Official Star Trek Beyond Signage At Cannes Film Festival

The Cannes Film Festival begins today in France, and official Star Trek Beyond promotional posters have been spotted up at the Carlton Cannes Hotel.

Star Trek Beyond has made an official appearance with some of the first real artwork we’ve seen for the film on display at the Cannes Film Festival taking place at the Carlton Hotel in France. Steely-eyed attendees snagged some pics of the displays.





The 69th Cannes Film Festival runs from May 11-22 in France.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Nice artworks. Would love to see a more detailed image of the Swarm.

Also, I find it a bit weird that the marketing campaign is focusing a lot more on Jaylah & not Elba’s character Krall.

Was thinking the same thing about Elba.

Elba’s character is generic alien # 38. Jayla is a hot girl with cool make up. Making her look like a star appeals to the male audience (who like hot girls) and the female audience (who can identify with a woman in a prominent position). Trek is very male-heavy to begin with. Just adding some balance.

Agreed. Too bad they buried Elba under a shipload of alien make-up, because he is a star in many areas of the world and a respected actor.

It is the 21st century. You can’t market only men in a movie. That’s why Uhura was on the posters for 2009 and not McCoy or Scotty.

Plenty of room at Cannes for all genders and creeds!

@Lt. Dakin,

Not talking about a gender issue. Elba plays the MAIN villain in the movie & he is a well known actor, therefore it make sense to give his character a bigger share in the marketing.

Now that I think about it, Sofia Boutella is an Algerian-French and she was in some French TV shows & music videos, so she might be a familiar face to French audience.

Worth remembering that Elba is covered in make up to the extent that he isn’t instantly recognisable, so chances are you put him on the poster and people say “who’s that”?

Yeah he’s in heavy prosthetic! Kind of wish he would have been Mo-cap Ala Andy Serkis (Serkis expressions shine trough as Caesar) Just a thought.

Walt 12 May 9:24a, Hope he has makeup that allows him facial expression. He has an incredible range …

Ahmed 11 May 7:17, I wonder if she’s recognizable to them in the makeup. Elba certainly wouldn’t be, but his name would attract attention. Not sure why they didn’t have the actors’ last names somewhere in the logo representation.
“Elba – Boutella – Saldana – Quinto – Pegg – Pine – Urban – Cho – Yeltsin in STAR TREK BEYOND” — something like that. Small letters over Big Title Letters, featuring the most famous actors worldwide in the early part of the listing. Oh well. Good ol’ Paramount. Nice poster though.

Lt. Dakin, May 11, 2016 6:49 pm — actually for ’09 all seven actors were pictured, Kirk and Spock with those under-the-brow glares. I think you’re thinking of STID.


I suppose it at least explains that black banner in the last photo exclaiming “THE SOURCE OF BEAUTY”? ;-)

Jayla is inarguably sexier than Krall.

The nerve of Paramount, promoting Trek at some schlocky film festival in France. France, for Christ sake!!


Indeed. Does Paramount think Justin Lin is French for Jerry Lewis?


Even nervier is the theater information seems to be in French but the artwork features the English word “COMING”. The French are NOT big fans of Franglish.

Dis 12 May 2:49p, Can’t imagine why they didn’t use the proper form of “Arriver” in French; the word is very similar to the English!

Why are Quinto’s eyebrows looking less and less Vulcan every time a new image comes out?

I said that exact thing on some other thread. They don’t even point up, so I think they’re just his regular brows after a trip to a decent barber. It’s not like it’s a disaster or anything but c’mon! Pointy eyebrows!

Even the sideburns don’t seem pointy for any of the characters in this film.


In reply to your comment uniquely identified by the URL:

Styles of facial hair in the military go in and out of style just as it does for civilians. I would imagine in a future where beings zip around the galaxy in nothing flat that such fads go in and out of style likewise at a much more accelerated rated than one we, ourselves, might be accustomed.

@ THX-1138: The photo of Quinto is probably highly photoshopped and does not necessarily represent his make-up in the film. I think they released similarly fake promo shots of Quinto for STID.

I would say it actually looks like the complete lack of photoshop in regards to his eyebrows. It might not be a photo of any kind.
In any event, pointy eyebrows or death!

@ THX-1138: Over at Trekcore they have some bigger shots of Quinto, and it looks very much like some painting job done around his eyes. I don’t think you have to worry about missing pointy eyebrows in the movie itself, though.

Not entirely worried about the eyebrows other than Quinto has always seemed to be uncomfortable with Spock’s whole “hair” deal.

this crap at Cannes? oh c’mon…

Sweet! I like how they feature a bright Starfleet delta (best seen on the first image with Spock and Uhura)


I wouldn’t exactly describe it as “featured”. More like suggested by a fascinating artistic technique that only reveals it at a distance.

