Chris Pine Talks STAR TREK 2; "We're Not Making Batman."

Chris Pine Talks STAR TREK 2; "We're Not Making Batman."

Chris Pine (This Means War) talks briefly about the tone of J.J. Abrams' highly anticipated sequel, promising fans that they won't be taking a darker route despite the fact that the crew of the Enterprise will be met with a, "much more frightening" threat.

By JoshWilding - Sep 01, 2012 04:09 AM EST
Filed Under: Star Trek
Source: Total Film

In an interview with Total Film Magazine, Chris Pine (Kirk) has shared his thoughts on the tone of the highly anticipated sequel. Nowadays, it's fairly commonplace for sequels to take a darker route, but according to the actor, that won't be the case in J.J. Abrams' highly anticipated follow-up to the 2009 smash hit. As you can see, he also comments on the threat that the crew of the Enterprise will be facing off against (presumably led by Benedict Cumberbatch's 'Gary Mitchell'). Star Trek 2 is set to be released on May 17th, 2013.


"We're not making Batman. That's not our deal. There's comedy, which I think J.J. does a great job of, but, like the first one, there's some serious issues being dealt with. And I'd say the threat is even greater in this one. The force [the Enterprise crew] are met with is much more frightening. It's relentlessly action-packed and in terms of character development it goes places you'd never expect. The arc is huge for all the characters. It's a really big story - I can't hype it enough!"

Quentin Tarantino Finally Explains Why His R-Rated STAR TREK Movie Is Never Going To Happen
Related:

Quentin Tarantino Finally Explains Why His R-Rated STAR TREK Movie Is "Never Going To Happen"

STAR TREK: Colm Meaney On Possible Miles O'Brien Return And What He REALLY Thinks About Trekkies (Exclusive)
Recommended For You:

STAR TREK: Colm Meaney On Possible Miles O'Brien Return And What He REALLY Thinks About Trekkies (Exclusive)

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
CoolantTech
CoolantTech - 9/1/2012, 5:03 AM
Definately looking forward to this we need big budget sci-fy back, it was good that we had Prometheus this year
Berger45
Berger45 - 9/1/2012, 5:16 AM
So Star Trek 2 is not Batman?
ZombieOverEasy
ZombieOverEasy - 9/1/2012, 5:17 AM
So glad he cleared that up...thought Star Trek was all about the Batman.
NeoBaggins
NeoBaggins - 9/1/2012, 5:19 AM
Pretty lame he's pulling Batman out of his ass for no reason. Love the new Star Trek so far tho.
kong
kong - 9/1/2012, 5:26 AM
Why can't J.J do GOTG?
datNAMEtho
datNAMEtho - 9/1/2012, 5:36 AM
Of course it isn't Batman you stupid pig.
StrangerX
StrangerX - 9/1/2012, 5:37 AM
Keep it up Pine, and your gonna be taking off my Flash fan cast list
Ha1frican
Ha1frican - 9/1/2012, 5:37 AM
Has he seen the last 3 Batman films -____-
Ha1frican
Ha1frican - 9/1/2012, 5:39 AM
Wait looking at it again he might be saying that it isnt that serious and dark but it is more so than the first one, at first i thought hemant Batman was goofy but now i think i get it.
Grimm
Grimm - 9/1/2012, 6:02 AM
LMFAO @tea
cheers pal, ain't seen ya around, but maybe cause I ain't been around!
longbowhunter
longbowhunter - 9/1/2012, 6:05 AM
I dont think anyone is expecting the same drama out of Star Trek as we did a Nolan Batman flick. I'm super excited for the sequel. Hell I was ready to see a sequel as I walked out of the theater from seeing the first one.
BRandom
BRandom - 9/1/2012, 6:07 AM
@Tea Where do you find these Gifs? lol
MJPETTY7
MJPETTY7 - 9/1/2012, 6:08 AM
Can't wait!!!
Boekelaar
Boekelaar - 9/1/2012, 6:13 AM
I've never seen so many people miss the point before lol
Maybe he should have said it's not 'Empire', that'll teach him for being modern and relevant haha
jazzman
jazzman - 9/1/2012, 6:19 AM
geez people need to stop riding on Batman d!ck.
pintoman
pintoman - 9/1/2012, 6:20 AM
They're making a lens flare, bar-code scanner, boiler room, effeminate Spock flic.
Ceejay
Ceejay - 9/1/2012, 6:46 AM
What he means is they're not making serious scifi, they're making the nations favourite type of genre, action comedy. Real Star Trek was too intelligent for the masses so they dumbed it down to this shit and now everyone whose brain can only process action films now thinks they're Star Trek fans.

The films box office internationally was almost as bad as Green Lanterns. This is an all American popcorn affair, wake me when they start making real Star Trek on TV again and not the crap they've spewed since TNG ended. Star Trek was not meant to be compromised for cinema!
Darkhaven
Darkhaven - 9/1/2012, 6:50 AM
...this article is taken from an article from a Total Film Magazine, which is not only LINKED IN THE FIRST LINE, the author of the article talks about how the Star Trek reboot came out at a time after Batman Begins, when sequels were "like the original, only darker". Which is why Chris Pine mentions Batman.


