is Star Trek (1)4 happening?
- Thread starter Danlav05
- Start date
I suppose if you want to make the focus of Star Trek to be Kirk, Spock, and Uhura then that billing and pay structure makes sense. It also might be something that won't hold the interest of Karl Urban (who might have been expecting a structure more like TOS.)
Looking back at The Motion Picture it was certainly neat that they got all the old crew back. But the only ones that they were going to chase after were Shatner, Nimoy, and MAYBE Kelley. (Having said that I gather that Koenig did manage to negotiate a bit. But I'm sure he wasn't even close to what Kelley made.)
It comes down to "How many people will stay home if you're not in the movie (or will go see the movie if you are)?"
Nobody said "I don't like the idea of a Trek reboot. BUT CHRIS PINE!" They might now. (Or they might not.)
Looking back at The Motion Picture it was certainly neat that they got all the old crew back. But the only ones that they were going to chase after were Shatner, Nimoy, and MAYBE Kelley. (Having said that I gather that Koenig did manage to negotiate a bit. But I'm sure he wasn't even close to what Kelley made.)
It comes down to "How many people will stay home if you're not in the movie (or will go see the movie if you are)?"
Nobody said "I don't like the idea of a Trek reboot. BUT CHRIS PINE!" They might now. (Or they might not.)
Well, Chris Pine was the best thing, but I see your point.
Seriously, giving McCoy and Spock scenes together hadn't been done since TOS! So good.
Threatening to not come back if you don't get what you want looks like a good imitation of blackmail, to me.
Calling it differently doesn't change the point. Besides, he has little star power and his face isn't even useful for posters.. so his demands might not be too reasonable if your argument is disputing he might have a case of ego.
Point: Some people always make it seems Zoe would be the one demanding and expensive, I say there are hints about Urban being the problem more than her. He is the only one who said he wouldn't come back unless he got his way. Zoe might be the biggest name, but she is a woman and a poc so nuff said. I doubt she could do what Karl did without getting called ungrateful bitch for that.
If you want to be selfish as actor because it's your job, and how you pay the bills, that's fine for me - but stop preaching about trek's progressiveness and inclusiveness (and his trying to get credit for the rank stripes on the women as if that, alone, suddenly made Beyond the most feminist of this trek), when pegg&co sidelining the third lead woc in favor of a white dude isn't exactly trek spirit, nostalgia pretext aside. That's pretentious.
For all his preaching about some things, he, like many trek fans I might add, pretty much is adamant the white dudes status quo must get preserved no matter what. Where it really counts, trek must be still as conservative as it was in the 60s for him.
And he knew Zoe was more the third lead than him, he could've asked for a way to give his character a purpose in the story without ignoring the different dynamic of this trek. Why it must be a trio anyway?
Besides, he got in these movies the same screen time Deforest got! It seems some people, including him, pay attention or have issues with McCoy's screentime only when the woman is elevated to his level and is getting more.
He has the nerve to complain he wasn't in stid (??) while making interviews with John Cho, of all the people. Gimme a break Karl! You are playing a doctor not action hero! In stid, they did include him in scenes that might already be forced for the character, and he already spends more time on the bridge with Kirk than in sickbay, what were the writers supposed to do to give him more scenes? This trek DOES have two male protagonists already: Kirk and Spock.
And the original trio doesn't exist because Kirk and Spock are different. In fact, the different relationship k/s have made the original spock/mccoy banter redundant. This Spock is different, and unless you turn him into a caricature of tos Spock, his rivalry with this McCoy is too one sided making the latter come across as bigoted and gratuitous in his hostility towards Spock.
He really seems to want his character (and trek) to be stuck in the past and not evolve. TOS purists love him best because he does an impersonation of the original; the problem is this never was the purpose of this reboot so his costars aren't at fault for not doing the same.
I beg to differ.
Beyond is the least successful of the whole trilogy, and the reason why the reboot might be over, and we are discussing an OT instead of talking about a fourth movie that had been announced before beyond came out and was a flop for paramount.
I'm sure Karl and some fans are happy the reboot went backwards for nostalgia, and I'm glad the writers gave you what you wanted, but giving him more screen time didn't give this trek a future.
Karl adds nothing to canon besides being a (safe) living homage. He's ok but hardly the best... and aside from trek fanboards, he hardly gets recognition (he surely didn't get award noms for his role. Only Chris, Zach and Zoe did) . He's overrated.
