The news for the next Star Trek movie keeps coming, following yesterday’s announcement from CinemaCon that two Trek features were in the works. Today Hollywood trades The Wrap, Deadline and The Hollywood Reporter are reporting Paramount and Bad Robot are in talks with British director S.J. Clarkson, for her to helm the next Star Trek film. And according to Variety, Clarkson has already been tapped for the job.
If Clarkson signs on, she would be the first female director in Trek film franchise history. According to The Hollywood reporter “Paramount is deep in the hunt for a female director, a mandate that comes from the top, including producer J.J. Abrams.” Making sure women are considered for the director’s chair is a serious objective for Hollywood now. Just last week Abrams hired Victoria Mahoney to be his second unit director for Star Wars: Episode IX. And earlier this month Warner picked Cathy Yan to helm the upcoming Harley Quinn film.
Clarkson is best known for her directing work in television and has been active since 1999, working on series such as Dexter, Bates Motel, Orange is the New Black, Jessica Jones, and The Defenders. Her only connection to producer J.J. Abrams seems to be directing single episode of the short-lived HBO series Vinyl. She most recently produced and directed all four episodes of the BBC/Netflix mini-series Collateral.
Hemsworth returning as George Kirk
According to the reports, the Star Trek film Clarkson would direct will be the one first announced in the summer of 2016, based on a script written by J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay. The film will feature Thor actor Chris Hemsworth returning to the role of George Kirk, which he portrayed in the 2009 Star Trek film.
Variety also reports that Chris Pine is set to return as Kirk along with Zachary Quinto as Spock. No word yet on the rest of the Kelvin-verse cast, however the original release noted they were “expected to return.” The report also states that “a key plot point sees Pine’s character running into his father (Hemsworth) in a time travel ploy.”
From the original 2016 official release:
In the next installment of the epic space adventure, Chris Pine’s Captain Kirk will cross paths with a man he never had a chance to meet, but whose legacy has haunted him since the day he was born: his father.
Chris Hemsworth, who appeared in 2009’s “STAR TREK,” will return to the space saga as George Kirk to star alongside Pine.
Producer J.J. Abrams also spoke about the project back in 2016, telling Scott Mantz from Access Hollywood the film involves George Kirk and the crew going on an adventure together.
Tarantino Trek is next – with a different timeline?
As we reported yesterday, Paramount CEO Jim Gianopolus said there were two Star Trek films in development. The other film is the based on a pitch from Quentin Tarantino. According to the new Variety report, the script for that (being penned by Mark L. Smith) is “still being written,” and the project would “come after the fourth movie.” According to The Hollywood Reporter, the film is “understood to be set in a separate timeline.”
TrekMovie has reached out to Paramount, however they have declined to comment on the reports at this time.
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.
So no R rated Kill Bill in Space, very optimistic if Clarkson is chosen.
It said Tarantino film will be second if it happens. And I don’t think it would automatically be rated R just an option which makes sense to me.
Yeah I’m glad that the Tarnatino thing is going to be a separate project and not the sequel to Beyond.
I’m not sure how I feel about the George Kirk thing yet but I’m just excited their doing another movie at all.
Why? is she a great director ? I have not seen anything she has done as yet….
There’s a good chance you’ve seen some of her work. Check out IMDB.
The first season of “Jessica Jones” was first rate… I recommend it without reservation.
Sounds like time travel will be involved. No?
Maybe prime universe George Kirk gets in a tangle with some red matter while on his way to vacation on Risa and ends up in the Kelvin universe. He finds that Risa is now New Vulcan in the Kelvin U making it absolutely no fun at all.
Absolutely no fun at all=the last three star wars films. Let’s hope this is kept in mind moving forward.
Really? Last Jedi was pretty enjoyable, minus the over-Disney parts. But I agree that the cast of the new SW is pretty lame. [By that logic “no fun at all” can be applied to all SW movies produced since 1983.]
you betcha!
Yes and why I’m excited! I love ALL the time travel Trek stories. I can watch most of those endlessly and some of the best Trek movies were time related including obviously the first Kelvin film.
Quantum communicators ~ !!
Jesus a lot of crazy Trek news today!!! So it looks like the Hemsworth movie may happen after all. That is crazy. And cool there may be a woman director. Never heard of her but its nice this is developing fast now if she gets the job.
It is great news. Now we just need a production timeline and release date!
I know *next* summer is way too soon. Maybe December 2019 ? Ten years after Star Trek 2009 !
…Although summer 2020 is probably more likely. Trek 5 around 2022
2 years between movies LOL you’re dreaming
The Hollywood Reporter’s article contains two additional nuggets:
“Paramount is also developing a separate Star Trek movie that Quentin Tarantino would direct. The latter is understood to be set in a separate timeline. ”
So a Prime universe movie might be possible if this is true.
“The studio does not have acting deals with the castmembers, which also include Simon Pegg, John Cho, Zoe Saldana and Karl Urban. Fresh contracts would have to be drawn up, making the project pricey, but Star Trek is a crown jewel for Paramount.”
Separate doesn’t have to mean Prime. Just saying…
Likewise, the secondary cast doesn’t need to come along, either.
No it may not be which I’m COMPLETELY good with. As I been saying I want a multiverse of Star Trek. We technically have three now: Prime, Kelvin and Mirror so what’s one more? And this one could even take place farther in the future too.
It just makes me wonder how complicated they’re gonna make this franchise. Trek already turns off casual viewers who feel it’s too dense for them to understand. Now they’re making it worse with more timelines? I dunno bout that.
@albatrosity Me neither. I had a couple in front of me walk out of Into Darkness after he’d been trying to explain to her who Khan was and why it mattered (because the movie didn’t).
Nobody wants to do homework before going to a movie. Gosh, I’d completely forgotten the plot of Civil War and couldn’t remember why the various Avengers weren’t talking in Infinity Wars. Plus I kept going “Wait, who’s that again?” everytime the audience started cheering for a character (ex. Red Skull). And I’ve seen them all.
But adding multiple, unrelated universes seems like it would totally confuse people (and me). I’d argue that it hasn’t worked great for Fox/Sony with X-Men/pre-Holland Spiderman.
Even the various Star Wars spinoffs all take place in the same universe.
I’m trying to think of a franchise where this has worked…
Or, per Les Moonves, Star Trek is a Family Jewel [snicker]
AT least all the actors have said they want to come back. We’re not dealing with a Robert Downey Jr, Chris Evans, or Ben Affleck situation where those actors are clearly done with their characters once they’ve fulfilled their contracts.
Well… Chris Evans extended his deal by one so he could appear in one more Avengers feature. THEN he claims to be done.
The difference is the Kelvin actors isn’t tied to the Trek universe the way the MCU actors are. I mean Chris Evans for example has been making a movie for Marvel every every year for eight years now. He’s been in six films in eight years. Think about that. Contrast that with the Trek actors who pop up every 3-4 years and have plenty of time to do other things.
At the other end of it though, Evans has probably made so much money over being in all those films he doesn’t need to do them anymore where as for some of these actors Trek probably pays the most so I can see why they would want to keep doing it.
Wow.
Hey, hey………… I want your cray, cray.
The most exciting part is that bit about Tarantino’s being in a separate timeline. Still, I’m happy for a fourth Kelvinverse venture, too. Fantastic day for Star Trek news all-around.
I wonder why two films.
Could the costs of the Kelvin timeline films be a factor?
Could the Tarantino idea be a way to go in a new direction and perhaps the 4th film in the Kelvin universe be the last one?
Because this would be the first time that I can recall that their would be different Trek timeline films. All the others were set in their respective timelines.
So it would be a little weird to have a Kelvin and whatever the Tarantino Trek films timeline is be released so close to one another.
I’d be careful making too many assumptions at this point. They may just have two different stories the powers that be are happy with.
One possibility is that Paramount wants to crank up a steady stream of Trek to compete with other cinematic universes that put out movies in rapid succession, instead of the plodding production pace of the Abrams Trek movies so far.
@JASV — true, but that’s a bit of a stretch considering Paramount doesn’t even know how it’s going to pay for one film any time soon.
Good point. Paramount is in a genuine mess.
Maybe they’ll merge with Viacom. If Viacom even wants them.
Paramount is under Viacom, not CBS.
The plodding production pace does still seem to be an issue . . . why are they just now moving ahead two years later on the same project originally announced in summer 2016? Hopefully, they’ve turned a corner on that finally.
I’ve interviewed Clarkson within the last year, she is a very sharp lady, with a good visual sense. This is not a bad choice at all, I wonder how she got onto their radar? Must have been the Netflix superhero stuff.
Jessica Jones is great, lots of focus on the characters.
Here’s a link to the interview-article, the camera folk working for her think she is really inventive. http://www.icgmagazine.com/web/s-j-clarkson-the-defenders/
Interesting cast in Collatoral. Two big Dr Who actors in it.
I’d say there’s three. Even though one of them was only in one episode,it was a classic,and she did go on to do a lot of other good stuff.
Great to hear Kmart. I realize I seen some of her Jessica Jones work so I’m pretty open minded about her.
I’m down for it! To boldly go where no woman has gone before. Second star to the right then straight on till morning S.J. Clarkson.
I know I’m corny but I like it ;-)
Intriguing, wonder if the Tarantino project would be a return to the prime timeline after forays into the Kelvin timeline and Discovery’s controversial Garbage timeline.
So, hiring women is a ‘bit of a trend’? Not the deftest of phrasing, there…
Hopefully, Zoe Saldana gets paid the same as her male counterparts, too. If she’s in the next one at all.
1. Multiple hands touched the article. That was slightly awkward phrasing from rushing out the article, no agenda or subtext was intended. I’ve changed the wording.
2. Zoe Saldana is now a bigger star than anyone else on the Kelvin Trek movies, so yes I’m sure she is going to be paid well. She would be renegotiating to appear in a 4th movie anyway, the only two people who were pre-locked in are Quinto and Pine.
Is Zoe Saldana really that big a star? Honest question, by the way. I don’t get to the cinema that often (two small kids and living abroad so no grandparents/babysitters) but I never see her name light up the advertising around the local cinema in Portugal.
She played Gamora in Guardians of the Galaxy for one and has had many appearances in other films and voice roles.
Thanks Nebula. I’m genuinely out of the loop at the moment. In that phase of people mentioning actors or bands that apparently are big and I’m flummoxed. If it’s not Doc McStuffins or the latest Disney Princess extravaganza, it doesn’t tend to enter my world these days! I’ve been told that in a few years time I’ll get to catch up with pop culture again!
Well she stars in a pretty big movie this week. You may have heard of it, Avengers: Infinity War.
Right, and she’s very busy and a big part of major franchises and deserves a fat paycheck but I’m not sure if she falls under the category of ‘box office draw’. I would say she’s more Jeremy Renner than Robert Downey, Jr.: Talented actor and great as part of an ensemble but not a performer who can carry a film on their own.
Agree, but re ‘but not a performer who can carry a film on their own.’ neither are Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban etc etc.
And Zoe got Luc Besson’s Colombiana though. Not a box office hit, but solid enough as an example of her being able to carry a movie on her own. Her skills in action scenes, similar to Sofia Boutella, help too because she does most of them (see guardians and avatar ) on her own.
She’s locked in with James Cameron’s Avatar sequels, and the Marvel universe, though I suspect we’ll have to wait for Avengers Part IV to see how that shakes out for all of them.
Yes, Karl, she has been in “Avatar” [as you may know, Cameron is making three count ’em THREE more] … both Marvel movies “Guardians of the Galaxy” and the Marvel spectacular coming out this week, what is it, “Avengers something”? ;^)
Yeah… I heard about Cameron and the Avatar sequels. I will avoid them all. The first one was probably the worst movie Cameron has ever helmed. It was complete and utter cow sh*t. Plain and simple. I’ve seen bad movies but that was the first one where I really felt the filmmakers owed me my money and time back.
“Avengers: Infinity War”
‘Infinity’ because every character ever mentioned in a Marvel movie is going to make an appearance, evidently.
Yes, she is. She’s definitely beyond a day rate. Just her credits alone without figuring in any “star” status or box office puts her into a top spot.
She is a bigger star compared to the others in this cast and has more exposure in other big, popular, franchises making it so Paramount is accidentally lucky having her for this reason too.
@ Matt….Much better, thank you.
Wouldn’t hold my breath, but yeah. She is the first to get a star in the hollywood walk of fame too, and along with Chris she’s the one making trek get awards noms and such, not to mention her face is used for promotion more than even Quinto’s at times. The promotion guys seem to wish she were his co-protagonist instead of the guys, to use her more, because there are no big stars in this cast, unlike marvel that has many.
if they hire Thor he will be expensive so if they can afford him, they better pay their leads accordingly too.
I just got a call form George Kirk and He is going to come from the Mirror universe and set the Kelvin back to Prime……
Sounds like what the Discovery people would do. Except they would insist the KU was prime.
It’s about time Paramount is branching out more with Star Trek.
With the exception of STID I’ve rather enjoyed the Kelvin timeline. They could have saved STID by simply making John Harrison another member of Khan’s crew who was awoken first because they transported onto a different deck of the Botany Bay. We would then learn that Harrison was an enemy of Khan’s who ended up killing Khan while still asleep to take control. The same story can then play out from that reveal.
Different timeline, different events.
They probably should have gone with Garry Mitchell any way.
However George Kirk is involved in ST4 hopefully will be interesting.
Tarantino Trek set in a different time line might be interesting also. As long as he stays away from dull TNG time line any thing could work.
Perhaps an adventure involving Captain Robert April, predating even Captain Pike.
Tarantine is a fan of TOS so maybe he’ll go that route.
I’m not going to be hyperbolic that Tarantino will make an R Rated Trek, that’s for worry worths to get steamed about. But branching out into different levels and exploring new things is what should be important.
After all if they can say F#ck on Discovery and show gutted Klingons what more could they do if they really decide to break out of the box to do new things.
We don’t need to see the Klingons or Romulans reimaged and recycled again nor do we need another look at the boring Borg.(actually the Borg are a joke. the greatest enemy always defeated by mere humans)
PS, I don’t mind new ships and new styles of sets, but come on Paramount, can we have some things that do show high aesthetic style and beautiful designs?
I didn’t have much of a problem with JJ interior designs, but the ship it’s self needed more grace and resemblance to TOS. So please DO change that before ST4. The glimpse of NCC-17001A didn’t put much hope into a better looking ship.
Discovery suffers from the same design flaws, nice interiors but exteriors leave much to be desired. And the Klingon ships were even worst (sorry in advanced to the fans that some how liked those designs)
OK, I’m outta here for another long while.
