TV: The All - Encompassing Star Trek Thread. Debate Long + Prosper

[LeafalCrusader]

By Michaels do you mean Michael Burnham?

Yup my bad.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

Who?

.And you pretty much have to pry the "worst helmsman" title out of Travis Mayweather's blank, irrelevant hands. Or maybe Wesley if you shoehorn Space Doogie into the role of helmsman instead of his usual gig of "non-departmental awesomeness officer"

Also if I'm being petty, neither Data nor Kim were science officers. They were Operations officers. Considering it was a science and exploration vessel by design, it was always kind of weird that they didn't really have a dedicated science officer/station on Voyager.

I don't know Deana's ability to come in and crash the ship every time she takes the helm gives her a leg up for me in terms of fail. Also if it offends you guys so much you can have separate science/operations officers.

 

[Blender]

Just want to say a Tarantino style Trek sounds awful but I guess I'm just not a fan of his in general.

I'm a Tarantino fan, but that doesn't mean this is a good idea or that I will love it. If he's a fan of the series and thinks he has a great way to do it justice, than I'm all for it. If he just wants to make a Tarantino film with the veneer of Star Trek, just no. That would be doing the franchise as much of an injustice as JJ Abrams making a Star Wars movie with a veneer of Star Trek did.

 

[Cloned]

Patrick Stewart says that he might be interested in playing Jean-Luc Picard again if Tarantino will be directing.

Patrick Stewart Might Reprise Jean-Luc Picard Role if Tarantino Directs 'Star Trek'

Tarantino usually finds a way to draw the most forgotten about, obscure actors out of the woodwork and onto the big screen again.

In that vein, I think we could see Avery Brooks.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Tarantino usually finds a way to draw the most forgotten about, obscure actors out of the woodwork and onto the big screen again.

In that vein, I think we could see Avery Brooks.

I don't think any amount of money in the world, let alone Tarantino, could get Brooks to come back to Trek.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I don't think any amount of money in the world, let alone Tarantino, could get Brooks to come back to Trek.

I was ab out to say this--I think money could--but if you have ever attended a convention that Brooks was PAID to be at--he is by far the most out spoken on his hatred of the show after he left. But this has something to do with the fact he believes he was sold a bad bill of good. He was under the belief that DS9 would end with a big budget movie and that never happened

 

[RobBrown4PM]

The guy strikes me as a casting snob. He reminds me a lot of Edward Norton in that way.

 

[The Nemesis]

I don't know Deana's ability to come in and crash the ship every time she takes the helm gives her a leg up for me in terms of fail. Also if it offends you guys so much you can have separate science/operations officers.

To be fair, Deanna was a counselor, not a pilot. I'd expect the same sort of thing if they had just, for example, plunked Geordi into sickbay and expected him to perform surgery on someone.

 

[Jumptheshark]

The guy strikes me as a casting snob. He reminds me a lot of Edward Norton in that way.

he is like Patrick Stewart and theatre back ground and is a tenured professor in the theater department at Rutgers University where he has taught since 1976.

So he is a bit of an academic

 

[Blender]

I mean, you can't explain this.

 

[Osprey]

Just want to say a Tarantino style Trek sounds awful but I guess I'm just not a fan of his in general.

I agree. Tarantino would be awful. His movies are style over substance. It's no surprise that JJ Abrams is entertaining the idea of him. Tarantino may be "cool," but that doesn't make him right for the franchise. JJ Abrams is "cool," too, and he brought us the last three movies.

 

[johnjm22]

I agree. Tarantino would be awful. His movies are style over substance.

I couldn't disagree more. He's very talented. He knows how to create real drama, tension, and compelling dialog.

You haven't enjoyed any of QT's movies?

His movies are stylized, and often too reliant on violence. I would like to see the violence toned down, but I would love to hear Tarantino's touch applied to the dialog in Star Trek.

 

[Blender]

I agree. Tarantino would be awful. His movies are style over substance.

While it's been a while since Tarantino has made a movie I've loved, this just isn't true. Pulp Fiction especially is an amazing movie.

 

[Osprey]

I couldn't disagree more. He's very talented. He knows how to create real drama, tension, and compelling dialog.

While it's been a while since Tarantino has made a movie I've loved, this just isn't true. Pulp Fiction especially is an amazing movie.

He's talented; I agree. He's very clever at passing off style as substance, but, at the end of the day, his movies are hollow and similar because of it. No matter the setting--urban, western, WWII, martial arts, slavery, etc.--the movies feel the same because because he adapts each setting to his style, rather than his style to the setting. I agree that it'd be intriguing to see him adapt his style to Star Trek, but that's not what he does. He'll, instead, try to adapt Star Trek to his style, and we've put up with enough people, creative though they be, giving us their spin on Star Trek.

