The new Star Trek Beyond character Jaylah is a dynamic addition to film and potentially the crew. Here I make my case for why she is among the strongest characters of the franchise and should stick around should another Kelvin film be made.
Fresh is not generally a word associated with someone or something that is celebrating its 50th birthday. While J.J. Abrams breathed new life into the aging Star Trek franchise in 2009, the introduction of a new character that resonates with audiences has been missing from both the television shows and feature films arguably since Worf in Star Trek: The Next Generation. However, in Star Trek Beyond’s Jaylah, fans have been presented with a character that offers a new vitality as well as the potential of a new role model to an aging franchise that needed a reboot to once again connect with the zeitgeist.
Innovation has always been at the forefront of Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek, especially the aspects in which he personally created. Two of those revolutionary moments came in the characters of Uhura in The Original Series and the aforementioned Worf. Both represented powerful images in times of social upheaval, and sadly, both are still needed today.
While Jaylah’s origins are not as unique as those two, her inclusion is no less important for a franchise that needed to go back to the original characters Roddenberry created to remain relevant and interesting to audiences.
Exciting debuts are hard to achieve, and yet Justin Lin, Simon Pegg and Doug Jung were able to accomplish just such a feat when Jaylah, superbly portrayed by the talented Sofia Boutella, bursts on screen to rescue Scotty from a marauding band of scanners. As soon as the audience set eyes on her, it was evident Jaylah was a strong and independent character, not defined by her gender or race, but by her perseverance to survive and ingenuity to repair the USS Franklin, a type of technology she had never encountered.
Sofia Boutella brought the character of Jaylah to life
Dynamism is a lot like charisma, one either has it or not. It is difficult to manufacture, and yet Jaylah possesses a passion, spirit, and vivacity for life that has not been seen in Star Trek for a long, long time. Taking nothing away from the stronger female characters that came before Jaylah in the Final Frontier, like Janeway, Torres, and Kira, Star Trek’s newest addition is responsible for saving the entire crew of the Enterprise. When introduced to Scotty and Kirk, she does not wither into the background, but remains an integral component in the crew’s rescue, escape, and ultimate defeat of Krall.
Debuting on television screens in 1966, Uhura famously connected with a disenfranchised part of the population that had never been portrayed in other than a servant role. Martin Luther King stated it was the only television show to be viewed in his home. Following in Uhura’s footsteps was Janeway when Voyager debuted in 1995, as the first female captain to lead a Star Trek show. Again, a new generation of viewers were inspired by her inclusion and role. While Zoe Saldana’s Uhura has been a revelation in terms of growth and strength, her character already had an impact on audiences.
Struggling with the depiction and inclusion of strong female characters, popular culture has come under fire, and rightfully so, for its handling of female comic book characters, as well as women in film. Another Abrams production broke down the barrier a bit when the character of Rey was introduced to the world in the latest Star Wars film. Her character was the best part of the film, and introduced the typical male-dominated fandom of the franchise to young women. Opportunity are always present to make an impact and impression on audiences and Abrams’ Rey accomplished its goal. Now Jaylah has the potential to do for Star Trek what Rey achieved in Star Wars.
This is why Jaylah’s story continuing in the Kelvin Timeline is essential and vital that she not be a one-off character. The director and screenwriters already opened the door with her admittance to Starfleet Academy, and it would not be beyond the realm of possibility for the amount of time needed to pass in the fictional universe for her to join the crew for its potential fourth cinematic adventure. She is spirited, powerful, positive and courageous – all the attributes all people should look for in a role model.
As the Great Bird of the Galaxy once said:
“Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. […] If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there.”
Whether it be man, woman, Russian, Klingon or anybody, regardless of orientation and background.
I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing Jaylah again.
One can only hope.
Many had hoped the JJ-Carol Marcus would come back (not because a posh English Carol Marcus made any sense, but because it would be some level on continuity and continuity creates a universe…) but no. And Jaylah, if Beyond hadn’t financially flopped, and a fourth movie were made (in your uninspired dreams, why not “hope” for something better? Like good Trek movies made for fans of the TV series) – she’d be at Starfleet Academy, you won’t see her anyway.
What are you talking about? In the JJ-verse, Carol Marcus grew up in the UK instead of the USA. Happens all the time.
Re:a posh English Carol
What are YOU talking about? That’s not what POSH means at all which is the substance of his critique.
You are just transparently isolating the word “English” as an excuse to haul out one of your favorite strawman pre-canned responses which you feel justifies your bigoted notions that the loyal opposition to Bad Robot’s style of STAR TREK movie storytelling are all insane. Take your negative Nelly blinders off and see that people that don’t see everything your way or agree with you are NOT all evil raving maniacs. You do them as well as yourself, a great disservice when you let your mind get seduced into these lazy methods of reasoning which allows you to mindlessly dismiss many worthy ideas counter to your own.
Re:Carol Marcus grew up in the UK instead of the USA
“There is a cheekily subversive tone in [Bryan] Caplan’s book [SELFISH REASONS TO HAVE MORE KIDS] , but he makes a serious argument about nature versus nurture. He cites studies of identical twins who were adopted by different families — but then went on to live very similar lives…” — ‘SELFISH REASONS For Parents To Enjoy Having Kids’ by NPR Morning Edition Staff; April 22, 201112:01 AM ET
“My basic message is this: You might think that it’s just a matter of opinion as to how much and in what ways parents are able to change their kids for life, but there’s actually an excellent scientific literature on this that doesn’t get a lot of attention, but it’s really worth paying attention to. By studying kids who are adopted, you’re able to find out how much do parents change you apart from changing your genes. And the punch line is, for most traits, there is little or no effect.” — Bryan Caplan, author, SELFISH REASONS TO HAVE MORE KIDS
Of course it’s a matter of “opinion”. In fact, you are deliberately ignoring a well-worn science-fiction trope, where the principle character is changed based on a different set of circumstances. BACK TO THE FUTURE. THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT. Several episodes of the TWILIGHT ZONE and the OUTER LIMITS. IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE. HOT TUB TIME MACHINE. Those are off the top of my head. And I also would like to add that KT Carol Marcus is a young woman, while the PT Carol Marcus is an older woman. So not only do you have the premise where Carol Marcus grew up in a different place, but a different Carol Marcus at a different point in her life. We do not know what the PT Carol Marcus did or was doing when she first met her James Kirk. You complain about Carol having a “posh English” accent? Newsflash: anyone, especially children, can pick up the grammatical syntax of where they live, regardless of where they came from. So, if KT Carol Marcus grows up in the UK, presumably a prestigious prep school because of her father, yeah, THIS Carol would be a bit “posh”. Would that change her attitudes and demeanor? Who knows? Now, we’ll never find out…
Re:you are deliberately ignoring a well-worn science-fiction trope
Well you are deliberately ignoring that unlike other forms of fiction, in SF, the tropes don’t remain static but are modified and adapted as our understanding in real science advances. In fact, Bob Orci wrote reams on nodding towards this trope evolution explaining as to why the old time travel tropes will NOT work in his STAR TREK and this includes many of the ones you just cited.
Re:You complain about Carol having a “posh English” accent
No. Once again you keep returning to the “accent” strawman even though I have been quite clear no one is complaining about that. It’s the Posh English demeanor that came with it that is what we’ve been pointing out to you but you keep obsessing on having an “accent” argument. If you read carefully what I wrote you will see I said that identical twins raised in different families WILL have different accents and can even go as far as speaking entirely different languages, but the research shows that as they exit childhood they will return to their shared biological “personality” (not ACCENT) traits. The research even says this holds to some extent even for adopted separated fraternal twins but I wasn’t making that case only the one for identicals which I took Eve’s blonde Carol to be based on Orci’s assertions that only the accent had changed due to a change in geography.
