ST-TMP: your first time...

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies I-X' started by Warped9, Mar 1, 2014.

  1. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    Here's a little something I quickly worked up comparing each film's budget and world box office take and then adjusting both for inflation.

    [​IMG]

    In this light TMP made a shitload of money and ranks in the top three for the most financial successful of the Trek films. The difference among the top three films is negiigable. All the other films rank significantly lower.

    In terms of return on budget TWOK is the runaway winner earning back eight times its budget. Of course, its budget (as well as TSFS) was significantly less than TMP's because of the re-use of established sets and other resources.

    Ranked in terms of world box office:
    STID
    TMP
    ST09
    TVH
    TWOK
    FC
    TSFS
    GEN
    TUC
    TFF
    INS
    NEM

    Ranked in terms of return on budget:
    TWOK
    TVH
    TSFS
    TMP
    TUC
    FC
    GEN
    ST09
    STID
    TFF
    INS
    NEM
     
  2. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Hmm. It's interesting how people can come up at this from completely opposite directions. I adore TVH and can watch it endlessly, but I can't stand TFF which I watch only for research purposes--and only when I absolutely have to.
     
  3. Lance

    Lance Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Location:
    The Enterprise's Restroom
    I gotta agree, it would have been more satisfying for Gillian to remain in the 20th century looking after her cause (saving the whales), informed ever more so by her knowledge that they *do* die out in the future. It'd be in character, too.

    Am I right in thinking somebody (the novelization?) hand-waved it away as her being useful in the 24th century, being one of the few people with the specialist first-hand knowledge to lead a new whale breeding programme? Shame that wasn't mentioned in the movie either. Or was it? :confused:
     
  4. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    Well, to be clear, I didn't say that either. All I said was that it's ridiculous that she leaves everything behind to come to the future only to totally forget about the whales. Either option, staying in the past to try to change history or coming with George and Gracie but actually to be with them, makes more sense than the half-baked seemingly tacked-on ending for Gillian that we got. The freaking guest-star of the film deserves better than what we got. I'm sure people will argue that they never said she wasn't staying with the whales on her science mission, but the point is that it was completely out of character not to mention that, if she was in fact going to be with them.

    Edit: Gillian doesn't have to go to the whales either. She's entitled to change her mind and go off flying around the galaxy to learn about the future, and maybe, if George and Grace are being honest, Gillian reminds them too much of captivity. In any case, my point is that, given everything that transpired before, the whales still deserved final mention before Gillian exits stage left.
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2014
  5. Brutal Strudel

    Brutal Strudel Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Well, Gillian said she was off to her ship. She didn't say starship or even space ship. I assumed she meant ship, as in "travels on water." Unlike radio, which is probably mostly used in the 23rd Century with subspace as a modifier, the term "ship" could still refer commonly to boats--like the one Scotty bought just before the Sarek-Gorkon peace initiative pulled him out of retirement.
     
  6. OpenMaw

    OpenMaw Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Location:
    Everett, Washington
    She referred to it as a "science vessel" and said "see you around the galaxy." I'm pretty sure she meant a starship, and never had any reason to think otherwise.
     
  7. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    I meant as in a dramatic "and...?" what does this mean for the story? :)
     
  8. Brutal Strudel

    Brutal Strudel Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Perhaps.
     
  9. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    I always assumed she meant spaceship and I suspect that was what was intended, although I'll grant that there's some wiggle room there if you really want to look for it.

    As a general rule of thumb, however: When somebody on STAR TREK mentions a "ship," they're probably not talking to about going to sea! :)
     
  10. Brutal Strudel

    Brutal Strudel Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    ...unless they are marine biologists who just followed two whales they viewed as their children three centuries into the future but okay.
     
  11. TenLubak

    TenLubak Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 10, 2003
    Location:
    Baltimore MD USA
    As a child who was 12 at the time, and had only seen TNG season 6+7 on Fox 45 WBFF, I rented my first Trek movie from the library Star trek 5. The fist time I saw the Enterprise, I said aloud thats not the enterprise. This Star Trek was different than what i was used to. I didnt understand how they were in dif time peroids and alll
     
  12. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    TUC's final budget was absolutely 30 mil, not 27, which was the point of departure for the budget, the number at which it got greenlit. That's all direct from Steven-Charles Jaffe, speaking the same month the film went into theatrical release.

    I thought TMP's figure was pretty solidly 44, that 35 was just for the production w/o other charges.

    Also, the gross figure for TMP worldwide that was bandied about endlessly in 80-81 was 175 mil. I have no idea how to reconcile that with this 139 number everybody has now.

    Mike Minor claimed TWOK came in at 13 mil because of all the insane overtime to get sets ready to shoot each day, since Par didn't allot enough stage space. Unsubstantiated, i guess ...

    I've seen claims that TFF ran to 33 mil. The number for INS seems high, as the reshoots ran the budget up to 68, not 70.





     
  13. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Ummm ... changes your worldview? 'Character grows richer upon reflection,' or one of those studio reader-style quotes that sound like that?

    And anyway, it is that you discover Satan, and God exists only by implication. So the existence of God is validated indirectly.

    This is a weird conversation for somebody who hasn't intentionally set foot in a church in nearly 40 years except for funeral services.
     
  14. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    TAS already went to the center of the galaxy and found "Satan."
     
  15. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    TOS had already encountered a mutated machine from earth that was wiping out everything in its path, too, but apparently it doesn't invalidate TMP. You're gonna get hung up on somethin only you and I and maybe 5000 other people remember?
     
  16. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    FYI. I have the APRIL 12, 1991 Budget for Star Trek 6 right here in front of me. Even then it was projected to cost just over 30mil. Add any additional overages over the remaining 7 months of post and you've easily into the low 30s.

    [RIGHT]ABOVE-THE-LINE TOTAL 10,008,007

    PRODUCTION TOTAL 15,857,139
    POST PRODUCTION TOTAL 3,370,641
    OTHER DIRECT COSTS TOTAL 921,031
    BELOW THE LINE TOTAL 19,148,811

    TOTAL BUDGET 29,127,811

    OVERHEAD COSTS 1,100,000

    NEGATIVE COST (GRAND TOTAL) 30,227,811[/RIGHT]​
     
  17. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    I know what you mean. I suppose searching for "God" or "Eden" resonates if you're religiously inclined. But from where I was sitting it was like the Enterprise was going in search of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. It was hard to take it seriously.
     
  18. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    I don't believe that searching for, and especially actually finding, God or Satan is something that Star Trek could pull off in a commercial feature film, without pissing a lot of people off.
     
  19. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    That and I think it's still a story dead-end. The journey has to be about these people searching for or denying the truth and what finding or failing to find "God" means to them or fails to teach them. But that's not what the story is about, which is why the idea wouldn't have worked with the story as-is. It requires a different narrative.

    For me the real meaty story there is how does a scientific society deal with a religious zealot, where "reason" doesn't work because proof denies faith. THERE is some character conflict and a theme worth exploring.
     
  20. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Besides, everyone would just accuse them of ripping off The Black Hole. :)