 

[SJSharksfan39]

Klingon Heavy episodes that I think are among the best in no particular order.

Errand of Mercy (TOS)
The Trouble With Tribbles (TOS)
A Matter of Honor (TNG)
Redemption (TNG)
Birthright (TNG)
Blood Oath (DS9)
The Way of the Warrior (DS9)
The Sword of Kahless (DS9)
Apocalypse Rising (DS9)
Once More Unto the Breach (DS9)

I would add Tacking into the Wind on your list. It was the episode where I fell in love with Ezri, mainly because of her opinion on the Klingon Empire.

 

[The Nemesis]

I mean, you can't explain this.

All the drugs. All of them.

 

[Warden of the North]

I dont know if I like the thought of a Tarantino Trek film. I dont mind the R rated part, but Im not sure the world needs Trek from his POV.

 

[theotis77]

I mean, you can't explain this.

He is not linear.

 

[Tawnos]

Hate the idea of Tarentino being involved in a Star Trek film.

I couldn't disagree more. He's very talented. He knows how to create real drama, tension, and compelling dialog.

You haven't enjoyed any of QT's movies?

His movies are stylized, and often too reliant on violence. I would like to see the violence toned down, but I would love to hear Tarantino's touch applied to the dialog in Star Trek.

Tarentino's dialogue is the epitome of pseudo-intellectual.

Then again, my answer to "have I enjoyed any of QT's movies" would be a resounding: absolutely not.

 

[Osprey]

It feels weird to be strongly united with Tawnos against johnjm22 for a change, on a Star Trek matter, no less. Is this what an alternate universe is like?

 

[Tawnos]

It feels weird to be strongly united with Tawnos against johnjm22 for a change, on a Star Trek matter, no less. Is this what an alternate universe is like?

Ha, I know what you mean. Although, I suspect our tastes on a lot of things run more similar than not. We just approach new material differently.

The thing that bugs me about QT is the same as what bugs me about a lot of media. I hate when I get the feeling that someone is creating material with a purpose rather than allowing the material to come out of their talent naturally. What I mean by that is that I don't like when someone is trying to be edgy for the sake of being edgy or I don't like when a thrash metal band is fast for the sake of speed.

With Tarentino, I always get the feeling that he's trying to write pithy, smart dialogue for the sake of pithiness and intelligence. This is opposed to someone like Sorkin, who I get the feeling writes musical and smart dialogue because that's just how his style comes out.

 

[Blender]

As I said earlier, I like Tarantino but don't for a second think a Tarantino style movie fits Star Trek in any way. If he wants to make a Star Trek movie and make it in the spirit of Star Trek, I don't have a problem with that though.

 

[Osprey]

The thing that bugs me about QT is the same as what bugs me about a lot of media. I hate when I get the feeling that someone is creating material with a purpose rather than allowing the material to come out of their talent naturally. What I mean by that is that I don't like when someone is trying to be edgy for the sake of being edgy or I don't like when a thrash metal band is fast for the sake of speed.

With Tarentino, I always get the feeling that he's trying to write pithy, smart dialogue for the sake of pithiness and intelligence. This is opposed to someone like Sorkin, who I get the feeling writes musical and smart dialogue because that's just how his style comes out.

I agree. I get the feeling with Tarantino films that he really wants you to know that you're watching a Tarantino film. You're always aware that it's him behind the camera. If he were a classical artist, he'd be standing there with you in the gallery, talking about his art and distracting you with his presence, instead of standing way in the back and observing quietly. Some people like that, since they're interested in the artist as much as the art, but that's not really for me.

 

[Tawnos]

I agree. I get the feeling with Tarantino films that he really wants you to know that you're watching a Tarantino film. You're always aware that it's him behind the camera. If he were a classical artist, he'd be standing there with you in the gallery, talking about his art and distracting you with his presence, instead of standing way in the back and observing quietly. Some people like that, since they're interested in the artist as much as the art, but that's not really for me.

Yes, exactly. I mean, you know how much I like to stay hands off in terms of judging creative choices, but that's at least partially because I don't really care about the artist that much. It's what the artist creates that interests me. When the motivation feels transparently purposeful, it takes away from the art.

 

[johnjm22]

Hate the idea of Tarentino being involved in a Star Trek film.



Tarentino's dialogue is the epitome of pseudo-intellectual.

Then again, my answer to "have I enjoyed any of QT's movies" would be a resounding: absolutely not.

His dialog isn't intellectual and not trying to be. It's fun, quirky and interesting.

His movies get critical acclaim, but they're not high brow, and not intended to be.

Jackie Brown, Pulp Fiction, and Django Unchained were all great.