Who's Mr. Pink?
Tarantino and Abrams to Do Next Trek Movie
- Thread starter Maurice
- Start date
Yeah, Just like Lin.. and I got beyond. A movie that mostly ignored the first two.
If only paramount&co knew what they wanted this trek to be..
This is no Star Wars and no Disney where, no matter the different creative team, there is some sort of plan and the ones hired to make the movies need to follow those guidelines and keep an established integrity the trilogy must have.
I'm not worried about Tarantino adding violence etc. He just doesn't seem to fit with the genre, and I don't find his movies have the heart these movies had. I don't think he'd respect the integrity of the characters, I don't think he'd do well with the dynamics. I don't think he cares. He'd probably have an interesting villain and general story, but I care more about the characters than those aspects.
Sure, he said he likes tos and tng but I'm honestly tired of tos fanboys who think they'll fix this trek by turning it into a self serving tos fanfiction of old episodes. It is like trek must be so doomed by its past so no matter what, we always get back to the same point. It is tiring.
back then, my worries about Pegg and Lin also proved to be right so my knee jerk reaction might be, in part, my not being willing to take another risk and have hopes when my gut feeling tells me to be concerned. Even for stid, I was worried about Lindelof's involvement because of what I knew about him as a writer from lost (and in fact, it seems he was responsible for some of the stuff I didn't like about the movie and that now give it a bad reputation)
Personally, anyway, I'd rather have a less known director who really loved these movies and is inspired by them. If you need to hire a fan, hire one of the reboot who is excited to do more with it because they want more of it themselves.
If nothing else, I'll wait for more details and then worry.
Honestly, the fact that Paramount is willing to consider Tararntino is encouraging to me, because that means they are willing to put up money.
Honestly, the fact that Paramount is willing to consider Tararntino is encouraging to me, because that means they are willing to put up money.
I'd definitely go see it. But I won't believe it is happening until it is in production.
A lot of STID was a retread of Space Seed/TWOK, so I don't quite see what your point is here?
Outside of the radiation chamber scene, I'm always curious what folks see in Into Darkness, that makes them think of "Space Seed" and The Wrath of Khan?
I'd love to see this. Let Tarentino go nuts.
Since Tarantino has directed a couple of my favorite movies (Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained) and written a couple more (True Romance, From Dusk Till Dawn), I say "Hell yeah!" I hope this goes through and he ends up writing and directing. He's proven he can do many different genres very well, and I hope we get to see his take on science fiction in the form of Star Trek!
-Also can't wait to see Samuel L. Jackson in a Star Trek movie!
-Also can't wait to see Samuel L. Jackson in a Star Trek movie!
Interesting as a thought experiment but it’s highly unlikely that it would happen.
Um... the fact that the villain said his name was Khan? And he had a bunch of followers stored in life support capsules? And they were all supposed to be superhumans from the 20th century?
Whatever. I gave nuTrek three chances to impress me and it failed every single time. If nuKirk hasn't grown up by now and nuUhura still hasn't stopped whining on duty about her love life, I can't see anything changing by a 4th movie.
Which was backstory and motivation but barely factored into the story.
I'm talking about the actual story they told, not Khan's background. Khan having genetic supermen in TWOK doesn't make it a remake of "Space Seed".
This is fantastic news. I love all the Tarantino movies. And he is obviously a Trek fan, from his TWOK reference (revenge is a dish...) in Kill Bill to his uncredited rewrite of Crimson Tide which added trek related dialogue. He even knows titles of Trek episodes like us nerds.
But for the movie to be great they need to let him write and direct. I doubt if that happens, as they have already assembled a writers room to write the script based on his idea.
Tarantino has long said he will retire after his 10th movie. Since he is already working on his 9th (1969, the Charles Manson based movie), it would be something if his last movie was a Trek movie.
But for the movie to be great they need to let him write and direct. I doubt if that happens, as they have already assembled a writers room to write the script based on his idea.
Tarantino has long said he will retire after his 10th movie. Since he is already working on his 9th (1969, the Charles Manson based movie), it would be something if his last movie was a Trek movie.
