The future of the Star Trek film franchise has remained uncertain since Star Trek Beyond‘s release in 2016. Now another star of the Kelvin trilogy is talking about what could be next.
Quinto ready to play Spock again, but unsure on appetite
Four years ago, Paramount announced plans for a follow-up to Star Trek Beyond, but after fits and starts, that project eventually stalled out in 2018. Since then the future of the Kelvin films has remained uncertain, but one of the stars, Zachary Quinto, says he believes the cast is up to return. While out promoting his AMC horror series NOS4A2, Zachary Quinto told ComicBook.com:
All I know is that we, all of us, had an incredible experience making those films. If there is an appetite for more of those stories with us in them, I’m sure that we would all be thrilled to come back and do one more or whatever, but I’m not really attached to it anymore.
Quinto’s comments echo co-star Simon Pegg’s, who recently said he believed the cast would “all jump at the chance” to return to Star Trek.
John Cho, Simon Pegg, Chris Pine, Karl Urban and Zachary Quinto at the premiere of Star Trek Beyond
Even though the planned follow-up to Beyond was shelved—and the possible Quentin Tarantino Star Trek concept also appears dead after Tarantino stepped back from the project—there is still an active Star Trek film under development at Paramount, being lead by Fargo’s Noah Hawley. The last word on that project was the studio was still waiting for a script, and earlier in the year Hawley indicated that he had his “own take” on the franchise
While Quinto doesn’t know if he will ever play Spock again, he is sanguine about his experience with the franchise and optimistic for Trek’s future, telling ComicBook:
I have lifelong friendships from those films and working relationships and a lot of respect and fond memories, so if that’s what it ends up being and I can look back on my life and say that’s what it was, then that’s incredible, and if we get to do more, that’s also incredible. But as far as the stories go, they’ve been around for decades and generations, and I think that that will continue, whether or not we continue on with them.
The main cast on the set of Star Trek (2009) with director J.J. Abrams
Keep up with all news regarding upcoming Star Trek films at TrekMovie.com.
I still cant quite get my head around walking film legend Quentin Tarantino offering his services to do Trek 4 and Paramount being abit..’uh…hmm.. what about that Legion dude?’
Tarantino never committed to actually doing it and then ended up opting not to. In no way is that on Paramount.
Also, Hawley’s shows Legion and Fargo are both big-time critically praised. He’s a terrific choice, at least in theory.
Doesn’t matter; that movie is never happening.
Quentin Tarantino won’t do it
Well there’s a school of thought that says maybe Star Trek fares better as a medium budget movie so maybe the TV guy is a better option. Tarantino’s an auteur, I can’t deny I’d have been intrigued to see his movie but the lack of understanding of the most basic sci-fi concepts that he displayed in his interviews did have me concerned. I’ve not seen a lot of Fargo or Legion to have a strong opinion either way on Hawley but it seems at least that he has a reputation for doing smart, entertaining TV which is an encouraging start.
All of which makes me wish that somebody would just hire Hawley to take over the tv shows from the deeply mediocre people currently running them. Why waste him on a big-budget movie that’s unlikely to earn a profit when you could instead use him to get the television shows back on track?
Bryant,
Boy, when you’re right, you’re right. One small feature success — even TWOK-sized — wouldn’t register anywhere near the same impact as turning the TV TREK situation around, starting with SNW having the proper writing leadership.
The Trek TV writers are just fine where they are. There’s nothing to fix.
(laughter)
Show us the data and stats to back up that derision kmart. Otherwise, it’s hard to see this as a conversation.
I totally accept that you and Bryant Burnette loathe Secret Hideout’s streaming Trek offerings. That’s fine, it’s your personal opinion/assessment based on your own preferences.
What’s getting up my nose is that there are repeated assertions about the lack of market success without evidence to back those assertions. To me, it’s beginning to feel like you’re trying to push a narrative that validates your own disappointment, but that may have no basis in fact.
What I find when I look for stats is that else shows are doing well enough to build market both in the traditional Trek franchise markets in the US, Canada, UK and Germany while also extending the global reach to Latin America, the Mediterranean and Asia. For 36-odd episodes in, that’s quite a solid track record.
