Decent enough read, makes some good points. We shall have to see what happens.
Star Trek 4 Hits A Snag
- Thread starter Doc Mugatu
- Start date
Decent enough read, makes some good points. We shall have to see what happens.
If all fans were like me, they would replace Pine and still make money. I would give a Star Trek movie a chance even if Kirk was played by a donkey, the comedic factor would have me rolling down the aisles. 
P.S After all I did not watch Star Trek 2009 twice in the cinemas because of the actors since I had never heard of em. I was glad to see Star Trek back on the big screen
P.S After all I did not watch Star Trek 2009 twice in the cinemas because of the actors since I had never heard of em. I was glad to see Star Trek back on the big screen
Last edited:
I suspect the Chris' would be damaging their market value if they accepted less than promised. But I just want my Star Trek 4. And I want it to be the story promised in 2016.
Last edited:
two cents here:
1) It is important to note that when they cast Nichelle, they weren't specifically looking for an african actress because Uhura didn't even exist yet and, therefore, wasn't really african yet. (in fact, she read Spock's part on her audition and it influenced how she wanted to play Uhura) She just was black with an ethnicity yet to define, just like her physical appearance. Nichelle defined these things. In a fictional world where characters are mostly divided between aliens and humans (where being human is itself an 'ethnicity' because the concept of people now includes other worlds too), the character's nationality was a plus to add later. When given a choice, Nichols (who literally created the character with Gene) embraced the idea of making her african instead of american Iike herself.
This, alone, makes Uhura's case more unique and interesting, and not really comparable to Hollywood's habit to cast american people for every role. (Which the reboot too subverts, anyway, because Zoe is afro-latina)
That said, they never meant her to walk around with her ethnicity tattooed on her forehead, and Nichelle certainly didn't want to set up a scenario where Uhura must only get played by kenyan actresses when she herself wasn't one.
Using Nichelle's own canon suggestions for Uhura against her, and to invalidate both Uhuras, is a tad absurd in this context. It's like you are saying she invalidated her own casting when she decided to not project her own life on the fictional character.
Again, Nichelle is the only Uhura. She is Uhura. And in casting a new version for the reboot, she still was their reference. Pretending that she wasn't is disingenuos. In a way, in context of trek it may make sense, anyway , to have an african character played by someone who doesn't fit with people's stereotype, frankly, of how native african people must all look, sound and behave.
But mind you, they certaintly aren't saying that Uhura is the representation of all african girls. She is only one of them. If they were to cast other kenyan characters, they wouldn't need to use Nichelle or Zoe as reference.
2) You are arguing that an african character must be played by an actor who shares the same exact ethnicity and nationality in order to look and sound authentic, but truth is Zoe would play Uhura with an accent and she'd have more of her african culture IF the writers asked her to. But they don't give Uhura that, and they didn't give Nichelle that either. Even if they cast Lupita, she wouldn't automatically be more authentic just because of the actress ethnicity (that is mixed like Zoe's anyway).
Thinking about it, if compared to Chekov, Scotty and even McCoy, one could say that Uhura was never played as an american caricature of her ethnicity/culture. Some may say they erased the culture of the poc characters, or really this also was a side effect of how much they were sidelined and underdeveloped in tos, and it's completely valid criticism but still, it isn't mutually exclusive with the first point that she was less a caricature than the guys sometimes. Uhura's ethnicity was like a subtle, nice, thing you are reminded of through big or little clues placed there and there when it was fitting to the plot.
It was like you needed to know her personally, outside of her job on the ship, to know more about her family background (or you'd need to crushing on her enough to look for the meaning of her name in her native language, thank you Spock )
For better or worse, depending on different perspectives, I always imagined that humans in trek see some things in a completely different way we do because they experience the world differently. Especially those who work in starfleet, and had spent the better half of their young life at the academy where they got exposed to an explosion of different people from not only all around their own world, but other worlds too.
In a sense, Chekov's or Scotty's portrayals, and their overt pride for their ethnicity, makes them the ones that may not really fit with the reality trek wants to represent, not really Uhura.
Futuristic fiction is hard to handle because it tries to imagine a future and see things differently, but the writers still live in their time and still write the characters as if they were living in the 60s with them rather than so far away in the future. An american writer gives Chekov an accent because it's the only way they can think it makes his being russian explicit...
What I recognize is that it always is difficult for writers to find the right balance when trying to make the characters authentic in their culture AND the reality or context they are representing. Sometimes, especially when you don't share the ethnicity of the character, it may be easy to fall in the parody territory and thus damage the purpose of making your story more diverse.
Last edited:
I doubt very much a 1960 US network would have cast an actor from Africa or even the Caribbean even if she was originally written that way (which as you stated came later with Ms Nichols assistance). However if Star Trek continues, if the TOS element is ever rebooted, the producers hands are not tied to follow the casting decisions made in the past, the 'lets choose an American actor cos Uhura is always played by an American' should never come into it. No matter what nationality the future actor who plays Uhura is (or even La Forge who is meant to be Somalian, you would never know it watching TNG), it would be nice if the culture of the character was represented on the screen. Or pick a heavily accented White Australian to play Captain Kirk from Iowa with an Australian accent...yeah why not.
I think lack of planning is part of the reason the Kelvinverse films have burned out so quickly.
I look at the recent Planet of the Apes trilogy for an example of how these ST films should have been handled. The POTA movies are all part of a large connected story (as opposed to the one-off villain movies of ST). They have nice special FX and action, but are mostly character focused. The action doesn't feel excessive and over the top like the Kelvinverse films. There's lots of quiet moments in these movies and the filmmakers aren't preoccupied with stuffing in references to the franchise's past. Each film in the trilogy was released on schedule once every 3 years with simple straightforward honest marketing.
The most successful run of ST films was essentially a connected trilogy; TWOK, TSFS and TVH. Each film picked up where the last one left off. The stories were focused and it wasn't filled with a bunch of over the top action and references.
I look at the recent Planet of the Apes trilogy for an example of how these ST films should have been handled. The POTA movies are all part of a large connected story (as opposed to the one-off villain movies of ST). They have nice special FX and action, but are mostly character focused. The action doesn't feel excessive and over the top like the Kelvinverse films. There's lots of quiet moments in these movies and the filmmakers aren't preoccupied with stuffing in references to the franchise's past. Each film in the trilogy was released on schedule once every 3 years with simple straightforward honest marketing.
The most successful run of ST films was essentially a connected trilogy; TWOK, TSFS and TVH. Each film picked up where the last one left off. The stories were focused and it wasn't filled with a bunch of over the top action and references.
Just a reminder: Fair Use says it's permissible to quote relevant portions from an article, with a link to the rest, but quoting the entire article isn't considered good form. Go back and trim it down a bit, 'K?
YMMV.
It seems the first thing the writer of any new Trek movie has to do is to figure out just when poor old Enterprise gets the living shit kicked out of it.
He makes some good points. Honestly if Paramount really want's Kirk in the next movie and Pine isn't willing to play ball I think they should go ahead and recast. They've got to recast Chekov anyway. It might actually be more interesting. Also isn't this supposed to be some kind of Alternate Universe? Why go to all the trouble of creating an AU to just keep everything exactly the same? Why not make Spock the Captain or Kirk a woman? Why not have more than the token black and asian person in the main cast?
If they make Spock Captain and Uhura or Sulu first officer and bring Jaylah on as a new crew member, I could get behind the idea of Star Trek 4 without Pine, though it would still be heavily confusing to anyone who saw Beyond and didn't hear the bts stuff, since Kirk specifically rejected promotion as a plot point. They'd basically have to kill him off off-screen, which would be seriously awkward.
Even so, I find it dumb to recast Pine after 3 movies while keeping everyone else the same. I do not see that working at all.
Even so, I find it dumb to recast Pine after 3 movies while keeping everyone else the same. I do not see that working at all.
Good thing that they are.
I quite like the new POTA movies too (and novelized the most recent one), but the trilogy certainly contains plenty of homages to the original cycle of movies, from naming the main orangutan character "Maurice" after the actor who played Zaius in the movies, to "Damn dirty apes!" and so on. Heck, the last movie alone gave us a new "Nova" and referenced the Alpha-Omega doomsday cult from BENEATH and the crucified scarecrows from the original movie. (There was also a scene in the script referencing the "Forbidden Zone" but it didn't make it into the final cut of the movie. )
Not that I'm complaining, mind you. I thought those homages were handled nicely.
I have to side with the actors on this one. Whatever JJTrek4 will be, Paramount can and will make money on it, the actors' likeness for merchandising etc. Actors' careers come and go and they have to get as much earnings as they can while they're hot. Studio can wait for QT to jump start the franchise again, but if not, they should honor the promise. Also, there's no guarantee the production will stay under budget, these kinds of films can go over fast. At least with Pine, and Hemsworth they'll be committed to a project if they're treated right.
Plus whatever "Trek" movie Quentin Tarrantino's planning to make, which I think would've put the franchise further away from Gene Roddenberry's vision (Star Trek is about exploration and diplomacy, not 'pew-pews' and bloodbath).
I was never a big fan of Planet Of The Apes but the new movies have been an object lesson in making serious, high quality, thought provoking, character led movies. They have been superb and I can only wish that the big dumb, flashy, plot hole ridden, action adventure JJverse films had taken more of that approach.
Can I just ask a question that I don't mean to be snarky, but will come across as snarky:
Who are the people who care whether or not Star Trek 4 goes ahead?
It seems to me that interest from the fanbase in the Kelvinverse declined in the months following the 2009 release, then positively collapsed after Into Darkness. Maybe these movies have some mainstream appeal, but I would suspect that's significantly less with Star Wars films being a regular thing again.
For my part, if another Kelvinverse film is made I'll go and see it. But I don't really care if it doesn't happen. I sense that position isn't far from where the majority of Trek fandom is?
Who are the people who care whether or not Star Trek 4 goes ahead?
It seems to me that interest from the fanbase in the Kelvinverse declined in the months following the 2009 release, then positively collapsed after Into Darkness. Maybe these movies have some mainstream appeal, but I would suspect that's significantly less with Star Wars films being a regular thing again.
For my part, if another Kelvinverse film is made I'll go and see it. But I don't really care if it doesn't happen. I sense that position isn't far from where the majority of Trek fandom is?
Me. I care, I'd very much like to see the movie JJ Abrams promised us in 2016. If it never happens, it'll feel like we had three movies building up Jim's daddy issues with no payoff.
Similar threads
