# stare trek 3 news



## trappedslider (Dec 6, 2014)

Looks like Roberto Orci is out and replacing him could be...Edgar Wright or at least he's on the short list of names being tossed around.....

Roberto is  still going to stay on as a producer and writer.  There’s a small role for William Shatner if he wants it.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 6, 2014)

Shatner has limits on how small a role he'll take.  If he isn't pivotal to the plot, he is apt to take a pass.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Dec 9, 2014)

Actually, it appears he's taking a role of an Admiral or other high ranking official and while it isn't a cameo, it's not what one would call a co-starring role neither.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 23, 2014)

Looks like Star Trek 3's director will be Justin Lin from the Fast and the Furious movies


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 23, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Shatner has limits on how small a role he'll take.




...and it damn well better be buttered!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 23, 2014)

trappedslider said:


> Looks like Star Trek 3's director will be Justin Lin from the Fast and the Furious movies




Soooo...we can expect to see one of the main cast jumping from a shuttle onto an enemy starship to rescue someone, all at high speed?


----------



## Stormonu (Dec 23, 2014)

Now I want to see the Mirror Universe in 3, and one where in it's timeline, the Federation was wiped out and mirror Kirk* ends up traveling to the past ... and to Abram's alternate trek - new Kirk vs. Old Mirror Kirk, new Spock & old Spock vs. Old Mirror Spock...

* mirror Kirk as if from a failed Voyage Home had occurred, where Earth was lost to the whale alien satellite and only mirror Kirk and mirror Spock survived the universe transition following a failed slingshot around the sun...


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 23, 2014)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Soooo...we can expect to see one of the main cast jumping from a shuttle onto an enemy starship to rescue someone, all at high speed?




I was thinking more of shots of the ship's wiring after the punch it to wrap speed....


----------



## Umbran (Dec 23, 2014)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Soooo...we can expect to see one of the main cast jumping from a shuttle onto an enemy starship to rescue someone, all at high speed?




Has nothing to do with the new director.  Abrams has already done that twice.

[video=youtube_share;4DHE7VS7lyw]http://youtu.be/4DHE7VS7lyw[/video]

[video=youtube_share;04aK-4NoJOo]http://youtu.be/04aK-4NoJOo[/video]


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 23, 2014)

I hadn't seen any of the reboot stuff, so I was blissfully unaware.


----------



## tomBitonti (Dec 23, 2014)

Yeah, but the "Dive" mark II has debris.  It's an upgrade!

Thx!

TomB


----------



## Umbran (Dec 23, 2014)

So, in three, they need to have enemies actively shooting at them as they dive, or something.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 23, 2014)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I hadn't seen any of the reboot stuff, so I was blissfully unaware.




They don't suck.  Aside from one major continuity issue that pretty much invalidates the existence of a Starfleet, that is.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 23, 2014)

So a release date has been set  July 8, 2016 -- marking the 50-year anniversary..too bad they didn't want to go for the full anniversery and release on  Sept. 8.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Dec 24, 2014)

Difference between movies and TV - movies want summer release dates, TV has the fall schedule (which is why movies want summer release dates).


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Dec 25, 2014)

Umbran said:


> They don't suck.  Aside from one major continuity issue that pretty much invalidates the existence of a Starfleet, that is.



ok I'll bite... what's that?


----------



## Richards (Dec 25, 2014)

I assume he's referring to the fact that in the first movie, they had Scotty devise a way to beam from a planet to onboard a starship moving at warp speeds across the galaxy.  So if you can now beam yourself halfway across the galaxy, why would you need a starship?  Or, say, a whole fleet of them?

Johnathan


----------



## Morrus (Dec 25, 2014)

Richards said:


> I assume he's referring to the fact that in the first movie, they had Scotty devise a way to beam from a planet to onboard a starship moving at warp speeds across the galaxy.  So if you can now beam yourself halfway across the galaxy, why would you need a starship?  Or, say, a whole fleet of them?




Same reason why in TNG every week thwy reconfigured the sensor array to make the ship much better, then didn't just make that the default design.


----------



## El Mahdi (Dec 25, 2014)

deleted


----------



## Umbran (Dec 26, 2014)

GMforPowergamers said:


> ok I'll bite... what's that?






Richards said:


> I assume he's referring to the fact that in the first movie, they had Scotty devise a way to beam from a planet to onboard a starship moving at warp speeds across the galaxy.  So if you can now beam yourself halfway across the galaxy, why would you need a starship?  Or, say, a whole fleet of them?




Scotty's warp speed beaming does not invalidate Starfleet.  It was demonstrated with long, but still limited range.