PT Carol and KT Carol both have left childhood and should have more bounced back traits in common than the flagrant dissimilarities both on screen have. Beyond that, their ages have little bearing nor serve as an explanation as for why they were not far more similar than apart in the actresses’ two portrayals of supposedly the SAME character.
There’s nothing at all nonsensical about an English-accented Carol in a new timeline.
Re:nothing at all nonsensical about an English-accented Carol
Indeed, but that’s not what was being asserted by Ralph despite what dswynne claimed.
His observation was the complete personality rewrite was what made no sense, which is a valid observation given the results of many studies of separated identical twins.
The transformation of Carol Marcus’ personality traits from a smart Lauren Bacallesque (“Can I cook or can I cook?”) scientist to a posh English one IS a valid critique.
The twin studies show that for the most part, indeed, they can and will have different accents or even speak entirely different languages, but fundamental personalities in sf are not so likely to be easily overwritten by a change in space, geographical or outer.
You don’t make ANY sense. The fact of the matter is that Nero’s temporal incursion changed the course of events. For some people, very little. For others, a lot. In this case, we’re dealing with a version of Carol Marcus who led a different life. Simple as that. It’s not anyone’s fault that you can’t wrap your mind around a rather simple premise. Now, had you stated that you prefer a Carol Marcus that was closer to how the character was originally depicted, I would have accepted that. But stating something that is wrong, simply because you don’t like it, but masking it as “fact” is silly. SMH.
Re:But stating something that is wrong, simply because you don’t like it, but masking it as “fact” is silly.
Oh, but I can demonstrate the falsity of your claims by citing and quoting the source for what you simply dismiss out of hand as “wrong” because your simple obsessed mind can’t conceive that what it assumes is reality, might not be:
“Adoption and twin research provides strong evidence that parents barely affect their children’s prospects. If parents gave themselves a big break—or redoubled their efforts—kids would turn out about the same.
Before you dismiss this claim as crazy, imagine you adopt a baby girl and raise her to adulthood. Who do you think she will resemble more by the time she graduates from high school: Her biological parents, or you? I don’t just mean physical resemblance; I’m also talking about smarts, personality, achievements, values, and so on. Can you honestly say you’d be shocked if your adopted daughter had a lot more in common with the strangers who conceived her than she did with you?
You don’t have to merely imagine this scenario. It’s been done— repeatedly. A small army of researchers has compared adoptees to their relatives—biological and adopted. They find that when adopted children are young, they resemble both the adopted relatives they see every day and the biological relatives they’ve never met. However, as adopted children grow up, the story has a shocking twist: Resemblance to biological relatives remains, but resemblance to adopted relatives mostly fades away. Studies that compare identical to fraternal twins reach the same conclusion.
The lesson: It’s easy to change a child but hard to keep him from changing back. Instead of thinking of children as lumps of clay for parents to mold, we should think of them as plastic that flexes in response to pressure—and pops back to its original shape once the pressure is released. The book explores adoption and twin research in great detail.” — SELFISH REASONS TO HAVE MORE KIDS; By Bryan Caplan, Hardcover; 240 pages; Copyright 2011 Basic Books; excerpt from Author Interview ‘SELFISH REASONS For Parents To Enjoy Having Kids’ by NPR Morning Edition Staff; April 22, 201112:01 AM ET
Ergo, especially even moreso operating under the assumption that both ADULT Carol Marcuses are otherwise identical there should be far more recognizable similarities than the very obvious dissimilarities for which you apologize in ever back bending contortion extremes.
You’re making a huge assumption here.
Carol Marcus looked to be younger than Kirk in both timelines. Which means she was almost certainly conceived after the timelines diverged, and Starfleet began building up a very different fleet than it had in the prime timeline.
Admiral Marcus, or perhaps Commander Marcus at the time, was probably involved in that. Which means he and his wife were almost certainly not able to achieve the precise timing that would have been required to produce the exact Carol Marcus we saw in the prime timeline films.
Different sperm/ovum=different genetics. She no doubt had a similar upbringing to a point, but is arguably closer to Carol Marcus’s sister.
And yes, that means the same applies to Chekov, Uhura, and Sulu, as all were younger than Kirk.
Re:You’re making a huge assumption here.
No, you are. To make a canon argument hold water there has to be some on screen evidience of the assertion. There is absolutely zero, zip, zed, etc. on screen evidence in the two films in which the character Carol Marcus appears for her being younger than Kirk.
Re:You’re making a huge assumption here.
However, even if there were evidence of what you assert, as I noted to dswynne:
The research supports a fraternal twins biological similarity of inherited traitson exiting childhood too.
I doubt we’ll be seeing her or this production team again after the failure of Beyond.
BEYOND wasn’t a failure. It just under-perform at the box office. A couple of reasons contributed to this – mainly due to the fact that Into Darkness was a horrible movie. The same way The Undiscovered Country under-performed at the box office due to The Final Frontier. Beyond was well received by critics, fans and non-fans alike. In my opinion, it was the best of the Kelvin timeline movies. Into Darkness is my least favorite of all Trek movies including Nemesis and The Final Frontier.
“Beyond was well received by critics, fans and non-fans alike.”
Yeah, it was well received by fans and non-fans that it underperformed domestically and internationally!
As for the critics, ‘Beyond’ is the lowest rated of the three Kelvin movies, and currently the 6th among all Trek movies.
Post of the week.
@Joe – how many millions does it have to lose before its deemed a failure? How much money do you lose on investments and project before you decide it was a failed endeavour?
Star Trek never loses money. Nemesis, the lowest grossing of all Star Trek films, eventually turned a profit for Paramount. It took some years to do it but the studio eventually recouped its investment and continues to profit from it today.
Re:Star Trek never loses money. Nemesis
A valid observation. Unfortunately this Paramount has gotten itself into an unfortunate financial situation where it can’t afford to wait that long. It needs cash NOW.
STAR TREK never loses money in the long haul but this 2005 created Paramount does and will.
What a childish load of nonsense.
You have STID to thank for Beyond’s opening weekend having been good, and not abysmal like the rest of the performance after word got out among the public that the third wasn’t as strong as the other two.
STID was the most successful movie in the history of Trek, and well received by both the public and the critics. Only haters are deluded enough to keep telling themselves it could ever have had a negative effect on Beyond’s box office.
Beyond is a very enjoyable movie, but it’s also clearly the weakest of the three, and way less engaging for the public at large rather than us long time fans.
And I say this as a lifetime TOS fan.
I agree, it has failed. Even if it hadn’t as we saw with Carol ‘Just In My Bra’ Marcus, they’re happy to introduce a new character without honouring that in the follow up movie. But thankfully, it’s unlikey there will be a fourth. The best film of the three (not saying much..) and yet it did fail to make money. 200 million in the red is an indication Paramount will pass on JJs alleged Chris Hemsworth script. And I would be relieved to see this soulless incarnation end. Great music, great production values, great enthusiastic cast… But it’s a glorified fan production when pretending to be other characters played iconically by other actors… While constantly apologising for what came before it, then oddly rehashing things when it runs out of ideas. Into Darkness was insulting. I sat in Greenwich IMAX in London, weeks into it’s release, a full house, couldn’t possibly all been Trek fans… And when Cumberbatch is revealed as Khan EVERYONE loudly moaned and then laughter. It was embarassing. The films that were marketed as ‘Not your dads Star Trek’… But they need your dads ideas… Oh, and a photo of the original cast to create emotional impact.
Also, I’ve seen STID in theaters enough times to know that when you claim “everyone” in a theater was “moaning and laughing” at Cumberbatch, it’s a barefaced lie. His performance as Khan was amazing. You were doing the morning-laughing for sure, and pretending others were too so you felt better about your irrational dislike of a well-received movie.
You adequately refuted the STID bad aftertaste mojo apologizing for BEYOND’s drop, but when it comes to Cumberbatch, unless you are likewise claiming to have watched STID in the uk as Ralph did, isn’t it MORE likely the different theater experiences between you two is because Ralph and his London audience were much more aware of who Cumberbatch was as he rose in acting acclaim their first before SHERLOCK brought him international fame elsewhere? And if you are in the US as I am, I doubt most of the US STID movie going public had as much awareness of who he was and where he was from when he first appeared on screen in a scene in STID?
Also, recall Carol Marcus’ “reveal” scene occurrs in advance of Khan’s which sets up this whole confusing characters with exposed “secret” identities now speak in different accents than they did before in the other Trek movie thing where you first suspect the accent was just a part of a false identity cover but then are left to think no maybe it’s some common factor between the two characters to be revealed later but then never is as it goes nowhere.
It was a failure of marketing and promotion. The movie itself was not a failure.
Dennis C is absolutely correct. Marketing was awful. Beyond was very well written, lots of fun, best of the Kelvin Timeline films by far.
Beside the character moments, the movie was OK, not great or exceptional in any way.
And it failed at the box office everywhere.
It’s SAD how we Fans look at a films success or failure film the perspective of the studio’s bottom line.
I see that it matters to the studios who just want to make money but why do we Judge the film that way.
How about looking at how many people actually saw it?
17 Million People so far have watched the film in 5 weeks & it hasn’t finished it’s run or opened in every market.
That’s close to Star Trek First Contact, the same as Star Trek VI & Star Trek Generations & more than Star Trek Insurrection, Star Trek 5 & Nemesis.
Re:17 Million People
And on a planet with a worlwide population of around 7 billion, an insignificant drop in its vast oceans.
Most of the world’s population don’t have access to movies playing in theatres. Or to clean drinking water, for that matter.
I could have sworn that I left a comment already
Nonetheless, I sincerely hope Jaylah comes back.
She would make a fine addition to the Enterprise crew.
This website is OBSESSED by the JJ-movies. We have a new Trek series coming out, that is actually in production NOW. ‘Let’s ignore that and write redundant articles on hollow characters there’s a chance we won’t see again’. Jaylah was transparent copy of the female Star Wars Awakens character… But with less realism. Surviving alone on a planet, somehow a techno genius able to work holograms, cloaking devices and fix starships. And most of you lap it up. The cast of the JJ-films are a delight off camera, but the reason this movie worked for a lot of you because of that fleeting photograph of the original cast. It wasn’t a profound story, the deaths of Nimoy and Yelcin were profound. The film did nothing in way of celebrating 50 years of Trek, just the similar ending to the other two movies, with a refit ship that wasn’t brave enough to be that much different. This is the case of The Emperor’s New Clothes. You all clap. They are not good films, and what’s more, they do nothing in way of continuing the Trek legacy, just dilluting it. I hate the fact that our new series will be yet another prequel, but at least it promises to have a bit more substance and most importantly – prime universe. Reading the informative, and mostly ignored realism of ‘Curious Cadet’ on the other thread… It really doesn’t seem financially viable a fourth film can get made. Trek 09 had problems everyone seemed to forget about as Darkness was SO bad, and now Beyond is an average movie we all praise for not sucking. And you know what? Not good enough. Paramount aren’t making Trek movies for fans, it’s insulting and the vocal minority claim anyone who questions these 3 movies is a troll. I am happy the film did badly. Enough now, it was a thrilling, effects-heavy 3 movie romp… But Trek it was not.
The site is called TrekMovie.
But, they have covered Discovery when there was news to talk about
I do not see the problem.
TrekMovie covered everything from documenting the TOS Remastering to Tweets Rick Berman makes… I didn’t think anyone would actually be lazy enough to say ‘But it’s called…’. Yes, I’m aware what it’s called. But the movie has wrapped, been released, and tanked. It was our favourite out if three, because it was the most Trek. But in an age where you can’t really say what you think about things… We’ll pretend the JJ-verse is an outrageous success, has made all the fans of a 50 hear legacy happy and let’s continue to write silly articles about things that has no consequence when we could be researching, investigating the new chapter of Trek.
Jaylah as a new alien species may well have a place in the new series. The case being made for the next film could well apply to the next series. Everything about the Kelvin Timeline is not all bad. Why throw e baby out with the bathwater?
Ralph, you are clearly not a Trek fan. Try embracing the show’s core message. At the moment, you just don’t get it.
Trekmovie is doing great job covering almost everything in Trek world. The focus on ‘Beyond’ is understandable since the movie was just released a month ago.
TM published articles about ‘Beyond’ terrible box office numbers, while the other major site, TrekCore completely ignored reporting on the box office performance. They reported only the opening night number and after that, they went completely radio silent!
Re:The site is called TrekMovie
Indeed, but note, neither is it called TheMostRecent3TrekMovies.com, either.
Why don’t you link to the new news stories that have come out about Discovery in the last week? Meanwhile STB is still making news in the theaters as it continues to open in new markets, affecting its boxoffice and future prospects. And why don’t you just ignore the Vegas convention coverage (which was attended by none of the BR crew), and all the DIscovery articles that came out around comic con which was when STB launched, and all the articles since.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but please get some perspective.
I can tell what you are: an anti reboot, pro-Axanar Trekkie who refuses to accept the current time. Just watch everything from 2005 and backward, and you will be fine. In your own little world, Star Trek is dead… In my world Star Trek is thriving once again. Gene Roddenberry would cast you out of fandom if he was still alive…
I couldn’t care less for Axanar. I didn’t like the trailer, I don’t care for anything unless it is canon and looks professional. I care about 50 years of continuity, creativity and hope. I am happy our new Trek series is set in the prime universe. Star Trek is very much alive in my world. These 3 movies are the best examples of The Emperor’s New Clothes I’ve ever seen, and the vocal minority that ‘shame’ and bully people who critise them just come across as desperate. These movies don’t matter. And against 50 years of Trek and 7 respective televisiom series… Won’t be remembered.
Oh I see. You’re a “hey you kids get off of my lawn” type. Got it.
No. You’ve got nothing. I miss the prime universe and the three JJ movies are vacuous.
Yeah Ralph, the vocal minority that ‘shame’ and bully people
I’m pretty tired of seeing the constant shaming and bullying of people who enjoy the new movies, too, mister. Apparently I am a non-critical popcorn-munching vacuous idiot because I enjoy all Trek, including the KT movies. They have their faults, as do all Trek movies, even the apparently sacrosanct TOS movies.
People who shame and bully us are no better than one certain poster who has left this site for greener pastures. They need to take a look in the mirror.
Im not seeing a lot of shaming and bullying. To be honest, it was far worse coming from the Pro Bad Robot films towards those that didn’t love them and preferred Prime Timeline. Now that Beyond is a flop and the future of BR films is dubious at best, most of the aBoblogists are being rather quiet. Which is nice.
You, Marja, are not counted among them. Your posts are always quality.
Give ’em Hell, Girl!
Enough with this distorted narrative of yours, repeating it won’t make it real.
I read most of the comments and what I see is people criticizing the KT movies, expressing their dislikes for lazy writing, stupid plots, dumb marketing and so on.
You realise this is the same argument against the First Star Trek Films & Next Gen & …
I agree the JJ films were more show than substance but some of us fans enjoyed them & some people were brought into Star Trek by them so although they didn’t have the impact of past treks they will not be forgotten.
