Which new Star Trek film would you actually have Chosen

[Castle]

Big Big sigh....Looks like ever since Star Trek Beyond in 2016. Paramount has been at a mixed road of what to do with the franchise. it's feels like every year they announce some star trek film project that never takes off. Now they have announced a new star trek film and I am thinking the movie will never see post production as the others or maybe it will?

If you were calling the shots at Paramount and you were a Trekkie. what star trek film would you actually have supported getting made and why. I have listed all the star trek movies that has been announced Post 2016 that never may never see the light of Day and given a rough summary of their background

S. J. Clarkson - Star Trek 4

This film was announced as the follow up to Star Trek Beyond. A heavy focus was made around the movie getting directed by a female director. This was the momentum Paramount was building at that time. the Kelvin cast was set to return.

Noah Hawley- Star Trek

Writer and creator of shows such as Legion and Fargo. I think out of all the Trek projects, fans were very hyped for this one because Noah Hawley is one of those very old school kind of talent. I have seen some of his stuff and he does have the goods and more. His style and talent and work appeal more to the intellectual hard chess of sci-fi culture. I feel while this may have been good for Star Trek, it may not have been commercial enough and even if Hawley were asked to dumb his style down for a more mainstream crowd, how much is dumbed down by his own narrative. The movie was meant to be a stand alone film


Quentin Tarantino - Star Trek 4?

This was sort of controversial for fans, however I was down with this movie the most, because it could be what Star Trek may have needed to rebrand itself. It was rumoured that Tarantino's wanted to make an extended version of Star Trek TOS City on Edge of Forever and return the Kelvin Timeline Cast to the Prime Universe

Also as it is Tarantino, I think it would be a new challenge for him to make a science fiction movie. it could be bonkers, but it could work amazingly.

Matt Shakman - Star Trek

This was announced last week. I don't know so much him but he has worked on Wandavsion, Fargo and Game of Thrones. I think based on that, his movie would be my third choice after Tarantino and Hawley. I would be putting S J Clarkson film last, because not only am I not familiar with her work at all, I don't agree that a woman should just get a job because of her gender alone, if there are artistically better directors, especially when you don't have a big influential studio like Disney to back and protect your project even if it turns out awful.


Rob Orci - Star Trek 4
This was a film that was meant to be the original 3rd Star Trek movie before Beyond and the film concept was raised again after Beyond but Chris Hemsworth and Chris Pine walked away because Paramount did not want to pay them more money they asked for. This movie was meant to be a story about Chris Hemsworth (George Kirk) returning to bond with his son, Jim Kirk (Chris Pine). It was a time travel film....in the long list of time travel star trek stories.

While, this looks good on paper. Rob Orci sadly, has not shown he can be a great writer or good director. the movie would have also been his directorial debut. I don't trust that at all, especially not after the mess that became of first time director Alex Kurtzman and Orci's former writing partner- The Mummy movie. I feel for this reason, Orci Star Trek 4 movie is out of my top 3.

So Here is my standing of all the Trek movies I would like to have seen gotten made.

1. Tarantino's Star Trek

2. Noah Hawley's Star Trek

3. Matt Shakman's Star Trek

4. S. J Clarkson's Star Trek

5. Rob Orci's Star Trek.

[thwhtGuardian]

Tarintino would be my first choice because it would certainly be different but I also really enjoy Clarkson, as her work on Life on Mars was fantastic.

[CosmiComic]

Would a Tarantino Star Trek be full of Tarantino-isms?

[Castle]

Tarintino would be my first choice because it would certainly be different but I also really enjoy Clarkson, as her work on Life on Mars was fantastic.

Did not see that, never even heard of it. However this is part of the down side of making everything so political. Clarkson may be good in her own right, but when you focus less on her talent and make it about her gender, it hurts her as an artist.

Obviously this movie would never.... is no longer happening but we may never know for sure what the outcome would have been.

[thwhtGuardian]

Did not see that, never even heard of it. However this is part of the down side of making everything so political. Clarkson may be good in her own right, but when you focus less on her talent and make it about her gender, it hurts her as an artist.

Obviously this movie would never.... is no longer happening but we may never know for sure what the outcome would have been.

Life on Mars was an amazing show, definitely the best sci-fi show from the last 20 years.

[skyvolt2000]

If there was no Covid-Tarantino would be my first choice.

Since we got Covid-Noah would be my choice since we are talking a stand alone film.

I would hope it would be the last voyage of Enterprise C or the first voyage of USS Excalibur (New Frontier books) or USS Titan. Maybe Sulu's Excelsior.

There is enough stuff out there for a stand alone film that should not require a huge budget.

Clarkson may be good in her own right, but when you focus less on her talent and make it about her gender, it hurts her as an artist.

How is that hurting her????? It's not HER fault no woman got a shot at directing the films.

It's not like they didn't have any running around in the past.

You would have the same issue if you gave the gig to Levar Burton-would he not be the first black one? Justin Lin was he not the first Asian one?


Can't help if they are the first-it will get bought up. That is the price everyone pays for excluding folks. There were qualified POC, women & LGBTQA+ in the past-not their fault when you pander to entitled echo chambers.

[DrNewGod]

Honestly, None Of The Above, which is why I didn't vote.

Star Trek films have been at their best when they were closure stories on the tv shows. So, stand-alone, or franchise entry films? Especially director ego pieces or brand pumps?

No thanks.

[Castle]

If there was no Covid-Tarantino would be my first choice.

Since we got Covid-Noah would be my choice since we are talking a stand alone film.

In terms of talent, no doubt it will be a split between the Tarantino and Hawley film, although my lean towards Tarantino is more for also name recognition. Tarantino is a legend at this point and his name on the film may help the box office, which has never been star trek's biggest reliable strengths. Domestically, Into Darkness and Beyond fell off at the Box Office.

How is that hurting her????? It's not HER fault no woman got a shot at directing the films.

It's not like they didn't have any running around in the past.

You would have the same issue if you gave the gig to Levar Burton-would he not be the first black one? Justin Lin was he not the first Asian one?


Can't help if they are the first-it will get bought up. That is the price everyone pays for excluding folks. There were qualified POC, women & LGBTQA+ in the past-not their fault when you pander to entitled echo chambers.

Cutting the long story shot, I am just going with nahh. Hire people only based on talents and even if you hire a woman or POC, you have to be sure the quality of work is just as good as their white counterparts. As I said with S.J., I have not seen any of her stuff to judge but Paramount has an obligation to ensure she was right for the job beyond her gender.

[C_Miller]

Cutting the long story shot, I am just going with nahh. Hire people only based on talents and even if you hire a woman or POC, you have to be sure the quality of work is just as good as their white counterparts. As I said with S.J., I have not seen any of her stuff to judge but Paramount has an obligation to ensure she was right for the job beyond her gender.

You seem to be the only person concerned about her gender.

[CosmiComic]

People like them act like there's a bunch of mediocre minority filmmakers being hired only for diversity purposes when the opposite is clearly true

[Castle]

You seem to be the only person concerned about her gender.

No I did not care about that, it was Paramount trying to make people get concerned about it.

[thwhtGuardian]

No I did not care about that, it was Paramount trying to make people get concerned about it.

I don't remember a lot of Paramount press harping on her gender at all...but a lot from you which is weird.

[j9ac9k]

Would a Tarantino Star Trek be full of Tarantino-isms?

I'm sure he has the equivalent of the N-word for Vulcans peppered throughout his script like a steak au poivre.

[C_Miller]

No I did not care about that, it was Paramount trying to make people get concerned about it.

Can you back that up? I see some mention of it, but it's A) not from Paramount and B) No one is making a big deal of it. They are literally just mentioning the fact that she would be the first woman do direct a Star Trek movie. There are plenty of mediocre men who get to direct movies every day. Someone them even direct Star Trek movies. Why is it that they have to be the best when they're a woman? Why is the bar so much higher for them?

[green_garnish]

This was sort of controversial for fans, however I was down with this movie the most, because it could be what Star Trek may have needed to rebrand itself.

This exactly states Star Trek's problem. The issue is not rebranding itself, it's rediscovering its brand. Stop trying to make this Die Hard or X Files. Just keep it Star Trek.

I could not possibly support Tarantino as a Star Trek director. He would insist on making a Tarantino movie, not a Star Trek movie.