Kelvin Timeline actor Zachary Quinto hit the media circuit this week promoting the release of his new film Aardvark, where he was asked about the status of the yet-unnamed Star Trek 4 sequel announced by Paramount last summer.

ROKER: “Any insight as to what’s coming up [with ‘Star Trek’]?”

QUINTO: “I don’t know, Al – we’re waiting. I know they were working on a script for another [film], and we’ll see how that all plays out.

But the nice thing about that experience is that the timing between those big tentpole films allows us to go out an cultivate a lot of different creative experiences for ourselves. Being back on stage, doing independent films, and things like that that I love that I’m able to do.

So, I’m hopeful that we’ll do another one, but there’s no guarantees.”

It’s been several months since we heard anything about the supposedly-planned sequel; Trek actors Chris Pine and Zoe Saldana both expressed their desire to return to the series, and Thor actor Chris Hemsworth – who appeared in the 2009 film as George Kirk – spoke to MTV News about the “amazing pitch” for the fourth film in January.

Pine also expressed his lack of knowledge about Trek 4 several weeks ago at the annual Cinema-Con movie theater owner trade event, indicating that he’s “the last to know” about when the films move forward to production.

 

PINE: “I am literally one of the last people to find out — costume designers find out before me; prop people find out before me.

I can’t wait to make the film. I love everyone in the film, you know that. I love the world and will be back as many times as they ask me. I love the tall man they call Thor.

I’ll do this film. If you can talk to J.J. [Abrams] for me, let him tell me – I’d like to find out so I can plan my life!”

As of yet, however, there’s been no further word on the status of the Kelvin Timeline from Paramount Pictures.

SHARE
  • The Science Fiction Oracle

    Paramount is getting its finances and management straightened out, and they know that their lack of a decent marketing campaign, coupled with a really bad release date, were the reasons the last film did not make the $ that they had hoped it would.

    I’ve personally guaranteed here on Trekcore that they will be making a 4th film, and I’m not going back on my prediction.

    • Gary Smith

      I also believe that a fourth film is still likely.

      • Fctiger

        I do as well but its probably 60/40 in terms of not happening vs happening IMO,. I think they will figure it out soon though. I’m just happy even if there are no more of these movies we have a show again.

        • Bifash

          I’d love for the Trek films to continue – TV and movie Trek can live side-by-side, just as the Marvel/DC/Star Wars properties can ( and a number of these are over-saturated imo ).

          • Fctiger

            Trek films will ALWAYS continue. I’m not worried about that at all. Its just a question of if these films will continue or not? Thats how franchises are today, it bombs they will just come up with something new. But yes if there are no more KT films it may take awhile to decide on what the next set of movies will look like. It took a decade to finally get another show after Enterprise got canceled I hope it doesn’t take THAT long to decide on another movie. 😉

            In fact I have a feeling if the KT films are done they are probably thinking of ideas where to go next already but just a guess of course.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            You know, give the relative youth of the cast, it’d be quite interesting if say they didn’t do movies for 10 years, and then brought this cast back for a latter period Trek piece, later in the TOS storyline…Kirk’s an admiral, etc.

          • Fctiger

            That would be interesting but I don’t see that happening. I have a feeling if the another film actually happens but doesn’t do well or below $400 they will just reboot it to something else entirely.

          • cetrata

            Why do these star trek films have to be nearly 200 million in budgets? They can come up with a great looking star trek film with just half the budget at best like they did in the old days.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Mark Hammill, Paul Ruebens, Paul Newman, Anthony Perkins, Ewan McGregor, etc. called to say Hi! 🙂

            The future is the future. Even if they do go in a different direction at some point, I could still see them working this crew into a future movie 10 or even 20 years from now.

  • Fctiger

    Not remotely surprised. They still might make another one but not holding my breath. Beyond did bomb and the other movies were never big hits to begin with, but at least made a profit. And most of the actors are no longer on contract making it harder. And the hardcore fans seem to hate them and look like they bailed on Discovery over it.

    They may still make one more but my guess is if not will probably let the movies rest awhile and just see how Discovery does. And maybe make a new crew and post 24th century again. Especially if Discovery is back in the 23rd.

    Either way the KT films are probably coming to an end.

    • FrostUK

      I think ‘Star Trek’ (2009) got people’s attention, and ‘Into Darkness’ had a big marketing campaign behind it, some really good trailers and a big star driving it forward as well (Cumberbatch) and to be fair, the first half was alright. But then… Khan… what were they thinking?!

      There wasn’t even a need for him to be in the movie. You could’ve had the same story with someone else. Maybe they found Khan’s ship, but decided he was too dangerous to be revived, so they brought back one of his lieutenants instead. That would’ve made more sense. It still doesn’t really make sense that someone from hundreds of years ago could design a super-modern starship a cut above the rest, but whatever.

      And then the decision to remake scenes from Wrath of Khan… Obviously the writers were blissfully unaware of that youtube clip that mocks George Lucas for saying ‘its like poetry, they rhyme’.

      • Fctiger

        Sadly agree with everything you say with STID. It was such a dumb move to have Khan in the movie and then the silly WOK ending. I think it just really ruined what could’ve been a great film. Lets not talk about the magic blood, personal transporters and and a 300 year old man building advance ships. I still like it overall but Khan put a bad taste in my mouth like I think a lot of people. If they kept him just as a Section 31 agent and scrapped that entire last act entirely it would’ve been better received.

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Or alternatively, go full bore with Khan and get an actor that could channel Montelbahn-Khan instead of a lily-white Brit who they wanted just because they were worried about being political correct by avoiding having another terrorist from the middle east/SW Asia.

          Either go all the way with Khan or don’t do it at all. Their half-assed approach pleased no one.

  • Bifash

    I’m a big fan of the NuTrek films ( as a whole, even if STID as a story was a mockery ), but I am pessimistic:

    – The film did make nearly 350 Million worldwide which isn’t too shabby at all, but it wasn’t great domestically ( USA )

    – The longer they leave it, it will hurt the next film’s chances of being a bigger hit.

    – If they reduce the budget drastically to the point where the movie looks and feels cheap ( to the level of a TNG movie even ), it may further hurt the NuTrek property.

    – If they leave out actual box office heavy hitters such as Zoe Saldana, it may also hurt the film.

    One can imagine that if they sell the film as ‘One Final Ride” or “The End of the 5 Year Mission”, it may pique non-fans’ curiosity and they go and see the film. I’m not saying they should do this, I’m just running scenarios through my head.

    Nothing would please me more to see the NuTrek movies get a shot in the arm the same way the Mission Impossible films did with GHOST PROTOCOL or The Fast & Furious films got with FAST 4/FAST 5. Perhaps the Paramount honchos are regrouping to see if they can produce a similar effect? I certainly hope so.

    I think if STAR TREK BEYOND had been the second NuTrek film ( and come out two years after Trek 2009 ) we would be in a better place – and we may even have been in a better position to build up to – and bring in – an EPIC Khan saga for the third instalment, rather than the wasteful ‘Khan-but-not-really’ plot of STID.

    • Fctiger

      Yeah they really screwed up on this franchise. STID was just an idiotic mistake with white Khan and just pissed off a big part of the fanbase (which is ironic since Khan was only there to make them happy in the first place). Although I don’t think all the hate over STID is why Beyond bombed I do think it made a lot of the hardcore TOS fans less interested in it and why it didn’t do better.

      I also agree the long wait between sequels just didn’t help. Sequels for big franchises today don’t wait 4-5 years to make a new movie anymore. SOME do but stuff like Star Wars, Marvel, Harry Potter, DC, Fast and Furious etc pump this stuff out 1-2 years now. Not only that they have stories which keeps building from the last movie. Serialization is in. And yet these KT films are still doing the standard standalone adventure every 3-4 years. The casual audience moves on faster today and with no story threads to keep bringing them back its easy not to care if you’re not a big fan in the first place.. Thats movie making in the past, not today. At least with Discovery they realize that and thats being serialized like all sci fi shows now.

      Anyway like you I do hope they can pull out one last film. Hope so but someone might think they did a trilogy already, one cast member has already passed away and most of them will now have to be renegotiated contracts (and probably want more money, not less) for a so-so money making francise so they might just call it a day and come up with something new. I’m good either way if we get one of these or go a different direction in next set of films. As long as they keep making Star Trek in some form.

      • Ace Stephens

        Didn’t the main stars renegotiate between STID and Beyond (including a set amount for 4)? Like the previous contracts, those would likely go seven years or so, I imagine. So they’d have until 2021/2022 to film another under those. Any actors not already contracted for another could be selectively brought back (depending on cost/availability) and, if it’s dealing with time travel or similar with a focus on Kirk, may not be needed for a great deal of filming.

        • Fctiger

          Yes but only two of them: Pine and Qunto. AFAIK the others are all not signed for the next one. And I highly doubt Pine or Quinto signed on for 7 years. It was only 7 years to make three films. But thats part of the problem in general. When an actor FIRST signs on a movie series, yes generally there is a certain amount of films they are asked to sign on to, usually 3 as Star Trek did. But once those are over, then depending on the situation its just movie by movie from that point on.

          Thats what happened with RDJ and Iron Man. At the time they had no clue how big it was going to be of course but he only signed on for four films. But thats why he’s so expensive now because once that four movie deal was over they renegotiated with him several times more now to get him into three additional films and why his pay checks are nuts compared to all the other actors who signed on to 6-9 films once they realized how big the franchise can go. The Fast and Furious gang all negotiate film by film at this point now since most of those guys probably signed on for 3-4 films originally. But those movies make so much they are willing to pay a lot to keep them coming back at this point although maybe someone like Vin Disel and Rock they got them to sign on multiple films for crazy pay outs.

          But thats also WHY Marvel gets people to sign up to so many films up front because once that first deal is over the actors have more control. Sure in theory they can get them to sign up for another three but doubtful.

          And thats why I’m really doubtful there are going to be many more of these films because the actors have more control now and if the money is just not there its easy for them to walk away. And then when you realize they paid Pine just $600 thousand for the first movie but $6 million for the third movie and the third film made less than the first, well, this is the problem.

          • Ace Stephens

            With Fast and Furious, I’m pretty sure it was one film at a time to start which is why Diesel (and everyone else) didn’t return for the second and Walker (and everyone else save for a cameo) didn’t return for the third.

            As for most star actor contracts of this “franchise” sort in Hollywood, my understanding is that they’re seven years because that’s what’s allowed by law. As a result, I believe Pine and Quinto are very likely under contract for seven years for 3 and 4 (the number of films is immaterial – they could sign on for five in seven years if that was wanted…just as the numerous films in just five-to-ten years’ time for many Marvel stars who haven’t re-signed indicates).

            For 4, if they wanted to do a minimalist approach to it, they probably could, only having cameos from the rest of the crew (or as many as had time) or something which wouldn’t cost as much. Presumably pay for Pine and Quinto was built into the 3/4 contract and the underwhelming box office for Beyond would suggest they don’t have a ton of wiggle room.

          • Bifash

            If one considers the X-Men movies ( Singer’s ) you’ll note that in the first three movies Patrick Stewart is missing for nearly half or more of every film.

            They could take a similar approach ( with regards to your third paragraph ) – have some of the other characters/stars been in it near the beginning, go “missing” during the middle, then reappear at the climax.

          • Ace Stephens

            With the potential time travel or doubles or alternate reality or whatever allows for Kirk’s father to return, I would think something like that seems probable. Perhaps scale matters back to tell a more heartfelt story with just a few key action sequences and where the opening and closing are when the whole crew (or as much as can be) is back. Perhaps with a few scenes interspersed where they are “breaking through” or combating the perceived “baddie” and trying to rescue Kirk and/or Spock regarding whatever’s going on. Of course it all depends on what their full concept is for how Kirk’s father returns.

            Many in the supporting cast are busy in some form yet I can’t imagine they’re so busy that they couldn’t be available for a couple weeks if scheduled for around mid-year next year. Even Saldana, who’s apparently shooting the next Avengers movies and the next four Avatar movies…I’m sure they could find the time somewhere. Or adjust her exact character circumstances so she appears on a scrambled video signal or something.

            Lots of options and potential storytelling opportunities can arise sometimes from strains like this if they keep track and adjust accordingly. I have faith in them to do it and I hope they don’t fall into the all-too-common franchise trap of thinking bigger spectacle is the same as a bigger, more emotionally-engaging story.

          • Bifash

            Some terrific thoughts here which I wholeheartedly agree with.
            I HOPE the head honchos at Bad Robot ( and hopefully Simon Pegg, etc. ) are having these same discussions.

          • Fctiger

            OK I get your point maybe ANY film they sign up for they have a 7 year lease but they do only sign up for a certain number of films.

            And it doesn’t really matter too much if its only the two of them. And maybe thats ALSO why it might be harder to get some actors to resign because if you what you say is true and every actor automatically tied to a movie for 7 years then my guess is its going to have to be worth their wild.

            I don’t think they would go that minimalist though. IIRC Karl Urban almost didn’t come back to Beyond because his contract was up and he only came back because they gave him more to do, not less. Same reason why they can’t get Shatner to do Star Trek again because he always wants more than cameos (ie, more money ;)).

            My guess is they will try to get them all back or just not bother.

  • Visitor1982

    I’m sure there will be more Star Trek movies, not so sure it will be Bad Robot/Kelvin Timeline movies with this group of actors though…

    • Bifash

      The problem here ( same problem faced after the failure of NEMESIS ) is that by potentially setting the “next” films in a new timeline with a new crew, and new CAST, it’s not going to appeal to anyone outside of Trek fandom necessarily, so won’t achieve the wide appeal they are striving for.

      At this moment in time, the JJ trek cast are incredibly well-known ( in spite of the domestic box office failure of BEYOND ). I imagine Paramount will be bending over backwards to try and utilise Pine, Quinto, Urban, and Saldana especially. But if that doesn’t work they may want to let the movies lay fallow for a while.

      Bottom line is: How can use these actors, save money on production, AND achieve box office success after yet another delayed ( indefinitely ) production start?

      Will they seek to bring in Shatner ( or some other past Trek crews – for the gimmick/wide-spead publicity that it may garner even though that may not translate into box office success for the reasons outlined above )?

      • Fctiger

        I don’t believe that. If that was the case every Star Trek show would’ve failed after TOS.

        I think if they find a good enough premise and strong actors they can make anything they like. Lets be honest the Trek fans will watch ANYTHING if its good enough. Its really the casual fans thats the issue and they don’t care who the characters are just that its exciting for them to watch. No one knew who Chris Pine was before he became Kirk like no one knew who Patrick Stewart was before he became Picard. They became popular after the fact.

        It just depends on how strong the film is and the actors who play them.

        • Bifash

          Fair point.

          On a tangent, I personally would like to have seen a movie ( or even TV series ) set in the oft-theorised second 5-Year mission post-TMP. Undoubtedly, this will have no resonance outside of Trekdom, so I don’t see it happening.

          Movie-wise if they were completely leave behind Kirk & Co. I’m not sure where they could go ( I doubt if they would reboot TNG – I don’t think that would work ).

          I wouldn’t mind it if the final Kirk & Co NuTrek movie ended with the Prime-Timeline being restored, and in the last five minutes of the movie we see Pine-Kirk, Quinto-Spock, Urban-McCoy, etc. on the bridge of the 1960s’ TV rendition of NCC-1701, heading off towards the stars.

          • Fctiger

            Dont get me wrong I certainly see your point. I think its always easier to market already known characters which is why we got the KT films but sadly thats just Hollywood today and falling on brand names because they know if enough people know a character its going to make some money.

            Which is why we now have the same dozen franchises popping up over and over again for the past 30 years. And why so many comic book films are being made. No one even bothers to take the chance of making a new hero when they have literally hundreds they can fall back on for my guess decades at this point.

            Also why I like Trek on TV, because they still take actual risks (yeah Discovery is playing it safe with the same lazy time period but at least its a new ship and crew again).

            And you’re right I don’t know if they will take a chance on brand new characters in the films vs the shows but they HAVE come up with ideas to do just that in the past. One idea was Star Trek: The Beginning which was going to be a trilogy movie about the Romulan war but from the perspective of non starfleet people (although one was going to be an ancestor of James T. Kirk IIRC). But yeah that was tossed for these movies lol.

            So who knows? HOPEFULLY it won’t just be another TOS reboot if the KT films are done but who knows? And I honestly think going that direction is just harder because Star Trek fans are so damn fickle AS he KT films themselves proved. Comic book characters gers rebooted over and over again, why they keep making the damn things. I don’t know if anyone is prepared for a completely rebooted Kirk and Spock series based on our perspective today. I mean we sort of have that with the KT films but it didn’t seem to work. And if they just restart everything I think the fans would hate it more which is why rebooted Trek is not the same as rebooting Batman. That character has been done in so many different forms at this point you can do anything.

