Danai Gurira to join Star Trek 4(?)

[XCV330]

I would prefer the cast someone to play Riley, personally. On the subject of who (if anyone) should replace Chekov.

Otherwise, I prefer M'Ress, Alex or even Ilia to someone as obvious as Saavik (at least I assume she'd be more obvious because we've already gotten a Khan movie).

Jaylah is fine too. It would seem a stretch, if much of the Kelvinverse wasn't already.

Chekhov provided a bit of humor, plus he was this version of Trek's amazing-wiz-kid. Jayla is not chekhov but she can fill that role in her own way, better, plus she's awesome in action scenes.

While we're on the subject of additions to the crew.. where is Dr Mbenga? Where is DeSalle?

 

[pst]

Chekhov provided a bit of humor, plus he was this version of Trek's amazing-wiz-kid. Jayla is not chekhov but she can fill that role in her own way, better, plus she's awesome in action scenes.

that whole lack of speaking, active women on the bridge of the enterprise would also be remedied by jaylah taking up chekhov's position.

 

[XCV330]

that whole lack of speaking, active women on the bridge of the enterprise would also be remedied by jaylah taking up chekhov's position.

I'm sad that Yelchin is dead. I hope my post didnt seem negative about him, and yes there should be more women on the bridge that actually talk. (though the crap storm of posts from the usual suspects, that will bring)
I thought that Chekhov actually would have worked better down in engineering opposite Scotty and Keenser. On TOS, the movies, or the new movies, Chekhov never seemed to have a defined role.

 

[pst]

I'm sad that Yelchin is dead. I hope my post didnt seem negative about him, and yes there should be more women on the bridge that actually talk. (though the crap storm of posts from the usual suspects, that will bring)

i'm with you.

to be totally fair, the kelvin timeline's representation issues are baked in from the original series. i wish abrams and co. had been free to gender or race swap a few characters but i also don't think they could've gotten a better cast than the one they had. so yeah it's totally sad yelchin is gone, but his departure is an opportunity to give another woman an active role in this universe.

bring back carol marcus and you'll have three strong women in the cast without being accused of shoehorning for the sake of social justice or whatever.

 

[XCV330]

Maybe Carol saw some wisdom in her father's bad decisions and became part of whatever is left of Sec.31 in the Kelvin timeline. I've thought for awhile Prime Carol Marcus could have been involved. But she and her son knew that the Genesis device was as much a weapon as a tool, and with the inclusion of the proto-matter flaw it was really ONLY useful as a weapon. I can't believe she did not work for years as a project head on that and didn't see what David had done.

Kirk on the other hand, doesn't seem like the kind of person to want anything to do with that kind of thing. I can't imagine them working well together for very long.

 

[Kemaiku]

I'm pretty sure the Kelvin Archive bombing destroyed both S31 and Transwarp technology.

The Kelvin universe is now free of Section 31, let it stay that way and have it only infest the Prime verse.

 

[pst]

I've said before that the natural next step in the arc is Kirk finding out that he himself is a father...

it wouldn't be a terrible development if that's where carol was in star trek beyond. kirk got her pregnant and she left the enterprise and has been raising david alone.

Maybe Carol saw some wisdom in her father's bad decisions and became part of whatever is left of Sec.31 in the Kelvin timeline. I've thought for awhile Prime Carol Marcus could have been involved. But she and her son knew that the Genesis device was as much a weapon as a tool, and with the inclusion of the proto-matter flaw it was really ONLY useful as a weapon. I can't believe she did not work for years as a project head on that and didn't see what David had done.

i like the idea of carol being a villain instead of... well kind of milquetoast.

I'm pretty sure the Kelvin Archive bombing destroyed both S31 and Transwarp technology.

The Kelvin universe is now free of Section 31, let it stay that way and have it only infest the Prime verse.

however, i hope you're right. i'd love it if the kelvin timeline was free from section 31, which i've always thought was a totally dated idea from the 90s that's a drag on the franchise.

anyway, looks like section 31 is going to play a big role in discovery season 2 and i doubt the film series would get tangled up with that.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I've said before that the natural next step in the arc is Kirk finding out that he himself is a father...

Again, ID already did this.

It blatantly makes the captain = parent connection, a common trope across all Trek. And almost every single plot point in the film examines or defines what it means to be a parent -- right down to the old kids arguing in the back seat gag.

It also makes a pretty strong statement about [magic] blood and family not being the same.

Not everything has to be literal.

 

[Malaika]

Besides, if we want to talk about 'natural next step' then it's Spock, if anything, who should find himself challenged with the new role of a (literal) father. They surely wouldn't need to create the mother out of nowhere since he has an established significant other that is one of the main characters too. No need for explanations or treating the mother as an afterthought or offscreen thing. In terms of his arc, it would be fitting with the fact he is a hybrid himself..thus him wondering if his kids will have to suffer like him.
Bones' phrase in Beyond kind of telegraphed it a bit... he may eventually have kids with Uhura, thus the woman he loves, and not really need to make them with a stranger to contribute to the survival of his race (when, regardless, his offspring will always be mixed anyway but that doesn't mean they are not vulcan still).


You know, sometimes I think that as much as this trek is a different reality they still don't really let it be one, and it seems like some big changes are still too linear and everything is still kept tos-safe, which doesn't make much sense with the unpredictability of another reality. For instance, Sulu is probably allowed to have a kid because he has one in tos too..in fact, people automatically assumed the little girl must be Demora - in spite of the realistic possibility his daughter here was born in a different time and possibly different parent too so it doesn't HAVE to be her.
and of course Kirk is expected to have one kid for the same reason. Ditto for Mccoy.

But truth is, if this really is another reality - even if they had to bring back all the iconic characters thus project a concept of "destiny" still - it's possible that some people who exist into one reality may not exist in the other and viceversa. So nothing says Kirk must have a kid because he had one in tos therefore David must exist here too (and die young). If his parents don't get together, he won't exist in this reality. If Kirk has a kid with another character, that will be a brand new person and not David. Even if he has one with Carol, it doesn't have to be David.

In a way, isn't it fascinating too? That's the beauty of different realities, but also the scary thing about them.
But after all, it is a reminder we are a coincidence ourselves. One thing gone wrong or differently, and we wouldn't be here.

So yeah, my point is this trek should be a tad more bold with the different reality too and not fall in the trap of getting stuck into canon still.
Besides, creating characters that didn't exist in tos has a tremendous amount of potential.

 

[JKM]

Again, ID already did this.

It blatantly makes the captain = parent connection, a common trope across all Trek. And almost every single plot point in the film examines or defines what it means to be a parent -- right down to the old kids arguing in the back seat gag.

It also makes a pretty strong statement about [magic] blood and family not being the same.

Not everything has to be literal.

Interesting, I would disagree there. In movies if it's not literal you can literally argue for a character to have any motivation. It then becomes subjective to the viewer and how they see the story. As it already does to a certain extent, granted as evidence by ppl usually either loving or hating STID. You then have to rely on the script or portrayal through the Actor/actress to prove points in any debate.

I assume you are referencing the argument between Uhura and Spock with Kirk asking 'Guys are we really going to do this right now?" That reminded me more of how my brother and sisters used to act. To a T. I didn't see Kirk acting as a parent there. It wouldn't even have occurred to me at that point since his behavior in the first part of that film was pretty immature overall. Now if he had put his foot down and said 'No you are not doing this right now. Focus on the mission.' Maybe. But if I were to see anyone as a parent figure in the first two films it would be Spock if not Pike. And I'm definitely not getting the tribble/blood having anything to do with family and I've watched that film hundreds of times maybe more.

 

[Jayson1]

Admittedly, I'm biased about this point anyway because I'm not interested about a movie that is, once again, focused on Kirk.
There are a million of plots I can think about and what they could do with this cast, and tailoring a movie on the idea we gotta bring his dad back because the actor is famous now is, well, just a waste for me.

