Here it is: OFFICIAL official word on Star Trek XII?

[Norrin Radd]

I like this because it comes from the CEO of Viacom himself:

Paramount charts franchise course

Studio hopes slate will lead to profitability

By JILL GOLDSMITH

Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman said Wednesday that Paramount's focus on franchise films and more control over its slate will lead the way to profitability at the studio.

Investors, while impressed by Par's strong run at the box office -- most recently with "Star Trek" -- are still fretting at its red ink.
The studio posted a $123 million operating loss in the first quarter of this year.
"We were in a situation where we weren't fully in control of our release slate. We now have full control of our slate. We won't be in a position where our big, franchise pictures are offset" by a handful of smaller, less successful films, Dauman told Wall Streeters at a media conference in Gotham. He was referring to Viacom's split last fall with DreamWorks co-founders Steven Spielberg and David Geffen. "That's why 'Star Trek' is so important. We greenlit 'Star Trek 2' several weeks before the release of '1' because we knew what we had," he added. He cited upcoming pics "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" and "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra" as well as a busier release slate from DreamWorks Animation, which will bump up its output from two films a year to three. Viacom distributes DreamWorks Animation pics.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004220.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

 

[indranee]

so what's the date?

 

[Norrin Radd]

Yeah, i guess we still need a date. But at least it's not just the writers or director talking about a sequel.

 

[ALF]

Mark my words. 2011 will be too early and it will be bumped ahead to 2012.

 

[MvRojo]

Mark my words. 2011 will be too early and it will be bumped ahead to 2012.

I'd prefer a good weekend in 2012 rather than them squeezing it somewhere in 2011, which is already getting booked up.

 

[Too Much Fun]

The same question applies now to the "Star Trek" and "The Dark Knight" sequels, as no one is sure whether they'll be out in 2011 or 2012. Since "The Dark Knight" was the top grossing movie of last year and "Star Trek" seems poised to achieve the same distinction this year, I think one of those years could be very good for Hollywood (and fans of both franchises, like myself) if they do end up coming out in the same one.

 

[Captain Brown]

2011 or 2012, either way I am excited that we will see more of this crew.

 

[Borgminister]

Are Xmass releases just generally not as profitable as summer hits? Because I'm sure there have been smash hits of 300+ million during that season... it is a thought, anyway.

 

[Trekker4747]

I like this because it comes from the CEO of Viacom himself:

Paramount charts franchise course

Studio hopes slate will lead to profitability

By JILL GOLDSMITH

Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman said Wednesday that Paramount's focus on franchise films and more control over its slate will lead the way to profitability at the studio.

Investors, while impressed by Par's strong run at the box office -- most recently with "Star Trek" -- are still fretting at its red ink.
The studio posted a $123 million operating loss in the first quarter of this year.
"We were in a situation where we weren't fully in control of our release slate. We now have full control of our slate. We won't be in a position where our big, franchise pictures are offset" by a handful of smaller, less successful films, Dauman told Wall Streeters at a media conference in Gotham. He was referring to Viacom's split last fall with DreamWorks co-founders Steven Spielberg and David Geffen. "That's why 'Star Trek' is so important. We greenlit 'Star Trek 2' several weeks before the release of '1' because we knew what we had," he added. He cited upcoming pics "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" and "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra" as well as a busier release slate from DreamWorks Animation, which will bump up its output from two films a year to three. Viacom distributes DreamWorks Animation pics.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118004220.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

If they think that POS GI Joe movie is going to do anything for them, then they are diluted.

 

[Norrin Radd]

That's what I was thinking. My god, GI-Joe looks like shit.

 

[Rackon]

LOTR comprised three huge Christmas releases for 2001 -2002 - 2003. Several of the Harry Potters were Thanksgiving/Christmas releases.

Studios like to gear their sci-fi and action tentpoles for late spring/summer release.

 

[Trekker4747]

That's what I was thinking. My god, GI-Joe looks like shit.

"What are these?"

"Accelerator suits."

"What's it accelerate?"

"Your faceless CGI double. It's cheaper and easier to animate cool SFX sequences that way. You'll also look like an extra from a Halo game."

 

[Lumen]

Yeah, GI: Joe looks absolutely terrible. The trailer played during one of my Star Trek outings and people actually laughed at it, in a sort of "What the fuck was that?" way.

 

[Q2UnME]

It also played at my second Trek viewing. I leaned over and said to my son "When did HALO become GI Joe?" It looked like CRAP... (all, IMHO).

Q2

 

[Norrin Radd]

The accelerator suits remind me of the sound weapons in the 1984 Dune movie. They don't appear anywhere in the mythology and they're put in there only because they look "cool". What troubles me though is that they seem to play an even bigger role in this flick.

 

[scottydog]

I don't want future trek movies being spaced too far apart because soon the actors will all start aging badly.

 

[Norrin Radd]

I don't want future trek movies being spaced too far apart because soon the actors will all start aging badly.

Especially John Cho. Did you know he's already 36?

 

[Franklin]

I don't want future trek movies being spaced too far apart because soon the actors will all start aging badly.

I don't want them spaced too far apart because soon I will start aging badly.

 

[Trekker4747]

I don't want future trek movies being spaced too far apart because soon the actors will all start aging badly.

They couldn't age any worse than then men who originally played these characters.

 

[dudley]

The scary part is the chance that Abram's might not direct the movie. We've already got a winning team, let's not change it up and get another Baird, shall we? Wait for JJ.