Zachary QuintoThe dust from Star Trek Into Darkness may still settling but if Zachary Quinto‘s recent comments at the 2013 Galway Film Fleadh (via BuzzHub) are anything to go by, we may be getting a third J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie sooner than we thought.

When asked directly about his role as Spock in J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek films, Quinto told the audience:

Star Trek 3 should be filming, I suppose, next year. It’s going to be made a lot quicker than the last one. That’s the plan, although nothing is confirmed yet.

At another point he’s also said to have told the audience that J.J. Abrams was planning on returning to direct the third installment.

Cryptic hints indeed. What are your thoughts on such a quick turnaround for the third Abrams movie and the possibility of Abrams returning to direct? Paramount is undoubtedly over the moon with the financial success of Into Darkness this year so it seems that – for now at least – the franchise is very much under lock-down at Camp Abrams.

Star Trek Into Darkness is coming to Blu-ray and DVD this September. Check out our full coverage with listings of all the available options in your country.

  • NicWhit

    More Trek can only be a good thing IMO. Hopefully they’ll do something fresh – they have the whole alternate universe to play with…so play!!

  • hypnotoad72


    Given how “Into Darkness” had some surprisingly good innovations – the double-double cross, Kirk stuck in the middle, the idea of the role reversal as to why Spock would scream “Khaaan!” (which fails but I liked the idea of what was trying to be conveyed), Spock/Uhura subplot… pre-credits teaser and the set up of the prime directive… only when Kirk/Khan became pals did I start to lose interest, until Spock Prime showed up out of the blue to remind Nu-Spock to get back to the movie’s point, which was fabulously well done.

    Montalban will always be Khan to me (Cumberbatch comes off as a generic baddie, sorry), but part of me likes the retelling of Khan’s origins better – especially as it’s not 1996 with spacefaring ships…

    And, of course, Khan’s blood being the cure-all was lame, especially if 72 canisters with equally compatible people remained to utilize. The need to get him back alive was needless, and the fight scene was overly long…

    (as for peoples’ complaints about physics, the original 60s show and all the spinoffs didn’t always pay close attention either, and the physics-bending scenes won me over with their gripping nature – they allowed me to suspend my disbelief, which is crucial to any form of entertainment/fiction…)

    But in an alternate timeline, they can indeed do anything. Do they need to take old scenes from the movies and rehash them? ST09 was atrocious in that manner, but STID had more tact and felt truer to the franchise while doing new things (esp. Spock/Uhura.)

    Glad Abrams is returning – consistency between the movies does help.

  • Mike Jones

    The 4 year gap didn’t exactly help Into Darkness, hopefully Paramount have learned from that.

  • Patio

    No Klingon War please…maybe they can intercept an attack fleet and they both have to work TOGETHER for a common cause? Every movie doesn’t HAVE to have a villain

  • archer9234

    As long as its new and not Search For Whales or some combining crap like Darkness was. Since he’s coming back I expect 1000x the lens flares now.

  • No way is Abrams returning to direct the third one, not with the new Star Wars keeping to a 2015 release date.

    I actually doubt that Quinto knows anything.

    • Donny Pearson

      Agreed. Let’s hope someone else would direct “Star Trek XIII,” like Bryan Singer, a die-hard Trekkie who made a cameo in 2002’s “Nemesis.”

      • Matt_Cardiff_UK

        Please for the love of Trek DON’T let Bryan Singer anywhere near any franchise. I’m still pissed off about how he ruined Superman. If I had a choice of two evils – JJ would still win.

        • Donny Pearson

          Respectfully, I love “Superman Returns.” I can’t blame those who were like “‘Superman Returns’ drools!”

  • Frequent Guest

    1.) I really love the look of the Enterprise (Especially the bridge.) and the uniforms (With the exception of the gray dress uniforms.). I don’t care either way about the Engineering set (It kind of grew on me when I played Star Trek: The Video Game.).

    2.) Please, no more Kurtzman & Orci. Seriously. Their poor writing and insane, offensive conspiracy theories ruined STID for me.

    3.) Please, no more overhyped, overrated actors who fail to deliver (Cucumberpatch.).

    4.) Despite the bugs, glitches, and repetitiveness, I’d really love a sequel to Star Trek: The Video Game, but with more species and no more Gorn.

    5.) I know I’m a broken record, but can Paramount please let CBS Digital remaster/restore the first 10 Star Trek movies (Director’s cuts and SLV’s.) before 2016? It would be so awesome to finally see it all in true 1080p.

    • Jeff O’Connor

      Definitely can’t agree with the second and third points. I love Cumberbatch’s performance (he sold Khan to me in ways Montalban did not, but I was born in ’87 so maybe I had to be there) and Orci and Kurtzman, while far from my favorite writers ever, have done an admirable job thus far. I kind of know what you mean about the conspiracy theory stuff, but it didn’t go overboard in ID for me.

    • vincanss

      Cumberbatch is not overrated in the least. Sounds to me like you need to watch more of his stuff.

    • Donny Pearson

      Or better yet: CBS Digital should recreate the visual effects for the upcoming Hi-Def Director’s Edition of “Star Trek: The Motion Picture,” most specifically: the visual effects originally created for the Standard-Def Director’s Edition as well as new visual effects added to the existing ones that were seen in both the theatrical cut and the standard-def director’s edition. Same may go for the Hi-Def Director’s Edition of “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.” The four TNG-era “Star Trek” motion pictures did have some computer-generated visual effects in addition to the models.

    • pittrek

      Wow, your first point cover basically the things I HATE about the new movies 🙂
      I agree with points 2 and 4 however

  • leon22

    OH NO! No more JJ crap!

    • Simon

      Oh no! More useless comments from people who don’t like the new films!

  • Chris915

    If it’s true, let’s hope it’s unique this time and more Star Trek-ish… so far, the only thing Star Trek to me, is the setting… I mainly enjoy these movies for the VFX… and Zachary Quinto. 😀

    • vincanss

      If they do that it’ll probably tank at the box office though. Part of their success is in ‘not’ being so ‘Star Trek-ish’. I mean, girls liked the first one wtf.

      • Chris915

        lol, well, that’s because people nowadays just want big explosions, fast paced action… reality forbid someone to actually think while they watch a movie.

        Well, I know many female Trekkies/Trekkers.

        • vincanss

          All the Trek movies have explosions and action though so I’m not sure that was quite the sole appeal to be honest. Nemesis had lots of bangs and fast action too.

          • Chris915

            Yes, but it wasn’t as fast paced as movies today.

            There was a different feeling, in general, in those movies.

    • kadajawi

      Hm. Orci/Kurtzman have hinted IIRC that they want to go more Star Trek for the third installment. I doubt they can pull it off, but if they can I may be interested in watching that movie.

  • spooky

    That would imply that there is a script in place already… or are they just unabashedly just rehashing the old TOS scripts now. I’ll bet we will be seeing The Doomsday Machine and it’ll be talking this time with a British Accent provided by Ian McKellan or someone.

  • trojoe

    It’d be nice to see an adventure that isn’t fraught with violence… to get away from fist fights on the hull of flying ships or fist fights in the bowels of ships or fist fights on giant laser drills… etc.