Reasons to be happy / not happy about a 4th film.

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Of course it doesn't have to do anything right now, but it would be nice if they'd bother to mention that they're aware that the 50th anniversary is coming and say whether or not anything is planned. Of course some people would demand to know exactly what is planned, but for me it would be enough if there was something that included references to all the different TV series (including TAS).

Again, I would argue that putting out a $180 million movie counts as "something."

That's Job One. Anything else is gravy.

(Although I certainly wouldn't object to some nice plomeek soup as a side course.)

It's something for the people who like nuTrek. But for those of us who don't, it's the same as nothing if there aren't any acknowledgements that Star Trek actually was around prior to 2009..

I guess, but there's a difference between "they're not doing what I want" and "they're not doing anything." And I'm a little bemused when folks (not just you) insist that "nothing" is being done at the same time that a new movie has already started filming.

It's like there's a big wedding planned for next summer. The date has been set, the venue has been booked, the happy couple is on board. The crucial stuff has all been taken care of.

Meanwhile, people are fretting because they don't know anything about the bridal shower yet or what's being served at the reception afterwards . . . .

"But Jim and Sally aren't doing anything next summer!"

 

[JWPlatt]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

The third Star Trek movie was The Search for Spock.

Yes. This rebooting of the numbers as well promotes revisionistic ideas such as Abrams wanting to do away of all former history and merchandising so he could get all the dollars from new merchandising.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

The third Star Trek movie was The Search for Spock.

Yes. This rebooting of the numbers as well promotes revisionistic ideas such as Abrams wanting to do away of all former history and merchandising so he could get all the dollars from new merchandising.

Except, of course, that the new movies aren't actually numbered. There have been no "revisionistic" Roman numerals in the titles of any of the new movies. No official attempts to rebrand the new movie Star Trek III.

Heck, we stopped numbering the movies as far back as Generations. Was that a shameless attempt to sweep the first six movies under the rug?

And if people on-line casually refer to the next movie as the third NuTrek movie, just for ease of conversation, how does that matter if we all know what is being meant?

And would it really change things if they retitled the new movie Star Trek XIII: Beyond?

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

The third Star Trek movie was The Search for Spock.

Yes. This rebooting of the numbers as well promotes revisionistic ideas such as Abrams wanting to do away of all former history and merchandising so he could get all the dollars from new merchandising.

No. The numbers were/are simply placeholders. Which is why before the name was known, Star Trek Beyond was known as Star Trek 3 not Star Trek III.

It seems some people are overtly looking for reasons to nitpick anything Abrams and company does.

EDIT: Beaten to the punch by Greg Cox!

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

And just to belabor the point, we have a third new PLANET OF THE APES movie in the works. Which people are, naturally, referring to as the third new APES movie.

Do you see anybody insisting that it should be properly referred to on-line as the eighth APES movie? Or that Escape is the third movie, darn it!

No, because we all understand that this is a new cycle of APES films, just like BEYOND is part of a new cycle of TREK films.

That's not a slam at the originals. And it's not an insidious plot to erase them from history. It's just reality.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

If Trek remains a viable property, there is a chance that it might work its way back on to television. If nuTrek were to fail completely, then the chances for new Trek on TV are almost zero.

Old Trek failed completely, yet we still have new movies now. Things flop, and then they're rebooted. Yeah, there might be a sizable gap in between (or not, if you're Spiderman), but Star Trek wouldn't die just because a movie did poorly.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

And just to belabor the point, we have a third new PLANET OF THE APES movie in the works. Which people are, naturally, referring to as the third new APES movie.

As a sidebar, I've really enjoyed the two new films and am interested in seeing where they go next.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

If Trek remains a viable property, there is a chance that it might work its way back on to television. If nuTrek were to fail completely, then the chances for new Trek on TV are almost zero.

Old Trek failed completely, yet we still have new movies now. Things flop, and then they're rebooted. Yeah, there might be a sizable gap in between (or not, if you're Spiderman), but Star Trek wouldn't die just because a movie did poorly.

I think a fair question though is: how many times can it fail before studios see it as no longer viable? Nemesis failed in 2002, Enterprise was cancelled due to low ratings in 2005 and ratings had been constantly sliding since TNG went off the air in 1994.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

If Trek remains a viable property, there is a chance that it might work its way back on to television. If nuTrek were to fail completely, then the chances for new Trek on TV are almost zero.

Old Trek failed completely, yet we still have new movies now. Things flop, and then they're rebooted. Yeah, there might be a sizable gap in between (or not, if you're Spiderman), but Star Trek wouldn't die just because a movie did poorly.

I think a fair question though is: how many times can it fail before studios see it as no longer viable? Nemesis failed in 2002, Enterprise was cancelled due to low ratings in 2005 and ratings had been constantly sliding since TNG went off the air in 1994.

I don't know. Hollywood can be pretty stubborn when it comes to trying pump new life into old properties.

Let it be noted that a SCREAM tv series is debuting just a few hours from now . ...

 

[BillJ]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Let it be noted that a SCREAM tv series is debuting just a few hours from now . ...

True. My wife has it set to record on the DVR.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Let it be noted that a SCREAM tv series is debuting just a few hours from now . ...

True. My wife has it set to record on the DVR.

So do I.

But the point is, Hollywood seldom lets anything die if there's even a hint of life remaining.

(Somewhere LOGAN'S RUN weeps and wonders where its reboot is.)

 

[Kilana2]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

But the point is, Hollywood seldom lets anything die if there's even a hint of life remaining.

(Somewhere LOGAN'S RUN weeps and wonders where its reboot is.)

So do I. If there's ever a remake, it's definitely without Peter Ustinov (I liked him much as actor when he was still alive). All I found out is that they still don't have a cast.
I was looking for the novelization, but it is out of stock. They say it's quite different from the movie. Maybe it's better to keep my hands off it, lest I meet with disappointment.

So what?

Rumor has it that even Mel Brooks is planning a Spaceballs remake......

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

But the point is, Hollywood seldom lets anything die if there's even a hint of life remaining.

(Somewhere LOGAN'S RUN weeps and wonders where its reboot is.)

So do I. If there's ever a remake, it's definitely without Peter Ustinov (I liked him much as actor when he was still alive). All I found out is that they still don't have a cast.
I was looking for the novelization, but it is out of stock. They say it's quite different from the movie. Maybe it's better to keep my hands off it, lest I meet with disappointment.

Just to clarify, it's not a novelization. The book came first, which is why it's very different from the movie, which was (loosely) based on the original novel by William Nolan and George Clayton Johnson.

 

[Kilana2]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

But the point is, Hollywood seldom lets anything die if there's even a hint of life remaining.

(Somewhere LOGAN'S RUN weeps and wonders where its reboot is.)

So do I. If there's ever a remake, it's definitely without Peter Ustinov (I liked him much as actor when he was still alive). All I found out is that they still don't have a cast.
I was looking for the novelization, but it is out of stock. They say it's quite different from the movie. Maybe it's better to keep my hands off it, lest I meet with disappointment.

Just to clarify, it's not a novelization. The book came first, which is why it's very different from the movie, which was (loosely) based on the original novel by William Nolan and George Clayton Johnson.

Thanks for the clarification. The book is not easy to get. Sometimes it is better to just remember a nice, but old SciFi movie.

As to the remake thing: at least I have to confess that the new Star Trek movies - despite not being my cup of tea - are very different from Roddenberry ST.

I remember my consternation when I watched Gus van Sants Psycho remake which was unable to hold a candle to Hitchcock's version. It was just a copy
The only thing I like is Leon Payne's song Psycho as part of the soundtrack, sung by Teddy Thompson.

The same goes more or less for Petersen's Poseidon....

