Den of Geek

Where to take the Star Trek sequels

Charlie Brigden


While Abrams will, no doubt, have carte blanche to do what he wants with the sequel, it still has to bring the bucks home

JJ Abrams and his team have begun the work of putting the next Star Trek film together. But where should they be heading?

Published on Nov 9, 2009

It's a bit of an odd question in these times. Where will they take the Star Trek sequel, or sequels? Trek fans are more used to the question: will there be another Star Trek film?, as the steadily declining box office receipts for many of the previous sequels made new entries in the series far from a foregone conclusion.

However, thanks to bespectacled geek filmmaker J. J. Abrams and his motley crew, a new hope for Star Trek's future has emerged, which generally comes in Hollywood after making a lot of money, which the film has managed to do. Who could have guessed that in a year where heavyweights such as the Transformers, Harry Potter, Wolverine, Terminator, and Paul Blart: Mall Cop, what was once perceived to be the nerdiest franchise in the world would not only hold its own, but eclipse some of them? Not even Derren Brown and his splitscreen of doom could have predicted that.

So, with a lot of money comes the inevitable word: sequel. Abrams and Co. have already said that they're looking at ideas for the sequel, and there are a lot of questions to be asked. Will we see cameos galore from the franchise's past? Will Chekov say "nuclear wessels"? Will they finally bring back the numbering system? Just where will the Star Trek sequels go?

One thing about this new era of the franchise is that everything has been thrown open by that oft-used sci-fi phrase 'parallel universe'. Once Spock and his jellyfish decided using red matter was a good thing, and the Narada decided the Kelvin should be blasted into oblivion, the universe as we know it was irrevocably changed, with the two timelines now running parallel, one featuring Shatner, the other featuring Chris Pine, which opens up all kinds of opportunities for new takes on classic events. Let's hope one of the first things Nimoy does is tell Starfleet never to let Kathryn Janeway anywhere near a starship.

Khan

Let's get this out of the way first. As soon as Star Trek went supernova, everyone started talking about sequels and lots of (clearly unsubstantiated) rumours floated around about bringing Khan Noonien Singh into the fold. The reason for this is that Star Trek II is the Trek universe's equivalent of The Empire Strikes Back, and in much the same way as after that movie every geek thought all Star Wars movies should be dark and tragic, both Trek fans and the filmmakers usually looked to a big screen-stealing villain for Kirk or Picard to face, with some space battles thrown in for good measure. Sometimes it worked (Star Trek VI), sometimes it didn't (Insurrection).

But where fans look to Khan, it's almost certain that most of them are thinking about vengeful and eel-wielding Khan, as opposed to charismatic yet overly confident Khan, from Space Seed. But for that to really come off, they'd have to redo Space Seed, then wait a while before bringing him back, as one of the beautiful things about Wrath Of Khan is that both protagonist and antagonist had aged appropriately for the story. So by my reckoning, we'd see Melville-quoting Khan right about 2024.

The Space Seed idea is somewhat interesting - although I think it would need reworking as the nature of the episode means it almost completely takes place aboard the Enterprise, which isn't necessarily cinematic - but mostly because of the possibilities about not only who could play Khan, but who could possibly match Montalban's inspired ravings. Send your answer, along with a stamp-addressed envelope, to...

Time Travel

Long before a certain white-haired scientist decided eighty-eight miles per hour is the optimum speed for time travel, the starship Enterprise was bouncing all over the space time continuum like nobody's business and, indeed, Star Trek 2.0 is all about time travel itself.

Time travel is great because it opens up a shedload of new possibilities for drama, but is also kind of a cliché in Star Trek now. Time travel was once this shiny new ‘ooh' thing, but after thirty years, a bit of the sheen has been taken off, which was bound to happen once you let Voyager and the NX-01 get involved (sorry, Enterprise fans). Nevertheless, there must be some great ideas somewhere that involve travelling to the past (or future) to help save the present. Sorry, parallel-present.

Writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman have said that they were looking to work in some political themes for the sequel, so maybe we could have Kirk et al head back to England circa 2007 and stop Gordon Brown becoming Prime Minister. That one might have a slightly limited appeal, but it'd certainly guarantee a five-star review from The Daily Mail. One plotline that would definitely get the crowds rolling in would be to send the crew to California circa 1997 to stop a certain bearded filmmaker from messing with his magnum opus. Or at least stop Alexandra Burke murdering Cohen/Buckley's Hallelujah on The X-Factor.

But seriously, where could they go? They could go to the future and meet any number of people from the future franchises, including, perhaps, the Borg. I have to admit it would be nice to see someone try and give the Borg back their teeth, especially after their overuse made them seem a bit, well, cuddly. Not to mention having two shades of shit kicked out of them by Species 7627290, which didn't really do a lot for their street cred.

I suppose it might be a bit interesting to maybe have the knock-on effect of Old Spock's arrival causing a major disruption/tragedy, meaning New Spock has to take him down, or Kirk's future womanizing causing a breakout of apocalyptic war between the Federation and the Planet of the Amazons. As long as there's no whales involved, I'll be reasonably happy.

Klingons

Ah, the Klingons. Again, once the most fearsome race in the galaxy, now a bit teddy bear-esque after our love affair with Worf and the entire empire helping out the Federation against the Dominion, which was admittedly quite awesome.

The whole honour and death thing though, it's a bit cute now, isn't it? Like ‘Aww, they're drinking bloodwine to honour their fallen comrades who did a kamikaze run on a Jem'Hadar battlecruiser. How adorable!' The only real glimpses of parallel-Klingons we've seen thus far were the Warbirds in the Kobayashi Maru sequence, and the interrogators from a deleted scene on the DVD, who were all wearing steel masks and as such looked a bit like the Predator.

I suppose the other question is, will they have the forehead ridges? Canon has established that they originally did have the ridges, but these were originally lost after the Klingon Empire caught a bit of flu, only to restore them a century later. Maybe the Enterprise and the Klingons will have lots of fights and harsh conversations, with the situation only being resolved when Dr. McCoy gives them some Lemsip? Either way, it would be nice to see the old, nasty Klingons back, ridges or no ridges. Vicious warmongers out to rid the galaxy of the human pestilence and claim glory for the Empire, with no reservations about what they do, be it bar room brawls on the K-7 space station or the threat of mass genocide. Those are the Klingons I miss.

The Alien Object

One of the main themes of Star Trek, which has occasionally been forgotten over the years, is that of exploration. The Enterprise as originally conceived was a vessel for scientific discovery, as denoted in the "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life forms and new civilisations" in the opening log. As opposed to running around blowing everything up.

This was explored liberally over the various television series, with some themes generally repeated, and in a couple of the movies, the much-maligned The Motion Picture and The Voyage Home. Unless, of course, you count God as an alien object, even though he wasn't really God, just a bloke with a few magic tricks and a bit of a chip on his shoulder.

One of the downsides to this kind of story is its lack of commercial appeal. While Abrams will, no doubt, have carte blanche to do what he wants with the sequel, it still has to bring the bucks home, and the main issue with these kind of plots is that there's no real villain, and with that a lack of your typical action and space battles which the public are expecting to see. Nevertheless, it's something I'd personally love to see explored, a possible combination of the philosophical and theoretical ramblings from The Motion Picture with Abram's pace and wit.

Shatner

Oh, Bill. Most people reading this will know how fiercely William A. Shatner, esq. lobbied for a role in Star Trek 2.0, only to be told by Abrams that there was no room for him in the film. Which is probably right, as, looking back, there is only one place where I thought he would have fit, and that would be to have him read the opening narration at the end of the film.

Personally, I'd have much rather Chris Pine read it than Shatner or Nimoy, but that's logically the only part that I think would have worked with him in, especially since in normal Trek canon, his Kirk is, well, dead, although that word certainly doesn't have the finality in Star Trek that it does in real life.

