‘Star Trek 3′ Gets Three Writers; Aiming for 2016 Release Date

Published 1 year ago by

star trek 3 screenwriters Star Trek 3 Gets Three Writers; Aiming for 2016 Release Date

2015 is shaping up as the Year of the Hollywood Franchise, but 2016 isn’t looking shabby either. A handful of genre tentpoles – like the Warcraft and Angry Birds game movies and The Mummy film reboot – have already been set for release that year, in addition to heavyweight sequels like Independence Day 2, Finding Dory and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (all of which had previously been eyed for a 2015 launch).

Paramount hopes to have Star Trek 3 - the third entry in the rebooted Star Trek movie continuity - ready for takeoff by 2016, seeing how that year marks the 50th anniversary of the late Gene Roddenberry’s original sci-fi TV show (which has become the basis for a multi-platform phenomena over the years since airing).

J.J. Abrams directed the Star Trek reboot and its sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness, but he’ll only be involved in a producer capacity – at the most – on the third film, since he currently has his hands full putting Star Wars: Episode VII together in time in order to make a December 2015 deadline. Nothing is set in stone yet, but filmmaker Joe Cornish (Attack the Block) is tapped as the favorite to replace Abrams at the helm for the U.S.S. Enterprise’s next space mission.

Star Trek Into Darkness Captain Kirk Commander Spock Star Trek 3 Gets Three Writers; Aiming for 2016 Release Date

THR has an update on the writer situation for Star Trek 3, following a previous report which indicated that the film will once again be penned by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci (writers/producers on the last two installments). Orci is still onboard to script the third Star Trek, but Kurtzman is taking a pass; meanwhile, Patrick McKay and J.D. Payne – screenwriters on the slow-in-development Boilerplate comic book adaptation that Abrams is backing – will serve as Orci’s screenplay collaborators.

Orci and Kurtzman are still tapped to co-write The Amazing Spider-Man 3 (also slated for released in 2016) together with Jeff Pinkner, meaning the superhero blockbuster will reunite the scribe trio responsible for next year’s second installment, The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Combine that and Orci/Kurtzman’s ongoing responsibilities as co-creators/showrunners on Fox’s hit Sleepy Hollow TV Series – which has been confirmed for a second season in 2014 – and their involvement with ushering in a new era for Universal’s horror monster properties (The Mummy, Van Helsing, etc.), and it’s fair to say that Kurtzman probably has a legitimate excuse for skipping out on writing Star Trek 3.

Sagittarius A Orci and Kurtzman Star Trek 3 Gets Three Writers; Aiming for 2016 Release Date

Besides, the unproven writing additions to the film – in the shapes of McKay and Payne – could be the key to bringing the Star Trek franchise back to its roots (see: the hopeful outlook and progressive nature of the Enterprise’s missions in pre-reboot Trek movies/TV shows), following Abrams’ two installments – which are fun, but arguably more TV-style space drama/adventures, with regards to the execution.

Similarly, a storyteller like Cornish – also the co-writer of The Adventures of Tintin and Edgar Wright’s upcoming Ant-Man comic book movie – may be more inclined to embrace the intelligence and compassion of Roddenberry’s founding vision (with the proper geeky spirit), while still providing the requisite spectacle, shiny CGI effects and thrills necessary to satisfy the demands of a modern action movie template.

Now, that sounds like a fitting way to commemorate the series’ 50th birthday, yes?


We’ll keep you posted on Star Trek 3‘s development as more details are made available.

Source: THR

Follow Sandy Schaefer on Twitter @feynmanguy
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. Okay guys, let’s actually try something “new” for a change…nothing stealing from the past, no revenge flick, no excessive camera flares. Space is your storyboard, so have at it!

    • …and don’t go back and time and rescue whales, as that, also, has been done before far better than you could do it. Again…just try to imagine something new happening with the crew’s space travels.

      • Comletely agree.Something new,no throwbacks and references to previous films characters/scenes.