Computer… Arch!

i hope it’s the angle, but Spock’s swept-back ears look a bit off. Hopefully, it’s a bad photoshop job, I don’t recall them looking so “off” in the trailer. In this poster they resemble the horribly butchered ear-design from Trek 5, There are only 79 hours of examples, is it really that hard to make it match? …speaking of, I’m missing Kirk’s pointed….once-upon-a-time, starfleet-issue pointy sideburns,…it’s the little things that show me they’re paying attention….or not.

@ jonboc: If I remember correctly, they used similarly photoshopped promo shots of Quinto for STID. Seems like they take these photos long after principal photography has wrapped and Zach is back to his normal look.

Right, DIGINON, I do recall those photos now that you mention them…that could very well be the case, fingers are crossed!

Hope this is not the ENTIRE marketing budget blown those are not cheap to put up in Cannes!! Hopefully its a good sign Paramount have some faith in the finished movie. 1 week tomorrow we should know a lot more I hope!


Nah, more like Paramount’s there to successfully bid on independent productions to fill out their weak, in volume, slate of distributable theater product because of their cutback on the number of films they actually produced.

Promoting STAR TREK there is likely just a win-win situation where Paramount can use it to convince independent producers that the studio can promote and distribute their wares in ways the ips could only dream of doing on their own while also getting the word out on BEYOND.

Once again, the film’s advertising focuses on Kirk, Spock and Uhura, pushing McCoy to the background. McCoy is one of the three most important characters of the original crew, not a background player. Uhura, on the other hand, just isn’t interesting enough to be in the constant spotlight.

I do understand the need to appeal to everyone, and I don’t have a problem with that. Uhura’s strong (well, the new version of Uhura, in any case) and beautiful (both versions), so men and women alike can find her appealing. I get that. I’m glad she’s in the films, and she’s certainly a much better actor than Nichols was.

However, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy have always been the soul, mind and heart of Star Trek, and Uhura’s forced shoehorning into that position in place of McCoy just doesn’t work. Pretty much every review of the past two films has commented on the need to focus more on McCoy and less on Uhura. This isn’t about sexism (which I abhor) or feminism (which I support). It’s about the fact that McCoy is a more important, more interesting and more entertaining character than Uhura is, and always has been.

Plus, Urban is widely praised as the best member of the new cast, in terms of honoring the original actor’s performance. He IS DeForest Kelley in these films–which makes him the ONLY member of the new cast to absolutely nail it. He’s very clearly the fan favorite, and so he belongs on the posters, not her.

I dont think the inclusion of Uhura has anything to do with her character…

I always thought of Uhura in TOS as strong.

The films. The TV show not so much. But sign of the times. I dont find her character particularly strong in the BR films. She’s too often portrayed as the inappropriately emotional girlfriend


Well said.

I do think however that Bones will have a bigger role this time around. In the ‘Trek rescue mission’ interview, Justin Lin said the following:

Bones is my favorite character, because I’ve always viewed him as the curmudgeonly uncle I never had. So it was fun to talk with Karl [Urban] about where McCoy is going and where he is right now. I almost feel like I’m making the biggest-budgeted fan film! We got to have Bones and Spock have the conversation I’ve always wanted them to have.

We will find out in July.

They are not shoehorning in Lt Uhura. If anything it was Dr McCoy who was “shoehorned” into the original TV and film series. The focus has been placed on the bridge crew more than others, which is why we see Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Sulu and Chekov. Dr McCoy rarely had any reason to be on the bridge and neither did Scotty. They both had their stations and important ones they were at that.

Clearly, from the little that we have seen of Star Trek Beyond, Dr McCoy and Scotty have their parts to play. It is just that they are NOT bridge crew.

Dr McCoy was shoehorned into TOS TV and Films???

McCoy was shoehorned in? LOL. I sometimes wonder, Keachick, if you’ve actually seen the original series. Your comments sometimes don’t seem to indicate an understanding of the show.

Agreed. The fact the doctor was often on the bridge for no good reason and yet it seemed perfectly natural was because he wasnt just the doctor, he was a chief advisor to the Captain. His place was organically and naturally at James Kirk’s side.

In BR films, them showing Bones as an academy friend, a trusted friend, of Kirk’s should have made his role as advisor even more obvious and natural.

Because he portrayed thst academy buddy in 09, his role was “better” than in STID where they didnt seem to have much for him to do. His dialgue was often awful, spewing one liners. There was a scene where he rattled off a bunch of junior high level dialgue with the punchline that Kirk finally tells him to stop. GROANED in the theatre watching that.

In fact, STID had more than one scene that should never have made it past the writers room, let alone editing. The aforementioned Bones scene. The underwear scene. The heavyhanded “what are you doing with that Tribble” scene. Uhura nagging Spock about their relationship while on a dangerous mission and ignoring the Captain. Im sure there are others….

If it turned out the crew was all infected with Polywater Intoxication, I’d probably enjoy STID more in retrospect.

TUP, Today 9:21 am – Agreed, STID dreadfully shortchanged McCoy, and it was really too bad, not only for the plot, but for his character.

Although there was not as much of Dr McCoy in STID as one would have liked, he did act as a barometer for Kirk’s mental state etc. He helped carry the narrative. As for McCoy’s dialogue, that is matter of opinion. I did not mind the banter he had with Carol Marcus, or the fact that he was in a “use metaphor” phase. I thought Kirk shut McCoy down too early re the metaphors. Two metaphors were not enough…:)

As for McCoy naturally being at Kirk’s side on the bridge, why? TOS never stated that Dr McCoy was anything more than CMO, which does not necessarily mean that he is/could be an adviser or counsellor. At least, with Deanna Troi, her position and reason to be on the bridge was clarified from the outset. Whether some viewers thought that she did a good or bad job is irrelevant.

TUP – “In BR films, them showing Bones as an academy friend, a trusted friend, of Kirk’s should have made his role as advisor even more obvious and natural.”

Why? Other crewmembers likely have friends from their Academy days who are just as intelligent and trustworthy. Surely it would be just as “obvious and natural” to have those friends at their side also. For all we know, Dr McCoy could easily have been assigned as CMO on another ship. Does that mean that Kirk would not cope without his friend’s advice and counsel? Really?

Lt Uhura’s role for being on the bridge was/is clear. Dr McCoy’s is not.

Dandru Today 7:09 am, I think Keachick is speaking in terms of stations for these senior crewmembers — McCoy is CMO and Scotty, Chief Engineer.

However, if we look at McCoy as a cross between doctor/psychiatrist/”counsellor” his position on bridge by Kirk is very important.

Note, though, the major stand-off and big-ole plot-driving mistake of McCoy rushing Decker to the Bridge in “Doomsday Machine” instead of taking the mentally stressed commodore to Sickbay, where they both belonged at the moment. Plot-wise, if he hadn’t rushed to the Bridge, there would have been no Decker-Spock-Kirk confrontations, but for Decker’s mental condition and the doctor’s position’s sake, they should have gone to Sickbay.

Other people use the word “shoehorn” in connection with Lt Uhura. If we are going to use that word, a word I have not used, btw, then it is clear that Dr McCoy could be seen as just as easily being “shoehorned” into an episode as people claim is the case for Lt Uhura.

Actually neither characters have been “shoehorned” in anywhere, either in the BR Trek series or in the other series.

Dandru May 12, 2016 9:22 am, Once again, the film’s advertising focuses on Kirk, Spock and Uhura, pushing McCoy to the background. McCoy is one of the three most important characters of the original crew, not a background player. Uhura, on the other hand, just isn’t interesting enough to be in the constant spotlight.

Well, that depends on what perspective you’re coming from. To an old-timey male TOS viewer and fan, yes, the Trio is the be-all and end-all, and to this female TOS fan, I would certainly like to see more of McCoy, and continue to feature Uhura in a strong role.

There is no reason some action cannot be sacrificed for McCoy-Kirk-Spock arguments/discussions. Uhura does not “replace” McCoy; she has been given a larger role because many in the modern audience are female, and in fact, many old-timey fans of TOS are female, and I personally like seeing a strong female in the main part of the cast.
Uhura was not a “whiny girlfriend” for all of her scenes in the movies. Yes, a concerned mate, but not “whiny,” ( it DOES sound sexist to me; how many times has “whiny” been applied to male characters?) and for some reason those scenes seem to receive all the attention from naysayers instead of her stronger scenes.

I didn’t call her “whiny,” and I also said that I’m in favor of featuring strong female characters. But the focus on McCoy is lacking, and I just don’t see Uhura as being interesting enough as a character to warrant Bones being overlooked like he has.

Dandru, 11.25a, I apologize; I should have made myself clearer. It seemed to me that 90% of the reviewers called her the “whiny” or “nagging” girlfriend. You did not. Thank you.

But for me and other females, and I hope males as well, she is an interesting character, particularly in attempting the diplomatic overture with the Kronos Klingons and fighting her way out (yes watch carefully folks, she stabs him in the thigh).

The remarks by Jemini are over the top, ridiculous and offensive. This person is altering facts to try and support their incorrect position.

Many many people were disappointed in the use of Carol Marcus. Need we re-visit underwear-gate and the fallout that resulted in filmmakers having to respond to it?

