# Star Trek rated R



## trappedslider (Dec 9, 2017)

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/quentin-tarantino-star-trek-movie-191929487.html

Well..this will definitely be different.....


----------



## Mallus (Dec 9, 2017)

I can’t wait! Though I still don’t believe it’s entirely real...

[insert Star Trek + Tarantino jokes I can’t make because of ENWorlds longstanding language rules here]


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 9, 2017)

I like Tarantino movies. I like Star Trek. I also like steak and strawberry jam, but that doesn't mean I want strawberry jam on my steak.


----------



## Kramodlog (Dec 9, 2017)

R is for Romulan.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 9, 2017)

Ryujin said:


> I like Tarantino movies. I like Star Trek. I also like steak and strawberry jam, but that doesn't mean I want strawberry jam on my steak.




Somehow 
I knew this would be your reaction


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 9, 2017)

*Jimmie T. Kirk*: I don't need you to tell me how f*****g good my coffee is, okay? I'm the one who buys it. I know how good it is. When the replicator makes it, it tastes like BAKTAG! I buy the gourmet expensive stuff because when I drink it I want to taste it. But you know what's on my mind right now? It AIN'T the coffee in my kitchen, it's the dead Klingon in my shuttle bay.
*Redshirt*: Oh, Captain, don't even worry about that...
*Jimmie T. Kirk*: [interupting] No, No, No, No, let me ask you a question. When you came pulling in here, did you get a hail from _Enterprise_ that said "Dead Klingon Storage"?
*Redshirt*: Captain, you know I ain't heard no...
*Jimmie T. Kirk*: [cutting him off again; getting angry] Did you get a hail from _Enterprise_ that said "Dead Klingon Storage"? 
*Redshirt*: [pause] No. I didn't. 
*Jimmie T. Kirk*: You know WHY you didn't get that hail? 
*Redshirt*: Why? 
*Jimmie T. Kirk*: 'Cause it didn’t happen, 'cause storing dead Klingons ain't my f*****g business, that's why!


----------



## Eltab (Dec 9, 2017)

This decision sounds like a mistake.  Based on the article, Mr. Tarentino does not understand that _Star Trek_ is bigger than him.

Edit: On second thought, they could do something from the First Romulan War, which will require gratituous violence (and doubtless Kirk will find an opportunity to seduce some attractive young female), a genre at which Tarentino excels.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 9, 2017)

trappedslider said:


> Somehow
> I knew this would be your reaction




Well I do tend to be consistent in my outlook.

*EDIT* There are some ways that I could see a Tarantino style film working in the Star Trek universe. An Orion crime syndicate movie. A story within the Klingon Empire or the Romulan Empire. His style wouldn't do justice to the Federation.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 9, 2017)

Quentin Tarantino's _Khan Noonien Singh Unchained_?


----------



## Kramodlog (Dec 9, 2017)

I never got why some people dislike Tarantino. The man is a great film maker who masters dialogue and montage.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 10, 2017)

Kramodlog said:


> I never got why some people dislike Tarantino. The man is a great film maker who masters dialogue and montage.




Certainly so, though in a rather narrow sort of genre.

There are some people who will never forgive him for the destruction of a priceless guitar, just to get one shot.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 10, 2017)

Ryujin said:


> Well I do tend to be consistent in my outlook.
> 
> *EDIT* There are some ways that I could see a Tarantino style film working in the Star Trek universe. An Orion crime syndicate movie. A story within the Klingon Empire or the Romulan Empire. His style wouldn't do justice to the Federation.




I honestly thought about putting in "This won't make Ryujin happy" in my op lol


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 10, 2017)

trappedslider said:


> I honestly thought about putting in "This won't make Ryujin happy" in my op lol




I won't lie; it doesn't exactly have me doing handsprings


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 10, 2017)

Ryujin said:


> There are some people who will never forgive him for the destruction of a priceless guitar, just to get one shot.




That _was_ singularly stupid.


