I've started hating the word "rehash"...

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Roald, Jun 5, 2013.

  1. starbuck

    starbuck Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2001
    Location:
    Scotland

    I hope they stay with Classic time frame,yes its changed but we don,t need to use tng villiains,maybe they can fill in the two yrs of the 5 yr mission with new aliens we just never got to see new worlds that have not been seen ,just as long as we have another good story .
     
  2. teacake

    teacake Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    inside teacake
    I feel like hipster sentiment for the past has condemned us to no new villains.
     
  3. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Nah, it's apples and oranges. Just as there's no evidence that what I say is true, there really is no evidence that it's not, and there are actually far more trends that point toward Star Trek as a brand never far exceeding this limit.

    Probably the more apt comparison would be Star Wars though. Ever since those movies came out, Star Trek has never been able to get out of its shadow. And these two new movies are so much like Star Wars that it makes you wonder why they still can't hold a candle to it. The reason is likely because the brand is still held down by a stigma or that it's not something kids will enjoy. I'm not sure that's something that can be doctored up by Abrams any more than he already has. They've already put forth a pretty great effort, and reverting to throwing Borg or whatever at it isn't going to suddenly make things that much better.

    I think their best shot at it was in 2009. It had everything going for it. It was the reboot, it had stylish new visuals, up and coming attractive youth actors, Leonard Nimoy passing the torch, JJ Abrams at the helm, etc. That was plenty of reason for anybody to go see a Star Trek film and lots of people did. It's often going to be difficult to rope people in for sequels no matter how much Khan or Borg or action you shovel into it. 2009 was the indicator of what Abrams Trek is capable of, more or less. It's not going to be radically greater than that, barring some fluke.
     
  4. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    Is the new Trek really that much like Star Wars ? I don't see it.
     
  5. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    I feel like it is. It's definitely larger in scope, heavier on action, and more toward the fantasy side like Star Wars is. Many reviews of the new Trek movies even made the comparison between the two, especially with Abrams now directing episode VII. Seeing what he's done with Star Trek, I believe that he's the perfect fit for Star Wars. Like more so for Star Wars than for Star Trek. But that remains to be seen.
     
  6. solariabsg25

    solariabsg25 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    I wonder if the next movie could take a lesser known race and bring them in?

    After all, how much do we really know about for example the Tholians? May be seen as a risk and just "pandering to the fans" (another phrase I hate!), but they have a practically untouched canvas to paint on there.
     
  7. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    I know many have made the comparison but I don't see the Fantasy angle at all. It may be more action-oriented than before, but I wouldn't call that Star Wars, except that, in this regard, every movie in more like SW since 1977.
     
  8. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    True. Really, there's a lot more to it than what I could sum up in just a couple sentences, but I don't really feel like writing a big tldr about it, especially since it would be radically veering off of an already veering subject.
     
  9. Roald

    Roald Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 1999
    Location:
    Schiedam, the Netherlands
    It would be cool. You know what would be cool too... If they could take a hated episode like Spock's Brain or a hated film like The Final Frontier and re-imagine it into something ultra-cool... It would be an amazing feet......
     
  10. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    I agree with you. I like TOS and TNG but I do also like to keep them separate as possible. I really do not want to see TNG villians in a TOS movie.

    What I would love to see in the next movie is an incident where something happens while they are exploring the galaxy. It would be neat if the Klingons and Romulans had to be used to help not only the Federation surive but also themselves.
     
  11. solariabsg25

    solariabsg25 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Oh it would be nice, but then would also just bring the cries of REHASH!!!!

    It's a shame because to be honest, where the movies are would be the ideal point to re-do some of the original stories, like the comics were doing.
     
  12. Gojira

    Gojira Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Stompin' on Tokyo
    I just want to add I am tired of the word rehash. When I see a comic book superhero movie or a Star Trek movie I expect that well loved characters are going to be used. Many times that is what draws people in!

    When people found out that Zod was in the new Superman movie some fans were crying that they we rehashing Zod...who hasn't been in a feature film in over 30 years!!!
     
  13. RoJoHen

    RoJoHen Awesome Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2000
    Location:
    QC, IL, USA
    Maybe they invade Klingon space and the Federation is forced to help out, averting the "inevitable war" between them.
     
  14. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    The evidence is the countless series/sub-genres that had been blemished with mediocre or moderate success until that one break-out smash comes a long.

    Hell, The Fast and the Furious is a great example. Racing/car chase movies have were long thought to be a niche genre that catered to a very specific group of people. (Sound familiar?) While the first four films did better than any of the predecessors, they were still moderate takes. Tokyo Drift basically bombed. The numbers, however, were all on par with the Trek franchise.

    Fast Five comes along and blows the first four out of the water. Why? They tweaked the formula. They shifted the formula to more of a heist film--Ocean's on wheels, if you will. This gave the franchise a mass appeal that it never had before.