The people who dislike the portrayal of Marcus and Uhura are not people who want it to be all-male – they are people who just want a well-written strong female.

There is no doubt how poorly Uhura was written. She WAS too often the whiny girlfriend. Her use in the film was not to be a strong female, it was to enhance Spock’s role. So she had to be the one struggling with dating a Vulcan and everything that entailed.

One can grant some leeway within the confines of a movie but from leaving her post to make out with Spock in the elevator, leaving her post to make out with Spock on the transporter pad, demanding her superior officer change her ship assignment (which i believe resulted in uhura living and someone else dying all because she was lucky enough to be sleeping with the boss), jeopardizing a mission over her feelings for him, crying on the bridge, confronting him about their relationship while on a dangerous mission and disobeying the Captain…I mean if there was ANY realism at all, she’d be in the brig.

But that brings up the issue that these films rarely show us “down time” akin to the crew gathering in Kirk’s apartment in TSFS or Bones visiting Kirk in WoK. I have no problem with exploring Spock/Uhura but they should have made it off-duty. And in that, they could reveal glimpses into the characters by showing them off duty.

I dont want less women. I want less offensive women. Marcus would have worked had they not devolved her into being the hot girl put in front of a lecherous, drooling creep (Kirk).

So Im hoping Jayla is a strong female. But none of this changes why she or Uhura were made front and center in marketing material and none of it explains the dis-service done to McCoy. What explains away McCoy is that his role is being served by Spock & Kirk in various ways. They dont need the passionate, emotional, human-centric, morally centered opinion when they get all of that from Spock & Kirk already.

What a perverse perspective. There is so much that is just *wrong* one hardly knows where to start.

Kirk was NOT a “lecherous, drooling creep” in STID and was only once such a person in the first film, when he accidentally grabs onto Uhura’s breasts in the bar fight. When he realises that he had her breasts in her hands, that’s when he gave a lecherous grin. He didn’t grin for long because Uhura gave him a well deserved whack.

The only person likely to jeopardise the mission was Spock, because Uhura AND Kirk did not know where Spock was coming from, emotion-wise. The confrontation was NOT JUST ABOUT the personal Spock/Uhura relationship. It had to do with Spock’s attitude in his PROFESSIONAL relationships and that included Kirk. Therefore it was important that Kirk and Uhura finally had Spock speak his mind (which he had refused to do), even if it was on the shuttle on the way to a dangerous mission. Better they know and prepare (if they can) than still be in the dark…
What part of that scene did people not see and hear? What is more, some viewers are too busy WHINING about Uhura (yes, that is the real meaning of whining) that they never mention just what Spock told the two of them – very poignant and actually quite beautiful. It was because of what Spock had explained, that caused Uhura to give him a little peck (kiss) when they arrived back safely on board the Enterprise with Harrison in tow. Kirk also had greater understanding and respect for Spock and that showed in his general manner.

Uhura simply stood up for herself in the first film. Spock admitted his bias and corrected matters.

“(which i believe resulted in uhura living and someone else dying all because she was lucky enough to be sleeping with the boss)” What a reprehensible comment. Uhura and Spock did not cause Gaila’s death. Nero did.

Edit: Uhura did not cause the death of the one who would have replaced her on the USS Farragut. Nero did. No one is in any position to know what the outcome of any mission would be, as in who may die, and who may live. Since when was the other person’s life of more value than Uhura’s, or for that matter, of less a value?
The comment above by TUP, which I quoted, is such a stupid and totally off thing to write.

@Rose – it didnt take long for you to revert back to your insulting, condescending and childish manner. Oh well.

Again, what ROSE sees does not make what OTHERS see wrong. You LOVE the whining, emotionally unstable girlfriend. Thats cool. Others dont. If others disagree do you even entertain the possibility that their perspective has merit?

But your own assertion, Kirk sexually assaulted Uhura and was amused by his own actions. But its okay because Uhura physically assaulted him in return. I bet neither of those things are allowed in your work-place harassment policy! lol

“Standing up for herself” ie. being insubordinate. But its okay because she’s a woman and he was wrong. In fact he was correct in assigning her elsewhere due to their relationship which continued to interfere with their work.

Its perfectly okay for none of those plot weaknesses to bother you. You are entitled to love a film even if its not very good. But dont insult others for not agreeing with you.

“@Rose – it didnt take long for you to revert back to your insulting, condescending and childish manner. Oh well.”

pot meet kettle. again.

have fun voting down mine and Rose comments.
excuse us for ‘ruining your party’

@Jemini – dont let yourself be dragged down to irrelevancy. If you cant contribute intelligently, dont bother trying. Man is this place negative lately. tsk tsk tsk. Also, love the typical whining about votes. jackass.