So many reading fails and conclusions jumped onto...
SpideyQuad
SpideyQuad - 9/1/2012, 7:01 AM
LOL, of course not.
TheGambitFreak
TheGambitFreak - 9/1/2012, 7:09 AM
Yeah, a couple of you misunderstood. He meant that they're not making full on dark, gritty, serious toned movie, it's gonna be a summer popcorn sci-fi flick like the 1st.
Genesis488
Genesis488 - 9/1/2012, 7:16 AM
Can we PLEASE stop massaging Nolans balls? I enjoyed his Batman flicks (the last one was 50-50), and even though I enjoy Marvel comics better than DC I don't consider myself a "Marvelite" (They have pumped out some crap in the past), but I'm getting sick of hearing people freakout every time someone criticizes Lord Nolan. Other than Batman hes only made a couple of good movies anyway!

Yeah that's right! I just said that!
HAVE AT THEE!!!!

Besides your missing the point of what Pine said. But I'm not going to explain it and deprive you of the chance to actually develop some reading comprehension skills all on your own like a big boy...
SFCamerica
SFCamerica - 9/1/2012, 7:25 AM
Too bad, it would have easily been the best Batman movie. ;)
Knightstalker
Knightstalker - 9/1/2012, 7:40 AM
@Ceejay....I couldn't agree with you more. Roddenberry's vision of a thought provoking, mind stimulating series is gone. Unfortunately, we are now given Star Wars in a Star Trek wrapper. Abrams has pretty much dumbed it down to a high budget version of Mystery Science Theater 3000.
ScarSpeedster
ScarSpeedster - 9/1/2012, 7:42 AM
He obviously means it won't be dark and gritty like the TDK series guys. Heaven forbid he compares the tone to a popular movie out right now, no ones ever done that before.
Blackmatter
Blackmatter - 9/1/2012, 7:49 AM
"We're not making Batman"

well, that's a relief
Ranger14
Ranger14 - 9/1/2012, 8:51 AM
It amazes me how some people get all bent out of shape over what he said. You would think Pine was anonymously posting here as Marvelite the way some people are reacting. Tea is right...I am going to paraphrase in a little different way...common sense doesn't seem to abound around here too much.
LOL
LOL - 9/1/2012, 9:09 AM
Ignorance is curable, stupidity isn't. Pine just means that the movie isn't going the "We're taking ourselves WAAAY too seriously in our mythology of the story" route in tone.
Logan5
Logan5 - 9/1/2012, 10:09 AM
The book was better! Really? The book will always be better than the film, 'cause you've seen your directed version of the source material in your mind's eye; no it will never be better. Same goes for people arguing how bad a video game adaptation is: video game will always be better. The same goes for those that despise the new Trek films. The whole argument that Abrams Trek is not true Trek is about as one-sided and discriminatory as the side taking idiocy with this summer's comicbook movies(we got 3 good ones, yet few will admit that or sit with it). Half-baked observations & ideas expedited instantly as ancient religion: the internet. :P

Trek cannot exist in the cinematic universe in the manner that the show did. The concepts were thought provoking and well written(boring to 80% of the human race). 12 hours a year allows for a much richer universe than 2hrs every 3 or 4 years. Also the design of the show(s) were awful, every alien was a forehead appliance & the effects were silly(phasers looked like tv remotes & deodorant sticks, despite the type 1 being a nod). The Blu rays of the Star Trek shows are well worth picking up and improve on these flaws, but overall the last time a Star Trek venture to the big screen tried to "enlighten us" was the late '70's lukewarm received "Star Trek the Motion Picture." I enjoyed that film, but there was no way that the herds could have. So with that being said, JJ Abrams sending scowls daily to the folks that make the Star Trek: New Voyages fan films doesn't bother me when the new Star Trek films do what they should: understand the original crew, the original tv show & are entertaining!

l0rdleg0las
l0rdleg0las - 9/1/2012, 10:21 AM
As long as the is more Bones and less Uhura I will be happy
Ranger14
Ranger14 - 9/1/2012, 11:00 AM
"As long as the is more Bones and less Uhura I will be happy"

You're speaking for your own self on that one. More Uhura is all win for me!
musashi
musashi - 9/1/2012, 11:41 AM
I want to hear Bones say "I am the law!" lol
musashi
musashi - 9/1/2012, 11:42 AM
Uhura = WIN!

Uhura & Spock? Not so much.
Bodwulf
Bodwulf - 9/1/2012, 12:52 PM
That would explain the 8 year wait between movies.....
UrbanKnight
UrbanKnight - 9/1/2012, 2:43 PM
I get his point but the way he said it I don't like.
Please he should be so lucky. If he was in Nolan's Batman he would have been kissing ass.
1 2
View Recorder