Tarantino and Abrams to Do Next Trek Movie

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Maurice, Dec 5, 2017.

  1. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    Last place in Australia to get the NBN
    Merry Christmas everyone.

    I've seen the announcement on the board about Smith writing the next movie so its almost official. Exciting.

    I'm no astrophysicist and I'm not up to the latest theories on time travel and duplicate universes. And I'm guessing that most of the general audience is like me.
    I know that the Kelvin Universe is an additional universe in relation to the Prime Universe but thats only because I'm on the forums and read the books. Its not stated in any of the three movies and its a different theory from most of the existing Star Trek lore which says if you go back in time and break something you can fix it and not create a new universe. So I'd actually be surprised if QT knew about it.
    Saying that after talking to Abrams I'm sure he'd be told but as none of the duplicate universe stuff is said onscreen then by the stroke of a pen as you say maybe the Kelvin Universe could be wiped out and the Prime universe restored. Just depends on what they want. They've done it with Spiderman.

    Saying that I think it would be stupid to wipe out the Kelvin Universe when they've gone to all that trouble to create it. I don't think I could handle a new new Kirk and Spock but then again they're not catering for me.
     
  2. dswynne1

    dswynne1 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Actually, it was "stated" in STAR TREK '09, when NuSpock postulated that a divergent timeline was created thanks to the Narada's incursion into the past. Was this confirmed? No. But we also know that the episode "Parallels" (TNG) established that having multiple timelines within the same universe was possible. Now, whether or not Paramount will "close out" the Kelvin Timeline remains to be seen, either by going back to the Prime Timeline, or have yet another "reboot" (though, given that Tarantino liked STAR TREK '09, this is the least likely route at this time).
     
  3. dswynne1

    dswynne1 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Actually, you probably could get Hardy to replay Picard again, if Tarantino directed the next 'Trek film.
     
  4. dswynne1

    dswynne1 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    This means that he is, at the most, going to get a producer title. He has yet to state that he'll direct.
     
  5. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
    A lot can happen between now and the proposed finished film. Most big-budget movies are made by committee and are rarely ever singular visions. It'd be interesting to see if it keeps its reported R-rating as it gets near its release date or if Paramount chickens out and demands edits during post-production to make it PG-13...
     
  6. Captain of the USS Averof

    Captain of the USS Averof Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2016
    Location:
    Greece
    Agreed. And since QT ain’t writing it himself, he probably ain’t directing it either.
     
  7. WarpTenLizard

    WarpTenLizard Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Location:
    Planet Spaceball
    Bets on how many different alien species' feet we'll see in the next film.

    In all seriousness, I love Tarantino and am really excited to see what he'll do with "Star Trek." His flashback style could go worlds to, well, worlds. As in world-building.
     
    Daddy Todd likes this.
  8. Phily B

    Phily B Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Bring back Picard and do a Yesterday's Enterprise rip off with Pine "restoring" the old universe

    That's about the best way Paramount can make a ton of movie.
     
  9. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    Last place in Australia to get the NBN
    I think one of the sources that said Smith was writing said Tarantino was directing, Abrams producing.
    Whatever producing means, what do all the 22 producers do on Discovery, whats Eugene doing?
     
  10. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
    Keeping the Roddenberry name in the series, IMO. The term "executive producer" or "producer" can be very vague, with different people having different levels of involvement. Some are involved in almost every minute detail of the series, while others have really very little to do with it.
     
  11. Khan 2.0

    Khan 2.0 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Location:
    earth...but when?...spock?
    yes. And add The Shat for an extended cameo = big money (first ST to break 500m)
     
    M-Red likes this.
  12. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    the grimdark bluniverse
    I think you're seriously overestimating the number of people who care about "restoring the timeline"

    Especially since there's already a new show (supposedly) already set in that timeline.
     
    Ovation, grendelsbayne and Malaika like this.
  13. Malaika

    Malaika Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012

    Actually, it was said on screen


    I might add that if one pays attention, the movie showed it. And Spock prime explained what happened.

    Tarantino totally didn't get it in his previous comments, but I assume anyone hired to make the next movie would get lecturized about the basics by the producers. At least.

    Honestly, I think it's people's attachment to tos the issue here, and the reason why they don't get it as well as having this sort of insecurity about the prime timeline. A lot of casual fans get this this isn't the original series and it isn't even a topic worth of discussion for them. Even those who don't get all the nuance of quantum mechanics, still see it as separate things and the whole 'restoring the timeline' would be even more complex as concept for them to wrap their mind around than understanding the simple notion of an alternate reality.
    IMO they should stay away from time travel because it's been there done that already. It would only be a hindrance and painting themselves into a corner. People want to see new stories with these characters, not remakes of old episodes, or a greatest hits of Tos homages.



    Anyway, it's officially canon and part of the lore that this is the kelvin timeline and an alternate reality (not to mention that the concept of parallel realities isn't new to trek either). The fact some of the audience doesn't follow all the plot elements doesn't mean it would be professional for them to ignore them and change their own canon with massive inconsistencies that many would no doubt notice.
    They'd have nothing good to gain from that.

    Exactly.
    Why delete this new reality and thus prevent it from being used in future stories, movies, novels, comics, TV series etc etc? Thus make money thank to their own brand, so to speak. It is insane.
    They'd only lose from it.

    [/sarcasm]
     
  14. Daddy Todd

    Daddy Todd Fleet Captain Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Only the females. And Zoe’s.
     
    WarpTenLizard likes this.
  15. MrPointy

    MrPointy Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Location:
    Darwin, NT
    It depends on whether Bad Robot Productions will greenlight the script Smith has written and then whether Paramount will okay the movie after that with whatever stipulations they attach, not to mention Paramount will likely try to arrange funding from other sources (like how Alibaba and Huahua Media co-funded ST Beyond). I'm sure with Tarantino's name attached to the project, it's fairly likely it'll go ahead, but there's a bunch of hoops this whole project has to go through. Just don't be surprised if something stalls and Tarantino pulls out for reasons.
     
  16. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA
    Honestly, it's early days yet and this sounds a long ways from being green-lighted. At the risk of being cautiously skeptical, remember Brian DePalma's THE DEMOLISHED MAN? Oliver Stone's PLANET OF THE APES? Ridley Scott's I AM LEGEND? Bryan Singer's LOGAN'S RUN? Tim Burton's SUPERMAN? James Cameron's SPIDER-MAN? Del Toro's MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS? George Miller's JUSTICE LEAGUE? Etc.

    History is full of high-profile projects involving big-name directors that got stuck in development and never made it to the screen.

    At this point, I never believe a movie is happening until it actually starts filming! :)
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2017
  17. ISS Enterprise

    ISS Enterprise Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2016
    Thanks, had a great Christmas aside from kids lack of patience while new tech items were being set up lol

    I'm not defensive about a thing

    You tend to go off on people with multiple paragraph responses when they bring up points that go against this timeline, it's science, and feel the need to defend it as it's set in stone, can't, won't, change as it defines the new ST n it's universe
    Claiming people love nostalgia, bromance of the old school trio, etc. If they bring up issues of the KT or yes issues w Uhura. JT Frat Boy has a few too......

    And jumped right in defending it on my response of a POSSIBLE QT DIRECTION in new movie. Tryig to turn it on me lmao

    My main issue hasn't been the timeline, new iterations of these characters (tho feel they need to be refined a bit across the board), but the crappy scripts of the last two movies. IMO wasted opportunity. ST09 was a blast, breath of fresh air, moved franchise along. Had its faults for sure, but STID N Beyond didn't keep it on that trajectory, again IMO.

    My half assed crayon typed idea was just that., even said so in thread. An extremely rough idea of where QT COULD go, etc.

    I honestly want a great Trek movie, n if QT can deliver I'm happy. I don't feel the prime timeline NEEDS/has to be restored. It would waste the new blank sandbox ST09 set up, if it hasn't been wasted yet. I honestly don't feel the general audience knows it's in a alt reality, just it's the org ST characters and want a good story and entertained, hopefully with a classic ST type message to it (it's 2017 so classic could refer to something from the 90s or early 2000s not just the 60s)

    This science, reality, alt reality, version of ST did NOT exist prior to ST09 and can change. Hell episodes in most of the various series contradicted themselves almost weekly and I others kept on watching.

    AND again, here's hoping QT n team can DELIVER

    And looking back, apparently my response was multiple paragraphs lol..... my bad

    LLAP
     
  18. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    Last place in Australia to get the NBN
    Spoilsports!

    While I am somewhat fearful of QTs involvement, I consider any news of a 4th movie to be good.

    I don't think that 30 second grab proves anything. Sounds more like they made an alternate outcome tham an extra universe. However to me its ambiguous and not a big deal to the general viewing public (those people who don't have the Star Trek series DVDs at home) who probably think its just a modern remake of Star Trek (which is essence it is).
    With a single line in any new movie they could "restore" the timeline if they wanted to.
    Eg. "Captain, you do realise that if our actions are successful we will restore the timeline as it should be and neither the Kelvin crew or Vulcan will be destroyed"
    or
    "Spock, dude, we fix this and neither my Dad or your Mum dies"
     
    jaime likes this.
  19. Malaika

    Malaika Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    And yet, you keep justifying yourself and try to prove you don't have ulterior motives for wanting to restore the timeline

    you come across as getting offended by my reply in spite of admitting it yourself that your theory is flawed.

    Again, never mentioned Uhura. Your argument is, honestly, pretentious and an immature reaction. So what? If you said you wanted Spock to dye his hair blond and I disagreed, would you accuse me of being defensive about Uhura just because you read me liking her in completely different discussions? That's what you did.

    And that's the definition of straw man argument and trying to invalidate my point using a false premise of me not being 'believable' because biased, instead of you actually replying to the point raised and current topic of discussion.

    That said, again, it makes sense for me or anyone here to like these movies and disagree with people who dislike them and their reasons shared in a public forum.
    It also makes sense, I think, that those who like the thing this very board is about may not find ideas of killing this timeline that exciting...
    Canon makes the 'restore the timeline' ideas already forced, I'm unsure what kind of response you expect from people who, after all, like these movies.


    Yeah, because, clearly, the fans of these movies who don't like the 'restore the timeline' idea or QT directing don't want a great Trek movie, lol.

    You accuse me of going off on people with multiple paragraph when that's what you are doing. In your case, by acting as if reboot fans should dislike these movies and find the idea of eliminating the timeline, or other 'let's go backwards to make it look like tos' ideas, exciting.
    Clearly I'm the one weird and off topic here. Why would anyone defend the thing they like in a board about it.


    If you think so, then I have no idea what we are even discussing about and why you got defensive and felt attacked when I more or less expressed the same opinion. I wonder if you'd react the same way to my reply if it were written by a different user.

    ----------
    No one says that they can't completely change things, or that this timeline is set in stone. Just that they shouldn't because it's a bad idea and stupid for many reasons already explained.
    They could make Spock blond and remove his Vulcan traits, for example, doesn't mean it would be a good idea or has to necessarily make sense for me or others. Can =/= should or good idea.


    Alternate reality means 'extra universe' tho.
    And that scene isn't even the only evidence the movie provides, just the one where they explicitly call it alternate reality (since the argument was they never did)

    It isn't ambiguous. I know people who aren't trek fans and they got it just fine, it isn't that complex as a thing, nor new as concept to Hollywood at large.

    And yes, the general audience probably doesn't care and only saw a remake, but it actually is one more reason why restoring the timeline storylines would only alienate most of the audience and confuse them. It's unnecessary and derailing because to most, there is nothing to restore.

    Except, there is no 'as it should be' here. The characters wouldn't feel like that. This is the point some fail to comprehend and yet, it's fundamental.

    The concept is relative with alternate/parallel realities. How would you feel if someone proposed a movie set in the prime timeline where the characters thought they had to change their story to fit the kelvin timeline more? It's the same thing.
    Who establishes that tos is the default reality and how it was meant to be? From a different perspective, you could say that it's tos that didn't go like it was supposed to be. The characters of this reality could think that!

    Point is, for the characters of this trek their reality is as real as that of the prime timeline characters, and their experiences and choices are now their 'destiny'. They might want the possibility to change some things like not losing a parent etc etc, but it doesn't mean they'd see their tos counterparts as how they are meant to be too.
    To them, it's the other version that is different compared to them, not the other way around. Subtle but important.

    Tos too is a parallel and alternate reality to this, and there could be tons of different realities. Again, if this crew went back in time of their reality and changed some things, they'd just access to yet another alternate reality, but theirs would still exist! Just like Tos still exists right now in spite of this other reality!

    There is nothing to restore. Nothing. If you think so, then you believe that tos ceased to exist after this reality was showed but it is untrue because tos still exists, and if it still exists, there is nothing to restore.


    What you guys call restoring pretty much is just creating another reality that is more similar to the tos one. It is the illusion of turning the kelvin trek into tos because some want yet more movies about tos, and possibly don't care about this version of the characters and their own journey enough to want to preserve it TOO.
    Most of the audience doesn't feel that need though. Neither do trek fans who love this version of the characters too, nor the part of the audience for whom there is nothing to restore anyway (this reality might be their one and only trek too )
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2017
  20. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    Last place in Australia to get the NBN
    Your friends must be smarter than mine or think more.
    Its true that most of the audience don't know much about TOS except for some things like Kirk and Spock and transporters.

    If you were to "restore" the timeline and I'm not actually advocating they do it - it would have to be at the end of the movie or do some Star Wars thing *shudder) with Nimoy and Shatner. And after watching "Inglourious Bastards" the other night I don't think a simple "restore" the Prime timeline would be done, There'd be some (evil) twist.