Support NeoGAF

[jshackles]

New ‘Star Trek’ Movie In Works At Paramount From Jonathan Goldstein & John Francis Daley

Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley plan to write, direct and produce a new 'Star Trek' movie.

deadline.com

Plot details are being kept under wraps for now, but sources say Goldstein and Daley's film is a completely new take on the Star Trek universe and not connected to any previous or current television series, movie or prior movie development projects. That pitch falls in line with Skydance founder David Ellison's recent comments on an earnings call where he said the next Star Trek film would not be a sequel in the Chris Pine-led series but something different with new actors.

While not confirmed, sources also add it's likely that new characters will be featured in this version.

What do you think GAF? Ready for a fresh new take on Trek?

 

[Power Pro]

No thanks. Star Trek is just done to me. Picard season 3 was an anomaly that was decent but not perfect, but beyond that, I haven't liked anything Trek related in a long long time.

 

[falconhoof]

I watched this earlier covering a Den of Geek article https://www.denofgeek.com/tv/90s-star-trek-creators-modern-trek-tone/ with two of the 90's Trek writers who talked about how modern Trek missed the tone of what Trek used to be.

If they can really take to heart what Trek is in its own universe and not a very thin reflection of current year, then it's a franchise that will always have legs. But there are more ways of getting Trek wrong than right. Same as anything, so faith stays low until results are seen.

 

[jshackles]

If they can really take to heart what Trek is in its own universe and not a very thin reflection of current year, then it's a franchise that will always have legs. But there are more ways of getting Trek wrong than right. Same as anything, so faith stays low until results are seen.

Goldstein and Daley were behind the recent Dungeons and Dragons movie, and despite it being a bit silly it was a pretty faithful representation of what D&D is (and used to be). So I'm going to give them a small benefit of the doubt here, though I agree with you that there are a million ways this can go very badly.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

We are so f**ked, Star Trek bros.

 

[falconhoof]

Goldstein and Daley were behind the recent Dungeons and Dragons movie, and despite it being a bit silly it was a pretty faithful representation of what D&D is (and used to be). So I'm going to give them a small benefit of the doubt here, though I agree with you that there are a million ways this can go very badly.

I personally felt that the D&D movie was a cheap effort comedy. A chance to make a fantasy franchise that had humor, but instead a humor based fantasy effort, played mostly for laughs with a thin relationship story to try and pull heart strings.

I've played D&D since the late 80's and still do today. It's a game that can have a lot of humor, but its got the potential to tell gripping stories in a believable world setting. So much more than a show case to point at the screen and shout out the name of spells you recognize.

A lot of friends said they really enjoyed it, I get why they did. But at the same time, it's a movie that left no legacy and I doubt many people are enjoying re-watches of it now, because it was basic popcorn throw away stuff.

I personally much preferred the Warcraft movie, which for all of its issues, plenty of them, it made an effort to take the setting seriously, and I wished it could have found a way to get a sequel in hope that they could have improved the execution and grew it into a worthy franchise.

 

[Dirk Benedict]

They managed to make both Star Trek and Wars look shitty in the last 10 years. They were commandeered by people who pretend to be "nerds"
There aren't many real nerds, these days, let alone a good movie about space travel that doesn't have cringe writing and make you regret wasting time engaging.

 

[AJUMP23]

Do it all in Lego.

 

[Wheeljack539]

They managed to make both Star Trek and Wars look shitty in the last 10 years. They were commandeered by people who pretend to be "nerds"
There aren't many real nerds, these days, let alone a good movie about space travel that doesn't have cringe writing and make you regret wasting time engaging.

 

[Dacvak]

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

 

[kevboard]

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

as someone who isn't onto star trek that much, I liked it. great soundtrack, decent action...
but I can see how star trek fans would not like it lol

 

[Warspite]

No thanks. Star Trek is just done to me. Picard season 3 was an anomaly that was decent but not perfect, but beyond that, I haven't liked anything Trek related in a long long time.

I liked Season 3 it was a good getting off point for Star Trek for me. The TNG universe got its undiscovered country moment and with that you could close the book on Trek and move on.

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

To me Its fun but utterly disposable, it the like difference between a steak meal and fast-food burger, you can get enjoyment out of both but one is clearly superior and stays with you, the other is a cheap chemically infused dopamine hit.

 

[Dacvak]

as someone who isn't onto star trek that much, I liked it. great soundtrack, decent action...
but I can see how star trek fans would not like it lol

Yeah. I'm a casual Star Trek fan. Same with Star Wars. I've watched the original series, and a small amount of TNG (I know, I should watch more), but that's about it. And I thought the "reboot" movie was great. I don't remember much about the sequel, but I think I liked that one too?

