Chris Pine out as Captain Kirk for new Star Trek movie. Really?

And Spock pummeling the crap out of bad guys like Schwarzenegger in an 80s action flick.

 

Possible news of Star Trek 4?

ViacomCBS CEO Bob Bakish confirms two new Star Trek series and a movie — Daily Star Trek News

 

If they can't get Pine and they really want a film franchise, then I would seriously think about a reboot with Anson Mount's Pike as the core with Number One and Spock. I do think they could carry a film series if well written.

 

I think they are too obsessed with the Kirk war and would gladly

watch a film with Mount as Pike.

 

We all know that Chris Pine has done quite well since the first Star Trek Kelvin Line movie in 2009 so he's more expensive actor to hire, but he's not Chris Hemworth (just to name an actor from the same period whose paycheck skyrocketed on the last 10 years), so if Paramount has to pay more to Chris Pine who's played a great Kirk (I know what I'm about to say may sound as heressy but Pine is my favourite Kirk, I've always disliked Shatner's performances), pay him!
We Star Trek fans will go to the cinema like docile sheeps to see the latest Star Trek movie,and then buy the BD/UHD BD.
I have the feeling the Paramount/Viacom are a bunch of mean,cheap morons.

 

Well not all of them. For the record, Shatner’s earliest portrayal of Kirk is perfect IMHO Nd Pine echoes that performance without duplicating it.

 

When's the last time Shatner played Kirk? Back in 1994 on Generations? I don't know. I don't like Shatner's acting, I watched some TJ Hooker episodes back in the late 80's and early 90's and still thought he was a bad actor.

 

Hemsworth a one tricky pony.
Great as Thor not much good in anything else.

 

That's right. Shatner acting, to say nothing of his charisma, is so bad that a sci-fi series he was the lead in sank without trace, made no money and everybody's forgotten it. Oh! wait...

 

Bill Shatner was a believable captain and hero in the 60s series. He is so damn iconic and everyman handsome.
And his vocal delivery/phrasing is my favorite thing about him.

To each his own.

 

I thought he was great in Rush.

 

Early not late. The older he got the more mannered he got. The first two seasons he did a terrific job for the most part.

 

Ragnarok amazing in that.

 

He was great in Black Hat and Rush.

 

Did z i l c h for me. About the same acting range as the other Chris’s.
Saying that I think his Thor character is awesome!!!!

 

I thought he was great in Bad Times at the El Royale

 

Underrated movie, IMO.

 

The reason Paramount/the old Viacom couldn’t cut his paycheck (at least until recently) is because they quite simply didn’t have the money - other than the Mission: Impossible franchise they’ve had a drought in terms of hits and they’ve been largely relying on foreign investors to supply their budgets. After Beyond flopped it meant no investors were willing to sign on unless they could promise a smaller-budgeted movie, and apparently part of how they planned to accomplish this was cutting actors’ pay, which the stars (justifiably) wouldn’t agree to.
Now with Viacom and CBS re-merged however and all the license complications settled with the IP under one roof I think Star Trek is going to take a very different direction and will likely more-or-less ditch the JJ Abrams Kelvin timeline in favor of either the original or something more closely resembling it. A lot of the differences between Trek pre-2006 and what we’ve had since stems entirely from licensing complications with merchandising and Bad Robot steering the ship in order to get their cut, and now they can finally ignore legal problems and just do whatever they want.

 

They need JJ Abrams back to direct the next (if there's a next) Star Trek movie if they are to continue the Kelvin Timeline which I quite like, and a good script.

 

If Star Trek is so damn good...then, why can't it survive not trying to re-create Kirk every decade or so? Just focus on Trek, and move on. He's only one iconic character, for cryin' out loud, not an elephant in the room.

 

I hear ya, about re-creating Kirk, though I think Pine did a pretty good job. But after deep initial skepticism, I've become a big fan of Anson Mount's recreation of Captain Pike!

 

[insert rant about whiny fans here]

That said, this reinvention has only happened once.

 

Actually, the legendary iconicness of the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triumverate has come up every time a new Trek property has been in development, particularly once Shatner became past his prime. Desilu/Paramount/CBS just can't possibly fathom a Trek property without some "Kirk-y-ness" to it. As if Roddenberry's dream were somehow about some bold, swaggering blowhard with rousing speeches, instead of an achievable future full of optimism and possibilities, meeting up with society's toughest issues in methaphorical guise as aliens with prosthetic noses. I understand a need for there to be a Captain in charge, and an ensemble of actors whose traits compliment and contrast the main star...it's just that every time a new revision to the franchise comes up, it always starts in a board room asking, "Well, who's gonna be the Kirk? Can Bill do it again, or do we need his essence is the form of ______?" "Hey - let's make him a woman!"

With Michael Burnham, at least we got away from the swaggering Captain...but then, look who swoops in to "save" the show...the mighty Captain "LooksLikeKirk", and his sidekick, "PointyEaredBoy". "Don't worry fans, here's your familiar tropes!"

 

I hear ya. Fans' over-reliance on Things They've Seen Before has been the source of a lot of the current "fandom menace".

 

Or they can just accept the fact that they've done all there is to do with the Star Trek franchise and move on. Hopefully Disney does the same with Star Wars.