Whereas I feel the exact opposite. Beyond was fine, but it felt like just another Trek movie. ST'09 and ID had an extra energy and a spark, and felt like big events.
BREAKING: Paramount Sets Top Secret Star Trek Movie For Summer 2023; To Be Produced By J.J. Abrams
- Thread starter PixelMagic
- Start date
- Status
I believe they were after production wrapped on Beyond. Not sure if they still are. The studio did auction off the costumes and props from the first two Kelvin films a few years ago and last year.
I’m back on the line: hook and sinker!
So colour me excited: in fact, I will be ecstatic if a fourth Kelvin Trek movie eventuates - and probably more excited for this than any potential future SW movies / series (and that’s me saying a lot).
So colour me excited: in fact, I will be ecstatic if a fourth Kelvin Trek movie eventuates - and probably more excited for this than any potential future SW movies / series (and that’s me saying a lot).
"Just another Star Trek movie" was bound to happen eventually. By the time we got to Beyond the majority of the public had probably already made their minds up on the Alternate reality/Kelvin movies. '09 had the new look reboot TOS and Leonard Nimoy to entice people and Into Darkness of course had Cumberpatch as KHAN. Beyond probably seemed more humdrum than either of those movies to most people.
The budget will probably be a fair bit less too though once the costs of the previous few attempts are included it'll probably end up being close to Beyond's.
The budget will probably be a fair bit less too though once the costs of the previous few attempts are included it'll probably end up being close to Beyond's.
Doesn't even need to be done........much less at a cost of $100 million plus for a niche part of a fan base.
I agree, it doesn't.
It's just the fanservice finishing and wrapping it all up in a nice neat bow thing that might interest someone who doesn't like the cast or filmmaking in the Kelvinverse movies.
yes,had it been:
then therd have been significant 'hook' for the 3rd movie. as it was Beyond was like 'just another star trek movie' which for the 50th didnt cut the mustard
No other information about the film. If it were a continuation of the first three, they probably would've said so.
Speculation Only: I think they're going to do a Kelvin Timeline version of TNG. That's why they're not giving details yet. They're done with their version of TOS, so they're moving on to do their version of the other big Star Trek show.
Speculation Only: I think they're going to do a Kelvin Timeline version of TNG. That's why they're not giving details yet. They're done with their version of TOS, so they're moving on to do their version of the other big Star Trek show.
Last edited:
Exactly the right point on making the movie an event with a hook. When the studio struggles with marketable ‘hooks’ the films come across as ‘just another adventure for the crew of your beloved starship,’ especially when there is significant competition for interest from the streaming series. Insurrection and Star Trek V are two really good examples of films that had no ‘butts in the seats.’ Nemesis had a half hearted attempt at suggesting maybe this was the last TNG film and Into Darkness dropped the ball by trying to ‘hide’ Khan, which forced the film to be sold simply as the ‘next’ film.
Beyond certainly came across as an obligatory outing, when the 50th anniversary was certainly there as an opportunity to provide a hook. I think the challenge there was that creatively, after the first two films leaned into franchise mythology and nostalgia, there was a desire to do something a little more original (which is in part why the Orci original version was set aside). The problem is that was exactly the wrong time to take that path, because you’re losing connectivity to the anniversary and you get a film that feels like a greatest hits album. That all stems from the inability to more quickly get Into Darkness out. That delay probably cost us a film and the studio some significant dollars. The four year gap is quite a lengthy by today’s box office standards - Paramount’s 2008 huge success Iron Man had its first sequel out in 2010. You can debate the quality between Iron Man 1 and 2, but 2 unquestionably made more money than 1 and captured the momentum and good will generated by the first film.
With the four year gap, for Star Trek after Into Darkness, the then only realistic option is for a then Star Trek 3 to come out in 2016 for the anniversary. While I agree with the creative impulse to do something more original with this cast, the 50th anniversary film was the wrong one to do it with. Having had a third movie that was more ‘original’ in 2013 or 2014 would have made it much easier for the studio to accept a celebratory type of film in 2016 (and probably more successful).
Beyond certainly came across as an obligatory outing, when the 50th anniversary was certainly there as an opportunity to provide a hook. I think the challenge there was that creatively, after the first two films leaned into franchise mythology and nostalgia, there was a desire to do something a little more original (which is in part why the Orci original version was set aside). The problem is that was exactly the wrong time to take that path, because you’re losing connectivity to the anniversary and you get a film that feels like a greatest hits album. That all stems from the inability to more quickly get Into Darkness out. That delay probably cost us a film and the studio some significant dollars. The four year gap is quite a lengthy by today’s box office standards - Paramount’s 2008 huge success Iron Man had its first sequel out in 2010. You can debate the quality between Iron Man 1 and 2, but 2 unquestionably made more money than 1 and captured the momentum and good will generated by the first film.
With the four year gap, for Star Trek after Into Darkness, the then only realistic option is for a then Star Trek 3 to come out in 2016 for the anniversary. While I agree with the creative impulse to do something more original with this cast, the 50th anniversary film was the wrong one to do it with. Having had a third movie that was more ‘original’ in 2013 or 2014 would have made it much easier for the studio to accept a celebratory type of film in 2016 (and probably more successful).
The Adventures of Yor?
There's not going to be a Discovery Movie. And I say this as a DSC Fan.
TV Movie? Maybe. Who knows what Paramount+ might want to do? But movie movie? No.
The sets are probably gone, not that it matters much. Since they filmed Beyond in Canada instead of LA, they rebuilt all the Enterprise sets from scratch up there, and the ship didn't look unfamiliar (if anything, it helped that we now saw some slightly different corridors than usual).
I don't think it'd be very easy to make a Prime Timeline TOS movie in 2016. In fact, I'd argue it's downright infeasible. And the "Kelvin Twist" was the worst part of STID; "You thought we were telling a new story but, twist, it's a surprise remake of Wrath of Khan! That's what you nerds want, right, something you've seen before with a minimum of alteration so you can play 'find-the-difference'?"
speaking of Orci in a recent TM.com article hes stated he wants to do an interview with TM.com about his ST3 so we'll see if that happens (hopefully it will)
Zachary Quinto Would Be Happy To Do Another Star Trek Movie; Open To Spock TV Show Too – TrekMovie.com
https://trekmovie.com/2021/04/14/st...s-line-between-movies-and-television-is-gone/
Short version: GOD damn it.
(Not that Kurtzman and them are usually in the habit of saying or insinuating anything that you could draw definite conclusions from. If there's cause for hope it's that this time is no exception).
Short version: GOD damn it.
(Not that Kurtzman and them are usually in the habit of saying or insinuating anything that you could draw definite conclusions from. If there's cause for hope it's that this time is no exception).
I believe we are witnessing the birth of the actual STU. Its pretty much what we all hoped at the merger.
RAMA
- Status
Similar threads
