Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley developing Star Trek reboot for Paramount

[Turtletrekker]

If they try and claim that it's set after everything else and don't put it in at least the mid 32nd century, that will be two and a half strikes against it from me right off the bat.

 

[BillJ]

A rumor I've seen here and there is that this movie will be set in the 25th century on an Enterprise that is essentially the first Enterprise. In other words, the name "Enterprise" and elements of Trek outside existing characters will be the focus. Seems very odd, but again, these are Internet rumors.

What's the source of the rumor?

 

[Firebird]

What's the source of the rumor?

I Made it the Fuck Up Quarterly

 

[The Wormhole]

What's the source of the rumor?

According to the other thread this was posted in, the source is the comments section on Trekmovie.

 

[Jayson1]

A rumor I've seen here and there is that this movie will be set in the 25th century on an Enterprise that is essentially the first Enterprise. In other words, the name "Enterprise" and elements of Trek outside existing characters will be the focus. Seems very odd, but again, these are Internet rumors.

Could work. Makes sense to put it another universe. Imagine a universe that developed a Starfleet and Federation but never had a ship named Enterprise. This would be the first ship named Enterprise. Maybe it's state of art and is expected to be a flagship but still their is no Legacy reputation with the name in this universe.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

New Star Trek Directors Officially Reveal Plan to "Subvert With Respect" [Exclusive]

Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley discuss their plans for a new Star Trek movie that will subvert expectations & respect the franchise's DNA.

collider.com

When asked about their dream project, they revealed that it's already in the works: it's their new Star Trek movie, which was first announced late last year. Daley made it clear that their new take on the franchise will not be a continuation of the "Kelvin Timeline" Star Trek movies that kicked off with J.J. Abrams' big-screen reboot of the franchise in 2009; a fourth film in that series was in the works for nearly a decade, and went through multiple directors and screenwriters before finally being scrapped. What Daley and Goldstein's movie will be is a totally new take on Trek that won't be a continuation of any of the franchise's various TV series. They told Nemiroff:

"We're very fortunate to already be in the process of this with the Star Trek movie that we're developing. I think, if we get to make it, it would be very surprising for people because it is a version of Star Trek that no one's ever seen before. We are subverting it in a way that I think would be very exciting and also set itself apart from the television versions of the IP, but also the J.J. movies. It's just a matter of if we get to actually get it done."

Goldstein clarifies that they aren't looking to denigrate Star Trek; they'll be treating it much as they did another long-established IP they worked on, in the form of the well-received Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves. "I’d say 'subvert with respect.' It's kind of like that old Reagan quote, 'Trust but verify.' That's how we approached D&D," he explained. "We want to do something that is different, that will surprise people, but also respects the DNA of what Star Trek is in this case." Daley made it clear that while the film will respect its source material, it won't be solely for the fans, and that the film will be focused on its characters, not the franchise at large: "You don't have to be a Star Trek fan to like what we're doing because it's a very character-based film that we're putting together."

 

[Mudd]

"We're very fortunate to already be in the process of this with the Star Trek movie that we're developing. I think, if we get to make it, it would be very surprising for people because it is a version of Star Trek that no one's ever seen before. "

 

[Detached Nacelle]

It is bold to say it'll be like nothing we've seen before because Star Trek has covered so much in its life.

Should it come to be, I will wish it be entertaining for those who partake, but my heart has not the place for a new continuity

 

[Firebird]

If your writers are having to say “if we get to make it” in interviews, perhaps it was a little too fucking early to announce the project, Paramount?

This studio never learns, man.

 

[I am not Spock]

'if we get to make it'. So this project is just vapourware, like every other movie pitch we've heard in the last ten years. Until it isn't

 

[The Wormhole]

So this project is just vapourware, like every other movie pitch we've heard in the last ten years.

I could have told you that even before the "If we get to make it" quote.

 

[HotRod]

I really thought this would be the one that got made, if only because the new owners would inject some energy (and money) into the film side of the franchise. But with the recent news about the project and all the "ifs" we're hearing... yeah, throw it on the pile with all the other failed films that never got made.

 

[Firebird]

I really thought this would be the one that got made, if only because the new owners would inject some energy (and money) into the film side of the franchise. But with the recent news about the project and all the "ifs" we're hearing... yeah, throw it on the pile with all the other failed films that never got made.

Folks can criticize the Kurtzman era all they like, but at least he was able to actually produce stuff reliably over the last ten years. Paramount's feature division has been like watching Sideshow Bob stepping on a never-ending series of rakes.

 

[fireproof78]

Folks can criticize the Kurtzman era all they like, but at least he was able to actually produce stuff reliably over the last ten years. Paramount's feature division has been like watching Sideshow Bob stepping on a never-ending series of rakes.

Having stepped on a rake that hurts.

 

[FredH]

It’ll be out right after Amazon Bond, maybe.

 

[Steve Roby]

Folks can criticize the Kurtzman era all they like, but at least he was able to actually produce stuff reliably over the last ten years.

If the Kurtman era really does end after the series finales of Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy, that'll be around 262 episodes produced from 2017 through 2027 or so. And no one will have released a theatrical Star Trek film in that time.

I don't know if we'll have anything like this again in my lifetime. The Kurtzman era has been wildly ambitious and experimental, with everything (well, not Section 31) keeping true to what Star Trek has traditionally been about. People will someday look back at this time and realize that it was something special. If that sounds like crazy talk, consider that there are people nowadays loudly proclaiming their love for Enterprise. Strange but true.

Paramount's feature division has been like watching Sideshow Bob stepping on a never-ending series of rakes.

I think the success of ST '09 and the changes in the movie business since the days of the old TOS movies have changed studio execs' expectations. Star Trek's not something that can be handed off to a TV producer and some semi-retired TV actors with a modest budget. A new Star Trek movie has to be big and it has to be as close to a sure thing as possible. Big director, big stars with busy schedules, big budget, all while there's a lot going on with the studio behind the scenes and a whole level of toxic fandom activity that didn't exist in the days of the first ten movies.

 

[camdudetenger2018]

doesnt the term reboot in the entertainment world kinda means restarting the old but with everything new and fresh

 

[Steve Roby]

These days, "reboot" seems to mean whatever the person saying it thinks it means.

 

[FreddyE]

from trekmovie: "
Subverting… with respect
Goldstein and Daley were at SDCC to promote their new Cold War action comedy Mayday starring Ryan Reynolds and Sir Kenneth Branagh, but at that panel last week they revealed the script for the Star Trek movie is “in progress” and they were “very excited about it.” Collider got them talking a bit more about Trek at an SDCC press event, with Daley again talking about the “surprising” approach they are taking:

“I think, if we get to make it, it would be very surprising for people because it is a version of Star Trek that no one’s ever seen before. We are subverting it in a way that I think would be very exciting and also set itself apart from the television versions of the IP, but also the J.J. movies. It’s just a matter of if we get to actually get it done.”

source

WHEN are they going to understand that (as far as I can tell) a big part the fanbase does NOT want a "subversion", "darker and grittier", "re-invention" or ANYTHING like that bs?

"We" just want STAR TREK.

Yeah..setting it appart from the television versions...what can go wrong with that?

IMHO the more Star Trek movies are like a long, big budget tv episode...the better they work.

 

[Mudd]

WHEN are they going to understand that (as far as I can tell) a big part the fanbase does NOT want a "subversion", "darker and grittier", "re-invention" or ANYTHING like that bs?

Everyone involved has always understood that, from points-of-view you have no idea of.

They also understand that giving fans "what they want" is just a way of pissing money down the drain. Because "what fans want" doesn't appeal to enough other people to keep the lights on.

Don't start up with "TNG proved" or nonsense about TWOK. Different audiences of different generations, different industry economics.

If Trek had the broad appeal that some fans believe it would "if done well,*" it would have been as financially successful at some point as SW and the MCU and MI, because the studio has certainly persistently, doggedly thrown money at it and handed it to a wide variety of creative people who've succeeded with other projects over the decades.

At the movies, Trek always hits an audience ceiling that falls short of what's expected by investors spending money at the levels required to make such films in a plausible way.

Trek is fundamentally a TV property with a devoted but limited following.

*All rights reserved by Samuel T. Cogley, 2007.