It is probably comments like yours that got to his head and are part of the reason why he went from being someone who said he'd play McCoy no matter what, to someone who now makes demands and seems to believe McCoy should be the protagonist at Kirk and Spock level. I'm not sure that's what JJ&co told him when he got the role and he accepted it, though.
Last edited:
I suppose the 'you' person here is JJ and the original team since the first two movies of this trilogy, and ironically some of the promotion for beyond too, followed the Kirk-uhura-spock formula as the only trio of this trek, if there was any. Karl&co had 2 movies to get over the original trio not being a thing in this trek. People's obliviousness over that fact, and their pretending the characters still have the symbolic roles that old fans ostensibly project on the old iterations, is pretentious at this point. And again, instead of insisting on the original trio at any cost, why not ask for a quad? The first movie set up Uhura and McCoy as having the same screen time and importance to the story as the two characters who have a connection to main guys. Work more on that and the new dynamics.
Nobody will watch the movie just because Chris or Zach or even Zoe are in it, it figures they'll watch for Karl.
We aren't in that era anymore.
And general audience, the majority, who doesn't share our affection for the original won't care or notice that much if one of the white dudes isn't in x movie.
Even the non Trek fans would expect Kirk, Spock and McCoy to show in a TOS-era Trek-movie. Uhura, Sulu, Checkov and Scott are window-dressing. The character dynamics are changed for the JJ-movies, and that works out very well. But they don't stand or fall with the greater emphasis on Uhura.
TOS and the TOS-era movies aren't ensemble pieces. The JJ-movies try to be ensemble movies and give every one of the main characters the spotlight. That the emphasis shifts between movies isn't sidelining an actor or an actress. Race is most certainly not the reason that Uhura plays a smaller role in Beyond.
I sense a deja-vu..
and neither they do with emphasis on McCoy.
I'm not the one who is claiming that a movie is the best only because a character got more screentime; that's the claim that, just above, is being made about Urban/McCoy (in spite of evidence already debunking the argument since Beyond actually is the least successful movie of the trilogy, if anything)
Giving him all that credit for the success of a movie is unrealistic, and so is - in all its patronizing biased tos fan glory - claiming that the general, international, audience (let alone non-trek fans) cares about this McCoy more than the female lead character played by a bigger star.
I might argue that the writers sidelining the only two poc of the cast, and/or the female lead character (that was treated as third lead in previous movies of the same verse, so there is a comparision already) of a cast of 7 male characters (plus the villains), is a tad more noticeable for a nowadays audience than a secondary male character getting less screentime compared to the two male protagonists...
It's the inflation that is by default against characters like McCoy, Scotty etc.. . especially when you already have not one, but two male protagonists whose personal arcs take so much of the story.
Even in terms of dynamics, there are plenty of bromances/male dynamics already compared to fewer different kinds of dynamics.
and neither they do with emphasis on McCoy.
I'm not the one who is claiming that a movie is the best only because a character got more screentime; that's the claim that, just above, is being made about Urban/McCoy (in spite of evidence already debunking the argument since Beyond actually is the least successful movie of the trilogy, if anything)
Giving him all that credit for the success of a movie is unrealistic, and so is - in all its patronizing biased tos fan glory - claiming that the general, international, audience (let alone non-trek fans) cares about this McCoy more than the female lead character played by a bigger star.
I might argue that the writers sidelining the only two poc of the cast, and/or the female lead character (that was treated as third lead in previous movies of the same verse, so there is a comparision already) of a cast of 7 male characters (plus the villains), is a tad more noticeable for a nowadays audience than a secondary male character getting less screentime compared to the two male protagonists...
It's the inflation that is by default against characters like McCoy, Scotty etc.. . especially when you already have not one, but two male protagonists whose personal arcs take so much of the story.
Even in terms of dynamics, there are plenty of bromances/male dynamics already compared to fewer different kinds of dynamics.
Last edited:
On Uhura becoming 3rd lead its like if they rebooted TNG with Dr Crusher or Troi (or Yar)becoming 3rd lead over Riker..
Actually the ATeam remake did something similar to JJtrek where Jessica Biel (who was playing a role sort of comparable to Amy/Tanya role in the series but in a relationship with Face) became more prominent than say Murdock
Actually the ATeam remake did something similar to JJtrek where Jessica Biel (who was playing a role sort of comparable to Amy/Tanya role in the series but in a relationship with Face) became more prominent than say Murdock
Last edited:
Nimoy really changed that with III. And after that was born the myth of the Star Trek "family".
