Star Wars has hundreds of "breaking news" (all with bogus--I mean--"unnamed sources") of the impending demise of this or that or the firing of this person or that person. Why should Star Trek be any different?
If true, break some new ground. New crew, new era, whatever. No reboots or recasts.There will be another Star Trek movie, too valuable of a property to keep out of the cinema for long. What form it takes, is anybody's guess.
There will be another Star Trek movie, too valuable of a property to keep out of the cinema for long. What form it takes, is anybody's guess.
If true I'd be delighted.
Not because I'd take any pleasure in denying others the chance.Why would you want to deny other folks something they like? I loved going every three years or so to the theater to see Star Trek on the big screen.
Partly because of the repeated disappointment from successive movies (especially Beyond) and partly because I really would rather Trek stick to TV.
That may well be true, but it's not an argument for continuing to make them now.If it weren't for the movies, Star Trek wouldn't have returned to TV in 1987 or 2017.
Apart from that I'll no doubt shell out on a cinema ticket and Bluray for something I probably don't like.
But that's stupid and entirely on me...
Star Trek 5 (2025) Pine will be 45 years old, young enough to do a pre TMP revised Star Trek movie
Star Trek - The custody battle for David
Marcus
No but he is getting older. He’s no longer the fresh faced young kirk of the Kelvin movies or even tos. He’s a seasoned officer now. He’ll be late middle aged kirk with the curly hair soon.There is no reason for the time frame to be the same from Kirk to Kirk.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.