I think John Harrison should have been Joachim. Cumberbatch even resembles Khan’s right-hand man from TWOK. Except for the golden hair.
And the big reveal / surprise should have been that Marcus was actually Khan all along, released decades earlier when Starfleet learned of his existence after the Kelvin was destroyed. Section 31 gives Khan an assumed identity which allows him to infiltrate Starfleet and to climb though the ranks as he eliminates those who stand in his way. Khan eventually takes control of Starfleet with Section 31 at his disposal and his crew waiting in the wings.
Oh, well. What could have been.
So on Into Darkness… honestly if they had done a real evil Kahn almost takes over the galaxy movie instead of a “poor Kahn is abused by evil Starfleet that fires photon torpedoes across the peaceful Klingon Empire plot”. I think it would have worked. Post Vulcan destruction the Federation is in disarray with the Klingons on the offensive and Federation members considering leaving feeling unprotected and marginalized. Thinking it will save the Federation Marcus recruits recently found Kahn on the SS Botteny Bay hoping his “superior intellect” could save the Federation from the Klingons. Kahn instead goes behind Marcus and basically commits a coup with a secret deal worked out with the Klingons (sending most of the Starfleet into an ambush and leaving the survivors desperate for Kahn’s leadership) to divide the galaxy and consolidate power, throwing out the Prime directive. Admiral Marcus and any Starfleet officer that knew of Kahn’s real identify are killed in the massacre. On their five year mission on the frontier Kirk and the USS Enterprise discover a plot is in progress given they have been asked to interfere on a world and turn half of it over the the Klingons and now must fight Kahn leading Section 31 and the Klingons and rally what’s left of the fleet!
Wow the glory days of the 90s seems to be returning to the Star Trek Universe. Instead of multiple TV series and a motion picture now we have a great new digital series and two MPs in the works. Hope they all come to fruition. Can’t wait for Star Trek 14&15 and the return of Star Trek Discovery.
Another woman stealing a job from a man. :P Good for her.
I don’t think she stole anything. Lousy comment there.
It was a joke. I’m making fun of male sexism.
Because a man having a job is sexist. ffs. Fight the good fight, don’t fight the one that isn’t there.
Robots are really stealing their jobs. 😂
I’ve been rewatching TOS season 2 on blu-ray (my favorite season, as the characters are in full flower, plus the big musical fanfares whenever you see the ship in orbit seem to be their most strident and memorable) the last couple of weeks (amazing how many episodes open with at least one solar system full of people being killed, but then again it IS a big galaxy), and ‘losing your job to a machine’ is one of the themes in THE ULTIMATE COMPUTER. It’s an excellent Kirk ep, but after bringing it up and showing us a taste of how Kirk is processing it, they let the matter drop, since the machine can’t seem to do Kirk’s job after all. I’m thinking if the episode had been tackled in the 80s, that it could have struck a balance, where Kirk has to plug the thing back in or talk it around while acknowledging that there are some benefits — but that wouldn’t have been kosher yet in the 60s, I don’t think.
BTW, rewatching TOS after seeing DSC really brings home for me that the storytelling is just bad on the latter.Not just the writing, but the visual way of telling the story. DSC seems to be mainly talking heads (which is okay if the talk is all that important), but TOS used to let scenes play out in wide shot, so you’re seeing everybody’s reaction, and it lets the actors play off one another’s reaction too, which I think engenders a better feeling of being there with them. THE IMMUNITY SYNDROME, a longtime fave of mine, had a lot of examples of this, where they saved the closeups for when they needed them, like McCoy and Spock outside the hangar deck, but would stay on wide shots all the way through an event, like entering the space amoeba.
The others I’ve watched this week include THE CHANGELING, speeding through the good parts of TRISKELION (doesn’t take long, just fight scenes and the stuff on the bridge while Spock is in command), A PIECE OF THE ACTION, THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE, MIRROR, MIRROR and AMOK TIME. I think I’m going to mix it up a little and catch some TAS next week (always thought JIHAD should have been the basis for a ‘mix’ TREK movie, where they bring together various crewmembers/stars from different franchises/times to solve a galactic crisis, and always wished TIME TRAP and YESTERYEAR were done as live-action episodes, and believe ONE OF OUR PLANETS IS MISSING to be yet another inspiration for TMP.)
So, I’m guessing that Trek XIV will feature time travel and will either return us to the original timeline, or create an entirely new timeline. Then, Trek XV will be set in either the original timeline or this new timeline. I wonder if XV will feature Pine and the rest of the Trek XI cast, or if XIV will act as a finale for them, and XV will either feature the Discovery cast, one of the old casts, or a brand new cast.
I think Kirk will get to meet his dad, but at the end they send him back so he can die on the Kelvin again.
That sounds like Yesterday’s Enterprise, which is one of ideas Tarantino has spoken of, so I’d suspect the Tarantino film would be more likely for a story like that.
