J.J. Abrams Talks “Compelling” Story For ‘Star Trek 4’; Chris Pine Expresses Frustration Over Wait

The saga of J.J. Abrams’ attempt to follow up Star Trek Beyond with another feature film at Paramount Pictures continues with the first comments from the producer himself since his high-profile announcement a year ago the project was moving forward.

Abrams still looking for a director

The update on the Star Trek movie comes from an Esquire Magazine profile primarily about Chris Pine, star of Paramount’s upcoming movie Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves. In between comments from Pine, interview Alex Pappademas dropped this clue from the Star Trek producer:

Pine and crew’s return to the screen was announced in February 2022; when I speak to producer J. J. Abrams by phone, the search for a director is ongoing. Abrams is elliptical about the film, even by J. J. Abrams standards. “I will say it’s the first time [since the original reboot] that we have a story that feels as compelling as the first one.”

Director Matt Shakman stepped away from the Star Trek project last August, recently citing issues with getting the Kelvin crew actors’ schedules aligned along with the opportunity to work on a Fantastic Four movie for Marvel, but the director said the project was still active at Paramount.

J.J. Abrams with 2009 Star Trek movie cast

Pine is frustrated

As for Captain Kirk, Chris Pine tells Esquire he is in the dark:

“I don’t know anything,” he says. Which is apparently pretty standard: “In Star Trek land, the actors are usually the last people to find out anything. I know costume designers that have read scripts before the actors.” Is it weird, I ask, to be the captain and know so little about what you’re signing on to?

“I would say it’s frustrating,” Pine says. “It doesn’t really foster the greatest sense of partnership, but it’s how it’s always been. I love the character. I love the people. I love the franchise. But to try to change the system in which things are created—I just can’t do it. I don’t have the energy.”

One of the reasons it has been so hard for Paramount to follow up Beyond is due to the 2016 film not meeting studio expectations; it brought in $344 million, significantly less than the $467 million delivered by Star Trek Into Darkness in 2013. Pine addressed his concerns over the studio’s goal of trying to match mega-hits from other franchises:

“I’m not sure Star Trek was ever built to do that kind of business,” Pine says. “I always thought, Why aren’t we just appealing to this really rabid fan group and making the movie for a good price and going on our merry way, instead of trying to compete with the Marvels of the world?” He’d like to span more years as Kirk but wouldn’t be surprised if Beyond was the end of it. “After the last one came out and didn’t do the $1 billion that everybody wanted it to do, and then Anton”—Yelchin, who played Chekov—“passed away, I don’t know, it just seemed . . .” He pauses, looks out the window at the view Star Trek bought.

Chris Pine as Kirk with Anton Yelchin as Chekov and John Cho as Sulu in Star Trek Beyond

Matt Shakman, who helmed the Star Trek 4 project for over a year, recently said Paramount’s goal was to make another “large tentpole film,” noting it is expensive to make a sci-fi film, especially with the returning cast that includes stars like Chris Pine and Zoe Saldana.

For now, fans will continue to wait as we will soon pass the seven-year mark since Trek’s last time on the big screen, with no solid idea when it will be back.

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

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

‘a story that feels as compelling as the first one’

Maybe he means its involving time travel/alt reality, and legacy characters?

Bring back a baddie like Chris Plummer’s Kang, have a weapon that does “Rockem-Sockem Starships”, and have Kirk’s half-human/half-cat son up as a young terrorist with a heart of gold!

I just don’t understand why you’re not working in Hollywood as a writer or showrunner. You got skills.


You just answered your own question with that second sentence.


“Bring back a baddie like Chris Plummer’s Kang”

Kang was Michael Ansara.

Time travel, Alternate Universe, Trans Warp.. They slowly become a nice sweet poison. You know it kills you, but you can not Stop to like it

What i mean:

Time travel: With Section 31 and other Time travels so far in Star Trek (also the Movies), at some Space and Time you want to ask yourself what was first? The Chicken or the Egg?

Alternate Universe: Surprisingly it’s always the Terran Empire. What if the Vulcans did not separated and are the bad guys? Because it is Logical to eliminate the “cancer” of all Unworthy Lifeforms?

trans Warp: Wrath of Khan in the Kelvin Timeline Enterprise say it all. Why this Tool is to Omnipotent. Nearly the Same as the Spore Drive of Discovery

I find that worrying. He thought what Tarantino wanted to do was a good idea. He liked the Daddy Kirk transporter story. JJ is also the person who thought turning Luke Skywalker into a worthless maguffin was compelling.