        • Agree with that !
          But Abrams Movies always feel like TV Shows !
          Must be in his roots that he can not shake off !
          Hopefully someone else takes over !

    • Story is hard to write. Special effects, flare ups, recycling (or “rebooting”) is easy.

      • The effects are so easy that they take hundreds of people many months of work, while writing takes only a couple of guys for a few weeks, if that.

    • The lens flares are a visual style, it would be a shame to remove them for the 3rd in the trilogy.

      Into Darkness was clearly building the likelyhood of a war with Klingon, so unless that is uncharted ground in Star Trek story telling then I think the “new” you’re hoping for may not come. Either way, I’m happy, I was never a fan of Star Trek until JJ Abrams took the reins, I loved both of Abrams’ Trek films.

      • correction: Star Trek is not a “trilogy” … it is a verifiable SERIES – with over 50 years worth of stories in several mediums.
        please don’t be so limited in your thinking and refer to Star Trek as something so common as a typical “trilogy” that will be rebooted every 10 years. And regardless of how many movies are made with the current cast – the stories will continue long afterwards – but considering the entire cast is so young – and they all LOVE playing their roles – they will all likely make a long number films – not unlike the original cast and the STNG.

        When actors are chosen to become part of the Star Trek family (or any movie franchise as beloved .. if there is one) – the actors all know it is something that will likely be a part of their lives until they die. And I say that confidently because Leonard Nimoy was there as part of the first film to guide, counsel and welcome all the new actors to the universe that Gene Rodenberry built. And each actor was likely chosen with that understanding & hope.

  2. I hated “Attack the Block”

  3. I hope that this bodes well for the next Trek film. For the 50th anniversary especially, the franchise deserves a film worthy of its legacy as a vehicle for thoughtful, forward-thinking stories.

    • then get rid of hacktastic lindelof, kurtzman and Orci. they’re movies are anachronistic, unoriginal and just plain bad. We need writer who can write Star Trek, not Car Wreck.

      • +1

        Orci and Kurtzman are hacks, indeed. Everything they touch is hackneyed and unoriginal (save FOX’s Sleepy Hollow).These new guys don’t sound much better, frankly. What the hell do they know about Star Trek?

        Proper Trek demands high-concept, great storytelling, and writers who get the characters.

        • +a googleplex

    • Totally agree.

  4. The Borg please.

    • Over-over-over-over-over-over done.

      • Whatever they third movie is going to be about it’s always going to borrow heavily from what have come before either in the movies or the shows.
        And whatever enemy Kirk & Co are going to face none would be as potentially awesome as the Borg…. if done right.

        • The Borg could fit in, you know. The Narada (the Romulan ship from the future) was upgraded with Borg technology so the Borg could have picked up their own signature one century earlier than in the original timeline…

          I’d also love to see a Borg origin story. I know there are books, but they aren’t canon. It would be awesome to have twist like on NuBSG… The Borg were created by Man and they have a plan :-)

      • Over done? Really? The only three really memorable Borg moments were Q Who, Best of Both Worlds and First Contact… Voyager wasted their potential big times although Scorpion kinda worked with Species 8472… anything after that one can be dismised…

        The Borg should be brought back at some point… if Daleks and Cybermen can come back every series on Doctor Who, the Borg have been blatantly underused in comparison…

        • That’s already three feature-length instances of Borg story. Yup, definitely overdone, when you have to deal with a movie series that only gets to crank out one “episode” every 2-4 years. I want a new story.

          • Borg Count:
            15 Games, 37-38 episodes, and 1 movie

            • Nero ship was Borg and many people believe the craft in the The Motion picture was built by the Borg.

  5. I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to incorporate members from all the trek series into this 3rd film as it’s a 50th anniversary. Can anyone say William Shatner ?

    • That would be awful.

      • No, that…would…be…awful.

  6. Bet it’s a Klingon/Romulan war.

    • Exploring the Romulans and Spock as one of the last Vulcans would be a fantastic idea. But true Romulans, very tactical and intelligent.

      • The thing is: “New Vulcan” may not be what it seems. The planet was picked by Spock Prime to recreate the Vulcan homeworld…the same Spock Prime that knows about a certain planet called Talos IV and a race of alien illusionists that could have been very helpful in recreating Vulcan. Spock Prime once took Pike to Talos IV to give him a future… why would he shy away from taking the remnants his entire race there in order to give them a future??? The only place in the galaxy that has the power to ease the ultimate loss…

        • An interesting idea except that with Pike it was for one man; a man physically crippled.

          Vulcans are better able to control their emotions. I doubt logical Vulcans would appreciate living a life that was illusory en masse as opposed to having a chance to start over in reality.

  7. Just as long as there are no whales in the movie.

    • ‘Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home” contained time-travel and whales.

      ‘Star Trek: III – The Search for Spock’ contained Klingons and the Genesis device.

      • Yes, but Kirk didn’t stay dead, so they couldn’t remake Search For Spock.

        • I’d put nothing past them, logical barriers or not.

        • Here is where you are wrong. Not only COULD they remake Search for Spock, it is likely they actually WILL. Yes, Kirk has already come back from the dead so it won’t be a 1:1 remake but neither was STID a 1:1 remake of TWOK.

          The thing is: Kirk has been revived by Khan’s superblood so it’s still in his blood. The Klingons got whipped their collective a**es by Khan, one man they now consider the ultimate weapon. And yeah, they will kidnap Kirk to get to Khan’s secret DNA. Spock might even steal the Enterprise to save Kirk along the way. Expect an army of Klingonized Superkirks…Mark my words…

  8. i am hopeful…

  9. interesting topic please. like the four next generation films. these past two have awesome casts but just felt like action setup movies for what people really want. lets explore something not just do stunts.

    • Interesting enough, some people begin to appreciate the Next Gen movies these days. Back in their day and age, three of them (7,9,10) were largely deemed as dull, uninspired double feature episodes with crazy action stunts for the old man in the center seat. However, comparing them to the reboots, supports the notion that their is a lot more true Star Trek to them than originally perceived. They could have been much better, but all in all they are real Star Trek movies, not just action movies set in an alternate universe…

      • Often imitated but never duplicated…the original cast was and always will be the best.

      • I don’t know of anyone that looks back on the next gen movies with any fondness other than First Contact.

        They were all out of character to their tv characters. Kirk on the other hand was always an action man.

        There was a sense of Trek in Abrams films that had been lost since Tos. My only complaint was getting Wrath of Khan stories for the first two in the form of Nero and Khan (especialy given that Nemesis was also a direct copy of TWOK). But the actual feel of the movies is very much like the original series.

        • Well, now you do. I very much enjoyed the NG films. Even the one I liked the least was STILL miles (parsecs, even) beyond ST5. These new films, while entertaining, have NOT had the same depth as TOS,TNG, or DS9. They have been…frothier.

          • I forgot to mention WHAT my least favorite NG film was: “ST: Nemesis”.

  10. Thank god 2016, i think there was too much expectation for 2 due to such a long wait.

  11. Star Trek 3: Rise of the Tribbles

    • Star Trek 3: A New Tribble

      Star Trek 4: The Tribbles Strike Back

      Star Trek 5: Return of the Tribbles

      Star Trek 6: The Tribble Menace

      Star Trek 7: Attack of the Tribbles

      Star Trek 8: Revenge of the Tribble


      Wait for it…

      Star Trek 9: Rise of the Planet of the Tribbles

      This could work.

  12. STID was garbage. I’m done with this and awaiting the next reboot.

    I was watching TNG the other day and thinking how easy it would be to pick up with a new TV series with another ship and a whole new crew following the events of First Contact. Something more combative that would show the military side of Starfleet as they go all-out to exterminate the Borg.

    • > STID was garbage. I’m done with this and awaiting the next reboot.

      My thoughts exactly. Waiting for the next reboot as well. Hopefully it goes back to TV (and not the movies), since that’s where it all started.

      But please, no more military/Borg themed shows. I realize it isn’t popular with the casual fans, but to me, ST has always been about space/exploration. They should focus on “space, the final frontier”, as opposed to the typical “back yard stuff” they’re doing now.

      • Whether on TV or in movies, I agree with you. The focus should be Roddenberry’s original “Wagon Train to the stars” concept.

        It’s easy to do war in space, and doesn’t take much thought.

        It’s all in the title, folks. Star TREK — it’s a trek through the stars. Exploration of the unknown should be the key in any writer’s mind right now.

        If it isn’t, then it’s just more fluffy, CGI-loaded. space opera.

      • >But please, no more military/Borg themed shows. I realize it isn’t popular with the casual fans, but to me, ST has always been about space/exploration. They should focus on “space, the final frontier”, as opposed to the typical “back yard stuff” they’re doing now.

        Don’t worry, my idea wouldn’t “fight of the week versus the Borg”. The crew would still discover new planets and life forms. By following the Borg after they have assimilated more alien life forms, life forms previously unknown to the Federation.

        Levar Burton makes the best point about ST, it’s always been about “exploration and new life”. I think of my show as a bit of the opposite where the Prime Directive gets ignored at times in order to rebuild some civilizations the Borg have damaged.

      • I have a reply to this, it is awaiting moderation…

    • I haven’t completely given up but I certainly won’t be there on opening night. There were a handful of critics that recognized the Naked Emperor for what it was, and rightly slammed the last film; I’ll be waiting for their reviews. I actually didn’t mind 2009. The casting was inconsistent and the story dumb, but it seemed to have its heart in the right place. STID, on the other hand, was a badly written mess. I’m not optimistic but I remember saying the same thing after Generations and then First Contact was terrific so there’s always hope. In the meantime, we can hope for another series but I don’t see it happening for a long time.

    • @Zipper Stevens,

      “Star Trek into Darkness” was the first ‘Trek’ movie I waited to see on dvd. I didn’t go see it in the movie theater. I borrowed the dvd from a friend. rofl…

      I have also made a pact to never watch another “Star Wars” movie in the theater.

      • Same here. While I did enjoy ST2009, it has diminishing returns in my book – the more I watch it the less I like it. The trailer to STID did a great job of getting me into the Theater to see it. It also made me realize that, I WILL read spoilers for the next one! I don’t want to get duped like that again.

  13. I hope they go up against the Klingons and Romulans I cant remember if they ever really went up against the Romulans or a Klingon Romulan war would be epic.

    • @B. Siegel. Epic? as in over a long time and a long distance? because that is what Epic means. And speaking of B. Siegel, is that you, the guy who invented Vegas? you’d be just over a hundred years old. seems you sure like to follow. Seems you want everyone to do your thinking for you. But if you mean that the war of Klingons and Romulans would go for years, decades, and across galaxies, universes, then yeah, epic is right.
      otherwise, you can say “interesting”, “Scary”, “Suspenseful”, and other such adjectives.

      • I’m using Epic as in Massive, Incredible , or Awesome. Mr Harding is that you? Are you still teaching Middle School English? And why are you going by the name the Realist?

        I only say that because he was a bit of a tool and only a tool would go out of their way to leave a comment like that.

        • B.Siegel,
          you see, that’s the problem. someone comes up with a word and then thoughtless people, like yourself, bandy it about as if it were a word. someone did your thinking for you. there’s a reason Mr. Harding tried to teach you correctly, and there’s a reason you failed his class. now we’re stuck with zombies like yourself, all because you thought you knew better than Mr. Harding. So did Lindelof, Orci, ad Kurtzman, and now we’re stuck with STAR WRECK instead of STAR TREK. Where is the TREK? It ain’t in the stars. It’s suckers trekking to the theater to watch movie stars look cool and flashy and CGI to hide the fact that Mardock and others are right: We got Wrath of Khan, Wrath of Shinzon, Wrath of Nero and Wrath of Khan. It’s not AN epic, it’s a tragedy.

          • Its called slang most people use it. It wouldn’t be AN EPIC just Epic. I liked the new Star Treks, if you don’t that’s your right.

            I like the alternate timeline aspect. I thought it was a weak at first but it grew on me now I have accepted it. I think its kind of cool to have Spock talk to Spock. I also want to see action when I go to the movies. And its kind of a reboot so what are they gonna find new the other Kirk or Picard haven’t found yet.

            If all you want is exploration pop in Star Trek the Motion picture, watch that and try to stay awake. I cant wait for the next Star Trek and hope its plenty of action. If you don’t like what their doing don’t watch it. And don’t get upset with other people because they happen to enjoy the new Star Treks.

            And Mr Harding was a terrible person and teacher he didn’t and couldn’t fail anyone because he didn’t teach anyone anything. All he did a was complain and criticize everything, and he smelled like mint and vodka all the time.

            • The problem I have with these new Treks is not the action and effects, it’s the script. These writers seem to have very little knowledge of Trek lore and basic science. In Trek 2009, Spock told Kirk he was trying to stop an exploding star from….destroying the galaxy? Really? And it seems like going to other sectors only takes a couple of minutes. I’m about to talk about **** SPOILERS **** for STID; be warned.

              ***** SPOILERS for Trek: Into Darkness *****

              In this new movie, the Enterprise is under water to hide from the indigenous population; why? Why couldn’t they be in orbit? It made no sense. Also, Khan was a product of eugenics, selective breeding; he would not have this special blood. Spock would not have gone ballistic on Khan like that, and he would definitely not discuss his personal matters with his mate in front of others (especially not the commanding officer). Kirk loses his command just to be given it back right away? And Kirk contacts Scotty, who is on Earth, with a handheld communicator……from Klingon space?

              These are just some of the problems I had with the writing of these films. They had good action and effects, but what made Star Trek special is gone.

      • Reaist, maybe we’ll take your vocabulary advice more seriously after you’ve grasped the concepts of capitalization and basic grammar.

        • ahh, gebrown, in the digital age, where people type faster than they think, and care not for proofreading, grammar “in whatever aspect” and capitalization, are easy targets. That would not impress dear Mr. Harding in the least.
          I care not for capitalization. this is a forum for ‘discussion’, not formalities.

          by the way, it’s realist, not reaist. there’s an L in there somewhere, and before you throw stones, my friend, be sure to be outside of your glass house. preferably in line to see Star Wreck XIII.


  15. Third movie Klingon and Romulan war & Enterprise Refit version.

  16. Who Sid they could write needs banned from hollywood

  17. So far out of 12 Star Trek movies we have had wrath of Khan, Wrath of Shinzon, Wrath of Nero and Wrath of Khan 2.

    If they can move on from a 1982 template and actually give us a sci fi film full of hope, wonder and surprises they might make a whole lot more money on the Next Star Trek movie.

    • And please skip Klingons. The other overdone bad guys in Star Trek movies. Boring!.

      Lets see new world’s.

  18. The first star trek reboot/mirror universe from Abrams was nothing more than a remake of Star Wars. No substance to the plot just like Star Wars itself.

    The second one was good.

    In both cases, not nearly enough technobabble that sounded realistic. They need to hang a lantern on red matter. Not just use it as a plot device.

    That said I realise the original ST series was all about Kirk disobeying orders and being involved in action. Not nearly as good as TNG where ideas and ideals were explored thoroughly in-depth.

    • The original series explored many, many ideas in-depth. Often they were thinly veiled morality plays on war, racism, the duality of existence (“The Enemy Within”), etc, etc.

      And they were written by some of the best sci-fi writers of the time: Ted Sturgeon, Robert Bloch, Harlan Ellison, Richard Matheson, etc.

      Abrams’ movies are nothing more than space fluff for lowest-common denominator audiences. But don’t blame him, blame the studio — they want to create a money-making franchise out of it once and for all.

      • And we have so many excellent scifi writers here and now that are being ignored by Hollywood & indie film makers: Alastair Reynolds ‘Revelation Space’, Peter F Hamilton ‘Nights Dawn’ and ‘Dreaming Void’ series, Ian M Banks (RIP) Culture novels… etc etc etc.

  19. Lindelof teases Trek 3 villains and potential crossover with original timeline

  20. When J.J. Abrams boldly created an alternate timeline with 2009’s Star Trek, fans were left with tons of questions. But many of us had one in particular: Would there be crossovers with the prime timeline?

  21. In an interview with HeyUGuys, Star Trek scribe Damon Lindelof not only revealed who may be the bad guys for Star Trek 3 (or rather XIII) but also talked about the Borg and Q—two of our very favorite Star Trek villains—and a potential crossover with the prime timeline.

  22. First off, Lindelof teased us about the identity of the villains in the next Star Trek outing, which should be released in 2016, just in time for Star Trek’s 50th anniversary:

    “You can never see enough Klingons, and I think in this film we’ve given the audience a little taste, but there’s also a promise that there’s a larger conflict on the horizon, and that would be fun to see.”

  23. Is that what Abrams (if he comes back in time from a galaxy far, far away) and the writers have cooking for us? A war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire? Been there, done that, don’t you think? Still, Klingons are always cool in our book, and they were pretty badass-looking in Into Darkness, even though Khan (Benedict Cumberbatch) beat the crap out of them—you know, being a genetically engineered Human augment and all that.

    And what about Khan? Will we see him again? Lindelof remained coy and offered:

    “To answer that question would be to determine whether or not he actually survives this movie, but if he survives this movie, I think that we would be incredibly stupid to not use him again.”

    So that’s a resounding YES, then.

    • So more Klingons and more Khan.

      That sucks.

      I have friends who would normally crawl over hot coals to see Star Trek who just never bothered with Into Darkness because it was a Khan remake. That is despite me vouching for the film. I could not even interest them in watching it on dvd.

      I’m guessing there is a sizable chunk of the market who feel exactly that way. Enough for it to impact what comes in at the box office. Lets face it the Star Trek sequel should have had a better domestic performance than the first.

      Pre Abrams the franchise was feeling old but particularly stale and rehashed. Now with opportunity to do something truly creative they made Into Darkness a Khan remake in the minds of much of the die hard fan base.

      To the new fans Into Darkness was just a remake of Star Trek, Khan simply being another Nero.

      If they go with Khan or with Klingons it is simply going to reinforce the idea that the movie is simply more of the same, just on a bigger budget.

      • It will be war with the Klingons, Khan will be thawed out to help and they will use Tribbles as a bio-weapon against them .Then in the last scene the Borg will show up.

  24. Now, back to the Borg and Q and the possibility of a crossover with the prime timeline. Here’s what Lindelof had to say:

    “You can’t talk about Trek and not talk about the Borg, and certainly about Q. Very iconic adversaries from The Next Generation which is, outside of the original cast films, was my entry way into Star Trek, so I wouldn’t mind getting – towards the end of our run on Star Trek, maybe baby Picard could be born. There has to be some sort of crossover we’re not thinking of.”

    What do you think? Would you love a crossover with the Borg and/or Q? Any ideas you’d like to pitch to Lindelof?

    • The only idea I’d like to offer Lindelof is…..WATCH THE FREAKING SHOWS!!!!

  25. How about going back to the show’s roots: To boldly go…

    Not, to boldy toss random action shots…

  26. just bring back Jolene Blalock and Jeri Ryan…done!

    • The problem I had with 7of9 was that the Borg had her and her parents for, like, 10 years yet in Q Who, it seemed like the Borg had never seen humans before. The Borg should have known about Earth ten years ago.

  27. The new actors/characters are potentially amazing but the storylines dont seem to allow for character moments, its all high stakes and post trek references. i miss the spirit of exploration and discovery

  28. Maybe they can do a story about everyone beaming all over with Scottie’s super Transporter, and living to be 1000 years old on Khans super blood serum?

  29. Now that they have been given the chance to explore, it presents a unique opportunity to show new races and planets. Something unique for both die hard fans and the new generations.