Honestly my guess is Paramount has spent two years asking itself “ok how do we make Trek profitable again” and came up with the conclusion that the Kelvin timeline needs to end, but Trek must continue. So they rewrite this Hemsworth script to be the swan song for the now decade-old [and incomplete] KT crew, and get Tarantino to make them a really epic new take on the franchise that sets us up for future films. That’s why it’s taken them this long to even talk about these projects.
You may be right. Although I think they will just reboot TOS like what’s been done with the Spiderman franchise. So we’ll get a new crew and ship and a whole bunch of new complaints from diehard jihadist Star Trek fans.
Time Travel =)
Cool news. I’m up for another Kelvinverse film AND a Tarantino Trek.
why can they not give us the prime universe the real startrek and union fly the fan base. stop given us these different universes and give us the real startrek the prime universe after tng.
Movie viewers don’t care about stuff like that.
My guess is most viewers care about one thing: a good story. But the fans care about a little bit more. The studio should be able to please both by making a good story set post-TNG that resonates with fans and non-fans alike with gripping storytelling. I really don’t think the KT films have had one good story that truly holds up. Just write something good, and it won’t matter what era it’s set in
For me a post TNG movie would be a turn off for me. The kind of movie that I would wait to see on Netflix.
Which reminds me, Chris Pine better have a secret cameo in INFINITY WAR just so we can stop waiting for ALL FOUR CHRISes to appear in a single motion picture. Maybe Pine will be the voice of Howard the Duck or something like that. WOWBOBWOW
I think it’s great that a women could direct the next ST film. That said, is she the best option male or female? She doesn’t seem to have much of a cinematic resume
So far, the only directors with extensive resumes going into their respective first Trek films have been Robert Wise and Justin Lin. As film directors Meyer had one film under his belt, Nimoy had zero, Shatner had zero, David Carson had zero, Jonathan Frakes had zero, Stuart Baird had two, had one.
You really have to give credit to Harve Bennet and Nicholas Meyer who were both new to Star Trek but did their homework and delivered for the studio and fans. Robert Wise didn’t seem to get it and Carson really didn’t seem to care.
Yeah, Carson, Shatner and Baird never directed a movie again. Frakes was persona non grata after the dismal Insurrection and Nemesis.
Nick Meyer didn’t direct another movie after TUC. For what that’s worth.
The film just prior to Undiscovered Country, Company Business, didn’t help either.
ML31,
Re: direct Trek after TUC
Neither did Nimoy. I’m not sure what the point of this exercise is supposed to be?
Neither am I, really. I was just adding his name to James’ list. It seemed to qualify.
Well, Nimoy did direct a few films after his last Trek film, and he did direct after TUC. The last film he directed was Holy Matrimony, in 1994.
Frakes has had a pretty successful career since. It’s mostly been on television, but he’s directed films since, such as Thunderbirds and Clockstoppers.
I think Tarantino’s film will be in a Mirror Universe. Makes sense with his style. I did say “A” Mirror, it could be either mirror the Prime or the Kelven timeline.
Why doesn’t JJ just direct the thing? He isn’t doing anything that we know of.
I think he’s working on some Star Wars thing.
Episode IX or something like that.
Do people still even watch Star Wars? I haven’t seen one of those in months.
Hee, hee. In months. You nailed it.
In ‘Star Trek’ 2009, The visual of the Kelvin colliding with the Nerada obscured from the viewer what I think REALLY happened: Commander George Kirk was transported off the Kelvin’s bridge milliseconds before it exploded. Then, while he was being interrogated by the Nerada’s first officer, Klingon’s boarded the mining ship and took everyone prisoner- including a badly injured George Samuel Kirk. Where he ended up from there is anyone’s guess. I suspect we will find out in due time. It’s the only way I can think of that explains George Kirk showing up. Someone had to beam him off the Kelvin’s bridge in the last second.
Or more easily he just got swept away by the time rift into a more primitive era & spent a long time trying to return. Another even easier way is have the time fracture reopen again & spit George Kirk back out!
Maybe he was transported to Asgard
Where the real money is.
How would he survive within that environment? That’s one thing they could not easily explain.
Thank you everyone. I’m an OG fan and when I read the report my assumption was that many “open-minded” Trek fans were going to lose their minds.
My confidence in fandom has been restored. Thank you.
So she’s getting the Director job because she is a woman and not the best person for the job. Don’t yell at me, it basicall says it right there in the article. Sounds just a little sexist. You gotta love liberals. You think they would just give her the job and say she’s a great or the best director available becasue she and anyone should get the job based on their ability and not their sex, but of course not. I’m sure she would have rather thought she got the job for her record instead of her sex. Of course if she’s a good director, which her work apparently shows (although no sci fi) then that’s all that matters.
No science fiction?
Life on Mars (UK) (directing more episodes than anyone else), Heroes, and Jessica Jones don’t count?
I guess that doesn’t count because, you know , liberals and all that. Or something.
You clearly didn’t even understand or even try to understand the point I was making further proving my point about tolerant people like you.
First of all I am not complaining about her record of directing as it was just an observation, and the shows you mentioned are more super hero stuff than sci fi like Terminator, Star Trek, Star Wars,Back to the Future, Invasion of the Body Snatchers etc. Where it’s more realistic (somewhat) than Super Hero stuff and Heroes (good for first couple of seasons) was basically super heroes. Trek characters aren’t super heroes. I haven’t watched Life on mars.
Well, I’m not sure what the point is then, because she’s directed realistic crime shows, superhero shows, and stuff in between, like “Life on Mars,” which is a critically acclaimed British police procedural in which a cop is thrown back in time to the early 70s, around the time of his childhood and has a culture clash when he goes to work for the police department that uses rough and tumble methods instead of forensics. It was so acclaimed that it spawned an American remake, the first pilot of which starred Colm Meaney. She also directed regular dramas like EastEnders. Her resume is long and has a wide variety of tones and genres.
Anyone have favorite examples of her work? I’d like to take a look. I’d rather not watch everything she’s ever done. Don’t have time for that.
Tentatively excited
Her DEXTER ep, “hello dexter morgan” is near the end of the John Lithgow season and it is awesome! There’s some great camera stuff at the beginning of her VINYL episode too, as I recall, where you do 360 pans that go from an empty room to a church full of parishioners. Stuff that you expect to only see in a movie, not TV (if that silences folks saying they should have hired an established feature director.)
She directed 6 out of 16 episodes of the original British version of Life on Mars. That would be the only thing I’ve seen, and I loved it, but she’s also directed hit shows like EastEnders, House, Ugly Betty, Heroes, Whitechapel, Dexter, and Jessica Jones.
@eric original Life on Mars is one of my favorite shows of all time! Very very cool. Thanks
She has an extensive resume in television. She’s not some newbie who has never been behind the camera.
The Kelvin films should stay dead, and also please kill Discovery as well. The franchise at this point needs to be overhauled cause it’s been one bad decision after another for the past decade. Star Trek Online and The Orville are better Star Trek than the Kelvin films and Discovery. Just have a show or film in the Prime timeline post-Nemesis for f*** sake!
Also while I’m at it, whatever happened to just hiring whomever is best for the job instead of trying to check off a box in a diversity checklist?
HA HA What a Story Mark.
While The Orville is certainly good fun to watch, it still feels and looks cheap. For me, it’s some sort of serialized “Galaxy Quest” film.
No match for Discovery. For me, it is good they go more the Battlestar Galactica / Babylon 5 way instead of the nth iteration of TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT
I don’t have a problem with STD going the B5 or BSG way. The real problem is it just wasn’t nearly as good as either of those.
Well maybe the Tarantino movie will surprise you if that really gets the green light. It sounds like it will be different to everything we seen before. I’m hoping its NOT another reboot and something original. I don’t really care what universe its in but I do hope its post-Nemesis as well (but not holding my breath).
Those are very good news, I’m really looking forward to the Hemsworth time travel.
Tarantino movie: The mirror could be the perfect background for this ;D But how could this come together with the plot of “Yesterdays Enterprise”? OK, separate timeline must not be equal to alternative timeline ;)
Dan Mindel to DP please.
My vote would be for Dante Spinotti. I guess they approached him for NEMESIS but it didn’t happen (would have been a waste of his talents anyway.) He is open to doing genre stuff, I just talked to him about ANT-MAN & THE WASP. I’d love to see L.A. CONFIDENTIAL-style color saturation in a TREK movie, though he admittedly doesn’t repeat himself and takes most of his inspiration from what he sees through the lens.
There’s a female DP who doesn’t work anywhere near as much as she should, name of Amy Vincent. She shot one of the clearest-looking movies I’ve ever seen in a theater, a Sam Jackson flick called THE CAVEMAN’S VALENTINE, about 20 years back, and came up with some innovative stuff for flashback treatments (using film with an ASA rating of just SIX, for those of you who know tech stuff) and isn’t all about messing up the image like a lot of cinematographers are these days.
Probably the hottest female cinematographer out there right now is Rachel Morrison whose stock rose significantly first with her Oscar nom for Mudbound and then with Black Panther. SHe would be a major ‘get’ for a Star Trek movie.
My reply to that would be to get Reed Morano; she is a great DP who has branched into directing with HANDMAID’S TALE, but she still shoots stuff too.
I would like Hoyte Van Hoytema or Roger Deakins, but Dan Mindel is good too.
Now I know many people here would jump at my comments and give me all sorts of crap for saying this but here it goes anyway: Now I believe SJ Clarkson is a good choice and can make an excellent Trek film, but if they wanted a woman to helm a Star Trek picture, they should have at least considered Roxann Dawson too. She is also a TV director, but she has lots of Trek directing background and almost all the episodes she makes are top class. I am not trying to take anything away from Mrs Clarkson here, just saying that Mrs Dawson should at least have been considered. In either case, it is good that Trek is getting some much needed momentum in the movie side of things.