I thought JJ had nothing to do with LAST JEDI, that he just trashed the odd-numbered ones? Not making excuses for him, I hate nearly all of the guy’s work — TFA is somewhat rewatchable — and think he managed to disimprove on Berman era, which is really saying something pretty nasty in my book.

JJ had nothing to do with Luke’s story in The Last Jedi. I know for a fact JJ didn’t understand why Rian Johnson made the character choices that he made… for any of the characters.

I feel for Pine- such a great actor, and really an enthusiastic creative person- and Bad Robot has strung them along with a series of false starts. I’m really skeptical of J.J. Abrams’ tenure at this point. He’s failed to get a feature off the ground for a few years now. And with Kurtzman’s shows gaining so much momentum, I wonder if the film division is looking at this 4th Kelvinverse movie as a fading prospect. Eventually, the studio is going to move on, and probably not too long from now.

Shakman the Betrayer

Why? Because he took another job when this one was stuck in development hell.
I think the real issue is they can’t afford to pay the actors and keep the budget on par with the previous film.

The jokes on him — Fantastic Four…lol

They can keep the budget in line with previous films, but Beyond’s $185m is why it wasn’t profitable, it needs to be lower. But the actors are part of the reason they can’t keep the budget reasonable.

No, Paramount’s loss of two marketing executives during the period leading up to BEYOND is why the film failed. Internally this is the explanation that Paramount reached almost immmediately.

That makes sense!

Even Trekkies weren’t very excited about Beyond though. It felt like Insurrection did, a big budget episode. And I liked it. It’s the only JJ verse movie I like actually but it just had no real hook.

And another supervillain trying to take down the Federation is probably another reason no one really cared They can’t seem to come up with something new and fresh.

It’s def true that the letdown from STID probably played a role in Beyond’s disappointment. But do you really think that doing something fresh and new, a decade later, is going to lead to a $750m box office? No matter how good it looks, I think any new Trek film will struggle to reach that kind of blockbuster status.

The problem is like Pine says: they need to set their sights lower, and produce something on a more modest budget and just have fun with it. But I doubt he’d take a pay cut to do it.

We agree fully brother! 👍

I’m still shocked they are still trying (and trying and trying and trying) to even make another JJ verse movie at all. I think it’s going to make what Beyond did or even worse.

But they can still make a good movie at least. I don’t care about about JJ verse at all, especially now that Star Trek is back where it really belongs, on TV. But if it’s good I’ll definitely go see it.

But I agree I don’t think anyone really cares that much anymore. Hardcore fans will go see it of course but everyone else will just probably catch it on Paramount+ in a month, especially if it’s the same ole same ole like the last three.

As for Pine, this guy keeps saying they should make smaller movies but wasn’t he the same guy who walked when they tried to make his paycheck smaller too? 🤣

Yeah if you want to make smaller movies then you have to start where the budget inflates the most, usually starting with actor salaries. That’s also easier to control.

But Pine is just talk. Trust me, if they ever decide to call the guy again, his asking price will be the same as before and why there won’t be another movie.

Transformers films have flopped or did not make the money Paramount wanted before, they didn’t stop making Transformers movies. Same with MI 3 was a near bomb, they continue to make those. Its just Star Trek the studio doesn’t believe in. They are far more likely to greenlight more Bayturtles films than to make a Star Trek film.

Bro not a single aTF has flopped or lost money, no idea where you’re getting this? What movies are you talking about??

Bumblebee has made the least amount of money, but it was also the cheapest movie too at $130 million. And keep this in mind, it still made $150 million more than Beyond did with a much lower budget;😂

It basically made what STID made and much cheaper than that as well. How these JJ verse movies keeps getting made for the ridiculous money but no real profit to show, I will never understand it?

Ok I went and looked. Transformers: The Last Knight can be argued it bombed because it cost $250 million but it still made $600 million. So I don’t think that’s a bomb but it didn’t reach expectations either like Tiger2 explained in another thread. They probably assumed it would do a billion like the one before it and it didn’t.

But we know it wasn’t a real bomb because unlike Star Trek they made too more movies since, Bumblebee and the new one this summer. And they didn’t cancel 5 movies before they finally made Bumblebee like how bad the Trek movies have turned into a joke.

And I’m glad they finally moved on from Bay.

