J.J. Abrams To Direct New 'Star Trek' Film

Tycoon Guy writes "TrekToday reports that Paramount has asked 'Lost' creator J.J. Abrams to direct a new 'Star Trek' film. The movie will be set at Starfleet Academy and will feature younger versions of James T. Kirk and Spock, chronicling their first meeting at the Academy and their first outer space mission. The movie is set for a 2008 release and will apparently be one of Paramount's biggest projects for the year."

Comments

Kirk and Spock, the steamy years....

[beheaderaswp]

Milk it.... Miiiiilk it.... Miiiiiiiiiiiilk it....

Yeesh, talk about taking a good idea and turning it into a dogmatic commercial eggroll. Egads.

What's next? "Is that a phaser, or are you just happy to see me"? I'll pass.

Re:Kirk and Spock, the steamy years....

[kryten_nl]

... or is my ST timeline completely off?

Who knows, they fucked with it so much.

Re:Kirk and Spock, the steamy years....

[Ucklak]

Because Enterprise sucks?

OK, that's _my_ opinion.

I grew up during the original TOS reruns and I loved it. The shows really sucked, most of them. What was cool was what it represented and the surounding environment. Phasers, transporters, warp speed, travel to other planets, aliens in cool makeup (at the time), hotties in William Ware Theiss outfits, Kirk was ruler of the universe and Mr. Spock was cool. Kirk was so cool that we forgave the Catspaw, Spocks Brain, Spectre of the Gun, Platos Stepchildren (hell- most of the 3rd season), the Abraham Lincoln episode, and the evil twin episode which really wasn't that bad of all the evil twin episodes that exist on television.

We got the movies and we thought that that's it. No more tv episodes then TNG happened.
OK, different, cool, different, not as cool as TOS because no Vulcan. The straight guy Data was alright, Number One (bozo) was annoying but Picard rocked. We forgave Whoopi Goldberg and the tar creature episode because we had the holodeck and some real baddies, the Borg and Q.
TNG wasn't as engaging to me but I wasn't a kid anymore.

Then we got DS9. WTF?!? Same universe, different point of view.
Very well written and a surprise all around. The tribble episode was neat and we got the Ferengi.

Voyager, no one really cared about it, at least people who liked the older series. Only die hards seemed to like it as they would like anything with "Star Trek" slapped on it. Mostly all female, doctor didn't exist in real space and they brought back a vulcan, as a black guy. Nothing wrong with that but it just seemed like they wanted a 'black' alien that wasn't a klingon.

Then we get Enterprise. OK, I'll bite. Pre TOS so they can't really screw up now or else the space time continuum will get messed up and the fans of Voyager will turn rabid and scream that Enterprise ruined Star Trek.
Don't really get anything new because anything new already existed. This time we get a female Vulcan that follows the Voyager steps of hotties in spandex. Hotties look better in William Ware Theiss outfits, not spandex.

Most of the crew is likable except I don't get the doctor character. Why make him an alien when aliens are new?
Enterprise sucks because it isn't bold and doesn't break new ground. All it is is Voyager with different people with limitations of what they can't or can do. It's like all of the tech in Enterprise "doesn't work well or isn't tested yet".
Voyager was TNG with different characters but without the drive.
TNG was TOS with different characters but it continued the "where no man has gone before" dream. Voyager just placed them farther out.

It seems like they're trying to return to the roots which made TOS good which was Kirk but William Shatner is responsible for us liking Kirk, not the writers.

I say let it rest for another 5 years at least and if they're going to do a series, do another starship becaue Enterprise will always be about Kirk, no matter who is in the captains chair.

Most of the movies suck, they even had an evil twin movie.
How is it that in TOS, we can see on the view screen people on a planet surface in detail but in Generations there are annoying reportes with huge cameras mounted on their eyes?

Give it a rest. Fire Berman and Braga and remove them at least 1000 miles from any star trek property, they're only in it for a paycheck.

Re:Kirk and Spock, the steamy years....

[SamSim]

Letting the franchise rest for a decade or two is exactly what is needed. It worked for Doctor Who, it worked for Battlestar Galactica... I have some of my own ideas about the future of Star Trek (two words: Mirror Borg) but I'm sure everybody else does too...

Re:Kirk and Spock, the steamy years....

[SamSim]

I get it, that's a Mirror Universe version of the other guy's response, right?

Sooooo....

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's Harry Potter in space then?

Desperation

[Gryle]

I was going to post a joke about Star Trek: The Beginning of the End, but then I realized that happened a long time ago. Paramount has gone beyond running Star Trek into the ground, at this point they're trying to get blood from a stone. Then again, with Spock's intellect, perhaps we can finally figure out all of the secrets on that darned island.

