RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,349
Posts: 5,354,469
Members: 24,620
Currently online: 635
Newest member: Cultiste

TrekToday headlines

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 21 2013, 04:37 PM   #106
Amasov
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

heavy lids wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm not sure moving to the big screen was a mistake. But going straight to the big screen was. There was no time for general audiences to 'miss' the characters
Very true. With many things, not just Trek, you need a break from time to time to then rediscover why you love it.
Add to the fact that TNG was also in syndicated reruns by this point. I vividly remember it being on weeknights at 7PM in my area while it was still in first run every Saturday at 7PM.
Amasov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21 2013, 04:57 PM   #107
USS Firefly
Commander
 
USS Firefly's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I don't know if it mattered how long they waited, 2 years or 10.
It still remain two badly written stories
USS Firefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 23 2013, 01:39 PM   #108
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

USS Firefly wrote: View Post
I don't know if it mattered how long they waited, 2 years or 10.
It still remain two badly written stories
You wait ten years and it likely isn't two burnt out series writers writing the big screen version.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 23 2013, 07:51 PM   #109
Gojira
Commodore
 
Gojira's Avatar
 
Location: Stompin' on Tokyo
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm not sure moving to the big screen was a mistake. But going straight to the big screen was. There was no time for general audiences to 'miss' the characters plus they were still competing with weekly adventures of two series.

Voyager should have been delayed til DS9 ended and the TNG movies shouldn't have premiered until 24-36 months after "All Good Things..."

Good points, I agree. It could almost be seen as a cash grab because now we have to go to the theater to see something we could once watch for free. But with most paying for either cable or dish TV we were paying for it, so what do I know?
__________________
My Science Fiction-Fantasy movie review Blog: http://foleyfunfilmfacts.wordpress.com/
Gojira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24 2013, 04:18 PM   #110
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

BillJ wrote: View Post
USS Firefly wrote: View Post
I don't know if it mattered how long they waited, 2 years or 10.
It still remain two badly written stories
You wait ten years and it likely isn't two burnt out series writers writing the big screen version.

you wait ten years and Stewart's almost a senior citizen at the start of the film series. TNG went off the air a very popular show, there was no reason to wait very long for the movies.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24 2013, 10:27 PM   #111
Gojira
Commodore
 
Gojira's Avatar
 
Location: Stompin' on Tokyo
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I have not read the entire thread but if more of the TNG movies had been successful I do not think this thread would exist.
__________________
My Science Fiction-Fantasy movie review Blog: http://foleyfunfilmfacts.wordpress.com/
Gojira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24 2013, 10:46 PM   #112
Dream
Admiral
 
Dream's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I still don't know why they WAITED four years after Insurrection to release Nemesis. If they wanted to stop doing TNG films then stop.
__________________
=)
Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 24 2013, 11:24 PM   #113
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Gojira wrote: View Post
I have not read the entire thread but if more of the TNG movies had been successful I do not think this thread would exist.

well, that's kind of tautological, no?
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 02:37 AM   #114
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Dream wrote: View Post
I still don't know why they WAITED four years after Insurrection to release Nemesis. If they wanted to stop doing TNG films then stop.
I surmise the decision was to focus on VOY and get it "working". I thinking blaming VOY is a bit over the top, but when you look at INS and NEM as films at the time 98 and 02. The only draw for audiences is to come see the TNG crew in a feature films. INS failed to aspire to anything great. The entire Dominion War (The largest Intergalactic War in Trek history) is skipped out for the TNG crew and we get a mediocre story fit for tv TNG. NEM had scale and scope in some parts, but it was too late to salavage the films and NEM failed to some up "All Good Things" in the TNG swan song.

Rick Berman was the executive producer for VOY and the TNG films at the time. DS9 was essentially Ira Behr's child at the time. I suppose you could say Berman didn't keep his eye on the ball. VOY being free to watch but TNG now pay for view.
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 03:18 AM   #115
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Dream wrote: View Post
I still don't know why they WAITED four years after Insurrection to release Nemesis. If they wanted to stop doing TNG films then stop.
I surmise the decision was to focus on VOY and get it "working". I thinking blaming VOY is a bit over the top, but when you look at INS and NEM as films at the time 98 and 02. The only draw for audiences is to come see the TNG crew in a feature films. INS failed to aspire to anything great. The entire Dominion War (The largest Intergalactic War in Trek history) is skipped out for the TNG crew and we get a mediocre story fit for tv TNG. NEM had scale and scope in some parts, but it was too late to salavage the films and NEM failed to some up "All Good Things" in the TNG swan song.

Rick Berman was the executive producer for VOY and the TNG films at the time. DS9 was essentially Ira Behr's child at the time. I suppose you could say Berman didn't keep his eye on the ball. VOY being free to watch but TNG now pay for view.

Voyager would have been in its FIFTH season by then, I don't think that was the reason. More likely, the delay was a result of INS disappointing box office results.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 03:59 AM   #116
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

^ The story which was Berman and Piller's decision to go with. New TNG was for paying customers. They needed to develop movies that people would want to PAY to see over and over. They failed to sell TNG to audiences.