The four most likely scenarios I see from this are (from most likely to least):
I welcome more stylish filmmaking in the franchise, as it's long been pretty bland for a cinematographic and stylistic view point. The Original Series had some fun with lighting, but that was about it until the Kelvin movies and Discovery finally tried to make things more dynamic. I just feel like Tarantino's specific style may not be good for the franchise.
But if he genuinely wants to take a crack at it, I'd certainly be curious.
- It goes nowhere beyond the pitch. Maybe in a few years we start hearing snippets from interviews or a leaked story that forms the basis of some interesting articles and YouTube videos that explore what happened.
- Tarantino somehow finds a way to fit being directly involved in a Star Trek movie (either as director, writer, or producer) into his schedule. Gets into pre-production, gets fed up with the studio, and quits. Then we get some slightly juicer articles/YouTube videos.
- Tarantino pitches a story and maybe writes a script. He probably gets an executive producer credit, but someone else directs.
- Tarantino somehow actually directs a Star Trek movie based on a story/script that he put together.
I welcome more stylish filmmaking in the franchise, as it's long been pretty bland for a cinematographic and stylistic view point. The Original Series had some fun with lighting, but that was about it until the Kelvin movies and Discovery finally tried to make things more dynamic. I just feel like Tarantino's specific style may not be good for the franchise.
But if he genuinely wants to take a crack at it, I'd certainly be curious.
Not sure I expect this to ever become an actual movie, and equally unsure what I'd expect it to be like, if it does.
I'll correct the spelling of Tarantino's name in the subject line, though.
But not as a Klingon, or anything so predictable as that. Make him the admiral from Starfleet Command, who appears on the Briefing Room monitor with orders for Enterprise & crew. And make him teetering on the brink of going off the deep end. Not howling mad - just teetering.-Also can't wait to see Samuel L. Jackson in a Star Trek movie!
I precisely didn't like those elements in stid, that are mostly Lindelof's fault as he's the one who insisted they had to turn Harrison into Khan.
From my perspective, and I always said it here, both stid and beyond have a similar core issue. I don't get people who give beyond a pass for the very same thing they criticized in stid when beyond did it, imo, worse and alienated some fans of the first movie more than stid did.
So yeah, I'm sick of nostalgia, and a hopeless desire to placate haters, ruining otherwise good movies or wasting the potential of this trek.
I guess you also think everything she did was making out with her boyfriend. Clearly, one scene=the character does that all the time.
If her having agency in her relationship is 'whining', then I wish she were allowed to ~whine about her love life in beyond.
It surely is no less legit and understanble for her to express her feelings than the many times the guys, especially McCoy, were 'whining' about something or Spock. In and out of duty.
One of the biggest issues of beyond, for me, is precisely the fact she isn't allowed to be a character in her relationship, or even talk about it at all, as her pov is completely ignored; her own problems and relationship instead become a pretext so that McCoy has something to talk about with Spock and mock him. McCoy assumed that Uhura was 'upset' about something that would understably make anyone unhappy, but actual Uhura doesn't express that feeling on screen. She is 'nicely' silent and hardly interacts with her boyfriend, just like some like it.
Of course, women having agency is constantly passed as 'sexism' by some, as some people gotta complain when female characters do everything guys get a pass or are praised for, so it's more 'feminist' to dehumanize women to placate said people. And even when writers do that, it still isn't enough because to some, even in beyond, she's just the 'whiny' girlfriend. By default, no matter what actually happens on screen.
As for Kirk, I'm not happy about how his conflict was handled in beyond, but I'd say he has matured a lot compared to the first movies and I have nothing to complain about him as a captain in beyond. He handled the crisis the best he could, and tried to get his crew back.
In the other movies, I honestly thought Spock deserved to be the captain more, but in beyond I was ok about Kirk having the role and he became a bit more believable, to me. I liked him in beyond.
Last edited:
Apart from the villain being Khan, him reviving/trying to revive his followers, and the radiation chamber scene, there isn't much that does, really.
He pretty much has, though. He had by the end of Into Darkness, look at the speech he gave. Look at how he put the safety of the Enterprise and the crew above his own. And the Kirk in Beyond is far, far more mature than ST09 Kirk. Don't forget in the Kelvin timeline we're still a couple of years behind where we join Kirk & co in the prime universe.
You know TWOK didn't coin that phrase, right?
"What ain't no planet I ever heard of! They speak English on What?"
Similar threads
