Sign in to follow this  
Sherlock Holmes

Rated R Star Trek is a dumb idea.

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Mr.Picard said:

You know what I think? Paramount and CBS should finally come to their senses when it comes to who has the rights to what and they should just wait a year or so and then make an MA-rated Discovery movie.

Problem solved. :P  (Well, not for the gatekeepers but they hate the Kelvin timeline as well anyway, so it doesn't matter what kind of movie they get, they'll hate it, regardless.)

Easy peasy...:laugh:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though R rated movies might not make much money, usually they don't take much money to be made anyway, since most of them are dramatic in nature, more than heavy action movies with a lot of special effects. So that could be a step in the right direction for Trek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JJ Abrams, Paramount, and QT are not naive to the fact that R-rated films can limit the audience size and money-making potential.  Part of QT's concept probably involves some money-saving aspect that made it appeal to JJ and Paramount.  Perhaps he is focusing on only a few main characters?  Perhaps he is abandoning the Abrams cast?  Perhaps he is focusing on a narrower less effects driven plot? 

I think a movie like Logan is a good example of what can be done on a modest budget.  Fox knew that Logan would not get as large of an audience as compared with PG-13 films.  As a result, the film focused on a few main stars (Stewart and Jackman) instead of the usual X-men ensemble.  They also had to carefully plan out where they used CGI.

I suspect that QT is going to take a few pages out of the Logan playbook.  Another aspect of Logan I anticipate QT will adopt is its references to classic westerns.  Let us not forget that Star Trek was originally billed a "space western" or "wagon train to the stars."  I could see QT making this pitch to JJ.  Let's bring it back to its roots--Star Trek is a space western.  JJ has an "aha" moment and buys into it.  Then they go hire Mark Smith--writer of the most critically acclaimed epic western in recent history and write a truly epic "space western."  Sounds promising to me.

As for the idea that Star Trek must be "family friendly," there are a few realities that one should not overlook.  Like most of us, I discovered Star Trek as a kid; however, we are not kids anymore and neither is the Star Trek fan base.  It is aging despite Abrams efforts to appeal to a younger audience.  The vast majority of Star Trek fans are adults and are mature enough to handle an R-rated Star Trek film.

Edited by Locutus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he is not planning on using the story behind Logan. That was clearly not a Star Trek type movie. True it was about a cowboy mutant, but it was in no way a Star Trek story. Logan seemed a nod to the kind of movie Hateful 8 was trying to be, so in a sense, he already did it. It was niche though, not for everyone. I liked Logan, but it's not for the general fan, and it took liberties with "Old Man Wolverine" comics. That's fine. It's hard to translate those to screen.

The awe inspiring story without a central villain seems to be something Hollywood wishes to avoid. We aren't going to get a Trek version of Arrival. That too was fine for what it was. It just is not Star Trek.

I do not think rater R is Star Trek. Not to be prudish or anything, but it just isn't. It does smack of desperation, from someone who thought QT would be a good catch. Yeah, he can do something else.

Star Trek is both wagon train and space opera, not soap opera, and it is sweeping and ultimately uplifting. The heroes win under incredible odds.

I could seem someone like James Gunn doing something with Star Trek, once he's done doing Marvel. He seems to have the right amount of whimsy and also some darker, but still fun, elements. Crowd pleasing seems to be the key to big money movies.

I think ultimately if I were to pick an idea, do an exploration story on a strange new world, with Kirk and crew discovering something hlpful to the Federation, and you still get the wonder and the excitement of being there, hanging out with those people. Heck, I would even given Jason Lin another shot. Some of Beyond was spot on, like watching a classic episode. A lot of the 2009 film was also like that. Bits of the 2013 one had this also. They just need someone who understands not just making a great movie, but making a great 'Star Trek' movie. It is after all the journey, not merely the destination. The Marvel movies seem to work because it's the journey, even though a villain does show up. It's still about the fantasy opera and our heroes getting there and winning. I can't see QT really going with that. 

I can see the Arrival (current movie) director doing Rendezvous with Rama someday maybe. Maybe not Star Trek.

Besides, Star Trek and X Men the team up was a book and a comic series in the 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chimera82405 said:

I hope he is not planning on using the story behind Logan. That was clearly not a Star Trek type movie. True it was about a cowboy mutant, but it was in no way a Star Trek story. Logan seemed a nod to the kind of movie Hateful 8 was trying to be, so in a sense, he already did it. It was niche though, not for everyone. I liked Logan, but it's not for the general fan, and it took liberties with "Old Man Wolverine" comics. That's fine. It's hard to translate those to screen.

The awe inspiring story without a central villain seems to be something Hollywood wishes to avoid. We aren't going to get a Trek version of Arrival. That too was fine for what it was. It just is not Star Trek.

I do not think rater R is Star Trek. Not to be prudish or anything, but it just isn't. It does smack of desperation, from someone who thought QT would be a good catch. Yeah, he can do something else.

Star Trek is both wagon train and space opera, not soap opera, and it is sweeping and ultimately uplifting. The heroes win under incredible odds.

I could seem someone like James Gunn doing something with Star Trek, once he's done doing Marvel. He seems to have the right amount of whimsy and also some darker, but still fun, elements. Crowd pleasing seems to be the key to big money movies.

I think ultimately if I were to pick an idea, do an exploration story on a strange new world, with Kirk and crew discovering something hlpful to the Federation, and you still get the wonder and the excitement of being there, hanging out with those people. Heck, I would even given Jason Lin another shot. Some of Beyond was spot on, like watching a classic episode. A lot of the 2009 film was also like that. Bits of the 2013 one had this also. They just need someone who understands not just making a great movie, but making a great 'Star Trek' movie. It is after all the journey, not merely the destination. The Marvel movies seem to work because it's the journey, even though a villain does show up. It's still about the fantasy opera and our heroes getting there and winning. I can't see QT really going with that. 

I can see the Arrival (current movie) director doing Rendezvous with Rama someday maybe. Maybe not Star Trek.

Besides, Star Trek and X Men the team up was a book and a comic series in the 1990s.

The point is not that QT should do "Star Trek: Logan," but rather that folks could have more of an open mind about what is and what is not Star Trek.  Throughout its run, Star Trek has dabbled into different genres to great success--hard core sci-fi, mystery, drama, comedy, action, and yes, westerns--Star Trek has drawn upon all of these influences.  There is plenty of room in the Star Trek universe for it to do a film that dovetails nicely with the western genre.  It is in the shows blood as envisioned and originally pitched by Gene Roddenberry.  Part of the western genre is about exploration and pushing into the frontier after all.

Edited by Locutus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, did you guys hear this rumor?

TARANTINO TO direct A Star Wars Story:

OBI-WAN KENOBI: ONCE UPON A TIME ON TATOOINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I made that up)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Robin Bland said:

Hey, did you guys hear this rumor?

TARANTINO TO direct A Star Wars Story:

OBI-WAN KENOBI: ONCE UPON A TIME ON TATOOINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I made that up)

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

Palpatine Fiction?  :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a problem with the whole idea that we know what is and is not Star Trek in the context of a film franchise. This is something that various Hollywood writers/producers have been trying to figure out since the TNG movies. Yes we all know what is in Trek's DNA, but how it is expressed in a film can be different. 

Trek movies started out as a vehicle for the beloved original cast. The TNG movies copied that formula and were a vehicle for the massively popular TNG cast. Turned out that either Picard and crew were not as beloved as the TOS crew to carry the franchise, or movie audience tastes changed (probably some of both). At that point the whole concept of what is a Trek movie had to be reconsidered. For a time it was going to be an action adventure war story set in the Romulan war, and then JJ Abrams came up with his idea. 

