RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,674
Posts: 5,212,667
Members: 24,201
Currently online: 553
Newest member: KieBH84


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 XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 3 2013, 05:51 AM   #91
Shaka Zulu
Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Has star trek changed

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
Sorry, I liked Superman Returns a great deal. It's a good movie, and certainly better than at least half of those starring Christopher Reeve.

THIS.

I too loved Superman Returns, and want to buy the Blu-Ray one day.

Also, the idea that Superman Returns was a flop is a ton of bull, as this article shows:

PERCEPTION: Superman Returns was a flop.
REALITY: Most estimates put the cost of this film at $270 million. That number actually includes the cost of several previous, unrelated, failed attempts to make a new Superman movie and doesn't really reflect the actual cost of Superman Returns. Even if it did, Superman Returns made $391 million worldwide. That's even more than Batman Begins, totaling only $371 million in box office receipts worldwide. Yet Batman Begins is widely considered to be the more successful movie, so successful in fact that it spawned an entire series of even more successful sequels while Superman was abandoned to be completely rebooted years later.
You're Wrong: 20 Common Box Office Misconceptions
Shaka Zulu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 07:45 AM   #92
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Has star trek changed

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Yeah, Roddenberry was every bit as much of a money grubber as Abrams is.
Upon what do you base this about Abrams? Because he's been successful as a director/producer? (I haven't seen him setting up mail order companies, nor writing lyrics for theme songs to get half the royalties, nor getting jewellery featured onscreen because he wants to sell them, nor selling scripts to fans without any royalties going to writers, nor convincing View-Master to "come next week" when his own script will be being filmed so he can claim royalties on the booklet text...)

as clearly outright dumb as Abrams is
If Abrams is "outright dumb", then I want some of his smarts.

Even JJ Abrams gets way too much credit from people who don't know he hasn't written either Trek film he's made.
Movies are almost always written by committee. So what if the director/producer doesn't have a credit on the script? His input is all over those films.

And who's praising his "writing" anyway? Writing the script is not necessarily the only element behind a film's success or failure.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 08:14 AM   #93
PhaseIIforever
Ensign
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Here is Ron Moore's take on TV vs. Film that I really agree with and points out how Trek has changed since it's gone from one format to the other.

"I think that Star Trek, in its DNA, is a television show. The features are great. They’re a lot of fun and they’ve certainly opened it up to a lot of different audiences, but the features all are basically atypical episodes, if you think about it. The features are very big action-adventure movies, lots of spectacle, run and jump, shoot-em-up and blowing things up. The fate of the Earth, or the universe itself, is always at stake. It’s always about the captain, and one other character has a strong B-story, and everyone else sort of has very small roles beyond that. But Star Trek, as originally conceived, and as you saw play out in all the other series, was really a morality play every week, and it was about an ensemble of players. They were exploring science fiction ideas, sociological ideas and moral ideas. That’s really what the shows are about, and the movies are just pitched in a different way and at a different audience. The movies will do a story where the captain is split in two by a transporter accident and one half is evil and one half is good, and the whole story is about where does the nature of a man’s strength come from? What makes a man a man? Is it his good side? His bad side? Or how the two come together to make something greater than the sum of its parts? The movies will never do that. They’ll never do a day-in-the-life story with Data or something like “Lower Decks,” where you go explore the other characters. They’ll never do all the things that all of us who are fans fell in love with this franchise for. So I think, at some point, Star Trek will return to television, and that would be great. I’d love to watch the weekly adventures again just because it gives you an opportunity to explore lots of other things besides the action-adventure component."

http://www.startrek.com/article/you-...answers-part-1
PhaseIIforever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 10:00 AM   #94
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Has star trek changed

DalekJim wrote: View Post
the time travel episodes of Lost and he had zero influence on them.
And you know this because...?
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 12:40 PM   #95
Squiggy
LORD SHIT SUPREME
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: Has star trek changed

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I'm waiting for post-TNG stories ever since 2002.
You're going to be waiting an awfully long time.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 01:32 PM   #96
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Also, the idea that Superman Returns was a flop is a ton of bull,
I don't know, it took seven years before another Superman movie was made, and that's a reboot. Maybe Returns isn't technically a flop, but is also isn't technically a success, either.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 01:36 PM   #97
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Has star trek changed

Well, I certainly never wanted to see SR again, after the first time.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 01:37 PM   #98
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Has star trek changed

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Also, the idea that Superman Returns was a flop is a ton of bull,
I don't know, it took seven years before another Superman movie was made, and that's a reboot. Maybe Returns isn't technically a flop, but is also isn't technically a success, either.
How can it not be considered a success when it made 20 million more worldwide than Batman Begins? It isn't Returns fault that it got saddled with production costs for several prior attempts to bring Superman back to the big screen.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 01:42 PM   #99
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Has star trek changed

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Yeah, Roddenberry was every bit as much of a money grubber as Abrams is.
Roddenberry was probably more primarily motivated by the possibility of financial success in his attempts and approaches to bringing Star Trek back under his control than Abrams has been on the worst day of his life. Sorry to be the one to break that to you.

Anyways...Star Trek may not have changed that much, but Kha-a-a-a-a-a-n! has.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 02:07 PM   #100
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Has star trek changed

BillJ wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Also, the idea that Superman Returns was a flop is a ton of bull,
I don't know, it took seven years before another Superman movie was made, and that's a reboot. Maybe Returns isn't technically a flop, but is also isn't technically a success, either.
How can it not be considered a success when it made 20 million more worldwide than Batman Begins? It isn't Returns fault that it got saddled with production costs for several prior attempts to bring Superman back to the big screen.
Which franchise takes off and which doesn't probably has to do with what's generally popular at the time, too. It seems that for the last few years, "dark" has been the buzz word in popular TV shows and movies, along with eccentric and maybe even a little bit flawed heroes. Batman fits into that genre far better than Superman does because he is by nature dark and brooding, while Superman is the apple pie eating boy next door who seems so good and innocent and is brighter than a penny. I don't think it's a coincidence that the trailer for "The Man of Steel" looks like it presents Kal-El as someone who is living through an identity crisis and is not particularly selfless and perfect. Superman needs to be humanized. He needs his flaws.

On topic, darkness has even found its way into "Star Trek". Kirk is allowed to be flawed. My guess is the brooding will be left to Spock while dealing with the loss of Vulcan and his mother. The interesting thing is how the powers that be have felt the need to assure people that there is still plenty of hope and optimism in the movie.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain

Last edited by Franklin; April 3 2013 at 02:25 PM.
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 02:24 PM   #101
yousirname
Commander
 
yousirname's Avatar
 
Re: Has star trek changed

BillJ wrote: View Post
How can it not be considered a success when it made 20 million more worldwide than Batman Begins? It isn't Returns fault that it got saddled with production costs for several prior attempts to bring Superman back to the big screen.
Because it cost more. Even if you knock $70 million off the $270 million budget estimate, it still cost $50 million more. And I think it's generous to do that. How much can you spend not making a film? $120 million?

I kind of feel like if it was really the case that SR was significantly cheaper than reported, the studio would have greenlit a sequel. Hollywood Accounting only goes so far, they're not going to leave money on the table for the sake of it.

The list that was linked to is interesting, but it annoys me that they mention inflation in the Hulk vs Incredible Hulk listing and ignore it in the Die Another Day vs Casino Royale one. There's about the same gap in time between the two films.
yousirname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 03:04 PM   #102
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Superman Returns was a financial success for Warners - they made money on it. That doesn't mean they weren't disappointed with its performance; to spend an enormous amount of money to make a good deal less than you expected isn't a formula that inspires a lot of confidence in sequels.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 05:03 PM   #103
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: Has star trek changed

ChristopherPike wrote: View Post
I don't think they see their Kirk, Spock, McCoy et all as a prequel to anything. It's all brand new to them with its own future.
True, and with today's 400th confirmation that Harrison is Khan it will soon be impossible to pretend that this new universe will someday be erased or squeezed back into the old one.

Prequels they are not.
__________________
I laugh at danger.
thumbtack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 05:12 PM   #104
cbspock
Rear Admiral
 
cbspock's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: Has star trek changed

PhaseIIforever wrote: View Post
Here is Ron Moore's take on TV vs. Film that I really agree with and points out how Trek has changed since it's gone from one format to the other.

"I think that Star Trek, in its DNA, is a television show. The features are great. They’re a lot of fun and they’ve certainly opened it up to a lot of different audiences, but the features all are basically atypical episodes, if you think about it. The features are very big action-adventure movies, lots of spectacle, run and jump, shoot-em-up and blowing things up. The fate of the Earth, or the universe itself, is always at stake. It’s always about the captain, and one other character has a strong B-story, and everyone else sort of has very small roles beyond that. But Star Trek, as originally conceived, and as you saw play out in all the other series, was really a morality play every week, and it was about an ensemble of players. They were exploring science fiction ideas, sociological ideas and moral ideas. That’s really what the shows are about, and the movies are just pitched in a different way and at a different audience. The movies will do a story where the captain is split in two by a transporter accident and one half is evil and one half is good, and the whole story is about where does the nature of a man’s strength come from? What makes a man a man? Is it his good side? His bad side? Or how the two come together to make something greater than the sum of its parts? The movies will never do that. They’ll never do a day-in-the-life story with Data or something like “Lower Decks,” where you go explore the other characters. They’ll never do all the things that all of us who are fans fell in love with this franchise for. So I think, at some point, Star Trek will return to television, and that would be great. I’d love to watch the weekly adventures again just because it gives you an opportunity to explore lots of other things besides the action-adventure component."

http://www.startrek.com/article/you-...answers-part-1

I agree, the movies are more like episodes of The Doomsday Machine, Space Seed, Immunity Syndrome, The Ultimate Computer. They all lean toward the big action adventure element of the original series.


-Chris
__________________
Shania's Place
"It's important to give it all you have while you have the chance."-Shania
cbspock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 3 2013, 05:43 PM   #105
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Has star trek changed

thumbtack wrote: View Post
True, and with today's 400th confirmation that Harrison is Khan it will soon be impossible to pretend that this new universe will someday be erased or squeezed back into the old one.
Who's pretending that?
Admiral Buzzkill 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 11:51 AM.

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