This judgement isn’t about marketing or dollars and cents, it is about quality and sense. If your hackles are raised about market success, then complain to companies that don’t disclose the data, not to somebody addressing the ineptitude of the writing and the usually godawful visual calls. As to particulars on the writing and the rest, you can review numerous past posts of mine covering this in exhaustive detail. I wrote a very negative review of TNG s1 intended for a fanzine that the guy didn’t wind up actually issuing, and even that was mild compared to my disdain for the utterly wrongheaded creative calls on DSC and PICARD — it’s like they’ve got Abrams’ brain stuck into their writer’s room or something.
Legion and Fargo are pretty good on FX I heard.
I am SO happy Tarantino will not be near this movie now. Like you I was originally intrigued with the idea, didn’t care the movie would be R rated but the second he opened his mouth about not understanding how the Kelvin universe worked made it very clear he should stick to what he knows and stay away from science fiction. Or at least a known property like Star Trek and make his own thing.
As for Hawley never seen Fargo but watched the first two seasons of Leigon, strange is not the right word for it but close enough ;). But in a good way. I don’t think he would go that surreal for Star Trek but he is a great story teller either way. So very curious.
Well, you don’t need to get your head around it since your understanding of what happened is inaccurate. Tarantino walked away from the project when he decided to retire from filmaking.
uh, no.
I’m pretty sure Tarantino’s involvement in this project never got much past Tarantino talking about it a lot, and the studio taking a look at a story outline. This was never a project that was ever going to progress any further then that.
Good cast, bad movie makers, lets forget about the Kelvin Time line.
Yup. Ended up not working out.
let;s not
Yup. The nuTrek fanbois were very transient anyway, most have gone back to Marvel, Star Wars or Wrestling by now anyway.
Transient? Only three movies, the first one eleven years back, the last one four? Can’t blame the fans when the studio treated the films as an after thought. That being said, yes, it’s time for a new perspective on the franchise.
Meh. The Kelvin Universe was an interesting experiment, but after showing some promise with the 2009 movie, the follow-ons strove for selling popcorn as opposed to striving for coherent and interesting stories. It’s been so long since Beyond, and CBS is so active with Trek development for the small screen, that another Kelvin romp at this time seems fairly pointless.
If they did accomplish anything, I think it was in waking CBS up to the fact that they also had a franchise to revive.
Kelvin movies have dated considerably already considering they arent that old. Better leaving them where they were and move forward.
If the are going to reboot the cast of a new Star Trek movie, then my suggestion is forget making the movie. I believe that they will not make a profit if they do reboot. I know that I have no desire to see a new rebooted cast. Star Trek will be dead in a few more generations anyway due to the fact that they have done nothing to promote it to younger fans through regular TV. Perhaps they need a reminder that not all of the viewing public can afford one streaming channel less more multiple streaming channels. If I had to pick one it would be Disney plus which is home to Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar and all of the Disney classics. More Bang for the Buck. I am one of the original fans of Star Trek but to be honest I have not seen any of the new streaming Star Trek shows. If I am going to pay to see Star Trek then I want to watch it on the big screen. I also never liked Picard as the captain of the Enterprise. Too much talking and not enough action.
I doubt we will ever get another Star Trek movie anytime soon. Quentin Tarantino is obviously not going to make one. Well, at least Star Trek is alive and well on the TV side of things.
The crazy thing is even if the Hawley movie does happen, we probably won’t see it until 2023 at this point given everything. That will be SEVEN YEARS since Beyond came out! That’s crazy.
Meanwhile on the TV side it’ll probably be on its fifteenth new Star Trek show by then; a Quark and Rom sitcom showing Rom’s life as the Grand Nagus while Quark is always getting into one crazy scheme after another his brother has to get him out of.
And I’m glad Tarantino won’t be anywhere near Star Trek.
WB seems to have concluded that the DC universe is better as a series of stand alone features. I suspect Paramount (or who ever ends up acquiring the studio or it’s catalog) will probably handle Trek in a similar fashion moving forward.
2024 at the earliest, for a few reasons. 1.) Not likely Paramount (or any smaller studio) survives this recession. 2.) CBS will need to find another studio if they stay in the motion picture business. 3.) Selling assets in a BK may take years. 4.) No one has really stepped up to say they could make a Trek movie for 100-125MM. 5.) Not really sure Hawley has anything to proceed with other then a letter of interest. His comments seem to suggest he’ll get around to it once he’s done with his current committments. Who knows how long that could be with the Rona resurging?
We need you back, Zach!
Star Trek movies was never popular anyway. The franchise should focus on TV for the time being. The powers that be wanted Star Trek to be like Star Wars and Marvel superhero movies but that obviously didn’t work.
The movies will never happen. I would love to be proven wrong of course.
Wait, what?
Star Trek: The Motion Picture was the fourth biggest movie of 1979.
Star Trek II was the seventh biggest movie of 1982.
Star Trek III was the eighth biggest movie of 1984.
Star Trek IV was the sixth biggest movie of 1986.
Star Trek 2009 was the seventh biggest movie of 2009.
If the studio can keep the costs down, it is insane for them to walk away from that kind of bank, no matter what the franchise. They just need to be a lot smarter on where they put their money (no more millions to a star hidden under latex, no more unnecessary CGI when cheap extras would have worked just as well.)
Biggest earners doesn’t translate to most profitable. Look at TWOK’s cost to profit margin — now that’s huge, that is significant.
Making more expensive big-budget movies like the Abrams pics mandates a huge return to ensure actual success, and is very unlikely to do so.
Expecting Abrams to produce an economically sound low-budget TREK picture is like expecting David Fincher to shoot a movie in 45 days — ain’t gonna happen.
“Expecting Abrams to produce an economically sound low-budget TREK picture is like expecting David Fincher to shoot a movie in 45 days — ain’t gonna happen.”
Where is it written that Abrams has to be the one to make the next movie?
So far as I know, Bad Robot extended their Paramount deal so Abrams will be xprod on whatever they make. I certainly can hope he isn’t involved in the Hawley, as that just puts above the line baggage into the budget as well as taste monitors in the crapper.
Ah. I didn’t know that. I thought all the Hawley/Tarantino discussion was an indication that it wouldn’t be Bad Robot anymore.
“Star Trek movies was never popular anyway.”
Are you drunk? There is NOTHING accurate (or grammatical) about that statement.
They made thirteen of them, buddy, and the film franchise as a whole is very profitable. Now, if Paramount was having visions of ST being Avengers profitable, well, that’s another story. In terms of how the franchise is managed, a better comparison would be to the X-Men movies. Trek movies made for 125MM (give or take), that consistently return 300-500MM will get green lit all day long.
You might want to check your figures LOL
Sadly I don’t think we will see the Kelvin cast again. After an excellent start and cool alternate timeline concept in 2009, they waited too long to release the next installment, which coupled with a totally inept tie-in to the 50th anniversary with Beyond, has led to where we are today. I would still love to read what Orci had penned for the 09 follow-up.
I know many didn’t like the Kelvin universe movies, but IMO I am thankful that they were made. They helped bridge the gap to where we are today, following the end of Enterprise back in 2005.
I for one was just happy to see some new stories and the cast helped me get over the fact that new actors could not only play beloved characters such as Spock, Bones and Uhura BUT they could fabulously succeed in doing so. It is strange that I had concerns again about Ethan Peck playing Spock, but once again just like Zachery Quinto before him, Ethan Peck has done a fine job playing perhaps Trek’s most beloved character. I have to admit, Leonard’s outright acceptance of Quinto and his family’s endorsement of Ethan Peck made an impact on me. I for one hope to see Quinto and the KU cast back up on the screen and on the bridge of the Enterprise, but now with CBS and Viacom back together again, who knows if this will ever happen. As Zachery said, no matter what – the franchise will go on, whether on the small screen or in the theatres.
All three of the movies have good moments. History will be relatively kind to them in the way one is to a puppy that used to always crap in your shoes but was also cute.
I enjoyed the Kelvin movies but I’m more of a Star Wars fan I guess. Star Trek will go on because it has to do so.
I agree DeanH!
I wasn’t that crazy about a TOS reboot on the big screen but I understood why they did it and at the time it was the right direction to go in. It was a good idea to bring the franchise back to the characters that started it all and try to set up a younger fanbase at the same time. I was even there at the original premiere in Sydney in 2009. I was maybe five rows up from where Abrams and the cast was. I remember how excited I was at the time!
