Star Trek Beyond pays homage to TOS

[Dales]

this is my worst fear coming to pass. Abrams has said he made mistakes in STID surely it must have taught them something.

Well, the spock/bones banter is itself a big 'homage', and so is the fact that so far it seems the movie is a white dudes fest (listening to Pegg it also seems Scotty is the third lead here) where the only kind of relationships with narrative importance are the friendships between males. Also as an attempt to pay homage to Nichols and the amazing 60s, Uhura's more contemporany and improved role in the trio dynamic seems to be toned down and she is downgraded.

It seems to me, the vibe I get from the last interviews, that this team is trying to preach about being better than the previous one and not do the mistakes they think stid did, except they ultimately do the same. They also keep saying what they think TOS fans want to hear. I loved Pine's honesty when he got asked about the trailer and Pegg's faux negative reaction about it ..he was like, well the trailer isn't exactly lying about the tone of the movie.

It sounds funny to say this but star trek tos is the worst enemy of this trek and any possible 'new' trek anyone will want to add. If I sound bitter it's because I'm. When I watched the first movie I loved it and it gave me hope, I thought trek wasn't dead and I was looking forward to see more of these characters and excited about the potential of new stories and see them in new dynamics. But it's hopeless because we're stuck in the 60s.
The new successful star wars gave people a female lead and hero and two supporting characters who are poc. What will trek give to people and this generation?

I don't think its a race thing and we can not compare the new star trek to star wars because star wars was set for brand new characters to lead with rey, finn and poe while star wars was based on old tos characters with new actors playing them.

its wrong and even upsetting to think star trek is racist. star trek has done just as much and even more for race relations than star wars even though I think both series have done well for race relations with characters like Lando from the original trilogy and Geordi and Guiyan from the next generation.

star wars was so going to be very successful with or without POC because it is freaking STAR WARS. star trek has never matched the commercial sucess of star wars regardless of the races of the characters. it is not a race issue and the white dude card is just wrong and misplaced because we know all this characters were white as they are based on TOS characters. we can't just assume that the spock/biones dynamic is a white dude fest that is indirectly implying the dynamic is racist in itself when it is not.

They could please TOS fans but not in the pretentious way they tried to do with STID where they lifted an entire scene from WOK and spock screaming khan.

I am not surprised about Pegg, as a writer for the film he was more likely to lift up the character he plays . this is why I don't really like actors writing their own scripts because it leads to a lot of wish fulfilment for the actor and the character.

my worst fear for this film will be the film to turn into Guardians of the Galaxy and fast and the furious and from the trailer.... looks my worst fear has been confirmed.


The new star wars was very serious and intense and boy I loved rey , finn and poe. they are currently my new favourite trio in films. the new star trek film from the trailer neither looks serious or intense.

 

[Malaika]

its wrong and even upsetting to think star trek is racist.

we can't just assume that the spock/biones dynamic is a white dude fest that is indirectly implying the dynamic is racist in itself when it is not.

you're off base here, especially with the second quoted comment. I think you're obsessing over one detail missing the whole point I was actually making.

there is a weird pattern in that everytime someone mentions the race of the characters, people seem to have an over defensive reaction about it and read accusations of racism even when there are none.
Nevertheless, to say that trek had always been a white dudes fest for the most part and maybe that should be corrected a bit especially in light of the 50th anniversary and honoring the Gene's 'ideal' that a lot of fans, including this team, keep preaching about, is =/= calling the writers or trek racist. Someone saying that downgrading Uhura's improved role in the reboot in favor of a story that puts 4 white male characters at front and center is =/= screaming about how racist trek is (if anything, the more implicit accusation might be that the writers are being sexist). Someone pointing up that this team might be doing that in a time where even the least progressive franchise (star wars) made a successful movie with a more diverse cast and a female lead character is also a simple consideration about hollywood.
Trek unlike star wars didn't really need to add new characters to improve some things or be more progressive or more in tune with our time and this generation. Trek simply needs to make a good use of what the franchise already has.