            I think why Trek is probably ultimately more successful on TV where you can just create new characters and expand canon and not redo it.

          • Bifash

            Very good points. I certainly agree on everything you say.

          • Fctiger

            Thanks. Yeah like you I think the movies are in a tighter bind. I have no doubt a new crew and cast can make money, the question is can it make the kind of money they want? And I dont think the KT films ever done that, hence why these movies are on life support after just three of them.

            Meanwhile Fast and Furious 8 will hit a billion dollars by Friday lol. Crazy world.

          • Bifash

            To be fair, Fast & Furious have built their brand over 20 years after early false starts.

            I think where they began to coalesce as a world-wide monster is when they embraced the core notion of the “family” and these characters that many people around the world enjoy seeing time and again.

            Where the NuTrek faltered ( as discussed many many times of course, even in this thread ) is trying to break apart its own “family” in just the second movie – trying to be all “Empire Strikes Back” and “Dark Knight”.

            I wish sequels would stop using these two examples as benchmarks because it just doesn’t apply to Trek.

            Trek 2009 set up the “family”, and we should have seen how this family worked together to face adversity.

            I take nothing away from Fast & Furious ( indeed I am a huge fan ), and commend it for its core philosophy of friendship, loyalty, hope, and outright fun.

            Surely these notions are what should have been the focus of the NuTrek movies instead of waiting for the third movie ( directed of course by F&F’s saviour director Justin Lin – himself a bigger fan of Trek from childhood than he ever was – or is – of cars ).

          • Fctiger

            No my point being that Star Trek has been around for 50 years and yet Beyond on its “50th” anniversary still made less money than FnF 8 made in one weekend lol. The same franchise that was thisclose to going straight to video when Tokyo Drift basically bombed in the theaters. Now its one of the hottest things ever while Trek is LUCKY if it can past $400 million after a 4 month run in theaters.

            THATS what gets studios excited and why I think the KT films are on burrowed time sadly. These movies just don’t generate the kind of hype for the money they cost.

          • Charles Baxter

            I didn’t know FnF 8 made 340 million on it’s opening weekend. According to multiple sources it’s only made 98 million to date. So that claim isn’t true.

            If you can’t get your facts straight don’t comment.

          • Fctiger

            Uh Fast and Furious 8 made $539 million opening weekend chief. Nearly $200 million more than Beyond made in its total run. In fact it actually beat out The Force Awakens to have the biggest opening weekend in film history.

            http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4284&p=.htm

            http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/worldwideopenings.htm

            I guess all those ‘multiple sources’ you never found one that discussed its TOTAL box office opening weekend, domestic and international. If you can’t even find the most basic facts that takes all of 30 seconds to find don’t comment, especially when you end up looking like the idiot over it claiming others don’t have their facts straight. 😉

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            LOL — you just did this to charles BAXTER:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym-toH7EF1c

          • Fctiger

            Hey ‘multiple sources’ I see you haven’t been back to say you were wrong or apologized for claiming I didn’t know what I was talking about (irony).

            What I love about the internet, some idiot who couldn’t be bothered to do a minute of research before attacking me spewing out of the mouth I’m wrong. And then when they are the one proven wrong they are never seen again. Maybe its best you don’t comment not to look as silly as you look now.

          • cetrata

            That’s one of the things I miss about IMDB. You owning idiots like that guy.

          • DC Forever

            Ah, those were the days! You and your buddy Fctiger having good times trolling over at IMBD. Seems like it was only yesterday. Now it’s just not the same anymore.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJNrKHv50X8

          • cetrata

            Dont know who you were on imdb but you were one of those trolls we owned. Not me and fctiger.

          • DC Forever

            I was joking, genius. LOL

          • cetrata

            Sorry. Its hard to tell sarcasm just from online comments.

            And i do wish the imdb boards were still around.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            LOL !!!!!!

          • cetrata

            Kind of like those guys who kept saying beyond would do easily a billion on imdb. There was one guy that kept promoting the chinese box office and attacked “haters” who were actually fans and just being realistic.

          • Charles Baxter

            Idiot hmm? I guess you don’t take all box office returns into account?
            For Star Trek Beyond look here: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=startrek2016.htm

            Furious8 made 167 mil total as of today (4/26/17) as we can see bellow it had an opening of 98.7 million: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/byseason.htm?season=Spring&adjust_yr=2017&p=.htm

            I do apologize for making someone who has no importance what so ever in my life wait 4 days. While I am working and keeping my business going.

            So yeah feel free to SnS (maybe you can figure that out in a few weeks)

          • TIG1701

            Guy you quoted domestic box office. He’s quoting world box office. How can you not get that? He’s saying Fast 8 made more in one weekend worldwide with $500 million than Beyond made worldwide in its entire run.

            Did Beyond make $340 million in America only? No which means he was citing its world box office and not just domestic. Maybe its time to stop looking foolish now.

          • Ace Stephens

            Rap music? What? The same song from ’09?

          • cetrata

            It does help that the main cast consists of difference races and that the film’s themes are universal around the world (that’s what universal pictures is built for right?)

      • Xandercom

        Same goes for Discovery.

  • Bifash

    The Marvel Cinematic Universe already has Hemsworth, Saldana, and Urban. If they could have found a way to bring in Pine ( too late – he’s in the DCU ), Quinto, Cho, and Boutella, it would be great to see this cast re-united again.

  • Bifash

    At the risk of yet again evoking past Trek movies, I’m wondering if the proposed team-up with Hemsworth & Pine could benefit from another time-travel story set in the Present Day:

    It may help to keep production costs down if it can be a compelling story, with minimal sfx ( limiting sfx mostly to the beginning and climax of the movie ); most of the crew are missing by the evil machinations of some human looking aliens, leaving Pine, Hemsworth, Saldana, and urban to carry most of the film.

    • Xandercom

      Well, that damned Whale probe is still out there. The new Enterprise doesn’t have a cloak though.

    • Tone

      They just need to write a story where they spend lots of time in the brewery, I mean Engineering.

  • GhostLoveScore

    Hopefully there won’t make any more Kelvin movies. I like every Star Trek – TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, I like all pre-Kelvin movies except The final frontier. I don’t consider TOS to be the only real Trek. But I hate this new movies. If you take away name Enterprise and famous names Kirk, Spock, Uhura… You wouldn’t know it was supposed to be Star Trek movie. I just hope Discovery won’t be this modern camera-shaking, flare-lens everywhere, romantic-relationship-issues crap.

    • FrostUK

      The third film has given the creators the opportunity to turn some things around. With the Enterprise being destroyed, and a new one being constructed, I’d really like to see a proper interior. The JJ Enterprise interior is so tedious and devoid of life and imagination. Justin Lin did his best lighting the interior but its just a horrible design. Thank God the brewery-engineering didn’t come back in that film.

      A proper bridge and a proper engineering would be a step in the right direction. The cast are getting stronger with each movie I feel. If they had a good story behind them and not another poorly developed villain hell bent on revenge, they might have a chance at a good movie.

      I think its time a new composer took over as well. Get a fresh pair of eyes on the score and give us something new.

      That said, I guarantee none of this happens if there is a 4th movie. They’ll probably bring back all the shit sets, the brewery, give us another poorly developed villain, get Giacchino back and add an extra $20m to the budget to try cover the plot holes.

    • Fctiger

      I don’t mind these movies at all and they are fun. But that said I knew it was a BIG mistake to try and reboot TOS. Yes it got a lot of attention over it but I knew it was never going to please the fan base overall. The first film actually did fine all things considered and did more right than wrong IMO. But STID basically proved every fear I had why making a TOS reboot would be a mistake and it paid the price for it with the fans. Then they tried to correct the ship with Beyond but by then most of the fans just stopped caring. This movie made $100 million less in America than ST09 did with more theaters, inflation and in 3D. Thats really bad and an alarming sign they are just going in the wrong direction for a long term franchise.

      I really do hope they can get one more film out to at least give it closure but I’m not holding my breath either way at this point. The films just never made the money Paramount probably expected and I don’t know if they can ever get enough fans back to be bigger hits.

      • GhostLoveScore

        Agree, what they should have done is make new Star Trek. This looks to me something like this – “hey, TOS movies made good money, we are lazy to think of something new so let’s just keep all the characters, put them in a parallel universe and just change plot a little bit. That way we can earn lots of money from naive fans”

        I just looked up box office data for ST Beyond, they didn’t even cover production costs…

        • The Science Fiction Oracle

          Which our course explains why Star Trek The Motion Picture and Star Trek 2009 made the most money of any Star Trek films in history.

          WHOOPS !!! LOL :-))

          • GhostLoveScore

            The Motion Picture is WAY better than Star Trek 2009 🙂 I could probably enjoy ST 2009 only after I drink 10 beers, it’s only a shame that I never have enough time to drink 10 beers and then watch 2 hours movie. I should drink faster. 🙂

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well I love Trek 2009, but thought STID and Beyond were kind of OK, but not great. After Enterprise, Nemesis and Insurrection, ST 2009 was fracking awesome in terms of me seeing Trek make a comeback.

            But hey, you do bring to mind that ST 2009 could be watched while making a beer drinking game out of each lens flare that appears on screen.

          • GhostLoveScore

            That’s a really good drinking game, I should try it sometime 🙂

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You’re not totally right here. Star Trek TMP was successful at the box office but was considered a flop considering the amount of money wasted on it.

        • TIG1701

          Agreed as well. The Kelvin movies were trying to get old Trekkies to see Kirk and Spock again, only they dumbed down the characters so much its like Kirk and Spock for high school students. And oh yeah in a parallel universe because they wanted to keep real Star Trek in tact. They were smart to do that at least.

      • cetrata

        Hey Fctiger. Do you remember me back from IMDB where I was the only one that requested you keep the james cameron stories going? But yeah, quinto saying star trek 4 isn’t a guarantee isn’t a surprise since the third film basically flopped.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        You assessment of Beyond’s box office is just plain wrong. The reason why Beyond performed so poorly was two-fold:

        — First, due to I expect the studio’s financial works, they barely marketed it — there was nearly NOTHING in terms of long-term marketing of this movie. Until the lame Rhianna song came out, the general public had no clue this movie was even coming out.

        — Secondly, the mid-summer release date, which kept movie, then was put up almost next to the Olympics, was dumbfoundingly stupid by the studio. The movie public was tired of the action movies by that point in the summer. They should have waited and done a fall release.

        The poor performance at the box office has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with whether this movie series was a TOS re-boot or not.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      You lost me when said you loved Voyager and Enterprise. I couldn’t take your opinion very seriously after that, no offense meant.

      • GhostLoveScore

        No offense taken. What’s wrong with Voyager, they had very good episodes. Enterprise too. There is something about Enterprise that I like very much. Especially xindi arc. I hate T’Pol though. Such and annoying character.

        TNG is still my favourite Trek.

        Insurrection and Nemesis are OK, not great, but I watch them every now and then. I probably like the main cast.

      • TIG1701

        It means he thought they were better than the Kelvin movies. Was that clearer?

        Those actually felt like Star Trek. The JJ movies feel like less cooler Star Wars movies for teens.

  • James

    I hope Abrams is more involved with the next one. The guy knows how to generate excitement around a movie. He also knows a fair bit about creating a successful reboot.

    • Xandercom

      Doubt it. His fees have gone sky high now, and Bad Robot can’t make Trek without making it look like Star Wars

    • Pedro Ferreira

      He knows how to generate excitement but does he know how to create a good film?

      • TUP

        I’ll tell you something that bugs me. Not just the fact JJ admitted he was a Wars fan and not a Trek fan. But there was an idea for the Kelvin to be the classic Enterprise. I liked that idea.

        But even if it wasn’t the Enterprise, they couldn’t use a ship from canon because JJ wanted to name the Damn ship after his grandfather.

        Like paying you a huge sum isn’t enough? You need to add little Easter eggs to your family?

        Totally self absorbed.

        • Simon

          Oh please. Talk about self absorbed fans.
          He has a nod to the Kelvin name in all his films and it didn’t hurt TREK 2009 one damn bit. You’re really pulling at straws for any kind of criticism here. Especially since Abrams said he’s a fan now. Just as Nicholas Meyer was before TWOK – he wasn’t a fan either and considered the franchise somewhat of a joke. Read his book if you don’t believe me. But will you criticize him for that? Will you?

          • TUP

            Im sorry, Simon, if we discuss issues on a higher level than you understand.

            Here’s a comparison. If you and I are looking for a new car and you’re happy with a rusty golf cart that sometimes runs but I want an Escalade, to doesnt mean either of us is wrong. It means you’re easier to please.

            I stand by this: If ANYONE liked STID, then GREAT! Good for them. The people that come along to argue with fans who did not like it in an attempt to prove their opinion is wrong simply dont get it.

            Its as okay for me to dislike STID as it is for you to like it.

            And again, reading is your friend, Simon. If I get an Escalade and I love it but I notice a scratch on the fender I probably say ‘hey this car is great so who cares about a little scratch’. But if it has multiple issues I start thinking its a lemon and then that scratch becomes just another reminder of how much it sucks.

            You’ve heard of Tour Riders? Those requests bands make of the local promoters, such as having a certain beer brand in the green room or specific snack? We’ve heard the stories of ridiculous requests like a bowl of M&M’s but with all the red ones removed.

            The reasons bands do that is because if they walk into the green room and see red M&M’s it tells them the organizers didnt pay attention to their requests and if they couldnt get a small and mundane thing right, then what big things did they also get wrong.

            So you picked out a rather small criticism from my posts. But let’s address. Do I really care if the ship is Kelvin? No. But this is the arrogance of the film makers. If the movies were great, we wouldnt even be discussing it. But because the films were hurt by the arrogance of the film makers, we can look at the Kelvin as an example.

            Oh JJ is now a fan? Thats great. He’s a fan of HIS version of Star Trek because he tried to create a NEW Star Trek that Bad Robot would control and profit from. We’ve heard the stories of them trying to create a vast merchandising universe and Paramount or CBS blocking them along the way.

            JJ and his pals made the Star Trek films they wanted to make for themselves. And thats why we got what we got. On Star Wars, JJ made the Star Wars film Kathleen Kennedy wanted and thats why TFA was a much better Star Wars film then 09 & STID were Trek films.

            So please, if you love the films, great. Enjoy them. I liked 09. But dont condescend to me about my opinion of the film makers and the garbage they gave us.

          • Simon

            Talk about condescending. You didn’t address what was said, you just went on a manifesto like rant. It’s not high level, it’s mundane fanboi nitpicking of the worst kind. The very fact YOU think it’s garbage and don’t realize it’s YOUR opinion, assuming it’s fact, speaks volumes. You also have no idea how business works. It’s a Paramount, Bad Robot production. FILM is a business. Rodenberry wrote lyrics to the original STAR TREK theme so he could get royalties forever. Enough of the double standard.

          • TUP

            Agai9n, Simon, you miss all the points so you urn to insults. Feel free to disagree. You’re entitled to you’re opinion. if you’re easier to please, thats cool. But here we are probably not getting a 4th Trek Film. Is that because people like me want them to be better or people like you accepting lesser quality?

          • Simon

            “Quality” has nothing to do with it. Paramount being in financial disarray has everything to do with it. Being “easy to please” has nothing to do with it either. I was around when TOS was first run in the ’60s. Nimoy was happy with the new films as well. You disagree with him I guess.

          • TUP

            Oh Nimoy liked them? What else did Nimoy like so I know what I HAVE to like too.

            Listen, not loving the films like you is not a personal attack on you.

            And yes, quality has everything to do with it. I made a list of issues with STID and Beyond. And its not an exhaustive list. There was not enough care and over-sight with the scripts. They just werent good enough.

            If they were good enough for you, thats great. No one is taking away your enjoyment.

            But they werent good enough for me and a lot of other people. And thus, we have under-performing films, either box office or acclaim or both and now we are unlikely to get a 4th.

            Paramount having issues right now is not why there is reluctance to do a 4th film. If Beyond was a huge hit, they’d have greenlit a 4th already. they dont seem to have trouble making other films during their current chaotic period.

          • Simon

            Nimoy knew TREK better than any of us.
            STID & Beyond have less issues than most of the TOS films and there was plenty of care with their scripts. They’re just not good enough for your expectations (which aren’t possible for a TREK film anyway – that stuff is for a TELEVISION series to address). As far as underperforming they still made a lot of money, more than most previous TREK films even after adjusting for inflation. Paramount knows they need to spend a certain amount to keep the quality up and they can’t pay the bills right now.

