Chris Hemsworth Unsure On His Return To Star Trek Following Tarantino Trek Reports

Before all the talk about J.J. Abrams working with Quentin Tarantino on an R-rated Star Trek film (a project which recently moved forward with the selection of screenwriter Mark L. Smith), the next Star Trek film was going to be one that involved the return of Chris Hemsworth (reprising his role as George Kirk, father of James T. Kirk, from the 2009 Star Trek film). That ‘Star Trek 4’ project was announced in the summer of 2016, with J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay tapped as screenwriters.

Since then not much had been heard about the ‘Star Trek 4’ project with Hemsworth, except periodically Star Trek actors like Chris Pine or Karl Urban would say they would like to know what was going on. Last summer Zachary Quinto said he wasn’t sure if it was ever going to happen but did say a screenplay was in the works.

The last word from Hemsworth on the project was a year ago when he said the movie was still happening, although he “wasn’t sure on the dates” but he felt JJ Abrams had an “amazing pitch.” However in light of the recent news about the Tarantino project, Hemsworth isn’t so sure anymore. Talking to IGN, the actor said:

“I don’t know. It’s a reminder to call J.J. and ask the same question because I haven’t heard any updates on it either.”

The actor did offer some more detail on the original pitch from Abrams back in 2016:

“…he had a way of reinserting the character into the world. I can’t say too much — there’s not even a script — but I always thought, maybe, there was a possibility of him coming back in some way. I didn’t know how or what, but he was pretty enthusiastic about what they had planned.”

It isn’t clear at this point if the recent progress on Tarantino Star Trek film means that the ‘Star Trek 4’ with Hemsworth film project is dead or possibly delayed. It is entirely possible both films could be in development in the same way Disney currently has multiple Star Wars films in the works and Paramount has multiple Transformers films in the works. Of course a film being in development does not necessarily mean it will be released. It’s possible both or neither of these Star Trek films will ever go into production.

 

Keep up with all the news regarding the next Star Trek film here at TrekMovie.

newest oldest

That script probably died the day Paramount realized Beyond was going to flop in the theaters sadly.

What I still don’t understand how Paramount thought Beyond would do even passably since they didn’t even promote the movie…They set it up to fail if you ask me. And yet we’re getting another Transformers piece of garbage next year. How unfair is that??

Believe me, I’m just as confused. I don’t understand why they made sure the movie opened during the 50th anniversary but not once did they advertise that fact. They had a huge hook to at least get the fan base to celebrate a pretty big occasion but it was completely wasted. Contrast that when the 30th anniversary came around and they went all out promoting First Contact with it having both a 30th anniversary show and a special on the movie.

Its like they didn’t care enough about the film but then when you realize they spent $120 million to promote it you have to wonder where did all that money go?

They advertised it alongside TFA. Beyond failed for the same reasons Insurrection was a dud. It was dull and inconsequential.

Maybe now that movies and TV are separate they think they can’t mention the anniversary of TOS.

I assumed they thought the 50th Anniversary and the promotional legwork they spent buckets of cash on for “Into Darkness” (that international tour! first Trek film to gross more overseas than domestically!) would have done more of the work for them. Stupid assumption, if so.

Well even if Tarantino’s story is a retelling of Yesterday’s Enterprise, the story with bringing back George Kirk could still work.
Simply substitute the Kelvin in place of the enterprise C.

Except then you’d want the Kelvin *not* to be destroyed. :-)

I don’t think anything is ever really off the table here. If Abrams stays on a producer indefinitely, and really loves the idea, it can always find its way into a future movie one way or another, but it makes sense that a Tarantino pitch would derail it temporarily.

The George Kirk sequence was better than the rest of both JJ Trek movies.

Hear hear!

Interesting how Abrams can “reinsert” George Kirk, but couldn’t figure out how to bring in Kirk Prime.

Had Enough of Kirks father……..

So true. Probably just did not want him.

I honestly feel like the only purpose using George Kirk in the movie would serve would be to boost the film’s popularity, because Chris Hemsworth is such a huge Hollywood icon these days because of Thor. I seriously can’t see how it would be a beneficial story at all. Now maybe if they did a Yesterday’s Enterprise type of story…where Kelvin takes the place of Enterprise C, then the “alternate timeline” would revert to the “prime timeline,” or at least a closely related one, considering that Kelvin would be saved. Sure, unless the Narada also is brought forward through time then it wouldn’t be exactly the same but still.

I don’t know, I think it’s good to have the films in the alternate reality…not that I’d mind if they weren’t, but it keeps it separate. After all, DC Comics has their CW shows and they are clearly a different reality than Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad and all that…in fact I feel the Arrowverse is better sometimes…especially this season’s crossover.

But anyway, if you keep ’em separate you don’t have to focus too much on canon, and therefore there won’t be near as many “canon thumpers.”

So… JJ Kirk finally finds the Guardian, goes back and fixes the timeline. Sounds like a great way to wrap up the Kelvin experiment.

The George Kirk story was nothing more then file fodder. There’s not the slightest bit of evidence to support that it’s in development, or was nothing more then a bad case of gas on JJ’s part. Anything beyond QT having some interest in developing a Trek project is just speculation, too. Getting a script roughed out is no guarantee it’ll ever be green lit….

Hemsworth should have played Jim Kirk.

I think I know where this is going. I think Tarrantino is going to do a time bending movie playing out much in the same way as Yesterdays Enterprise where at the end of the movie Kirk ends up never existing that way you can have a new trilogy where there is a “new captain and new crew”. Or perhaps like with Tasha Yar, Kirk ends up existing as an evil character. Perhaps sequels will be made with the goal to bring back good Kirk and re-unite the original crew. They could even do at where at the end of Tarrintino Star Trek we see a different crew because of the time changes and that sets up the future sequels and a new trilogy.

Just go for broke, and have a Thor/Star Trek crossover movie? We’re beyond the Rubicon now…

Well, this indicates to me that Star Trek, the movie version of it, is not in entirely safe and secure hands, in a manner of speaking.

If you look Quentin Tarantino’s oeuvre, you will see that it consists of pictures that are renowned for their fairly “violent” style. I don’t have a specific problem with that. I quite enjoyed “Inglourious Basterds,” for example. That was an interesting movie.

On the other hand, I didn’t watch his “Kill Bill” movies. I have little desire to get into the whole “violence porn” genre, which I think is a little akin to such movies, and vice versa.

I have nothing against R-rated movies. I liked the original “Bladerunner,” and I enjoyed “Bladerunner 2049”. I thought “Deadpool” was pretty good.

But, unless I am wrong, Tarantino doesn’t necessarily rate as a “blockbuster” director, it seems to me. BoxOfficeMojo tells you clearly who the very top directors are in this realm. It isn’t clear to me that Tarantino will make Star Trek “cool” again with the masses.

Not a lot of discussion seems to be focused on how well Trek will do, financially, under Mr. Tarantino’s helm, but right now, I am uncertain.