 

[Dales]

you're off base here. I think you're obsessing over one detail missing the whole point I was actually making.

there is a weird pattern in that everytime someone mentions the race of the characters, people seem to have an over defensive reaction about it and read accusations of racism even when there are none.
Nevertheless, to say that trek had always been a white dudes fest for the most part and maybe that should be corrected a bit especially in light of the 50th anniversary and honoring the Gene's 'ideal' that a lot of fans, including this team, keep preaching about, is =/= calling the writers or trek racist. Someone saying that downgrading Uhura's improved role in the reboot in favor of a story that puts 4 white male characters at front and center is =/= screaming about how racist trek is (if anything, the more implicit accusation might be that the writers are being sexist). Someone pointing up that this team might be doing that in a time where even the least progressive franchise (star wars) made a successful movie with a more diverse cast and a female lead character is also a simple consideration about hollywood.

if it was an entire new set of characters and a brand new movie with no ties to the past films then maybe the race of the characters will matter and we can have more diversity.

In TOS, we already have diversity . Spock is Vulcan, uhura is african, sulu is Asian and checkov is Russian.

Uhura can maintain her improved role. there is no rumour or actual prove that her role was down graded. It is possible to write a film and have 7 major characters.

the only rumour we heard was she and spock may have cooled things off. if we compare uhura directly to rey , it clears things up. rey was the major character in star wars and she was not officially in any romance with Finn at least not yet although the two are fond of eachother. so a female character can still have an improved role without been in an official romantic relationship. Rey wasn't in one and she was still the female lead. ending a romance between two characters does not mean the characters role are diminished just because spock and uhura may have broken up does not mean Uhura's role is diminished or downgraded in anyway.

What is sexist to me is for people to assume that just because Uhura is no longer Spock's honey means her role is official downgraded because it means that the only reason why her role was improved in the first place was because she was in a romance and that is sexist in itself.

 

[Ovation]

Why is anyone assuming Spock and Uhura are no longer a couple? My wife and I have been together for 16 years but we don't constantly interact every hour or even every day. If someone were to make a film covering our lives over a six month period (not that anyone should) it would be very easy to edit the story in such a way that we spend very little time together yet are still in a strong, loving relationship. Star Trek is not the story of Spock and Uhura's romance, so giving the relationship less attention in one instalment of a series of films is not tantamount to declaring the whole thing is over.

 

[Malaika]

Why is anyone assuming Spock and Uhura are no longer a couple?.

because apparently to some the speculations of a biased fanboy (Devin Faraci) over what the director said, and his sensational click-bait articles, matter more than what the director really said.

the only rumour we heard was she and spock may have cooled things off. if we compare uhura directly to rey , it clears things up.

I don't even get what's your point here

besides, if you want to compare Uhura 'directly' to Rey in terms of being 'progressive', your comparison is flawed because it's ignoring the little detail that what might be progressive for characters like Rey (white girls that are very often portrayed as love interests by hollywood) is the very opposite thing for characters like Uhura (woc, who are very often portrayed as 'strong independent woman who doesn't need no man' by hollywood). I get you don't like to get reminded of the race of the characters but in this case it's unavoidable.
tl;dr: if your intent was making a statement about 'feminism' (good luck) then the fact that Uhura is a love interest in trek is as progressive as Rey not being one in star wars.

but really there is no connection between Rey and Uhura beyond the fact that both movies are directed by JJ
If your point is that JJ is someone who is all about women needing to stay single forever you probably got that wrong too. In his work, JJ had never been one against romantic relationships (if anything, all his major female characters and female protagonists are strong women that have relationships) and even in trek the S/U romance apparently was (at least according to Orci) among one of the reasons why he accepted to direct the first movie.

ending a romance between two characters does not mean the characters role are diminished just because spock and uhura may have broken up does not mean Uhura's role is diminished or downgraded in anyway.

yeah, but if you gonna keep all the dynamics and 'bromances' between the male characters (and even add new ones of that kind) and make them stronger and front and center, all the while the only relationship/dynamic that is sacrificed or toned down is the relationship with the woman, it's going to look a tiny bit suspect. At the very least, that's getting back to the 60s where the main male characters are only allowed to have feelings and express them for their male friends (and if they do for a woman, the latter must die or vanish by the end of the episode)

What is sexist to me is for people to assume that just because Uhura is no longer Spock's honey means her role is official downgraded because it means that the only reason why her role was improved in the first place was because she was in a romance and that is sexist in itself.

