Chris Pine and Chris Hemsworth 'Star Trek 4' Future In Doubt as Talks Fall Through

[planet_tv]

I happened to come across this while on MSN and it's from the Hollywood Reporter. It's about the 4th J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie. The link is the article as it was posted on the Hollywood Reporter.

Chris Pine and Chris Hemsworth 'Star Trek 4' Future In Doubt as Talks Fall Through (Exclusive)

I haven't seen any of the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movies but from the little I have seen I think Chris Pine works as Kirk.

[McClance]

That was one Abrams Trek movie I was really hoping to see.

[Annoyed]

They could always recast the part, but if the article is accurate, and the studio is trying to back out of the deal they made, they might have trouble finding an actor to make a deal.

On the other hand, they may be "negotiating".

[Gatefan1976]

My problem with the JJverse is entirely story based.
ALL the actors are fantastic as slight alternates to the TOS actors, but every story is just crap.

[Annoyed]

I've never agreed or been a big fan of the revised JJ Abrams universe. He should have worked with the existing content of the project he agreed to do, rather than try to remake it in his own image.

But in a franchise as long-lived as Trek, you have to expect recasting; actors are human and they age. I have no problem with a new actor playing a character, as long as the actor can actually act.

But if studio is going back on the deals they made with their existing actors, how are they going to get a good actor to replace Pine, for example? A good actor doesn't have to put up with that nonsense.

In addition, many actors might be reluctant to playing a role like Kirk for fear of being typecast.

[Crazedwraith]

I feel sympathy for both sides; contracts are contracts, and sucks to be stiffed on money you're owed.

On the other the movies aren't making big bucks, so costs do have to be cut. Acting salaries feel like something you can tighten your belt around. And TBF other than Star Trel/Marvel/DC I can't think what big things these two actually have been. I mean Hemsworth was in the Ghostbuster reboot I guess, anything else?

Apparently obligatory commets in JJTrek as a whole: 2009 is fun as brainless action nonsense. Into Darkness was actively bad and terrible and shouldn't have touched Khan. Beyond is fine and gets a lot of credit with me for actually trying to be decent optimistic Star Trek.

[DigiFluid]

And TBF other than Star Trel/Marvel/DC I can't think what big things these two actually have been. I mean Hemsworth was in the Ghostbuster reboot I guess, anything else?

I don't think that matters in the least. If I got paid $100 each for Job A and Job B and you wrote and signed a contract saying you'll pay me the same for Job C, of course I'm going to walk away if you renege on the contract--regardless of whether I've had Jobs D and E or not.

For curiosity's sake (without passing judgement on the roles themselves), some of their notable acting credits:

Chris Pine
2006 - Smokin' Aces
2009 - Star Trek
2012 - Rise of the Guardians
2013 - Star Trek: Into Darkness
2014 - Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Horrible Bosses 2, Into the Woods
2015 - Wet Hot American Summer
2016 - Star Trek Beyond
2017 - Wonder Woman, Wet Hot American Summer: 10 Years Later
2018 - A Wrinkle in Time
2019 - Wonder Woman 1984

Chris Hemsworth
2009 - Star Trek
2011 - Thor
2012 - The Cabin in the Woods, The Avengers, Snow White & The Huntsman
2013 - Thor: The Dark World
2015 - Avengers: Age of Ultron
2016 - The Huntsman: Winter's War, Ghostbusters
2017 - Thor: Ragnarok
2018 - Avengers: Infinity War
2019 - Avengers 4, Men in Black

[P-90_177]

Such a shame. I still love the JJ verse. Even Into Darkness even though I find aspects of it jarring (*cough* transporters *cough*) Beyond is possibly my joint third favourite Star Trek film of them all.

Hopefully it'll work out. I always found the concept they went with for those movies the best of both worlds. A fantastic way to create your own universe that makes sense while acknowledging what came before.

[Crazedwraith]

I don't think that matters in the least. If I got paid $100 each for Job A and Job B and you wrote and signed a contract saying you'll pay me the same for Job C, of course I'm going to walk away if you renege on the contract--regardless of whether I've had Jobs D and E or not.

Oh to be sure. Contracts are contracts and if they really had existing deals they're perfectly entitled to insist upon them being fulfilled. Actors who are really invested in roles have taken pay cuts to make sure films are made but that's not in anyway obligatory.


But the article seemed to be making a deal out of them being such big stars and now... and I just thought 'are they?'

[Annoyed]

I feel sympathy for both sides; contracts are contracts, and sucks to be stiffed on money you're owed.

On the other the movies aren't making big bucks, so costs do have to be cut. Acting salaries feel like something you can tighten your belt around. And TBF other than Star Trel/Marvel/DC I can't think what big things these two actually have been. I mean Hemsworth was in the Ghostbuster reboot I guess, anything else?

Apparently obligatory commets in JJTrek as a whole: 2009 is fun as brainless action nonsense. Into Darkness was actively bad and terrible and shouldn't have touched Khan. Beyond is fine and gets a lot of credit with me for actually trying to be decent optimistic Star Trek.

We might agree here; Ricardo Montalban's Kahn is the defining portrayal of that role, I don't think anyone could come a close second, let alone surpass it. That should be hands off for all future Trek.