As noted in our earlier report, actor Karl Urban is doing press this week to promote his new movie Bent and he has been taking some Star Trek questions. The actor admitted to Yahoo Movies that he is in the dark about what’s going on with next Trek movie, but weighed in on the news that there is a project in development based on a story pitch from Quentin Tarantino:
“I know nothing more than you guys do! My personal belief is that he’s probably the exact kind of energy the franchise needs.”
Of course, Tarantino is best known for adult-themed films and it has been reported the Star Trek film he has pitched would be R-rated. Urban told Yahoo that he is open to new ideas for Star Trek:
“It’s just important to remain open to whatever the story is, and whatever collaboration may evolve. Whether that’s going to mean swearing, more graphic violence or sex, I don’t know. It’ll be interesting to see.”
Zachary Quinto (Spock), Sofia Boutella (Jaylah) and Karl Urban (Bones) in Star Trek Beyond
Karl Urban hasn’t seen Discovery (yet)
And when speaking to ScreenRant, Urban – who is a self-avowed Trek fan – said he plans to watch Star Trek: Discovery:
“No, not yet, but I’m really looking forward to checking it out. I hear great things about it and, you know, by all accounts I think there are elements of it from my understanding that give Star Trek a fresh perspective and I think that’s something that producers and makers of Star Trek movies should strive to achieve.”
When asked if he would consider appearing in the show, the actor mostly demurred.
“I don’t know. I haven’t thought about it to tell you the truth. And ultimately it would depend on the context and the material.”
See Urban in Bent
Karl Urban can be seen in the new crime thriller Bent, where he plays a discredited narcotics detective seeking revenge on the man who framed him. He stars along with Sofia Vergara and Andy Garcia. Bent was released this weekend in select theaters and on demand. Check out the trailer below.
Keep up with all the news regarding the next Star Trek film here at TrekMovie.
I don’t know If I will catch Bent this weekend.
I wish Karl Urban luck with it though.
All you need to read is that Karl has no more insight then any of us. Nothing to see here, folks…
I kind of wish he would shut up. I really like him as an actor. Hope he doesn’t say anything to make me change that opinion.
Uh just he’s doing interviews for his movie like all actors do. In this case its for Bent. They asked him the questions and he respectfully answers them. What do you expect him to do? He just give honest, but basic answers. Its not his fault Trek sites make headlines over it.
Curious Cadet, did you slam your head on something? That was a BIZARRE comment.
Did I miss something here? He’s responses were fairly generic.
You missed nothing. Curious Cadet is clearly on drugs.
“That would explain a great many things.”
Uhhh. Does’nt this article actually spoil the movies plot? And hasn’t Kirk met HIMSELF before? I can think of a few times that he has.
And isn’t Quentin a bit of a PERVERT? With DEEP Weinstein connections?!
Paramount! Why hire a pervert fanboy to direct the next BIG ST picture?
Why make it an R rated film? Trek has made increasingly more money through the years. It is not something that needs to take chances. Just deliver us good sci-fi NO HORROR, GORE OR any such morally debased shock content!
And again. PLEASE DO NOT turn the Enterprise over to Quentin – who has demonstrated a very strange and twisted filomgraphy – that would be ESPECIALLY damaging to Star Trek and a further insult to decent positive American values.
And keep in mind, The ME-TOO movement will be larger by the time this movie is made. A good step to make, to sure your investments are not wasted in when some weird sex scandal erupts, would be to hire a better, less experienced director who has a good positive vision for HUMANITY.
What he did?
Honestly, I liked him more before he pulled a diva and basically blackmailed them to get back. He seems annoyed that a modern trek isn’t still about the white dudes status quo in perpetuity. Give rank stripes to the ladies to make feminists happy but please don’t make a woc equal to my character. Poor Karl, oppressed by Hollywood.
His idea of good development for Mccoy doesn’t coincide with mine tbh. In some aspects, his character was handled better and with more integrity in the first two movies but he seems to only care about screentime and original trio scenes, rather than Mccoy as a character and his actual role on the ship.
He may get more screentime in beyond but it’s all about kirk and spock and their issues, and him getting shoehorned into an action role that doesn’t make sense for him. He complained that in stid the kirk/mccoy friendship was only inferred but was it much better in beyond? At least in stid there are scenes that show their mutual concern about each other, beyond’s team sidelined it to once again pretend only the k/s friendship exists and matters when it really counts. He wasn’t even allowed to know about kirk leaving and have feelings about that fact.
IMO, Kirk and Spock have no chemistry (ie. Pine and Qunito) in the KU. Shatner and Nimoy did. And Kelley shared in that, too. Hard to match that trifecta.
tbh, it isn’t a matter of chemistry for me; I think the whole cast has nice chemistry because they also get along well behind the scenes and a lot of them are friends in real life (Zoe and Zachary, Chris and Zachary etc etc).
I just don’t see the tos friendships they want to force at any cost because these characters just met and they are a different version from a different reality, so when the writers and/or fans (or Urban) preach about those tos bromances being the same, it’s forced to me and it becomes a hindrance on screen that we have to focus on those nostalgia dynamics at any cost and ostensibly try to make them like tos when, in this story – for these characters – it wouldn’t make any sense for them to have the same dynamics.
This isn’t the first reboot or remake, I’m used to see different character dynamics even with the same characters from the original, and I don’t get why trek should be any different.
I’d like them to allow the characters to have their own dynamics in respect of their own integrity, rather than spending all the time saying that Kirk&Spock or Spock and Bones have the same identical dynamics they had in tos when it’s obvioustly untrue and can’t be otherwise because the characters are different.
This explains part of my comment, specifically when I mention Kirk/Bones. I find it annoying that the most realistic dynamics that are genuine to the reboot are often ignored or pushed aside just to make Kirk/Spock IT. That’s forced. Kirk/McCoy is the biggest example of it: their friendship probably is the most real in terms of the story, it’s the most perceived for me because I see it happening and existing not just in the name of tos canon but because it just really exists here too.
But it happens that, at times, in order to pretend Spock is Kirk’s best friend and the one and only Kirk ‘needs’, they constantly ignore that Bones is THE friend Kirk has since the academy and the one he actually talks about his issues with, not Spock. In Beyond, once again, Kirk is forced to ‘thank’ only Spock for saving him and give him all the credit.. just like in ‘into darkness’ when, in reality, he should’ve thanked McCoy and Uhura more. Same goes for when Kirk is dying and Scotty thinks about calling Spock instead of McCoy in spite of the latter being a doctor. In Beyond, McCoy conveniently is forgotten when it comes to Kirk’s decision to leave the ship so that he doesn’t have to have feelings about it, and it’s all about Kirk and Spock loosing their friendship in spite of McCoy also losing his friend.
Red alert. Triggered. Red alert.
Sadly this is all Jemini seems to talk about over and over again. I think most people kind of ignore her posts at this point.
talking about the same things over and over seems to be the norm in this site so I guess I got infected by you all.
chile. It would be funny if after all the bashing other actors (especially Zoe/Uhura) received in this very site, or the reboot and the creative team itself received (and with a language that isn’t always polite or reasonable), folks get all get worked over my rather tiepid criticism.
Not that it would surprise me; some fanboys here like to preach about ‘different opinions’ only when it comes to their bashing – pardon, negative opinions -, but don’t dare to touch what they like.
I think we can all safely assume that J.j Abrams is largely out of the picture, as he will be very busy with Syar Wars Episode 9 for the rest of 2018 and into 2019 and probably beyond.
Justin Lin was a serviceable director but his effort was less than great at turnstiles.
I cannot think of anyone?
Maybe Jonathan Frames could do a job; yes I know, it will not happen. Give him a good script and he could do a good job, he proved that with First Contact. Even Insurrection is fairly decent when you consider that the actual script is underpar for a big movie; A lesser director would have made Insurrection even less palatable!
Who in the hellos “Jonathan Frames”. You’re on a worldwide chat board and you don’t know how to spell?
