What? We have Spock and Uhura, who might have take a break in Beyond but seemed to have gotten back together by the end.
Orci's ST3 or Beyond?
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
For the 50th Anniversary I thought it would be nice to see the past cast mix with the new cast, a bit like Days of Future past on a bigger level. But the studio wanted a more Guardians of the Galaxy type of movie which seemed less appropriate for a franchise celebrating 50 years based on the original series.
And judging by the fact Spock/Uhura is one too many for some trek fans (a couple! Kissing! Outrage!!!) in spite of it being really dignified and understated for the most part, if we had another ongoing heterosexual romance I feel like some people would call the Kelvin timeline 'the bold and the beautiful'.
I didn't see any romance between Kirk and Carol in stid, let alone the potential of seeing them in an ongoing stable relationship with offspring in trek 3. There was equal potential for Carol/Bones if anything..I have a feeling it's one of those aspects where people project tos things on the reboot a bit.
Either way, I think Kirk being single for a while is interesting for the same reason why Spock having a girlfriend is interesting: because it is new and goes against the stereotypes for both characters.
If we had to have a couple with kids, it would make more sense at this point that it was a pair we have since the beginning, not to mention the fact that Spock's kid would create more potential than Kirk's human kid precisely because of Spock's story and his dual heritage. In either case it would feel more organic than watching a movie and suddenly being told that Kirk has a kid from a relationship we never saw (and they already did that with Sulu) .
I didn't see any romance between Kirk and Carol in stid, let alone the potential of seeing them in an ongoing stable relationship with offspring in trek 3. There was equal potential for Carol/Bones if anything..I have a feeling it's one of those aspects where people project tos things on the reboot a bit.
Either way, I think Kirk being single for a while is interesting for the same reason why Spock having a girlfriend is interesting: because it is new and goes against the stereotypes for both characters.
If we had to have a couple with kids, it would make more sense at this point that it was a pair we have since the beginning, not to mention the fact that Spock's kid would create more potential than Kirk's human kid precisely because of Spock's story and his dual heritage. In either case it would feel more organic than watching a movie and suddenly being told that Kirk has a kid from a relationship we never saw (and they already did that with Sulu) .
yes bones and carol did attract a lot of people . memory alpha wiki even listed her as a potential romantic partner for Bones.
Carol by the end of STID definitely has a thing for kirk. I do think they slept together between STID and beyond. if there is a 4th film, I would not be surprised if she got pregnant with david but based on the overall content of the story and 3 films, if anyone deserves a family or some kids, it should be their flag ship couple, which is spock and uhura and I would think Star Trek Beyond has foreshadowed it because Spock clearly has children in his mind and likes the possibility of settling down.
He nearly ditched uhura for a vulcan lady in beyond so the best way to wrap it all up is to have with uhura, everything he wanted with a vulcan woman which were for the wrong reasons in the first place but with Uhura , it would be for the right reasons. This is why I need paramount to give us a 4th film. all these characters need a proper closure.
Last edited:
I think that, in either case, the only more realistic way these movie can introduce the concept of an ongoing couple having a kid is in the end. You wouldn't really see S/U having a kid, but you'd have the information that she's pregnant at one point and that would also need to have a narrative purpose beyond that fact alone (like raising the stakes for the characters when they are in danger)
Or they'd need to do something like the sequel of 'The Mummy' where the couple's kid is old enough to be a new character with their own subplot and kind of actively participate in the story in some way (with parents like these, imagine the level of sass that kid would have). An infant is adorable to look at but when the ship is in danger what are we supposed to do with the cutie patootie?
I have to say, though, that opening a movie with a toddler running through the corridors of the enterprise while McCoy hopelessly follows them with a hypospray would be fun, all the more if said kid has pointy ears and wears a tiny replica of the blue or red uniform of his/her parents. Spock's kid would be McCoy's nightmare
but a nightmare that he'd love to death I bet (btw, didn't original McCoy have a little girl? I don't remember any mention of her in the comic about new McCoy that dealt with his backstory and divorce )
Or they'd need to do something like the sequel of 'The Mummy' where the couple's kid is old enough to be a new character with their own subplot and kind of actively participate in the story in some way (with parents like these, imagine the level of sass that kid would have). An infant is adorable to look at but when the ship is in danger what are we supposed to do with the cutie patootie?
I have to say, though, that opening a movie with a toddler running through the corridors of the enterprise while McCoy hopelessly follows them with a hypospray would be fun, all the more if said kid has pointy ears and wears a tiny replica of the blue or red uniform of his/her parents. Spock's kid would be McCoy's nightmare
but a nightmare that he'd love to death I bet (btw, didn't original McCoy have a little girl? I don't remember any mention of her in the comic about new McCoy that dealt with his backstory and divorce )
I don't think a bunch of geriatric actors wheeling around the sets would've improved the box office. If anything, it would've further depressed it.
it would've only been shatner (unfortunately)
This sounds EXACTLY what they will do in the 4th movie!
I most certainly hope not.
been thinking that Paramount could be thinking that a reason STB isn't performing as well as expected is that compared to ST09/ID its a relatively all new adventure with the nucrew (like FC was for TNG at the movies), the first time its really been about them and the nu timeline with little connection to Trek 'Prime' (where ST09 had Nimoy and the plot revolved around the changing the timeline/alternate universe etc. STID had khan and all the call backs to TWOK (& even Nimoy again) and it was all about the inevitability of the prime timeline coming to pass in the new one..but with certain changes)
so if there is to ST4 maybe they will go back to heavily referencing Trek Prime (i.e. adapting Orcis 3)
so if there is to ST4 maybe they will go back to heavily referencing Trek Prime (i.e. adapting Orcis 3)
Last edited:
Hopefully there will be differences (otherwise why approve now a script that was discarded in 2014?), but the casting of Chris Hemsworth clearly indicates that the "restoration" part will be in the next movie.
The only thing Chris Hemsworth's casting "clearly indicates" is that George Kirk is in the movie. There can be multiple ways to have him that don't involve "restoring" the Prime Universe.
personally, I got the opposite vibe. For me, this movie feels closer to tos and it distanced itself a bit from the 'new' fresh aspect of the first movie (e.g., they went for the old trio and ignored the fact that the 'trio' in the reboot was with Uhura? They keep spock/uhura and many loved it in this movie too but still, they surely prioritize the old tos bromances - plural this time - over it in terms of screentime and this is very '60s trek' style) and they possibly lost a part of the reboot fans for this reason too (no doubt helped by a promotion that didn't seem to even consider the people who love these movies and was a bit too busy trying to win the heart of the tos fans who didn't like the first movies).
if trek 4 puts even more tos homages and makes this trek even more similar to the old thing at the expense of the new elements introduced by Abrams and that the critics praised in the first movie, I seriously doubt it's going to be more successful. I think, rather, that like some critics already predicted back for stid, they'll further end up alienating the fanbase of THIS trek.
he could play Kirk's brother too or Kirk's father from the mirror reality (or another parallel reality)
I'm skeptical they'd release a part of the plot (the whole Kirk meeting his father thing) so soon.
as for Orci' script.. back when star trek beyond by Lin started its production, Orci was adamant he couldn't even make a vague summary of his script because he couldn't take the risk and accidentally reveal aspects of the movie that was being made..and now we know that while Pegg&Co didn't read the script, the studio/producers did and the movie we got does share similarities with Orci' script, hence why he couldn't talk about his story at the time. The fact he is talking about it NOW maybe is a hint that this is not the story they'd use for trek 4 otherwise he'd have to keep quiet about it for the same reason he did before for stb.
I remember that back when rumors about the studio rejecting his script started to circulate and were confirmed, he said that him and those two other guys had ANOTHER STORY they also were proud of and hoped the studio would approve. It's possible that for trek 4 it's that story (or a version of it) that they'd use. Possibly they couldn't use it for trek 3 for a number of reasons and saved it for later.
Have you watched a little film called 'Star Wars The Force Awakens'?
Yes. And that was a continuation of a story and sold as such. The Abrams films are a reboot. Completely different animals.