das Monkey

I see no point in this. While I wouldn't endorse it either, an Academy prequel makes much more sense as a TV series than a feature film. Other than the obvious cash-grab, why even bother with this? Paramount has found a way to destroy TNG, Voyager, and Enterprise with dreadful closing chapters, so I guess TOS is up next on their list. Perhaps DS9 fans should just be thankful to be ignored.

At least the good thing is that this is an Abrams project that isn't going to series, so we don't have to get all pumped at how good it is early on and then suffer years of disappointment when he gets bored with it and takes a higher-paying job.

Being a Trekkie gets more difficult with each passing day. It's like God is on a karmic payback mission for all the great stuff we got early on.

das

Supermallet

But hey, at least we can always go back and watch Wrath of Khan through The Voyage Home endlessly.

BellsOfWar

ugggggh, do we really need another star trek?

B.A.

I'm not a Trekkie, so I would of course be interested in this because of Abrams and Co.

Two words - Victor Garber.

Dr. DVD

What's with all the prequel approaches to tired series these days? First Star Wars, then Bond, now this. Do they figure that there's no more forward left so they might as well go back in time?

I am interested, but this will eliminate any true suspense as you know Kirk and Spock will make it. Not to mention create another inconsistency in how the FX of today will look and then how the 60s sets will look when placed in sequential order.

MvRojo

For SW, it was probably more about finishing the story (and money).

For Bond, Batman, Superman, and now ST, it seems to be more about re-starting things to get a new vision/perspective after the previous outings were not as well-received, and also an attempt to get new people in by "restarting" things so there isn't so much baggage they have to deal with. I'm not sure if that actually works though.

Calculon

Colin Farrell. Irish/Scottish, whatever -- close enough.

Also, let me be the first to say that this whole prequel enterprise is a terrible idea.

Filmmaker

How are you anywhere close to the first?

Supermallet

The difference between Superman and Batman (didn't read about the plans for Bond) is that they are ignoring all the other Superman/Batman movies, and creating a whole new franchise. Neither Star Wars nor this proposed project will ignore the other films in the series. Thus, SW/ST are prequels, while Batman/Superman are just different movies. It would be like saying Tim Burton's Batman was a prequel to the 1960's Batman, which it clearly isn't.

Deftones

I don't necessarily like the concept, but I do like that they are trying to breathe new life into the series with some good talent.

Chew

Anything that causes B&B to be stripped of their Trek duties is a happy day for me and I'll be cautiously optimistic.

That said, why is Paramount soooo hung up on this Academy idea? We've heard about this since STIV came out. Enough with the prequels already!

Numanoid

I've been avoiding reading too much about the new Superman, but I got the impression that it takes place after the events of Superman II. Did that change?

rennervision

I've always hated the prequel concept ever since Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. I have no idea why Hollywood has been so fascinated with them since SW: Episodes I-III. You go into the movie automatically knowing how it will end, and you know which characters will survive - even if they seem near death.

I've yet to see one that was necessary, and the backstory they provide never quite measures up to the one you imagined in your mind. And don't get me started on how much they ruin the continuity of the series!

chanster

Well Doom was technically a prequel, but it really didn't emphasize the point to show it. Indiana Jones was Indiana Jones.The only motivating factor to change the date was to make it a prequel was to excuse Marion not being around.

I guess you could make an argument that beginning of Doom Jones was more of a Belloq type figure - just in for the money. At the end, he was an altruistic grave robber. But its a stretch.

An idea of a Star Trek prequel is inherently boring. Its gotta be one of the reasons Enterprise failed. The idea doesn't sit right - William Shatner is Kirk, Leonard Nimoy is Spock. I'm not sure people are going to like it or even care.

The only logical way for this movie to end up - is a rebooting of the original Enterprise with new actors. I think that would suck bad.

das Monkey

They should just do an epic war film. Take all the actors who aren't asking for a shitload of money, put them on ships, and wage interstellar war on someone. I don't care who. Maybe the Orions. Or the Vorlons. Who cares. Then kill half of them. Make it 3 hours. But no more time travel and no more Moby Dick. Oh, and no love interests either.

das

Tracer Bullet

"Who are you?"

"We're Starfleet... and we're here to help."

riley_dude

But part of the Trek movie appeal is fans going to see there favorites up on the Big Screen and without that draw any Trek movie is going to suffer. You do a movie with a whole new cast and non Trek fans are going to say, Ohhh, a Star Track movie. Trek has got a bad image with both Non Trek and Trek fans right now.
I say, go forward not backward.

Supermallet

The trailer I saw shows it to be a reboot of the series. If it takes place in the universe of the other Superman movies, but after Superman II, then the trailer does not at all show that.

Filmmaker

It happens after SUPERMAN II and incorporates footage from at least SUPERMAN I and possibly II; it DOES proceed as though those two films exist, but not III and IV. It will hopefully represent what we always wanted III to be...

Supermallet

Oh, that is very interesting. I had no idea. I'm much more interested in the film now.

shaggy

I love the idea of JJ Abrams taking over Star Trek. This guy has a perfect track record so far, Felicity, Alias, Lost and by the sounds of it M.I 3. The concept is questionable , its hard to recast classic characters like Kirk and Spock. There is hope, because I didn't think Lucas could pull off a young Obi Wan, and it was done to perfection.

Dr. DVD

FWIW, I never understood how, if Temple of Doom was a prequel as the date indicates, Indy could go through all of that stuff and then in Raiders claim he didn't believe in magic and superstitous hocus pocus.

It would be like Kirk talking about the importance of commiting to a one true love in life, though I hope we get to see Carol in this one if you know of whom I speak.

milo bloom

I can't be the only one who saw how well Enterprise turned around it's last season. When they brought in writers who understood the series as a whole, the difference was amazing. And since ENT only needed one more year to start the Romulan Wars, I'd still be behind a continuation, heck even DTV movies.

And I'm not inherently against the idea of Trek prequel. The novel mentioned earlier, Best Destiny, is a young Kirk adventure and is a rousing adventure that I've read multiple times. You just need the right people behind it.

riley_dude

I just don't think that the masses are going to except two new people playing icons like Kirk and Spock. Talk about alienating the fanbase that you want to attract.
Glad that Berman got the pink slip though.

Ayre

From IMDB News:

Mission: Impossible III director J.J. Abrams is hitting back at unauthorized reports he is directing the next Star Trek movie. The Alias creator is furious the news was released prematurely and is also upset that key details regarding the storyline were incorrectly reported. He explains to Empire online, "The whole thing was reported entirely without our cooperation. People learned that I was producing a Star Trek film, that I had an option to direct it, they hear rumors of what the thing was going to be and ran with a story that is not entirely accurate." Last week, Hollywood trade paper Variety, reported Abrams was on board and that the film would center on the early days of Captain James T. Kirk and Spock and that Philip Seymour Hoffman was in talks to play the ship's doctor. Abrams won't reveal the true storyline, but hints that it won't feature characters Captain James T. Kirk or Mr. Spock at all, but doesn't rule out bringing some of the original characters back for the new film, adding, "Those characters are so spectacular. I just think that..you know, they could live again."