Star Trek makes bold return April 27, 2004

Staff and agencies Tuesday

The producers of the Star Trek movie series have confirmed they are considering an eleventh film in the space exploration saga.
Rick Berman, who has taken charge of the series since the death in 1991 of the franchise creator Gene Roddenbery, said he was working on plans for a prequel to the tales of Captain Kirk and crew.
The series had been thought to be dead in the water following the critical mauling and poor box office return achieved by 2002's Star Trek: Nemesis. That film made just $43m in US cinemas despite a budget of $70m.
However, it now seems the series is simply set to move away from using the crop of actors, such as Patrick Stewart, who first appeared in the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation, and focus on an earlier period in the history of the Federation.
Berman told sci-fi magazine Dreamwatch: "I am involved in the very early stages of what could be the next Star Trek movie. It's something I will be producing with two other producers."
The first Star Trek film, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, was released in 1979 on the back of a wave of new interest in the cult 60s TV series about a team of space explorers on board the starship Enterprise. The original series' cast appeared in six films, before handing over to the cast of The Next Generation on 1994's Star Trek: Generations.

Rumor has it that it's about the childhood of Q. Anyone else know anything?

Its optimistic and usually intelligent vision seems antiquated given the present circumstances (and administration). Don't think they can recapture the spirit; maybe if they slaughter helpless worlds with overwhelming firepower, it would be a hit.

There are books with better stories than this. Jeri Taylor has written some really good ones, as has Shatner himself. Let the fans make up a plot via a contest. We are all more competent than that assmunch Berman anyway. :mad:

The Romulan Wars.

... DS9 did the Dominion war so well, I would hope the often mentioned first war with the Romulans could be equally as epic.

How many times can we watch the Enterprise get destroyed?

Trek "Insurrection" pulled in such low revenue that they waited 4 years to make the infinitely WORSE "Nemesis". Insurrection, while having much less insurrection than Undiscovered Country, at least had a solid, genuine feel, where we could care for the characters. Nemesis has NOTHING to save it and is a paltry derivative of several other works, some of which include halcyon flicks such as II and III. :puke:

Oh goody. A prequel movie. :eyes:

Berman is the same jerk who used his clout to get Paramount to cancel a Sulu-based series in 1995. Bastard. (William Shatner is infinitely more respectable to me, and he's done some despicable things too.)

Berman needs to take a nice long cryogenic rest and give it up. He can share it with John Logan :puke: and Brent Spiner...

The first trek film came about because Paramount wanted to compete against the surprisingly successful 'star wars' and some exec remembered they had trek (which had found its audience in the early 1970s and became a smash in syndication...) It was to originally be a TV series ('star trek phase 2'), but star wars had changed the scene. The delays ultimately worked in the franchise's favor... though the 13 scripts were dropped (two of which were recycled for TNG - "The Child" and "Devil's Due".)

With "Enterprise" proving to be a dud far worse then TOS, and the pathetic ratings of Insurrection and Nemesis, I'm amazed Paramount would take yet another chance on this idiot, known as The Bermanator. :eyes:

Rumor has it that it's about the childhood of Q. Anyone else know anything?

That would be great! I always thought the biggest mistake they made with the Next Generation movies was that they never featured Q. If there ever was a character made for the big screen - with a big screen budget and big screen special effects - it was Q!

Unfortunately, if they explore Q's "childhood" (or whatever Q started out as), John De Lancie would be too old play him, which is really a shame because he is Q. :( They'd have to find an actor who could fill his shoes, which would be pretty tough because he's one of Trek's best loved characters. But ... De Lancie's son, Keegan, played Q's son in one of the final Voyager episodes and was very good! He had the quirky personality, the quick wit; he was lovable and annoying at the same time - he would be great as a young Q ... but it's Hollywood, so I'm sure they'll go for a "name" actor who'll ruin it! :mad:

with Trek, anything is possible.

...for the powers that be...

Enterprise's first two seasons had an often ignored "temporal cold war" story arc.

At one point, the entire series was going to be serialized with that storyline and take place in multiple time periods with different characters in each period.

Alas, Berman must have felt that premise would be too complicated.

Trek needs new blood!

before he pokes an eye out.

Either that or force him to sit in a locked room with a note pad, a television, a DVD player, and all 60-some episodes of the original Star Trek series, so he can get a clue as to what made the show a franchise to begin with: good, involving stories by competent writers that featured characters we cared about.

The writing in "Nemesis" was atrocious.