MI3 didn’t bomb though, it just didn’t reach expectations. And it made more than 2 out of the 3 Kelvin movies and much cheaper than 2 out of the 3 movies as well.

That’s why we got four more of those movies and Trek remains DOA

Those two marketing executives, what were their names and how exactly did their exit lead to the failure? Were they fired? Did they quit? Genuinely asking, i’ve not heard of this before.

But if Paramount is well aware that these two execs are the key to a successful Trek film, have they rehired them?

Wouldn’t that affect Paramount’s non-Star Trek products in a comparable way, though?

If they can cut $80 million like they should have from Beyond then they will probably get a greenlight.

They know the next movie could bomb again.

And the real irony is like that old saying, necessity being the mother of invention. I’d bet that if they slashed the budget, and writers were forced to be creative, they’d wind up with a better movie.

Isn’t that literally what happened with TWOK? 😉

After putting everyone to sleep with the mind blowing budget of TMP (I’ve seen it once 20 years ago, promise myself never to watch it again) they came back and did it better with TWOK with a third of the budget.

It doesn’t have to be that low but half makes sense or around $100 million. No one is going to give these fools over $150 million anyway. Not anymore! 😉

But TWOK would have cost way much more if it would have been the first movie, that means if it had been made instead of TMP.

LOL at people who feel fandom requires them to defend every thing and every one involved in Star Trek.

So annoying I agree. Almost as bad as the ones who are required to trash every thing and every one involved with current Star Trek.

Is that me? I didn’t realize finding it absurd to call a director for hire a “betrayer” because he walked from a project defending everything and everyone involved in Star Trek.

Huh. They had no cast signed on, no approved finished shooting script and no greenlight. Just a bunch of pr to try and get investors. Worse than JJ’s mystery box smoke and mirrors.

As compelling as the first one?
I’d really hope he means considerably more compelling.
Yea, that film sufficed because it had novelty value, but they need to do much better this time.
And for my money the best one was Beyond anyway.

Beyond was the best, indeed!

Beyond was the ONLY compelling one. It was great. The 2009 film was fun, but generic, and Into Darkness was a pale ripoff of Wrath of Khan.

Agreed on Beyond; I have found things to appreciate about all of them, but Beyond is the only one I was truly enthusiastic for.

Oh, don’t get me wrong–I like all three. But the 2009 film was rather simplistic and Star Wars-y, and Into Darkness was derivative. Beyond was the first original story in that trilogy, and the only one I’d call “compelling.”

Into Darkness was paranoid conspiracy theory junk.

I agree — BEYOND was the only one of the Kelvinverse movies that I ultimately liked, in retrospect.

2009 was Star Wars remade as Star Trek, basically he remade A New Hope. Then he did it again with Force Awakens.

I’ll go so far as to say it is the only emotionally engaging one, that it at least felt right in several key moments. I saw it twice in the theater, which makes it the only Abrams-related project so viewed by me. It still has a big sag in midfilm and a protracted act 3 with all the peter pan chasing tinkerbell above yorktown stuff that had me drumming my fingers on the chair arm. Still, tons better than ID and no comparison with the utter waste of film that is the 09, which I think I’m going to start calling the Mythology-Deformer, since it tries and fails woefully to Joseph Campbell a property that already had its own unique mythology.

Loved Trek 2009. It’s by far the best of the three Kelvin movies.

I know it’s going to be a bad day when I find myself agreeing with you…

Yeah! :-)

It had a lot of problems. But all three did.

Yep Beyond was the best, mostly because it felt like Star Trek and waaay less dumb than the first two.

STID was bad and dumb but the first one was actually way more dumb in so many ways but less bad of a movie, so I guess they are even. 😀🙄

Just make Tribbles the villain! Can you imagine that trailer? Easy $1bn box office gross.

In all seriousness, Trek 2009 was a good origin story. But a HUGE mistake was made with ST:ID and the Kelvin film series has never recovered from it. I can see why they went with Khan as the villain for the 2nd movie, but the John Harrison thing was a massive blunder. Kelvin-Khan needed to show less head squishing, and more of that superior intellect, to be an intimidating villain.

Failing to use the Borg as a villain in the 3rd one is puzzling. Surely space-cyborgs done right would pull in a decent non-trek audience. You could literally have had a modified (better) version of Beyond.

Idris Elba as the Borg King (Edison first to be assimilated, then assimilated the Franklin crew).

The drone ships being actual Borg drones invading the E and assimilating crew, even as the E is being ripped apart.

