PDA

View Full Version : What the Fudge, Tarantino to direct Star Trek



rustythe1
12-23-2017, 03:10 PM
Well, title says it all, Star trek moving into the seriously grown up realms, his stipulation is that it has to be R rated! never would have expected the combination of writer, director, producer they have lined up!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/movies/quentin-tarantinos-star-trek-movie-finds-its-writer/ar-BBH9103?li=AAdfeCr&ocid=spartandhp

gar26lw
12-23-2017, 03:53 PM
wow, if true perhaps there will be hope for sw too?

50one
12-23-2017, 04:53 PM
Klingon! Do YOU SPEAK IT MOTHFCKR?!

MichaelT
12-23-2017, 05:39 PM
Well, title says it all, Star trek moving into the seriously grown up realms, his stipulation is that it has to be R rated! never would have expected the combination of writer, director, producer they have lined up!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/movies/quentin-tarantinos-star-trek-movie-finds-its-writer/ar-BBH9103?li=AAdfeCr&ocid=spartandhp

Oh god, yes .. please. If anyone is to bring some good old darkness in there.. he can. Not like the current version.. which is on a Laurel & Hardy level. With the difference that I *can* actually watch them.

gar26lw
12-23-2017, 06:43 PM
perhaps they realise that disney is going to totally balls up the sw franchise and star trek could take its place?
hopefully it’s dark, menacing and lacking in any significant humour. chris nolans batman and blonkamps district 9/elisyum spring to mind. real movie makers. i was reading that the same dude who did this latest sw might be on for a trilogy. i was also reading that fans said sw was dead to them and walked out of the cinema mid screening. anyway, i appreciate director/writers such as tarantino so much more now.

SBowie
12-24-2017, 06:25 AM
While a measure of realism can improve many a story, and its absence can surely ruin it, it's also true that not everyone wants to be entertained with a profanity-laced gorefest. Count me in that number. And people vote with their wallets, which doubtless helps account for quotes like this one about SW-TLJ: "... on track to soon exceed $1 billion in global ticket sales and eventually become the biggest movie of the year".

Reality sucks enough these days that no-one needs to pay for a movie to see people eviscerated. They can just turn on the news. So while some lament the trend to 'soft cinema', others are of precisely the opposite mindset ... just sayin'.

gar26lw
12-24-2017, 06:47 AM
i don’t think it needs profanity to be good, think of bladerunner and yes, the original sw. some violence is needed but not necessarily over the top nonsense. anything by christopher nolan is just right, imho.

Paul_Boland
12-24-2017, 10:12 AM
As a life lone Star Trek fan, this news has me intrigued. I'm wondering what he'll do with the franchise...? Looking forward to some more news in the coming year...

Ma3rk
12-24-2017, 11:41 AM
While a measure of realism can improve many a story, and its absence can surely ruin it, it's also true that not everyone wants to be entertained with a profanity-laced gorefest. Count me in that number. And people vote with their wallets, which doubtless helps account for quotes like this one about SW-TLJ: "... on track to soon exceed $1 billion in global ticket sales and eventually become the biggest movie of the year".

Reality sucks enough these days that no-one needs to pay for a movie to see people eviscerated. They can just turn on the news. So while some lament the trend to 'soft cinema', others are of precisely the opposite mindset ... just sayin'.

Count me in with that group as well Steve.

I've personal reasons for not wanting to see any of Quentin's stuff. One friend still has a court issued restraining order against him and I'll leave it at that.

shrox
12-24-2017, 11:48 AM
Well. No.

m.d.
12-24-2017, 03:04 PM
Reality sucks enough these days that no-one needs to pay for a movie to see people eviscerated. They can just turn on the news. So while some lament the trend to 'soft cinema', others are of precisely the opposite mindset ... just sayin'.

A few years ago, I had to edit video for a NGO of a slaughter at a village in Nigeria by Boko-Haram....stuff shot by the villagers and people directly after.
Babies sliced open, burned corpses still sitting upright, partial decapitations.....about 500 killed in 1 night.


Nasty stuff, couldn't show 95% of it on TV....I had to sift through all the footage (a few hours) and edit the story without making the general public puke.
Barely made the news....

Not a fun job, that one.

MichaelT
12-24-2017, 07:36 PM
In any case, Tarantino said he would quit after having made 10 movies. How many is it now?

wingzeta
12-24-2017, 08:11 PM
A few years ago, I had to edit video for a NGO of a slaughter at a village in Nigeria by Boko-Haram....stuff shot by the villagers and people directly after.
Babies sliced open, burned corpses still sitting upright, partial decapitations.....about 500 killed in 1 night.


Nasty stuff, couldn't show 95% of it on TV....I had to sift through all the footage (a few hours) and edit the story without making the general public puke.
Barely made the news....

Not a fun job, that one.

That is horrible. I had a few jobs where I was exposed to some hard to watch raw footage, but nothing that bad. I don't mind violence in films, when it is part of telling the story, or used to provide a stark contrast to some other value, for dramatic effect, like in the Godfather. What I don't care for, are scenes of torture, or gratuitous violence for its own sake. Of course the tolerance for that is different for different people. A lot of modern horror movies go too far for my taste, but I usually just think the stories are weak, and that repels me more than the overly vicious violence.

I have the same issue with Tarentino, when his stories are good, it works, when they are weak, all his Tarentino-isms, come off a little too precious.

My guess for his Trek, would be, that he will take his favorite episode of the old series, and expand that plot to a feature. Probably some potboiler plot that you wouldn't normally see in a feature. Uhura will play a big role, and be fetishized. Sam Jackson or Christoph Waltz will play the villain. Just a guess.