Re: Just watch everything from 2005 and backward
We can’t. Funai can’t get the tiny part needed so that we can continue to watch our TNG VHS episodes. Thank God for H&I where STAR TREK lives, where it always has: in reruns.
You may not like Into Darkness but general audiences obviously did like it, because… it made quite a decent amount of money, and it did very well across the world. So.
I thought into darkness was OK but not at all great. Nothing about the film was particular memorable about it because it did feel like a retread of things we’ve seen one too many times in films these days and also, indeed, in recent Star Trek films. Oh and TWOK too. I didn’t like the spock yell. I’ll admit that it is so ridiculous.
But as films Star Trek 09 and Into Darkness are OK and we’re the only way Star Trek could pull in the box office audiences. Beyond unfortunately had probably succumbed to Star Wars. Star Wars films are what audiences are now looking to watch at the big screen. Star Trek needs to probably return to TV for a while.
I do think another Star TREK film is an absolute guarantee. That is not in question. But we may wait a good 5 years now before we get another one, kelvin timeline or something else.
“You may not like Into Darkness but general audiences obviously did like it, because… it made quite a decent amount of money, and it did very well across the world. So.”
Well, domestically it made less money than ST09. Worldwide it was opened in far more markets & it grossed more because of the 3D/IMAX high priced tickets & the aggressive international marketing campaign.
ST09 made more money in the home video sales, about $198 million, while STID made just $84 million. So…
Oh man, you said it all right there (sans the website dis, I like this place)! This movie was BAD! All three of them for that matter were bad! My family plays a game where we recast old TV shows or movies for fun. We threw a caveat in this last one we played, and it was a recasting of TOS. The caveat was, you can use the original cast or the JJ-verse cast or another actor. All the TOS crew made it except for Nichelle Nichols (through no fault of her own), the way they have used the Uhura role as an actual translator (a la Hoshi Sato) instead of “All hailing frequencies open, Sir,” line deliverer gave Zoe that role. To me . . . to us, that is the only interesting thing they have given us with these last 3 movies. That’s sad for (how many million dollars spent?) 3 movies and nothing new to add but that. I concur, it’s time for a regime change.
RIP Kelvin Timeline
If the box office of Beyond proves anything it’s that the world audience has rejected cookie cutter caricatures of legendary sci fi characters, heartless, soulless plots, the iBridge, the Budweiser/Titanic engineering section, miscast villains, hamfisted nostalgia (looking right at you STID). The most successful ST movie is STWOK because it was a executed direct sequel to an Original series episode. By throwing out the Prime universe, the Kelvin timeline can never take advantage of the lore of Trek.
Your argument is negated by stating that you’re ‘happy the film did badly’. That’s not critical analysis, it’s wish fulfillment,
“This website is OBSESSED by the JJ-movies.”
Apparently, you haven’t noticed the website’s URL. This site’s main focus is on Trek movies. (And in any case, your use of “OBSESSED” in caps is melodramatic and inaccurate.)
“We have a new Trek series coming out, that is actually in production NOW. ‘Let’s ignore that and write redundant articles on hollow characters there’s a chance we won’t see again’.”
The new TV series has gotten a LOT of coverage on this site. In any case, you don’t pay to read this site, so it owes you nothing. Feel free to go somewhere else.
“the reason this movie worked for a lot of you because of that fleeting photograph of the original cast.”
Not even remotely true. You clearly haven’t been paying attention to anyone’s comments.
“I am happy the film did badly.”
Then you are not a Trek fan since you don’t understand its core concept: positivity and the embracing of diversity.
“But Trek it was not.”
A Trek fan you are not.
While the site was originally created to cover Star Trek 2009, our focus has broadened to covering everything new in Trek. News, features, reviews, and editorials on the films (all), shows, events, documentaries, soundtracks, and some merchandise.
Regarding DSC, that is a primary focus of this site moving forward. It is something we have covered since the initial announcement, and whenever there’s news to report about it, we do. As we receive more information on the series, we’ll be all over it. As this site never existed when a Star Trek series was broadcasting new episodes on television, you’ll see a lot of new things in the future.
It’s an exciting time for Star Trek, and we’re certainly excited to cover it.
Let’s give JJ credit: he brought Star Trek back and made it relevant again. His casting was spot on. This great ensemble is his greatest legacy.
Beyond was great. I’m looking forward to Discovery- Fuller knows Trek.
No, the studio brought it back and hired JJ to produce it. If JJ said no, Star Trek was still coming back. Star Trek was not something buried in a closet somewhere that JJ found and rescued. The market has essentially rejected JJ’s vision of Star Trek.
Jaylah was my favorite part of the movie! I got chills when she sees the sun from space again when she finally got off that rock. She should get first pick for Enterprise-A navigator in the next film.
Not sure if an TrekMovie editorial would do the trick as much as a petition campaign. Frankly, if Trek gets another chance on the big screen, it may need more actors with pull like Benedict Cumberbatch to accompany Kirk and his gallant crew. Jaylah was fun, and, in Star Trek tradition, an English-speaking alien with a weird head. Sure, bring her on board. Paramount’s Trek film franchise has much larger fish to fry before another one gets green-lit, which is very much in doubt at the moment.
Cumberbatch still isn’t a big enough name to be an audience draw. They need a Matt Damon, or Will Smith. But they’re going to cut the budget if there’s another film, and they’ve already set their sites on Chris Hemsworth who is not a box office draw without Thor, but still commands a huge salary.
Jaylah makes a good Chekov replacement in the true spirit of Trek. However, she doesn’t do much as a box office draw, and that’s Treks biggest problem as long as they keep expecting Summer tentpole results.
Cumberbatch is a hugely popular actor in Asia. That’s part of why he was in STID. Not to mention he’s a really good actor :-)
Cumberbatch WAS the “Into Darkness” in many markets. It was marketed as a Cumberbatch vehicle. It made all the difference – that, and the fact there was actual outdoor advertising for it outside North America.http://topcovers.ru/uploads/posts/2015-10/1444935127_startrek-vozmezdie-star-trek-into-darkness-2013.jpg
200 million in the red. No fourth film. Why are we even discussing Jaylah, and not writing more articles on a new Trek series which is IN PRODUCTION.
Please elaborate on what you’d like to discuss. We know everything about Discovery that they’ve told us. In the meantime, this film is still making money at the box office, and the biggest story is what it’s future will be. While it’s not likely for a number of reasons a 4th bad robot movie will be made, there’s still plenty to discuss about this film, until more Discovery news comes along. Perhaps you’d like to suggest some.
Perhaps the writers of this site can do some actual journalism, contact/network/research and write some interesting articles about the REAL exciting things to come. Not hypothetical articles about a hooky Avatar/force awakens cloned character that we will not see again.
“Perhaps the writers of this site can do some actual journalism, contact/network/research and write some interesting articles about the REAL exciting things to come. Not hypothetical articles about a hooky Avatar/force awakens cloned character that we will not see again.”
I am seriously beginning to wonder if you’re on the spectrum.
Your just a troll Ralph Daay. Take the Shat’s advice, get a Life.
Ralph, you are having so much fun with your denouncements. Yippee for you.
Go check the Discovery threads and enjoy!
Unless she has a break out role, she probably comes pretty cheap. No reason they can’t have her.
Dear Ralph, we are discussing Beyond because we all just saw it & like the other films it will live with us good or bad for a long time, oh & there isn’t much New on Discovery atm, dumbass.
Try to make your point without name-calling, you’ll feel much better.
As for news about Discovery, here is major new information about the show
Waiting for the good folks at Trekmovie to post an article about the new info.
Great article. Love the perspective and would love to see Jaylah in the next film!