The first movies elevated Uhura at the level of the original trio and they did that by creating a connection between her and one of the main male characters (or both if you count Kirk's attraction for her and later friendship with her).
There is nothing sexist about that because this is the same exact way Spock and Mccoy became part of a trio in tos and thus more prominent than the other characters: because they were best friends, and thus shared a connection with, of the protagonist who was Kirk. If you read some old Roddenberry's letters this concept is pretty clear.
Even in the reboot itself, MCCoy was more prominent than, say, Sulu or Chekov, *because* he's Kirk's friend ( and the same will happen in star trek beyond to both him and Scotty if they share most of their screentime with Kirk and Spock)
The fact that the connection Uhura shares with Spock in the reboot is also romantic in nature is just a plus, but that in her case becomes relevant in light of the fact that the original Uhura was denied a romantic relationship because of racism so, in her case, making her 'the friend' would be nothing 'new' neither for this franchise, nor for hollywood (and not even for Spock's character, tbh, because he already has the 'friendship' subplot)

What is sexist is people holding Uhura to double standards and essentially deem as problematic the very same thing that is considered a natural occurrence when it comes to the narrative of the secondary male characters.
What is sexist is the idea that a female character cannot get developed both as an individual and in a relationship, and somehow while the male characters are allowed to have relationships, the woman must pay a 'price' and cannot be amazing and have a relationship at the same time.
So much for Roddenberry's 'ideal' and optimism the fans preach so much about, yet we're supposed to think it would be positive to see that apparently even in the century where Uhura lives a woman cannot have both a career and a relationship.
What is sexist is the idea that the writers must tone down the relationship between the female character and one of the protagonists in order to make the male friendships more relevant and give them more screentime.

 

[TheSubCommander]

"Meanwhile, we got scoop from Sulu himself, John Cho, about surprising crew revelations we'll discover in Star Trek Beyond -- including a secret baby!"

Did anyone else catch this? I think this is very interesting. Definitely a call back to Star Trek Generations. Makes me wonder if this is a set up for the upcoming Star Trek series. Could it be that my wish for a "literal" Next Generation series is about to come true. If so, it would be cool if Sulu's daughter is in that series. Maybe we WILL get a Captain Sulu series after all. Just not the Sulu we were expecting!

 

[Malaika]

"Meanwhile, we got scoop from Sulu himself, John Cho, about surprising crew revelations we'll discover in Star Trek Beyond -- including a secret baby!"

Did anyone else catch this? I think this is very interesting. Definitely a call back to Star Trek Generations. Makes me wonder if this is a set up for the upcoming Star Trek series. Could it be that my wish for a "literal" Next Generation series is about to come true. If so, it would be cool if Sulu's daughter is in that series. Maybe we WILL get a Captain Sulu series after all. Just not the Sulu we were expecting!

there is a thread about that

do we know if the new series is set in the reboot continuity? I read they said it's not related to star trek beyond. Nevertheless, it would be cool if (in case the new series is about this continuity) his daughter is one of the characters.

 

[ihno]

I thought CBS and Paramount are not the best of friends? (except for suing Axanar perhaps)

So I think there might be no obvious connection between JJTrek and 2017.

 

[F. King Daniel]

In fairness, Star Trek is based on a 60's TV show. Short of racelifting or gender-swapping any of the characters (that ship's sailed until the next reboot, bar a transporter malfunction) what can Trek do to be less of a "white guy" fest? And isn't Jaylah supposed to be a lead character in the movie?

 

[Dales]

Re: Malaika
--------------------------------------------------


You made the comparison with star wars. You compared star wars to star trek and I furthered the comparison by saying star wars had a woman who was the lead and she was not even in any romance. Then you made it about white women and women of colour.

You are making it sound as if no blockbuster film has made progress and Uhura is the first ever women of colour to have a romance in a major Hollywood movie that makes money. this are some WOC in roles that made money
Jada Smith and Lawrence Fishbourne (The Matrix)
Will Smith and Vivica Fox (Independence Day)
Pierce Bronsen and Halle Berry (James Bound)
Jet Li and Aaliyah ( Romeo must Die)
Whitney Houston and Kevin Costner (The Bodyguard)

I don’t get the strong independent woman thing either because a woman can be strong and independent and can still choose to date and not date, that is the woman’s choice. In 1977 Princess leia was strong and independent with or without han solo and Leia is white.Her romance with han was not her top priority . it was saving her people and fighting the empire.


When and where has Pegg said uhura is going to be strong and independent and not need a man? He has said no such thing and the strong and independent black woman troop has mellowed down and has changed because I have seen women of colour in TV and film date and not stay single because they fall under the stereotype of strong and independent black woman which automatically means they must be single.


The case in unavoidable but at the same time we are denying progression. If the only elevation WOC get is to be the girlfriend first.