----------



## Tonguez (Dec 10, 2017)

I could certainly imagine Khan Noonien Singh in an R-rated movie, 
(because Cumberbands version wasn't really Khan)

then theres the Shakespeare Episode of the Original Series, where a murderer is hiding out in a theater company, that would work with a Tarantino treatment


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 10, 2017)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> That _was_ singularly stupid.




I would have said either selfish or arrogant.


----------



## Mallus (Dec 10, 2017)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> *Jimmie T. Kirk*: I don't need you to tell me how f*****g good my coffee is, okay?... snip



Nicely done! And seeing as asterisks are okay, I give you my impression of Sam Jackson's Picard.

"Tea. Earl Grey. Hot. And when I say 'hot' I don't mean lukewarm. I mean 'hot like the core of a sun'. I'm talking Theta Orionis C hot. I swear if this b***h-a*s wall give me lukewarm tea one more time, I'ma gonna reach up in there and f**k its s**t up so bad LaForge is gonna need all the kings horses and all the king's men, and team of engineers outa the Daystrom Institute *and* that hologram b***h of his to put it back together."


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 11, 2017)

And of course, there would be a discussion of gagh with cheese/gagh royale...


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 11, 2017)

The more I think of it, the more _Pulp Star Trek_ needs to be a thing.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 11, 2017)

I’d really rather they not.


----------



## Imaculata (Dec 11, 2017)

I've always wondered what a Tarantino scifi film would look like. But a Tarantino Star Trek film? That is amazing. Now I wish he'd done this sooner, and with the cast of Next Generation.


----------



## Legatus Legionis (Dec 12, 2017)

.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 12, 2017)

You know you want to see it: Klingon in a gimp suit.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 12, 2017)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> You know you want to see it: Klingon in a gimp suit.




Already got that in "Discovery."


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 12, 2017)

I believe it when I see it.


Eltab said:


> This decision sounds like a mistake.  Based on the article, Mr. Tarentino does not understand that _Star Trek_ is bigger than him.
> 
> Edit: On second thought, they could do something from the First Romulan War, which will require gratituous violence (and doubtless Kirk will find an opportunity to seduce some attractive young female), a genre at which Tarentino excels.



Gratitous violence in the Romulan War? While that sounds logical, according to canon, no one in the Federation actually knew how Romulans looked until the events in _Balance of Terror_, so it seems the war hapened without direct physical combat, or at least without leaving corpses behind.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Dec 12, 2017)

This sounds horrible.  More evidence to me that the people running Trek do not understand Trek at all.  Or they don't care and are just remaking it as they see fit for the current audience. 

I'm in the minority in that outside a couple flicks I find QT to be not so good, Oh well there is always the classic show.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 12, 2017)

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> Oh well there is always the classic show.




Thank god for DvD/blu-ray and then in a few years a 4k release..I mean honestly they should just re-air the  classic episodes and  give up on all attempts to modernize ore reinvent the show/movies.movies. I mean some of theses directors make the claim they were fans of the show grow up but I think that's just a lie said to help try to win over people.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 13, 2017)

Hmmmm...this thread has me thinking.  _Star Trek Reimagined: The TV Show_

Invite big name/hot newcomer directors interested in such a thing to either retell classic storylines or tell new stories in the established ST settings, but in their own style.  They’d get to do single episodes or, for some, up to 4-6 episode arcs.

(And I mean that, even as I think of M. Night Shaymalan’s taste for “twists” and so forth. )

Imagine what Guillermo Del Toro or Clive Barker could do with “Wolf in the Fold”.  Or Khan’s storyline in the hands of John Fawcett (_Orphan Black_).  There’s all kinds of fun Ridley Scott could have.


----------



## Eltab (Dec 13, 2017)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> according to canon, no one in the Federation actually knew how Romulans looked until the events in _Balance of Terror_, so it seems the war hapened without direct physical combat, or at least without leaving corpses behind.



...nuclear and antimatter explosions are not conducive to leaving corpses around...

So it could work, if the war was all spaceship combat - no James Bond stuff or planetary invasions.  Plus, don't Vulcans and Romulans look almost alike?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 13, 2017)

Eltab said:


> ...nuclear and antimatter explosions are not conducive to leaving corpses around...
> 
> So it could work, if the war was all spaceship combat - no James Bond stuff or planetary invasions.  Plus, don't Vulcans and Romulans look almost alike?