I certainly hope so. I was out with my friend and my wife and my friend randomly asked if we wanted to watch a movie. My wife is Filipina and we live in the Philippines, so we had a rather limited set of English options: Ghostbusters. Star Trek Beyond.
I argued for Star Trek while my friend suggested Ghostbusters. I was sleepy and cranky and ready for bed, but I perked at the chance to see Star Trek again. Both my friend and my wife enjoyed it, which I doubt would have been the case for the first two (which I randomly saw with my grandmother and mother, respectively). My wife fell in love with Jaylah and if Jaylah makes an appearance in the future, it means I could get my wife to watch with me again. She doesn’t really watch much with me, being full-on Telenovela mode here in her country, so the chance to “engage” her with Trek is preferable.
Wil Weaton’s opinion of the new film as well as Jaylah…
Will Wethead carries very little weight with me and I detest that’s he’s on Dark Matter.
@ Lone Browncoat
Now I have to check out Dark Matter (but not at all because of him). Show trailer looks interesting.
“amazing female character (who could keep a fucking STARSHIP HIDDEN for years while she survived on a hostile planet)”
Doesn’t sound negative to me. What he seemed to have disliked was, that despite all her badass attributes, the “boys” needed to rescue her, particularly Kirk.
I don’t see it so bad though. She after all rescued a guy, Scotty, first. Then when she met Kirk and Chekov, they were trapped and she helped them out. And during that motorbike scene, she was fighting an opponent. And Kirk rescued not just her but his whole crew before and without Jaylah’s help, it wouldn’t have been possible. By the way his motorbike distraction thing wouldn’t have worked, too, without Jaylah’s tech. So I see it overall as balanced. She was portrayed as a hero. Being a hero doesn’t mean, that he or she can’t be helped by anyone ever.
Her makeup is the worst part of that character. The black lines on her face are reminiscent of the half-black/half-white aliens from TOS. It’s just so articficial looking, and took me out of the movie from the beginning. Why didn’t they just make her an Andorian Aenar? I’m guessing so they could create their own character for merchandising reasons.
Because in the JJ-verse Star Trek fans aren’t allowed to feel too at home.
Considering the amount of martial arts moves that Jaylah did in the movie, there’s no way she could’ve been an “Aenar” as you suggested. The Aenar are BLIND for crying out loud. Learn the damn lore before suggesting things you obviously know nothing about.
I’m well aware of the lore. The Aenar are “blind” like bats are blind. Yet they’re pretty effective aerial acrobats and pretty good at killing prey.
It’s been over 100 years since the Aenar were first revealed living under the ice on ENT. One like Jaylah would have been very cool, especially because she was sightless. She would make a pretty good role model for audiences too, in that she’s a species who overcame her physical limitations.
Add to that she could have been a hybrid like the daughter of Jhamel and Shran. In fact Jaylah even fits the naming conventions, established by canon.
And finally, even if they were completely blind, we’ve already seen by this period that sophisticated sensor webs like the one worn by Dr. Jones in the Medusan episode, are available to achieve virtual parity with sighted individuals.
Did you seriously just recommend they make Jaylah into Daredevil? Hehehe
“… the Aenar were first revealed living under the ice … One like Jaylah would have been very cool…” — Curious Cadet
I saw what you did there. Love the doble entendre.
Much as I like Jaylah, I think these movies need her namesake to deliver what Paramount wants and, unfortunately because of Grey’s poor blockbluster [ sic ] franchise building attempts, now definitely needs the likes of J-Law if he’s bullheaded determined to continue on this course..
What future? The film failed. To date it collected 233 mil on a 185 mil budget.
If they make a 4th film on a reduced budget, then that one will most certainly be a true flop.
You forgot the $120 million marketing budget which also has to be recouped.
And why would that be the case that a reduced budget will make a 4th film a true flop? As long as there’s an audience to recoup the investment, I’d say that would be a true success. If they’d made STB for $125 million, they’d be doing very well at the box office right now.
As has been pointed out, a reasonable scenario is that Paramount will continue to make money from Star Trek regardless of how bad the initial box office does, so investing in more is always a good bed, especially since Paramount doesn’t have any other franchises that will result in a sure thing.
The question is whether they can afford to make another film with Bad Robot or not for a lower budget, or whether the current Paramount regime and Bad Robot will even be around by the time the next film needs to be green-lit. It Brad Grey doubles down on Trek, and immediately gets the next film Abrams wants to make (with script and cast already in place) into production after convincing the Viacom board that Trek is always a good investment, then there’s a chance BR might jump on board (seeing the writing on the wall), even with a reduced budget. Abrams might not do it, but Lin might, as he’s used to working on smaller budgets. And China could still be the deciding factor here.
So no, this is far from over, even with the current poor box office showing.
It might, but ‘big budget” does not equal “big success” (see The Lone Ranger or John Carter) and “reduced budget” does not equal “flop” (see Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, or even the modestly budgeted Star Trek: First Contact.)
I said before, if they made another movie after Star Trek V: The Final Frontier and Star Trek: Insurrection, they’ll make another one now. Hell, they even very seriously entertained the idea of another movie post-Nemesis (the Earth-Romulan War movies) until a shakeup at Paramount killed both the movies and Enterprise.
Yes, another shakeup could spell the end of Star Trek. But it could also result in new Powers That Be saying “why the hell did you treat Star Trek so poorly? It’s got a huge built-in audience, and it isn’t Fast & Furious. Do another movie, and do it right this time!”
Time will tell.
it could also result in new Powers That Be saying “why the hell did you treat Star Trek so poorly? It’s got a huge built-in audience, and it isn’t Fast & Furious. Do another movie, and do it right this time!”
I really hope this is what happens. Paramount needs to have some sort of Star Trek advisor to help them understand the love for Trek.
New one, if Paramount is willing to go ahead, will likely feature every trope that has been deemed successful in the past. So count on the Borg. And time travel. And Klingons. And a charismatic, Shakespeare spouting villain. Actually…that sounds interesting…
I want very much for Ms. Alice Eve to be return in Movie #4. She was very nicely introduced in INTO DARKNESS in a way that beggared future development, both as a genius scientist and as the one significant woman in Jim’s life that marks his transition from sexual tomcat to a devoted lover, companion, friend. Additionally, Ms. Eve has grown, partly from the Abrams collaboration but also from her work in Neil LaBute’s two recent films, into a very strong actor with considerable screen presence and a easy state of naturalism in her performances. Sure, bring back Jaylah in some way but not only is Carol a potentially great female lead, she also brings out the best in Pine (as evidenced by their remarked upon onscreen chemistry).
Obviously Carol Marcus was part of a story skipped over in the first three years of the 5 year mission. At this point I have to assume the reason Carol left the crew was to leave Star Fleet and get into private research, and won’t be coming back. And maybe that reason was because she got pregnant, and the baby’s father was Kirk, who refused to leave his ship to start a stable family with her. Maybe that plays into his decision to become an Admiral.
Re: Maybe that plays into his decision to become an Admiral
Hmmmm…this is before TNG and even before the Federation Space Station K-7 where commerce and trade were clearly taking place.
So is this your way of suggesting that child support may have been a motivating factor in both versions of Kirk considering bumping up the ladder to Admiral? Interesting…
Off topic. I guess it’s over, huh?
Well, it’s definitely evolving. But remember, Universal Studios had a similar professional tourism license for STAR TREK in its their own UNIVERSAL STUDIOS TOURS which they evolved into a “Star in you Own STAR TREK adventure”, and THEY were a direct Paramount competitor in the movie making Biz.. So that might not be the last that we see of those sets on film as they’ll probably pop up on some tourists’ facebook pages as their “STAR TREK Adventure”.