The Bad Robot concept for what is a Trek movie was not able to successfully carry the franchise. It did not capture the audience and fewer people went to see each subsequent movie. Now they are having to rethink what  a Trek movie can be all over again: Maybe it can work as a QT style film... Maybe it can be R-Rated. 

I argue that you can have a successful franchise that is a "smaller" more intimate space movie, in part because you have to convince the audience that your movie is going to be unique, different than Thor/IronMan on the Enterprise. Trek cannot get a large audience with hype around big spectacular action sequences. It has to be special. You can still do the character development, and the Trekian morality play. But the formula for a Trek film plot (which has been the exact same in every movie since NEMESIS) simply must be scrapped and rethought.    

        

Edited by Justin Snead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sehlat Vie said:

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

Palpatine Fiction?  :giggle:

It could work! 

Just struck me that with his oeuvre, Star Wars might be a better fit than Star Trek. 

With the Weinstein Company, I believe Tarantino always had final cut of his work. Wonder if that would be true here, too? That, I think, could be a deal breaker. 

 

Edited by Robin Bland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Robin Bland said:

Just struck me that with his oeuvre, Star Wars might be a better fit than Star Trek. 

Absolutely.

Han Solo’s story is essentially a space western; well, Tarantino’s had a bit of experience with that genre (Hateful Eight, Django Unchained, Kill Bill 2).   And Inglorious Basterds’ Nazis would feel right at home in the heartless Imperial bureaucracy.  

But Star Trek?  I really don’t see it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Justin Snead said:

There is a problem with the whole idea that we know what is and is not Star Trek in the context of a film franchise. This is something that various Hollywood writers/producers have been trying to figure out since the TNG movies. Yes we all know what is in Trek's DNA, but how it is expressed in a film can be different. 

Trek movies started out as a vehicle for the beloved original cast. The TNG movies copied that formula and were a vehicle for the massively popular TNG cast. Turned out that either Picard and crew were not as beloved as the TOS crew to carry the franchise, or movie audience tastes changed (probably some of both).

        

The problem was more the fact that the TNG crew couldn't be as easily adapted to be a movie crew. They WERE massively popular as series characters because the show was usually deep, thoughtful and told tales of morality - it wasn't an action series, and the characters weren't action heroes unless circumstances forced them to be, but that was usually just for one episode ("Starship Mine" comes to mind here). It was easy to make movies for the TOS crew because TOS was a series that relied on leaving meaningful messages, yes, but still often put funny moments and quirky people over plots before those went TOO serious, AND also because the show relied quite heavily on action scenes through somewhat ridiculous means (Kirk-Fu) but still, action was action, even if it was the 60s.  

With TNG things were different - you had a much more serious crew and, more importantly, a much more serious captain who''s an accomplished diplomat first and foremost.Trying to push these characters into action-oriented plots felt out of place, and it was most glaring with Jean-Luc, who turned more and more into Rambo the more the TNG movies progressed. It just didn't fit. It's no wonder that the only real popular TNG movie is also the one that actually lets the characters do what they do best (Riker gets the away team funny plot, LaForge gets to tinker with a ship, Troi gets to help keeping someone in check emotionally, Worf gets to fight some bad guys, Data basically gets to play First Officer and also gets as many scenes as possible because he's the most beloved character but they wisely decided to NOT make him comic relief like they did in Generations) while also picking the only thing that could make action movie plots make sense for Jean-Luc: Not being himself. (They tried to repeat this in a completely grotesque way in Insurrection with the whole youth nonsense but all THAT did was make him look like Hipster Grandpa who tries to be cool and funny by requesting a Mambo and dancing to it, hurr hurr hurrrrrrrrr, so funneeeeeeh - not.)

In short: People noticed that the TNG characters were forced into being characters they really weren't, and that's why the TNG movies (particularly the last two) failed the way they did. Movie audience taste had indeed changed and Paramount tried to adjust, but frankly speaking - they tried it with the wrong crew. TNG movies would have had to be much more like the series, but they couldn't, because ACTION ACTION ACTION, movie audiences want ACTION, etc. If they had used the DS9 crew for movies after First Contact, things might have been different - THOSE guys would have been PERFECT for action movies. The TNG folks just weren't, and it didn't fit, things seemed out of place, and that's why the whole thing fell apart. Add to that some atrocious writing, directing and plot holes (Nemesis, anyone), weird "high school humor" additions (Insurrection, anyone) and you have the perfect failure.

It's no wonder the studio decided to go back to what worked - the TOS crew. And since they couldn't get the original crew, they made a new one and adjusted them to make them match the taste of today's mainstream movie audiences. Not sure if that was a good thing, I still haven't bothered with Nu!Trek, but given how much of a terrible rift it caused in the fandom, I'm not sure it was worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Absolutely.

Han Solo’s story is essentially a space western; well, Tarantino’s had a bit of experience with that genre (Hateful Eight, Django Unchained, Kill Bill 2).   And Inglorious Basterds’ Nazis would feel right at home in the heartless Imperial bureaucracy.  

But Star Trek?  I really don’t see it.

 

Did someone say “space nazis”? 

alien-nazi-stormfronti.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fly on the wall in the studio meeting when Tarantino was in there. The fly heard them say, 'Star Wars, Quentin, not Star Trek', and he was like, 'Yeah, that's what I meant. The one with the space nazi's. I can do that. That's it. What is Star Trek? Is that the one with the green chick? Oh, not that. I mean, sure it's a green chick, but it's too  kid friednly. I want something raw, like Ben Kenobi. He was a total bad a..." Or was that Anakakin? Can we do him? He was like Vader and stuff. Dude. That would be raw."

"And have a mechanical spider tank bat thing fight a giant Jedi, because those things are bad a..." QI, I think you mean a Yeti. Oh? Oh yeah.

Note, not an actual conversation. But I've seen interviews with this guy, and he is all over the place like that. I can see him doing a Star Wars stand alone.

Edited by Chimera82405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Robin Bland said:

THOSE GUYS!

:laugh:

In my mind, those guys were Star Trek: Enterprise’s “jump the shark” moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hirogen were way better space Nazis in "The Killing Game."

Coto never should have wasted an episode tying up that Temporal Cold War nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Locutus said:

In my mind, those guys were Star Trek: Enterprise’s “jump the shark” moment.

I am not gonna dispute how ludicrous that story was. :giggle:

It's been hinted that Tarantino's idea riffs on a particular TOS episode... wonder if that ep is Patterns of Force?

 

 

Edited by Robin Bland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2017 at 10:56 AM, Mr.Picard said:

The problem was more the fact that the TNG crew couldn't be as easily adapted to be a movie crew. They WERE massively popular as series characters because the show was usually deep, thoughtful and told tales of morality - it wasn't an action series, and the characters weren't action heroes unless circumstances forced them to be, but that was usually just for one episode ("Starship Mine" comes to mind here). It was easy to make movies for the TOS crew because TOS was a series that relied on leaving meaningful messages, yes, but still often put funny moments and quirky people over plots before those went TOO serious, AND also because the show relied quite heavily on action scenes through somewhat ridiculous means (Kirk-Fu) but still, action was action, even if it was the 60s.  

With TNG things were different - you had a much more serious crew and, more importantly, a much more serious captain who''s an accomplished diplomat first and foremost.Trying to push these characters into action-oriented plots felt out of place, and it was most glaring with Jean-Luc, who turned more and more into Rambo the more the TNG movies progressed. It just didn't fit. It's no wonder that the only real popular TNG movie is also the one that actually lets the characters do what they do best (Riker gets the away team funny plot, LaForge gets to tinker with a ship, Troi gets to help keeping someone in check emotionally, Worf gets to fight some bad guys, Data basically gets to play First Officer and also gets as many scenes as possible because he's the most beloved character but they wisely decided to NOT make him comic relief like they did in Generations) while also picking the only thing that could make action movie plots make sense for Jean-Luc: Not being himself. (They tried to repeat this in a completely grotesque way in Insurrection with the whole youth nonsense but all THAT did was make him look like Hipster Grandpa who tries to be cool and funny by requesting a Mambo and dancing to it, hurr hurr hurrrrrrrrr, so funneeeeeeh - not.)

