Paramount CEO Confirms Two Star Trek Movies In Development

At the Paramount Pictures CinemaCon presentation this afternoon in Las Vegas, CEO Jim Gianopulos discussed upcoming films for the studio, including Star Trek. According to The Hollywood Reporter’s account of the event “Gianopulos also teased the studio was developing more in the Star Trek universe with studio partner Skydance. He provided no new details, though Quentin Tarantino is known to be developing a Trek film with J.J. Abrams.”

Gianopolus’ mention of two Star Trek films in development was also reported by multiple  members of the entertainment press on hand at the annual event, including Variety’s Dave McNary who tweeted “Jim Gianopulos, chairman-CEO of Paramount, is teaming with Skydance on two “Star Trek” movies and on the “Top Gun” reboot with Tom Cruise.”  And according Fandango’s Erik Davis, Gianopulos “first he said ‘several new Star Trek movies’ and then clarified that it was two right now in the works.”

Paramount CEO Jim Gianopulos on stage at CinemaCon 2018 with Tom Cruise and Simon Pegg (for Mission: Impossible – Fallout)

Two Star Trek movies

The notion that there were multiple Star Trek scripts in consideration has been recently discussed by Trek actors Zachary Quinto and Simon Pegg, with Quinto suggesting that more than one could be put into production. Today’s statement from Paramount’s CEO appears to confirm these statements.

According to today’s reports, no more details on the two Trek films were discussed at CinemaCon. However, one of the two projects is almost certainly the one based on a 2017 pitch to producer J. J Abrams from Quentin Tarantino, which is being written by Mark L. Smith. The other could be the project announced in the summer of 2016 – to be written by J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay – which would involve Chris Hemsworth returning as George Kirk. There is no indication which film Paramount would have in mind to go first.

It’s important to note that at this point Paramount has not given an official green light to any Star Trek film, however the mention of Skydance’s involvement is a key important step. Skydance Productions partnered with Paramount on the last two Trek films – 2013’s Star Trek Into Darkness and 2016’s Star Trek Beyond – and has been a key financing partner for Paramount for many of its tent pole releases over the last decade. It’s also worth noting that this morning Viacom announced better than expected financial results, including Paramount’s return to profitability.

Skydance founder David Ellison (R) with Paramount exec Rob Moore and actor Chris Pine at Star Trek Into Darkness premiere in 2013

The next big steps would be script approval and picking a director, or directors. Summer 2020 still seems a likely target for the next Star Trek film based on development times and Paramount’s current announced slate. And if Paramount wanted to start releasing Star Trek films closer together – like Disney is doing with Marvel and Star Wars films – the studio would likely have to give the second Star Trek film in development a green light before the next one hit theaters.

This is a developing story so please check back for updates.

The crew in Star Trek Beyond

Stay glued to 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.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wow two?! Nice :D

Two, just like a Klingon.


I’ll never look a Worf the same way again.

Now we know how that guy got such hot women!

True, very True.

I hope so..

So do Klingon women have… um… two as well? ;)

Can Klingon women carry two children? Interesting concept(ion)…

Woo Hoo!

and…The Adventure continues !!!

All thanks to the success of Star Trek Discovery.


See, this is why people think you’re a troll. Do you really think the success of Trek these days is “all thanks” to the success of DISC?

Yes, the success of the show boosted the support for new films at the studio. You really think if Discovery was failure that they would be doing this? Quit trolling guys.

“Quit trolling”? You’re the one who wrote that the whole 60 years of Trek’s success now is due solely to DISC.

I’m pretty sure even JJ wouldn’t think that.

And stop referring to us as “Guys.”

I doubt it has anything to do with Discovery considering they already made three films before it existed. They were ALWAYS going to make more movies, it was only a matter of what those would be and when, which oddly enough we still have no clue on the two.

Look, I keep saying this, it doesn’t matter if the last film or show is a success or a failure, they will ALWAYS do another regardless. This is Star Trek, did we forget TOS got canceled in its third season only for them to try and make another show a few years later only to do a big budget film and its been going ever since. Its not one movie or show, its the brand overall that will always get people to roll the dice on it. Once TNG especially proved people will watch Trek outside of TOS it told them Trek was no longer a product but a brand and 30 years later here we still are.

Now that said, my guess is Discovery getting another season is obviously a positive towards the direction of a film but my guess even if it got cancelled there would still be a film coming. Again, matter of when and what. TPTB is never going to let Star Trek go dormant regardless. I mean after Enterprise got cancelled and Nemesis bombed and they decided to still make more movies should tell you that.

Of course. Discovery is what showed there is still an appetite for Trek in the mainstream.

But didn’t the last three Trek movies already show that? If anything, DISC proved through subscription rates that there’s still a dedicated fanbase willing to support Trek.

@Holden The last film was failure, ST could have easily seen a 10 year break before another movie was made.

“The last film was failure”? OK, Comrade. And what’s your point?


I think that you are wrong, the story was a good one.

I think he wanted to say the box office numbers were not so good. The production cost 185 Mio. $, Total Gross was around 340 Mio. Here you have to add all marketing costs, which can double the amount. Other movies would be considered as flops, but the first two JJ-movies performed only a bit better.
In my opinion, the next one needs less “crash boom bang” but I’m sure they keep it going.

Beyond bombed. You can spin it as much as you want the film did not earn its money back, at least at the box office. Now maybe LATER it has earned a profit, I have no idea but either way my guess is the next film is going to be WAY lower than the last one. I think, or at least hope, they learned their lesson on that.

This is the definition of ‘bomb’ from

2. informal (of a movie, play, or other event)
fail miserably. “a big-budget movie that bombed at the box
office” synonyms: fail, flop, fall flat, founder
“the show bombed at the box office”

“Star Trek: Beyond” was not a bomb. It did not fail miserably. It opened at Number 1 its first weekend and was Paramount’s most successful movie of 2016.

OK Thorny. But it “bombed” in that it did not make nearly what the studio execs were hoping for. At all.

I believe it did recover the production costs. And some on top of that. Not exactly what Paramount was banking on.

I think “bomb” should be reserved for the truly spectacular flops, like say “John Carter” or “Lone Ranger”. Calling “Beyond” a bomb really isn’t accurate. At most, it was a disappointment.

OK, fine, its basically the wording that bothers you. It failed. Is that better?

But it still bombed. I mean maybe not a BIG bomb, but its still a bomb. Look it didn’t make its money back at the box office. That’s a bomb. Clearly not a BIG one since it probably made its money back by now and why we are even talking about another film so soon. But the fact it took nearly two years for Paramount to even say another film was in development should tell people they were not happy with Beyond’s performance or it would’ve been greenlit long ago (which its still not formally).