The clear threat to Yorktown/Federation.

Spock wondering if he is more like the Borg than human in light of his break up with Uhura/thoughts on continuing friendship with Kirk.

Kirk’s fear of losing his individuality if he stays in his role as a Captain, or accepts Admiral’s position. Questioning his Starfleet future.

Jaylah seeing her family being assimilated/fear of Borg. Having to fight her borgified father/brother instead of random henchman.

Artefact from the beginning of the movie was a hidden Omega particle. Borg King wants it to perfect the collective and power his planned assimilation of the Federation. Ent-Crew activate it in climax destroying the borg and (an assimilated) Yorktown.

Ent Crew escape Yorktown/Omega detonation in barely completed Yorktown starship (designated ENT-A at end of movie).

I remember some rumours about the Borg being in Beyond even with the trailers out (twist would end up being Krall and his army are the borg). If they want some marvel box office (AntMan box office at least) they could do worse than bring in the borg .and even have them from the Prime timeline (to create a trendy multiverse link).

Apparently, Jonathan Frakes is interested… I doubt Bad Robot has/will ask him to though.

I don’t know that Frakes would be the guy to direct a potential $200mm film. A film that big is a massive undertaking.

These films shouldn’t cost $200 million though. Creative artists and producers can find a way to make magic out of a budget of half that. A $120 million film doing $300 million at the box office reads as a success story.

Depends how Picard Season 3 succeed, Perhaps he would be to busy for the Movie :)

“I would say it’s frustrating,” Pine says. “It doesn’t really foster the greatest sense of partnership, but it’s how it’s always been. I love the character. I love the people. I love the franchise. But to try to change the system in which things are created—I just can’t do it. I don’t have the energy.”

Yeah, Nimoy and Shatner, had much more pull in TOS movies than this.

The interviewer noting that “Abrams is elliptical about the film, even by J. J. Abrams standards.” just screams volumes about why Pine is frustrated. Anyone in Bad Robot’s orbit just talks in circles all the time. All the talent potentially involved with Trek XIV has moved on, because they are in demand, and you can’t work when all a potential project gives you is double, or elliptical talk.


They moved on because these movies don’t make real money. If the last three movies made what the Transformers movies did more would’ve stuck around.

There is a reason why Michael Bay did five TF movies and Abrams bailed after the second Kelvin movie. One made hand over fist in profits, the other one just broke even or bombed.

Like why doesn’t Abrams just direct this one then? Isn’t it weird how the guy who started these movies in the first place and has less to do these days since WB has turned down practically every TV show or movie the pitched for DC doesn’t seem to have any interest to do it?

Here’s the opportunity to step in and direct the next one once Shakman left just like he stepped in to direct Episode 9 when Colin Trevorrow left. Here is the chance for history to repeat itself. But that’s not happening, I wonder why?

Probably because either they can’t afford the guy anymore or it’s not enough potential money for a backend deal Abrams to do it like he made with Star Wars.

There could be a third reason and after making huge stinkers like STID and TROS they don’t want him near this either. But we know Hollywood doesn’t care about making quality stuff, only money. It’s why Bay made five Transformers movies in the first place. 🙄

So it’s probably just a money issue.

Star Trek Beyond was so boring, the other films were very disapointing overall but not boring as such, but Star Trek beyond just felt…boring, and it had the scale of a very expensive TV movie to me. They have soooo much potential with the Kelvin crew, each film has had moments of brilliance, true “Trek” moments, but they are just moments lost in a big budget mess of a dumbed down movie series. I dont know what to say, the last 20 years of Star Trek has been awful it really has struggled in the 21st Century, I include Nemesis and ENT in that and I am fans of both.

The real life tragedy of 9/11 disproved Star Trek‘s thesis once and for all. That’s why everything we see now is either a pastiche of the 60s version or a gritty “update” with the label of Star Trek stretched over underlit Blade Runner ripoff schlock.


I’m not exactly sure what “thesis” 09/11 disproved once and for all, so I think that probably overstates it some. But there is no question that the classical Trek value of depicting a positive, rational future has been pretty devalued, and at this juncture is pretty out of touch with the culture. Plenty was going wrong in the world when TOS and its spinoffs were on the air — wars, assassinations, crime, environmental calamities, etc. — but there was also a sense that the world could be different, and the one thing liberals and conservatives alike took for granted was that there was at least a fair chance that their children would have it better than they did, as had been the case for every generation after the postwar boom. That, unfortunately, is no longer the case. So I’ll repeat the question I’ve been asking since the Picard season premiere: if Star Trek no longer exists to portray a more hopeful future than you can get in other genre offerings, what exactly is it for?

