The big news about Star Trek feature films is that Quentin Tarantino has pitched an idea to JJ Abrams and a Revenant scribe Mark L. Smith has been tapped to flesh it out into a script. It is still unclear where the potential film would be set or who would be in it, even to Star Trek star John Cho. But the actor is all for it.
As a guest on Ora TV‘s Larry King Now, Cho was asked about Tarantino Trek, he said he was aware of the reporting, but noted: “What I heard is [J.J. Abrams and Tarantino] met. I have not heard an official announcement.”
When King noted that he would expect Cho to reprise his role as Hikaru Sulu, the actor joked:
“Tell J.J. I am an integral part of Star Trek.”
Cho said that he hoped to be in the next Star Trek feature and said he thought Tarantino is “brilliant.” Regarding the reports that the film would be R-rated, Cho noted:
I would like to do some Quentin Tarantino dialog, as Sulu.
The actor also talked about how much fun it has been playing Sulu in three Star Trek feature films. You can watch a clip of Cho’s appearance on Larry King Now below.
Keep up with all the news about the next Star Trek feature film at TrekMovie.com.
Sorry, John, but Sulu, Scotty, Uhura, and Chekov are supporting cast. There are no guarantees what QT Trek would even look like at this point.
If it’s a TOS movie, then they would obviously be included. The fact that they’re supporting cast is irrelevant.
There were eleven other Constitution class starships in the TOS universe, so there’s nothing stopping Paramount and QT from heading off in some entirely new direction. Or just make a Kirk/Spock movie. It won’t kill Trek to do a non-ensemble story….
True. But if you had to bet money, it would be that the supporting cast would be back as well.
@ TUP – If they stay in the Kelvin universe, I’d probably take that bet. If Paramount decides to hire this new sheriff that has ridden into town, there’s a good chance that horse is riding off in a new direction….which is why I wouldn’t want to be setting the odds on that bet, just yet.
@Dana — so recast Checkov?
@ CC – sure, if we are sticking with the Kelvin universe, why not?
If KT crew is used, I doubt they recast Chekov.
Jaylah is a perfect Tarantino character…
you forgot Mccoy. In this trek the third lead was more Uhura than McCoy; it’s her face that is consistently used for promotion, and her actress who gets award noms for the role and is the third most interviewed actor of this cast. Delusional old tos fans keep pretending that this is like tos and McCoy is at the same level of Kirk and Spock when he isn’t. He never was not even in tos (and Deforest didn’t complain about that half of how much Urban had already complained) Most of the audience of these movies doesn’t give a damn about tos, and doesn’t have any nostalgic attachment to the old characters and their dynamics to the extent of projecting that fannish obsession on the canon of this different trek iteration – regardless what is really done here.
anyway, the secondary characters may not matter to same but let’s not pretend that a movie with Kirk and Spock only, thus just Pine and Quinto, would be a hit for nowadays audiences, even less the existing fans of this trek that already know this cast. They aren’t strong and popular enough to carry a movie alone, and there were already many critics and fans who thought the movies docused on those two too much at the expense of doing something interesting with other characters too.
If Tarantino is hired to do something different, making a Kirk show or Kirk/Spock movie really isn’t fresh, groundbreaking, original, daring etc etc.
At this point I have zero expectations for the fourth film but it would be great to have him and the rest of the cast back. I’m not betting on it, though.
I feel that by this movie bears fruit ( if it indeed comes to pass ), Tarantino end up only with a story credit rather than being a full-on director.
I also wonder if the next movie will be a semi-reboot ( i.e. recasting/new aesthetics/etc. due to STAR TREK BEYOND’s box office failure.
I am by no means a movie industry expert, and this is my personal view.
My feel is that one of the reasons ST Beyond tanked at the box office, despite it’s many positive reviews, was due to the abysmal marketing from Paramount. It’s almost as if it was a last minute afterthought. Majority of movie goers did not know a new Trek was out there and just didn’t bother. Despite it being Trek’s 50th anniversary, where was the hype?
I do agree, that played a large part. I also feel there was a level of audience fatigue/frustration coming after the not-greatly received Star Trek Into Darkness.
If a fourth film is to come into being – it needs a real shot in the arm/reboot of sorts to garner audience interest.
Having ( the possibility of ) Tarantino direct, is one way – but that’s still a big “IF” at this stage as there’s been no offical statement – lot’s of movies have people attached at the earliest stages only for deals to fall through later.
Poor marketing yes. But they needed to re-capture a lot of fans. 2009 created a lot of goodwill with new fans, old fans, core fans, mainstream. STID pissed it all away.
Dr Beckett: Your comment is spot on. Paramount’s marketing was abysmal. In fact, they don’t seem to have much of a clue these days. Their movies haven’t performed to expectations. It’s been 18 months since Star Trek Beyond came out, but until now, there hasn’t been any word from Paramount, only rumors.
I totally agree that Paramount does a poor job with promotion and, in general, trying to create hype around the movies.
On the other hand though, I feel like Beyond isn’t a movie that gave to the promotion guys that much exciting stuff to use for promotion and what we got, for the most part, was the ‘truth’ in terms of what we were supposed to expect from it.
