Quentin Tarantino's Star Trek XIV?
 

http://www.tasteofcinema.com/wp-cont...-tarantino.jpg

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...-movie-1064206

And here's an older article from a couple of months ago where he talks about his wish to take "City on the Edge of Forever" and make it feature length, within the Abramsverse (yet remarking that TNG's "Yesterday's Enterprise" is his favorite so ever) : https://www.cinemablend.com/news/170...d-like-to-make

I dunno... and Abrams still aboard as producer? Why?

I just want another one of those movies. I love them so much.

Weren't they gonna do the 4th Star Trek movie, with Kirk meeting his father? who was played by Chris Hemsworth in the first one.

That was before Beyond bombed. It was always just talk, probably to tantalize people into getting that "treat" if they turned up to see Beyond... they didn't.

I wonder what Quentin Tarantino pitched for the new Star Trek movie, he normally doesn't do these type of movies, he's always done his own stuff, so far he's done two Westerns, and we never seen him tackle Scifi movies, but this would be a first if he does.

If the interview from two months ago is to be believed, a feature length Abramsverse version of the TOS episode "City at the Edge of Forever" probably. But maybe not.

Here's where I am on this, I think.

Pros:

* It will almost undoubtedly be a great movie and highly witty and entertaining.
* Tarantino is a huge Trek fan, and of the right kind of Trek. His favorite episode of Trek is TNG's "Yesterday's Enterprise."
* It would probably be -- storytelling-wise -- a great bit of course correction from the Abrams flavor of storytelling (explosions! more action! more explosions!). It would show that Trek can work on the big screen in ways other than the Abrams movies.

Cons:

* From an interview two months ago it sounds like Tarantino wants to pitch a feature-length "City on the Edge of Forever" set in the Abramsverse. In other words... another remake/prequel.
* It'll probably be the Abramsverse.
* If it's Abramsverse, further cementing that as "modern day Trek," that makes it even less likely that non-Abramsverse/prequel/connections-to-Kirk-and-Spock TV shows will be greenlit. So get ready for a lot more stuff like STD.
* While it may be a great done-in-one kind of film, I'm not sure we can put a lot of faith in whoever/whatever follows it will follow suit in kind or do any kind of quality control after Tarantino drops the mic and is done with the film. I mean, he's not going to do the sequel, or helm a TV show afterward. It'll just fall back to Abrams and his cronies.

How do you know it's going to be in the same movie verse and not be something totally new or different?

I like Tarantino.

But no. Not for any reason.

If somebody wants to do great Star Trek, bring Ronald D Moore back.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/170...d-like-to-make

Because he specifically mentioned a couple of months ago that he'd need to "find something for Zoe Saldana and John Cho to do" in his "City on the Edge of Forever" movie and that he "sees the reboot (Abramsverse) as an opportunity."

It doesn't mean at the end of the day his actual Star Trek movie pitch will be that, or even for sure Abramsverse-based, but it does show where his head is at with it.

For some reason I feel like the new Star Trek reboot movies needs to make 6 movies to match the 6 movies the original Star Trek crew got. We're only 3 movies down, so we should get another 3 to go.

Especially before the current actors get too old. Chris Pine is nearly 40.

No.

We don't need a "Benedict Cumberbatch is NOT playing General Chang" in "The Undiscovered Remix."

Nah, f*** that crew. The TNG crew only got 4 movies.

Worst TNG movie in your opinion?

I'll go first... Insurrection.

"Nemesis" by a landslide for me. It was upsetting how bad that was and WoK-rip-offy that was. Who knew that only two movies later they'd do an even more blatant WoK rip-off. "Nemesis" also began the "The big bad guy in a BIG BLACK SHIP we need to FIGHT!" thing that would be in 3 back-to-back Star Trek movies.

"Insurrection" isn't bad but it never should have been a movie. It should have been a two part episode on the show though even then, it would have been a forgettable one.

I wonder how he'll fit in the word ninja in this movie...

Yeah, but I'll take a Trek-lite movie with Picard and Data starring again over "fountain of youth two-parter" crap. :tlol:

Insurrection was my least favorite. TNG

I like 2, 4, 6 and 8.

Cubed, Pine is 37, the original crew were way past that by 6 :) well actually past it by the 1st movie.

I'd probably rate them...

2
4
6
1
8
13
7
3
5
11
9
10
12

I need to think about my order for all of them, forgot to add the new ones.

I was just remembering years ago when the Simpsons made fun of Star Trek with the 'Star Trek 10, We're tired' (something like that) that was before there were 10, now we have 13

Everyone knows that the even number Star Trek movies were the best ones.

I nearly fell asleep watching the first Trek movie, even on 1.5x speed it was too slow.

Tarantino's Star Trek? At this point sure, why not, it'll be entertaining and maybe Tarantino's homage take on 60's sci-fi. I don't have a horse in the new Trek movie universe anyway.

Only real Star Trek movie I've never bothered to watch. The novelization did a better job of telling the story... with some odd input from Gene Roddenberry himself, if I remember correctly.

Wasn't true of 10 and it sure wasn't true of 12.

Two, four, six, and 8 I'll give him though. 10 is a big "MAAAYBE".... Three and seven were pretty good.

11, 12, and 13 aren't Prime Trek, they're Kelvin Trek. I wouldn't bother ranking them together with the Prime 10 even if I did like them.

10 kinda limped, but I still like it. Loved Tom Hardy. I think it would have been better if Stewart, Frakes, McFadden, Sirtis, et al didn't look so old... Nemesis was an action movie with a geriatric cast, and it was just a little unconvincing.

10 is a great big "F*** no." Embarrassingly bad. I never thought I'd feel as horrible leaving the theater until Into Darkness years later.

3 hasn't aged quite as well as 2, but I do dig it. 7 gets a lot of crap from people but I generally really enjoy it. It's not all it could be but it works for what it is.

I agree with Plinkett on every point:

I definitely wouldn't be opposed to a Star Trek movie by Tarantino. Bring it on, as far as I'm concerned!

But seriously though, it was a pretty big mistake to reboot the franchise like this in the first place. We had nearly a decade and a half in the Prime Universe's 24th Century. Should have placed movies and tv shows AFTER that point. Also...retcon the 29th and 31st Centuries stupid obsession with time travel. You cannot tell me that the Federation became more time focused than space focused. Unless they have a presence everywhere in the Universe at that point which I highly doubt!

Yeah, let's see the 25th. What's going on with the Federation then? With the Romulans, after Romulus blew up? With the Klingons? Plus we can get the occasional guest spot from the TNG, DS9, or VOY crews.

Or...

Retcon that away? That's a horrible idea. The Starfleet of the 29th century onward is fascinating and we know so little about how it operates. A Star Trek show set within that timeframe on a ship that is as much tasked with policing time as it is exploration and politics could be awesome. I'd kind of like to see that show over even a 25th century show (plus if you're doing a straight up Star Trek time travel show, TOS and TNG could be revisited).

Absolutely. Prequels are easy sells to Hollywood, but most times end up horrible or forgettable or just inferior.

Go 25th century; show us the Romulans and Dominion as allies, and scary new threats from outside the Milky Way.

Or go to the 29th century, and show us the USS Relativity taking orders from the 31st century as they fight on the front lines of the Temporal Cold War.

Or go back to the 22nd century and show us the founding of the Federation, if you must, and explore the time period halfway between ENT and TOS.

But 10 years before TOS? Come on... :trolleye:

I do remember someone saying that years go but that was before 10 came out I think.

Well, this thread has put me in the mood for a Star Trek movie this eve.

I think I was so caught up in the original characters coming back and seeing their enterprise design again etc that I just didn't hate the new movies like most on here. I was also very happy to see Leonard Nimoy, Spock is my favourite ST character.

Anyway, back on the thread topic, I'd be curious to see what he'd do.

Quentin Tarantino's Star Trek is going to be the 1st R rated movie for this franchise, and Paramount is all for it.
https://deadline.com/2017/12/quentin...ms-1202222161/

..... but does ST need an R rating? Holding off criticism here btw, I'm just interested to see what you guys think of that.

Will it still be the re-booted Kirk and Spock or totally new incarnation?

Oh sure. Making Kirk a reckless hard copy of Maverick in Top Gun wasn't enough. He needs to be gun totin' as well, phasers set to XTREME annihilation.

Or the R rating comes from Internet Space Rapist Kirk finally makes his cinematic debut...

Or the Enterprise crew will be dropping F bombs left and right.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I've never been very impressed with Tarantino's work. I find I have more fun quoting the movie after the fact than I do actually watching it.

I do wonder how what the Americans euphemistically call "the n-word" will fit in the Star Trek universe.


I've only truly see Inglorious Basterds. It was alright, but the trailer was misleading. There were times in the movie where I forgot about the existence of the "basterds". Shoshanna felt more like the main character of the movie to me.

I'm not familiarised with the rest of his work. Only seen clips of pulp Fiction and Django Unchained on youtube. The man either loves rap music or thinks he is a black man in a white man's body :lol:

I've seen all his movies, Kill Bill 1 and 2, Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained, Hateful Eight, etc. are some of his best.

I haven't seen a Tarantino movie I haven't loved. Maybe Jackie Brown... I don't remember much about it now aside from Robert De Niro screwing Bridget Fonda at one point and Samuel L. Jackson being super scary. I've also found that Django Unchained doesn't hold up super well on a second watching. The rest? All aces. Every single one, even "Death Proof."