Director JJ Abrams told Paramount investors the news. The last S.T Movie was terrible, so don't expect an enormous Budget. Wobbly studio sets might make a comeback, and he hasn't got the original cast to sign on the dotted line yet.
https://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/1211841-star-trek-fourth-movie?fbclid=IwAR3Ov0UobKzYOAI_PW88zLNSCyw-uNnIta1yFXOGwdBdFxiYTAg1qZVB_w4
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 February, 2022, 09:30:12 AM
Director JJ Abrams told Paramount investors the news. The last S.T Movie was terrible...
...But still several orders of magnitude better than the incoherent mess that was
Into Darkness.
(https://c.tenor.com/X6E3tjmanvYAAAAd/stop-already-dead.gif)
Star Trek Beyond was perfectly alright. But I'm not interested in another reboot. Get the same cast, or make a film about different characters.
Quote from: IAMTHESYSTEM on 16 February, 2022, 09:30:12 AM
The last S.T Movie was terrible...
It
performed terribly; I'm not sure that's the same thing. Critically it did very well indeed, and as Jim says was at least far superior to
...Into Darkness.
Empire was reporting it was same cast.
I right enjoyed the 2009 reboot and Beyond. Into Darkness, considerably less so.
I'm up for this.
Star Trek on big screen is ideal for telling any number of great stories because people being familiar with the concept saves us from origin-story-itis; far from dead in this sauropods eyes.
Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage
I disliked the reboot for all manner of reasons. Aside from the three films objectively not being that great, the run lacked the courage to not tie itself to the original continuity (which it then bafflingly also hand-waved away and essentially wiped from existence). And it lacked the courage to make meaningful change. This future Earth is a relative utopia, and yet the primary crew are almost all white men. But don't worry, everyone, because there's a comms officer who is a woman and POC! So that's two boxes ticked in an efficient manner. Oh, and we'll further rebalance the cast in a sequel, making everyone happy by showing a new science officer in her pants. FFS.
(Also, having watched every episode of The Expanse, anything Star Trek is going to have to work very hard for me to give the slightest shit about it now—and I don't think it's capable.)
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 February, 2022, 11:28:56 AM
...it lacked the courage to make meaningful change. This future Earth is a relative utopia, and yet the primary crew are almost all white men. But don't worry, everyone, because there's a comms officer who is a woman and POC! So that's two boxes ticked in an efficient manner. Oh, and we'll further rebalance the cast in a sequel, making everyone happy by showing a new science officer in her pants. FFS.
You forgot about the asian fella*. I get your point, but I think that's just an artefact of being based on a show from the '60s. Still, they should have at least included the cat lady** or three-armed guy from the cartoon.
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 February, 2022, 11:28:56 AM
(Also, having watched every episode of The Expanse, anything Star Trek is going to have to work very hard for me to give the slightest shit about it now—and I don't think it's capable.)
They won't work very hard. Everything about 21st century Star Trek has symptoms of laziness born of the people in charge just not caring. JJ Abrams publically stated he doesn't even like Star Trek***. There's no thoughtfulness to any of it.
Do you know why the Vulcan nerve pinch was created? Because Spock needed to knock someone out, and they decided Spock would never stoop to anything as primitive and base as punching someone in the face****. I don't know if it was Nimoy, Roddenberry, one of the writers, or a collaborative effort, but they put thought into characterization and a punch became a pinch.
JJ Abrams makes a Star Trek Movie:
(https://i.imgur.com/qkiS6rX.gif)
I don't know why he wants to make another one. Maybe he has a good script, but given his track record I highly doubt it. The last one didn't make much money, but I guess he knows nerds are easy marks and he's probably not allowed near Star Wars anymore.
*whose foil was replaced with a katana because asian and apparently you have to set phasers on stun, but you can bring a lethal bladed weapon too
**it would get a certain subcultures befurred bums in seats
***it was on Jon Stewarts show and I don't want to look it up/link to it because the algorithm will start filling my feed with angry rants from Dubya's administration
****outside of ponn farr horniness
I enjoy the reboots more than bloody Discovery, which teeters on the edge of adequate.