Because it was just great to see Star Trek BACK and on a grand level we haven’t seen since TMP. I have certainly been mixed on the films overall like a lot of people but I ALWAYS said that you want these movies to succeed because if they do eventually we will get another show again (which is what most of us wanted) and just more Star Trek in general.
And that happened. Yes many aren’t happy with the new shows today, I get that as well. And many hate the fact someone from those films are leading the franchise, but Star Trek IS back and there is time to see it develop in different ways and yes hopefully better ways.
I don’t care that much if we ever see another Kelvin movie or not, especially since I never been all that interested in a TOS reboot and more interested in seeing new characters and settings.. But I fully support if another one happens.
But we’re now at a point ANYTHING can happen in the Star Trek universe frankly and that’s what excites me most. And frankly that includes the Kelvin movies when they decided to make a new permanent universe for those movies along side the prime universe, so it opens up the possibilities in SO many ways! That’s what I want to see, EXPAND the franchise. Don’t think so small and just nostalgia all the time. That’s why in so many ways I’m way more excited for Discovery next season than I am for Picard and even Pike.
And even though many thought the Kelvin movies made the universe actually feel smaller in some ways with its actual stories it still gave us an expanded multiverse where you can do practically anything in and I’m truly hoping we move into others in the years to follow.
Personally, I enjoyed the Kelvin films as a whole…But I really wonder since CBSAA is really making headway and gaining momentum with all their Trek series across the board…whether it is time to put the Trek films back on hold (or back-burner) for a long while?
Nothing again the Kelvin cast/crew – because I felt they are fine cast for the movies and did a nice job reinventing these classic characters, but I am just not sure where they are going to go from here?
Sure, we know that Noah Hawley’s script is in-development…whether or not if the entire Kelvin crew is returning or some, etc. is still rather unknown.
But I suppose the question becomes, whether or not Noah Hawley’s trek moves forward or not, is should Star Trek leave the big screen for awhile?
Let’s face it, both Star Trek and Star Wars are doing rather well in this new platform returning back to tv (streaming tv per se), and it really is working quite well…IMHO. Has these two IP’s more or less exhausted the big screen in this day in age?
I am curious to know if they move forward with Noah Hawley and a 4th Trek film dealing with OT crew…and it doesn’t meet the expectations set out and and mirrors another ST Beyond, what really happens to the Trek name for the big screen for the future?
I think the Trek brand is doing better on the streaming platform than on the silver screen right now……
Star Wars is doing rather well because of Disney. Star Trek movies could get better in the future. Star Trek is better off on streaming.
First Kelvin movie is a masterpiece. Look, feel, pace, story, music, cast all perfect. Second movie was outstanding. Third movie has been an epic fail.
I agree with everything you just said. The first one was pretty good. Second and third ones I don’t care at all.
Many people consider BEYOND the best of the three, and for good reason.
Well, from where I sit Wehmut, it’s good to know that the Kelvin movies have some champions in Trek fandom.
I’m completely onboard with the strategic concept, advanced by Kurtzman, that acknowledges that there isn’t a single, homogeneous Trek audience and that the franchise needs to have a range of offerings to survive and grow.
That said, whether one likes Kelvin films 1 and 3 better or 1 and 2 better (clearly two different audiences), the unfortunate thing is that none of them have much longevity. Or, at least they don’t seem to be pulling in New audiences through streaming.
I know that I haven’t been able to get our kids to watch them. One watched the first and said no more. The other didn’t last 15 minutes into the first film. So, I don’t see the Kelvin movies engaging new fans at this point.
Meanwhile, Voyager, TNG, TOS and Enterprise seem to be endlessly appealing as our kids cycle through the 20 hours available on CTV Sci-fi channel. (DS9 is something that they watch occasionally, but they may be a bit young for it yet.). Discovery and Picard are definitely interesting for them, even though they’re something they watch with a parent due to the 14+ ratings.
First Kelvin was THE low-point in franchise history for me, outside of some really bad TNG eps (gave up on ENT and VOYAGER. they probably had worse stuff.) Second Kelvin was not quite as bad. BEYOND was actually kinda fun and even touching, but act 3 ran WAY too long and killed some of the joy. Don’t see what Abrams is serving up that you all have found so tasty.
I enjoyed 2009 and appreciated what they were trying to do. Was not a fan of into Darkness for so, so many reasons. Beyond, however, I really enjoyed. Beyond presented the first original standalone Star Trek story fans had seen in years.