Re:Desperation

[Disavian]

IMHO, the peak of the series was somewhere in TNG. From there... they beat it into the ground.

Just gimme back my TNG, and I'll be happy. The actors are willing, I'm sure; even LeVar would be willing to step to the other side of the camera (not that directing precludes you from acting in an episode).

Re:Desperation

[kemichail]

I preferred DS9. The sterile atmosphere of the Enterprise with it's limited cast and crew and the expendable ensigns doesn't work as well for me. Also, the richer possibilities introduced with say the Defiant were fun, and the station used as a defensive outpost... That said, I think both Captain Picard and Commander Sisko wereoutstanding actors.

Re:Desperation

[xetovss]

Picard was never captured and tortured by Romulans. In the episode when Picard, Crusher, and Worf infiltrated a suspected Cardassian research base Picard did get captured and subsequently tortured by a Cardassian and asked how many lights there were however.

Re:Desperation

[elrous0]

DS9 was defintely the most well-written, sophisticated series of the bunch. It's not surprising, considering it was the baby of Ronald Moore (who would go on to create what I consider the best damn scifi series ever, the new Battlestar Galactica).

-Eric

Re:Desperation

[AKAImBatman]

The peak was at The Best of Both Worlds, part 1.

Indeed. I look back at BoBW, and I keep thinking, "Now this is how you build up the suspense!"

Can you even imagine seeing a quiet but tense moment in a new series where you see a Borg cube in the distance, and the Captain merely states, "Contact Starfleet... (dramatic pause) We have engaged, The Borg."

It would never happen today. The writers and producers see it as "not enough action". Which is stupid, because action doesn't mean anything if you don't care about the characters in the story. Getting to know each character, and entering a situation fraught with suspense is the best way to get something out of action sequences. Otherwise you might as well watch an hour of skydiver and bungie jumper clips.

Re:Desperation

[farrellj]

It was just a Babylon 5 rip off...read the history!

ttyl
          Farrell

Re:Desperation

[lidocaineus]

Damnit, and I just ran out of mod points! B5 also had some of the most painful, atrocious acting I've ever seen. The only good point about B5 was that it had an overarching plot over the entire series (not too common at the time, though not the first either). Unfortunately, the plot was extremely hackneyed. DS9 built its characters so well that it was amazing to watch... and this coming froms someone who doesn't even LIKE Star Trek.

Re:Desperation

[Jherico]

even if DS9 was a ripoff of B5, that doesn't detract from the fact that DS9 was better executed.

Re:Desperation

[Kippesoep]

It was actually Gul Madred, played by David Warner.

I like this idea

[WCMI92]

I like the idea of reviving the original characters in some way. That was what was really lacking from the later iterations of Star Trek, was the strength of characters. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were the perfect balance of differing personalities, one of the best sets of characters ever in TV or film.

Re:I like this idea

[somersault]

you mean reviving the characters in the same way that the Star Wars prequels did? *shudder*

Re:I like this idea

[hal2814]

Not only were they "the perfect balance of differing personalities," they were also the right number of characters to focus on in a show that is situationally driven instead of character driven. When the focus of the show is some new weekly visit to an alien world, trying to spread focus to 10-15 characters like they did in TNG really didn't work for me. I don't really care what happens to Diana Troy or the Crusher family or even to Worf or Kunta Kinte (or Toby or LaForge or whatever you call him). Sure they need screen time, but it seems like TNG spent entirely too much time delving deeply into too many characters' lives. I really liked that TOS had three main characters and the rest were important but certainly secondary.

Re:I like this idea

[elrous0]

...as if 1 million voices screamed out "Don't do it, George!" and were suddenly silenced by the quest for money.

-Eric

Re:I like this idea

[Lumpy]

but this is going to go bad fast.

next year we will have "startrek kids" and then Startrek babies"

Spock,Kirk and Kaahn ride their hover-tricycles around the neighborhood going where "no 4 year old has gone before"

It will be "rugrats" set in the Star Trek universe.

I can hear sci-fi fans puking all across the country at that thought.

Re:I like this idea

[Hawthorne01]

Dear God, what a bad idea that was. Let's just compare the writing of Jonathan Hales to the other Star Wars co-writer, Lawrence Kasden.