As I recall, they’re related.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 13, 2017)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> As I recall, they’re related.




Common ancestry; lost colonists who left before the move to Logic, or something similar. It has generally been left somewhat vague.


----------



## pming (Dec 13, 2017)

Hiya!

I'd love to see it all take place in/around a set area....so, not on a starship. Maybe a base? An orbital station? Something where we get to see stuff in the Trek universe that we pretty much never really get to, at least not with any depth anyway. I mean, really, just WHY do the Klingons hate the federation? Why do the Romulans hate the Vulcans? How do families and individuals...that never 'joined' Star Fleet but were born into it...feel when their life is suddenly upended in a surprise attack by some crazed [insert ST race]?

A story that blurs the line between "good" and "bad"...as many of Tarantino's films do...and shows more realistic expectations and reactions from "normal folk on the base".

I still remember on episode of Babylon 5 where a camera crew shows "the behind the scenes aspect of what keeps B5 station running, and how the bar keeps, store owners, and janitors do all the "real work".  I LOVED it! The scene where two janitors are doing maintenance in a hallway...and one guy gets asked what' he's doing: "Oh, uh, moving this thing around on the floor"..."Ok. Why? What does it do?"..."Oh, it...uh...it...ummm...hey, Al? What DOES this thing do anyway? Is it some sort of buffer or vacuum or something?".  Got a big laugh out of that! I can imagine a LOT of star trek personnel using items and doing tasks that they know how to do...but have no real clue why or what the thing they are doing, does. "I'm moving this blue light thing around this circuit board. Not sure exactly why. Have no clue what it actually does or how it works. All I know is I have to do it and if the light turns red I have to let my boss know".

A whole movie about that would be...boring. But if you take that general idea...the idea of "what do normal, everyday Star Fleet people do? What do they care for? What are their concerns? What and how does SF react to things that affect ONLY the citizens of some outpost? Do they care? Do the 'norms' get screwed and lied to all the time? Are they taken seriously, or does SF just threaten them with transferring them to some horrible, desolate, or dangerous outpost? (I suspect the latter, as in a couple of trek shows/movies this threat is actually used....and some characters are actually at these sucky places and make it known that it is a 'punishment' for something or other).

Anyway, yeah. Like to see a Tarantino Trek! Definitely one I'd watch and buy. 

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 14, 2017)

Eltab said:


> ...nuclear and antimatter explosions are not conducive to leaving corpses around...



Which wouldn't be very bloody.


> Plus, don't Vulcans and Romulans look almost alike?



Exactly, they didn't know that, and if hey had routinely fought Romulans in hand to hand combat (or just shot them at hand phaser ranges), they would have noticed that their enemy looks suspiciously like Vulcans.


----------



## Lord Mhoram (Dec 15, 2017)

Kramodlog said:


> I never got why some people dislike Tarantino. The man is a great film maker who masters dialogue and montage.




In my case, I don't like much swearing or graphic violence (or too much blood) in movies I watch. So that means no Tarantino for me. And I don't mind.


----------



## Argyle King (Dec 17, 2017)

Off topic, but I think Tarantino would have made a much better Rogue One.


----------



## MechaPilot (Dec 19, 2017)

I've always wanted to see a Star Trek movie or series set on Earth during the Eugenics wars.  Maybe Tarrantino could pull that off.


----------



## MechaPilot (Dec 19, 2017)

Lord Mhoram said:


> In my case, I don't like much swearing or graphic violence (or too much blood) in movies I watch. So that means no Tarantino for me. And I don't mind.




His recent western movies have really overdone the blood.  Django and The Hateful Eight had buckets of blood everywhere.  I don't know if that's a growing trend for him, or if he just considers that part of the western genre.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 19, 2017)

MechaPilot said:


> His recent western movies have really overdone the blood.  Django and The Hateful Eight had buckets of blood everywhere.  I don't know if that's a growing trend for him, or if he just considers that part of the western genre.




He's been pretty consistent. "Reservoir Dogs" had a ton of blood and a torture scene.


