Well, the need it to be the homeworld so there needs to be room to grow, and recreate structures of cultural significance, as well as most Vulcans, and their future offspring, and the anticipated much higher birthrate
Writing In A New Chekov
- Thread starter Dryson
- Start date
Well, the need it to be the homeworld so there needs to be room to grow, and recreate structures of cultural significance, as well as most Vulcans, and their future offspring, and the anticipated much higher birthrate
You would have thought the logical Vulcans would have thought of colonies as places for future expansion for their civilization thousands of years ago when they first started into space.
There are other considerations for New Vulcan's location, beyond the simple ability to support Vulcan life. Is this colony in a strategic location? Is it within a reasonable distance of Federation supply lines? What, and where, are the nearest hostile powers? How large is this colony expected to grow (there is a difference between a simple colony world, and the center of Vulcan civilization itself)?
And even if all Vulcan colonies are equally viable to designate as New Vulcan, they still have to pick one. Why is *this* colony more suitable than *that* one? I doubt they would just roll some dice.
And even if all Vulcan colonies are equally viable to designate as New Vulcan, they still have to pick one. Why is *this* colony more suitable than *that* one? I doubt they would just roll some dice.
Last edited:
I am in principle opposed to recycling minor characters, and also my first thought is that a second Vulcan on the bridge would be redundant.
BUT -- if they bring back the idea that Saavik is part-Romulan, that would be interesting.
I can imagine it serving as a good subplot for at least one movie, e.g. Spock revealing his prejudice: "You should be aware, Captain, that in Romulan culture deception is seen as virtue."
I wonder if they'd cast a non-white actor in the part? I think most fans would be okay with that.
They should continue without checkov.
Exactly. Don't recast. Honor Anton's contributions by leaving his character be.
And bring on Lt. Arex!
Mark
And bring on Lt. Arex!
Mark
Right, and dispose of the character Walter Koenig created.
Right, and dispose of the character Walter Koenig created.
There's no reason the character can't appear in another incarnation of the franchise, and I don't think anyone's suggesting 'perma-banning' him.
Like they disposed of the character Majel created?Right, and dispose of the character Walter Koenig created.
Which "one"? 
The nurse Chapel in *this* continuity transfered off and wasn't replaced, but she was an ND character anyway.
My point was that in *this* movie franchise which has already recast everyone with purpose and reason should not become a revolving door of replaced actors. Anton made a great secondary character his own and IMO they should honor that by not recasting again.
Should there be a fourth film (and I somehow doubt we will have one regardless of this one's success), have him transferred off like he was in TOS/TAS to obstensibly get command training, then permanently write him out of the continuity and onto another ship should it continue. I'd like to imagine he, Chapel, and officer Cupcake having many adventures on their own somewhere.
Mark
The nurse Chapel in *this* continuity transfered off and wasn't replaced, but she was an ND character anyway.My point was that in *this* movie franchise which has already recast everyone with purpose and reason should not become a revolving door of replaced actors. Anton made a great secondary character his own and IMO they should honor that by not recasting again.
Should there be a fourth film (and I somehow doubt we will have one regardless of this one's success), have him transferred off like he was in TOS/TAS to obstensibly get command training, then permanently write him out of the continuity and onto another ship should it continue. I'd like to imagine he, Chapel, and officer Cupcake having many adventures on their own somewhere.
Mark
Any and all of them! They also forgot that Chapel was overqualified to be a nurse but took the job to get a quick posting on the only ship heading close to Korby's last known location. I guess nuChapel just lacks ambition. No wonder she had no lines.Which "one"?
My point was that in *this* movie franchise which has already recast everyone with purpose and reason should not become a revolving door of replaced actors. Anton made a great secondary character his own and IMO they should honor that by not recasting again.
I have no strong objections to recasting a main character but there are other options that I prefer. I have absolutely no concerns about recasting a cameo.
Apparently, there are no plans to recast Chekov for the next movie:
http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/07/j-...ng-anton-yelchins-chekov-in-potential-sequel/
http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/07/j-...ng-anton-yelchins-chekov-in-potential-sequel/
"JJ Abrams: 'Star Trek' won't replace Anton Yelchin"
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/14/jj-abrams-star-trek-wont-replace-anton-yelchin
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/14/jj-abrams-star-trek-wont-replace-anton-yelchin
JJ Abrams says they won't be recasting the character for ST4.
I think this is the right decision. Star Trek is an enormous tapestry filled with tons of stories and characters that can be pulled from. Kelvin Chekov had three films and its very sad that Anton died so tragically but there is no reason that we need to recast this iteration of the character and I think it honors the actor's memory to not do that and have him fly off into the sunset... so to speak. Recasting him just seems counterproductive when you consider all of this. It does not cheapen Walter Koenig's Chekov at all by leaving him out of future installments and it honor's Anton Yelchin and his portrayal of the character. From those who feel otherwise, I respectfully disagree.
Similar threads
