Star Trek Beyond
 

Been some new on the 3rd Star Trek for a while but no thread on it...


So far, news is they're aiming for 2016... so it'll go head to head with Warcraft, Finding Dory, Pirates Of The Caribbean Dead Men Tell No Tales, Batman Vs Superman, Independence Day 2, The Mummy reboot and... Star Wars Episode VII (at least in terms of ticket sales of 2016, EpVII is hoping for a December 2015 release).

2016 is also the 50th anniversary of the original TV series... so bets are they'll do it for 2016.


Abrams, being busy with Wars 7, will only be producing Trek 3. British comedian turned filmmaker Joe Cornish, the man behind Attack The Block, was pencilled in to replace Abrams, but has since dropped out.

Joss Whedon was also rumoured but is busy with The Avengers sequels.

Jon Favreau, Guillermo Del Toro and none other than Commander Riker Jonathan Frakes have been rumoured at as well.

Peter Weller (best known as the original RoboCop and Buckaroo Banzai), who starred in Into Darkness as Admiral Marcus, is also rumoured to direct Trek 3.

---

As for writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci who wrote Star Trek and Into Darkness...

... Kurtzman has passed the chance for Trek 3 as he's working on The Amazing Spider-Man sequels (Amazing Spidey 3 is also pencilled in for 2016), Orci is back on board though.

Replacing Kurtzman are Patrick McKay and JD Payne... the writers behind the still-in-production-comic-book-adaption of Boilerplate. Boilerplate is also being produced by Abrams.


So there you go. Some facts, some rumours.

As far as I know though, the cast are all returning for the 3rd film.

I like the idea of Jonathan Frakes directing, he made the best by far of the Next Gen films with "First Contact".

Of course the cast are returning, they will all be signed up to contracts for several films with increasing pay depending on success etc.

It's a shame Leonard Nimoy is ill, looks like no cameo this time around. End of an era.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

Maybe they'll have a tiny cameo with old Spock's death as part of the 50th anniversary/handover.

It'll add a depth as well as it would mean young Spock sees himself die.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

I like that idea Rodent.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

I liked Star Trek and Star Trek: Into Darkness more than I liked most of the original content, I have been thoroughly entertained with the last two movies, so, as long as they hold onto what they did right with the last two movies, I'll be happy.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

Benedict Cumberland Sausage was what interested me in the last film so will not be rushing to see a third Star Trek film as I wasn't that keen on the first one.

But it could be of interest if Guillermo Del Toro directs.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

I'm not really a fan of Del Toro...

Not sure what it is with him... his work I've seen has been mediocre yet he's revered by everyone.

He does have massive amounts of talent... he proved that with Pan's Labyrinth which absolutely blew me away, but he just seems not to use it for anything else.

Blade 2, Pacific Rim, The Hobbit films, Splice, Puss In Boots, Hellboy films, Mama, Don't Be Afraid Of The Dark, Mimic, The Devil's Backbone... all had interesting concepts and little ideas, entertaining in a fashion, but none of them I would say I genuinely cared for or would go out and buy on DVD.
I bought Pacific Rim, but only because I hadn't seen it. If I had seen it beforehand, I wouldn't have.

Pan's Labyrinth was just awesome though, maybe he's a one hit wonder.

If he takes on Trek 3, I hope he doesn't just do another Pacific Rim. At least he won't be writing it anyway, so hopefully the story will be decent.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

I think they should bring back Nicholas Meyer... the guy behind The Wrath Of Khan and The Undiscovered Country...

He is brilliant. Besides writing the screenplay, Time After Time was his directorial debut and an excellent twist to H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.

I liked the first Star Trek movie more than Into Darkness, even if I absolutely adore Benedict's work.

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

Most of this has been knocking around for a bit but this thread has sat for over a year without updates...


Simon Pegg has promised "a kickass new villain".


The title is rumoured as Star Trek: Beyond.


Simon Pegg's script was a lot closer to the original TV series, but was changed around a little as it was simply way too close to be taken seriously. It was called "too Trekkie".
Pegg has worked with Doug Jung on the script.


Justin Lin is directing, the guy behind Fast Furious 5 and 6.


Sofia Boutella of Kingsman fame is on the cast sheet.


The story is set during Kirk and crew's first time out on the 5 year journey we saw them start at the end of Into Darkness. The story will involve new planets and new species that have never been seen before.


The cast are all returning, filming has already started, and is set for a July 8th 2016 release.