Mars Needs Moms bombed.

If people want to equate ST Beyond to Mars Needs Moms, and use the word “bombed” incorrectly, then no further discussion is warranted.

“If anything, DISC proved through subscription rates that there’s still a dedicated fanbase willing to support Trek.”

And how do you figure? No one knows what the true figures are save some folks at CBS. And they aren’t sharing.

@Panaroid Thank you, the Discovery haters here are beyond the pale.

Which “haters” in particular? We’d hate to think you’re just chasing windmills.

PRAX: “Chasing windmills?”

You guys know who you are.

Paranoid has a point. Discovery had a lot of people talking who weren’t talking about Trek. Trek 09 was a great shot of adrenaline but Into Darkness was…well…yeah. Beyond by everyone’s reviews was a solid film that felt like Trek the most but honestly just didn’t perform as well as it should. Disco created a bit of buzz again. That’s not to say a new film rested on whether Disco was a hit, but its success definitely helped with the momentum.

“Discovery had a lot of people talking who weren’t talking about Trek.”

Interesting that some people say that. What evidence is there of this? I’ve seen none. My 15 year old son is far more entrenched in social media than I am. I’ve asked and he hasn’t run across people talking about STD. And I know I haven’t.

Dude, twitter was always full of Discovery talk on the nights it aired. Your 15 year old son is not an expert on social media.

And you aren’t either. STD is really not garnering any “buzz” beyond Trek sites or groups.

I just told you people on twitter were talking about it. What has more influence on people. Twitter or some hole in the wall Star Trek forum board?

But you are wrong. It’s not all over Twitter. At all. I’m sure some are talking about it there. They even show us many of the STD tweets here on this site. But that doesn’t mean it’s a huge Twitter topic at all.

@ML31 I said when the show was airing. Discovery was all over Twitter on Sunday nights.

Plus a lot of people watch ST and never talk about it in public. I was a huge ST fan back in High School, but I would die first before I ever told anyone that I was a fan. Not even to the ST fans that started a ST Club. God those kids were freaks.

Except it wasn’t “all over” Twitter. Not according to my observations or the observations of others who use it far more often than I do. I’m sure there were pockets of conversations. But it was never a trending topic. Certainly not like other media.

And you go on to say it that Trek is basically an underground success. Maybe children are concerned with that sort of attitude. But not grown adults. Plenty of people like Star Trek and will say so. They aren’t hard core fans or even fans enough to be posting opinions on message boards. But there are people who like it who have no idea STD exists. Sorry. You are very wrong.

YES, YES we all know how amazing your 31 year old son is. He knows everything about everything.

Hmm… I don’t throw this term around lightly, but it might be possible we have a 2nd troll to ignore here.

I think you’re right.

lol …yeeeeah….I’m sure the $$ the last 3 movies made worldwide had nothing to do with it…

That was a good laugh this morning.

Lol….yeah, right…

Glad to hear it. Please, can we get a story movie this time? No more 45 minute cg n’ fist fights sequences. I’d love to see what a real Trek story would be like on the big screen. A little action, a lot to think about, some great character moments… and the Big E in all her glory!

Don’t hold your breath. The problem is Paramount lacks explodey franchises except for The Go-bots and Old Tom Cruise Running so they need Captain Kirk to do a lot of flying kung fu.

Mirror Galt,

The term is “Kirk-fu.”

Love to see that but they want the bums of the general audience on seats. That means a certain amount of action stuff!

So you’re already piss? Yeah it’s not going to be an art house film.

I never thought of Star Trek TNG as arthouse story telling, but the majority of the episodes fit the requirements of CmdrR. It’s not really too much action it’s that things are balanced. I mean some of the Marvel movies have more to think about and better character moments than the recent Star Trek movies.

Actually many of the Marvel movies have deeper themes and character moments than the entire first season of Discovery.

Shall we compare apples and oranges next or do you want to stick to comparing massive, huge budget films vs tv shows?

But, see…the movies are TOS reboots…not TNG. Colorful, people-don’t-get-along, ripped shirts, fistfights, sexy ladies TOS. You’re not going to get heady, talky “idea” Trek. Nor should you.

Your impression of TOS is very selective, not to mention a little daft. But, whatever works for you.

That was Insurection. The so called real trek fans hated it. I loved it.

YESSSSS IT WASN’T JUST ME! I actually thought this was one of the best Star Trek films because it WAS a proper TNG episode

Oh please no, let’s get a TOS action adventure movie that doesn’t get ruined by a nonsensical political message like “Poor Taliban (Kahn), evil US starfleet wants to shoot photon torpedoes at you across the entire peaceful Klingon Empire and all you want is to reunited your family.” Even throw in a political message but avoid dumb ones where a – Kahn and the Klingons are just poor abused and misunderstood b – you beam and shoot photon torpedoes across the Klingon Empire. Whoever thought that was going to work was not getting enough sleep.

The fact that it felt like a standard TNG episode, for me at least, was part of the problem. It’s the same issue that TMP had. I sorta expect a bigger story from a motion picture. If it feels like a TV episode then the movie failed a little bit. On a similar note, I had higher expectations for STD because of the streaming platform it’s on. Because I went out of my way just for STD (like going to a movie) I expect it to be better than your standard TV fare.

I really didn’t love it originally when I first saw it but I grew to like it the more I watched it. There was just something about it missing. But I do find it funny how both Insurrection and Beyond feel similar in some ways, especially the vilians who felt they been slighted who is looking for immortality and both look extremely altered from human form.

They were very different movies but funny how they shared a lot of elements together. Main one feeling like big budget episodes.

I didn’t hate Insurrection, but I didn’t love it, either. It just felt like a two-hour episode of TNG and really didn’t have the scale or grandeur needed for a movie. It is the third-best TNG-era movie. “Generations” warts at all, at least had greater ambition.

Thorny, to me it was easily the worst of the TNG features.

I think two movies would be good. The Tarantino one could be a smaller budgeted film (e.g., less than $100 million), and they can go bigger with the other one.

If they really are going to make two films (which would be great to expand the universe), I think it means the Tarantino one is definitely either a new cast, or at least not the Pine-led cast.

I think by two movies they mean they’re looking at two possible movies.

He mentioned that Skydance is co-producing two Star Trek films and the Top Gun sequel. That sounds like two movies.

I am beginning to wonder if Tarantino’s idea will be in the Prime universe. Maybe that is why there are two projects.

It won’t.

I’m hoping one of those projects involves TNG with either original cast (a proper send-off) or a reboot. It’s time to move on from TOS era.

That would be fine with me but I doubt it. I think, or feel, like they have moved on from all the original casts at this point and want to get new actors. Why I don’t think you’ll ever see Shatner in a film again. I could be wrong but its just how I feel.

That doesn’t mean there can’t be a TNG reboot in time but it will probably be with new people.

I honestly do not see a TNG reboot like TOS got. Picard and Data just aren’t part of the zeitgeist like Kirk and Spock are. It’s why the feature was a TOS reboot rather than another TNG film. This comes as bad news to those who like Picard and TNG better. But that’s just the way it is.

But I don’t believe that’s completely true either. My guess is someday someone may try and make a reboot of that crew and honestly if they give it the same big budget treatment they gave the Kelvin films: big time director, hot or famous actors, make it look like Star Wars, they will probably get enough people who knows little about them as they did for the first Kelvin film.

I don’t think its going to happen anytime soon, but sure I see its possible. I mean with all the reboots and revivals Hollywood is doing its not out of the realm of possibility. They are making a Six Million Dollar Man movie with Mark Wahlberg and I doubt most people under 50 has ever seen or heard that show. They are making a big budget BattleStar Galatica film. My guess is unless you seen the Ronald Moore show then majority of people can’t tell you one single thing about it. And yet like the Six Million Dollar Man its coming anyway.

OK. We can disagree on Kirk being more recognizable to non fans than Picard.

“They are making a Six Million Dollar Man movie with Mark Wahlberg”

I heard this but thought it was still at rumor stage. Has this been green lit? As in, it’s really happening? When I was a kid I LOVED the Six Million Dollar Man. So much so that I have never seen the reruns out of fear that as an adult I might change my mind about it and think it garbage.

I’m not saying Picard is more recognizable than Kirk I’m saying it doesn’t really matter because Hollywood has shown over and over again as long as something proves it made money once then it can probably make money again. Thats what my point is. TNG was huge and all the films actually made money minus Nemesis which bombed. That and Beyond are the only two Trek films to do that (Even The Final Frontier broke even, it was just considered a flop compared to all the others at the time).

Again don’t get me wrong, I’m NOT saying they will ever make a TNG reboot or if they do its any time soon. But sure, obviously someone may consider it because it was really popular when it was on and someone will always bet they can make lightning happen twice. Thats how these things work now.

For god sakes, they are turning the cartoon MASK into a movie. Have you ever heard or seen that? Trust me when I say unless you watched it in the 80s, most likely you haven’t since it was cancelled after two seasons. And yet its getting a $100+ million budget and being made by the guy who made the last Fast and Furious film. Paramount is spending its money on that and I bet you 90% of the population can’t tell you one single thing about it, much less heard of it.

So yes its not out of the realm out of possibility TNG wouldn’t get a reboot someday, especially since it still has a loyal fanbase today. Its chances are no worse off than everything else today (Again…MASK) but my guess is that won’t happen until after the Kelvin movies are completely done and even then it could be awhile if they tempt it.

And yes Million Dollar Man is definitely happening. Its set for May 31st of next year. It was announced last month. Peter Berg is directing.

TNG is too boring. Maybe if Vin Diesel played Picard. Then you might have something.

Clearly too boring for you. I’m not surprised. Also not surprised Vin Diesel is your favorite actor.

Come on, you know he would make a great Picard. Picard has already shown how much he likes to drive fast cars.

It’d be a dream come true to see a show as classy as TNG sent off in a proper way. Anyone under 40 probably wouldn’t even remember it though, sad to say.

Best way to send of TNG is as an event series on CBS all access.

Soren, they did get their classy send off in Nemesis. I think a lot of TNG fans are just annoyed that their send off wasn’t as good or as cool as the TOS folks got in TUC.

Even as a big TOS fan, I totally agree with you. It is time to move on from the TOS era, both on the big AND SMALL screens. As to the TNG cast, as much as I would like to see them again, I don’t think it viable. *Maybe* in what QT is offering…

Great News, bring them on!

Tarantino is out of movie jail apparently, so maybe he will get a Trek project moving.

When was he IN movie jail? His Manson project has been a go for awhile now and will star Dicaprio and Brad Pitt.

Is Dicaprio playing Manson? He’s like a foot taller than ol’ Charlie was.

No, he’s playing a former actor in the film. Neither is Brad Pitt.

Awesome news! TV Trek really stinks the moment, I’m more than ready for some more big screen adventures with Kirk and company…the sooner the better!

Sounds like good news.

Bout damn time they start making films and doing two is great. The length between films when JJ was doing it was horrendous. How can you keep a market going when you have over a half a decade between films??

4 years is not “over half a decade”.

Boom goes the dynamite!

Awesome! With a lower budget, these movies will do great!

Why a lower budget?

Because with a lower budget, you have to rely on story as opposed to action.

People watch Star Trek movies for action. A boring Trek won’t do very well at the boxoffice.

Let me rephrase; story can provide action if it’s compelling. Star trek VI for example, had a small budget, but it had a lot of action and the story was compelling. It doesn’t have to be CGI blow-up action to be good.

I don’t watch star trek movies for action. I’m not sure many people do, hence why Beyond didn’t make much money.

But a lot of people considered Beyond boring even with action I think was the issue. I think the premise just didn’t excite people. And plenty of action films bomb, you still need more than just explosions for some of them.

I didn’t see it that way, Tiger. I think a lot of people just didn’t give Beyond a chance after seeing Darkness. The weak/bad marketing for the film didn’t help either.

I mean, take the cat and mouse scene in the Wrath of Khan. Both ships in the nebula trying to get their bearings; It’s submarine warfare, slow, plodding, but it builds tension. Characters are fleshed out based on their thoughts and actions. It’s beautiful.

Now contrast that with the shakycam, CGI swarm that destroys the Enterprise in Beyond. I don’t know what the hell is going on. Nobody is saying anything. Bones and Spock are spinning around in the alien ship. Kirk is sliding down the Enterprise saucer in the most unbelievable way.It’s all so stupid. I basically have to close my eyes until everything calms down.

Big tent movies today have a tendency to separate action pieces from plot/story. So you have in one scene people talking, and then another scene that’s pure eye candy. It’s like you’re watching videogame cut scenes. Contrast that with movies like Crimson Tide, The Last Crusade, Hunt for Red October. In those movies the action and the plot are one in the same. Trek needs to go back to that, otherwise these movies won’t hold any replay value.

I’m literally basing on what some people have said about it here and other places. Maybe STID is what kept many from seeing it but, and I ALWAYS point this out, the fact is even after opening weekend Beyond had much bigger drops the following weeks than both the 09 and STID did which means even word of mouth didn’t get people to go or at least return. I mean what’s funny about STID even though people supposedly hated it, they went and saw it in droves even after it opened. It had very healthy drops in the following weeks, especially in America. Beyond didn’t.

And Beyond only made $15 million less opening weekend than STID did but it made less than $70 million overall.

But yes there are a lot of factors for it failing. Marketing is probably the biggest IMO.

I felt that Beyond was like 30 minutes too long. I remember looking at the time and waiting for it to be over. Not a good sign.

and that is the problem with the ‘trek’ movies recently.
‘khan’ has cast a long shadow over the series while the studio ignores the merits that storylines like ‘voyage home’ can be successful.

and audiences are in the mood for thoughtful sf as the success of ‘the martian’, ‘interstellar’ and ‘gravity’ have proved.

There was nothing thoughtful about “Gravity” though. It was nonstop action sequences.

but not a war film with a body count like the ‘trek’ movies have become.

Lower budget so we dont have a film that makes lots of revenue but doesnt make lots of profit. Also, it might prevent people working on the film to brag about their bank accounts and private jets following a movie considered widely to be a box office failure.

The second line was necessary TUP. And yes STID still the most money in the franchise but as I also remind people it was also the costliest. So lower budgets is a plus if they want these films to continue.

I meant wasn’t.

You’re losing it Tiger.

More like Beyond, less like Into Darkness please.

More like Into Darkness, less like Beyond. Into Darkness made more money than Beyond.

I don’t care. It barely resembled Star Trek.

Still, if I recall correctly you’re the guy who thinks it’s the best Trek of all time so your post isn’t that surprising.

I like Into Darkness better too. A lot of people do – check the scores on RT.

The DVD of STID currently serves as a beer coaster in my den. I’ll never watch that one again.

I think, El Chup, that HN feels Darkness was the best of all time for the sole reason that it made the most money of the JJ films. Not because he actually thought it was good. He equates box office with quality.

No I think it was best because it was entertaining and exciting. Beyond had me checking my watch, and I was at home watching it on Amazon.

THat’s the first time I read you claim it was good for any reason besides “It made the most money”.

I found Darkness to be uselessly derivative and a shameful use of the Khan character. It also felt like the director was afraid to let character moments sink in and last. And it had me groaning throughout much of it. Beyond was far far better. It felt a lot more like Star Trek. But hey… That’s all just opinion.

Beyond wasted a good actor like Idris Elba and turned him into a monster of the week.

And Darkness DIDN’T waste a good actor in Benedict? Puhlease.. Further, Edison was a far better bad guy anyway. He was a believer and there was no talking to him. He totally felt he needed to make his point. And it was a valid one, too. So you could empathize with him and still find his actions horrifying. As meglomaniacal as Khan is one could still reason with him, to a point.

Benedict’s Khan was awesome. I really hope he comes back.

He won’t.

Yeahbut, tell us more about the Top Gun reboot. I hope the Beverley Hills Cop sequel has not been delayed by the Ratner, our hearts have already been broken by the Crocodile Dundee 3 ruse. Deeper Impact? Coming to American Again? Make it so.

It’s thrilling to be contrary, isn’t it?

By dull and predictable, yup, I think you’ve pretty much nailed it.

Deeper Impact is priceless, thanks! (I think these days it would be coming on america)

The Dukes being “back in business” at the end of COMING TO AMERICA is a perfect launch point for a TRADING PLACES soft-reboot wherein Randolph and Mortimer are back to their old tricks of raping and pillaging Wall Street style, hence Coming on America.

You mean Crocodile Dundee 4? There are three movies already,I’d love a new one,they were fun,lol! And two Trek movies sounds GREAT!

Everyone just pretends Crocodile Dundee 3 never existed. And I mean EVERYONE!!!!

I’d like to pretend they stopped on CROCODILE after they shot the trailer for the first one — that’s the only part of a DUNDEE I enjoyed (except for Peckinpah’s MAJOR DUNDEE, that is.)

LOL! You’re wrong though. I KNOW it existed and watched it and enjoyed it for what it was at the time. Not gonna say WHAT it was though,lol! So no,NOT EVERYONE!

OK, clearly JRT is Paul Hogan. Everyone else though…

ROFL!! Sssh,don’t tell anyone.

GREAT NEWS! Very excited to hear this. I think the best is yet to come from these guys

There is only one line in this story that means anything….’It’s important to note that at this point Paramount has not officially given any official green light to any Star Trek film’. Of course Paramount is developing Trek…like they are still developing the WWZ sequel, Transformers, and Terminators.

Agreed, Phil . .

I think we got censored for spoilers. . . Sorry!

Yep. The run time for Avengers: Superhero Poses isn’t a spoiler, though, and at 2.67 hours for the first half, that’ll leave a lot of numb backsides, regardless of the body count on screen…

To be fair, only one of those franchises is currently in development hell. :-)

The Terminator film was cancelled years ago and now Cameron has the rights. Transformers is still getting made, are you kidding. Even if the last one wasn’t huge, it was still easily Paramount’s biggest film that year.

And they may not make both of them but clearly if they have TWO in mind then at least one is getting made. It just sounds like they have decided if it will be both or which one will get the greenlight first.

They also have ‘A Quiet Place’ on their mind, 213MM in revenue on a 17MM budget. Beyond was Paramounts best performer in 2016, at best a break even production at the box office. Two movies in development or twenty, if the analytics show them to be break even projects, they’ll never get out of development. I’ll stick with my original observation – until something is green lit, all this is is chatter.

Phil, I don’t get why you seem so determined NOT to see another Star Trek film will be made, but clearly when the CEO of the studio tells the public in such an open way they are working on several Trek films its with the intent they plan to make one, or why would one be in development at all?

This is news because this is literally the first time since Beyond has come out a Paramount executive has said a Trek film is being developed. Before that we only got word from the actors themselves like Pegg and Quinto. Even when it was reported Tarantino was working on an idea Paramount never said a word about it. This thing was strategically announced for a reason.

Now sure maybe something will happen that will get them both cancelled but CLEARLY they want to make another one or there wouldn’t be two in development in the first place. We obviously know another Star Trek film will be made, its just a matter of when, with who and how much. But I know even you know another Trek film will obviously happen, it just may happen sooner than you predict it will.

All I’m doing is NOT reading something into this that isn’t there. Plug this conversation into any other industry to see just how ridiculous the reaction is. Gee, CEO of GM, are you developing new cars? Why, yes, we are! Gee, CEO of Merck, are you developing new medications? But of course! Gee, CEO of Apple, are you developing new smartphones? Yes, and I’ll bet you can’t wait for the announcements! Gee, owners of Trekmovie, do we need to throw some content out there to drive some traffic? Sure do, ad revenue is down.

I’ve never once said Paramount won’t make another Trek feature. I have said that we won’t see one before 2020, and if they aren’t hip deep in pre production in six months, it won’t be until 2021. All ‘in development’ means is they have some interesting concepts they are looking at. Paramount is very aware their big budget tentpoles have flamed out over the last four years, so the likelihood of them continuing to shovel good money after bad is slim. Whatever Trek may look like in the next five years, they won’t look like big budget extravaganzas….as of today, nothing is green lit. Nothing.

OK but they are clearly going ahead with at least Trek 4 now as a director has all been announced at this point. So clearly they are, or at least the Kelvin film is getting out of development.

Like I said, he probably made the announcement for this reason, they are ramping up the PR for the next film and its exciting we are now getting REAL progress.

Hopefully the Tarantino one happens too.

No one would love to see several new Trek films more than me. Go back to the time travel story teased when STB debuted. Let QT and his team do whatever they want. Find a way to tease the DISC crossover when the corporate time is right. Sign me up.

But I don’t think this is really news though. When there’s hard news about timelines in relation to definite production dates and release days, then I’ll get excited.

Sounds good! good luck to all involved!

Good luck to all involved!

Two films “in development” is still a far cry from “two films will be produced.” No change from what we’ve been hearing these past few months.

Exactly. “In development” is a highly nebulous phrase, a phase during which far more projects have died than materialized.

Star Trek will always exist. But they better do better than the last two.

I call the J.J.Addams reboot of Star Trek – Star Trek New Universe. Due to Spock’s Time Travel thru a black hole, thus creating an entirely new TIMELINE, Thus it’s an entirely new Universe. I hope somebody agree’s with me, if not that’s ok, too.

Yes The JJ Abrams Universe is a Different Quantum Reality created by Time Travel in fact all Time Travel creates coexisting Parallel Universes.

DS9 is King,

Non sequitur, your facts are uncoordinated. No theory making such a prediction has ever provided a mechanism through which the creation of a parallel universe could be confirmed by observation nor has any experiment confirmed such a thing.

In regards to “all Time Travel”, it is a fact that time travel into the future occurs all the time, and yet, still there has been no experiment confirming the creation of any parallel universe.

What you have is a conjecture with beautiful equations but that’s not always the way a Large Hadron Collider particle crumbles.

“No such theory” umm, the De Witt interpretation of the Multiple Worlds theory, which was cited by the writers does exactly that.

De Witt, B. S. M., 1970, ‘Quantum mechanics and Reality’, Physics Today

Not in Star Trek it doesnt

I’m just curious what you consider the Mirror Universe?

@Rodney Ladson — that’s what Bob Orci calls it too. But that does not make it canon. A new timeline, yes, but not necessarily a new universe. By all Star Trek canon time travel rules, the Kelvin timeline is overwriting the Prime timeline we all know. Just like in City on the Edge of Forever, it all happened, which is how Prime Spock exists, but now it’s all changing. From my perspective, Prime Spock was prevented from fixing the timeline by Admiral Marcus, and then died, taking his secrets with him, ensuring that everything that previously happened, is replaced by the new timeline.

Curious Cadet, will you PLEASE stop saying this. They have said over and over that’s not happening and the fact we have Discovery kind of proves none of that is even true, unless you are suggesting Discovery also takes place in a different universe.

I don’t get Star Trek fans sometimes, this is all fiction. Yes Star Trek based itself on one form of time travel until another writer showed up and based it on another form of time travel. The writers said the old timeline hasn’t been erased, hence why you still get reruns of the old shows.

I get its a Trek forum and its nothing wrong to nerd if up here but can’t people just believe the people who make this stuff? If one writer says the new films take place in another universe then they do. If another writer says the new show takes place in the old universe then that does as well. Yes I can understand why people question both, but again, its all fiction. I mean you don’t have to believe Cumberbatch was Khan but he did play the character regardless how different he looked. Until someone who wrote this stuff says something conflicting then its nothing to argue about.


Re: will you PLEASE stop saying this

Right back at you. What the writers say off screen has never been a determining factor in STAR TREK canon. I refer you to the thoughts and musings on STAR TREK by one, Harlan Ellison, in refutation of this specious reasoning that you employ.

I’m talking about people in charge of the franchise man, not a writer for hire from one episode. And I don’t even know what Ellison said and I don’t care. He’s about as annoying as you are.


Re: I’m talking about people in charge of the franchise

No, you are not. Bob Orci is as done professionally with Star Trek as Ellison. He said so, himself.

Fine, if you stick by rules of canon, to wit, “anything on film is canon,” ST2009’s officers discuss the alternate universe right thar on the bridge of the Enterprise.


Re: alternate universe

Again, I am afraid you are mistaken.

My source disc, which I am playing right now, only reveals them talking about an “alternate reality”, a topic which covers alternate timelines in the Prime Universe as well, on the bridge. Universe is only mentioned by the Vulcan bullies and Ambassador Spock to KT Spock. One was about the universe not being big enough and the other was about a universe ending paradox fiction. There exists no on screen 2009 effort dialogue about universes being alternate or parallel for canon to draw upon.


Also, I remind you that even if your false writer assertion was true, Bob Orci has declared himself done with STAR TREK professionally, and Paramount seems to agree. He therefore has no power to change anything in future movie scripts to advance this pov.

Lord have mercy, Curious, don’t get the people all upset.

It’s an Alternate Universe, based on the Bubble Universe theory. I think.

At any rate, it isn’t OVERWRITING the Prime Uni.


Re: it isn’t OVERWRITING the Prime Uni.

There’s no on screen evidence in the 2009 effort to point canon to the contrary of an overwriting. But regardless of whichever time travel notions one wants to entertain, if time travel into the past occurs resurrecting George Kirk in the next film, the Kelvin alternate reality will be abandoned.

According to your reasoning, a new universe will be created preventing Kirk and Spock from ever returning to their Kelvin “Universe.”

Please give us another Next Generation cast movie. If we can get past a re-modeled TOS Discovery Enterprise I can deal with an old Data. B4 or whatever.

Sucks that Nimoy is dead. From what little I read in the comics. The events that lead to ST2009 in the prime universe would have made a good movie.

Not a whole lot of people would go see another TNG movie. That cast would seem to be done unless a new TV show is set some 15-20 years after Nemesis. Then they might get mentioned and I’m sure every actor wouldn’t mind guest shots.

Assuming two years before principle photography begins…Patrick Stewart, 79. Jonathan Frakes, 67. Levar Burton, 63. Brent Spiner, 71. Michael Dorn, 67. Gates McFadden, 71, Marina Sirtis, 65. This ship has sailed….

@Phil , I dont think you can bring the entire TNG cast back for a TV series. Im not even sure there would be a point in bring them all back for a film, especially since we know, in canon, some of them moved on.

