RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,947
Posts: 5,390,754
Members: 24,722
Currently online: 630
Newest member: Jadakiss

TrekToday headlines

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Dorn To Voice Firefly Character
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

No ALS Ice Bucket For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Free Star Trek Trexels Game
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19


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 August 11 2013, 05:34 PM   #1
Roald
Commander
 
Location: Schiedam, the Netherlands
ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

The parallels between the James Bond 'reboot' are very apparent...

Star Trek (2009) was like Casino Royale... Praised for being different, breaking away from traditions, polarizing fanbases but being appealing to new audiences...
STID was like Quantum... Good, but not as good as the first one (judged by Rotten Tomatoes score, general consensus, not my personal opinion per se), and where STID didn't fare as well as ST domestically, Quantum didn't fare as well as CR internationally...

Both CR and QOS made an equal amount of money, much like ST and STID...

Then came Skyfall...

For the record:
CR made 599 international...
QOS made 586 international...

Skyfall made 1,108..!!! It doubled both domestically and internationally..!

It may have had something to do with Bonds anniversary, well... ST 3 will also be released with ST's 50th anniversary..!

The parallels are there... I'm really hoping Skyfall's success is an indication for ST 3....
Roald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 05:55 PM   #2
serenitytrek1
Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

may be ...hopefully so.

however Trek 3 needs to get excellent reviews.
serenitytrek1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 06:13 PM   #3
ComicGuy89
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

I too, thought of the parallels between the reboot James Bond and Trek.

Hopefully, with some new blood or newfound enthusiasm, the next Star Trek movie will reach heights that the franchise has never been before. I liked the previous two movies but who wouldn't want a movie that is truly great and ambitious?
ComicGuy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 06:27 PM   #4
The Keeper
Commodore
 
The Keeper's Avatar
 
Location: Where reality ends and illusion begins
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Fascinating comparisons. Hope the similarity's continue.

A reason for concern may be ST3 not having enough time for the spit and polish it needs for truly big time success. ID had four years, can it be topped in only three years while dealing with a [possible] change of director and reshuffling of the writers?
The Keeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 06:35 PM   #5
Roald
Commander
 
Location: Schiedam, the Netherlands
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

The Keeper wrote: View Post
Fascinating comparisons. Hope the similarity's continue.

A reason for concern may be ST3 not having enough time for the spit and polish it needs for truly big time success. ID had four years, can it be topped in only three years while dealing with a [possible] change of director and reshuffling of the writers?
I think 3 years should be enough. I think the 4 it took STID was actually abnormally long. It took 3 years for The Empire Strikes Back to come after Star Wars, and that film is just about the greatest sequel ever made, so I do think 3 years should be enough.
Roald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 07:19 PM   #6
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Interesting parallels to be sure. If anything, between the parallels drawn between Trek and big franchises like Bond and Batman, Star Trek is sure in great company!

It'll come down to the story, though. It always comes down to the story.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 08:37 PM   #7
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

It would be nice if Star Trek 3/XIII was as huge as Skyfall. But I must admit, after this early talk of them turning to the director of G.I. Joe 2, my hopes aren't nearly as high as they were after the '09 movie. :-/

Also, here's a pretty cool Youtube video this thread reminded me of:
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 08:43 PM   #8
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

serenitytrek1 wrote: View Post
may be ...hopefully so.

however Trek 3 needs to get excellent reviews.
Into Darkness got excellent reviews and still had a tough time because of so much competition. Regardless of quality, if Trek 3 has an Iron Man on one side and a Fast and the Furious on the other, it will struggle to make a billion dollars as well.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 08:49 PM   #9
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

^^They haven't decided on a director, so don't get too ahead of yourself just yet. Internet chatter has never proven to be exactly reliable.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 11 2013, 08:52 PM   #10
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Quantum failed because it was so erratic with it's action, ID was significantly better. But, I can see the parallels and I hope it to be true.
__________________
*Tim Duncan fills glass with milk*
"Hm, you know what..."
*adds squirt of chocolate syrup*
"Tonight's a special night."
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2013, 02:10 AM   #11
ComicGuy89
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Quantum failed because it was so erratic with it's action, ID was significantly better. But, I can see the parallels and I hope it to be true.
I agree. In this aspect of the comparison, Into Darkness was a significantly more enjoyable movie than Quantum of Solace. I thought Into Darkness was excellent, but Quantum, less so.