Quoteapparently you have to set phasers on stun
No you don't, the 2009 film explicitly shows Kirk switching his phaser to kill on the Romulan ship.
Quotethe run lacked the courage to not tie itself to the original continuity (which it then bafflingly also hand-waved away and essentially wiped from existence).
That seems to me like a rather odd interpretation; surely that is exactly and explicitly not tying itself to the original continuity?!
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2022, 12:11:42 PMYou forgot about the asian fella*
I didn't—I said
mostly white men.
QuoteI get your point, but I think that's just an artefact of being based on a show from the '60s.
No, it's down to decisions made with intent. There is no reason why, in a reboot, they couldn't have gender flipped half the leads, and made some more of them not white. BSG, while flawed and not doing that with enough characters, managed some of that. It's just laziness, a lack of imagination and, probably, a fear of fanboys throwing their toys out of their prams (which also happened with BSG, because, apparently, the original Starbuck was an icon of science fiction) that leads to the status quo.
QuoteI don't know why he wants to make another one. Maybe
My guess: ££££££$$$$$$€€€€€€.
Quote from: Richard on 16 February, 2022, 02:29:07 PMThat seems to me like a rather odd interpretation; surely that is exactly and explicitly not tying itself to the original continuity?!
Not really. It tied itself to it and then discarded it, which is the worst of all worlds. Nimoy should not have been in that first film—or at least he shouldn't have played Spock. Just start afresh, without baggage.
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 16 February, 2022, 03:06:29 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2022, 12:11:42 PMYou forgot about the asian fella*
I didn't—I said mostly white men.
QuoteI get your point, but I think that's just an artefact of being based on a show from the '60s.
No, it's down to decisions made with intent. There is no reason why, in a reboot, they couldn't have gender flipped half the leads, and made some more of them not white... It's just laziness, a lack of imagination and, probably, a fear of fanboys throwing their toys out of their prams ... that leads to the status quo.
Fair enough. They might not neccessarily have had to gender flip anyone. Having given it a bit more thought, they could have included Janice Rand, but gave her a more senior role. Flip the roles and make Christine Chapel Chief of Medicine, with Bones as Head Nurse. Make "Number One" the XO (but y'know, give her an actual name) and make Spock just the Science Ofiicer . I would not be surprised if they didn't know these characters existed though.
As much as I like Simon Pegg, a gender-flipped Scotty (Tammy O'Shanter?) couldn't be much worse than his portrayal.
But I think we can all agree that the worst of all the casting decisions was having Bones played by Carl Urban AND THEN BARELY FUCKING USING HIM!
Quote
QuoteI don't know why he wants to make another one. Maybe
My guess: ££££££$$$$$$€€€€€€.
Well yeah, like I said, nerds are an easy mark.
Quote from: Richard on 16 February, 2022, 02:27:21 PM
Quoteapparently you have to set phasers on stun
No you don't, the 2009 film explicitly shows Kirk switching his phaser to kill on the Romulan ship.
Yes, I'm aware phasers have both a stun and kill settings. My issue was that, from everything I had seen in Star Trek up to this movie, "Set phasers to stun" seemed to be the standard procedure. The Federation/Starfleet was presented with a pacifist organisation that had developed a weapon that could render an aggressor unconscious without maiming or leaving horrible scars. The kill setting was for extreme circumstances. Lethal force and unneccessary violence was frowned upon. So Starfleet officers carrying swords as a matter of course seems a bit off to me. A contemporary military officer carrying a sword would be weird. A knife? OK, but a sword? And contemporary militaries are most certainly not pacifist organisations.
Even Worf left his batleth at home.
Mostly.
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2022, 04:09:13 PM
A contemporary military officer carrying a sword would be weird.
Aha, yes! But this is THE FUTURE! Here is some irrefutable evidence in support of my case:
(https://www.fastgamsat.com/wp-content/uploads/Drive-me-closer-I-want-to-hit-them-with-my-sword-Macro.png)
I keep meaning to look into Warhammer 40,000. Is there a resource that summarises or abridges the first 39,999?
Quote from: Mister Pops on 16 February, 2022, 05:57:38 PM
I keep meaning to look into Warhammer 40,000. Is there a resource that summarises or abridges the first 39,999?
Yes, but you have to paint it yourself.
I think you're overthinking the bit with the sword, it was only done as a joke really.
Someone: "We need people with combat experience."
Sulu: "Pick me, I have loads of combat experience!"
Someone: "Great, you're in!"
Sulu: "Yay!"
(Later) Kirk: "What is your combat experience anyway?"
Sulu: "Fencing."
Sulu's eyes: "I dare you to mock me, fucker."
Kirk: "...oh, right."
That's barely a joke, and if I can't nit-pick Star Trek, what's the point of even having an internet?
Porn, obvs.
(https://c.tenor.com/be9gaBFH1dYAAAAC/kirk-mccoy.gif)
Does Warhammer 40K meet Star Trek? A mighty short meeting since the Emporers finest detest Xenos and loathe tolerance. No, I assume it might be Earthbound due to costs, so setting it on Earth, a Spacestation, or even Starfleet Academy will save a pretty coin or two. With JJ Abrams in control, I'm keeping my expectations very grounded. Creative hell might await the intrepid Enterprise crew rather than exploring the galaxy.
As someone who absolutely enjoyed the hell out of the last three Trek movies -and never understood some of the vitriol that was sent their way - I can't wait to see this new one. Maybe I'm just easily pleased? :-\
I didn't mind them, but Benedict Bandersnatch being able to teleport across the galaxy on a whim was a bit pants. I thought the first one reinventing the franchise for a nu generation was rather bold (ly going), the second one was a bit pants and the third one was just fine, but not really rocking my world.
All three much better than Quantum Trek or anything that's come after it, series-wise.
Quote from: paddykafka on 17 February, 2022, 03:31:31 PM
As someone who absolutely enjoyed the hell out of the last three Trek movies -and never understood some of the vitriol that was sent their way - I can't wait to see this new one. Maybe I'm just easily pleased? :-\
You're not alone! They have a lot going for them. I was gobsmacked by the first of the three reboot movies, absolutely floored. The casting was perfect, the designs eye-popping, the action visceral. The shine has rubbed off a little over time, but I've watched it several times since then.
Quantum Trek was OK. A bit uneven and I don't think a prequel series was a great idea, but it gets bonus points for its bold choice of a Christian rock theme tune.
Quote from: The Legendary Shark on 16 February, 2022, 01:21:07 PM
I enjoy the reboots more than bloody Discovery, which teeters on the edge of adequate.
I doubt anyone who enjoys Star Trek is involved in that show. If there is, they're fans who think season one of Next Gen and DS9 were the best, or that Wesley Crusher and Neelix were inspirational. Maybe they hired a Trek advisor who's a bigger fraud than the indigenous American consultant they hired to flesh out Chakotay.
Quote from: Mister Pops on 20 February, 2022, 11:22:25 PMI doubt anyone who enjoys Star Trek is involved in that show.
Wow. You gate-keeping fuckers can piss right off. I really quite like Discovery — if it doesn't tally with your notion of the One True Trek™ then, y'know, just don't watch it.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 20 February, 2022, 11:38:54 PM
Quote from: Mister Pops on 20 February, 2022, 11:22:25 PMI doubt anyone who enjoys Star Trek is involved in that show.
Wow. You gate-keeping fuckers can piss right off. I really quite like Discovery — if it doesn't tally with your notion of the One True Trek™ then, y'know, just don't watch it.
If you enjoy it, don't let me stop you. I have stopped watching, but I suspect if it was still on Netflix, I would be persisting through morbid curiosity.
I don't have a notion of One True Trek
TM. However both Abrams and Kurtzmann have both stated in televised interviews* that they don't like Star Trek. It's "too philosophical" for them apparently. I have a problem with that. Just like I would have a problem with some randomer taking over Dredd even though they thought it was "too satirical" and then made him a big stupid selfish crybaby.
