Earlier this week we reported on Spock actor Zachary Quinto talking about how Paramount was “eager” for more Star Trek films and now his Trek co-star Simon Pegg (Scotty) is also showing confidence in more Star Trek movies.
In an extensive interview with The Quietus, Pegg expressed enthusiasm, with the caveat that the late Anton Yelchin (Chekov) will be missed:
“I know we’re doing more [Star Trek]. I’d love to – I love those guys. It’s, of course, difficult because we lost Anton [Yelchin] and moving forward without him still feels unimaginable.”
The cast of the 2009 Star Trek movie with producer/director JJ Abrams
Pegg and Quinto’s co-star Karl Urban also expressed confidence in the future of the Trek film franchise, last month predicting that the cast will be back together and shooting within a year. These 2018 comments from the cast are in stark contrast to 2017 comments, such as Chris Pine expressing frustration on the lack of movement, Zachary Quinto saying there were no guarantees for another Trek and Urban seemingly resigning himself to 2016’s Star Trek Beyond being the last film for the Kelvin crew.
In the new interview, Pegg also talked about the story pitch from Quentin Tarantino, retelling the story about how the cast was informed:
“We all got this email the other day from J. J. Abrams just sort of saying, ‘um, oh guys, Quentin Tarantino came in the office and pitched this and we’re gonna think about it.’” Pegg starts to laugh. “We were like, what? People just assume, I think, because it’s Quentin that it will be R-rated but he is a massive Star Trek fan… who knows!”
The Tarantino-based idea is being drafted by screenwriter Mark L. Smith and is one of multiple Star Trek scripts in consideration for the next feature film.
Simon Pegg on the set of Star Trek Beyond with director Justin Lin
Stay glued to TrekMovie.com for all news, whispers, and more about the future of Star Trek movies. You can keep tabs on all updates on the next movie via our Star Trek XIV category.
Lets hope so. Some crossover with DSC – a bit of universe building wouldn’t go amiss.
Well if the CBS and Viacom merger goes ahead then this wouldn’t exactly be out of the question.
I’d rather those worlds not crossover. I’d rather that Vulcan continues to exist (It does) and, other than the Klingons, Disco has better ships, phasers and tricorders. I like Disco’s Enterprise better too.
Well Vulcan would still exist as Discovery is set in the Prime Universe but there’s no reason that we couldn’t see a Kelvin version of Lorca cameo in one of the movies or have an episode of DSC in which Stamets inadvertently lands them in the KU.
Vulcan still exists in the Prime universe. It was destroyed in the Kelvin universe.
Never gonna happen. Nor should it. Think about it. A crossover with a show that has said over and over they are not a part of the KU. And is set some 10-13 years before the movie will be taking place. Sorry… No. If there were to be a crossover it should be with some of the surviving original cast members. I love TOS and the original cast but even I think that is a terrible idea. The KU needs to stand on their own. It’s why they set up their own universe in the first place.
@ML31 Technically it makes more sense for a crossover with Discovery than surviving TOS cast members as given that the Kelvin Universe only separated from the prime timeline on the day Captain Kirk was born then it’s highly likely that versions of those characters exist in that reality. Sure events would have unfolded differently so Burnham may not have lost her parents and been brought up by Sarek and Amanda, the battle of the binary stars wouldn’t have happened so Georgiou could still be around and there’s nothing to say that prime Lorca traded places with his mirror counter part. None of that really matters though, the point is that you could easily have a Discovery cast member pop up in a cameo without confusing casual fans or contradicting the respective timelines.
I see what you are getting at, Corinthian. But I wasn’t talking about KU versions of STD characters. I was talking about the supposed prime version of the characters coming over. If they really wanted to use STD characters the perhaps they should recast? Maybe make Georgeau Latina. Stamets straight. Saru gay. And Burnham white?
(In case the point was missed this was a jab at casting BC as Khan.)