Ma3rk
12-24-2017, 08:19 PM
In any case, Tarantino said he would quit after having made 10 movies. How many is it now?

A LOT more than that, so got a source for that quote?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quentin_Tarantino_filmography

djwaterman
12-24-2017, 09:02 PM
That's what he's stated a number of times, and some of the films he's made he doesn't count in that list, for various reasons, so if he's working on something at the moment, that would be the 9th, and the ST gig would be number 10. I don't think it'll happen and he'd probably not count it as one of his films.

JamesCurtis
12-24-2017, 10:13 PM
I like some of Tarantino's movies, but I personally hope he doesn't do a Trek. The world is seeing enough gore and violence. Not really a place for it in Trek

gar26lw
12-24-2017, 10:25 PM
i think it won’t be a gore fest but have a half decent story and a cool villan

gjjackson
12-25-2017, 09:41 AM
While a measure of realism can improve many a story, and its absence can surely ruin it, it's also true that not everyone wants to be entertained with a profanity-laced gorefest. Count me in that number. And people vote with their wallets, which doubtless helps account for quotes like this one about SW-TLJ: "... on track to soon exceed $1 billion in global ticket sales and eventually become the biggest movie of the year".

Reality sucks enough these days that no-one needs to pay for a movie to see people eviscerated. They can just turn on the news. So while some lament the trend to 'soft cinema', others are of precisely the opposite mindset ... just sayin'.

Precisely. For myself, if Tarentino's name is attached I will not even consider watching it. Filmmakers have taken violence and gore to a level that can only have the outcome of societal destruction. What is being displayed on a movie screen has little difference between that and what terrorists are doing in real life. It's as if the entertainment industry has exported a genre that has returned with a vengeance. They may as well be saying, you want realistic looking images of the worst violence imaginable, then see what Real Life looks like. The people watching the films are no different than those who are on the sidelines of the "real thing". They are both engulfed in the horror. But those who watch a film, do so by "paying" to see "realism".

This route has been taken because there is a serious lack of creating writing ability. The vast majority of scenes are not done to further a story, but just the opposite. Keep the viewer "distracted" by throwing anything and everything at the screen to overwhelm the senses and the viewer will not notice the lack of a cogent storyline. Star Trek has taken that path for some time, using stunts and effects that are so ridiculous it would qualify more for a parody than an excursion into the unknown. No doubt it comes from a serious lack of imaginative thinking. If a writer is incapable of imagining something new and intriguing then look to the past. There has been many creative writers of the past with ideas never considered. I've read very old SciFi magazines and listened to many Old Time Radio shows of Science Fiction that have ideas never imagined on screen. Part of the problem with scripts these days is the belief they must "follow" a certain template. Reality doesn't subscribe to that template and has made it predictable at every stage. This pattern has infiltrated every venue and is excruciating to watch.

SBowie
12-25-2017, 09:48 AM
I recall a review of the Paul Newman movie, "The Verdict", which included a line I can only paraphrase from memory ...

[EDIT: I looked it up, and it reads as follows: "James Mason, who can give to a three-piece suit more menace than was radiated by Darth Vader's armor ..."]

Great acting and direction can provide all the tension needed, without 'splatter'.

Ernest
12-26-2017, 06:04 PM
While a measure of realism can improve many a story, and its absence can surely ruin it, it's also true that not everyone wants to be entertained with a profanity-laced gorefest. Count me in that number. And people vote with their wallets, which doubtless helps account for quotes like this one about SW-TLJ: "... on track to soon exceed $1 billion in global ticket sales and eventually become the biggest movie of the year".

Reality sucks enough these days that no-one needs to pay for a movie to see people eviscerated. They can just turn on the news. So while some lament the trend to 'soft cinema', others are of precisely the opposite mindset ... just sayin'.

I don't think it's even the "measure of realism" that people are after. It's certainly not people being eviscerated (with a few exceptions, I guess). People have just been trained to expect R films to be better written than G films. For some reason, R film writers tend to care about what they're writing and about exploring themes and characters, and following continuity. While G writers have this super annoying habit of saying, "Meh, the film is for kids anyway, so just write the first thing that comes to your mind to make 10 minutes pass by and leave it at that."

I know that writing is hard, but when you're writing about something that millions of people care about, why would you want to "get away" with doing the minimum effort? Yes, it will sell a lot anyway because it's a Star Wars film. They always break ticket records. But you have the -opportunity- to do so much more for the people buying those tickets.

It's not the gore or the swearing that people want. If it were, then they wouldn't have loved a New Hope, or the Airbender series, or the Pixar films, or Frozen, or the first season of My Little Pony, or Gravity Falls. So, speaking of fudge, these are all amazing G stories where the authors have not said the word fudge but they have given a fudge. That's all we want! That makes our lives amazing for a few hours!

Tarantino is a completely wrong choice for Star Trek in a ton of ways, but people still get excited because, at least, he does care about the stuff he directs. It's incredible that it has become so hard to expect even -that-.

RileyM
12-27-2017, 10:07 AM
Just my two cents:
I personally have never seen a Star Trek episode or film, but am very familiar with the product. There isn't any combination of actors or actresses that would have made me interested in the franchise, but my interest level piqued immediately when seeing that list of names attached. I will definitely pay to see a Tarantino Space War movie so they already have one more guaranteed ticket sale before the thing is even written. So for a franchise that is struggling to compete with Star Wars and getting butts in seats they have already begun to succeed by making these choices.
Unless he casts Samuel Jackson then I won't see it. I'm still not over Star Wars Episode II.

Markc
12-28-2017, 05:38 AM
All this being said, it could turn out to be fantastic.......:D
Personally I like Tarantino and his films :neener: