StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I agree with what TRR said about not needing prior experience to make good SF. Case in point, Nicholas Meyer (IIRC) had barely even seen TOS when he was asked to write a film, and e delivered Wrath of Khan, probably the best film of the whole bunch. Sometimes an "outsiders" take is productive.

Personally, if/when this does get made, I'll go see it and reserve judgement until then.

Weird, since the quotes should have been their automatically when I quoted it, and I can't think why I would have deleted and then forgot to re-add them.

Oh well. Too late to edit now. Apologies.

Eternal_Freedom wrote: ↑2017-12-19 12:33pm I agree with what TRR said about not needing prior experience to make good SF. Case in point, Nicholas Meyer (IIRC) had barely even seen TOS when he was asked to write a film, and e delivered Wrath of Khan, probably the best film of the whole bunch. Sometimes an "outsiders" take is productive.

Personally, if/when this does get made, I'll go see it and reserve judgement until then.

Yeah, that.

Also, I don't know how much of a Trekkie Tarantino is or isn't, but I have a general view that its good NOT to have hard core fans running the franchise. Because fans have baggage-accumulated years of nostalgia, expectations, and axes to grind, that inevitably clutter their perspective. I call this the Peter Jackson effect, or the Steven Moffat effect.

What IS needed is a solid understanding of the basic principles of writing and filmmaking, a clear and cohesive vision for the film, and a professional attitude.

The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:11pm

Eternal_Freedom wrote: ↑2017-12-19 12:33pm I agree with what TRR said about not needing prior experience to make good SF. Case in point, Nicholas Meyer (IIRC) had barely even seen TOS when he was asked to write a film, and e delivered Wrath of Khan, probably the best film of the whole bunch. Sometimes an "outsiders" take is productive.

Personally, if/when this does get made, I'll go see it and reserve judgement until then.

Yeah, that.

Also, I don't know how much of a Trekkie Tarantino is or isn't, but I have a general view that its good NOT to have hard core fans running the franchise. Because fans have baggage-accumulated years of nostalgia, expectations, and axes to grind, that inevitably clutter their perspective. I call this the Peter Jackson effect, or the Steven Moffat effect.

What IS needed is a solid understanding of the basic principles of writing and filmmaking, a clear and cohesive vision for the film, and a professional attitude.

I would say that a degree of respect for the source material or franchice is also needed.

The problem with the so called "true fans"(tm) is that their respect for the franchice as morphed into blind worship and they won't see what needs to be changed or adjusted, as they see their (nostalgia colored) vision for the franchice to be utterly perfect.

To give an example a hardcore trekkie might insist on making the movie into a 2 hour rant against the Kelvin-timeline movies and Star Trek:Discovery, while I'm not saying you must like those works, your average movie goer will also not care one bit about the film makers opinions and is just there to watch an entertaining movie and rants rarely are entertaining.

Lord Revan wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:27pm

The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:11pm

Eternal_Freedom wrote: ↑2017-12-19 12:33pm I agree with what TRR said about not needing prior experience to make good SF. Case in point, Nicholas Meyer (IIRC) had barely even seen TOS when he was asked to write a film, and e delivered Wrath of Khan, probably the best film of the whole bunch. Sometimes an "outsiders" take is productive.

Personally, if/when this does get made, I'll go see it and reserve judgement until then.

Yeah, that.

Also, I don't know how much of a Trekkie Tarantino is or isn't, but I have a general view that its good NOT to have hard core fans running the franchise. Because fans have baggage-accumulated years of nostalgia, expectations, and axes to grind, that inevitably clutter their perspective. I call this the Peter Jackson effect, or the Steven Moffat effect.

What IS needed is a solid understanding of the basic principles of writing and filmmaking, a clear and cohesive vision for the film, and a professional attitude.

I would say that a degree of respect for the source material or franchice is also needed.

I'd file that as a sub-set of "a professional attitude".

The problem with the so called "true fans"(tm) is that their respect for the franchice as morphed into blind worship and they won't see what needs to be changed or adjusted, as they see their (nostalgia colored) vision for the franchice to be utterly perfect.

Or they've got caught up in the inevitable fandom wars, and want to attack some specific aspect of the franchise that they don't care for.

To give an example a hardcore trekkie might insist on making the movie into a 2 hour rant against the Kelvin-timeline movies and Star Trek:Discovery, while I'm not saying you must like those works, your average movie goer will also not care one bit about the film makers opinions and is just there to watch an entertaining movie and rants rarely are entertaining.

Quite.

I hate it when writers in a series try to retcon a previous writer/director's work without good cause. Its petty, and unprofessional.

I can see a Tarinto R-rated movie working.

Set it in the TOS Era, about 2 years after the end of TOS. The Organians are no longer enforcing the treaty, and war has broken out with the Klingons.

The call backs could be to classic TOS episodes. You get the humor of Spock keeping a straight face to cope with the stress of the war, Kirk going ape-shit military on the Klingons, Bones moving towards the 'hippy' thing he had going when he first appeared in the original Star Trek movie, etc.

Eh, I'd rather that they not do another TOS-era reboot this soon. Or are you talking about using the cast and continuity of the Abrams films?

The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2017-12-19 08:16pm Eh, I'd rather that they not do another TOS-era reboot this soon. Or are you talking about using the cast and continuity of the Abrams films?

He's talking Prime Continuity between TOS and TMP.

It would have to be a recast though even if not technically a reboot.

Has Tarantino ever not used original characters aside from IB (Hitler and co.)? I can’t see him using prepackaged characters like Kirk and Spock myself, it would seem far more likely that he’ll create his own little corner of the ST galaxy to fuck around in.

That’s assuming this bizarre marriage of franchise and director ever gets off the ground in any case. I predict it’ll have the plug pulled on it way before it actually gains steam.

Iroscato wrote: ↑2017-12-20 05:09am Has Tarantino ever not used original characters aside from IB (Hitler and co.)? I can’t see him using prepackaged characters like Kirk and Spock myself, it would seem far more likely that he’ll create his own little corner of the ST galaxy to fuck around in.

Jackie Brown. It's an adaption of a novel not original.

Crazedwraith wrote: ↑2017-12-20 05:24am

Iroscato wrote: ↑2017-12-20 05:09am Has Tarantino ever not used original characters aside from IB (Hitler and co.)? I can’t see him using prepackaged characters like Kirk and Spock myself, it would seem far more likely that he’ll create his own little corner of the ST galaxy to fuck around in.

Jackie Brown. It's an adaption of a novel not original.

That I did not know. Fair enough.

The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:42pm

Lord Revan wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:27pm

The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2017-12-19 07:11pm

Yeah, that.

Also, I don't know how much of a Trekkie Tarantino is or isn't, but I have a general view that its good NOT to have hard core fans running the franchise. Because fans have baggage-accumulated years of nostalgia, expectations, and axes to grind, that inevitably clutter their perspective. I call this the Peter Jackson effect, or the Steven Moffat effect.

What IS needed is a solid understanding of the basic principles of writing and filmmaking, a clear and cohesive vision for the film, and a professional attitude.

I would say that a degree of respect for the source material or franchice is also needed.

I'd file that as a sub-set of "a professional attitude".

I suppose you can file it that way but I think it bares mentioning seperately as you can be a professional and still not have enough respect for the franchice to do the reseach needed seeing it as "just another job".

The problem with the so called "true fans"(tm) is that their respect for the franchice as morphed into blind worship and they won't see what needs to be changed or adjusted, as they see their (nostalgia colored) vision for the franchice to be utterly perfect.

Or they've got caught up in the inevitable fandom wars, and want to attack some specific aspect of the franchise that they don't care for.

true but in the end it really boils down to seeing their vision for the franchice as perfect and holy.

To give an example a hardcore trekkie might insist on making the movie into a 2 hour rant against the Kelvin-timeline movies and Star Trek:Discovery, while I'm not saying you must like those works, your average movie goer will also not care one bit about the film makers opinions and is just there to watch an entertaining movie and rants rarely are entertaining.

Quite.

I hate it when writers in a series try to retcon a previous writer/director's work without good cause. Its petty, and unprofessional.

It even doesn't have to be retcons, it could be the writer and/or director taking pot shots at parts of the franchice they don't like thru the characters (possibly even having pre-existing characters act out of character so they can take said pot shots).

EDIT:For example the movie could a very thingly veiled copy of Micheal Burnham (or even use the character sort of directly just removing any appealing factors from the character) intentionally written as an unappealing character as possible with the movie going out of it's way to show how unappealing said character is, simply to have a "take that" against Star Trek:Discovery.

Honestly while this is an interesting move, I'm not going to get excited about it until we see actors signing, a date for filming, production art and everything. Back in the 00s (or was it the late 90s?) we were pretty sure Kevin Smith was going to make a Superman movie with Nicholas Cage, and that never went anywhere. John Carter was in development hell for *decades*. More recently, Neill Blomkamp was doing some pretty serious-looking work about an Aliens sequel with Sigourney Weaver and Michael Biehn, storyboarded out and everything. Fizzled in favor of Ridley Scott's Prometheus and Covenant.

True. A lot of intriguing film and television projects have fizzled before completion.

From earlier this year:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/rzNnfKT6IrM[/youtube]

Note that he wants to handle something mythology wise in Star Trek.

Video link isn't working for me