What were they thinking? AVENGERS style TREK

[Squiggy]

Are you on drugs?

[CorporalClegg]

Squiggy wrote:

---

Are you on drugs?

He likes Saw.

Oh. It was a rhetorical question.

[Oso Blanco]

Franklin wrote:

---

I can't help thinking a lot of discussions like these boil down to TNG people who aren't TOS fans being distressed and maybe angry about the reboot of Kirk, Spock, et al probably closing the door on the TNG and TNG-era characters forever.

You are forgetting one thing: nuTrek is not TOS!

I've been a fan of TOS since the mid-seventies. And I have been a fan of TNG era Trek ever since it premiered. I just think that rehashing TOS is kind of pointless, although I can live with the "alternate timeline" explanation. But I will never care for nuKirk or nuSpock the way I did for the original characters.

If Abrams and his gang had made a movie set post Nemesis, with a new crew, it would have been just as successful. Or do you seriously believe that the general theater audience cares about the names of the characters they see on the screen? Most of them have probably halfway forgotten what the movie was all about before they have even left the cinema!

On the other hand, I'm glad they didn't set the new movie into the TNG era ... who knows how they would have screwed that up! At least in the alternate timeline, they can do almost anything they want without messing up established continuity.

I'm looking forward to STID nevertheless ... I hope the movie will be as good as the trailers promise.

[CorporalClegg]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

If Abrams and his gang had made a movie set post Nemesis, with a new crew, it would have been just as successful.

I hope you're joking.

[The Mirrorball Man]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

Or do you seriously believe that the general theater audience cares about the names of the characters they see on the screen?

If you believe that the general audience cares about any generic spy character just as much as they care about James Bond, if you believe that slapping a Nike label on a pair of shoes changes nothing, in other words, if you think that brand recognition does not exist, I think I should be the first to say you this: welcome to the 21st century, time traveller from the past!

[Oso Blanco]

The Mirrorball Man wrote:

---

If you believe that the general audience cares about any generic spy character just as much as they care about James Bond, if you believe that slapping a Nike label on a pair of shoes changes nothing, in other words, if you think that brand recognition does not exist, I think I should be the first to say you this: welcome to the 21st century, time traveller from the past!

The brand would be still there, no matter what time period. It would still be called Star Trek! The last movie was a huge success because it was a big action movie aimed at the younger audience, not because it had Kirk and Spock in it.

[CorporalClegg]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

The last movie was a huge success because it was a big action movie that had Kirk and Spock in it.

FTFY

[The Mirrorball Man]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

The brand would be still there, no matter what time period. It would still be called Star Trek! The last movie was a huge success because it was a big action movie aimed at the younger audience, not because it had Kirk and Spock in it.

Do I have to spell out everything? Kirk is a brand, Spock is a brand, the Enterprise is a brand. Captain Whatshisname of the USS starship Random is not a brand.

[Shazam!]

King Daniel wrote:

---

^Red, The Expendables, Expendables 2, The Watchmen, A Good Day to Die Hard...?

All rubbish.

[Set Harth]

Jackson_Roykirk wrote:

---

we DID already have one "Picard and Kirk save the Galaxy" film

Actually, they only saved a system.

[King Daniel]

Oso Blanco wrote:

---

The brand would be still there, no matter what time period. It would still be called Star Trek! The last movie was a huge success because it was a big action movie aimed at the younger audience, not because it had Kirk and Spock in it.

If the generic Star Trek universe setting alone were enough, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise would have all been massive successes. But it was steadily diminishing returns until ENT's cancellation in '05.

Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise have name value. They're part of pop culture. A modern take on their adventures is a much greater lure than another crew in the familiar setting.

[BillJ]

King Daniel wrote:

---

If the generic Star Trek universe setting alone were enough, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise would have all been massive successes. But it was steadily diminishing returns until ENT's cancellation in '05.

Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise have name value. They're part of pop culture. A modern take on their adventures is a much greater lure than another crew in the familiar setting.

If you go to a restaurant called "McDonald's" yet they don't have a Quarter Pounder, Big Mac or Chicken McNuggets on the menu... would you consider it a McDonald's?

[Shazam!]

Set Harth wrote:

---

Actually, they only saved a system.

Same thing #abramstrek

[Konata Izumi]

Even that one cool kid in primary school randomly name dropped "The Next Generation" when telling how uncool Star Trek is.

There's also visual brands like Captain, Jan-luc-pic-ard ofthe u-s-s, enter-prise

[The Mirrorball Man]

BillJ wrote:

---

If you go to a restaurant called "McDonald's" yet they don't have a Quarter Pounder, Big Mac or Chicken McNuggets on the menu... would you consider it a McDonald's?

Actually we don't have Quarter Pounders here, because of the metric system.