Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Star Trek XI - What We Know

Posted by Zonk on Thu Oct 05, 2006 05:05 PM
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.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Matt Damon as Kirk in Star Trek XI? 594 comments
GiggidyGiggidy writes "Our friends at IMDB.com are reporting that Matt Damon has been cast to play a young James T. Kirk in the new Star Trek Movie directed by J.J. Abrams. Is this the end of the Star Trek series we fans know and love, or the beginning of something bigger and better for the series?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Harsh (Score:5, Funny)

    by frosty_tsm (933163) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:09PM (#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, @05:10PM (#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, @05:14PM (#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?

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          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) * <seebert@aracnet.com> on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:16PM (#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.
    • 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, @05:10PM (#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, @05:13PM (#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 avalys (221114) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:13PM (#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, @05:35PM (#16329095) Homepage 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 camperdave (969942) on Thursday October 05 2006, @06:33PM (#16329903) Journal
        Q could wipe out the entire Enterprise timeline. Then we could all feel good about ignoring it
      • by memfrob (157990) on Thursday October 05 2006, @08:49PM (#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.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          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 Faizdog (243703) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:17PM (#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.
    • 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
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        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
  • Everyone? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by exley (221867) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:17PM (#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, @05:31PM (#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.

      • 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

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:18PM (#16328869)
    Cause odd/even principle will show that this movie will be terrible anyway so lets just get it over with.
  • CBS has kicked Rick Berman off the Trek bandwagon

    Someone at CBS actually has a brain?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:22PM (#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, @05:27PM (#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, @05:28PM (#16329001)
    ...and as far as I'm concerned, if you kill Data you have to go.
  • by B11 (894359) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:32PM (#16329053)
    'Nsync cameos as red shirts?
  • by rkcallaghan (858110) on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:42PM (#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, @05:45PM (#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)

      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 HTH NE1 (675604) on Thursday October 05 2006, @06:02PM (#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, @06:16PM (#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@@@gmail...com> on Thursday October 05 2006, @06:29PM (#16329865)
    *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, @06:36PM (#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, @06:40PM (#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)

        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.
  • Three Words (Score:5, Interesting)

    by flinxmeister (601654) on Thursday October 05 2006, @07:12PM (#16330357) Homepage
    Captain
    Wesley
    Crusher
  • by petrus4 (213815) on Thursday October 05 2006, @08:10PM (#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, @08:25PM (#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.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      I could live with it if you said 3-4, but 3-5? The fifth last movie is The Undiscovered Country, usually considered the second best move (after The Wrath of Khan). Though it had one major error (the equipment for cataloging gasious anomalies was on Excelsior, not on the Enterprise) it was still a great movie with a wonderful storyline.
      • Non-nerds usually consider The Voyage Home the best one (Non-Nerd: Is that the one with the whales in it??). But I agree, The Undiscovered Country was great. Kirk rules, Picard drools!

        • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 05 2006, @05:56PM (#16329393)
          # Has a bigger spaceship, which can separate into two spaceships.
          # Quotes Shakespeare all the time. Hell, even the ability to speak without pausing every two to three seconds puts him above Kirk
          # Not only the president of the Enterprise, but also a client.
          # Was turned into a robot. Robots are cool.
          # Can say "Make it so" in 43 different inflections in 6 different languages.
          # Isn't a walking sexual harassment suit. Hiring Picard instead of a skirt-chaser like Kirk is estimated to have saved the Federation 23 billion credits worth of legal fees and hush money paid to the mothers of illegitimate children spread out across hundreds of star systems.
          # Has an annoying techno song compsed totally of his lines. Then someone took the time to make a music video by finding the scenes the lines were from, and editing them to fit the song. Crazy.
          # Wasn't made an admiral. Kirk told him not to let starfleet promote him, and he didn't. Therfore Picard is better.
          # Picard would never, ever tell his fans to GET A LIFE!
          # Kirk was a leader of followers. That's the only reason he (almost) got away with it.
          # Picard's worst episodes were originally written for Kirk.
          # Picard discovers new life, new civilizations and strange new worlds, not discarded movie sets from 1950s period dramas.
          # Picard can act out entire Shakespearean plays, not merely remember 5 or 6 lines.
          # Picard can get his ship to orbit a planet in both directions.
          # Picard would never ever date a shape-shifter who had previously morphed into a little girl.
          # Picard doesn't need to wear glasses.
          # Picard has so much backbone Starfleet designers had to cut out a section of his command chair for it all to fit in.
          # Picard didn't have to reprogram a computer to give him better grades in order to graduate from Starfleet Academy.
          # Picard has to contend with crap Starfleet Admirals. If he stole a starship only to have it get destroyed, he'd get vaporized, not given captaincy of a new one like in the easy old days.
          # Picard commands his ship using the big head.
          # Picard has a ship whose engines can take it.
          # Three words: seven whole seasons.
          # Picard never uses Grecian 2000.
          # Picard has to contend with the "Prime Directive", a ruling imposed on him by Starfleet after they saw what a complete shambles resulted when they let Kirk meet new alien races.
          # The only way Picard would allow Tribbles on his ship would be as hors d'oeuvres.
          # Picard never met Joan Collins.
          # Picard's bridge doesn't sound like an aviary.
          # Picard participates in the odd archaeological dig. Kirk would make a suitable subject for one.
          # One question: to which Captain would you entrust the safety of your daughter?
          # Picard is far too cool to beam down to a planet, strip to his waist and wrestle with some guy in a rubber lizard suit. He lets his First Officer do all that for him.
          # Picard never shot his best friend's body into space in a photon torpedo.
          # Kirk probably thinks a concerto is a kind of ice cream dessert.
          # Picard doesn't need hair, real or not.
          # Picard's crew are too sophisticated to be taken over by a bunch of women in gogo boots and have the most intelligent person aboard controlled by a box that has less buttons than a Super Nintendo joypad.
            • Just uh, btw, Picard = Patrick Stewart = Prof. X. Ian McKellan, who played Magneto, was (afaik) never in any star trek production.

              # Picard's adventures spun off three new series, each longer than Kirk's run. Kirk only inspired a one-seasoned cartoon, and six movies.
              # Kirk's First Officer played some form of Vulcan harp, an instrument that makes the trombone look like just about the most macho thing this side of Kirk's toupee.
              # How many innocent yellow-shirted security officers have been killed by crazed al
      • Re:What's known? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Ucklak (755284) on Thursday October 05 2006, @06:15PM (#16329639)
        Actually, they all pretty much suck.
        ST:TWOK(2) is good entertainment.
        ST:TUC(6) is decent entertainment on par with ST:TSFS(3) and ST:TVH(4).

        What I mean by "they all suck" is that they don't hold up well today. Watching them is like watching Logans Run, severely dated and off.

        The only one that stands out as a decent timeless piece of science fiction is ST:TMP(1).
        ST:TMP holds up as well today as it did then; slow, kind of boring, pretty to look at and listen to.
        It is not nearly as dated as the rest of them and has a better vision of technology in the future.

        One of the worst offenders of displaying future tech was ST:G(7). That movie is as dated as any Twilight Zone/Night Gallery episode that dealt with future technology.
        Why the hell do camera crews have huge cameras on their heads when a starship can view, while in orbit, people on a planet at a comfortable distance?

        The worst one was ST:TFF(5) followed by ST:N(10),ST:G(7),ST:I(9) as far as being unwatchable.
        The only watchable Next Gen crew movie was ST:FC(8).

        Alien holds up extremely well today. The only dated piece is the `mother` computer room but maybe by then, Linux will really have a foothold and command line interfaces will be commonplace.
        Planet of the Apes (1968) is another timeless piece of Sci Fi.
        Star Trek:The Motion Picture is probably the best Star Trek movie in terms of what Star Trek is about.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            She's probably still in denial over Nemesis. It's the first Star Trek film I've ever considered walking out of the cinema in the middle of; if I hadn't been there with friends I would have done.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              Really? I'm curious, what didn't you like about it?

              I actually liked it a lot more than IX - Insurrection and V - The Final Frontier.

        • Yeah, Passion of the Christ only made about $600 million.

          I don't think The Passion of Kahless would bring in the Christian movie-going crowd.
    • I think Enterprise vs Death Star was settled long ago. Just for the record:

      The original Death Star did not have any kind of energy shield. I've also never seen the Death Star go faster than light, although I presume it must, in order to travel from planet to planet -- regardless, anything faster than light in Star Wars must enter hyperspace to do so, which is difficult, takes a lot of calculations and preparation.

      The Enterprise can go Warp 8 easily, and actually be maneuverable at that speed. If Luke can