star trek pushed to may 2009

shinzon

source www.trekmovie.com

Dramatically underscoring the need for movie-side execs to review slates following the long writers strike, Paramount on Wednesday bounced six films to new dates and moved two unslotted films to next year’s calendar.

Other distributors were scrambling to complete similar reviews of their upcoming productions to determine what can or can’t be delivered on scheduled dates. In some cases, films will move because of talent issues, but many film projects have been frozen in time when script rewrites weren’t completed before the 100-day scribe walkout.

“Star Trek” arguably was the biggest film moved, with the intended Christmas Day release now set for the first prime date in the following summer boxoffice season: May 8, 2009. But “Trek” appears something of an exception in the mix of itinerant pics, with its shift unrelated to script or cast considerations.

” ‘Star Trek’ is moving to summer because its has so much boxoffice potential,” Par spokesman Michael Vollman said. “It does not need any script tweaks. They’re two-thirds of the way through shooting, and we would have delivered a great movie at Christmas.”


well that blows

shin

Goodshape

Donkeys for quarters.

Kiith

****bags :mad:

User45701

**** you hollywood.

i mean **** you. **** anyway. **** **** **** **** **** ****.

Can anyone explain this to me? the "trekie" demographic does not care what ****ing month it is and non trek fans probbley wont be watching this. christmass or MAY? whats so big about may? do they honnestly thing there would be a difference in the views?

Maybe they do but i ****ing guarantee you all that if they are 2/3rds of the way filiming and its ****ing FEB 08 and they want to wait 15 months? they think it will take that long to film? no it wont.

What will happen?

*LEAKED* It will get leaked and then people will download the nice DVD Quality version and they will get less viewers, then they will be convinced that star trek is a franchise that is not worthy of investment and due to their own ****ing stupidity they might not make another one.

If this gets leaked anytime between christmass08-release date i will download it. Ill still go see it in the cinema so they can still have my money.

Goodshape

User45701 wrote: »

Can anyone explain this to me?

1. There was a writers strike, which means they're a bit short on films for the Summer '09 season. Star Trek (and others) moved to fill the gap.

2. They're going for a wider demographic with this one.

Full_Circle

Well bugger it all to hell. Havent we had to wait long enough on another Trek movie??

I guess the one upshot of this is that it will give them plenty of time to work on post production and effects shots, so nothing should look shoddy or rushed Yep, theres that silver lining I was looking for!

Johnny Storm

Goodshape wrote: »

2. They're going for a wider demographic with this one.

That's what worries me. :cool:

tj-music.com

Johnny Storm wrote: »

That's what worries me. :cool:

Me, too! I found they chose the wrong director for Star Trek X and he hadn't a clue about Star Trek and the film suffered because of it.

Star Trek is for fans, always has been - shouldn't be changed now.

norrie rugger

tj-music.com wrote: »

Me, too! I found they chose the wrong director for Star Trek X and he hadn't a clue about Star Trek and the film suffered because of it.

Star Trek is for fans, always has been - shouldn't be changed now.

Why not?
it has not worked for 10 years

User45701

I would disagree on that one. i mean this is what was out in the last 10 years.

DS9 Seasons 6 & 7
VOY Seasons 4,5,6 & 7
ENT Seasons 1,2,3,4 & 5

And Insurrection and Nemessis.

Now the seasons of trek a listed where good i thought. as for the movies...

i try not to re-watch insurrection because it has very limited rewatchabality. Ive seen it 3 times. Its alright. Its not bad its just like a mediocure filler episode, not worthy of a movie and not even worthy of a 2 parter on TV. Would have made a nice 45 min filler ep.

Nesessis. I dont know allot of it was interesting but i was thought i would get more out of it. Still a decnt movie because it explored more of the romulan story and in particular i like that it is based post dominion war and post return of voyager. More like it was setting things up for a new future perhaps better romulan relations?

TVDX

I heard the Wolverine movie and Da Vinci 2 are set to be out around that time.
It brought a tear to my eye when I went to Nemesis the day after it first hit cinemas here and it was bumped to the second screen which was very small.
They had put the title "Star Trak" on the red led display above the door.

Right beside, in the massive first screen LOTR was full to the brim and the cues were winding outside all the way down the road.
The movie had been out for months at this stage.
That was around the time I started to become aware how trek was no longer being embraced by the general public.

norrie rugger

User45701 wrote: »

I would disagree on that one. i mean this is what was out in the last 10 years.

