Some will. And it will, as always, be really effing irritating.
I like Trek more, for sure, but they're two of my favorite fictional universes. Societal versus mentality is so dumb.
Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
Some will. And it will, as always, be really effing irritating.
I like Trek more, for sure, but they're two of my favorite fictional universes. Societal versus mentality is so dumb.
Redundant, how? Generally speaking, trailers are selected to go before certain films, often of a similar genre. For instance, I saw a trailer for "Chronicles of Riddick" right before a "Return of the Kings" showing. Both are genre films and the match up makes sense.
You know, I realized how worried I'm for this movie when reading Justin Lin say we will get a trailer soon filled me more with fear than excitement... I guess as someone who loved the first two movies, with a new creative team it's inevitable for me to be irrationally scared about the unknown and the fact they might have made many changes. I prefer a trilogy to get developed and possibly directed by the same guy..but no such look with this one
Probably, my apprehension and feeling detached is exacerbated by the fact that, so far, I only have interviews by Pegg but we didn't hear that much from the director and the other writer. The Dubai press conference disappointed me on that regard. I wish I could get a clue about these guys and understand if they at least liked the first movies.
Anyway, I don't know if putting the trailer for stb before star wars is a good idea. Surely, it would be fitting and I can see why they'd do that..but while trek and star wars are different franchises, a lot of the people in the general audience still confuse them and think they are 'the same thing' (as a fan of both I don't know how many times I had to try explaining the differences to people I know) so putting trek, or any other movie set in the space, before star wars could feel redundant.
I think that Star Trek and Star Wars are now large and diverse enough for audiences to know the difference.
You and I both think the same but I was referring to those who put trek and star wars in the same box, and I know many who do
There are people I know who believe that trek was the boring version of star wars for the television
it's crazyIn that group, though, there are some who loved the reboot and might want to watch the third movie if it's pubblicized enough.
That's, well, unusual to me. But, most of my friends that I hang out with at least understand the difference between the to.Redundant, how? Generally speaking, trailers are selected to go before certain films, often of a similar genre. For instance, I saw a trailer for "Chronicles of Riddick" right before a "Return of the Kings" showing. Both are genre films and the match up makes sense.You know, I realized how worried I'm for this movie when reading Justin Lin say we will get a trailer soon filled me more with fear than excitement... I guess as someone who loved the first two movies, with a new creative team it's inevitable for me to be irrationally scared about the unknown and the fact they might have made many changes. I prefer a trilogy to get developed and possibly directed by the same guy..but no such look with this one
Probably, my apprehension and feeling detached is exacerbated by the fact that, so far, I only have interviews by Pegg but we didn't hear that much from the director and the other writer. The Dubai press conference disappointed me on that regard. I wish I could get a clue about these guys and understand if they at least liked the first movies.
Anyway, I don't know if putting the trailer for stb before star wars is a good idea. Surely, it would be fitting and I can see why they'd do that..but while trek and star wars are different franchises, a lot of the people in the general audience still confuse them and think they are 'the same thing' (as a fan of both I don't know how many times I had to try explaining the differences to people I know
I think that Star Trek and Star Wars are now large and diverse enough for audiences to know the difference.
You and I both think the same but I was referring to those who put trek and star wars in the same box, and I know many who do
There are people I know who believe that trek was the boring version of star wars for the television
In that group, though, there are some who loved the reboot and might want to watch the third movie if it's pubblicized enough.
As for groups who might confuse it, I think that advertising before Star Wars would be more of a draw to them because its a film that will be interesting to them.
At least, that's my theory.
Star Wars wouldn't exist without Star Trek as an inspiration.
http://mashable.com/2014/09/27/star-wars-myths-gary-kurtz/#VGxBohJ9tqqw
George Lucas was always a Trek fan. Clint Howard relates that when he came in for an audition (as an adult), Lucas pointed and went, "Commander Balok! 'The Corbomite Maneuver!'" And in Rod Roddenberry's Trek Nation documentary, Lucas relates how the success of Star Trek helped him convince backers that science fiction could be financially successful and that it was worth investing in Star Wars. And I don't think it's a coincidence that they have such similar names.
http://mashable.com/2014/09/27/star-wars-myths-gary-kurtz/#VGxBohJ9tqqw
George Lucas was always a Trek fan. Clint Howard relates that when he came in for an audition (as an adult), Lucas pointed and went, "Commander Balok! 'The Corbomite Maneuver!'" And in Rod Roddenberry's Trek Nation documentary, Lucas relates how the success of Star Trek helped him convince backers that science fiction could be financially successful and that it was worth investing in Star Wars. And I don't think it's a coincidence that they have such similar names.
