Paramount Is Looking At Noah Hawley To Write & Direct Next Star Trek Film

For the better part of a year, after it was clear the script written by J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay was “shelved” indefinitely, there had been no indications that a fourth Kelvin movie would be made. However, Deadline Hollywood this afternoon just dropped a surprise; they have it on good authority that Paramount is actively courting Noah Hawley to write and direct the next Trek movie. Deadline assumes that this film will be with the Kelvin cast for their fourth movie together.

Hawley is no stranger to genre work, having created Legion for FX and Marvel. He is best known for his work as executive producer, writer, director, and showrunner on FX’s Emmy-winning series, Fargo.

The film would be made under Hawley’s 26 Keys production company, along with producer J.J. Abrams’ Bad Robot.

Tarantino Trek still on the table

Deadline notes that the Tarantino project is also still alive and is a separate project, not directly impacted by this fourth movie news.


Keep up with all the news on Star Trek 4 and upcoming Trek films at TrekMovie.com.

218
Leave a Reply

53 Comment threads
165 Thread replies
3 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
83 Comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify me of
DonDonP1

Fascinating. The question which timeline and era?

It’s assumed to be a fourth Kelvin movie.

DonDonP1

Hello, Matt. Oh, right. Thanks.

Brian

His Lucy In The Sky movie was a HUGE flop…

A34

It would have been a hit if Lucy was fighting aliens.

khambattafan

Noah Hawley wrote, directed, and produced LUCY IN THE SKY (2019). It has a critics score of 21% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Though, the little I’ve seen of Fargo, Hawley certainly has more functioning brain cells than the likes of Alex Kurtzman.

Pick Hard

Your criticism of Kurtzman is nonsensical.

The Collector

Your defense of Kurtzman, a man of extremely limited talent with no ability of storytelling and has somehow been given the keys to crash the Rolls Royce that is Star Trek, is nonsensical.

kmart

Advantage: The Collector.

Based on the two seasons of FARGO I own and the single season of LEGION I got to watch, this is really good news. Hawley is also a novelist, like Meyer was, and is supposed to produce a version of Vennegurt’s CAT’S CRADLE too. Wouldn’t be surprised if he goes full-on weird with this one, though have to admit that I was looking forward to what Clarkson would do (and still hold up hope for the QT thing.)

I'm Dead Jim

Kurt Vonnegut.

phik

to be fair, star trek has never been a rolls royce.
more like Saab, the quirky, green (for its time) efficient, fun to drive car driven by intellectuals without big egos (egos drove BMWs).
it was taken over by a corporate behemoth called CBS, i mean GM, who turned it into badge engineerering experiment minus all its quirks and free and innovative storytelling, i mean, engineering.
After some time in GM’s hands it lost all originality and eventually died on the vine. GM cut it loose and it went bankrupt shortly after.
on a separate note, the cockpit inspired driving positions, small displacement turbo engines, and fuel efficiency that saab championed are now all over the auto market. much like the golden age-star trek esq plots now all over TV.

on a similar note, star wars is a ford mustang, extremely successful, very fun, though not technically sophisticated. it’s known all over the world as an American symbol and is generally well liked, though thought to be a bit juvenile.
it’s also currently being reborn by Disney as a whole new series of films, i mean, as an electric SUV, something that is making the purists howl with rage.

rolls royce would be something else completely.

dennycranium

^^^^^this^^^^^

Soren

Kurtzman is killing Star Trek, one badly structured, overloaded and emotionally unearned scene at a time.

A34

I don’t agree

Aus Trekker

It’s not just Klutzman unfortunately.

Michael Hall

Maybe not, but juvenile nicknames don’t help make your case. Just sayin’.

The folks at CBS disagree.

snoopytrek

.. agreed. Just hoping he didn’t have much influence on ST Picard

Tek

Interesting. Legion and Fargo are highly regarded.

ThePhaige

Really love Fargo and Legion season 1 was genius in many ways…might be cool :)

I only know Fargo, which is gold.
Sure, I’d go see it.

Back to the drawing board. Just because Hawley is being asked to the dance doesn’t mean he’ll go.

Athus

No more JJ Trek, they didnt usterstend that after the last failure?

A34

JJ brought Star Trek back from the grave.

Athus

Did it? It was Marvel Avangers, CBS realise that they have a franchise waiting there. JJ Trek movies, especialy the last one, failed..

So, to clarify: The movie with the least JJ did worst and that’s evidence that JJ is a bad influence?

(Personally, BEYOND was my favorite, I thought the reboot was solid fun, and INTO was a mess. A mixed bag!)

A34

Into Darkness was my favorite. That’s the movie that made me a Trek fan again.

dennycranium

That’s the one I was most excited about. How does one defeat a supposedly “better” human, with enhanced genetics. In TWOK, Kirk ultimately defeated Khan by “laughing at the superior intellect.” I was hoping for the same type of challenge for Kelvin Kirk. Khan was ultimately a thug for a rogue Starfleet Admiral. In my opinion, lazy writing, and a wasted opportunity for a stronger outing. I’m glad you enjoyed the film and it’s good to have debate with each other about the movies.

Tiger2

JJ, no JJ, Star Trek was always coming back regardless. If they didn’t hire him to do it, someone else would’ve did it. These arguments are nonsensical. The reality is Star Trek was never ‘dead’. You know how I know it wasn’t it wasn’t dead? Because they wouldn’t have made a $150 million film just a few years later in the first place if it was. They would’ve done something much smaller and probably not for another 5-10 years. Enterprise as a show failed and Nemesis bombed. But that doesn’t mean people didn’t want more Star Trek, they simply didn’t like those products (although that has changed a lot with Enterprise).

I mean Beyond bombed and they still made Discovery anyway. Even if Discovery got cancelled this season or next, do people think all the other shows they have planned would stop? You think they would pull the plug on Picard? Of course not. Now Abrams took it another direction (literally) but it doesn’t mean the franchise was on its last legs.

Even now, everyone thought maybe the Kelvin movies were finally dead after Beyond failed and Pine walked away and yet here we are again lol.

In fact I remember hearing once upon a time from certain trolls that we would NEVER see TNG or the 24th century again because Nemesis did so badly so no one would touch that era again with a ten foot pole…and we’re now mere months from seeing it again with the fanbase is more excited than ever about it. ;)

Star Trek is just too strong of an entity to ever truly die and everyone knows it.

A34

No one ever said Trek wouldn’t come back, but the first rebooted movie could have easily been a failure if the right person wasn’t at the helm. Thank god for JJ.

BTW…The Picard show takes place in the 25th Century and the only reason Beyond bomb was because it’s budget was too high. If they had shaved 30 minutes off the movie and lowered the budget it would have been a hit.

Tiger2

I usually wouldn’t waste my time with you, but you actually have something of substance to say for a change. And you know what I mean about Picard. And FYI, Lower Decks DO take place in the 24th century, one year after Nemesis in fact.

And yes the first reboot movie could’ve failed. You know what would’ve happened after that? They would’ve just waited a few years and try again. That’s my point, someone will always try to do Star Trek again. Even after Enterprise got cancelled, a bunch of people from Bryan Singer to J. Michael Straczynski still wanted to pitch another show. Both Netflix and Amazon offered to make their own which ironically gave CBS the idea to do with it Discovery and put it on AA.