TUP – “But your own assertion, Kirk sexually assaulted Uhura and was amused by his own actions. But its okay because Uhura physically assaulted him in return. I bet neither of hose things are allowed in your work-place harassment policy! lol”

What has work-place harassment policy got to do with the bar scene in question? If you had watched the scene in question, it was CLEAR that no one was at work. They were all at a bar, a bar which was Jim Kirk’s “local”, drinking and relaxing. Certainly, many were seen in SF cadet uniform, but JIM KIRK was NOT even a cadet NOR a member of Starfleet. Therefore your work harassment notion does not apply.

I never said that anything was OK. I was comparing Kirk’s response in the bar when he realised he had grabbed onto Uhura’s breasts, with his more considerate response to the sight of Carol Marcus in her underwear.

As for entertaining the notion that other perspectives have merit, I see none of it coming from you. It seems clear that you have watched neither Star Trek films in a long time because you seem to need reminding as to what, when, how etc of what took place, eg referring inappropriately to work-place policies.

If a man had queried where he was being assigned, I doubt there would even be a discussion in terms of what is considered “whiny”, “insubordinate”, “pushy” and sarcastic comments like “…it’s okay because she’s a woman…”. I suspect that if a man did not assert himself, ie query his posting, many would be calling him a wimp. It all just reeks of sexism…Ugh…:(!

@Rose – well we could discuss the military protocol of several cadets being in uniform at a bar and whether the code of conduct applies (it does). Its okay if he rapes her because she’s off duty? Really?

Kirk’s more considerate response? So what did he learn? That its amusing to get drunk and sexually assault Uhura but not as amusing to stare, jaw-dropped, at a subordinate in a state of undress until SHE told him to turn away? Wow, Kirk’s come a long way.

“The remarks by Jemini are over the top, ridiculous and offensive. This person is altering facts to try and support their incorrect position. ”

pot meet kettle. Talk about ‘altering facts to support incorrect position’, because clearly your opinions are facts? LOL sure, you might have as well watched different movies judging from the stuff you said that is 99% revisionism of what actually happened in the movies, decorated by blatant sexism and double standards from your part which is absolutely nothing new here (I’m not even having, again, this argument and call you out on the fact that you judge Uhura for stuff the male characters are given a pass for even when they are the ones whose behavior – e.g, Kirk and McCoy – does actually fit with the accusations you make for Uhura) If you see Uhura that way it says more about YOU than the character and who wrote her.

but we’re well used to your presumptuous self, what to expect from someone who argues even with one of the writers of the reboot here and talks to them as if they were their pals and they can teach them how to do their job?

No my opinions are opinions. Are you a moron?