I would want to include Stewart though and he still works and certainly looks great so why not? I mean, Picard looked old in 1987 lol

If they want to include someone for easter egg purposes, you could include Spiner in a view-screen scene with CGI. Dorn would still look the part in Work make up if needed. And I dont mind using Frakes either. But only if there is a story-reason.

Disney’s gamble on buying the SW franchise was Rogue One – can they tell a Star Wars story that isn’t leaning on Skywalker/Solo/Vader crutches? Maybe I’m whistling in the wind here, but if Paramount is looking at multiple productions now is as good of time as any to cast off fan service projects, and just tell a good in-universe story that doesn’t involve dusting off Shatner or Picard one more time. If QT told an Oscar worthy story that ended with a couple of Starfleets finest jumping through the Guardian, we could hope it would be embraced by fans…..Trek needs its own Rogue One much more then it needs nostalgia to sell tickets.

I hope they move on from all the old actors completely. Don’t get me wrong I would be fine if they brought back some of the actors but I like to see something completely different. But sure, it would be great to see some of them again but I’m hoping they are not going that direction at all and I don’t think they are. I think all the old casts from TOS to Enterprise are done although I feel they may try to sneak in an Enterprise cameo in Discovery since that would make some sense story wise.


Re: I hope they move on from all the old actors completely.

History, at least, may be on your side in this. 2020 will be 11 years for this current cast. Twelve seems to be the max that a STAR TREK series of films’ complete cast can last. So with that as a rough guide, it should surprise no one if Pine and Quinto are the only ones in the next one to hand it off to some other younger generation.

I wasn’t talking about the Kelvin actors, I was talking about the shows. But my guess is they may only last for 1-2 more films.

Tiger2, Enterprise already appeared on Discovery, and will play a major role in at least the first 2 episodes of season 2 (Episode 2 Director Jonathan Frakes excited to work with new Christopher Pike Anson Mount).

How about if it took place in a Starfleet retirement home?


According to Cochrane and Scott, people of 80 years and older go touring the galaxy in spacecraft roughly the equivalent of shuttlecraft. In DS9 Sisko mentioned planning to retire to Jake, but there’s never been any indication of a Starfleet retirement facility of any sort. Old Picard was maintaining his family’s vineyard.

Starfleet’s dirty little secret – Soylent Green is warp core coolant.


I’m not saying Picard forgot. I’m saying he did it on purpose just as Kirk did with Cochrane and Khan. The most likely reason being that he found the Nexus was too addictive and it was best not to reveal its secrets causing others to risk its too powerful addiction trying to investigate it. He decided the less said about it, the better.

But if you want an example of Picard acting out of character, he left his com badge on Kirk’s grave. To what end did any of that serve? Didn’t he need to use it to let the others know that he was alive and needed rescuing? And my point is why would Picard waste time burying Kirk at all, if it was his intention to tell all to the others that he asked Kirk to save, who could have assisted and given Kirk a proper Veridian III ceremonial send off? What was Picard’s rush?

It wasn’t Picard’s comm badge. It was Kirk’s Starfleet pin. But yes, the grave with that pin left on it on a mountain in an unpopulated area of a planet with a pre-industrialized civilization does not sound very smart on Picard’s part. Those people will find this grave filled with alien remains. Not good.

Good news then. The QT movie will as many of us predicted be the 2nd movie not the first due to timescales. So that means most likely the George Kirk time travel story is moving forward closer to production. Its going to clash with Indy 5 though if summer 2020 I hope they can get Trek into theatres early May would work best box office wise.

TV shows now days are getting close to cinema quality. I’d just as soon they trim these Star Trek movie budgets down to $50 million or so (instead of the $150+ million), tell smaller stories, and churn out one movie every year instead of every 3+ years. Shoot like you are doing it for top tier TV but with a slight longer schedule and bigger budget for the cinema.

I guess some of the actors would have to agree to a smaller paycheck though for that to happen.

I think with both Discovery and Orville doing what they are on TV budgets (Well, Discovery on a mega-TV budget) it shows that a Trek film could be done on a much smaller dime. The main expense will be the actors which is still going to be $30 million or so for the main cast. They can get good actors who aren’t quite huge money for the villains. Hemsworth will be costly, and if they bring in Shatner into that story, that’s also another $5m at least, but Shatner and Hemsworth both would bring in enough audience to make their cost justified.

I am just hoping that they actually market the movie correctly – and hype it right. Perhaps they should outsource that job to Disney, because Paramount has NEVER done that right.

Re: publicity
Darn tootin’
Paramount’s “publicity” for Beyond was ABYSMAL. At least in my neck of the woods.

In one of the Scripts Kirk will go back in time prevent Nero from Destroying the USS Kelvin thereby Restoring the Prime Universe so we may see the New Enterprise in the Future Post Romulas in the OG Universe.

Hey Bob. Hope all is well. Any opinions on the news?

WOW, I assumed Blunt and hubby’s Krasinski’s low production cost A QUIET PLACE hit had stopped Paramount’s bleeding red, but turned it profitable too in the face of Paramount’s loss of Asian financing?

AMAZING news! I’m so excited to hear things are at least happening. And TWO at that. I know I’m jumping the gun but thats what the internet is for lol. I’m guessing another one will be a Kelvin film but I am really hoping we get another one that is COMPLETELY different and post Nemesis. That would be exciting and then Trek will feel BIG again with Discovery doing her thing in the 23rd century in ‘prime’ universe (yes I believe its in the prime universe its for others who doubts it), Kirk and the others going off in another adventure in the Kelvin universe and then maybe a different crew farther in the future doing their thing. It could even be a TNG reboot (but hope not, I want something completely new).

Or yes it could just be two more Kelvin films but I’m hoping Paramount is thinking bigger. It would be fun to make the universe(s) feel bigger again.

I have no insight but if I were a betting man I would bet both films are KU films.

I hope so. I love that cast.

It actually sounds like that isn’t the case as its being reported Tarantino is doing his own thing outside of that universe, which gets me excited. It doesn’t have to be in the prime either, I love the multiverse idea.

In the later article it does indeed sound like the QT thing could be something separate altogether. Which I would be all for, too. Not everything needs to center on Kirk or Picard. It’s a large universe they created. Let’s see some people just in one movie. If Star Wars can do it, so can Trek. And they can set it nearly any Trek era too. TOS time. TNG time. Post TUC. Post Nemesis. It’s pretty wide open.

Star Trek the Next Generation starring Arnold Schwarzenegger is John Luke Picard and Star Trek Deep Space Nine staring the guy that played Black Panther is Benjamin Sisko

I wonder is one of them Nicholas Meyer’s project?

That was to be another TV show.

I think that was mere speculation.

“The next big steps would be script approval and picking a director, or directors.”

Christopher Nolan would be a great choice to direct a Prime Universe movie.