Spoken like an old, disillusioned liberal…and I get that, because I am one of those too!

I say that because I do see a lot of positive young people today who do have a better vision for the future. And for them, yes, we need more positive Star Trek — like what see see on SNW, Prodigy and DSC, for the most part, not like what we are getting on Picard Into Darkness and Cynical Decks, for the most part.

To turn a profit for Paramount in order to cover losses in Viacom’s larger portfolio.

I used to think that if Trek could convey optimism while on the air in 1968 — a year when it seemed the balloon went up (or is it down?) on world madness — that it would probably survive tough times again with the proper stewardship.

But the last few years (or the last 30 odd years if you want to go back to when I got seriously concerned about the environment in addition to all the other Big Things) have really provoked equal measures despair and rage in me, and a Pollyanna future barely works even as escapism. Older Trek still works for me because it is protected against my cynicism by its preexistence in a memory bubble of my youth, but honestly, the TREK that remains relevant for me is mainly the darker DS9 stuff: PAST TENSE nails things decades ahead of time, s31 shows what it needs to about governments and IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT is prid near perfect.

Sorry to pee on the wedding cake, but that’s my two cents. Now I got to go back to editing my PICARD article, which is quadruple the length it is supposed to be. (Too bad startrek.com and the newest version of the TREK magazine never respond to my inquiries, because I could keep them well-fed with just my leftovers.)

…there is no question that the classical Trek value of depicting a positive, rational future has been pretty devalued, and at this juncture is pretty out of touch with the culture. Plenty was going wrong in the world when TOS and its spinoffs were on the air — wars, assassinations, crime, environmental calamities, etc. — but there was also a sense that the world could be different…

This is a fascinating discussion. I’m not *not* convinced, but I’m not convinced, either. :)

TOS premiered in 1966 — that’s just over 20 years after V-E day, longer than the time that has passed between 9/11 and today.

If TOS could credibly portray an optimistic future a mere 20 years after the Holocaust, and indeed a mere 40 years after the Great War, I’m not sure why 9/11 precludes modern Trek from doing so as well.

I’d throw out the following hypotheses:

1. The issue is not so much 9/11 or other world events, but *domestic* politics — after Watergate, the loss of confidence in domestic institutions, and the US government to “do the right thing,” made it harder to believe in a future with a robust, stable, morally positive polity like the Federation. In the early 1960, people believed in the righteousness of Western democracy. Watergate changed that, and although that crisis of confidence receded in the 1980s and immediate post-Cold War period (uncoincidentally, the time when TNG was made), it came back with a vengeance in the new century after the Great Recession. Just *why* it came back is a huge question for political scientists.

2. Roddenberry and his cohort were not just garden-variety Hollywood producers — they served in the war, and then as a civilian commercial pilot with PanAm. Say what you will about him, but he believed in that future despite lived experience that showed how hard it would be to achieve. JJ’s lived experience is what, Hasty Pudding?

This is a fascinating (sorry) conversation to have. I think the parallel I would make is that in the mid 60’s, the nation was dealing with the existential dread of the A bomb constantly looming over them. If embracing space socialism meant not having the bomb dropped on themselves, that was something to look forward to! Now, the clear existential threats hanging over us constantly are not just the bomb, but also the wealth gap, a charred environment with the slimmest of chances of turning around, an economy that has pivoted to the exact opposite of socialism that we have healthcare from Amazon (owned by the richest person on the planet). The hopeful optimism of TOS Trek (which I still unabashedly love and show to my child) is not applicable. SNW did a radical thing (in my opinion) right off the bat in the pilot episode by showing familiar images to us 21st century rubes and pairing them with fabricated images of WWIII to show that it will get worse, much worse before it gets better. It shows us that we will pay for our follies but that we may still be resolute if we rely on each other to solve issues.

The nice thing about current Trek isn’t that all the programming is solid (spoiler, it isn’t) but that each show gives different people different views through which to help understand our humanity. Having trouble coping with trauma? There’s Discovery. Need a kids show that portrays a diverse group of kids working together? There’s Prodigy. Need a show about dealing with multiple midlife neurosis? There’s Picard. Want the old feeling of episodic cowboys in space? There’s Strange New Worlds. Need a good laugh while wallowing in the warm blanket that is 24th century LCARS and uniforms? There’s Lower Decks.