There is ALWAYS someone who wants to do another Star Trek.There have been multiple movie pitches after Nemesis failed. They simply picked Abrams idea, but it wasn’t the only one either. It’s just a matter of if CBS was willing to let them do it. They let Paramount do it with new movies and finally decided to do their own TV show, for better or for worse.

odradek

Doesn’t Picard takes place in 2399? Nach Adam Riese that is two years before 25th Century, I guess.

Corinthian7

I think the long gap between instalments combined with godawful promotion might have played a big part in Beyond bombing.

Holden

“No one ever said Trek wouldn’t come back.”

Just before that, you literally wrote “JJ brought Star Trek back from the grave.”

Apparently things dead and buried “come back” all the time. lol.

Like Tiger2, I mostly ignore your trolling, but I just couldn’t ignore this hilarious bit of cognitive dissonance.

Michael Hall

Yeah, as a shambling mindless zombie. No, thanks.

Pick Hard

Non sequitur. BEYOND was the best of the three films. It didn’t fail–INTO DARKNESS failed to bring people back for another movie.

PEWDIEPICARD

HAHAHA…Pick Hard…hahah. Nice name.

Denny C

PIK HARD and PEWDIEPICARD. Respect to you both!

ML31

That is my thinking as well. There were a lot of things that led to the lower than hoped for box office. One of them was Beyond was the unlucky recipient of following a sub par movie that a lot of people did see and were disappointed with. But the overall quality of the film was not one of them.

TonyD

While Beyond was a much better movie than STID, it was poorly marketed and I don’t think it ever recovered after that godawful first teaser. The movie also still had too many ties to the earlier JJ Abrams movies like that nonsensical opening sequence or trying to shoehorn that atrocious Beastie Boys song into the proceedings and making the villain another disgruntled victim bent on revenge. The fact that you had a known actor like Idris Elba but then made him unrecognizable and borderline unintelligible for 9/10 of the movie probably didn’t help draw in mainstream viewers either.

If Hawley really manages to get this off the ground the best thing he could do would be to divest himself as much as possible from the Abrams tropes the prior films clung onto for no good reason.

ML31

I agree that the poor marketing was a contributor. But many of the things you mentioned were not known unless you SAW the movie. I’m not a fan of the song either but it was a nice call back to the first film. Yes, the villain was weak but so were the ones in STID. I’d argue even weaker. Yet it did better box office.

I’m sure Hawley will do what he deems best with the script and his directing, if this ever comes to pass. Don’t think he will care what JJ would have done.

Michael Hall

It’s a poorly structured, very derivative story with little to make a non-fan audience care much about what happens, though it does capture the spirit of the TOS characters far better than its two predecessors. And Starbase Yorktown was visually awesome, I’ll grant them that.

Jack

Yeah, Beyond was my least favourite of the Kelvin films — and I hated Into Darkness. Beyond is the Insurection of the Kelvin era.

albatrosity

^Someone had to say it!!!

ML31

I would say STID was the Insurrection of the Kelvin films.

Pick Hard

Insurrection is the best of the TNG movies.

Sam

Insurrection was the most Berman Trek of the TNG movies. I suspect that’s the reason a lot of fans insist it’s the weakest (though many of them wouldn’t realize that’s why).

ML31

It did play out like a TV episode, sure. However Picard playing judge, jury and executioner to Ru’ofo was something that would have NEVER happened on the show. But that was only part of why I felt it was the weakest. In this case, it really wasn’t just one thing. A lot about it felt off for some reason.

Pick Hard, I’m happy you like it. I’m sure you aren’t alone. I know what it is like to enjoy something many condemn. I think Nemesis was pretty darn good. But many, for reasons I still cannot agree with, hate it. Conversely I found The Voyage Home to be vomit inducing garbage. Yet many seem to think it was great. Go figure.

Sam

While it’s certainly notable that no one thought to save Ru’ofo, it’s not the kind of detail casual moviegoers would get hung up on. Nor is it within the scope of Movie Trek to figure out what to do with your bad guy once you’ve captured him (plus the rest of the picture would already have been shot when they re-filmed the ending).

It’s a very average Berman Trek/Prime Directive story, shot on expensive locations with very average cinematography and TV-quality production values (make-up, post-production), and almost nothing to offer audiences outside of fandom. If it were a 46min TNG episode it would belong in either seasons six or seven.

ML31

True that most movie goers expect the demise of the “bad guy”. My point was that TNG on TV would never just let the episode antagonist perish if they had the ability to “bring him to justice”. And in this case, they easily could have beamed him out right along with Picard.

If it were a TV episode, the hollo-ship would have been in a cave!

Sam

He already wasn’t in the rest of the movie. He would have disappeared from the epilogue once they beamed him.

And the holo ship would have looked better in a cave. None of the CG horizon shots with it and the lake looked convincing at all.

ML31

I beg to differ. He was all over the movie as the established antagonist. No need for an epilogue of more than a minute or so either. Could even be less.

I said it would be in a cave because TNG famously went to a lot of them. Frakes I think even joked that if it wasn’t for caves they wouldn’t ever leave the ship!

Sam

They re-shot the climax. Everything after that was already in the can. They could change how he died, but he never would have been seen again after the beam-out. And keeping him alive serves literally no story function. He’s not a complex enough villain to have earned any final words. He was going to die in that scene no matter what, because once defeated he had no more purpose.

I’d have been completely fine with the ship hiding in a cave, or even just completely out in the open (after all it was cloaked). They shouldn’t have exceeded what their TV industry FX houses were capable of.

kmart

Sam,
VIFX was hardly a TV house, though Santa Barbara was. VI did the holoship stuff, but if you check their credits, they were real comers at the time, with a great work history (some very solid stuff in the X-FILES movie around the same time, too.) I think the holoship look is more to blame on Berman and Lauritson, because VIFX was working to satisfy them. on FC, ILM was less than thrilled with how B&L kept asking for more iterations on stuff that was already fine, so I imagine that kind of micromanaging didn’t go down well at VIFX either. (for example, ILM originally didn’t have Earth almost totally stripped of clouds in FC, but Berman kept insisting that you be able to see specific land masses, so you get what looks like the view from above a desk globe that has been dabbed lightly with cotton.)

(I covered Treks VI through IX for Cinefex, so I got to talk with nearly everybody on the tech end for INS — that article is something like 15,000 words long. The non-digital stuff at the very end was amazing for how much being done so quickly. I also note here that the 7 to 10 mil spend on all that last-minute reshooting seemed to have dropped off the official budget about 4 days after the movie came out and was seen to be underperforming … the film was 58 mil BEFORE the reshoots, not the final cost, which is what I remember seeing touted right after release.)

Sam

Embarrassed by how much money they’d spent, were they?

I realize a lot of CG still didn’t look that great in the late ’90s. I mean Starship Troopers certainly hasn’t aged very well. But on the other hand the SW special editions had already come out. I just remember trying to convince myself that Insurrection at least looked as good as FC, but after a couple of screenings there was just no way.

kmart

I think Berman was trying to do by citing 58 mil was to make the film’s then-projected gross look okay relative to the budget. Essentially a Monday-morning QB solution, since the box office was less than expected and it wasn’t going to rebound second week, not for a Trek movie and certainly not that Trek movie.