    People who'd never seen a FF film went to it. They didn't know any of the characters, story, or whatever. They didn't care, because F5 gave them a reason to go that none of the first four had.

    Or you can just look at superhero films. They were essentially a proverbial box office desert. Despite being one of the most critically acclaimed movies of its era, Superman was the one bright spot for a long time. And even its performance was fairly modest compared to most of the other blockbusters of the time.

    Then Batman comes a long and rakes in loads. But it had to bank on one of the greatest performances by one of the greatest actors of all-time. But it was an oasis, because the genre went strait back to the desert for another decade.

    Then BOOM! Superhero movies are the thing.

    Or if you want to be more specific: Marvel. The two a fore mentioned examples were both DC characters. For decades, Marvel was kind of the laughing stock of Hollywood with one piece of crap after another.

    Who's laughing now?

    This really isn't true at all and just makes you sound a little disgruntled.

    For one thing, the first two Star Wars movies are considered to be two of the greatest films ever made. No Trek movie can make that claim. Not even close.

    Throw in the outstanding marketing and peripheral paraphernalia and the massive IP that carried the other four films. Never mind the two decades of pent-up anticipation that sustained TPM before word of moth got out.

    Yes. Wars does track a lot younger. But the "kids" Trek should go after are, as I stated earlier, the high-school/college crowd--the ones going to superhero movies now.

    That's not true at all. As a rule (there are exceptions of course), sequels always track better than their predecessors.

    Think about it:

    The Avengers, more or less a sequel.
    Harry Potter DH2, sequel.
    The Dark Knight/Rises, sequels.
    The Phantom Menace, sequel.
    The two Pirates sequels.
    Transformers DOTM, sequel.
    *Skyfall/Thunderball/Goldfinger, sequels.
    LotR:RoTK, sequel.

    I could go on and on, but you get the point.

    *Another good example. The adjusted takes for Dr. No and FRWL are very similar to nuTrek. Goldfinger comes along and crushes them.

    It doesn't have to be. If a third film can match ST09's domestic take, STiD's international take, and increase both by about 15%, then it's suddenly treading in mega-blockbuster territory. Anything above that makes the franchise the legitimate IP powerhouse it's always strived to be.
     
  15. Robert_T_April

    Robert_T_April Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Location:
    Yesterday's Enterprise
    I would love to see Q and/or the Borg again...if they ever do a TNG reboot.

    Using the Borg or Q in a TOS movie would be the equivalent to using the Joker as the villain in the upcoming Man of Steel movie. It just wouldn't make sense IMO.

    Save the Borg and Q for a TNG reboot.
     
  16. teacake

    teacake Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Location:
    inside teacake
    And who will say the line.. "They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate countless worlds, and we fall back. Not again. Not this time. The line must be drawn here!"

    Cuz someone's gonna say it.
     
  17. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    All this talk of war.

    So, do we really want the next movie to show Admiral Marcus was right, and Starfleet should've been focusing on militarizing to prepare for all out war?

    If so, maybe in the movie someone will acknowledge that a preemptive war with the Klingons would've been a good idea, after all.

    No. Please, no. No war. Not with the Klingons. Not with the Borg. Not with tribbles that mutated into large fury creatures with sharp, pointy teeth.

    All I am saying, is give peace a chance.
     
  18. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    I don't see the problem with mixing TNG and TOS elements, especially now that we're rewriting history so there aren't any continuity issues. You've got forty years worth of toys to play with; why limit yourself to just TOS aliens?
     
  19. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    Perhaps. That would be rather interesting.
     
  20. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    And I think that JJ Abrams' Trek are those breakouts. The mediocrity was the preceding films, and these are the ones that stand out. These are the ones that changed the formula to draw more people in, and we saw what can be achieved with them. When the 3rd one comes along, it's not likely to be a radical departure from that unless it's a new creative team.

    Not at all. And it is true. Star Trek couldn't even find its way back until Star Wars paved the way by showing that space opera could be popular. But for as much as Star Trek tried to capitalize on it, they just couldn't be as successful or as ingrained in pop culture. There was still a place for it to be sure, and I love Star Trek and have always been more fond of it than Star Wars (which I also love), but there's a time to be honest in that Star Wars has had the upper hand ever since it came out.

    And regardless of the quality of the first two movies, picking the most mediocre outing of Episode II, Star Trek still can't aspire to reach that level, and it probably never will. And that doesn't bother me, it's just the truth.

    That's not a rule at all. For just as many movies you presented I could easily come up with a list of movies that tracked worse, and they're not just exceptions.

    There are no guarantees except for maybe in the case of the biggest of blockbuster hits, which are coincidentally pretty much all that was on your list. Star Trek is not one of those, so it's going to have to work harder to achieve more, as is shown by STID.

    I guess you and I have different ideas of what constitutes a mega blockbuster. I think it's a lot more than just another 15% of the best of both worlds.