In short: People noticed that the TNG characters were forced into being characters they really weren't, and that's why the TNG movies (particularly the last two) failed the way they did. Movie audience taste had indeed changed and Paramount tried to adjust, but frankly speaking - they tried it with the wrong crew. TNG movies would have had to be much more like the series, but they couldn't, because ACTION ACTION ACTION, movie audiences want ACTION, etc. If they had used the DS9 crew for movies after First Contact, things might have been different - THOSE guys would have been PERFECT for action movies. The TNG folks just weren't, and it didn't fit, things seemed out of place, and that's why the whole thing fell apart. Add to that some atrocious writing, directing and plot holes (Nemesis, anyone), weird "high school humor" additions (Insurrection, anyone) and you have the perfect failure.

It's no wonder the studio decided to go back to what worked - the TOS crew. And since they couldn't get the original crew, they made a new one and adjusted them to make them match the taste of today's mainstream movie audiences. Not sure if that was a good thing, I still haven't bothered with Nu!Trek, but given how much of a terrible rift it caused in the fandom, I'm not sure it was worth it.

I would agree insomuch as the fact that modern studio imperatives requiring writers squeeze the TNG crew into a superhero movie plot resulted in bad writing that resulted in low ticket sales. Back in the day I used to assume that a future TNG movie would try to capture the TNG spirit that was on display in All Good Things and many other episodes: the TNG sense of wonder, adventure and moral dilemma but on a more epic scale. We never got this. 

GEN was a film that had a lot in common with the previous six in how it approached its story. FC was as well, but the action imperative was creeping in--it worked like gangbusters. But by INS, the Hollywood imperatives were taking over. Piller wanted  to tell a certain type of story that simply could not fly as a summer or holiday release. And by NEM the main driver was the Hollywood blockbuster rules. It's not only that those rules do not fit well with the TNG crew, it's that those rules produce bad movies at least half the time no matter what type of movie it is. NEM was one of them.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On December 12, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Mr.Picard said:

The problem was more the fact that the TNG crew couldn't be as easily adapted to be a movie crew. They WERE massively popular as series characters because the show was usually deep, thoughtful and told tales of morality - it wasn't an action series, and the characters weren't action heroes unless circumstances forced them to be, but that was usually just for one episode ("Starship Mine" comes to mind here). It was easy to make movies for the TOS crew because TOS was a series that relied on leaving meaningful messages, yes, but still often put funny moments and quirky people over plots before those went TOO serious, AND also because the show relied quite heavily on action scenes through somewhat ridiculous means (Kirk-Fu) but still, action was action, even if it was the 60s.  

With TNG things were different - you had a much more serious crew and, more importantly, a much more serious captain who''s an accomplished diplomat first and foremost.Trying to push these characters into action-oriented plots felt out of place, and it was most glaring with Jean-Luc, who turned more and more into Rambo the more the TNG movies progressed. It just didn't fit. It's no wonder that the only real popular TNG movie is also the one that actually lets the characters do what they do best (Riker gets the away team funny plot, LaForge gets to tinker with a ship, Troi gets to help keeping someone in check emotionally, Worf gets to fight some bad guys, Data basically gets to play First Officer and also gets as many scenes as possible because he's the most beloved character but they wisely decided to NOT make him comic relief like they did in Generations) while also picking the only thing that could make action movie plots make sense for Jean-Luc: Not being himself. (They tried to repeat this in a completely grotesque way in Insurrection with the whole youth nonsense but all THAT did was make him look like Hipster Grandpa who tries to be cool and funny by requesting a Mambo and dancing to it, hurr hurr hurrrrrrrrr, so funneeeeeeh - not.)

