I see the "he's never done anything like it" argument a lot. But my counter argument is: The Russo Brothers.
Feel free to check out their filmography before Marvel (for some reason) tapped them for Winter Soldier.
Yeah.
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
While I'm certainly curious, to, me it reeks of desperation. That they're willing to try anything to rejuvenate the franchise since Discovery just isn't really cutting it in my book.
While I'm certainly curious, to, me it reeks of desperation. That they're willing to try anything to rejuvenate the franchise since Discovery just isn't really cutting it in my book.
Paramount is a separate company from CBS now and doesn't have any particular stake in Discovery
I'm not sure audience reaction to the first season of Discovery indicates anything long term.
The first seasons of TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise were all controversial if not outright derided. Fan opinion didn't really solidify until the third or fourth season on all but Enterprise.
That said, the only way I want to see the TNG crew again is if they finally do a Q movie. I'll never understand how we got "hippie immortal luddites" and "literally an evil clone" before we got Q in a movie.
Well if it's good enough for Patrick Stewart, it's good enough for lesser beings like us.
Then again, the Emoji Movie was good enough for Patrick Stewart...
+3
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Fuck it, I'm down for a Tarantino Trek movie. I didn't see ST:Beyond which I understand is not crap, but the last not-horrible Trek movie I saw was First Contact and even that does not hold up well. Patrick Stewart is good, but the rest is kind of hit or miss. Tarantino doing this might suck, but we could at least get some interesting camera work and a nice soundtrack out of it, and even if it sucks it will most likely suck in new and interesting ways, which is more than what I can say about the last five (?) movies in the series.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I see the "he's never done anything like it" argument a lot. But my counter argument is: The Russo Brothers.
Feel free to check out their filmography before Marvel (for some reason) tapped them for Winter Soldier.
Yeah.
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
Unfortunately they were on the right track with Beyond, but Into Darkness thwarted their attempt at soft rebooting the franchise.
+1
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
I see the "he's never done anything like it" argument a lot. But my counter argument is: The Russo Brothers.
Feel free to check out their filmography before Marvel (for some reason) tapped them for Winter Soldier.
Yeah.
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
Unfortunately they were on the right track with Beyond, but Into Darkness thwarted their attempt at soft rebooting the franchise.
Beyond came after Into Darkness. And I agree, it's on a much better track.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
phasers create lots of gore, 20 minute long conversations about the prime directive with witty dialogue, an extended close up camera shot of a female ensign's bare feet
phasers create lots of gore, 20 minute long conversations about the prime directive with witty dialogue, an extended close up camera shot of a female ensign's bare feet
sure why not
Wait, we're involving Joss Whedon now too?
I didn't know that's also a Tarantino thing.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I see the "he's never done anything like it" argument a lot. But my counter argument is: The Russo Brothers.
Feel free to check out their filmography before Marvel (for some reason) tapped them for Winter Soldier.
Yeah.
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
Unfortunately they were on the right track with Beyond, but Into Darkness thwarted their attempt at soft rebooting the franchise.
Beyond came after Into Darkness. And I agree, it's on a much better track.
I think what he means is that Beyond underperformed because people were expecting a bucket of warm dog vomit like Into Darkness.
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
+4
Options
Waffles or whateverPreviously known as, I shit you not, "Waffen"Registered Userregular
I finished the part half of Season 1 of Discovery. I actually like it. The two biggest annoyances for me with Discovery so far are Michael Burnham and the Klingon scenes. I actually enjoyed the final episode with the Klingons better when they were being universally translated, but a part from that. I'm eager to see the rest of season 1 take off.
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
And Beyond had Scotty's "stick in a bundle" line.
Which, honestly, if the whole movie was just opening credits>that scene>end credits, it would have been a better, less nonsensical Trek movie than Into Darkness.
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
I see the "he's never done anything like it" argument a lot. But my counter argument is: The Russo Brothers.
Feel free to check out their filmography before Marvel (for some reason) tapped them for Winter Soldier.
Yeah.
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
Unfortunately they were on the right track with Beyond, but Into Darkness thwarted their attempt at soft rebooting the franchise.
Beyond came after Into Darkness. And I agree, it's on a much better track.
