Star Trek 4 Reportedly Shelved
- Thread starter PixelMagic
- Start date
They've tried going all in for an actor who was enjoying their apotheosis of popularity at that given moment before, and I don't think Hemsworth would have been any more beneficial to the film than Cumberbatch was in ID. Hemsworth wasn't so iconic as to be irreplaceable either. He had maybe 10 minutes of screen time in 09?
If insiders think this script is so good that they just HAVE to make it (and i doubt it, though I'd love for them to finally get that awesome movie script that will allow them to stop remaking variants of TWOK), just replace him. And Pine. Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, but how many people even remember he was an MCU hero actor? Anyway, I don't think there will be any more Bad Robot trek films.
If insiders think this script is so good that they just HAVE to make it (and i doubt it, though I'd love for them to finally get that awesome movie script that will allow them to stop remaking variants of TWOK), just replace him. And Pine. Edward Norton is a fantastic actor, but how many people even remember he was an MCU hero actor? Anyway, I don't think there will be any more Bad Robot trek films.
Yesterday I saw Dark Phoenix. Although it was flawed, I enjoyed it immensely. But it's a massive flop and is being critically mauled.
I remember there being comparisons between Star Trek Beyond and X-Men: Apocalypse and wonder if maybe this would have been the fate of Star Trek 4 had it come to pass.
As much as it pains me to say it (since I love the idea of Jim getting to literally face his daddy issues with wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey-Star-Trekky stuff), maybe Chris Hemsworth's comments on the quality were legit, maybe it was financially doomed and maybe we're better off.
I remember there being comparisons between Star Trek Beyond and X-Men: Apocalypse and wonder if maybe this would have been the fate of Star Trek 4 had it come to pass.
As much as it pains me to say it (since I love the idea of Jim getting to literally face his daddy issues with wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey-Star-Trekky stuff), maybe Chris Hemsworth's comments on the quality were legit, maybe it was financially doomed and maybe we're better off.
fake but fun tweet
https://twitter.com/john_tyler646/status/1124544737820672000
wonder what ST4 would've been called? - maybe 'Star Trek Endgame'
https://twitter.com/john_tyler646/status/1124544737820672000
wonder what ST4 would've been called? - maybe 'Star Trek Endgame'
Last edited:
Yesterday I saw Dark Phoenix. Although it was flawed, I enjoyed it immensely. But it's a massive flop and is being critically mauled.
I remember there being comparisons between Star Trek Beyond and X-Men: Apocalypse and wonder if maybe this would have been the fate of Star Trek 4 had it come to pass.
As much as it pains me to say it (since I love the idea of Jim getting to literally face his daddy issues with wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey-Star-Trekky stuff), maybe Chris Hemsworth's comments on the quality were legit, maybe it was financially doomed and maybe we're better off.
Given the premise, I always felt there was some promise to the idea that Kirk and Spock would basically undo their timeline in order to save the billions lost in Vulcan, while at the same time saving their father (George) and mother (Amanda). This would essentially mean they sacrifice their life experiences. I understand why some fans would HATE that, because there's those that would rather see the Kelvin universe expanded rather than "erased". Personally I'm much more for the story than the big picture. If it resulted in a great Trek film, I couldn't care less that it put an end to a certain timeline. The Kelvin films would always exist to be cherished as their own thing. And given how the Trek universe is supposedly endless, isn't it somewhat refreshing to have an actual DEFINITIVE ending for one iteration? That's why I find something like the very divisive THE DARK KNIGHT RISES as something special because it gave Bruce Wayne a definitive ending, which is not something you typically get in other media because the business suits want to keep it going so it can make money. I'm reminded of how Tom Mankiewicz hoped to give Sean Connery's last Bond film a definitive ending where Bond retires, settles down with Sophia Loren, and sails off into the sunset. Producer Cubby Broccoli famously said "that's a great ending, but I don't want to end these films, I want to keep fucking making them!"
But you know what, BEYOND can serve fine as the ending of Kelvin too in the same sense as "All Good Things..." where it didn't serve as an "ending", but left the characters in their prime, ready to take on more adventures beyond the end credits.
I think it was blessing in disguise for both the kirk daddy movie and Orci script.
I said it before, but I still don't think Orci's story would erase this timeline (is it even possible when they use quantum mechanics?). He said there was no reset or time travel, only a temptation. I think he wanted a moral dilemma for kirk&Co, and probably it would create tension between them and their friends (I can imagine Mccoy and Uhura, in particular, would disagree about using the device and argue with Kirk and Spock) but in the end, Kirk and Spock would do the 'right' thing and destroy that device. What happened would make them realize that their own life matters and you can't play God and alter things. What happened has happened, you can't change it.
They'd gain nothing from it anyway because this version of themselves would cease to exist so it wouldn't matter, then, that their parents were saved when it isn't really them who experience it and have no memory of it all. Besides, they know there are other realities where things went differently, so using the device to delete their own would be all the more redundant and useless...a kind of worthless sacrifice in the grand scheme of things.
From a general perspective, a reset/erasing this timeline thing wouldn't make any sense for me. I can see Paramount being like 'wtf?' because it would be counterproductive, not to mention it's easy to imagine it would only piss off fans and critics because it would be an end that makes the previous movies, and thus this franchise, completely useless. Serioustly, why watch these movies and get invested into characters and stories that are doomed anyway? Whatever happens to them, it wouldn't matter because they won't exist anyway so who cares? It's going beyond ending things with a sad note, it's erasing the purpose of your own movies and why you created another reality, and all the things it allows you to do. Even if this trilogy was over, they can always use this reality to make spin offs or explore other trek series from the perspective of the kelvin timeline (thus see how tng, discovery etc etc went differently). The kelvin timeline doesn't have to be restricted to stories about kirk&Co only, so it would be quite a waste to destroy any chance to use it in the future.
Besides, it would just, once again, trap trek into that small universe syndrome. The idea everything must only happen into one contained universe with a self contained, already established, past, present and future is too limiting and frankly unacceptable at this point.
It maybe worked decades ago , but nowadays what they did with this reboot is a more contemporary approach to time travel and, in general, the perception of reality and how utterly infinite the universe is.
The problem of these 'reset the timeline' theories also is the fact they rely on the flawed, certaintly human but quite incorrect assumption that the kelvin timeline is the 'timeline that went differently', while tos is the default and 'meant to be' just because it's the first one we watched. Truth is, nothing says that tos is how things MUST be for the characters/universe. Prime is an alternate reality of this one too, it goes both ways. Nothing says that it shouldn't be the prime timeline that needs a 'reset'. If you were to look at all the universes from the perspective of a superior level, you'd only 'see' parallel realities as all existing at the same time, and none of them is more important, none of them establishes a set of 'rules' that make it the 'main' reality the other realities are different compared to.
Tl dr: there is no reason the characters of this reality should even feel their existence is invalid so they need to reset or erase their timeline because it's different compared to prime. No reason they should naively believe there must only be one universe and it must be the one Spock prime came from.
Sure, in our time we apparently have people who still believe that earth is flat..but when you have people like Hawkings, how can you honestly believe that characters who are supposed to represent who we will be in a more advanced, informed, future can still retain such a limited perception of how the universe works and they can still believe in magic time travel devices and 'destiny'?
In that sense, I can't reconcile with a narrative that makes them go backwards.
I said it before, but I still don't think Orci's story would erase this timeline (is it even possible when they use quantum mechanics?). He said there was no reset or time travel, only a temptation. I think he wanted a moral dilemma for kirk&Co, and probably it would create tension between them and their friends (I can imagine Mccoy and Uhura, in particular, would disagree about using the device and argue with Kirk and Spock) but in the end, Kirk and Spock would do the 'right' thing and destroy that device. What happened would make them realize that their own life matters and you can't play God and alter things. What happened has happened, you can't change it.
They'd gain nothing from it anyway because this version of themselves would cease to exist so it wouldn't matter, then, that their parents were saved when it isn't really them who experience it and have no memory of it all. Besides, they know there are other realities where things went differently, so using the device to delete their own would be all the more redundant and useless...a kind of worthless sacrifice in the grand scheme of things.
From a general perspective, a reset/erasing this timeline thing wouldn't make any sense for me. I can see Paramount being like 'wtf?' because it would be counterproductive, not to mention it's easy to imagine it would only piss off fans and critics because it would be an end that makes the previous movies, and thus this franchise, completely useless. Serioustly, why watch these movies and get invested into characters and stories that are doomed anyway? Whatever happens to them, it wouldn't matter because they won't exist anyway so who cares? It's going beyond ending things with a sad note, it's erasing the purpose of your own movies and why you created another reality, and all the things it allows you to do. Even if this trilogy was over, they can always use this reality to make spin offs or explore other trek series from the perspective of the kelvin timeline (thus see how tng, discovery etc etc went differently). The kelvin timeline doesn't have to be restricted to stories about kirk&Co only, so it would be quite a waste to destroy any chance to use it in the future.
Besides, it would just, once again, trap trek into that small universe syndrome. The idea everything must only happen into one contained universe with a self contained, already established, past, present and future is too limiting and frankly unacceptable at this point.
It maybe worked decades ago , but nowadays what they did with this reboot is a more contemporary approach to time travel and, in general, the perception of reality and how utterly infinite the universe is.
The problem of these 'reset the timeline' theories also is the fact they rely on the flawed, certaintly human but quite incorrect assumption that the kelvin timeline is the 'timeline that went differently', while tos is the default and 'meant to be' just because it's the first one we watched. Truth is, nothing says that tos is how things MUST be for the characters/universe. Prime is an alternate reality of this one too, it goes both ways. Nothing says that it shouldn't be the prime timeline that needs a 'reset'. If you were to look at all the universes from the perspective of a superior level, you'd only 'see' parallel realities as all existing at the same time, and none of them is more important, none of them establishes a set of 'rules' that make it the 'main' reality the other realities are different compared to.
Tl dr: there is no reason the characters of this reality should even feel their existence is invalid so they need to reset or erase their timeline because it's different compared to prime. No reason they should naively believe there must only be one universe and it must be the one Spock prime came from.
Sure, in our time we apparently have people who still believe that earth is flat..but when you have people like Hawkings, how can you honestly believe that characters who are supposed to represent who we will be in a more advanced, informed, future can still retain such a limited perception of how the universe works and they can still believe in magic time travel devices and 'destiny'?
In that sense, I can't reconcile with a narrative that makes them go backwards.
that's pretty much what they did in XMen DOFP erased the original timeline of X1-3 (plus the 2 Wolverine movies) the result was the best XMen movie of all. and of course as we saw in films that followed everything that happened in those movies pretty much mustve happened again with the odd differences.
but they probably wouldn't have erased the Kelvin timeline (in either Orcis ST3 or the ST4 with Hemsworth).
DOFP was definitely in my thoughts, and I have to wonder if Orci had something like that in mind. Say they succeed in changing the timeline, but it's still very much the Kelvinverse only with George Kirk and Vulcan alive and well. Kirk and Spock are the only ones to retain memories/experiences of the timeline they lived through. And just to make Malaika happy, it ends with Spock introducing his mother to his fiance, Uhura.
Another nail in the coffin.
https://redshirtsalwaysdie.com/2019/06/17/j-j-abrams-bad-robot-close-inking-deal-warnermedia/
https://redshirtsalwaysdie.com/2019/06/17/j-j-abrams-bad-robot-close-inking-deal-warnermedia/
We knew that whatever shape the next Trek would take, Bad Robot wouldn't be involved. The Bad Robot/Paramount relationship has been toxic since The Force Awakens. That's why I'm suspicious of Tarantino Trek, since I believe initial feelers were done via BR. Then again, Mission: Impossible is continuing on with the same cast and director but no Bad Robot, so who knows...?
wonder what ST4 would've been called? - maybe 'Star Trek Endgame'
My fan trailer for it is titled Star Trek: Doomsday. Yes, that Doomsday.
Abrams working on new projects doesn't mean he couldn't executive produce a ST:4 film with Paramount; he had very little direct involvement with Beyond due to his other commitments.
Paramount could still axe the current proposed ST4 script in favor of something involving less time travel; but unless a new film is supposed to tie into existing television series, which can't happen without CBSTV involvement, anything that takes place in a "new" universe would just confuse audiences.
Nah. Almost the entirety of the general populace doesn't even know Star Trek Discovery exists because it's locked away behind CBSAA. They certainly don't watch it. Only Trek fans in the U.S. would ever bother to subscribe to CBSAA for DSC, and people in the rest of the world can watch it on Netflix, but Trek's biggest following has always been in the states.
Also, I bet if you asked any random general audience member if they knew Star Trek 2009 took place in a parallel reality, they wouldn't even know what you're talking about. Only fans care about "canon" and "timelines." Everyone else just wants to be entertained for 2 hours and go home.
I don't know. Some don't care, but I have met others in my family who are not Star Trek fans and were confused. It faded after the movie got going but still.
Something that, due to international distribution being far wider than local, has changed for this generation of Trek.
Pretty much anyone willing to plunk down $12 or $15 to see Star Trek in theaters has at least some idea of what's going, who Kirk, Spock and Mcoy are; many people who come to watch it in theaters have watched parts of the show at home.
After all the effort that they went into creating the new Kelvin series of movies; I just don't see it as being practical to reboot it yet again just because they had a falling out with the last director.
And just because they wanted to undercut what they negociated with the actors before realizing that Beyond was going to under perform at the boxoffice.
And just because Chris Hemsworth decided he was unimpressed with the intended story.
Recasting all the principal cast would pretty much require a reboot wouldn't it?
Unless they just do a Sulu film with Cho as captain.
True enough !
I'm taking that as good news.
We've already had one too many.
Not by me - I quite liked Apocalypse !
They can ditch Hemsworth and attempt to negotiate in good faith with the rest of the cast.