From IMDB.com:
# Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
# The Scorpion King (2002) (story)
# The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones: Tales of Innocence (1999) (V)
# The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones: Spring Break Adventure (1999) (V)
# Young Indiana Jones: Travels with Father (1996) (TV)
# Kazan (1995/I) (TV)
# Baree (1994) (TV)
# Young Indiana Jones and the Hollywood Follies (1994) (TV)
# "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles"
# "Dempsey & Makepeace" (1985) TV Series (writer)
# Loophole (1981)
# The Mirror Crack'd (1980) (screenplay)
# "Dallas" (1978) TV Series (writer) (! -ed)
# "The Guardians" (1971) TV Series (writer)
# "Manhunt" (1969) TV Series (writer)

Lawrence Kasden

# The Risk Pool (2006) (announced) (screenplay)
# Dreamcatcher (2003) (screenplay))
# Mumford (1999) (written by)
# Wyatt Earp (1994) (written by)
# The Bodyguard (1992) (written by)
# Grand Canyon (1991) (written by)
# Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Adaptation (1989) (V)
# The Accidental Tourist (1988) (screenplay)
# Silverado (1985) (written by)
# The Big Chill (1983) (written by)
# Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
# Continental Divide (1981)
# Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
# Body Heat (1981)
# Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

Okay, there's some stinkers on Kasden's resume, but compared to Hale, he's friggin' Will Shakespeare.

I think we've found the difference in quality between the two sets of movies...

Not enough time has passed

[WebHostingGuy]

Not enough time has passed since the last movie. They need a bigger break because they will still have the same people who have been dragging down the movies for a while. Unless the screenplay is truly orginal and very creatively written this is not going to be that good. The problem with the last couple of movies is that rather than create a fantastic movie around a fantastic story being told they are creating a movie to create a movie and using the template of Star Trek to do it. If you think of the very successful movies in the franchise they are the ones in which the writing of the story was original and out of the box.

Re:Not enough time has passed

[Kamel Jockey]

Not enough time has passed since the last movie. They need a bigger break because they will still have the same people who have been dragging down the movies for a while.

Didn't they try this with the Crocodile Dundee franchise?

Starfleet Academy?

[Dr_LHA]

In my mind this could go one of two ways.

1. The Star Trek equivalent of Animal House. Crazy co-eds, the antics of Star Fleet Academy's most crazy frat house

2. Cadets save the world.

I know which one is more likely, and it pains me to say it, I don't want to watch movie #2, but #1 would be awesome. ;)

Seriously, who actually thinks a movie based in Starfleet academy is a good idea? Obviously the unimaginative producers think its an "angle" of Starfleet that hasn't been covered, and an excuse to "sex up" the franchise by having a bunch of 20-somethings in the roles.

I especially cringe at the thought of "young Kirk" and "young Spock". Face it, Muppet Babies was terrible, Star Trek babies will be too.

Re:Starfleet Academy?

[Vinnie_333]

1. The Star Trek equivalent of Animal House. Crazy co-eds, the antics of Star Fleet Academy's most crazy frat house

Sounds more like a series of videos. Star Fleet Academy Girls Gone Wild.

I'd rather have...

[hal2814]

Personally, I'd rather see post-TOS but pre-TNG Star Trek, maroon uniforms and all. Kirk and Spock could be older (which works out for the actors who are older themselves now) and the movie could be set closer to the most popular (in terms of movie revenue) stint in Star Trek history. I've still got a bad taste in my mouth from Trek prequels thanks to First Contact and Enterprise.

Re:I'd rather have...

[aurum42]

Oh please, "First Contact" was one of the better films in the Trek franchise, I'd rate it 3rd overall. If there was a movie that deserves to be panned, it was the last one. "Insurrection"? The title was something along those lines. Truly awful, almost as wretched as the one in which Kirk sets off to find "Eden" and "God".

Re:I'd rather have...

[hal2814]

I wouldn't rank it 3rd. It was a decent movie but I thought the early earth characters and setting was by far the weakest part of the movie. As much as I dislike the Borg, I thought the Enterprise vs. Borg situation really saved the movie. Just for kicks, here's my rankings:

1. Wrath of Kahn
2. Voyage Home
3. Undiscovered Country
4. Generations
5. Search for Spock
6. First Contact
7. Motion Picture
8. Nemesis
9. Final Frontier
10. Insurrection

Re:I'd rather have...

[voice_of_all_reason]

Story could've been better, but Patrick Stewart's performance was incredible. And whoever played Lily wasn't half-bad either.

Re:I'd rather have...

[sehryan]

I wouldn't put Search for Spock or Generations above First Contact.

First of all, you just can't have Doc Brown as a Klingon. I know Search came before Back to the Future, but it just doesn't work after seeing both.