I have a rather pronounced allergy to CG myself (still do — am amazed how bad a lot of stuff looks even now, given the tech advances and talent pool — I think it is due to artists being trained with something other than a photographic mindset, plus having weird aesthetics inflicted on final product, like DSC’s annoying and to me disgusting blue-foggy spaceship shots), but I am actually still good with TROOPERS, which to me is a great example of how you mix practical effects with digital. There are only a couple of ship shots in that — right at the end, I think — that don’t work for me, and most of the critter stuff is okay to great, probably because the physical effects really sell the big moments. TROOPERS was a big miniatures show, which is why the ship stuff is excellent.

Late 90s is when there was a proper mix of traditional and digital work — you had EVENT HORIZON, SPACE COWBOYS and DEEP IMPACT all delivering really good to excellent stuff for the most part (EH has some bad zero-gee CG elements in one shot.) FC’s digital ship work in the big battle meshes very well with the miniatures, too. I think ILM’s lighting of the miniatures is what made them look so good in GEN and FC, though supervisor John Knoll’s preference for rim light got a lot more play in GEN. I saw the E-E model in person, and while I have issues with the design (mainly that the hull plating makes it look like the K’tinga AMT model kit), that was one helluva miniature, one that should have seen a lot more action than it did.

ML31

Sam, I’m aware of the change in the ending. Personally, I think the original demise of Ru’ofo worked better than having Picard act out of character and leave him to die a firey death. And quite frankly if Mr. Abraham was unavailable for an extra day of shooting it would be fine as there really wasn’t any need to actually see him anymore. It’s enough for Picard or someone to say he’s in the brig and will be taken to Starbase X. Or they could even say he was going be turned over to the Baku. Doesn’t really matter. The point is Picard did not personally sentence someone to death. Hell even Riker could be deemed as complicit. He would have known Ru’Ofu was there. He could have beamed straight to the brig himself. I doubt his Captain would have disapproved.

Sam

I cannot agree at all.

Going out of the way to explicitly demonstrate, for the 517th time (Right? How many eps had the Berman Trek machine churned out by this movie?), that these are cosmic Boy Scout do-gooders who never kill anybody is NOT a priority. It is not a priority to be adding scenes, or even single lines of dialogue, that in no way service the story at hand. Let alone use an already-rejected version of a film’s ending because fans might find it morally more agreeable. Ru’ofo dies because he’s a single-note villain who unwittingly kills himself through his own actions. And in no other movie franchise would fans have a problem with a hero not being obligated to intervene.

ML31

Regardless of the standard action movie trope, it has been established that Picard, and the Federation in general, will save people even if they personally feel they deserve to die if it is possible to do so. In this case, it was VERY possible and just as easy to beam them both as it was to beam out one. It absolutely DOES serve the movie as it fits the characters. The only way it would not have been possible is if they stuck to the original demise. It was changed to a death that could have easily been avoided and should have had the characters acted like they have been acting like since 1987. If they wanted to avoid that, they ought to have thought it through a little more and come up with a way for Ru’Ofu to perish in such a way that it would have been unfeasible for Picard or the Enterprise to save him.

Dlope67

re Pick Hard… totally agree, don’t know why more people don’t recognize that Into Darkness tanked the Kelvin timeline. While I’m not a big fan of JJ Abrams stuff anymore (too much sloppy storytelling), 3 was the most solid trek of the bunch. I was kinda hoping we shut the door on the Kelvin Universe.

Jonboc

Into Darkness didn’t become the highest grossing Trek…worldwide…due to bad word-of-mouth. So, as far as Beyond not performing as well…you guys need to go back to the well and try again!

A34

Beyond tried to be a Star Trek episode and that’s a turn off to casual moviegoers.

Jack

It was also visually muddy. It felt small and inconsequential. Plus, Elba’s role made no sense.

A34

That’s what pissed me off most about that movie. Why hire a cool actor like Idris Elba if you’re just going to cover his face up. I rather have seen a movie with him as Captain of the Franklin.

ML31

I think the bulk of ID’s box office was off the good will ST09 created. Much like much I believe the bad taste of ID helped contribute to the low box office of Beyond.

A34

Into Darkness made way more money than Beyond.

Pick Hard

…and it sucked.

albatrosity

The summer of 2016 was also stuffed with blockbusters and while Beyond had the weekend all to itself in terms of tentpole films, it was overshadowed by the next release the following week. Should’ve been released on 9/8…I hate Paramount

Corinthian7

Could be interesting. I enjoy the Kelvin movies and thought Beyond was an improvement but I do find myself wishing for a little more thoughtfulness and maturity. I’ve not seen a lot of Hawley’s work but what little I have makes me cautiously optimistic.

khambattafan

I tried to watch the pilot of Legion. I found it a rather cloying and unconvincing attempt to render Marvel edgy and hip, yet lacking any of the humor or charm of, say, a Ragnarok.

Tiger2

Should’ve kept watching! It only got better and better (and weirder and weirder lol). I haven’t watched season 3 yet but loved the first two.

Corylea

I adore TOS, but I’m lukewarm about the Kelvin universe. I love the original characters, but I don’t really care for the way they’ve been written in the reboot movies.

On the other hand, the reboot movies have gotten lots of new folks to watch TOS, so I’m glad those movies exist, even if I don’t especially enjoy them.

I did enjoy the third reboot movie, because Kirk felt more like the TOS character in that movie. Spock, on the other hand, seemed reduced to Spock schtick — Spock misunderstands an idiom, Spock explains something in too much detail, Spock is Terribly Vulcan. The wonderful character I fell in love with in 1969 was missing from that movie, but I don’t blame Mr. Quinto for that; I think it was the writing that was at fault, not the actor.

Since Mr. Hawley is supposed to write this one, I hope he has a clue!

tony

the spock I grew up with was not an action hero, running, jumping and kicking Sherlock’s ass.

Corylea

Yeah, I miss my restrained and logical Vulcan scientist!

albatrosity

Spock is the worst character in JJ Trek. Actually they’re all pretty awful

Tiger2

Have to admit, this news is really surprising! I thought if we did see another movie it would be the Tarantino one if a movie got made at all. And I’m still not convinced everyone is really on board with that one if they are still trying to find a new director and script for the next one. I mean, what’s the hold up, that one was written two years ago now. Then just try and get that one made first.

But either way this is great news. I don’t know whether to get excited or shrug since this is not exactly the first time we been given news like this. BUT it does say Paramount is definitely still willing to make one and maybe with the merger that will help things a lot more now that they are one big happy corporation again.

I hope it happens, but not holding my breath until we here there is an ACTUAL film date and everyone is back on board. And of course the biggest question does it mean Pine is back or that is still up in the air as before?

PEWDIEPICARD

I”m guessing they get rid of Hemsworth and give Pine the money. But TBH, I hope this is the last Kelvin movie. I’ve disliked everything JJ has done, Star Wars, Star Trek etc. But I guess there are people that like it so maybe it will go on. As long as they have alternatives like the Picard show then I’ll be ok. JJ Trek can exist in it’s own universe.

Tiger2

Honestly I would probably prefer something else as well but I don’t have a big problem with the films. And my guess is they are probably at the wrapping up stage if we do get another film. Look hard it is just to get these made now. And if another one flops then its probably done for good. But I don’t mind seeing more of them.

PEWDIEPICARD

They should make a mirror universe movie.

