A coincidence?

[davekill]

Sorry if this question has already been answered...

Do you think that George Lucas had any influence on the next Star Trek movie being made so soon?

We can credit the success of Star Wars in 1977 for Star Trek the motion(less) movie being made instead of the planned TV series that was in pre-production.

February 2, 2005 Enterprise was cancelled by UPN. It was the first Trek series since the original Star Trek to have been cancelled by its network rather than finished by its producers and it looked like the franchise had been abandoned.

So

I wonder how long it would have been for Star Trek XI, if the release of Episode III - Revenge of the Sith had been delayed for a few years - not 3 months later, May 19 that same year?

[Rico]

I don't really think Paramount had any intention of letting the Trek franchise rest for very long after Enterprise.  Keep in mind, when the movie comes out in May of 2009 it will have been almost 7 years since a Star Trek movie has been seen on the big screen (Nemesis was back in 2002).  I wouldn't call that soon.  And I don't think Lucas and the Star Wars franchise had much to do with it.  Abrams came around and Paramount liked what he did on Mission Impossible 3 and he knows Trek so it was a good fit.

[davekill]

I'm glad it's getting made now because like Deforest Kelley once said "Let's go, I'm not getting any younger".

I don't feel like there has been a good Star Trek movie made for years. Seems like the last few have been Next Gen extended episodes. I'm ready for an Epic.

[X]

I think that when they decided to end Enterprise, they specifically stated that they were going to let the property rest for 3 -4 years and come with something fresh. On the even of the cancelation, there were rumors that JMS had tossed his hat into the ring to revamp the property after sufficient time had lapsed.


Now if they can turn the movie into a series with JMS at the helm, I'd enjoy that. Perhaps a updated TNG based on the changed brought by the new movie?