Disney first black princess, Princess Tiana from the Frog Prince was her own woman and had her own story and personal journey. she was not just there to be the girlfriend first.

Back to the connection of rey and uhura, there is a connection because rey shows that you don’t have to have a romance to be front and centre. Which means the same can happen for uhura. It is not entitled to any single race. Rey will hook up with finn by episode 8. The romance is not the first importance, although it is a great add. Rey’s importance is to be the new chosen JEDI.


I know JJ Abrams work, I am even a fan of Alias and Sydney (the leading character in Alias) best friend was a person of colour her name was Francine, an African American woman. Francine had her up and downs and she had her own storyline. Francine also had romantic relationship with friends but her romantic relationship is not what made her character great. Francine would have still been a great female character like Sydney with or without a guy. You are implying that what makes uhura great is because she is in a romance.

A woman’s role regardless of her colour should not be elevated solely by a single romance. That is not progressive because it feeds on the stereotypes that beautiful women only get far by been beautiful or by romantic attraction. Romance is not the same Friendship.

In fact one of the most important female writers of our time agrees on this and she herself is a black woman from Nigeria. Her name is Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.
No woman regardless of race should have their roles elevated singly because they are linked to a male character romantically. Uhura even debunks this ideology when she forces Spock to put her on the Enterprise.
Spock and mccoy were part of the trio in TOS to balance Kirk out as captain and they became close friends from that. Spock and uhura is a personal thing first. They are boyfriend and girlfriend which is private. The trio came from a place of business and profession and from that the a friendship was born so we cannot compare spock/uhura to spock/bones.

Uhura was not denied a romantic relationship either. She was with Scotty by star trek 6. I am not holding uhura to a double standard all I said was she does not need a romance as the most important reason to be elevated.

When I see Uhura, I don’t see her as Spock’s girlfriend first. I see her as a xenolinguistist and senior staff member of the enterprise who should be going on mission and translating federation languages. That is the most important aspect of her character. The most important aspect of her character is not to be spock’s girlfriend although it could be a plus when well written.

Pegg may break them up and it will not be because of her race or because he wants uhura to be strong and independent. he may break them up because he can't write a well written romance like Orci or JJ Abrams.

 

[Malaika]

Re: Malaika
--------------------------------------------------
You made the comparison with star wars. You compared star wars to star trek and I furthered the comparison by saying star wars had a woman who was the lead and she was not even in any romance.

I didn't make a comparison. I simply pointed up the fact that we're in a time where we do have more movies that put women at front and center and have more diverse casts, so it would be ironic if trek of all the franchises ends up being the most conservative and outdated, especially after the first movie was praised for Uhura's elevated role and thus an element of tos that got fixed by the new team.

whatever Rey and Uhura are single ladies is irrelevant. They don't need to be single to be good female characters. I could have used Hunger Games as an example (the protagonist is a lady with a romantic relationship and even ends up married with kids) but romance is not the point.
It's relevant in this trek, though, only in the measure in which you already have a romantic relationship for the female character and not only it's unnecessary to get rid of it at this point, but it would also look problematic if of ALL the dynamics we have in these movies, her relationship(s) with the main characters end up being the only ones sacrificed or toned down.

Then you made it about white women and women of colour.

that's called intersectionality, and your comment called for it. Feminism doesn't exist in a vacuum and you can't directly make a comparison between Rey and Uhura based on how progressive it's for Rey to not be a love interest, and somehow imply that the same would be valid for Uhura too, when, actually, Uhura being a love interest in trek is as progressive as Rey not being one in star wars. Also, you're comparing apples and oranges.

You are making it sound as if no blockbuster film has made progress and Uhura is the first ever women of colour to have a romance in a major Hollywood movie that makes money.

I never said such a thing.
btw, I'm not stupid. I know that you're making a huge straw man argument here in an ill disguised attempt to derail my actual point (it wouldn't be the first time).

Back to the connection of rey and uhura, there is a connection because rey shows that you don’t have to have a romance to be front and centre. Which means the same can happen for uhura.

except Uhura is not the main character of the whole story while Rey is.
Uhura is a secondary character like McCoy and Scotty. apples and oranges of the most disingenuous kind.

