Star Trek 4 Reportedly Shelved

[fireproof78]

Alex Kurtzman has carried over much of what JJ started in Discovery which now feels like a permanent pollution of the Prime timeline.

Yes, how dare we have something new in this franchise...

Seriously, I don't understand this need to constantly gripe about the visual style. It didn't "pollute" it-it expanded upon previous designs. Or, as Kirk would say, "Young minds, fresh ideas-be tolerant."

 

[Dukhat]

When JJ started he had become the new official caretaker of the Star Trek franchise. The Pope, basically. Therefore the stakes are higher. That's why when he rammed his aesthetic (i.e. lens flare, pulse-phasers, brewery engine room) and other sensibilities into Trek it felt sort of out of place.

I completely disagree. The Abramsverse looked and felt far more like TOS/TMP than DSC does.

Alex Kurtzman has carried over much of what JJ started in Discovery which now feels like a permanent pollution of the Prime timeline.

It wasn’t Kurtzman that made DSC season 1 look and feel like it does. If anything he seems to be trying to get back to TOS’s roots.

The Tarantino film on the other hand would be a one-off. He comes in, does his thing, and leaves. There would be no need to reconcile it against canon. It's an experiment.

What does any of that matter? The Abramsverse is a new universe. Adhering to established prime Trek canon doesn’t matter no matter who is directing the movie.

 

[BurnhamAll]

If they let Bad Robot go they will probably also have to strike the sets and any Tarantino movie would have to spool up tabula rasa and I don't think Paramount has the cash for it these days.

Once again I must caution against making claims like this without knowing anything about the legal agreements, and who controls what. You're operating under a lot of assumptions.

 

[BillJ]

I know people who do VFX for The Orville. I assure you the physical model shots are extremely limited. It was mainly because A) Seth thought it was cool do to models, so he wanted to. B) To use it as a "practical effects omg!" marketing gimic.

There are 2-3 stock shots of Orville flybys done with the physical model, but 90%+ is all CG. As I've stated before, CGI starships can match and surpass the realism of physical models if enough time and talent is put into it.

Fair enough. Though I still find the effects work superior to what we've gotten from Discovery so far.

 

[DarthPipes]

I've always thought Star Trek worked better as a TV series. I enjoyed the Kelvin movies and would have definitely seen a fourth movie. But I'm all right with it because JJ had no understanding of the Star Trek universe and would often note how he wasn't a fan of it growing it. His films are absolutely riddled with plot holes as well. Tarantino as well isn't a good fit for Star Trek.

I enjoyed Beyond but I certainly won't miss the involvement of an odious, hypocritical worm like Simon Pegg.

 

[PixelMagic]

Fair enough. Though I still find the effects work superior to what we've gotten from Discovery so far.

I don't know where the directive is coming from, but I think Discovery is going for a "stylized" space look over realism. Which I personally don't like. If you have a live action show with real sets and real actors, you should try as much as possible to make the space shots have realistic cohesion.

Discovery likes to have bright nebula and such in the background for variety, I get it. But you can still try to make that realistic. I did this flyby shot of the Shenzhou to kind of combine the bright colorfulness of Discovery, while also trying to temper it with photorealism.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[saddestmoon]

[saddestmoon picks jaw off floor]

That is amazing work PixelMagic!

 

[BillJ]

But I'm all right with it because JJ had no understanding of the Star Trek universe and would often note how he wasn't a fan of it growing it.

So what? Harve Bennett, Nick Meyer and Rick Berman weren't fans either.

His films are absolutely riddled with plot holes as well.

Welcome to 1966, 1987, 1993, 1995, 2001 and 2017.

 

[BurnhamAll]

I always got the impression that 90% of the look, feel, and tonal direction of Discovery came from Bryan Fuller, irrespective of the Kelvin Films. Maybe some subtle things were carried over, like pulse phasers, but the Klingon re-design, the updated look of the ships, the visual direction-- I would bet were all Fuller.

Not the specifics and details, those were probably done later, but the overall tone and direction. That said, any intentional similarity to the JJ films likely came from the studio, who wanted to attract the millions of people who had gone to see those movies. Remember, those movies may not have been profitable, but they made hundreds of millions of dollars so a LOT of people were going to see them. I think the studio probably wanted those movie-goers to watch the premiere and stick around.