I'm sure we've all seen this. My point is, with movies you have to sell them to the audience. With a franchise movie like Trek you have to make it as appealing to fans and general audiences alike. Rewatch value in theaters and people telling family and friends to go see a certain movie is how movies can be sucessful. INS takes for granted audience tastes and presumes everybody will like and go see the film multiple times because TNG was a breakout tv show and popular. Generations made the same presumption as INS in my opinion. FC and NEM try there damnedest to appeal to the masses and make as much money as possible. FC succeeded while NEM floundered.
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 05:27 AM   #117
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

I do wonder if 'mass market appeal' is a large part of it. FC clearly tapped into something that the other three TNG movies quite frankly didn't (GENS had the benefit of coming off the back of TNG ending and the crossover with Kirk, but internally it was arguably far too inwards looking to have true mass market appeal). NEM screwed itself over by advertising "A Generation's Final Journey...", subconsciously planting the seed into the minds of casual movie-goers that it was another naval-gazing exercise for the fans rather than a good movie in its own right. I'd actually say NEM had the potential to tap into the same broad appeal as FC, but as I say they fumbled the ball.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 03:28 PM   #118
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

Lance wrote: View Post
I do wonder if 'mass market appeal' is a large part of it. FC clearly tapped into something that the other three TNG movies quite frankly didn't (GENS had the benefit of coming off the back of TNG ending and the crossover with Kirk, but internally it was arguably far too inwards looking to have true mass market appeal). NEM screwed itself over by advertising "A Generation's Final Journey...", subconsciously planting the seed into the minds of casual movie-goers that it was another naval-gazing exercise for the fans rather than a good movie in its own right. I'd actually say NEM had the potential to tap into the same broad appeal as FC, but as I say they fumbled the ball.

I think NEM never really had a chance. The franchise was clearly struggling by that point and suffering from fatigue and over-saturation. Combine that with the lousy marketing of NEM(I don't remember seeing ANY commercials for it in the weeks leading up to it), and you get a recipe for failure. Remember that even before word of mouth could take effect, NEM STILL opened up second at the box office to "maid in manhattan" of all movies. Even had NEM been better regarded, it would likely have made 60-70 million at most. There just wasn't the fanbase interest at that point.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 25 2013, 03:56 PM   #119
LOKAI of CHERON
Commodore
 
LOKAI of CHERON's Avatar
 
Location: Post-apocalyptic ruins of my once mighty Homeworld.
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

RAMA wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
I was looking at The Numbers.com, and apparently some of the BO numbers have been revised, if you go by that, the top 3 pre-2009 ST movies are:

STFC: $150 million
STTMP $139 million
$STIV: $133 million

A STNG movie tops the BO. They also make more than the TOS movies overseas.

RAMA
If you're looking at http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php#, those figures don't appear to be adjusted for inflation.

Comparisons of movies at different times is meaningless, if the figures aren't adjusted.
I of course realize those are not adjusted but absolute figures are what most people use to compare films. STFC still made the most in absolute dollars for any of the movies before ST09. ST09 and STTMP sold the most tickets. There are often inaccuracies with using the adjusted numbers based on what method used to adjust, and international sales were less accurate back in the 70s and 80s and figuring out the ticket prices is even more problematic.

I'm still trying to figure out why STTMP's original take of $175 million has been readjusted from almost every source I see to $139 million.

RAMA
Using the Consumer Price Index, the inflation calculator on this site... http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ reveals 1979's $139,000,000 to be worth approx. $432,787,275 in 2012 money. Out of interest, according to Box Office Mojo, First Contact took $146,027,888 worldwide in 1996, which translates to $210,978,720 2012. I have no idea if this is the most accurate, or even an appropriate, method of comparing box office figures.
__________________
YOU MONOTONE HUMANS ARE ALL ALIKE... FIRST YOU CONDEMN, THEN ATTACK.
LOKAI of CHERON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 26 2013, 11:51 PM   #120
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Was moving 'The Next Generation' over to movies a bad decision?

LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post

If you're looking at http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/StarTrek.php#, those figures don't appear to be adjusted for inflation.

Comparisons of movies at different times is meaningless, if the figures aren't adjusted.
I of course realize those are not adjusted but absolute figures are what most people use to compare films. STFC still made the most in absolute dollars for any of the movies before ST09. ST09 and STTMP sold the most tickets. There are often inaccuracies with using the adjusted numbers based on what method used to adjust, and international sales were less accurate back in the 70s and 80s and figuring out the ticket prices is even more problematic.

I'm still trying to figure out why STTMP's original take of $175 million has been readjusted from almost every source I see to $139 million.

RAMA
Using the Consumer Price Index, the inflation calculator on this site... http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ reveals 1979's $139,000,000 to be worth approx. $432,787,275 in 2012 money. Out of interest, according to Box Office Mojo, First Contact took $146,027,888 worldwide in 1996, which translates to $210,978,720 2012. I have no idea if this is the most accurate, or even an appropriate, method of comparing box office figures.

Accounting for inflation, STID's take domestically rises to over $403 million total as well ($278 million domestic). Probably over $420 million worldwide.

It is partly this disagreement on accuracy both amongst fans and the business that I don't normally like using adjusted figures.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.