Spock and mccoy were part of the trio in TOS to balance Kirk out as captain and they became close friends from that. Spock and uhura is a personal thing first. They are boyfriend and girlfriend which is private. The trio came from a place of business and profession and from that the a friendship was born so we cannot compare spock/uhura to spock/bones.

you keep missing the point (but I'm not pretending I don't understand your goal here) Neither Uhura, nor McCoy and not even tos Spock were the protagonists: Kirk was. The other characters became more prominent compared to the other secondary characters ONLY through their connection with the protagonist. That's the way it works and it's still like that in the reboot where McCoy and Uhura are more prominent as characters than the other secondary characters because they both have some sort of relationship/connection with the main characters.
It doesn't matter what kind of connection they have with the main character. In tos Spock's case, there are letters by Roddenberry that even show that the basis of the Kirk/Spock friendship was the fact that Spock was too popular as a character so they made it so that most of his screentime was with Kirk in attempt to make people love Kirk (their actual protagonist) thank to Spock.
Had them decided to develop different friendships for Kirk, had Spock not been so popular, had people not liked McCoy, you wouldn't get any Kirk/Spock/McCoy's trio because for them there was not such a thing as a trio or 3 protagonists: it just was the Kirk show.

Uhura was not denied a romantic relationship either. She was with Scotty by star trek 6.

you mean star trek 5, where, btw, she has no romantic relationship with Scotty, or anyone. Unless you think that a scene where 50 something Uhura tries to seduce a very confused Scotty under the influence of Sybok is 'romance' (I guess Kirk/Uhura were a romantic relationship too) or is even remotely comparable to what they did in the reboot.
I don't need to further comment here.

----------------------
the funny thing here, that really empathizes how off base you are and how you totally don't get the point (purposely or not, posterity will judge) is that in my original comment I didn't even mention the romance at all. If Uhura is pushed aside in favor of the male characters and the 'bromances' it isn't just S/U that gets sacrificed but it's the very new dynamic of the trio the reboot had with Kirk/Uhura/Spock that gets changed. So far my impression is that Pegg&co seem to have conveniently separated the group in a way where Uhura not only might not interact that much with her boyfriend, but she's also kept away from Kirk as well (you seem to completely ignore the fact that S/U isn't her only dynamic in the reboot, anyway) so that Scotty and McCoy can get more screentime with the main male characters.

 

[Franklin]

Why is anyone assuming Spock and Uhura are no longer a couple? My wife and I have been together for 16 years but we don't constantly interact every hour or even every day. If someone were to make a film covering our lives over a six month period (not that anyone should) it would be very easy to edit the story in such a way that we spend very little time together yet are still in a strong, loving relationship. Star Trek is not the story of Spock and Uhura's romance, so giving the relationship less attention in one instalment of a series of films is not tantamount to declaring the whole thing is over.

Same thing for my wife and I after almost 28 years. Probably how we've made it that far.

McCoy and Spock apparently spend a fair amount of time together in STB. I can imagine a discussion at some appropriate moment where McCoy would broach the subject of Uhura to Spock.

 

[Malaika]

Same thing for my wife and I after almost 28 years. Probably how we've made it that far.

McCoy and Spock apparently spend a fair amount of time together in STB. I can imagine a discussion at some appropriate moment where McCoy would broach the subject of Uhura to Spock.

well, if they're still an item, it is a tad funny to think that for all McCoy's complains about Spock, in this reality he's still the one with a stable relationship while HE has a divorce in his backstory.
It's one of those differences between tos and the reboot that would be great if they actually took advantage of. For me, there are many reasons why the dynamic between Spock and McCoy in the reboot cannot be the same it was in tos (fundamentally, it's because Spock's character took a different path and is different about some important things), and really I'd rather see that explored than just see them banter for the sake of putting a tos nod. Even if Pegg wants to add comic relief with them, he can still do that without copying tos stuff or necessarily make them have the same exact dynamic they had in tos.
Besides, I always thought that reboot Kirk/Spock already was reminiscent of tos Spock/McCoy

 

[BillJ]

It is the 50th Anniversary. I'd be surprised for there not to be any nods to TOS.

 

[fireproof78]

This is always an interesting discussion to me. On the one hand, there seems to be a desire to see something new and fresh. And yet, if something new is done, it is compared against the old, often lamenting it's not like the old.

Hollywood is reactionary and scared of lost money. They will play it safe until they are certain about the profit of it all. It's a lose-lose for them. They can something and there are criticisms. They don't change something, and they are accused of being "hacks" such as Michael Bay for Transformers or Justin Lin for Fast and Furious.