Keep in mind, I LOVE Uhura in the JJ movies. Some of the TOS novels back in the day took the tack of Uhura being, well, the James T. Kirk of communications. She was a black belt ninja SCIENTIST and LINGUIST. Which we certainly saw in ST09.
Hell, in Wrath of Khan she has how many lines? Sulu wasn't much better off, even including his cut scene in the travelpod.
I'm not sure it's an apt comparision.
The only star for tos creative team was Kirk/Shatner.. then, because he became the most popular character, Nimoy took the spot as almost co-protagonist later on. It pretty much was the Kirk, secondarily kirk/spock, show.
McCoy was more prominent than other secondary characters because he was Kirk's friend (much like in the reboot).
At the time, that's everything we were allowed to get even in terms of interpersonal relationships. They originally tried to have a female first officer, or at least have a female lead included in the dynamics later on, but they weren't allowed to.
That's why I find Urban's (and some fans) obsession with the original trio having to be front and center even in this already different reboot, especially while he's also preaching about how progressive inclusive and different trek should be, pretentious in its lacking nuance and any effort to contextualize things a bit. There is no effort to acknowledge that if the old thing's dynamic was only 3 guys it was because of the context of the time putting some serious limits on what Roddenberr&co were allowed or not allowed to do too; limits that shouldn't exist nowadays.
tl dr: just because 60s' trek was in a certain way, it doesn't mean every new trek iteration must be about white dudes front and center in perpetuity. I read that nostalgia argument being made about Discovery too, and it's just absurd.
Modern reboots of old things tend to change some things a bit not just for the sake of changing things, but to make the story a tad more contemporary too.
And I want to add that Uhura's popularity, and how iconic she is in pop culture, goes beyond the screentime she got in the original series. Elevanting her to the original trio level in this trek was much more than just giving more screentime to a random secondary female/male character.
In the successful reimagined Battlestar Galactica, Lieutenant Starbuck is a woman (Kara Thrace). In Elementary, Lucy Liu plays Dr. Joan Watson.
Changes in remakes and reboots are nothing new, and there are franchises that did it in more foundamental ways than JJ&co did in the reboot.
They even wrote the reboot being AU in the canon. I think this trek is, even with the changes, as safe as it could be for the most conservative old fans.
Let's be real here: TOS might have started out as 'the Kirk-show', but for it's majority of it's run, it was the Kirk-Spock-McCoy show. That's why these three guys have top billing in the credits. Yes, I know, it's three white males. But let's be honest here: That kind of comes in the bag if you're doing a remake of a 60's property. They could have gone the Starbuck-route, but they decided for a more faithful adaptation, and as such, McCoy was heavily underused.
And Karl Urban didn't exactly "blackmail" the crew, his contract was up. And seeing how he played one of the original three main characters, I can totally see his desire for more acting in the movie. It's not "blackmail" if somebody asks you to do something, and you have conditions. IMO it was the right decision - the McCoy/Spock-banter was one of the highlights of Beyond.
The third thing is Zoe Saldana. That might come down to personal preferences, but I think she's just not that great an actress. She delivers her lines just fine, but she doesn't add anything beyond what's already on the page. She plays her roles in Star Trek, Guardians of the Galaxy or Columbiana almost identical, even though these should be completely different characters. I think that for example Sonequa Martin-Green (Micheal Burnham on DIS) would have been a much better choice to play Uhura, as are a lot of other ethnic actresses. But, alas, she was the biggest name (it's very hard for minority actresses to become a big name, so props to her), so they chose her. I can see why, even though it was IMO not the best choice. What really didn't help was that her biggest subplot in two(!) movies was "being the love interest". That's on the writers, not her, but it underutilized her character. It would have been much better if, for example, she would have been pushed in a leadership role (instead of Sulu), or had a crucial part in establishing communication with aliens. That's why her role was shortened in favour of Jaylah, who was a more interesting and crucial character. What it came down to in the end was simply reacting to fan reactions. Everyone wanted to have more McCoy, few people were craving for more Saldana. So more McCoy it was.
And Karl Urban didn't exactly "blackmail" the crew, his contract was up. And seeing how he played one of the original three main characters, I can totally see his desire for more acting in the movie. It's not "blackmail" if somebody asks you to do something, and you have conditions. IMO it was the right decision - the McCoy/Spock-banter was one of the highlights of Beyond.
