Tarantino Trek - what could we expect?

[MakeshiftPython]

I find it really weird Bad Robot are involved since they and Paramount are about to part ways.

Might be a contractual thing for key franchises, where they'll continue co-producing Star Trek and Mission: Impossible, but all other projects would be with WB. There's a similar thing going on with Legendary Productions. For awhile they were with WB, but then signed a deal with Universal and now co-produce films with them. However, Legendary still works on WB projects like the Pokemon and Godzilla/King Kong franchises.

 

[Malaika]

MakeshiftPytho, It makes sense but my point is that even the writer seems to be a bad fit and further makes me think, together with Tarantino's own interviews that keep on getting ignored here but I'm unable to do the same, this is just a regular Tarantino movie with some trek in it....and it has no appeal for me. As a kelvin trek fan, my main concern is that if we get another movie that is part of it (as he implies his movie is about this trek, not prime nor a reboot with a new cast), I expect a sequel made by someone who understands the material and is inspired and really likes these characters. Tarantino simply isn't that person and I'm allowed, like many others over twitter, Facebook, Tumblr etc to have these honestly reasonable concerns about what he is saying.

It seems some people here are doing what Simon Pegg himself did when he defended QT, and he claimed that the guy gets trek so his movie surely won't be pulp fiction in space. I don't need to remind you all that Tarantino called Pegg annoying for that and he said that he is wrong.

I find it really weird Bad Robot are involved since they and Paramount are about to part ways.

Is it so weird, though?
Even if their main deal ends, it doesn't mean they won't still make trek movies together. They already made star wars with Disney in spite of not having a deal with them.

I think some people misuranderstand the true nature of the main deal between Paramount and bad robot a bit, thus what is coming to an end.

Dont think Malaika is too keen on QT Trek

What made you think that

 

[Rahul]

I know you all made a joke with Lars von Trier directing Star Trek. But here is the thing: If the guy has an idea for a Star Trek movie that is a good fit... why the fuck not? I'd much rather have someone like Trier (who doesn't appear to fit) if he has a story he truly wants to tell in Star Trek, than some other director that might be a better fit (say, Chris Nolan, or J.J. Abrams at this point) who isn't really interested in the property and just goes through the motions.

I have clearly no idea what to expect from a Quentin Tarantino Star Trek movie. But I love QT as a filmmaker. And even though I'd never have thought about him making a Star Trek movie - his movies are usually very different from what I expect a good Star Trek movie to be - the fact that he's so passionate about it tells me he has a lot of personal ideas andthings he wants to do with it. And that's what I'm really interested in.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

MakeshiftPytho, It makes sense but my point is that even the writer seems to be a bad fit and further makes me think, together with Tarantino's own interviews that keep on getting ignored here but I'm unable to do the same, this is just a regular Tarantino movie with some trek in it....and it has no appeal for me. As a kelvin trek fan, my main concern is that if we get another movie that is part of it (as he implies his movie is about this trek, not prime nor a reboot with a new cast), I expect a sequel made by someone who understands the material and is inspired and really likes these characters. Tarantino simply isn't that person and I'm allowed, like many others over twitter, Facebook, Tumblr etc to have these honestly reasonable concerns about what he is saying.

It seems some people here are doing what Simon Pegg himself did when he defended QT, and he claimed that the guy gets trek so his movie surely won't be pulp fiction in space. I don't need to remind you all that Tarantino called Pegg annoying for that and he said that he is wrong.

Is Smith really any less qualified than past Trek writers? Smith's credits (like Lindelof, Orci, Kurtzman, Jung, Pegg) mainly consist of genre films, which isn't all that unusual.

To bring up Bond again, this is reminding me of when EON announced that Sam Mendes, the Oscar winning director of AMERICAN BEAUTY, was set to direct the next Bond film. At the time, I thought that was utterly insane. Why would they go with that choice? He wasn't known for doing blockbuster action adventure films. Of all the directors you could pick, why him?

Then after it came out it became the highest grossing Bond film EVER, and is largely acclaimed for being one of the best of the series*. I was delightfully surprised to see that all work out, because I couldn't help but shake the feeling that this was going to go in a direction that was detrimental to the series.

I'm not suggesting Tarantino is going to pull the same miracle for Trek. I don't expect any Trek film to make a billion dollars. But you never know. J.J. seems keen on having QT on board, and QT is clearly passionate about Trek. If I had my way, I'd hire Brad Bird and try to get the crew back together, but I'm not J.J. Abrams.

*=Of course he came back to direct SPECTRE, which is far less acclaimed. Can't win them all, I guess.

 

[Malaika]

The Pegg/Tarantino thing basically went like this:

Simon Pegg: "Everyone sort of assumes it’s gonna be like “Pulp Fiction” in space, but I think his devotion to “Trek” and his understanding of it… It won’t be ordinary, it’ll have him all over it, but it won’t be anything a “Star Trek” fan will have to worry about. He has an acute understanding of the story and he’d never do anything to tear it down."
Tarantino: Simon please shut up, you don't know what you are talking about: I'm totally making pulp fiction in space!
​

I mean, what's wrong with what Pegg was saying? He was defending him and trusting him like you guys do.

