Captain of the next Trek series

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by USS Triumphant, Dec 28, 2013.

  1. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    This is a just-so statement, and I doubt that it's really the case. The hook needed to gain audience attention was the return of the Trek brand, period. Only fandom gives a shit about what characters are helming it, the general audience does not care.

    That sounds like wishful thinking to me? I'm pretty sure the public eye remembers Picard and crew perfectly well -- they had more eyeballs during their run than any other crew -- and it certainly seems over-hasty to be pronouncing them obsolete in pop-culture terms. In fact I wouldn't be overly surprised to see them rebooted at some point in the future, given how thoroughly they got gypped on the big screen. (I mean, who can say. The one thing I've learned about any incarnation of Trek by this point is never to count it out in the long haul.)

    Tell you what, how about we just agree to disagree on that one and simply stipulate that, owing to youth or different conception or alternate timeline influence or what-have-you, the characters in NuTrek are quite deliberately different from the classic characters (whether or not one still finds them compelling, yes?). NuKirk (likeable and charismatic though Pine is) is not personally someone I would follow on a pub-crawl, much less into a situation of life-or-death, but even if you disagree about that, the fact that he is a vastly different character from Kirk should not be in dispute. And that is my point.

    Serenity did not have the accumulated reputation and goodwill of the Trek brand backing it, so that's a false comparison. In fact it's arguably an example of the hindrances faced by a show and concept that, unlike Trek, really is dependent on having certain characters present and on the audience relating to and understanding their dynamics. A lot of Serenity would not have made sense to audiences outside Firefly's small cult base for just that reason (and the additional problem that the parent show aired for like six episodes before being cancelled); and Trek owes its long-term success to not suffering from that hindrance, precisely because its brand had the opportunity to grow beyond just being about one set of characters.

    The new franchise owes a great deal of its success to its dynamic and likeable cast, and there is some nostalgic fun to the notion that Karl Urban is updating DeForrest Kelley and so on. That's not an indication that "Trek is Kirk and Spock and Bones" and nobody else. If that were true, replacing Bones in the core trifecta with Uhura would not have worked. Right?
     
  2. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Behind the wheel.
    The Trek brand was about as valuable as mud after a decade of running it into the ground. What caught people's attention was a new Trek with the characters they actually knew and cared about.

    Star Trek has 'the dude with the pointy ears,' not the 'bald captain' or the 'gold android.' As for potentially rebooting TNG, that would also not surprise me on the small screen, but I don't see it as a film project.

    They are different because of youth and drastically different circumstances than the previous timeline but it takes a deliberately blind eye to miss the clear similarities. Pine Kirk and Shatner Kirk are very clearly the same person, shaped by different circumstances. He's not a 'vastly different' character at all. That same all-encompassing ego, the same bravura front concealing a sea of self-doubt, the same innate cunning. It's all there.

    I agree entirely, but you stated quite clearly that audiences 'just want to see some space adventures.' You can't now backtrack and claim you never said it.

    Trek was a tired and broken franchise when these films were announced and it was because the films went back to TOS and resurrected Kirk and Spock at a younger time in their lives that it picked up any kind of steam at all. That Paramount rejected a Trek offshoot 'war picture' set during the Romulan wars paints an even starker picture of Trek's viability from the studio POV outside of the Kirk/Spock dynamic.
     
  3. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    That is quite obviously not true, and the facts of NuTrek's reception do not bear it out. Given fresh wrapping and impetus and a bigger budget, the brand turns out to have had plenty of goodwill left to it -- that's exactly why reviewers were so explicitly forgiving about ST09's admitted flaws and relative nonsensicality, because it was fun and it was good to see Trek back again. A great many of them said it precisely that way and sometimes in so many words.

    To skip ahead a bit:

    ... because the TNG crew were wasted on films that didn't fit them and they went (at least) one spin-off show too far, yes.

    It was because of the concept of a reboot that the franchise gained new energy. There were any number of ways to do a reboot, and while I appreciate that you were probably excited that it resurrected Kirk and Spock -- a lot of people in fandom were, and the idea certainly felt fresh after years of the Bermagaverse -- but the general audience does not care about the specifics. You are projecting if you think they do. They don't.

    Star Trek has Starfleet. It's been thirty years since it was solely identified with "the guy with the pointy ears."

    I think you underestimate how "vastly different" the same person shaped by different circumstances can be.

    I stated that that's what audiences want from Trek. That they're more willing to go to Trek for this than to a less well-known brand is not news.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2014
  4. OpenMaw

    OpenMaw Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Location:
    Everett, Washington
    TNG has been selling quite well as far as it's remastered Blu Ray's are concerned. So I don't know where the idea that it was "long forgotten" comes from. I say that as a huge fan of the original crew, too. TNG has a big audience.


    Star Trek is not cemented to just one ship, just one crew. It can break out from there if the story is compelling, the visuals interesting, and the characters, above all else, well written.
     
  5. Jonny

    Jonny Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Location:
    Liverpool Merseyside uk
    :lol:

    Good choice as far as a female Captain is concerned. I think she could pull of at least being a member of the crew if not Captain.

    Another woman I think could be a good choice for Captain could be Marg Helgenberger.

    But then I am a C.S.I fan so I might be biased here.

    :lol:That's mean but still :guffaw:
     
  6. Shaka Zulu

    Shaka Zulu Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Location:
    Bulawayo Military Krral
    THIS.

    The Stig has nailed it in a way that I wish that I could, and people need to just accept the facts he's presented and stop blasting the new movies by saying that they aren't as good as the original series.
     
  7. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    The Stig is a nice fellow whose opinions I respect, but they don't rise to the level of "facts." And I've already responded to his post.

    And you seriously need to relax. I'm not kidding.
     
  8. Shaka Zulu

    Shaka Zulu Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Location:
    Bulawayo Military Krral
    But I am relaxed. And all that I'm doing is agreeing with the Stig. If you want, I'll throw this in as a sign of goodwill; :) (or if you prefer, this: :vulcan:)
     
  9. Captain Clark Terrell

    Captain Clark Terrell Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2013
    Location:
    The Captain's Table
    His point is that Stig's opinions are just that, opinions. That someone says something over and over doesn't make it true.

    --Sran
     
  10. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Okay, add air the pilot as the first epiosde, airing the episodes in their intended order, actually advertize the show, and don't preempt randomly the scheduled showings.

    Maybe then it will be a "monster hit."

    :)
     
  11. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    ST: Twelve's opening weekend was about five million dollars short of ST: Eleven's. They were in a similar number of theaters.

    Overall Twelve made about thirty million dollars less than Eleven.

    :)
     
  12. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    :techman: Too true.
     
  13. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Behind the wheel.
    ~$387

    No, it really didn't. STiD made ~$467 million world-wide to ST09's ~$385 million.
     
  14. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    Re: ~$387

    I think she was talking about net, not gross.
     
  15. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Behind the wheel.
    Re: ~$387

    No, she was using the US domestic take and ignoring the massive growth that Trek saw overseas.

    Trek has never been more popular internationally than it is today.
     
  16. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    Whatever T'Girl had specifically in mind, ST09 really was more profitable in worldwide terms than its sequel:

    (emphases mine ;))

    The Abrams films rank 8th and 10th in terms of worldwide profitability among Trek films. (Although I think it's correct to say that they relied much more on international markets to reach those totals than previous films. So strictly-speaking it's probably accurate to say this version of the franchise is more internationalized.)
     
  17. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Behind the wheel.
    That's all well and good, but doesn't actually respond to my post in any way. I didn't make any claims about profit margins or inflationary adjustments. STiD took in more money than any other Trek movie, even when 'adjusted for inflation.' It did more business internationally than any other Trek film and built and audience for Trek around the world that didn't exist before.
     
  18. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    You were claiming that STiD made more money than ST09. In terms of net profits, which is what "making money" generally refers to, that is false. (And I don't know why you're scare-quoting "adjusting for inflation." Adjusting for inflation is in fact how you make meaningful comparisons between box office takes in different years.)
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2014
  19. Sindatur

    Sindatur The Grey Owl Wizard Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    I don't se any evidence there that they are also adjustng the budget for inflation? It appears they are only adjusting the Box Office take for inflation, and then comparing that against the actual budget?

    They should be taking the Box Office Gross and multiplying it by the Inflation factor, then taking the Budget and multiplying it by the inflation factor, and then subtracting The Adjusted budget from the adjusted box office and comparing that for comparitive Profit Margin.

    Talking about percentages is merely talking about Profit Margin, not actual Profit
     
  20. BigJake

    BigJake Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Location:
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    It would be surprising to me if they weren't adjusting the budget totals as well. TMP's budget total is definitely adjusted; there's no way it cost 112 million to make in 1979, its budget unadjusted would be under 50 million.

    Profit Margin is how you calculate actual profitability, which obviously is the point of article. (It's of course quite easy to convert the profit margin percentages into actual dollars*.

    (*EDIT: Actually, why not do this? Gimme a sec.)
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2014