IDW Star Trek Ongoing...

[The Wormhole]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

I hope the Uhura one-shot focuses on her and not on her relationship with Spock - ah who am I kidding she's a girl, of course it's going to be about her love for her man.

Most likely it's about her pre-Trek XI life, just like the McCoy one was about his pre-Trek XI life and ditto the Keenser one. Although since Trek XI implied Spock and Uhura were already in a relationship, I guess it's possible this could cover how they met.

[serenitytrek1]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

Most likely it's about her pre-Trek XI life, just like the McCoy one was about his pre-Trek XI life and ditto the Keenser one. Although since Trek XI implied Spock and Uhura were already in a relationship, I guess it's possible this could cover how they met.

I kind of have mixed feeling of Uhura’s story because of the romance.

I am hoping the writer of this comics read the star fleet academy series as it does explain how their relationship started. The last book even implied when they first slept together.

I know the star fleet academy novels are not suppose to be canon but I still loved reading them as YA fiction.

It will be nice if the comic showed some consistency to the novels.

[Pauln6]

Issue 21 is confirmed as taking place after the sequel so that gives us a timeline. It also explains why they decided to fill in with origin stories. I hope they don't kill off one of the Big 7. I'd be a bit upset if we were only given a few issues retelling TOS stories with the full crew compliment.

[Christopher]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

I hope they don't kill off one of the Big 7.

Doubtful. Given the lengths they went through to establish the familiar, expected core cast in the first movie, even when it required contrivances like a wunderkind Chekov who was four years older than he was supposed to be, it seems unlikely that they'd make a fundamental change in that core cast in the very next film.

[ryan123450]

But it wouldn't be until the next film that the change really sticks.

[Christopher]

ryan123450 wrote:

---

But it wouldn't be until the next film that the change really sticks.

Even so. We got six TOS movies with the same core seven cast members, even when it would've been more logical for them to move on to different ships or careers. We even got one of them back from the dead. The original idea with TWOK was to introduce a new, younger cast (starting with Saavik and David) who'd gradually take over from the TOS cast, but instead the new characters got written out and we kept getting the same seven over and over. It wasn't until the last movie in the series that anyone moved on. Same with TNG -- every movie maintained the same status quo, with Worf always coming back; and the one major change they attempted, Data's emotion chip, was progressively deconstructed with each film. Again, it wasn't until the last film that any permanent change was allowed.

Trek movie audiences want and demand a stable status quo. They want the same familiar characters in every movie, and that pressure for familiarity has been a stranglehold on Trek movies for three decades. No real, lasting change in the core cast has ever been allowed while any Trek movie series has been ongoing. I see no reason to believe that's going to change now.

[BillJ]

Christopher wrote:

---

Even so. We got six TOS movies with the same core seven cast members, even when it would've been more logical for them to move on to different ships or careers.

While I don't expect a major change at the end of this film with the cast (though I'm interested on why Chekov is seen in a red uniform), I do think we'll see Paramount taking greater risks in the future or else they risk alienating the general audiences they've lured back to Trek with the reboot.

Whether something major happens with the cast, the Enterprise or with the greater environment, Pine said he wasn't sure how they would do a third based on the events of Into Darkness. So that gives me hope that they're not going to just keep tossing us status quo films.

[Pauln6]

Christopher wrote:

---

Trek movie audiences want and demand a stable status quo. They want the same familiar characters in every movie, and that pressure for familiarity has been a stranglehold on Trek movies for three decades. No real, lasting change in the core cast has ever been allowed while any Trek movie series has been ongoing. I see no reason to believe that's going to change now.

While I agree, we also have to take into account that the TOS cast were very loyal to the franchise and even then, Majel Barrett largely bowed out due to behind the scenes issues, Grace Lee Whitney was considered superfluous, and Nimoy flip-flopped a couple of times. We can't assume that the NuTrek cast will have the same longevity after the 3 movie deal is done, particularly when Pine and Saldana's stars are on the rise. It's harder to tell with the other cast members - Urban and Pegg are genuine fans and would probably be keen to appear if at all possible, the others less so.

Still, I suppose that now they've bitten the bullet once, they could always re-cast characters as and when required if they want to carry on beyond the third movie. Or it may be that the movies make enough money that they can offer salaries to keep all the actors interested.