Shatner's fiction seems to be obsessed with bringing Kirk back, and he did so in several novels with the aid of the Borg. However, with this new timeline, you still have to assume that he'll grow up to be Shatner, so there's a future-Kirk somewhere if they need to get him in there. I think they should leave it, though. Let's see what the new crew can do without having to rely on more cameos from established characters.

Crossovers

If you're to take the Internet and fan-fiction into account, if there's one thing people love more than graphic pornography and photoshopping cats into humorous situations, it's universe crossovers. From Buffy vs. The Evil Dead to Star Trek vs. Star Wars vs. Babylon 5 vs. Stargate vs. Battlestar Galactica vs. Buck Rogers In The 25th Century, there's literally millions of pages out there solely dedicated to seeing popular and not-so-popular franchises meet.

You could have the Enterprise fight the Millennium Falcon, Spock getting jealous as Uhura is whisked away in a whirlwind romance by Robert Pattinson, or even have it turn out that Iron Man's technology was really created by Mr. Scott. Which would, in turn, mean there'd have to be an awkward cameo by Stan Lee somewhere, but it's not as if these universes have never met before, assuming I'm not the only person who ever read Star Trek / X-Men.

Abrams himself has a few franchises to his name that could certainly be exploited. Perhaps the island-based survivors of Lost will make an appearance when the whole thing turns out to be an elaborate holodeck program, or the crew will have to intervene when the Cloverfield monster attacks 23rd century New York.

But to be honest, there's only really one option, and that's to bring Paramount's two longest-standing franchises together for a titanic battle. But would the intrepid heroes of the Federation ever really be any match for the force of nature that is Jason Voorhees? For their sake, let's hope Starfleet never builds an outpost at Camp Crystal Lake.

Harry Mudd

Just kidding...

Leave your own thoughts in the comments below...!

 

Tags

Users Comments

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By redryder 1 November 10, 2009 02:32:38 PM

NO MORE TIME TRAVEL!!!!!! The franchise has relied too heavily on it.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Geordie2004 1 November 10, 2009 02:44:20 PM

Wow, lots of controversial comments here... I'm not sure entirely where to start. Let's see.... Why exactly do you dislike Insurrection? I thought it was a very good dark take on the Fountain of Youth concept. Its allegories as far as the uprooting of an indigenous population go may have been unoriginal and obvious, but I still thought it worked well. And that scene where Picard confronts the Admiral still sends chills down my spine. Also, why exactly do you dislike Janeway? Bringing Kahn back would be very cool with the right actor to play him, and I don't think it would be too difficult to rewrite the events of Space Seed happening before Kahn's return in a film. Or the Federation's finding Kahn's vessel could even be thrown in as a teaser at the end of the next film, which could provoke a great deal of fan frenzy. I agree that seeing the Klingons come back with their old ferocity and viciousness would also be extremely interesting. They could even have some massive event effectively remove the race's sense of honour from the equation, just to give the new series a different twist on things, though that would of course be extremely controversial. When it comes to Shatner, I was glad that he wasn't brought back, because I think he'd have insisted on way more than just a cameo role in the project, and that would just be wrong. As for his novels, I've only read one (Captain's Glory) but it was highly enjoyable, even if it is extremely Shatner-centric. As far as the exploration concept goes, as you implied, I think that would be quite difficult to work into a film, so it should probably be kept for TV series. Speaking of which, let's get another one going, eh Paramount? :) Oh, and crossovers? Yeah, let's not go there...

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Geordie2004 1 November 10, 2009 02:46:41 PM

Whoops, I mean Khan. I blame Gengis for those typos. And yeah, no more time travel, at least for now.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By blindfold11 1 November 10, 2009 04:25:04 PM

I reckon in a copying ploy they should bump off Spock in the second film, like the did last time round. No-one would expect that. Perhaps have the plot of the film revolve around Spock being hunted by assasins so that he can't go on to be the Nimoy future character. this would make room for Nimoy in preceedings. Then at the end we could see the young spock becoming the spock we all know and love by comitting an act of selflessness like he did at the end of the original II. Of course leave it open to him returning in the new number 3.. and then perhaps opening a gateway somehow to Khan taking the stage in III. I'd like all that - but how it all would work is anyones guess!

