Tarantino Trek - what could we expect?

[Dales]

I think certain Kelvin film gatekeepers would rather see the return of Roberto Orci make a box office breaking fourth film that just consisted of the Kelvin cast metaphorically extending the middle finger exclusively to Kelvin haters while Spock and Uhura make out on the side. Mostly kidding of course, but I can't help but sense utter resentment from Kelvin fans.

Exactly again. And I am a huge Kelvin fan. what is irking me here is that there seems to be a narrative that you cant like both. I like both kelvin and tos prime.

Also it makes even less sense for anyone to support Orci over QT to me. if Orci directs a 4th movie it will suffer the same fate as X-Men dark Phoenix. IT WOULD BOMB.

sorry but please look at orci's track record? he is far from an acclaimed writer and director, I think the only movies of his to ever get good reviews where the his two trek movies but that was JJ directing. Orci cant do it alone.

Orci has no directing experience, all the signs of orci directing a 4th movie points to a flop but of course miracles can happen

The resentment is beyond superficial to me, as I have yet to see any convincing argument in why QT is so bad.

QT won't even be my first choice. I would have gone for Chris Nolan or Spielberg or Ridley Scott but none of this acclaimed directors have shown interest to do current Trek and QT has. So I am ready to make it happen.

 

[Dales]

Why does QT's Trek has to be in any ridiculous timeline? The film's strength would be best in the confines of its own reality and not worrying about fan drivel. If the movie is successful than maybe making stand alone projects of Trek will be more inviting to a general audience. Tarantino has the ability to lore people into certain genres and also educate them as he entertains.

Because QT has said it takes place in the Chris Pine timeline.

There is still a lot to explore about the Kelvin universe, also Kelvin is the freshest in people's mind. it makes more sense.

I think the movie could be the most successful trek yet.

You have the brand star trek

you have the name QT attached to it

you will definitely have the critical acclaim.

you will have the usual QT antics that will draw more media attention, even the controversies of QT usually always works to QT favour.

those 4 points should point to a star trek doing a 500m box office or even more.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I'm not even sure a QT Trek film would actually be a box office hit, but since I don't really see a future for Star Trek in cinema, it doesn't matter so much to me.

Back in 2009 I expressed that Trek should have just rebooted on television instead of cinema. However, we'd later learn by STID that Paramount no longer had the TV rights, so I guess that was never feasible.

 

[Dales]

I'm not even sure a QT Trek film would actually be a box office hit, but since I don't really see a future for Star Trek in cinema, it doesn't matter so much to me.

Back in 2009 I expressed that Trek should have just rebooted on television instead of cinema. However, we'd later learn by STID that Paramount no longer had the TV rights, so I guess that was never feasible.

I think QT trek would do more than 500M world wide. his movies makes around 300-400m and they are small budgeted art cinema movies so by maths once you add that with trek that has sometimes shown box office potential, QT trek can bring in an extra 200m. everything just has to come together.

star trek brand+ QT directing talent+ great marketing+very good word of mouth = a star trek smash hit film.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I can see the potential in hype, but we'll just have to wait and see how it shapes up.

 

[dswynne1]

I think the problem with "Star Trek" is fan-driven.

Here we have an opportunity to see a big-name director produce his take of a well-known sci-fi franchise, and already the complaints are coming in based on too many false assumptions. Everyone is assuming that OT is going to produce a "Pulp-Fiction Set in Space" film, when QT films have been about honoring the genres he loved while growing up in SoCal. If any of you bothered examining QT's film resume, you would see that each of his film are genre specific. Instead, you guys will dismiss QT as just a one-trick pony, mostly out of fear that he would make a mockery out of a beloved franchise. I will grant you the hesitation, but the fear of the possibility of seeing something that hasn't been done before? Not exactly 'Trek-like.

Besides, such an event will draw in the investors the franchise needs in order to make more 'Trek films. So, as a business matter, having QT on board is the "hail Mary" we need to jump-start the movie aspect of the franchise.

 

[fireproof78]

Everyone is assuming that OT is going to produce a "Pulp-Fiction Set in Space" film, when QT

Because that's what he said. I'm not skeptical of him just because. I'm skeptical because of his own words.

I don't care about a director's past work to give a blank check to. If I don't think a director is a good fit I'm going to say so. I've also said I'm glad people are excited. I hope you all are right that it is successful and draws money to the brand.

Until then, I remain skeptical.

 

[Malaika]

...what has just happened here?

I think certain Kelvin film gatekeepers would rather see the return of Roberto Orci make a box office breaking fourth film that just consisted of the Kelvin cast metaphorically extending the middle finger exclusively to Kelvin haters while Spock and Uhura make out on the side. Mostly kidding of course, but I can't help but sense utter resentment from Kelvin fans.

the struggle is real.

With the reverse-meaning properties of sarcasm in mind, are you suggesting that the next movie should be a flop made to make kelvin trek haters happy? Is that the reason why you support Tarantino?
Make it make sense (or hide your ulterior motives better? )

I guess all the fans who like the thing into a board that is about it are "gatekeepers" now but, honestly, I don't think it makes so much sense to consider it out of place for kelvin trek fans to care about..kelvin trek and not want it to fail. I mean... .

(FYI I was unsure about Orci directing too. And reading about his script and why it was rejected, I was right)
(the latest derailing and straw man argument is funny though. It almost seems like someone was truly proposing Orci as the better alternative, lol. Now, if only you two could put all that effort into also replying to the points people are actually making... but we can't have it all, I guess.)

 

[MakeshiftPython]

All I suggest is that I just want a good Star Trek film, enough that it makes the distinction of whether it’s Prime or Kelvin completely irrelevant.

 

[fireproof78]

All I suggest is that I just want a good Star Trek film, enough that it makes the distinction of whether it’s Prime or Kelvin completely irrelevant.

I want the same. I just don't think QT is a guarantee of a good trek film.

 

[Malaika]

All I suggest is that I just want a good Star Trek film, enough that it makes the distinction of whether it’s Prime or Kelvin completely irrelevant.

I'm unsure the comment I quoted above is the most effective way to suggest that.
Assuming a movie is even made, it would be hardly bad if it's a box office breaking movie that doesn't make haters happy, specifically.

Whether it's prime or kelvin, and that distinction being obvious, isn't that irrelevant to making a good movie in this context, for me. (for reasons already addressed in the other page) So.. agree to disagree.

 

[Smellmet]

I want the same. I just don't think QT is a guarantee of a good trek film.

It's a guarantee of hype and publicity though. Not saying it's the right approach but I can see the appeal and thinking.

Do I think he's good fit for trek? I've got reservations, but I'm willing to see what's brought to the table.

I still don't think it will happen though ultimately.

 

[fireproof78]

It's a guarantee of hype and publicity though. Not saying it's the right approach but I can see the appeal and thinking.

Oh, I can see the appeal, even if I disagree. I see the business sense and the name draw.

Doesn't make me less skeptical. The best business choice is not always lauded as the best movie choice.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I'm unsure the comment I quoted above is the most effective way to suggest that.
Assuming a movie is even made, it would be hardly bad if it's a box office breaking movie that doesn't make haters happy, specifically.

Whether it's prime or kelvin, and that distinction being obvious, isn't that irrelevant to making a good movie in this context, for me. (for reasons already addressed in the other page) So.. agree to disagree.

Huh?

 

[flandry84]

I want the same. I just don't think QT is a guarantee of a good trek film.

We haven’t been getting good Trek films anyway sorry to say.

 

[fireproof78]

We haven’t been getting good Trek films anyway sorry to say.

Disagree. TREK 09 is one of my personal favorites.

 

[ISS Enterprise]

All I suggest is that I just want a good Star Trek film, enough that it makes the distinction of whether it’s Prime or Kelvin completely irrelevant.

Agree completely. I'm a ST fan, TOS as my favorite. So simply desire a quality ST film, KT, or Cannon timeline not the point, a proper ST story is, for me
Now is QT the person to deliver that? I don't know, but seems KT is either dead or in the deep freeze - 3 years since Beyond n no new movie forthcoming, Paramount a mess, possible merger back with CBS, etc. Very cloudy. QT has this to a script stage with usual re writes etc. in play.

IF, still uncertain at this point, he makes this he will make his version not JJ's. He's on record as saying he did not prefer/like the KT dynamic. So with the current cast or not, the characters will be of his vision not others.
People can either choose to go see it ot not

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Unless it's Queen Brie Larson, right?

Are you kidding parts of Captain Marvel sucked

 

[M'Sharak]

Are you kidding parts of Captain Marvel sucked

Please feel free to talk about Captain Marvel in the appropriate forum, but — as was already pointed out to @mos6507 upthread — it's off-topic in this one.

But you knew that.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I want the same. I just don't think QT is a guarantee of a good trek film.

Is this one of those "it might be a good film but it's not a good Trek film" things? Because that never made any sense to me.