Jump to content

Star Trek 13


Recommended Posts

Doesn't the fact that Lt. Savik takes the Kobyashi Maru test STII: TWoK indicate that Starfleet did indeed not have a gender bias where Starfleet Captains are concerned?  Or was the Kobayashi Maru test open for all officers to partake, whether or not they were seeking their own ship?

Formerly Baal_T'shuvah

"Everyone has the right to make an ass out of themselves. You just can't let the world judge you too much." - Maude 
Harold and Maude
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, ST2:TWOK takes place less than a year before the events of ST4:TVH, and presumably the female captain in ST4:TVH had already taken the Kobayashi Maru, so...

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

So are we allowed to think yet about the implications for this film of Leonard Nimoy's death last week? (Too soon?)

 

Back when Orci was going to direct the film, he was actively trying to get *both* Nimoy *and* Shatner in the film. But Orci's script was ditched a few months ago, and it's possible that perpetuating the original-series actors' presence in the supposedly rebooted series wasn't being considered any more.

 

If it *was*, though, then... well, would they still want to bring back Shatner *without* bringing back Nimoy?

 

(These thoughts are partially informed by my recent listening to the audio commentary for Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, which was first released in 2003. Shatner and Nimoy both take part in that commentary, and along the way Shatner says he wished they had been invited to come back and appear in more Star Trek movies -- apparently oblivious to the fact that the TNG films, the last of which came out around the time he recorded that commentary, were really supposed to be their own thing (and never mind that Shatner's character *died* in the first TNG film). Of course, as we now know, Nimoy was invited to appear in the Star Trek reboot four years after that audio commentary came out -- and Shatner made a lot of noise about the fact that he *wasn't* invited.)

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would still love to see Shatner as Kirk in Star Trek 13. 

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say, when I first heard of Nimoy's death, one of my first thoughts was "What does this do NBooth's theory (it *is* NBooth's, yes?) that Spock Prime must die in the third JJverse film?"

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Idris Elba is in talks to play the villain. Which means that, once again, a Star Trek film will have a villain. (Two of the first four films *didn't* have a villain, you might recall. You could even say that three of the first five films didn't really have a villain. And one of those films in particular was very, very popular.)

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Idris Elba is in talks to play the villain. Which means that, once again, a Star Trek film will have a villain. (Two of the first four films *didn't* have a villain, you might recall. You could even say that three of the first five films didn't really have a villain. And one of those films in particular was very, very popular.)

 

But according to an interview Simon Pegg gave on a press junket for Kill Me Three Times, the script isn't even written yet. I'd be psyched to have Elba as a villain (in the right part) but this may just be internet rumormongering.

Edited by CrimsonLine
In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

‘Kingsman’s Sofia Boutella Lands Lead In ‘Star Trek 3′

EXCLUSIVE: After a sharp turn as the sexy blade-legged assassin in the Matthew Vaughn-directed hit Kingsman: The Secret Service, Sofia Boutella has been set for a lead role in Star Trek 3, the film that Justin Lin is directing from a script by cast member Simon Pegg and Doug Jung (the creator of the TNT series Dark Blue).

Prying loose info on this project is difficult, so I’m not sure whether she’s on the side of good or bad, but I’m told she’s got a lead role in the Paramount/Skydance film based on the Gene Roddenberry series that is produced by Bad Robot. . . .

Deadline.com, April 10

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NBooth wrote:
: Also Idris Elba.

 

Yep, he's been rumoured for the villain role since March (see earlier in this thread), but this video was the first official confirmation that he's part of the cast.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This, incidentally, would be the second British baddie in a row, following Benedict Cumberbatch's Khan (a Sikh character who was originally played by a Mexican, but never mind) in the last film.

 

And the villain in the first JJverse film was played by an Australian. For whatever that's worth.

 

... Hmmm, how about in the original series:

 

ST:TMP -- no villain at all (though for a while the film's chief antagonist, V'Ger, is represented by an android clone of an Enterprise crewmember who is played by Persis Khambatta, an Indian).

 

ST2:TWOK -- Khan, a Sikh played by a Mexican (Ricardo Montalban).

 

ST3:TSFS -- Kruge, a Klingon played by an American (Christopher Lloyd, born in Connecticut).

 

ST4:TVH -- no villain at all.

 

ST5:TFF -- no villain at all, sort of (though for a while the film has an antagonist, Sybok, who is played by Laurence Luckinbill, an American born in Arkansas; and in the end they encounter an evil alien "deity" who assumes Sybok's appearance).

 

ST6:TUC -- General Chang, a Klingon played by a Canadian (Christopher Plummer).

 

ST:G -- Soran, an El-Aurian played by a Brit (Malcolm McDowell).

 

ST:FC -- the Borg Queen, played by a South African (Alice Krige).

 

ST:I -- Ru'afo, a Son'a, played by an American (F. Murray Abraham, born in Pennsylvania).

 

ST:N -- Shinzon, a clone of Picard, played by a Brit (Tom Hardy).

 

So the only American lead villains to date are The Search for Spock's Kruge and Insurrection's Ru'afo -- though we could also throw Into Darkness's Peter Weller (born in Wisconsin) into the mix, I suppose.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Thoughts:

1. Destroying the Enterprise (it ain't a spoiler--it's in the trailer)? So, following TSFS playbook, but it sure doesn't feel the same. OTOH, at least it looks like an inciting incident, versus Into Darkness's whole-scale borrowing of the climax from TWOK.

2. That music? Major Guardians of the Galaxy vibe.

3. I still have hope that the bridge crew outside of Kirk and Spock gets better served--isolating them from the ship may be just the way to do that. 

4. Based on the trailer alone, these movies are now two-for-three in terms of replicating previous movies (three-for-three if you count all the stuff ST09 took from TWOK). Does this mean the next one will involve time travel, whales, or wacky San Francisco hijinks (or all three)?

Edited by NBooth
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

[Simon Pegg] said he had been asked to make the new Star Trek film “more inclusive”. 

“They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y,” he said of the original draft.

Quote from The Guardian several months ago, but worth revisiting now. 

It's the side effects that save us.
--The National, "Graceless"
Twitter Blog

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tyler said:

Quote from The Guardian several months ago, but worth revisiting now. 

approved.gif

Unfortunately, when Pegg excised all the overly-Star Trek elements, he seems--based on the trailer--to have forgotten to replace them with any alternative personality. 

Edited by NBooth
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buckeye Jones said:

Wow that looks terrible.  But I really liked the bad guys from Hellboy 2, so I'm glad to see them back.  Where was Stringer Bell anyway?  I missed him, yo.


That's EXACTLY what I thought when watching this less than stellar trailer.

Formerly Baal_T'shuvah

"Everyone has the right to make an ass out of themselves. You just can't let the world judge you too much." - Maude 
Harold and Maude
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

NBooth wrote:
: 1. Destroying the Enterprise (it ain't a spoiler--it's in the trailer)?

As I say at my blog, the *last* film ended with the declaration that the Enterprise was finally -- finally! -- going to embark on its five-year mission, after two movies of set-up. So it's weird to see that practically the first thing the trailer for *this* film does is destroy the ship.

: So, following TSFS playbook, but it sure doesn't feel the same.

It *is* an interesting series of parallels, isn't it, between the first three William Shatner films and the first three Chris Pine films. Movie #1: a newly-(re)commissioned Enterprise saves the entire planet from a distant threat, while Spock has disappointing encounters with his Vulcan elders. Movie #2: Khan does serious damage to the Enterprise. Movie #3: The Enterprise is destroyed.

: 2. That music? Major Guardians of the Galaxy vibe.

I believe it's the same Beastie Boys song that Kirk was playing in his (step)father's Corvette in the 2009 film.

: 4. Based on the trailer alone, these movies are now two-for-three in terms of replicating previous movies (three-for-three if you count all the stuff ST09 took from TWOK). Does this mean the next one will involve time travel, whales, or wacky San Francisco hijinks (or all three)?

Aha, you already made that point.

But dear Lord, if the characters on this alternate timeline try any time travel, that will just mess things up big time. It's problematic enough as it is that certain events in the 20th and 21st centuries were only made *possible* by the intervention of characters from the original 23rd and 24th centuries. If the characters from this *alternate* 23rd century go back to the earlier centuries that are shared by both timelines, things could get very messy indeed.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's an idea--one that could, perhaps, only work in a novel at this point: Enterprise crews from different timelines mucking about in the same general vicinity and stepping on each others' toes. Sounds like a job for Gary Seven to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...