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Strasner 1 November 10, 2009 05:08:01 PM

staines

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Strasner 1 November 10, 2009 05:08:42 PM

or Milton Keynes

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Strasner 1 November 10, 2009 05:08:55 PM

or perhaps Inverness

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Holmes 1 November 10, 2009 05:43:18 PM

One word: Tribbles

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By KWillyvox 1 November 10, 2009 08:14:59 PM

Dude! Insurrection? Seriously?? All TNG Trek movies did was mildly entertain the fans while showing how lame Star Trek can be to the masses. Thank God for Trek 2.0

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By theshadowalker 1 November 10, 2009 09:16:26 PM

How about taking one of those Klingon captains from The Original Series and reestablishing him as a recurring baddie in 2.0 along the lines of Darth Vader or Farscape's Scorpius?

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By Sengein 1 November 10, 2009 10:54:40 PM

It is always troublesome to see us Trekers relying on all the same trek moves. With the destruction of Vulcan things can be truly different. Stop looking old stuff and look froward to the new stuff. all that you are looking at have all been done. There is so much from TOS they can explore.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By jstanfield 1 November 11, 2009 05:07:42 AM

My vote is for Klingons, but a slightly different take on them. It's a new universe, so I say center it around a coup wherein the "samurai" Klingons (honor and such) are overthrown and replaced with some truly sadistic, power-hungry, slaver, planet-razing war mongers. *Show* us their revolting brutality and unimaginable cruelty - make *us* hate them - then throw Kirk at them. You can bring back the "samurai" Klingons later (muuuch later), but not in this movie. I want to leave the theater with a desire to go to the nearest Starfleet recruiting center and join the fight ... Epic clashes of civilizations is fertile material, guys, so get crackin'.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By jstanfield 1 November 11, 2009 05:10:37 AM

Crap, nevermind ... that's the setup for STX: Nemesis ...

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By kpitzer 1 November 12, 2009 01:40:34 AM

Here here! No more time travel...no more cameos...We don't need those sad and over-used plot devices any more. I like the very dark Klingon's idea. They should be most feared and savage. I like a dark look at the Borg too or the dark side of eugenics and cloning (Cylons any one?). You can do a lot with this stuff. Take the best of the past and kick it up 10 notches! But remember...no matter how dark it gets, there needs to be a bit of humor (X-Files anyone?) albeit a bit twisted.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By knightroostr 1 November 13, 2009 06:03:30 AM

umm.... Romulans anyone? Now that the Vulcan Empire is gone, why not employ the Romulans in the next movie. they had the most to gain in the desctuction of Vulcan and can rise to power the fastest.

Re: Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Posted By doctorspace 1 November 14, 2009 10:49:08 PM

What made the new Star Trek great was that Abrams didn't get into techy, geeky, fan pandering type of details that we in the sci fi community love to discuss over a game of WOW. Abrams focussed on the classic icons, and mixed them with the artful skill of a good DJ. In destroying Vulcan and changing the timeline, he essentially set fire to any obligations to the past directions in which the concept had been taken. No more sci fi con questions about plot inconsistancies or how a warp core engine works, and so forth. I expect he will continue to draw on the classic icons of the series, and focus more on the "cool", than the sci fi itself. I excpect we will se the Klingons soon, because they are a classic icon of the old series. I doubt that old plot lines will be reinterpreted, because it seems antithetical to what he is trying to accomplish.
Post a Comment
Security Code* Get another image
 
 
Where to take the Star Trek sequels
Untitled Document

Follow Den of Geek on

Related Articles

SEARCH

Coke Zero
Advertisement