More ‘Star Trek 2′ Plot & Villain Hints Surface

Published 5 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:28 pm,

Possible directions for Star Trek 2 More Star Trek 2 Plot & Villain Hints Surface

J.J. Abrams is notorious for being secretive about any in-development project with which he is associated and the Star Trek followup, Star Trek 2, looks to be no exception.

Screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, and Robert Orci are currently in the midst of scripting Stark Trek 2, which begins pre-production in January 2011.  Abrams has so far been tight-lipped about the direction that the Star Trek sequel will take, though he did share the following nugget of food for thought with SFX magazine for their upcoming 200th issue:

The universe that [original 'Star Trek' creator Gene] Roddenberry created was so vast. And so it’s hard to say there’s one particular thing that stands out as what the sequel must be.  Which is on the one hand, a great opportunity.  On the other hand it’s the greatest challenge – where do you go?  What do you focus on?  But I’m incredibly excited about the prospects.”

The 2009 Star Trek movie used the plot device of time travel – which itself could be considered a staple of the Star Trek franchise at this point – in order to (literally) reboot the timeline of the original series.  While a number of longtime Trekkies would like characters such as the Klingons or Khan Noonien Singh to play a prominent role in future installments, Abrams and his crew have a lot of freedom with respect to the worlds and creatures they could factor into Star Trek 2 and beyond.

Star Trek 2009  More Star Trek 2 Plot & Villain Hints Surface

What foe will the Enterprise battle next?

Both Kurtzman and Orci were also interviewed by SFX and addressed their issues relating to who the villain of Star Trek 2 would actually be.  Kurztman specifically brought up Khan’s name in his interview and mentioned the following:

“You have to start with what is the right story.  And that if you can say “That’s a story that Khan fits into”, that’s how you get to that.  Not deciding on a menu list of items and then seeing if you can’t string them all together.”

Orci echoed his co-worker’s concerns and had this to offer as well:

“Introducing a new villain in the sequel is tempting because we now have this incredible new sandbox to play in… The trick is not to do something that’s been seen before just because you think it will be a short cut to likeability.”

Star Trek Sequel More Star Trek 2 Plot & Villain Hints Surface

Lindelof compared Star Trek 2 to The Dark Knight a few weeks ago, which left a number of fans concerned that the sci-fi sequel would strike an uncharacteristically gritty and dark tone.  Kurtz and Orci assured SFX this was not the case and that the Star Trek sequel – which Orci confirmed will feature more of funnyman Simon Pegg as Scotty – will be similar in tone to its predecessor.

J.J. Abram’s Star Trek was well regarded for striking a balance between effects-driven action sequences and character/plot-oriented scenes – not to mention the fact that it avoid the 2 1/2 hour + running time of entries from other blockbuster franchises such as Transformers or Pirates of the Caribbean.  The Star Trek sequel will hopefully be able to repeat that act and then some.

Star Trek 2 is scheduled for release on June 29th, 2012.

Source: SFX (via TrekMovie)

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


1 2 3 5

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I would want to see Khan and the Klingons, but this is a new series, and needs new character. Don’t re-hash old ones.

    • They referenced the Klingons in the movie, but never showed them. I think exploring that at least a little bit would be cool.

  2. No time travel this time please. No Khan either, been there done that. However, if they want to use aliens from the original series, Tribbles could make great villians!

    • Ah ha……Mirror universe Tribbles!

      • That’s just a little scary, I wonder if they bite?

      • Worse yet…BORG tribbles!

  3. I think what a number of the “Khan crowd” might be missing is that Wrath worked so well because the character was already set up in the universe by the TV show. You can’t achieve the same level or interpersonal hatred that drove Kirk and Khan in a 2 hour show, not without the previous 2 hours that made Star Trek 2 possible in the first place.

    I personally would like to see the Romulans as the villains of the piece. The Klingons just lost a 48-ship fleet, the Federation just lost a founding world, 10s of billions of members, and a sizable chunk of one year’s graduating class for the Acadamy. Both governments have been hit _very_ hard. How can the Romulan Star Empire NOT take advantage?

    • another thing to consiter is kahn worked so well is because of ricardo montabon.

      • to clarify things my post was meant to say ricardo as kahn will never be topped and kahn should not be used again.

  4. Tribbles! Or Mudd! That dude could be awesome. Lots o’ potential for that slaver/smuggler/pirate!

    And as for 2.5 hr running time: So what? 2.5 hours of Star Trek every 3 years is not a bad thing. Honestly, I’ll take 3 hours of good JJ Trek over 22 episodes of re-hashed, unimaginative drek that has shaped the Star Trek Universe over the last decade or so.

  5. Uh, I have known about this for ages, I got my copy of SFX like 3 weeks ago! Seriously, can I just write some of your articles? They’d be more up to date.

    • @ DrSamBeckett

      It’s true, this issue of SFX has been out for a bit. That said:

      1) A lot of people have never even heard of the magazine, much less read it
      2) Everyone loves an excuse to speculate about the new Star Trek movie, right? ;-)

      • Hmmmmm true. However this isnt “news” and you did say upcoming issue, I have had mine for several weeks.

        • Sandy’s right, besides all Abrams really said is (in metaphorical terms) he has a hand full of 64 sided dice and there a huge number of possibles in each throw. Not exactly a plot spoiler.

    • DrSamBeckett,

      You know, most of the time you’re reasonable but sometimes you’re really obnoxious as hell, you know that? According to the magazine’s OWN site, their circulation (number of readers) is a WHOPPING 32,342 people.

      So please, give me a break. That’s fewer people than read this site each day. To act like that’s some well-known information is disingenuous at best.


      • I’m a printer and print is DYING. Case in point.

      • welll, ive never heard of that publication and wasnt aware of this news, so it news to me Vic. SR is my main source of movie/TV info. sometimes i MIGHT venture into IMDB, but thats really rare, as far as im concerned you guys are all doing a great job here.

      • Vic I think he was trying to say that it could of been reported sooner. I think that’s all he meant by it. The magazine may not have a massive number of readers, but after about a week it starts getting leaked on various sites so that at the point of three weeks a lot of people have heard the news. I think that’s all he meant.

        May problem here isn’t with SR reporting this now it’s with the magazine reporting it at all. It doesn’t give us any news and just continues a rumor that’s been floating around for months. After reading it you learn nothing new and still you’re stuck wondering who is the villain. That kind of reporting is ok for a website where your sort of obligated to put out multiple stories a day, but I’d think a magazine could have a better story to print than “We still don’t know anything about who the new Trek Villain is gonna be so here’s an interview where we learn more nothing.”

        That said looking forward to the film, but hope they don’t use Khan. A new villain or the Kilngon would be better.

  6. I don’t want to put down the character or the fans of Khan, but to do another version of Khan would be a cop-out. As Abrams said in the quote, it’s a vast universe, and to not do an original story after the set-up that first movie made would be a waste of everyones time and money. Thats not to say original characters or races shouldn’t be included, but please don’t redo old episodes.

  7. Pulitzer ! ;)

  8. Re: The line in the story above, that reads, “Screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, and Robert Orci are currently in the midst of scripting STARK TREK 2…”

    Is the next villain a well-armored millionaire playboy from the 21st Century?

  9. The way some people behave on here, and I’m the obnoxious one? Funny Vic.

    The magazine may not have a huge circulation, but it’s big enough, I know plenty of people that read it. I suppose it comes to this, it’s a UK magazine, not a US one, so just like all the new UK shows, it gets ignored.

    • DrSamBeckett,

      My point is that a magazine with circulation of 32K readers is not a widely read publication, so publishing something here from that magazine, even if it’s from a couple of weeks ago is still newsworthy. Hell, if I hadn’t seen TrekMovie write about this TODAY (head on over there and give them some grief in the interest of fairness) I wouldn’t have even known about it. I’m betting not a single reader of this article besides you knew about that news.

      This isn’t the first time you’ve given us grief in a very snarky way about posting “old” news. We do an excellent job here with the resources we have and I’m damned proud of this site. So snide little remarks like that don’t sit well with me.


  10. Good job Vic, DrSamBeckett is a tool

  11. My remarks were not intended to be snarky Vic, that’s clearly your interpretation of them. You know I have a high opinion of your site, I was completely on SR side during the Transformers debacle last week and I said so.

    However, can you not see my point? To me, this isn’t new information because I read it in fairly well known magazine, that despite your comments about circulation, is popular considering the size of the magazine. I may be the only person here who knew about this, but it’s still been out there in published form for some time.

    But I understand as a small UK publication, SFX is often overlooked.

    • DrSamBeckett,

      Really? This isn’t snarky?

      “I got my copy of SFX like 3 weeks ago! Seriously, can I just write some of your articles? They’d be more up to date.”

      If that wasn’t your intention, fine, I’ll take you at your word. But anyone reading that wouldn’t take it any other way.

      My point still stands – that magazine has the circulation of a small town newspaper in ONE town. So if the news surfaces to a wide audience two weeks later that doesn’t make it “old” to the larger audience.



  12. I would like to see Brent Spiner as a villain.

  13. The enterprise needs to get lost in space and end up in another dimension where they’ll find themselves in “Smurfs world”! That would be awesome! LOL!

  14. As long as thers’s no villains with tattoos on their faces and I’m good with it!

  15. The point about the Romulans is an excellent one. It fits with their character.

  16. i just wanna seea cool, epic villian(s). just NO Kahn please

  17. Anthony.

    I never said SR weren’t doing a great job, I wouldn’t come here every day if I thought otherwise. I would imagine SFX entire circulation is UK based but it’s well known here, and considering the stories, interviews and guest editors they have (Joss Whedon and Peter Jackson are fans), it’s by no means as small fry as Vic is suggesting.

    • oh i know thats not what you were saying at all Sam, my remark wasnt meant to offend you or anyone else, like i said this is my only real source of film and TV news, i like the atomosphere here..even though im guily of ranting on more that i should about certain subjects lol. Vic and Co. are doing a great job here to me. sorry if it felt like i was directing anything at you, i really wasnt :)

  18. Ok that’s cool.

    I think I probably owe Vic an apology. I, like some of us, get a bit overheated on some subjects.

    • ive had more than my share of A-holish behavior here LOL. sometimes i wish Abrams would give us a little more to go on than he does, it might soothe opinions here

      • and no Sam, i wasnt calling u an A-hole :)

      • Anthony your always an Ahole

        Lol jk

        In all seriousness though Anthony I think your one of the least attitude filled people here. I can only think of one article that you sort of crossed a line and only one is saying something. There are not many people that have had so few out bursts. Granted I don’t comment on every single article so I may of missed something.

        Speaking of which… Sam You said something about a huge Transformers debate last week? Where was that? I missed it I guess. Crazyness.

        • LOL daniel thanks, i think :) all this Star Trek talk has got me hyped to the point of watching the old show and the first two films and the new one lol.

          • Anthony I hate the original, but I know what you mean still. All this talk has finally convinced me to by the TNG series on DVD finally and pop in my copies of First Contact and Nemesis

  19. I’m just very glad that Simon Pegg will get more screen time as Scotty. I loved him! One of the best parts of that movie!

  20. @Vic

    Sorry, was being a dick, bad day. Took it out on you guys, sometimes the brain doesn’t engage.

    • DrSam

      No worries, we all have ‘em.



      • Vic, DrSam, well sorted, good attitude in the end. Given the attention given this site by some members – I see DrSam and 790 here all the time, maybe regular contributors could be invited to meet face-to-face (obviously travel can be a problem). You’ve probably got enough rep now to have your own Screenrant-con and I’m sure that sharing a beer would ease the tensions between people with different opinions. In the spirit of this topic, let’s remember IDIC – Infinite Diversity, Infinite Combinations.

  21. Abrams!!!
    “The universe that [original 'Star Trek' creator Gene] Roddenberry created was so vast. And so it’s hard to say there’s one particular thing that stands out as what the sequel must be.  Which is on the one hand, a great opportunity.  On the other hand it’s the greatest challenge – where do you go?  What do you focus on?  But I’m incredibly excited about the prospects.”
    Blah blah blah, Gene Roddenberry, blah blah blah,,,sequel, must be,,, blah blah blah,,, great opportunity, great challenge,,, blah blah,,,and some blah,,, I’m excited blah,,,

    Wow, the guy pratically gives away the entitre, blah blah blah film.

    • lol 790…i see youre in rare form again my friend :)

    • C’mon Vic! Wheres the “Spoiler Alert”?

  22. I’m not sure we need more Romulans just yet. Nero was a Romulan after all, and we didn’t even see the Klingons (officially) in the first movie. But all of that aside, I think that there are enough villians in Star Trek’s past and in the minds of the writers that we needn’t be concerned about the quality of the villian. Besides, what made Khan so good was Ricardo Montalban’s portrayal of him; imagine if the role had been cast to, say, Michael Landon. Some people just can’t play mean characters well. Montalban could traverse the spectrum from lovable to loathable without issue. I’m more concerned they cast a quality actor (Eric Bana wasn’t strong or particularly convincing) whom I can love to hate.
    To speak out of both sides of my mouth, something similar to “Balance of Terror” would make a great Star Trek movie. Mark Lenard (Ben Cross, you are not he) played the amazing “Romulan Commander” and then reappeard as Sarek. I’m all for a great villian, but I want a bit of balance in a great actor and a great story. I really do want to look back at the first movie and say “gee, that wasn’t so great” because the sequel is so amazing.

    I agree that 2 1/2 hours is long for most movies, but I’m willing to put it in for a Star Trek flick.

    Just my two cents.


  23. Good, now that that is over……………

    I DO hope they do NOT use Khan as the villain.
    Or anything “specific” (ie: one-shot from the original series).
    If this is a reboot I’d really like it to be rebooted completely.

    There are SO many races out there in the ST universe.
    Some barely hinted at.
    Some used as bare background filler.

    I’m not a writer, so I won’t make any suggestions, but please, nothing that *I* would write! lol

    And if it’s in a movie, I’d much rather have something huge and epic than something intimate and character driven. The former is good for the big screen sci-fi film, the latter is good on the small screen where budgets tend to be smaller.

  24. I think they should cast either John Malkovich or Gary Oldman as the villain! That would be sweet!

  25. I’d like to see some exploring, some gorgeous space vistas, great action, epic battles, more of the great characterisation and a new villain.

    Is that too much to ask for?

    I loved every second of the first film, I’ve been a die hard trek fan since the womb, and despite the severe reservations I had about this reboot, I left the cinema with the biggest grin on my face. They did the impossible.

    I think, re using old enemies and plotlines is a huge mistake and goes against everything they are trying to do by reinvigorating a franchise that was dead in space.

    I’m not saying I don’t want to see some Klingons, or what about the Doomsday machine? But these things aren’t as important as fashioning something new, leave the past Trek in the other timeline, let’s see this new (old) crew take us beyond the final frontier.

  26. What I’d like to see is for the Star Trek timeline to be repaired. Abrams’ Trek made major changes to the Trek timeline that plainly do not make sense. For one thing, The Spock that I have known for over 40 years would NOT permit things to stand as they were at the end of that movie. He would argue the logic of “The needs of the many” and enlist Kirk and company to do whatever it took to repair the damage to the timeline that Nero caused.

    The elder Spock knows how to calculate slingshot for time travel, he also knows where the Guardian of Forever is.

    Also, the Enterprise was not built in Riverside Iowa, it was built At Utopia Planitia shipyard in Mars orbit.

    Most of all, James Tiberius Kirk was NOT a brawling kid on a fast track to prison or death that Abrams painted him to be.