          • TUP

            That is absurd. Its your opinion so you’re entitled to it but stop framing your opinion as fact. Its simply not true. You have no idea if Nimoy liked Beyond. You have no idea if he gave 09 or STID more than a passing thought. And what he liked doesnt change whether they were as good as they could be anyway.

            Also, if Paramount knows they need to spend a certain amount but cant right now and thats why we arent getting Trek 4, why are they spending so much on other properties? The studio being is chaos may contribute to the lack of support for Trek but the lack of support is because its not good enough.

            And stop with the box office shell game. You want to compare how much STID generated in revenue compared to one of the TOS films? Start by comparing their budgets.

            And what is it I want in Trek films that can only be addressed on TV? A logical and sensible plot?

            Go back and read my criticisms in this tread of STID and Beyond and tell me what I disliked that is best left for TV. Are you excusing Orci’s half-baked War on Terror plot because telling a complete story requires TV? COme on…

            If STID was so good why did the studio fire Orci? Clearly they never felt comfortable with his promotion to director and they got rid of him as soon as it was clear he had no idea what he was doing.

          • Simon

            Seeing as Nimoy talked often about how much he liked the scripts for 2009/ID, coming out of retirement specifically to work on them and with JJ Abrams – it was a heck of a lot more than your passing thought.
            As for the other – Paramount was clearly uncomfortable putting an untested director on a prized (and expensive) franchise.
            STID has a higher Metacritic rating than TWOK – you might want to chew on that one for a while.

          • TUP

            So Simon, you cant form opinions for yourself? You have to rely on what Nimoy and metacritic scores tell you?

            You provide no sound reasoning for your views. You just state “facts” that are unfounded. Im sure Nimoy enjoyed 09 and STID. But uh oh, he seemed to enjoy WoK too but oh no, its metacritic score isnt as how so how is this possible? It doesnt matter, thats how.

            Maybe Nimoy liked Corn Flakes for breakfast too. So now you do too. I dont. Does that mean anything? No.

            I provided several reasonable criticism that you have not responded to. You are a JJ FANBOY so you have your ears and eyes covered and only your mouth is working.

            If Paramount was so uncomfortable putting Orci on Beyond, why did they? And regardless, what does that have to do with anything? it doesnt change that STID sucked and Beyond, while better, also sucked.

          • Simon

            Mmm hmmm. Your opinion is NOT fact, period. Once you realize that nobody will convince you otherwise, since you won’t listen.

          • TUP

            Ummmm riiight, thats exactly what I’ve been saying. You have your fingers in your ears yelling nananananana cant hear you. Whatever.

            I laid out reasonabvle criticisms of STID and Beyond and you just speak in general terms about how Nimoy liked it so it must be good.

            If you cant discuss, dont reply.

          • TUP

            @disqus_Ssz4iYYLzq:disqus and by the way, Nimoy saying he liked 09 and STID is great and might very well be true. But Shatner knew Generations sucked but did he do press tours saying so? No, he said come see this film, its great. Nimoy wasnt going to say “well, they’re decent but they have some issues”.

            Yes he came out of retirement for 09. 09 is the best of the three. He barely had anything to do with STID. I find it hard to believe the guy that created the story for TUC, based on the cold war de-frosting between the USSR and USA would actually love the anti-American half baked War on Terror plot. Thats exactly the type of story that Nimoy would take and say “im interested…but I want to re-write the script”. But he was sick, he was old and he was barely in it.

          • Simon

            Nimoy made it very clear he would only do the role if he liked the script and there was something significant for Spock to do. That’s why he refused to do GENERATIONS and most of his lines went to Scotty.

          • TUP

            And? So what. He said that about 09. Not about STID which was awful.

          • Simon

            Again, if you’re going to continue to mistake your *opinion* as “fact” we have nothing more to discuss.

          • TUP

            If you’re going to be that immature then I agree. Come back when you have something relevant and mature to post please. Discussion is good. Be open minded.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The Force Awakens was pretty terrible.

          • TUP

            Meh, I liked it. The people who were critical of it for being similar to A New Hope missed the point I think. I thought TFA was so much better as a Star Wars film then STID was as a Star Trek film.

            What bugs me the most is, the issues with STID could have been corrected. It was like Orci submitted the script and everyone said “yeah! Lets film it!” instead of working through the issues and making it better.

            Fair point though, Khan was apparently not his idea.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            The Force Awakens was much worse than any of the Star Trek movies he did, there was more to lose. I couldn’t care if it was a rehash of ANH had they made an effort to keep the EU and not destroy the Star Wars universe.

          • TUP

            EU complaints have nothing to do with the film. Deeming the EU non-canon was badly needed. Great decision. Certain EU ideas become canon as they go now.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Totally disagree. It would have been a smart move had they not only rehashed elements of it, twisting it but also by ruining the characters. They should have kept the EU as it was, this is why The Force Awakens is a complete disaster.

          • TUP

            Im not a Wars nerd like I am a Trek nerd so I cant debate it on the merits of the entire Star Wars universe. But I really liked it.

            And I was worried. Believe me. But the second it started and the first line was “Luke Skywalker Has Vanished”, I felt they probably got it right. They understood the importance of that character. He wasnt even in the movie (barely) and was the over-arching plot point of the whole thing. Brilliant, in my opinion.

            I have a few concerns about certain plot points, some small, some not so small. But we have to wait to see if they are sorted out in 8 & 9.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            If they had at least handled the Star Wars universe like (parallel universe) they did with the reboot Star Trek movies I may have been more accepting.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          Did he? I wouldn’t be surprised he’d do that. Apparently when MI III came out he made the journalists wait at the premiere because ‘he wanted to’. Everyone at Hotdog Magazine was livid and saying “it’s the guy’s first film and he thinks he can do something like that?!”

          • TUP

            Yup. The story I heard was they actually considered making the Kelvin the Enterprise 1701. But the studio told them they could not destroy the Enterprise in the first film (I think they meant the “main” ship so if the story was destroying OUR Enterprise from TOS they probably could have) and JJ wanting to pay homage to his grandfather or whomever it was.

            You’re not making the movie for you. Its for the fans. If he had an ensign Kelvin…whatever, I wouldnt care. But still it shows the self indulgence of the film makers.

      • Simon

        ST 2009 and ID were good films.
        Trouble is fans are too into what THEY think is a good film they get detached from reality. Look at the scores for both films at Rotten Tomatoes. Critics and audiences overwhelmingly liked them. The only criticism I hear is from the old fanbase.

        • Pedro Ferreira

          I wasn’t a big fan of those movies but Star Trek Beyond was fun.

        • TUP

          That isnt true. You hear criticism from Trek fans because you’re on a Trek forum. If I watch Dr Phil tonight and dont like it the only people that know are the ones in my immediate vicinity Im sure there are Dr Phil message boards with devout Dr Phil fans who will be more critical though.

          You can tout RT as much as you like but reality tells us a different story. 09 created strong interest. that was paid off in STID with strong box office but the film barely made money after the inflated budget, marketing etc.

          But if STID was so good, why was Beyond a disaster with over $100 million less box office with the same budget as STID?

          Bad Robot drew in the fans and casuals with 09, rolled in the money as a result in STID (even though their inflated budget made it far less successful than it looked) and chased everyone away.

          Interstellar had a smaller budget and WAY more box office. The Martian barely cracked $100 million budget and made WAY more box office then any of the JJ Treks.

          There was a smaller difference between the budgets for The Force Awakens and STID/Beyond than for those films and The Martian and TFA did over $2 Billion.

          Transformers had a smaller budget, way more box office and sucked.

          There is simply no excuse for the critical and box office performances of the JJ films other than the vision. Which was Bad Robot…JJ, Orci etc. And the studio’s insitance that Trek had to be a summer tent pole film with a huge budget.

          Make Star Trek for $120 million and its a success everytime. Release it in December.

        • tomorrowville

          ST2009 is decent enough, ID is absolutely awful and the perception of it has just gotten worse with time, which is not reflected at RT.

          • Simon

            Again, the bad perception is from the nerd-core who still gripe about it 4 years later.
            What’s hilarious is I see complaints from people who didn’t even watch the film, or not very closely because they’ll claim there’s “plot holes” that are clearly explained in the movie.

  • Charles Baxter

    I have no doubt in their being a fourth movie. As usual people come out hitting hard against the KT Trek when any statement that was or can be near negative.

    I think it’s time for fans to grow up and accept the fact that post 24th century TREK is dead, plain and simple.

    • cyclotis

      It seems entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that post-24th century Trek will be explored in some fashion either during or after Discovery.

      • DS9 is King

        I really hope so.

      • The Science Fiction Oracle

        No it doesn’t. There is ZERO EVIDENCE that Discovery will be covering post-24th century Trek.

        You may wish it so, but that is your subjective wish, nothing more.

        • cyclotis

          I didn’t say that Discovery would, but that it is likely to show up either within Discovery or after. Why are you being so rude?

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Well you are pretty making stuff up with no basis or evidence — you clearly said LIKELY, DURING, DISCOVERY, and there is absolutely no evidence for that???

            I find people just “making stuff up” a tad offensive, but seriously, you are being over-sensitive to my response. It’s nothing personal at all. If you took it as me being rude, I apologize.

          • cyclotis

            If you listen to interviews that Bryan Fuller did before he left the show it sounds like there is a time travel element at play in the plot. Of course nobody knows, but Fuller has also made comments about wanting to explore things post-Voyager and they hired one of the prominent writers who has done that for the show.

            Until more information is released nobody knows anything, but we can use informed speculation based on statements that the creators have made in past interviews.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            I don’t respond to name-callers and personal attacks.

            Bye….

          • cyclotis

            Says the troll who started this exchange by attacking me.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            Attacking your lack of facts and logic, not you. You are one who is engaging in personal attacks here. I even apologized to you since apparently your feelings got hurt.

            Whatever….

          • cyclotis

            You did apologize, which I greatly appreciate, and did not see until after I posted my original comment. I then edited out parts of my response that were unkind, and I apologize for those remarks towards you.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            OK, thank you — truce!!!

            I came on too strong and negative — I acknowledge that.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            You might be one of the worst fans I’ve seen here.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle
          • Pedro Ferreira
          • DC Forever

            Well, Oracle, even though he can be an ass at times, has a point.

            When you say something is “likely,” you should have some basis for that. I too saw the Fuller interviews, and I saw nothing in them that would lead me to believe that it’s “likely” that we will see 25th century Federation space, etc. Is it possible? Sure. But monkeys flying out of my butt tomorrow morning is at least slightly possible given the multiple universes theory. LOL

          • cyclotis

            Okay, here’s what I’m wondering about – when Discovery was ramping up last summer and Fuller was out talking about it he cryptically said that the main character will have “many ranks” in addition to being a first officer, without elaborating. Prior to that there was rumor that the new series was going to be an anthology series moving between different time periods, which was mostly debunked, but Fuller said that some of the details of that rumor were correct. Fuller is gone now, so who knows what has happened to his plans, but he intimated that there was something going on with the plot of the show that was different than the linear “explore a planet or phenomenon every week” model of TOS, TNG, Voyager, and Enterprise. What was he talking about with his comments about the main character’s identity and the potential of moving between different parts of Trek continuity? Time travel? A mystery than moves across Trek continuity? I have no idea, but seeing beyond what we know of the 24th century becomes a possibility.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Let’s point it this way: there’s a good chance some reference will be made to 24th Century Star Trek if they’re set in the same timeline, that is certain.

          • DC Forever

            Now that I agree with.

            Stick to intelligent posts like this and drop your immatuture trolling attacks on others. You are better than that!

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Absolutely when people like Master Oracle will stop trolling me and others for liking Voyager and Enterprise.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “It’s his revenge for all those arguments he lost”.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Don’t listen to him. He hates everything Berman did for Star Trek and so hates anything related to later Star Trek shows.

    • The Science Fiction Oracle

      And good riddance to post 24th century Trek. I don’t want to see “Berman 2.0” Trek…no thanks.

      • Pedro Ferreira

        And you call yourself a Star Trek fan…

        • DC Forever

          Guy, you might consider coming up with your own ideas for a change here? Your continuous “stalking” here of a couple people who I assume you have some petty grudges against is growing rather tiresome

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Actually I’m defending someone who likes Star Trek. However I do find what you guys say pretty tiresome as well.

          • Eskay

            Mr. Ferreira, I see that you are up to your juvenile hi-jinks again.

            I see that the Rodenberry Vault is on sale now for $29.99. Why don’t you do everyone a favor here and buy it, and then disappear into it.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            Mr Eskay looks like I’ve triggered you because you can’t handle a different opinion so why don’t you do everyone a ‘favour’ and disappear yourself or is that too much of a constructive opinion for you?!

          • Okay, Pedro Ferreira, cool it please.

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I’d be happy to if certain members hadn’t started it.

          • The Science Fiction Oracle

            “It’s his revenge for all those arguments he lost”

          • Pedro Ferreira

            I didn’t lose any arguments, you lost them all and you call yourself an Oracle. Ha, ha!

  • Fiery Little One

    I’m not surprised that they don’t know much more than we do. That decision is a little bit above their pay grade.

  • Vger64

    Kill the reboot idea. Bring in fresh new trek characters! That’s what we need. Look at what the Star Wars folks did with Rogue One. Personally I thought it was great! And I’m a trekkie

  • Newdivide1701

    Star Trek is a survivor, it’s been through worse — and I’m not talking about Star Trek 5: The Final Frontier.

    But then again Star Wars: The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones made Star Trek 5 look like Lawrence of Arabia.

    Back on topic, Star Trek was cancelled after its second season. A writing campaign later, and it was renewed for a third season — but the problem was it went from a bad time slot, 10pm Thursday nights, to an even worse time slot, 10pm Friday nights — and was cancelled after season 3.

    But thanks to syndication, Star Trek returned and given the chance it should have had before and its popularity exploded. This lead to an animated series and an attempt at reviving the Star Trek TV series with Star Trek: Phase 2. But that project gave away to Star Trek: The Motion Picture thanks to the popularity of Star Wars.

    This then spawned 9 more movies and 4 spinoffs. Then along came the dry and two-dimensional Nemesis which flopped at the box office (due to heavy competition), and the cancellation of Star Trek: Enterprise after getting their mojo back after the disastrous season 3.

    But even then Star Trek came back in 2009 with JJ Abrams bringing back the Buck Rogers/Flash Gordon element back to Star Trek, while at least understanding who Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon are, and keeping the Foundation element within it. Something Star Trek: Enterprise failed to do.

    Best described as bringing rock to a baroque Star Trek — where you read Star Trek instead of Star Trek being read to you — like Wrath of Khan.

    Star Trek Beyond did underperform, but it didn’t flop. It grossed $343.5 million on a $185 million budget and needed between $340-$350 to break even according to Industry analyst Danny Cox. As compared to the $60 million Star Trek: Nemesis grossing only $67 million world wide.

    Ouch.

    But like I said, Star Trek has been through worse.

    • I could not have said the above better myself. Thank you.

      Enterprise Season 3 was indeed a disaster. Season 4 was really great. I’m in the process of rewatching it with my young son now, and it’s so great. Such a shame the show was cancelled after season 4’s wonderful contribution to canon.

      Nemesis was a flop in the Box Office, and it had super corny bits that made no sense. Captain Jean Luc Picard, driving wrecklessly around in a dunebuggy on a pre-warp civ plant? Sorry, but that is NOT Captain Picard. Canon or no canon, Picard does not do something like that. But I still rate Beyond as worse than Nemesis on the whole.

      Here’s hoping the next Trek film will be decent. Thought provoking and with a good plot and an intriguing story.

  • GIBBS v2

    Translation: Money talks.

    Future Trek films will get smaller budgets but good directors and writers can work around that. If Paramount didn’t feel the need to turn Trek into the new Star Wars we could have modestly budgeted films turning decent profits from now until forever.

    It’s pretty clear by now the audience for Trek is fairly fixed in size. Give them what they want and they will show up again and again.

  • Pedro Ferreira

    They’ll continue making Star Trek movies as long as there’s money to be made. Whether it’s with this universe or no though remains to be seen.

  • If Star Trek 4 will be anything like Star Trek Beyond, they shouldn’t bother making it. Beyond was the worst movie ever. It was so retarded as to be BEYOND description. And I love Star Trek. I even love Enterprise. But Beyond was not a good movie. In my mind it was not a Star Trek movie at all. It was just a dumb and contrived action plot with the names of Star Trek characters randomly assigned to the various rolls.