The creative team didn’t make the most interesting interviews either. Lin sounded like he couldn’t wait to be done with it and get to his next project.
the reason why Beyond is the least successful isn’t just promotion. The movie was weak, alienated a lot of the fans of the first two, and not enough people cared about it. It didn’t do as good as the other 2 with the dvds either.
BEYOND didn’t make as much as ’09 or INTO DARKNESS but it was not a “box office failure.” Do some basic research and you’ll discover that big budget movies rarely “lose” money, and BEYOND did decent business (Paramount just promoted it in an embarrassingly poor manner).
@ Hawkeye…I think it was Forbes a few years back that published a story that virtually no movie has lost money, because on going residuals will nudge all pictures into the black over a period of time. There is a time value to money, though, so studio’s are not out looking for a majority of ‘Pluto Nash’ type projects that’ll take thirty years to break even. They want ‘The Last Jedi’ returns, where a picture is in the black during it’s initial run, or shortly after. Justice League didn’t perform, having to hit roughly 600MM to break even. STB’s production was moved to Canada, with the expectation of cost savings that didn’t materialize. Had they kept the budget in the low to mid 100MM range, it would probably have made it easier to call it a success, and green lit another episode. I won’t call it a failure, but it very much underperformed at the box office. Paramount, a studio on shaky financial footing, can’t afford to be shoveling 250-300MM into Trek tentpoles, just to keep having them break even.
I want the cast to return. What they did in Beyond was the closest this cast had gotten to playing their characters as matured and seasoned officers (no more teenage angst and immaturity). The departure of JJ from the directors chair and the added writing of Pegg were welcome changes. I still believe that ITD ran the JJverse into a ditch, and while Beyond certainly steered it back on course too many viewers (fan and non) had been scared off by ITD to give it a chance.
Keep the cast and allow them to continue spreading their wings
Personally I feel STID’s core mistake was to come along four years( too late ) after TREK 2009, and then only have the story move along by only 6 months from the first film. They then end STID exactly where Trek 2009 left off – with the promise of the 5 year mission – but still not there. ( Not to mention the whole KHAN debacle ).
STID’s core mistake was sucking.
I rewatched Beyond a month ago. I like this film a lot. One of the biggest nitpics a friend had when it opened was that Kirk usually refuses to kill his enemy. This ending did not match what she was looking for, especially from a racial point of view, being black and very sensitive to the idea that Cumberbach lives on but Idris bites it. I think the ending, which should have elaborated the villian’s motivation more than what we saw, was simply a slugfest.
@TIAC — yup. Lord Garth was rehabilitated wasn’t he? Many similarities …
I had a problem with making Sulu a married father, since Sulu was always such a carefree swashbuckler … Oh well different universe …
For me, STID’s problems go back to the writers, who seemed unable to come up with an original story, instead just riffing on prior events and mashing them into a new narrative (Khan, corrupt Starfleet warmongers, sacrifice to save the ship, somebody yelling KHAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!). While the film was pretty to look at, the story was incredibly derivative and unoriginal.
Quite: “While the film was pretty to look at, the story was incredibly derivative and unoriginal.”
That seems to be a general problem with the majority of big blockbusters these days. But I agree that they went too far lifting stuff from WOK.
STID Core mistake was KHAN. They could have made almost the exact same movie, even using the same identical backstory, but just make it another genetically-engineered Human Augment of the late-20th century Eugenics Wars period on Earth, and fans would have been much happier. There were several of these leaders sent into space like Khan. They could have easily made Cumberbach the leader of the European faction to make it work. That fact that JJ couldn’t figure this out is why JJTrek is in some ways become a poor mans starwars. JJ doesn’t even like Star Trek.
Interesting, but I agree with those who are saying we just have no idea where this QT possibility will even go, if anywhere. I’d certainly be happy to see it, though, as well as Cho. He’s made a fine Sulu.
I hope Tarantino Trek is Next Gen.
Nothing hurt the Kelvin universe more than the lengthy empty periods between movies and whatever absurd internal politics between CBS and Paramount prevented a marketing and merchandising blitz that would’ve kept all the new and old Trek fans that loved ST09 interested long-term. They should do JJ’s original Star Trek 4 idea with Chris and Chris.
And let Tarantino do his thing, which I hope involves an Undiscovered Country quality send off for Stewart, Spiner and TNG.
Berman and Braga believed the problem was too much Star Trek. But we live in a different time and the problem may be too little to keep people interested. Even with Discovery. CBS should add a second Trek show to keep viewers subscribed to All Access.
@ Mike – Berman and Braga were only half right, as the other problem was there was too much BAD Star Trek at the time.
@Mike Stivic — thank you no. Stewart and Spiner had their send off. Spiner can’t even plausibly play data anymore … And please god no technobabble explanation about how Spiner developed an aging program …
I don’t mind them setting a movie in the TNG era, but the time for cameos is long over, unless they are truly just that, brief moments with a popular actor like Stewart who will resonate with non trek audiences. But all the same, I’d rather they just recast data and Picard if they’re going to involve them in any way …
And Berman and Braga drove the franchise into the ground because they were trying to play it safe, recycling the same old formulas, just like Braga is doing now with ORVILLE …
Spiner has a built-in aging program. Data does not ;-)
If they were to recast the TNG crew we would likely get some kind of “origin story”. That’s just how these things are normally done these days. Also it would lead to constant comparisons between the original and the recast version.
At this point, I think I would prefer a movie that either uses an already established cast or one that introduces completely new characters. But that’s just my personal opinion in this particular moment.
All new cast sounds great, or maybe an all star cast. Like Kirk, Picard, DATA, Seven, Spock, T’Pol, Odo, Doctor, ect…ect…
An all-star cast seems too gimmicky to me. I’m not ruling out that it could work but, to me, the idea just screams “convoluted plot” and “a series of (probably) cringe-worthy homages”. If I want nostalgia I can always pop in one of the old DVDs. For a new Star Trek movie I’d actually like something new. I know that other fans feel differently.
You sound like you hope it will be two different Trek films. I don’t really see that happening. They can barely figure out what to do with ONE crew at the moment. I wouldn’t mind a TNG film either though but I seriously doubt it would happen.
Tarantino probably is using the KT crew as part of his story. I just have a hard time believing that the entire cast would be scrapped for a one off film which this sounds like so far. Unless he plans to stick around and build up this new cast my guess its the KT TOS characters.
I do think another Trek show will get added in time with Discovery. Alex Kurtzman hinted at it months ago and my guess is if Discovery is big enough for AA then its a no-brainer. Its CBS, when they smell a hit they keep spinning them which is why there were 5 CSI and 3 NCIS shows. The question is when though which could be a few years from now until Discovery gets its feet wet.
I read somewhere that Tarantino’s favorite episodes are City on the Edge of Forever and Yesterday’s Enterprise. I can see a Tarantino film set in the timeline of YE, with a different ship or recast TNG crew. The setting would allow for more of Tarantino’s style to come through, hence the R-rating, and the story would be separate from regular Trek (Prime and Kelvin timeline) so he can do what he wants without having to worry about canon. Patrick Stewart could return and play a similar role to Nimoy in ST09, but with an edge to the character like Prof X had in Logan. If they make it a one off, with a moderate budget, you draw in the Trek audience, the Tarantino audience and make a profit. It could give ST the adrenaline shot to the heart that it needs.
My take is somewhat similar but I think that since there is a strong likelihood that this will be the last movie of the JJverse, they will have to reconcile the Kelvin timeline (hopefully through George Kirk as previously rumored). A CotEoF/YE plot would be that the USS Kelvin gets tossed into the Narada’s “time warp” and thrown forward 30-odd years a la YE. Now the CotEoF angle comes into play (which is also in YE as Garrett/Keeler are very similar plotlines) as unless Jim sends George back to die in the impact with the Narada, the Klingons /Romulans/Tardigrades/Whatever win the war and destroy the Federation, etc. etc. etc. However in order to totally restore the timeline, it should be the JJVerse universe that ends in order to save the Kelvin’s Federation. Actually I think that the latter would make an even better, and more satisfying, end to the JJverse.
I know that some Prime Trek fans would like nothing more than for the Kelvin timeline to end but I doubt that Paramount/Bad Robot would erase this new universe they have created unless they have something completely new and even more shiny.
Tarantino? Is that what Trek has become? A potential movie that will be off limits to kids and make many of the adults in the audience retch in the aisles due to the gore and vulgarity he will undoubtedly pile on? I regret that I am not in the Quentin fan club as for all his alleged cinematic auteur brilliance, his movies are incoherent piles of blood, guts and spew. I’m really not interested in seeing Vulcan/Romulan/Klingon intestines splattering across the screen. I was more than disturbed enough by the recent dismemberment Disco episode, thank you…
While I agree, I don’t want that level of gore in Trek, its been my xp that kids don’t watch Trek willingly in the first place….
My 6 year old has watched every frame of the last season of Enterprise and loved it, but I’m sure that some kids wouldn’t go for Trek so I can certainly agree with you on that point. However, cutting out an entire generation out of Trek is unprecedented in over half a century. Although The Great Bird Of The Galaxy had his very serious shortcomings, the bottom line is that Trek has always meant to be uplifting and hopeful for the future, and I can’t think of a single splatter director I would trust with the franchise LESS than Quentin. Just the thought of it disgusts me.
Did she watch the scene with T’pols back side before her and Trip have sex….or is still dealing with it in therapy?
You did say every frame. That one is one of my favorite frames btw.
There is a huge difference between the nudity of the human body for procreation and that same body being disemboweled. My 6 year old is mature enough already to make that distinction.
News flash!: Actor wants acting job
Watch Kill Bill.
it’s refreshing to see an actor who is grateful to be in trek and to play such an iconic character, who understands he isn’t playing the protagonist and he doesn’t threaten them to not come back unless he gets his way.
It was beyond ridiculous and poor taste when Urban seriously stated that he ‘wasn’t in Into Darkness’ and didn’t want to come back for Beyond. If there is anyone, among the secondary male characters, who truly got the short end of the stick that’s John Cho and yet, he’s always excited about coming back for more and never really complains.