I don’t think anyone will jump on you for that and I agree Dawson has turned into a great TV director. Its crazy the number of shows she has directed. I think however its clear the Kelvin films seem to go out of their way to get directors NOT with a close connection to Trek. Maybe its not done on purpose but that does seem to be the case. And it is interesting they are going with someone with a strictly TV background, but of course Trek has had lots of TV directors or at least ones where TV was their start.
I would love Dawson to direct an episode of Discovery though.
Maybe they did consider Roxann Dawson at some point but opted to go for SJ Clarkson instead.
I don’t think people who keep cheering this next time travel Trek movie as taking place in the “Kelvin Universe” are thinking this through.
If Spock and Kirk step into a transwarp transporter which has its transport beam bent by a black hole and they end up meeting a not yet dead George Kirk then no matter what time travel theory you subscribe to, the events of their adventure with George can’t transpire in the Kelvin Universe.
This film’s time travel will mark the end of the Kelvin alternate reality adventures.
Why are they so keen to bring back Hemsworth? Why are they going out of their way to accommodate him?
They need him for the story. That’s pretty much it.
Also he is much more popular now since his Trek 2009 days because of his Marvel Universe roles.
His character is in some ways omnipresent in the KT films, and his one and only scene in the entire franchise was some of the most gripping minutes of cinema I’ve ever seen, and was like the perfect kickoff to the new films. So add to the fact he’s Thor and you’ve got yourself what promises to be a bona fide blockbuster, I would hope.
Yeah the loss of George Kirk has shaped not only the timeline but James’s entire story, even in Beyond his upcoming birthday making him older than his father ever lived to be is why he doubts his continuing in Starfleet.
this will suck.
First… Ugh. ANOTHER time travel story. Good lord… Enough already!
Next… “Separate timeline”. I hope that means a new story with new characters in the TOS timeline. Sorta like Rogue One. The Trek World is big. Not all stories need to revolve around Kirk or Spock or Picard.
We don’t really know that. It could be like TNG’s “Parallels” where Kirk is jumping from one universe to another and in one of them George Kirk is still alive.
Correct. We don’t know anything. I was merely hoping….
Wouldn’t it blow people’s minds if DeLance showed up and decided to give Kirk a chance to see what his dear old dad was like. Kirk has the option to save him from his fate therefore changing everything about Kirk’s life or realize that what was meant to be was meant to be and that it’s up to him to carry on the Kirk legacy by how he lives going forward, not looking back. Essentially the Picard/Q episode of TNG
PEB,
Ambassador Spock already told KT Kirk that George lived in the original Prime timeline. Why would KT Kirk believe nonsense from Q that George’s death was “meant to be” when he already knows it wasn’t?
I will say this, IF done right, the story has the potential to be an incredible story about fathers and sons and how we learn to move forward despite tragedy and loss. Or it’ll just be an action romp. Hope she can Patty Jenkins it and find a happy medium.
True.
Do we know it’s a time travel film or is this just a rumour based on nothing, but oft-repeated, especially because a time travel film seems… complicated and less than compelling?
Why can’t George Kirk pop out of a wormhole and travel across legions of space in search of his son? Perhaps only aged 10 years not 30?
Could easily be parallel stories about a moment when George Kirk was serving on the Kelvin to run alongside a story about Kirk. There was that Meryl Streep Julia Childs movie that did something similar. They followed a character in the present and kept going back to the past to Julia’s story. It can definitely work but we’ll have to wait and see.
I don’t see why the rest of the cast wouldn’t return. I know Pegg and Urban are more than keen to. That just leaves Cho & Saldana.
Pegg probably yes. Cho also seemed quite positive to me. I’ve heard that Urban almost didn’t return for Beyond until they agreed to give him more/better stuff to do. Saldana seems to be the biggest question mark just because of her involvement in the Marvel movies and multiple Avatar sequels.
Yeah but Urban’s been one of the people actually talking about Trek so I think he’d be coming back, and I pray they get Zoe because she really is great and very important to the KT cast, I think.
I don’t know if this got said already or not, but isn’t Tanentino’s idea in the same vein as Yesterday’s Enterprise? And if so, if they use the whole premise and George Kirk and the rest of the Kelvin come through a worm hole, isn’t that kinda how this will probably play out?
Nobody knows what Tarantino’s idea is (except for some studio executives and the writer supposedly working on turning it into a script). People just assume that his idea might be something like Yesterday’s Enterprise because Tarantino has apparently mentioned that episode as one of his favorites.
So they’re picking gender > talent rather than (as it should be) talent > gender. What a sad world we live in. Pick the best person for the job, regardless of whether they’re male, female, gay, straight, green or blue. DON’T start out saying “I want a female director, cause PR.”
Why do you assume she isn’t talented?
I never even suggested she wasn’t talented. Please don’t put words in my mouth. I’m questioning why they’re limiting their options by 50% and selecting on gender first, talent second. The best person should get the job. If that’s a straight white male, great. If that’s a gay blue female, also great. Paramount want good PR though, and it’s the world we live in, I just think it’s a shame.
There is no evidence that they hired her based on gender first.
