RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,547
Posts: 5,513,438
Members: 25,143
Currently online: 547
Newest member: ShadowL

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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 14 2013, 02:05 PM   #31
Aike
Commander
 
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Regarding Khan, in a Swedish magazine called "Film på Bio" they called the villain Khan, and didn´t mention the name John Harrison at all.

This magazine is distributed by the largest cinema chain in Sweden.

But of course, they might just their info from the IMDB, which didn´t mention Harrison until recently.
Aike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 02:48 PM   #32
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Christopher wrote: View Post

And that's a sad commentary on the moviegoing audience.
I don't think so. For what theaters are charging for tickets now, I want big, memorable "event" films especially from properties like Star Trek. We have seven hundred plus hours of the franchise grappling with the "Moral of the Week", I want something more when putting out cash to go see something at the theater.

I think Rick Berman really didn't understand this when making the TNG films.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 03:23 PM   #33
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Rick Berman probably did understand but never got the budget to do what he wanted because only the Trek fanbase would watch at that point, unlike the early/mid 80s and now.
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 03:28 PM   #34
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Flake wrote: View Post
Rick Berman probably did understand but never got the budget to do what he wanted because only the Trek fanbase would watch at that point, unlike the early/mid 80s and now.
Budgets seemed to be in-line with mid-range films of the same time and were higher than the TOS movies except for TMP. Berman was a TV producer and it showed in the movies he was in charge of.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 03:47 PM   #35
Flake
Commodore
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Trouble is, it was a mid-range budget of say $30-$60 million but you immediately subtract at least $10 million for paying Spiner and Stewart...

Already by 1994 sums of $100 million plus where being spent on movies (True Lies) and even in 1991 $94 million went on Terminator 2.
Flake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 04:17 PM   #36
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Flake wrote: View Post
Trouble is, it was a mid-range budget of say $30-$60 million but you immediately subtract at least $10 million for paying Spiner and Stewart...

Already by 1994 sums of $100 million plus where being spent on movies (True Lies) and even in 1991 $94 million went on Terminator 2.
But Schwarzeneggar was routinely pulling in $15-20 million for those films and the producers/directors were able to still make capable big screen movies. Hell, Shatner/Nimoy were eating up huge chunks of the TOS film budgets with their "favored nations" contracts and Bennett, Meyer and Nimoy were also able to make decent looking big screen films.

Berman just had a too much of a TV mentality on the first three films even hiring TV writers/directors to make them.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2013, 05:27 PM   #37
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

This is a good sign and an indication the studio has made the right decisions. It should be a good movie first.

RAMA
__________________
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
Old April 16 2013, 02:38 AM   #38
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

3/5 as a Star Trek movie? If that's in comparison to the rest of the movies, that's pretty bad. I'm not sure how you could really compare it to anything else.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 04:55 AM   #39
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

^As discussed above, it could be in comparison to Star Trek on television. And it is just one person's opinion, of course. One person's 3/5 is another's 5/5 and another's 0/5.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 05:45 AM   #40
cbspock
Rear Admiral
 
cbspock's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

King Daniel wrote: View Post
4/5 sounds good to me! I'm a lifelong, die-hard Trekkie, and to me the idea that a film needs a separate ranking "as a Trek movie" is elitist BS.
Christopher wrote: View Post
^That's not how I interpret it. A lot of Trek fans take points off for continuity discrepancies or differences in tone and style from what they're used to. It sounds to me like they're saying it's more enjoyable if you don't dwell on such issues.
In my experience, it usually involves talk of Gene's Vision(TM) and how Abrams' Trek spends too much time being fun and exciting and not enough time reciting the pretentious nonsense of The Next Generation.
I agree TNG was FILLED with pretentious nonsense, all the pontificating by Picard. The original series was able to do more episode styles than the TNG cast because in TOS, characters were allowed to have flaws. TOS could tell a morality tale, or have a msg and have fun at the same time. I find TNG to be the most dated out of all the series, with its moral equivalence BS. TNG had some really good episodes as well but by the time they got to the movies, they changed the dynamics of the characters to make Picard some sort of lame action hero which he never was on the show.



-Chris
__________________
"It's important to give it all you have while you have the chance."-Shania
cbspock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 12:22 PM   #41
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

cbspock wrote: View Post
I agree TNG was FILLED with pretentious nonsense, all the pontificating by Picard. The original series was able to do more episode styles than the TNG cast because in TOS, characters were allowed to have flaws. TOS could tell a morality tale, or have a msg and have fun at the same time. I find TNG to be the most dated out of all the series, with its moral equivalence BS. TNG had some really good episodes as well but by the time they got to the movies, they changed the dynamics of the characters to make Picard some sort of lame action hero which he never was on the show. -Chris
Most of this is because Roddenberry was allowed to be writing for TV again in the first place. During the movies with the original cast, he was kicked upstairs by Bennett and the Paramount brass after TMP, which is why the movies were somewhat better while still being Star Trek in form and message (The Voyage Home being the best example, with its plot about ecological issues.) Of course, after Paramount decided there was to be a new TV show, Roddenberry had to be back as the creator. But just because he was a great creator back in the '60s doesn't mean he'll be a great creator in the '80s, and so we got what we got with TNG (as much as I liked it.)
Shaka Zulu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 01:16 PM   #42
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post

Of course, after Paramount decided there was to be a new TV show, Roddenberry had to be back as the creator. But just because he was a great creator back in the '60s doesn't mean he'll be a great creator in the '80s, and so we got what we got with TNG (as much as I liked it.)
Roddenberry wasn't the first choice of Paramount to create a new series, more like fourth or fifth behind people like Leonard Nimoy and Greg Strangis. IIRC.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 04:00 PM   #43
Ryan8bit
Commodore
 
Ryan8bit's Avatar
 
Location: St. Paul, MN
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Christopher wrote: View Post
^As discussed above, it could be in comparison to Star Trek on television.
Which is dumb.
Ryan8bit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 04:09 PM   #44
Relayer1
Rear Admiral
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

Aike wrote: View Post
Her friend gave it 3 stars out 5 as a Star Trek movie, but 4/5 as a normal movie.
Because Trek movies are normally better, thus the bar is set higher ?

Sadly not : Trek 3, Trek 5, The Next Gen movies...
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2013, 04:20 PM   #45
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Comments From Someone Who Has Seen Into Darkness

BillJ wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post

Of course, after Paramount decided there was to be a new TV show, Roddenberry had to be back as the creator. But just because he was a great creator back in the '60s doesn't mean he'll be a great creator in the '80s, and so we got what we got with TNG (as much as I liked it.)
Roddenberry wasn't the first choice of Paramount to create a new series, more like fourth or fifth behind people like Leonard Nimoy and Greg Strangis. IIRC.
How did Nimoy get to be considered for that top job? That's amazing (if true) and it's too bad that he didn't get to do that.

OTOH, we can be glad that Greg Strangis didn't get control of Star Trek, considering what a mess he made of the War Of The Worlds TV show.
Shaka Zulu 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 04:39 PM.

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