here we go again with the same juvenile comments about the stupid posters… ———————————————- “Uhura, on the other hand, just isn’t interesting enough to be in the constant spotlight.” ———————————————- Sorry to burst your tos nostalgia for the ‘men only show’ bubble, but a lot of people disagree with your statement so you better speak for yourself only here. ———————————————- “However, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy have always been the soul, mind and heart of Star Trek,” ———————————————- the id-ego-superego thing was a fanmade thing and was mostly based on the fact that Kirk was the main character and Spock and McCoy were supporting. It also was a habit of the old days to want to ostensibly give to characters some symbolic ‘role’. In new trek you don’t need that stuff, the dynamics are different because the main dudes are different. Both Kirk and Spock are the main characters here, not just Kirk (thus Spock’s role is not just being the devil at his side to McCoy’s angel). HOW can anyone not notice that Kirk and Spock are more similar to Spock/Bones from tos? It’s Kirk the emotion clashing with Spock’s logic. Uhura? She might be that bridge and ‘voice of reason’ between Kirk and Spock: she embraces emotion but she also loves logic. She has a new role as someone who is important to both these guys for different reasons and who cares about them both differently which creates a context where, unlike tos, the male friendships aren’t the only kind of dynamics we can have. Spock himself is less one-dimensional and like Quinto said, it was a choice to make his Spock (also helped by Nimoy who approved) less ‘all logic’ like tos Spock was and his portrayal is more in tune with our time. New Spock is less the mixed child who must choose only one part of his heritage (which was part of the cultural mindset of the 60s), and more a nowadays portrayal of mixed people who can embrace both their heritage. ———————————————- ” and Uhura’s forced shoehorning into that position in place of McCoy just doesn’t work” ———————————————- Uhura is not replacing McCoy. Kirk is. But it’s obvious you cannot notice it because the context of these movies doesn’t matter when you are too focused on pretending that it’s tos and it must be like tos even though everything says it isn’t. ———————————————- “Pretty much every review of the past two films has commented on the need to focus more on McCoy and less on Uhura.” ———————————————- Doubtful when there are people who actually lamented that the movies are too much about TWO dudes and there aren’t enough women, unlikely ‘everyone’ is fervently asking to have a story about 3 dudes in 2016. Most of the critics I read (who also happens to be the same who praise last JJ’s Star wars for having a female lead character) had, actually, praised the new dynamics in the reboot. It’s only some tos fanboys (and some fangirls slashers) who complain that Uhura got in the way of the original trio. Beside anonymous comments on articles about this movie, it doesn’t seem to me that trek fans in trek boards ( e.g., trekbbs) share your opinion. It also doesn’t seem to me that anyone really complained when the old thing was less ‘the original trinity’ and became more the Kirk/Spock show. Or when the new female character ‘replaced McCoy’ in the old movie posters. People’s ability to remember about the ‘original trinity’ seems to be limited to when Uhura gets more screentime or promotion but then Scotty can get more prominent than Mccoy and no one cares about ‘poor McCoy’. Funny how that works. ———————————————- “It’s about the fact that McCoy is a more important, more interesting and more entertaining character than Uhura is, and always has been. ” ———————————————- I understand that there is an alternate reality where apparently ‘every review of the past two films’ has agreed with you’ but you should still start to use the whole ‘in my opinion’ thing. ———————————————- “Plus, Urban is widely praised as the best member of the new cast, in terms of honoring the original actor’s performance.” ———————————————- by those who, coincidentally, complain about the reboot not being ‘trek’ because it’s not carbon copy of tos. he’s also criticized as being the one who gets the reboot’s purpose the least because his portrayal is too much an impersonation of the original character, and he doesn’t really give us anything NEW making him, well, an alternate version of the character as he should be. Nimoy himself LOVED new Spock because he ISN’T an impersonation of his character but rather a new version of him with different layers (bonus: he also said that the Spock/Uhura romance was one of his favorite… Read more »

jemini, Today 12:18 pm,
I’ve been pointing out for several years now that, instead of the Testosterone Trio, they could be the Fab Four. I don’t see why not.

People’s ability to remember about the ‘original trinity’ seems to be limited to when Uhura gets more screentime or promotion but then Scotty can get more prominent than Mccoy and no one cares about ‘poor McCoy’. Funny how that works.

Innit though …? Even some who “deplore” sexism seem to change their tune when it comes to a female fictional character being featured in a new Trek universe.OMG SHE GOT ONE MINUTE MORE SCREEN TIME THAN [fill in male character’s name] — Trek’s goin’ to the hot place in a handbasket!!! SMDH

“Even some who “deplore” sexism seem to change their tune when it comes to a female fictional character being featured in a new Trek universe.OMG SHE GOT ONE MINUTE MORE SCREEN TIME THAN [fill in male character’s name] — Trek’s goin’ to the hot place in a handbasket!!! SMDH”

the ‘wanting to have the cake and eat too’ game is quite strong with some trek fans. They’re the best at that.

For all people’s endless preaching about the trek spirit and how progressive the series was for the time, it seems that some might as well love trek and be fans precisely because it was a tv-show made in the 60s where its more progressive aspects could never be more than merely decorative elements.
If Roddenberry could have had his way, completely, and tell all the stories he wanted to tell probably a lot of trek fans wouldn’t be fans today,

Relax and stop taking things so seriously, Jemini. Your reply is ridiculous and over-the-top.

Dandru May 13, 2016 7:30 pm
Relax and stop taking things so seriously, Jemini. Your reply is ridiculous and over-the-top.


Ha! You made whiny (redundant) over the top rant about a stupid poster because you perceive a fictional woman as a threat to your faves and I’m the one taking things serioustly?
Pot met kettle.

The super predictable ‘ending’ to every episode of this ongoing saga with the ‘complainers’ here.

and frankly, this movie has been promoted, so far, as a dudes fest and the Scotty/Pegg’s show ANYWAY. Both him and the new alien lady might as well have a more prominent role in the story than McCoy (just like in stid Scotty had a more active and important role than McCoy), yet you chronic complainers seem to have no problem when Scotty, or new characters, having bigger roles than McCoy or them getting more screentime than him. It’s years with the same arguments: you care about McCoy and the original trio ONLY when you get reminded of the fact that Uhura is a bigger character in this trek.
Even with Carol/Alice Eve there wasn’t all this harping on every bit of attention she got (and she got more promotional stuff than McCoy), she wasn’t considered this huge ‘threat’ to the importance of your boys. But Uhura/Zoe for some reason is this scary woman who should be put away otherwise your faves cannot be important. So ridiculous.

Jemini – EXACTLY!

That’s not remotely true. Alice Eve’s Carol Marcus was hugely lambasted.

And your post very much mischaracterizes what people have said about Zaldana.

The more i look at those swarm ships i still think its a Jem’Hadar film. Hopefully next week trailer and fan event provides better insight to the film. Only 2 more months till its release and its not getting that much buzz.

It’s definitely not a Jem’Hadar story. Come on.

Marcus Watstein,

The Jem’Hadar were humanoids engineered and manufactured by the Founders. If they appear in BEYOND then it would have to be at the very least a Founder’s film as there can be no Jem’Hadar without them.

Marcus, May 12, 2016 10:11 am — take a close look at that aliens “photo-op” with Justin Lin. The guy is definitely not Jem’Hadar. If he is, I’ll be VERY surprised.

Cannes!!! Only hip people will ‘get’ this.

here is what “steely-eyed” means

having a hard, determined look … is that really what you meant?

Uhhh… neither did I. ‘splain please?

Seems more like “Eagle” would reference NASA as in the LEM Eagle.

Steely makes me think of Steely Dan which makes me think of England Dan which calls to my mind:

I’m not talkin’ ’bout movin’ in, and I don’t want to change your life.
But there’s a warm wind blowin’.
The stars are out.
And I’d really like to see the better half of the constellation Aries tonight…

the term “steely-eyed” makes no sense in this article (having a hard, determined look) … maybe “eagle-eyed” was meant?

I mentioned the same thing over at TrekCore. No Star Trek anywhere, simply Beyond. Not something I relish. The words Star Trek seem to be getting smaller and smaller in the titles and in this case, have completely disappeared. Not a fan of this “new age” form of marketing.

Interesting interview clip with Simon:


Well, for me the posters look great in every sense. Go #StarTrekBeyond

One thing. The Cannes artwork mentions the hastag GOBEYOND. Any clues as to how Paramount’s using that?

Not really getting a sense of what it’s about but here it is:

Its a shortened version of #PleasePleaseGoSeeStarTrekBeyondPlease

TUP 6:54 am — LOL
I hope they do!

Wow. That’s really wonderful. They hung up posters. How quaint.

Why do Spocks ears look different in every movie? in STID, they were just right…

agreed…how hard his it? Make it look like it did in the series…which they did wonderfully in the first two films. Do you really need Nimoy on set to correct and advise you? it’s not like there isn’t any visual reference out there. lol

jonboc Today 8:38a, even Nimoy gently hinted in one interview that he was not so pleased with his PrimeSpock ears. Sorry, I don’t have a reference for which interview. I think it was filmed.

Marja, you’re right, Nimoy had often mentioned that the original series ears were very uncomfortable in that they also had to use two-sided tape to pin the ears back to avoid the “Dumbo” effect. lol Of course, Fred Phillips was the master…the veteran make-up artist did the ears for the series and returned for the motion picture…but, sadly was too old to do the subsequent films. (trek 5’s “Spock” make-up, from the ears to the shaggy hair cut were horrible) Nimoy did lament the shifting “look” of his alter-ego in the movies until he had full control in, Trek 6, to issue a mandate that the make-up artists give Spock the same look he had in the series. Looking at the art again, I think maybe it’s just the severe angle of Quinto that is making it look off…I hope they are on target!

Athlan Today 6:53a, Agreed, it’s not like they don’t have 4 hours of reference visuals. These ears look TERRIBLE.

Is nobody going to comment on the fact that they omitted “Star Trek” from the title on the walkway standee?
I find that super strange.

I mentioned that but was rightfully pointed out that they use Star Trek quite prominently in other areas so it probably means nothing short of aesthetic.

Every time I see the motorcycle clip I think “Star Trek Be…yaaawn”.

Nope. The motorcycle clip just indicates that just because something is apparently old (as in was used decades, even centuries) does not necessarily mean that it has little or function or value now. Starships, cars, planes, motorbikes, horses may be all about helping us get from A to B. They all have their place…

It seemed to me that it indicated that you can take the director out of fast and furious, but you can’t take the fast and furious out of the director. They have said this trailer doesn’t represent the film, but haven’t released anything to show otherwise. I was pleased with the first film, a little let down with the second. I don’t have a good feeling about this one, but would love to be wrong.

I cant say the motorcycle is bad until I see how they get there. Its a too-often used gimmick in Star Trek that everytime they need a connection to the past it just happens to be something from the contemporary world. God forbid they try to create a 23rd century version of a motorcycle.

It was the same in 09 – Kirk stealing a car and driving down a deserted road. Uh huh.