 

[Paltheos]

Goldstein and Daley were behind the recent Dungeons and Dragons movie, and despite it being a bit silly it was a pretty faithful representation of what D&D is (and used to be). So I'm going to give them a small benefit of the doubt here, though I agree with you that there are a million ways this can go very badly.

Just browsing their filmographies, it looks like they've really only written comedies or action movies, nothing with the quietness or gravitas that I think of when I think 'Star Trek'.

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

Ok popcorn flick but not anything I'd particularly recommend to anyone. The performances and direction are overall good but as has been covered ad nauseum the writing blows dick.

 

[Warspite]

This is from people involved with the Flash movie and Dungeons & Dragons, not a good start.

 

[nush]

It will be shit, like every new Star Wars thing.

 

[Joramun]

The main character will be male pretending to be a woman, blind and crippled trying to understand why bioligical science hasn't changed since its inception.

 

[SirKicksalot]

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

I was ready to watch five sequels and a TV show as soon as the credits hit... Whoever was in charge of Star Trek after that opening weekend was a fucking moron.

 

[Kenpachii]

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

Absolutely loved that movie

 

[kevboard]

I was ready to watch five sequels and a TV show as soon as the credits hit... Whoever was in charge of Star Trek after that opening weekend was a fucking moron.

it was kinda weird how it fizzled out. it was a huge hit too, and I'm pretty sure the sequels were either higher or on the same level of success as the first one as well.

 

[Fake]

Will be as good as Star Trek Picard: Episode 9, Hide and seek.

 

[Paltheos]

The main character will be male pretending to be a woman, blind and crippled trying to understand why bioligical science hasn't changed since its inception.

There's revisionist history in some circles that Star Trek has never been so political. Gender identity and sexual orientation, for instance, is a topic classic Trek's covered before, in season 5 episode 17 of TNG, The Outcast, where Riker works with and falls in love with an alien whose society has no gender. It turns out that their civilization just heavily discourages gender identity from a belief that they had grown beyond it, and her identification as female puts her at risk of some government-sponsored psychotherapy to 'fix' her.

All very unabashedly political for the '90s when LGBTQ+ was less accepted than it is now. The difference of course is that old Trek carried itself with a bit more class. The message was carefully built up to and discussed and not just shoved in your face like some afterthought between a bunch of characters spouting some awful line or another.

 

[falconhoof]

There's revisionist history in some circles that Star Trek has never been so political. Gender identity and sexual orientation, for instance, is a topic classic Trek's covered before, in season 5 episode 17 of TNG, The Outcast, where Riker works with and falls in love with an alien whose society has no gender. It turns out that their civilization just heavily discourages gender identity from a belief that they had grown beyond it, and her identification as female puts her at risk of some government-sponsored psychotherapy to 'fix' her.

All very unabashedly political for the '90s when LGBTQ+ was less accepted than it is now. The difference of course is that old Trek carried itself with a bit more class. The message was carefully built up to and discussed and not just shoved in your face like some afterthought between a bunch of characters spouting some awful line or another.

It's part of the beauty of sci-fi story telling where it can put the viewer into a seemingly alien concept, but it can weave into it something relatable and interesting. A success is leaving you with a new perspective on things.

Modern writing is anything but subtle or graceful in its execution. I haven't watched more than a few minutes of modern Trek, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear of story lines about Tonald Drump an orange alien oppressing all the minorities played by black people with the tiniest bit of "alien" makeup. With the crew defeating evil Drump and then everyone living happily ever after in harmony.

 

[Escape Goat]

Nu-Trek is hot garbage. Even people like Stewart have forgotten what made their characters great. I have absolutely zero faith in the current leadership to make anything remotely meaningful as TOS or even TNG.

Im glad they didnt double down with 7 of 9 and Jack Crusher. The only thing worse than Section 31 was that creative bankrupt excuse for TV. Then they go and create a Star Trek Academy thats more at home on The CW than Gilmore Girls.

I can only hope this new team jetisons the Nu Trek esthetic. Im not asking for us to go back to flat set lighting and carpeted decks but for the love of God no more sterile sets clearly made to accommodate multiple camera angles/blocking. You shouldn't have sets large enough to play field hockey on.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Rather watch TOS and TNG remasters again.

 

[TheUnicornGuy]

Is that the same John Francis Daley that played Sweets in Bones?

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

To boldy shit where no executive has been before

 

[Zathalus]

They should have put Mike McMahan in charge. He at least loves Trek and knows what makes it good.

 

[RCX]

Step 1: put the whole thing on ice

Step 2: wait for Kurtzman to die

Step 3: do nothing else ever again

Good things have a use-by date. Treks time is over.

 

[RCX]

Rather watch TOS and TNG remasters again.

Recently finished TNG. Hadn't seen it all since I was a kid. And it holds up so perfectly, such a great, great series.

Sad to see how it all began falling apart with the later TNG movies. Shaka, when the walls fell.

 

[simpatico]

Nah it wrapped up after TNG.

 

[Mengy]

What do you think GAF? Ready for a fresh new take on Trek?

I love Star Trek, I grew up with Star Trek, but the phrase "fresh new take" worries me.

For reference to my feelings on Star Trek:

I love:
TOS
TNG
DS9
Voyager
Enterprise
Picard S3

I only somewhat like:
SNW
ST 2009
ST Beyond

I despise:
Discovery
Picard S1&2
ST Into Darkness

As a huge ST fan with the above preferences, what I would LOVE to see from a new show or movie is NOT a "fresh new take" on Star Trek. I'm totally fine with a new crew and a ship other than the Enterprise, in fact I'd love to see that, BUT keep it set in the classic/TNG ST universe. That means with those races, those ship designs, that level of tech, that style of personalities and social levels, etc. While I can enjoy something like SNW it's not true Star Trek to me, but rather some modernized amalgamation of it.

Truth is I miss the original five series feel to Star Trek, and nowadays I simply re-watch the old five series rather than watch anything from New Trek.

A fresh new take is not what I'm interested in. I'd rather see a return to form for Star Trek.

 

[Major Insano]

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

I really liked it. It was the first movie I watched on my full HD projector with SS. And I like lense flare, mostly..
But I've always loathed how 'gun-ho' and reckless Kirk is in this.

'I dare you to do better' is one of my favourite lines.

I also like Into Darkness, in a guilty pleasure kinda way.

I'm always up for more Trek.

 

[Trilobit]

I watched this earlier covering a Den of Geek article https://www.denofgeek.com/tv/90s-star-trek-creators-modern-trek-tone/ with two of the 90's Trek writers who talked about how modern Trek missed the tone of what Trek used to be.

If they can really take to heart what Trek is in its own universe and not a very thin reflection of current year, then it's a franchise that will always have legs. But there are more ways of getting Trek wrong than right. Same as anything, so faith stays low until results are seen.

What's GAF's take on the 2009 Star Trek movie? I personally really liked it, even though the lens flare was holy-shit levels of overused.

I grew up with TNG, but ST 2009 was my first experience with TOS. I loved the mobie, the sequels sucked though. It made me watch the original series and I was astounded by how different they were. Kirk wasn't at all the hothead and rulebreaker. Original Kirk takes the Star Fleet rules seriously, even if he's sort of a cowboy in space. TOS is probably my absolute favourite Star Trek, it's exciting, but very contemplative. The quality isn't even comparable with nu-Trek shows, including SNW. Nu-trek is, as Rich Evans said "VIOLENCE!!!" and crying, oh so much crying.

 

[jason10mm]

We can go round and round about nu-trek and modern takes and why they are wrong.

But at this point ANYTHING is better than the Kurtzman hellscape so I'll give these guys a chance.

A recommendation for Paramount though....let them write the script and flesh it out in pre-production. Then SLASH THE BUDGET. The addiction to CG and over producing the sets/effects is one of the problems with Trek. That zooming spinning camera work, massive elaborate interiors, crazy cluttered space shots, cut all that and get back to Trek as a naval battle, not a jet fighter duel in the middle of a confetti shower. If they commit to making some models, a more stately space combat aesthetic, dial down the sets, and then make characters that read like "engineer, always pushes limits of equipment, puts self at risk over others, loves his pet lizard, likes obscure 20th century earth EDM, is from an alien race that has no parental influence so is always fascinated by human family units ........................................................................................................ ...................................................... ............................................................................................................... ...........................................................................................................................................................oh yeah, might be gay" such that the idpol shit takes a distant back seat to actual interesting personality traits, then we can get this ship back on track.

 

[Warspite]

But at this point ANYTHING is better than the Kurtzman hellscape so I'll give these guys a chance.

We keep saying that yet the industry always finds a way to make something worse than what came before it.

I don't know the answer but they have a lot to prove and very little good faith to go on now.

 

[jason10mm]

We keep saying that yet the industry always finds a way to make something worse than what came before it.

I don't know the answer but they have a lot to prove and very little good faith to go on now.

