Quentin Tarantino has an idea for a ST film (kind of)

You obviously don't watch The Orville.

Also, one thing Seth and Tarantino have in common is both have a strong nostalgic streak and aren't chasing what's perceived to be contemporary. I mean, Tarantino has been trying to keep analog film alive and all his work is either a period piece or invoking retro styling.

I wouldn't put it behind him to shoot this in 70mm and bring back Robert Wise's split-diopter shots. The guy is in love with everything you can do with film, not just lens-flares and shaky-cam.

 

This is terrible news. Should this movie come to pass, I'll be done with Star Trek. At least for the foreseeable future. Ugh, first I had to stop watching Discovery, now this...

 

"Abrahams". His actual name is right there in the article!!!!!

 

Pedant. I was in a hurry.

 

I'm surprised you made it this far, given TNG featured an exploding head and Picard getting stabbed through the chest, as but two examples.

I haven't seen anything in Discovery worse than that.

 

It all depends on how 'R' it goes - if we're talking constant F-bombs and bloody violence then I think that's a step too far. If we're talking say, Terminator 2 levels where there's violence and language, sure, but nothing too gratuitous then I think it would be doable without spoiling things. Remember TWOK at one point was a '15' certificate in the UK (my VHS copy, part of the 90's box set had a 15 certificate, which is the equivalent of an R rating) and contained fairly graphic violence and gore for a trek film, and it didn't do that film much harm. It's all about the context of the film for me, in that you can get away with some fairly graphic stuff when it's within the trappings of a sci fi movie, as it is, by definition, fantasy. We will see.

 

If he wants to do a rated R movie you let him do it. Tarantino is a once in a lifetime oppourtinity and you don't say no to that. I see it as Trek's version of "Logan.' All the X-Men movies are Pg-13 and they will almost always be that way and that is fine. That doesn't mean you can't have this anomaly of a movie that is sort of it's own thing.

Jason

 

there are two threads about this, can we merge it all in some way?

aside from the fact that, to a lot of fans and critics, this trek hadn't done nearly 'enough' with its characters and its potential to get considered redundant and 'done and over'. The fact the comics are past 60 issues and still going strong is too a testament of how hungry for more stories with these characters a lot of fans are. People want more of this trek, or at least one more movie to give the characters more closure than Beyond really did.

I dunno, it seems like some people here truly forget and understimate how popular these movies really are. If people lost interest, it's because the sequels hadn't done 'enough' or used the potential of this trek enough, not because they have done too much with these characters and there is nothing more to do with them.

 

If it's to be in the Kelvin universe, then as long as it feels part of that continuity then I'm fine with it, as long as it isn't gratuitous. If done right it won't be any different than the change from TMP to TWOK, or like you said the X-Men films to Logan. Same universe just a different story.

 

Me I would hope for the "Logan" aproach. Still I think a "Deadpool" kind of meta movie might also be fun. Something that is not really connected to anything in the franchise. The important thing is the movie would almost be a lock of being great because Tarantino has never done a bad movie. Even his worst movie which I guess would be "Death Proof" is only bad in comparison to the rest of his movies.

Jason

 

Agreed, over to you, mods...

 

That post is silly. With your attitude, we would have gotten "Star Trek: The motion Picture" with the same colorful but cheap sets from the tv-series, an older Captain Kirk still ripping his shirt off in a fistfight, and corny visual effects with the same old studio model from the tv-show.

If you want to start something anew, you need to change things up. They did that with TMP. It wouldn't have survived if it were just a straight up continuation of a cheesy tv-series like you propose. Kelvin Trek is dead at this point. They need to change things up again if they want to make new movies.

 

Why ?

 

Honestly, I'll be happy to be proven wrong and even if not, I'm certainly curious to see what this could become, but I have to agree Tarantino is about the worst possible fit for the franchise I could imagine.

The violence is jarring enough, if he maintains his usual style (and no, TWoK does not compare even slightly), but that's not even the major issue. The real problem is that anytime I watch a Tarantino movie - entertaining and well-made as they are - what I'm looking at is about as close a thing as I can imagine to what I would consider 'Anti-trek'. Hateful Eight, Inglorious Basterds, Kill BIll, Reservoir Dogs, Django Unchained, Pulp Fiction... These are movies about bad people. And not just people who happen to be bad, but movies where all people are bad, just to varying degrees. Even the purest, noblest heroes he makes are violent psychopaths driven by revenge. I have literally never felt an ounce of hope or optimism of any kind anywhere in his movies. Usually, they seem pretty much designed to make you weep for the human race in general. That's not a bad thing by itself, but it certainly doesn't fit in the world of the Federation at all.

Obviously, he isn't confined to only doing what he's done before. But he has been following basically the same lines in every movie he's made (that I've seen) so I don't see how we can just assume he won't do the same, here, (especially with the news that he insisted on the R rating).

 

I wouldn't assume anything based on "news" this far out.

So much of the "news" about Discovery turned out to be wrong.

Sites will churn out all sorts of speculation disguised as news to get clicks on a hot topic, which this is at the moment.

 

Wait. You mean DISCO isn't an anthology series taking place around the time of the sixth movie? But reliable sources insisted that was absolutely, positively real news . . . .

 

Because of the gore and graphic violence in the third and fifth episodes. I couldn't tolerate the third episode, but I gave the fourth and fifth episodes a shot, hoping that it was a one-off. Nope. I stopped watching after the fifth episode.

 

It's really not that bad. It's no worse than TWOK.

 

Yes, yes it is. In TWOK, the violence was mostly off screen. You never saw most of it. Not so much with Discovery. The only thing I've ever seen in Star Trek that is close was the first season "Conspiracy" episode of TNG, which I've only ever seen once. I've seen every other episode of TNG several times, but I saw "Conspiracy" when it first aired and have skipped it since.

 

I don't doubt that Tarantino is a fan of Star Trek but he and his formula is not a good fit for it. It's not an R-rated franchise and the franchise doesn't need such "wonderful" filmmaking moments as random scalpings.