Pretty sure he’s secretly a Trek fan. In many ways, “Interstellar” was very Trekkish. The overall vibe, of course, but also some major story points, eg. wormholes and “aliens” from the future saving their ancestors (see DS9), the “Tesseract” scene at the end (very similar to TMP’s “Memory Wall” deleted scene), and so on.

So give Nolan a shot at the helm if he’s interested.

If it turns out that two TREK movies get greenlit before long, then great!

Will one of them involve a new cast?…or a new ‘Enterprise’ re-design?…or a new time period?…or a whole new universe?…

Who knows? But at this point, there are always possibilities…

I’d say not. They need to keep the budget under control. No need to pay for new sets, props, CGI designs and costumes if they don’t have to. That’s how TWOK came in so cheap.

@ Thorny – I agree that one could likely be a continuation of the JJ-verse with it’s current crew…but if Tarantino gets fully involved with the property for the 2nd movie that may appear, then all bets are off I’d say.

But they already destroyed the Enterprise in the last film though so they are going to get new sets regardless. And every new film has had new costumes as well. I don’t see that changing with the new film even if its a lower budget.

Too bad Joseph (Hitchcock’s PSYCHO and THE OUTER LIMITS-TOS) Stefano isn’t still around to write one of the next two STAR TREK films (he wrote the TNG episode referred to in this article).


Nicholas Myer was rumored to be apart of another Star Trek Related Project. I wonder if the second Trek Film is his next movie?

Wasn’t that the “Khan on Ceti Alpha V” show, though?

Ugh. I for one think that idea sounded pretty terrible. Imagine a show where “Khan” (hopefully someone actually looking something like the original character this time) stalks around a wasteland planet seeing his wife die, hating James Kirk, and all the while we know how that turns out. No thank you.

Yes it sounded horrible. I mean ANOTHER Khan story? And a prequel to the story we already know what already happened on a boring dessert planet? Yeah that sounds super exciting.

We need BOLD Star Trek again, not more nostalgia fests to keep pleasing old fans.

We need a sequel to Into Darkness. Khan needs to get his Wrath on.

No we don’t, seriously.

Tiger, Agreed on both points.

I always thought the franchise was a big enough thing to sustain more than one film every four years. Obviously though that is dependent on strict quality control. Marvel Studios make multiple features a year, but they also rarely put a step wrong at the same time.

Nothing to really get excited over until there are details of the stories. There were always supposed to be new Trek films. It’s the ridiculous delay between them that’s an issue.

Let’s not and say we did.

Is this two films being worked on or simply two competing scripts to be the next film?

I suggested in another thread the idea of filming back to back. You can reduce some costs and perhaps get the actors easier (longer shooting schedule but once they clear their time, you’ve got them). And makes for a more cohesive story and marketing.

That’s what The Avenger movies did….but its The Avengers lol.

TUP, that is EXACTLY what they should have done. But, at least they can do it now.

I hope.

Happy to be reading this. I always felt this was a good cast that never got a particularly good story to work with. Beyond ended up being better than I expected and is still probably the the most “Trek-like” entry, if that makes any sense, but I’m sure they could do better.

Here’s hoping for a good story, good character interactions and a worthy villain to tie it all together.

Not much to comment on here, except that this is positive news, and I *hope* these films aren’t simply action-CGI schlock with no depth. I hope they’re not just Star Trek in name only. I hope they represent the best moments of both the big and small screen history of the franchise. The possibilities are endless.

IIRC Star Trek IV was one of the highest grossing films in the franchise. That film involved time travel to the (then) current era and told a fish out of water story (with the crew not the whales) where the crew interacts with modern people in San Francisco.

So… it behoves the studio to reboot “Trek IV” and do something very similar where the crew travels back to the early 21st century and interacts with modern humans. This would make the story accessible to a much wider audience.

Thus: a big screen version of “Star Trek meets the X-Men” as was done in a comic book at one point I think.

Spock fights The Wolverine.

‘voyage’ was great because kirk and co treated earth ’86 like it was an alien planet they were exploring off the tv show.

Agreed. And at the same time that alien planet (from the crew’s perspective) was recognisable to audience members who hadn’t seen Star Trek before.

…sad thing there is I liked 1986 a lot better than I like 2018. But I know I’m not the target audience here….

I’d have loved to be in my teens in the 80s. It’s a great decade for films. 1986; Aliens! Need I say more?

Being a teenager in the 80’s was an absolute blast, DataMat. Great memories.

If the JJ franchise was more successful (or done with any sort of common sense budget), they could tell whatever story they wanted.

As it is, you’re a studio exec, you make a list of things that excites the audience:

– Time travel
– big stakes
– Original cast (Kirk, Picard etc)
– Borg
– race against time

Now write a story using all those.

*furrows brow upon being confronted with that list*

Aw man can’t we just reboot Wrath of Khan?

(Although I want to come back to you with a serious pitch involving your bullet points – leave it with me…)

So, you want a re-imagining of First Contact?

What’s exciting the exec’s at Paramount right now are huge returns on small budgets. They’ll invest 20MM for Capt. Picard spending ninety minutes reading the phone book because it’ll make money. A big budget production that breaks even isn’t going to happen.

I just want a good story. But to really juice the fanbase, you need hooks. Time travel is one.

I think one of the reasons 2009 did so well was because of Nimoy. It’s just free marketing and free goodwill. Shatner would be the same.

If you use Shatner (or Stewart to a lesser degree) and the movie sucks, their inclusion will magnify that. But if you use them and the movie is good, you’re starting off ahead.

I’d try to create a time issue that uses the JJ characters with stops along the way, so you can include an Shatner and Picard (and whomever else the story dictates).

Something that requires Captain Kirk (our Kirk) who has a connection to both the past and future.

You dont need the borg but I mentioned them because they’re a villain that excites fans (or used to anyway) and if the Borg were “re-imagined” in a bad Robot film, it would be…intriguing at least.

A Borg movie would put butts in the seats! And a Borg story dealing with the Kirk crew would feel exciting and difference since its never been done before but easy to do since the Kelvin timeline is obviously different from prime.

I love the Shatner Kirk as much as the next person, but he had his send off with the whole cast in 1991. Generations was a mistake. The ending of undiscovered country is perfect in its poetry.

@TUP ok I’ve got it. I think I’ve hit all your criteria – check it:

The Borg are gone. The virus introduced by captain Janeway eradicated the collective. Starfleet begins its exploration of the delta quadrant proper.

Except… a small group of drones called “the guardians” exists in a subspace bubble outside of normal space time. In an effort to revive the collective (as is their primary function) the guardians determine that in order to be safe from destruction they must assimilate humanity. In order to do this they realise that they must acquire one of starfleet’s greatest officers: James T Kirk.