I already thought, honestly, that into darkness was a waste because of that and because it focused too much on kirk. I felt the priority for continuity sake should've been dealing with the aftermath of the destruction of vulcan that was a bigger and most impactful plot they had , but instead Spock got kind of sidelined to focus on Kirk and his daddy issues and as a result, 3 years later (beyond) Spock suddenly remembers he's a survivor and may need to help the vulcans after that part had been already, more or less, resolved in ID and the last scene of ST09 where Spock Prime urges him to remain in starfleet.

In ID, I couldn't help but feel like Kirk's issues as a new captain were just of lesser importance in that moment than Spock, the vulcans and the federation itself having to deal with a fairly recent tragedy such as the complete destruction of a whole planet. His issues didn't deserve, in that moment, to be the primary focus right after a movie like ST09 where something so devastating had happened.

To this day, one of the things that make me feel unable to truly connect to the k/S friendship the movie preaches about IS precisely the aspect that I never saw Kirk acting as a friend to Spock, in a way. I never saw him asking Spock if he was Ok after what happened to vulcan, I never saw him wondering if he had ptsd. Only Uhura seems to even notice that Spock may have a death wish.
Kirk was only focused on Spock not getting they were friends, but aside from saving him he didn't really give the man any reason to believe they were friends. . I just can't agree with the notion that Spock was being the one 'dense' because he's alien. I honestly would probably perceive things the same way if I were in his place.

Basically, it's like we never got a real sequel of ST09. And in the end, both kirk and spock keep getting dragged into having to deal with the same conflict.

This reminds of some of the early idea's before "TMP" were they were talking about doing a movie were Spock was the star and Kirk was going to be a secondary star. The idea being that Spock was the true star of the old show and the most popular. Me I actually kind of like upending the idea and making it about KIrk's dad. Hemsworth is the biggest star and for all intense and purposes he is basically a brand new character since he had only a small role in the first movie and the character was never even seen on the old show. It would kind of a first for a Trek movie.
FOr me I also want to see Kirk's mom and Robau and the asshole stepdad also from the first film. Me I don't like the idea of them changing the past but maybe bringing them back through other means such as cloning. Insert flashback to his life back with his wife and his time also on the Kelvin. ALso I think they should kill a main star as well. Maybe Bones or Scotty to really surprise people.

Jason

 

[XCV330]

Academy lasts 4 years, unless the movie is that many years later in a new five years mission, they'd have to explain why she's aboard the flag ship already..

There are plenty of examples of cadets on starfleet vessels. Wesley, the entire Red Squad, Tilly, Preston, (possibly Will) Decker

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

It blatantly makes the captain = parent connection, a common trope across all Trek. And almost every single plot point in the film examines or defines what it means to be a parent -- right down to the old kids arguing in the back seat gag.

Yeah, but it's one thing to look after your crew like a family. It's quite another to be responsible for (or feel like you ought to have been responsible for) helping to mold and nurture a son or daughter from the earliest age, give them a bit of yourself, a legacy, develop a parent-child bond. Kirk's crew may take on some of his mannerisms and learn from him, true, but it's not the same as raising a kid.

 

[XCV330]

Yeah, but it's one thing to look after your crew like a family. It's quite another to be responsible for (or feel like you ought to have been responsible for) helping to mold and nurture a son or daughter from the earliest age, give them a bit of yourself, a legacy, develop a parent-child bond. Kirk's crew may take on some of his mannerisms and learn from him, true, but it's not the same as raising a kid.

In some ways ships on star trek are a bit more akin to long missions in the age of sail. some of the whalers would stay out for years, not to mention ships on missions of exploration or long haul trade (Bounty is an example where that went terribly wrong.). People grew up on ships. If starfleet tends to put its cadets on ships by at least their fourth year, they probably do a bit of their growing up, aboard, at least by age and development standards of that era.

A modern commercial ship has its captain usually only on board for a couple of months, who then returns to his home port or wherever he or she lives and then they'll take his next assignment. Same with their crews.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I guess it depends on what years you consider formative - early childhood or adolescence.