The one plot device in Trek cannon that could put a crossover in play would be The Guardian of Forever.
No crossover. Nope.
I didn’t foresee this, but we’re now in a position where we need the unexceptional Bad Robot Trek films to redeem the brand after being badly sullied by Discovery. Star Trek Beyond was no masterwork, but it wasn’t an embarrassment like Disco. Beyond seemed to understand the tone of Trek, unlike the awkwardly tone-deaf Discovery, flailing about in its inanity while failing to find any direction. (For those hoping Christopher Pike can salvage the plummeting Disco, I wouldn’t get too excited- so far this looks like a limited guest appearance.)
I’m really enjoying Discovery. And I AM getting excited for Captain Pike.
I’m watching, really not on board yet.
Speaking of Tone Deaf I have no idea how you can so easily dismiss what is the second best first season in any Star Trek series. It still shocks me how absolutely stick-in-the-mudd some Trek fans are.
Bullying. Why does everything have to lead to insults anytime someone voices criticism of Discovery? You’re trying to shut down people’s opinions instead of sharing your own. To me Discovery is reductive at best, but the bizarre visual reboot of the Klingons is really pointless and distracting for fans of a 50 year franchise. I found the whole season story arc, up it’s own ass and pretentious and character building could have been done with more a episodic format. DS9 did what it’s patting itself on the back for doing, 25 years ago.
It’s the worst first season of any Trek series, hands down. Animated series included.
Second best Season 1 after TOS, but I accept that it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
Discovery is the only Real Star Trek.
HN4, now you are just trolling. You can like the show, many of us do. But stop sounding so defensive over it. People have different opinions. And yeah especially Trek fans.
I’m just passionate about the show. Discovery and DS9 are my two favorite Treks, but DS9 suffered from being 90’s Trek.
And the 90’s sucked big time. I don’t think I could rewatch DS9 again.
Well then maybe you can understand why others simply think this show sucks? No one is saying you can’t like it, but this silly immature attitude to dispose of 700+ hours and 50 years of Star Trek comes across as trollish because you can’t seem to tolerate others not liking this show. Especially since you have been watching it for decades yourself.
For the record I do like Discovery, but it has many problems like they all did. I just have faith and patience it will improve like they all have as well.
Those people are wrong.
OK you’re trolling. Thanks for wasting my time.
Yep, Tiger2. Definitely trolling. For the record, I like DISC too. But some are just looking for a fight.
I’m just looking for Hugs. The world needs more Hugs.
Yep.
Considering that there hasn’t been a good first season on a Trek show since TOS, you’re still putting the bar pretty low (not that I agree with you — despite the duds, I’d still rank DS9’s 1st season over DSC, and probably even TNG’s, despite the howlers. As I found VOYAGER and ENT largely unwatchable, I’d put DSC right down there with them, except with the caveat that it SEEMED at first that it might be better, but then went right down the tubes with later episodes.)
I would agree with the concept that it started out promising and went downhill as the season wore on. And I would say this was the worst first season of any Trek show. And it’s not even close.
TOS had a good season? That’s news to me.
The only Star Trek show I had real difficulty with in its first season was Enterprise and mostly because it was a prequel and a lot of the episodes just felt boring. DS9 would actually be the second show I had the most issues with its first season (but today is my favorite show).
For me I had a lot of issues with DSC first season but no more than I had with most. But I think it being serialized where every episode is connected its more easier for people to either love it or hate it as a whole so I can understand why others would really hate it if the Klingon war or MU didn’t do it for them.
I think for me the MU saved it. Until then it felt tedious and I didn’t care about the characters. All that changed for me once they got to the MU. I hated the Klingon war though.
Interesting. For me, the MU destroyed what little momentum the show was generating. That was where it went down for the count. I kept thinking they needed to get back to the Klingon war. QUICKLY. But the MU episodes just went on and on and on until there was no time left to deal with the Klingon war. For me, the MU didn’t give anyone any character changes or growth. It was just a sorry waste of time. Now I was never a fan of the MU episodes to begin with. The ones I liked the best were the Enterprise two parter. But that was only two episodes of a twenty + episode season. In a mini series like DSC there really is no time for wasteful endeavors like the MU. Especially if nothing is gained from it.
Yes, I know, that was where we learned about mustache twirling Lorca and they did bring back Evil Georgeau. But both those plot points were part of what killed the show for me anyway.
Unexceptional? Well,that’s your opinion. Some of us fans actually liked them. lol
Sadly I agree with you, Galt. It’s likely we’ll only see Pike for a couple of episodes. I have the feeling that when he leaves with the Enterprise, I’m going to want to go along with them as opposed to staying with Discovery…
So you’re down when Pike decides to get his sex reassignment surgery?
I am most certainly not down for that, no indeed.
Why? Don’t you want Pike to be happy. Her feelings also count.
What’s up with making trans jokes in 2018? And on a Trek site that centers on a show that embraces diversity at its core. #Backwards #Boring #Blah
What joke? How come we don’t see trans on Star Trek?
I don’t even get the joke. Is there something I’m missing about the character?
It always looked like Pike envied Number One for being a woman.
Uh, OK.
Maybe somebody is just projecting …
You wish.
I took it as a joke not about Pike at all but a jab at the STD show runners.
LUKE,
What else should you expect from somebody who seems to evince superior ambition, but is limited in repertoire? He’s been shooting himself in the foot with every post lately, but now is moving up his body towards his head.
@kmart Says the guy that wants me to become a woman. So weird.
HN4,
Re: wants me to become a woman
I’m not sure what the problem is that you perceive with his wanting that?
I’m certain kmart wants you to be every bit as happy as you wish for Pike.
I think he just wants to date me. Creepy.
For all I know you ARE a woman, but regardless of how you identify, it sounds like you are very unsatisfied with your lot, given how you seem to be projecting — and then accuse others of projecting when they call you on it.
This is good news. What kind of good guys, bad guys and starships are we gonna see in Star Trek 14? Who is going to play Chekov? Are we going to put pointed ears on Robert Beltran? It would be nice to see members of Star Trek Voyager’s cast in the next movie.
I would hope that Chekov is NOT recast.
Personally I would not mind if Chekov got recast. But I could understand him not being there for the next movie.
Same, Gary. Respect Anton’s legacy and don’t recast the role. I dunno how they’ll explain his absence, but they also don’t have to.
Easily. They could say Chevok has been promoted to the USS RELIANT. They could replace him with Jayla, or even any number of TREK extras ( characters ) from the original series.
Spock Jenkins,
In the first series the character was a ivan-come-lately added in the 2nd season to fill a perceived gap in on screen representation by the first country to actually make it into real space. They tweaked the character further to appeal to other demographics as well. In fact, as Kirk assumed command earlier in Pike’s last 5 year mission in the Kelvin incarnation, Chekov wasn’t supposed to show up till 7 years later, which is why he’s so young and green. I love Yeltsin but it makes sense for the character move on to other assignments to sand off his youthful rough edges.
But I suppose there’d still be a Russian gap with his absence? Well, maybe this time around they could spare his Russian girlfriend who turned hippie that ignominious bell-bottomed fate and put her at the helm?
Also, as much as I love Chekov (both iterations) — he’s also not in the animated series.
Yet he was handed the keys to the engine room after Scotty jumped ship in STID. But yeah my point is I’d rather they not even really explain his absence, not even a throwaway line mentioning his “promotion” or whatever they want to call it, because it will inevitably feel like they’re papering over a real-life tragedy. I’m curious to see what Disney has in store Episode 9 after Carrie’s death too.
My guess is they will explain it though. Look what they did with prime Spock and he wasn’t even a main cast member.
RELIANT probably hasn’t even been built yet, given the 1864 number and the fact it looks very much like a TMP-era or later vessel. What that means in the visually challenged Abramsverse I dunno, but just transferring him to have a callback only diehards take joy from isn’t worth the effort, especially since we haven’t seen him running security or even being promoted to lieutenant.
Minus that stint he had as the CHIEF ENGINEER OF THE USS ENTERPRISE after “shadowing” Mr. Scott in what comically sounded like an unpaid internship. I don’t think Starfleet is a meritocracy in the Kelvinverse, more a loose association of people wearing space pajamas trying to run a starship
I stand corrected, forgot totally about ID and the engineering assignment. I ‘reach’ your meritocracy remark!
I have no problem with Chekov being recast. Anton Yelchin wasn’t first anyway. But if they can find a way that’s not too derivative of Spock Prime in the first two KU movies, get Walter Koenig to do it.
I hope we get to see Kelvinverse Excelsior with Captain Sulu.
Nobody will be cast as Chekov. They will however be introducing Arex and M’ress.
No, I’m thinking Chekov stays Anton’s role, and unrecast (is that a word?). . . Let’s have them bring back Kevin Riley. (But not in a singing role!)
The character should never have been cast in the first place. It told the audience that the people making the movie didnt know what they were doing. Would have been a nice character to add in Trek 3. Oh well
Dont recast. Its not like the character is vital. I’d have him promoted to the Reliant. And if you want to pay homage, use archival footage to have him send a message or something.
Pop over to the Unbelievable! thread. Voyager actors galore there.
Keep Discovery well away from the movies its the worse Trek ever made by a long way. That would truly sink the franchise outside USA Discovery is widely considered as garbage scow!
I disagree. I live outside the USA and most fans I know like the show and don’t really use American terms like garbage scow to describe anything!
Agree with you Corinthian7! I’m also outside the US, and know plenty of people who never liked or were indifferent to Star Trek who really enjoyed Disco, even with its flaws. Most were disappointed it ended after just 15 episodes
Very true Karl, although Trek has always had a decent following in the U.K. the movies have traditionally not fared very well outside of the USA. Given that Netflix seems happy with Discovery and they are the international distributor of the show it could be argued that it’s success might help he next movie.
The thing is, none of us really know what kind of success or failure or middle ground it truly is. CBS hasn’t given out any kind of ratings or viewer numbers. And if they follow the lead of other streamers never will. Our personal acquaintances are just not enough to make any kind of estimate regarding popularity. For example, I personally know only two others who watched the show. And they had no idea it even existed until I told them about it. And wouldn’t watch it until I offered to share a CBSAA account with them for a month. And those two friends of mine are Trek fans too! Further, there is a poster here who claims to know NO ONE who watches. Now these cases really don’t mean much. But I still would be very curious what the numbers truly are.
You are correct, we don’t know what the actual viewing figures are or what constitutes a success to Netflix or CBS but I was merely challenging a baseless assertion that Discovery is “widely considered a garbage scow” outside of the USA.
I been saying for awhile now while I think Discovery is easily All Access biggest hit (thats not hard though lol) I wouldn’t be surprised if less people were watching it than they were watching Enterprise in its final season. Like the other poster you mention I don’t know a single soul watching it either.
And no that’s not the only reason I believe few people are watching it, but it doesn’t feel like its a show that is being discussed anywhere outside of the usual Trek circles. I will say for the Kelvin films they WERE actually part of the mainstream as I knew people who watched, everyone has heard of them, people around me talked about them, even if they didn’t watch them, etc.
Discovery just feels like a big hole, although I blame that for being on a streaming site with few subscribers. I don’t say this out of hate as I like the show and STILL subscribed to AA myself even after the season is over but I know most people is probably not interested in it and I can’t blame them if the show itself is not enough to pull them in. In time hopefully it will change.
