It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quentin Tarantino Set to Maul Star Trek to Death

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: DBCowboy


I'd rather see him play Ahoohah or whatever her name was.


Uma.




posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


Right. She gets hung at the end.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

This is a tricky one for me.

On the one hand, Intrepid made a damned fine point about Tarantino's directing what turned out to be one of the best CSI episodes in the entire library thereof, and of course we cannot forget that Tarantino is responsible for the creation and the on screen depiction of some of cinemas most interesting characters, and indeed responsible for the direction of some truly great movies.

While his episode of CSI was probably the least science focused of all the episodes (understandably), it was not jarringly so. I mean, when the regular episodes include cast members not wearing paper suits, or paper boots on scenes, failing to apply masks and even failing to don gloves sometimes, either belief is already in significant suspension, or the viewer has missed a trick somewhere.

But Star Trek, for all that it delves into the fantastic as much as the scientific, does have a very cerebral quality to it, which I think has been waning somewhat over recent iterations. In my view, making a Star Trek which is basically fan service only, no noobs need purchase tickets, absolute nerd fest with absolutely no dumbing down, dedicated teams of hired scientists to pick over every detail to perfect the storyline before it goes to shooting, as well as onset scientific support, and no expectation of great success (aside from in the pre-existing fanbase) would be brilliant, but I understand that this is unlikely to occur, and for the record, Tarantino would not be able to pull that off. He hasn't the patience for it, and is far too much of a control freak to accept that level of interference.

However, its not remotely likely that there will ever again be either a television show, or a film in the Star Trek Franchise, which SHOULD be made from a long time fan perspective. Real Trekkers want a nerdgasmic experience, tailored to be watchable only for long term fans, and utterly unapproachable from outside the fandom, because lets face it, their minds are simply superior and need very specific nourishment.

*disclaimer: the sentence directly preceding this disclaimer is meant in jest and pokes careful fun at the breed of which I am a part, and is in no way meant to reflect my actual attitude toward the fandom of either Star Trek, or any other franchise within the media environment*

From the perspective of a genuine, dyed in the wool trek head, I think the thing died the death when everything became about prequelisation. You had that disasterpiece of a show, Enterprise, whose only redeeming feature is that it is over, and the Discovery segment, which is shaping up to be the largest embuggerment of decades old cannon that the entire franchise has ever seen, not to mention a few films which, while amusing, totally retcon entire generations (did you see what I did there) of Star Trek lore, by sidelining the original universe, and pissing off in a new direction. I think most real, hardcore, old school fans, just want to know what happens after Voyager, just want to see what happens five hundred or a thousand years on from that, not way back in the distant past.

I also think that unfortunately, the networks and the film production houses, do not have real Trekkers in the power positions, holding the purse strings, which is why we are far more likely to see a Tarantino movie come out, than either a series which remains true to the ever forward looking ethos of Star Trek, or a film dedicated to the high minded roots of previous incarnations of the Star Trek franchise.

Its a shame, but shallow is about the best we can hope for going forward, from what I have seen in the last decade.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Ew. No thank you.

I don't go to a Star Trek movie to see Kill Bill.




posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   
MF'ing snakes on a starship.

This is a terrible TERRIBLE development for the franchise.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: dug88

originally posted by: projectvxn
Quentin Tarantino Developing 'Star Trek' Film (With Help from J.J. Abrams): Report - Space.com


"The only thing that limited them was their '60s budget and eight-day shooting schedule," Tarantino said in a 2015 Nerdist interview. "You could take some of the classic Star Trek episodes and easily expand them to 90 minutes or more and really do some amazing, amazing stuff."


JJ Abrams didn’t do a horrible job with the Kelvin timeline Star Trek. But now we’re gonna add one trick pony d-bag Quentin Tarantino into the mix?
So we’re just gonna move away from the science advocacy, diplomacy, and the role of the Federation in galactic events, and dive right into a Tarantino bloodbath with zero story line?

Sorry but I don't trust Tarantino to make a good Trek film.


So Samuel L. Jackson will be cruising around busting Klingon



Classic:

"Say 'nuq" again. Say 'nuq' again, I dare you, I double dare you MF, say nuq one more Goddamn time!"




posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I liked Enterprise and would not have had a problem with a prequel show if what followed that had actually tied it all in. That didn't happen. Granted Enterprise was no Voyager or Deep Space 9, but I didn't see it that way, and it kept true to the continuum.

Everything that happened after Voyager has been written, and even added to the game STO, where much of the continuum is kept.

