125
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] natecox@programming.dev 62 points 6 months ago

I enjoy the Tarantino films, but I don’t want them anywhere near Star Trek.

I really dislike what’s happening with ST lately; what was in my childhood a hopeful message for how much humanity could achieve when we finally get our shit together, is now just another action movie / drama template. Government bad, corruption everywhere, war for the sake of war, etc.

I’m certain Tarantino would double down on that and I just don’t want it.

[-] Ramin_HAL9001@lemmy.ml 21 points 6 months ago

Government bad, corruption everywhere, war for the sake of war, etc.

I’m certain Tarantino would double down on that and I just don’t want it.

Tarantino is kind of a bellwether for the mostly apolitical right-wing (but non-fascist) middle-class majority of the US population, the movie "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" convinced me of that. It also convinced me that Tarantino himself has lost the plot, or actually never really had it. He reminds me a bit of Beavis and Butthead, kind of just watching movies and TV all the time, sorting everything into the binary categories "cool" or "sucks", except he actually goes out and makes films that glorify all he thinks is "cool" which happens to be a cross-section of all media that glorifies violence and toxic masculinity.

So he likes Star Trek. Congratulations Tarantino, your "geek" bona-fides are authentic, but like the rest of the right-wing (non-fascist) middle-class majority, you really have no fucking clue and don't care about the political origins of Star Trek and are just itching to erase them so you can make it into another "cool" movie that glorifies violence and toxic masculinity. You can fuck right off, Tarantino.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

You should check out Strange New Worlds then, it's a return to episodic form

[-] natecox@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago

I kinda feel like I just don’t have the heart for ST anymore. Picard was the final nail in the coffin, I am all out of trust for the modern generation of writers.

I’ll just watch TNG through every couple of years and be happy in my bubble.

[-] xilliah@beehaw.org 10 points 6 months ago

Have you tried strange new worlds?

[-] Kyre@kbin.social 10 points 6 months ago

Also Lower Decks is incredible. A Star Trek show that makes fun of itself and the franchise but is still narratively driven and... entertaining.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago

I call it the Omniman/Homelander distinction

That is to say, is the deconstructing work made by someone who gets the message of the work being deconstructed or not.

Omniman is a complex look at the stated origin of Superman being sent to earth, and the paternalistic nature of what exactly Jor'El wished for Clark to do with the benefits of Earth's environment, and also a look at how even despite that, Superman would have been capable of learning to be a true hero without that guiding hand of a human upbringing, and that some of his spark isn't nature or nurture but just that drop of empathy it takes to make someone see helping others as worth it for its own sake.

Homelander is a wankfest about how bad superhero comics are written by a guy who wrote an entire series about how he believes everyone secretly wants to be a murder rapist and is just "brainwashed by societal bullshit" to not acknowledge it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FuryMaker@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Yeah, I prefer the positive role models & society present in 90's trek. You don't get that much in nutrek.

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 5 points 6 months ago

You must have hated DS9.

I see TNG with mostly 2D characters where the Federation and its ideals are the main driving force of the plots. When they deviate from that is when you get bad episodes (cough Sub Rosa cough). The characters had to shed some of their depth and become idealized for message to shine through.

On DS9, you have a gritty view of a frontier without the influence of the Federation. The evolution of the characters and how they react to the changing reality around them is the center stage, and for that you need 3D, flawed characters to build development arcs upon.

Then on DSC you have perfect 2D characters in a corrupt world and the show is about Michael Burnham but she's also perfect and I can't see what message they're trying to send.

[-] natecox@programming.dev 9 points 6 months ago

I think DS9 set a precedent that was bad for the franchise, but I don’t hate it; the show felt like it understood its roots. I took DS9 as a way to explore how federation values addressed a galaxy not quite there yet.

It didn’t diminish the hopeful future by saying that “actually the federation is evil" it just said “listen, we still have work to do”.

Watching Cisco wrestle internally with reconciling who he knew he was supposed to be while the galaxy tested that was at least interesting on an intellectual level.

I think that bit of nuance got lost though, so I do kinda wish it had never happened.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] maegul@lemmy.ml 36 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

FWIW, I recall an interview with Tarantino on YouTube somewhere in which Trek came up, and he was asked to name one of his favourite episodes.

To my surprise he named Yesterdays enterprise. He genuinely seemed to love it and remembered a lot of details about the plot. The other he mentioned is city on the edge of forever.

So while many might react to the idea of an R rated Tarantino Trek film negatively, I’d be quietly optimistic that he has good taste in Trek and would have a good core of a premise and story. I suspect he’d also handle the characters well, knowing how to balance campiness, seriousness and comedy.


EDIT: Found the interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyD7CFnFH3A

It's from 2015. Go to 3.47 for the relevant section. Interestingly, rewatching it, the prompt of the conversation was "what Star Wars movie would you like to do" and Tarantino responds with he'd rather do a Trek film.

And to further my point, he's main point is that so many good episodes from Trek, especially the original series, could be made into movies.

[-] ulkesh@beehaw.org 3 points 6 months ago

City on the Edge of Forever is the best TOS episode in my opinion, and surpasses 90% or more of all Star Trek across all the series.

It’s good to know he knows his Star Trek. But I still wouldn’t want a Tarantino Trek movie — unless, of course, Avery Brooks reprises his role and recites Ezekiel 25:17 and has a phaser with Bad Motherfucker etched on it. That’s a Trek movie I’d watch.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 6 months ago

Pure marketing piffle.

Paramount would never let a Hard R Trek get made. Not only is it the completely wrong tone for Trek (even if you rate the JJ Abrams movies) but it would seriously harm ticket sales as kids and young teens would be prohibited from going to the theater to see it. Imagine Kirk and Spock sitting around, smoking weed, talking about their favorite obscure 2200s films while holding knives to each other's nutsacks.

They only started talking about Tarantino directing a Star Trek movie in order to build hype for the new Trek shows that are of dubious quality.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 9 points 6 months ago

I also don't think Captain Picard needs to drop the N-word while gazing at alien feet tbh

[-] kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee 20 points 6 months ago

When you came to space dock here, did you notice a sign out in front of my station that said "Dead Romulan Storage"?

[-] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 19 points 6 months ago

Man, now I'll never find out how many times Samuel L Jackson can be called the n-word on the bridge of the Enterprise...

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

Tarantino movies do tend to feature the hard r pretty prominently.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 16 points 6 months ago
[-] Plopp@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Jesus, man, Omulan please.

[-] Basilisk@mtgzone.com 13 points 6 months ago

I feel like in the best case it would have been a catastrophe that somehow manages to fall together in a way that actually works, and in the worst case it would have just been bad to the point of being offensively bad, appealing to neither regular filmgoers whole also pissing off established fans.

... But it also feels like giving a chainsaw to a bear: You know whatever's gonna happen you're not gonna like, but also you kinda want to do it just to see what it is.

[-] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

Your last analogy made me snort my 3 sleeping partners (human canine and feline) awake.

Also spot on. But I really don't want to see it. But I'm sure I'd be entertained by reading about the result.

[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Don't you mean feet out? Preferably, women's feet. Covered in oil?

[-] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 4 points 6 months ago

Quentin's pitch: "So there's an entire species where they're all feet. And Kirk says the n-word. Like, a lot."

[-] Ithorian@hexbear.net 12 points 6 months ago

I love Tarantino but I would hate to see his star trek. His balls hard R star wars movie on the other hand would be the best film in the series.

[-] Corgana@startrek.website 12 points 6 months ago

I understand hesitancy for an R-rated Star Trek movie, and I also understand that Tarantino's style isn't for everyone, but that said- he always puts a lot of effort in to crafting a good story, and there's always a ton of attention detail. His movies are never shallow pandering cash grabs like certain other directors who will remain nameless here.

So while a Tarantino Trek movie sounds very weird on the surface, I think he's far and away earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to making any movie at this point and I would welcome his perspective.

Not that it's ever gonna happen, of course. But if we do ever see a new movie, I would far prefer an auteur over a plug-n-play disneyfied cash grab like we see with the MCU, Star Wars, and basically any other pop culture franchise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It would have been like the mirror mirror episode only with more of Uhuras feet.

Mirror mirror episode description

[-] guitarsarereal@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I still maintain that a Quentin Tarantino Trek likely would have been the greatest Trek film ever made (not a high bar though). Come on, imagine Inglourious Basterds set during the Cardassian occupation of Bajor. But the rights holders have always been Trek's biggest enemy because for the most part they just want to make something safe that will get people viewing, when what's great about Trek is how expansive the universe is and how much room there is to tell stories of every kind. Literature about the far future, whose entire point is how expansive and diverse that far future could be, shouldn't be so stylistically narrow that people get their knickers in a twist when Picard swears. But since it is, we can never have something as good or even just interesting as Quentin Tarantino Trek.

[-] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

No. The story would revolve around an intergalactic war started over a teenage girl's feet.

[-] guitarsarereal@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago

I didn't say give him full artistic freedom!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

I don't think it would be, galaxy quest set a pretty damn high bar.

[-] Corgana@startrek.website 3 points 6 months ago

Imagine Inglourious Basterds set during the Cardassian occupation of Bajor

Damnit Jim, I hate that you said this because I know I'll never get it!

[-] DosDude@retrolemmy.com 10 points 6 months ago

I like star trek, and I like R-movies. I don't know if they will mix well.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] maegul@lemmy.ml 10 points 6 months ago

For anyone interested, Tarantino spoke ad lib about the idea of making a Trek film back in 2015. I mentioned this in another comment here but didn't have the link to the interview.

The interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyD7CFnFH3A

Go to 3:47 for the relevant section. Interestingly, rewatching it, the prompt of the conversation was "what Star Wars movie would you like to do" and Tarantino responds with he'd rather do a Trek film.

He's main point is that so many good episodes from Trek, especially the original series, could be made into movies, and cites specifically City on the Edge of Forever and Yesterday's Enterprise, which certainly indicate that he has some good Trek Taste.

[-] TIN@feddit.uk 9 points 6 months ago

A team of section 31 assassins armed with katanas are beamed aboard the enemy starship with orders to take out the top leadership?

[-] Vaggumon@lemm.ee 9 points 6 months ago

I'm a big Qentin Tarantino fan, but I never felt he was right for Star Trek. Not his type of movie IMO. But what the fuck do I know.

[-] Corgana@startrek.website 3 points 6 months ago

I just left a comment with more detail elsewhere, but at this point I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt. Tarantino-Trek sounds like a weird combo, but based on his spotless track record, I would be surprised if he somehow managed made a stinker.

[-] Lucien@hexbear.net 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I love Tarantino films; major fan. But I don't think he's capable of nuance or subtext, both of which are heavily used in the franchise. I would also abhor a "hard R" Star Trek film. It would be right up there with the Kelvin films. There's no way in hell the fan base would allow something like that to be canonized. The only alternative I could see is if it involved time travel and all of the "hard R"s were from humans from the past.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 3 points 6 months ago

Star Trek itself often has nuance that's about as subtle as being hit in the face with a brick. Need I remind everyone about Let That Be Your Last Battlefield, TOS S3E15.

[-] TonyHawksPoTater@kbin.social 3 points 6 months ago

I think when they say "hard R" here, they mean a strong R rating for the film, not the other hard R for which Tarantino is known.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Either talk about the plot, set a production date or stop writing these nothing articles.

I mean, no duh Tarantino would do a Trek movie that has lots of blood. To be familiar with his name is to know that's his style. Just tired of years teasing how great something WOULD'VE BEEN but not saying why.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 6 points 6 months ago

So, set on Qo'noS?

[-] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

As a longtime Trek fan, I’m certainly in favor of it. There’s plenty of things to work with; things implied but never really shown. Which is why I also liked more recent Trek projects like Strange New Worlds and Picard. They have a bit more grit to them.

Tarantino’s trek would not have been for everyone… but it certainly would’ve been a massive hit. Even if you hate his other work, you can’t help but be intrigued.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 months ago

I mean, of course it was going to be R-rated, Quent doesn’t exactly make family-friendly pics.

But also, why is everyone always trying to make Star Trek edgier these days?

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Flyberius@hexbear.net 4 points 6 months ago

All I know is that I would really have wanted to see it.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 3 points 6 months ago

I'm guessing it would have really leaned into the colonial pulp fiction aspect of the original series.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
125 points (87.0% liked)

Star Trek

10352 readers
44 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
05-09 DSC 5x07 "Erigah"
05-16 DSC 5x08 "Labyrinths"
05-23 DSC 5x09 "Lagrange Point"
05-30 DSC 5x10 "Life, Itself"
07-01 PRO S2 Index

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Lower Decks (2024)

Prodigy (2024-07-01)

Strange New Worlds (2025)

Section 31 (TBA)

In Development

Starfleet Academy


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.


Allied Discord Server


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS