'Star Trek' Sequel Already in the Works
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Fandom, Newsstand, Remakes and Sequels
The digital ink on the J.J. Abrams Star Trek reboot isn't even dry yet, but nevermind the furthermore: Variety reports they're already accelerating from impulse power to warp speed on a sequel. The writing duo of Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman will be back, this time with producer Damon Lindelof joining in on writing duties. What was it they said about three cooks spoiling the soup? Anyhow, Lindelof is megaenthusiastic for the project, saying "We're so excited about the first one that we wanted to proceed." Let's hope he doesn't bring the Black Smoke from Lost into the world of Trek.
If the first movie tanks in April (which could happen, Trekkies can be fickle folks), then the skids will be put on this sequel faster than all those ambitious plans that Cloverfield had back in the day. Remember? It was going to be a prequel, a sequel, and a breakfast cereal. What happened to all that jazz? Still, they're aiming to have a sequel in theaters by 2011, so you could see a new Trek franchise film every two years. No word on whether we'll get to see mirror universe versions of Spock or Kirk ... and I've just outed myself as a Trek geek.
Taking into account the fact that we haven't seen the new film yet, what sort of instructions would you give for sequels moving forward?
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-31-2009 @ 1:18PM
jeff said...
Here's my idea for the next one: Spock and Kirk go back to the year 2008 and prevent this one from being made.
Then they build a huge machine that generates original movie ideas and runs on the blood of michael bay, McG and whoever's directing this movie and drop it on Brett Ratner's head.
Reply
3-31-2009 @ 2:13PM
vegimorph said...
It does seem a little early for a sequel but that's the studio bosses for you. Personally I think this Star Trek movie looks pretty good. I'm not a Trekkie but I have watched a lot of TNG episodes. Its a wait and see thing
Reply
3-31-2009 @ 2:16PM
Bill W. said...
I'm curious about the film. It looks very exciting. But I have no ideas on a sequel. I don't know if it will be a hit, but I would like to see it come back if for nothing else than to start a trend of sci-fi films that are NOT so dark and apocalyptic. Star Trek is not known for its action scenes, but if you're going to do space opera on the big screen, big action doesn't hurt. I hope it also has some brains though. Awhile back Cinematical had a story on 2001: A Space Odyssey and some people said they hated it and wanted to see Michael Bay do a remake, which was a pretty funny idea. I think trying to make Star Trek sexy and exciting may be almost as offensive to some of the Trekies, but let's see what they do with it.
Reply
3-31-2009 @ 3:43PM
Jay Seaver said...
"I think trying to make Star Trek sexy and exciting may be almost as offensive to some of the Trekies"
If it is, then those fans are missing what made the show popular in the first place. Before it became a franchise dominated by senior citizens and utopians in the 1980s, "Star Trek" was FUN. Green girls in bikinis! Kirk's shirt ripping! Fight music! To a large extent, this isn't Trek being reinvented, but returning to its roots.
3-31-2009 @ 4:17PM
jackmurphy1969 said...
Sorry to be a smart-ass, but; it can't tank in April. It doesn't open until May.
Reply
4-01-2009 @ 1:53PM
Jan said...
I'd like to see more star trek in the future. I mean post DS9, post voyager. Stop going back in time! I'm sick to death of Kirk and his crew.
Reply
4-04-2009 @ 2:18AM
BLee said...
wait.. cloverfield didnt do well?? I loved that movie..
Reply