Good news for Number One/Spock stans. The beloved fan-favorites will be returning in a new Star Trek: Short Trek!
On Sunday, Trek Movie noticed that director Mark Pellington had “quietly” posted two photos about a month ago (both since deleted) with details about the short in question. In one photo, Pellington is posing with Rebecca Romijn (Number One) and Ethan Peck (Spock), with the caption reading “Trek shorts” and including the hashtag “Chabon,” leading the site to speculate the Pulitzer winning author Michael Chabon, who wrote last year’s short “Calypso,” is penning the script. In the other photo, Pellington reveals the episode is titled “Chaos Theory” and filmed in Toronto.
As Trek Movie noted, there’s no word on whether fans will see more of another fan-favorite, Captain Pike (Anson Mount), in a new short or otherwise. That said, it hasn’t been ruled out. Last week, in a slew of Star Trek-related updates he spilled on Deadline’s “Crew Call” podcast, Alex Kurtzman said he was definitely open to bringing Captain Pike back one way or another:
“I would be remiss in saying you’re going to see Spock again on Discovery because we’ve obviously jumped so far into the future that it wouldn’t make sense… but the the idea of bringing Ethan [Peck] back, and Anson [Mount] and Rebecca [Romijn] and the Enterprise, I mean, we loved it so much, that to find a way to do that is definitely something we’re thinking about a lot.”
no comments here, just looking forward to this![.](//s04.flagcounter.com/mini/Jkzv/bg_FFFFFF/txt_DEDEDE/border_FFFFFF/flags_0/" width="1"/>)
Ok, this is very off topic, but I have weird language question.
I initially read “Number One/Spock stans” as meaning “people who are obsessed with Number One/Spock as a romantic pairing.” I assume the author in fact means “people who are fans of Number One and/or Spock.” Part of the problem is that I read Character/Character notation as implying a romantic relationship (not a universal reading, I realize, but not unreasonable given the number of fic-friendly pieces posted around here). The other part of the problem is that in my experience “stan” implies a sort of over-the-top aggressive loyalty, different from merely being a “fan” (a term which is now pretty toned-down). I guess stans for either character would be pleased to see them on screen some more, but the connotation seems out of place since regular ol’ fans would also be pleased.
Are others also having these problems, or have I fallen behind on my terminology? (Am I Herbert? Do I no longer reach?) Or is this actually specifically good news for the presumably-existing faction of serious Number One/Spock shippers? Please help me, internet.
@2
I’m assuming that “stans” is a weird typo, and ol’ Stubby meant to type “fans”.
@3 I think you are right
No, @2 is right about stans.
I don’t read fan-fic so the slash thing wasn’t obvious to me, but given Star Trek’s long slashy history, I now can’t unsee it.
Pleased to hear it. They built the sets and made the costumes and everything, it makes sense they’d try to get some more use out of them (and the cast).
And I notice that the “secret inside source at CBS” who gives Midnight’s Edge/Doomcock/Nerdrotic their click-driving “scoops” didn’t hear about this particular development. I wonder why?
According to Urban Dictionary, “stans” are “crazy obsessed fans” (as @2/zeina points out) which at its heart is a redundancy, given the origin of “fan” — but since so much of fandom is now mainstream, I guess we now need words that convey degrees of intensity :)
Short Treks is one of the best ideas the new Trek producers have had.