Simon Pegg On Board To Co-Write Next Star Trek Film 138
According to a report at The Verge, itself based on another at Deadline.com, Shaun of the Dead creator Simon Pegg is to co-write (along with Doug Jung) the next Star Trek film. Pegg is also signed on to play Scotty, as he did in both the Star Trek reboot and Into Darkness.
Sounds good to me (Score:5, Funny)
The rest of the cast can become Borg and Scotty can kill them.
Re: Sounds good to me (Score:3)
nominating for AC first-post hall of fame.
Re:Sounds good to me (Score:5, Funny)
I'm thinking what these movies need is even more action and less of that boring talking bullshit. You know, get back to their roots. Maybe a bunch of scenes too where characters get punched in the balls. Those are always cool. And tits, intergalactic weed, maybe a road trip. And a *TALKING DOG*! SHIT THAT WOULD BE AWESOME! A fucking TALKING DOG!
Re: (Score:1)
You and your high-brow stuff. Go read a book, you freak. What Star Trek needs is bewbies. Bewbies and car chases and explosions. And maybe some robot testicles, although I know that's a pipe dream. Although I'm with you on the ball-punching.
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder if it would be more fitting if Jar Jar Binks was casted as Kirk? "Meeesuh Like'm dem bewbies" .... and got punched in the balls...a lot. Wait do they have balls?
Re: (Score:2)
Wait do they have balls?
If Michael Bay had done the Star Wars prequels...
Re: (Score:1)
Hi there!
-- Doug
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and it would be nice if Crusher finally lived up to his expectations and fulfill the traveller's prophecy; I'm just so tiring of the waiting, encouraging this guy even well into his adulthood without even as much as an explanation.
Re: (Score:2)
With a cricket bat!
It's about time. (Score:1)
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)
Because ... severing yourself from the canon isn't new or original?
Star Trek now has freedom to have any future the writers can come up with ... how is that now awesome for the franchise?
I personally like the idea that it basically gives a preemptive "Shhh" to the nerds who are going to go all Comic Book Guy and say "but clearly this is in contradiction to episode 62 where Kirk says the saliva of Dactarian Moon Bats is the source of his secret powers".
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
The direction I don't care about. I care about the fact that they have made yet another "solve all problems with firepower" franchise out of something that has dealt with so many important and/or taboo topics in the past.
First kiss between white and black actors, knowingly keeping a gay actor on, solving problems with diplomacy, observing the wishes of a people and let them die, even though it goes against your own moral concepts...
This is a US made show that dared suggest that a society that has relied on cloning so much they're basically inbred need to band together with a society of hillbillies and had to effing ditch monogamy to survive! The question over Data's and the Doc's sentience or do the Borg enjoy the same considerations as other species... can the Borg even be considered a species... The list goes on and on.
They took EVERYTHING Star Trek had which let me hope for a brighter future for once instead of the pretty redundant apocalypse mindsets and turned it into fucking space cowboys...
So do excuse me if I shed a tear over the clusterfuck Abrams created.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The direction I don't care about. I care about the fact that they have made yet another "solve all problems with firepower" franchise out of something that has dealt with so many important and/or taboo topics in the past.
First kiss between white and black actors, knowingly keeping a gay actor on, solving problems with diplomacy, observing the wishes of a people and let them die, even though it goes against your own moral concepts...
This is a US made show that dared suggest that a society that has relied on cloning so much they're basically inbred need to band together with a society of hillbillies and had to effing ditch monogamy to survive! The question over Data's and the Doc's sentience or do the Borg enjoy the same considerations as other species... can the Borg even be considered a species... The list goes on and on.
They took EVERYTHING Star Trek had which let me hope for a brighter future for once instead of the pretty redundant apocalypse mindsets and turned it into fucking space cowboys...
So do excuse me if I shed a tear over the clusterfuck Abrams created.
Agreed. However, I would like to think Simon Pegg might be able to rescue this. He's a devout classic science fiction fan, to the point where he burned his Star Wars collection upon a funeral pyre after Episode I launched (according to Simon Pegg's commentary on the first episode of Spaced). So, if Simon is at all offended by the new Star Trek as you are, he may bring this alternate Star Trek back to some semblance of the Roddenberry-inspired sagas.
Re: (Score:2)
So, if Simon is at all offended by the new Star Trek as you are, he may bring this alternate Star Trek back to some semblance of the Roddenberry-inspired sagas.
How about writing his own character out of the next movie?
The problem with the "reboot" is that there are thousands of stories that can be told in the Star Trek universe without involving Kirk, Spock, McCoy, et.al., as proved by four television series.
Re: (Score:2)
I discovered Simon Pegg when I watched "Spaced" a few years ago, and really like him. With that kind of geek cred, I'm surprised they would let him anywhere near the writers' room, but from what you are saying I'm interested to see what he is able to do.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think this should affect your level of optimism / pessimism about humanity's future. For the most part, the real world will go about its business independently of whether or not Star Trek episodes cover a certain topic.
Re: (Score:3)
Star Trek was not what you think it was.
Re: (Score:2)
Space Cowboys. Fuck yeah.
Re: (Score:2)
I love me some space cowboy, but I wish he had just made more Firefly instead of turning Star Trek into a space cowboy movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you...sorta.
I mean, the best possible thing ever would be absolutely no reboots ever. I generally don't like reboots on principle because it kills the chance for new stories with new characters to be told in new worlds.
I'm not really on board with idea that because it isn't YOUR generation's Star Trek, it isn't Star Trek at all.
The problem is, if rebooting is unavoidable, you have a generation consuming the product that didn't grow up in the generation that produced it. Consequently, they don
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)
And for all that, Star Trek was still pretty much "science fiction lite"... it didn't tackle some of the really wild concepts that you see in SF books, where the authors are not limited to practical budget considerations or keeping it simple enough that new viewers can pick up partway through a season. I haven't seen "Interstellar" but from what I've heard it's a great movie that actually holds up as real science fiction. Most so-called SF movies these days are really just action movies or horror movies in a science fiction setting (including JJTrek and JJTrek 2). That's not necessarily a bad thing. I thought "Pacific Rim" was great. But the thing is, audiences are more sophisticated than they were almost 50 years ago when the original series aired. We've seen "Blade Runner", "The Matrix", "Contact", "Fringe" and whole host of other movies and TV shows that expanded the popular consciousness of SF tropes. There's room to tackle all the heady and serious subjects that were tackled in the original series and the newer series, plus there's a whole lot of science fiction concepts that people take for granted today that would have been incomprehensible or at least confusing to most audiences from decades ago.
Sure, you need to have wide appeal, and you can pretty much get that for free with good SFX, but is there no room for something other than fluff? Is Michael Bay the template from which the Star Trek reboot needs to be cut? Is the audience really that dumb? (Note I just described above that the audience isn't. I think there is a wider demographic to which a "real" Star Trek movie could appeal to now than there ever was). Besides, Star Trek II, widely considered the best one (by me as well) wasn't deep or complex, it was just a really good story that utilized the SF setting and Star Trek canon well). "Star Trek IV" had even wider appeal could almost be considered a comedy and yet most people also consider it excellent, and it was still very true to the spirit of the TV series. I know a lot of people liked JJTrek, and there were elements of the production design that I really liked, as well as some of the actors (particularly Karl Urban, Simon Pegg (despite his overuse as comedy relief) and Zoe Seldana, all of whom captured their respective roles with heart), but I thought the movies overall were awful... a Bay-Transformers level of awful.
The problem with the Star Trek movies is that they always lacked the primary advantage of the TV show, the ability to address a topic in detail, to be thoughtful and detailed, and sometimes slow and talky, which is usually the best way to express and explore these ideas. The movies never did could really do this (with the exception of the "The Motion Picture", which I always really liked as well... it was the most true to the original series, whatever its flaws were), even the good ones, because there is a built-in requirement for action and spectacle. What we are seeing now, however, is all action and spectacle and absolutely none of the issues and concepts that are the heart of Trek (and of any good fiction) or even a decent story. The new movies are just mindless eye candy.
Re: (Score:1)
Well stated, and I particularly agree with your sentiments regarding ST:TMP. When it came out, I watched it on the big screen 7 times before it left the theatres, and enjoyed it immensely every time. I found it to be fresh, insightful, and thought-provoking, while supplying mind-boggling special effects (for the time), in most cases superior to those seen in a movie called Star Wars that had been released 2 years prior.
Re: (Score:2)
Uhh... The Original Motion Picture? The Undiscovered Country? Not all of them were the Wrath of Khan (in more ways than one).
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it sheds the ideological purpose that startrek was created for.
Startrek was by design, created to illustrate a damned-near utopian future where all races and genders work together as equals, and accomplish a society that all can be proud of.
In fact, Johnathan Frakes shares this little pearl of wisdom on the subject.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
It is for this reason that I do not like the startrek reboot. It has shed its soul, to capitulate to the american audience's desire for boobies and explosions. It is not startrek.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
TOS really didn't push the utopian future as much. Gene really started pushing that with TNG. TOS pushed the envelope with a lot of things, but I never got quite the same utopia vibe from it that I did with TNG. Especially TNG when Gene was still alive and in charge.
As for the boobies, did you not see TOS? They might not have shown as much skin as now, but they were pushing it for the times. Gene Roddenberry was no prude in that sense. Even though the strip down scenes in the new movies feel a lot mor
Re: (Score:2)
The theme is there, but it isn't so "In your face", no. When you think about it, the futuristic technology required didn't exist yet in the TOS timeline. They had food slots, but not "Hey bro, I can make any fucking thing you can fit in my compartment!" omni-fabrication like they do in TNG with pattern replicators. This meant that there was still some value for physical possessions and the like. The "Full on" utopia happens in TNG.
However, the underpinnings of that future utopia are present in TOS-- In
Re: (Score:2)
I agree there was some utopianism, but there was also the occasional dose of human triumphalism. I'm not a devout fan, but I remember an episode where Riker makes Q uncomfortable by alluding to some future glory of the human race about which Q apparently is aware. I could be wrong, but I imagine that idea crept into other episodes as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmmm.... I wonder how far The Culture is from Roddenberry's ideals? In some ways, The Culture seems to me to be a far more realistic post-Singularity type of civilization than the Federation. The trappings are far more fantastic, (GSVs, anyone?) but TOS tended to underestimate many things. As one example, the communicators were basically phones, and other than communicating with an orbiting starship instead of a local tower, they only do a fraction of what today's smartphones do.
Plus even The Culture g
Re: (Score:2)
Is that in Surface Detail, or do you mean the opening to Excession?
Re: (Score:2)
Look who's blind. The Klingons weren't the blacks. That's laughable. The Klingons were the commies, particularly the Chinese.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there's no utopian society, and I don't believe there ever will be. But that doesn't mean it isn't interesting to consider what one might look like, how it would work and what challenges it would face. If you're trying to argue Star Trek wasn't perfect, well of course it wasn't. But it was a worthwhile example of speculative fiction that raised and considered interesting questions. Besides, the Federation is supposed to be the utopia, but that doesn't mean all races in the galaxy are. I think
Re: (Score:1)
Don't hand me that bullshit. Earthlings were stand-ins for the white race and Klignons for the blacks. You can keep going from there. Surely you can't be that blind.
Nice try race baiter!
The Klingons were stand ins for the Soviets and the Romulans were stand ins for the Chinese. Anyone who can't see that wasn't paying attention. (At least that was always my take on it)
Try to keep in mind the political climate and the state of world affairs when TOS was in first run. The Cold War was running at full speed and fear of Communism spread over the world was in full effect.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)
No, they're stuck with the universe Abrams left them. A universe which makes no sense [io9.com], where starships are irrelevant because transporters can move people over interstellar distances (from Earth to the Klingon homeworld), and where a cure for death has been found in Khan's blood. Not to mention the absurd political situation, with a corrupt Starfleet operating accord to some bizarre system of personal prerogative of individual commanders rather than any rational chain of command. [sequart.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The corrupt Starfleet is fine. Just have the Federation collapse into a bunch of feuding warlords kind of like the Chinese Warring States period.
Yeah the interstellar transporters make little sense unless you add some sort of restriction to it.
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, because that could be in no way allegorical for government agencies acting according to their own personal prerogative, instead of any rational chain of command, or following the law.
Nosiree, you could never get the situation where a security/military branch lies to those who give it oversight.
Nor could they ever go to extremes to protect the citizenry, to the point of being willing to lie, cheat, steal, kill, or break the law.
They'c certainly never create secret weapons and then try to find an excuse to use them.
Sorry, but this is just nerd rage that Trek isn't living up to your personal expectations.
Not all of the movies dealt with big issues in deep ways -- Final Frontier was based on the bad hippie episode, and it was pretty hokey.
The series was dead in the water. It needed to be rebooted, and you don't do that by diving into preachy plots nobody else will watch ... you do it in such a way that people actually watch the damned thing, and you have a chance to do things with it later.
It's a movie. by definition, it's escapism.
And let's not pretend for a minute that every episode of every variation on Trek was some great work of art dealing with weighty issues, or that Weasley didn't magically save the day with some contrivance or another in the last 5 minutes.
I reject all parts of those links you provide which say "but this isn't what happened in the original". Yes, they changed the timeline, the canon doesn't exist ... deal with it.
I think you people take Trek way too damned seriously. Yes, it was innovative and ground breaking ... but it's not holy scripture pointing us to the promised land.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a matter of following canon or not, the problem is it's not following the original intent of it's creator.
But TNG was my favorite series, so we're probably worlds appart in our tastes.
Enjoy the new Trek movies, I won't watch 'em, they're boring.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well if you free yourself from the cannon, what makes it Star Trek ?
Re: (Score:1)
Not very awesome, in light of the results so far. For the second movie they had carte blanche to pursue any story they wanted to, and decided instead to ape Wrath of Khan.
They should have called it "Into Dumbness."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the "twist" was that the story didn't make any sense and turned the most memorable Star Trek villain ever into a boring, forgettable cardboard cutout.
Re: (Score:2)
That only works if what they do doesn't suck. I had no problems with the canon breaking (it's not like previous writers ever adhered to canon in any meaningful way), the problem I had was with the incoherent plots, stupid writing and the lack of any, you know, science fiction. Karl Urban was good, though.
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Funny)
You must mean Tiberian bats you insensitive clod!
Episode 67 clearly established they were Factarian moon bats. What you hear was an overdub based on a misspelling.
Re: (Score:3)
You must mean Tiberian bats you insensitive clod!
Episode 67 clearly established they were Factarian moon bats. What you hear was an overdub based on a misspelling.
I'm sorry, I've got the Swedish dub and translates back to English as Fat, Aryan moon bats. This fits in with that Nazi vampire episode - the one that's only ever screened at Fan meetings.
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy to fix. How about we have Spock come through a wormhole (or somesuch) to a point just before the first movie and nip it in the bud. That way, the existing canon will be wiped out and the series can be rebooted without messing up canon.
Ah shit; that's just too simplistic. No studio will ever fall for a crap idea like that.
Re: (Score:2)
"Clusterfuck"? That's not how you spell "awesome fun thing".
Re: Abrams stage inventory (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully he can fix the clusterfuck that Abrams left, and take the franchise in a new, and original direction.
I agree with you on this...I did not like the JJ Abrams reboot of the franchise. Now, Abrams is supposedly producing and directing the new Star Wars trilogy...Prepare for disappointment.
Re: (Score:2)
Wassamatter, the "incoherent string of loosely connected action set pieces" not new and original enough for ya?
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.collegehumor.com/vi... [collegehumor.com] (there's 8 minutes and 33 seconds of lens flares)
http://www.theguardian.com/fil... [theguardian.com]
Scotty Might Have a Bigger Role in This One? (Score:3)
Because I would be okay with this.
Re: (Score:2)
mostly based around the engineering department, i would be absolutely ok with that... but maybe because i like science fiction more than action?!!!
The Verge? (Score:1)
Get a better source than this wretched pile of crap. Boycott them for #shirtgate!
Expect a lot of Star Wars jokes (Score:2)
And also Nick Frost as the wacky friend from the apartment across the hall.
what about... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Nick Frost as Harry Mudd?
Nathan Fillion as Mudd
Nick Frost as a giant Tribble.
Re:what about... (Score:5, Funny)
Nathan Fillion: Do you want to run this ship?
Simon Pegg: Yes!
Nathan Fillion: [caught off guard] Well... you can't...
New Script (Score:2)
The Starship Enterprise exploring a wormhole comes across a region of space controlled by the "Alliance"... After an improbable accident they are all stranded in Alliance space and spend the next 5 years doing more interesting and entertaining things.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Harry Mudd's not *supposed* to be good-looking. That's part of the character.
Re: (Score:2)
I know that Nick Frost has done a lot of projects with Simon Pegg but I'd see Brian Blessed as Harry Mudd instead.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking more along the lines of a Paul II with Seth Rogen playing a Klingon or something.
Re:Expect a lot of Star Wars jokes (Score:5, Funny)
Seth Rogen playing a Klingon
Well, it would save a lot of money on makeup.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just expecting (Score:2)
A fence scene, you know where he either jumps over a fence or through one. Should be classic!
Re: (Score:2)
I now half-expect to see a fence in the middle of the warp reactor room for him to jump over.
I suppose this means there's still hope (Score:3)
Hopefully this means the writing will improve somewhat. Granted, it's not exactly a tall order but I'll take what I can get.
Re: (Score:2)
The first movie in the reboot series was passable.
I hear this so much and I am convinced that people are deluding themselves. Both films are filled with action schlock and related tropes with anemic stories. I don't see how the cold fusion bomb is any better than red matter. Why does the first garbage film get a pass when the second one is an awful betrayal?
Re: (Score:2)
The best Trek comes from the TV shows where there was diplomacy, subterfuge, spying, etc. We need the real Romulans from TNG, not the weird-looking ones from the reboot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first movie in the reboot series was passable. The second was flat-out some of the laziest writing I've ever seen; I'm still raging about the "cold fusion" bomb.
Hopefully this means the writing will improve somewhat. Granted, it's not exactly a tall order but I'll take what I can get.
Will it really fix things though?
I'm sure it will improve the humour, but that wasn't really why the movies sucked.
Star Trek at its best was speculative fiction with a bit of action thrown in.
The new movies are action films with a bit of speculative fiction thrown in.
The focus of the TV series and even the first movies were philosophically interesting problems. The focus of the new movies are big FX action sequences.
You've almost got to completely re-reinvent the franchise again, even if it were possible wi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Star trek is not and has never been anything about speculative fiction any more than star wars is. The have technospeak. They are deliberately not even trying.
You're confusing hard science fiction with speculative fiction.
Star Trek is not hard science fiction and I don't think anyone ever claimed it to be, the technology presented is not only scientifically unrealistic but internally inconsistent.
But it's definitely speculative fiction. Regular moral quandaries over the Prime Directive, questions about the actions and motivations of all-powerful beings, when to resort to military force, conflicts between respecting individual rights and respecting other cultures,
Re: (Score:1)
It's fucking star trek. The lowest of the lows in all of sci fi *ever*.
Two suggested titles (Score:3, Funny)
Star Trek: Skip to the End
First five minutes of the film. (Score:1)
Everyone dies except Scotty. Scotty hires one new crew member (played by Nick Frost) and they travel the galaxy going on hilarious adventures looking for new places to drink.
Re: (Score:3)
Wait... this almost makes sense...
It's a Shaun of the Dead remake, but the pub is on Vulcan (they travel to the past, of course) and the zombies are replaced by Borg.
That's gold, Jerry, GOLD!
Re: (Score:2)
Bob Evans: "It's gold, pure gold! Greenlight it, fund it, and get Stanley Kubrick on the line because I want him to direct! Also, tell my secretary that I'm in a nursing home and talking into my shoe."
So it's a comedy franchise now? (Score:2)
I like Simon Pegg, but I'm not sure if his writing CV is best suited for the genre...