----------



## MechaPilot (Dec 19, 2017)

Ryujin said:


> He's been pretty consistent. "Reservoir Dogs" had a ton of blood and a torture scene.




Yeah.  But, Django and The Hateful Eight had scenes where it literally looked like someone was off-camera and threw an actual bucket of fake blood at an actor, or at a wall.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 19, 2017)

MechaPilot said:


> Yeah.  But, Django and The Hateful Eight had scenes where it literally looked like someone was off-camera and threw an actual bucket of fake blood at an actor, or at a wall.




I didn't remember a scene with "BloodRayne" levels of tomato soup, so it couldn't have been too out of character for him.


----------



## Mallus (Dec 19, 2017)

Would a Tarantino Star Trek film be all that different from the sort of auteur franchise works we're already seeing? For example, _Logan_, which features not only graphic, gory renditions of Wolverine fighting with his claws, but an F-bombing 90 year-old Charles suffering from dementia. 

This is a, ahem, singular take on the Marvel universe we haven't seen before (maybe kinda in the old "Ruins" miniseries) and a damn fine film. 

Or FX's Legion, which isn't as graphic, but is also much stranger, as someone cleverer than me put it, "Wes Anderson and Stanley Kubrick present the X-Men". Or NBC's art-house rendition of Hannibal Lector, courtesy of Bryan Fuller. 

I'm really excited by the idea that serious artists, with varied skill sets and personal visions, are getting the chance to work on the genre franchises I love. To breath a new kind of life into them. We're already long into the era of competent (and expensive) genre media. Let's see some risks get taken. 

Obviously, the result of some of this will be absolutely awful. But when it works...


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 19, 2017)

Some of the Wolverine comics were actually pretty bloody. Severed body parts, etc.. For that reason "Logan" wasn't all that different, except that they took advantage of the R rating to up the language.


----------



## Mallus (Dec 19, 2017)

Ryujin said:


> Some of the Wolverine comics were actually pretty bloody. Severed body parts, etc.. For that reason "Logan" wasn't all that different, except that they took advantage of the R rating to up the language.



True, but _Logan_ was far and away the most graphically violent X-Men movie, and I think the difference in medium makes a, well, a difference. Seeing actors embody that violence is just more visceral than seeing words and static images on a page. It hits harder. For me, anyway. 

In the same way that while tragedy is par of the course for the X-comics, seeing Patrick Stewart (and Jackman, for that matter) act the hell of those roles was more affecting than any experience I had w/the comics.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 19, 2017)

Mallus said:


> True, but _Logan_ was far and away the most graphically violent X-Men movie, and I think the difference in medium makes a, well, a difference. Seeing actors embody that violence is just more visceral than seeing words and static images on a page. It hits harder. For me, anyway.
> 
> In the same way that while tragedy is par of the course for the X-comics, seeing Patrick Stewart (and Jackman, for that matter) act the hell of those roles was more affecting than any experience I had w/the comics.




That sounds like a normal change in perception I would expect any time the presentation medium changes. Cartoon violence is, no matter how grisly, still only cartoon violence.


----------



## CapnZapp (Dec 30, 2017)

trappedslider said:


> Star Trek rated R



I realize this thread was started because of the Tarantino news, but if I use the thread as its actual topic indicates, I gotta say, "Star Trek rated R" sounds excellent. 

Just look at The Orville. Take a pinch of the slovenly imperfect human crew there. 

Then look at USS Callister (the recent Black Mirror ep) for a hilarious send-up of TOS, complete with jokes about miniskirts and genitalia.

As for the _actual_ "mature" Star Trek series (that's Discovery) I'm much less enthused about that one. Sure it's "dark" and "edgy" but only in a superhero sense. Not in any actual dark or edgy sense. And who wants dark and edgy anyway?!?! F*ck Tarantino.

Star Trek should be optimistic and light. Just because it's rated R doesn't mean it can't be optimistic and light. 

Instead, I give you... *Barbarella!*

Just think about it. Barbarella is "the sixties" But it isn't censored. And most importantly, it's optimistic and light.

Just the way I want my Star Trek.


----------