Hopefully we’ll never see a Kelvin Trek movie again. They were weak rehashes of what’s come before and a complete contradiction of canon.
Like I have said many times before, I think Tarantino will be a divisive and polarizing idea for Star Trek. Please no. Star Trek has survived over 50 years without swearing, extreme violence and gore.
The new producers, not Gene Roddenberry, began this trend. They all argue that Roddenberry couldn’t blow some limbs or use inappropriate language due to the restrictions and previous limits of Television.
If Gene still alive today, I wonder if he will agree heading on this new trend.
His vision was all about hope and the improvement of humanity. The betterment of our society. An optimist portrayal of our future where we are all better than what we are today.
Don’t get me wrong, I recognize Tarantino is a great director. I used to watch some of his movies, but for me, his movies are too violent for my taste.
One thing that I enjoy the most about Star Trek right at this moment, is that now I can see these shows with my kid, with my family.
I understand that Roddenberry is not here. That a new generation is producing the shows. Of course. The world is moving on. But violence, blood, and cursing does not necessarily improve the quality of the new productions.
Right after Roddenberry passed away, I remember few hints, Picard and Riker blowing up the alien. Data going ‘Oh Shit’ on Generations. It was the beggining of what have become.
For Roddenberry, the future is hope. Rick Berman and his team were successful heading into that direction until they didn’t. Once they went negative and dark, not talking about DS9 which was amazingly executed, they headed in the other direction, Star Trek went down the hill.
For Kurtzman, now learning all this with trial and error, he realized that they need to go back to the very beginning. Trekkers and Trekkies are beggin for decades. Is taking 11 years, since ST 2009, for him to realize that they have to go back to a leader like Anson Mount’s Pike. A true leader, brave, a prudent and respectful Captain. Excellent casting. An episodic show with serialized elements. I think this is why Pike and Strange New Worlds could be a big hit for Kurtzman.
Hope and positivity has to be present in STSNW. After working with the franchise for over a decade, his up and downs, I hope this show will shine. Strange New Worlds has all the elements for success.
I am enjoying very much watching Star Trek and Star Wars with my kid. One thing that I really like from Star Wars, like Star Trek from the beginning, is that they do everything for a wider audience. No cursing is needed. It has violence, yes, it has…But going Taratino will be terrible. Good for a limited audience.
Like the new Kurtzman Star Trek. But going Tarantino all the way, will be going way to the top, to the extreme, for my opinion. Could be Discovery Mirror Universe on Steroids, without the caricature characters.
p & r blew away that alien in s1, years prior to GR’s death..
You are totally right Kmart. Yes, I apologize. But what I was trying to say is that before we saw one scene here and there. Tarantino will be the Cursing and Blood during the whole movie.
Jay, g
Re: divisive and polarizing idea
I’m sorry but I just don’t see how Tarantino, could possibly be more divisive and polarizing than Harlan Ellison, before him, as Roddenberry himself often claimed.
But for that matter Roddenberry was a rather polarizing and divisive figure in his own right, in the 60s. Certainly, The Bible Belt did NOT consider STAR TREK of the 1960s “family friendly” in that era.
You describe a totally safe and timid Trek which certainly wasn’t the STAR TREK that I launched with into my teen manhood years, even as Harlan would forcibly argue it was in regards to his script.
And “Let’s get the hell out of here.” crossed the swearing line for Trek long ago, too late to turn the clock back now.
I am talking in regards to extreme violence, gore, cursing, etc. What we see in Tarantino’s movies.
Jay,
Re: Extreme
And I am talking about that the line for what is considered “extreme” is constantly moving and the stories Gene wanted to tell were constantly butting into it. STAR TREK was created expressly to confront and get around the censoring of Gene’s ideas considered too extreme for HAVE GUN WILL TRAVEL, THE LIEUTENANT, etc.
Your idea of STAR TREK as some sort of “safe” series was only true of the Filmation animated one. STAR TREK from the get go was intended to hold a mirror up to the inequities of the so-called “safe” status quo while holding out the hope that in the future we will shake off the foolish fearfulness of the “other” that fuels those inequities.
If STAR TREK leaves you unsettled but hopeful, then it is doing its job. If watching STAR TREK leaves you feeling warm fuzzy and safe with our current state of affairs, then it is an utter storytelling failure.