So… they time travel to the 23rd century and assimilate the crew of the Enterprise 1701.

In the 24th century the Enterprise E (with a new, young and sexy crew that has a special ambassador on board – Jean Luc Picard) encounters an anomaly that’s rich in tachyons. A tachyon discharge hits the Enterprise. Seconds later a temporal shockwave rips through space and everything (but the Enterprise) changes.

The Borg have assimilated the federation- yet it is in ruins.

The assimilation of James Kirk and the original Enterprise led to the doomsday machine weapon (and others like it) eating all the class M planets in the federation- the Borg, unable to assimilate them, were unable to defeat them and the collective nears defeat. The planet killers have rampaged through the galaxy destroying worlds left right and centre.

The crew of the Enterprise E must race against time to correct the timeline – before the effect of the tachyon anomaly fades and they’re trapped in the new timeline forever.

They encounter a band of rebels trying to destroy the planet killers using a weapon of mass destruction that, if not perfectly calibrated, could destroy all of subspace in the galaxy making warp travel impossible. The leader of these rebels? That’s right- former Borg drone James Kirk (and his Enterprise crew).

The twist? The planet killers have evolved and they’re now sentient – so killing them creates an ethical dilemma for Picard and the new Enterprise E crew. Kirk and co argues to destroy them, Picard argues for negotiation.

In the end, they establish communication with one of the planet killers and it agrees to go back in time with the Enterprise E crew to the guardians’ arrival in the 23rd century and stop them assimilating Kirk.

They succeed. Picard says something to OG timeline Kirk about his potential or whatever and the Enterprise E warps back to the future.

*TOS theme plays*


– time travel [seen it]
– big stakes It’s the end of the Galaxy! End of Earth! [seen it]
– original cast [no, feh!]
– Borg [OMG didn’t they do this to DEATH in VOY and TNG??]
– race against time [cheezy plot device, but present in most blockbusters]


Got it! They Go back in time, to stop Trump becoming President!

Studios have dozens of projects in development at all times. This is merely PR to address rumors that it’s doing nothing with the Trek franchise, and capitalize on CBS Trek coverage. It’s specious to assume both films would go into production at the same time, or that this is more than developing two concepts at once, to determine which film they ultimately proceed with. Paramount is in no financial position to launch a major franchise push by financing a blitzkrieg of movies. This just goes to prove how badly Paramount has dropped the ball with this franchise, and how desperate fans are for another cinematic experience. Maybe they do have a strategy of staggering movies every year the way Disney has done with Star Wars. Then again, that’s gonna take a lot more than two movies, and much more than a vague announcement about being in development.

Regarding the return of George Kirk – really not that crazy about travel between prime/JJ universes, or in time. However, if they go down that path, then the real payoff would be if it also had Shatner in the movie.

I dont think their intent is to cross back into Prime. It would be a time travel device within the Kelvin Universe, something that probably prevents George Kirk’s death but causes havoc elsewhere.

I think Orci said his idea involving Shatner did not “restore” the timeline, which to me implies it was still within the JJ-verse sandbox. I think Shatner & Nimoy would have played older versions of Kelvin Kirk & Spock, not Prime Kirk & Spock.

Can they finally get Shatner in one of these??

Shatner was in the first seven of them.


Right. As much as I would have liked to have seen Shatner somehow reappear as Kirk over the years, Prime Kirk fell hundreds of feet along with some scaffolding into a pile of rocks and died in 1994. Great writing, there (gags). That ship has sailed.

Well… It’s better than Soren just shooting Kirk in the back. Was was originally scripted and even shot. No one like that to the point where they spent a ton of money to completely reshoot that ending.

I actually saw that alternate ending, ML. Disgraceful. Actually taking out one of the most iconic figures in all of sci-fi history by shooting him in the BACK. It’s not like Soren was even menacing in any way. I had such high hopes for that movie, too. Still watch it from time to time.

Darth Vader was turned into a crying and stoic old ‘man’ in Return of the Jedi; the greatest villain in science fiction.

Everyone dies. Picard said himself it is ‘important how we lived’. Kirk lived an extraordinary life which sadly ended in an unexpected and tragic way. It’s actually far more realistic a death than most of us would like to think too hard about. Life can be cruel and completely unexpected.

Yep. I saw the original ending as well. The bridge thing is not the best but it was vastly superior.

Datamat, I think Kirk had a great death scene. I loved the line, “It was.. fun.” It very much felt appropriate. The line worked for Shatner and Kirk at the same time.

Did Shatner ad-lib that line? I seem to recall reading something to that effect, but it’s been a while. I agree, it was a great line for Shatner/Prime Kirk to go out on.

I think he ad libbed the “Oh my…”

Another thing about Kirk’s death is that it fulfilled his thinking that he would die alone. That is, not around friends/family. Picard was a colleague at best.

That “Oh my …” was great. Kirk was looking into a new universe. The “undiscovered country.”


Re: fell hundreds of feet…. That ship has sailed.

Spock’s coffin fell further and harder at the end of TWOK.

As the mass of both the scaffolding and Veridian III, are unknowns to the viewer it is difficult to say what, if anything, killed Kirk. Picard was not noted for his medical expertise and certainly performed no autopsy.

And it was never made clear that Picard ever bothered to report Kirk’s, who had already died a celebrated heroic death in Federation history, involvement. We certainly didn’t see him bury Soran’s remains.

It’s kind of hard to imagine Picard, slavishly devoted to duty, would have forgot that little detail in his logs or report. Damn it, Will, I left something on the planet, but for the life of me, I can’t recall what it was?. Or that the shuttles, who undoubtedly scanned the area looking for Picard would have all failed to notice the corpse he was standing next too.

As I understand it Picard buried Kirk to keep scavengers off of him until his body could be recovered by the ships coming to remove the Enterprise and its crew from the planet. I’ve walked in woods just like those most of my life, if you think there aren’t loads of scavenging animals out there waiting for a nice fat corpse like that.

i’m cool with that, just please do TIME TRAVEL, thanks

I guess I’m in the minority here. I want them to avoid time travel at all costs. Seen enough time travel in Trek. Getting pretty sick of it.

Me too, ML31.
Me too, ML31.

So, that they are greenlighting BOTH movies is actually a possibility, as opposed to just picking the one draft that they deem to be most promising? Cool! (Though I guess they’d need to have some cooperation between the two script writing teams, so that the movies don’t accidentally contradict each other in terms of continuity, if they get written in parallel….)

There is a possibility that Paramount are thinking of a bigger storyline across two movies and not two entirely separate story’s.
Of course, I hope that two separate story’s are actually being pursued. In this way they can satiated the appetite for another Kelvin film, while also experimenting with something different, and potentially more exciting.