View Single Post
Old September 14 2011, 05:14 PM   #39
Vice Admiral
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Abrams Commits To Direct

Dennis wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Dennis wrote: View Post
BTW, what Trek was "prior to his hijacking it" was...canceled.
What's the difference between Enterprise getting cancelled and four years later being followed by a movie... and Star Trek 2009 coming out and four years later being followed by a sequel?
Uh...well, for starts just the fact that because the first Abrams movie was a success the studio is doing a second movie in the same setting with the same cast and crew.

Hope you're not waiting on the next Star Trek: Enterprise show or movie, or anything. That's the difference between failure and success.

If your question is meant to be "what's the difference in the rate of supply of new product between failure and success" then the answer is: you're getting a new movie, period. Failure = no new Trek, at all.

None of that is unclear, is it?

milo bloom wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
wow, a potential four and a half year gap between movies is just ridiculous
Seriously, this.
No, a longer gap should work out fine. People may not get tired of this version as quickly as they did the last if they have to wait a little longer.

I doubt that there will be another four-year gap after this one, though.

I don't agree with this. There's no Star Trek on TV right now, so there's no real risk of "over-saturation," like when there was two TV series and a movie series going on at the same time. Also, TWOK-TVH came out every two years and were all big hits.

There's no other new Trek competing with these movies right now. Long delays between them are more likely to crush momentum than they are to whet the appetite.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote