You mean like they did with all the other Star Trek movies????
Star Trek 4 Hits A Snag
- Thread starter Doc Mugatu
- Start date
I would recast Uhura with the Kenyan actress from Black Panther.
Pegg should stay on the MI movie set or write low budget British comedies
I agree. I firmly believe that even now shatner would be a bigger draw for fans (obvs) and the general audience than Hemsworth
No one outside Trek Fandom will give a shit, and it's their money we need.
Yeah.. no
JJ said they wouldn't recast Chekov because Anton deserves better than that. Well, so do the other actors. They deserve respect, it wasn't easy for them to play iconic characters but they did their best and, now, many fans love them TOO.
If the studio really thinks that they can replace them for something as petty as money, and not wanting to respect previously established deals, I wouldn't care either way. I wouldn't watch their movie knowing they cared so little about the cast and integrity of the characters and story.
Honestly, I can't say I understand fans who seem to minimize the negative repercussions of a recast, of any of the main characters, either. Recasting is no joke and it's, it should be, the studio's best interest to avoid that thing like plague.
Kelvin trek is this cast and they made the characters their own. They worked their ass to make them their own - and this version is kinda iconic by itself, now, thank to the actors. Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Urban especially are the face of this trek and get constantly praised for what they do.
No way a new actor can come in and not feel awkward, as if they effectively killed off the character in spite of still having one that has the same name. It is disingenuos, for me, to pretend fans wouldn't care or it wouldn't make any difference. Even the dynamics would get damaged by that (though in that sense, replacing Pegg wouldn't hurt the chemistry of the cast as much as replacing one half of important relationships) . It makes a huge difference that even the casual fan notices, responds to that.
The only way a recast can work is for a new reboot in some years, but not this specific version of the characters. Especially not after 3 movies, many comic series and merchandise used their faces. It's too late.
Personally, I'd rather settle for a cameo than killing the character (be it either in text or with a recast, for me it's the same thing)
If the studio really thinks that they can replace them for something as petty as money, and not wanting to respect previously established deals, I wouldn't care either way. I wouldn't watch their movie knowing they cared so little about the cast and integrity of the characters and story.
Honestly, I can't say I understand fans who seem to minimize the negative repercussions of a recast, of any of the main characters, either. Recasting is no joke and it's, it should be, the studio's best interest to avoid that thing like plague.
Kelvin trek is this cast and they made the characters their own. They worked their ass to make them their own - and this version is kinda iconic by itself, now, thank to the actors. Pine, Quinto, Saldana, Urban especially are the face of this trek and get constantly praised for what they do.
No way a new actor can come in and not feel awkward, as if they effectively killed off the character in spite of still having one that has the same name. It is disingenuos, for me, to pretend fans wouldn't care or it wouldn't make any difference. Even the dynamics would get damaged by that (though in that sense, replacing Pegg wouldn't hurt the chemistry of the cast as much as replacing one half of important relationships) . It makes a huge difference that even the casual fan notices, responds to that.
The only way a recast can work is for a new reboot in some years, but not this specific version of the characters. Especially not after 3 movies, many comic series and merchandise used their faces. It's too late.
Personally, I'd rather settle for a cameo than killing the character (be it either in text or with a recast, for me it's the same thing)
So? If no one knows the character, build her up! Cripes, how many MCU characters are outside of the general public's knowledge that have gotten their own films? She's already Kirk's mother, a character I would very much like to know more about than the typical father/son dynamic that we're overstuffed with already.
I don't think they should do Star Trek 4 without Chris Pine. If they can't get him back, they should just reboot again.
Ummmm.... as unsavory as this sounds... and I'm not too crazy about this AT ALL... their horny male demographic would give a shit if it was a "hot chick" in which case they'd be "interested" in Winona Kirk.
I hate this answer but that's how you get a ton of the stereotypical young male demographic to watch something. That and shit blowing up (or more accurately "shit getting blown up real good"), an action star, some fights, T&A, red meat, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Turn Star Trek into a Bruce Willis, Vin Diesel, Tom Cruise, Jason Stathem type of action vehicle and you can have anything you want in the films because no one will care. They'll be too busy focused on what they really went to see. Continuity will be like a porno plot, then you'll have true "continuity porn".
And, no, this type of movie would not appeal to me at all. So it's not even remotely what I want. BUT it would be a safe way to make the big bucks they crave. Unless it bombs.
Ummmm.... as unsavory as this sounds... and I'm not too crazy about this AT ALL... their horny male demographic would give a shit if it was a "hot chick" in which case they'd be "interested" in Winona Kirk.
I hate this answer but that's how you get a ton of the stereotypical young male demographic to watch something. That and shit blowing up (or more accurately "shit getting blown up real good"), an action star, some fights, T&A, red meat, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Turn Star Trek into a Bruce Willis, Vin Diesel, Tom Cruise, Jason Stathem type of action vehicle and you can have anything you want in the films because no one will care. They'll be too busy focused on what they really went to see. Continuity will be like a porno plot, then you'll have true "continuity porn".
And, no, this type of movie would not appeal to me at all. So it's not even remotely what I want. BUT it would be a safe way to make the big bucks they crave. Unless it bombs.
Last edited:
Keep Pine, drop Hemsworth, the franchise does not need George Kirk again
If they insist on going down this Kirk's dad route, then recast Hemsworth and give Pine what they originally agreed on. Can you imagine if they'd recast Shatner for The Voyage Home? it would jar beyond belief. Hemsworth was only on screen for a couple of minutes, and as a young man, I wouldn't be bothered if he was replaced in the slightest. Pine I would be though.
To be honest, I think the only two that have owned their roles are Urban and Quinto. I have zero attachment attachments to the others.
I realise ymmv, but I don't think the others have brought anything special at all. And Pegg (who I generally like) is just plain wrong for Scotty.
Hopefully it's really this simple.
But if Pine thinks Paramount is acting in bad faith (And I wouldn't blame or fault him if he did.), then he might walk away forever.
Star Trek needs Pine a lot more than Pine needs Star Trek.
Shatner would draw in the crowds. Keep the press happy until they get to gush about the QT film
No, no he wouldn't
Ask your average 25 year old moviegoer about the prospect of this. I bet most of them don't even know who he is, let alone part with cash to watch him star in a film franchise that already has an image problem.
William Shatner is a lot like Mel Brooks. Most people probably heard the name, but they have no idea they are even alive.
Agree, the avg 25 year old would be much more inclined to see Thor in a ST movie frankly
Similar threads