I know you all made a joke with Lars von Trier directing Star Trek. But here is the thing: If the guy has an idea for a Star Trek movie that is a good fit... why the fuck not? I'd much rather have someone like Trier (who doesn't appear to fit) if he has a story he truly wants to tell in Star Trek, than some other director that might be a better fit (say, Chris Nolan, or J.J. Abrams at this point) who isn't really interested in the property and just goes through the motions.

I have clearly no idea what to expect from a Quentin Tarantino Star Trek movie. But I love QT as a filmmaker. And even though I'd never have thought about him making a Star Trek movie - his movies are usually very different from what I expect a good Star Trek movie to be - the fact that he's so passionate about it tells me he has a lot of personal ideas andthings he wants to do with it. And that's what I'm really interested in.

The issue is precisely the fact that Tarantino doesn't seem to be really interested in the property. There is no passion and no heart here. How could he be really interested and truly inspired to continue this trek into a respectful way when he doesn't even want to understand its basic premise, and they hired a writer who might as well perceive trek as something like Harry Potter compared to the other stuff both him and Tarantino do.

Everything Tarantino said is discouraging for me. He only seems to like the cast, but even that isn't encouraging when it seems to be just a superficial appreciation and he doesn't even understand that Pine, Quinto etc played their own characters. He doesn't really respect their work.

Call me prejudiced but I'm not even sure he doesn't consider the Enterprise and space ...optional. What a torture it must be for someone like QT to even have to think about the fact you have to set the story in space, thus know how spaceships are supposed to work there. To have to care about showing aliens beside the humans. Sci-fi isn't everyone's cuppa and in Tarantino's case, optimism and the kind of reality trek represents, the kind of job the characters have, doesn't seem to be his cuppa either judging by his other movies.
You guys keep pretending he's this super trek fan too but he really just said he likes Shatner.

Tarantino seems to think he's too good for trek and his fans seem to have the same opinion, hence he can do what he wants and it doesn't matter either way.
However, after all the arguments fans made against the other creative team, it is really weird the same give Tarantino a pass now. Honestly, it almost looks like karma that we get this guy now. If I didn't know better I'd think Paramount is trolling the fans.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

I think you’ve already made your point like a dozen essays ago.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Well to counter the QT talk what would Micheal Bay trek be like? Isn't his schtick explosions and more explosions?

 

[Malaika]

Of course I did, but you guys keep on derailing the point and ignoring what the guy actually said lol
Those who have concerns are dismissed as if they have no reason whatsoever to be sceptical or puzzled by what this guy is saying. No reason to worry. Worse, those who like kelvin trek are apparently expected to not care about it at all just because it's Tarantino.

I'm not the one being disingenuos either. Before his interviews, his fans were like 'oh come on don't be ridiculous it's obvious he won't do pulp fiction in space! He'll adapt himself to this genre" and yet, now that he is contradicting that opinion (and getting annoyed poor Pegg defended him that way) people be like "oh well what's wrong with pulp fiction and gangsters in space?".
First it was like "of course he gets the material" but then when he admits he doesn't even get the alternate reality thing it's "oh well, what's wrong if he doesn't understand the material?" Lol

I realize this isn't just a matter of having different opinions about Tarantino, though. Some here cannot really understand why fans like me are worried. My perspective is that of someone who simply likes these movies and wants a decent continuation of them. I don't care about who is the director, it could be an unknown one too. What is the most important for me is that they like these movies, get them, are inspired by trek, and respect these characters and the story. I'm not desperate to get more movies no matter what, but it wouldn't hurt to get a decent continuation of them. Tarantino doesn't seem to be the guy who can give that to the fans of this trek.

 

[Smellmet]

I'm reserving judgement until we have some solid information, at the moment we have next to nothing.

I'm not even that big a fan of QT outside of dogs and pulp fiction but I'm interested in the prospect of him doing a trek film, though to be honest I'd be excited at the chance of any further movie with this cast regardless of director.

 

[Rahul]

How can Tarantino "think he is too good for Trek" if he's precisely pursuing doing a Trek movie?

And what the duck makes you think he doesn't understand "space" or "starships"? This guy is deep into genre, and has consistently preferred Star Trek to Wars everytime interviewers have asked him that loaded question (unlike some other directors).

And quite honestly, at this point, a Star Trek movie that doesn't try to be the poor man's Star Wars or a bland superhero movie would be a welcome change of pace...

 

[STEPhon IT]

I find it really weird Bad Robot are involved since they and Paramount are about to part ways.

This is nothing new, Production companies moonlight into other studio projects all of the time.

 

[fireproof78]

And what the duck makes you think he doesn't understand "space" or "starships"? This guy is deep into genre, and has consistently preferred Star Trek to Wars everytime interviewers have asked him that loaded question (unlike some other directors).

Because of his quotes that he likes Star Trek for Shatner.

And Abrams made an effort to familiarize himself with the material, even as Star Wars fan.

Well to counter the QT talk what would Micheal Bay trek be like? Isn't his schtick explosions and more explosions?

We shouldn't question it. If Bay wants to make a Trek film he should be given carte blanche to do whatever he wants. That's what this thread has taught me .