Tiger2

I wouldn’t have a big issue with that, but I think some may feel its too one note and got plenty of the MU between DS9, Enterprise and now Discovery. But I really love the MU stories and it was the only thing that kept me interested in Discovery first season. The Klingon war was a snoozer.

@PewDie….they’ve done none of that. All this is is ‘courting’. Meaning someone at Paramount had lunch with the guy and asked if he’d be interested in a second date.

sam

I don’t mind more kelvin movies with the existing cast, the problems are pine and quinto’s ever increasing pay demands.

A34

They should make a Section 31 movie.

PEWDIEPICARD

HAHAHAH…wait…areyou serious?

Tiger2

No, he’s trolling.

A34

Yes, an action movie like Mission Impossible set in the Trek universe would do very well I think.

Legate Damar

Maybe if the show is good, they can have the cast do a movie eventually. Otherwise, it would be kind of weird to have a Section 31 show and to also have an unrelated Section 31 movie.

A34

Into Darkness was kind of a Section 31 movie. I would love to see the USS Vengeance again.

Pick Hard

INTO DARKNESS ***is*** a Section 31 movie and it’s among the worst TREK films to date.

Michael Hall

I sure hope to one day read the Tarantino script, if nothing else.

DataMat

I think Paramount are stumped on ideas at this point.
By logical definition they wouldn’t be willing to risk making another Kelvin movie after Beyond did not make nearly enough money to make a fourth financially viable.

Of course a few years have now passed and as time goes on they may simply feel it’s the only route they can go because no one else has pitched a good enough idea for a new movie franchise. Ultimately they might decide to stick with the current Kelvin cast and take it in a different direction (they surely have to).

This feels like a somewhat similar situation to what happened after V: The Final Frontier. That movie was a big disappointment but they ended up making another movie (a lot quicker obviously…) which was ultimately well received and made more money. The difference here is that Paramount have not acted to get another movie into proper reproduction quickly and have let things fester for 3 years and counting so in this situation they have to probably so a ‘soft-soft’ reboot of the ‘reboot’ so to speak.
Personally if they actually have a really worthwhile and interesting story that someone has pitched then brilliant, it’s definitely worth a go.
But if nothing really different and interesting, it really is not worth the effort at this point.

Michael Hall

*Yawn*. Absent a wild card like Tarantino bringing something new and fresh to the table I have almost no interest in seeing another generic Kelvin ‘verse film.

JoeTrekFan

In a way, I’m glad the new Trek movie is back on track. The Hemsworth return seemed unlikely to happen given his success with the Marvel films. Before everyone starts condemning the film, let’s see what the story outline is and who will be the new guest star or stars. I’m suspecting the usual $150M or so budget. You can’t do these films on the cheap. The TV series currently on now boast some pretty cinema quality visuals. It would be cheat not to spend the money to achieve the expected production values. You’ve got to justify that $20 IMAX-lite ticket price. Although…what would be really cool is to have a version done in Doug Trumbull’s new HDR format. How cool would that be to experience?

I’m hoping for a decent SCI-FI story this time and no more rehashed TWOK references. We also need better supporting cast scenes. Also, more parts of the ship should be shown. We’ve seen basically nothing beyond crew quarters, corridors, bridge, sick bay and the engine room, which was not too creative re-dressing a beer factory. To take a page out of TMP…a recreation area. Holodecks anyone? They were originally part of TMP’s production but weren’t story worthy so we never saw them.

kmart

Holodecks in TMP? The rooms on the rec deck were supposed to have a space for zero gee swimming, but I’ve never heard of a pre-TNG holodeck outside of the TAS ep called PRACTICAL JOKIER (which was pretty funny as I recall.) They’d have had an impossible battle convincing Paramount that such a thing was possible at that time (look at how much trouble there was with the concept of a living machine, let alone a bald woman.)

Michael Hall

Roddenberry did have something akin to a holodeck in mind for the aborted PHASE II project, IRRC.

kmart

Hmm, have to check into that. I remember Mike Minor art of folks playing with big glowing beach balls in a rec room for p2, but I thought it was all practical.

Pick Hard

TMP was never going to have a holodeck. The holodeck debuted in the animated series.

ML31

And they called it the Rec Room in that episode, too.

David Duncan

Sell Star Trek to Disney and be done with it. It’s inevitable. Resistance is…well, you know.

Just Another Salt Vampire

Once CBS and Paramount merge back into one entity, entertainment analysts expect that it will be sold to a larger company. Amazon? Netflix? Apple? Probably not Disney as they just bought another major movie studio and library in Fox.

Thorny

Apple. It makes a huge amount of sense.

albatrosity

God no, I don’t trust Disney with any franchise. Have you seen the direction ahead for Marvel? Yawnnnn

ML31

My theory is that is not so much Disney’s fault. From my point of view Marvel has shot their wad at this point, looking at what they have coming the next couple of years.

JJ’s Kelvin universe and timeline? Pass.

Michael K

I’m a Star Trek fan and I have very little interest in revisiting the Kelvin series. They probably should start from scratch, but maybe base it in the TNG universe.

Tiger2

I think Picard will be the priority for the TNG era for at least three seasons. I would like to see something post-Picard but with all the plans Kurtzman has on the TV side now, that’s not a huge deal anymore.

I’m not too concerned about the time period but I would love to see something new in terms of characters like the TV shows do (well most of the time ;)).

Or maybe they can do Pike movies since that would at least draw interest in the fanbase if a show doesn’t happen.

ML31

Well I’m a Trek fan who DOES have an interest in revisiting the Kelvin U. Maybe I’m just old and biased but I’ve always preferred the TOS era to the TNG era. Even though there has been some REALLY good Trek from that time. I feel like the TOS era is just the safer place to go, too. I have a hard time thinking that 20 years from now there will be a TNG reboot. But I can totally see another TOS reboot. I know TNG has its fans and there are a lot of people who grew up with TNG these days. But it still seems like Kirk and Spock resonate with non fans much better than Picard and Data. And it’s fine if you younger readers think I’m wrong here. I sorta expect that from younger fans.

Michael K

I’m a TNG fan just entering my 40s, I was born well after TOS so that Star Trek never appealed to me and always seemed unrelatable, and it still does to this day. A huge generation of fans grew up on TNG and the fandom is far larger than TOS at this point. It’s always perplexed me why this fandom has been so under-served, it’s also why the Picard show has so much excitement around it now. I’m definitely TOSed out, the novelty has been exhausted for me. I’ve always felt I’ve had to pay attention out of obligation to the franchise, but it’s still not the Star Trek I care about.

ML31

My theory… As I suggested above… It’s very possible that among the casual audience out there with now allegiance to any era of Trek just recognizes Kirk & Spock more than Picard & Data. When you mention Star Trek to non fans most probably think of Spock and Captain Kirk to this day. This even though there are still a lot of TNG fans who grew up with Picard.

Tiger2

I don’t doubt that ML31, but anytime someone brings this up, my feelings is always so what?

What I mean is I just DON’T understand this thinking, at least when it comes to the movies and that they seem to think people will only care about them if they recognize the characters. I will give the TV shows credit, they HAVE opened up Star Trek in a huge way beyond just the Enterprise and Kirk and we now have a fuller universe for it, from TNG to Discovery and everything in between regardless how people may feel about one particular show or another. The Trek universe is richer for it.

I don’t get it why on the TV side is willing to try out new things and characters that seems to prove that they can make new characters and crews successful but the movie side seems to think you CAN’T present anything new?? It’s bizarre to me.