I didn’t mean to make this a defense of the franchise as a whole and sorry if I derailed the thread a bit, but I am one of the most cynical people I know and having a son that I am mostly convinced will grow up in a capitalist hellscape makes me reach for any amount of hope I can. I usually find writing and thinking about Trek gives me that so I think they’re still abiding by the original mantra set forth in the 1960’s. At least for me.

I find it very courageous that you even had a kid given that viewpoint. I knew that I couldn’t ever live with myself if I brought a kid into the world, given the way I saw the world as far back as the mid-70s when I was a teen. I spent a couple decades waiting for a vasectomy procedure to become free before finally shelling out for it myself. My wife and I always and only wanted to adopt, but never came across any situation where we’d qualify financially.

There’s a little core of gushy optimism in nearly all cynics, and Trek really used to tap that expertly with me. But that was another century …

For me Star Trek has been awful with Enterprise and only got worse JJ verse (but I thought all those were better than Nemesis at least) and more awful with Discovery and Picard.

Now I like more of that today. Really came to like Enterprise once I watched it and I did like Beyond but yeah it is on the boring side but a quality film. Picard is finally feeling like Star Trek to me this season but I said the same thing about the first two seasons after the first few episodes only to turn into huge stinkers, so not jumping the gun yet

But it’s sad I have been mostly unfulfilled since Voyager went off the air until very recently when LDS, SNW and PRO showed up. And I know some fans are still mixed on those shows too. But I am enjoying it more personally today, it just sucks it took this long.

Can’t be too compelling if no one is ponying up the money to make it, and the studio is waffling on starting it.

Even if the story was the most compelling thing ever conceived, this is a commercial business and the studio’s overriding concern is whether the pic would make money. The Kelvin films’ track record at the box office is pretty spotty. It ST films made bank, we wouldn’t be talking about when the fourth film is going to be released. We’d be eagerly anticipating the seventh.

Untrue. Film studios don’t make monetary decisions based on how compelling something is.

You’re splitting hairs on semantics there. Whatever the process is for evaluating a potential project, if compelling is one of the adjectives used to describe it, then they’ll make their decision accordingly. Outside of JJ talking it up, no one seems to be in a rush to make this movie (we’re assuming this story even exists). No one else seems too….compelled….by it.

Abrams wouldn’t know compelling if it hit him in the head.

If finding a director is the issue, why not JJ himself?

It would be erroneous to assume Abrahm’s isn’t busy.

JONATHAN FRAKES has been saying all along he’d direct a JJ ‘Trek film ….. what’s stopping Paramount (and JJ) from asking him, if they’re ONLY waiting to find a director?

Another candidate I would put forward from Star Trek is Olatunde, perhaps my favorite Trek director right now.

The problem with Olatunde is that he doesn’t know what a tripod is. Hand held camera works for action scenes, but when two people are talking and having a quiet moment he still has the camera bouncing around. It’s jarring and constantly pulls me out of the story.

Jesus Christ, no. All that guy knows how to do is spin a camera.

What’s stopping Paramount? Maybe no script. No story. No investors. Clearly, no budget.
And Frakes waffles just a bit on directing, as well. Seems he does have other projects going on.

Yeah…all of this! 🤣

Simple answer. He doesn’t want to.

Because JJ will want a huge paycheck which will prevent it from being made on a reasonable budget. Trek was never a passion project for him, it was a job.

It was supposed to be a cash cow, with him wanting TPTB to suppress all other merchandise so that Kelvingear would have a wide-open road. When that didn’t happen, he probably washed at least one of his hands of it for good. And I’m more than fine with it going down that way.

I thought the 2009 film was great, which has re-watch value for me to this day. As does Beyond, which was very good except for pretty much wasting the talents of Idris Elba. As for STID, if it were a newspaper, I wouldn’t even deem to line my birdcage with it.

Overall, I find Abrams/Bad Robot to be very overrated. And please, stop using Beastie Boys songs in Trek movies.

Sooner or later Paramount will make this with the Kelvin crew! Its all about budget how little or how much they want to spend but in 2009 they went big & got approx $1.5b out of the franchise with 3 films. They just need to go big again relaunch the Kelvin crew with another mega budget JJ production with lens flare searing out of every frame & even JJ himself directing perhaps!

As crazy as that sounds, I think you’re right

Otherwise no point making another Trek movie the setup costs for new ship & crew are too high! Give the Kelvin one last adventure I think will do big box office & get a few more movies with this cast!

Makes no sense. A. They already have to make a new ship since they destroyed the last one lol. B. You think it will cost more to hire a new actor than it would to keep Zoe Saldana around who has already been in three of these and can command even more money now since her last three movies were Infinity War, Endgame and Avatar 2? Bro all those movies made more money in a single weekend than Beyond made total. 🤣🤣

What are you talking about??! New actors would be way less money unless they are Tom Cruise or Matt Damon replacing them lol.

They probably should fire the cast and just hire Cruise to do it and the next movie might actually make money.

I don’t get the lens flare or Apple bridge; SNW did that all much better with a smaller budget.
I’d use the SNW bridge sets, ships just go with that’s the Kelvin “movie era” or restore the timeline or something along those lines.
Go full motion picture era with Carol Marcus, Saavik, etc but something totally different like trying to stop a civilization from triggering a Higgs collapse at a supermassive black hole and go totally new with the 1701 ending up on some cross-galaxy expedition to stop it before everything (including the prime timeline) is doomed. Try to combine TMP with TWOK in some LOTR type adventure, something that should be possible but has never truly been done.

That’s not bad, something a little along the lines of what John Black pitched as a feature back in the 70s.

I always want to say that a small but successful Trek feature would be the way to go, but small, even if profitable, doesn’t often leave a mark that spurs more interest (look at Karl Urban’s DREDD — no followup and it has been over a decade I think.)

Is there just a whiff of sarcasm here?

Bro the last one bombed! No one cared about it but Trekkies and that was 3 years after STID. Now I don’t even think even a lot of Trekkies care about these movies anymore which means the next movie can bomb harder than Beyond did it the budget is too high again.

Why else has there been no movie after 7 years? It’s just money. Either they still don’t have enough to make a movie or they don’t think it will make enough. That’s all it is. If Beyond made a billion dollars, the next one would’ve been made years ago with an even bigger budget.

But instead it flopped, people aren’t dying to give the next movie more money because they will probably flop too. On top of that the cast can now ask for whatever they want not being under contract anymore and why no one has called Chris Pine. 🤣

I get why he’s complaining, but he’s also part of the problem. If they could make another big movie like Beyond they would just make the movie by now. It’s been 7 years! 😜

Pine should direct ST4. Obviously! They just need to ask him.

I just read the VF story. I don’t think that’s something Pine is interested in doing.

I like Chris Pine because, unlike pretty much everyone else involved with Trek, he’s not a hype machine. He’s an honest and thoughtful person.

One big problem is that the cast is now VERY expensive and that defeats the purpose of trying to make a film on a modest budget.

Well, perhaps the State of the Art now with Greenscreen and Monitor walling could reduce some Budget. But Today you need more CGI as in the Past and i bet many Star Trek “Pipeline CGI Artists” have their hand full with TV Series and such

But well, perhaps they can hunt for Ex-Game High Qualify Animators. They are trowing some of them out, because of saving Money. Same Ships but different Decks. could work

Go back to the TOS movie sequel model. Limit the number of space and transporter and ship shots to 150 cuts, not 1500.

And I find it terribly ironic that Pine is pushing for a lower budget. “Ok, Chris, we found a way to make it for $90m. You just have to do it for a $1m salary.” Crickets…

Quinto, Cho and Urban are doing TV shows. How pricey could they be? These guys aren’t Tom Holland or The Rock.

Semi-warm take: Pine is right. Trek films are never gonna make Marvel levels of money. Paramount would do well to disabuse themselves that they are.

Anyone in their right mind agrees!

I feel like Paramount is stalling and waiting for the clock to run out on JJ’s Kelvin Trek. It seems like it is going to be very close to a decade since Beyond before anything new is back in theaters.

With the Prime timeline of Star Trek flourishing on P+, how long will any interest in the unrelated and dormant Kelvin Trek last?

There are many questioning (including Paramount perhaps?) that the streaming series are flourishing, as you contend.

Who are the “many questioning” other than trolls here in the chat room? The streaming series objectively are flourishing as they are at the forefront of everything that Paramount+ publicizes.

Lots of people like those youtubers who have been yelling at the sky that Kurtzman is going to be fired ANY DAY NOW because new Star Trek is a failure, viewership is in the toilet, and Nick Meyer has ALREADY signed on to replace him! Haven’t you heard????