ML, I personally know only one other person who watches DISC (and he steals it online). Very few people I know either at home or work are even aware it’s out there, and the ones that know about it are in no way interested in buying in to CBSAA for it. So I too would be very curious to know what CBS’s numbers are, but you’re right, we’ll probably never know.
I know several people who are aware of it (thanks to me) and are interested, but don’t want to pay CBSAA for it. They say they’ll wait for it on Blu-Ray. I’ve tried to tell them that’s more expensive, to no avail.
LOL
LOL, No.
This is great news. I think this cast is great and I look forward to more adventures with them.
I want to see the new Enterprise in action. I hope they update the bridge so it is less apple store in design.
I felt after Into Darkness, I never wanted anymore JJ-verse movies but the liberties Discovery have taken with it’s bizarre and selective visual reboot choices, mushroom drives and angry, joyless and dimly lit, blue drenched scenes – I’m so desperate for adventure – I would actually give a fourth Bad Reboot movie the time of day. At least there’s some colour on the screen and a sense of fun. Never thought I would say that, but that’s where I am – a fan of this rich 50 year tapestry… but now getting my Trek fix from The Orville and Simon bloody Pegg. I want to be uplifted, I want to feel inspired – Discovery does none of that. But the Klingons have two members now, double disappointed meat for fans to suck on.
Yeah one thing I do love about the Kelvin films is that they are actually fun. Discovery is fine but its too bleak and joyless so far. I’m hoping next season they get back to that a bit. DS9 was also a dark show but there was lots of humor and a lot of adventure as well.
Agreed, Tiger. Amongst the other problems I have with the show, it lacks levity in a big way. Except the episode where Mudd kept killing off Lorca in different, amusing ways. That got some chuckles out of me.
Interesting. Personally I have no issue with attempting to change up Trek. I like seeing different things. I had no real issues with the tweaks made in the KU for the features. All that stuff is fine with me. 5e problem I have is when the product fails. As was said, as bad as Darkness was it was still entertaining and still a decent journey for Kirk. Yes, there were issues but it was still a little watchable. Unlike STD. Kudos for trying something different. But they failed miserably with the evil Lorca and the other bad plot decisions they made.
To sum up… its not that they changed up Trek. It’s that they failed in the execution.
Failed miserably in your opinion. Please don’t speak for me.
Is Jaylah going to join the crew, or like Carol completely written out of the series.
*fingers crossed*
Fingers crossed that Jaylah will join the crew? Or fingers crossed that she will be written off? ;-)
No I like Jaylah I’m hoping she comes back, although I know that won’t be the case because that’s never the case. But the TOS crew could use a better gender ratio.
Depends on the passage of time. But I guess with the crew sitting on that space station for 3+ years twiddling their thumbs while the new Enterprise is built, it makes sense.
I liked Jaylah too.
Unless they built the ship in like three weeks? I mean who knows how long that time lapse was! But you’re right what are they gonna do until that ship gets built…
It feels like if the actress is available then she could take Chekov’s place.
I am eagerly awaiting the return of Star Trek, the show that, as the PBS documentary said, “had something to say.” So that means I have to wait for season 2 of The Orville.
Orville’s “something to say” seemed to be nothing but d*ck jokes, from what I saw.
Then it sounds like you, Thorny, have never seen The Orville. Dick jokes, yes from time to time but very very far from “nothing but”.
Watched the first three eps, then gave up on it. Crude Family Guy humor is not my cup of tea.
Fair enough. Family Guy humor is not for everyone. Orville is not quite there but it certainly closely approaches it.
Weird I love Family Guy but I really, really hate MacFarlane’s face. I can’t stand him.
HN4,
Re: … hate MacFarlane’s face.
So what you are saying is you like your men handsome? Interesting…
No I like curvy girls like Tilly.
HN4,
Oh, so when you said “I love Family Guy” you didn’t mean that you love the face of Peter, the Family Guy who MacFarlane voices, over that of MacFarlane’s actual babyface?
Retry with a few of the last episodes. I agree with you about the humor within the first episodes but over time this gets less and moves to more TNG like episodes
R-rated violence and language are not my only red flags with Tarantino. ‘Hateful 8’ has gaping holes in logic. ‘Django Unchained’ subscribes to the (idiotic) theory that onscreen racism is fine as long as it’s ironic. ‘Inglorious Basterds’ thumbs its nose at history. To me, that’s all a lack of focus, maturity, and… talent on Tarantino’s part. ‘Jackie Brown’ is his only film I like without serious reservations.
Pulp Fiction was a masterpiece. Actually so was Kill Bill. His skills as a film maker were on full display in taking what sounded absolutely absurd (and clearly a minor thread from Pulp Fiction – Vega/Mia in the restaurant) and made it awesome.
But keep in mind, its QT’s story and someone else, a very good writer, is crafting the screen play.
So if logic holes are your concern, I’d suspect it wont be an issue. And of course, we’ve discussed (though no one likes to admit it) how non-violent Pulp Fiction actually was and as for language, I have no issue with adults speaking like adults and Im sure we wont hear too many MF’ers or N Bombs in Star Trek.
Why don’t they – y’know – get some proper and well-respected science-fiction writers in for this (used to be) science-fiction show? Tired of glorified fan-fic scripts. Trekking through the stars… exploration, adventure, morals etc. Tarantino would be a very poor choice, but then again so was JJ and the whole first season of Disco. So what does this old fan know. You try and change Trek, ‘sex it up’ to appeal to everyone inc. lowest common denominator and ADHD challenged modern multiplex audiences, is it really Trek anymore? Do something different and leave Trek as Trek!
To be honest, I haven’t kept track of recent science fiction literature. Who are some of the well-respected sci-fi writers of our time? What I’m wondering is whether a well-respected sci-fi author would be willing to have himself boxed into fitting into established Trek canon. Back in the 60s Trek was very much still an open book. Now it’s 50 years of existing stories spanning several centuries of fictional Trek history. We’ve seen hundreds of alien worlds, we know the technology. Many fans have very strong expectations of what Trek is supposed to be like. So would this leave any potential well-respected writer enough freedom to give it their personal spin? And 2nd question: Would such a story be something that a movie studio would be interested in sinking substantial cash into?
The original TOS show (not the cheaply cgi’d ‘remastered’ version) along with the TOS movies (ending with the ‘Undiscovered Country’) will always be my favourite re-watchable slice of Trek…but I’m ready to embrace another adventure with the ‘alternate’ nu-crew at this stage…as I’ve warmed to the various actors, and I want TREK back on the big screen in some form.
I’d love Tarantino to actually direct this next one…but as long as we get a coherent screenplay and plot, then I’ll gladly take it, no matter who directs.
Personally, I still prefer to look on the whole ‘Kelvin Timeline’ premise as actually being something that’s split off from an ‘alternative universe’ to the TOS show and movies to begin with – meaning that the ‘elderly Spock’ we see with the nu-crew is NOT the one from the original TOS show/movies universe…and the ‘Nero’ character doesn’t come from the original TOS setting either – both those characters merely come from an ‘alternate universe’ in the first place!
Looking at it this way just helps me accept the J.J.-verse stylings a lot easier overall.
And the latest ‘Enterprise’ re-design (due to unavoidable rights issues it seems) in ‘Discovery’ has greatly helped (along with the look of everything else) with my choice to view this show as merely being set in an ‘alternate universe’ to the original TOS show also – meaning once again, it’s ‘Sarek’ and ‘young Spock’ are NOT the ones from the TOS show/movies setting, and I can enjoy it much better overall.
