Problem is, I don’t feel franchises are a good place for auteur filmmakers to land, unless what they get to do is just an isolated movie or two, completely under their call. Studios these days are far too risk averse to let one director have that much power over an IP, unless it’s someone like Christopher Nolan.It's not about making all Trek fell like Tarantino movies. It's more about making Trek a more attractive landing space for high profile writers,directors and actors. It shows them they won't be restricted creatively.
Just no.It's not about making all Trek fell like Tarantino movies. It's more about making Trek a more attractive landing space for high profile writers,directors and actors. It shows them they won't be restricted creatively.
Just no.
Remember all the hand wringing and frustration over swearing in Discovery and Picard? The commentary on wanting more science fiction writers? The frustration at characters feeling like 21st century evil humans? Tarantino would bring all of that and the kitchen sink.
I might attract directors and it would just piss off fans. Or expose hypocrisy and double standard because it's *insert director here* free pass bullshit.
And that's what I find to be a double standard.Some people are talented enough to get a pass. Kurtzman might not get away with something like Academy but if Joss Whedon back in his prime had made a similar show people would love it. I mean the quality would have been even better but also because he already had the kind of love where people want him to bring his style and tastes to something.
Given the changes from TOS to TNG and viewer response, yes.I don't know, Police procedurals have been pretty much in their modern form since Hill Street Blues in 1981. Is Trek so different?

Michael Chabon is a very well respected and high-profile writer that wrote the entirety of PICARD S1 with virtually no real creative restrictions and the support of Patrick Stewart directly.It's not about making all Trek fell like Tarantino movies. It's more about making Trek a more attractive landing space for high profile writers,directors and actors. It shows them they won't be restricted creatively.
When something's has "always been done a way" accepting the new will be a challenge.Right now TNG fans are starting to understand how TOS fans felt when the TNG error started and so many things were different and a lot of the aspects that they really enjoyed were changed.
Michael Chabon is a very well respected and high-profile righter that wrote the entirety of PICARD S1 with virtually no real creative restrictions and the support of Patrick Stewart directly.
What did you think of the results?
Generally I think you can say most TNG fans were somewhat disappointed.
My point? Getting high profile Riders and giving them creative freedom doesn't ensure the resulting product will be enjoyable to Star Trek franchise fans.
It's my favorite season. And it's "writer".Michael Chabon is a very well respected and high-profile righter that wrote the entirety of PICARD S1 with virtually no real creative restrictions and the support of Patrick Stewart directly.
What did you think of the results?
Very much so.I don't know, Police procedurals have been pretty much in their modern form since Hill Street Blues in 1981. Is Trek so different?
That's what happens when you're dictating to your phone and you miss the check - although IDK why the speech to text algorithm chose that ; but fixed.It's my favorite season. And it's "writer".
Very much so.
Cop shows of every stripe are a perennial format. Trek is an anomaly that was successfully revived on TV once. Its fans won't let go, but most of the audience moved on twenty years ago.
Cure cancer while you're at it!Skill issue, I would simply catch lightning in a bottle for the third time and re-enter the cultural zeitgeist.

We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.