Second, Generations was just...rough. I admit it has been a while, but I remember being fairly dissatisfied with it. Shatner was forced obviously forced into the plot, and it didn't work. I also remember being unimpressed with the "crash landing" scene.

And I would also move Final Frontier down to the end. The others might be crap, but come on. Of all of the movies, Final Frontier was the least plausible, as it were. And to top it off, you could tell no one making the movie cared.

Re:I'd rather have...

[hal2814]

"not adjusted for inflation:"

Here'a a list adjusted for inflation (in 2005 dollars):

1. Wrath of Kahn $158M
2. Voyage Home $186M
3. Undiscovered Country $104M
4. Generations $95M
5. Search for Spock $140M
6. First Contact $111M
7. Motion Picture $232M
8. Nemesis $45M
9. Final Frontier $81M
10. Insurrection $81M

Old Crew: $133M per movie (not counting TMP since that's kind of unfair)
New Crew: Not a single movie that hit's the old crew's average though First Contact only missed the average by $22M. FC did commendably beat out the Undiscovered Country.

Now that's not even adjusting for ticket prices that have outpaced inflation so the older movies will probably have even more of an edge is you adjust for that too. I just used an inflation calculator.

Sounds like a winner.

[Pedrito]

Really, I don't think they could do any better than J.J. Abrams for a movie like this. The guy writes really smart, compelling stuff (Regarding Henry is one of my all-time favorites) and he's an impressive director, at least from the TV stuff I've seen him do. I'm actually kind of hoping this will spawn a new series. Anyone else get the feeling that maybe they're testing the waters? I wouldn't mind seeing a series created by J.J. Abrams. He's done well in the past, particularly with Lost and Alias.

Yousa sayin wesa gonna die?

[TK2216UKG]

Past experience would suggest that we should be wary of franchise prequels where principal characters have sidekicks with funny ears.

The big scene:

[Vengeance]

Kirk, while waterskiing, jumps over a shark pen.

Bones! Tell ME about the NEW _Star_ _Trek__ movie!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bones: The horse... Its DEAD Jim!

Spock: I concur with the doctor. There is a 97% probability that this movie will suck.

Scotty: If ah tol' ya one I tol' ya a shoushand times, I'm not a miracle worker. Jus' let 'er rest in peace!

Option 3 - Star Trek ala Harry Potter

[Picass0]

The story of a tallented student (Potter/Kirk) who breaks all the school rules to save his friend and is rewarded for his creative thinking.

Re:They won't learn

[Ubergrendle]

Hey, come on, the last time they attempted a prequel series (Enterprise) things worked out really, really well!

Hello? Anyone there?

(insert crickets chirping.wav here)

ugh

[Blob Pet]

I don't have a problem with a new trek movie... I have a problem with Berman not being fired, and is it so hard to bring back Nicholas Meyer?

As a former Trekkie, PLEASE JUST LET IT DIE!!

[elrous0]

For God's sake, let it rest for a while. Generate some fresh ideas. In this age of real war, and more gritty realistic fare like Battlestar Galactica and Firefly, Star Trek has become hokey and stale. Let it rest until its time comes around again.

-Eric

Re:As a former Trekkie, PLEASE JUST LET IT DIE!!

[chrysrobyn]

For God's sake, let it rest for a while. Generate some fresh ideas. In this age of real war, and more gritty realistic fare like Battlestar Galactica and Firefly, Star Trek has become hokey and stale. Let it rest until its time comes around again.

Battlestar Galactica. An excellent point of comparison. Graphics aren't fantastic, but they're good. What SFX shots are shown seem to appear to have some realism. Writing is interesting, although certain episodes stick out as forced. Certain SciFi appeal -- which limits the audience. While it's setting records fro the SciFi channel, it's not being bought out by bigger networks.

Firefly. My personal favorite of recent fare. The SFX are a notch below Battlestar Galactica, but the writing makes up for it. There are some inconsistencies which as of yet stand to be reasoned away (like why Zoe really respects Mal). Certain SciFi appeal, although the movie performed like "a below average genre picture" if I recall correctly. The show couldn't sustain the audience to pay the production costs.

You've chosen to compare a hypothetical Star Trek prequel to modern underperforming SciFi. Nemesis, arguably the worst Star Trek movie, required back story and had trouble standing on its own. The appeal to the mass market was zilch, and the appeal to those who watched ST:TNG when it was first run was mediocre, because it seemed to imply that we'd never stopped watching reruns on TNT/Spike. I believe that movies can be an escape from realism. I think that's partially why Star Wars did so well in the face of terrible acting, groundbreaking but horrible SFX and wooden writing -- it was during the cold war. There was an epic story.

How about a Star Trek that stands on its own? A few references here and there for the fans, but largely something that doesn't require a huge back story? Don't make me need to know why it's significant Riker and Troi are marrying (and don't make me remove myself from the story for a reality check, "What happend to Troi and Warf?"). There's no problem with a Kahn tossed in -- a minor character from a single episode to act as a nod to the fanatics -- as long as the movie briefly summarizes in all the right places the gist of the conflict.

Re:As a former Trekkie, PLEASE JUST LET IT DIE!!

[geobeck]

...more...realistic fare like Battlestar Galactica...

You used "realistic" and "Battlestar Galactica" in the same sentence... and weren't being ironic?

Okay, Firefly I can almost see; interplanetary rather than interstellar, and in the recent movie version (Serenity) they actually had a silent space encounter, but BG is only as realistic as the next space opera.

As for the movie, go Animal House version! Owen Wilson as Kirk, Vince Vaughn as Spock, Ben Stiller as Bones, Amanda Bynes as Nurse Chapell, and throw in Craig T. Nelson as Dean Wormer and Jim Carrey as Kahn (because a consistent timeline hasn't seemed to matter since Enterprise), and you've got a movie that might make back its production cost after a few years of DVD downloading--I mean, sales.

Re:As a former Trekkie, PLEASE JUST LET IT DIE!!

[rtb61]

Well that is easy to resolve, make use of the star trek universe without the fedration and star fleet i.e. the rise of the borg, from the first out of control nano probes to the final enslavement of their parental race plus a bunch of other aliens along the way, very dark indeed.

Re:As a former Trekkie, PLEASE JUST LET IT DIE!!

[elrous0]

There are a number of things that you could do in the Trek universe to make it darker, more honest, more realistic, etc. The problem is that Trek comes with so much baggage that this would be all-but-impossible. Paramount would balk and fans would howl.

It was all they could do just to get DS9 made, much less something even FURTHER away from the "Goody-two-shoes, happy-go-lucky-perfect-communist-state, Federation-always-right, let's-make-a-self-righteous-speech-now" mentality of traditional Trek.

There was a line in DS9, I can't remember it exactly, but it pretty much summed up everything that's wrong with Trek, and why it's grown so tired. Some Cardassian so other alien is talking to Quark and says something along the lines of "That's the Federation for you", to which Quark replies "I know. Doesn't it just make you sick?"

-Eric

Sounds fine to me

[Udo Schmitz]

Hm, I'm one of those who grew up with the TOS reruns on german TV and watched every singele episode of Next Generation Deep Space Nine, and one of those to whom Star Trek is dead since ... I don't know 4th or 5th episode of Voyager? But this still sounds like a really nice idea to me. Just make sure that noone who particpated in the last movie and/or Enterprise is involved.

It's an odd number...

[Odiumjunkie]

there is no hope

Old Star Trek Tech vs. New Gagdetry

[digitaldc]

So what I want to know is, are the controls and panels going to look like they are made from Lego sets?
Or will it be super sophisticated and electronically dazzling, or will it look like it does in the TV series era, cheap sets with cardboard controls and hand-painted view screens?

Fascinating.

what about a DS9 movie?

[Squeezer]

I loved Deep Spance 9 because unlike TOS and TNG where it was a space ship flying around causing trouble, with DS9 the trouble came to the station. It was neat to have something different, and I really liked that.

Re:what about a DS9 movie?

[IronTek]

It will be hard to bring Sisko back, but there is not really a need for that. His role diminished as the series went on. I'd say let Avery Brooks direct, he did some good episodes.

Seriously? You think so?

Jake: (turns a corner in a hallway sees his father standing in front of him) "Dad! What? How?"
Sisco: "The profits, Jake...my path with them has brought me back here to you because..." (and thus the movie/adventure begins)

...or maybe I'm just bored at work

Star Trek meets Revenge of the Nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

Leaked preliminary script:

Cadet Kirk: Cadet Scott, how long until you tap into the visual sensors in the women's shower?
Cadet Scott: It'll be at least an hour. I can nay change the laws of physics.
Cadet Kirk: That hot freshman, Janice Rand is due in the showers in 5 minutes.
Cadet Scott: Janice Rand!!! I'll have it done with 2 seconds to spare or I'm not a half-sloshed stereotype.
Cadet Kirk: Good man! Do it and you can have any job you want when I'm captain of the fleet flagship.
Cadet Spock: Normally I would point out that the risks do not justify these actions... but that Janice Rand would bring on Ponn Farr in an Andorian. Perhaps you should try cross circuiting to B, Cadet Scott.
Cadet McCoy: Can you tie in my medical tricorder so I have a record for future... umm, anatomy study?
Cadet Scott: Do it yourself, pervert.
Cadet McCoy: I'm a medical student not a pornographer!!!
Cadet Scott: All right, all right.

