third time? i will go to see it again next week. same movie twice in 2 days is a bit too much for me.

i wonder if the new movie, st 12 will continue with the 'alternate timeline' or will get back to the 'normal one'.

[Hupp]

any chance for a third time? i will go to see it again next week. same movie twice in 2 days is a bit too much for me.

i wonder if the new movie, st 12 will continue with the 'alternate timeline' or will get back to the 'normal one'.

actually yeah; sunday ill probably see it again with a different group of friends at the imax. I'm pretty sure the alternative timeline is the new timeline. Otherwise whats the point of the reboot? You would just undue everything you did in this film.

[gazebee_]

Just came back from the movie and I enjoyed every minute of it! I haven't seen any Star Trek shows before, and a sequel sounds great!

[duntkno]

i also just came back from seeing. great freaking movieeeeeeeeeee. so gooood. cant wait for the sequal.

[Golferjim]

Zzz.... I hope this squeal wont kill the first one ><""

However on a good note im keen to see it haha :D

[SuperJediMedia]

Well Deserved!

JJ Abrams MUST also be involved again!

[Lt-DavidW]

^ I agree.

[Noveed]

i thought the movie was awesome, certainly deserves a sequel.

[Rappy Veteran]

'Star Trek' Director Open To Sequel With William Shatner Or Khan

After last weekend's $76.5 million opening, three phrases keep getting tossed in the direction of "Star Trek" director J.J. Abrams: sequel, Khan, and William Shatner.

On Friday, as the filmmaker hoped to maintain momentum heading into his second weekend, Abrams told MTV News that he's open to all three.

"The fun of this [new alternate 'Trek' reality] is that the destiny of these characters is in their hands ? it's not constrained by the pre-existing films or TV series," the "Lost" mastermind explained. "Believe me, whether it's William Shatner or Khan ... it would be ridiculous to not be open to those ideas."

As those who've seen the film know, Abrams' new "Star Trek" establishes an alternate timeline for the series' key characters ? one that veers off course when the USS Kelvin is attacked in the film's opening scene, killing James T. Kirk's father and causing the future Enterprise captain to be born in space. Other events in the film also similarly impact the young "Trek" characters, resulting in wholly new story lines.

"One of the reasons we wanted to break with the original 'Star Trek' timeline was it felt restrictive," Abrams said of the plot device that could conceivably fuel the venerable series for another five decades. "The idea, now that we are in an independent timeline, allows us to use any of the ingredients from the past ? or come up with brand-new ones ? to make potential stories."

One buzzed-about ingredient is Khan Noonien Singh ? arguably the most memorable villain ever to inhabit the "Trek" series ? whom Kirk banished to a barren world in an old story line. Writer/producers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have stated their hope of bringing Khan into the "Star Trek" sequel ? and Abrams told us that in his universe, the superhuman tyrant may never have been stuck on Ceti Alpha V.

"It'll be fun to hear what Alex and Bob are thinking about Khan," Abrams said of their impending meetings to discuss sequel plotlines. "The fun of this timeline is arguing that different stories, with the same characters, could be equally if not more compelling than what's been told before."

"[Khan and Kirk] exist ? and while their history may not be exactly as people are familiar with, I would argue that a person's character is what it is," Abrams said of the notion that his Khan could be just as evil, even if Kirk never stranded him on Ceti Alpha V. "Certain people are destined to cross paths and come together, and Khan is out there ... even if he doesn't have the same issues."

Another intriguing possibility is that the door is seemingly open once again for a William Shatner appearance, since the writers have said that Chris Pine's Kirk won't die in the same manner as in the original franchise and could live to be older.

"I wouldn't rule out anything," Abrams said of a possible flash-forward that could make up for Shatner's near-miss inclusion in the new film. "The point of creating this independent timeline is to not have the restrictions we had coming into this one. And one of those restrictions was that Kirk was dead."

"But this all assumes that there's another story that's going to be told," Abrams cautioned, saying that there's a lot of work to be done before such ideas can be sorted out. "We're all still coming down from making this movie."

[qdave]

interesting article but i would rather have something original.

[dt]

Yay! Damon Lindelof! :D He has done a fantastic job with Lost so I can't imagine him going wrong with a Star Trek film :yes: .

[DrCheese]

ugh don't bring back Khan, this isn't batman where the main character has a set number of already known villains each new version must go through.

[Budious]

They should leave the successful movies alone, let them stand apart, and praise them as classics. Kahn could make an appearance as a minor character in a bigger story but he shouldn't be the sole focus. I think they should go back to the less successful elements of Star Trek and fine tune them, the Genesis planet, Spock's half brother's telepathy with a god-like alien, or build on elements of the TOS episodes.