It would be nice if we could get a show that STARTS in the 25th century. The Federation has Temporal command. I want to see the expansion of the role of Section 31. There are also a lot of loose ends when it came to the Dominion War and where that lead the rest of the galaxy.

No one cares about those stories anymore other than hard core fans.

Discovery is not Star Trek. When in the first episode the first officer is introduced as a mutinous emotionally and mentally unstable nutjob.

That said Discovery is following Kelvin timeline story lines and we may yet see the Sphere Builders from Enterprise as the hand that moves the Klingon Empire in the Kelvin universe. That may be the tie in to the other universe. Right now STO treats the Kelvin timeline as an alternate universe and timeline rather than current canon, but the Sphere Builders have a vested interest in destroying our galaxy and their efforts take them to the Kelvin universe. So we'll see where that goes.

I still follow it. I'm still interested. I also hope that Taratino proves me wrong. But CSI and ST are different animals, as you have pointed out, and while I don't think we should exclusively kowtow to established fandom, to take a story that has been running for 50 years and simply ignore everything put on paper and screen in that time is ridiculous to me.
edit on 7 12 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: projectvxn


Sorry but I don't trust Tarantino to make a good Trek film.

Depends on his ideas about "amazing". The film Wrath of Kahn was good follow on.

I could see some other early episodes getting a second helping, if its done right.

Original trek episodes greatest draw were the story lines. Thats what was so easy about making the early episodes they had good plots.

Early sci fi puts modern tripe to shame.

Go Quinton...



The one I would love to see is a remake of the "Doomsday Machine" Form the original Star Trek.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chance321

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: projectvxn


Sorry but I don't trust Tarantino to make a good Trek film.

Depends on his ideas about "amazing". The film Wrath of Kahn was good follow on.

I could see some other early episodes getting a second helping, if its done right.

Original trek episodes greatest draw were the story lines. Thats what was so easy about making the early episodes they had good plots.

Early sci fi puts modern tripe to shame.

Go Quinton...



The one I would love to see is a remake of the "Doomsday Machine" Form the original Star Trek.

That was a good one. Planet gobbler drones from ancient stellar wars.



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Surprisingly, I'm not opposed to this idea. We already have F bombs in Trek and adding a little more violence won't be bad, as long as it isn't totally gratuitous. Also, I really like the way Tarantino does dialog for his characters, so they will at least have interesting conversations.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Star Trek meets true romance, this could have some potential, not sure how they would remake the Sicilian scene with hopper and walken though.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn
Cant be worse than the new show Discovery.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Most recent update to this story says that the Tarantino film will be rated R at Tarantino’s request.

If anyone thinks Tarantino is going to do something good with Star Trek, you can stop now.
edit on 8 12 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
Most recent update to this story says that the Tarantino film will be rated R at Tarantino’s request.

If anyone thinks Tarantino is going to do something good with Star Trek, you can stop now.


Did you miss Deadpool? They took that R rated and it was awesome.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Deadpool is supposed to be rated R.

Star Trek is a very different story and universe.



posted on Dec, 8 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Deadpool was weak sauce.

What Tarantino did to Django that had a franchise in it's own right was atrocious.



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Deadpool was weak sauce.

What Tarantino did to Django that had a franchise in it's own right was atrocious.



say what?
django was a #ing great movie.

tarantino will go down as one of the greatest directors of all time.
props to whoever mentioned true romance. one of my favorite movies.

everyone usually thinks if 'the scene' but that movie is great start to finish.
for sure

'thats the way it goes but remember it goes the other way too'

true romance and reservoir dogs for the win



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96
Deadpool was weak sauce.

What Tarantino did to Django that had a franchise in it's own right was atrocious.



say what?
django was a #ing great movie.

tarantino will go down as one of the greatest directors of all time.
props to whoever mentioned true romance. one of my favorite movies.

everyone usually thinks if 'the scene' but that movie is great start to finish.
for sure

'thats the way it goes but remember it goes the other way too'

true romance and reservoir dogs for the win

Patrick Stewart's actually expressed interest in working with Tarantino on this one. That could actually pan out as a balanced scales scenario, Stewart would not ever allow Picard to be portrayed differently, and theoretically, he could also keep Tarantino's gratuitous tendencies in check. Assuming Tarantino is open to listening to him.



posted on Dec, 9 2017 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

I'd love to see Stewart reprise the role of Jean Luc Picard once again.

I just don't want to see Star Trek turned into the third rate bloodletting that is the hallmark of Tarantino films.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join