It would help if they announced that they got some actual legit sci-fi authors on board for story. Guys like Peter F. Hamilton, Adrian Tchiakovsky, Peter Watts; folks that can give visionary, edgy, and topical concepts for Trek to explore without necessarily devolving into trendy current fads that age like spoiled milk. A couple naval folks that can restore the sense of a chain of command, authority, and give that "life on a ship" aspect that current trek is largely missing as well.

 

[Warspite]

Maybe a less well known show runner might help as well, someone with a bit of hunger to succeed, rather than someone who wants to attach their name to property and exploit it for personal gain.

 

[StueyDuck]

Unless its completely removed from everyone currently involved with star trek it will be shit.

Wildcard, give it to Seth macfarlane , the Orville was far better than anything new trek (besides the humor, which it mostly dropped after the first season)

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Unless its completely removed from everyone currently involved with star trek it will be shit.

Wildcard, give it to Seth macfarlane , the Orville was far better than anything new trek (besides the humor, which it mostly dropped after the first season)

Orville was every bit as bad as any of the nuTreks. Zero gravitas and all the characters had room temp IQ.

 

[StueyDuck]

Orville was every bit as bad as any of the nuTreks. Zero gravitas and all the characters had room temp IQ.

I think stick to your shoop shoop dances in your online games

 

[IDKFA]

Reboot TNG. It was the best ST has ever been.

My cast.

Eddie Redmayne -JLP
Michael B Jordan - Gordie
Mahershala Ali - Worf
Liam Hemsworth - Riker
Emma Stone - Troi
Danny McBride - Data

 

[jason10mm]

Reboot TNG. It was the best ST has ever been.

My cast.

Eddie Redmayne -JLP
Michael B Jordan - Gordie
Mahershala Ali - Worf
Liam Hemsworth - Riker
Emma Stone - Troi
Danny McBride - Data

I don't think the bridge can handle that much ego

 

[touchfuzzy]

I really liked it. It was the first movie I watched on my full HD projector with SS. And I like lense flare, mostly..
But I've always loathed how 'gun-ho' and reckless Kirk is in this.

'I dare you to do better' is one of my favourite lines.

I also like Into Darkness, in a guilty pleasure kinda way.

I'm always up for more Trek.

I like all three of them honestly. All fun, fast-paced, excellent visuals, good chemistry between the actors. The stories aren't anything to write home about (all three boil down to variations of "Some bad guy hates the Federation and wants revenge!") but they're at least entertaining and well-made with their hearts in the right place. Beyond might be the most underrated film in the whole franchise.

And compared to what's come out since, yeesh. nuTrek makes the Kelvin trilogy look like Wrath of Khan.

 

[Mengy]

Orville was every bit as bad as any of the nuTreks. Zero gravitas and all the characters had room temp IQ.

I'd disagree with that. Orville was more comedic than Star Trek, but despite that it still had a solid Star Trek undertone which felt a LOT more like true Star Trek than anything Kurtzman has done. As an old Star Trek fan I enjoyed Orville much more than Discovery, Section 31, or Picard S1/S2.

 

[jason10mm]

I'd disagree with that. Orville was more comedic than Star Trek, but despite that it still had a solid Star Trek undertone which felt a LOT more like true Star Trek than anything Kurtzman has done.

Orville has heart, for sure. And the broad brush of the absurd. But it also tackled stuff like the gender transitioning race, love with a cold robot, the divorced couple realizing the infidelity was forced, and other stuff that was actually interesting sci-fi framing of human issues. I think it falls down due to some dodgy acting and the sad loss of the STUNNING Halston Sage, yowzah.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I'd disagree with that. Orville was more comedic than Star Trek, but despite that it still had a solid Star Trek undertone which felt a LOT more like true Star Trek than anything Kurtzman has done. As an old Star Trek fan I enjoyed Orville much more than Discovery, Section 31, or Picard S1/S2.

I can appreciate that you enjoyed it but you ignored my two primary complaints with Orville.

- Zero gravitas tone.
- Low IQ characters.

Good Star Trek doesn't have those problems.

 

[MooMilk2929]

I really like the star trek reboot. I hope its the same thing but with new actors. the old star trek media is kinda boring.

 

[Trilobit]

The only enjoyment I've had of modern Trek, except for the 2009 movie, has been this spoof from Red Letter Media:

 

[Mengy]

I can appreciate that you enjoyed it but you ignored my two primary complaints with Orville.

- Zero gravitas tone.
- Low IQ characters.

Good Star Trek doesn't have those problems.

Sure, but modern Trek has those same problems yet without the heart and optimism Orville has. At least Orville tried to honor classic Trek, which is something Kurtzman does not take seriously.