I think one thing that should be noted about Skyfall is that despite being a critically and financially acclaimed movie, it remained unapologetically reboot Bond. People were complaining that Casino Royale and Quantum strayed too far from classic Bond tropes, such as less gadgets, supervillains or class, but Skyfall marched on unperturbed and made the reboot style work. It did this through strong characterization and addressing the core of what Bond is about. This is what I hope the next Trek movie will be, something that fully embraces the reboot style yet makes it work in a way that is distinctively Star Trek. Not try to pander to classic Trek while missing the point.
ComicGuy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2013, 06:26 AM   #12
Talosian
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

I don't care. I enjoyed both Trek 09 and Into Darkness.

It makes me sad that fans of all movie franchises are obsessed about not just box office numbers but financial minutiae as they are today. It wasn't always thus.

It's not the place of fans to judge movies aesthetically by the cold criteria of the market. That's a business decision. Let's not mix these two categories together.
Talosian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2013, 06:52 AM   #13
ComicGuy89
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Talosian wrote: View Post
I don't care. I enjoyed both Trek 09 and Into Darkness.

It makes me sad that fans of all movie franchises are obsessed about not just box office numbers but financial minutiae as they are today. It wasn't always thus.

It's not the place of fans to judge movies aesthetically by the cold criteria of the market. That's a business decision. Let's not mix these two categories together.
These details are not important of course, but it's still great to see Trek succeed. It doesn't need to succeed financially to be a good movie but it's really nice icing on the cake, I think.

Can we imagine a Trek movie that breaks the billion dollar barrier? It would be so enticing to the producers that CBS might immediately greenlight a new TV series.
ComicGuy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2013, 07:24 AM   #14
Roald
Commander
 
Location: Schiedam, the Netherlands
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

Talosian wrote: View Post
I don't care. I enjoyed both Trek 09 and Into Darkness.

It makes me sad that fans of all movie franchises are obsessed about not just box office numbers but financial minutiae as they are today. It wasn't always thus.

It's not the place of fans to judge movies aesthetically by the cold criteria of the market. That's a business decision. Let's not mix these two categories together.
Obsessed is too great a word. But one of the best things about being a fan is looking foreward to something new... That excitement, the first news, the first picture, trailer.. The only way to get that feeling again is when ST is succesful enough to ensure new ST to be made... If STID had bombed, a third film may not have been greenlit at all... So yes, the financial numbers are definately an important factor.
Roald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 12 2013, 08:54 AM   #15
serenitytrek1
Commander
 
Re: ST 3: ST's equivalent of Skyfall..?

ComicGuy89 wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Quantum failed because it was so erratic with it's action, ID was significantly better. But, I can see the parallels and I hope it to be true.
I agree. In this aspect of the comparison, Into Darkness was a significantly more enjoyable movie than Quantum of Solace. I thought Into Darkness was excellent, but Quantum, less so.

I think one thing that should be noted about Skyfall is that despite being a critically and financially acclaimed movie, it remained unapologetically reboot Bond. People were complaining that Casino Royale and Quantum strayed too far from classic Bond tropes, such as less gadgets, supervillains or class, but Skyfall marched on unperturbed and made the reboot style work. It did this through strong characterization and addressing the core of what Bond is about. This is what I hope the next Trek movie will be, something that fully embraces the reboot style yet makes it work in a way that is distinctively Star Trek. Not try to pander to classic Trek while missing the point.

BINGO.......
serenitytrek1 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 10:59 PM.

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