DS9 Seasons 6 & 7
VOY Seasons 4,5,6 & 7
ENT Seasons 1,2,3,4 & 5

And Insurrection and Nemessis.

Now the seasons of trek a listed where good i thought. as for the movies...

i try not to re-watch insurrection because it has very limited rewatchabality. Ive seen it 3 times. Its alright. Its not bad its just like a mediocure filler episode, not worthy of a movie and not even worthy of a 2 parter on TV. Would have made a nice 45 min filler ep.

Nesessis. I dont know allot of it was interesting but i was thought i would get more out of it. Still a decnt movie because it explored more of the romulan story and in particular i like that it is based post dominion war and post return of voyager. More like it was setting things up for a new future perhaps better romulan relations?

OK we are getting away from the central topic but i think i should clarify.
With the exception of DS9 (which i loved)

VOY Seasons 4,5,6 & 7: basically a rerun of TNG with data finding his humanity replaced by seven (less well acted though). Constant plot holes and a Borg force reduced to whipping boys. Remember, a single cube got as far as Earth in First Contact, taking out everything thrown at it. Still, Voyager can repeatedly take on the Borg. Sorry but no.

ENT Seasons 1,2,3,4: i took out 5 obviously. Had potential but was miscast from the get go. The only believable character was Flox. I used to love Scott Bakula in quantum leap but in Enterprise, his idea of authority is overprouncing every word (best example of this is In a Mirror Darkly, where he puffs out his cheeks with every word)
All the characters were underdeveloped, though i think that their acting would not have been up to standard anyway. Above all, they were cleaner than clean and too sterile. Mani Cotto pulled back respectability (esp in season 4) but it felt like too much too late. Entire season arcs were condensed into 2-3 episodes.
The less said about TATV the better.

You are exactly accurate about Insurrection

Nemesis?? good movie BUT Remens are not heard of, practically, ever and they suddenly appear with the mother of all attack ships, with a flawless cloak, with capability of firing through cloak, faster then Enterprise (remember that it not only caught up with it but was trailling it) AND a planet destroying Super Weapon.
Cap this off by it having a fighter bay (that is only used as an escape route) and an Enterprise crew stupid enough to fly through a Nebula that cuts off comms to the fleet and it just bugged the hell outta me


(oh and Rikers "fight" in the bowles of the ship on a rickety platform)




*edit* damn, this must be the longest post that I have ever written. Guess it is no surprise that Trek is what draws it out of me

edit 2: used profanity in the heat of writing, removed

kevmy

Well I think they think the reason it will have a wider demographic than usual is because of JJ Abrams.

And they're right. He's massive at the moment: Cloverfield, Lost, MI:3.

And he's spent most of his time on Star Trek lately. I'll be going in with an open mind. I think they needed to go down a different route with the films and they have. Now I'm not entirely sure it will work out but I'm willing to give it a go.

I love if it kick-started a new series. Not Kirk based but just a renewed enthusiasm for Star Trek. If the film works you could have JJ Abrams and Ron Moore (BSG is finishing soon) involved and I think that would be one hell of a dream team.

User45701

I dont know, im in a weird mood these days have been for a awhile but i just dont have faith in this movie being good. I mean i do hope its great but i have very low expetations and with any luck i will have the film so under hyped for myself that when i do see it and the very least i will probbley come out thinking meh. I just hope its not a slap in the face to star trek. Oh and ive said it before, this movie needs william shatner in it as a cameo i odnt care dress him up in so much makeup only die hard fans would know its him. Shatner made star trek and i just think he should have a role in it.

JJ i hope he does not mess things up, as for moore. He has done trek, he did DS9 and Battlestar is what he wanted voyager to be (-cylons)

kevmy

User45701 wrote: »

JJ i hope he does not mess things up, as for moore. He has done trek, he did DS9 and Battlestar is what he wanted voyager to be (-cylons)

Well Moore was never show-runner at Star Trek so he never had that much control over the overall arc of the show only over episodes he wrote. He was going to take over such a role in VOY but most of his ideas were shot down so he left.

He did say he wanted VOY to be more like BSG but he wouldn't have used Cylons. He purely meant it in the battling through space having difficulties within the crew and difficulties without in getting supplies.

Goodshape

I think User45701 meant "-cylons" ....i.e. minus the cylons. But without the Voyager 'reset switch' at the start/end of each episode.