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I remember my consternation when I watched Gus van Sants Psycho remake which was unable to hold a candle to Hitchcock's version. It was just a copy

One can argue that the main problem with that remake was that it was too faithful to the original, to an insanely ridiculous degree.

Bates Motel, on the other hand, is kinda fascinating, even if it takes some effort to get used to Norman Bates using cell phones and the internet ...

 

[Kilana2]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I remember my consternation when I watched Gus van Sants Psycho remake which was unable to hold a candle to Hitchcock's version. It was just a copy

One can argue that the main problem with that remake was that it was too faithful to the original, to an insanely ridiculous degree.

Bates Motel, on the other hand, is kinda fascinating, even if it takes some effort to get used to Norman Bates using cell phones and the internet ...

I was more fascinated with comparing Bloch's story with the (original Hitchcock) movie and finding out about the differences. From the outward appearance of the characters to the killing and so on. Anthony Perkins was more attractive than the character Bloch introduced.

 

[Hythlodeus]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

And just to belabor the point, we have a third new PLANET OF THE APES movie in the works. Which people are, naturally, referring to as the third new APES movie.

As a sidebar, I've really enjoyed the two new films and am interested in seeing where they go next.

well Rise was basically a Conquest remake and Dawn was a Battle remake with a only couple of names changed. I think it's easy to say that there were plans for plots after Battle back then. I guess you just have to do a little research, find out what the planned premise for Apes 6 was and voíla, you have the plot for War.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

I remember my consternation when I watched Gus van Sants Psycho remake which was unable to hold a candle to Hitchcock's version. It was just a copy

One can argue that the main problem with that remake was that it was too faithful to the original, to an insanely ridiculous degree.

Bates Motel, on the other hand, is kinda fascinating, even if it takes some effort to get used to Norman Bates using cell phones and the internet ...

I was more fascinated with comparing Bloch's story with the (original Hitchcock) movie and finding out about the differences. From the outward appearance of the characters to the killing and so on. Anthony Perkins was more attractive than the character Bloch introduced.

Exactly.

Frankly, I love comparing multiple versions of the same story or characters. It can be fascinating to see how different incarnations reinterpret the same raw material: what they keep, what they change, what they borrow from previous versions, how they update things--or don't.

For example, I've seen at least ten different film adaptations of Dracula, and it's often the difference between them I find most intriguing.

Which, to bring us back OT, is probably why I scratch my head when people insist that there's only one definitive version of STAR TREK . ....

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

why would anyone be excited to see more of something they dont like ?

Perhaps for reasons similar to someone who thinks the new films are "shit" and the third film will be "crap", yet takes the time to create a wallpaper from the first image released from the third film.

Your correlation makes zero sense, but allow me to address it anyway.

I think Geodi LaForge is one of the most boring characters I have ever seen in trek, he is even worse than wesley and other dismal characters, but since I make art pics it would be pointless to leave them out if I am doing everyone else in terms of main characters.

Likewise with banners and logos, crests, uniforms etc, if I do one series , might as well do them all

I am going to let you in on a secret, just because I might not like something does not mean others might not like them. or maybe I do nu trek stuff as a lot are requests,

did that ever dawn on you ?

The correlation makes perfect sense. You express extreme distaste for something in post after post. Yet you're still willing to use this thing either by request or on your own volition. Yet can't understand that others might do the same?

Me, I don't like Voyager. But I will contribute to the Voyager caption contests and if needed would mine the show for characters, concepts and situations. So I've no problem understanding why someone who doesn't like the new films might have a small interest in them for one reason or another.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Reason why I am not happy for a 4th film.

Me, I don't like Voyager. But I will contribute to the Voyager caption contests and if needed would mine the show for characters, concepts and situations. So I've no problem understanding why someone who doesn't like the new films might have a small interest in them for one reason or another.

Makes sense to me. I don't particularly care for STAR TREK V, but I've referenced it in my novels when it seemed appropriate.