Paramount Confirms TWO Star Trek films currently in the works!

That's my thought as well. How much time do we see the Whale Probe on screen? Maybe 2 minutes? It's not the focus of the story. It's just a catalist of the story. And it's not some guy wanting revenge. Please anything but a guy wanting revenge.

In the original episode it was headed to Rigel. Rigel could be an Earth-like stand in without having to go to Earth.

 

They've been whining since day one and they haven't ruined a moment of Trek for me yet.

 

Really, though, out of all the second season, why "The Doomsday Machine" in particular? Just because it's TOS's version of an FX-heavy space battle spectacular? That's hardly something that stands out in modern feature films. Hmm, I guess the next most obvious one is "Mirror, Mirror," but Discovery just did that one. Or "The Trouble With Tribbles," if they wanted to go for comedy. (And no cracks about how they already based a movie on "The Changeling." That's too easy.)

They could always do a story about Spock's pon farr, since the timing would be right for that. Vulcan being destroyed would make things tricky. The comics already covered that, but I'm sure that wouldn't matter to the filmmakers.

How about a big-budget reimagining of "By Any Other Name" where we get to see the Kelvans in their true form? Or maybe a version of "Journey to Babel" that's a political thriller set at the actual Babel conference.

 

Pretty much, yeah.

That's a feature, not a bug, in Hollywood unfortunately.

 

That's kind of the point. We'd get big space battles regardless, so there's no reason I can see to single that episode out. Heck, even an adaptation of "A Piece of the Action" would end up with a huge space battle in it somehow.

 

Using the Doomsday Machine would make that easier, though. Plus it's got audience recognition – pop culture remembers the Gorn, the Mirror Universe, Khan, womanizer Kirk, tribbles, the Amok Time fight music, and the Doomsday Machine. In terms of recognizable TOS elements that lend themselves to space action and have not yet been strip mined, the Doomsday Machine stands out.

 

I miss the days when Star Trek was about exploring the new and looking to the future, when it was the most groundbreaking and innovative SF show on TV. I don't want it to become just one more nostalgic exercise in self-reference, and it frustrates me that so many people today don't seem to want or expect it to be anything else.

There are things I like about Into Darkness, but in retrospect I wish it hadn't been made, because it created the wrong expectations for the series. The first movie was supposed to be about creating a new reality where all bets were off and anything could happen -- that's why they took the radical step of destroying Vulcan, to drive home that everything would be different and unpredictable from then on. But then they chickened out and made the sequel a rehash of past elements, and now that's what people expect, even though Beyond did tell an original story.

 

Khan scream and death scene (which was arrived at in a completely different way, with a different meaning) aside, was Into Darkness a rehash? Or was it Khan and Carol Marcus from Wrath of Khan transplanted into an original story?

The answer is: The latter.

 

The answer isn't so binary. Few things ever are. Yes, you're right that the story is more than a rehash, but look at the kneejerk reactions and impressions out there and you'll see it's widely seen as a rehash. And it's those expectations and perceptions that I'm talking about, more than the actuality. The fact that the second film reworked old elements to any extent led many people to expect the rest of the series to be remakes and reworkings instead of original stories.

And that's what I'm complaining about -- not what the films actually do, but how the public these days perceives Star Trek. As I said, it frustrates me that so many people look at this thing that used to be so groundbreaking and forward-looking and want nothing from it but nostalgia and self-reference.

 

And studios are willing to oblige as it is far safer bet.

 

Odd, though -- the most well-regarded Trek movie (though not by me), The Wrath of Khan, was an episode sequel, and it was only the second film in the series. And yet it didn't prompt any further episode-sequel movies or return guest stars. (Though I guess you could say First Contact was both a sequel to "The Best of Both Worlds" and a prequel to "Metamorphosis.")

 

It just (eventually) resulted in an endless stream of revenge-obsessed madmen with doomsday weapons, themes of friendship, old age, and sacrifice optional. It's not a great legacy, to be honest.

 

Just playin' around.

 

But who could play Decker?

 

Jason Issacs.

 

Kiefer Sutherland comes to mind.

 

Well, his constipated face might serve the part well.

 

Cranston

 

Winner.

 

Bryan Cranston? Right, that's a great choice. I was trying to think of the most Windom-esque actor today, and he's a better fit than Sutherland.