Concerns about the casting

[Stag]

While I am generally pleased with the choices made for the cast I am concerned about one thing.

Here me out on this - my excitement level is rising and I think over the next year or so leading up to the release the buzz on the film is going to be pretty big, encompassing non-fans much the way I feel Transformers did.

So assuming that, let's say the film opens huge and is a success, and there are plans for a sequel or two. I just don't see this group staying together to make a series of films like the original cast did. Most of the new cast already have fairly established careers of varying levels that the original cast did not - Shat and DeKelley did, but really not many of the rest were as familiar to the general public from other roles as this cast is today.

I guess my point is, if this resurection of Trek becomes popular I would hate to see new actors in familiar roles every film or every other film - like how they had a new Batman or Bond - because the actors in TREK XI have "grown beyond" those roles.

 

[Falcor5]

I would think that Paramount would have all the major players in the movie sign a contract agreeing to be in a sequel (or two if they are planning a trilogy) if the movie makes a certain amount of money before offering them the part.

 

[The Doctor]

At this point, that's the least of our worries.

Trek is dead. This movie may, may resssurect it. In that circumstance, a few actors changing here and there will be of very little consequence. In any case, if the movie does well enough, Paramount will pay what it takes to get the major players back. The progress on the Transformers sequel is evidence of that, IMHO.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It's rarely a problem getting actors who aren't "A-listers" to come back for three or four films if the first in the series is a big success. If it's not, that's different.

Are these people likely to all hang around for forty years? Nah, but then if this version of Trek does it's unlikely that it will be frozen in amber the way the first version was - unlikely because, as the OP noted, so few long-running series are.

 

[Warp Coil]

I'm fairly certain that the actors who have been cast in Trek XI have clauses in their contracts for sequels (at least one sequel... likely 2). I believe the TNG actors all signed contracts for 3 TNG movies when they came on board for GEN. They had to re-negotiate for NEM.

 

[Dale]

Didn't I read somewhere that Quinto signed for a three-picture deal?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I'm not too concerned. When I first heard about this moive, I figured they'd introduce Kirk and Spock, maybe McCoy, that's it. All these characters are perplexing, but maybe they'll be basically walk-ons. In two hours, how could they shoehorn in much more? For future movies, they could whittle it back down to three or four characters and that would be fine - just make sure Kirk and Spock are among them. That also goes for any future TV series.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Temis the Vorta said:
All these characters are perplexing, but maybe they'll be basically walk-ons. In two hours, how could they shoehorn in much more?

Abrams is actually pretty good at giving a lot of characters something to do, all at the same time.

 

[seigezunt]

I'm not so concerned. What if one of the new actors really tanks in the role. Should they not get a chance to do a better casting?

And I don't think they should be doing a heck of a lot of sequel planning. Let's not worry about building an empire again, let's just make a decent movie. Thoughts of "franchise" don't end well, apparently.

 

[Franklin]

seigezunt said:
I'm not so concerned. What if one of the new actors really tanks in the role. Should they not get a chance to do a better casting?

If the cast doesn't click, they'll be problems, too. Problems that may make sequels no worry -- as in won't happen.

Also, if this should spawn a "new TOS" on TV, it will almost certainly have a different cast.

Quinto apparently has a three movie deal. But it's only a contract, and I'd think it could be appeased by working him into two other projects if "Star Trek" tanks.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Samuel T. Cogley said:

Temis the Vorta said:
All these characters are perplexing, but maybe they'll be basically walk-ons. In two hours, how could they shoehorn in much more?

Abrams is actually pretty good at giving a lot of characters something to do, all at the same time.

For a two hour movie I think it's more than enough to feature Kirk, young Spock, old Spock, at least one main villain and reintroduce the whole Trek thing to an audience that largely has forgotten/never knew about it, PLUS have a plot with plenty of kick-ass action, space battles and splosions. If they can give us an inkling of how the other actors will do in the roles, that's fine with me. The main thing is to be a success. We can get to everyone else later.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Temis the Vorta said:

Samuel T. Cogley said:

Temis the Vorta said:
All these characters are perplexing, but maybe they'll be basically walk-ons. In two hours, how could they shoehorn in much more?

Abrams is actually pretty good at giving a lot of characters something to do, all at the same time.

For a two hour movie I think it's more than enough to feature Kirk, young Spock, old Spock, at least one main villain and reintroduce the whole Trek thing to an audience that largely has forgotten/never knew about it, PLUS have a plot with plenty of kick-ass action, space battles and splosions. If they can give us an inkling of how the other actors will do in the roles, that's fine with me. The main thing is to be a success. We can get to everyone else later.

I was perfectly fine when I thought this was just going to be a Kirk and Spock movie. In fact, I think I still would prefer that.

I didn't want to see the Enterprise or any of the secondary characters until the sequels.

I wanted them to take their time and build things slowly, like a "Batman Begins" or a "Casino Royale."

We may still get that, but it seems like they are giving the kids all of the Halloween candy at once instead of doling it out over time.

 

[seigezunt]

Samuel T. Cogley said:


I was perfectly fine when I thought this was just going to be a Kirk and Spock movie. In fact, I think I still would prefer that.

I didn't want to see the Enterprise or any of the secondary characters until the sequels.

I wanted them to take their time and build things slowly, like a "Batman Begins" or a "Casino Royale."

We may still get that, but it seems like they are giving the kids all of the Halloween candy at once instead of doling it out over time.

but what if the candy store closes after one movie? I would argue for at least some short scenes with the seven dwarfs.

I'm not sure if they have the luxury for a multifilm buildup. This may be the only shot they get.