News The ongoing next Star Trek movie thread
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Watched Seán Ferrick’s video about this earlier today, and while it doesn’t exactly come as a surprise that they’re not planning another Kelvin Trek movie and I didn’t really wait for another one to come out anytime soon, I’m still kinda bummed that it now seems less likely than ever before that we’ll get another movie with that particular ensemble.
At this point I have a lot of nostalgia for those movies, especially the first one, since it was a special time here on the board as well. I still remember fondly the first pieces of information and images coming out, and the time they had the starfleetshipyards.com* landing page where we (IIRC) first saw glimpses of the new ship. These were fun times, and I still think Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Beyond hold up really well. The cast of these movies was just perfect and I really would have liked to see them on the screen one more time. Catching up with them a little later in their careers could have been an interesting basis for another movie, now that a few years have gone by and the actors are a little older.
* By the way, does anyone know if that’s archived anywhere? The original page sadly seems to be down.
At this point I have a lot of nostalgia for those movies, especially the first one, since it was a special time here on the board as well. I still remember fondly the first pieces of information and images coming out, and the time they had the starfleetshipyards.com* landing page where we (IIRC) first saw glimpses of the new ship. These were fun times, and I still think Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Beyond hold up really well. The cast of these movies was just perfect and I really would have liked to see them on the screen one more time. Catching up with them a little later in their careers could have been an interesting basis for another movie, now that a few years have gone by and the actors are a little older.
* By the way, does anyone know if that’s archived anywhere? The original page sadly seems to be down.
I don't think it will happen like this, they will probably make it cheaper.
Heh. I remember starfleetshipyards.com it was a neat teaser for ST09.
Meh.
Paramount Has “Moved On” from a STAR TREK Kelvin Timeline Sequel Film, Says New Variety Report
After a decade of false starts on a new Chris Pine-led STAR TREK film, a new report today indicates Paramount may have closed the books on the Kelvin Timeline once and for allblog.trekcore.com
It's been obvious for a long time that Paramount had no serious plans for ST4. Too many start and stops. If they actually had an entertaining script, they would have put it into production long ago. With all the names attached at one point or another to star alongside the Kelvin cast, it's amazing it was never capitalized. Failing that, they could had done what was done with TWoK and take the best parts of them to make a new script and make a film out of that.
Paramount dragged their feet too too long. And I don't think they wanted to deal with the Anton Yelchin question either.
There's also the reality of making Star Trek that been revealed during the Kurtzman era.
Why make a movie when they can spend the same amount of money on a 10-episodes season and tell a story better? And not have to worry about airing it on P+ a month after hit hits theatres.
There's probably still money with the Kelvinverse, in seeing where they ended up a decade later, and a way to tie the movies into a more coherent arc. And if they wanted to explore a Federation that was more militant and undemocratic, the Kelvinvese was the perfect canvas for that, since it also would not upset the canon-obsessed with it being set in an alternate reality. But Paramount does not seem interested in that direction.
But it's interesting they want a clean slate. Since Paramount tried that with Section 31, and everyone hated that movie. So, I'm not sure what direction they could go in that they think will generate interest. Prequel fatigue exists in the fandom and the Toby Haynes film is pitched as an origins film.
Explain.
Speaking just as a fan of Star Trek and trying not to bring politics into this, I am bummed they are not going to move ahead with new Kelvin movies. I liked that era and I liked Beyond. My first hope when Skydance bought Paramount was the movie producers are now owning a company so this means it will be easier to get a new film off the ground. Reading they are not going ahead with it feels confusing and disappointing.
On another note, I really wanted to see Jaylah again.
On another note, I really wanted to see Jaylah again.
The Kelvin movies did what they were meant to do: revive a franchise that was on life support, or maybe even completely dead. There really was never any need for more.
It remains to be seen what a future Skydance movie will do, as the franchise seems to be moving towards that road again (although we will see if SFA makes any kind of dent in the viewership numbers.)
It remains to be seen what a future Skydance movie will do, as the franchise seems to be moving towards that road again (although we will see if SFA makes any kind of dent in the viewership numbers.)
Well, we see how well that worked with DISCO, and if any of the people behind that were helming a new ST movie, so one might say...do not get your hopes up.
i guess if they made the many star trek kelvin movies like back to back which i think they should have done when they could have made more star trek kelvin movies and there would have been at least 12 star trek kelvin movies
but it all depends on the hours of the day they make the back to back star trek kelvin movies
That is not how theatrical filmmaking works. There is at least two to three years of preproduction, production, and postproduction.
There used to be a time when sequels would be churned out under two years.
That's how the MCU and Transformers took a foothold in the moviegoers psyche.
It's completely Paramount's fault for not striking when the iron was hot.
Star Trek 2 should have come out in 2011, 3 should have been 2014 at most, and if the quality and B.O. picked up, 4 and 5 should have been 2017 and 2019.
We could have had 5-6 movies set in the Kelvinverse, not a paltry 3.
It never happened with Star Trek films. Ever.
In the TOS films, TSfS came out exactly 2 years after WoK. In the TNG films, there were exactly 2 years between GEN and FC, and just over 2 years after that was INS.
Everything else took longer -- usually 2.5 to 3 years.
TMP - 7 December 1979
(2.5 years)
TWoK - 4 June 1982
(2 years)
TSfS - 1 June 1984
(2.5 years)
TVH - 26 November 1986
(2.5 years)
TFF - 9 June 1989
(2.5 years)
TUC - 6 December 1991
(3 years)
GEN - 18 November 1994
(2 years)
FC - 22 November 1996
(2 years)
INS - 11 December 1998
(4 years)
NEM - 13 December 2002
(2.5 years)
TWoK - 4 June 1982
(2 years)
TSfS - 1 June 1984
(2.5 years)
TVH - 26 November 1986
(2.5 years)
TFF - 9 June 1989
(2.5 years)
TUC - 6 December 1991
(3 years)
GEN - 18 November 1994
(2 years)
FC - 22 November 1996
(2 years)
INS - 11 December 1998
(4 years)
NEM - 13 December 2002
Edit:
There's also something to do with audience size which means the franchises you're using as a yardstick may not be entirely appropriate for comparison to Star Trek films.
Last edited:
We're long past the days of putting out a sequel every year or two. Even the Bond franchise couldn't keep up that pace.
It's a simple fact that production and post-production times on special effects-driven movies can't be done in less than two years any longer. Add to that the availability of the cast and crew. Anyone saying different has a complete lack of understanding how movies are produced.
Colour me gutted by this news - despite all evidence long pointing towards this being the reality of the Kelvin-timeline movie-verse.
Writing on the wall, and all that…
Writing on the wall, and all that…
It may also be worth pointing to how many visual-effects houses went broke / out of business trying to meet the schedule demands of the blockbuster movies of the period in question.
Similar threads