Apparently, I should feel privileged that a director like Tarantino has deigned to grace Star Trek with his presence. We plebes should feel so fortunate. /s

 

[Malaika]

How can Tarantino "think he is too good for Trek" of he's precisely pursuing doing a Trek movie?

• For one, the fact he said trek is apparently lacking the kind of cool content you see in his movies. Hence him wanting to make it pulp fiction and gangsters in space, R rated. He also got offended by what Pegg said about him, when the guy was just defending him and saying that he respects trek (see my other comment above and tell me what Pegg said wrong in that comment I pasted).

• Then there is the fact that he sounds almost proud he doesn't get the source material (eg the fact it's another reality) and he doesn't give a damn. The way he talked about these movies is arrogant.

Again, after the stuff people said against previous directors, it seems rather interesting they are OK with Tarantino admitting that he's clueless and doesn't care about the source material.

I don't expect casual fans to follow the continuity perfectly but if Tarantino or anyone wants to make a Kelvin trek movie, as he is implying, he can't pretend everything we saw on the screen didn't happen just because he cannot make the simple effort to understand it's another reality, or he just doesn't want to.

Recently, they announced that some of the kelvin trek novels that were written in 2010 will finally get released. One of the authors said he made sure his novel still makes sense with the sequels. Novels aren't even canon yet the author still cares. I don't think it's too much to ask a director to make this effort too. No excuses.


He doesn't need trek. If they don't give him complete free rein, he'd most likely walk away.

And what the duck makes you think he doesn't understand "space" or "starships"? This guy is deep into genre, and has consistently preferred Star Trek to Wars everytime interviewers have asked him that loaded question (unlike some other directors).

He only likes trek better than star wars because he has a thing for Shatner. He said it.

His fav episodes, from what I remember, are the ones that focus on Kirk and aren't really about space, exploration etc.
And really, look at his movies and his fav movies. Sci-fi doesn't seem to be his cuppa. He even admitted it isn't (this isn't a flaw in general btw, it becomes one only if you want to make a movie in this genre)

Honestly, he may prefer trek to star wars but, ironically, he might prefer a Luke Skywalker kind of hero/lead due to his fixation with Kirk and him saying that having a crew, thus the enterprise family, is a loss of time basically. He may consider useless some of the very things that make trek different from Star wars. Kirk, alone, isn't really what makes trek ..trek. You can have a male lead in many franchises..you don't need trek for that. In our time, it seems ensemble franchises are more successful than those old fashioned 'solo' movies about a guy, his destiny and another guy being his sidekick.

If marvel can break the box office by making movies with so many characters and so many dynamics , I don't see why Tarantino or anyone should get depressed over the fact there is a crew and a ship outside Kirk (and again, if he's such a genius I don't think it should be THAT hard for him to understand that kelvin trek is another reality and not a retcon of tos).

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Get with the program, fireproof78 and Malaika. You’re not supposed to be free to have your own opinion or concerns, because we’re interested in the prospect of a QT Trek film thus your thoughts are invalidated.

[/sarcasm by the way]

Seriously though, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS, just please understand that I simply don’t share them, and I’ve already explained why a few times. If that’s not helping, let’s just leave it to “agree to disagree” because it feels like we’re going in circles at this point.

 

[fireproof78]

Get with the program, fireproof78 and Malaika. You’re not supposed to be free to have your own opinion or concerns, because we’re interested in the prospect of a QT Trek film thus your thoughts are invalidated.

[/sarcasm by the way]

Seriously though, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS, just please understand that I simply don’t share them, and I’ve already explained why a few times. If that’s not helping, let’s just leave it to “agree to disagree” because it feels like we’re going in circles at this point.

Agreed. I hope you all enjoy Tarantino and his Trek film.

Sadly, this conversation has pushed me further off him than before. Just not worth it at this point.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Agreed. I hope you all enjoy Tarantino and his Trek film.

And I hope YOU enjoy his Trek film, despite your initial concerns.

 

[ISS Enterprise]

How can Tarantino "think he is too good for Trek" if he's precisely pursuing doing a Trek movie?

And what the duck makes you think he doesn't understand "space" or "starships"? This guy is deep into genre, and has consistently preferred Star Trek to Wars everytime interviewers have asked him that loaded question (unlike some other directors).

And quite honestly, at this point, a Star Trek movie that doesn't try to be the poor man's Star Wars or a bland superhero movie would be a welcome change of pace...

Well a Bay ST movie would be more of same, IMO.

 

[donners22]

... it feels like we’re going in circles at this point.

Oh, I think we reached that point quite a few pages ago.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

Well a Bay ST movie would be more of same, IMO.

The only difference I could see is that Bay would make his characters be outright hateful. Like when Kirk defeats the villain, he raises his phaser to the villain’s head, the villain says “no, please show mercy!” then Kirk spouts “you don’t deserve it” before blowing his brains out.

That’s essentially what happened in TRANSFORMERS 3.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fireproof78]

Well a Bay ST movie would be more of same, IMO.

No. I at least care about characters in Abrams' films. Can't say that about Bay films.