Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by RAMA, Apr 26, 2013.
It'll eke out 225 maybe... Go Japan!
Nice to see Trek at the top.
Had the story been more tightly written and better reasoned, and made more sense to the audience, that number might be over 500. That's where word of mouth would have come in.
ST:TWOK did it all by word of mouth and fantastic writing, directing, and filmcraft.
By most accounts, word of mouth on the movie has been great.
Made plenty sense to me, but maybe I'm just crazy.
Like how the crew of the Reliant forgot to count the planets in a system that housed 73 or so mad supermen? Ya know, the ones who tried to capture the Enterprise and kill James Kirk?
The Transformers series of films would seem to prove you wrong. I still think it comes down to marketing and such widely scattered release dates across the globe.
Yep. Lots of us have gone multiple times, but perhaps there is a section of fandom (and their extended social groups) who didn't go to this new film even once (or definitely not multiple times) because they didn't like Bad Robot's first Trek movie, or were angered by the Khan rumours for this one? Did some other fans blackban the film because it opened outside USA first?
That's probably still only a tiny percentage of the audience who sees the film, but relatives and friends of angry fans may well be easily influenced not to get too excited about an upcoming movie, especially with the vehemence of their rants. Similar to the US situation with "Nemesis" (and that one eventually broke DVD sales records)? I'm sure the leaking of the full script of "Nemesis" to the Internet, and Paramount's denials that it was genuine, generated a lot of resentment of "Nemesis".
TMP, ST IV and "First Contact" were huge attendances. Some of those numbers were diehard fans going back again and again and again. I'm a diehard fan myself, but I still only saw ST V, "Generations", "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" in cinemas twice each. First time was usually a complementary preview ticket.
Despite the dissing the first film got, friends of mine who were really keen "Transformers" fans as kids loved (at least) the first film. And lots of them took their kids.
I do recall a similar phenomenon with ST:TMP. Grown fans taking their young families, but it wasn't quite the movie kids (and young JJ Abrams) wanted to see after "Star Wars".
The notion that audience response and therefore word of mouth was in any way lacking flies against all the evidence.
People get into this false reasoning that really breaks down to "if I had liked the movie better, it would have been a bigger hit."
Well that's just silly. I liked it quite a bit (my favourite of all Trek films), so clearly it IS a big hit.
(isn't that how the "logic" goes? )
Oh it will get to $225 domestically. It hasn't even moved to the dollar theaters. Probably another 3 million or so there.
Yes, precisely. People conflate their own personal likes and dislikes and opinions and such with objective reality all the time. Very frustrating.
If TWOK came out in the internet age, it would have been ripped to shreds like all movies are these days.
Absolutely. It was nitpicked by Trek fans in 1982, but that stuff rarely spread beyond small groups in those days.
Not really - STII was VERY hyped leading up to its release (and I was there in 1982 and saw it twice on opening day) - and the fact Spock dies was known (just not when in the film and they had the mis-direction of having Spock 'die' in the opening simulator scene - so many figured that was the 'death' leaked to fans); BUT, the fact was, it was just MUCH more enjoyable ST film than TMP was - and Star Trek fans were so happy about that we were indeed willing to IGNORE the GLARING plotholes and inconsistencies, such as:
1) The Reliant crew (Chekov in particular) not noticing that Ceti Alpha V exploded and other planet's orbits in the system were altered. (Of course if he's written competently, we have no film.)
2) The fact that (again by the Reliant's scans) the altered Ceti Alpha V was shown to be uninhabitable (with a toxic atmosphere; and even Terell and Chekov beam down in EVA gear) - YET - Khan and his people seem to survive in the open just using masks - and are able to trake long walk from therre containers (for what purpose who knows, buts it's the entire reason Terell and Chekov can check out the completely empty cargo containers.)
3) The fact that Chekov WASN'T a part of the Enterprise crew back when the events of "Space Seed" took place -- yet Kahn says to him, "I never forget a face!" (and sorry the fan rationalizations don't wash as there was a line in Season 2 TOS stating Chekov was 'recently transferred to the ship.'
I also have an issue with Kahn being described by Spock (and depicted in the film) as 'inexperienced (in a military sense) and showing "two-dimensional thinking". Why? Remember his background as stated in "Space Seed" - Kahn was one of the most militarily successful tyrants that conquered most of Asia before they were stopped <--- You don't do that without being a shrewd military leader; and any successful ground or air campaign would require three-dimensional thinking.
Again, NONE of the above prevented the film from being very entertaining; but, overall, nothing really stands out as overly exceptional with regard to the writing, directing or 'filmcraft'.
And I bring that up because as an old Star Trek fan (watching first run since 1969) - I honestly found Star Trek: Into Darkness equally as enjoyable and entertaining; and honestly, (depending on my mood) it's either in a tie with, or ahead of Star Trek II: TWoK as my overall favorite Star Trek feature film.
I don't think this film compares to WOK at all in writing and direction. I just don't. Maybe because I have an internal bias and because I think that the director was able to work wonders with a relatively restricted budget that had been scaled back from TMP.
This movie was good, but the plot holes alone kept it from being a better film. They were aiming for Dark Knight territory, and they missed. It's how they handled Khan/Cumberbatch: methinks so much more could have been done to make it a better character study that could have been more appealing to a wider audience. People are still attracted to drama and conflict.
However, I think that was too much of a reach for this writing team.
BTW, don't get me wrong. I enjoyed the film and I do think they resolved the fact that NuKirk wasn't ready for the Chair. The resolution of how he was made Shat-Ready was a little pat, however.
I don't see this film as any worse than TWOK.
It shares a wonderful common thread with TWOK - friendship, family, sacrifice.
And it's action-packed - something many wished TOS movies could have been, and should have been, but Paramount never spent SW $$$ on Trek's budget.
It's a story about TOS characters as younger versions - Say what you will about the TOS movies, I wasn't too keen on my heroes going through mid-life crises while I was in my teens. (Ironically I'm at mid-life enjoying my heroes in their youth now!)
I'd say the only thing TWOK has going for it are the original cast, and rose-colored feelings of nostalgia. No one is arguing TWOK's longevity and cultural impact ("KHAAAANNN!!!!). I'm just saying, personally, strip away the good feelings and memories and they are about dead even.
And, I'd dare say, STiD may be a little bit better... All IMO of course.
Episode and quote, please.
He can't because it was NEVER said. Made up to cover his weak argument.
The actor came along for season 2---the crewman's posting was never mentioned. PERIOD. Red herring----of course he could have been aboard.
"George Takei (Sulu) does not appear in this episode. Neither does Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), although Khan remembered him years later. There are several non-canon explanations for this, all pointing to some off-screen contact between the two characters."
Separate names with a comma.