Good writing is good writing (Score:5, Insightful)
I like Simon Pegg, but I'm not sure if his writing CV is best suited for the genre...
Forget genre - his writing is very strong (unless it's mostly written by Wright, and Pegg is taking too much credit, which is doubtful). Take any of the films in the Cornetto trilogy and try and find a serious flaw. I don't mean whether or not you thought it was funny. The screenplays are solid pieces of writing. Just look at the opening scene of Shaun of the Dead: We learn very quickly all we need to know about each main character, the dialogue of the characters completes others sentences in a clever and funny way, and it sets the (I would argue actual) plot in motion by establishing that Shaun is slacker who needs to start caring more about his girlfriend. The zed-words are just the MacGuffin to help show that Shaun really does care. I for one am ecstatic that he'll be on board for the next Star Trek, because I was done with the franchise otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Plot synopsis (Score:5, Funny)
Kirk violates the prime directive again, resulting in yet another five-minute demotion and a random crewmember reassigned to a garbage scow for the Ganymede outpost.
Suddenly an alien probe starts microwaving Earth's oceans. To save Earth, Starfleet instantly promotes Kirk to double-plus-admiral and gives him an experimental portable time travel module, which he uses to take the enterprise back to 1980s Earth.
Once there, he must find and kill a 10 year old Benedict Cumberbatch before he invents the plague that wiped out the whales.
In the second to last scene, wacky hijinks ensue as we learn that Uhura secretly hid a chihuahua in her purse before returning to the future, which due to tachyon flux has evolved into a catch-phrase spewing mascot with the power to float just out of reach.
Finally, Kirk makes a speech (possibly as a voiceover) intended to beat some cheesy moral principle about the benefits of communism into the audience.
Credits.
Re: (Score:2)
Suddenly an alien probe starts microwaving Earth's oceans. To save Earth, Starfleet instantly promotes Kirk to double-plus-admiral and gives him an experimental portable time travel module, which he uses to take the enterprise back to 1980s Earth.
No, it won't be 1980's Earth. It will be 2010's Earth. Doing the 1980's would cost more, and have fewer opportunities for product placement. Do you remember the blatant Nokia marketing in Star Trek XI? Kirk, as a child, driving a 'vette, blasting the Beastie Boys, and taking calls on his clearly-branded Nokia cell phone (ringtone and all). They could make a whole fucking movie out of that shit.
Star Trek used to give me hope for the future of humanity. It was a vision of the future where mankind had out
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations, you've captured everything about JJTrek. You win an internet. Have a nice day.
Re: (Score:2)
which due to tachyon flux has evolved into a catch-phrase spewing mascot with the power to float just out of reach.
How many tabs did you take?
Re: (Score:1)
which due to tachyon flux has evolved into a catch-phrase spewing mascot with the power to float just out of reach.
How many tabs did you take?
Haven't you ever seen Red Dwarf?
Re: (Score:1)
First off, how did you get a hold of confidential studio communications?
Secondly, it wasn't going to be a chihuahua it was going to be a red shirt's cat until Pegg came on board and pointed out that it had already been done.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot the plot point where Kirk seduces and makes love to some sexy 80's icon girl, creating a time paradox baby that grows up and can be used in #14.
Key scene in #14: Daughter confronts Kirk (his father) and, as the camera is zoomed close up to her face, Kaley Cuoco screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"
FTFY... Wouldn't be the first time a movie was inspired by a cheezy advert...
Go Axanar! (Score:2)
I'll just wait for Axanar to finish filmong. That looks at least really awfull from the trailer they released.
References (Score:1)
Hope they take notes from Axanar and Phase 2 on how to make Star Trek. Sure as heck didn't know for the last two big films.
Checkov: The captcha says victors and I keep typing wicktors and it doesn't work?
Still not Star Trek (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Don't get me wrong, I'm neither happy nor entirely comfortable with what they did to the timelines, but you can't go back and move forward at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
Neutral (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
More Female Pon Farr or I'm not watching (Score:1)
I predict: (Score:1)
Star Trek according to Pegg (Score:1)