I look at Star Trek 09 and I love the look, the feel and the fun of it all. But, a common criticism is that it wasn't like Star Trek, that it didn't feel like Star Trek, and wasn't "right." Then we see the swing the other direction in STID looking at Khan. While I don't think it was a total rip off (feel free to PM me about how I'm wrong) it suggests that Star Trek's best days are behind it, looking to TWOK for inspiration. As much as I enjoy STID I think the fact that it feels Khan is necessary for the second film, like First Contact did, like Nemesis aped, I think it speaks to TWOK being the impossible standard.

Star Trek isn't the only one that suffers from this, but I think all the backwards looking without looking forward can lead to missed opportunities. I know its the 50th and there will be some reflection, but I think Trek 09 showed you can have both.

I'm probably wrong on some points, and I'm sure there are some better ways to put it but that's a frustration of mine, not just with Hollywood, but with expectations of what films need to do.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Jesus...

Only Star Trek fans would have a discussion analyzing how and why a certain character eats an apple.

That's the core, app el, of star trek.

 

[Malaika]

Star Trek isn't the only one that suffers from this, but I think all the backwards looking without looking forward can lead to missed opportunities. I know its the 50th and there will be some reflection, but I think Trek 09 showed you can have both.

Pretty much this.

Of course I expect homages and TOS nods in the new movies, but I like them when they are sutble and things trek fans probably are the only ones who really see (and it's fun to notice the details the more general audience might not get) but the movie shouldn't be a greatest hits of TOS and the nods shouldn't be main plot elementsthat take away from the story (otherwise they are not 'nods' anymore)..at one point this is a reboot and these characters should be allowed to exist on their own merits and there should be things people will remember this reboot for.

 

[eyeresist]

I recently saw the scene on youtube and I found it very much too much. He bit in it after every sentence

Well, Kirk was up all night reprogramming the simulator. He was probably really hungry.

So far my impression is that Pegg&co seem to have conveniently separated the group in a way where Uhura not only might not interact that much with her boyfriend, but she's also kept away from Kirk as well (you seem to completely ignore the fact that S/U isn't her only dynamic in the reboot, anyway) so that Scotty and McCoy can get more screentime with the main male characters.

Look at it the other way - Uhura is a strong enough character to get her own story arc, rather than having to tag along with one of the "main" characters.

I loved Pine's honesty when he got asked about the trailer and Pegg's faux negative reaction about it ..he was like, well the trailer isn't exactly lying about the tone of the movie.

That's actually the opposite of what he was like.

 

[ihno]

Well, Kirk was up all night reprogramming the simulator. He was probably really hungry.

Oh come on. You can't be serious. An apple can't sate a cool guy like JJTrek Kirk. He needs something more filling like pizza or some casserolle. And have people in the 24th century forgotten how to multitask?

 

[Malaika]

Missed this comment

In fairness, Star Trek is based on a 60's TV show. Short of racelifting or gender-swapping any of the characters (that ship's sailed until the next reboot, bar a transporter malfunction) what can Trek do to be less of a "white guy" fest? And isn't Jaylah supposed to be a lead character in the movie?

Not toning down the only female character of the iconic crew and push her aside in favor of secondary white male characters, would be a start. Not radically change the dynamics the reboot already has with said female character by replacing it with the kirk/spock/scotty/bones show, would be another.
Also, not endorse the bad hollywood stereotype that there can only be ONE lead female character at a time in a very male dominated cast. Or that just because you have a female character being 'badass' that means the writers are justified dropping the ball with the lead female character (or getting rid of another female character, possibly b/c you are not inspired to make her Kirk's love interest, that by intents and purposes was made part of this crew by the end of stid)

I also sure hope this team didn't cast a great actor like Elba and completely covered him in make up as an attempt to tell the audience that they 'fixed' the white-khan fiasco. Don't even try with that guys.
----

Tl dr: I totally agree that trek isn't a franchise that gives to writers a lot of chances to improve some things more than they are allowed to. For instance, you cannot add too many new characters and I'm sure no one asks or expects them to make Uhura or Sulu the main character instead of Kirk or Spock. Absurdity.
But let's stop placating these writers so much please. It's disingenuous to pretend that nothing can be improved or that these movies are justified going backwards even in terms of the standards set by the reboot itself, and thus get rid of the few thing the reboot already improved. And why? Because using Dales the 'critic' words Pegg can't write good relationships for women or women in general? Or, always using their logic, since he plays one of the characters and he's a fanboy it gotta be natural that he makes his own (secondary) character and his faves more relevant? That sounds a bit like a joke, honestly.