I really hope this won't be a rushed production. Still looking forward to it, though. I'm a big Trek fan, been a fan of the franchise ever since I was a kid.

actually it's pronounced Benedict Cucumber Patch......;)

Thread title needs to be changed.....

Re: Star Trek 3, The Sequel To Into Darkness
 

I wasn't sure if I'd seen Star Trek Into Darkness. Turns out I have, it was just that forgettable.

I'm not keen on the new title and the lack of director doesn't exactly fill me with confidence either. I think this will be pretty low on my list of movies to watch out for, although perhaps slightly higher than Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Horses Keep Getting Flogged.

Hi, this is ShakierCleric. I just wanted to let you know that Star Trek Beyond has a director. It's Justin Lin, and he's the director of the Fast and Furious 4, 5, and, 6. He's also a lifelong Trek fan. Simon Pegg did the script this time.

Star Trek Beyond
 

Well they posted some set shots this weekend and I think Irdis Elba is a great casting choice. Now we get to the five year mission. really hope Pegg and Lin are bringing back what made the original series so great !

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Justin Lin? Fast 5 and 6 are giant turds, doesn't bode well at all imo.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Never really gotten into the Fast and the Furious franchise, but we shall see where this takes the films, the last 1 wasn't one of my favourites.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

i loved the first 2 movies, and certainly hoping for more of the same.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

THR is reporting that the first trailer for Star Trek Beyond will be attached to The Force Awakens.

what dont tell me it's the same universe?

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRVD32rnzOw

Whats your honest opinions on this guys???

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

A Star Trek reboot is not Star Trek, so I don't care about it.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Trailer looks bad, like what is even happening. Justin Lins Fast and Furious movies were ****, I don't care how much they made.

Be amazed if this is any good.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I would've loved an actual "prequel" of the original Star Trek using young actors.
Instead, what we got was a concurrent "splinter" reality with a parallel universe retcon and alternate continuity carbon copies of all the characters, meaning the characters were no longer unique since there was now at least two versions of every one of them.
i.e. Everything we ever knew about the original Star Trek universe may as well have never happened and can now be thrown away since it's all been replaced by a copy - and as we know with copies, their quality degrades with every subsequent replication.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Just for fun... if they ever do a prequel for ST The Next Generation, will James McAvoy play young Jean Luc Picard?
(Get it? Get it? Huh? Huh?) ;)

Or Tom Hardy (Get it?) :)

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

The tone in this is sooooo much different than the other 2 movies. It was a mistake getting someone like Justin Lin for this. It looks like its gonna be Fast & Furious in Space......I guess Star Trek beat Fast & Furious to it...

So there is another true Trekkie on the forum., what a relief! JJJ AMBRAMS will probably destroy Star Wars next. I mean Vulcan destroyed when it still exists in the current books ?LMFAO! Go bollocks JJJJ ABRAMABAS!

Color me dense:eek: But I don't get it?

Yah, I am:) And there's GBgoodies and Captain Steel too.

I'm sure you guys seen this trailer for a fan funded, possible Star Trek series, that never was picked up for syndication

Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjeX5drV9ms

The full movie is on YouTube and legit. I watched the movie a few weeks ago. Loved the concept and characters, the script needed work but at least it existed within the Star Trek universe and not the JJAMBRAMS universe!

Wasn't Star Trek a TV show in the late 60s? Why would some random series of books somehow be the definitive version of the material?

Did Roddenberry write all these books? I don't think he did. Sounds like fan-fiction to me! ;)

RE: Star Trek:Renegades. I was hoping this would be good, but i couldn't even make it through the entire film. :(

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I wish Patrick Stewart could live forever.

Star Trek has a timelime set by stardates!

As do I... Great Star Trek captain!

Not a fan of this new trailer, btw...

In the X-Men movies Patrick Stewart (who played Jean Luc Piccard in ST-TNG) was Professor Xavier. In the prequel & time-travel X-Men movies James McAvoy plays young Professor Xavier - so if McAvoy can play a young Patrick Stewart, then he could just as easily play a young Jean Luc Piccard.

I had to look up the Tom Hardy reference - but he played Shinzon in Star Trek Nemeis (2002). Shinzon was a clone of Jean Luc Piccard. So Tom Hardy was also playing a younger version of Patrick Stewart!

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Oh, I get it now, you guys are too clever for me:p

The trailer is boring and derivative, and it seems this latest movie will only trample that much more on what I used to love about Star Trek.

Honestly, with the tremendous popularity of television dramas these days—and the incredible openness that audiences have shown the fantasy and sci-fi genres—why isn't there a new Star Trek series on television? Paramount really should jettison this big-budget, action-packed malarky and take a slower, more intellectual approach. I bet Netflix would jump at the opportunity to reboot Star Trek on the small screen.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I heard one was in the works. It'll probably happen.

I won't judge from the trailer too much, because it's easy to create a film that isn't there with the right clips/music. I will say that it looks very much like a throwback/homage to the cheesy older series, where Kirk was semi-regularly stranded on some desert planet that looked suspiciously like California. There were a lot of nods to the old episodes in here, and that could be fun if done right.

Star Trek in California...This is the classic shooting spot,

It also famously appears in Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey. :D

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

"Phase II" anyone?

There's also the second half of the "5 year mission" we never got to see on TV.
And there's the years between V-ger (TMP) and Wrath of Khan - which in the Trek universe was something like 12 years, during which another 5 year mission took place.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

since most trailers regarding "blockbuster films" have been action-packed assaults to the senses I won't entirely gauge this one by it and while the Too Fast director is on board I am more than a little concerned, I focused more on the dialogue spoken during the clip and that appealed GREATLY to me. I watched the reruns of the original Star Trek series on local TV as a kid and was a little so-so on the Enterprise Universe tv shows that came out in my early twenties aka the eighties.

I fully enjoyed the last two reboots of Star Trek and hopped aboard the parallel universe premise which, I gotta say, TRULY follows the dogma: To boldly go where no man as gone before. So in that spirit, I'm in.

And if we're gonna dispute what is "true" Star Trek; even the original Star Trek TV series fell very short of its creator Rodenberry, who's vision was something far more inspirational than a womanizing, brawl-starting Kirk, Tribbles, and all the crazy split universes that they encountered, ranging from being caught in the Shootout at the OK Corral to a really bad "gangsters" world.

So, where do we draw the line and claim we're true to the original premise and where do we crossover and explore?

I think you can guess which one I'm going for

At least Roddenberry had input up until he died. What's kind of telling is that as soon as he passed, people started retconning his universe.

What Abram's did goes far beyond a retcon of details like Zephram Cochrane's origin or which aliens were Earth's fist contact - the new ST universe is Abram's mustache on the Mona Lisa.

I LOVE THAT LINE!!

I thought the trailer was okay – Kirk seems to be just as unlucky with his ship as in the Prime Universe. It would also seem that Idris Elba is heavily made up as an alien so it will be interesting to see him work that way. It just looks like more of the same, really, but I also have to ask myself why Scotty is suddenly blond.

That's a pretty good summation of the downside. I sympathise with it in some respects; for example the varying degree of fidelity to the original actors. Spock (brilliant); Kirk (okay); Pike (nothing like Jeffrey Hunter:mad:). The Star Wars prequels were great for that.

Stewart must find it ironic he keeps playing people who lose their hair. James McAvoy was quite a surprisingly good young version of him I think, without doing an 'impression'.

That was silly in Star Trek: Nemesis to have an undoctored photo of a bald Tom Hardy for Picard's Starfleet Academy photo. Fans would know he had hair in those days but even as a casual viewer we'd been told that Shinzon had had seven shades beaten out of him, so he wasn't an exact clone any more.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

This trailer is too fast & furious for me. At least the first 2 movies gave the feeling like if they had or were exploring space. Now, pfff...

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Not looking good. They already did the Beastie Boys in the first one and it worked because it was so unexpected. But to see them go down this road again, seems like they have no ideas.

And is this really a Stat Trek film? Besides teh brief shots of the Enterprise and Spock teleporting away it looks like a generic sci fi film.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Much better trailer and I am not sure why its getting hate. My god the world will end if we put action and fun into a star trek movie. I like the new trek movies and it was time for a new director for some of Into Darkness was very boring.

The problem isn't that there's action and fun in a Star Trek movie at all, it's that the action and fun are being emphasised at the expense of the characterisation and explorations of inner and outer space that were at the heart of the Star Trek brand. By downplaying or disregarding those elements, the two rebooted films end up playing out like generic sci-fi blockbusters that just happen to be using the Star Trek characters and universe. It's not that there's something inherently wrong with mindless action, it's that it's wrong for Star Trek. That's the problem with the first trailer for Beyond - it plays up the empty spectacle and little else as you get to see shots of motorcycle jumps set to the thundering guitars of "Sabotage", thus implying that this is likely to be more of the same as the last two movies. At least this second trailer gets the tone right by scattering several character moments throughout it so as to suggest that there's actually more to this film than just another helping of flashy explosions and high-speed action.

