More Star Trek: John Cho is Sulu + $160 Million Budget?!

October 12, 2007
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Star Trek

It was only a matter of hours ago that the news about Simon Pegg being cast as Scotty in Star Trek XI broke. Quickly following that up is news that Harold & Kumar's John Cho has been cast as Hikaru Sulu, the ship's helmsman. This is yet another odd choice of an actor for a major role in the next Star Trek film, and I just hope J.J. Abrams knows what he is doing. On top of that, reports are stating that the budget on the film is pushing upwards of around $160 million.

John Cho as Sulu already joins Simon Pegg as Scotty, Anton Yelchin as Chekov, Zoe Saldana as Uhura, Zachary Quinto as Spock, and Chris Pine as Captain Kirk. Still uncast is Bones, although I'm unsure if he'll get a role in the film at all, Captain Christopher Pike, the first captain of the Enterprise, and Kirk's parents.

John Cho as Sulu in Star Trek

Additional reports from inside sources claim that the budget on the film originally started at $130 million and is veering upwards of around $150-$160 million. Paramount apparently is not too happy, but I'm sure the fans will be a bit more pleased to know that it's getting that much funding. They're really sparing no expense to go all-out and make this one hell of a mainstream film.

No other Star Trek movie (out of 10 previously made) has ever earned $160 million at the box office. The closest contender was Star Trek: First Contact from 1996, which earned $146 worldwide. Most of the previous Star Trek films, starting with Star Trek: The Motion Picture in 1979, made around $80 to $120 million at the box office domestically. It seems like they're taking a gamble with Star Trek XI and hoping that it'll be embraced by mainstream audiences.

I can tell you right now that they've got a very diversified and talented cast. John Cho will get the stoners who know him from Harold & Kumar, Simon Pegg will draw the massive fanboy audiences, Zach Quinto will draw a lot from TV audiences, and Chris Pine from the females who known him in Just My Luck. With an early May release in 2009, they've almost got a guaranteed smash hit on their hands. Do you agree?

Find more posts: Hype, Movie News



"No other Star Trek movie (out of 10 previously made) has ever earned $160 million at the box office." I am afraid you, as with other arty types in the film industry, need a lesson in inflation. $146 Million dollars in 1997 is worth roughly $190 in today's money. Whereas $80 million in 1979 is worth about $230 million today. So contrary to what you say Star Trek films have exceeded $160 million at the box office.

Smart Arse on Oct 12, 2007


Picky, picky. Technically speaking Alex is correct and the ultimate point remains -- Star Trek flicks aren't typically blockbusters.

Devon Shaw on Oct 12, 2007


PS: John Cho has come a long way from introducing the world to the MILF acronym.

Devon Shaw on Oct 12, 2007


i Agree and think they will make their money on the first weekend if they do their advertising right.. JJ abrams wouldnt have gotten in on the project if he thought it was gonne flip over crash and burn at the box office since he has top projects coming his way. and for sure with inflation the first couple killed the 160 million mark just my 3 cents

Bob Quinn on Oct 14, 2007


I heard that Chris Doohan, the son of James Doohan auditioned for the role of Pike.

kathy on Nov 2, 2007


Dude, If you adjust the $ gross value for the past films for inflation and compare it to 'today's' $ you will see that the revs from world wide screen release and DVD sales can recoup the expense for the film.

Star Trek Economist on Dec 7, 2007


I for one am Definitely gonna' see it! Being a Strartrek fan...well I've seen everyone..(never liked the original too much ie: cheezy effects) I have most of the Satr Trek consel games...collect Trek...and even have a tatto of a Comm badge on my chest...looks like great casting, and saw a picture of the ENTERPRISE....Looks good! I know I'll be buying the DVD too..if for anythng just to ad to my collection.

Rextrek on Dec 9, 2007


I hated the original Star Trek and cant believe that they have become so desperate they are remaking the original. I thought the whole concept of Star Trek was about New Frontiers not going back into the past. Enough with the prequals already... I much prefered the later versions, so this has really dissapointed....wont be wasting my money on seeing this.

daren on Dec 29, 2007


I hated the original Star Trek and cant believe that they have become so desperate they are remaking the original. I thought the whole concept of Star Trek was about New Frontiers not going back into the past. Enough with the prequals already... I much prefered the later versions, so this has really dissapointed....wont be wasting my money on seeing this!!

daren k on Dec 29, 2007


I can't wait, although I always think Christmas day releases are silly... but I guess maybe lots of Star Trek fans might love the opportunity to get away from their families. I'll probably see it December 26th. I agree with Smart Arse that they'll probably make their money back, movies draw more and more money every year, so First Contact making 146 million... if it does that well it will make way more than their budget. But I don't know, First Contact was definitely one of the best Star Trek movies. I wish they would have made movies for DS9 or Enterprise, but it's a little late now for DS9 probably, and I doubt they'd risk making a movie based on Enterprise, seeing as it only lasted 4 seasons due to a lack of ratings. It's really too bad, I loved Enterprise, but their problem was they linked too many episodes together into a continuing storyline. Made you pretty confused if you missed any.

Emily on Dec 30, 2007


I think the movie will be awesome--as long as the script is believeable and the science feels authentic. Also, to repeat themes of past movies in any way would be deeply unfortunate (mating a human with a rogue space probe, save the whales, etc.). Just do cool stuff with a real story. Don't expect the special effects and high tech to carry the movie--like they did in the very first Star Trek movie. This is a prequel to all the amazing stuff. No anachronisms--like beaming up a running captain with the as-of-yet first untested transporter (Enterprise series). C'mon! None of the other movies or series ever did that! Be real--and so will the profit!

Levi on Mar 1, 2008


I am really looking forward to this movie and (I know it's a bit late now) but as long as film producers don't take a perfectly good and very popular formular and make really stupid changes in order to "update it " I don't have a problem. My best example is the "Thunderbirds" movie from a couple of yeards ago. The producers cannot possibly have ever watched a single program. When Star Trek, Superman, StarWars, Close Enounters and especially Jurasic Park first came out, the industry showed the cinema going public what could be achieved with the new technology. But then what did they do - SUDDENLY Fab 1 COULD FLY ! 10 year old kids could operate Thunderbird 2, and the cherry on the cake was that main team stopped being "Internation Rescue" and became "International Being Rescued" - Such a popular T.V series was decimated in one foul swoop to the horror of whole generations of people who watched ,and still watch the t.v series and for years looked forward to a possible live action version. No wonder it flopped so pathetically. Update and modify films for todays market by all means, and they will most likely be the sucess the film studios want (the new James Bond and X-Men are testiment to that) - but change too far away from what the public are looking forward to - or worse, throw in the most stupid changes known to man for no apparent reason or logic and you will have a really expensive disaster - and more importantly a seriously dissapointed cinema going public ( who I believe the films are made for in the first place) who will then never pay to go and see a sequal, pre-qual or any other qual. Here endeth the first lesson.

Steve Ogilvy on Nov 13, 2008


P.S - Yes, I know it wasn't Thunderbird 2 that the snotty little 4 footers successfully operated, but my point's still the same. This only goes to show how little interest the film held for me after YEARS of anticipation only to be slapped in the face with a wet cod that should have been called "BLUNDERTURDS". Regards Steve

Steve Ogilvy on Nov 13, 2008


No need for Jean-Luc Picard. He is a bald-headed wuss. The younger Captain James T. Kirk on the other hand is badass!

Jonesey on Mar 22, 2009

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram