Would Nolan have made a great Star Trek Film

I think Nolan shares some elements of Gene as far as preferring something colder and more cerebral. I think he'd be an excellent choice for a reboot if they wanted to elevate it out of popcorn trash while still being able to pull in blockbuster numbers.

 

.

 

These are also elements of JJ Abrams films.

Like you pointed out, a Nolan film would have had a more focused story. For that reason alone I think CN would have done a better job.

 

star trek 2009 had a lot of great action sequences, here is a few.

1. nero's line of FIRE EVERYTHING has become quite popular for the right reasons.

2. who can forget the enterprise unexpectedly dropping at wrap to fire at the Narada.

3. may I also add the narada's end at the black whole with Micheal's score. That was beyond fantasic.

there is no way star trek 2009 had bad action sequneces at least not in art. all you need to do is look at the fans and critics reaction to it. the film would have even won an oscar for best visual effect if not for Avatar.

star trek 2009 had a great romantic plot. for two reasons. it was not the expected kirk/uhura that got together which is the standard romantic tale. the male hero and the girl.

it was spock and uhura that got together and no one saw that coming. so that was original because JJ and the writers went against the basic romantic norm of how the heroes who saves the day gets the girl as well.

oh and it only went on for like 5 minutes or less, so its not like the romance took center stage or upstage anything the main story of how this crew who are so familiar got toghter in a different timeline. that would have been bad. I also make this case by referencing some of star wars prequels....yes I am looking at you anakin/padme.


every character in this trek 2009 is also likebale and memorable. all of nolan's characters are all broody and tortured and cant even smile.gosh ...even, spock a Vulcan can smile, what is nolan excuse for all his human characters been so broody and moody all the time. it makes no sense and frustrating to watch his films at times. nolan must think the whole world is dark , gloom and gritty. well not true. we all have happy times in our lives.

I will still prefer JJ over nolan to dirct trek,I will just get rid of Lindeloff as one of the writers and tell Orci to stop listening to fans on the internet who think they represent all the trek fans and all will be well again after the disappointment of Into darkness.

 

Nolan would have probably made a similar film but could have been better with a nobler version of Kirk (which I would have preferred) and the plot more about planet-trotting (which IMO works better in Trek than globe-trotting does in Batman).

 

I dont think it would have been better. In terms of critical reception. star trek 2009 still rates higher than any of nolan's films on rt and metacritic.

JJ overall is more talented as a director than Nolan. JJ is a three dimensional director. Nolan is one dimensional as a director. JJ can also work with poor and fair scripts.nolan would not be able to.

 

Could the opening sequence of the film be considered "action"? Because I enjoyed that scene.

I also enjoyed the initial warp drive sequence.

Actually, I enjoyed the first quarter of the movie. I liked the way it built up. It was fresh, exciting, and dynamic. But right around the time when they have a sword fight on the Vulcan home world, the whole movie starts to fall apart. It just becomes a big dumb action movie.

There's so much action and crap happening on the screen, that it becomes numbing, and dulls out any good action sequences there may be.

Also, the "romance" between Spock and Uhura is pointless and lame. It's like they're doing everything they can to make Spock emotional, which defeats the whole point of his character.

I do agree with you that Nolan's films are a bit joyless. Occasional humor has always been an element of Trek. I still think Nolan would have made a better film though. Mainly because I think Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof are terrible writers. These guys have literally almost never written anything good.

 

Nope.

 

If Nolan likes the deconstruction of heroes and worlds in a dark and gritty future full of violations of our expections in the name of art, then no, he would be a bad choice. So would Ridley Scott be in the same sort of way. And I would, of course, now be as concerned about Nolan's soundtrack as much as Abrams' lens flares.

 

Nolan's films have occasional humor. It's just not near-constant as in some MCU films.

 

I don't know if someone mentioned it already, but Hans Zimmer would possibly have been the composer. We get a hint of how that might have sounded in one of the trailers for the 2009 film.

 

Nolan would make an excellent James Bond film, but not a Star Trek film.

 

In a prequel setting like Enterprise or a version of Star Trek that's a hell of a lot nearer to the present day. So the tech is less magical and the lack of multiples of warp speed, mean the universe isn't as convenient to explore. Anyway is it wrong that I came back from a screening of Interstellar, and put the pilot of that show on? Maybe.

 

Hey guys, I'm on the phone with Chris right now. Paramount's offered him the movie, but he's not sure whether or not to accept - he mainly keeps repeating "But how can I give Kirk or Spock a dead wife? Sure, they both have dead moms, but without a dead wife, I just can't find an emotional connection to the story the first two movies have set up."

I pointed out to him that he could fridge Uhura or Carol Marcus. "Maybe," he replied, "but neither of them were wives per se, though I do find the Spock-Uhura romance extremely compelling. Maybe if both Carol Marcus and Uhura died?"

"And then I need a part for Mike," he added. "Didn't Carol say she grew up in England? So, Mike can be her father." I pointed out that Peter Weller already played her father. "Okay, so he's her uncle, or step-dad, maybe," Chris replied. "That's how she got her accent." "But she doesn't exactly have a Cockney English accent," I objected. "Shut up, man," he said. "Mikey's gotta have a part."

Spoiler: what I heard on the call with Chis next

BBBBBWWAAAAAMMMMMM!!!!!

 

I am not sure about that. Nolan's bond girls would be bland and the action sequences forgettable especially with hand to hand combat and this two factors is a core necessity to the bond series.

 

I 'd actually think Nolan could make a very good Trek movie something smart, intriguing and exciting. And I'm sure he could do interesting female charact3rs, but I'm one who thinks Nolan is a very, very good director.

 

So he just chooses not to? I feel like that's worse.

 

I agree.

 

Hans Zimmer would not have used the Alexander Courage theme, though. He would have insisted on creating his own work, saying "to distinguish this film from all the rest" or something like that, when really he'd make something that would sound too dark and pretentious for Trek, with too much electric percussion and overproduced brass.

I'm quite happy with Giacchino. Like his work for Mission Impossible and the Incredibles, he's got this fun mix of huge scale modern movie orchestra with 1960s cues in there. At times, it takes me back to TOS.