And I sure would like to know what the judge thinks about CBS not offering a license to Peters since it is now apparently good business to license tours of fan bulit sets used in violation of copyright, without license, and outside the guidelines prior.
Sets, I might add many were contending were fixed and could not be broken down and removed as easily as Axanar’s but somehow were transported to a defunct Dollar storefront in short order.
I loved Star Trek Beyond and the character Jaylah! I hope she comes back in a 4th movie and Carol Marcus too!
Ingredients for more profit in a 4th movie:-
JJ Abrams to direct
Chris Hemsworth as George Kirk
A darker plot/theme like Star Trek First Contact/Into Darkness
None of those things will inherently improve boxoffice, and will likely cost as much as STB, but in any event not substantially less. The key to profitability is clearly reduced budgets, at least with this cast.
I would like to see a prime universe film, and Bad Robot to just leave already.
Be of good cheer, there is a Prime Universe TV series on its way.
Not long ago you were clamoring for a Kelvin TV series with the movie cast, so why are you badgering him for wanting a Prime movie?
Star Trek 2009: Romulus and Vulcan destroyed. Amanda Grayson among many billions killed.
Star Trek Into Darkness: Terrorist attack in London, Pike killed, Enterprise nearly destroyed.
Star Trek Beyond: Enterprise destroyed, Spock Prime dies.
Enough with the “dark” plots, please.
Thanks for a great article!
I would love to see Jaylah in Star Trek Discovery as unlikely as that may be.
They could include her race, but they probably won’t as royalties are surely due to Paramount as having created the character.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by now, but it amazes me that a story about the new [and wonderful] character Jaylah has sunk into the usual denouncement of the Kelvin timeline films by the usual gang. There’s another thread where y’all can biyatch about the new film.
I love Jaylah. She was a brave, resourceful and brilliant engineer and fighter and I loved her chemistry with Scotty and the rest of the crew. Uhura kicked ass, doing the saucer separation to save Kirk and the remaining bridge crew and facing off with Krall. Spock and McCoy had a couple of the best scenes in the film. And Kirk was now a fully developed and mature character, a believable captain.
I really hope there will be a fourth KT film, and I suggest the editors of this site start a section called “Hate the New Timeline?” I am really tired of wading through the constant dislike and the cheering over the “failure” of “Beyond” … I can deal with legitimate criticisms of the film, such as the plot and characters and motivations, but most of the “criticism” seems to be New Trek Sucks and I Can’t Wait Til It’s Gone.
100% agreed. The Prime timeline is dead. “Voyager” slowly drained it of life, and “Enterprise” and “Star Trek: Nemesis” finished the job. That they’re going back to yet another prequel with “Star Trek: Discovery” shows that there’s just no more life nor legitimate ideas left in the Prime timeline. Time for something new.
The Kelvin timeline is Star Trek’s legitimate future, and “Beyond” was the best of the bunch thus far.
Funny, the new show is set in the Prime timeline :)
And you’re talking like the KT movies offered something new, they did not.
@Marja – to the victor go the spoils. If this rather shallow and poor film had made tons of money, you know the usual suspects here would turn every thread into a JJ love fest and Prime crapfest. Discussing Beyond is fair game. If you loved it, great. By all means, express your opinion. But don’t get upset when those (seemingly the majority) disliked it, discuss that dislike. Actually, its more discussing the flop aspect and the future then picking apart the crap that was Beyond.
I think you’re overstating what you describe as ‘seemingly the majority’ since it’s the same voices repeating the same argument repeatedly in numerous threads. It’s healthy to disagree, it’s petty to attack those who do.
I think the general audience has spoken.
And I think you’re right to a degree. Most people here probably rate Beyond “acceptable”. Then you have the “loved it!” and the “Hated it”. Im on the middle between acceptable and hated it. But people complaining about people expressing their opinion is hilarious.
I agree. I enjoyed ST09, despised STID, loved Beyond. And you know what? That’s pretty much how any film franchise works and Star Trek is no different.
The Kelvin hit it’s stride with this movie by allowing this rebooted franchise to stand on its own for the first time.
Unfortunately, by standing on it’s own, it seemed to fall over. And will lose money.
I also would love to see Jaylah return in another film.
Also – while Beyond has obviously underperformed it is not a flop. It hasn’t even opened everywhere yet. Paramount seems to be pushing it a little in China, and STID did well there, so it may make up some ground yet.
Speaking of Paramount, it’s their awful promotion which limited a good films potential. Many people didn’t even know there was a new Trek film out. Especially kids who have to be completely sold from scratch on Trek every film. My son is 8, and his friends don’t know what Star Trek is. That is a HUGE audience that these films are not reaching. If Paramount had brains they would get a Trek presence into the next Lego movie at any cost. That and a cartoon or cgi show would get Trek introduced to the younger generation.
They want to be as big as Marvel well one movie every 4 years with a half assed ad campaign isn’t cutting it now is it?
My only concern would be them screwing her up. What made her interesting and cool would be difficult to translate into a film where she;s “assimilated”. Will she be fully integrated in Federation life? A good little officer during the day and wearing sweet dresses at night, going out on dates with handsome Lieutenants while Scotty chews his nails waiting for her to come home past her curfew?
If they hadn’t already done the big bad Federation plot, she could have been used well as someone that thinks she loves that life and realizes its not all its cracked up to be, leading to some adventure.
“No Pressure, But I Need STAR TREK: DISCOVERY To Save The World
What the world needs now is Gene Roddenberry’s vision. ”
When are they going to announce casting for the new show? They are less then six months away and we still don’t know the names of the characters or who is playing them. Another thing about the new show is I bet they will not have the entire season available at the beginning like they do on Netflix for Orange is the New Black or House of Cards. I’m sure they will release one episode a week or every other week to make you have to pay for an entire year.
They announced the cast of the ‘Enterprise’ in May 2001, that was four months before the premiere on September 26, 2001. So they still have time before making announcement.
The 13 episodes will be released weekly just like any other typical TV series.
Star Trek as a franchise has a branding problem. Here’s what I mean, TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DISC, Movies, Kelvin Timeline. Each one with it’s own font/logo, theme music, etc. To me, the best music of the franchise, the music that captured the essence and spirit of Star Trek was the original series, composed by George Duning, anyone wanting to make new Trek should listen to his music. It captured the drama, action, comedy, tension the best. The Kelvin Timeline is so far off the rails it shouldnt even be called Star Trek. It is Star Trek in name only with characters in name only with cardboard villains and plots. No serious character development, no serious drama or tension or thought or heart. Just bright shiny explosions. I think the world is seeing it for what it really is…a knock off…officially licensed by Paramount. Paramount has no idea what it has in it’s Star Trek franchise. They should sell their movie rights to a studio that knows what it’s doing.
I’d be happy to see Jaylah back. It would help the Kelvin timeline begin to feel more like it’s own path.
I’d like her to join the bridge crew as checkov’s replacement in the jj films and be the ops officer….
I like that idea. Jaylah was my favorite part of STB. She’s a great, fresh, spirited, entertaining character.
I was thinking the same
I would love to see her continue. Each of the movies has picked up with time passing from the previous films; this one ends with her entering the academy, the next could open several years later with her having just graduated and being assigned back to the Enterprise. I think it would be great to have another strong woman in the Enterprise core crew, with a very unique personality and skill set compared to the others. It’s clear she already has chemistry with the other actors and she brings something new, much like Savik did in the earlier films – and quite honestly, something that the Carol Marcus character did not do in Into Darkness. It would be a missed opportunity to not continue to develop her character and include her in future films.
You have to ruin everything, do you? Can’t we enjoy a well-done, entertaining, enjoyable character without turning it into a poster child for silly neoleftist agenda?
I never noticed Jayla is “a woman”, just like I never noticed Uhura is “a black” or Sulu is “an Asian”. Because they were well-made characters that matter as people. On the other hand, Mayweather in Enterprise, he sticks out like a sore thumb: “Look at me, my only reason for existence is to be black.”
Is it good to have Jayla around? Yes. Would I like to see more of her? Totally. Do I give a flying fluffy fudge about Jayla’s gender, or about empowerment of some sorry wimps who need to identify with movie characters in order to realize their own worth? No, not at all.
You are obviously a guy (maybe also white). It is always the guys who don’t seem to mind, if a cast is extremely heavily male leaning. Only one measly female character appeared in more than one of the last three movies. Compare that to the guys: Kirk, young Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Chekov, old Spock, Pike, Keenser, Hendorff. And we already know, that Kirk’s daddy will also come back in the next movie.
If we swap all the genders around and there suddenly would be practically only women on the screen, I bet you would talk differently and start noticing the gender of the characters, too. This holier than thou attitude is typical for someone, whose gender is in practically every Hollywood blockbuster movie very overrepresented.
She’s the obvious choice to replace Yelchin’s Chekov. Maintains some continuity in the face of an impossible situation.
The cast, I think, what have a major say on any potential replacement. Unless the overwhelming majority is OK with someone joining the group, I doubt any addition would last.
The cast is hired to act in movies, not to cast a vote.
I said ‘I think’, troll. Goodbye.
Sofia Boutella character of Jaylah was well played and refreshing as well as a much needed new character in the Star Trek/Kelvin timeline.
Probably more so then any other newly introduced character.
She was intelligent, naive, sentimental and courageous.
Perhaps the perfect new character to add to the crew filling the space of a certain young ensign.
I read a review of this film by Wil Wheaton.
He wrote “I really didn’t like that there was this amazing female character (who could keep a fucking STARSHIP HIDDEN for years while she survived on a hostile planet) who turned into The Girl For Kirk To Save the instant the boys showed up.” (http://wilwheaton.net/2016/08/because-you-asked-some-thoughts-on-star-trek-beyond/#more-5908)
I see this a counter to the article.
Star Trek Beyond is a disappointment for Paramount, one of many this year. For the film to break even, it will need to make $350 to $400. For there to be a sequel, it will need to make much more than the break even figure. The film is at $235 million.
And yet with past Star Trek films that have bombed the studio still had enough fate to continue even if the fans complained…and they still made their money in the end no matter what the current figures are.
Strange how that works.
So there likely will be a 4th kelvin time line film…and probably a 5th also.
@I Khan Believe It An\’t Butter,
The Kelvin movies cost far more than those past Trek films that you talk about, in fact each one of the KT cost as much as 3 of TNG movies combined.
If there is a 4th KT movie, it will be the last one if it continued the domestic decline trend.
I don’t think Jaylah added much to the film except her tremendous kick boxing abilities…I don’t see any need to include her in future films.
Jaylah would be interesting to see again.
But if anyone’s taking votes on the subject of female characters, I’d first like to see Janice Rand be re-introduced into the current film series (…AND stick around). Or even Christine Chapel.
Has Rand even been mentioned in the KT? I know Chapel is probably already off with Dr. Corby thanks to Kirk’s ‘womanizing ways’ … It’s odd they haven’t bothered to expand the cast of originals, considering they shoehorned Chekov into an earlier timeline than to which he belonged.
Jaylah is great. She should come back. The new Star Trek movies have too few female characters either way. Keeping her would help there a bit.
One, I do hope to see a fourth film. Two, I do hope to see the Jaylah character return in a fourth film. And, three, I hope Paramount learns how to market the fourth film better. FYI.
As to the naysayers who dislike JJ Abrams, Bad Robot and the Kelvin Timeline so much that they don’t want a fourth film to be produced: I want to ask you all a question. WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM A TREK MOVIE FRANCHISE? Let’s say that the KT is put to rest for good, and that we’re dealing with a “blank canvas” of sorts. If you were in charge of Paramount, and could choose a production company to produce a film and so on, what would you do? I’m curious as to the answer. Just remember, whatever you choose to do has to be different from what CBS is doing on the television side.
I’m not really a JJ naysayer, although I think he is somewhat overrated and tends to remake, reuse, imitate and keep hollow secrets that don’t deliver anything that interesting. If Paramount were to reboot Star Trek, I would like to see more exploration of strange new worlds, seeking out of new life and new civilizations. A higher level of sophisticated storytelling on a smaller budget – say a budget like the Martian at $108 million, or no higher than Prometheus at $130 million. I’m not a huge fan of action movie franchises with tons of money being poured into blowing things up – that’s not Star Trek at its best. Original stories with truly alien species that harken back to the best of TOS – City on the Edge of Forever, the Cage, the Corbomite Maneuver, etc., but with new species and plot ideas. Plots that are interesting, surprising, unpredictable, and fun to watch. I would get rid of the formula of short intro adventure leading into credits, and then an angry villain bent on revenge. Each movie installment would have a single, unique story that begins at the beginning and builds to a satisfying climax, with one or two new and interesting things to say about humanity along the way. As an example, looking to Christopher Nolan’s original movies as setting the bar for contemporary cinematic storytelling, but keeping it to a Star Trek sensibility. Truly A-movie quality scripts to fit the A-level talented cast. If I were running Paramount, that’s what I would request of the creative team. I suspect Bad Robot might even be able to deliver that kind of product if it were requested of them.
I’d love to see Chris Nolan direct a Star Trek movie. While I enjoyed BEYOND and thought it was the best of the three Kelvin timeline films, I don’t fundamentally think Bad Robot groks Star Trek. It comes across as comic-book Trek, with moustache-weaving villains and lots of explosions. Chris Nolan took a BATMAN franchise that was in similar dire straights and resurrected it with a very realistic take on things.
It’s a shame that ‘Trek fandom will never reach the level of its Star Wars counter-part, simply because of differences of opinion. You don’t get that from SW fans. Even at its worse, Star Wars is able to remain popular with its detractors (i.e. the Prequels). With ‘Trek? Not so much. In fact, there is a segment that actively want the KT movies to fail, in hopes to have a single interpretation of ‘Trek lore. That’s how insane these people are. Hopefully, Paramount ignores these malcontents, and do what it wants to do to sustain the ‘Trek movie franchise, even if it means that the KT might be at an end. And considering how rough the movie industry is, as well as how mismanaged Paramount is, that may be an actual possibility. IMO.
“the introduction of a new character that resonates with audiences has been missing from both the television shows and feature films arguably since Worf in Star Trek: The Next Generation”
With all due respect, that is an utterly absurd comment, given that three TV series were made after Worf was introduced, all of which had resonating characters.
Yeah, that was a weird statement. Perhaps the author is not familiar with the other series!!
She HAS to be part of the crew for the next film. Maybe they think she could be a substitute for Chekov (I wouldn’t want this but I have a worry that’s what they will do)?
Yes, she was the standout character of the film and greatly overshadowed the vaunted ‘star’, Idris Elba! But I wonder how she would fit into the everyday world of the Enterprise bridge? Even considering that the dynamics have been altered in the JJ-verse.
New info about ‘Star Trek: Discovery’
More STAR TREK DISCOVERY Scoop!! Lead Will Be Called ‘Number One’!! Nick Meyer Scripts Hour Two!! Bryan Fuller Hires Co-Showrunners!! More!!
1) “Star Trek Discovery’s” lead character, whom we learned earlier this month would be a female, human non-captain Starfleet officer, will be referred to in the series as “Number One,” showrunner Bryan Fuller told me during a radio chat late Saturday.
2) Also? The first season of “Star Trek Discovery,” which begins airing in January, will boast only 13 episodes (the shortest live-action season of Star Trek ever produced), but Fuller told me during the same KERN-FM interview he would prefer to produce only 10 “Star Trek Discovery” episodes per year.
3) While Fuller and “Star Trek Into Darkness” screenwriter Alex Kurtzman wrote the first hour of “Star Trek: Discovery,” the second hour was scripted by Nicholas Meyer (“Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,” “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home,” “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country”).
4) Fuller seemed to indicate – at least at first – that the first season of “Star Trek: Discovery” might be the first live-action season of “Star Trek” NOT to utilize time travel.
Doesn’t mean she will be THE ‘Number One’ from THE CAGE. After all Riker was also called “Number One”.
If there’s no time travel, it’s hard to imagine how they’d use Shatner, other than as a future narrative. Could this be told in flashback? Maybe a senior Shatner telling about a top secret mission he was involved in as a junior officer? That would of course mean Kirk is a character on the ship, if even only as a supporting role only seen ocassionally. Maybe the whole thing is a holodeck recreation like the last Episode of Enterprise for a course Shatner is teaching at the Academy? Doesn’t really seem like Kurtzman or Meyer’s style. The funny thing is, if anyone could figure out how to bring Kirk back it would Nicholas Meyer who co-wrote and directed TIME AFTER TIME, which will be rebooted as a TV series which ABC will be bringing to its Fall lineup.
“If there’s no time travel, it’s hard to imagine how they’d use Shatner,”
It’s not a definite no, this is what he said in the interview
Fuller: “We know what the story is [for future episodes], but no [time travel] yet. You never know when you want to pull out that [storytelling] device, but I am not anticipating a reliance on time travel to tell this season’s story.”
Didn’t Fuller say he wasn’t prepared to use past characters yet? However he has certainly made his desire to work with Shatner clear
Yeah but I think we might see one past/future character in a “pass the torch” cameo like what they did before with TNG (Bones), DS9 (Picard), VOY (Quark) and ENT (Cochrane).
Good Point about the cameos. Listening to Fuller and the tweets with Shat gave me the impression that it would be more than a cameo if they were to use Kirk Prime.
Certainly sounded like Fuller is interested in bringing Shatner in. Not sure if it would be in the first season although sadly the sooner the better to have this happen
Yup. They really need to get Shatner working as soon as possible. Nimoy showed us just how quickly things can change.
More details via TrekCore
Bryan Fuller Delivers New STAR TREK: DISCOVERY Data
Thanks Ahmed. I love how Core is posting NEWS, while this site as always, seems obsessed with fabricating non-debates concerning JJ-verse. Article after article about a film that was another let down, another kick in the teeth for fans of a 50 year legacy who should shut up and feel grateful for 2 seconds of *that* photo. We all miss our prime universe, but most are too intimidated by the bullies to admit it,
Interesting spin on things there…
You’ll note we have an article up on Fuller’s comments on the radio show now. We were taking some extra time to transcribe quotes and verify information. We saw the AICN link this morning, they’re hardly reputable, and their bullet pointed version of the items reduces what was actually said and adds their own interpretation.
We sincerely apologize for posting so many stories about Discovery.
Since you raised the issue, I can assure you that we’ll return to obsessing over the JJ-verse and ignore all other Trek news.
No, no, no, no. Bringing in new characters to add life to a series is the WORST kind of lazy writing. It shows the writers either don’t like, understand, or have grown bored with the intended lead characters. There are plenty of interesting characters in the TOS crew, and their structure has stood the test of time. Bringing in Cousin Oliver or Pinky Tuscadero or Scrappy Doo is NOT what good Star Trek needs!
So do you suggest they recast Chekov? But as I recall Chekov was the Pinky Tuscadero of TOS.
I’d prefer they recast Chekov. But if they don’t want to, then the only logical replacement is the alien from the animated series, Arex.
Point of Col. Harry Potter and Major Winchester, my good sir.
I hope she comes back. She was really good imo. Maybe as a new helmsman?
I liked her, but I don’t want to see her again to be honest.
I liked her, but I don’t want to see her again to be honest.
She definitely was not the damsel in distress that Marcus was in STID. Would not mind seeing her back, but that would suggest that Paramount is gearing up for some continuity in the Kelvin universe….that’s an assumption I’m not willing to make at this point.
I think Jaylah makes for a natural replacement character given the sad loss of Anton Yelchin. It certainly seemed naturally set up by the end with her going to the Academy… she could be a fresh out of school new recruit after Chekov goes where ever they write that he went. She’s already friends-ish with the main crew and has an interesting parallel to Kirk’s story in this other timeline.
I agree. The only concern I have is if in order to get her there the writers decide to run her through the Academy in another record breaker.
Going just through my “head-canon” of the movie universe, I could see a fair bit, if not all, of the time needed to build the new 1701-A to be consuming the time she spends at the Academy. Assuming the Academy takes 4 years to complete I think they would only need to set the next movie right after the end of Beyond (where we see the new A launch). In universe time that should, at least roughly, line up between how long it would take to build the ship itself and how long it would take Jaylah to complete her time at the Academy.
How’d I arrive at that? Well, the “build time” for the new A which I came up with is based on the build time you can sort of estimate in the 2009 movie (which was already well under way with construction in 2255 and launched its maiden voyage in 2258). So, I’d guess the original new Enterprise took about 5 or 6 years to build. Using that, I’d guess 4 to 5 years to build the brand new A because, I would assume, it should take less time to build since it’s no longer a new design in addition to the ease of moving big stuff around in space compared to on Earth.
Your reasoning is sound, but then how do we account for the fact that the already graduated Jaylah wasn’t afforded a part of the NCC-1701-A crew parting shot Carol got in STID?
Agreed, it would seem like a natural fit imo. I really enjoyed her character, tough as nails but also sensitive, not a bad mix. And she’s not an unpleasant alien to look to either lol. And like you said she’s already familiar with the crew. I think she would fit right in for Chekov/Anton (RIP).
Dang every time I type about Anton Yelchin I cant help but to think how bad it stinks not only that he died so young but the cray way it happened.
It’s too bad Jaylah’s character is concealed under such janky skunky makeup. Sofia Boutella is freakin’ gorgeous.
Box Office: The Big Bombs And Bigger Disappointments Of The Summer
Star Trek Beyond
Another casualty of over-budgeting, this crowd-pleasing and (my second act kvetching aside) fan-pleasing sci-fi sequel proved that the third time wasn’t the charm for the rebooted franchise. The film will top out at around $160m, well below the $228m and $256m domestic totals of the last two Star Trek films in 2013 and 2009. It’s not done overseas yet, but its current $230m total points to another Star Trek that didn’t connect outside of North America. Had this film cost a lot less than $185m to produce, then we might be having a different conversation. The Star Trek franchise is never going to be a top-tier series, and its budgets need to reflect that. We’ll see if that announced fourth installment (which will bring back Chris Hemsworth) gets
1) At least they didn’t have any scenes with Jaylah stripping down to her underwear (re: Uhura in 2009, Carol Marcus in 2013).
2) Someone floated the idea that Jaylah would make an excellent replacement for Chekov. I could get behind that.
Re: scenes with Jaylah stripping
In the 60s and 70s I would have just chalked it up to the production couldn’t afford the body paint artist, but since JJ bragged to Eve about being able to change the color and texture of the actual bra and panties she wore in that scene’s filming, I’m guessing now not so much now?
Ya know I just have to say it. I really like coming to this website for news about Trek and am a fan of a couple of the series, most of the movies and looking forward to Discovery. But some of the people in the comment sections are ridiculous. Lots of hate for anything kelvin and lots of mis-information. Some things you just gotta let go.