So ‘Disco’s young ‘Spock’ can have as many ‘half-sisters’ or ‘half-brothers’ as the makers wish, as far as I’m concerned…as it’s just all ‘alternate universe’ shenanigans to me. :)
Some people may tell you that your “explanations” go against what the makers intended but if they help you enjoy the new movies/Discovery then all power to you. After all, that’s all that counts: To enjoy your fandom.
I appreciate your comments DIGINON.
Despite the makers claims that the new movies and ‘Discovery’ show are directly linked to the original TOS show’s universe, it’s much easier for me to disregard them as being set in totally separate ‘alternate universes’ instead – so none of the visual inconsistencies throughout them bother me one jot now.
I had just started thinking of STD as being in the KU. It just helped accept the changes better. But then the plot decisions pretty much ruined the show for me. Evil Lorca was the straw that broke the camels back.
Honestly, people can think it’s in any universe they want if they can’t accept reality. They can’t keep trying to tell everyone else its a fact though. Its simply not true.
But whatever helps people wrap their brains around it and enjoy it, so be it.
None of this stuff is reality, so all’s well ;)
I agree with this as well but I think we can all admit it would help people accept the show more if they were told it was in another universe.
I agree that evil Lorca was trash. But I always find it kinda funny that people need to “rationalize” the canon changes with their own head canon. Was the fan community similarly up in arms during the TNG era when Kang from TOS had ridges in DS9? I know fans were upset with ENT. But like, I dunno, this is all just television right? Can’t creatives be allowed to, you know, be creative? Put their own spin on things? And can’t we as an audience just accept and judge that work on its own terms? Or are we so possessive of our franchise that we can only accept it in certain iterations? I certainly don’t love Disco but it’s entertaining enough, and I’m not racking my brain to find an in-universe explanation for all these things. The answer is, it’s 2018 and things are different now.
I tell you… If the show was better I wouldn’t feel the NEED to rationalize the inconsistencies they themselves created. Regarding Kang and Koloth and Kor suddenly with ridges, that is not as big a deal. Not only did they decided to update their look to coincide with what had become the established Klingon look, but the two part Enterprise episode made it even more reasonable they might change their look if one wanted to go that route. The issue with the look and feel of TOS is a different animal. Everything in every show established the look and feel of TOS as their history or future. These guys (STD producers) came in and changed the look just because they wanted to be creative. Nothing really wrong with that but they chose the wrong Trek era if they wanted free reign to do whatever they wanted with the look. The KU found a loophole and used it. STD used no such loophole. They essentially gambled that their show would be so good that few would be bothered with their canon inconsistencies. That gamble did not pay off. The show was not good. Causing even more scrutiny to be laid to their poor production design decisions. And even the decision to set the show when they did.
Absolutely, right, ML. If the producers had placed DISC in a later time period than they did, post TUC or post TNG, I for one would have no problem with how different this looks than other Trek shows. As to the writing, that’s another story, but I would enjoy DISC so much better if I wasn’t being asked to believe this is really happening a mere ten years prior to TOS. That alone is taking me out of the story, big time. And I agree – if the writing was so good to make me overlook all that…but it’s not, imo.
Yeah I agree with you and ML, Disco’s canon inconsistencies are bothersome in-universe, and even if the show aspired to augment the TOS aesthetic and be the “true” visual interpretation of the TOS era, it certainly wasn’t good enough to earn it. Anyway I guess I just kinda accept it the way I accept the KT’s spin on things: a big fat “meh.” Which maybe isn’t enough.
Then you should also view The Motion Picture and all after as a separate universe from TOS as well. Nice little multiverse you have going in your mind there.
LOL dude KT is ALREADY in another alternative universe. But you also need Prime Spock from one as well? Some Star Trek fans are just weird.
@ Tiger2 – just to clarify, it’s NOT ‘Prime Spock’…it’s merely an elderly ‘alternate universe Spock’ ;)
No worries, you continue to look at the movies/shows the way you wish to, and I’ll continue to look at them the way I wish to.