I think what he means is that Beyond underperformed because people were expecting a bucket of warm dog vomit like Into Darkness.
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
Insert list of terrible Trek episodes that share elements with all of the crap ST movies.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
Insert list of terrible Trek episodes that share elements with all of the crap ST movies.
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
Insert list of terrible Trek episodes that share elements with all of the crap ST movies.
Sure, you could do that. But why?
I don't know. Why does the thread do it every time someone doesn't like something in Discovery?
Beyond had a lot of problems but it felt much more like a Star Trek adventure than Into Darkness, and it didn't rely on references to a much better movie
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
Insert list of terrible Trek episodes that share elements with all of the crap ST movies.
Sure, you could do that. But why?
I don't know. Why does the thread do it every time someone doesn't like something in Discovery?
Because it's tiresome hearing "this has never been done in Star Trek" when it has, and I'm perfectly certain you knew that already.
I finally got around to watching the last aired episode of Discovery this weekend, and for the first time I found myself downright excited. I'd enjoyed the rest of the series to date, but I thought it was okay and had a lot of promise but it wasn't great; this ep was a marked improvement in terms of pacing, I felt. At the same time, I do think that the writing is the series' weakest link; at best it's functional, at worst it's clunky. The actors are all doing a great job, but they're working hard to make the script work.
Also: the universal translator introduced in the episode is obviously the series' new MVP. I didn't mind the subtitles, but I definitely minded the actors playing Klingons struggling to make their scenes dramatically interesting while fighting the prosthetics/language combo.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Posts
Not saying he can't do something good with Star Trek, just that I would never have picked him to do something with Trek. And that he's far from a death sentence for the franchise, given some of the truly turdmendously bad stuff that's been done with it.
But considering the wildly inconsistent quality of the franchise, I'd bet Paramount would let any filmmaker known for making money take a swing at the series. They don't give a shit about the quality, they just want the money. I don't know much about Tarantino's interests, but I'd bet that at least he has some personal liking for Trek and that he pursued the chance himself, which is something positive.
Even more bonus points if they get McAvoy in there to be Mirror Universe Picard.
That's not necessarily what happens with every director. The same director of Book of Henry gave us Jurassic World.
Very true, but in this case we already know Tarantino is actually talented.
He is talented, but this is something else entirely outside his signature style. Either way it'll be entertaining.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Paramount is a separate company from CBS now and doesn't have any particular stake in Discovery
The first seasons of TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise were all controversial if not outright derided. Fan opinion didn't really solidify until the third or fourth season on all but Enterprise.
That said, the only way I want to see the TNG crew again is if they finally do a Q movie. I'll never understand how we got "hippie immortal luddites" and "literally an evil clone" before we got Q in a movie.
my body is ready
Then again, the Emoji Movie was good enough for Patrick Stewart...
Unfortunately they were on the right track with Beyond, but Into Darkness thwarted their attempt at soft rebooting the franchise.
Beyond came after Into Darkness. And I agree, it's on a much better track.
phasers create lots of gore, 20 minute long conversations about the prime directive with witty dialogue, an extended close up camera shot of a female ensign's bare feet
sure why not
Wait, we're involving Joss Whedon now too?
I think what he means is that Beyond underperformed because people were expecting a bucket of warm dog vomit like Into Darkness.
And Beyond had Scotty's "stick in a bundle" line.
Which, honestly, if the whole movie was just opening credits>that scene>end credits, it would have been a better, less nonsensical Trek movie than Into Darkness.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
it felt more like a star trek adventure to me than about half of the original 10 movies
The trailer really didn't help it there.
Sure, you could do that. But why?
I don't know. Why does the thread do it every time someone doesn't like something in Discovery?
I also really enjoyed hearing my mother audibly sigh and roll her eyes with the tiny tiny bit of gay rep in the film so that was worth it as well
Because it's tiresome hearing "this has never been done in Star Trek" when it has, and I'm perfectly certain you knew that already.
Also: the universal translator introduced in the episode is obviously the series' new MVP. I didn't mind the subtitles, but I definitely minded the actors playing Klingons struggling to make their scenes dramatically interesting while fighting the prosthetics/language combo.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It was this close to being directed by Orci.
Written AND directed by Orci, no less. Close call with that dark future timeline.