The third thing is Zoe Saldana. That might come down to personal preferences, but I think she's just not that great an actress. She delivers her lines just fine, but she doesn't add anything beyond what's already on the page. She plays her roles in Star Trek, Guardians of the Galaxy or Columbiana almost identical, even though these should be completely different characters. I think that for example Sonequa Martin-Green (Micheal Burnham on DIS) would have been a much better choice to play Uhura, as are a lot of other ethnic actresses. But, alas, she was the biggest name (it's very hard for minority actresses to become a big name, so props to her), so they chose her. I can see why, even though it was IMO not the best choice. What really didn't help was that her biggest subplot in two(!) movies was "being the love interest". That's on the writers, not her, but it underutilized her character. It would have been much better if, for example, she would have been pushed in a leadership role (instead of Sulu), or had a crucial part in establishing communication with aliens. That's why her role was shortened in favour of Jaylah, who was a more interesting and crucial character. What it came down to in the end was simply reacting to fan reactions. Everyone wanted to have more McCoy, few people were craving for more Saldana. So more McCoy it was.
Zoe Saldana wasn't that big of a name before Star Trek, remember Avatar hadn't come out yet. Everything before that is standard working actor stuff. Though I think the Trek casting people foresaw Avatar being a big deal so that may have still helped her get the role of Uhura (and get her in a contract before her price goes up).
If you get a main part in a James Cameron movie you ARE an up- and coming movie star. Just ask Leonardo DiCaprio, Arnie, Ed Harris or Kate Winslet. At least for a while, other studios will try to grab this talent early on. Wrath of the Titans, Star Trek, GotG all cashed in on that. For a short time, Sam Worthington, Saldana and the dude from Terra Nova were all the rage in Hollywood. Out of these three, Saldana did IMO the most of her fame.
Except, he isn't Deforest or the original character, and he still got the same screen time he got in a trek where he never was third lead. And he isn't that big of a star to make demands, such as asking to become a more prominent character than the original or how his one was when he accepted the role.
His role in beyond wasn't that great compared to the first two, anyway. More screen time=/= being a well developed character with an interesting storyline. He has none. He only is the friend - and someone who listens to Kirk and Spock's problems, but no one cares about his. He doesn't have a voice. His scenes with Spock are about Uhura and Spock's conflict, while his scenes with Kirk are about the conflict of the latter. They really wasted an opportunity to make us know this McCoy more. It was right there in some scenes, and they just didn't care. Even his dynamic with Kirk lost its original appeal to me, it was one sided and all about k/s with McCoy not even being allowed to feel anything about his friend leaving because the narrative didn't care about that, it only cared about how k/s were feeling. He didn't even interact with other characters.
Least successful movie of the trilogy.
Again, we should talk about a fourth movie here instead of this ot but thank to beyond, we can't.
I'm happy you are happy, but don't ask me to be grateful that Karl's fav movie was almost a flop that may have doomed a trek that I, unlike a lot of Beyond's fans who didn't like the reboot, actually liked and hoped to see more of.
And a safe, fan pandering tos nostalgia move. It was nothing new and a wasted opportunity to make the characters truly interact with those they never interacted before.
'That might come down to personal preferences' it sure is. however, what you said next is all about passing the personal preferences as facts.
Your comment about her hits every fanboy clichè; you even put her against other actresses (one of which is black too, of course).
Your passive aggressive suggestion that she, of all the cast, got the role for reasons not related to her talent just adds extra class, I have to say.
Next you'll claim she slept with the director, and the clichè will be truly complete.
Like really, are you JJ? You are passing speculation as facts.
What the actual people who hired her said is that she got the role because JJ had auditioned her before and loved her as an actress, and so he asked Cameron to allow her to film trek too while they were still doing avatar because she did fit with the Uhura he wanted to have in his trek. She wasn't a big name at the time, just like the rest of the cast. Avatar became big later, and she got awards and praise for her role, but I'd argue people hardly knew she was the actor below that character and trek maybe have helped her a bit more in terms of visibility.
Nichelle Nichols herself is more than happy about Zoe and said she couldn't see a better actress playing her role (not saying her opinion matters more than yours..)
And since you like the petty game of putting actors against each other, Zoe got trek some award noms for her work in it, unlike Karl and the other secondary actors.
Now tell me how and why they cast Urban and the other dudes since you seem to know so many behind the scenes facts...
A lot of the guys there got their role just because of their name, not because they were the best for the part, but of course you are projecting that on the woman and using it to dispute her merits and talents.
Which is worse than Urban only playing 'the friend of hero', and only having a purpose in the story if he interacts with Kirk and Spock why?