I don’t think Star Trek is suffering from a lack of swearing, sex, or graphic violence. The Force Awakens managed to do pretty well without those elements and so do the Marvel superhero movies. I like Tarantino and hope he brings a renewed energy to the franchise, but if he just drops in and inserts some f-bombs, exploding heads, and hot sex into an otherwise poorly written story, then….no. In my best Yoda voice I guess I’m trying to say, “violence, sex, and swearing does not a good movie make.”
Agreed. Frankly, I think it does the franchise a disservice to overtly discourage younger audiences from even being allowed into a theater on their own. Discovery is already inappropriate for a lot of kids who are the age I was when I started TOS and TNG. If QT isn’t clever enough to be able to work within a PG-13 mandate, it’s perhaps not worth the trouble.
It’s ironic because I thought he did an excellent job with his script polish for Crimson Tide and that was working to a PG-13 mandate. I thought he actually demonstrated there that he could do a good job with Trek so I don’t get why he feels the need to make it less accessible to younger fans.
I agree. Why put a movie rating or set it up so that it HAS to be an R. You can make a hard PG-13 movie without the admittance restrictions that come with an R movie. I’m kind of thinking that Tarantino may have at least one graphic scene in mind that would be an R. The scene would be a transporter malfunction and we’d see maybe the twisted, contorted body parts from the inside out with blood everywhere. Even TMP’s G-rated transporter malfunction scene as experienced in theaters was quite tense and dramatic for its time.
One thing I do give Tarantino kudos for is for using real film to make movies. Even releasing his last two in 70mm. Aside from TMP, we’ve never
had Trek filmed in 65mm, so technically, we’d get at least a good looking movie. :)
If I’m not mistaken, I believe QT is in a bit of a pickle from something that happened to Umma Therman during the production of Kill Bill. Not sure we should put all of our eggs in that basket.
Not really.
QT is chugging along with his upcoming Once Upon a Time in Hollywood production. There’s some chatter about Sony getting cold feet, the issue with Thurman is that QT seems to want a ‘hand on’ approach with scenes of violence against his female talent. That is a creepy vibe, but it hasn’t mushroomed into anything like the Weinstein scandal.
There are no eggs in any basket at the moment. All QT and JJ are doing is roughing out a draft script for Paramounts consideration. Nothings been greenlit, with QT or anyone else.
@Ed Sams — not really a basket to put anything in at the moment. I doubt Paramount is even involved in this pitch by Bad Robot as the current exec producer of the Trek film franchise, under his exclusive first look deal. The fact this is a story at all speaks volumes about how desperate the Trek community is for some one to get their act in gear and deliver new movies.
Things are basically the same.
We don’t know whats going to happen.
As for Karl, I don’t have any problem with him answering questions about Trek while He is promoting his other projects.
People are too focused on the director. We need decent writing. We got that to some extent with Beyond, but none of the Kelvin films have had stellar writing.
QT doesn’t have to direct. Take his pitch – get a good writer and have someone like Edgar Wright or Tron Legacy director do it.
QT is the least guy I’d want to direct the next movie. His movies have nothing to do with trek with their cool pessimism and abrasive language and violence, and neither does him as a person. A guy who puts his actors in danger, spits on and strangles actresses for ‘realism’, covered a rapist for years, and was openly apologist of a pedophile.. . I already didn’t like him before, but after the stuff Uma Thurman said, and him claiming a 13 years old girl basically wanted to get drugged and raped, that was the last straw and ill never support him. If Paramount&co are a tiny bit decent human beings they should find another director, there are many talented people in Hollywood that deserve a chance.
If his apologists get offended I don’t give a damn. I don’t like this guy, he doesn’t get a pass just because you like his movies. He’s overrated anyway. The fact that JJ haters who said he was unfit for trek now see no issue in QT directing and making it R rated once again proves the inconsistency and hypocrisy of many self claimed trek fans on the internet.
What is shown on screen and described in real life confirms QT is not a big fan of women.
The guy who wrote two huge films that featured a predominantly female cast including in the lead role?
that doesn’t mean he likes women or respects them in real life, neither it means he can write them well or as multidimensional humans.
You realize JJ is the one who pushed the QT idea so hard in the first place, right?