In the second movie, Kahn's transporting from the Klingon solar system directly into Earth's is what invalidates Starfleet.  It is demonstrated as full on interstellar transport, and that's a problem.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 26, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Same reason why in TNG every week thwy reconfigured the sensor array to make the ship much better, then didn't just make that the default design.




That one you can No-Prize as the reconfiguration is good for only a very specific task, or a short duration, and so isn't useful as a default design.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Dec 26, 2014)

Umbran said:


> That one you can No-Prize as the reconfiguration is good for only a very specific task, or a short duration, and so isn't useful as a default design.




For those kind of instances, I always just assume we don't see the week long repairs to ship's fried circuits.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 26, 2014)

Umbran said:


> That one you can No-Prize as the reconfiguration is good for only a very specific task, or a short duration, and so isn't useful as a default design.



Modular kits, anyone?

At least make it so that the necessary reconfig work doesn't require someone risking their lives in a Jeffries tube...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 26, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Scotty's warp speed beaming does not invalidate Starfleet.  It was demonstrated with long, but still limited range.
> 
> In the second movie, Kahn's transporting from the Klingon solar system directly into Earth's is what invalidates Starfleet.  It is demonstrated as full on interstellar transport, and that's a problem.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 26, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Scotty's warp speed beaming does not invalidate Starfleet.  It was demonstrated with long, but still limited range.
> 
> In the second movie, Kahn's transporting from the Klingon solar system directly into Earth's is what invalidates Starfleet.  It is demonstrated as full on interstellar transport, and that's a problem.




Well, Klingon space is only a few minutes away in the Abrahmsverse anyway.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 26, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Well, Klingon space is only a few minutes away in the Abrahmsverse anyway.




While I have found the movies to not suck, there are problems.  This is one of them.  

I am actually hoping that, with the third movie, they wrap it back around and close the time loop, making it a three-movie side-Trek, as it were, in an alternate timeline, and they return us to our normal universe at the end of it.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Dec 27, 2014)

Umbran said:


> While I have found the movies to not suck, there are problems.  This is one of them.
> 
> I am actually hoping that, with the third movie, they wrap it back around and close the time loop, making it a three-movie side-Trek, as it were, in an alternate timeline, and they return us to our normal universe at the end of it.



Doubt it's going to happen - I prefer the alternate timeline thing, because it allows JJ to tell a story without actually stepping on Trek (unlike G Lucas re-writting stuff, we had Enterprise which was bad enough).
For me it wasn't Scotty's beaming that I thought was the issue, but that he beamed inside a waterpark in the engineering room - that whole scene made my stomach turn.  Not due to the shaky cam, but why the hell was it there in the first place?  The replicators have long been held to re-purpose matter due to the lack of available materials in space and the sonic showers were used so large amounts of water, which is both heavy and finite, would not be needed.  So that whole section was off putting.  For me, I like that in the 2nd movie Khan isn't dead per se; THAT equals sequel fodder and a chance to do something totally original.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 27, 2014)

Thunderfoot said:


> Doubt it's going to happen - I prefer the alternate timeline thing, because it allows JJ to tell a story without actually stepping on Trek (unlike G Lucas re-writting stuff, we had Enterprise which was bad enough).
> For me it wasn't Scotty's beaming that I thought was the issue, but that he beamed inside a waterpark in the engineering room - that whole scene made my stomach turn.  Not due to the shaky cam, but why the hell was it there in the first place?  The replicators have long been held to re-purpose matter due to the lack of available materials in space and the sonic showers were used so large amounts of water, which is both heavy and finite, would not be needed.  So that whole section was off putting.  For me, I like that in the 2nd movie Khan isn't dead per se; THAT equals sequel fodder and a chance to do something totally original.




The Transporter has been an issue in Star Trek since the first time that they used it to cure someone. From there it can't get any better; just worse.

While the miles of clear Lexan and the fact that Scott didn't cause a nuclear blast by beaming into the space occupied by existing matter annoyed me, the mere presence of recycled water didn't. You need power for replicators and despite the fact that they can create food at will, they carry "emergency rations." You can live far longer without food than you can water.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 27, 2014)

Yeah, but that's no reason for the roller-coaster Man-sized water tubes which appeared to serve no purpose but to create a cartoonish comedy scene. 

A tank of water? I guess I could understand that, though for hundreds of people no tank is going to last long. 

Plus water is abundant in the universe. But that's by-the-by.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 27, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Yeah, but that's no reason for the roller-coaster Man-sized water tubes which appeared to serve no purpose but to create a cartoonish comedy scene.
> 
> A tank of water? I guess I could understand that, though for hundreds of people no tank is going to last long.
> 
> Plus water is abundant in the universe. But that's by-the-by.