Because she's a woman? Or it's just your bias and double standard for the original bromances that makes you disingenuously consider the first by default more relevant to the narrative and ' important' than the romance?
She still got it better than him because her skills as officer are constantly emphasized, and she plays a key role in every movie.
You are praising male characters whose screen time is dominated by an interpersonal dynamic, in the same breath you are concern trolling about the female character who is less defined by her own dynamics than the dudes are.
I'm sorry but until you guys will keep preaching about the importance of the bromances, and how you want McCoy to be more important through a relationship with the main guys only, and never propose anything different 'for his character only' than shining through dynamics, I won't even take your ridiculous concern trolling about Uhura seriously.
At this point I don't even know what you are talking about. It's like you didn't even watch these movies (e.g. Uhura already got some of the stuff you claim she should get), and you are attempting to make false equivalence between some things just for the sake of bashing Zoe/Uhura by being petty. Come on now.. I'm not 10.
90% of the points you are making are blatantly baity.
Define this 'everyone'. Plenty of critics and fans absolutely loved Zoe/uhura and asked to see more of her, not less. I don't remember all these rampant demands to see more bromance with McCoy honestly, even from interviews she always got more questions about her character and dynamics than him .. and even those critics who praised him and wanted to see more of him surely didn't ask the creative team to sideline the female lead in his favor, or create a new female character to replace uhura. That's making stuff up and overinflating the opinion of some fanboys online passing that as the whole freaking audience. I also wonder if you actually pay attention to the fandom these movies have or had, or you just want to overrate McCoy/urban's popularity to underrate that of the female character.
And again, your argument is too easy to debunk when the first movies with the new dynamic worked just fine and are successful. If what you said were remotely true, beyond wouldn't be the least successful. And they wouldn't use Zoe's face for promotion instead of your fav boy.
Even the comics follow the kirk/uhura/spock formula of the first two movies, and they are past 60 issues now. The comic writer said that the ones that focus on Uhura are among the ones he knows are liked the most, but I guess he - a tos fan whose fav character to write is McCoy - must be biased for not following what 'everyone wants'. Clearly.
yours was an attempt...
Last edited:
There is no denying that most of the new cast is very easy on the eye. With the exception of Yelchin their acting talents vary only from adequate to good.
Saldana was cast for her looks and so was Pine.
Stop getting personally offended by other people's opinion. It won't help you in life and only being able to respond with personal attacks won't make anyone ever agree with you either.
I know. I love Simon Pegg. But he was IMO horribly miscast as Scotty. Zaldana is a better fit than him. But not perfect either, and her flaws kinda' matter also a little bit, with her effectively being the third lead for the movie and all.
You really do love the words "concern trolling", do you?
Sorry to burst your little bubble, this has nothing to do with everyone else being a racist, sexist misogynist. In the end this purely comes down to you going full insufferable fanboy on Zaldana-Uhura, and it not being enough for you to disregard everyone else's opinion (that would be okay), but feeling the need to personally insult everyone that doesn't share your enthusiasm for her.
In the end, I don't care about "bromance" or "my favourite white-dude bro". It all comes down to convincing characters. In the end, "bromance" is as simple a clichéd relationship as "love interest". The biggest difference was that they made the former work on screen - it didn't really develop either, but at least the banter was fun to watch -, while the latter just meandered from movie to movie.
I know you hate the comparison, but let me get back to Burnham: I'm not the biggest fan of Discovery as a whole, but I like the characters. Specifically Burnham, Stamets, Saru, Tilly and Lorca. It was obvious the show revolved around Burnham, so they made the core relationships around her work. And it IMO does. The core relationship of the JJ-movies was Kirk-Spock. In ST09, when both characters had meaningfull interactions with Uhura, it worked. But after that? Overall, Zaldana-Uhura simply added only a minor contribution to the major character dynamics (not more than, say, Sulu or Chekhov), but felt shoe-horned in because they gave her so much extra-screentime for the role as designated love interest. If you give someone much screentime, people want to see more development.
Oh: And by the way, Beyond is more critically acclaimed than Into Darkness (but less than ST09), which sounds IMO right. The franchise suffered from diminishing returns as a whole, each movie made less money domestic than the previous one, speaking for some general problems of the franchise. If you judge a movie by it's financial success, Transformers must be your favourite movie series.
It should be expected that not everyone can be center stage in an ensemble piece. Should Elba and Boutella have been given less screen?
By what measure? On Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb, Into Darkness is superior on both user and critic ratings.