[Christopher]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

We can't assume that the NuTrek cast will have the same longevity after the 3 movie deal is done, particularly when Pine and Saldana's stars are on the rise.

Which doesn't mean anyone's going to be written out in the second movie.

Still, I suppose that now they've bitten the bullet once, they could always re-cast characters as and when required if they want to carry on beyond the third movie.

Just what I was about to suggest. These are already the second set of actors to play these characters, so more recasting is always a possibility. And other film franchises have managed to get away with recasting characters -- James Bond being the classic example.

[Therin of Andor]

Pauln6 wrote:

---

I'd be a bit upset if we were only given a few issues retelling TOS stories with the full crew compliment.

The death of Spock only affected a few issues of DC Comics' first post-ST II series. And post-ST III he was back! There were plenty of flashback issues to the TOS era in both of DC's runs.

Flashback stories are always possible, no matter what the trilogy of movies does to the main cast.

[Christopher]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

The death of Spock only affected a few issues of DC Comics' first post-ST II series. And post-ST III he was back!

Actually that's not true, since post-STIII, Paramount required DC to shunt Spock off to the sidelines, since they weren't sure yet what his status would be in the fourth film. So of the 27 issues that are set between III & IV, Spock is only a significant player in the initial 8-issue arc and then in 6 subsequent issues. It wasn't until after ST IV that Spock was a regular again. So the death of Spock technically affected at least 3/5 of the series's regular issues.

There were plenty of flashback issues to the TOS era in both of DC's runs.

Not quite. Volume 1 had only three stories set in the 5-year mission (one of which had a movie-era frame), plus one issue that brought the 5YM-era cast forward in time to the movie era. Vol. 2 had only one 5YM-era issue in the first 70 percent of its run, but more than half of its remaining issues -- including the whole final 10% of the run -- were mostly or entirely in the 5YM and pilot eras.

[ATimson]

BillJ wrote:

---

While I don't expect a major change at the end of this film with the cast (though I'm interested on why Chekov is seen in a red uniform)...

I'm assuming they're trying to do just a little more lead in to his eventual position as security chief, unlike what we got in the Prime Timeline...

If that is the case, does that really count as a "major change", since we've seen it before?

[BillJ]

ATimson wrote:

---

I'm assuming they're trying to do just a little more lead in to his eventual position as security chief, unlike what we got in the Prime Timeline...

If that is the case, does that really count as a "major change", since we've seen it before?

An 18-year old genius would seem ill-equipped to be security chief. I'm thinking it has something to do with a transfer to engineering. Whether it sticks or not is another story.

[Pauln6]

BillJ wrote:

---

An 18-year old genius would seem ill-equipped to be security chief. I'm thinking it has something to do with a transfer to engineering. Whether it sticks or not is another story.

Chekov Prime was ill-equipped to be security chief too (he was naive and more interested in scientific trivia than security protocols and he was always geting beaten up) but he did make a competent bridge tactical officer. No way should he ever be groomed to be security chief but aligning him to the security division to make more of his fast reactions and mathematical skills to improve weapon and shield use is a perfect fit. I never understood why you would want your chief of security sitting on the bridge opening hailing frequencies instead of being in charge of his department. Bridge tactical and small unit security do not have to be administered by the same person.

I'm still in favour of them introducing a new (alien?) female character as a security chief to try and even up the numbers but in a 2-hour movie I

[Therin of Andor]

Christopher wrote:

---

Actually that's not true

It is true. He was back. Not quite the way we were used to, but for the point of my response, it was enough. I thought.

Not quite. Volume 1 had only three stories set in the 5-year mission (one of which had a movie-era frame), plus one issue that brought the 5YM-era cast forward in time to the movie era...

But the existence of the movie era comics did not prevent the possibility of flashback issues. Those flashback issues reassured us that 5YM stories were not dead just because the characters were now appearing in movies set many years later. And later, during the Marvel/Paramount, WildStorm and IDW issues, five-year mission stories were common, so for the point of my answer, it seemed sufficient.

Expand on my answers all you like. I ran out of time to elaborate. But I wasn't wrong. Just too brief for your liking.