    • mec

      tbh, the first movie was great but after that they got a cold feet because the fanboys complained it wasn’t their trek(c) so their ruined the integrity of their own thing. Who thought it would be a good idea to make a movie like Beyond all about fan pandering after ‘Into Darkess’ was disliked for that? If they weren’t obvious already in their arse-kissing of the crybaby fanboys who can’t accept change, Beyond sidelining Saldana (the only actor of this cast who actually has a bit of star power, btw) to restore McCoy’s old trio was a public admission that they do everything that minority demands them to do. At least JJ tried something new and was bold, Lin just reminded people how redundant and outdated trek is.

      • Hm. I’m not sure how to read these comments. I guess I have to consider myself one of the old fanboy crybabies. But, I really liked the first Kelvin Universe Star Trek movie. I thought it was great! I also liked the Into Darkness, as long as we know these events are unfolding in a parallel universe, it felt like a pretty good “trek” film. But Beyond was truly dumb. Like, worse that Star Trek V dumb.

        Who keeps a dirt bike the bridge of a starship??! How did the ex-Maco crazy guy not realize that the ship he arrived on was still hanging out on the planet? I mean, the whole thing was just so incredibly dumb. There was absolutely nothing cerebral about it. And to me, Trek is allowed to break with canon in a parallel universe, that’s what parallel universes are for! But, to be Trek, it at least has to have something cerebral and can’t just be mindless Fast&Furious style action. There are enough dumb action flicks out there to watch that we don’t need to make another one and then call it Star Trek.

        • DC Forever

          It’s a good thing the internet wasn’t around after Star Trek V, as with whiney posts like this using juvenile words like “retarded,” Paramount would probably have not given TOS movie team and cast the chance it needed for redemption that we got with the great Star Trek VI.

          I love people who try to come up with all of these grandiose negative conclusions based on one movie. That’s the “what have you done for me lately” world we inhabit today. Very few people are able to maintain a credible perspective these days….if you doubt me, just look at that buffoon that “the people” elected last November.

          • So… I take it then that you thought Beyond was really good? 🙂

            If they could correct their course and make a Star Trek 4 that was really great, of course, I’d be all for that. Star Trek VI was indeed better than V. But, I believe I am entitled to the opinion that Beyond was a bad movie. Sorry about the pejorative “retarded” But, how else can express my disdain for the film? It was horrible? Wretched? I feel betrayed, like I wasted my money on a ticket? Ashamed that such garbage was given the “Star Trek” monicker? “retarded” maybe be juvenile, but it’s also short and punchy. It was a stupid movie.

            Also, since when is complaining whining? I’m not whining, I’m expressing my utterly sincere extreme dissatisfaction. Am I allowed to do that here? Will you give me that option?

          • DC Forever

            I thought Beyond was weak, but not bad. You come across like you are suggesting it’s so bad that they should not do another one?

          • Okay. Fair enough. At least you agree it was weak! I also think it was weak.

            I believe I said, “If Star Trek 4 will be anything like Star Trek Beyond, they shouldn’t bother making it.” And I stand by that. If they want to make the next one much more compelling then I am in favor of them making it. Weak Star Trek movies are, again in my opinion, bad for the franchise.

            Look, I really liked the first two JJ films. Even though they are very different than the rest of Trek canon which I love, I am willing to welcome the first two into the fold. But the third is terrible. It literally embarrasses me. Mostly, because I rally my friends and family to come with me to opening night of every Star Trek film. And when I left Beyond, I was… embarrassed. I felt a knot in my stomach that I had dragged other people out to see it with me. I don’t ever want to feel that way again after opening night of a Trek film.

          • DC Forever

            OK, I get your opinion. Good discussion.

          • TUP

            Its not that they shouldnt do another. They shouldnt do another with this creative team. They are sliding downward. Yes STID generated more revenue but lost money.and was critically panned compared to 09. Beyond made even less.

            I like the cast. But they need a new vision.

          • DC Forever

            Good idea. I can go with that.

        • TUP

          Beyond was better but not by much and maybe only because they didnt try that hard. If I try to run 10K but only make 5K that feels like a failure compared to if I only try to run 3 K and manage to get 2. That’s Beyond.

          The opening scene with the cartoon aliens was absolutely dreadful. Not everything needs to be played for comic relief. It was brutal. Like we’re to believe this moronic little twerps are not only an intelligence warp-capable species but deserving of Federation negotiation? Puh leeze.

          Then, because everyone wanted to see the crew actually on their 5 year mission, we skip right to where they go to the most advanced and stupid starbase ever for shore-leave. But dont worry, you didnt miss anything because they helpfully show us how boring and mundane EXPLORING THE GALAXY is.

          And Im angry they patted themselves on the back for the gay Sulu bit and then didnt have the balls to actually show it. I greet the hobo who sleeps down the street with more affection then Sulu did his partner.

          And then just in case we werent sure after the two previous films that Kirk sucked and wasnt ready fro Command, he flies right into a trap and his ship is immediately destroyed.

          But just like Kirk’s “death” in STID, this is sooooo emotional, right? Like, Spock died in WOK so kill Kirk in STID because PARALLELS and we will get so emotional. Except we gave a crap about THAT Spock. Same problem here…destroy the Enterprise in TSFS so that must mean we will care with the ApplePrise gets destroyed. Nope. Dont care.

          Thank goodness Scotty is so brilliant he can defy the laws of physics. Whew, that was close.

          Hey, here’s Spock being emotional again. This time its uproarious laughter. Yup. That makes sense. Spock was always good for a few yuk yuks.

          Hey look at these wierd evil aliens who want to destroy the Federation because…well because…hmmmm, because they crashed and no one came looking for them? Even though they’re apparently like 5 minutes from the nearest 7/11 starbase.

          But lucky for those poor bastards, the previous inhabitants left a robot army! And a fancy machine that allows you to EAT THE LIVING! Who was the lucky guy that got to try that first? Why? Because just like in STID when we have to lie about the identiy of the villain for some stupid reveal that falls flat, we HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN in Beyond. And the only way to do that is to hide the humans under make up.

          God forbid the story of a crew surviving alone on a planet be dramatic enough. No, now they’re VAMPIRES! And they changed their names too because…well because…ummm cant give away their human names. Good thing Uhura is so good at listening…she’ll solve the whole thing by CHANCE!

          And damn, they make those old ships strong. Just start it up and fly away. And Jaylah (the best part of this dog of a film) doesnt need to go to the Academy. She taught herself English, fighting, engineering and invented some advanced holographic emitters. COOL!

          And whats the point of all this? To get the last piee of a super weapon that was scattered in space because the inventors were so upset and regretful at its creation they wanted it to never be used again…but instead of DESTROYING it, they THROW IT AWAY for someone to find. Thank goodness!

          And why do the humans look like that from sucking off their fellow creatures? Who knows. But since he now looks human because he ate a human I guess he also sucks out their cultural and ethnic identity. Does he get their powers too? *fart*

          But we finally resolve the Spock/Uhura relationship by them deciding to stay together. I was worried for a minute. Oh and all you fanboys wanting to see Shatner…here he is jerks. In a photo. Reminding us all how stupid the idea of Spock Prime coming back and just chillin til his death was. Hey, we need to negotiate with tiny little furball aliens that are oh so cute instead of dealing with things like why Spock Prime isnt the most wanted man in the universe.

          And look, just like Kirk’s death was undone, so too was the destruction of the Enterprise. Here’s a new Enterprise, just like the old one. Now we can go have another 5 year mission of boring and mundane exploration.

          Star Trek Beyond Lame.

          • Oh my god. Preach it brother. Thank you for spelling out all the completely insane and utterly stupid things in this movie. This is so close to how I feel about how lame Beyond was, I’m glad I’m not alone.

          • TUP

            And before people bash me as a hater, I liked Beyond. That’s my “like” opinion. Again, it didnt try as hard as STID so it had less to suck at. The dialogue was better. Pegg was smart to split the crew up to make it easier to give everyone something more or less to do.

            But it was so lame and silly and contrived.

          • mec

            dude, it’s not like I disagree with everything you said about “Star Trek Beyond Lame” – but when you still say that movie is better than the previous ones, just because it wasn’t made by Orci, in spite of it being the least successful of this franchise and the weakest in terms of plot, your whole argument loses credibility. Regardless what are our personal opinions when it comes to some of the plot points and characters, the previous movies were more successful than Beyond. Even the elements you hate and consider ‘flaws’ were successful aspects for a lot of the people who do like these movies e.g, spock/uhura have a big following among the fans and not even just female ones; in fact, it could be said that Pegg sidelining Uhura, and that dynamic, in favor of bringing the focus back to the old tos ones was counterproductive and just another, of the many, element that didn’t help making the movie more successful. This is only one example, the thing is Beyond probably drove away that majority of the audience that went watching the first movies and liked them mostly because of the promise of something ‘different’ and ‘new’, and thus not the old thing all over again, just with different actors. If reboot haters disliked Beyond too it doesn’t really make a big difference one way or another.. but if Beyond lost even the fans of the reboot? Now that’s a problem and it’s that audience that ultimately made it so it’s the least successful, and it’s that audience they need to bring back if they want to make more movies.

            Frankly the point is that your opinions are your opinions but are derailing the point and being off topic because you are not really talking about what would make these movies more successful, and what didn’t make Beyond accomplish anything big. You aren’t really seeing it from a generic audience perspective.

            From some of the things you write, I don’t think if the writers made the movie you deemed as ‘perfect’ it would be more successful than Beyond and save this reboot.

          • TUP

            Success and quality are not always the same thing. Bob Orci will tell you that STID was the greatest film ever made because it produced a lot of revenue. But that is obviously not true,. How many big budget action flicks made lots of money and were entertaining but not considered “great” films?

            So once you accept that revenue and quality dont always go hand in hand, we can have a reasonable discussion.

            For me, 09 was the best of the three because its the one I can watch multiple times. I had to force myself to get through STID a 3rd time and barely made it through Beyond a second time.

            What Beyond did better was get the interaction of the characters right. The dialogue was better for the most part. Pegg is a better writer of human interaction than Orci is. But Orci is a better idea guy. His ideas were bigger. Pegg’s were simpler. When the Beyond plot delved into ideas of space weapons and robot armies, it staggered.

            And here’s the thing about “fan vs casual”. That’s the crutch of the defenders to say “well, they wrote it for the general crowd so Trekkies are mad”. No, not at all. Did LucasFilm write TFA for a general audience and thus alienate Wars fans? No because if you write a good movie, you will get both.

            Orci and Co. did some things right. When they referenced canon in general ways, like Nurse Chapel, that’s servicing the fan without impacting the general audience. No one hears “Chapel” and is confused because they either smile knowing the character or they just assume its a Nurse. No big deal. Same with Pike. We, as fans, love the idea of Pike as a major character. But if he had been Admiral Smith, what difference does it make other than not building the depth of the canon?

            What they did was actually alienate both fans and casuals. STID is the bigger example of this and Khan is the obvious thing. Casuals were confused. Fans were disappointed. They screwed both. Pure arrogance.

            And by the way, me telling you everything wrong with the films is as relevant as me telling you my list of how to make them better. Firstly, take everything I criticised and change it. That makes the films better.

            And as for Uhura/Spock, I had no issue with the fact they were in a relationship. But I did have an issue with writers who you’d think had never been in a relationship before. The same guys who thought Carol standing around in her underwear while James Kirk eye-bangs her was appropriate, wrote Spock/Uhura.

            I had minor issues with it in 09 (Uhura using her relationship to get an assignment, Spock as her superior even being in the relationship and keeping it a secret, Spock and Uhura kissing on the transporter pad etc) but I was okay with it. STID ruined it by making Uhura the whining emotional girlfriend who couldnt do her job because of her love for this guy.

            Beyond rightly back-burnered it because there was little else you could do. In fact, it would have been easier to pretend it never happened. Bu they still had to make it a plot point because Pegg inherited it from Orci so he had to address it. He handled it fine.

            If Beyond failed because a huge amount of fans didnt go because they somehow heard the relationship wasnt a primary focus…well, thats just absurd.

          • mec

            and yet, a lot of guys who are, or had been, in a relationship (especially one with someone who experienced a trauma, like the soldiers who come back from war) and could relate them in stid would say the opposite thing, and that only someone who had never been in a relationship before wouldn’t understand, or call Uhura’s feelings ‘whiny girlfriend’.
            Kirk and McCoy would equally, if not more, be the whining ones too. Doesn’t seem to me they do their job better than her either.

            Beyond completely omitting Uhura’s perspective in the relationship issues, only addressing her possibly being ‘upset’ through third person dialog and not by her own mouth in her own scene with Spock, is not good writing, or realistic, or writing female characters better. It’s coward and keeping things ‘safe’ because you don’t know how to write women as human beings.
            Pegg’s female characters are, from his own admission, the weakest because he doesn’t want them to come across as weak so as a result, of his double standards and sexism too, only his male characters are allowed to express their feelings in and out their relationships while women are reduced to a ‘strong female character’ stereotype and dehumanized.

            “What Beyond did better was get the interaction of the characters right.”

            the movie was fun sure, but the characters and their interactions lacked
            the depth that some of the dialogue from the first movies had.
            It’s basic and simple, nothing memorable beside, maybe, that silly tracking device necklace joke.
            At best, even that Spock/McCoy banter, with McCoy’s one sided gratuitous annoyance at a Spock who does nothing to annoy him, that was so much overhyped during promotion was just (as predicted) a pretentious-too-obvious fan pandering move, with Urban seemingly being still very convinced that his impersonation of DeForest makes him the best.

          • TUP

            See, I can agree with this. But Whiny girlfriend is what she was in STID and its a lousy and shallow stereotype of the nagging girlfriend wanting to talk about her feelings at inopportune times. Funny? I guess. Save it for a RomCom.

            Uhura had little to do in Beyond, I agree. Im not defending Beyond as great cinema. Im saying it was less offensive than STID. I WANT strong female characters. Jaylah was much better than Uhura or Marcus but she was an easier character ti write because she came with no baggage.

            I also agree, we should have heard from Uhura what the issue was. I would have included more “personal” scenes, not long, just scenes cutting between the main characters to show us their perspectives. They spent too much time on Kirk’s lame and silly perspective. Then they could have shown us Uhura/Spock rather then hinting at it and having Spock spend time telling McCoy.

            Also, Urban is pretty good but he routinely gets lousy material. He was awful in STID doing a bad parody of angry Bones. I agree there. They make him the annoyed grumpy character. Bones was so much more. Again, writers that dont understand Star Trek.

            Most of the characters were parodies. Like if you ask a casual person to describe Captain Kirk, they will speak in stereotypes about him as the womanizing man of action. But thats not who he was. But the JJ film writers only looked at the surface of each character. Scotty is sort of funny sometimes so he’s the comic relief. Chekov is young so he’s the whiz kid even though he shouldnt have even been in the films until Beyond.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            How on earth Uhura’s behavior is being a ‘whining nagging girlfriend’? When was the last time you had a relationship?
            Uhura wasn’t a whiny girlfriend. She’s a human being.
            Her portrayal isn’t necessarily sexist, but your interpretation might be if you are not complaining about Kirk and McCoy’s behavior with Spock (or each other, in general). They are SUPER ‘whiny’ and nagging then.
            Since when the guys are professional, anyway? McCoy and Scotty don’t ever refer to Kirk as their superior.
            Don’t even let me start about Spock because if he really had a death wish, like his behavior suggested, any officer was 100% entitled to point that up because he could have compromised the mission and put them in danger.
            That scene is no more offensive, anyway, than Kirk arguing with the acting captain, aboard a ship he wasn’t assigned to (and he was there only because of his best friend sneaking him aboard with him), until the latter almost kills him in front of the whole crew, in the middle of a crisis when everyone is in danger.

            stid’s Uhura is a female character with agency who is allowed to speak her mind and has a more equal role in the trio dynamic, not only in her romantic relationship but also in her dynamic with Kirk and its evolution.
            Beyond’s Uhura is a female character who isn’t allowed agency in her relationship, and not really allowed any relationship not even some bonding with Sulu, just so that people like you won’t complain about her being ‘weak’ using sexist arguments like the ones you keep making. I guess kudos to Pegg for admitting he isn’t good at writing women, but it doesn’t change the fact that Beyond’s ‘feminism’ essentially is a farce when you really look at it and notice how much the writing prioritizes male bonding and their feelings over different kinds of relationships and women.

            I can’t stand trek fanboys and their bullshit. The double standards about Uhura and the Spock/Uhura’s relationship are embarrassing. Let’s be honest, the problem is that for you all the ‘bros being bros’ should still be everything trek is allowed to develop, 50 years later, when it comes to interpersonal relationships.
            The moment the writers try to have a woman in the dynamic too and allow for a different kind of relationship, y’all suddenly start to concern troll about professionalism and harpy on ridiculous stuff that is never an issue when it comes to the ‘bros’. All this trying to rationalize people’s distaste over Uhura having a role that they think only Kirk and McCoy should have: making Spock see a human perspective.