You know ....

[gstoddart]

The Star Trek Universe has become so damned muddled over the last years, I'm not even sure it would be canonical for Kirk and Spock to have been at the academy together. (Then again, I've never been clear if some of the stuff in Enterprise was strictly canonical either.)

Spock had served with Christopher Pike before Kirk, and I don't recall much in the way of explaination of how they met each other. Given the relative life-spans of Vulcans and Humans, I had assumed Spock had served in Star Fleet for quite a while.

Add this in with it being a prequel of a bunch of well known characters, I have fears this will turn into a Star-Trek Troopers meets Wesley Crusher Episode. They'll either have some fantastic adventure thrown in the middle, or it won't have any action and it'll be about Kirk reprogramming the Kobiashi Maru (or, well get an alternate explaination for it as opposed to it being a planned exam).

But the actors will either have to completely re-interpret the characters, and piss people off -- or they'll act as charicatures, and really piss people off.

Nothing good can come of this; and I'm not sure I'd watch this. It scares me. :-P

Re:You know ....

[UnanimousCoward]

Wow, I was too embarrassed to bring up the Pike thing first, but now that you've spilt the beans:

My first reaction was to ask Abrams whether he knew who Christopher Pike was. My second reaction was that the Trek franchise thinks that the hardcore fans have either died off already or won't make a big stink (because they've become so disillusioned about the whole franchise) about the fact that Tiberius and Spock could in no way have overlapped at the Academy.

What a crock this movie will be--built on a premise inconsistent with the origins. But since when did that stop anyone...

Alternate Story

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was young I played the RPG. They had an interesting supplement that involved the secret agent side of star trek. I think this would be a better angle maybe not for a movie but for a series (say 20 years from now). It would have a darker angle from the ususal idealic society that Star Trek has created. They did a few episodes on espionage in a few of the different series but it would be a refreshing change from the starship/spacedock scenery.

I don't know about you...

[matt328]

but I could watch probably about 100 more TNG movies. It doesn't get any better than Riker shoving a photon torpedo right through those klingon bitch's windshield, or Data exclaiming 'oh shit!' when he realized the ship would be in for a rough landing.

Maybe I'm just too much of a TNG fan, but I've never seen an episode I haven't liked, nor changed the channel because I've already seen this one. IMO TNG was the pinnacle of Roddenberry's works, to go back and make a kind of spinoff/prequel of the original just isn't going to appeal to fans (and lets face it, who the hell else is going to go see it?)

I've got the title

[goombah99]

Trek and Trekker: When Kirk met Spock.

Re:I've got the title

[netsharc]

Brokeback Academy? Starfleet Mountain?

Re:I've got the title

[tillerman35]

How about:

1. Dude, Where's my Starship?
2. JT and Spock go to White Castle IV in the Delta Quadrant
3. Starfleet Police Academy MMDCCCXIII
4. Extraterrestrial House
5. Phillips Insists You Watch This Long Commercial From Our Sponsors Without Skipping To The Part Where You Get To See The Title Of This Movie Don't Touch That Remote It Won't Work Anyway Stay Seated Do Not Go Get A Soda Or Unit Will Pause Playback Until Your Uniq Embedded RFID-Chip and Infrared Signatures Are Detected By Sensors Trek - The DCMA Mandatory Voyage

What was it Dax said?

[Runehawk]

Forgive me for trying to quote from memory, but... in the DS9 Tribbles episode... Sisko: No, in the day, command wore gold (uniforms), engineers wore red... Dax: And women wore less. I'd pay the price of admission if Paramount *doesn't* screw with the uniforms!

*tap* "Is this thing on?"

[UberOogie]

"You, there. Get off the corpse. We've warned you about this already."

Nemesis killed it for good

[Wylfing]

I think people are still turned off because of Nemesis. It did have some quality stuff regarding Data and humanity in there, but they did some things that made it suck hard:

• The "enemy" was totally new and hastily introduced.
• The "enemy" was a frikkin clone of Picard.
• The "enemy" has a superweapon aimed at Earth.
• They killed Data.

The first three add up to a ridiculously bad story, and the last is more or less a betrayal. I mean, think about it: they cap off a rotten story not worthy of a mediocre television episode by killing Data. This is a problem in a lot of ways. For one, there is a lot of "future history" that says Data lives a long, long time -- longer than any of the other characters by far. Completely ignoring previous canon, to Star Trek fans, feels like...well, a betrayal. That's why they hated Enterprise and its freewheeling attitude toward canon. If you're going to do Star Trek, you really have to stick to the existing facts.

The other problem with killing Data is that, because he was supposed to be the longest-lived of all the main TNG characters, his death feels like all their stories are done. Put another way, as long as they aren't shown meeting their ends, they continue to be alive in the fans' minds. Having them die makes fans' interest in the entire thing drop off. It makes it hard to work up interest in any Star Trek.

Brokeback Star Fleet Academy

[Ranger]

It's my understanding it's going to be based on Star Trek The Lost Gay Episode.

Jim Abrahams and David Zucker?

[Hoi Polloi]

When I first glanced at the article I thought it said "Abrahams", as in Jim Abrahams and David Zucker of "Airplane!" fame. I think they should be the ones doing this movie and rename it "Starship!".

Re:Jim Abrahams and David Zucker?

[geobeck]

Spock: I'm very serious, Captain. And don't call my Shirley.

Bones: It's just like that time over Camp Khittomer!
Kirk: I'll... never be over Camp Khittomer.

Announcer: The white zone is for immediate shuttle embarking and disembarking only. There is no starship berthing in the white zone...

Die in a Fire Rick Berman

[gadlaw]

If it takes a village to raise a child then it only takes one village idiot (Berman) to screw that child up. Those rat bastards who took Roddenberry's ideas and totally screwed them up can all die in a fire. They can take their own ideas about how to do characters and stories to make them 'edgier' 'darker' or whatever and write their own characters and their own stories and quit raping the memory of Star Trek. That's assuming they have any talent of their own which I doubt other than to be able to fasten themselves like leeches onto somebody else's ideas and somebody else's science fiction/fantasy universe. Pompous idiots without an ounce of creativity sucking at the teat of dead authors and dead creators and who try to bask in the reflected light of their betters. So unless Gene Roddenberry rises from the dead and decides to do something with Star Trek (which does not include changing what's already in the can - do you hear me George (die in a fire) Lucas?) then leave it alone. This means you Rick Berman/Paramount. The market will of course decide as it has with most remakes and recycled ideas and put them in the garbage disposal as they should. Personally you idea recycling bastards can take your Starsky and Hutch remake, your Dukes of Hazzard remake, your Star Trek 'remake',your upcoming Dallas remake and any movie starring or featuring Owen Wilson/Johnny Jackass whatever his last name is and shove them up the bodily orifice they came from. I won't buy one movie ticket, one dvd, I won't even watch a preview on Apple or even bittorrent a copy of your festering efforts. And so metaphorically speaking of course, may you all die in fires. (saw that term used on Fark (Duke sucks)and thought it was funny) Okay, rant over, I feel better now. - Please nobody actually die in a fire.

I'd trade it all for Serenity II / Firefly seasons

[jpellino]

Please. Pretty please? Characters that have somewhere to go - rather than simply fulfilling our expectations of personalities long since drained of any originality. We know exactly how TOS characters will act, and we know that 15, 30, 45, 60 and 75 minutes into this film there'll be an excruciatingly obvious bone mercilessly tossed to us in the form of a promordial "Dammit Jim", "Highly illogical", "Must... not... give... in... to...", or "She kenna' take much more, Cap'n!" that'll just tickle those clever writers. Every character in Serenity did something previously unseen but that moved their character forward and thus the story too.

I was thinking bout this...

[UnixRevolution]

Just the other day. kinda like the "Young Indiana Jones" tv series, except maybe it'll be good. I know it sounds like they're beating a dead horse...

but as long as Berman isn't involved i'm intrigued.

At least Paramount hasn't given up Star Trek for dead yet.

Re:Ok, on one condition.

[Bohnanza]

Most likely, Shatner and Nimoy will star. With lots of makeup and computer editing, they can pass for 20-year-olds. I'm almost sure of it.

Re:Yeoman?

[digitalgiblet]

"I thought Rand was enlisted--she wouldn't be at the academy"

NEEEEERRRRRRRDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!

Re:Actually option 3 is more Kirk like..

[Ex-MislTech]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

R.C. ripoff

[ichigo 2.0]

Don't forget 'Two Kirks, A Khan & A Pizza Place'.

Eh.

[StarKruzr]

I mostly agree with you except regarding Enterprise, which really started to approach TNG in quality toward the end. I'm not sure why you couldn't call it Star Trek.

That said, this is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE idea. Who gives a shit about Kirk and Spock's academy years?

Give us the adventures of the Enterprise-B or -C. Give us a COMPLETELY NEW STORY - something that can stand on its own as Star Trek. How about a story about the frontier - that's only been briefly explored with the Maquis. Something going on with civilians at the edge - or beyond - recognized Federation space.

Something NEW, for God's sake. PLEASE. This movie as they explain it to us is going to be DeGrassi Junior High in space.

Here's the Movie Poster

[vaylen]

Paramount should really consider putting this idea direct to video!

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b177/troyzilla/w henkirkmetspock.jpg

Those who don't learn from history..now write Trek

[NetSettler]

I have a problem with Berman not being fired

Hear, hear!

I was going to say something similar, that is, that the only real way out is to pull a Dallas.

Star Trek's big contribution to the world is not about space stuff, it's about humanity:

It's not just the little morality plays of the first series. When they went to the big screen, they made the huge mistake of assuming we just all wanted to see a rehash of the same old faces, without the substance. The result was a seriously bad movie, unquestionably the worst of the Star Trek movies and arguably bad by many standards. Then they followed with one of the best movies of all time, not just best of Star Trek, best of any movie. It's in my all-time top-10.

Wrath of Kahn is not only an outstandingly well put together movie, but it broke ground on movies in a new way that, to my knowledge, had not been seriously done before, or not that effectively. Instead of treating the aging of a character as a weakness (as in Bond or Superman movies where they eventually replace the actor but always behave as if he does not age), they turned it to a strength and taught us about aging. They let the character's wisdom grow and they presented not just seasoned actors but characters befitting those seasoned actors.

To do it in reverse, is to return to the Bond/Superman fallacy--that what we want is more of the people. Sure we do, if we could. But their time has largely come and gone and we cannot go back. That was the message of the Star Trek movies. Life moves on, and you live with it.

To try to restart those characters is to ask for too much. It is to take no risks. Gene took a risk with Next Generation in going to a new crew, and showed the formula could survive the transition. But those entrusted with Gene's legacy didn't stick to formula in Enterprise, and now the studio has learned nothing and wants to simply return to clinging to straws rather than analyze the mistakes.

It's not inconceivable that a trip to Star Fleet academy could make an excellent series, but it's handicapped by trying to lock into Kirk and Spock. Get new characters.

What really killed Enterprise was a lack of purpose. I hope they reanalyze the purpose, or the "motive" as so many actors would say... "What's my motive?" The studio's motive seemed to be money and greed and milking a thought-naive audience, and the not-so-naive audience called them on it.

Star Trek took risks, but could reinvent itself weekly. Another thing Enterprise blew was that the new framework was so constraining (the long-arc time-travel story) that when it didn't work, there was no easy out. Let a thousand flowers bloom. Solicit stories from the community. Take some chances.

An academy might be about the unwritten future, except that we've already read the future. We know who will live and who will die unless there are new characters. That eliminates suspense. Enterprise also missed a huge chance to be funny. It presented a world before everything technological was debugged, and where the storylines might be as much about technical failure as success. But then it never used that. Will this new series really use its campus to its capability? It won't if it ties its hands too much with constraints of other series... Let it go free.

Why not let George Lucas direct

[Jerim]

If he can screw up Star Wars, think of what he could do with Star Trek.

Seriously, what is this need to create a huge backstory for these characters, with them all knowing each other? I preffer for these three individuals, Kirk, Spock and McCoy, to be three seperate individuals who led very different and seperate lives before they joined up on the Enterprise.

Maybe even have Kirk have a long history of hating the Vulcans for some reason. (Rascist perhaps.) That would lend more dramatic power to the Kirk/Spock bond many years later.

Have McCoy traveling around the universe with his parents who were entertainers. Live a life two rungs from the bottom of the social ladder. So he decides to become a doctor because everyone admires doctors. Then he turns his back on his parents, who he is ashamed of. Even have the love of his life meet his parents and take their side. She insists that McCoy should love his parents which he can not. So she lives him. At some heartbreak on top of heartbreak. (Sort of puts into perspective his "grouchiness" on the Enterprise.)

Have Spock be anything but the controlled, devout Vulcan on the Enterprise. Maybe he was a wild teen, caught up in drugs and killing people, until he one day woke up to find himself surrounded by the misery of life. He embraced the Vulcan traditions because they gave him stability in life to rise above. Maybe even add in some father-son conflict which we know existed thanks to ST:TNG.

Why in the hell do you dump these three characters at starfleet, and basically try to recreate the same show just with a different setting? Do something new and innovative. Having Kirk and Spock being friends at the academy makes no sense. It dilutes the history that they will have in the future.