Well I did mention that the miles of clear Lexan annoyed me 

Scenario: Your drives go out. You only have emergency power and have to survive until help arrives, when you're light years away from your nearest support. A water reclamation and filtration system with a simple storage tank could last for weeks, if not months, even with a crew of several hundred.

The 'fixings' to make water are fairy common, though not as common as something like methane (carbon and hydrogen), but you have to be able to get to them. Space is rather unforgiving.

*EDIT* Oh, and the original deck plans for the Enterprise show a swimming pool and a bowling alley, so why not a water park?


----------



## Umbran (Dec 28, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Plus water is abundant in the universe. But that's by-the-by.




Water is abundant... as matter goes.

But there's that "space" thing.  You know, that big empty void?  Not so much water there.  

If the presence of water distribution on the ship is going to be a major problem for your credulity, watching Star Trek may not be the best idea.


----------



## HobbitFan (Dec 28, 2014)

The news that Orci is off the movie can only be a good thing.  With him gone, the chance that they will actually have a good Star Trek movie went up a great deal.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 28, 2014)

Umbran said:


> But there's that "space" thing.  You know, that big empty void?  Not so much water there.




Well, yes, Umbran.  I know this.



> If the presence of water distribution on the ship is going to be a major problem for your credulity, watching Star Trek may not be the best idea.




You're mistaking "major problem for my credulity" for "minor niggle".  Most every movie has minor niggles about it, but I think I'll keep watching them if that's OK?


----------



## Umbran (Dec 28, 2014)

Morrus said:


> You're mistaking "major problem for my credulity" for "minor niggle".  Most every movie has minor niggles about it, but I think I'll keep watching them if that's OK?




Yeah, that's fine.  'Cause I think you're missing the *IF*, as in, "IF this is a problem..."  That implies that, if it is not a problem, the rest of the statement does not apply.  Nice and simple - conditionals, they work for you.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 28, 2014)

Let's be honest- the franchise has multiple areas in which credulity is strained.  

For example, in how many RW organizations are the most senior and experienced personnel regularly sent into harms way as the initial front-line responders?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 29, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Well, Klingon space is only a few minutes away in the Abrahmsverse anyway.




Isn't that something imported from Enterprise (which is technically still part of the timeline)? The NX-01 was pretty quickly at Q'Onos, even though it could only achieve Warp 5.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Jan 2, 2015)

Ryujin said:


> *EDIT* Oh, and the original deck plans for the Enterprise show a swimming pool and a bowling alley, so why not a water park?




**Facepalm**


----------



## Janx (Jan 2, 2015)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Let's be honest- the franchise has multiple areas in which credulity is strained.
> 
> For example, in how many RW organizations are the most senior and experienced personnel regularly sent into harms way as the initial front-line responders?




I don't know about "harm's way" but in business, it's fairly typical to send in a CEO or VP or something to make contact with a big major client, not the low level peons.  Sales guys are acquiring mid-size contracts.  VPs are landing the really big fish (think Lennovo landing the original deal to make laptops for IBM, not IBM getting "Your School" to buy all IBM computers).

So it's not entirely implausible, at least outside of "harm's way" situations.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 2, 2015)

Janx said:


> I don't know about "harm's way" but in business, it's fairly typical to send in a CEO or VP or something to make contact with a big major client, not the low level peons.  Sales guys are acquiring mid-size contracts.  VPs are landing the really big fish (think Lennovo landing the original deal to make laptops for IBM, not IBM getting "Your School" to buy all IBM computers).
> 
> So it's not entirely implausible, at least outside of "harm's way" situations.




Sure, for diplomatic missions, but in Star Trek the senior officers would transport down to the equivalent of an unexplored Polynesian island with an erupting volcano, to the raucous sounds of predatory animals, during World War II. They tried getting away from that a little during the ST:TNG years, explicitly, but that really didn't last.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 2, 2015)

Plus, it wasn't "a" CEO- the ST version was to send out a majority of the ship's senior staff on a fairly regular basis.  How many times did we have Captain, senior science officer, senior medical and senior engineering away on a mission?

In a business setting, that's like sending away your CEO, CFO, COO etc. to the meeting, and leaving Murray from Accounting in charge.

BTW, even today, if and when a meeting requires a huge percentage of the executive staff attend, they don't travel together*.  Too much risk of leaving the company without guidance if there is a catastrophe.








* ditto wealthy families, FWIW.


----------



## Morrus (Jan 2, 2015)

I always though a series focused on the lower decks - a security team, perhaps - would make an awesome series. Keep the captain remote.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 2, 2015)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Plus, it wasn't "a" CEO- the ST version was to send out a majority of the ship's senior staff on a fairly regular basis.  How many times did we have Captain, senior science officer, senior medical and senior engineering away on a mission?




After TOS?  Not too often.  Ryker mentions, I think in the first episode, that he feels it inappropriate for the captain to leave the ship on away missions most of the time, and they largely stick to it.  Once LaForge becomes head of engineering, his place is usually in engineering, not on away missions, and so on.  A great deal of the action of NextGen is, in fact, on board the ship.

Oh and let us note that Starfleet *is* a paramilitary organization.   Most major corporations are not likely to see their home offices under fire from major artillery, right?  But it happens to the Enterprise *all the time*.  So, the analogy kind of breaks down, given the already-present levels of risk.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 2, 2015)

True, but again, you really wouldn't send out the four top-ranking officers from the most protected position in the area- the starship- on an away mission.  Which is one of the major improvements TNG introduced and sorta followed.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 2, 2015)

Morrus said:


> I always though a series focused on the lower decks - a security team, perhaps - would make an awesome series. Keep the captain remote.




One of the novels (can't remember which) was based on a security officer and it made for an interesting change.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 3, 2015)

I always thought a series set in the Trek universe done without any or very few recurring major characters could be fantastic.  One story arc of 3 episodes set in the Academy; another one-shot on a scouting vessel on the frontier; something on Romula; Q messing with the Klingons or Tholians for an episode or 2...


----------



## Rune (Jan 3, 2015)

I always thought the only reason senior officers went on away missions in TOS was that Kirk was a megalomaniac. Who was very good at it.


----------



## Janx (Jan 3, 2015)

Rune said:


> I always thought the only reason senior officers went on away missions in TOS was that Kirk was a megalomaniac. Who was very good at it.




I don't know about megalomaniac, but "man of action" seems to fit.

A "man of action" doesn't sit on the bridge, waiting for the away team to call in and tell him what's happening.  he goes there and does it himself.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Jan 6, 2015)

Ryujin said:


> Sure, for diplomatic missions, but in Star Trek the senior officers would transport down to the equivalent of an unexplored Polynesian island with an erupting volcano, to the raucous sounds of predatory animals, during World War II. They tried getting away from that a little during the ST:TNG years, explicitly, but that really didn't last.



Well, DUH, how do you think they got those shiny ranks?   XP - lol


----------



## Thunderfoot (Jan 6, 2015)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I always thought a series set in the Trek universe done without any or very few recurring major characters could be fantastic.  One story arc of 3 episodes set in the Academy; another one-shot on a scouting vessel on the frontier; something on Romula; Q messing with the Klingons or Tholians for an episode or 2...



You should read the comics.  While they stayed close to the originals, one of my favorites had to do when Kirk gets his ass saved by a rookie "red shirt" and dies in the process.  Kirk tries to find out more about him and comes to find out that he was just a new nameless slob on the Enterprise.   I think the reason it struck a cord with me is he later says he's from DeSoto, Illinois - which is about 20 miles from here; but also because Kirk realizes that the 439 members of the crew that aren't mentioned (list include, Chapel, Rand and Dr. Mbinga) are people too.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 6, 2015)

Random Star Trek-y thoughts...

I'm okay with Justin Lin directing nuTrek 3. I'm only familiar with his Fast 6, but it was a charming, thoroughly entertaining film in a series I previously had no interest in nor affection for. 

A part of me is happy an Asian-American will be directing the Trek film coming out in a 50th anniversary year. Because I'm an Asian/Pacific Islander-American who has loved Star Trek since early childhood.  

I'd really like to see a new TV series. This might be an unpopular opinion, but I'd kinda like a prestige nuTNG, for Netflix or HBO. I'd love to see what a good creative team working in that context would do with something like the Klingon Civil War plot line. I've been watching the TNG Blu-rays -- with my wife, who's been a good sport, since SF isn't her thing -- and while I enjoy them, they're... a bit schlocky compared to more contemporary serial TV drama. 

Give me 10 episodes a season like GoT with the freedom to be daring w/the material and I'd be very happy.


----------



## Ryujin (Jan 6, 2015)

Mallus said:


> Random Star Trek-y thoughts...
> 
> I'm okay with Justin Lin directing nuTrek 3. I'm only familiar with his Fast 6, but it was a charming, thoroughly entertaining film in a series I previously had no interest in nor affection for.
> 
> ...




You might be interested in "Prelude to Axanar" and the Axanar film, soon to be released, that focuses on the Federation/Klingon war that covers the time between "ST: Enterprise" and the original series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W1_8IV8uhA


----------