I try not to be a dick about things I don't like, but modern Star Trek just seems to trigger me.
*See previous comments about it being on John Stewarts show and not wanting to search/link to it to avoid the algorithm inundating me with anti-Dubya era rants
Yeah, what Pops said.
Just because I find Discovery disappointing, that doesn't mean I think everyone else should, too. (Indeed, my favourite Trek iteration used to be Enterprise, which isn't a popular choice amongst fans, but I didn't cry because nobody else thought the same. My favourite Trek now (by the narrowest of margins) is Lower Decks, which seems to be made by people who do love the whole universe of the show.) It's the philosophy of it that I'm a fan of more than anything else. For example, in First Contact Picard says something like, "We no longer work for personal financial gain, these days we work to improve ourselves," and I think that's brilliant. Enterprise charts the initial journey out of a devastating global war as mankind struggles to find a better way to move forward, even finding a way to deal with the Xindi that doesn't involve just blowing the crap out of them. Discovery, to me, just says that, aside from all the incredible technology, the future will just be more of the same - and I hate that. That's what The Expanse is for - and it does a far better job of it than Discovery ever could.
"Gatekeepers" - Jesus, Jim, we like different things, expect different things. Live with it and enjoy the show.
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 February, 2022, 12:24:02 AM
I don't have a notion of One True TrekTM. However both Abrams and Kurtzmann have both stated in televised interviews* that they don't like Star Trek. It's "too philosophical" for them apparently. I have a problem with that.
"'Star Trek' is my favorite show of all time," he admitted. "But for some reason it never clicked with me until I started working on it, and then I fell in love with it."
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/blogs/movie-talk/j-j-abrams-star-trek-too-philosophical-192548775.html
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 February, 2022, 12:24:02 AM
I try not to be a dick about things I don't like, but modern Star Trek just seems to trigger me.
Sorry. That was unnecessarily grumpy. I'd had a somewhat bruising run-in elsewhere with some
real gate-keepery types and it wasn't fair to take that out on you. Apologies again.
Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 21 February, 2022, 11:08:18 AM
Sorry. That was unnecessarily grumpy. I'd had a somewhat bruising run-in elsewhere with some real gate-keepery types and it wasn't fair to take that out on you. Apologies again.
No need to apologize, I know the types you mean and I'm quite aware I could easily get lumped in with them. And grumpiness is a necessity when talking about things you care about. Notice how I haven't posted any snark about the gritty Fresh Prince* reboot**, because although I enjoyed it back in the day, and think Uncle Phil is one of the best role models for fathers everywhere, I don't care as much.
Quote from: wedgeski on 21 February, 2022, 09:31:02 AM
"'Star Trek' is my favorite show of all time," he admitted. "But for some reason it never clicked with me until I started working on it, and then I fell in love with it."
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/blogs/movie-talk/j-j-abrams-star-trek-too-philosophical-192548775.html
It seems like he saying he started liking it when it started paying.
Edit to clarify: I don't dislike the reboot movies or new TV shows because they have failed some sort of Trek purity test, I dislike like them because they have failed on their own merits. Shows like The Expanse, The BSG reboot and even going back to Farscape are/were better at doing the things STD and Picard are trying.
*if you're unfamiliar, I can provide a summary of the premise in rap form
**no really, Will Smith has actually done this
If they want to keep the budget down, then they should just do a remake of Star Trek IV :)
If they were going to remake something, Star Trek has plenty of good ideas, poorly executed. Star Trek IV is not one of them. In fact, The Voyage Home is kind of the opposite; a pretty fucking daft idea executed really well. It might be my favourite. Definitely doesn't need remade.
Quote from: Mister Pops on 21 February, 2022, 11:14:03 PM
The Voyage Home is kind of the opposite; a pretty fucking daft idea executed really well. It might be my favourite. Definitely doesn't need remade.
I agree with all of this. Tremendous fun.
If there was going to be a remake or reboot, I think Voyager might work - that was the series for me that never really lived up to its potential.