• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Tarantino and Abrams to Do Next Trek Movie

It depends. Some actors will build that in to their contract, and others just have will have a discussion with the director, i.e. Mark Hamill.

Some have too much a say and too much power too, ie Tom Cruise ruining the mummy reboot with his demands (maybe the movie would've flopped anyway, but still one gotta wonder about how some things were written originally).

I think probably none of the actors of this trek would have that kind of power because they aren't big names.

I honestly would never hire certain actors if I were to make a movie. I get big names are hired in attempt to attract more audience, but it doesn't even work that much anymore.
The politics behind a movie, with the influence of executives etc etc, are bad enough that you don't need to get actors who will be too demanding and difficult to work with.
 
What they should make is .......

"Old man sisko"

Imagine a full on QT style ben sisko going on a rampage.

Count me in

"The year is 2395. The Romulans are gone, the Klingon Empire is collapsing, and the Federation has become a fascistic state. My name is Benjamin Sisko, and I've returned to bring balance to this corner of the galaxy."

"Hey, weren't you like Space Jesus or something?"

"Man, shut the f*** up!"
 
Do the actors have a say or they have to shut up and accept anything done with their characters?
.

In general, there's not a hard-and-fast rule. It's all about the power relations--and maybe trying to keep the talent happy.
 
Last edited:
I'd hope the powers that be have learned the pitfalls of giving cast members too much power. Stewart caused all sorts of issues on the TNG films.

There's a fine line.
The actors know the characters better than some random director.
Nimoy and Shatner wrote they told the writers on the movies Kirk wouldn't do this and Spock wouldn't say that.
Seems like that was a good thing???
Maybe not with STV and Shatner's horse stuff on GEN though.
 
There's a fine line.
The actors know the characters better than some random director.
Nimoy and Shatner wrote they told the writers on the movies Kirk wouldn't do this and Spock wouldn't say that.
Seems like that was a good thing???
Maybe not with STV and Shatner's horse stuff on GEN though.

That's what I originally meant. Not actors influencing things too much, but they know the characters.

If, say, Tarantino ignores this Spock's character development and the work Quinto did with him, and turns him in a robot and caricature of Tos Spock with added Tarantino's language, I'd hope Quinto has a say and is allowed to express his opinion.
 
I'd hope the powers that be have learned the pitfalls of giving cast members too much power. Stewart caused all sorts of issues on the TNG films.
I thought Patrick Stewart looked good in all the TNG films except for GEN. Everyone else not so good. Except Data in FC.
 
That's what I originally meant. Not actors influencing things too much, but they know the characters.

If, say, Tarantino ignores this Spock's character development and the work Quinto did with him, and turns him in a robot and caricature of Tos Spock with added Tarantino's language, I'd hope Quinto has a say and is allowed to express his opinion.
It would surprise me if QT didn't allow that.
 
That flop has Alex Kurtzman written all over it.
he isn't that bad, IMO (I even considered him for this trek for a while lol), but I think audiences have reboot exhaustion/fatigue right now and it doesn't help either. There already is a popular 'the mummy' remake that has 3 movies, one of which, the last one, was a flop because, along other things, they recasted the female lead character (who was the protagonist, basically. Rachel Weisz read the script and thought it was crap, they should have listened to her maybe.. but anyway replacing her doomed the project already because the new actress could never have the same chemistry with the male lead. and the story had none of the fun and energy of the first movie).
We didn't need another mummy. However, the one interesting thing about this remake was their idea to have a female mummy.. which was ruined by Cruise demanding script changes that would ensure his character has more screentime than her, and would essentially turn the movie into mission impossible: mummy protocol.
They should've cast all young, unknown, actors for that reboot and let big name actors make little cameos only.
 
The Mummy (2017):
Directed by: Alex Kurtzman
Produced by: Alex Kurtzman
Screen story by: Alex Kurtzman

Not only that, but Alex Kurtzman (and Chris Morgan) was lead producer and head runner of the whole (Universal Monsters) Dark (Cinematic) Universe up until The Mummy bomb, the postponement(?) of The Bride of Frankenstein and his subsequent resignation.
 
The Mummy (2017):
Directed by: Alex Kurtzman
Produced by: Alex Kurtzman
Screen story by: Alex Kurtzman

Not only that, but Alex Kurtzman (and Chris Morgan) was lead producer and head runner of the whole (Universal Monsters) Dark (Cinematic) Universe up until The Mummy bomb, the postponement(?) of The Bride of Frankenstein and his subsequent resignation.
Ah, one flop means we don't trust him?

Got it. Glad to know the standard.
 
You must've never heard the old saying, "you're only as good as your last picture."
Sure I did. I felt that way towards Liam Neeson and have since been proven wrong. I discarded the saying as being largely narrow in focus, and, at times, used to dismiss someone categorically rather than as a person.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top