Did you read the article? “Paramount is deep in the hunt for a female director, a mandate that comes from the top, including producer J.J. Abrams.”
The unfortunate truth is that without orders from on-high such as this, the odds are simply against a woman being chosen to direct. Unless you believe that there were no equally talented women director’s available for the previous 14 Trek films, which seems highly unlikely. Just because you don’t know who they are, doesn’t mean they aren’t out there, waiting for an opportunity to showcase their talent. It’s only very recently that the tide has begun to turn even a little; how many women have directed big-budget, tent-pole movies in the last 10 years?
It’s a shame really, because now women have to overcome another obstacle: the feeling that somehow they really weren’t a worthy choice, but just a ‘token.’ It’s a messed up situation.
Exactly. You nailed it.
This entire silly argument always comes up and its truly sad how its viewed. When a white guy or a man is awarded something, no one questions if it was his race or gender that got it for him, even when they are selected again and again, like all the Star Wars films.
But if its a POC or a woman…of course they only got it for being a POC or a woman. It is a messed up situation and shows how far we still have to go.
Where did you remotely get the idea they chose her for being a woman first? No one ever said or suggested it, all they said she is the first woman director.
“Paramount is deep in the hunt for a female director, a mandate that comes from the top, including producer J.J. Abrams.”
Women can do anything men can. No one is limiting their options by looking for a female director. A woman can be the best person for the job just as a man can. It is you who makes the assumption that because something isn’t being offered to a man, it’s “limited” in some way. That’s simply untrue.
“No one is limiting their options by looking for a female director.” Oh ok…then let’s never hire a females for anything because, ya know..no one would be limiting their options doing so. I’m sorry. That’s nonsense.
Sorry it’s too difficult for your bigoted mind to understand. It isn’t “limiting” to choose a female over a male. I’m not really sure why this is so hard to get. By deliberately looking for a woman to direct, you’re limiting the pool of talent, sure. But you aren’t limiting the breadth of that talent, or the capabilities of that talent. Again, women can achieve anything men can. And that means a woman can be as good a choice as a man. In fact, she can be the *best* choice.
Picking non-straight-white-males for jobs is not mutually exclusive to the concept of picking the best for the job. Her resume is roughly equivalent to David Carson’s before he directed Generations. And given that she specializes in single-camera work in a television landscape that’s increasingly cinematic, her resume could rightly be compared to Robert Wise and Justin Lin, both of whom were previously by far the most experienced directors going into their first Trek films. Lin, Clarkson, and Wise also demonstrate a dizzying range in their resumes, from dramas, comedies, science fiction, and crime shows.
She’s more than qualified for the job.
I agree with you 100 percent.
Clarkson is well-regarded in British TV drama circles, as she directed entire miniseries Collateral, which was a prestige project for BBC 2, written by Sir David Hare. After having to watch Jim Kirk slide down a flipping saucer and jump to safety like a claymation figure, I welcome a proper drama director to Star Trek. Though it may not matter much, depending on the daftness of their proposed time-travel-to-meet-your-pa-Thor script.
Is this confirmed as a time travel story or is it possible that it is simply a story about the parallel universe where Kirk’s father (Hemsworth) is still alive? If the reported merging of Viacom and CBS does take place, then I can see Star Trek 4 really becoming Star Trek 14 and the Kelvin Universe (and the new cast) rejoining the Prime Universe along with CBS’ Star Trek Discovery. Time travel or parallel universes – either way it should be fun.
News from the World of Solipsism. I know I’ve been rather self-indulgent lately, but the word “Clarkson” actually seems to comport exactly with a favorite of mine that only those who know me (primarily, but not exclusively, yours truly) would understand. In any event…. That Paramount and/or CBS are considering Ms Clarkson no longer should surprise anyone. Star Trek is a very international phenom. There is no comparison between Trek and any other cinematic SF enterprise, primarily because Trek is explicitly intellectual in scope. Nothing else compares.
Ms Clarkson is well-known as an international personage who is associated, I believe, with films that do not feature (thankfully) clashes of gigantic robots or superheroes… the latter of which has “avenged” the more staid past of cinema.
Trek is a mix of action and intellect.
I am optimistic, and I wish Ms Clarkson very well. I am also very excited for the future of Trek.
Ridley Scott says a director should do a medium-budget feature before being assigned a $180m+ production, to which Sverker responds “Taika Waititi” to which Petra responds “Marvel is the exception.” Dunno, maybe Jessica Jones is good enough experience for Star Wreck and they can hire Yuen Woo-ping to do the martial arts sequences for Kirk & Jaylah. I was watching the Jones pilot and it’s more stylish than the likes of Daredevil or The Power Man.
@MG — not sure what you’re getting at? BEYOND was only supposed to be $150mm, and exploded to $185mm under Bad Robot. That’s why it didn’t make money at the BO, and why Paramount is likely to want to get away from Bad Robot Trek. The next film’s budget will likely be less than $150mm.
Well if Marvel is the exception,
She has worked for them in the past.
I don’t see a problem here