            You all are so scared of the woman getting in the way of the ‘bros’ and the importance of those dynamics, that you need Beyond to sideline Uhura and her relationships to give more screentime to your faves.

          • TUP

            No, you’re wrong. And my opinion is shared by many. Being a human being is fine. If we have a film with multiple strong female characters then different stereotypes is fine. But we didnt.

            So they wanted Uhura to be all things. The strong woman. The independent woman. The emotional woman.

            She was willing to screw up a mission in STID because of her relationship with Spock. She was crying about him. She was playing kissy face on the transporter pad in 09. She confronted him more than once about dangerous missions, not in private.

            But the worst was her angrily whining about him not opening up to her..WHILE THEY WERE ON A DANGEROUS MISSION. She disregarded a direct order from Kirk to knock it off.

            It was silly and stereotypical. if you dont see that, thats fine. But to suggest my opinion is sexist when Im saying give us a stronger female who isnt a stereotype, puh leeze.

            If her behaviour was good enough for you, thats cool. It wasnt good enough for me. They did a dis service to the relationship by not taking the time to give us some insight in the privacy of their quarters.

            Dont attack me because I wanted MORE and BETTER.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            it’s shared by many because many trek fans are sexist concern trolls like you who would rather hide behind this childish bullshit, than simply admit they are butthurt over trek not being only about the bros anymore. How dare Uhura be a human and allowed to the narrative that only McCoy&Co should be allowed to. It figures.
            The fact you keep harping on Uhura with these excuses all the while giving a free pass to the male characters just proves the point further.

            ps: Spock kissed Uhura on that transport pad btw (it’s even written in the script that he initiated it) and there is nothing wrong about that scene, just like there isn’t anything wrong with officers in real life who kiss or hug their partner before going on dangerous missions. Maybe you just can’t relate.

          • TUP

            Ohhh I get it now. You’re not very intelligent. Okay, sorry, I thought we were having a discussion but I guess its over your head.

            Read my posts, pal, I dont give anyone a pass. YOU are the one you grabbed my criticisms of Uhura to harp on. I was critical of many facets of the films and characters.

            Maybe date a bit, have a relationship or two, read a book and then get back to me about how Uhura was such a strong female and appropriately conveyed as a professional woman in the workplace.

            I know you actually dont disagree with me which is why you switched to saying “yeah but what about the men”. You exposed yourself. I agree, the men werent much better.

      • TUP

        No, what ruined it was Bob Orci and his giant ego and the fact no one was keeping an eye on what he and his merry band of idiots were doing. Orci pushed his politically left agenda to write an Anti America War on Terror story but didnt have the balls to write the whole story.

        So we were left with a barely warmed over one-sided weak argument for why terrorists are just misunderstood and its all out fault that bad people do bad things.

        It wasnt in keeping with the development of the Kirk character at all. It killed off the best actor in the films (Greenwood) for no reason other then to force a Kirk we didnt want to the forefont and treated his death like it meant nothing anyway.

        It shoe-horned a stupid Spock/Uhura sub-plot that was insulting to everyone involved.

        It wasted the best performance in the film, that of Peter Weller by making him a mustache twirling villain with a bigger, blacker ship to contend with which, by the way, he had a friggen model of sitting on his desk and no one bothered to ask WTF that was.

        JJ and Co. got way too cute for their own good by casting Cumberbatch in an iconic role and then lying to fans, media etc for months about it which did nothing but raise expectations which were inevitably going to come crashing down the moment Cumberbatch droned out “I am Khan”, eliciting confusing among half the audience and snickers among the rest.

        They tried to pull on our emotional heart strings with a stupid death scene we knew wasnt for real and one the writers didnt understand. They tried to force us to care by showing the ever-emotional Spock bawling his eyes out at the death of his frenemy when he barely twitched when his mother and home planet were wiped out.

        And it continued the trend of having stupid things happen to move the plot along and if it warrants an explanation its done so in stilted and awful narrative dialogue (like why all senior officers had to meet at the top of the HQ surrounded by windows to the outside which werent bullet proof, but dont worry, Kirk figures it out by quoting regulation to a room full of people smarter then him).

        Oh and in case you wondered if Khan’s blood would matter later, we’ll stop the film for an awkward exchange between Kirk and Bones about what he’s doing to the tribble.

        And just in case there were any 13 year old boys who didnt want to see the film, we’ll have Kirk drool over his subordinate while she changes clothes.

        And in the end, Kirk’s journey to the big chair he wants so badly ends with him not really liking it much in Beyond anyway. *fart*.

        STID was flat awful. An insult to fans, to film and to hack writers everywhere.

        • mec

          you are a text book example of the fanboys I was talking about, and why the people behind this trek should stay away from message boards or comments sections from sites like this. It’s almost comical how much they tried to please people like you with Beyond and not only you guys still hate them and the reboot (no one had a doubt this would change) and you are still trying to ruin the party for those who enjoy these movies and the new things from them, but Beyond (a movie not made by Orci or JJ, btw) ended up being the LEAST successful movie of the franchise with the weakest plot. Now thank to Beyond we might not even get a fourth movie.

          • TUP

            @mec – you’re 100% correct that the people behind the films should stay away from fan gatherings like this if they want to continue making THEIR Trek films.

            Look at Orci. He was all over Trekmovie when he was lauded as a hero. But when the opinion changed after STID he turned into a surely jerk who went there an insulted people.

            Why dont you ask yourself why Beyond had the weakest plot and made the least amount of money? And dont start with JJ had nothing to do with it. JJ Produced the film.

            Paramount rejected two stories from Orci before firing him as writer and director. They brought in Pegg who had a short period of time to get a film together. The budget was smaller because of the failure of STID. The studio did little marketing.

            If Beyond sucked it was a group effort. Pegg created a film with better dialogue and character moments, more “heart”. But he wasnt up to crafting a big story. Orci had big ideas but couldnt write dialogue or character moments. His stories were ridiculous set pieces loosely connected by grade-school level creative writing.

            The studio didnt change directions to give FANS something they wanted in Beyond. Pegg himself said the studio wanted a film that was LESS Star Trek. And Orci’s scripts were rumored to be heavy on Canon references including Shatner and Nimoy to the extent it was speculated he heavily copied an existing Trek story.

            The studio wanted cheaper, faster, adventure. And Pegg gave it his best shot. The Beyond story, to me, was what you get when you dont have people that understand the source material providing notes and instead, you take the first submitted script and film it.

            Beyond needed a few more re-writes to be a good movie.

            And STID did too. I liked the general idea of the War on Terror analogy for STID. It had the makings of a great Trek film. But politics, ego and incompetence made it a mess. And STID is why there probably wont be a 4th film. Not Beyond.

          • mec

            I’m not a fan of Orci, but I’m unsure why you keep blaming him for Beyond’s poor success when he didn’t make that movie. He only was part of the creative team of the previous movies that by any means were more successful (critically and money-vise) than Beyond. JJ also directed the movies that are successful, he didn’t direct the one that is the least successful and is putting in doubt a fourth one.

            I don’t see you trying to understand why Beyond failed. Or, maybe you don’t want to see the reasons why it failed because it might as well be because of the very elements that make you prefer that movie (hint: has nothing to do with Orci)
            key thing here: successful trek movie =/= the movie you like and think is ‘good’.
            Anyway, for people who never liked this reboot I don’t see why its future and movies are of any concern for them. 8 years later, that is.

          • TUP

            You’re trying to shoe-horn in a very narrow perspective of why Beyond didnt do well to support your position which is not valid. Are you suggesting Beyond did poorly because it catered to Star Trek fans more so than STID did? Because that is absurd.

            The canon-callbacks in Beyond had little to do with the plot. So if the point is to say they wrote a movie that was all Trek canon and it failed, its simply not true. The ship looking similar to Enterprise NX and reference to the Maco’s had very very little to do with the plot to the extent the ship could have looked like anything and the word “MACO” might not have been uttered and it changed nothing about the plot.

            But consider STID which had a plot that completely hinged on the fact one of the “bad guys” was Khan, one of the most iconic characters in the franchise’s history. Consider that the climax to the film was a nearly word for word re-creation of one of those remembered and emotional scenes in the entire franchise.

            Need we discuss 09 which actually had an actor from TOS as a critical character in the film?

            So the idea FANBOYS somehow demanded MORE TREK in their Trek and that hurt Beyond is laughable.

            Beyond failed partially due to lack of support from the studio but they knew it wasnt a blockbuster. How did they know? They watched it.

            What killed this film series was STID. Period. Whatever goodwill had been created by 09 (and there was a lot of goodwill with fans and new fans alike) was wasted by STID. Thats why STID did well, all those people wanted to see it. Then they saw it. Then they were over it.

            Ill give you this – Beyond wasn’t a good enough story. And thats on Pegg and Doug as they wrote it. I said this already though but you ignored it. They wrote better dialogue and character moments but the story wasnt “big” enough. It wasnt a summer blockbuster plot.

            I liked 09 the most out of the three. STID was by far the worst. Beyond was just lame and boring but not offensive like STID was.

            Orci was the brains behind STID. STID killed the series. It was in a coma until Beyond came along and pulled the plug but make no mistake, it was Orci and STID that did in the series.

          • mec

            You keep making different arguments here and talking in circles but the point remains that the movies that least catered to certain star trek fans (the ones made by Orci and JJ), are the most successful while the one that did that the most, is the least successful. There is no argument here. I’m only judging the facts.
            Old tos movies too suggest that the more a movie catered to certain trek fans only, the less they are successful for a larger audience and catch their interest the way other more successful franchises do. The reboot only confirmed a well established trend and that, if we want to put it that way, Paramount&Co can’t expect to make ‘more money’ from movies only made for ‘trek fans’.

            I think you should be careful when using ‘star trek fans’ as a definition too because not all the fans are the same, so the movie didn’t, even, really cater to them all. Specifically, it only catered to the ones who didn’t like the first movies because they weren’t ‘their trek’ and they can’t accept changes.. so they went backwards in some aspects to placate those and give them what they wanted so they’d stop to complain this isn’t trek. Catering to all trek fans is impossible though because there also are many old fans who liked these movies because they are different (and never asked them to restore the character dynamics back to tos basics, nor complained that Mccoy ‘replaced’ Uhura, to name a few).
            If anything, they needed to cater to the existing fans of this reboot (who are mostly new people to trek, but also many old fans as well) instead of driving them away the way Beyond inevitably did by being a mostly standalone movie that almost completely ignored the first movies (that those people liked).

          • TUP

            If you’re argument is that STID catered less to Trek fans than Beyiond, you’ve lost the argument and I said so why already. STID was ALL fan servicing. Which is great if done well. It wasnt done well though.

            The FACTS are that STID was not successful. Factor in that bloated budget and marketing expenses and it did not do well. That’s why Beyond had a lower budget. I wont defend Beyond’s story but the film was way better than STID and not as good as 09.

            Its a fools errand to suggest that the issue is catering to fans. Ive shown why that isnt true. It isnt about making a film so “inside” the canon bubble that casuals cant understand. In fact, Beyond was the most accessible of the three to non-fans.

            Imagine watching 09 and STID and not knowing Star Trek canon. Why are there two Spocks. Why do Romulans look like angry Vulcans. Why doesnt Spock time travel back and fix everything. Why did Kirk go from cadet to Captain? Why is Spock so emotional? Who is Khan? Why do I care? What is a Tribble? Why is Carol Marcus important? Why cant Admiral Marcus build advanced technology without a guy from 1990?

            Im telling you from experience, my friends who arent Trek fans liked 09 and were confused and turned off by STID. Thats a fact.

            You’re the one using “Star Trek Fans” as a defense to explain why you disagree with everything. Ive repeatedly said fans can like STID or not like STID. Disagreeing doesnt change the validity of the opinion. Yu liked it, end of discussion for you. I didnt, discussion continues for me. Im not trying to convince you not to like it. Im explaining why I didnt. Stop trying to convince me I should like it.

            What is this drivel about Bones replacing Uhura? Because thats the choice the writer of Beyond made, was to explore McCoy’s relationship with Spock, to bring a different dynamic then Spock/Uhura? You’re missing the point because you dont want to see why that was a valid creative choice.

            If STID was so good, Beyond should have opened HUGE. If Beyond turned away fans it would have opened HUGE and then died off. It didnt. It was poor from Day One. Because a lot of people who saw STID didnt bother seeing Beyond.

            And by the way, the whiny Uhura stuff is valid. Her and Spock were both terribly unprofessional in their conduct in 09 and STID. Thats my point. I dont care if Spock bends Uhura over and nails her from behind in a full frontal X Rated scene. In fact, I’d love to see that. But not on the bridge. Orci is such a weak writer he couldnt write their relationship at all.

            I liked ONE scene – Uhura comforting Spock on the Turbolift in 09. EVerything else was awful. And you should be mad too because it did the relationship a disservice.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            “What is this drivel about Bones replacing Uhura? Because thats the
            choice the writer of Beyond made, was to explore McCoy’s relationship
            with Spock, to bring a different dynamic then Spock/Uhura? ”

            except, Spock/Uhura is the ‘bringing a different dynamic’ thing. McCoy/Spock, the old trio dynamics: this stuff is 50 years old for trek (vs only 2 movies this reboot had before Beyond).
            Bringing the old dynamics back adds nothing new, nothing different, nothing that will differentiate this trek from the other. It’s not like they explored a Spock/Chekov friendship! You are not even trying.

            A reboot’s purpose is to do different, possibly more modern, things compared to the original thing, and that’s what JJ did, and one of the reasons why his trek was successful when no one thought a trek reboot would be. Lin&Pegg, on the other hand, just went backwards to placate fanboys’ nostalgia. Nothing is bold and memorable about Beyond, not even in negative (not even destroying the Enterprise!).

            Replacing Uhura as the third lead, in the NEW trio, with McCoy, and thus restoring the OLD trio, is going backwards with one of the few things JJ modernized to make this trek more contemporary and realistic to nowadays audiences.
            It might be a valid creative move for you because you like the old dynamics more, but this no doubt could have contributed to Beyond being the least successful movie of the 3, especially when a lot of the critics and fans who liked JJ’s trek actually praised him for elevating Uhura to McCoy’s level.

            You don’t like it but Spock/Uhura is popular and one of the most talked about things from JJ’s trek (and one of the things that, according to the comic writer, people like the most from the kelvin timeline comics too). Even when they released that ‘break up’ clip from beyond, a lot of ‘reboot fans’ automatically assumed that Pegg did the lame, predictable, thing of sidelining Uhura and Spock/Uhura, the new dynamic, to placate the fanboys who accused her of replacing McCoy and wanted everything to be like the old thing (they weren’t wrong, btw).
            The Kirk/Uhura/Spock trio is the dynamic of this trek too and for many, Beyond went against the integrity of this franchise in the name of nostalgia.

            anyway, it’s just silly to make things mutually exclusive. Why it must be either McCoy or Uhura? Why can’t they respect the new dynamic(s) of this trek, WHILE also homaging old tos dynamics? It just reeks insecurity if you need sideline the female character and her relationships to make a secondary male character and the bros more important.
            With all the concern trolling about Uhura and her relationship with Spock, it’s funny how for some of you McCoy can be a character only if he interacts with Kirk and Spock more than the others. It’s like he has no other purpose beside being Kirk’s friend and the racist dude with Spock. Did he even interact with other characters in Beyond? What is this new McCoy adding to the character??? Nothing. Even Sulu, who got the short end of the stick from the start, now has something new added to his character, however subtle and underdeveloped it was.

            “You’re missing the point because you dont want to see why that was a valid creative choice.”

            or you are the one missing the point because you are too biased.
            You want to blame Beyond being the least successful of the trilogy only on what STID did bad (a movie that is still more successful than Beyond), but you aren’t even trying to see that, perhaps, the people who liked the first movies and made them successful didn’t like Beyond, and therefore didn’t make it as successful.
            The fact that the movie distanced itself from the previous movies, that people liked and made successful, and doesn’t have all the elements a lot of those fans liked in the first movies, might be a far more plausible reason why Beyond ‘failed’ than ‘it’s STID’s fault!’.

            Beyond just, further, proved that the side of the trek fandom that hated the first movies, and wanted everything to be like tos again, is a minority not only in the trek fandom as a whole, but the general audience too.

