Star Trek Sequel - Part 1

[Destructus86]

please...please don't let it be Khan.....

 

[Doctor Jones]

I'm kinda suspecting it is. Three Hispanic actors isn't a coincidence, it's a pattern. Which is ironic considering Khan was originally supposed to be played by an Indian actor.

 

[Evil Twin]

I doubt they would limit the choices to only one ethnicity. They should be looking for someone with a similar look as Montalban. He doesn't have a look that you can necessarily pin down, which makes sense given that he was genetically engineered, not a regular person born in India.

I don't get where getting someone that looks similar to Montalban gets you. It's not like Pine looks all that similar to Shatner. Or Pegg to Doohan. Etc. Quinto and Nimoy are the only ones that really look similar, and considering Nimoy's presence there was a good reason for that.

Longtime fans probably would accept someone with a different ethnicity than Montalban based on story reasons. New fans probably don't care.

 

[Sentinel X]

I disagree, the main three actors: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and Zoe Saldana look A LOT like their original counterparts. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto in particular are dead on.
That being said, I don't think changing Khan's ethnicity is that important

 

[bunk]

I don't get where getting someone that looks similar to Montalban gets you. It's not like Pine looks all that similar to Shatner. Or Pegg to Doohan. Etc. Quinto and Nimoy are the only ones that really look similar, and considering Nimoy's presence there was a good reason for that.

Longtime fans probably would accept someone with a different ethnicity than Montalban based on story reasons. New fans probably don't care.

Well if you're going to cast a character who already exists in an alternate timeline, it doesn't seem unreasonable to start with actors that have a similar look. With that it mind, I don't personally care if the next guy looks like Montalban or not. He shouldn't have a look that you can necessarily pin down to some specific part of the world, given that Khan was created from a variety of genetic sources. What exactly do you find beneficial in choosing someone with a "different ethnicity" anyway?

 

[Sawyer]

The only ones that don't look that close to the originals are Cho and Pegg IMO.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I picked up and read the new Star Trek comic called The Gallileo Seven. It was very good. I liked how the comic takes place in this canon. It also is within the spirit of the original show as well.

 

[Pink Ranger]

The only ones that don't look that close to the originals are Cho and Pegg IMO.

Well, you know the old racial stereotype ... all British people look alike.

 

[Sawyer]

Well, you know the old racial stereotype ... all British people look alike.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Hey, I met a Scottish guy in university about 8 years ago. His name was Neil. You must know each other.

 

[Sawyer]

Scottish Neil? Yeah, I know him.

 

[raybia]

Will these new baddies have elongated deformed foreheads or spikey ears AND elongated deformed foreheads?

If JJ, Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof have a good story to tell with Khan as the baddie. I'm interested.

With Khan possibly involved this film might actually wind up being better than the first film.

I still think Man Of Steel will make more money overall and be more successful than this Trek sequel, even with Khan possibly being involved.

I agree that is all about the story.

For those who don't want Khan for whatever reason then I feel for you but if you are a J.J. supporter then you cannot both support him as a director and at the same time prevent him from telling the story he wants to tell just because you don't like his choice of character(s).

For those who are not a J.J. supporter and don't feel he is up to the task of making the movie you would like to see then it really doesn't make a difference if its Khan, a Klingon, or a brand new character.

For the umpteenth time, even if he uses Khan does not in any way shape or form limits his use of the character to how he was used in the "Space Seed" and "Wrath of Khan".

If JJ has a great story to tell then it really doesn't concern me who the protagonist is as long as its a strong one.

 

[raybia]

I disagree, the main three actors: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, and Zoe Saldana look A LOT like their original counterparts. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto in particular are dead on.
That being said, I don't think changing Khan's ethnicity is that important

I disagree about Pine. He doesn't look or sound like Shatner however I love his portrayal as Kirk. I read that he intentional stayed away from trying to impersonate Shatner and rather drew inspiration from Harrison Ford's depictions of Solo and Indiana Jones, highlighting their humor and "accidental hero" traits.

 

[raybia]

please...please don't let it be the Joker.....

There, I fixed it!

 

[Dark Knight]

I disagree about Pine. He doesn't look or sound like Shatner however I love his portrayal as Kirk. I read that he intentional stayed away from trying to impersonate Shatner and rather drew inspiration from Harrison Ford's depictions of Solo and Indiana Jones, highlighting their humor and "accidental hero" traits.

There were a couple of times in Trek, that he tried to do Shatners Kirk.

I'm glad he didn't do that the whole film. It would have turned into a comedy. If Pine stays away from impersonating Kirk, then all will be fine.

 

[bunk]

There were a couple of nods to Shatners Kirk. It was just the right amount.

 

[cherokeesam]

I agree that is all about the story.

For those who don't want Khan for whatever reason then I feel for you but if you are a J.J. supporter then you cannot both support him as a director and at the same time prevent him from telling the story he wants to tell just because you don't like his choice of character(s).

For those who are not a J.J. supporter and don't feel he is up to the task of making the movie you would like to see then it really doesn't make a difference if its Khan, a Klingon, or a brand new character.

For the umpteenth time, even if he uses Khan does not in any way shape or form limits his use of the character to how he was used in the "Space Seed" and "Wrath of Khan".

