Next Star Trek movie discussion

pixelburp · 23-07-2019 2:19pm

Tarantino popped up in a podcast to shed some light on the story of this phantom film: seems like the timelines may yet get even more tangled; Tarantino seems to hate the 2009 reboot, but more interestingly he apparently spoke to Abrams, who in turn disowned that deviation. So in case you didn't already hate the "John Harrison" nonsense, even those who came up with it don't have the backbone to own it.

Well, it’s an idea then we got together and talked it out and then we hired Mark Smith, who did [The] Revenant to write the script. I don’t know how much I can say. The one thing I can say is it would deal with the Chris Pine timeline. Now, I still don’t quite understand, and J.J. [Abrams] can’t explain it to me, and my editor has tried to explain it to me and I still don’t get it...about something happened in the first movie that now kind of wiped the slate clean. I don’t buy that. I don’t like it. I don’t appreciate it. I don’t — f*** that...I want the whole series to have happened, it just hasn’t happened yet. No, Benedict Cumberbatch or whatever his name is is not Khan, alright? Khan is Khan. And I told J.J., like, ‘I don’t understand this. I don’t like it.’ And then he was like, ‘Ignore it! Nobody likes it. I don’t understand it. Just do whatever you want. If you want it to happen the exact way it happens on the series it can.

Rawr · 23-07-2019 2:26pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Tarantino popped up in a podcast to shed some light on the story of this phantom film: seems like the timelines may yet get even more tangled; Tarantino seems to hate the 2009 reboot, but more interestingly he apparently spoke to Abrams, who in turn disowned that deviation. So in case you didn't already hate the "John Harrison" nonsense, even those who came up with it don't have the backbone to own it.

Based on that quote, it seems that he wants to do another Prequel, but one that is in line with the established universe of Trek (not JJ-verse).

I'm kind of very sick of prequels at this stage. If he really does go ahead and make a movie I'd hope he'd move the story forward. Maybe he doesn't want to re-hash Kirk & Co. and instead wants to do his own thing that just happens to be set within the Star Trek universe?

FutureGuy · 24-07-2019 10:29am

John Harrison was an absolutely fantastic character. Until he became Khan. All went to horse-**** at that point.

There were snippets in trailers that heard him saying “your commanders have committed a crime that I cannot forgive”

I still believe that a decision was made during filming to turn Harrison into Khan and some reshoots were done.

AMKC · 24-07-2019 6:36pm

FutureGuy wrote: »

John Harrison was an absolutely fantastic character. Until he became Khan. All went to horse-**** at that point.

There were snippets in trailers that heard him saying “your commanders have committed a crime that I cannot forgive”

I still believe that a decision was made during filming to turn Harrison into Khan and some reshoots were done.

John Harrison was an absolutely fantastic character. Until he became Khan. All went to horse-**** at that point.

I also agree with that and have said it here before too. The beginning of Into Darkness is not bad and there is some good parts to the film but it was utterly ruined by trying to do Khan again. They should have left him as Harrison and he could have been another augment maybe one that was also around at the same time as Khan or even a clone maybe that the bad Admiral had made.

I also agree there must have been reshoots done.

pixelburp · 19-12-2019 10:12am

In a recent interview, Tarantino looks to be already backing out of his Trek project:

So, what’s next? Are you really going to stick to the 10 films?

Yeah, that’s the idea.

Is Star Trek going to be part of that?

I think I’m steering away from Star Trek, but I haven’t had an official conversation with those guys yet. [...]

To me, it sounds like he's not really invested in the production at all, so methinks if this happens at all it'll be without active involvement from Tarantino - with the script doubtlessly edited far beyond his original treatment;

https://consequenceofsound.net/2019/12/filmmaker-of-the-year-quentin-tarantino/2/

ManOfMystery · 19-12-2019 10:49am

Part of me is hugely intrigued by the thought of a Tarantino ST movie, but another part of me thinks that his unique signature way of storytelling and film making just wouldn't work with that kind of property. Like handing production of a Scorcese flick over to Michael Bay, or asking Christopher Nolan to do a short comedy. Some directors have certain sensibilities and are better suited to certain works.

But what do I know. Spielberg's name was synonymous with 80s family friendly fare for a long time, then along came Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan.