          • TUP

            You’re just making up ideas to support your position. The purpose of a “reboot” is not to be different, it’s to be successful. If they wanted to be different it wouldnt be the same characters and everything else. They wanted, very specifically, for it to be as similar as possible.

            Did everyone remark how different and new and unique and fresh Quinto looked compared to Nimoy? No, they remarked how much they resembled one another.

            Now that is out of the way…

            I agree the film makers made the conscious decision to elevate Uhura from glorified secretary to a fully fleshed role. And that’s a good thing. I had no issue with it whatsoever. Im sure marketing had something to do with it as well (gender, appearance, ethnicity).

            But to say there is a definate trio to the extent you’re counting screen time and declaring the top three isnt a great way to look at this. The Bones character still had importance in 09 and STID. And its not Uhura replaced him in the dynamic Bones/Spock/Kirk had in TOS.

            In fact, thats a complete falsehood to suggest she did. Unless Bones and Spock had a sexual relationship in TOS and Bones and Kirk didnt really like each other. The dynamic between Kirk/Uhura/Spock was not so much a trio as it was just that specific dynamic. And Uhura certainly didnt fill the role Bones did as Spock’s intellectual and moral opposition and she certainly didnt fill the role as Kirk’s confidante and friend.

            If there was a deliberate choice to treat the Uhura and Bones chanracters differently it had nothing to do with a trio. But you saw a marketing poster that had her on it so NEW TRIO!. Not true.

            And thus, the decision to pair Bones with Spock in Beyond was not an effort to restore the fanboys wanton desire for TOS, it was because that specific writer liked the dynamic between Bones and Spock that was mostly missing from 09 and STID. And not because Uhura replaced him but because the films never slowed down long enough to bother to have those conversations which create character dynamic.

            Its not like Beyond was Bones/Spock buddy movie. They were together somewhat. And certainly the plot point that had Bones pilot the small ship with Spock was stupid. We can agree on that.

            But you’re issue is to insult me because I thought they played Uhura wrong. I had no issue with the romance. I wanted them to treat it more appropriately. I said before, if they filmed an explicit fully nude sex scene, I’d be fine with it. Just give us some context and insight. But again, they couldnt slow down long enough for that so they have to have these awkward conversations and moments on transporter pads, during dangerous missions etc. None of that was needed had they taken the time to treat the relationships more importantly and appropriately.

            As for Beyond. If Beyond had been awesome, it would have attracted more eyeballs for a longer period. That is correct. But to suggest STID was awesome and everyone who loved it saw Beyond and didnt love it and thus Beyond did worse doesnt make any sense.

            If everyone who watched STID liked it and everyone who liked it watched Beyond, then why were Beyond’s numbers so poor compared to STID? How can someone dislike Beyond when they havent seen it yet?

            STID had a RT score of 86% and Beyond at a RT score of 84%. So if it was liked equally, how do you account for Beyond doing so much worse?

            The answer is, a lot of “casual” fans who went to STID because of the positive word of mouth and enjoyment of 09 didnt like it and were no longer Trek fans.

            Its like me wanting to see The Hobbit, not liking it and not bothering to see the sequel.

            Beyond was NOTHING like TOS to the extent you’re trying to say. There was WAY more canon references in 09 and STID. You’re competitively wrong to say Beyond was an effort to be TOS and people rejected it. And there is zero evidence to suggest that.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            falsehood is to suggest that the new trio must be totally like the old trio, but with different characters, in order to be called a trio dynamic.
            Why should Uhura have the same exact ‘role’ McCoy had in tos? Not even Kirk and Spock have those roles anymore, and you know what? thank God they don’t have those ‘roles’.

            The point is that if this trek has a trio dynamic, then the kirk/uhura/spock dynamic is that trio (and marketed as one), surely not kirk/spock/bones; just because the new character dynamic doesn’t rely on the same tropes and ‘roles’ the old trio had, it doesn’t make it not a trio dynamic on its own too. It’s just a different dynamic. And no, it isn’t just because of a poster because it was the creative team themselves that presented them as a new trio and developed them that way, and in fact for many, critics included, this is the face of this trek.

            I, for one, never considered Uhura ‘replacing’ McCoy. I thought they had a sort of ‘Han/Leia/Luke’ trio dynamic with Kirk/Uhura/Spock (the genre; the hero and his two friends who are a couple + Uhura developing a sibling-like friendship with Kirk beyond her relationship with Spock), but I also thought the main dynamic is Kirk/Spock with Uhura and Mccoy being the ‘biggest’ characters amongs the secondary characters because they are the ones with a relationship with the main guys. Spock/Uhura is the second most important relationship of this trek and the most talked about and focused on in interviews, but it’s closely followed by the Kirk/Bones dynamic. The first movies had a nice balance between old and new, and different interpersonal relationships getting enough attention.

            Nevertheless, Beyond ignoring the new dynamic(s) to restore the old trio dynamic was a mistake because, after all, the reboot dynamics worked and were liked by the majority of fans who made these movies successful. They could have turned it all into a more definite kirk/uhura/spock/mccoy dynamic instead of making things so mutually exclusive (not to mention Pegg’s ego because he gave more screentime to Scotty than Uhura). Or they could have dropped any ‘trio’ ideal and make it a real ensemble (that Beyond isn’t, even if this creative team desperately wanted to give the illusion that it was better than the other movies in this aspect).

          • TUP

            You’re the one who has pushed the idea that there is a defined trio (not an ensemble, not a foursome) and that the JJ films created this “new” trio. I didnt push that narrative. You did.

            The idea that not featuring Uhura as Spock’s girlfriend in Beyond is why it made over $100 million less is laughable. She was still featured in the film. There was no Kirk/Spock/Bones dynamic in Beyond. There was Spock/Bones to a small degree.

            Why stop at Kirk/Uhura/Spock/Bones? Make it a fivesome. You’re grasping at straws.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            You’re the one grasping at straws.

            There is a new ‘trio’ in JJ’s trek which is Kirk/Uhura/Spock. Denying it is silly; even the comics reflect that scheme. Other considerations are just an extra for the sake of discussion, but there is still a trio and you are disqualifying it only on the basis of that not being the same trio tos had (btw, using your logic why there isn’t a definite trio in this trek one could say that there isn’t a definite trio in tos either, then, since McCoy never really was at Kirk and Spock’s level and if we want to nitpick, the tos dynamic was more a Kirk/Spock duo than an actual trio with McCoy).
            No one said that it was anyway so you are replying to an argument that doesn’t even exist. No one said that Uhura has the same role McCoy had and the same dynamics (she challenges Spock’s human side in a completely different way McCoy did and without having to be reduced to a racist bully, btw). She doesn’t need to, not even Kirk and Spock have the same relationship they had in tos.

            When people complain or praise that Uhura ‘replaced’ McCoy in nutrek they mean as third lead of this trek and third element of a trio dynamic (as Orci once stated that they did elevate her at the original trio level. So it clearly wasn’t just ‘in the posters’ like you falsely claim)
            Your whole argument is disingenuous and so is you playing oblivious about the fact that in beyond, unlike the first movies, McCoy/Urban is the third lead instead of Saldana , and they ignored the Kirk/Uhura/Spock dynamic to bring back the old tos one, plus they sidelined Uhura and her dynamics (Spock/Uhura, but also Kirk/Uhura) to give McCoy (and Scotty) more screentime with the protagonists and focus on bromance more. Uhura very conveniently spends most of her screentime away from Kirk and Spock too (paired with Sulu, but without really having any dynamic with him either, unlike the other duos), while McCoy and Scotty are the characters who interact with Kirk an Spock the most. Basically the fanboys’s dream of a perfect trek movie where women stay in their place and don’t interfere with the bros stuff.

            You might like that movie because you hate spock/uhura, and it’s not an issue for you if the old dynamics and the male characters are front and center and the movie catered to people like you more, but it doesn’t dispute the fact that for many ‘reboot fans’ Beyond went backwards by replacing a female third lead with another man, by sidelining new reboot dynamics to restore old ones, by prioritizing nostalgia over the integrity of this trek and everything JJ&co set up as the tone and ‘face’ of this trek. For many people who loved the first movies, Beyond wasn’t even a real sequel. Even the interviews by the new creative team were discouraging because it felt like they were talking about tos and had no idea about what happened in the first two movies and how different the characters are and their dynamics are. Their trying to distance themselves from the first movies made them lose a lot of the fans who loved the first movies and made them successful. Even this whole idea that they were ignoring STID backfired because, unlike what you want to believe, that movie was still more liked than hated, by reboot fans.

            tl dr: people liked the first two movies and they liked certain elements from them. Beyond did a different thing to cater to the fans who didn’t like those elements= Beyond became the least successful because the fans it catered to evidently weren’t a majority. In trying to get on board people who didn’t like the first movies, they lost a lot of the fans that they already had and who had made the first movies successful.

            All these elements are a far more plausible reason why Beyond is the least successful, but keep only blaming STID and turning a blind eye to the fact that the elements you disliked in the first movies might be successful elements for the majority of the audience, and the elements you think Beyond did ‘better’ might actually be the very things that contributed making that movie fail.
            It’s like you are making excuses for the new creative team by blaming JJ&Co so that the guys behind Beyond don’t have to take the responsibility of their own choices and failure. It seems to not even compute to you that maybe they just had bad ideas that didn’t work for the general audience and the people who loved these movies.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            oh and it isn’t just the uhura and spock/uhura fans btw. That was only one example of the people they possibly drove away and discouraged (even before watching Beyond).

            Frankly, I don’t think Beyond did any favor to McCoy either. His ‘banter’ with Spock it too one sided to make me understand his perspective, or give him any perspective for that matter. This Spock comes across as a good dude for the most part who doesn’t really provoke McCoy, he doesn’t even deny his feelings or plays ‘vulcan superiority’ so, basically, McCoy just plays the role of this whiny, bitchy, racist bully with him e.g., his inappropriate and gratuitous appearance in the ‘break up’ scene where he looks like he’s happy Spock got dumped by his girlfriend of years – without having any proof that was the case – almost coming across as a petty jealous guy with a failed marriage who is happy the alien is finally failing too, as if him having a relationship contradicted whatever stereotype he had about the man. It would have been more interesting if McCoy was consciously played that way, instead of them pretending that they were writing this supposed friendship between him and Spock.

            He loses some in his dynamic with Kirk too, and consequently didn’t make Abramverse Kirk/Bones fans that happy either. In the first movies, you see their friendship as this mutual bond and many even thought their friendship was the ‘real thing’ instead of Kirk/Spock. Beyond didn’t do that: in spite of giving the illusion that they have more scenes than in stid, their friendship is completely sidelined where it really counts. McCoy doesn’t even seem to know that Kirk is leaving so he can’t even be sad about it on screen. With Spock and Uhura, they at least acknowledged in some way that him losing her and her losing him would be an issue for these characters no less relevant or important than Kirk losing Spock and viceversa. Kirk and Bones don’t even get that, it’s like McCoy possibly losing his best friend is irrelevant and everything that matters is just Kirk and Spock losing each other, Kirk and Spock being upset, Kirk and Spock having issues, Kirk and Spock being sad. No one cares about how McCoy feels and him losing HIS friend. Everything is about Kirk/Spock and their friendship only, and what Kirk would do without Spock, without really acknowledging McCoy as his best friend too (and the one who saves him too in the end).

            I had the impression that new creative team doesn’t acknowledge, let alone respect, the reboot dynamics (and their fans), and its version of the characters, like they maybe should’ve, because they are too focused on bringing back the tos ones only and thus paying homage to the old thing. In doing so, they compromised the integrity of this trek a bit.
            Everything about them was like ‘If you loved the first movies this one isn’t for you’, and yet they now are surprised by the ‘results’.

          • TIG1701

            I agree the JJ movies did cater to some Star Trek fans but I don’t think enough and why they are partly failing.

            But I also agree with you about Beyond. It seemed to be a movie that was trying to cater to both casual fans and old fans but didn’t seem to satisfy either that much. The movie story was made for old fans in mind but its tone and advertised as something for new fans trying to be more like GOTG. My feeling is TPTB probably wanted a more accessible film for new fans but since it was the 50th anniversary have the story feel like something from the show while having stuff like motorcycles and Beastie Boy music to remind new fans this isn’t your granddad’s Star Trek.

            But oddly I don’t think it pleased either one all that much and why it failed. I liked the movie but it felt bland.

          • TUP

            I can agree with this. The story though, wasnt so much an effort to please Trek fans, in my opinion. At least not to the detriment of casuals. If they wrote a very canon-heavy film that forced you to know the back story of Trek history to enjoy and understand, then I’d say an effort to please Trek fans hurt the accessibility of the film.

            Beyond wasnt like that. The canon references such the NX looking ship, the MACO etc were all things that might have brought some recognition to long time Trek fans but had they been original inventions for the film (different ship, different back story for Krall) it doesnt change the plot. You didnt need to know MACO’s were on Enterprise to understand that Krall was a MACO who was basically made obsolete.

            Unlike STID where you really did need to understand why Khan was important to appreciate the story. And to know that Spock died in much the same way in WoK to understand why that Kirk death scene was important. To a lesser extent you needed to understand why Carol Marcus was important to the franchise too. And if you wondered why they had a goofy little ship on board and managed to catch reference to “the Mudd Incident”, you’d probably wonder what that was all about too.

            I think the studio saw the negative feedback to the convoluted and insulting plot of STID and the backlash about how Khan was portrayed and probably felt he worked better as a new character. They saw Orci’s story ideas chalked full of canon reference and decided it was going in the wrong direction.

            The irony is, had Orci made the film he wanted, complete with Shatner & Nimoy, even if it was a mess like STID, it likely would have done better than Beyond because it would have generated more mainstream interest.

          • TIG1701

            I don’t mean just the story elements. I mean the way the story was set up in general. The fact that they were on a five year mission which all the fans been wanting to see forever, ie, actual exploration. Away from Earth. We got to see more the Kirk, Spock and Bones interaction again like on the show. The being stranded on a planet was a basic TOS story line trope. In other words they were trying to get back to the tone of the original show which STID definitely wasn’t.

            And once they saw the film and got all the other references from TOS, Voyager and obviously Enterprise it worked because you didn’t have to be a fan to care but if you were it made it extra special.

            But I don’t think this was still enough to get fans excited though. I think too many already stopped caring about the JJ films in particular and yes because it looked more like a Marvel movie in the first trailer and not a Star Trek movie, they basically just said fuck it and most probably ignored it from that point on.

            And I agree with you about STID, the problem was they put in a lot of stuff casual fans wouldn’t understand but then it was very eye rolling to a lot of older fans. Having Shatner in the movie probably would have gotten more people to see it, I agree. I don’t really care they brought him back but it mightve had the movie break even at least.

            I kind of think the JJ movies just needs to end personally. If they make more I will go see them but I don’t think old fans really care anymore. I think they screwed them up too much.

            They need to bring the Borg in or something. Get Q in there. Something big. Something exciting. No one gives a damn about Kirks dad.

          • TUP

            One of the weaknesses in te Beyond script was the “idea” of the 5 year mission but no actual evidence of this. They did too much telling and not enough showing.

            One could argue that the opening to STID showed this better because we had them on an alien world where Kirk and Co. were forced to make important decisions because they were too far from Starfleet to get advice.

            In Beyond we open with Kirk telling us the 5 year mission to explore strange new worlds is boring and mundane. If anything, it was a slap in the face to fans who wanted to see exploration. They were saying “no, exploration is boring, lets blow something up”.

            Then they immediately dock at a space station. There is no alone on the final frontier at all.

            My strong sense is that STID turned off a lot of casual fans. 09 did well, it drew in casuals and it had strong word of mouth. STID came along and had all the goodwill and generated more box office. But it was so convoluted, confusing, insuilting, that those same casuals who decied after 09 that they would give Trek a shot, decided they didnt like it afterall.

            Then you have the media speculation on Shatner. And that led to Pegg unfortunately saying the studio wants a less Treky Trek. Then you got rhose lousy trailers which, if anything, told people it was just another mindless action mess like STID. It confirmed to them that they didnt care about Star Trek. There was a lot of marketing that actually omitted the words Star Trek as well.

            The studio took the fans for granted. They thought the trek fans would watch anything. So if they made a film for mainstream audiences and toned down the Trek aspect, they’d attract everyone. In reality, they turned off everyone.

            The film still generated lots of money. But with that budget, it was death.

          • TIG1701

            I don’t really disagree with anything you said. I think this is a perfect example of why these movies aren’t better. The first one was decent if not great, the second just bad and the third one just OK. None of them have been real stand outs. They look cooler, shinier and lots of lens flares but they feel pretty empty.

          • mec

            you keep blaming stid for beyond’s lack of success and it’s stupid, No matter what the fanboys say, that movie is very successful and critically praised, more than Beyond. If you got Beyond, it’s because STID was the very opposite of the flop fanboys make it out to be. If you might not get a fourth movie now, it’s because Beyond is the least successful of the 3. And that also is a movie with a completely different creative team so you can’t even blame them anymore.

          • TUP

            STID was not very successful. Do some homework.

    • TIG1701

      Ouch!

  • ¡ zer0 !

    If these movies don’t continue – i think it’s only fair that the people who actually enjoyed them talk shit about Discovery from Day 1 . It’s only fair i feel.

    • ¡ zer0 !

      Not MY star trek etc etc

    • TUP

      There is a lot of people who talk shit about the show and the films BEFORE seeing them. Discovery had lots of issues and they are worth discussing. But no one can say the show will be bad because of them. We have to see it first.

      Same with the films. I actually defended the use of Khan. Until I saw how they used him. Be open minded. Shit all over it after you see it if you really dont like it. But be relevant in your discourse. Lets discuss!

      • ¡ zer0 !

        My point was that there was that group of people who HATED the kelvin movies no matter what. Even though 2009 and Beyond were generally well received. Into Darkness was NOWHERE near as bad as they made out. They just hated every single aspect of them. Wah Wah Enterprise is a different shape wah wah. Oh grow up.

        • TUP

          Why cant people hate what they hate? Why do they have to like it a little just because you do?

          • ¡ zer0 !

            It’s fine if they dont like the kelvin movies. Just that they go on and on about it not being “real” star trek… It may not be the Star trek you want but it’s what you got…

          • TUP

            But that doesnt invalidate their opinion. Im not fully disagreeing. I dislike the hate when there is no context or reasoning. But people are allowed to watch a film or show and dislike it.

            As for their dislike of things you consider trivial, perhaps to you, the Enterprise looking like it did didnt bother yu. Perhaps you even liked it. But I think if a film is generally good, small things can be over-looked. But when a film is bad, it invites nitpicking.

            They got so many things wrong in STID, it makes you wonder if they even knew what Star Trek was. So that snowball of discontent rolls down hill getting bigger and bigger and collecting more items to criticise.

            09 had its share of issues but generally people enjoyed it so we look past the issues. STID actually made 09 worse in retrospect because it made certain plot points stupid and/or didnt improve upon concepts from 09.

    • mec

      or retroactively criticize tos for its flaws? Don’t forget the fan productions that real trek fans ™ love, just in case you were looking for suggestions.

  • Newdivide1701

    My wife asked me yesterday “Do you know Star Trek 4?” Of course I thought of The Voyage Home, but she meant Star Trek 4 of the Kelvin Timeline. And I see this as Star Trek 14, not 4.

    Anyways, though not confirmed on other sources that I know of, she looked on Chris Pine’s Facebook page that Star Trek 14 is a go with JD Payne and Patrick McKay penning it and coming out 2018. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2619b3a92e3e3c0c5a2644a2c4380b6d2258d37d8e1e178d44a5f026abe52aa3.jpg

    • TUP

      Arent those the two that wrote the rejected story for 3 with Orci? It sort of speaks volumes that they brought those guys back (if in fact they have), Like they wanted to be rid of Orci but liked the work of the writers he brought in.

      One wonders if their story idea that brings George Kirk in has similarities to Orci’s idea that would have brought Shatner & Nimoy in.

      • Tom

        That would be pretty cool. If there is some kind of use or mention of the Spock Prime character since he was responsible for the KT. Assuming of course that having George Kirk involves going back to that event from 09 at some point. How do you get the Shat though? Dare i say a CGI Spock Prime?? Adam Nimoy seemed to be open to that although he admitted it would not be his decision alone.

        • TUP

          Well i sort of get the impression whatever device they’d use to get “future” guys (ie. Shatners Kirk, Nimoys Spock) into the story, JJ probably said “great idea, but instead of bringing in Shatner, let’s bring in Hemsworth instead”. So the same device and story but rather then bringing Shatner into the story from the future, they bring George in from the past.

          I like Hemsworth. But get Shatner in Trek! He’s 86 years old! And remember when the story was “leaked” about Shatner being in Orci’s script? Orci denied having anything to do with the leak but it was when Paramount rejected Orci’s story and he appeared on thin ice. My theory was always that Orci had it leaked to try and drum up public support.

          And it DID create a public interest. The amount of free PR Paramount got for just the rumor of Shatner returning to Trek was immeasurable. It was everywhere, every mainstream news source mentioned it. But Paramount’s desire to be rid of Orci (or dislike of the script) over-rode whatever free PR they realised Shatner brought them.

          Which is why the speculation that its these two writers working on the Trek 4 story is interesting. Paramount rejected 2 stories by these guys and Orci and brought them back for a 3rd kick at it?? I think either they really just wanted to wash their hands of Orci or the idea for 4 uses elements of their previous submissions.

          If they wanted rid of Orci, they might have tossed these guys out too so they didnt have to deal with any claims by Orci of elements of his story being used. As it is, Orci did claim that ideas from his story made it into Beyond which ran counter to the claims of Pegg and Yung that they were not permitted to see the story (lending credence to my believe that Paramount wanted nothing to do with Orci).

          I think Orci’s behavior to fans online is probably just a state of how he is in real life and he likely pee’ed off the wrong people and they turfed him.

          • Tom

            You are probably correct about using whatever plot device they were going to use for Shatner will be used for Hemsworth. I just wish JJ would break down and say hey you know what lets finally get Shatner in. Especially if you can include something that has a mention of Spock Prime and messing with or putting closure to the KT timeline. Of course the $$ will have to be there for Shatner. That could be a problem since Hemsworth will take some of the budget. I know you have pointed out the benefits of having Shatner but Enterprise, the KT films and Discovery cannot seem to make it work for whatever reason 9Story and or cash)

          • TUP

            Its a weird thing. It seems like Shatner has been blackballed from Trek. If Im the studio, I’d insist he was in it. But they ran from the Orci story as fast as they could. This was a studio that gave Orci and Co. free reign to do a War on Terror story that painted the terrorists as the sympathetic victims of government aggression but want nothing to do with Shatner.

            The story is always twofold: 1) he wont do a cameo 2) he wants too much money.

            On the second issue, Shatner works. He’s worked consistently in everything from commercials to weekly TV to films to whatever. And everyone made deals with him but for Star Trek he costs too much. hmmmm

            On the first point, he has repeatedly said he wants a story worth his time and involvement. Nimoy’s role in 09 was more or less a cameo but it was critical to the plot. I think Shatner wants a role like that. Doesnt have to be a lot of scenes, just something important. And he’s entitled to want that.

            But he did say, when told about the holo emitter scene that had it been offered, he would have done it. Thats easy to say in hindsight though. We dont really know if he would have.

            My impression is Shatner wants to be paid like William Shatner of Star Trek should get paid. Not just William Shatner in another unrelated role. He knows his value to the franchise. And the studio should considering the massive media they got for the mere speculation that Shatner’s Kirk was in Orci’s rejected script for Trek 3.

            Pay the man. Because when the inevitable happens and he passes, if the friggen studio and JJ and everyone else says how they wished they could have worked with him, I will puke.

          • Tom

            All your points are right on target. Especially all the BS we will hear how they wished they could have worked with him. So get the barf bags ready.

          • DC Forever

            In all fairness, although I can’t prove it, I “believe” that Shatner would not be happy with a cameo, and I also “believe” he would have an inflated view of what his paycheck should be for just a day or two on the set.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            Shatner could virtually say what he wants now. His lack of consistency in comments wouldn’t be something new.

            However, the belief he wouldn’t do cameos is more supported than someone believing he’d be willing to do cameos but there is a conspiracy in paramount to keep him out of this trek: 1) he did say that he wouldn’t do cameos 2) JJ ruled this possibly out himself because when they were making the first movie, and he talked with him, Shatner made it clear he’d only accept a big meaningful role.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            I’m glad that Paramount stopped Orci’s idea to include Shatner. He will never accept to make a cameo and this trek doesn’t need to get turned in the Shatner’s show. This is not the old thing, just move on and let the new cast do their own thing.

          • TUP

            What else did Shatner tell you when you spoke to him?

          • CogitoErgoSum

            did you ever read his interviews? he’s the one who said he’d make an appearance in this trek only if they give him a big role. He doesn’t want to do cameos, in fact he rejected the one from the first movie because he wanted to have a role like Nimoy’s.

          • TUP

            That is completely untrue.

            Shatner never turned down any role in the JJ films. He was never offered a role.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            do I need to bring back old interviews from the past 8 years just because you are playing oblivious on purpose? give me a break.

            everyone knows they wrote him a role for the first movie (it’s in the script) and he rejected it because it was just a cameo. Even during Orci’s fiasco for the third movie, he reiterated he would come back only if they give him a big role.

            e.g., http://redshirtsalwaysdie.com/2016/10/06/william-shatner-says-no-cameos-star-trek/

          • TUP

            Yes, please do so. Shatner was NEVER offered a role in JJ’s Star Trek. The film makers confirmed this (I cant recall if it was JJ or Orci).

            The link you provided is from six months ago not 2009. And the opening paragraph states:

            “Shatner once expressed his desire to appear in a cameo in the Kelvin timeline films” which is counter to what you said.

            Shatner wants a meaningful role. Like Nimoy. He also said he would have done the holo emitter scene had it been pitched to him which it never was. He never asked for a “big” role. A meaningful role. Nimoy’s role in 09 was not big. But it was meaningful.

            Can you admit this?

          • CogitoErgoSum

            when did Shatner say he would have accepted to make that holo cameo scene from the 2009’s movie?

            LOL Nimoy’s role not big? he literally created the alternate reality. Granted, he didn’t have soooo much screentime compared to the main characters, but to say that his role isn’t big ….
            anyway, for me Shatner having a similar role would be a problem and take away from these characters and their own story. I’d rather see a new character, or see the existing ones getting finally developed more. No more nostalgia.

          • TUP

            Dont me immature. You laugh at my point and then immediately agree with me. Nimoy’s part in 09 was a glorified cameo. His role was not big but it was meaningful which I just wrote above. Thats all Shatner wanted.

            At some convention, fans asked him about the Holo scene after it had been leaked or released and he said it was the first he had ever heard of it and why didnt the film makers offer it to him because he would have loved to do it. I read it. Dont know where. But it happened.

            That doesnt it WOULD have happened. Once you get lawyers and agents involved in negotiations. But he said it himself. His no cameos thing was pretty obviously an effort to leverage a better role. He’s in his 80’s, he wanted it to be worth it.

            They never offered it to him though. So we shall never know.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            I love that you ask me sources for stuff that is well known since years (him not wanting to do cameos) but when you are making claims yourself, you say ‘don’t know where it happened but I read it’. That’s the first time I read about Shatner being interested in that cameo, if what you said is true and he did indeed say it then I guess it would be his word against that of the people behind this reboot and Nimoy because according to them, a cameo was offered to him and he said no. Hence why that scene is only in the script.

          • TUP

            Again, stop being immatuire. I didnt ask you for sources. You claimed you could provide links as if it was a threat and I said sure, please do. You think linked one thing that actually proved my point.

            The fact I know what I read and you are in circles trying to talk your way around it proves to me you’re just spouting nonsense.

            Shatner was never offered a role. He publicly said he wanted something meaningful. He admitted to fans that the Holo scene was great and he wished it had been offered. He’s also expressed that he doesnt know how they’d make it make sense to include him. There is no grand conspiracy here.

            Good writers who want Shatner in will write a good script that includes him. The idea he is too difficult? Well, odd that he works for so many other people without difficulty.

          • DC Forever

            You do realize that Shatner has a history as being a very good spin doctor. I’m sure there are two sides to that story, but we only have Shatner’s side, which I don’t think I fully trust.

          • TIG1701

            I feel sorry for some of these people. Hoping for an actor who hasn’t been in Star Trek in decades may appear again. Its not happening. Why are people arguing about it? He had his time, who cares whose right in some cameo appearance? Shatner was great as Kirk but that was another life. 😉

          • CogitoErgoSum

            if any of them is offered a cameo, they should be grateful. No one says they must be in this trek. They had their time with these characters, now they are played by other people.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            “Again, stop being immatuire.” ain’t the pot calling the kettle black.

          • TUP

            First of all I’ve repeatedly said you’re entitled to your opinion. You’re being very sensitive about this. You’re pushing untrue statements as fact. That’s the problem. Shatter was never offered a part in the films. That is fact. So….don’t know what else to tell you.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            pot calling the kettle black, again.
            and what untrue statements? Shatner said he doesn’t do cameos and the people behind this trek knew that too. I posted examples of interviews backing this information up. What did YOU post? Nothing. You are just whining about me being a liar and talking about supposed facts without any source to back them up.

          • TUP

            The one story you linked actually confirmed Shatners willingness to do just that. So thank you.

            Now it doesn’t matter to me whether you believe me. But Shatner was never offered a role. He confirmed that. The filmmakers confirmed that.

            If you choose not to believe it that’s fine. It matters not to me. But just know that if you continue to express the position that Shatner was offered a role and declined then you are going forth in ignorance. That’s all.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            no, it doesn’t. There is no direct quote by him saying that but there is only a direct quote by him where he says the opposite.

            “If there was something meaningful I would do in the science fiction world, of bringing a 50 years-later captain, I certainly would jump at the chance, putting in a cameo appearance is not something I would entertain.”

          • CogitoErgoSum

            and assuming you could produce this supposed comment you heard by Shatner, where he supposedly said he’d do cameos and that he was never offered one in the first movie, I’d take that comment with a grain of salt because of past examples of inconsistency (e.g., his conflicting comments about his participation in trek 3)

            Shatner’s lack of availability for making cameos is a well know fact that the people behind this trek knew about too from talking with the guy himself, as JJ implied in the quote I posted above (‘We tried desperately to put him in the movie, but he was making it very clear that he wanted the movie to focus on him significantly’).

            You acting as if it’s completely untrue and false that Shatner wouldn’t do cameos is very disingenuous and just having an useless argument for the sake of. I don’t think at this point it really matters anyway.

          • TUP

            Why are you arguing? If you read what I wrote I said ages ago that shatners statement to fans that he’d do the cameo can’t be taken as gospel because an actor saying that isn’t the same as lawyers and agents negotiating.

            It really makes no difference. You’re own link stayed Shatner was willing to do it. He’s said he’s willing to do Discovery. He said he was willing to do Orci’s proposed Trek 3. The one thing that is clear is he’s repeatedly said he’s do it.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            grasping at straws. In the link I posted Shatner only said he doesn’t want to do a cameo, and that’s the only direct quote from him that they posted and the whole point of the article, yet you want to pretend that the article said a completely different thing. There is no source or quote by him to prove the assertion that he was willing to do cameos.

            you are the one making an argument that doesn’t even exist. You can’t claim that what someone said is completely false by making statements you can’t prove yourself, and then hide yourself behind ‘I can’t prove it and I don’t care if you believe my word on it but you are wrong’.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            “But Shatner was never offered a role. He confirmed that. The filmmakers confirmed that.”

            and yet, unlike me you still fail to provide any source backing your statements up.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            + Even assuming you could produce this supposed comment you heard by Shatner where he supposedly said he’d do cameos and that he was never offered one in the first movie, I’d take that comment with a grain of salt because of past examples of inconsistency (e.g., his conflicting comments about his participation in trek 3)
            Anyway, the actual point is that Shatner had expressed a lack of interest for making cameos and this is a well know fact that the people behind this trek knew about too from talking with the guy himself too while making the first movie, as JJ implied in the quote I posted above (‘We tried desperately to put him in the movie, but he was making it very clear that he wanted the movie to focus on him significantly’).

            Even assuming they didn’t offer him that specific cameo Orci&Kurtzman eventually wrote in the first movie, the point that he said ‘no’ to this reboot on the basis of him not getting the kind of role he wanted is still valid. Maybe they didn’t offer him that cameo because it felt redundant after he already told them he wouldn’t do that kind of thing. Or maybe they offered him that hoping he changed his mind but he didn’t.

            You acting as if it’s completely untrue and false that Shatner wouldn’t do cameos is very disingenuous and just having an useless argument for the sake of. I don’t think at this point it really matters anyway.

          • DC Forever

            Well you do claim to have all of these interview sources that back up your point, yet you can’t seem to produce one example here?

          • CogitoErgoSum

            I actually posted, just above, an example of interview where Shatner does say he doesn’t want to do cameos, and he’d be in the movie only if he gets a meaningful role (=big).
            from the link I posted:
            “If there was something meaningful I would do in the science fiction world, of bringing a 50 years-later captain, I certainly would jump at the chance, putting in a cameo appearance is not something I would entertain.

