“Star Trek 4” Rumored to Feature Female Villain, New Female Hero

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
The follow-up to 2016’s Star Trek: Beyond will be the first Star Trek movie ever directed by a woman, but not only that, rumors claim it will also feature a female villain and new female team member, potentially filling the void left by Anton Yelchin (Pavel Chekov), who died in a freak accident. Chris Hemsworth is reprising his role as George Kirk, who will cross paths with son Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine).

The fourth Star Trek film was announced shortly before Star Trek Beyond opened in theaters. However, Paramount went silent on the film for over a year after Star Trek Beyond underperformed at the box office. Paramount saw some leadership changes at the executive level and reconsidered its box office strategy and now Star Trek 4 is back on track.
 

Verge

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 27, 2001
Messages
6,816
I'm sure that making it a SJW movie will help. It made the Ghostbusters movie awesome!


I mean in space where you shoot laser guns, I don't really care the gender of the antagonist. So I don't know if it's really a SJW movie just yet... I'll withhold judgement till it comes out.

However the fact that this is newsworthy scares me, who cares about the gender unless she's a human cage fighter against men.
 

Spaceninja

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
2,355
I mean in space where you shoot laser guns, I don't really care the gender of the antagonist. So I don't know if it's really a SJW movie just yet... I'll withhold judgement till it comes out.

However the fact that this is newsworthy scares me, who cares about the gender unless she's a human cage fighter against men.

Since they have to announce it and make a big deal about it, it's a SJW movie. It will also flop because it won't appeal to the base audience. If they want to make a statement, make the bad guy a dude and have the woman kick his ass, then they can at least run it on Lifetime later.
 

Mode13

Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
866
Since they have to announce it and make a big deal about it, it's a SJW movie. It will also flop because it won't appeal to the base audience. If they want to make a statement, make the bad guy a dude and have the woman kick his ass, then they can at least run it on Lifetime later.

Already saw that movie, it was the hilarious joke of a modern take on Mad Max.
 

Merc1138

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
2,128
Since they have to announce it and make a big deal about it, it's a SJW movie. It will also flop because it won't appeal to the base audience. If they want to make a statement, make the bad guy a dude and have the woman kick his ass, then they can at least run it on Lifetime later.
Exactly. It's not as if female Star Trek characters are rare, and we've had a few female villains as well over the years. The fact that they feel the need to play up something that would otherwise be COMPLETELY NORMAL within the franchise for decades, makes me wonder what the hell else they're going to focus on to try and appeal to people who aren't Star Trek fans, which likely means inserting things ST fans don't want.

As far as inserting SJW things into Star Trek... yeah, that was there right since the start and no one complained. The original series was actually more progressive than most of the crap currently on TV today for a variety of reasons, and even threw it in the viewers faces quite often, even including stories that had the subtlety of a bull in a china shop. The difference is that even with those themes that people today may fail to realize how progressive they were(even as recent as Voyager and Enterprise) the difference is that they were tacked onto an interesting series, instead of the other way around.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Since they have to announce it and make a big deal about it, it's a SJW movie. It will also flop because it won't appeal to the base audience. If they want to make a statement, make the bad guy a dude and have the woman kick his ass, then they can at least run it on Lifetime later.

Not really sure where the "social justice" criticisms of Star Trek come from, there's nothing new about Star Trek and liberal social commentary and character portrayals, that's always been a part of the Star Trek universe.
 

Dead Parrot

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
2,831
I'm sure that making it a SJW movie will help. It made the Ghostbusters movie awesome!

Considering that ST-TOS pretty much defined SJW decades before SJW became a thing, don't see a problem here. A Black female bridge officer in the middle of the civil rights movement, a Russian bridge officer in the middle of the Cold War, an Asian before Asians were cool. Not to mention a certain green blooded pointy eared Second Officer.

Way late to worrying about Star Trek going SJW.
 

Spaceninja

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
2,355
Not really sure where the "social justice" criticisms of Star Trek come from, there's nothing new about Star Trek and liberal social commentary and character portrayals, that's always been a part of the Star Trek universe.

True, there has been. The original cast was diverse, the first interracial kiss on network TV and so on. It has always been that kind of show. Now it is heavy handed, they try to beat you over the head with equality and hate. The original series serves as an example of how to show that people can be strong characters of any race/sex.
 

bigdogchris

Fully [H]
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
18,293
I'm sure that making it a SJW movie will help. It made the Ghostbusters movie awesome!
Not going there about GB, but what's wrong with having a female lead character? I've read nothing about this move being a SJW move or female lead just to say it's a female lead. If it makes a good story that's what counts.

This is some rando site claiming this. Until CBS shouts from a mountain top "We employ females!" your argument holds no weight.
 
Last edited:

Snowdensjacket

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
348
The last movie was so bad that I will simply not watch any more of them. So who care? The fact that they are openly advertising that it's going to put women into men's roles and then probably have them act like men and react like men and be nothing at all like women, except that they don't have a penis, really doesn't sound good for the future of this franchise.

Though I'm sure that all the trekkie nerds will fail to recognize that the characters are men without anything between their legs, not women, as trekkies and other assorted nerds do not have a very deep understanding of real live actual women.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Now it is heavy handed, they try to beat you over the head with equality and hate.

I don't think it's any more heavy handed now that it was 50 years ago. TOS garnered many of the same kinds of criticisms then as it does now over social matters. That was something Gene Roddenberry intended.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
11,523
Exactly. It's not as if female Star Trek characters are rare, and we've had a few female villains as well over the years. The fact that they feel the need to play up something that would otherwise be COMPLETELY NORMAL within the franchise for decades, makes me wonder what the hell else they're going to focus on to try and appeal to people who aren't Star Trek fans, which likely means inserting things ST fans don't want.

As far as inserting SJW things into Star Trek... yeah, that was there right since the start and no one complained. The original series was actually more progressive than most of the crap currently on TV today for a variety of reasons, and even threw it in the viewers faces quite often, even including stories that had the subtlety of a bull in a china shop. The difference is that even with those themes that people today may fail to realize how progressive they were(even as recent as Voyager and Enterprise) the difference is that they were tacked onto an interesting series, instead of the other way around.

Yes, ST has always been socially progressive, but as of late, the shit they are throwing down our throats are downright blatant SJW, not even trying to be subtle about it to make it OK. Hence why STD sucks ass.
 

heatlesssun

Extremely [H]
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
44,154
Yes, ST has always been socially progressive, but as of late, the shit they are throwing down our throats are downright blatant SJW, not even trying to be subtle about it to make it OK. Hence why STD sucks ass.

When was it ever subtle though?
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
724
Star Trek's tired formula has been boiled down to revenge and time travel stories that have now been soiled by SJW antics.

This is why I watch Yamato 2199/2202 :)
 

Nolan7689

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
1,694
damn i just found out Anton Yelchin tried to stop a rolling car and died. i thought he was the best version of Chekov. going to be hard to replace him.
I always thought the car rolled into him and not that he was attempting to stop it rolling. Iunno.

Already saw that movie, it was the hilarious joke of a modern take on Mad Max.
Iunno I thought Fury Road was pretty good and Max was still a equal protagonist with the Furiosa...which is a fucking retarded name.

Plus same writer and director (George Miller) at least.
 

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
I read the article and thought, "i wonder how long it'll take for the misogynists of [H] to show up. Answer: first post.

My thought exactly.

It’s funny how anti-woman some people are that they prejudge the way they do.

Base the movie on its own merits. If it sucks it sucks but to write it off immediately as a “SJW” movie is beyond comprehension.
 

Croak

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Messages
1,138
Star Trek has always been SJW. TNG and the spin-offs just ramped it up, and because it was syndicated instead of airing on a major network, it gave Rodenberry and his acolytes more freedom to proselytize.

Which is why I kinda like the reboots better than anything since TOS, because Lensflare Trek threw most of that "Federationy" stuff out the window, went for action and bewbs and banter and mostly worked.
 

Riouken

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2015
Messages
210
Don't watch The Expanse series if you're afraid of girls. It has a lot of them. shudder

The Expanse actually gets it right with its female characters. They dont try and throw it in your face and come up with retarded plot lines to somehow show the no good viewer how misogynist they are. Instead they are strong powerful females because of their character and stories.

The Expanse is really good writing. Movies like Annihilation are SJW trash with ridiculous plot lines, horribly written characters and story arcs.

Just because someone doesn't like SJW trash Movies/TV Shows doesn't mean they are a misogynist. Movies should be written/made to tell the viewer a great story and provide them entertainment. If you instead make a movie as a SJW statement you have already failed.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,760
The Expanse actually gets it right with its female characters. They dont try and throw it in your face and come up with retarded plot lines to somehow show the no good viewer how misogynist they are. Instead they are strong powerful females because of their character and stories.

The Expanse is really good writing. Movies like Annihilation are SJW trash with ridiculous plot lines, horribly written characters and story arcs.

Just because someone doesn't like SJW trash Movies/TV Shows doesn't mean they are a misogynist. Movies should be written/made to tell the viewer a great story and provide them entertainment. If you instead make a movie as a SJW statement you have already failed.
OK you keep telling yourself that, but the misogynists of [H] always prejudge stories based on casting, not story. I guess that also includes the racists of [h] who threw a fucking fit when the Finn character was <gasp> black. It was horrible SJW BS, despite the fact that outside of a few fanboys nobody had heard of the character and from what I've read he was a minor character at that.

Hell, they whined about Solo being SJW and I saw the movie. It barely had any message at all, beyond "here's a fun movie about young Han Solo," but oh the misogynists were outraged about this atrocity of a movie that they never saw because it has GIRLS. Oh the horror.
 

Merc1138

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
2,128
OK you keep telling yourself that, but the misogynists of [H] always prejudge stories based on casting, not story. I guess that also includes the racists of [h] who threw a fucking fit when the Finn character was <gasp> black. It was horrible SJW BS, despite the fact that outside of a few fanboys nobody had heard of the character and from what I've read he was a minor character at that.

Hell, they whined about Solo being SJW and I saw the movie. It barely had any message at all, beyond "here's a fun movie about young Han Solo," but oh the misogynists were outraged about this atrocity of a movie that they never saw because it has GIRLS. Oh the horror.
And that is a result of failed marketing. What I mean is, the movie was marketed as something it wasn't, lo and behold for a SW movie it was a flop. The simple reality is, that when you have a franchise like SW or ST and begin marketing it as something it isn't... the otherwise reliable fanbase(aka $$$$$$) grabs their wallet and runs.
 

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
OK you keep telling yourself that, but the misogynists of [H] always prejudge stories based on casting, not story. I guess that also includes the racists of [h] who threw a fucking fit when the Finn character was <gasp> black. It was horrible SJW BS, despite the fact that outside of a few fanboys nobody had heard of the character and from what I've read he was a minor character at that.

Hell, they whined about Solo being SJW and I saw the movie. It barely had any message at all, beyond "here's a fun movie about young Han Solo," but oh the misogynists were outraged about this atrocity of a movie that they never saw because it has GIRLS. Oh the horror.

Adding women as any focus of a conversation triggers weak men’s hatred of women that itself stems from a perceived injustice that women have done to them.

Guess what weak misogynists? Not all women will like you. Rejection is not the fault of the gender but yourself alone. Deal with it like a man and move on to th next woman.
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
11,523
Adding women as any focus of a conversation triggers weak men’s hatred of women that itself stems from a perceived injustice that women have done to them.

Guess what weak misogynists? Not all women will like you. Rejection is not the fault of the gender but yourself alone. Deal with it like a man and move on to th next woman.

Not sure if serious? Because thats hilarious if you folks really think that.
 

macksomerville

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
1,979
I read the article and thought, "i wonder how long it'll take for the misogynists of [H] to show up. Answer: first post.


How so? Today's so called leftists demand that things not even remotely recognizable as common sense be thrust upon the core of society, if not through fact or science, than by executive fiat. The problem being pointed out, is that if the film is ALREADY virtue signaling that norms of this film, which were already "boldly going" in questioning certain societal norms, then how is it going to focus on the actual story? Hollywood isnt out of ideas, but none of them get made because in an effort to normalize vastly dissimilar ideological beliefs to the majority, they have to tear down pre-existing norms through media and entertainment.

SO, discounting the fact that so many "remakes" have been wholly worthless to the masses that consume them, how is, yet again, using the same model (insert x, y, x, y "social progressive" agenda here) on top of a preexisting meme of entertainment going to make a GOOD MOVIE? But its okay, calling out the stupidity of the agenda makers in hollywood automatically discounts any dissent as "misogynist". Being that pejorative counter-claim was the first example expressed to the fact that "new" Ghostbusters sucked dick and this model isn't working, maybe you could of found examples of a good remake that exemplifies how so called social justice progress makes movies a better experience for us and our peers; instead of blasting off on a claim that construes moral superiority?
 

4saken

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
11,523
How so? Today's so called leftists demand that things not even remotely recognizable as common sense be thrust upon the core of society, if not through fact or science, than by executive fiat. The problem being pointed out, is that if the film is ALREADY virtue signaling that norms of this film, which were already "boldly going" in questioning certain societal norms, then how is it going to focus on the actual story? Hollywood isnt out of ideas, but none of them get made because in an effort to normalize vastly dissimilar ideological beliefs to the majority, they have to tear down pre-existing norms through media and entertainment.

SO, discounting the fact that so many "remakes" have been wholly worthless to the masses that consume them, how is, yet again, using the same model (insert x, y, x, y "social progressive" agenda here) on top of a preexisting meme of entertainment going to make a GOOD MOVIE? But its okay, calling out the stupidity of the agenda makers in hollywood automatically discounts any dissent as "misogynist". Being that pejorative counter-claim was the first example expressed to the fact that "new" Ghostbusters sucked dick and this model isn't working, maybe you could of found examples of a good remake that exemplifies how so called social justice progress makes movies a better experience for us and our peers; instead of blasting off on a claim that construes moral superiority?

Well you know, name calling when you have no facts. Label people nazis/misogynists/bigots/racists etc when you need to marginalize their views. Identity Politics is a joke and its pervasive in hollywood now and is ruining what once were good stories.
 

RealBeast

Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
648
My thought exactly.

It’s funny how anti-woman some people are that they prejudge the way they do.

Base the movie on its own merits. If it sucks it sucks but to write it off immediately as a “SJW” movie is beyond comprehension.
I'm extremely pro-women actors kicking ass, like say oh Scarlett Johansson.

But I really do prefer women with real women parts and no gear down there. :rolleyes:
 

Sonicks

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
1,401
I'm extremely pro-women actors kicking ass, like say oh Scarlett Johansson.

But I really do prefer women with real women parts and no gear down there. :rolleyes:

Don’t confuse watching hot women, I.E. Scarlett Johansson, for your pleasure as having a stance on watching any woman in any role.
 
Top