AMKC · 19-12-2019 10:34pm

pixelburp wrote: »

In a recent interview, Tarantino looks to be already backing out of his Trek project:

To me, it sounds like he's not really invested in the production at all, so methinks if this happens at all it'll be without active involvement from Tarantino - with the script doubtlessly edited far beyond his original treatment;

https://consequenceofsound.net/2019/12/filmmaker-of-the-year-quentin-tarantino/2/

Part of me thinks good as I do not think he would do it right but if he did do it right maybe it would be great for Star Trek as being Tarantino 10th and last film could make it a huge hit at the box office.

ManOfMystery wrote: »

Part of me is hugely intrigued by the thought of a Tarantino ST movie, but another part of me thinks that his unique signature way of storytelling and film making just wouldn't work with that kind of property. Like handing production of a Scorcese flick over to Michael Bay, or asking Christopher Nolan to do a short comedy. Some directors have certain sensibilities and are better suited to certain works.

But what do I know. Spielberg's name was synonymous with 80s family friendly fare for a long time, then along came Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan.

I always thought Star Trek is better when it is a mature, intelligent movie aimed at adults and people who want to think and question what is happening in the movie unlike say a Marvel or a Star Wars film. If Tarantino could make a Star Trek movie like that then great I am all for it but if its just guts, swearing and violence then no thanks.

TheIrishGrover · 20-12-2019 10:50am

I do like Tarantino when he is good (He is quite hit-and-miss in my opinion). But even at his best I don't think his tone would suit Trek at all. What, we gonna have "Photon Torpedoes - when you positively absolutely kill every motherf*ckin' Klingon in the room, accept no substitute"

If they want to go down the celebrity director route then offer it to someone like Christopher Nolan or Denis Villneuve or someone similar if you want cerebral, interesting and visually stunning Trek. Give it to Katheryn Bigelow if you want visceral action Trek. Give it to Ben Affleck or Steve McQueen if you want Thriller Trek..... Hell, give it to Taiki Waititi if ya want mental Trek. I believe each of those directors would bring a more interesting take on Trek that Tarantino ever would (With the exception of Waititi. I love the guy's stuff but I don't want him to direct EVERYTHING and he was just there for a joke really). I always thought Tarantino was a poor choice. And let's face it: Did anyone really think it was ever go into production?

odyssey06 · 20-12-2019 10:53am

I don't think Tarantino was a good fit for Trek, certainly not for Starfleet, maybe for a film that focuses on the Orion Syndicate

Would like to see what he would do in a more general scifi\futuristic setting.

Rawr · 20-12-2019 11:28am

odyssey06 wrote: »

I don't think Tarantino was a good fit for Trek, certainly not for Starfleet, maybe for a film that focuses on the Orion Syndicate

Would like to see what he would do in a more general scifi\futuristic setting.

That's the thing, I have often felt that a movie about something / someone else in the Trek universe might be really interesting, especially if we're talking about a one-off story and not a weekly Trek show following a Starfleet crew. I'm a sucker for good world building, and I have enjoyed it when Trek would occasionally give us a view of non-Starfleet life in the 23rd Century.

If I were to make such a story myself I keep imagining a short war thriller set during the Dominion Occupation of Betazed. It would be a sort of Micheal Collins style story following Betaziod resistence fighters being forced to take up arms against the Jem Hadar and the Vorta. I know there was an Extended Universe Book about this (which I haven't read), but I fell like stuff like this could make for a good film if done right.

Evade · 20-12-2019 1:03pm

Rawr wrote: »

That's the thing, I have often felt that a movie about something / someone else in the Trek universe might be really interesting, especially if we're talking about a one-off story and not a weekly Trek show following a Starfleet crew. I'm a sucker for good world building, and I have enjoyed it when Trek would occasionally give us a view of non-Starfleet life in the 23rd Century.

If I were to make such a story myself I keep imagining a short war thriller set during the Dominion Occupation of Betazed. It would be a sort of Micheal Collins style story following Betaziod resistence fighters being forced to take up arms against the Jem Hadar and the Vorta. I know there was an Extended Universe Book about this (which I haven't read), but I fell like stuff like this could make for a good film if done right.