 

[fireproof78]

But I'm all right with it because JJ had no understanding of the Star Trek universe and would often note how he wasn't a fan of it growing it. His films are absolutely riddled with plot holes as well. Tarantino as well isn't a good fit for Star Trek.

This pretty much sums up the history of Star Trek in films.

Nicholas Meyer is my good to example, as he had never seen Star Trek before being asked by Harve Bennett to step in.

 

[BillJ]

I always got the impression that 90% of the look, feel, and tonal direction of Discovery came from Bryan Fuller, irrespective of the Kelvin Films. Maybe some subtle things were carried over, like pulse phasers, but the Klingon re-design, the updated look of the ships, the visual direction-- I would bet were all Fuller.

My biggest problem with Discovery is how bland and uninspired it plays.

That said, any intentional similarity to the JJ films likely came from the studio

Alex Kurtzman co-wrote the first two Abrams films.

 

[fireproof78]

Alex Kurtzman co-wrote the first two Abrams films.

Kurtzman wasn't tapped until last June.

 

[BillJ]

Kurtzman wasn't tapped until last June.

Isn't Kurtzman credited as series co-creator? And Secret Hideout, his production company, was attached to the show at a fairly early stage.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Welcome to 1966, 1987, 1993, 1995, 2001 and 2017.

Not to mention the other 45 years in between.

 

[DarthPipes]

This pretty much sums up the history of Star Trek in films.

Nicholas Meyer is my good to example, as he had never seen Star Trek before being asked by Harve Bennett to step in.

Yes but what did Nicholas Meyer do after he was hired to direct The Wrath of Khan? He proceeded to watch 72 episodes of the original series and certainly showed a much better understanding about the characters of Star Trek and their interactions with each other than those involved in the first movie. Plus he delivered an exciting movie...something that the first movie should have been.

 

[BurnhamAll]

My biggest problem with Discovery is how bland and uninspired it plays.



Alex Kurtzman co-wrote the first two Abrams films.

I'm sure what that has to do with the visual tone of the series. I think the studio hired him precisely because they wanted some tonal carryover given the big audience his films had.

 

[Tuvix5675]

I've always thought Star Trek worked better as a TV series. I enjoyed the Kelvin movies and would have definitely seen a fourth movie. But I'm all right with it because JJ had no understanding of the Star Trek universe and would often note how he wasn't a fan of it growing it. His films are absolutely riddled with plot holes as well. Tarantino as well isn't a good fit for Star Trek.

I enjoyed Beyond but I certainly won't miss the involvement of an odious, hypocritical worm like Simon Pegg.

Kelvinverse films served their purpose, they kept Trek alive, brought in new fans til Trek could return to television in a new form. I'm not surprised or saddened to see it go. Some of the actors, writers, and producers from Star Trek (2009) (Chris Pine, Zoe Saldana, Zachary Quinto, J.J. Abrams) have become too popular, or in demand to need to remain attached to the franchise. Abrams is probably the most in demand director/producer making sci-fi these days, he's moved on to the biggest sci-fi franchise, Star Wars. I don't really see why we need another Kelvin-verse film, the novels and merchandising don't sell as well as classic Trek.

 

[BillJ]

I'm sure what that has to do with the visual tone of the series. I think the studio hired him precisely because they wanted some tonal carryover given the big audience his films had.

I think they hired him because they already had a profitable relationship with his production company prior to Discovery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Kurtzman

He was a proven television producer.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Forbes has an interesting theory on the (apparent) demise of JJ Trek
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...tar-trek-4-and-disneys-star-wars-is-to-blame/

 

[valkyrie013]

The whole thing with the Kelvin verse was predicated that JJ wanted a complete reboot, and trash the Prime timeline. Cbs said.. uh.. nope. So with Pine out, and apparently ST 1(4) shelved, so goes the Kelvin Timeline. If there was no TV shows on right now, then they might be able to select another crew, or time shift to latter in the timeline, in the Kelvinverse, but with the TV shows going, thats dead on arrival.
So.. What next?
1. Do a Prime timeline movie, be it prequal romulan war, etc.
2. Tarintino, supposidly that was with the Kelvin Verse crew, so we'll see.
3. Wait some years, and come back and do a ST4 , but not the Kirks Dad one.(Never liked that idea, In Beyond Kirk got past his daddy issues, thats done.)
4. Wait and see, cbd/paramount re merger and go forward.
There will be another Trek movie, its just a matter of.. what.!