1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

Star Trek 4 Reportedly Shelved By Paramount

Discussion in 'Movies' started by dpippel, Jan 8, 2019.

  1. Greg.K

    Greg.K Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1998
    Messages:
    1,712
    Likes Received:
    531
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    NY
    Real Name:
    Greg K.
    This was part of the problem. Why was he surgically altered to hide who was when nobody alive would know who he is? It made no sense. It was supposed to be a big reveal, but it was just a gimmick to keep the viewing audience (who already knew who Khan was) in the dark, it didn't make any sense as a plot device for the story.
     
  2. Message #62 of 156 Jan 12, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2019
    joshEH

    joshEH Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    5,223
    Likes Received:
    1,838
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Room 303, The Heart O' The City Hotel
    Real Name:
    Josh
    It was because there would still be enough historians alive (as indeed we saw with Marla McGivers in “Space Seed”) who would have eventually put two-and-two together and recognized him in his original physical appearance, considering his status as one of history’s most renowned and successful conquerors.

    Admiral Marcus made the correct call in realizing that in order for Khan to properly “disappear” into Section 31, he needed to change his physical appearance, too. At that point he desperately needed Khan’s military prowess and combat skills and intellect, but his outer features (as seen in history books) were too much of a liability for such a clandestine organization.
     
    Tino likes this.
  3. Message #63 of 156 Jan 12, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2019
    BobO'Link

    BobO'Link Producer

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Messages:
    4,501
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Mid-South
    Real Name:
    Howie
    While I wasn't a huge fan of the 2009 Star Trek I did appreciate it for what they were trying to do. It mostly worked as a method of keeping Kirk & Co. in movies. I have a few issues with it but they are truly minor and it has grown on me over the years. I *do* like it better than any of the ST:TNG movies which feel more like extended TV episodes with slightly larger budgets.

    Then came Into Darkness. After a somewhat promising reboot of the franchise they can do nothing better than a reworking of what many consider to be the best of the TOS movies?!? I've never considered there might be folks out there like Trevor who've never seen much Trek before watching this one and thinking it's "not bad" or even good. You'd think I would have since I'm married to a woman who's never seen an episode or movie in the franchise and refuses to watch any of them. In spite off that, the creators behind that movie could, and should, have come up with a better, more original, story. As a long time fan of the franchise I was very disappointed with this movie.

    They follow that remake with a very generic SF action movie onto which they slapped the Star Trek name. This one was so bad it pretty much cemented my disinterest in seeing any more movies in this timeline.

    It's as if they were trying to kill the franchise in the theater and I'm OK with that as I feel that Star Trek works much better on TV than as a theatrical movie. And then they make Discovery... I never thought there'd be a Star Trek series I liked less than TNG, which has also grown on me over the years yet still came in dead last in my rankings, but here it is.

    For Star Trek: TMP Paramount simply reworked some of the scripts intended for Star Trek: Phase 2 into a movie to piggy back on the success of Star Wars. It mostly worked. Mostly. And was successful enough to have spawned the sequels. I'd have rather had the series as it was originally envisioned, not as ST:TNG which it eventually became, or the series of movies with the TAS crew in spite of enjoying several of them, but at least Star Trek didn't die as a TV franchise. However, it is what it is and I'm happy with what we've received over the decades. Considering how it was treated during the original airings I'm simply amazed with what's come since.

    Star Trek on TV has had a fantastic run and generated huge amounts of quality SF. It needs to continue by going forward, not backward or sideways, in the timeline with new characters and new stories that build on what's come before. I don't need, nor want, stories that use any of the previous Trek crews in TV shows or movies. I also realize that "new" Trek stories with unfamiliar crews are likely to do poorly theatrically. Paramount/CBS/whoever *needs* a successful Star Trek TV series to generate interest in more movies. I also feel they don't know how to handle the franchise. Gene's vision has mostly been lost.