I'd go one step further and have a non Federation setting.

And I'm sure everyone is sick of reading this but Star Trek needs an anthology series.

AMKC · 20-12-2019 2:32pm

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

I do like Tarantino when he is good (He is quite hit-and-miss in my opinion). But even at his best I don't think his tone would suit Trek at all. What, we gonna have "Photon Torpedoes - when you positively absolutely kill every motherf*ckin' Klingon in the room, accept no substitute"

If they want to go down the celebrity director route then offer it to someone like Christopher Nolan or Denis Villneuve or someone similar if you want cerebral, interesting and visually stunning Trek. Give it to Katheryn Bigelow if you want visceral action Trek. Give it to Ben Affleck or Steve McQueen if you want Thriller Trek..... Hell, give it to Taiki Waititi if ya want mental Trek. I believe each of those directors would bring a more interesting take on Trek that Tarantino ever would (With the exception of Waititi. I love the guy's stuff but I don't want him to direct EVERYTHING and he was just there for a joke really). I always thought Tarantino was a poor choice. And let's face it: Did anyone really think it was ever go into production?

If they want to go down the celebrity director route then offer it to someone like Christopher Nolan or Denis Villneuve or someone similar if you want cerebral, interesting and visually stunning Trek. Give it to Katheryn Bigelow if you want visceral action Trek. Give it to Ben Affleck or Steve McQueen

Rian Johnson I think could make a great Star Trek film.

Evade · 20-12-2019 2:54pm

AMKC wrote: »

Rian Johnson I think could make a great Star Trek film.

Only if you like having all your expectations subverted.

pixelburp · 20-12-2019 3:03pm

If they want genuine creative directors to take the job, the very first thing Paramount need to do is slash the budget and pitch it as a thoughtful SciFi piece - or if it must be action based then pull a Wrath of Khan and make a re-badged submarine thriller. Anything but another SW clone.

Notwithstanding the tonal clash of Trek as a rollercoaster blockbuster, there's simply less runway for any talented director to work with if 70% of the work is happening with the 2nd unit or FX team.

Perhaps, perhaps with successes like Joker there's a slim chance the studio might realise you can make a hit with a good cast or director, and put some reasonable constraints on the production. Denis Villeneuve would be a great choice, and someone who doesn't let spectacle get in the way of story, but methinks he'll be tied up on Dune for a while (assuming it doesn't flop)

Evade · 20-12-2019 3:31pm

pixelburp wrote: »

If they want genuine creative directors to take the job, the very first thing Paramount need to do is slash the budget and pitch it as a thoughtful SciFi piece - or if it must be action based then pull a Wrath of Khan and make a re-badged submarine thriller.

I think doing a <insert genre here> film in a Star Trek setting is definitely the way to go.

Thinking on it now a disaster film on a starship is something I'd like to see. If you absolutely must have a space battle a Pyrrhic victory for our crew as an opener could work with the rest of the film showing mounting tensions among the crew trying keep themselves and what's left of the ship in one piece.

Is the Star Trek name alone enough of a draw with an unfamiliar crew? Genuinely not knowing who would survive would be a big bonus to future Star Trek films.

I wouldn't mind Star Trek: A Few Good Men either.

TheIrishGrover · 20-12-2019 4:42pm

There is also the toxic "fandom" of Sci-fi fans. ANY deviation from the norm is decried and reviled automatically. Directors of Sci-Fi franchises are in a no-win situation if they are not the original people involved. JJ Abrahams got slated for basically reworking A New Hope (Some validity in that). Rian Johnson got slated for deviating too much and everyone wanted Abrahams back. Now Abrahams is getting slated for being too safe again. And God almighty if they gave the director role to a WOMAN!!!!! Women: The scurge of Sci-Fi

(Woke/JSW/men-hating/insert-other-narrowminded-opinion-here) Even a bad-ass director like Bigelow.

A would believe that most directors would shy away from an established Sci-Fi franchise as there is nothing in there for them. I would imagine that if you asked many directors they would jump at the chance except for the toxic fan backlash they would 100% get. Why put yourself in that position?

