• Nate Cox@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year 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 Honary@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year 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.

      • Nate Cox@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • FuryMaker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year 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.

      • Nate Cox@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meh, it is not like a Tarantino Star Trek movie is going to diminish the older series.

      I’d say let him try, and if it turns out bad, throw it on the pile of bad Star Trek movies.

      No real harm done.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So I agree mostly, but classic Trek also had plenty of looking at the present and past showing how bad things were/are/can be. It’s a hopeful message in that we can change and solve problems, but it doesn’t totally ignore issues either.

      I do agree the drama and action is a negative for it though. Some amount of its fine, but ST is about considering our reality through the lense of sci-fi and aliens, not just brainless entertainment. Star Wars already exists in that market. ST needs to do what it does well and not worry about trying to be as big as Star Wars. Endless growth is only going to kill the franchise.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It apparently would have been a direct follow-up to “A Piece of the Action”, the gangster planet episode. Which is probably the one Star Trek plot that would make sense for Tarantino.