Star Trek Beyond **SPOILERS FROM POST 566 ONWARD**

bnt

Cantstandsya wrote: »

I sincerely hope this movie flops.

The new Star Trek is Star Trek in name only and as long as these films are ongoing there is no chance of a return to the good old days of TNG/DS9 (even later seasons of Enterprise).

Not even if Jonathan Frakes directed it? :pac:

Cantstandsya

bnt wrote: »

Not even if Jonathan Frakes directed it? :pac:

Pass :-)

Wedwood

Well if Shatner does appear in the next Star Trek movie, it will hopefully undo the greatest travesty of the movie series.

It's a pity Shatner went the extra round after the perfect send off for the Original Series cast in The Undiscovered Country.

OldeCinemaSoz

Who cares about that? All I want to see is those fantastic SALT VAMPIRES
running rampant over the HIGH PLAINS in the next FILM.

Instead of Russians picking things over a BMW as in the first two RUBBISH ENTRIES. ClumberBACK included.

Antar Bolaeisk

http://badassdigest.com/2014/12/15/whats-going-on-with-star-trek-3/

Hopefully the above isn't true otherwise we all might have been a bit premature cheering the the fact that Robert Orci won't be directing as Paramount may be looking to make Star Trek (1)3 more like the big, exciting sci-fi film of 2014. I've always thought there was a distinct lack of Rocket Raccoon in Star Trek in the past.

Maybe Spock could get a knock on the head and lumber along, capable of only stating "I am Mr. Spock".

If Robert Orci left because even he could recognise that that wouldn't be the direction to take Trek in then I dread to see what comes next.

The_Valeyard

They better not completely mess it up by bringing in the Borg, Undine, Hirogen, Cardassions, or some other race far in the timeline.


Josh Whedon for director? No?

doubledown

Lin in!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/69855

SarahBM

beat me too it.

I think he might be a good choice

(ducks for cover)

Antar Bolaeisk

doubledown wrote: »

Lin in!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/69855

Excellent news, now instead of lens flare all the starships can be fitted with nitro and neon underlights.

SarahBM

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

Excellent news, now instead of lens flare all the starships can be fitted with nitro and neon underlights.

And NOS. Don't forget the rear spoilers too

_Kaiser_

doubledown wrote: »

Lin in!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/69855

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

Excellent news, now instead of lens flare all the starships can be fitted with nitro and neon underlights.

I love the top comment on that link...

Space: the fast and the furious.
These are the bitchin' rides of the hot rod Enterprise
It's happenin' gig: to explode strange new worlds,
to seek out new babes in new clubs,
to boldly drift where no badass has drifted before!

nyarlothothep

nyarlothothep wrote: »

People seem to associate darkness/cynicism with more adult storylines and higher drama. But this is a bit simplistic because you can have precisely the same adult storylines in a show like TNG, probably moreso, because it's focused on abstract concepts/theories. However this doesn't fly nowadays.

FFS Riker had a fling with a gender conflicted alien 25 years ago on TV.

That would not even get past the drawing stage now days outside HBO

SarahBM

SarahBM wrote: »

And NOS. Don't forget the rear spoilers too

They already added spoilers to the nacells of new Enterprise that have blue neon glow when warp engines engage

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I genuinely don't get the hate for the newest incarnations of Star Trek - as someone who has grown up watching the numerous series (all bar Enterprise, but that's because even I thought it was muck) and whose happiest childhood memories were from watching Next Generation as a child, I thoroughly enjoyed them. It was so good to get a proper blockbuster Star Trek movie because, truth be told, most of them bar Wrath of Khan and First Contact weren't the best. And sure, there could have been less lens flare, but that aside, Abrams made a good movie.

The guy knows movies and you can tell he loves them through every single one he makes.

Good dumb space actioners but not StarTrek.
"Space Journey" would be a better title

Goldstein

Star Trek and all it stands for has a fan base.

The generic space action JJ Trek films do not and never will have beyond the fickle space action movie crowd.

"Star Trek 3" will have about as much integrity as Transformers 3.

Dollar signs have blinded them but they really don't seem to get it yet - no one cares about your supposed tabloid "Star Trek" blockbuster. You can shove this movie where the Sun doesn't shine along with the other two.

don ramo

i really loved the first abrams star trek, but like everything abrams does hes great at getting the ball rolling and then after that he just doesnt have a clue, hence how bad his second was, just recycled crap, he just undone all the great work he done on the first one,

youreadthat

I just don't see the point of the new Star Trek films from a non $$$ perspective. I get what a re-boot is, but these films are so generic and devoid of character that without the uniforms it looks and feels like a different universe and if that's the case, why not just make a new sci-fi franchise? It's like when they re-booted SimCity and came out with the best facebook game not on facebook.

Antar Bolaeisk

Orci won't be on writing duties either, I'm pegging that as good news for the moment.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-trek/33473/star-trek-3-roberto-orci-no-longer-writing-the-film

pixelburp

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

Orci won't be on writing duties either, I'm pegging that as good news for the moment.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-trek/33473/star-trek-3-roberto-orci-no-longer-writing-the-film

In the immortal words of Yazz, the only way is up. Orci shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a writers' room in the first place, I'd be surprised if many people shed a tear over his departure from Star Trek.

JP Liz V1

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/idris-elba-early-talks-star-784262


Idris Elba in talks to play the villain

Wedwood

don ramo wrote: »

i really loved the first abrams star trek, but like everything abrams does hes great at getting the ball rolling and then after that he just doesnt have a clue, hence how bad his second was, just recycled crap, he just undone all the great work he done on the first one,

Into Darkness wasn't a bad movie, it's just the reworking of the ST II pieces at the end were corny. The rest of the movie was terrific.

Hopefully the third movie does a 'Skyfall' and gets back on track.

don ramo

Wedwood wrote: »

Into Darkness wasn't a bad movie, it's just the reworking of the ST II pieces at the end were corny. The rest of the movie was terrific.

Hopefully the third movie does a 'Skyfall' and gets back on track.

i really hope it is good, but Into Darkness was terrible, wont stop me watching 3, but i have low expectations for it, maybe with abrams gone it might be better, but i dont think Justin Lin is the right guy to direct either,

and its pathetic to spend $185million to rework what is a perfectly fine film, this is Star Trek, if your not creative enough to do something original with it, then you shouldnt be involved in the first place,

No, it was bad. Kahn randomly encountered early, Section 31 being public and having a master ship, interplanetary transporters and magic frikkin blood curing death

The_Valeyard

It just better not kill off Trek again.

Agent Coulson

ruskin

The 'new' Star Trek films are not Star Trek. They are spectacle-driven, colourful childrens action movies, more akin to a cross between a Marvel movie and Thunderbirds. 'Star Trek' is simply a familiar brand name to help marketing, nothing more.

We know

don ramo

ruskin wrote: »

The 'new' Star Trek films are not Star Trek. They are spectacle-driven, colourful childrens action movies, more akin to a cross between a Marvel movie and Thunderbirds. 'Star Trek' is simply a familiar brand name to help marketing, nothing more.

well to be fair the first abrams one was actually brilliant, blowing up vulcan was inspired, a huge thing like that leaves them open to go and do so many things, but the problem is they set themselves up perfectly, and then when it came to actually doing something they just shat the bed, they didnt have a clue what to do, so they just had some conspiracy within starfleet and said theyd retell the kahn story with a twist, not in least bit interesting, this is star trek, not even that, its sci-fi, you can do anything your imagination can imagine, and thats the best they could come up with, just pathetic,

abrams is a great guy to get the ball rolling on a project, but thats all he offers, once you get past the starting point he just doesnt know how to follow up or end something, he got lost going and then jumped ship, and he seems to know it now, hes only doing the first of the new star wars and then someone else is taking over,

Nervous Wreck

ruskin wrote: »

The 'new' Star Trek films are not Star Trek. They are spectacle-driven, colourful childrens action movies, more akin to a cross between a Marvel movie and Thunderbirds. 'Star Trek' is simply a familiar brand name to help marketing, nothing more.

Why is "new" in inverted commas...?

Gbear

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Why is "new" in inverted commas...?

All modern Hollywood blockbusters are actually derived from stone tablets discovered in the ruins of an ancient Mayan Temple.

Just another thing Big Archaeology didn't want you to find out about.