            There is also this explanation from JJ himself why Shatner wasn’t in the first movie
            “It was very tricky. We actually had written a scene with him in it that was a flashback kind of thing, but the truth is, it didn’t quite feel right. The bigger thing was that he was very vocal that he didn’t want to do a cameo. We tried desperately to put him in the movie, but he was making it very clear that he wanted the movie to focus on him significantly, which, frankly, he deserves.”
            link: http://screenrant.com/shatners-star-trek-absence-explained/

            TUP is claiming that everything I said is false (in spite of words from Shatner himself saying otherwise) and that the man supposedly claimed the opposite thing, but they didn’t provide ANY interview/source backing that claim up.

            Even assuming TUP could produce that comment by him (they didn’t. They are basically saying we have to take their word for it), I’d take that comment with a grain of salt because of past examples of inconsistency by Shatner(e.g., his conflicting comments about his participation in trek 3)
            The only constant thing here, and the actual point, is that Shatner had expressed a lack of interest for making cameos, which is a well know information that the people behind this trek knew about too, and they knew about it from previous talks with the guy while making the first movie, as JJ implied in the quote above (‘We tried desperately to put him in the movie, but he was making it very clear that he wanted the movie to focus on him significantly’).
            Just for the sake of supposition, I can even believe they didn’t offer him that specific cameo Orci&Kurtzman wrote in the first movie because, after talking with him about what kind of role he’d accept, it would feel redundant and almost insulting to ask him to do something he had already said he wouldn’t be interested about doing.
            However, even in that scenario the claim that he said ‘no’ to the reboot on the basis of him not getting offered a big role, thus not a cameo, would be valid anyway.

            Someone here acting as if it’s completely untrue and false that Shatner wouldn’t do cameos is very disingenuous. If you claim that something is completely untrue and basically call people liars, the least you can do is posting sources proving your point, AND THEN ask the others to provide their own sources to prove their own point.

            I stand by my original point that I don’t want and I won’t need Shatner in this trek because giving him an important big role would take away from this cast and be just another waste of screentime for these characters who are still barely developed. I want to watch their stories, not Shatner’s. What they did with Nimoy was enough. I’d be fine with a cameo, which frankly is something that him and any of the old cast should be grateful about making, but he doesn’t want to do that.

          • CogitoErgoSum

            I actually posted, just above, an example of interview where Shatner does say he doesn’t want to do cameos, and he’d be in the movie only if he gets a meaningful role (=big).
            reminder:
            “If there was something meaningful I would do in the science fiction world, of bringing a 50 years-later captain, I certainly would jump at the chance, putting in a cameo appearance is not something I would entertain.

            There is also this explanation from JJ himself why Shatner wasn’t in the first movie

            “It was very tricky. We actually had written a scene with him in it that was a flashback kind of thing, but the truth is, it didn’t quite feel right. The bigger thing was that he was very vocal that he didn’t want to do a cameo. We tried desperately to put him in the movie, but he was making it very clear that he wanted the movie to focus on him significantly, which, frankly, he deserves.”
            link: http://screenrant.com/shatners-star-trek-absence-explained/

            TUP is claiming that everything I said is false (in spite of words from Shatner himself saying otherwise) and that the man supposedly claimed the opposite thing, but they didn’t provide ANY interview/source backing that claim up.

          • DC Forever

            I think you are stretching it a bit to compare the obvious proposed William Shatner cameo of the single scene holograph with the much more substantial supporting role that Nimoy did in Star Trek 09. Now, Nimoy’s scene is Darkness — that was a cameo.

  • BatesHotel

    Don’t really care one way or the other. Beyond was fine, but Into Darkness was execrable. I’m looking forward to the TV series, which is where Trek shines brightest when it’s at its best. Here’s hoping…

  • Dean M Dent

    With ST:B, as well as the 50th Anniversary, Paramount really dropped the ball.
    A really good movie plagued by an obnoxious teaser trailer (A “Guardians of The Furious” action melee with Kirk on a dirtbike as Sabotage plays) and a poorly timed release date.
    With the return of Chris Hemsworth in. ST14 as George Kirk, could mean the end of Kelvin Timeline bringing closure to the Abramverse

    • TUP

      A mess of a movie that was less offensive than STID so people think it was really good. It had really good moments. And the plot was forgettable enough that most people didnt bother to even notice how full of holes and stupidity it was.

      I agree, that trailer was a disaster. On the other website, those of us that complained were met with backlash from the JJ apologists who said, no it was custom made to run in front of Star Wars and there will be other trailers better suited…*crickets*.

      JJ was dragging Hemsworth out before Beyond opened because he knew Beyond was a lemon and was trying to generate interest in continuing a franchise he knew was on its last legs (the JJ Trek Franchise).

      • Tom

        I hope they do a 4th with Shatner included. Especially of they do time travel and want to close out the timeline. However if it is successful they would want to continue. That is why I don’t think the story will be designed to close the JJ verse

        • TUP

          I know people sort of get their backs up when it comes to time travel related stories but they generally have mass appeal and create interesting stories.

          William Shatner returning to Star Trek is a no-brainer in my mind. Especially if you have a good script and a good director. Shatner has put forth some really really fine performances in his career but at 86 years old I’d imagine he’d need some additional attention to bring out the best performance.

          I think one reason we got the forgettable Beyond and nothing better for the 50th was simply timing and the failure of STID. STID had more of an “epic” story but was such a mess. It sounds like Orci had a big story in mind for Trek 3 using Shatner & Nimoy but we know what happened there.

          I think the size and scope of STID and the fact it fizzled scared of Paramount. So they just went with the safe “smaller, simpler” story with Beyond. Had Trek 2 been more of a Beyond-style story, they might have been in a position for a big time traveling epic for the 50th.

          In regards to “fixing” the Alt Universe and how that impacts future films, Im not sure it has to end it. Everything is on the table if you have good writers. But the idea of the Alt Universe was a fallacy to begin with.

          JJ, Bob etc claimed they had to create a new universe so they were not constrained by canon. I will say I appreciate that they came up with the unique idea for Spock Prime going back in time rather then simply “re-booting” TOS. I think Nimoy being in 09 went a long way to generating interest and “endorsing” it.

          But the idea they needed to be free of the shackles of canon was simply not true. And we see this with how often they invoked Canon. They even created the idea that the Universe wanted to “repair” itself and run as close to how it *should* be as possible which is why certain things, people, events etc would be the same or similar. They invoked canon all the time, in fact, usually to pat themselves on the back and increase their “Trek Cred”.

          Lets assume they use the same hook in 09 as intended. Spock Prime ends up back in the past, so too does Nero. If you “repair” the timeline within the film, returning Spock Prime to the future (logically if he could return, he would want to because his presence in the past is far too dangerous), you could alter the way Trek does time travel slightly without completly screwing up stories like The Voyage Home.

          Repair the timeline so if Spock Prime returned to the future, its still the future he remembers. But for the people within the “changed” past, they experience their changes but you dont have to have it be this completely different thing. But we as viewers dont go back to “our” time with Spock Prime, we stay in the past and follow these stories.

          But everything that happened in the “past” of the Prime tlimeline will happen in the new timeline but its not boring as some say because we dont have to repeat every story from TOS. There was so much we never saw. Show us those stories. Is it boring that we know Kirk wont die? guess what, he aint dying regardless.

          • TUP

            Indulge me…this is what I’d do if I was making changes to 09:

            If its me, the kelvin would have been the Enterprise we know and love
            from TOS. Updated to a degree for modern audiences but not
            overwhelmingly changed from its traditional appearance. Captain April
            in command. I might even consider a young ensign Pike on the ship,
            someone who might look up to George Kirk (flipping the later
            relationship with Pike & Jim Kirk). Enterprise is destroyed, George
            heroicially sacrifices himself. Pike escapes, saving Winona Kirk in
            the process.

            You start 09 by destroying the TOS Enterprise. Now
            you have an excuse for that stupid new ship. But of course, rather then
            make it a gigantic Apple inspired monstrosity, you really do need to
            make it smaller, more intimate, just for character and atmosphere
            reasons.

            Instead of James being a rebel because he grew up without his dad and the stereotypical angry step dad routine, I’d play it differently. I’d have young Kirk portrayed as a kid who idolizes his father and dreams of going to space. But his mother doesnt want it. His mother fears losing him because she sees his pull to that life…she sees the “destiny” within him.

            She could dislike the hero worship people have for George. The reason they build the Enterprise in Iowa because its the George Kirk Memorial Fleet Yards or something. Pike maintains a relationship with the family, sort of an Uncle to Kirk. Kirk loves when “Uncle Chris” visits with stories of space travel but Winona doesnt. Perhaps a hint of romance between them but standoffish at the same time. Winona appeciates Pike’s care & interest in James (“I owe it to his father”) but she fears it adds to Kirk’s desire to follow in his footsteps.

            You have conversations between Pike and Winona about Kirk’s destiny, how he’s brilliant. But that he stays in Iowa to please his mother. Show us a James staring at the stars, dreaming of going there but he’s a good son..he stays for his mom.

            And ofcourse finally, something happens that makes Winona realise she cant hold Kirk back. I didnt like the Rebel without a Cause Kirk in 09. Make him more of the Kirk we know.

            The film can essentially unfold in a similar way to how it did. Although the Kobiashu Maru was awful. Give us a more serious Kirk. Have him fail in the Maru test and be really upset with Pike explaining its a test of character…its not meant to be beaten. Its a no-win scenario. Kirk snaps “I dont believe in a no-win scenario”. This leads to discussions of his father’s death and Kirk’s refusal to believe it had to happen etc. So when he re-programs the test to win, sure, he gets a commendation for original thinking, pleasing certain Admirals but worrying Pike who sees Kirk as not accepting his own mortality. A sense that Kirk rushes in in some desire to prove himself to the memory of his father by facing situations like he did…and finding a way out.

            I’d also find different ways to have Spock Prime & Kirk meet. Perhaps Spock isnt trapped but in hiding and he seeks out young Kirk to offer him the wisdom he needs to be successful.

            And definitely dont end the film with the stupid promotion from Cadet to Captain. Keep Pike as Captain (or promoted to Commadore but still in command of the Enterprise). Spock as his 2nd officer and science officer. A female #1 (could be a great role for the sequel). Kirk is off to the Farragut as Lieutenant. etc etc.

            So we get an ending where they are saying goodbye and “hoping” to serve together again. We KNOW they will all come together. Perhaps Spock Prime is looking on, the barest hint of smile as he knows they will. The theme of this being destiny.

            I know they wanted to end with everyone together. But what difference does it make.

            Then you open STID, not with the goofy mission they had but with an event that destroys the Farragut, Kirk takes command, faces something similar to his father. And it continues his arc and ofcourse brings us our heroes together. Returning to Earth, Kirk is promoted to Lieutenant Commander and assigned to the Enterprise. This explains him rising past Spock.

            Dont kill Pike the way they did because it was stupid and pointless. You can keep Khan but have him lying about being Khan. He’s actually Joachin (or however its spelled) pretending to be Khan to protect him. That way you still get your silly I Am Khan reveal but its a lie, thus explaining why it doesnt make sense.

            Flesh out Admiral Marcus more as a character so we can understand and even appreciate his perspective. Make him less of an evil villain and more of an ideological foe. Flesh out the idea that Marcus and Pike are close but essentially different sides of the same coin.

            So while Marcus spoils for war, Pike wants to find another way. Kirk learns both sides, sees both sides…we are led to believe he’ll have to choose a side. But in the end, the resolution is that both sides are right and both sides are wrong. That shows us OUR Kirk, the diplomat and man of action. The guy that would arm the other side of a conflict to even the playing field but also host the Klingons for dinner because its the politically right thing to do.

            Instead of Kirk “dying” in the radiation chamber, have it be Pike who “sacrifices” himself. But Kirk saves him…even if you want to use the stupid magic blood. But instead of it restoring a person, it merely stops the decay. So we end with Kirk visiting the terribly injured Pike, his skin scarred from radiation, unable to speak (familiar of course).

            In the way that he can, Pike expresses that Kirk should not have saved him. That he wished he was dead. In that moment Kirk understands being a leader. “I used to believe there was no such thing as a no-win scenario. I was wrong.” Now its something he has to live with. The heroic sacrifice of his father on one hand, the heroic efforts of Pike only to be horribly scarred because Kirk saved him on the other.

            End the 2nd film with Kirk promoted to Captain, Spock as his first officer. And now we’re off…

            Much more thoughtful story telling. And no less action.

          • TUP

            Oh and also, in regards to Khan not being Khan. if Spock Prime is in the film, instead of that terrible cameo, you have his appearance actually reveal that Khan isnt Khan. So now a critical plot point is revealed by Spock AND actually contributes a worthwhile development that allows AltSpock to defeat Joachin.

            And as the film ends, you can have the camera pan over the Cryotubes and linger on the familiar face of Ricardo Montalban’s Khan.

          • Tom

            I hope they do something EPIC but am concerned because they will and probably should reduce the budget. However you are correct in that if the writing is good we could still get something special that will appeal to a large group. How much backstory do you tell on George Kirk? Would seeing 09 be necessary to totally understanding the next movie? Would they use the excuse that seeing Shatner would confuse audiences?

          • TUP

            Its tough. I think if you are making a sequel in the same film series, its not unreasonable to use elements of previous films without a complete re-hash. If you go see the second installment of Lord of the Rings, you probably should see the first one.

            But you can generally explain the circumstances of George’s story pretty briefly and since it was filmed, you can even show it.

            For Shatner, its tougher. it depends on the story. The argument was always, since he died, if you’re using the same Kirk character it has to be before Generations and that means 1) he has to look the same and 2) he has to “return” to his time to die in Generations.

            Im not sure he really HAS to look the same. Technology is there to de-age to a degree but I think fans get the idea that this is William Shatner.

            If you’re using a Kirk that would be the age he looks, then the question is how did he survive Generations and that requires some story telling.

            Although, off the top of my head, one idea would be a story that, for some reason (the big brains can figure out why), “Kirk” must survive past Generations (whether its in the 23rd or 24th century, who knows). So if his survival is critical to the story, the idea could be that Spock tells young Kirk how he dies…the implication being that once he knows, he can prevent it. Voila, Kirk lives.

            the easier one is what I think Orci was planning to do, have Shatner player an aged version of Alt Kirk. Its better than nothing but I dont like it. For the same reasons a lot of people have trouble connecting emotionally to the Alt Characters – they arent “out” Kirk and Spock etc. If they die, it doesnt matter because OURs are still out there and a million other versions are there too. That was the real boner of the Alt Universe idea…removing risk because none of it matters.

          • Tom

            When they brought Nimoy back he did some appearances to promote the new film. I think Shatner is way more publicly active and will hit all the National talk shows. Definitely will bring some buzz that has been missing the last 2 films. Like you have been saying for awhile the writers should be able to find a way to bring in OUR Kirk in an entertaining story

          • TUP

            Exactly. And we know this is true. Because when it was “leaked” that Shatner was in Orci’s submitted story for Trek 3, the press was enormous. It was all over the mainstream press, CNN etc. Nimoy got press for 09 but Shatner’s return would be them a massive amount of free PR.

            And whenever they say “well we just cant do it, we cant figure out a way to bring him into the story”, I cringe. You’re professional writers. If I was interviewing writers and I asked “What do you think of including William Shatner as James Kirk” and the writer says “I dont see how…”, NEXT!

          • Tom

            i know. it just does not make any sense. Which goes back to your theory that Paramount may have black balled him for who knows what reason.

          • TIG1701

            People need to get over Shatner being in Star Trek again. I like him too but he had his time.

          • TUP

            So did Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill

          • TIG1701

            None of those people were killed off 20 years ago. 😉 The characcter died man. Its over. Time to move on.

    • TIG1701

      Agreed. Paramount did drop the ball hard with both Beyond and the 50th. And I really hope that idea of bringing Hemsworth back never sees the light of day. It sounds horrible.

  • CogitoErgoSum

    @TrekCoreStaff:disqus why are some of my comments disappearing? It seems they are marked as spam in spite of being just legitimate comments about trek and perfectly in topic. I doubt you guys are deleting them so my only guess is that they are marked as spam by one of your readers.

  • tomorrowville

    I’m so tired of the time travel nonsense crap of the Kelvin timeline – I loved Beyond because it finally felt like we were allowed to move past all the table-setting of ST2009 and ignore the dumpster fire of ID to make something that doesn’t depend on multiple layers of time travel and alternate universe stuff. It just told a story. I like Hemsworth but I don’t need him back – can we not please just move forward?