Saber Forum

PLEASE NOTE - THE FOLLOWING IS A SPOILER FREE REVIEW. I WILL NOT REVEAL ANY MAJOR PLOT POINTS FROM THE MOVIE.

Ever since JJ Abrams rebooted Star Trek in 2009 with what is now known as the Kelvin timeline, fans have been split. There are some who grew up watching the tv series in all its incarnations and the movie franchise that followed who have been less than happy with this new timeline. Others are completely fine with it. And then there is wider audience whose first exposure to Star Trek was the 2009 movie who love everything JJ has brought to the table (with the exception of all the lens flares). In this, the 50th year anniversary of the franchise, will this latest movie bring all the fans together or push them further apart?

The story/plot
3 years into their historic 5 year journey aboard the Enterprise, Kirk and Spock are having some misgivings about their respective futures and whether that future will involve starlet. While docked at a deep space station, they embark on a mission of mercy to an uncharted nebula. The ship is attacked and the crew scattered. Will they find each other again and be able to stop the alien Krall from his mission of destruction against the Federation.

Overall opinion
Let me start out by saying that I have been on the fence about Trek's Kelvin timeline. I really liked the 2009 reboot but thought that Into Darkness was a poor remake of Wrath of Khan and a missed opportunity for them to go in a new direction and tell some truly original stories. That being said, with Justin Lin directing a script co-written by Simon Pegg (who is a MASSIVE geek as we all know) this is actually a really good science fiction movie. However, it still doesn't feel like a Star Trek movie. I know that the studio rejected a script by original writer Robert Orci for being too "Star Trekkie" so it's obvious that they want to attract new audiences to the franchise by rejecting the themes of exploration, humanity's tolerance in the future and fan favourite "Trek speak" (dilithium crystal, remodulating shield variance phase harmonic etc). However, the movie was really enjoyable. It had some good jokes (as well as some that didn't really hit), the set pieces were executed well and the CGI was amazing, with one or two noticeable exceptions.

The Performances
Chris Pine - Captain Kirk
Chris Pine has done a great job in the first two movies embodying the spirit of the character without doing a William Shatner impression. He definitely feels more assured in the role in this movie and does throw in the odd subtle Shatnerism occasionally, which truly fits the character well.

Karl Urban - Bones
From the start, Karl Urban has done a really good update of the Leonard Bones McCoy character and that continues in this movie. He actually has most of the best lines in the film and is clearly having a ball as a slightly grumpy Southern doctor in space.

Zachary Quinto - Spock
In my opinion, no-one has ever been truly able to portray Vulcans properly on screen outside of Leonard Nimoy and Mark Lenard (who played his father Sarek in the original show/films). However, Quinto's performance as Spock is really good, truly capturing the internal conflict the half human half Vulcan character has. If I had on criticism (and it is a minor nitpick) is that Quinto can't quite get the deadpan delivery style of Spock right. Some of Leonard Nimoy's more humorous moments came from his stonefaced deadpan delivery. But Quinto might get there one day.

Anton Yelchin
RIP Anton. You will be missed. His Chekov was once again a joy to watch on screen. Although, given the circumstances, I felt a little twinge of my heart every time he was on-screen.

John Cho
I love George Takei. He is a talented actor and an amazing activist. However, John Cho is really outshining him in the role of Sulu. Confident. assured and funny, Cho gives another great performance.

Zoe Saldana - Uhuru
From a confident and skilful linguist in the reboot and reduced to bickering with her Vulcan boyfriend in the second, Saldana gets to bust out her skilful Gamora moves in this movie. She is only given a few scenes and not much to do, however, whenever she is on screen you cannot help but be drawn in.

Simon Pegg - Scotty
The Scottish accent fluctuates a little here and there, but Pegg brings all his considerable liveability and humour to the beloved character of Scotty. And he definitely has more to do in this movie that Into Darkness.

Sofia Boutella - Jaylah
For those of you who do not know who she is, she was the blade legged female assassin in the 2014 movie Kingsmen. Once again, she is completely badass. However, this time she actually gets to act. She brings a very emotional weight to the character that is nicely balanced with the humour and moments of action.

Idris Elba - Krall
I think in years to come, people will take away Morgan Freeman's voiceover crown and award it to Idris. Completely unrecognisable under the excellent prosthetic make-up, he brings an intensity and air of menace to a role that could have ended up being played totally over the top. However, much like Ricardo Montalban as Khan in The Wrath of Khan, Idris understands that less is more and understated menace and an amazing voice can make a compelling villain. And what a twist too!

The effects
Great CGI for the planet environments, space station and action in space.

The action
This is my main gripe with the movie (not just this movie). Bloody shaky-cam. Very few directors know how to use it properly in action scenes to help ramp up the intensity of that scene. In fact, the only director I can think of who uses shaky-cam well is Paul Greengrass in the Bourne movies. So many of the action set pieces and fights scenes used this technique that I couldn't engage with the characters at that moment.

Away from the shaky-cam, you can definitely feel Justin Lin's Fast & Furious imprint all over the action. Was it bad? Not really, but it was nothing amazing either. Ultimately I felt the set-pieces felt a bit flat and empty and not the thrill ride I was expecting.

Other stuff
Aliens! Aliens everywhere! The movie introduced 50 different species of alien with some truly amazing VFX and prosthetic make-up. It really did flesh out that the United Federation of Planets included hundreds of planets, cultures and species.

There was a very touching tribute to not only Leonard Nimoy but the entire cast of the original series which did almost give me a lump in my throat.

The score was really good, although the levels of the sound design sometimes drowned out the dialogue.

The way they explain the motorbike we saw in the trailer was really well done, as was the way they subtly linked this movie to the Enterprise tv show.

Final verdict
Great performances from all of the cast again. Definitely a better movie than Into Darkness, although I can see some of the more diehard Star Trek fans not liking it. The plot is certainly original and ties in nicely to the mythology opened by Enterprise the tv show. The pacing was off in places for me which ultimately affected the flow of the movie. The set pieces could have been trimmed down to make them tighter and we definitely didn't need all the shaky-cam. However, I think there was only three really noticeable lens flares, so that's a plus!

I would say it is a huge improvement over Into Darkness, but not as good as the 2009 reboot. Is it worth watching? Most definitely. Will you enjoy it if you're a lifelong Star Trek fan? I'll leave that for you to answer.

Score - 7.2/10

After-thought: Future of the Franchise
While I was sat on the night bus on my way home after watching this movie I had an epiphany about the Kelvin timeline movies: they are taking their inspiration from these new movies from the existing movies and not the tv show.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture      - first cinematic movie
Star Trek (2009)           - first cinematic movie in the Kelvin timeline

Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan
Star Trek Into Darkness    - a remake of Wrath of Khan

Star Trek 3: The Search for Spock   - biggest iconic moment in the movie? The Enterprise is destroyed
Star Trek Beyond               - The Enterprise is destroyed

Star Trek 4: The Voyage Home   - time travel adventure
Star Trek 4 (untitled)         - a time travel adventure in which Captain Kirk will co-star with his dad, Chris Hemsworth.

God knows what they will do when they get to Final Frontier, in my opinion the worst Trek movie in the entire franchise.

I have to say, I really enjoyed myself at this movie.  And having just come off of seeing that horrendous animation for Discovery, I do wonder if there's an eventual desire to scuttle the prime universe in favor the Kelvin universe.

Without offering spoilers, I will say that the thing that was VERY strongly impressed on me was the huge jump in maturity levels of all characters.  These aren't squabbling children anymore--these are adults.  Quirky adults, yes, but actually adults.  This is the first time I was impressed with Uhura as a character...I felt she was done a disservice in BOTH prior movies, and now I actually saw some of the dignity I associate with Nichelle Nichols' version of Uhura in the original series movies.

There was one thing that kept coming to mind during the movie though, that I'm wondering if I was crazy for spotting.  Is Jeremy Lin or someone affiliated with this movie a Mass Effect fan?  I could have SWORN I heard voices intended to sound like EDI and Tali'zorah, the bad guys' armor made them look like Collectors (Protheans) in a major way when fully suited up, and without saying when I saw it, there was a location in the movie that gave me a major Citadel vibe.

I ALSO think I spotted a couple of nods to Galaxy Quest in the alien designs...

the admiral is the voice of one of the characters in mass effect, so you're not going mad

what do you think about my after-thoughts?

Aha!  I knew that was another familiar voice, but I couldn't place it.  Another quarian, I see.

To me, Jaylah's voice resembled Tali's, and Kalara's Universal Translator voice sounded like EDI.

And as for your afterthoughts, yep, a lot of Star Trek fans have pointed that out too, though generally not so nicely as you have.

EDI was voiced by Tricia Helfer who was in Battlestar Galactica, but I see where you're coming from.

But Jaylah didn't sound as mechanical (or adorably geeky) as Tali.

As for the direction of the new movies, I don't see why any fans would be less than nice about that fact. Especially when you look at The Force Awakens and it's similarities to A New Hope.

However, given the similarities so far with the Trek movies, it seems obvious that the studio sees the future of the franchise lays with the movies and not on tv (although given the nature of the talent involved with the new series I don't think they are deliberately making something that will fail)

As an FYI, Jaylah was played by Sofia Boutella, the same actress who played Gazelle, the henchwoman with the bladed prosthetic feet, in Kingsman: The Secret Service.

as stated in my review

Well, I didn't read your review at first because I didn't want to spoil anything even slightly (I went on a complete internet Star Trek blackout from Thursday Night to Saturday afternoon when I got back from seeing it). And now, I guess I skipped over that part entirely in my speedreading.

I wouldn't have called them exact resemblances by any means, but it did make me think of those characters.  I think part of the quarian resemblance with Jaylah may be that they seem to go for a Middle Eastern vibe with the way the quarians speak in Mass Effect, and both actresses that I thought had a quarian connection were of Middle Eastern origin.


There are people that will trash the JJverse at all costs. :\


I'd like to hope that's true, that they aren't setting it up to fail.

i did the same thing with Civil War and Star Wars. It's actually quite easy to avoid facebook, websites and various forums when you really want to.

And why on earth would you want to speedread through my review? It's extremely well-written, full of deep insights, humour and analytical brilliance.

...because I am a speedreader by nature.

I actually read everything you wrote EXCEPT the bit about Sofia Boutella. For some reason, it skipped right past my eyes when I scrolled down.

i get that. And jaylah was a great addition to the trek-verse. Hope to see more of her in the next movie.

i think people are hating on the Kelvin timeline less because of the content and more because they have a dislike for JJ. Which is a shame, as he has made some great movies. And some duds too, like all directors, but the good far outweighs the bad.

what gave me the most hope is that they have brought Nicholas Meyer into the fold, he who is responsible for two of the best Trek movies in the franchise. He truly understands how to tell a great Trek story.

natural speedreader. Cool mutant power to have.

Missing that part is understandable, so I may forgive you. Eventually. At some point. Maybe.

Great review, as usual.  I'm waiting for a rental release on this one, as I haven't seen anything in the trailers saying I need to go see it.


You mean the test footage that was done at the studio, as opposed to being done by someone at an actual effects company?  (they haven't even hired an effects company yet)  It truly amazes me how people are going on and on about that.

people are going on about it as it was officially released at comic-con. If there was a disclaimer or something saying it was unfinished/temporary/demo footsge that would be one thing, but as far as i know there has been nothing like that.

Glad you liked the review. I would say it is definitely worth seeing on the big screen.

If it's as scifidude says, then they made a major PR snafu by not making that clear.

I actually enjoyed the new movie a lot.  Closest thing I have seen to a TOS episode in a long long time.  I thought the actors did a great job and the effects were done well.  And one moment at the end put a tear in my eye, and made me smile.

Another stellar review by Darth Knox!

I want to go see this one.  I wasn't ever really into the OS - more TNG, but did see all the movies. :)

Thanks for doing this yet again my friend. :)

-1

Yeah, they could have made that clear.  In fact, knowing how fans are, they should have made it clear.


I may go see it.  I'm on the fence.  Part of me wants to see it sooner rather than later.

as a Trek fan, you should go see it on the big screen. It is your duty as a starfleet officer to uphold the princicples laid down by the federation under grand admiral roddenberry

It's bad enough that I thought of Roddenberry in Chiss makeup, but the disturbing thing is that I also thought "That sounds like the beginning stages of decomposition, with bloodshot eyes and bluish-white skin..."

Oh dear. O_o



One other thing about Beyond.  Some of you know my theory that in Into Darkness, Kirk was suffering from a breakdown of sorts because of having to deal with two versions of the universe and of himself, from mind-melding with Ambassador Spock.  It seems to me like Into Darkness was definitely Kirk hitting bottom.  His death and recovery, plus the passage of time seems to have aided in his healing, and I get the sense from some of his behavior in the movie that he's actually learned how to integrate the two identities and directly call on each--intentionally--when it's situationally appropriate.  To say HOW this is, though, would be to give spoilers.

Go see it.  As a life long Trek fan I was very happy with this movie.

Question of the day (because I can and i've been drinking)

What is the most rewatchable Star Trek movie? Not necessarily the best, but the most easiest to watch over and over again.

My choice would be Star Trek First Contact. While I maintain that Wrath of Khan is still the best Trek movie, First Contact is a perfect balance of sci-fi, action, horror, humour and Trek.

Dated as it is, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home is extremely rewatchable.

i agree that is extremely rewatchable, but more so than First Contact? What are your reasons?

Nostalgia, mostly. I grew up during the time they traveled to. Also, it was absolutely hilarious watching the crew in 1986. I've always loved Fish Out Of Temporal Waters stories.

Of course, the reveal of the Enterprise-A is always a plus. Such a beautiful scene.

that was the first trek movie i remember hearing about while they were filming it. I remember thinking it a dumb idea at the time. And then i saw the movie and loved it. It is definitely the funniest of the movies with the original cast. My choice came down to this and FC.

For me it's First Contact and The Undiscovered Country.

if you could only watch one which would you choose?

Ouch...hard choice.  In the end I'd have to take First Contact on sentimental value (I saw it in the theater but not Undiscovered Country), better effects, and having one of the best scores in the franchise.  That and Picard getting kicked hard in the hypocrisy.  It actually makes a cool companion piece to DS9 in that way as well as being a TNG movie, given that DS9 was in the process of deconstructing a lot of the excessive parading on a high horse that TNG and Picard specifically did a lot of.

(Oh and of course it actually gave us a good reason to have Worf aboard and acknowledged the Defiant, so it strengthens the sense of it being a companion piece to DS9.)

The Undiscovered Country is really awesome too, though, and when I do my top movie lists, I usually rank them together at #1. :)

from some of your comments it seems like you're not a fan of Picard.
The Undiscovered Country is brilliant too.

I'm really not.  He has some interesting moments--especially when something happens to humble him (which is what Best of Both Worlds/Family, The Inner Light, and Chain of Command all do in various ways).  But I would never be able to respect him as my commanding officer the way I could Sisko, if I were in that universe.  Sisko does have a few moments of bad, but I overall consider his command judgment to be much more sound.

Kirk also demonstrates fairly solid command judgment in TOS, and in Star Trek Beyond, but I couldn't respect him fully as a CO because of his treatment of women.  Still, he comes in as #2 behind Sisko for me.

but why? not a fan of earl grey tea?

I feel like Sisko can make the hard decisions that are needed to deal with one's enemies.  Getting Picard to acknowledge a threat (look how many times he shot down Worf when Worf turned out to be right) in the first place is a problem, as is Picard's willingness to throw his people under the bus over rules and high-and-mighty politics.  I think he was gunning for the admiralty or something. ;)

fair enough. I disagree, but fully accept your opinion.

They even made it an "evil universe" thing for Picard to even SAY the word "enemy."  (Look at "Yesterday's Enterprise.")

Without spoilers, there's a similar issue in Beyond, but I felt like they were a little more dignified in how they handled it than in TNG, because of something Kirk said that softened it a little.  I can't get into what without dropping a GIANT STB spoiler though.

I found Picard to be sound of mind.  "THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!"

Commander Riker never earned my full respect thought.  Way too fickle.

Data was my man. :) ;D And Gordi.  What a pair. :)

Edit: Post amended. :)   I like that one.

it's actually four lights and the cardassian was trying to get him to see five (just watched that episode over the weekend).

Riker as TNG's answer to Kirk, getting his naughty on with as many alien females as he can.

Data and Geordi were a great double act

I just saw the film and I liked it.  Granted, one doesn't need to dwell too much on the plot, but it was good.  Of course, there was more action than science, but we've come to expect that from these films.  The characters got more fleshed out in this one and, for the first time, we see a more mature James T. Kirk.  Chris Pine's part was more like William Shatner's in the good old days.  We also get to see more Spock and McCoy interactions and many of the "supporting" characters have more to do than in previous installations.  Of course, the action was good but, with Justin Lin at the helm, fans of his Fast & Furious films expected that.

Minor nitpicking without spoilers: we see even more evidence that the Kelvin timeline was never part of the Prime Universe, or at least not as established by Enterprise.  Make of that what you will.  (it doesn't bother me because I've always considered this a completely separate universe, it was just worth noting)

Most importantly, it's vastly better than Into Darkness, in my opinion.  Though, that's an incredibly low bar, so no big surprise.

Final note:  I really like the U.S.S. Franklin, it's a cool ship.  I'd live to see (and study) the full model in all its glory.


A guy I used to work with was of the impression that they split Kirk into two people, and you got Picard and Riker.  Picard represents Kirk's mature, commanding side.  He's the duty bound one who will do anything for his crew and he shares Kirk's love of Shakespeare.  Riker represents the ladies' man side of Kirk, the one who can let loose and have a good time, as well as laugh in the face of danger and use unorthodox tactics to get out of a jam.  Of course, that's a simplification, as Picard can certainly use unorthodox maneuvers and many of the traits Picard has regarding command and duty can also be applied to Riker.  But, that may have been how they started fleshing out the characters.

I'm actually really interested to hear you elaborate on this. Did you think the plot was good? Or do you think plot is secondary to other things? I'm weirdly fascinated by this statement and would love to hear more lol.


Definitely with you on that one. INTO DARKNESS drives me crazy. -_-

It's a simple plot is all.  It's your basic bad guys doing bad things and threatening entire worlds bit that we've seen a lot.  There are a couple minor twists, but nothing Earth shattering.  At least it's not a rehash of another film, like Into Darkness was.  New enemies and whatnot.

Just watch Enterprise...

I totally get what you mean. Personally, I'm okay with simple plots done well, but I also have a craving for "Earth-shattering" new things and always love it when they happen. EX MACHINA was one movie that really subverted my expectations in a way that made sense within the story and I loved it for that.

And goodness, the whole "Kirk dies instead of Spock" twist is one of the least artistic things I've ever seen, especially since it didn't have the long, deep friendship between Kirk and Spock over multiple movies and TV episodes to give it a strong emotional context. I really wish INTO DARKNESS had Cumberbatch playing Gary Mitchell (as I believe was rumored before the film's release) instead of Khan and it was a more straightforward "stop the bad guy" story with some themes about power and whatnot.

It's a different design.  If anything, it looks like a cross between the ships from Enterprise and the Kelvin (and its kitbashes) from Star Trek (2009.)

I took Kirk's death as less about the friendship and more about the obvious breakdown he'd been experiencing for the whole movie.  He bottomed out in a very literal manner.  I also believe that the psychological breakdown was worsened by the mind meld in the first movie, which would have given him echoes of his alternate self, and the dissonance hit a crisis point during STID.  Knowing him, he failed to report the adverse reaction to the mind meld (which IMO was fairly blatant in ST 2009) and let it fester.

I am not saying STID was without some very notable flaws but the way I see the Kirk character does help a bit o explain his arc in that movie.

I read somewhere (I forget where) that Chekov will NOT be recast for future movies.  If they kill his character...just imagine how that will be especially since we know that a couple of people are aware he survived longer in the Prime universe.  I believe Kirk is the second who knows, based on the theory above--I will not spoil who the other person is or how they know.

This is the best view of the Franklin I've been able to find.  It has some Enterprise influences, but is clearly a different design.  For one thing, it's smaller.

(https://evilgenius180.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/tmp_9562-franklin-diagram-stb147494260.jpg)

That's a good way of explaining his arc, thank you for that. I think it ultimately comes down to comparison for me, because WRATH OF KHAN had an incredibly affecting, emotional death, and INTO DARKNESS trying to homage it can't help but feel lesser, even if it has its own context aside from KHAN. Does that make sense?

For Chekov, I'm hoping they'll do something like mention he's been promoted to a different position on another ship (maybe even Captain?). I think that'd be a really nice, respectful sendoff for him.

I'm thinking Chekov was reassigned and is "out there" still serving Starfleet.  A few lines of dialog will make that happen.  Don't kill him off, there's no need to.  Real world military personnel get transferred all the time.

By the way, STB has a nice "For Anton" at the end.

What needs to happen is that Chekov needs to be on temporary assignment on another ship (the Reliant, maybe?) when something goes wrong and he dies. Later, at his memorial, Kirk needs to go up to his father and express how great of an officer he was, only to reveal that Chekov's father is played by Walter Koenig.

That seems a little disrespectful to Anton's family. You're essentially having him die again, which would be hard for them to handle seeing tragic reality reflected on screen, then bringing in the other actor, which could have an adverse effect of removing focus from Anton's performance because of the excitement at seeing Koenig again. Plus, as of BEYOND Koenig is confirmed as having played Prime Chekov, so it would be weird in the film's continuity.

I mean, it's definitely a cool idea and seeing Koenig as Chekov again would be kickass, but I don't think it would be very sensitive.

I've gotta go with LivingBrain on that one.  Having him die a second time is disrespectful.  A promotion and transfer is a nice way to do things.  Though, I suspect they won't do anything without checking with his family.

Does he have a brother who looks a lot like him? They could pull a Fast and Furious....

I can see what you mean but I guess that the headcanon overrules a good bit of it for me.

For me I have always felt (until Beyond, somewhat) a very strong sense of loss and tragedy around the Kirk character.  Part of the tragedy is that he cannot--and perhaps never will, even in Beyond and future movies--have the closeness with Spock that he did in the original series.  HE is, in my opinion, aware of that loss, not just from what Old Spock told him, but from what he FELT, very intensely, in the mind meld.  To me, that is part of his pain and anger when Spock throws him under the bus in STID: he is seeing that all the hope he thought there was at the end of ST2009 to make things exactly the same as they were in the original universe was a lie.

He went into that engine core partly to save the ship and partly because I think he literally no longer wanted to live...but at least he would be able to go out in a way more dignified than an outright suicide.  He got scared at the end as natural instinct will typically cause in all except THE most disturbed and unhealthy individuals, as he felt that his fate was sealed.  And Spock...I think that this is a version of the character that has made fundamentally different decisions about his human half.  He has no home but Earth, and would suspect his place of residence is there.  And I also think that the question at the beginning of ST2009 about pursuing Kolinahr was indirectly answered: he is now firmly against it.  This Spock would probably consider it disrespectful to his mother and the human side of his heritage to do so.

Now admittedly I don't accept Zach Quinto to the same degree as I do Chris Pine.  Pine had the advantage of being able to play a severely, tragically altered version of the character.  I see no reason to hold him to the same close comparison to Shatner.

We'll never see my theory confirmed onscreen, I don't think...but to me it was telling that it came right out in the Star Trek Beyond trailer that Kirk had a direct question about his identity.  And while I won't give spoilers, I saw that the man who was "reborn" out of that engine room has made progress.  But I think it's always going to dog him, that question about who he is and whether some of that was permanently destroyed by Nero versus what he has been able to learn how to integrate from the meld since his death and rebirth.


I would accept that too--but, it does occur to me that making certain members of the crew have to realize that because of all that Nero did to the timeline, there was another very untimely loss compared to the prime universe...there IS story material there.  I would not bring Walter Koenig into it as Jev suggested though, and I would handle any references to it in a private, solemn, dignified way as a certain other thing was in Beyond.  Kirk should have strong feelings after how things went down in Beyond.

THAT SAID--I think the point about having the Yelchin family say what they want done is a very good one.  Absolutely consult them.  Even though I think I see a story that fits in with the themes of tragedy and loss caused long-term by Nero, if the family wants it handled as an offscreen promotion, then their word should be law.  I can absolutely put aside my personal "authorial" preferences for their wishes.

Technically, he's by no means the same Pavel Chekov from the Prime Universe.  The Prime Universe Pavel was 22 in 2267, giving him a birth year of 2245. (this is canon, as his age was stated in the series)  The Kelvin Timeline Chekov was 17 in 2358, giving him a birth year of 2241.  So, he's really not the same person.

HOWEVER, I still wouldn't kill him.  See what his family wants to do.

JJ Abrams and Justin Lin have already confirmed that they will neither recast or kill off Chekov. He will be writen out gracefully (probably by having Uhura or someone mention him being transfered or something).

That's the best way to do it.  It could be a conversation as simple as:

Uhura: "Have you spoken to Pavel recently?"
Sulu: "Yes, I spoke to him yesterday.  He's happy in his new assignment on the U.S.S. (insert ship name here.)"

Nothing grand, just some simple dialog to tell where he is.

I'd say that's less of a "headcanon" and more of a "really good reading." No joke, that's one of the best analyses I've read of these movies, and I wouldn't be surprised if what you said is what the creators intended! You get a point from me.  :)

Well...since as far as I know it hasn't been said outright anywhere, it still remains a theory, but thanks anyway! :)

By the way, according to Justin Lin, his initial cut of Star Trek Beyond was nearly 1/2 an hour longer.  One wonders if we're going to get an extended cut release on Blu-Ray and digital.

That would be very interesting to see what the missing material was.  I'd be game.

There's speculation on TrekCore, but I don't want to spoil anything for people who haven't seen the film.  So, if you don't care about spoilers or have seen the film, go check it out.  (I was intentionally avoiding that site before seeing the film)  Of course, much of it is speculation.  I'd love to see what's "missing."  If it's like BvS, it may be more story that was cut for the sake of action.