One can hope Trellium G.

2009 is the only Kelvin movie I could get my family to watch, and it convinced them to stick with the prime timeline. I can’t see myself going to a theatre to watch one alone.

I notice in hindsight that Paramount stuck JJ with making the announcement of the fourth movie launch window to investors…a deadline he’s failing to meet.

The fact that Abrams himself now seems to feel compelled to keep the hype alive suggests he’s not in a position of strength.

And why would he be?

His tentpole projects are not doing well.

Star Trek 4 should be about Kirk traveling back in time to save his father (aka Chris Hemsworth). In the process he sacrifices the Enterprise and dies dramatically but manages to restore the timeline. This erases the Kelvin alternate universe and puts everything back in place. It wound be a nice closure and ends the way the whole movie series started.

Of course the Alternative Universe is separate from the main universe so nothing needs fixing.

I’d direct it and I’d do it for 100.000 to 200,000. But I’m not really all that experienced with big budget films. Still to work on a Trek film is a dream of mine. I’ll do whatever the current prenise they got is though and not fight then. I will push it to be better of course. If anyone there at Paramount wants to contact me we can talk about it. Not that I expect them to from a post on this forum.

To summarise: I don’t feel like I need anymore of this crew. It’s too late. That era is closed for me. The series franchise is way ahead and currently way more interesting. I’m talking about SNW and any new post-TNG era series.

I feel bad for Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Urban, etc. These actors are constantly asked about a follow-up film. I don’t personally care about the Kelvin timeline … I would rather Paramount pour any money for the Trek film franchise into Kurtzman’s coffers.

A surefire way to generate the most comments in the least amount of time is to post an article on ST 4.

Maybe JJ Abrams should direct it. I mean he probably has enough pull left with the studio to actually get the movie made. Though i still believe the 4th movie as real as George Lucas sequel Star Wars trilogy. As in its not getting made.

After “Rise of Skywalker,” I’d prefer Abrams never direct anything else ever again.

I could be devil’s advocate and say he had to course correct after Last Jedi, but i won’t because JJ never had a plan. If only he had bothered to outline, and figured out who Rey was and had an actual arc for Luke. All he did was remake A New Hope. There were some interesting ideas i liked Rey as a scavenger and the idea of Finn as a renegade former stromtrooper turned Jedi. But it never went anywhere. The least interesting to me was Kylo as the new Vader. Why did Luke search for the first Jedi temple, why was there a map. A bunch of mystery boxes. And Last Jedi didn’t answer them. Also JJ making Rey a Palpatine i also found incredibly disappointing.

JJ was handed an impossible task with that film, and I guarantee he didn’t even want to do it. But they wanted his name attached, and probably thought that if anyone could clean up that mess it could be him, and backed up a brinks truck to convince him.

The real question is why they didn’t just contract him for all three in the first place, so there could be at the very least one clean story, win or lose.


Pine is frankly right. And I’m not even a fan. Trek was never going to pull in Marvel money and they should spend less on the movie and expect modest returns. As many of the TOS era movies showed us, You can make classic timeless movies on a limited budget if you Just Stick To the STORY!

“I always thought, Why aren’t we just appealing to this really rabid fan group and making the movie for a good price and going on our merry way, instead of trying to compete with the Marvels of the world?”
At least Sad Robot did a decent job casting Kirk because that Pine guy is also smarter than the admirals.

Just feed ChatGTP with all those attempted scripts and ideas for ST4 (and the rejected for ST3) and we might get a story…

Chris Pine nailed it on the head. It goes to show you that the actual artists and creators understand the real potential and niche this franchise holds. It’s the number crunchers at the top trying to squeeze every damn penny out of us that create issues. Good on Pine for allowing his frustration to boil over. A combination of passion for the material and being self aware enough to know he’s ready to move on if it’s just going to cause frustration.

I’m of the opinion that the movie franchise needs a new “showrunner”, because it really demands someone’s undivided attention, and I mean no slight to JJ Abrams when I say his undivided attention is a rare commodity.

Is anyone even looking for a fourth movie at this point?

If pine wants the film made on a tighter budget he could have helped by accepting a lesser fee.

I’m hoping Star Trek 4 is base on TOS “Assignment: Earth” and TOS “Tomorrow is Yesterday” together. It would make a super Star Trek movie.

A better formula for success is to stop trying to recast old characters with new actors. Just invent new characters and tell new stories with those guys.