That's essentially what theaters do now, they just pause the loop at an arbitrary "end/beginning" to run people out. Profit margin entered into the process sometime or other.I got that part easily enough. But the way they describe it, it reads more to me they're just talking about successive showings of the same film. Maybe I'll read it again later.
No, they were specifically talking about the tendency of theaters at the time to cycle through a whole program of films -- presumably a couple of features, a short, a cartoon, a newsreel -- and show them in a continuous loop so that people could come in any time and get the whole program, just not necessarily in the same order.
Huh? No, it's completely different. Modern theaters are multiplexes that only show one repeating film on each screen. What they had in the past was a single screen showing a program of multiple consecutive features and shorts. In electric-circuit terms, modern theaters run their films in parallel, while older ones ran theirs in series.
Not entirely true, Chris. My AMC will offer different films on the same screen depending on the time of day. Especially on the IMAX screen. The older film gets the matinee and afternoon screen time, the newer gets the evenings.
ETA Oh, you meant as in no double features. That's probably true. Unless the recent BTTF event featured both films on one ticket. I don't know, I watched them at home.
ETA2 I remember when it was common for late comers to sit through the intermission and watch the film again up to the spot they came in.
Last edited:
^Even so, it's ludicrous to say that anything like the movie programs of the past is still being done today. We don't still have newsreels and cartoons and serial chapters and comedy shorts airing before the main feature -- just commercials and trailers. That classic style of theater program ceased to exist once television came along. Newsreels were replaced by the nightly news, cartoon shorts were syndicated in the afternoons, people got their serial fix from soap operas, etc.
I never said it was the same, or same type of, material. I was just pointing out that it was the same principle applied to what they show today. Each cycle is the same material all day long, But unlike from 70 to 100 or so years ago, they have an arbitrary end/beginning of each cycle that they pause the loop and run out the audience, so a new audience with new tickets they just paid for can come in to watch.
Okay, can we now get back to, you know, discussing the actual movie? 
Speculations people! Lets have at it!!!
Speculations people! Lets have at it!!!
It could happen sooner (though, granted, production is on a tighter schedule this time.) First trailer for the 2009 movie came mid-November. For STID, I believe it was the first week of December.
I speculate that it'll be good.
more than a trailer I think we probably will get a tiny teaser
been looking at the imdb page and here's the character list for the secondary/background roles:
Injured Senator is interesting, as well as the guy that has a name ('Jae')
no Ancelotti yet
I found an article about Joe Taslim http://www.antaranews.com/berita/530621/joe-taslim-adu-peran-dengan-idola-di-star-trek-beyond
no news about what kind of role he has in the movie but google translate tells me he has a crush on Zoe Saldana.
been looking at the imdb page and here's the character list for the secondary/background roles:
Injured Senator is interesting, as well as the guy that has a name ('Jae')
no Ancelotti yet
I found an article about Joe Taslim http://www.antaranews.com/berita/530621/joe-taslim-adu-peran-dengan-idola-di-star-trek-beyond
no news about what kind of role he has in the movie but google translate tells me he has a crush on Zoe Saldana.
I mean, who doesn't?
Per the IMDb list, generally speaking those things aren't terribly trustworthy. But in the case of Star Trek Beyond, since the marketing engine hasn't really fired a single thruster as yet, there's probably far less incentive for trolls to dick around, so I'm going to take this list as "80% likely" for now.
Per the IMDb list, generally speaking those things aren't terribly trustworthy. But in the case of Star Trek Beyond, since the marketing engine hasn't really fired a single thruster as yet, there's probably far less incentive for trolls to dick around, so I'm going to take this list as "80% likely" for now.
To put it mildly. Before Nemesis came out, IMDb's cast list for the movie included virtually every actor who'd ever played a Romulan in TNG, DS9, or VGR. Not one of them was actually in the movie.
Fiona Vroom as "Green Girl" ... she played the title role in STC's "Lolani." Coincidence?
Wasn't there a fan-film actor who had a cameo in the '09 film? Not to mention Christopher Doohan as the transporter chief. These filmmakers like to give cameos to people from fandom and the like.
I know it's a Dutch name, but "Fiona Vroom" sounds like it should be the name of a cartoon race-car driver, like Penelope Pitstop.
James Cawley from Star Trek: New Voyages/Phase II had a brief cameo in the 3rd act of ST09.
I swear, "Fiona Vroom" is one of the worst stage names I've heard outside of a Bond film.
Similar threads
