Caffeinated Clint
We knew it’d be out sometime in the next eighteen months, what with production gearing up for first quarter next year, but now Paramount has confirmed a release date for the “Star Trek” reboot sequel.
Roland Emmerich’s big-budget “Singularity” movie was supposed to open on that date, but its been pushed to Nov 1, 2013, so the Melrose gang were happy to park the Enterprise in the vacant spot.
In addition, remember that report from What’s Playing a few months back suggesting Abrams was going to shoot the thing in 3D? Confirmed.
What’s Playing reported earlier in the year :
Firstly, there’s a rumour buzzing around the intersphere that Star Trek 2 might be in 3D (which, c’mon, shouldn’t be that much of a surprise – even Thor, which I saw this week, is in 3D and I tell you, it doesn’t need to be!). Story has it that, apparently, J.J Abrams had said somewhere that he might consider adding a stereoscopic 3D element to the newly polished enterprise – might. There’s also said to be mounting pressure on Abrams and Paramount o add 3D to it because, well, Star Wars is. According to my fellow Brit and Star Trek star Simon Pegg it’s not a definite that Trek 2 will be in 3D – its a ‘maybe’.
Asked about the sequel going 3D Pegg says, “As far as I know, no” before adding, “I mean.. it depends. Maybe.”
The actor who plays Scotty in the rebooted franchise says that he’s not personally the biggest fan of 3D but Spielberg’s Tintin has done a good job of convincing him that the technology does have it’s place.
“When something’s made to be in 3D, if it somehow part of the experience, fair enough. I’ve done 3D movies. Tintin is amazing. That is going to be in 3D and that is going to be amazing. Sometimes, it’s like if you see a movie that doesn’t necessarily lend itself to 3D, like perhaps something live action or that isn’t built for 3D, it’s more like they’re worried about it. 3D can sometimes be a vote of no-confidence.”
Can’t wait. Seriously. 3D “Trek” gets me damp.