    Because of all that, I'm somewhat glad they've cancelled the 4th movie. I also don't know how I feel about an "R" rated version from Tarantino but believe it'd at least have a more original story than anything in the "New Trek" series. If that one comes to fruition and *doesn't* use crew members of any Trek TV series I'll give it a chance. Otherwise, it's "wait and see" just like any other Trek TV series or movie produced since 2010. Because of the direction of the newer movies and TV series I've become somewhat disillusioned. That's a sad thing. At least I have all the old series and movies to take up the slack.
     
    benbess likes this.
  4. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Star Trek has had a longer run than probably anybody could have imagined. From the 1960s television series through animation, spin off series, and motion pictures.

    What made Star Trek popular though was the characters and their interactions. It was not the special effects sequences nor crazy action scenes that inspired the following the property has had. In an amazing turn Paramount seems to have never really understood what it was about Star Trek that people fell so in love with.

    We also are in a different time for film and television. It seems these days it is not "stars" that are attracting today's audiences to watch a show or film.

    People seem attracted by the costumes and special effects more than the people you cast.

    So, if Pine or any other cast members want more money the easiest thing to do is to jettison them and reboot with a new cast.

    The Star Trek costumes may be as reliable as Batman or Superman costumes. Just put somebody else that looks good in the suit in it and start over.

    I have serious doubts that the Tarantino project ever gets off the ground, though rebooting the movie side of things with an R rated chapter may work...who knows...but typically if it is rated R the thing both financiers and theaters dislike about that is it cuts one of the big segments of the populace they wish to appeal to out of the box office take.
     
    Bryan^H likes this.
  5. Bryan^H

    Bryan^H Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    5,677
    Likes Received:
    2,544
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    I don't think it will happen either. I am still mixed about it, if it does indeed happen. I don't think Star Trek has any business in the world of "R" rated films(especially the use of the "F" word and for heaven sake no "exploitation" elements) but at the same time Quentin Tarantino is such a gifted story/dialogue writer + his love for the original series would equal a very fine Star Trek film in the end. I would be forced to watch it because of my like of both the film maker, and Star Trek itself.
     
    Reggie W and Tommy R like this.
  6. Tommy R

    Tommy R Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    647
    Likes Received:
    386
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Real Name:
    Tommy
    I am no prude, but the world of Star Trek has established itself on NOT using profanity, Kirk mocked the use of profanity in The Voyage Home when he explained to Spock and nobody would listen to you in the 20th century unless you curse with every other word.

    I'm very curious what Tarantino has in mind, because he IS a great filmmaker, but I see no reason to purposely make it R. If it just happens to be R while still feeling like Star Trek then okay. But it'll be kind of funny if it is, considering that the first, and best, Trek film was rated G! :D
     
    Bryan^H likes this.
  7. BobO'Link

    BobO'Link Producer

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Messages:
    4,501
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Mid-South
    Real Name:
    Howie
    I've read Tarantino's wanting "consequences" that matter and are a bit more "graphic" but not "R" for language.
     
  8. Thomas Newton

    Thomas Newton Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    165
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Star Trek is already full of consequences that matter … for Red Shirts.

    "The landing party will consist of the Captain, the Science Officer, the Chief Medical Officer, the Chief Engineer, and Security Officers Smith and Jones."

    Immediately Smith and Jones fall to the deck and begin praying – because they know that as soon as they materialize on the planet, at least one of them will be killed by a poisonous plant or hostile native. The officers whose loss might cripple the ship all survive with at most minor injuries.

    "Why do Starships stop at Starbases?"
    "To pick up more Red Shirts"
     
  9. Thomas Newton

    Thomas Newton Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    165
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    "What's the only safe Red Shirt to wear?"
    "The one that belongs to a department OTHER than Security!"
     
  10. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    13,725
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    That’s not the issue at all. Quite the opposite actually.
     
  11. Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    5,148
    Likes Received:
    2,876
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    Pine doesn't want more money. As @Josh Steinberg explained earlier in the thread, he wanted Paramount to honor their end of the contract he signed prior to filming Beyond. Paramount wanted to lower his previously-agreed-upon fee for the fourth film, and Pine said no. I think it is perfectly reasonable for the talent to expect the studio to stick to their end of an existing deal. There is no reason that he should take a financial hit as a result of Paramount's bad decisions despite doing the same amount of work normally expected of him on one of these films. And if Paramount isn't willing to pay him what he's worth, he can find work elsewhere. His presence in Wonder Woman gives him a bigger franchise than Star Trek anyway.
     
    Tino likes this.
  12. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Yes, I am aware of this. My point was not that the film stalled due to Pine looking for a raise, the point was that based upon what attracts audiences to a film today they can (and did) attempt to cut Pine's pay because they can put somebody else in the suit.

    They can "reboot" with a whole new cast. The thing about "reboots" is they seem to excite people these days. It is a chance to see a series remade perhaps, I guess, in a way some people may prefer. So, maybe they did not like the Star Trek films with Pine and that cast, so if they reboot, well, maybe some people will prefer the new incarnation of Kirk and company.

    If you read my entire post what it is about is how "stars" don't seem to matter much anymore when it comes to box office. With all the super hero films, and the "reboots" of them, each new person that inhabits the bat suit, cape and blue undies, or spider suit, really does not matter.

    It's kind of like Seinfeld's line about sports fans "We're rooting for laundry!"
     
  13. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    13,725
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    But it didn’t sound like you were aware. You said they wanted more money. Jake and I merely corrected you on that error. I think we’re all aware of all your other points.
     
    Jake Lipson likes this.
  14. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Actually, that is not what I said and interestingly you quoted me...

    I said IF anybody wanted more money. Truth is that Pine wanted what was promised which IS more now than Paramount wants to pay. The point being that Paramount can cut or increase pay however they see fit because people that go to see a Star Trek film are going to see Star Trek for the most part...not a Chris Pine film.

    And I say that in no way to diminish Pine and what he does, I actually think his "reboot" of Kirk was fantastic and would like to see him continue in the role, but to point out that Paramount does not need him nor any of the other actors really. Not in these big franchise pictures where the costumes and special effects are actually the stars.

    In fact a "reboot" would seem to be something that might excite some people because some people/fans seem not to like the Pine films or "Kelvin timeline" whatever that is. It always seems when "reboots" are done they generate a lot of excitement these days.

    I am a Star Trek fan but I realize that they can put other people in the costumes and still have Star Trek. I mean I grew up with the original cast and never saw anybody but Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley in those roles. When Pine and company took over though I went right along with it and enjoyed the hell out of them playing the characters.

    I see it like the Bond films in that we've had different Bonds over the years and at first I could see nobody but Connery as Bond...but now I am also a huge fan of Craig as Bond.

    I don't think everybody works in the roles but when they hit on the right cast it works and they don't need "stars" they just need to properly fill the suits.
     
  15. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    13,725
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    But then why even say “IF they wanted more money” when that was never an issue in the first place?:unsure:

    Interesting indeed. :D
     
    Jake Lipson likes this.
  16. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Well, I was replying after having read all the other posts about money being the reason Paramount was backing off doing Star Trek 4 and money being the issue between Paramount and Pine.

    Basically, I think if Paramount wanted to cut the budget of Star Trek 4 that what they could do is make a more intimate character based film that has fewer big action scenes. Also if they cut anybody out of the film my choice would be Hemsworth as I don't find him to be a very good actor. In fact I think he's kind of lousy.
     
  17. Sam Favate

    Sam Favate Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    7,994
    Likes Received:
    2,947
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Sam Favate
    You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but Hemsworth is one of the biggest stars in the world right now. Adding him to the cast of ST4 would undoubtedly boost the film's box office.
     
    holtge, Tino and Jake Lipson like this.
  18. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Well, it seems that "stars" don't have that big an effect on the box office numbers. Interestingly, none other than Stanley Kubrick once studied this and his take was that adding them to a picture does not balance out their cost in most cases.

    I did not realize Hemsworth is considered a big star as I have not seen all of his pictures. I've seen him in 8 films and never really felt he gave anymore than a below average to average performance in any of them. I think maybe Rush was the best I've seen from him. He's pretty dull to watch and basically brings nothing interesting to his characters.

    I mean he's a good looking guy but beyond that...well...he's got very little going on.
     
  19. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    13,725
    Likes Received:
    5,876
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    I think many here would disagree with that opinion.
     
  20. Reggie W

    Reggie W Producer

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes Received:
    2,519
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Agua Verde
    Real Name:
    Pike Bishop
    Are you saying you don't think he's a good looking guy? :lol:
     

Share This Page