This lame cop out that you should only market the movies to characters most people at least heard of makes no sense today. If that mentality carried over to other franchises the MCU wouldn’t even exist now. Because 90% of those characters NO ONE knew or even heard of until Kevin Feige decided to put them in a movie. Guardians of the Galaxy was one of the most obscure characters in Marvel comics from 50 years ago and today you now have kids in India buying Baby Groot dolls. But the funny thing is, UNLESS you watch MCU (and admittedly a lot of people do lol) you STILL don’t know who most of those people are even NOW! Most people not fans of movies can tell you who Spider-man, Hulk and Captain America are. Those same people are still just as lost who Peter Quill, Captain Marvel, Ant Man and the others are today because most of them are still C and D list characters. Iron Man was a B list character when his first movie came out.

But SO WHAT? MCU proves you don’t HAVE to just get the most known characters to be a success, you simply make the brand itself important enough, period.

That’s why its so mind boggling to me when it comes to doing Trek movies because its been proven DECADES ago fans don’t care about Kirk, Data, Sisko, Spock or Picard, they care about STAR TREK! Fans will watch ANYTHING that is related to Star Trek just like MCU fans will watch anything related to Marvel. Who CARES if some non fan only know five character names or know who William Shatner is, they aren’t going to watch it anyway so what difference does it make?

The point is you have a big enough universe and fandom to EXPAND that universe and, again, the TV side has always done and it has WORKED. I don’t care non fans never heard of Major Kira or Odo just like I don’t care non Marvel fans never heard of Sif or Gamora, but you better believe everyone in the fanbase knows because for actual fans they are devoted to this stuff and want to see the universe expands, not just rest on nostalgia for another 30 years. Its ironically why MCU is so popular now, because they don’t just rely on what the audience knows but what they DON’T know and that excites fans, both new and old!

It’s time the movie side of Star Trek go the same way. The biggest irony is we don’t know how successful it will even be because no one has ever even TRIED it yet. Its NEVER going to be the MCU, but as long as its something the fanbase will get behind it will be successful enough because its about Star Trek as a brand and not who they remember on any one show.

ML31

I don’t entirely disagree here. But, and this is very important, it would seem that those in charge of dishing the money out have been very reluctant to do it for unknowns or even lesser knowns. You can site Marvel all you like but let’s face it… These are different animals here. By the time they ventured out to Guardians and some of the others they were already established and very popular. They did Guardians not even expecting it to do very well and buried it deep in the end of the summer movie season. And it exploded. (although I never liked it if I may editorialize for a bit) Early on Marvel’s only hiccup was their 2nd feature. The Hulk stand alone. After that they went right back with the popular and proven character for Iron Man 2 before moving on with their plan for the other two Avengers. At this point they were rolling and could afford to start taking more chances. If the KU films all worked, maybe they would start branching off to feature films with other, new characters or even minor characters from TOS or something. Who knows? But TV is really the place for this sort of thing it seems to me. It is less of a commitment and the consequences of failure are much lower. In short, it’s safer.

Tiger2

I definitely see your point Michael K and agree with most of it. For me, I’ve always seen both sides of it because I grew up watching TOS like a lot of these guys here and so its always been important to me on a personal level. HOWEVER even though TOS is what started my fandom since I watched it in the late 70s through the 80s, it really was TNG that made the franchise more relevant for me. Because I wasn’t just watching old reruns of a canceled show, but now new material by a new era of Trek I can see evolve and change which was VERY exciting for me. And on top of that, in reality most of my friends didn’t become Star Trek fans themselves until the TNG era started so that’s where fandom was for me even though I knew TOS backwards and forwards because TNG was more relevant for someone my age at the time being teenagers. For my friends back then TOS was the outdated old show to them so they couldn’t get into it like they did with TNG, DS9 and VOY.

Now of course, those shows are now old for new fans today since they all been off the air for decades just like TOS already was when TNG and the others started. But I think the difference is its still MUCH easier to relate to the TNG era of Trek because it still looks and feels way more modern when compared to TOS. They are still old shows for sure but they don’t feel as outdated. And because there is just so much more mythology and background in that era when you have nearly 500 episodes and 4 movies to work through vs the 80 episodes and 6 movies of the TOS era.

That’s the other thing and what I always point out, the TNG era just feel a lot more connected because not only was there so much more mythology but because the shows were shot around the same time so it felt much more like a shared universe. TOS really feels much more isolated because not only when it was filmed but because the story telling at the time was much more standalone in general. For newer fans today who is use to more serialized approach to story telling TOS feels even older to them and why I think DS9 is having the resurgence it is because its really the only show that built up a single story line and made the universe more lived in which most people under 40 are use to watching now (and one of the many reasons its my favorite show). And hence why Discovery is serialized now.

As for Discovery, ironically, now that that show was around I thought they could finally build up the TOS era and create a richer mythology like the TNG era did. I didn’t like it was a prequel but I thought that would be the one advantage, build up more canon to this era to make TOS feel more relevant for newer fans. But since the show bailed the era after only two seasons I guess we have to wait for another show to do that. It could be Section 31 (although I’m still not 100% positive that show will even take place in that era) and yes there is the idea of the Pike show everyone seems to want and probably would do that job the best being set on the Enterprise again.

But for me, the 24th century of story telling made me more invested because it was simply more of it and I got to see the characters and universe grow in a way TOS never could do given the nature of television back then. And why there is so much excitement for Picard. There is just SO MUCH to mine in that era, mostly from TNG and DS9! It was no way they were going to ignore it forever given ALL the characters, stories and concepts created after 21 seasons of it.

Michael K

I understand everybody relates to Star Trek differently. For me, TNG represented progress while TOS was just nostalgia from an era I couldn’t relate to at all. That’s what made TNG so successful ultimately, it rejected nostalgia for something completely new and reflected the era it was created in both in style and substance. TNG was a world I wanted to inhabit because it was so well thought out and designed with intelligent people who worked together to do their job very well. It was something that was inspiring to me in every way. Once you use TOS as a template, to me the meaning of Star Trek is reduced to comic book fantasy and not a reflection of our contemporary view of the future. I can watch it for the entertainment value, but it’s ultimately too absurd to be taken seriously and there is so much tension because of canon. Of course there is more to creating a good show, TNG also had great writing, consistent world building, producing, production design, etc. But what I want from a Star Trek movie something that moves forward in the same way TNG did. And maybe this isn’t something that can be done in a movie anyway.

Tiger2

I agree with pretty much everything you said. We have basically the same outlook on a lot of this. And its amazing how different people see these things. There are some posters here, one in particular, who see TOS as definitive Star Trek in every way and you see it completely the opposite. Just more proof that Star Trek fans are not a monolith.

For me, TNG is progress in both chronology but also philosophy. That’s why I liked it so much. It’s still not perfect, no Trek show is, certainly not TOS either but they all brought something to the table that fans admired. Roddenberry wasn’t perfect either but the best thing he did was prove that Star Trek wasn’t one note, that it can just be more about Kirk and Spock and stay just as iconic. Now that said I don’t want a TNG reboot anymore than I want a TOS reboot, I want something that TNG did and give us something new going forward. Why I was a bit disappointed with Discovery. To be fair it did give us something new, but went backwards at the same time which put off a lot of fans (but also made many others very happy).

But I think they realize most fans want to go forward again and why we are getting Picard and Discovery is now 900 years into the future. It doesn’t mean ALL Trek shows have to go forward, but yes at least one show to represent new ideas and progress and now we have several which is AWESOME for me! And while Picard isn’t just redoing TNG the show again either it is a return to that era and all the mythology that was built up in it that made me excited about Trek and I can’t wait!!

Michael K

I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one that sees TOS and TNG+ as fundamentally different shows with different audiences. I’m still looking for Star Trek that moves forward and is less infatuated with recreating its own history.

Tiger2

Agreed, agreed! Which is exactly why I’m excited about Discovery in season 3. This is what so many of us wanted since Voyager went off the air. It’s not COMPLETELY starting fresh since the characters are from a different era but its nice to see a true and fundamental change in the universe and not just sticking to the status quo. The last time we got such a big change was in fact TNG. Everything since then has either been an extension of that show or TOS prequels.

HomerTrek

I just hope they use this to bring the KT to a tidy conclusion. Then please, no more eyecandy movies. Keep Trek on TV where it can work best.

Based on “Fargo” and “Legion,” I’m down for this.

PaUl

Fascinating as Mr Spoke Prime would say! Newish director means they shave a few million off the budget & no Hemsworth means they give Chris Pine his $6m salary. I just hope its more like Beyond than Into Darkness story wise. That is doable as well more sci-fi less generic wall to wall action also saves a LOT of budget!

Gary 8.5

Kelvin Spock would also say fascinating , as a response to this news.

Scott Gammans

The Hollywood Reporter is confirming that Hawley is directing the next film.

Mike Thompson UK

13 years from the first movie must be in the motion picture time frame now

TG47

Variety had the story that Hawley is both writing and directing last evening, even if plot/concept is under wraps.

So this is very real.

Yeah, they reported eighteen months back that SJ Clarkson was directing the next film, too. Way to early to be all aroused over this….

TG47

Picking up on a point I made on an earlier thread about Nickelodeon being in negotiations with Netflix, this comes across as lousy corporate behaviour on Viacom’s side.

It’s really not what one expects to see in a merger, unless it’s a hostile takeover.

I’m surprised that the financial press isn’t on this as offside/poisoning behaviour by some of the Paramount and Nickelodeon senior management.

The merger isn’t quite operational yet, and it’s a merger sold to investors on the basis that it would bring Star Trek under one umbrella with a coherent strategy across all platforms, and more broadly coordinate strategy across content development and distribution/broadcast/streaming/publication arms.

But here we are, a couple of weeks ahead of the point where Paramount will have to work closely with the television Trek powers that be, and they are locking down a contract with a writer/director that will tie the hands for the movie franchise. Another major source content, Nickelodeon is working on deals for access to its library.

This is the kind of negotiations and news that could and should have waited until the merger was operational.

As a reader of the financial press, the signal given by this behaviour is:

1). CBS will not be the senior partner in the merger

2) Viacom senior executives do not have Paramount ready to accept CBS as a partner let alone lead in the global brand strategy for Star Trek.

3). Same for Nickelodeon not playing ball with the global strategy for CBSAA.

It seems odd that Shari Redmond has put confidence in the CEO of Viacom to be the head of the merged entity given that he can’t get Paramount or Nickelodeon management to follow the strategic commitments that have been to investors.

J.P.

Pine rightfully walked when Paramount attempted to low ball him on salary in not honoring his original contract for a fourth film. I’m assuming they’ll begin new salary negotiations since no one is currently under contract? It will be interesting to see if they can get everyone back again, especially since Paramount is probably not willing to offer what they have offered previously for the first three films. I would love to see Sofia Boutella as Jaylah back again. Perhaps she could take Chekhov’s spot?

Jemini

I don’t know who he is but better than Tarantino.

Michael Hall

He seems like a totally insane fit for Trek, yes. . . which is exactly why I’d love to see what he has in mind. :-)

Mel

Yeah! That’s really good news.

I just have two wishes for the new movie. 1. That Earth is not in danger of getting destroyed. 2. That there is no typical moustache twirling villain.

I have seen all seasons of Legion and he definitely went too far with its weirdness in it quite a lot of times. But at least he has shown that he can think outside the box. I hope he comes up with something new.

Baxter

Good news is, fundamentally, the Kelvin core cast does have good on-screen chemistry. Hopefully they’ll realize that and play to their strengths as a result.

Rich

Tonally … Fargo and Legion have this way out, surreal feel, which I am not sure will work in Trek. I really tried with Legion, but it was not my cup of tea and gave up half way through season one.
I hope Mr Hawley has a varied palette. All for something different, but do not want what he brought to his other two shows.
Have fun … but respect the franchise.

DeanH

Star Trek seems to be in a good place right now, with both the movie and TV producers soon to be under one roof. This gives them flexibility to do a KU cast movie, a Pike or Picard TV cast movie or perhaps a hybrid of both casts, although that one would be hard to pull off. No matter what, seeing a fourth movie would be great.

BringBackKirkPrime

Of course the Tarantino project is impacted by this news. They aren’t going to release two movies at the same time, and these movies could require the same casts for all we know. I’m more interested in the Tarantino project right now than yet another movie from Abrams.

DIGINON

As far as I know Abrams is involved in the Tarantino movie as well.

i'mpaul

You would think that they would want Abrams out of there by now. And you would think that they would be attaching this more closely with CBS-Trek (should the reunification happen,) since Kurtzman really has demonstrated a business savvy when it comes to building a brand. Great things take time and I feel like he’s on the right track.

Abrams hasn’t done Star Trek any favors since his first outing, which I don’t think is aging that well, and is not as good as we remember it. He seems to treat Star Trek like an afterthought and as though he has Paramount “in the bag” and doesn’t need to put in any effort. Honestly, I’ve really come to think he’s the most overrated filmmaker of our time. He’s done plenty of OK things and zero great things. His movies have pacing issues and all plod along painfully and I don’t think he demonstrates excellence in his taste. I mean, he seems pretty lovable as a person, but I’m really done with the guy.

albatrosity

JJ is a hack and I think we’re all aware of it by now. It’s incredible how public opinion has soured against him. Whatever Rise of Skywalker will be [I’m predicting a full on timeline reboot] I doubt it will restore his former glory. Also didn’t he sign a massive deal with Warner? He’s gonna be tied up for years with that.

ML31

Pretty sure there will be no time line reboot. I’ve also heard a number of spoilers, supposedly from preview audiences that do not bode well, however. And I was thinking that already to be honest. Once I found out Palpatine will be in it, not as a force ghost but actually in the flesh, I just shook my head. But, I still am holding out hope it might be good…

i'mpaul

@ML31
Agreed! I’m still looking forward to it, but as soon as I heard about Palpatine — I declared fanboy fangasm nonsense!

Of course, I thought The Last Jedi was one of the best Star Wars movies, because it had some actual formula-straying surprises in it. So, (shrug emoji)

ML31

You know what? When I sat and watched Last Jedi in the theater I was unsure how to process it. My initial reaction was “ugh”. But upon a 2nd viewing at home months later, I decided I liked it. Even though there were some amazingly goofy flaws, it was still better than TFA. By a mile.

albatrosity

Fascinating. I was the opposite: liked it on first viewing, and was really turned off by it on the second, and have no intention of revisiting it. But as a fan of RedLetterMedia on YouTube, I love their takedowns and they really point out every way TLJ is such a mess.

The time travel reset theory actually came from them, if you watch their predictions video for Rise of Skywalker there are plenty of hints that it’s coming – including that the Millennium Falcon has its original round dish back, and JJ himself say “f*ck it” and ready to go bonkers with it. We’ll see in a month!

ML31

What do they have to say about TFA? Because I had your Last Jedi reaction to it. Enjoyed it when I saw it in the theatre but upon a 2nd viewing I realized it really wasn’t good as was, in fact, pretty much A New Hope all over again. Which irritated me.

I’ve heard some pretty disturbing rumors/spoilers regarding Rise of Skywalker, btw. None of them involved a time reset at all. But I’m forced to admit I have some really really low expectations for this film. I’m expecting it to be bad and hoping I’m wrong. Even more so once I found out Palpatine is in it.

VZX

Interesting that Paramount replaced what would have been Star Trek’s first woman film director with a man whose first film flopped.

I speculate that Paramount is going to throw way too much money at this movie since they are still chasing Guardians of the Galaxy money. They really need to look at what they did correct with The Wrath of Khan almost 40 years ago: decrease the budget and focus on character & story.

A34

Wrath of Khan would bomb if it was released today. The movie is too slow and boring. No one is going to spend the time and money to go out and see a low budget Scifi movie when they can sit home and watch Netflix.

Michael Hall

Agree completely, though I suspect that with so much Trek on television (albeit behind a pay wall) that the market for Trek films may be depressed in any case. But the simple fact is that Trek will never be able to compete with STAR WARS or Marvel in terms of sheer spectacle, and it was foolish to try. The Bad Robot tentpole model was just a terrible idea, even if the films had been worth a damn.

albatrosity

I disagree, I think Trek can be done well as action blockbuster fare. It just needs a dang story, not the stringing together of set pieces like in the JJ verse.

DIGINON

It has been my impression that most action blockbusters just string together set piece after set piece.

ML31

Hmmmn… I like hearing this sort of thing but at this point, start rolling the cameras or I’m not going to believe it. Sorry.

jako

well. Ok… just dont believe it. Go with it. Changes nothing but go on…

ML31

And your comment does change things? Does any comment on these boards? Not sure what your point is beyond just being snarky.

Tiger2

You can’t really blame people for being skeptical about it. This was a movie that originally got green lit BEFORE Beyond came out. But yeah, after that movie bombed it changed everything. Clearly Paramount wants another movie, but this wil be the third announced film after the original one with Hemsworth and then Tarantino. We know what happened with Hemsworth and everyone says the Tarantino is still possible but its been nearly two years now. I mean what are they waiting for?

But yes hopefully this is more than just a headline and that they have a budget, concept and everyone one board. I don’t think everyone will fully believe it until its officially announced. And even then it probably won’t feel real until there is a starting date.

Personally I don’t care who directs it. Give it to Frakes if it doesn’t work out with this guy or anyone who can just make a solid film. I just like to see another one before Trek hits it 60th anniversary.

albatrosity

Agree, until they sign the actors and clear their schedules this is nothing more than a headline and comment board catnip

Excellent, the Kelvin Timeline lives. Gotta admit, the reboot brought back my gusto in doing Trek art. Just in time to round out the 10th anniversary.

albatrosity

Would love to see some of your art! If nothing else you gotta hand it to JJ for reinvigorating the brand

Old Trekker

I’ve given JJ the benefit of the doubt, and the benefit of the doubt, and the benefit of the doubt and the benefit of the doubt and the benefit of the doubt. I’m giving him one more benefit of the doubt next month. But I gotta say, he’s wearing thin on me now.

albatrosity

He’s not worth it

Forward Propulsion

1) how many times have we heard from scifi or movie bloggers that trek was dead? such great experts. it’s been dead so many times and every time they’ve been wrong. that’s been going on for 40 years.
2) i like the idea of a writer director taking this on instead of a writer and a director separately.
3) i have no concern for lucy in the sky flopping… who cares it was an indie drama and has no relation to what he could do here. fargo is great. i haven’t seen legion but i know people who love it.
4) and for some reason i feel the need to say i love discovery and short treks and picard looks great and kurtzman is doing a great job on the small screen and ds9 is my fave and this is absolutely a wonderful time to be a trek fan with so much going on and i know some just gripe and live for griping and think they are totally right… and it’s too bad because you’re missing out on a lot of fun

Michael K

I would be a little surprised if they go back to the 10+ year old Kelvin franchise at this stage. Considering the cost of the cast and economic disappointment of the last movie, it’s probably a good time to go back to the drawing board and come up with something new.

Tiger2

I think they feel it’s better to stick to something people already know instead of reinventing the wheel (again). That and I think there are just no real ideas of what they can do next with it since its clear they are afraid to do something truly original with the movies like the shows.

Garth Lorca

I would like to see another KT movie and while I’m hardly familiar with this guy, he deserves a chance…

But the bad news: “Deadline notes that the Tarantino project is also still alive and is a separate project, not directly impacted by this fourth movie news.”

:-(

I think they waited too long. After watching Discovery, I kind of forgot about the Kelvin verse. Every episode of STD is better than any of those movies.

Baxter

Completely dead wrong. STD isn’t ST at all. Sorry.

ML31

This sounds like bait to me…

Michael Hall

Ryan,

Yes, I completely agree, and I’m no Discovery enthusiast by any means. BEYOND is a well-intentioned slog, INTO DARKNESS a total misfire on just about every level, and Trek 2009. . . well, let’s just say I’ve never had the bad manners to stand up in a theater and growl “What a POS!” prior to the day I first saw it.

DSC, at least, is fitfully interesting, and better than that on rare occasions.

Not gonna disagree. Assuming they go straight into pre production at the first of the year (not gonna happen), this movie hits the big screen the end of 2021. Six years between features (Seven or eight is actually a better guess). No one is gonna care what cast is there, but if they spend more then 30 seconds trying to tie it into the previous three movies this production is DOA.

Danpaine

Thanks for the chuckle, Ryan. They did wait too long, but DSC better? Ha!

J_Randomuser

Ummm…..#batshitcrazy

Jonboc

Best news of the day! JJ, deliver us from Discovery!! Please!!

Michael Hall

Ugh. I have my share of issues with DSC, but the opening credits have more wit and intelligence than Trek 2009 and INTO DARKNESS combined (BEYOND fares slightly better).

Garth Lorca

I’d really like to see Chris Colfer as the new Chekov if they decide to replace Yelchin.

Baxter

Just have Jayla jump in instead.

Chancellor Gowron

Or replace him with Arex.

Just Another Salt Vampire

YES!

ML31

That would be a fantastic way to go! But to the casual viewers, they would wonder where the hell Chekov is and who this tripod of a guy is.

Michael Hall

Many years ago I saw some CGI tests they did for bringing the Arex character into the fan series STAR TREK: NEW VOYAGES. They actually didn’t look half-bad.

Not to sound harsh, but Chekov didn’t have that much screen time. Not was he Central to any of the plots. It’ll also be at least six years between movies. It matters little if the character returns, or if he’s replaced.

