“The one thing I can say is it would deal with the Chris Pine timeline. Now, I still don’t quite understand, and JJ [Abrams] can’t explain it to me, and my editor has tried to explain it to me and I still don’t get it… about something happened in the first movie that now kind of wiped the slate clean. I don’t buy that. I don’t like it. I don’t appreciate it. I don’t – f*** that… I want the whole series to have happened, it just hasn’t happened yet.”
This makes me worried, along with the quote about Khan.
Now I think there is alot he could bring to the franchise, but I can also see a major backlash if its Pulp Fiction in space without respecting the canon. His quote about Pegg makes me wonder.
Just don’t see a studio handing him $175-200 million to make an R-rated Star Trek movie. Especially when it looks like Paramount and Viacom are looking to merge again.
The cost of humoring Quentin Tarantino? Nothing. The cost of offending Quentin Tarantino or brushing him off? The guy will be around for several more decades in all likelihood, and he’s abrasive and loud and likes to talk.
“Deal with” (the direct quote) the Kelvin timeline is not necessarily the same as “set in” the Kelvin timeline. The way I read it, he’s angry about what Abrams did. (He probably has no real choice in picking the movie’s setting, however. Paramount is not going to let him “undo” Abrams’ decisions.)
Well you see, someone goes just a little bit further back in time and blows up Nero…
Nothing about that movie made a lick of sense, and at least the third movie (didn’t see the second) was awful and not even Star Trek in any way other than the barest coat of paint, so anything that annihilates them is fine by me.
I enjoyed it a good deal, as well (and she was quite fun). Parts of it fall into guilty pleasure territory (eg - Beastie Boys saving the day was utterly ridiculous from a logical view, but if you’re on board with the film then it gets an “Oh, why the hell not?!?” kind of grin), but I’m totally good with that. Still, I can get where Kolbex is coming from in that the film is even a larger departure from the established Star Trek format.
Beastie Boys iskind of a JJ thing. One of the pilots in his Star Wars film is (h)Ello (n)Asty, of the species Abednigo (Paul’s Boutique reference) whose helmet has he slogan Born to Ill
To be fair, Shatner would express interest in a 16 Candles remake in Molly Ringwald’s role, if he thought there was even a miniscule chance to get the role. He does this every time there is a new potential Star Trek project in the news.
Heh… “Do something radical and different.” is kinda what JJ did and people are split on that.
I dig the JJ-Trekverse. I like what he did with Khan and with the crew. I probably don’t revere the original series enough to care how it makes people feel about that, though. I just kinda enjoy all things Trek.
I think a sweary Tarantino Trek is a terrible idea. Sounds like he should rather take a run at Star Wars… A Mos Eisley type bar fight on some off world seems more suitable.
The longer I have to sit with the idea, the more I think this should not happen (nor should it happen to Star Wars). Star Trek should be for everyone including kids somewhere around 10 and up. It certainly has an ability to inspire people and if you create a 100% adult film, you probably lose that. It might examine humanity in unique ways, but it might not be worth the cost to the franchise as a whole.
I really like Shatner. I got to talk to him for like one minute at a con. He was very cool to me and my wife, and my step son. So for that one very short moment, I was talking to Captain Kirk. Say no evil about my buddy. :)
