RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 142,291
Posts: 5,553,095
Members: 25,269
Currently online: 664
Newest member: Dustivus Jey

TrekToday headlines

Ortiz Art Mugs
By: T'Bonz on Jan 28

Ingham Passes
By: T'Bonz on Jan 28

Star Trek Online Celebrates Five Years
By: T'Bonz on Jan 27

WizKids/Star Trek Online Caption Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jan 26

No Quinto In Heroes Reborn
By: T'Bonz on Jan 26

Pine Responds To Pegg Writer Announcement
By: T'Bonz on Jan 26

Retro Review: Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
By: Michelle on Jan 24

Urban in Aquaman?
By: T'Bonz on Jan 23

Pegg Co-writing Star Trek 3
By: T'Bonz on Jan 22

Stewart Narrated NASA Documentary
By: T'Bonz on Jan 21


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 > Site Forums > TrekToday News Items

TrekToday News Items Discussion of TrekToday news items

 
 
Thread Tools
Old April 25 2008, 06:49 AM   #31
Augustus
Fleet Captain
 
Augustus's Avatar
 
Location: Sadly, not in Texas
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

Well I had quite a few friends who were intrigued by the teaser trailer and are fans of Abrams that are willing to see a Star Trek movie done by him. Or at least that is what they say now.

I think you are right bout alot of it though. I mean who sees star trek movies? star trek fans only, that isn't even totally true for Star Wars.
__________________
I don't know... I didn't go.
Augustus is offline  
Old April 25 2008, 09:55 AM   #32
Tyson
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Canada
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

TJinPgh wrote: View Post
ancient wrote: View Post
Captain Euphoria wrote: View Post
As a big fan of Trek first and Star Wars second, I have to say I'm at best intruiged by the melding of the two but at worst afraid this is going to ruin what I love about Star Trek. Let's just say I'm pessimistic that we needed to go back to the teen years of the original cast. I wish instead Paramount would have found a way to do what Stargate SG-1 is doing now with the direct to DVD movies. Maybe they still will. Anyone up for a Titan or Challenger movie?
Titan or what movie? Do we really want something that small-time as the next Trek thing? Direct to DVD is where franchises go to die.
Well, Starship Troopers went D2V for, what, 2... 3 films? It's now set to return to the big screen and compete with Trek.

It's hardly a death sentence, unless one treats it as such. B5 has made a ton of money on their release.




Bringing trek "back" to blockbuster status implies that it was ever a blockbuster to begin with. I really hate to break this to you, but it hasn't.

Star Trek always has been, and always will be niche programing that made money by producing films on a respectable budget.

Cloverfield is a prime example of this. It opened to a very nice box. Got fantastic reviews. And, still barely made half of what they're sinking into Trek. The difference is that it cost about 1/5 as much as Trek to make.

But, even if there was "blockbuster" potential for a Star Trek film, there's little to nothing about this movie that presents it.

We're talking about no-name actors in a sub niche topic of a niche genre.

Sorry, but it takes more than a bloated budget, a producer with an over inflated view of his own self worth and a series of canned praises to make something a blockbuster.


TJinPgh wrote: View Post
I still find the entire notion of a $150m film for a franchise that's only made more than $100m only once absurd.

If anybody other than Abrams were doing this movie, it would BE a direct to DVD film.
Aside from TMP, all the Trek movies have been strictly small-time affairs.

However, taking into account things like ticket price & inflation, the TOS movies all did really well. Even TFF breaks over the $100 mil mark in today's dollars, I believe (or at least close to it). The TNG movies did much worse, which is one of the reasons we will not be seeing a "Titan" movie. The other being that they don't want Trek to remain strictly little-leagues. There's not as much money in the little leagues.
All very true. But, other than Trek IV, most of those movies did well for one reason and one reason alone. Because Star Trek fans carried them. Fans went to see those movies 2, sometimes 3 or more times.

After First Contact, it's not so much that the general public stopped going (they'd stopped going long ago). It's that the existing Trek fans stopped going.

Look, I'm as much of a Trek fan as anybody. But, I'm also a realist.

Star Trek has existed for 40+ years because the people involved with the franchise had realistic expectations.

A bunch of relatively low budget films packed full of vetern TV actors with a decent amount of character recognition and a handful of series in syndication and second tier networks.

I think Berman's biggest crime against the franchise was not recognizing it for what it was, and thinking it could be built into some mega-conglomorate of multiple-front media with TV, books and film all going simultaneously.

The bar has continued to rise without a solid foundation to build upon. Abrams is not only upping that bar, he's doubling it.

I simply don't believe there are enough of us left to make it work.

Sadly, I don't think there ever were.[/quote]

This is the most eloquent analysis of the situation I've seen yet, and I can't think of a thing wrong with it. Thank you for posting that.
Tyson is offline  
Old April 25 2008, 10:05 AM   #33
Tyson
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Canada
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

Hmm, for some reason I can't edit my previous post, so I'll add this thought here:

One thing I've noticed over the years is that Star Trek has a bad reputation with the audience they're evidently shooting to capture with this film. I've heard people call it nerd shit, lame, stupid, etc. Not to mention people's general opinion of Trek fans. (Hint: Not all of us are the worst of the lot that got picked out for the "Trekkies" movies.)

Even if this movie was the best Trek film since The Wrath of Khan, I doubt these people would go see it. Critics could rave over it, but because Star Trek is apparently "cool-repellent" for most people, it wouldn't make a difference and in fact would hurt the film's chances. The general public doesn't want anything to do with Star Trek, and I don't think that's going to change just because they put a new coat of paint on the Enterprise.
Tyson is offline  
Old April 25 2008, 05:55 PM   #34
ancient
Vice Admiral
 
ancient's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

It's hard to say, since Star Trek has never really aimed for the general audience. At least not for a long time. Abrams is trying a completely new approach and I don't think we can properly gauge it based on the small-time trek that has come before.

I mean, both Lucas and Speilberg have visited the Trek set and/or given Abrams advise. When was the last time big names went anywhere near Trek? Never?

The last thing the producers will do is try to aim this at the Trekkies. That approach has led to declining sales and cancellation. There is only one other option: Aim it at the general audience using big $$$ and big-name creators.

If that also fails, the way aiming it at trekkies failed, then Trek will die. Based on Abrams's track record that seems unlikely. I guess I have more faith in his ability to raise the franchise than I have in the Trek name to drag it down.
__________________
----------------------------
Time Travel was and will be confusing
ancient is offline  
Old April 26 2008, 11:52 AM   #35
Captain Euphoria
Commander
 
Captain Euphoria's Avatar
 
View Captain Euphoria's Twitter Profile
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

ancient wrote: View Post
It's hard to say, since Star Trek has never really aimed for the general audience. At least not for a long time. Abrams is trying a completely new approach and I don't think we can properly gauge it based on the small-time trek that has come before.

I mean, both Lucas and Speilberg have visited the Trek set and/or given Abrams advise. When was the last time big names went anywhere near Trek? Never?

The last thing the producers will do is try to aim this at the Trekkies. That approach has led to declining sales and cancellation. There is only one other option: Aim it at the general audience using big $$$ and big-name creators.

If that also fails, the way aiming it at trekkies failed, then Trek will die. Based on Abrams's track record that seems unlikely. I guess I have more faith in his ability to raise the franchise than I have in the Trek name to drag it down.
Totally wrong. TPTB have ALWAYS been aiming at a general audience and failing miserably. Can anyone say "Enterprise" or Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson on Voyager? This is what TPTB do and then they wonder why they're losing people. Star Trek DOES have a negative connotation with far too many people. It's not Star Wars.

The Star Wars prequels sucked (and this is coming from a life-long Star Wars fan with a $50,000+ collection of memorabilia) but they did boffo because they had the name "Star Wars" tacked to them. Star Trek is considered too nerdy or uncool for mainstream people. Which leads me directly into what I was trying to say about direct-to-DVD earlier.

With the advent of cheap HD equipment & digital effects & editing, you can do amazing things with very little. I've even made a couple low-budget films on my own that wouldn't even be possible ten years ago (look at my sig for info about the newest, of which Omaha Star on here is a huge fan).

There is so much media available these days that everything is splintering into smaller and smaller niches. You already see it happening in the "big leagues" with so few big-budget films being made out of new intellectual properties. Instead, it's movies based on old TV shows, sequels, or movies made from comics or bestselling books. Those are the only things lately that appeal to wide audiences. I suppose you could argue that Paramount is doing just that with Trek in that it is an established property... which is true BUT it is unlike all other established properties in that it has no much (undeserved but still there)negativity associated with it -- namely, its fans and its "nerdy" nature.

Another thing, I, like many people, don't even like to go to modern movies anymore. It's too expensive and you have to deal with people who never learned to shut up at the movies. That and my home theater is better than most theaters out there. Instead I just rent or buy a movie in HD and watch it at home. With the advent of new delivery methods and the ability to achieve higher quality presentations at home, Video-on-Demand and things like Blu-Ray are going to quickly destroy the era of the "big blockbuster" unless it's a "sure thing" like Iron Man or Batman. Heck, even with those films all you have to do is wait three months and its available on home video!

And another point, look at fan films. They've exploded online and get thousands of downloads -- even the bad ones! It's time for Paramount to recognize that there is a market of die-hards like us who want Trek product that isn't geared at the "mainstream" but at us. I would LOVE a Titan or Challenger direct-to-DVD film. Why? Because I love the Next Generation and I want more. Lots more. And you know what? I'm also a Stargate fan and Stargate: Ark of Truth was a good little movie. It didn't cost an arm and a leg for MGM and it looks and sounds great, especially in my home theater which is where it was intended to be experienced.

So, going direct-to-DVD is not a "graveyard." It's the logical next step toward making money in such a splintered, niche-heavy environment.
__________________
My newest 1950s-style sci-fi epic "Destination: Outer Space" coming 5/25/10! www.sainteuphoria.com
Captain Euphoria is offline  
Old April 26 2008, 05:10 PM   #36
ancient
Vice Admiral
 
ancient's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

Captain Euphoria wrote: View Post
TPTB have ALWAYS been aiming at a general audience and failing miserably.
Yes they did try, and FAILED to do so.

Can anyone say "Enterprise" or Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson on Voyager?
Shitty ideas like this were not exactly what I'd call 'bringing in top talent'. Why not ask Hulk Hogan to show up also?

The Star Wars prequels sucked (and this is coming from a life-long Star Wars fan with a $50,000+ collection of memorabilia) but they did boffo because they had the name "Star Wars" tacked to them. Star Trek is considered too nerdy or uncool for mainstream people.
Which is why Abrams is trying to not make a nerd-orientated movie.

With the advent of cheap HD equipment & digital effects & editing, you can do amazing things with very little. I've even made a couple low-budget films on my own that wouldn't even be possible ten years ago (look at my sig for info about the newest, of which Omaha Star on here is a huge fan).
Unfortunatly most of that sort of thing ends up looking like a Sci-Fi original movie.

I suppose you could argue that Paramount is doing just that with Trek in that it is an established property... which is true BUT it is unlike all other established properties in that it has no much (undeserved but still there)negativity associated with it -- namely, its fans and its "nerdy" nature.
Where is this coming from? I've never noticed that Trek has some special stigma surrounding it. All these supposedly nerdy franchises have some level of stigma, and Trek is not an exception.

Another thing, I, like many people, don't even like to go to modern movies anymore. It's too expensive and you have to deal with people who never learned to shut up at the movies. That and my home theater is better than most theaters out there. Instead I just rent or buy a movie in HD and watch it at home. With the advent of new delivery methods and the ability to achieve higher quality presentations at home, Video-on-Demand and things like Blu-Ray are going to quickly destroy the era of the "big blockbuster" unless it's a "sure thing" like Iron Man or Batman. Heck, even with those films all you have to do is wait three months and its available on home video!
That's more of a personal choice, but I don't see blockbusters going away, at least not before May 2009.

And another point, look at fan films. They've exploded online and get thousands of downloads -- even the bad ones! It's time for Paramount to recognize that there is a market of die-hards like us who want Trek product that isn't geared at the "mainstream" but at us. I would LOVE a Titan or Challenger direct-to-DVD film.
There's a reason they don't do this: It's not worth tying up resources to make something like that. It may make money, but the studio dollars are better spent somewhere more profitable.

Besides, we've seen this sort of Pandering movie thing before and they are the most bitched-about/forgettable/unprofitable movies talked about on the internet. The Studios do make the sort of thing you're talking about fairly often, but with cheaper genres, like comedies. The only SciFi example I can think of is Serenity. Look how well that little fangasm turned out.

So, going direct-to-DVD is not a "graveyard." It's the logical next step toward making money in such a splintered, niche-heavy environment.
Direct to DVD is for things that are being squeezed dry before being shelved forever.
__________________
----------------------------
Time Travel was and will be confusing
ancient is offline  
Old April 26 2008, 05:24 PM   #37
ancient
Vice Admiral
 
ancient's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Re: 'Star Trek XI' Different Than Any Other 'Star Trek'

Since Editing doesn't work, I'll add this:

I think I might sound a bit harsh on the Direct-to-DVD format. I think it can be profitable for very cheap-to-make things, especially popular ones. For example, DC and Marvel have a large number of D2DVD movies of popular characters. But those are cartoons, which is why they are possible to make. A Trek Cartoon I would be in favor of, but it wouldn't conflict with the upcoming movie. Live-action D2DVD is almost always what I described before: a last gasp.
__________________
----------------------------
Time Travel was and will be confusing
ancient is offline  
 

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 10:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.