‘Star Trek 2′: Official Production Start Date, Shooting Locations, & More

Published 3 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:28 pm,

star trek 2 production update Star Trek 2: Official Production Start Date, Shooting Locations, & More

Production on the tentatively-titled Star Trek 2 was at one point scheduled to begin by either Spring or Summer 2011. However, due to factors like an extended screenwriting process and (primarily) director J.J. Abrams being busy putting the finishing touches on Super 8, filming on the sci-fi sequel ended up being delayed.

Jump ahead to late 2011 and the sci-fi sequel has (finally) officially been pushed back to an unspecified 2013 release date. On the plus side: an actual production start date has been announced, along with additional information concerning the state of the highly-anticipated film’s script, and some of the shooting locations that may serve as various (exotic and Earth-bound) locales of the Star Trek universe.

Trekmovie has learned that principal photography on Star Trek 2 is scheduled to get going by January 15th, 2012 – more than four years after filming began on Abrams’ original reboot. Nonetheless, the news is sure to be welcomed by many a fan who has been anxiously awaiting the arrival of the U.S.S. Enterprise’s next cinematic adventure.

When Abrams officially committed to directing the Star Trek sequel, it was mentioned that scribers Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof would soon have a shooting script (based on their 70-page plot outline) ready to go. However, Orci informed Trekmovie that the Star Trek 2 screenplay has actually been complete “for a while” and that he and his fellow scripters are currently revising their 3rd draft; apparently, the only writing work left to be done involves making sure the film will meet the budget Paramount has settled on. The original Trek reboot came with a $150 million price tag, so it stands to reason that the sequel is being designed to cost a (relatively) similar amount.

Star Trek 2009  Star Trek 2: Official Production Start Date, Shooting Locations, & More

The U.S.S. Enterprise will return to action in 'Star Trek 2'

Industrial Light & Magic (ILM) has already begun working on certain digital effects shots (ex. starships, planets) in Star Trek 2 that will not incorporate any live-action elements, so as to ensure that post-production on the film can be completed in a timely, but not hurried, manner. Likewise, most of the practical sets and elements used in the 2009 Trek flick (ex. the “renovated” Enterprise interior, Starfleet uniforms) have been preserved and are going to be re-used in the followup.

The majority of Star Trek 2 will be shot on sound stages on the Paramount lot. However, Abrams is currently scouting real-life locations to “play” the following:

  • A “jungle planet” that bears a resemblance to the undeveloped regions of Hawaii (that’s where Abrams traveled recently)
  • A “famous Star Trek location” that looks to be brought to life by a museum in Los Angeles

While there are no substantial rumors yet about what worlds or locations may show up in the Star Trek sequel, the film (as a whole) is described as being much “bigger” in scope and scale than its predecessor. So, rest assured, there will be plenty of cool new extraterrestrial eye candy on display.

Star Trek Sequel Star Trek 2: Official Production Start Date, Shooting Locations, & More

The rebooted 'Star Trek' crew

A lot of Trek fans have (understandably) been frustrated with the relatively slow-as-molasses pace that Star Trek  has had making its way down the production pipeline at, especially in comparison to many other blockbuster sequels.

It is nonetheless assuring to hear that the film’s screenplay has been thoroughly reworked and refined to (hopefully) perfection, the complex CGI and important visual effects aren’t being rushed through development, and that pretty much all the same ingredients (cast, creative team, even sets/costumes) that worked well in the Trek reboot are being used again in the followup. So, all in all: things are looking quite good right now.


We will continue to keep you posted on the status of Star Trek 2, and let you know when it has both an official title and theatrical release date.

Source: Trekmovie

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


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com 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. as long as Zoe is back as Uhura I’ll wait five years,shes worth the wait alone ,I thought the first movie was awesome Uhura should had gotten more
    to do then just looking beautiful.:)……………………………..

  2. I don’t mind them reusing SOME of the effects from 2009, but please redo the engineering deck.

    I don’t mind them taking their time as long as the film is great. If it turns out to be crap, then Trek may become what it was before the 2009 refit.

  3. I’m at the point where I barely care. The time between films has been WAY too long for both the viewers and actors. Hell, they could have almost completed their “5 year mission” before we get to see the sequel.

    They really need to abandon these grandiose space opera sojourns and return to TV where the show belongs. You cannot tell the tale of Star Trek correctly in a couple of 2 hour movies.

    • I agree 100%

  4. A jungle planet and a ‘famous location brought to life by a museum in Los Angeles’…?

    Boy, I’m stumped… No idea what those could be.

    • Natural History Museum, La Brea Tar Pits, Griffith Observatory…there are many museums in LA they can use.

      • I’m starting to think Talosians…? Klingons, Khan, and Talosians…?

      • The getty center

        • -DingDingDingDing-
          WE HAVE A WINNNAH! (With it’s very own monorail, no less)

          Don’t know if you’re right, but if I were a betting man..

    • “A famous STAR TREK location.”

      that can bring the guesses down to the shows and the films, not a small task.

  5. • The Orion Syndicate as the villains
    • Larger all-star cast as well as many cameos including by William Shatner
    • More planets
    • Larger space battles with more starships
    • Kirk having better fighting skills
    • Kirk having several human love interests played by Hollywood’s most beautiful young actresses
    • No cut scenes
    • The Star Trek theme music from the Insurrection end credits used at the end

  6. Although I mostly liked what Abrams brought in as an outsider (even if it was largely cribbed from Star Wars), if he were a Trek fan instead of a JJ fan, this thing would be in the can by now.

    Hollywood has always had a love/hate thing about the service. They love the uniforms, cool toys and blowing stuff up, and a movie production is run more like a military campaign than just about any other commercial endeavor, OTOH they see themselves as an elite cultural force that must be on the cutting edge of social progress and therefore above and beyond such brutish endeavors.

    Anybody who knows thing one about warships, past, present, or future, knows that they are heavily compartmentalized to resist flooding (or in this case, decompression) due to battle damage. There simply are no vast interior spaces below decks. When JJ used the factory and the brewery interiors to “show us how big those ships really are” he was really showing us a huge gap in his background knowledge. The only “big” room in a warship is the hangar deck, and those are simple, un-cluttered spaces easily replicated by green screen and a model.

    You only need to show engineering if the script calls for it, Scotty has his monitoring station on the bridge, after all. Perhaps it is better to write around it and let the memory of that mis-step fade than to waste screen time calling attention to it.

    (Besides, those who have read Act One of my spec script on the monster Star Trek review thread know how it “should” be fixed. ;))

    • Not to burst your bubble but….

      1) The (starship)USS Enterprise’s primary mission has always been, first and foremost, one of exploration and serves as a multi-role platform. So while it is well armed and can perform the role of warship, it is not labeled as such. That distinction goes to the heaver class cruisers/dreadnoughts.

      2) While compartmentalization does exist, it is not nearly as necessary on ships of the future because of the all powerful dreamed up tech, the “forcefield”. If you’ve watched all the shows through the years, they use forcefields to maintain hull integrity, possible hull breeches and to keep explosive decompression from happening.

      3) Monitoring engineering from the bridge while possible, was proven to be a poor story decision in ST:TNG. They had LaForge on the bridge for a couple episodes to keep everything focused on the bridge but it just wasn’t working so they moved him back down to Engineering where he belonged.

      Not trying to argue for Abrams vision (because I wasn’t exactly pleased with some of their design choices), more just a FYI.

      • As someone who is less versed in the finer points of Star Trek tech, is there an example of the heavier class cruisers/dreadnoughts from the original series? I know what that means in the later shows but all I recall in the original series was every Federation starship looking exactly like the Enterprise? Are there any episodes that showed variations on the designs of the starships? I’d love to go back and watch if there were…

          • Fascinating.

        • I think the only Federation battle ship we have seen on screen is the USS Defiant from DS9. While smaller than a galaxy class starship, it most definitely could exceed a galaxy class starship in raw power and maneuverability.

          • With all due respect to everybody’s favorite flying phaser bank; the little “D”, only one Federation ship has ever held the official designation of Battleship, and that is the Excelsior.

            The difference between the baseline Excelsior and the Ent-B of Generations was due to a need to add the equipment and facilities for deep space exploration, this necessitated an expansion and re-design of the secondary hull. This is probably the best illustration we have seen of the difference between a Starship and a mere battle wagon.

            Starfleet continued to produce standard Excelsiors long after that however, as they offered a lot more bang for the buck. Research labs aren’t cheap, and the highly trained and specialized personnel required to operate them don’t grow on trees.

            How does this relate to our current NuTrek timeline, where we will likely never see the ships being discussed here? Simply because it shows that in the Starfleet livery, you will never find a ship bigger, badder, or tougher than Enterprise, in this or any other time line.

            • Ent-B of Generations? You mean Ent-D?

              • I don’t blame you for forgetting, not the most memorable installment in the franchise. Generations began with the launch of Enterprise B; an upgraded version of the basic Excelsior platform, It was on that ship that Kirk was lost to the Nexus.

  7. You are so right, Bright Eyes!

  8. Starfleet have exploration vessels and warships, Defiant class ships were designed to fight the Borg. Others were produced for the Dominion war such Akira and Norway class.
    Starfleet has essentially been in a constant state of war for years, only ending open conflict when the Borg were finally destroyed. The Luna class, such as Titan, is Starfleets true return to exploration of space.

    • I also think the Prometheus from Trek: Voyager is, or should be, a battleship. That sucker was fast and had the ability to separate into not 2,like the galaxy class, but 3 ships in a battle.

      • Yeah I agree, Prometheus most likely would have been used as a warship, and was probably developed as one.
        I fail to see a non tactical use for multi vector assault mode.

  9. I think production will be pushed back yet again. Can’t wait to see this one though

  10. Hey, where are all the other Trekkers from the Star Trek 2009 forum?

    • Hey Kahless! How’re you going?

      I’m so excited for this movie. I can’t wait!

      • Gday, mate! How is it going down under?

        I’m excited as well. I just hope JJ learned from the mistakes of the first, even though I liked the first one.

        • It’s flipping hot!

          Yeah, it’ll certainly be interesting to (hopefully) see how they improve things from the first one.

  11. Indeed. Hope that it’s smooth sailing from here on. (smiles)