My forbidden dream of trekkie is to have a great director with every film. Once Tarantino and the time after Nolan or Villeneuve and then Bay and so on. Each director with his own peculiarities, courageously experimenting under the supervision of one or more experts of the canon. It would be fun.
My favorite thing about the Kelvin Universe is the actors, the excellent casting. I would like very much to see a conclusion with this group, closing this chapter, if that is what the executive want to move forward.
Very unfortunate what happened to Star Trek Enterprise. We were all left up in the air with no closure. Even the last episode was not Star Trek Enterprise.
i thought Paramount would be interested in using Tarantino’s story even if he did not direct it. I guess without him in the Directors chair it wouldn’t be as much of a draw
Trek 4 and 4.1 were shelved? In order to shelve something, it would have had to been started, and there isn’t a shred of evidence to suggest that these movies never got much past people talking about them over drinks, someone banging out a story outline, and some pressers for investors.
I thought the REVENANT writer did at least a full treatment for QT and Par, if not a whole draft. Wasn’t this reported on here? Or am I misremembering stuff said about the SJ Clarkson proto ST IV as being about the Tarantino?
No, you remember the reporting correctly. My exercise in reading between the lines usually kicks in when actual production details are lacking, but fan sites like this one are more then happy to fill in the blanks. Top it off with talent not actually being in the loop on anything, and you have a dead production at worst, or development purgatory at best. Smith’s screenplay may very well be locked away in a file cabinet at the Paramount lot somewhere. Gathering dust next to the WWZ sequel that, technically, is still in development.
Guess I’ll be adding WWZ to the huge list of projects Fincher was on-board for and ultimately did not end up making. 20,000 LEAGUES was another big one several years back.
Man, I remember that it was just about 20 years ago when I had a meeting with the lady who ran Morgan Freeman’s company about doing a making-of book on RENDEZVOUS WITH RAMA when Fincher was going to direct that, with mocapped faces on CG bodies for microgravity scenes. They were still hoping to get a draft that increased Jimmy’s part (the guy who flies the skycycle) enough to get Pitt interested!
Funny how things turn around. I remember arguing with someone from another site after the first Kelvin movie was released who was convinced the Kelvin universe (although we didn’t call it that at the time ;)) was now the ‘true’ universe and the prime universe was now forever dead and buried, especially the TNG era which he was convinced we would NEVER see again in any universe. I kept saying that you can’t just abandon 40 years of stories and characters because one movie had a strong opening weekend. But he was so convinced the prime universe was gone and that the Kelvin universe was going to be what defined Star Trek for decades to come.
And look where we are today? Not only is the prime universe is back, Picard is starting its second season after so much fanfare over its first. Meanwhile, after Beyond failed we don’t even know when we’ll get another Star Trek movie and if so, if the Kelvin cast will appear or not? It’s very strange on the TV side things are happening at warp speed but the movie side is completely questionable right now.
It just proves. A. nothing EVER truly dies in Star Trek and B. how short sighted a lot of Star Trek fans are. Eventually everything can come around again because Star Trek has such a huge fanbase and if something was popular once with them, it can be again. And yes that includes the Kelvin universe as well obviously.
I hope we do get at least one more movie with the Kelvin cast, although I have a feeling Paramount is ready to move on and probably will get something new with the Hawley movie (if that even happens). But it doesn’t mean we’ll never see those characters or universe again. It may be awhile, like a decade but I have a feeling we’ll see it back in some form.
It is amazing to see where things are right now. Star Trek is doing things I never thought it would do. It’s going to the far flung future in Discovery soon and is now an animated comedy. We are now getting a Pike show out of all things and I wouldn’t be shocked if another TNG spin off show is announced in a few years.
So who knows where the Kelvin universe will land in time. As someone once said, the sky’s the limit!
Wow, you got to see the world premiere of Star Trek 2009! That must have been really cool. I am glad Quinto has a great appreciation for those he got to work with during those movies and we all know he and Nimoy seemed to get along great, even doing that classic Audi commercial. I hope the cast members will one day embrace the convention circuit, whenever that returns.