Concerning the STAR TREK (2009) movie – in addition to smoothing things out with the different-looking actors and characterisations, my way of looking at it as being unconnected to the TOS show’s universe whatsover, also helps me to accept the likes of the KELVIN ship’s unfamiliar ‘pew pew’ laser design/bridge design/crew costume design at the beginning, much better.
…and also helps allow for the ‘alternate’ look of J.J.’s ‘Klingons’ and ‘Romulans’ too.
But WHY would Spock need to be from another universe as well? That makes no sense. Its the same actor playing the same character he played for over 40 years starting with TOS.
Its just weird but yeah you can do what you want.
@ Tiger2 – er, because the only way to make the start of J.J.’s 2009 movie work as a non-TOS universe for myself, even before it splits of into yet another ‘alternative universe’…is if the ‘elderly Spock’ character is an ‘alternate’ non-TOS universe character, regardless of the fact that he looks like the TOS universe one.
OK I guess I will never understand it but thanks for trying to explain it.
Tiger2,
Re: same actor playing the same character
What are YOU not getting? The same actor also was the first one to play Spock from another universe in the episode, MIRROR, MIRROR
He did it before, so why is it so weird that for some, he does it again? The Jellyfish didn’t even bear any Starfleet markings.
He’s not playing a different Spock from another universe Newton, he’s playing the character from the prime universe. That was made clear literally from day one.
Okay, last try…
yes Tiger2, the beginning of J.J.’s Star Trek (2009) movie is indeed SUPPOSED to represent the TOS ‘prime universe’, before TOS ‘prime universe’ elderly Spock eventually follows TOS ‘prime universe Nero back in time.
However, I think what Disinvited is saying to you, is that he ‘gets’ what I’m trying to get across…namely, that there are enough visual inconsistencies between the TOS show’s established designs and the start of J.J.’s re-imagining to let me IMAGINE that it’s merely an ‘alternative universe’ at the start of his movie…and therefore it’s ALSO an ‘alternative universe’ version of the ‘Spock’ character that follows the ‘alternative universe’ Nero character back in time within THAT ‘alternative universe’.
Phew.
Cervantes,
Exactly, I don’t think you or I could have been any clearer.
Anton Yelchin will be missed, for sure. But I think this is a perfect opportunity to add Lt. Arex to the crew. With the technology we have today, it would be easy to do, and pretty cool, I think.
And very expensive. They need to get the budget under control. Beyond was good, but a lot of those effects were unnecessary. Sometimes less is more. There must be a middle ground between the bare bones Berman-era movie budgets and the excessive KU movie budgets.
Thanks but it’s not necessary. Let’s continue with Discovery and some other spin off. What happened to the idea of the Federation in the XXX century? That would be interesting to develop.
Probably no chance, but I would like to see Carol Marcus again. They removed her thread without much explanation. Simon only mentioned it in the interview, and yet not everyone watch the interview.
Are we just slinging content against the wall now, to see what sticks? QT didn’t pop into JJ’s office a few days ago to pitch a concept, that was months back now, and they are farting around roughing out a script. It really is a bit misleading to be packaging old news like it just happened. Meanwhile, in real Paramount news, A Quiet Place is at 151MM box office worldwide on a production budget of 17MM dollars. Remember what I said previously about risk vs. reward? Paramount will be much more likely to greenlight the Quiet Place sequel before (or something similar to Roadside Attractions I Can Only Imagine) before gambling on a 200MM Trek project that breaks even. Either that or JJ gets a budget of 80MM to work with, which would be about as much at a QT project should be worth.
A Quiet Place was compared to Jaws. Unfortunately, most studios have no idea what Star Trek is so they see the word “Star” and assume it can be Star Wars.
Maybe Zoe Saldana isn’t so busy doing the next 26 Avatar films after all?
My guess is if they do make another one and her cast is in it, they will work around her Avatar schedule, assuming she still wants to do it.