I read it was the other way around from QT but either way, even if JJ did that I dunno what it has to do with my opinion and how I’d feel about QT directing. Just because I like JJ’s movies for the most part, it doesn’t mean I have to agree with him about everything.
You probably dont want Whoopi Goldberg anywhere near Trek either…she’s not a fan of women either. huh?
He apologized for that stupid remark too.
Do you dislike movies from the guy who actually did the rape?
Also, he’s not over-rated at all. You dont have to like his films but to suggest he’s over-rated is just silly. I dont love all his movies but he’s a phenomenal film maker and writer.
And Im not sure why his previous films WOULD have anything to do with Star Trek? Is that a prerequisite to writing a Trek film?
different day, same TUP trying to derail the point with the most forced straw man arguments. This time because you are a Tarantino fan/apologist (I don’t have to care about his half a$$ed conveniently too-late-and-only-after-busted self-serving ‘apology’, btw. I doubt he changed his mind or he didn’t know what he was saying or didn’t truly believe it)
You could have mentioned Woody Allen too, wouldn’t make it more random.
I don’t like the opinions or actions of those people either, but these people have nothing to do with the fact that QT, not them, is rumored being the director of the next movie of this trek. I can’t have issues with them getting a job no rumor says they will get.
Jemini,
Re: Tarantino fan/apologist
If so, apparently TUP’s in good company:
“Quentin Tarantino, was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so i could expose it and let it see the light of day, regardless of it most likely being an event for which justice will never be possible.
he also did so with full knowledge it could cause him personal harm, and i am proud of him for doing the right thing and for his courage.
THE COVER UP after the fact is UNFORGIVABLE.
for this i hold Lawrence Bender, E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible.
they lied, destroyed evidence, and continue to lie about the permanent harm they caused and then chose to suppress.
the cover up did have malicious intent, and shame on these three for all eternity.
CAA never sent anyone to Mexico.
i hope they look after other clients more respectfully if they in fact want to do the job for which they take money with any decency.” — Uma Thurman
and he’s overrated. The fact some of you insist he’d make a good trek movie or he’s a good fit for trek just because he’s Tarantino and you like him, all the while the same criticized JJ saying he’s anti trek (when QT’s movies ARE even more anti trek too, then, for pretty much the same reasons used against some of JJ’s choices) is a hint of it by itself. He’s already getting a pass. Even in light of the clues we already got that he wants to make trek fit to his style and preferred genre of movies (e.g., the R rating and the writer they supposedly chose), rather than doing the opposite thing and thus adapt himself to trek.
also, overrated =/= saying that his movies are universally bad or he has zero talent. I didn’t say that. I can 100% dislike a director and his movies but still recognize their merit when there is one. There is always so much work in a movie and I respect that regardless, I respect art, by default.
However, I also believe there are many other directors in hollywood that would make more sense for trek and would deserve a chance more than QT. At the very least, others would make me more hopeful.
So the only people that should direct Trek arre filmmakers that made movies that remind you of Trek?
How does that work?
I mean, if the preferred genre of a director, and his previous works reflecting that and being limited to that, must get ignored by people when trying to understand if he’d be a good fit for something completely different from anything he has ever done before, why not hire Woody Allen or Dario Argento for the next movie then?
There is more than a valid reason why QT, regardless what he says and what kind of person he seems to be (which is already against everything trek is about honestly, but I digress), is the least director a lot of fans would reasonably even imagine wanting to direct a trek movie, of all the things.
R rated Trek is a creative & commercial dead end. I hope that movie is a sideline movie not the main event otherwise Trek @ the movies is dead & buried until the next reboot.
Paramount need to go back to why Trek 2009 was popular then give them the budget to try one last time with Urbans crew & repeat that feat to grow the movie franchise.
Other studios would still pay billions to Paramount for the Trek movie series rights its strange that Paramount (even with new management) cannot see that or want to take the risk.
I can understand why some would be hesitant to believe the viability of an R rated Trek, but why would the rating make it a dead end creatively?
How did Deadpool do by the way? Commercial flop?
Prefiero a Karl Urban cuando habla sobre Dredd.
First Time I have ever wanted to bitch-slap Karl Urban.