In many ways, Star Trek 2009 (I like to call it Star Trek XI) proved to the network and movie execs that the franchise was still viable, therefore it helped lay the groundwork for two more movies plus the current multiple small screen iterations of Trek. I think it may have happened anyway, but you never know. Look at Stargate. That said, I probably am more apt to believe Quinto when he said the franchise will go on – whether they are part of it or not. As you (and the Captain) so aptly said, “the sky’s the limit!”
Yep, I went! But oddly it was not really planned at all lol. I moved to Australia that year and not four months after I was there just read the the world premiere was coming a week before to the Sydney opera house; literally just two miles from where I was working at the time. What are the freaking odds? I had only planned to just go to the premiere, take some pictures, hope to see Sylar. pester Abrams about what was the island and call it a day. But just by the strangest luck, I was offered a ticket twenty minutes before the movie started by a staffer and yeah. One of the best experiences of my life!
But even though I don’t think that movie ‘saved’ Star Trek the way others believe it did, clearly it re-energized it and I think gave it a new direction. You can argue if the direction was good or bad, but it made people interested in Star Trek again who may have gotten tired of it by the time Enterprise came around (and I count myself in that category even though I now love Enterprise). So it deserves credit for that at least. And yes if it wasn’t successful I don’t know if we would have Discovery or Picard now. I mean as you said we probably would’ve gotten another show regardless but if those movies bombed the wait could’ve been even longer because it would’ve told them Trek needed a longer rest.
Totally agree Tiger2, never say something’s dead and gone in the Trek franchise.
Quite the opposite actually.
TOS only lasted 3 years on original broadcast, but came to define success in syndication.
Voyager gets a lot of put downs, but is the most streamed on Netflix.
TAS got cancelled before the second season ran, but got an Emmy, and wooden animation notwithstanding had our kids riveted on dvd 40 years later.
So, I don’t know what’s next for the cinematic feature side of the franchise, or whether the Kelvin movies will attract new audiences down the line. But I do know enough not to make sweeping statements about what will work or not.
Yes, Star Trek comes back around again and again. I mean even the actors themselves who say they are done with Trek still manage to show up. Nimoy was RETIRED from acting and he ended up playing Spock in the first two Kelvin movies. Stewart said for years he had no real interest in playing Picard again and now he’s back. They even convinced Spiner to play Data again, even if it was to give him a final resolution. I’m hoping they can convince Kate Mulgrew to get back in her space suit holding a nice cup of black coffee soon too. ;)
But that tells you everything when actors who hasn’t played these characters for 15-20 years and had no plans to until someone just called them up tells you that no one can really predict anything in this franchise. Sure it may not happen again, but it CAN happen.
So even if we don’t get another Kelvin movie right away, I don’t think we should just write them off altogether any more than all the other previous series. There is SO much Star Trek being produced and with so many ideas and formats happening they can all appear in some form if not a full on movie again. After all, they originally just wanted Patrick Stewart to play Picard in a Short Trek and now he’s in his own show. And as you said because of streaming, ALL these shows are getting a second life now. Discovery is only on AA because of how successful shows like Voyager is doing on Netflix.
So I wouldn’t be shocked to see the characters from any of the past shows now, including Enterprise. It’s harder obviously because that show took place so much earlier than the others but anything is possible now with so much of it coming.
Never say never.. unlikely stuff happens all the time now (and did way back when with Connery returning as 007 in the 80s): Ford back as Han/Deckard (seriously did anyone think that could ever happen back in the 90s or even the 00s), Linda Hamilton (& Cameron) coming back to Terminator, Bill Murray doing GB3, Ridley Scott back directing Alien movies, and as you say the most unlikely ones ever were Nimoy (in a mega budget TOS era summer movie after the complete failure of Trek on film and tv) & Stewart/Spiner (in a mega budget sequel to Nemesis. how insane/utterly unbelievable is that?!).. and look at the current news with Keaton returning as batman. Nobody would think that could ever happen. literally all bets are off now when it comes to returning actors in belated sequels..so wouldnt rule out more Kelvin movies, a new Enterprise series, and even Shatner returning (either as he is now or CGI deaged to the movie era or even TOS era)
There will be another Cinematic iteration of Trek.
Someday.