A pared back film unrelated to The Enterprise would be great. It doesn't even need to be pared back: How about an action movie about a bunch of Makos (Wasn't that what their special forces teams were called?). Or a spy thriller with Section 31. They won't do it though because Genre fans want exactly what they want with no surprises or variation..... Well no. REAL fans want surprises and variation and something new. But you have a VERY vocal minority who are nothing more that homophobic, racist, misogynistic man-children who will subject all involved to their self-loathing bile.

AMKC · 20-12-2019 5:44pm

Evade wrote: »

Only if you like having all your expectations subverted.

I disagree. I think he made the best of the last three Staw Wars films even if it did have that silly bit with Leia in space in it. I think its the most cohesive of the three movies with the best story and that he could make a really good Star Trek movie.

pixelburp wrote: »

If they want genuine creative directors to take the job, the very first thing Paramount need to do is slash the budget and pitch it as a thoughtful SciFi piece - or if it must be action based then pull a Wrath of Khan and make a re-badged submarine thriller. Anything but another SW clone.

Notwithstanding the tonal clash of Trek as a rollercoaster blockbuster, there's simply less runway for any talented director to work with if 70% of the work is happening with the 2nd unit or FX team.

Perhaps, perhaps with successes like Joker there's a slim chance the studio might realise you can make a hit with a good cast or director, and put some reasonable constraints on the production. Denis Villeneuve would be a great choice, and someone who doesn't let spectacle get in the way of story, but methinks he'll be tied up on Dune for a while (assuming it doesn't flop)

Joker has to be the most everrated film of the year. I found it terribly boring and dull.

pixelburp · 20-12-2019 5:58pm

AMKC wrote: »

I disagree. I think he made the best of the last three Staw Wars films even if it did have that silly bit with Leia in space in it. I think its the most cohesive of the three movies with the best story and that he could make a really good Star Trek movie.

Joker has to be the most everrated film of the year. I found it terribly boring and dull.

Fair enough, I'm not fond of it either, but doesn't negate anything being said: point is that the production took probably the biggest comicbook property - Batman (well, Joker, but hey) - and went off to make an adult, $55 million dollar piece of art-entertainment. This was not the safe, four-quadrant blockbuster by any stretch yet the box-office proved you could make something different from a relatively mainstream, pop-culture IP.

Trek doesn't HAVE to be a Star Wars clone, if the studio is willing to step back from making that $200 million dollar behemoth, and give some talented individuals the wriggle room to make something smaller in scale.

Heck, the first Jumanji sequel from 2017 was made for a paltry $90 million and made nearly a billion.

AMKC · 20-12-2019 6:18pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Fair enough, I'm not fond of it either, but doesn't negate anything being said: point is that the production took probably the biggest comicbook property - Batman (well, Joker, but hey) - and went off to make an adult, $55 million dollar piece of art-entertainment. This was not the safe, four-quadrant blockbuster by any stretch yet the box-office proved you could make something different from a relatively mainstream, pop-culture IP.

Trek doesn't HAVE to be a Star Wars clone, if the studio is willing to step back from making that $200 million dollar behemoth, and give some talented individuals the wriggle room to make something smaller in scale.

Heck, the first Jumanji sequel from 2017 was made for a paltry $90 million and made nearly a billion.

Fair enough, I'm not fond of it either, but doesn't negate anything being said.

Glad too see I am not the only other one that thinks its overrated. I was not trying to negate your point just saying that I can't belive how many people including critics seem to think it such a great film. Fair play to the production company behind it for making it such a huge success do.

Also I hope if/when another Star Trek film does get made that its not another Star Wars/ action clone.. If it is I will not go see it.

Evade · 20-12-2019 11:31pm

AMKC wrote: »

I disagree. I think he made the best of the last three Staw Wars films even if it did have that silly bit with Leia in space in it.

And the casino diversion lecture by a millionaire working for a billion dollar company that corporations are bad. And many other things but this is a Star Trek thread.

I'm not seeing the newest one until tomorrow so it might be the best of the sequels but like RotS being the best prequel, it doesn't really mean much.

Kirby · 21-12-2019 12:37am

AMKC wrote: »

I disagree. I think he made the best of the last three Staw Wars films even if it did have that silly bit with Leia in space in it. I think its the most cohesive of the three movies with the best story and that he could make a really good Star Trek movie.

