New ‘Star Trek’ In The Works With ‘Andor’ Director Toby Haynes On Board
It’s beginning to feel like Charlie Brown and the football at this point, but let’s see if they can actually get this one off the ground.
@ValueSubtracted @startrek
Basically where I’m also at.Also, as someone noted in a Discord chat about it, “decades before” only gives you a small window between the start of the Kelvin universe and Trek '09, otherwise too far back and you’re making a Prime Timeline movie. So that’ll be interesting to see what they plan.
only gives you a small window between the start of the Kelvin universe and Trek '09,
I mean…we could all pretend the Kelvin timeline doesn’t exist…
I think the kelvin timeline is great for the sole fact that it is what peaked my interest in trek. I recently just finished watching everything trek and it was because the 09 movie was cool and got me to start watching the different tv series.
@M500 @cm0002 I think that’s amazing and wonderful. Any Star Trek vehicle from any point can be anyone’s gateway. And that’s why it’s still here. Rock on you!
Watching squabbles over this stuff is depressing. I have specific Trek I’ll avoid, but that’s me, and bringing it up over and over in every conversation is lame.
Which is it? For me it’s TOS. There are some good episodes, but it can be really difficult at times.
@M500 Season 1 and most of 2 of TNG is hard to get through because it’s pretty campy. Wesley went on trial on a planet because he crushed some flowers. They were going to put him to death. :ablobflushed:
Personally though… I’m very into The Wrath of Khan. It’s my list topper of great Trek. And I think that causes a lot of my disdain for “Into Darkness”. Every time I’ve watched it, it makes me like angry? Which is weird I guess, but I can’t objectively watch it. It’s always with judgement.
I agree that tng 1 and 2 can be difficult too. I think it was just genes Star Trek that I had trouble with. Once he was no longer leading the show it picked up for me.
Not to say that it’s bad or I don’t like it. But compared to the rest of trek that’s what I like the least.
Khan was a great movie and I really enjoyed trek 2, 3, and 4. I think I was burn out by 6 as I’d just finished a ton of trek at that time.
Finished tos season 3, watched all of tas and prod, and then did all the tos movies to finish it off. So after 5 I was not ready to like another tos trek movie.
I would take that with a grain of salt - it’s a general-purpose Hollywood outlet reporting what their sources told them, so there could be room for inaccuracies.
They could also follow Simon Pegg’s contention that the Kelvin and Prime timelines could be different at any point in history (which I support).
@ValueSubtracted @startrek Well like we said, all news about a Star Trek film comes with lots of salt onboard 😂
At this point the Kelvin timeline is just a handwavey excuse for recasting Kirk and crew of TOS and following movies. And a prequel to Kelvin is an excuse to recast those parts with younger actors.
Personally, I could care less about new movies featuring the TOS characters. Star trek evolved past them 30 years ago, I wish Hollywood would realise that.
Kelvin broke the seal on recasting, as it were.
If Discovery or SNW had been the first to recast Kirk, there would have been a revolt, but since Kelvin got us used to the idea people just kind of accept it.
Yeah, it was Pandora’s recasting, and now all the Kirks and Spocks are loose on the world.
There are actually differences in the Prime and Kelvin timelines that happened before Nero’s incursion. For instance, Kirk’s date of birth is off by several months. They tried to justify that afterwards by saying something about the event sending shockwaves through time to change things before it even happened or something like that. The real reason probably lies in that interview where JJ Abrams admitted he never liked Star Trek, but you could argue that the removal of various down-stream time travel events, like the events of “The City on the Edge of Forever” likely not happening in the modified timeline, could actually cause retroactive changes to the timeline.
But anyway, the Kelvin timeline already diverges before the Kelvin-Narada thing, because reasons.
Another change is Enterprise being built on earth instead of in orbit.
I’m almost entirely sure that choice was because JJ Abrams wanted that visual in his movie. Justifications to Trek nerds were an afterthought.
@setsneedtofeed @startrek Which never made any sense in any timeline.
Yeah, I’ll believe it when I see it.
As always, I will not actually believe there is a new Trek movie being made until my butt is in the seat, with a popcorn in one hand, Dr. Pepper in the second hand, opening credits already rolling on the screen.
You mean Cherry Mr. Pibb
Y’know, I don’t think I’ve ever actually seen Mr. Pibb available here, but I still believe my having one at the theatre is more likely than there being a new Star Trek movie in theatres any time soon.
They only sell it at Chipotle where I’m at. I’m tempted to order a box
Remember when Chipotle was a good deal for a big burrito?
Got one today- $18 for double steak. Would have had to sell a kidney if I added guac.
Jesus fuck. How small was it?
I got it without rice, so its girth was indeed unimpressive. And it was very wet.
They don’t have Dr. Pepper at my movie theater so I guess this movie really is never seeing the light of day :/
Now this I’m interested in. Andor was a quite good and, importantly, character-driven study of a desperate man growing to challenge an insurmountable empire… You know, in contrast to the exhaustive world building and effects-heavy “pew pew” fan service that has become the rest of modern star wars
I dare say, I’d also enjoy this film much more than the nixed Tarantino film
Andor was the best story of the Disney trash. I think anybody could watch it and be compelled. I think because Andor has a hard end in Rogue One, they need to go hard and establish him as a bad ass.