I’d like to see them mirror the original series cast and have an extended break. Maybe even have, say, a trilogy of Trek films that feature all new characters, or just a couple of stand alones with all new cast, and have the Kelvin crew stay off the screen until at least 2026 (ten years after Beyond) or even longer. Then have them return to effectively do their version of the TOS movie all red uniform era, so you’d have a distict line between their early adventures (09, ID, Beyond) and what they do later in life. Those movie era films could then be slower, less frantic to mirror the cast’s age at that point, more ‘thinky’ plots as opposed to what we have had in the Kelvin universe until this point.
Generally, I’d love to see an updated take on that TOS movie era of Star Trek, be it on TV or the big screen. It seems like the eternal forgotten at this point (Not to mention the gap betwen TUC and TNG never being touched). Excluding Picard, since ENT everything is either a century before TOS, 10 years before, 5 years before, alternative universe coloured uniforms set slighty before or during. I’m looking forward to SNW, don’t get me wrong, it’s just there’s way more places to prequel than where most of it tends to end up.
can totally see a belated 4th Kelvin cast movie in a few years set in the 80s ‘movie era’ with them all in the maroon uniforms (updated of course),and stuff like dark hair Kirk, the mushroom spacedock, and JJ versions of Excelsior/Reliant/BoPs, movie style nacelles, blue transporter beams, long streak phasers/orange star photons, rainbow warp trails, Genesis, more Horner based score. the plot could be something like Trek II/III meets Trek VI with Cumberbatch returning as khan and Eve as Marcus, Jason Momoa as Kruge, Michael Fassbender as Chang, Chiwetel Ejiofor as Terrell, Armie Hammer as Decker, Ken Watanabe as Nogura, with some hot up and comer as Lt Saavik, (and maybe Bana as Nero cameoing at the end to set up ST5.. maybe he was captured/reanimated by the Borg and is now Locutus.and maybe Vger is something to do with it too lol)
The cast is excellent, it’s too bad the scripts not so much.
Into Darkness was so nonsensical that it took the air out of the reboot. Kahn is just a poor guy trying to get his family back from evil Starfleet while beaming across the galaxy, the 1701 can only last 20 seconds in combat as if it was the flying hotel that was the 1701-D. PASS.
Beyond was better but destroyed the 1701 and with it the whole purpose of the reboot.
They should use the cast but on the Discovery 1701 bridge and design and just start a new with an action packed exploration adventure. Also bring in Saavik, Carol Marcus, Rand, Nurse Chapel.
Advanced civilizations are being reduced by a nanovirus to pre-warp tech, communication is being lost with an ever expanding sphere closing in on the Federation. The Enterprise’s mission – find out what is happening, seek allies and save the galaxy.
That was a lot of scrolling to get down to the comments section. Good thing my cat was here to keep his paw on the down arrow.
Click on the “XX COMMENTS SO FAR” link under the headline picture.
Three was enough. First movie was fun. Second was the worst of the entire franchise.The third movie was pretty good and recognizable Star Trek, buut I will not miss it if never comes back.
History repeats itself! ST.09 breathed new life into the franchise and they sucked the life back out of it with the TV shows. Keep cranking them out, Viacom!
And BTW, where’s the Trekmovie article on Woke JJ’s new Bad Robot rules on combatting “white supremacy” in the workplace? Yeah, no doubt there’s a lot of “white supremacy” at Bad Robot. Hahaha. Positively rampant, I’m sure.
But I would like to give him a hard time for hiring Benedict Cumberbatch when he had plenty of warning not to do that if he was making a movie about Khan. He didn’t listen.
See, when your principles are solid to begin with, you never have to apologize for obviously bad casting decisions, or issue Woke guides within your own company on combatting “white supremacy” in the workplace to placate the priests of the new orthodoxy.
Which is just hilarious in so many ways, because I can already tell where he will be apologizing in another 10 years for the things he’s doing today. I could warn him just as I–as many of us here–did about Cumberbatch, but he doesn’t listen to the wise.
What a truly entertaining timeline you earth people have created here. Hahaha.
Who cares! Very few these days as the fanbois have all run off.
Trek fans don’t need huge budget movies with flashing lights. We want them with good stories, adventure, science, exploration, moral stories, lovely ships that make sense, a good cast that does not need to be known faces, every 2-3 years, a quarter of the budget.
If it’s good, Strange New Worlds may fill the TOS-sized hole in many hearts, including mine.