Should Paramount go ahead with Star Trek 4 without Chris Pine as Captain Kirk?

[Jokerz79]

https://goo.gl/images/bQkzsw

[SpiderClops]

Recast. Nothing about Pine is irreplaceable, he brings nothing special.

[Colossus1980]

They probably should just cancel the film. The films are progressively doing worse and the whole point of them offering less money for the two actors was to obviously keep the budget in check due to the diminishing returns. Which is understandable. I'm shocked they even wanted to DO a fourth one. But now that it's lost its main star, it sounds crazy that they would want to move forward given the financial losses.

I enjoyed all three Trek movies but it's true what you wrote. Diminishing domestic box office and the foreign box office for the last film could not help turn the tide. But Paramount does not have too many franchises so I guess it's a case of having little to nothing and trying to salvage a sinking ship.

[Toreador]

If they can't get Pine back just re-cast the whole film. It would just seem awkward to have a new Kirk with the regular cast. While Anton did a good Chekov the character in TOS wasn't part of the cast until the second season and his character could always be explained away by being transferred to another ship and Jaylah could be the new navigator.

[choptop]

They already have to figure out what they are going to do with Chekov after the sad passing of Anton Yelchin, so replacing your lead actor also is a very bad move. They would be better off losing Hemsworth. He is not a big draw outside of Thor anyway.

All they have to do is say he got a job on a new ship and replace him with Jaylah.

[Colossus1980]

If they can't get Pine back just re-cast the whole film. It would just seem awkward to have a new Kirk with the regular cast. While Anton did a good Chekov the character in TOS wasn't part of the cast until the second season and his character could always be explained away by being transferred to another ship and Jaylah could be the new navigator.

Is there enough interest to keep Star Trek alive at this point? The downward box office trend does not look good. Are there enough big stars to attract the audience?

[XPac]

Is there enough interest to keep Star Trek alive at this point? The downward box office trend does not look good. Are there enough big stars to attract the audience?

While you can argue there's been a downward trend in Star Treks box office, the flip side of that question is does Paramount have any other franchises which could really do better? If not, then they might as well keep on making Star Trek movies.

[choptop]

They probably should just cancel the film. The films are progressively doing worse and the whole point of them offering less money for the two actors was to obviously keep the budget in check due to the diminishing returns. Which is understandable. I'm shocked they even wanted to DO a fourth one. But now that it's lost its main star, it sounds crazy that they would want to move forward given the financial losses.

This one didn't do so good but the last 2 did pretty good with into darkness being the highest-grossing entry in the Star Trek franchise also I think beyond was the best of the 3.

[Username taken]

I don't know, there seems to be various struggles with the Star Trek franchise for various reasons.

I'm honestly not sure they should re-cast or not. Everything just seems to lack direction regarding the franchise.

[Hypestyle]

No, make it something else entirely.

[ChrisIII]

Despite some production shake ups Discovery seems to be doing pretty well, and they seem to have confirmed some sort of TNG revival with Patrick Stewart, so the franchise as a whole seems to be doing better. However, I think the TV and film ownership of Trek is a bit split, and this caused Abrams some problems when marketing the last few movies.

[Elmo]

For various reasons, I didn't see the last film. I was told that it wasn't good and it was really nothing but the 'Disney-fication of ST. It was just an empty popcorn film. Them re-casting the film will or should be based entirely on how much Pine was a factor in drawing people in. For me, I've never been a fan of Pine. If he's in something I was planning on watching. Sure I'll see the film. But I would not go out of my way just to watch him.

I don't know who you heard that from but I would say that more accurately describes the first two films in the Kelvin timeline. Star Trek Beyond is fantastic and probably the best Star Trek film since First Contact

[Gaastra]

Info on what's going on.

[XPac]

I don't know, there seems to be various struggles with the Star Trek franchise for various reasons.

I'm honestly not sure they should re-cast or not. Everything just seems to lack direction regarding the franchise.

I don't think they even need to recast him. Just to a Star Trek movie without Kirk.

Star Trek doesn't HAVE to be about Kirk. The Star Trek franchise is a big enough draw without that character or without the actor Pine. Say he was promoted to admiral, give Spock the Captain Chair, and you're fine.

[AndrewCrossett]

Shatner: "I can still do it, dammit. We just might have to dye my chest hair."