ML31

Well… I don’t think you are wrong. If any one MAIN character could vanish without really hurting the movie or series it would be Chekov. My personal preference would be just to hire another actor to play the part. But if they want to let Chekov leave the Enterprise or some other reason for him to not be there I wouldn’t be up in arms over it.

albatrosity

I think hiring another actor to replace Anton would be insulting. The cast was rightfully broken about his passing and it would be disrespectful to just throw another actor in the role. Give Chekov an off-screen promotion and put a new character in his seat.

ML31

I don’t see it as insulting in any way. If they do, they are hypocrites as they are just replacement actors in these roles themselves. Also, replacing an actor for various reasons happens in show business all the time. Sure, they were broken about his passing. Many were. That doesn’t mean the show doesn’t go on. But as I said, I am fine one way or the other. It’s just that I would prefer to have Chekov on the bridge.

albatrosity

I just know JJ himself told the Toronto Sun “I would say there’s no replacing him,” but JJ also said Cumberbatch isn’t Khan so idk

VZX

Do not recast the Chekov character. Just continue the use of Jaylah or have new character.

Trek in a Cafe

The Kelvin timeline is an international investment and filled with actors who loved their roles. I hope they get their due.

Visitor1982

Let the Kelvin timeline die already. Do something new and fresh instead of rehashing these old characters and stories.

Gary 8.5

Technically the Kelvin cast are playing the same old characters that the TOS characters are playing.

Tiger2

Didn’t he just say that?

DataMat

I think they should make a Star Trek version of the Star Wars prequel trilogy do better.
Have a sleazy, secretly sinister, manipulative and ultimately brilliant political mastermind become president of the federation and eventually become dictator of a new Galactic Empire.
At least we’d have an actual through line to these movies instead of episodic movies that are not connected all that much.

Jannek

Good idea to let writing and directing in one hand!

MattR

I agree. It did work out for both WOK and TUC, with Nicholas Meyer.

kmart

Worked for TWOK, anyway.

Undiscovered Country hasn’t aged well, I’m afraid.

ML31

I disagree. It is still the 2nd best TOS movie easy. And I don’t see what has aged it, to be honest.

kmart

I don’t think it is a matter of aging badly, more than it wasn’t much good to begin with. There’s virtually no science fiction aspect at all to it, compared to TWOK having Genesis, an overly fantastic version of terraforming, the principal characters are assassinated by the writing, and the whodunit aspect is not even on a TV-level. Act 1 is WAY too short owing to the roundup being dropped due to cost, and the parts where they could have gone for depth, like the prison sequence, they instead stayed superficial. It is fast-paced, fairly rewatchable once you turn the critical-objection-meter off, and has an okay space battle at the end, but except for a couple of scenes, just doesn’t connect for me. Plus it has the mind-rape scene, which is possibly the most offensive thing in the TOS movies, made even worse somehow by staging it in public.

ML31

Not saying it didn’t have its flaws. Even WOK had flaws. I wasn’t a huge fan of the Genesis project myself but it was needed to move the plot along, I guess. Yes, the who-done-it was very pedestrian. (There is also a MAJOR consistency flaw that bugs me quite a bit but since the rest of the movie is so enjoyable I let it slide) Particularly so since the audience already knew who was complicit in it. It would have been a little less so had they kept Saavik and had it be her. But it still would have been pretty easy to figure out. The extraction of information from Valeris showed us how far Spock was willing to go for this. Do you think you would have taken it better had the character been male? For me it wouldn’t matter. Spock HAD to have the information. Knew she had it. It completely fits with his confrontation earlier with her in sick bay. He was PISSED. The end result was the 2nd best Trek movie of them all. Including TNG and Kelvin U. For me, there are too many good things in the movie for it to not be considered good. Even with some of the flaws.

Lord Hobbers

Meh! Now that we have proper Trek on TV again I’m not bothered about the movies. I wasn’t keen on the Kelvin-verse anyway.

RockoandSocko3

At this point, I’m open for it to be based on a different crew, timeline, etc. I don’t know if I personally want another Kelvin TOS crew given the current state of where the 4th movies is at, and how long it will/would take to come to life.

Historically, its about a 2-3 year gap between movies going all the way back to TMP. We are already wrapping up 2019 and a 4th movie is nowhere to be seen. I just think a fresh start would be welcome IMO.

DataMat

Daniel Crsig films have a 5 year gap between No4 and No5.

ML31

True but I don’t think that really helps the franchise any. Funny thing about that, Craig will have been Bond for the highest number of years. But he would have only made 5 films over that time where Moore made 7 over a shorter time frame.

VOODOO

This is great news. Very happy to see the Kelvin timeline continue

B Kramer
Tiger2

We know how much fans loved STID redoing parts of TWOK again lol. I say stay far far away from redoing any of the films or stories and here is a crazy idea,do something original!

TG47

As is often the case, we agree Tiger2.

Or, how about looking to Trek-lit for some innovative TOS stories that would be adaptable to the Kelvin timeline.

David Mack noted in a recent interview that CBS owns the rights to all the IP in Trek-lit : it’s the nature of the write for hire contracts.

So, there is no barrier to using Trek-lit as source material.

As another thought, Hawley and Paramount would be really smart to do as McMahan has done for Lower Decks, and bring on board a Trek author as consultant. Why not get ‘Trek’ right and avoid ticking of the fan-base with trivial and avoidable inconsistencies?

While it might be good to bring in a broader group of authors, Mack has written tie-in Kelvin novels and knows that continuity. In fact, Mack has a Kelvin novel coming out soon that had been held up from publication for about a decade.

albatrosity

Just give us a good story FFS. I’m tired of cringing in the theater. I’ve been watching TMP a lot lately and at least that movie has a brain, has characters with arcs, has some thoughtful ideas. No more unhinged Spock, no more frat boy Kirk, no more caricature McCoy. Give us officers from the finest crew in the Federation up against some interesting sci-fi challenge. That’s all it has to be, and everything it needs to be.

tony

‘stop competing with me, decker!’

I like TMP, but understand completely why it’s frequently referred to as Star Trek: The Motionless Picture.

tony

the 2001 director’s version is way better but the best thing is the film is a ‘trek’ that deals with exploration, about a voyage to the unknown, not just ‘pew pew pew’ headrush action.

Speaking from my experience, Trekkies can be cult-like in their belligerence, pettiness and hypocrisy if you don’t toe the party line. It is easy to criticize something that is not meant to play by the rules of the Prime Trek. If the gatekeeping fanbois simply step down their high horse and view things objectively; the KT is best appreciated as its own thing. Even their creators had the courtesy to refer to this iteration as an alternate reality. A kind gesture to keep the cohesiveness of the old Trek intact.

The fandom certainly tries hard to convert and neuter the scope of the JJverse into yet another version of Prime TOS in the pedantic pursuit of continuity. As if people have forgotten the purpose of alternate universe what-if stories in the first place. The often violent rejection of the Kelvin Timeline simply proves that the fandom is not yet mature enough to accept thinking that breaks the mold of the current construct of canon that has been the bedrock of Prime Trek.

Regardless, nothing is being replaced/disrespected by the other and nostalgia/seniority aside, Prime TOS is not necessarily superior to the KT either. The damn thing is all relative to the viewer.

ML31

I am one of the biggest TOS fans there is. It is my preferred Trek. And I was totally fine with reinventing the characters for a reboot. Or even this alternate time line.

BobZ

I’d like to see writer J. Michael Straczyski script the next STAR TREK movie.

BobZ

Straczynski.
Apologies.