Our contemporary world is Star Trek’s past. Why would they show something contemporary to the 23rd century if they want to show something that connects with their past and our present. Of course, in TNG, they went further back into our past by having Picard listen to Berlioz and Data play Mozart. With BR Star Trek, they have chosen vehicular transport – a 60’s American chevy and a more modern dirt bike. Why are so many people peeved by this? It does not make sense.

Perhaps people are peeved because from a technology standpoint it’s like characters from “Fast and Furious” needing to get somewhere fast and driving these:

So Rose you’re saying that only the mid-late 20th century is the past to Star Trek? I KNOW why they do it but its a bit on the nose to ALWAYS have the crew member who is a student of 20th century history or who collects “ancient” cars from the 60’s or loved TV from the 30’s or whatever.

Even the really nice scene between Bones and Kirk where he gives him glasses was a bit different…but at least it came full circle in TVH.

So what? A lot of young guys tend to be into cars and/or motorbikes so it is not so strange that a way of connecting a futuristic fictional world to our present would be through a male lead having an interest in 20/21st century vehicular technologies. Picard had his saddle, *classical* music (18/19th century) and big tomes, which were in print form and bound. Kirk had an actual book or two, one of them being Moby Dick, his antique guns (TWOK), glasses and, of course, he couldn’t resist riding anything that came close to a horse (ST:V).

It is far from “ALWAYS”.

@Rose – you’re so anal. Give it a rest. Do something that brings joy to your life because obviously discussing Star Trek doesnt. You’re a miserable person.

@MODERATORS – Deal with this poster TUP, please.

All I did was merely point out earth history (and its antiques) have always played a part within the ST franchise and these new films are no exception. How did these comments of mine relegate me to being referred to as “so anal”, “miserable”?

I am sick of TUP’s continuous insults.

The new film of Chris Pine, ‘Hell Or High Water’, will be presented in Cannes on Monday in the ‘Un Certain Regard’ section. It would be great if he is there, and also do some promotion for ‘Star Trek Beyond’.

Btw, for those “amazed” because Paramount is making the film promotion at the Cannes Film Festival, on June 22th, there will be another event for the film this time in the ‘Cannes Lions International Festival Of Creativity’, Simon Pegg, Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto will talk about ST Beyond in this event.

Excellent – for both events. I hope that Chris Pine can make it to Cannes this Monday and also to the event at Paramount in LA this coming Friday. That’s one busy man.

I hope that somebody records the talk/discussion given by Simon, Chris and Zack next month. This is a good kind of publicity. Also Chris and Zachary have both spent quite a bit of time in Europe, either working or travelling and I think they are getting known in those parts, perhaps even better than they are known in the US etc.

I sure hope I can see “Hell or High Water” — Jeff Bridges and Chris Pine and what looks like a really good, character-driven script.

I hope it will be a good movie; the marketing thus far (or lack thereof) combined with the perception around the Fast and Furious director coming aboard (flashbacks to the editor turned director mess surrounding Nemesis), the negative press around the anti-fan-film lawsuits, and the fact that the 50th being basically unaccomplished has me with very low expectations – this is the least enthused I’ve been for a Trek film since I can remember being old enough to get excited for them (too young to remember the blitz for the earlier films; I do remember being generally excited starting with TUC).

Typo – “unacknowledged”

@Tony – agreed. There are people who will tell you that you’re just being negative. But your points are all valid. The real irrational perspective is the “OMG this will be the greatest movie ever”. The cautious one is certainly the more rational perspective.

Apparently STB is being pushed back in some countries with rumors of it being pushed back in North America also, though I find that difficult to believe at this point.

For those that say CBS AA has nothing worth watching, it sounds like a The Good Wife spinoff will be announced this week, exclusive to CBSAA. The Good Wife was often brilliant so I’d put that in the “win” column


If so, I’d expect such to be reflected here:

I did find it odd that it is being promoted in France when it doesn’t premier there until August 3rd.

@Disinvited, I didnt click the link but it was over at Trekcore that Brazil was pushed back to December. Cant confirm it for sure ofcourse…



You’d discover that it is Paramount’s “OFFICIAL MOVIE SITE AND TRAILER FOR STAR TREK BEYOND”
and therefore the link you did not click on was for the “official” release dates which does not reflect what you and trekcore are asserting. It still has Brazil as July 21st.

Orci sez:

No delay for the U. S. A.

I have an ancestor who migrated to Brazil and lived there til he died. So I have more than a passing interest of goings on there. My understanding is it is not unusual to have international film releases there sync up with Argentina which Paramount’s official site has scheduled for a BEYOND release of Sept. 1st.

Not bad but I’m not really caring atm.
I was totally excited about STAR TREK (2009) & INTO DARKNESS but not Beyond & they haven’t given me a reason yet.