I’m sad to hear Tarantino got negged on ST though.
I know people like to say Trek was meant for the small screen, but I honestly love all the (well, non Kelvin) movies and am very excited for this.
It’s me. I’m people.
The article seems to suggest this film is part of the Kelvin line.
In that case I regret ever being born
What I liked most about Andor was how it felt perfectly at home in the Star Wars universe while also having its own distinct flavor.
A lot of modern Star Wars media just keeps leaning on references and recycling of old content. To quote RLM, “I saw things I know!” Andor stayed light on direct references and instead tried to have its own new ideas and visual designs that would fit in the universe.
If Hayes can do that with Trek, it will be very welcome.
Anyone else bothered by yet another prequel? Enterprise, Kelvin films, Discovery (s1-2), strange new worlds … there’s clearly a hesitancy to do something new right?
It doesn’t bother me at all, because I don’t think a fictional universe needs to have a “default” setting.
Aren’t prequels the default setting? What trek have we had since voyager that didn’t have a Spock or Soong in it?
Lower Decks, Prodigy, Picard, late-period Discovery…is that enough? Should I continue?
is that enough? Should I continue?
There are more?
But to dig into this …
- Separating late-period from early period Discovery doesn’t really work. As much as I like the time jump, it’s pretty much the same show, and Burhnam is still Spock’s sister.
- Picard is still a relatively hard se-quel, which resonates with the essence of my argument … plus it had a Soong. I’m not sure you can describe S3 as any less nostalgia baiting or digging into established IP than any prequel. Not sure Picard, especially S3, is a convincing example of “Star Trek doesn’t have a default setting”.
Which leaves Lower Decks and Prodigy … which are by my reckoning the two relatively universally appreciated Trek projects since Voyager (at least amongst those that have watched them) … which I would claim is not a coincidence (not that we all have to like the same things).
They’re both animated too which I feel exemplifies the risk-aversion modern Trek production has to “new” projects/characters etc.
deleted by creator
Separating late-period from early period Discovery doesn’t really work.
So your contention is that the third and fourth seasons of Discovery are a prequel to…something?
Picard is still a relatively hard se-quel, which resonates with the essence of my argument
Which makes it a prequel? Your argument is that the default setting is “prequel.”
But okay, prequels are bad and sequels are bad, so I guess we need to pick one episode of “old Trek,” and all future series and films should occur simultaneously with that episode.
Sighs. For a moderator I have to say this is poor form.
You’re putting words into my mouth, putting up straw man args, misinterpreting my statements and not really caring to try to engage with my side of the discussion all while being unnecessarily aggressive for what is a difference of opinion.
I hope you’re just in a bad mood.
But to clarify … it’s simple … leaning into old IP vs coming up with new IP.
I think there’s been too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I fear this new thing will continue that trend. Your argument about “default setting” is basically the same thing I’m saying where I think the interest in anything that can be directly tied to anything TNG and earlier is the “default setting”.
so I guess we need to pick one episode of “old Trek,” and all future series and films should occur simultaneously with that episode.
Don’t know where you pulled that from. It’s literally the opposite of what I’m saying. Really not sure what’s going on here.
And TBH, I’m going to report this, whatever that means in this situation. You’re being a moderator factors into my decision to do so.
Removed by mod
Aren’t prequels the default setting?
The literal words out of your literal mouth.
And spare me the concern trolling bullshit.
I’m OK with more prequels if it means letting Terry Matalas continue handling the post-TNG timeline.
I’m with you.
The fun thing about the Matalas post-TNG/legacy thing for me is that it nicely straddles the line between being new and nostalgic. Seven would be captain and a whole bunch of other stuff too would be new, but still connected to the TNG era past.
Andor is probably the best thing to come of Disney Star Wars. If that quality persists I am very excited. If that quality does not persist still a win: more Star Trek.
I just hope whatever form it takes we lose the bizarrely shoehorned-in fictional culture of having a “number one” (literally only Picard used that nickname for Riker back in the day) and the equally annoying and cringey creation of the captain of the ship having a “go to warp” catchphrase.
the bizarrely shoehorned-in fictional culture of having a “number one” (literally only Picard used that nickname for Riker back in the day)
Number One was “the first character Gene wrote into the script” of The Cage (the pilot episode of the original series), according to Majel Barrett Roddenberry.
There are also many other characters called Number One in Star Trek and elsewhere.
According to some sources, calling the second-in-command/executive/first officer “number one” might have historically been a thing in the British Navy, but i don’t see a reliable source for that after a minute of searching so I’m not sure.
This is the same guy who directed the Black Mirror’s Star Trek homage episode “USS Callistor”
I’m a trekkie but can’t we come up with more new stuff
What the hell!! I want more Stange new worlds! It’s probably one of my favorite of the treks.
Please just make more SNW.
@crazyminner @startrek This doesn’t have anything to do with SNW. Season 3 of SNW started filming a few weeks ago.
No need to worry, TV and movie Trek are usually produced independently of each other. You can have one and the other.
“Decades before” Star Trek 2009: that would be in the post-Enterprise, pre-TOS/Kelvin era. We know the first Romulan war happened somewhere in there; anything else?