In short: People noticed that the TNG characters were forced into being characters they really weren't, and that's why the TNG movies (particularly the last two) failed the way they did. Movie audience taste had indeed changed and Paramount tried to adjust, but frankly speaking - they tried it with the wrong crew. TNG movies would have had to be much more like the series, but they couldn't, because ACTION ACTION ACTION, movie audiences want ACTION, etc. If they had used the DS9 crew for movies after First Contact, things might have been different - THOSE guys would have been PERFECT for action movies. The TNG folks just weren't, and it didn't fit, things seemed out of place, and that's why the whole thing fell apart. Add to that some atrocious writing, directing and plot holes (Nemesis, anyone), weird "high school humor" additions (Insurrection, anyone) and you have the perfect failure.

It's no wonder the studio decided to go back to what worked - the TOS crew. And since they couldn't get the original crew, they made a new one and adjusted them to make them match the taste of today's mainstream movie audiences. Not sure if that was a good thing, I still haven't bothered with Nu!Trek, but given how much of a terrible rift it caused in the fandom, I'm not sure it was worth it.

Wha--?  How did I miss this amazingly insightful post?

Wow.  That is a spot-on analysis of where the TNG movies went off the rails.  Well done, Mr. Picard.

As for the movies going from TNG to a quasi-TOS reboot?  I think they were following the reboot/prequel craze that had overtaken a lot of franchises at that time (Bond, Star Wars, etc) and assumed (correctly or not) that TOS was next in line.  And I agree that the TNG movies were increasingly forcing a square peg through a round hole; they were trying to make the TNG characters action archetypes and caricatures rather than the more subtle, nuanced people that they were in their TV series. 

My concern with another Bad Robot movie, particularly one under Tarantino, is that it's possibly making the same mistake you illustrate so well in your post about the TNG movies.  If one looks at Tarantino's oeuvre, he's a bad fit for a Star Trek movie, even if he likes it ("Kill Bill" opens with a quote from TWOK, which itself is an old Sicilian proverb).  Tarantino overseeing a Bad Robot Trek film is like having Michael Bay take over directing duties on a remake of Steel Magnolias.  It's just a bad fit. 

He will make the Bad Robot incarnations of the TOS characters even more caricatured than before; as most of the characters in his recent movies has all been caricatures, and not real human beings.  It's ironic, since the older Tarantino movies are quite deft with characterization, but that Tarantino hasn't really existed for awhile.   Everything he's done in the last 12 years or so has been wildly over-the-top and almost cartoonish.  

Since the Bad Robot Trek movies have already 'amped up' the TOS characters a bit (everyone's a super sexy  genius all of the sudden...), I think it's only going to take them one more step further from who they really are.

But I digress; I still don't think Tarantino-Trek is going to happen at all.   I don't know why, but I see it going along the same lines as the twice-aborted Bryan Singer Battlestar Galactica remake that never happened...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2017 at 4:48 AM, Justin Snead said:

Is anyone (of us) really longing for more Bad Robot Trek films? I don't hate them at all but they are also not special to me. I could see myself sitting out Trek 4 no matter who makes it, especially if it looks like more of the same as the previous 3. This is probably why Tarantino is even being discussed. Paramount knows this film franchise is probably dead unless the next one is able to stand out in some dramatic, buzzy way.

I agree. I"m not longing for another Bad Robot Trek film. Overall, they're mediocre. I enjoyed the first one through the flaws(and the amazingly annoying lens flares). 

Trek needs a different direction. It's not the action/adventure genre that JJ tried to sell. It can't be just that I should say. There really wasn't anything more in those movies. Now that I see a second JJ Star Wars movies I'm convinced he's too much flash with little substance. To me, his name attached to a project no longer inspires desire to see it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, I think the Bad Robot team with stronger writing (no more revenge epics with super weapons, please!) and a bit more creativity could do one more.   I think ST Beyond was a lot more promising in terms of character and humor.  Would’ve liked for that wing of the franchise to get a proper closeout. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this