Joker has to be the most everrated film of the year. I found it terribly boring and dull.

Seriously? The most cohesive with the best story?

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie but I am very easy to please. As an exercise in good storytelling.....it fails comprehensively. Awful pacing issues, the deus ex holdo manoeuvre, the pointless sojourn to canto bight with its political preachyness, and the stench of "tell, don't show" in almost every scene.

There are a ton of critiques of the last jedi out there but I think this one hits the main points pretty well.

AMKC · 21-12-2019 1:23am

Evade wrote: »

And the casino diversion lecture by a millionaire working for a billion dollar company that corporations are bad. And many other things but this is a Star Trek thread.

I actually enjoyed that scene a lot and did not get the uproar over it.

I'm not seeing the newest one until tomorrow so it might be the best of the sequels but like RotS being the best prequel, it doesn't really mean much.

And the casino diversion lecture by a millionaire working for a billion dollar company that corporations are bad. And many other things but this is a Star Trek thread.

I actually enjoyed that scene a lot and did not get the uproar over it.

I hope you enjoy it.

Kirby wrote: »

Seriously? The most cohesive with the best story?

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie but I am very easy to please. As an exercise in good storytelling.....it fails comprehensively. Awful pacing issues, the deus ex holdo manoeuvre, the pointless sojourn to canto bight with its political preachyness, and the stench of "tell, don't show" in almost every scene.

I did not see any of them problems in it at all.

Kirby · 21-12-2019 3:41am

AMKC wrote: »

I did not see any of them problems in it at all.

Watch the video so and you will. Or choose another....there are dozens of them on youtube all making the same points.

pixelburp · 21-12-2019 12:44pm

Straying vastly off topic but I enjoyed Last Jedi, and think it one of the bolder, more enjoyable blockbusters in years. It has some big flaws, starting with its misplaced comedy but otherwise really dug the attempt to play with and evolve the characters and world in interesting directions. There mere fact the world is divided over the film shows its ambition in the first place, not a safe hit of dopamine.

Inviere · 21-12-2019 1:31pm

Loved TLJ, far superior to VII. Also loved IX a lot too, both very different, but both films I'll happily rewatch over the next many years. VII was good, merely good, but doesn't stand up to its successors imo. Most won't share that opinion, which is why I avoid reading the big threads, but hell, watch a film, if you enjoy it great, if you don't, fine, each to their own.

pixelburp · 21-12-2019 5:26pm

It's interesting in relating to Trek as while I don't intend going to the cinema for it, episode 9 is apparently accused of pandering to the fans who were incensed by Last Jedi - to the extent of open retcons (is that spoilery to say? Can't even tell sometimes).

So with Trek, given the Abrams films were quite polarising among fandom, ditto Discovery, one wonders where the needle should stick between doing ones own thing and keeping the fans on board. Feels like SW fandom is eating itself somewhat, but wallowing in tropes and the familiar isn't the answer either.

Evade · 21-12-2019 5:50pm

pixelburp wrote: »

It's interesting in relating to Trek as while I don't intend going to the cinema for it, episode 9 is apparently accused of pandering to the fans who were incensed by Last Jedi - to the extent of open retcons (is that spoilery to say? Can't even tell sometimes).

So with Trek, given the Abrams films were quite polarising among fandom, ditto Discovery, one wonders where the needle should stick between doing ones own thing and keeping the fans on board. Feels like SW fandom is eating itself somewhat, but wallowing in tropes and the familiar isn't the answer either.

I think because there's something else to directly compare the new SW films to is what's causing a lot of fan tension, the old Expanded Universe. It wasn't perfect by any means but there were far more doors open for story possibilities, especially with the OT cast, than there are now.

It seems like nothing of consequence really happened between VI and VII in the new canon where in roughly the same time period in the old EU ff the top of my head the rebellion continued for years after after Endor, Luke successfully founded his own take on a Jedi Academy, the Republic rose up as a major galactic power again, extra galactic aliens invaded uniting most of the galaxy albeit very loosely, and then Republic descended into another civil war wit the bad side led by a descendant of Anakin Skywalker.

Next Star Trek movie discussion

Comments