If JJ has a great story to tell then it really doesn't concern me who the protagonist is as long as its a strong one.

I don't want Khan because it's rehashing an unoriginal character in a "brand new" Trek that's supposed to be "fresh 'n' original." If JJ wants to be original, make an original villain. I don't think it's that hard to understand.




I'm pretty sure Kirk will still be the protagonist, and I'm pretty sure he'll be a strong protagonist. Still hope to hell the antagonist isn't Khan, though

 

[raybia]

I don't want Khan because it's rehashing an unoriginal character in a "brand new" Trek that's supposed to be "fresh 'n' original." If JJ wants to be original, make an original villain. I don't think it's that hard to understand.




I'm pretty sure Kirk will still be the protagonist, and I'm pretty sure he'll be a strong protagonist. Still hope to hell the antagonist isn't Khan, though

Yeah, my bad. I meant antagonist. Original doesn't mean brand new characters. The crew of the Enterprise are all unoriginal characters.

What I think original pertains to the story. Can he come up with an original story using whatever characters he decides will enable him to do so.

 

[8wid]

I just watched the first movie of this franchise again and give 6/10. What I think is wrong with it is the romantic angle between Kirk, Spock, and Ohora. Nero was a weak back story villain because he simply wanted an irrational revenge, against Spock for something that should have been considered a total accident and why didn't he just save his wife from the destruction of Romulus if he had the ability to go back and prevent it himself? The meeting of the entire crew was way too convenient as was Kirk's rise to the captain's seat when many more individuals in Star Fleet would have succeeded Pike to become captain of the Federation's flagship! If it's a new timeline, I can accept the destruction of Vulcan, but a space oil rig destroying an entire planet, even if it's from the future is very unfeasible. Kirk and Nero meeting in space simply doesn't work for me in the vastness of the Galaxy so that the timeline would be erased and changed for another existence. Too much CGI and lense flare really.

What I did love was the strong character performances from the cast and the retooling of the look of the retro Trek to a new form. The technology dramatically improved the look of what Star Trek was lacking and the story was much stronger than some of the films in the past. Taking it mainstream is what ST needed a long time ago.

How to improve another film? Do not simply rehash Khan or return of Old Spock or Kirk, much less dependence on lense flare and CGI for production. Kill the love triangle with Ohara and forget it even existed. Kirk needs to be less of a space hot pants and some sort of political element needs to be at the heart of the new movie to make it meaningful. Themes dealing with perpetual war, environmental destruction, terrorism, speaking out against the system, economic hardship in some form, would be a great use for the modern audience. Perpetual war to deal with the paranoia threat of the Klingons and dealing with Federation occupation with a planet of them could be an effective tool for storytelling.

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

There was no love triangle.
Spock and Uhura were together and since Kirk didn't know that and hit on every good looking girl he tried but moved on as soon as she said no.

Nero ship wasn't a mere mining ship, she has been outfitted with Borg technology.

Nero could not save his wife, he get too far back in time, Nero has also became a bit insame after the tragedy and years in Klingon prison, like captain Nemo but worst.

 

[Thundercrack85]

There was no love triangle.
Spock and Uhura were together and since Kirk didn't know that and hit on every good looking girl he tried but moved on as soon as she said no.

Nero ship wasn't a mere mining ship, she has been outfitted with Borg technology.

Nero could not save his wife, he get too far back in time, Nero has also became a bit insame after the tragedy and years in Klingon prison, like captain Nemo but worst.

Yeah, but it should be pointed out that the movie (the theatrical release) doesn't explain any of that. Borg technology, Klingon prison, etc.

What made the movie was good individual performances and special effects. The plot was just bad.

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

Yeah, but it should be pointed out that the movie (the theatrical release) doesn't explain any of that. Borg technology, Klingon prison, etc.

If I remember Nero makes an allusion to the Klingon prison or we see a scene where he is held captive but you're right, it is not obvious.

About the ship, you can clearly see that it has Borg enhancement IF you know a bit about Star Trek. Even my brother who is not a trekker ( far from it ) recognized the Borg style, the green glow is typical of them.

What made the movie was good individual performances and special effects. The plot was just bad.

We agree even if I don't find the plot that bad nor good either, time travel was the fastest/easier way to reboot the ST universe.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I watched the movie with some people who had never seen Star Trek. They were comically confused. Best line being "Is that guy supposed to be an alien?" when seeing Nero. It does create something of a plot hole, since the audience (in theaters) is left to wonder what the hell Nero and his crew have been doing for 20 something years between the start of the movie and battle of Vulcan.

But yeah, the movie really could have used a prologue or some exposition. The movie never explains how humanity was unified, or how Starfleet came into existence. Granted, most Trek fans know the background, but it would be nice to explain that in a reboot.

While I think the movie turned out well, I don't see why they just didn't do a hard reboot. Maybe fear of death threats from fans.

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

"The movie never explains how humanity was unified, or how Starfleet came into existence. Granted, most Trek fans know the background, but it would be nice to explain that in a reboot."

Understandable ( even if not necessary ) but not realistic in a 2h movie.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I don't know, they could have done a quick montage. Show World War III, first contact with the Vulcans, the inauguration of the Federation. Could have made for a cool opening. But perhaps that would be better suited for a new TV show.

Still some exposition would have been nice. It is a reboot after all.