    • Hoo boy… here we go again…



      • Tinfoil, they explained your last two points in the movie. The fact that his father wasn’t there as he grew up influenced his behaviour (there’s a whole scene on this in the film), so why not a flow-on effect for where the ship was built -an attcjk by Nero forced them to speed things up and use a different facility? Also, re the ‘needs of the many’, part of Spock’s character development has always been his breaking away from/struggling with Vulcan cliches – he is half-human after all. Spock has realised that sometimes, the needs of the one DO outweigh the needs of the many – that is what has made his character so interesting, and is defined by the meeting of young and old Spock in the film. If he were any other Vulcan, he would be boring. To (mis)quote Worf: “If you were any other Vulcan, I would kill you where you stand!”

    • The Spock that you have known for over 40 years would acknowledge that a star went nova, and destroyed Romulus and Remus. He would acknowledge that life still continues in that timeline, even if he does not. He would acknowledge that “changing” the timeline would be both irresponsible and illogical. And he would never use his knowledge of the future to alter events in the present. You’ll recall that – quite to Kirk’s objection – he insisted that the future be returned to what it was when McCoy saved Edith Keeler’s life in “City on the Edge of Forever.” That resulted in her death, of course. Knowing where the Guardian of Forever is located is entirely different from utilizing it. Furthermore, there is nothing that ever indicates in any of the series or movies that the original Enterprise was built anywhere. Finally, the principle things established about James Kirk’s past during the series and movies were:

      1. He had a brother named George
      2. He has a nephew named Peter
      3. He had a son named David
      4. He was never a Boy Scout
      5. He is from Iowa
      6. His middle name is Tiberius.

      The latest movie cannonized the names of his parents (and at least one grandparent) and that he grew up in Riverside, Iowa.

      Kirk’s childhood is never explored in any detail, and it is important to note that Abrams changed even the birth of James Kirk, presumably his birthday (although that is not verifiable).

      Abrams, in my opinion, did well to cut clean of the baggage from all of the shows, which often contradicted previously established “facts.” He has his own universe with which he can play, and nobody is forced to watch the movies if they do not wish to do so.

      As I do not view Star Trek’s timeline as “damaged” but rather as an “alternate” there is no need for repair. And because of the chaos effect, Spock would have no way of knowing what changes he would make to billions of lives if he tampered with Nero’s arrival, nor what changes he would make in the future not yet depicted in the “original” universe.

      At the risk of unintentionally offending someone, I hated the Next Generation movies and I completely lost interest in them after First Contact – which I admit was a decent movie. I’ve sold off my copy of Generations and all of the others (except First Contact) and I’m happy with that. When Star Trek, the Motion(less) Picture was released, fans were so desperate that they set a box office record on a long, boring movie. Rick Berman knew how to capitalize on this and released “average” spin-offs with the occasional amazing episode. It was time for Star Trek to be “rebooted” and return to its roots, and if they do the same thing with a new series, I expect it will be well received now that fans have had a taste of what “Star Trek” means again. Anyone who disagrees must remember that…

      …I’m a doctor, not a film critic.


      • The elder Spock would have used whatever means possible to insure that the event which sent Nero into the past did not happen. Even if he had to travel to another dimension and mind meld with a movie director and think some sense into him.

        His script killed something I really liked. Therefore I hate him.

        “We hates it. We hates it forever!”

        • No, he wouldn’t. That would be altering a different past, and Spock would not do that. Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end. A little bit of either would be very enlightening.


  27. I think it might be interesting to see Concience of the King rehashed. I mean, Abrams seems to be loving milking or providing angsty backstories, why not go into the Tarsus genocide?

    But new villians are good too. So long as they’re… y’know, people. And not just evil.

  28. Remember “Journey To Babel’? Who was that attacking the Enterprise?
    How about some political intrigue with an underlying plot to disrupt the process… Oh wait… That’s ‘The Undiscovered Country’.
    Never mind.

    • Orion Pirates, if memory serves…

  29. Loved the first movie can’t wait for the sequel, but I still miss TNG. :(

1 2 3 5