I liked the first star trek movie allot and some of into darkness. The seconds mistake was trying too be a wrath of khan rehesh and that was the wrong movie to steal from. The khan villain was too soon.

It is very strange that the whole point of the mission in Star Trek – space exploration – has taken such a back seat in the films. There's only really Star Trek V: The Final Frontier that comes close with the quest to find God, which also incorporated another aspect since lost to audiences, that of encounters with inexplicable, supernatural aliens. I think it's a real shame that nobody sees that side of Star Trek anymore.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

If anything they needed too start Kirks In reboot movie franchise. His rivalry will of all things with The Klingons. In the old movies they already seem too hate James T Kirk before Movie 3. Wrath Of Khan happens in the Five Year Mission in deep space. I think Lin has the right idea too have new allies and new aliens on there newly established Five Year Mission arc.

I think that seems to be a bit of a problem with franchise reboots these days (especially post-The Dark Knight) where the makers will feel the need to bring in the franchise's most iconic villain as soon as possible but will occasionally try to misdirect audiences about the villain's presence or true identity (not just Khan but also Blofeld in the Craig-era Bond movies). It might have been handled better

Yeah, I wonder how much of it is kowtowing to audience expectations of what the films should be - this arguably goes as far back as Wrath of Khan, which ended up being more of a straightforward action film than the much slower Motion Picture. It'd be interesting to see if the rebooted film series could pull off a film that didn't involve pitting the Enterprise crew against some sort of antagonist (sort of in the vein of Motion Picture or Voyage Home).

Well, yeah, the old movies follow on from the series so there's been plenty of time to build up Kirk's rivalry with the Klingons (by the time the first episode starts Kirk is already a seasoned captain instead of a fairly green recruit). By rebooting the timeline so completely that they have to follow Kirk from his beginning at Starfleet, the new film series is forced to build up said rivalry across individual films, which is going to be much more difficult (and that's assuming they do it at all).

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I do like that Idris Elba is the villain for he was amazing as Shere Khan voice and like he is a new race of alien but people of Star Trek want Mostly 3 races Romulans, Klingons or Vulcans simply thats the big bad Character races.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Vulcans aren't baddies :D

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

With these new films, you never know.

It'll be interesting if they ever choose to have the Borg in these films.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I hope for a funny comedy:D

Interesting, perhaps, but ultimately inadvisable if we're talking about pitting them against the TOS crew. The Borg were introduced in TNG and one of the most interesting things about them is how they serve as Picard's arch-enemies throughout the series, so to jam them into the rebooted TOS continuity simply because they're such iconic villains would be even worse than introducing Khan in Into Darkness.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Nothing has yet to top the wrath of khan,ricardo montalban s screen charisma and william shatner as james t kirk superb film eve after some 35 year or so ,except star trek 2009 which is extremely good i liked it a lot.

Apparently Simon Pegg has made Sulu gay in Star Trek Beyond as a nod to George Takei. My first thought was of Sulu and Chekov (I think it was) eyeing up Vixis's muscles at the end of Star Trek V :).

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

But, Sulu was married and had a Daughter. His Daughter even appeared in Generations.


Ok it's an alternate universe, but... Hollywood love their race-lifting and sex-lifting, and now a new one... orientation-lifting.

Oh that's true, I remember now.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Offhand, Idris Elba's character appears to be a Hirogen, judging by the shape of the head.

Judging from the reports, Sulu is still married (to a guy) and has a daughter. It's a nice touch, but it's interesting to see Takei himself take issue with it for some fairly understandable reasons. Hoping the film proper actually goes somewhere with it because these last couple of films tend to sideline Sulu anyway.

Ah, that's interesting to see. I agree with him, and it's an argument that translates to characters in a lot of other franchises.

What I find a bit peculiar is the way they keep saying that this Sulu is a different character. Perhaps what was confusing is referring to the "Prime Universe" and whatever this new one is called instead of the "Prime Timeline". As far as I can see, Nero just went back in time along the same timeline as he was from and changed history. So characters like Spock and Kirk are affected by that, sometimes only in small ways, but to me they should still be seen as the same characters and not from a parallel universe.

That's a laugh, I've just seen that Simon Pegg used exactly this phrase when explaining his decision. And then Zachary Quinto calls it the prime universe again. Star Trek and time travel do not mix.

I can't help but look at the argument and think there's a lot of pomposity coming from Pegg especially – I think it would have been more respectful to George Takei to actually listen to what he was saying, particularly as it was based on respect for Gene Roddenberry.

I saw a bit of Star Trek yesterday – unsure as to the episode but a scene involved a female alien trying to touch Sulu in order to kill him. Sulu is disturbed that a beautiful (and seemingly unthreatening) woman could be "evil" and unsurprisingly the moment is very heterosexual, and I think played as such by George Takei. We shouldn't forget that Sulu's heterosexuality was part of the role that Takei was portraying. It wasn't something that was absent or invisible, it was there on screen.

Does this look like the woman in the episode? If so, the episode was called "That Which Survives".

http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albu...rvives_112.jpg

Yeah, that's the one – she looked very familiar actually. I love the original series.

She's Lee Meriwether. She's also famous for playing Catwoman in Batman: The Movie (1966), and for the TV series "Barnaby Jones" in the '70's.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Love that crazy eye shadow:eek: It matches the alien sky.

Of course :p:). Thanks for reminding me.

Bligh me, that looks promising. There's a chance it'll even be the best Star Trek movie. I might even check it out in cinema one of these days. Thanks, Yoda. :)

Interesting details today about Star Trek: Discovery –

To me, The Wrath of Kahn was like the best of the Original Star Wars series. It is one of those iconic moments within a larger franchise that will probably never be topped.

I'm not sure its fair to expect modern day reboots to be able to top that... Although I thought the end of Star Trek: Into Darkness did a nice omage to it.

From what I understand, altering Sulu was supposed to be a homage to George Takei himself (though the man himself disagreed with it because it would not be truly respectful to the character as originally created by Gene Roddenberry). Also, I wouldn't say that making Sulu gay was a "requirement" - I would think that the point was to demonstrate how it wasn't a requirement. Besides, it is possible to have more than one gay character exist within a universe, especially one as expansive and varied as that of the Star Trek franchise.

I disagree I'm afraid. It seems to me that it was a requirement as Simon Pegg saw it (presumably others too) – to have a gay character in there at last, so that that part of society was represented. It just seems a mistake to have gone to the trouble of changing an existing character when a new one was about to be created — these arguments happen all the time and are never satisfyingly explained or resolved.

To be fair, it's not like you've given a satisfying explanation for why you consider changing Sulu to be a mistake, especially in light of the introduction of an all-new gay character in Star Trek Discovery. Like I said earlier, it's not like you can only have one gay character at a time.

I think it's more that satisfactory and more than fair. I agree with George Takei's response to the idea as it was pitched to him. He indicated that it would have been better to create a new character who happened to be gay rather than change Sulu, an established character.

I recall that Pegg may have even said that they wanted to change Sulu because it would be easier for people to identify with an established character, something like that, on top of the 'tribute' to Takei, which the actor rejects.

Thinking about it again I object to the clumsiness of the whole process, the ill-considered blundering nature of it.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

This is one of the worst sci fi movies i ever saw and certainly one of the weakest if not the weakest of them all, like a child has written thr story, it has no star trek soul.....

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Really? Beyond is probably the best of the new series.


If you think it's the weakest sci-fi movie you've ever seen you should really watch more.
The Happening, RoboCop 3, Mac And Me, Superman 4, Santa Claus Conquers The Martians, Chappie.... the list could go on.
Alien Hunter is possibly the most boring and uneventful sci-fi movie ever made.


Also, check out all the Mockbusters and sound-alike-titles made by The Asylum for some really bad sci-fi.

sorry to disturb u with my comment but i really was embarrassed when i was watching the movie in cinemas, it felt weak and plot wise really thin, star trek 2009 and into darkness are much much better than this.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

The hell you say. It's probably the best of the new Trek movies - certainly has more of the Star Trek soul than an empty rehash like Into Darkness. Plus I agree with Rodent, if this really is one of the worst sci-fi movies you've ever seen then you're getting off easy.

well man, from my experience in the viewing i felt it was thin very thin plot wise, it should have been bigger on scale or i don't know how to explain it, it just didn t feel on par with 2009 and into darkness

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

I'd make the case that its strength comes from its lack of emphasis on plot, whereas the other two suffer because they focus too much on delivering a twisty plot (especially Into Darkness, which I sort of liked when I first watched it but couldn't stand a second time around). I can handle a thin plot or a lack of scale if the rest of the film can compensate appropriately, and I felt that Beyond did that.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Elba wasn't a twisty plot?

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

Not as much as White Khan.

Re: Star Trek Beyond
 

LOL gotta give you that one
I liked Beyond, just not as much as the previous 2

sounds like a Michael Jackson movie Cmg..........Lam'ron would laugh..........................


executive produced by Q-Nitty............Cisco Rosado............