View Single Post
Old September 3 2013, 08:04 PM   #91
Vice Admiral
bbjeg's Avatar
Location: Where I'm suppose to be.
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

anh165 wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
So all that's left for Star Trek for the rest of it's existence is Kirk and Spock reboots? I doubt that would be a financially sound idea. Also there is more than a few hundred Star Trek online subscribers, not to mention fans into books, the remaining old fans who, and the new fans who would check it out. Even the worst movies do better than a few hundred viewers, which I don't think a Star Trek movie without any familiar faces could do as badly. I would like to know how you found that statistic.
Again you are talking from a position of a seasoned trek fan who is sentlemental about the TV material you grew up watching.

What you are willing to invest your time and money to see is not the same as what millions of others are interested in.
You're still speculating. Did you talk to the millions of people?
BillJ wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
X-men and Avengers both had successful spinoffs (and prequels), which Superman and Batman are trying to compete with by doing a Justice league movie (why Ben Affleck?). Plus, I'm sure if Avengers could get their hands on Spiderman, they would. People don't just want the norms.
But you're talking about things that run concurrently with their successful parents or where the parent is still there and new elements are added.
The Batman they are using in Justice League may not tie to the Dark Knight, X-men origins: Wolverine had an old Professor X before First Class, and Spiderman and Amazing Spiderman are two different movies. You could even lump Hulk and the Incredible Hulk in that group, the remake made it into Avengers.
The simple fact of the matter is this: with each spinoff, people became less and less interested in Star Trek. So if I'm a studio/network executive, the question is this: if I greenlight a new series do I go with the elements from two movies that recently generated $450 million dollars plus each or do I continue on from the elements that general audiences were obviously tired of a decade ago, including a series that finished its run with less than two-million viewers a week (nevermind the fact that three out of four series had dwindling viewership numbers) and a movie that was a box-office bomb? I know which answer I give.
For now - my original statement.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote